Issuu

Measurable Change Developing Metrics to Measure the Impact of Landscape Strategies for Climate Change in Fresno, CA

606 Studio 2018

California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Department of Landscape Architecture | College of Environmental Design

Measurable Change Developing Metrics to Measure the Impact of Landscape Strategies for Climate Change in Fresno, CA California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Department of Landscape Architecture | College of Environmental Design

606 Studio 2018 Studio Members

Faculty Members

Christopher Carrillo

Justin De Vesta

Weimin Li, PhD, ASLA

Di Liu

Neha Lohkande

Philip Pregill, ASLA

Jingwei Zhou

Yi Li

Steve Rasmussen Cancian, RLA

Acknowledgements Measurable Change is the product of various resources and their contributions. The team would like to thank the following individuals and the organizations for sharing their time and resources: H Spees, Director of Strategic Initiatives at the Office of Mayor in the city of Fresno for sharing his knowledge on project issues and opportunities, insight and information for TCC projects and helping the team connect to resources. Sophia Pagoulatos, Development and Resource Management Department, city of Fresno, for sharing the details of the TCC projects and making the geospatial data available for the team. Craig Scharton, for leading the team 606 in a field trip around Downtown Fresno and providing information on details of the Fulton Street mall. Xiaoming Yang, GIS analyst at geospatial center at California State University, Fresno for providing the team with the geodatabase for the area. The staff of Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District and the city of Fresno, for providing geospatial data to the team to be used for analysis. Timothy Curran, team member of the LA 632 Studio in Fall 2017, for his support and contribution to sections of chapter 1-4 of the report. MENTORES (Mentoring, Educating, Networking, and Thematic Opportunities for Research in Engineering and Science) project, funded by a Title V grant, Promoting Post-Baccalaureate Opportunities for Hispanic Americans (PPOHA) | U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. PR/ Award Number: P031M140025. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Department of Education. Studio MLA, Los Angeles, for giving the team an opportunity to present to them and guiding us with their insight, knowledge and information about the work site. Department Chair Andrew Wilcox and Dr. Kyle Brown, faculty, and staff of California State Polytechnic University, College of Environmental Design Department of Landscape Architecture for their support and guidance. Advisors Dr. Weimin Li, Professor Philip Pregill and Steve Rasmussen-Cancian for their support, perspective, critical eyes and invaluable insights throughout the entire project. To all families and friends for their love, support, adjustment and patience throughout the entire MLA program. The team could not have done without you. Thank You!!!

Executive Summary Introduction From the bleaching of the great barrier reef to the rising temperatures in urban areas, the global environment and human society are facing the devastating effects of climate change. Decisionmakers and environmental designers are faced with the challenge of simultaneously responding to current impacts and attempting to reverse the trend before it is too late. While coastal cities deal with sea level rise as an impact of climate change, inland communities like Fresno, California face a very different set of challenges such as temperature increases, irregular precipitation patterns, and drought (Akbari & Rose, 2001; Koenig, 1999; Pataki et al., 2006). To address this problem, the State established programs and funding to address the causes and impacts of climate change, focusing on solutions to help communities. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona’s Master of Landscape Architecture (MLA) students have joined the effort to combat climate change. The 606 Studio is the capstone experience for Cal Poly Pomona’s MLA program. The studio of 2017-2018 titled its project Measurable Change, which seeks to provide designers, policy makers and communities with the tools they need to design evidence-based landscape design projects that respond to the impacts of climate change. Measurable strategies are not common among planners, success rates for helping communities are difficult to quantify, and policies are slim at addressing landscape strategies. This project provides planners, developers, and decision-makers the tools to measure how successful landscape strategies are at addressing the issues of climate change and helping local, disadvantaged communities in adapting to the impacts of climate change. It also provides a framework for expansion and incorporation in future measurement systems and policies. By understanding the science around vi

climate change as well as the socioeconomic and cultural background of the communities involved, Measurable Change offers deep consideration of environmental justice for those most affected by climate change and inspires professionals and policy-makers to join the effort.

Fresno Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) is one of the programs created by the State of California to address climate change. As a climate investment program instituted by the Strategic Growth Council (SGC), TCC identifies the most disadvantaged communities and utilizes state funding to empower “the communities most impacted by pollution to choose their own goals, strategies, and projects to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and local air pollution” (Strategic Growth Council Fact Sheet, 2018). The city of Fresno was chosen as the ideal location to allocate state funds because it met the criteria of a disadvantaged community suffering from environmental and sociocultural challenges. TCC worked with the city of Fresno to choose projects within a 5-square-mile boundary that would address the causes and impacts of climate change.

Timeline of Phases and Methods Measurable Change occurred over the course of nine months, from September 2017 to June 2018. The project was split into nine phases, each focusing on a different aspect of the process (See Figure 0.1: Timeline of Phases and Methods). While the work within each phase was intentionally iterative, the process necessarily moved forward, reflecting on past phases for perspective. The 606 Studio researched a range of methods to address key questions about the project area. Some methods involved the gathering of

Figure 0.1

Timeline of Phases and Methods

Fall Regional Analysis

The 606 studio conducted a regional analysis, the history, and current conditions of the City of Fresno, including the impacts of climate change. It also conducted digital mapping and geospatial analysis methods to identify issues.

Site Visits to Fresno

Building on and supporting on-going efforts in Fresno, the studio met with staff from the Cityâ€™s planning department, the office of the City Manager and the office of the Mayor. Studio members also conducted site observations and informal interviews to gain perspective on the culture of Fresno.

Metrics Development

Synthesizing the information from literature reviews, precedents, and site visits, the studio collected and developed metrics that measured the impact of landscape strategies on climate change and other issues that Fresno faces.

Winter Site Visit to Fresno

The studio returned to the project area to double check first impressions, check initial plans against conditions on the ground, and visit each of project sites.

Metrics Refinement

The studio refined the metrics established in the fall, developing formulas and examples that could be applied to the planning process and the work of other planners and designers.

Vision Plan Development

The 606 Studio utilized GIS analysis of the TCC project area as well as the target zones to develop a vision plan that located measurable strategies in the most effective areas.

Spring Design Typologies Development

The studio developed typologies to assist practitioners in effectively incorporating elements and functions into their designs that measurable address climate change. Then it developed metric units to measure the average impacts of elements and functions within the typologies.

Vision Plan Refinement

The studio refined the vision plan to incorporate example areas in the TCC project site in which the typologies would apply, displaying strategies that dealt best with climate change.

Urban Contexts Development

By examining the different zones within the TCC area, the studio developed Downtown, Mixed-use, and Residential Contexts which used Metric Typologies to illustrate how the different elements and functions can be applied in each zone.

vii

data from within the project area, while other methods focused on gathering research and data to support the mapping and analysis of the projectâ€™s historical, environmental, and social context. The studio also conducted geospatial analyses to identify key areas of concern and developed strategies to address the issues within those areas. By collecting existing formulas for measuring the impact of landscape strategies, the studio was also able to develop additional formulas by researching the processes and components involved in each element of the landscape.

Research and Analysis The 606 Studio researched the history of Fresno, seeking information on the ecological, social, and developmental changes that occurred since European settlers arrived. This exploration revealed the historical origins of the changes in history that contributed to the challenges Fresno faces today. Utilizing CalEnviroscreen 3.0 and GIS, the studio then examined the current environmental and sociocultural conditions in Fresno. By using analyses such a park poverty analysis and a spatial analysis to calculate the impact of air pollution, the studio confirmed Fresnoâ€™s classification as a disadvantaged community under the TCC guidelines. After examining the regional context of the city of Fresno, the studio moved its focus to the project area. Within the project site, the studio analyzed data such as tree coverage, temperature, and vulnerable populations to discover zones of greatest need from the impacts of climate change. The 606 Studio then conducted a thorough analysis of the TCC area by analyzing the relevant biophysical and sociocultural data to find issues within the TCC area. After analyzing the existing conditions in the TCC area, the studio identified the critical challenges for vulnerable communities: disconnected urban zones, traffic-related air pollution, lowering groundwater levels, high surface temperature, park poverty, transportation-related GHG emissions, and vulnerable people who are most impacted by environmental and sociocultural conditions.

Metrics

To enable communities, governments and professionals to create evidence-based designs, the 606 Studio developed metrics that measure the impacts of a range of landscape actions. While these metrics can be used to access the impact of design after they have been created, they can also be used to influence what gets designed by quantifying the relative impact of a range of landscape strategies. The categories of the metrics were chosen based on the categories most used in landscape design. The studio chose Transportation, Water Management, Greening, Soil viii

Management, and Waste Diversion as topics to research. These categories are often used when designing, but the measurement of the impact of strategies is lacking, leading the studio to research existing metrics and develop addition ones. The studio first collected the metrics created by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and i-Tree. By further researching and studying precedent cases, the studio developed additional metrics to measure climate change impacts of the strategies in the above topics. These formulas measure a strategyâ€™s ability to mitigate Greenhouse Gases (GHGs), empower people to adapt to the impacts of climate change, or provide cobenefits (benefits in addition to mitigation or adaptation) to a community. An example of a mitigation method for Transportation is measuring the ability for the installation of a bike lane to reduce GHGs from vehicles by creating an alternative mode of transportation. An effective adaptation method for Water Management, for instance, is increasing the amount of surface water retention to provide a cooling effect with evaporation, thus reducing the ambient heat in project areas. For Greening, in addition to providing shade to help people adapt to the high temperatures, planting trees on the west and south sides of homes provides the co-benefit of reducing the energy bill for cooling (Yan, Wang, Hao, & Dong, 2012). These three categories guided the studio in measuring the efficacy of range of landscape strategies.

Typologies While metrics measure the mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits of elements and functions such as bike lanes, water infiltration, or trees, typologies (i.e. strategic groupings of elements and functions) inform designers on strategies that best utilize those elements and functions. By first employing the formulas from the metrics, the studio created metric units that measure the average benefit of different elements and functions (e.g. One fast-growing tree sequesters 18,143 gCO2 per year). These metric units can be used by designers to get a general starting point when designing for mitigation of GHG emissions. By utilizing metric units within typologies, the studio shows how typologies are examples to demonstrate how to apply the metrics in design.

Landscape Design Criteria The studio examined the issues in the TCC area and developed landscape design criteria to address these issues through a vision plan. While the metrics address mitigation of strategies, the criteria and strategies provide benefits related to adaption. The criteria developed are: Reduce Ambient Temperature, Improve Air Quality, Increase Greenspace, Increase Connectivity, and Improve

Table 0.1

Checklist of Metrics MITIGATION

Transportation GHG

Reduction

ADAPTATION Temperature Reduction

CO-BENEFITS Air Quality Improvement

Economic Public Ecology Health

Electric Vehicles Bus Stops Bike Lanes/ Bike Shares Cool Pavements Carpooling/ Vanpooling

Water Management

Water-energy Saving

Drought Ground Water Temperature Water Quality Economic Public Ecology Adaptation Recharge Decrease Improvement Health

Stormwater Collection Graywater Recycling Water Infiltration

Greening

Carbon Sequestration

Temperature Decrease

Air Quality Improvement

Economic Public Ecology Health

Trees Other Vegetations

Soil Management

Carbon Sequestration

Temperature Decrease

Economic Public Ecology Health

Constructed Wetland Recycled Soil Wood Burial Soil Cooling

Waste Diversion

Carbon Sequestration

Economic Public Ecology Health

Recycling Bins Recycled Materials Water Management. To fulfill these criteria, the 606 Studio identified the elements and functions able to be implemented in the TCC area. The studio categorized these elements and functions into three main strategies: circulation (bike lanes, light-colored pavement, public transportation, etc.), water management (stormwater

management, graywater management, and groundwater infiltration, etc.), and greening (parks, trees, bioswales, etc.). Each of these strategies fulfills one or more of the criteria and address the challenges identified in the TCC area. ix

Map 0.1: Rendered Vision Plan x

0.5

2 Mile

Vision Plan The five-square mile boundary of the TCC area included projects that complied with the TCC criteria and were chosen by the city of Fresno. These projects have different goals, stakeholders and designers. (For an example of how the metrics could be used to measure the mitigation of a designed project, see Appendix D). However, instead of helping design each of these projects, the 606 Studio used a landscape planning process to achieve a strategic vision plan for dealing with issues in the TCC area. The 606/TCC Vision Plan addresses the issues from the analysis by incorporating landscape strategies from into the appropriate locations parts of the TCC area. The vision plan also explains how the elements and functions can use typologies to provide mitigation, adaptation, or co-benefits to communities in the TCC area. Finally, the vision plan includes three major networks: circulation, water management, and greening (See Map 0.1: Rendered Vision Plan).

Urban Contexts The studio then developed urban contexts that illustrated how the range of typologies could best be applied to the different types of zones in the TCC area. To assess the effectiveness of elements used in each context, the 606 Studio developed a checklist (See Table 0.1: Checklist of Metrics). For instance, the implementation of strategies in downtown areas may differ from how they appear in residential areas because downtown areas have more points of interest than residential areas. Consequently, the studio designed typologies differently based on the diversity of zones and projects within the TCC area. Designers can also use the metrics to measure the effectiveness of their designs. One member of the studio developed a site design for the Yosemite Village Permaculture Garden, one of the projects in the TCC area (See Appendix D). This resident-led community garden incorporates elements of Greening, Transportation and Water Management. These elements and functions were measured using the metrics to calculate the mitigation trees, bike lanes, and stormwater reuse.

Lessons Learned Developing measurable landscape strategies is a difficult but an exciting process, because it involves creating new and innovative tools to assist practitioners in resolving issues related to climate change. Throughout the course of the project life, the 606 Studio employed different skills to address the various situations it encountered. Understanding the context

of a city and focusing in on a project scope required different skills than working with city governments, communities, firms, and studio members. Some challenges are typical among any landscape design firm while others were specific to the Measurable Change project. With the development of measurable landscape typologies, the studio had to understand that it could not create a comprehensive vision plan for the project site. Therefore, the vision plan and typologies do not illustrate specific site designs, but are tools that could be used by future designers. While the vision plan helps identify the opportunities for implementing strategies within the TCC area, the typologies measure the impacts of those strategies in different areas.

Recommendations The studio developed policy and design recommendations based on its experience of developing strategies, metrics and typologies to address climate change and disadvantaged communities. Policy-makers need to be pro-active in protecting the communities most-sensitive to climate change impacts, instead of only focusing on the mitigation of GHGs. Other recommendations were for designers, who should incorporate strategies that involve mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits into their designs. Future professionals can build on the work in the Measurable Change, developing more comprehensive measuring tools for planners and policy-makers.

Conclusion Within the school year of 2018, the 606 Studio followed a workflow that was iterative and covered a range of topics (See Figure 0.2: Project Workflow). As a catalyst which introduces measurable landscape strategies, Measurable Change offers several ideas for future development. As shown above, the metrics, typologies, and urban contexts provide tools for designers and policy-makers to use in the fight against climate change. In 2017, the drought in California caused policy-makers to re-think about policies regarding water. In the same way, by developing a standard vocabulary surrounding climate change, and by incorporating interactive strategies that produce measurable outcomes, the future of society can be better prepared to face future global impacts.

Figure 0.2

Project

Chapter1. Chapter1. Project Project Overview Overview Climate Change Policies & Policies TCC & TCC 606 Studio 606 StudioClimate Change Introduction Introduction

Background Background of Fresno of Fresno Chapter2. Chapter2. HistoricalHistorical Fresno Fresno

Current Fresno Current Fresno

ClimateClimate ChangeChange ImpactsImpacts Chapter3. Chapter3. on Fresno on Fresno Environmental Impacts ImpactsSocio-Cultural Environmental Impacts Impacts Socio-Cultural

Methods Methods and Metrics and Metrics for for Chapter4. Chapter4. Landscape Landscape Strategies Strategies Transportation Transportation GreeningGreening Water Management Water Management Soil Soil Wast andWast Recycling and Recycling MitigationMitigation

Adaptation Adaptation Co-beneﬁts Co-beneﬁts

Chapter5. Chapter5.Metrics Metrics Typologies Typologies

Communities Communities in inlandinareas inland areas face challenges face challenges associated associated with with climate change. climate change. VISION VISION Opportunities Opportunities exist to enhance exist to enhance the livability the livability and response and response to to climate change. climate change. Develop Develop landscape landscape planningplanning and design andstrategies design strategies that utilize that utilize measurement measurement metrics to metrics help to help vulnerable vulnerable populations populations mitigate mitigate and adapt and toadapt climate tochange climate change GOALS GOALS issues inissues Fresno, in California. Fresno, California.

1. Compile 1. Compile and develop and develop metrics to metrics counter to counter climate climate change that change measure that measure landscape landscape actions for actions planning for planning and design and design 2. Develop 2. Develop a masteraplan master thatplan that integrates integrates all projects all projects for for maximum maximum impact using impact using indicators indicators as a guideline as a guideline

OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVES

3. Produce 3. Produce design alternatives design alternatives for selected for selected projects projects that that exhibit measurable exhibit measurable landscape landscape solutionssolutions to the causes to theand causes and impacts impacts of climate ofchange climate change

4. Provide 4. the Provide City of theFresno City of Fresno with practical with practical suggestions suggestions for for future landscape future landscape planningplanning and and design projects design projects that address that address climate change climate issues change issues

Transportation Transportation Electric Vehicles Electric Vehicles Public Transportation Public Transportation Carpooling/ Carpooling/ VanpoolingVanpooling Cool Pavements Cool Pavements Active Transportation Active Transportation

Greening Greening Trees

Trees

Other Vegetations Other Vegetations

Water Management Water Management Stormwater Stormwater Management Management GraywaterGraywater Recycling Recycling Water Inﬁltration Water Inﬁltration

Soil

Constructed Constructed WetlandsWetlands

Wood Burial Wood Burial

Recycled Soil Recycled Soil

Soil Cooling Soil Cooling

Wast and Recycling Wast and Recycling Recycling Materials Recycling Materials

xii

Recycled Bins Recycled Bins

1. Analyze 1. the Analyze impacts the impacts of GHG of GHG emissions emissions and pollution and pollution on the on the environmental environmental and biological and biological functionsfunctions of the plan of the areaplan area

PLANNING PLANNING

2. Identify 2. the Identify mostthe vulnerable most vulnerable OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVES communities communities aﬀected aﬀected by theseby these changeschanges in environmental in environmental functionsfunctions 3. Identify 3. the Identify impacted the impacted areas areas of largestofconcern largest concern for for disadvantaged disadvantaged communities communities 4. Develop 4. Develop a strategic a strategic vision vision plan to address plan to address the challenges the challenges in the TCC in the areaTCC area

Workflow

Planning Process

DATA MINING

ANALYSIS

Biophysical Socio-cultural Metric Development

Chapter6.

Measurable Vision and Application Master Plan Goal and Objectives Landscape Criteria TCC Vision Plan Planning Strategies

Air Quality Water Conditions Thermal Conditions Park Poor Areas Vulnerable Communities Circulation

Contextual Typology CRITERIA & STRATEGIES

VISION PLANNING

Reduce Temperature Improve Air Quality Increase Greenspcae Increase Connectivity Improve Water Management

Downtown (Downtown Fresno) Mixed-Use (Chinatown) Residential (Southwest Fresno)

Use criteria and metrics to maximize adaptation and mitigation actions with co-beneďŹ ts

Chapter7.

TYPOLOGY

The vision plan countering climate change impacts assessed by the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation metrics

Discussion for Moving Forward Lessons Learned

Inventory and Analysis Community Outreach and Interviews Working with Organizations

Future Recommendations DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

Lessons Learned and Future Recommendations Assessment of Design Process

For Policy-Makers For Local Businesses For Landscape Architects

xiii

Table of Contents iv vi xiv xvii

Acknowledgements Executive Summary Table of Contents Lists of Figures, Tables, & Maps

1 PROJECT OVERVIEW

5 6 14 24 26 29 30

606 Studio Introduction to Climate Change Climate Change Policies Fresno Goals and Objectives Methods and Approaches Conclusion

33 BACKGROUND OF FRESNO 37 History 48 Current Conditions in Fresno 74 Conclusion

77 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON FRESNO 80 Climate Change Impacts in Fresno 86 Sources of GHG in Fresno 92 Conclusion

xiv

95 METRICS FOR LANDSCAPE STRATEGIES 98 110 118 126 133 136

Transportation Water Management Urban Greening Soil Management Waste Diversion Conclusion

139 METRIC TYPOLOGIES 142 150 154 158 162 164

Transportation Typology Water Management Typology Greening Typology Soil Management Typology Waste Diversion Typology Conclusion

167 MEASURABLE VISION AND APPLICATION 170 172 188 192 202 210

Goal and Objectives Analysis Landscape Criteria 606/TCC Vision Plan Urban Contexts Conclusion

213 DISCUSSION FOR MOVING FORWARD 214 Lessons Learned 219 Recommendations

223 REFERENCES 224 Glossary 230 Bibliography

269 THE 606 STUDIO 270 606 Instructors 271 606 Team

Appendix on CD

xvi

Lists of Figures, Tables, & Maps Figures vii Figure 0.1 Timeline of Phases and Methods xii Figure 0.2 Project Workflow 4 Figure 1.1 606 Studio 9 Figure 1.2 US Greenhouse Gas Emissions 15 Figure 1.3 Global Climate Change Policies 20 Figure 1.4 Cap and Trade 21 Figure 1.5 Cap and Dividend 26 Figure 1.6 Comprehensive Workflow 27 Figure 1.7 Studio Objectives 28 Figure 1.8 Planning Objectives 29 Figure 1.9 Methods and Approaches 45 Figure 2.1 Movement of City Center 46 Figure 2.2 Vegetation Degradation 48 Figure 2.3 Fresno as a Disadvantaged Community 49 Figure 2.4 Temperature Records in Fresno 49 Figure 2.5 Irregular Patterns of Precipitation in Fresno 52 Figure 2.6 Geomorphology and Susceptibility to Air Pollution 52 Figure 2.7 Wind Patterns 54 Figure 2.8 Groundwater Levels in Fresno 55 Figure 2.9 History of Water Table in Fresno 55 Figure 2.10 Drought Sensitivity in Fresno 66 Table 2.2 Urban Surface Covers 86 Table 3.1 Source Emissions in Fresno 101 Figure 4.1 Indirect GHG Emissions from Electric Vehicles 102 Figure 4.2 Petroleum-based Transportation Metric 103 Figure 4.3 Electric Vehicle Metric 104 Figure 4.4 Bike Lanes and Bikeshare Metrics 107 Figure 4.5 Daily Surface Temperature 111 Figure 4.6 Process of Water-Related Energy Consumption 111 Figure 4.7 Water - Energy Use 114 Figure 4.8 Water Energy Use per Acre-Foot in Specific Location 115 Figure 4.9 Wind Cooling 120 Figure 4.10 Urban Greening Metric 122 Figure 4.11 Park Cooling Intensity 128 Figure 4.12a Constructed Wetland Metric 129 Figure 4.12b Constructed Wetland Metric (continued) xvii

131 Figure 4.13 Soil Sequestration Metric 131 Figure 4.14 Wood Burial Metric 133 Figure 4.15 Waste Diversion Metric 143 Figure 5.1 Bike Lane Unit 143 Figure 5.2 Bikeshare Unit 144 Figure 5.3 New/Expanded Bus System 145 Figure 5.4 Bus Stop Unit 146 Figure 5.5 Carpooling Unit 147 Figure 5.6 Electric Vehicle Unit 148 Figure 5.7 Charging Station Unit 149 Figure 5.8 Transportation Typology 151 Figure 5.9 Water Unit 151 Figure 5.10 Stormwater Volume 151 Figure 5.11 Graywater Volume 152 Figure 5.12 Aquifer Recharge 153 Figure 5.13 Water Management Typology 155 Figure 5.14 Tree Carbon Sequestration Unit 157 Figure 5.15 Greening Typology 159 Figure 5.16 Wood Burial Unit 159 Figure 5.17 Recycled Soil Unit 159 Figure 5.18 Constructed Wetland Soil 161 Figure 5.19 Soil Management Typology 162 Figure 5.20 Recycled Materials Unit (Aluminium) 163 Figure 5.21 Waste Diversion Typology 164 Figure 5.22 Summary of Measurable Units 171 Figure 6.1 Project Workflow 204 Figure 6.2 Downtown Context 206 Figure 6.3 Mixed-Use Context 209 Figure 6.4 Residential Context

Tables ix Table 0.1 Checklist of Metrics 17 Table 1.1 Comparison of Climate Change Policies 50 Table 2.1 Air Pollution Sources 72 Table 2.3 Comparison of Disadvantaged Factors 99 Table 4.1 Model Year 2017 Ratings 105 Table 4.3 Adjustment Factor 105 Table 4.4 Activity Center Credit 109 Table 4.5 Checklist of Transportation Metrics 117 Table 4.6 Checklist of Water Management Metrics 121 Table 4.7 Tree Species and Carbon Sequestration 123 Table 4.8 Urban Greening Co-Bene its 125 Table 4.9 Checklist of Urban Greening Metrics 130 Table 4.10 Fuel CO2 Emission Factors xviii

132 Table 4.11 Checklist of Soil Management Metrics 134 Table 4.12 Recycled Material Emission Factors 135 Table 4.13 Checklist of Waste Diversion Metrics 165 Table 5.1 Checklist of Metrics 180 Table 6.1 Park Amenity Preferences 182 Table 6.2 Comparison of Vulnerable Communities 203 Table 6.3 Mitigation of Downtown Context 205 Table 6.4 Mitigation of Mixed-Use Context 208 Table 6.5 Mitigation of Residential Context 211 Table 6.3 Checklist of Metrics

Maps x Map 0.1: Rendered Vision Plan 36 Map 2.1: Fresno in its California Context 51 Map 2.3: Air Pollution Percentiles (PM 2.5) in California 53 Map 2.4: Ozone Pollution in California 56 Map 2.5: Drought in California 59 Map 2.6: Poverty Rate in California 60 Map 2.7: Unemployment Rate in California 62 Map 2.8: Asthma Rates in Fresno are Among the Worse in California 63 Map 2.9: Low Birth Weight in California 65 Map 2.10: Park Acres per 1000 Residents in Fresno 68 Map 2.11: Urban Heat Island Effect in Fresno 69 Map 2.12: Traffic-Related Air Pollution in Fresno 70 Map 2.13: Water Basins in Fresno 71 Map 2.14: Normalized Difference Vegetation Index in Fresno 73 Map 2.15: Overlap of Disadvantaged Factors in Fresno 87 Map 3.1: Sources of GHG Pollution in Fresno 113 Map 4.1: Water Conveyed from the CVP 173 Map 6.1: TCC Project Area Zones 175 Map 6.2: Traffic-Related Air Pollution in TCC Area 177 Map 6.3 Hydrology of TCC Area 179 Map 6.4: Surface Temperature within TCC Area 181 Map 6.5: Park Poverty in TCC Area 183 Map 6.6: Vulnerable Communities in TCC Area 185 Map 6.7: High Traffic Volume in TCC Area 186 Map 6.8: Existing Bike Lanes in TCC Area 187 Map 6.9: Points of Interest in TCC Area 193 Map 6.10: Vision Plan Diagram 195 Map 6.11: Vision Plan - Circulation 197 Map 6.12: Vision Plan - Water Management 199 Map 6.13: Vision Plan - Greening 201 Map 6.14: Rendered Vision Plan xix

01 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 606 Studio

1.2 Introduction to Climate Change 1.3 Climate Change Policies 1.4 Fresno 1.5 Goals and Objectives 1.6 Methods and Approaches 1.7 Conclusion

Burdened by climate change, disadvantaged communities, as defined in Senate Bill No. 535, face unequal proportions of environmental and sociocultural challenges (CalEPA, 2017). As a discipline which integrates art, science, and construction, landscape architecture is one of the most important and effective approaches available to respond to the unavoidable impacts of climate change (Rosenberg et al., 2011; Stead, 2014). While coastal cities deal with sea levels rising as an impact of climate change, inland communities like Fresno, California face a very different set of challenges, such as temperature increases and drought (Akbari & Rose, 2001; Koenig, 1999; Pataki et al., 2006). In this chapter, the 606 Studio introduces the topic of climate change, and discusses its causes, sources, and impacts. Global, national, and state policies are discussed as well as their implementation in the city of Fresno. Finally, the 606 Studio defines its project as Measurable Change, identifies its goals and objectives, and discusses the methods and approaches used in the process of the project.

The 606 Studio applies landscape architectural strategies to the city of Fresno

606 606 Studio Studio

Figure 1.1

606 606 Studio Studio

606 Studio

Stakeholders Stakeholders

606 Studio

Data Mining and DataAnalysis Mining and Analysis

Research Research

Stakeholders Stakeholders Stakeholders

Research

Planning Planning

Data Mining and Analysis

Stakeholders Data Mining DataAnalysis Mining and and Analysis Design Design

Research Research

Data Mining and Analysis

Research Planning Planning

Design Design

Planning

Design

The 606 studio mapping out the project sites in TCC area

1.1

606 Studio The 606 Studio is the capstone experience of the Master of Landscape Architecture (MLA) program at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. Since 1976, Faculty and MLA students in the studio have devoted an entire year to carefully and completely developing projects that cover a wide variety of topics, locales, and scales pertinent to landscape planning and design. Throughout these years, the 606 Studio had government agencies, NGOs, and communities as clients, usually working under a formal funded contract. This track record of practical and professional grade work on critical issues has greatly contributed to the national reputation of the graduate program, making it one of the top 11 MLA programs in the United States (DI, 2018). The Measurable Change 606 Studio of 20172018 focused on landscape architecture as it pertains to climate change. Providing technical

assistance to the city of Fresno, the studio was part of a collaborative effort to provide support that understands the causes, impacts, and solutions to the challenges at regional and local scale brought by global climate change. The 606 Studio researched the measurement metrics developed by CARB and then developed additional metrics to measure key landscape strategies, such as transportation, water etc. Finally, the studio developed typologies to apply to the variety of different types of sites and provide measurable strategies for the disadvantaged communities of Fresno and similar communities in arid inland area. The final deliverables included a measurable metric system, typologies of elements and functions, metric units with standard quantities, a strategic vision plan, and urban contexts that quantify the elements and functions on different zones of the TCC area (See Figure 1.1: 606 Studio). The 606 studio practicing their presentation for the instructors

1.2

Introduction to Climate Change Climate change is a long-term process of global shifts in the earth’s climate and can refer to both increases and decreases in temperature on a global scale (Stern & Kaufmann, 2014). Within the past 50 years, there has been much discussion about climate change and its causes (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007; NASA, 2018a; UNFCCC, 2014a). It is now widely accepted by the scientific community that the temperature of the earth has been increasing (Akbari & Matthews, 2012; D’Amato, Cecchi, D’Amato, & Annesi-Maesano, 2014). Historically, “climate change” was caused by natural causes as well as anthropogenic, or human-made causes. Today, the term is more often used to describe anthropogenic global warming that generally brings negative impacts to earth’s environment as well as the health of humans. California dairy plant along freeway 99 on the way to Fresno, an industrial site that contributes to GHG

1.2

A dairy factory in Chinatown, Fresno which also contributes to GHG

Causes of Climate Change Natural and Anthropogenic Causes Before industry was at the forefront of development, climate changes occurred from natural causes. These changes could have occurred from internal processes such as natural climate variability (Stern & Kaufmann, 2014). Another reason for the change in climate is from external forcing (increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations), such as solar irradiance and volcanism (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007). These natural forces may have contributed to the warming of the earth in the past, but it is very unlikely that this pattern of global warming observed during the past fifty years is due to only natural causes (McNeill, 2010). While natural forces like solar irradiance and volcanism do contribute to climate change, they only contribute to about 25% of the 20th-century temperature increase (Crowley, 2000). Therefore, the remaining 75% must be from other sources. The Industrial Revolution in the 18th century and its

introduction of machinery that relied on fossil fuels began a trend that persists today. Since the 1850s, the primary source of increased atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has been from â€œfossil fuel use, with land-use change providing another significant but smaller contributionâ€? (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007, p. 2). In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that the temperature of the earth has warmed about 1.5 degrees Celsius in the past decade. Experts agree that the main cause of this current global warming trend is due to the human expansion of the greenhouse effect: warming that results when the atmosphere with increased proportion of GHGs traps and prevents heat radiating from earth back into space (McNeill, 2010; NASA, 2018a)

1.2

Greenhouse Gases Different human activities and land uses produce various types of emissions. An understanding of the range of greenhouse gases (GHGs) contributing to climate change is necessary to target efforts to reduce emissions associated with climate change and adapt to its effects. Four main GHGs, Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous Oxide, (N2O), and Fluorinated Gases (F-Gases) are produced in significant amounts by human-operated systems and are discussed below (US EPA, 2015b). CO2 accounts for 82% of all GHGs with electricity generation as the primary source of CO2 (35%), followed by transportation (32%), industrial processes (15%), residential and commercial sectors (10%), and other sources (7%) (US EPA, 2015b). While CO2 is present in the atmosphere, fossil fuel-based transportation and power stations exponentially increase the amounts of CO2 (Council, 2011; Stern & Kaufmann, 2014). Methane (CH4), a chemical accounting for 10% of GHGs, is largely attributed to natural gas and petroleum-burning systems (31%) followed by enteric fermentation that comes from agricultural processes (25%) and landfills (18%) poor manure management (10%), coal mining (9%) and other sources (7%) (Council, 2011; US EPA, 2015b). Although methane is produced in the United States at lower rates than CO2, it has a proportionately greater impact because it is more efficient at trapping radiation than CO2 (US EPA, 2015b). Research indicates that increased temperature causes an increase in the concentration of some atmospheric gases such as CO2 and CH4, but do not cause increases in other gases like nitrous oxide (N2O) (Stern & Kaufmann, 2014). This is because

gases like CO2 and CH4 are temperature-sensitive gases while Nitrous Oxide (N20) is not a temperature-sensitive gas. N20, the third most common human-produced GHG, makes up 5% of GHGs and is mainly composed of agricultural byproducts (75%), followed by stationary combustion (7%), industrial or chemical production (6%), manure management (5%), transportation (5%), and other sources (US EPA, 2015b). N20 is a non-temperature-sensitive gas but still negatively impacts ecosystems and air quality (Stern & Kaufmann, 2014). Other gases, such hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, and nitrogen trifluoride are categorized as Fluorinated Gases, or F-gases and account for 3% of all GHGs. They are GHGs that come from a variety of industrial processes and are sometimes referred to as High Global Warming Potential gases because, while emitted in smaller quantities, for a given amount of mass, they trap substantially more heat than CO2 (United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2015) (See Figure 1.2: US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sources).

1.2

Figure 1.2

US Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Total Global Emissions in 2015 = 6,587 (Million Metric Tons of CO2 equivalent)

CO2 Electricity 35% Transportation 32% Industry 15%

100-year global warming potential 1

CO2

82%

CH4 Natural Gas & Petroleum 31% Enteric Fermentation25% LandďŹ lls 18%

N2O

Agricultural Soil Management 75%

28-36

CH4

10%

F-GAS 265-298 23,500

N2O F-GAS

Substitution of OzoneDepleting Substances 91%

(USEPA, 2015)

1.2 The Impacts of Climate Change Climate change has global consequences that affect nearly every aspect of the environment and living organisms. The most significant environmental impacts are the result of variations in temperature and precipitation. These factors have already affected human and environmental systems around the world: (1) Temperatures have increased to levels that impact residents’ health; (2) Extreme patterns of precipitation have increased the intensity of monsoons and flooding; and (3) Drought has intensified to the point of causing the demise of ecosystems, land subsidence and famine (Haines & Patz, 2004).

Evidence for Impact in Inland Communities Increased Temperature The globally increasing temperature impacts air, land and water, endangering sensitive ecosystems. Haines and Patz (2004) state that “since the 1850s when temperature records began, the world has warmed by approximately 0.6°C, largely in the last 3 decades” (p. 99). The IPCC predicts an increase of between 1.8°C and 5.8°C during the next century (Haines & Patz, 2014). Increased heat is more obvious in urban areas than in rural areas. Hot weather combined with other elements, such as air pollutants and heat absorbing surfaces, brings higher temperatures to urban areas, especially in large cities and metropolises (Gill, Handley, Ennos, & Pauleit, 2007). In these areas, the additional rise in temperature is called urban heat island (UHI) (Hidalgo, Masson, Baklanov, Pigeon, & Gimeno, 2008). In general, the urban temperature can be 33.8-37.4 degrees Fahrenheit higher than the surrounding rural temperature (US EPA, 2014b). Urban areas, typically contain more impervious surfaces (e.g., roofs, parking lots, pavements, etc.) and fewer permeable surfaces (e.g., green spaces, etc.), than rural areas, which contribute to higher surface and thus air temperature. UHI can also be affected by the type and color of pavement present, with darker 10

surfaces absorbing more heat than lighter, reflective ones (Mohajerani, Bakaric, & Jeffrey-Bailey, 2017). UHI increases the air temperature and has impacts on human health, especially for sensitive populations like children under 14 and elderly persons above 65.

Heat-Caused Increases in Air Pollution Human health can also be impacted by heatcaused increases in air pollution, earlier pollination seasons, and an expanded range of viruses. The impact of some air pollutants on health appears to be stronger during summer months or during high temperatures (Haines and Patz, 2004). For example, ozone levels that contribute to many health problems tend to rise approximately 17% when temperature increases 1°C (Mookerjee, 2017). In addition, higher temperatures in winter also have impacts. Warmer winters may result in an earlier start of the grass pollination season and an increase in CO2 levels, escalating the incidence of allergic rhinitis (Haines and Patz, 2004). Furthermore, high temperatures expand the geographic range of viruses and allow more time for carriers like mosquitoes to affect human beings and other organisms. For example, “when West Nile virus appeared in the United States in the summer of 1999, the July temperatures in New York were the hottest on record” (Haines and Patz, 2004, p 102). In other cases, hotter temperatures may help viruses proliferate in the places which are previously cold.

Increase of Irregular Precipitation Patterns Monsoons, hurricanes, and wet spells have become increasingly common because of climate change and have spread to the areas that were previously unaffected (D’Amato et al., 2014). Scientists found that “wet spells have grown more intense during the recent period” (Nature, 2014, p. 11), and have led to a higher risk of floods. Although the probability of huge floods may be low, when they occur, they cause major economic and physical hardship to local people. For example, Houston, Texas faced a massive flood in the summer of 2017

Increased temperature due to low tree shade and the absorption of heat from asphalt

in which 9 trillion gallons of water poured on the city within two days, producing as much as 60 inches of rain (Bogost, 2017). Even in California, cities like Tulare and Fresno have experienced flooding and its devastating effects, such as the flood in May of 1998 in which crops were damaged (Lobell, Torney, & Field, 2011).

Flooding affects the Central Valley communityâ€™s living (Randy Pench)

1.2

Intensified Drought While flooding may occur in the Central Valley, one of the most destructive impacts of climate change is drought. From 2012 to 2017, California faced a record-breaking drought, damaging crops and destroying trees (USDA, 2016). The drought intensified the decline of water tables and brought significant impacts to the state’s resources (CAGOV, 2015). To respond to the drought, California has increased its groundwater pumping (Siade, Nishikawa, & Martin, 2015). Over the past century, California has drained groundwater resources by 150-200 million acre-feet, with most of the depletion occurring in the Central Valley and in Southern California (Harter, 2017). Some of the impacts persist for a long time, even expanding beyond post-drought periods and impacting the economy such as in the loss of timber resources (CAGOV, 2015). Drought also affects the environment by impacting plant growth, threatening animal species, and increasing land subsidence (Siade et al., 2015). In general, the growth of plant species is hindered in a drought period, the existing animal populations move to other areas because of drought, and land subsidence is accelerated with inadequate refill of groundwater during the drought. Plant growth can be reduced by drought because of very limited water supply, especially to natural plants in forests. Unlike lawns and domestic plants, which can get water from man-made irrigation systems, natural plants depend on rainfall and groundwater that have been significantly decreased by drought. An article from the USDA analyzed tree growth and the mortality of the local forests during the 1950s drought and the 1980s drought in the southeast United States (USDA, 2014). The drought directly affected trees by limiting growth or causing mortality. It also indirectly affected trees by predisposing “trees to damage from other abiotic (e.g., fire) or biotic (e.g., disease and pathogens)

factors” (Klos et al, 2009, p 700). The drought in California destroyed a huge part of the greenery and left more than 100 million trees dead (US Forest Service, 2016) Fauna tend to diminish between drought periods and post-drought periods because different organisms survive in different environmental conditions. The species that once occupied a region in drought period may change after the drought. Animals tend to leave an area after drought has occurred, thus affecting the ecosystems that rely on them (Ellis & Taylor 2014). Conversely, increased rainfall and new food resources in woodlands generate more hospitable habitats and thus a higher species diversity and abundance. Land subsidence is another impact of drought. It is not generally triggered by drought alone but is often accelerated by drought when groundwater is over-pumped, leading to a decrease in the water table. Because of the excessive overdraft, the groundwater cannot support the land above in some places, causing the land to subside. Land subsidence is not attributed to a few farmers drawing groundwater over the past year but is the result of more than a century of groundwater exploitation in California (Harter, 2017). In places like Antelope Valley, California, in which the groundwater provided 50–90% of the total water supply in the area, groundwater pumping has resulted in as much as six feet of subsidence (Siade et al, 2015). Lastly, agriculture is also significantly impacted by drought. Bradbear and Friel (2013) write that food yields around the world were affected because of changes in average temperatures and rainfall patterns, water quality and availability. Many regions suffer from food issues that result from these changes. For instance, in Sub-Saharan Africa, climate change is commonly recognized as a major issue likely to have negative consequences on food

Dried out water resources in the city of Fresno; an impact of drought

security and livelihoods (Connolly-Boutin et al, 2016). The United States also recognizes the impacts on agriculture. When California experienced the drought of 2012-2017, water shortages for agriculture severely affected the Central Valley (USDA, 2016). In the future, climate change is expected to have a greater impact on food prices (Bradbear & Friel, 2013). The areas that have lost agriculture will have to buy food from other regions or other countries. Depending on the demand for imported food products, the prices can increase dramatically. It is for this reason, that drought is one of the most significant impacts of climate change.

Conclusion Increased temperature, precipitation, and drought that result from climate change have affected many areas and populations all over the world. Although these are only three of the many impacts of climate change, they have already caused immense problems. Increased temperatures threaten human health. Increased precipitation brings flooding. Finally, drought threatens the ecosystem, water supply, land stability, and agriculture of many regions. These impacts will continue to worsen until humans work together and reverse the climate change.

1.3

Climate Change Policies Global, national, and state and local policies have been enacted to address the challenges of climate change by reducing the production of GHGs and helping people and environments adapt to the impacts of climate change. All the acts, regulations, and policies which are described here seek to either: 1) reduce GHG emissions in order to mitigate climate change, or 2) take actions to counteract or adapt to the effects of climate change. Clearly defining and distinguishing mitigation and adaptation is critical for understanding how climate change policy relates to landscape architecture because different design responses produce greater degrees of mitigation or adaptation. NASA describes mitigation as: Mitigation - involves reducing the flow of heat-trapping GHGs into the atmosphere, either by reducing sources of these gases (for example, the burning of fossil fuels for electricity, heat or transport) or enhancing the “sinks” that accumulate and store these gases (such as the oceans, forests and soil). The goal of mitigation is to avoid significant human interference with the climate system, and stabilize GHG levels in a timeframe sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, ensure that food production is not threatened and to

enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner (NASA, 2018b). The EPA explains that “Mitigation of climate change refers to actions being taken to reduce GHG emissions and to enhance the sinks that trap or remove carbon from the atmosphere to reduce the extent of global climate change” (EHP & NIH, 2010, p. 4). NASA defines adaptation as: Adaptation – “The goal is to reduce our vulnerability to the harmful effects of climate change [such as temperature increases, air pollution, and water issues]” (NASA’s Global Climate Change, 2017). Over the past century, different policies and conventions have been established through the collaborative efforts of many organizations and nations. The 606 Studio developed its understanding of climate mitigation and adaptation policies by carefully examining these three examples (See Figure 1.3: Global Climate Change Policies).

Figure 1.3

Global Climate Change Policies 4 7

3 5

9 8

Climate Change Policies Global Mitigation

2. California Global Warming Solutions Act

1997 2006 1. Kyoto Protocol

3. Cap and Dividend

State Mitigation Adaptation

9. US Removal from Paris Agreement

2017

2013 2012

4. Copenhagen

Mitigation Adaptation

7. Paris Agreement

5. Cap and Trade

2009

National

2015 6. Presidentâ€™s Climate Action Plan

2017 8. Senate Bill 535

The 606 Team on their way to meet with Fresno city officials at City Hall

1.3

Global Policies Since the late 1980s, with the development of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), international discussions have been conducted on the individual responsibility of nations to address emissions (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), 2014a). The UNFCCC, adopted in 1992, established international conferences that address the issues surrounding climate change (UNFCCC, 2018). They serve as the meetings among UNFCCC Parties (Conference of the Parties, COP) in which they assess progress in dealing with climate change (United Nations Climate Change, 2017). These meetings were pivotal in negotiating the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 and establishing obligations with developed countries to reduce their GHG emissions (IISD, 2009; United Nations Climate Change, 2017). The first UN Climate Change Conference was held in 1995 in Berlin. (United Nations Climate Change, 2017). In 1997, the UNFCCC’s Kyoto Protocol became the first step towards achieving more extensive global emission reductions. It also set the binding emission targets for developed countries that have ratified it, such as the EU Member States, and limited the amount each country was allowed to increase its emissions for the first commitment period from 2008 to 2012 (EEA, 2007). “The Kyoto Protocol set out specific commitments by individual developed countries to reduced emissions by an average of 5.2% below 1990 levels by the period 2008-2012” (WNA, 2017). The next important international conference regarding climate change was the Copenhagen Summit (Cop 15) which is the 15th conference of UNFFCCC. The Copenhagen Accord contained a longterm goal of limiting the maximum global average temperature increase to no more than two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels (UNFCCC, 2014b). The 2009 Copenhagen Accord represented another version of “pledge, implement, and review” and became the first international climate agreement

that established mitigation actions by the involved countries (Aldy, 2017, p. 101). In the Copenhagen Accord, the participating countries agreed on being much more transparent than in the past agreements and focused on “expanding measurement, reporting, and verification of developed countries’ mitigation and establishing a system of international consultations and analysis for developing country mitigation (Aldy, 2017, p. 101). International consultations and analysis requires regular reporting on emission mitigation subject to expert, third-party review and a facilitative sharing of views among nations. Such transparency over emission mitigation could build trust among countries and increase credibility. In 2009, at the Pittsburgh G-20 summit, the leaders of the twenty largest nations agreed to “phase out and rationalize over the medium term inefficient fossil fuel subsidies while providing targeted support for the poorest” (G-20 Leaders, 2009). This agreement to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies represented a “fundamentally different approach to tackling climate change than the Kyoto Protocol” (Aldy, 2017, p. 99) (See Table 1.1: Comparison of Climate Change Policies). According to UNFCCC, “industrialized countries’ GHG emissions were 10–15 % below their 1990 levels over 2008– 2012” (UNFCCC, 2014b). This surpassed the Protocol’s aggregate goal of 1990—five percent over the first commitment period (Aldy, 2017). On December 12, 2015, the Conference of the Parties (COP 21) gathered in Paris. At the gathering, the participating nations UNFCCC reached a revolutionary agreement to combat climate change and to “accelerate and intensify the actions and investments needed for a sustainable low carbon future” (UNFCCC, 2017). Although the global temperature is increasing, the focus of the Paris Agreement was to help countries respond to the threat of climate change by keeping global temperature rise this century from reaching two

1.3

Table 1.1

Comparison of Climate Change Policies Pittsburgh

Kyoto

What

Non-binding leadersâ€™ agreement

Legally-binding treaty instrument

Who

Developed and emerging nations; open club

Industrialized countries; closed club

Focus

Focus on policy instruments â€“ agree on government policy level (reform energy prices)

Focus on environmental outcomes (economy-wide emission goals)

Outcome

Independent review of actions and nationally-reported reforms

Nationally reported emission inventories

Process

20 country process

190+ country process (Aldy, 2017)

degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The Paris Agreement went above and beyond, seeking to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius (UNFCCC, 2017). In addition to cutting carbon emissions, the agreement focused on dealing with the impacts of climate change, addressing the ways communities can adapt to the impacts (UNFCCC, 2017; WNA, 2017). Despite these advances in pursuing environmentally responsible initiatives, US President, Donald Trump, before he became president, claimed that global warming is a hoax concocted by China to weaken the competitive industrial power of the US (Politifact, 2016). He then announced on June 1, 2017 that he had decided to pull the US out of the nonbinding Paris Agreement (Zhang, Chao, Zheng, & Huang, 2017), altering the involvement of the US in the fight on climate change.

1.3

National Policies In the early 1960s, the issue of global climate change was first addressed in United States (Bodansky & Diringer, 2010). The United States’ policy toward climate change has evolved over the years, and the political evolution can be seen through the Clean Air Act, President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, the US EPA’s climate change action plan, and recently President Trump’s decision to take the US out of the Paris Agreement.

The Regulations of GHGs Under the Clean Air Act In 2011, the regulations of GHGs were enacted under Clean Air Act (US EPA, 2015a). The Clean Air Act regulates GHG emissions from mobile and stationary sources (US EPA, 2015a). Mobile sources are covered by the light-duty vehicle GHG emission standards and the corporate average fuel economy standards rule (United States Congress, 1990). Stationary sources include fossil fuel power plants and refineries , which are two of the largest sources of the nation’s GHG emissions (US EPA, 2015c). These regulations directly limit the GHG emission from the two biggest mobile and stationary sources. They are an effective mitigation approach at the national scale. However, for the small-scale and localized GHG emissions sources, the regulations are less effective because smaller emissions are not regulated nearly as much (United States Congress, 1990).

President’s Obama’s Climate Action Plan In 2013, President Obama issued his climate action plan, which included three goals: cut carbon pollution in America, prepare the United States for the impacts of climate change, and lead international efforts to address global climate change (Executive Office of the President, 2013). The Obama administration suggested that the whole

country cut carbon pollution by deploying clean energy, building a 21st-century transportation sector, and cutting energy waste in homes, businesses, and factories (The President’s Climate Action Plan, 2013). The President’s action plan also addresses climate adaptation approaches. The president encouraged building stronger and safer communities and infrastructure, protecting the US economy and natural resources, and using evidence-based strategies to manage climate impacts (The President’s Climate Action Plan, 2013). Finally, the action plan also proposed to collaborate with other counties to address climate change (The President’s Climate Action Plan, 2013).

US EPA Climate Change Adaptation Plan (2014) Building on the President’s climate change action plan, in 2014, the US EPA published its Climate Change Adaptation Plan to implement further steps on addressing climate change’s effects and prepare for the impact of climate change on disadvantaged communities (US EPA, 2014a). The EPA started to assess climate change vulnerabilities by analyzing the potential impacts of climate change on some of EPA’s own programs. They pointed out the data, information, and research that needed to be performed in the future. Some of these suggestions include: • Characterization of local impacts to precipitation and hydrology for use in planning long-lived water infrastructure. • Monitoring shifts in water quality and aquatic ecosystems in watersheds, and methods for incorporating such changes into water quality programs. • Monitoring potential impact of more intense weather events on EPA’s disaster response planning efforts. • Evaluating site-specific impacts of climate change on Brownfields, Corrective Action Facilities under

1.3

the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Superfund sites, RCRA Treatment, Storage and Disposal (TSD) facilities, non-hazardous solid waste facilities, and Leaking Underground Storage Tanks. • Examining effect of climate change on energy efficiency programs given changes in energy demand and supply. The interactions between climate and the stratospheric ozone layer. • Mitigating effects of climate change on multipollutant interactions in ecosystems. • A characterization of climate-related trends in chemical use (e.g., changing patterns of pesticide use and new chemical exposures to people and the environment), and implications for the review process for new chemicals or the registration process for new pesticides. (US EPA, 2014a) This plan prepared more accurate metrics to measure GHG emission reductions and assess the of effectiveness of diverse adaptation solutions (US EPA, 2014a). These metrics also pertain to landscape strategies, which will be discussed in Chapter 4 and include measurements like carbon sequestered from trees and vehicle-miles-traveled-reductions from bicycle lanes.

President Trump’s Administration on Climate Change President Trump has expressed that efforts to curb fossil fuel industries hurt the US’ global competitiveness (Washington, 2017). He pledged to roll back regulations placed on the oil and gas industry by the EPA under the Obama administration to boost the productivity of both sectors. Finally, as mentioned before, he announced that the US would withdraw from the Paris agreement, making him an outlier among the leaders of the developed world (WNA, 2017).

State Policies The California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) of 2006 requires a “statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions levels in 1990 be achieved by 2030” (California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2016). This act helped secure the state’s role as a global leader in climate change mitigation. While AB 4420 was the first bill to set standards for reducing climate change, AB 32 was the first to make a stance, specifically on GHG reduction and this law continues to guide California policies (CARB, 2017b; State of California, 2018). California has since created new laws that serve as tools for achieving the State’s climate goals (State of California, 2018). Tools such as cap and trade and solar and electric vehicle rebates are related to California’s legislative efforts to both mitigate causes of and counteract the negative impacts of climate change (CARB, 2017a). Besides AB 32 and the creation of the cap and trade program, other California climate regulations include the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and Disadvantaged Communities Senate Bill 535 (CARB, 2016) As the result of some of the state’s legislation and to meet California’s climate goals, the State created several agencies. Originally GHGs fell under administration of the California Energy Commission, which was responsible for managing emissions. Later, specific agencies such as California Climate Action Registry created by Senate Bill 1771, and other agencies such as the State Air Resources Board (ARB) helped manage GHGs (CARB, 2016).

1.3

Figure 1.4

Cap and Trade Purchase

Carbon Market

Sell

Excess GHG

Reduced GHG

This Year Next Year

Actual GHG Emissions

Disadvantaged Areas

Affluent Areas Disadvantaged Areas

Affluent Areas

Disproportionate Distribution

Cap and Trade To combat climate change systematically and strategically, California sought to develop effective tools to deal with the impacts of AB 32. Two different approaches that could be taken are a market-based strategy or a governmental approach. One example of a governmental approach would be to limit GHGs production through government regulation. This would give government direct control over the fight of climate change. Potential issues with a governmental approach indicate that California lacks regulatory infrastructure needed to oversee all the sources of GHG (London et al., 2013). Another potential issue is business opposition. A carbon tax would likely not be supported by many companies and special interests and may lead to brain drain or the law itself may not be passed. Instead of a governmental approach, the Governor approved a 20

Carbon Market (Mcgarrity, 2017)

bill in 2017 that would implement a market-based approach (Center for Resource Efficient Communities, 2017; State of California, 2018). This market approach resulted in the creation of California’s innovative cap and trade program. Cap and trade involves putting on a cap on the amount of GHG a business can release into the atmosphere and a market system determines where the pollution comes from. Companies that lower their emission rates below the cap are then able to sell emission rights to companies that pollute more. Every year, this cap is lowered, encouraging companies to emit less and the revenue generated form this “carbon market” is put into the GGRF, which helps to further reduce GHGs. (See Figure 1.4: Cap and Trade)

1.3

Cap and Dividend Detractors of the cap and trade program can deride it as a way of selling pollution. Furthermore, cap and trade is a mitigation strategy that puts unfair burden of adaptation on disadvantaged communities because it likely results in sources of pollution in areas with lower housing values less political clout to fight polluting industries, putting a disproportionate burden on these communities (Cyril, Smith, PossamaiInesedy, & Renzaho, 2015). An attempt to ease the issues with the Cap and Trade program took the form of the Disadvantaged Communities Senate Bill 535 (CARB, 2016). This bill and following state laws define disadvantaged communities based on income and negative factors such being in polluted areas (London et al., 2013). This law led to the creation of programs

Figure 1.5

such as the Transformative Climate Communities (TCC), a program that utilizes state funding to help communities most impacted by pollution. Senate Bill 535 also specified that a minimum of 10% with a goal of 25% of the GGRF would be allocated to helping these disadvantaged communities and TCC is the one of the programs implementing those projects (CLI, 2012). These implementations attempted to deal with some of the unfairness of the purely market based cap and trade program and the state created a cap and dividend program that uses money from the market to reinvest into disadvantaged communities to help them adapt to climate change (Oâ€™Mara-Eves et al., 2015). (See Figure 1.5: Cap and Dividend)

Cap and Dividend

Definition

Identification

Implementation

Senate Bill 535

California Air Resources Board

Transformative Climate Communities

Revenue from Auction Cap and Trade

10-25% Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund

Disadvantaged Communities

Funding 21

1.3

Transformative Climate Communities

Definition of Disadvantaged Communities

TCC is a California Climate Investment (CCI) program administered by the Strategic Growth Council (SGC), and implemented by various state agencies including the Department of Conservation (DOC) among others. TCC seeks to ameliorate issues of social justice by funding projects that reduce GHG emissions in disadvantaged communities that could be affected by the Cap and Trade Program. Actions to reduce GHGs will be done through the “development and implementation of neighborhood-level transformative climate community plans that include multiple, coordinated GHG emissions reduction projects that provide local economic, environmental, and health benefits to disadvantaged communities” (California Strategic Growth Council, 2017). These projects will be funded through grants from money from the GGRF which is generated through the cap and trade auction proceeds.

Senate Bill 535 also defines “disadvantaged community” in a way that combines environmental and socioeconomic challenges. Cyril et al. (2015) write that “disadvantaged populations are challenged by geographic access to healthcare, culturally inappropriate services, financial barriers, poor health literacy, and language barriers (1618), which impede their effective utilization of health services” (p. 2). Often related to income, education level, and public housing, people in these areas are defined as disadvantaged, “relative to the wider national population” (Cleland, Tully, Kee, & Cupples, 2012, p. 372; O’Mara-Eves et al., 2015). Because of the poor access to health care, these groups suffer from worse health outcomes such as lower life expectancy than non-disadvantaged groups (O’Mara-Eves et al., 2015). Senate Bill No. 535 states that the California EPA (CalEPA) would be required to “identify disadvantaged

1.3

communities for investment opportunitiesâ€? specifically allocating 25% of the GGRF to provide projects that would benefit disadvantaged communities (CLI, 2012). The SGC is responsible for selecting cities that would benefit from the GGRF based on Environmental Conditions (Environmental Effects and Exposures) and Sociocultural Conditions (Socioeconomic Factors and Sensitive Populations) (CalEPA, 2017). These cities work with the TCC to implement projects that fight climate change by mitigating GHGs, helping the communities adapt to climate change, or provide co-benefits.

Conclusion While there are benefits and shortcomings to global, national and state policies, they do seek to mitigate the sources of climate change and help people adapt to the impacts of climate change. The cap and trade system is one tool used by California to regulate the production of GHGs emissions. While the total production of GHG emissions may be reduced, the location of the polluted sources often disproportionately impacts disadvantaged communities. Because of this, California has established regulations to help these communities and provide a healthier and thriving future.

Air Pollution in Fresno due to constant traffic on streets

1.4

Fresno Fresno Transformative Climate Communities Collaborative As mentioned above, global, national and State policies have been enacted to address the sources of GHGs and how they impact communities. Fresno was chosen by the SGC as the ideal location to allocate cap and dividend funds because it meets the criteria as a disadvantaged community suffering from environmental and sociocultural challenges. (A more detailed analysis of these factors is illustrated in Chapter 2.2.) Specific areas such as Chinatown, Southwest Fresno, and Downtown Fresno are identified as some of areas with some of the most disadvantaged communities Homeless living on California Blvd in Chinatown Fresno

and their needs should be addressed (OEHHA, 2015) (discussed more in chapter 6). In accordance with the TCC requirements, the the City of Fresno chose a five-mile boundary that contained the most disadvantaged parts of the city. With many communities at-risk from climate change impacts, and now the funding to address the problem, Fresno is the perfect location for the 606 Studio to research and develop landscape strategies for addressing climate change.

Processing Plant in Southwest Fresno near the Yosemite Permaculture Project Sidewalk without paving or street trees decreases pedestrian use in Southwest Fresno on Kern St.

1.5

Goals and Objectives Figure 1.6

nities in inland Communities areas in inland areas allenges associated face challenges with associated with change. climate change. VISION unities exist Opportunities to enhance exist to enhance bility and response the livability to and response to change. climate change.

p landscape Develop planninglandscape planning ign strategies and that design utilize strategies that utilize ement metrics measurement to help metrics to help ble populations vulnerable mitigate populations mitigate pt to climate and change adapt to climateGOALS change n Fresno, California. issues in Fresno, California.

pile and develop 1. Compile and develop to counter climate metrics to counter climate that measure change that measure pe actions for landscape planningactions for planning ign and design

op a master2.plan Develop that a master plan that es all projects integrates for all projects for m impact using maximum impact using rs as a guideline indicators as a guideline

OBJECTIVES

uce design alternatives 3. Produce design alternatives cted projects forthat selected projects that measurable exhibit landscape measurable landscape s to the causes solutions and to the causes and of climate change impacts of climate change

de the City of 4. Fresno Provide the City of Fresno ctical suggestions with practical for suggestions for andscape planning future landscape and planning and projects thatdesign address projects that address change issues climate change issues

Comprehensive Workflow

The process of developing goals for the project was iterative, comprehensive, and VISION contextual. First, the studio studied the TCC requirements as well as all relevant policies and Planning Process procedures Planning Process regarding GHG emissions. Then, the Measurable studio examined geographic information system Chapter6. Chapter6. VisionMeasu Biophysical Biophysical and Application and A (GIS) dataSocio-cultural to identify spatial relationships DATA DATA Socio-cultural Metric Development Metric Development and sociocultural between the environmental MINING MINING Master Plan Ma factors impacting residents of Fresno, and GOALS specifically the neighborhoods of the project Goal and ObjectivesGoal an Air Quality Air Quality Criteria Lands boundary.Water In addition, data was gathered onLandscape the Water Conditions Conditions Thermal ConditionsThermal Conditions TCC Vision Plan TCC criteria of disadvantaged communities and their Park Poor Areas Park Poor Areas Planning Strategies Planni ANALYSIS ANALYSIS Vulnerable Communities Vulnerable Communities needs. After thorough analyses, the 606 Studio Circulation Circulation developed a project vision, goal, and objectives to govern its future work.

Contextual Typology Contextu

CRITERIA & STRATEGIES OBJECTIVES

VISION PLANNING

URBAN CONTEXT

PLANNING

fy the impacted 3. Identify areasthe impacted areas st concern for of largest concern for ntaged communities disadvantaged communities

op a strategic 4. Develop vision a strategic vision address theplan challenges to address the challenges CC area in the TCC area

to enhance livability and respond to the impacts of climate change.

Use criteria and metrics Use criteria to and metrics to VISION adaptation maximize maximize and Goal adaptation and The Project is: mitigation actions with mitigation actions with PLANNING landscape planning and design co-beneﬁts Develop co-beneﬁts

strategies that utilize measurement metrics to help for Moving Discussio For vulnerable populations mitigateChapter7. greenhouseDiscussion gasChapter7. emission and adapt to the inevitable impacts of The vision plan countering The vision plan countering change Fresno, California. (See Figure climate climate change impacts climateinchange impacts Lessons LearnedLesso assessed by Comprehensive the Climate assessed byWorkflow) the Climate TYPOLOGY 1.6: Change Mitigation and Change Mitigation and Adaptation metrics Adaptation metrics

Inventory and Analysis Inventor Community Outreach Community and Interview Ou To accomplish this goal, 11 measurable Working with Organizations Working w

ze the impacts 1. Analyze of GHGthe impacts of GHG ns and pollution emissions on theand pollution on the mental and environmental biological and biological ns of the plan functions area of the plan area

fy the most2. vulnerable Identify the most vulnerable OBJECTIVES nities aﬀected communities by these aﬀected by these s in environmental changes in environmental ns functions

Reduce Temperature Reduce Temperature Downtown Downtown Fresno)( The vision statement of the 606 Studio is: (Downtown Improve Air Quality Improve Air Quality CRITERIA Mixed-Use (Chinatown) Mixed-U Communities in inland areas face challenges Increase Increase Greenspcae & Greenspcae Residential (Southwest Residential Fresno)( Increase Connectivity Increase Connectivity STRATEGIES associated with climate change. Opportunities exist Improve Water Management Improve Water Management

PLANNING OBJECTIVES DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

objectives were created to evaluate the outcomes of the entire 606 Studio (See Figure 1.7: Studio Objectives). Future Recommendations Future Rec Lessons Learned and Lessons FutureLearned and Future

For Policy-Makers For Po Recommendations Recommendations The following chapters will explore DISCUSSION For Local Businesses For Loc & Fresno’s background, how it is impacted by Assessment of Design Assessment of Design CONCLUSION For Landscape Architects For Lands Process Process

climate change, metrics to measure landscape strategies, and landscape typologies that provide measurable examples of climate

1.5

Figure 1.7 Chapter 1

Studio Objectives Define 606, climate change, TCC context, mitigation and adaptation, disadvantaged communities, Goals, objectives

Introduce Fresnoâ€™s background as it pertains to climate change

Chapter 2 Identify existing conditions and disadvantaged communities in Fresno

Chapter 3

Identify the impacts of climate change in Fresno

Chapter 4

Compile and develop metrics that measure landscape actions

Chapter 5

Design metric typologies that exhibit measurable landscape strategies that address climate change

Analyze and identify issues and zones of concern within the TCC area that most impact disadvantaged communities

Chapter 6

Develop criteria and a vision plan that addresses the issues found from analysis of the TCC area

Develop urban contexts that incorporate different strategies based on diverse urban contexts

Distill lessons learned for future application in arid inland communities

Chapter 7 Provide practitioners with practical suggestions for future landscape planning and design projects that address climate change issues.

1.5

Figure 1.8 Analyze

Planning Objectives Analyze the impacts of GHG emissions and pollution on the environmental and biological functions of the plan area Identify the most vulnerable communities affected by these changes in environmental functions

Identify Identify the impacted areas of largest concern for disadvantaged communities

Develop

Develop a strategic vision plan to address the challenges in the TCC area

change mitigation, adaptation, and additional benefits. To design a vision plan and include the relevant projects that can effectively fulfill the goals, the 606 Studio also developed a set of planning objectives to guide the design process (See Figure 1.8: Planning Objectives). To achieve these objectives, the studio analyzed biophysical and socio-cultural data to identify the most impacted zones and communities in the project area. The studio then developed criteria that could best address issues in different zones. Next, the studio developed strategies that fulfilled each criteria, and a vision plan that showed all the ideal locations to implement each strategy. Finally, using the metric typologies, the studio illustrated how the elements and functions of each typology could be quantified in different urban contexts within the TCC area (See Figure 1.6: Comprehensive Workflow).

1.6

Methods and Approaches

606 Studio 606 Studio

The intent of this project was to focus on evidence-based planning and design, combining research from literature reviews with GIS analyses. The 606 Studio met with some key stakeholders, seeking opportunities for collaboration and information. The studio then examined the current scientific literature on climate change adaptation and mitigation in arid inland regions and the potential impact on disadvantaged communities. Conducting interviews and field observations, the studio acquired necessary information to understand

606 Studio Stakeholders 606 Studio Figure 1.9 Stakeholders

606 Studio

Methods and Approaches Stakeholders

Meetings with of Fresno

Collaboration with Project Designers

Literature Review

Case Studies

Stakeholders City

Data Mining and Analysis

Stakeholders

Data Mining and Analysis

Stakeholders Research

Research

Data Mining and Analysis

Research

Data Mining and Analysis

Research

Research Planning

Design

Data Mining Planning and Analysis

Research Design

Planning

the project site. Using literature from CARB as well as other sources like i-Tree, the studio developed and used tools for measuring the impacts of landscape design typologies on climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as the co-benefits of these strategies. Finally, the 606 Studio developed typological designs that illustrate the strategies used in various areas within the TCC boundary (See Figure 1.9: Methods and Approaches).

Data Mining and Analysis

Metric Development

Planning

Design

Planning

Design

Field Studies

Strategies

Integrated Vision Plan

Typologies

Address Climate Change

Planning Design

Design

1.7

Conclusion The 606 Studio is presented with the unique opportunity to support Fresno in addressing the causes and impacts of climate change and help the profession of landscape architecture identify the best measurement tools and design elements for mitigating and adapting to climate change. The following chapters will discuss the background of Fresno in relation to climate change, the environmental and sociocultural conditions on the disadvantaged communities in Fresno, Fresnoâ€™s production of GHGs, and design implications for the future of TCC and city-wide projects. The sequential chapters will explain metrics measuring landscape strategies, and landscape typologies for these strategies. Finally, the final chapters will illustrate the TCC project are analysis, vision plan and measurable landscape typologies for downtown, mixeduse, and residential contexts. The intent is to provide strategies that will guide the future implementation of design projects that contribute to the health and quality of life for Fresno and Californiaâ€™s most disadvantaged residents.

606 Team in Fresno

pic of 606 in fresno

02 BACKGROUND OF FRESNO 2.1 History

2.2 Current Conditions in Fresno 2.3 Conclusion

Fresno is blessed with great natural resources: world class fertile soil, water from the Sierra flowing through the San Joaquin river, and a location literally at the center of Californiaâ€”equidistant from San Francisco and Los Angeles. From the time of its founding, Fresno has represented an opportunity for growth and prosperity (Heathcock, 2014). Despite these great prospects, Fresnoâ€™s planning decisions, patterns of development and economic and racial segregation have left it particularly susceptible to the impacts of climate change (California Department of Water Resources, Natural Resources Agency, & State of California, 2015; Mohajerani, Bakaric, & Jeffrey-Bailey, 2017). With the arrival of High Speed Rail and state funding to respond to these challenges, Fresno now has the opportunity to become the model of a sustainable, integrated city for Californiaâ€™s future.

Urban vegetation by the railroad in Fresno

Map 2.1: Fresno in its California Context

OREGON

101

Sacramento

rr a

San Franciso

Fresno

NEVADA

Los Angeles

Freeways San Diego 36

0.5

Mile

lle Va

2.1

History Location and Geographic Context The Central Valley runs north to south parallel to the Pacific coast of California and is bordered by the Sierra Nevada to the east and Coast Ranges to the west. The city of Fresno sits in the center of the San Joaquin Valley on a very gentle slope in the southern half of California’s Central Valley (See Map 2.1: Fresno in its California Context). At the north is the San Joaquin River and the Tulare Lake Watershed, water sources that the city has relied on since its founding (Water Education Foundation, 2016). Located between the major cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles and at the junction of Interstates 180, 41, and 99, Fresno has become the crossroads of the Central Valley and the center of the state (Google Maps, 2017). Railroads intersect downtown Fresno transporting goods and people (See Map 2.2:

Location of TCC Projects

Map 2.2: Fresno City Context Riv

qui

180

CLOVIS 168

TCC Area

6 Mile

EASTON

Fresno covers a total of 112 square miles, making it the fifth-largest city in California (United States Census Bureau, 2010). The TCC projects were chosen by Fresno and are all located in the Downtown, Chinatown, and Southwest Fresno areas. These resident-led projects fit within a 5-mile boundary in accordance with the TCC Criteria (See Map 2.2: TCC Fresno City Context). The city of Fresno chose the boundary to encompass the areas with the most disadvantaged environmental and socioeconomic conditions. This boundary was also chosen to connect the new HSR station to the new projects and the local community.

d oa

0 1.5 3

ilr Ra

Fresno City Context). With the construction of the High Speed Rail currently in progress, the travel time to San Francisco or Los Angeles will be about an hour, making Fresno an attractive bedroom community for much of state’s job centers (California High-Speed Rail Authority, 2008). In and around Fresno are areas of interest such as colleges like California State University, Fresno and Fresno City College. Fresno Yosemite International Airport and the Fresno Chaffee Zoo are within the city boundaries as well, while parks like Yosemite National Park, Kings Canyon National Park, and Sequoia National Park are all within 75 miles of the City Center. Agricultural plots reside within and are located around Fresno, representing key elements of the city’s identity.

2.1

Forming Fresno: The Evolution of Fresnoâ€™s Ecology The Fresno region lies in a distinct ecological environment formed by the millennia of evolution. Prior to the first human settlement in the area, the Central Valley Basin was a lush mosaic of vegetation that supported a vast diversity of species. The position of mountains and rivers created lush wetlands with arid climate conditions. Over thousands of years, the vegetation and wildlife adapted to the climate and natural processes of the Central Valley (Francis, 1999). Native Californians adapted to the natural system to survive. However, as European pioneers further developed their settlements and later larger cities, the original natural environment was transformed into an agricultural industry center with little room for the natural ecology.

Vegetation Fresno is within the Tulare Lake Watershed which was originally inhabited by large variety of plant communities. Before Europeans arrived, oak woodlands and valley grasslands flourished on the edges of the marshlands extended from the Tulare Lake Basin (Preston, 1981). Diverse vegetation thrived off the water provided by Tulare Lake. Biodiversity was high until the European and Spanish explorers came, bringing with them invasive plant species such as Spanish Broom and Wild Oats (Preston, 1981). Both the vegetation and hydrology changed from natural and human-made changes, making Fresnoâ€™s environment hotter and more arid.

Hydrology Because of its arid climate, local water resources are particularly significant for the ecosystem and are influenced by temperature changes. The snowpack from the Sierra Nevada is the main source of water for the southern part of the Central Valley (Duffy & Kahara, 2011). The network of streams and springs brought silt from the mountains into the basin which provided the nutrients for rich vegetation growth (Francis, 1999). The southern Central Valley was formed from being enclosed by the San Joaquin River to the north and the Tulare Lake Watershed Rivers to the south (Barbour, Keeler-Wolf, & Schoenherr, 2007) . Water melted from snowpack of the southern Sierra Nevada and flowed from the Kings River, colliding with San Joaquin River (Barbour et al., 2007). The Fresno Slough over-flowed into the San Joaquin River during the wet seasons (Barbour et al., 2007) . As temperatures increased, snowfall became sparse, decreasing the amount of water that flowed during the summer. These changes caused more pumping of groundwater during the dry seasons (Siade, Nishikawa, & Martin, 2015).

The Friant dam along the San Joaquin River in northern Fresno is a primary source of irrigation in the area

2.1

A painting of the Yokuts in Pre-European Central Valley (Albert Bierstadt)

Settling Fresno: Early Cultures and Land Uses Since the founding of Fresno in 1856, generations of people from different parts of the world worked hard to make the Great Central Valley a global agricultural center, called by many, â€œthe breadbasket of the worldâ€? (Clough, 1984; Heathcock, 2014) . The valley had great agricultural potential because of its warm climate and gently-sloped terrain, and became a tempting destination for settlers (Barbour, KeelerWolf, & Schoenherr, 2007). From the time of the Native Americans to the European settlers, those who came to Fresno changed the areas in different ways and capacities.

The Native Americans and Pioneers Before European settlers arrived, the Central Valley was home to diverse indigenous cultures. Native tribes included the Maidu and Wintun in the north, Yokuts in the south and Miwoks in the eastern Central Valley (Johnson, Haslam, & Dawson, 1993) . These tribes interacted with the land through strategic fire regimes, burning vegetation to remove weeds and increase native crops. They also directed the flow of water to create riparian zones for hunting. Although native people did transform their landscapes, the greatest impact to the valley occurred with the arrival of European settlers. When these settlers arrived, they introduced new ways to interact with the land that had long-term consequences. (W. J. Miller, 1985).

2.1

Downtown Fresno Mural showing the history of the city

European Settlers and Irrigation Systems Human intervention and ingenuity transformed Fresno into an agricultural region that provided the world with many of its agricultural products such as almonds and raisins. With the warm climate and the persistent sunshine, the weather allowed a longer and more productive agricultural season. Due to the lack of precipitation, early pioneers constructed irrigation canals to water their crops (W. J. Miller, 1985). These privately-owned, hand-dug irrigation ditches were the first steps towards the large-scale, heavily-engineered system of dams, pumps, and channels which created the modern industrial agricultural system currently used in the valley (S. Johnson et al., 1993).

2.1

Growing Fresno: Culture, Economy and Transportation The Attraction of Diverse Ethnicities to Fresno Some cultures like Armenians and Mormons came to the Central Valley to escape religious persecution, while others such as the Chinese came because of available work in developing agriculture, irrigation canals, and the railroad. Diverse cultures moved to Fresno up until the 1970’s, when many southeast Asians refugees came into the region and became home to the nation’s second largest Hmong community (Clough, 1984) . Fresno also had an established African American community that grew and thrived, contributing to the diversity of Fresno.

Economy Historically, Fresno’s economy began with agriculture and expanded over time. Today, the economic structure of Fresno revolves around the sectors of agriculture, industry, financial, trade, commercial, and service (Data USA, 2017). While agriculture is one of the most well-known sectors in Fresno, the other sectors have also influenced its growth over the years. Data shows that the Fresno Finance Department works with over 25,000 businesses and events annually (Business License & Tax Certificate, 2017).

Agriculture California is the leading agriculture-producing state in the United States, producing 11 percent of the total U.S. production and exporting $13.7 billion of agricultural and livestock products to the world (Fresno County Farm Bureau, 2007; Huerta, ED, & E, 2014) . According to Fresno County Farm Bureau, “Fresno County is home to 1.88 million acres of the world’s most productive farm land, with agriculture operations covering nearly half of the county’s entire land base of 3.84 million acres (Fresno County Farm Bureau, 2007).” Within the county, farmers raise

more than 350 different crops, contributing directly more than $5.6 billion to the California economy and supporting 20 percent of all jobs in the Fresno area (Fresno County Farm Bureau, 2007). Between 1909 and 1919, agricultural lands were irrigated at 155,000 acres a year. To sustain this level of irrigation, farmers began to import water and heavily pump groundwater, especially in periods of drought (California Department of Water Resources, 2018; Clough, 1984) . This unrestricted groundwater pumping became a common practice, sequestering resources without restrictions.

Food Processing While raising food is a large part of the economy of Fresno county, within the city of Fresno, the economy is driven by food processing and other services that support agriculture. The city includes a large food processing industry that involves canning, curing, drying, and freezing plants and goods (Gale, 2006) . In addition, local industry produces farm machinery, metal products, transportation equipment, stone, clay, and glass products, wood products, furniture and fixtures, and electrical equipment (City Data, 2018) .

Commercial Centers From 1870’s to the 1960’s, Fresno downtown grew as a commercial center for agriculture in the Central Valley (Clough, 1984, pp. 203–216). By 1936, Downtown Fresno’s Gottschalks store at Fulton street and Kern street attracted many shoppers from Central Valley. Businesses like J.C. Penney Co., Coffee’s, Berkeley’s, Roos-Atkins and Walter Smith established themselves on areas like Fulton street (Historical Perspectives , 2009).

Agriculture is the main source of food production which helps in economic deveopment Processing Plant in Southwest Fresno contributes to GHG

View of Fulton Corridor, the pedestrian mall of Downtown Fresno

2.1

Transportation and Distribution Although Fresno’s economy began as a small agricultural settlement along the San Joaquin River (Clough, 1984) , the city grew and moved based on transportation centers – first to the stagecoach station then to the Fresno train station (H. Miller, 1985) On May 28, 1972, the Central Pacific Railroad established the station around twenty miles east of then Fresno city (W. Smith, 2004) . When the new Fresno station was built, the center of the city moved with it in 1874 and the railroad became the riverfront of the city (W. Smith, 2004) . With the centrality of the station in Fresno and the centrality of the city within California, Fresno became a prime location for the distribution of goods (Johnson et al., 1993). This method worked, and Fresno grew and became the

Chinatown Alley Mural showing the developmental history of Fresno

main “wholesale and retail center within a radius of seventy-five miles” (W. Smith, 2004, p. 526) . Though the early pioneers moved to Fresno in droves due to the easy railroad access (Clough, 1984) , the railroad had become a primarily a service for transporting produce, lumber, and minerals (Clough, 1984). Eventually, with the development of the highway system, trucks were used to distribute goods. The 99, 180 and 41 freeways create an interconnected network that is heavily utilized by large diesel trucks (See Figure 2.1 Movement of City Center).

2.1

Figure 2.1

Movement of City Center

1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856

First First Settlement First First Settlement Settlement Settlement / / / // / First Settlement First Settlement sinful sinful sinful sinful little little place little little place place place sinful little place First Settlement / sinful little place sinful little place

1867 1867 1867 1867 1867 1867 1867

Fresno Fresno Fresno Fresno City City City City Fresno City Fresno City Fresno City

1872 1872 1872 1872 1872 1872 1872

Fresno Fresno Fresno Fresno Station Station Station Station /Station / / // / Fresno Fresno Station Dowtown Dowtown Dowtown Dowtown Fresno Fresno Fresno Fresno Dowtown Fresno Fresno Station / Dowtown Fresno Dowtown Fresno

San San Joaquin San Joaquin San Joaquin Joaquin River River River River San Joaquin River San Joaquin River San Joaquin River

Stage Stage Stage Stage Coach Coach Coach Coach Trail Trail Trail Trail Stage Coach Trail Stage Coach Trail Stage Coach Trail

Central Central Central Central Paciÿc Paciÿc Paciÿc Paciÿc Rail Rail Rail RailRail Central Paciÿc Central Paciÿc Rail Central Paciÿc Rail

2.1

Ecological Degradation

Dividing Fresno: Ecological and Cultural Division

As human development spread, native plant communities began to decline in the 1890s (Kelly & Goulden, 2008). As agricultural production increased to support the increasing population and exports to other regions, the woodlands and wetlands decreased rapidly from 1890 to the late 1970s (Kelley, 2005) (See Figure 2.2: Vegetation Degradation). The natural landscape was drastically transformed due to agriculture and development. In the San Joaquin Valley â€œabout 64% of grasslands, 91% of water and wetlands, 97% of riparian forest/oak woodland, and 67% of shrublands have been converted to agricultural useâ€? (Kelley, 2005). According to Kelley (2005), the Riparian and oak woodland went from 1,797 square miles to 58 square miles; the Grasslands shrunk from 17,646 square miles to 6,403 square

Over 150 years of complex history, Fresno developed a mosaic of rails, culture, race, agriculture and urban development. The World War II era brought changes to the agricultural development. During this time, with the advances of technology, the population associated with agriculture decreased (Ganzel, 1999). From 1950- present, Fresno increased industries not related to agriculture. Although agriculture was responsible for employment of 6070% population, agricultural jobs were viewed as a lower socioeconomic class, and dividing lines that separated classes began to appear (Clough, 1984). These cultural divisions led to development away from the city center, impacting the land and depleting natural resources.

Figure 2.2

Vegetation Degradation

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0% 1800

1880

1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

Valley Grasslands

Open Water & Wetlands

San Joaquin Valley Scrublands

Riparian & Oak Woodlands (Kelley, 2005)

2.1

miles; the Scrublands decreased from 3,450 square miles to 1,199 square miles (Kelley, 2005). The wetlands community is the most important community for the ecosystem because it provides groundwater recharge, flood storage, water quality improvement, and biodiversity support (Duffy & Kahara, 2011).

Urban Sprawl As population grew in Fresno, urban sprawl occurred as a result of bad planning and white flight. Areas experiencing urban sprawl often contain restricted land uses, poor pedestrian connectivity, and a population that is susceptible to polluted air (Ewing, 2013). The downtown started developing around the tracks, which contained many minorities in the city. The rich and White Americans started residential development towards north and east sides of the tracks. Meanwhile, poverty became more prevalent in neighborhoods like Chinatown and Southwest Fresno, and people were prohibited from purchasing properties if they were not white Americans (Castillo & Fresno Bee, 2016). Due to politics, minorities were forced to live on the west side of the tracks known as Chinatown and Southwest Fresno, which is the TCC project location. To attempt to counter sprawl, the city introduced the new general plan in 1965 but the sprawl continued until the 90s (Department of Transportation, 2002). The Department of Transportation offered five ways to stop this sprawl: “introduce compact and balanced communities, provide a greater mix and intensity of land uses, form an integrated transportation system, improve pedestrian development standards, and provide incentives to reduce driving (including bicycle use)” (Growth Response Study, 2002, p. 55).

Conclusion Like all cities, human development in the city of Fresno has a complex history with a diverse set of challenges. In the Great Central Valley, agricultural development has negatively impacted the natural ecosystem, while in Fresno, policies have negatively impacted the societal interactions. Both the ecosystem and society are worsened by climate change through environmental and biological impacts. Therefore, the integrated project must respond to the needs of the environment and the people. Currently, Fresno has many hardships to overcome. However, Fresno’s Transformative Climate Communities Program (FTCC) can help the disadvantaged communities regain prosperity and experience a healthier local and global environment through incentives and projects. Fresno was selected as a location to receive state funding because it has one of the State’s most extreme combinations of economic, social, and environmental disadvantages. TCC projects that apply the state funding will not only help the communities grow economically and improve health but help them mitigate and adapt to climate change. Although the development of Fresno has led to much of its problems and contributed to climate change, future development can address climate change. Climate change impacts both environmental and socio-economic aspects of the city. Therefore, the projects must plan for the immediate needs of disadvantaged communities while preparing them for the future. Furthermore, Fresno needs to identify its contributions to greenhouse gases and remedy the current impacts while preparing for future ones.

2.2

Current Conditions in Fresno The history of Fresno illustrates the complex systems involved in creating the Fresno that exists today. Although not always evident, the changes people made to the land have had consequences that persist. While Fresno has contributed to society in the past, its current condition needs to be examined in order to plan for a better future. Chapter 1.5 discussed the criteria established by Senate Bill 535 that defines disadvantaged communities. The environmental criteria involve exposures and environmental effects while sociocultural criteria involve sensitive populations and socioeconomic factors. Fresno was chosen as the main recipient of the TCC funds because it is severely disadvantaged in these categories (See Figure 2.3: Fresno as a Disadvantaged Community). The 606 Studio utilized GIS data from Enviroscreen3.0 and the city of Fresno as well as existing literature to identify the most disadvantaged communities. The studio compared Fresno to California, proving that Fresno is one of the most disadvantaged cities in the state. The studio also compared Fresno to the TCC project area, showing that it is one of the most disadvantaged areas in Fresno and thus most ideal for implementation of TCC projects.

Figure 2.3

California Compared to Fresno: Environmental Conditions Climate Conditions For the state of California, temperatures increased by about 1.7 °F from 1895 to 2011, and the greatest warming occurred in the Sierra Nevada (State of California, 2012). In terms of precipitation, studies show that the increases, decreases and variation have become more acute over time (J. B. Smith & Mendelsohn, 2006) . Over the past century, snow and rain have been predictable, but in the last 35 years, “the Sierra Nevada range has witnessed both the wettest and the driest years on record” (State of California, 2012, p. 2). In Fresno, an arid inland community, temperatures are higher than much of California. Based on the records from U.S. Climate Data, Fresno had an annual mean temperature rise of 1.5 °F from 2000 to 2016 (See Figure 2.4 : Temperature Records in Fresno) with some of the hottest records in history (Weather Underground, 2018). From 2010 to 2016 the precipitation variation changed by 59% compared to the last 10 years (See Figure 2.5: Irregular Patterns of Precipitation in Fresno).

Fresno as a Disadvantaged Community Senate Bill 535

Environmental

Socio-Cultural

Exposures

Ozone Diesel Emissions Toxic Releases PM2.5

Sensitive Populations

Asthma Cardiovascular Disease

Environmental Effects

Cleanup Sites Hazardous Waste

Socio-Economic Factors

Poverty Unemployment Housing Burden

2.2

Figure 2.4

Temperature(OF) Records in Fresno

Temperature TemperatureRecord Record 90.0 90.0

80.0 80.0

Mean Max.Max. Temp Mean Temp

70.0 70.0

Annual Mean Temp Annual Mean Temp (1.5 Â°F) (1.5 Â°F) Mean Min. Temp Mean Min. Temp

60.0 60.0

50.0

40.0

2000 2000

2002 2002

2004 2004

2006 2006

2008 2008

2010 2010

2012 2012

2014 2014

2016

(City-Data, 2014)

Figure 2.5

Irregular Patterns of Precipitation(inch) in Fresno

Precipitation (Inches)

Precipitation (Inches) 18.00

18.00 16.00 16.00 14.00

16.54

15.24

13.96

15.24

14.00 12.00

10.93

8.00 10.00

10.64

6.75

4.00 6.00

11.69

9.08 8.48

9.14

13.67

10.93 9.99

10.64

9.14

6.00 8.00

2.00 4.00 0.00 2.00

11.69

12.06

12.00 10.00

13.67

13.96

12.06

7.04

6.75

9.00

9.99 7.47

9.08

8.48

9.00 7.47

7.04 3.02

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

0.00 2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014 3.02

2014

2016

2000-2007 Range 2000-2007 Range 2007-2016 Range (59%) 2007-2016 Range (59%) (City-Data, 2014)

2.2

Table 2.1 Motor Vehicles Agricultural Operations Industrial Facilities Power Plants Gasoline

Air Pollution Sources O3

NO2

PM10

PM2.5

SO2

x x x x x

x x

(NAAQS)

Air Quality Conditions The Clean Air Act established health-based air quality standards for the following air pollutants: o zone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10), particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5), Sulphur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb) (US EPA, 2015). The 606 Studio found that sources found in Fresno contribute to air pollutant sources like CO, NO2, and PM10 (See Table 2.1: Air Pollution Sources). Data from CalEnviroScreen 3.0 also shows that PM2.5 and ozone pollution are some of the most serious levels in the state of California (See Map 2.3: Air Pollution Percentiles (PM 2.5) in California). The EPA’s National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) describe the causes and the harmful impacts on humans and other environmental elements (Laurent et al., 2016). For human beings, air pollutants can cause direct damage to people’s respiratory systems and may increase the risk of heart disease . The vulnerable target groups are children, seniors, people who have lung diseases such as asthma, and people who are involved in outdoor activities, especially outdoor workers. For the environment, air pollutants can react with other

environmental elements, such as the chemical matter in water and soil, and contribute to acid rain and the changes of nutritional value in river or soil (US EPA, 2017) . Furthermore, air pollutants like ozone can lead to the vegetation mortality, which further changes the ecosystem and reduces biodiversity (Gustafson & Sturtevant, 2013). Therefore, understanding the causes of air pollution and its relationship with climate change is crucial for strategical decision making and finding landscape solutions to help the city of Fresno deal with these harmful effects on humans and the environment. Fresno is susceptible to air pollution for at least two reasons. First, Fresno acts as a pool of air pollutant emissions of CO, NO2, PM, and ozone. While these pollutants generally come from motor vehicles and fuel combustion, some of them are caused by agricultural operations such as fertilization and machinery. The second reason for Fresno’ susceptibility to air pollution is its geographic location. The surrounding Sierra Nevada mountains trap the air that comes from the ocean and prevents fresh air from removing toxins from the city (Schoenherr, 2017) (See Figure 2.6: Fresno’s Geomorphology and Susceptibility to Air Pollution).

Map 2.3: Air Pollution Percentiles (PM 2.5) in California

OREGON

15 EPA Standard

101

10.4

15.4

Fresno

PM 2.5 (Î¼g/m3)

Sacramento

San Franciso Fri a

NEVADA t

Fresno

99 nal

High 19.6

Los Angeles

Low 1.65 Freeways

San Diego 0

0.5

Mile

2.2

Figure 2.6

Geomorphology and Susceptibility to Air Pollution Adiabatic Cooling

Prevailing Airﬂow

Precipitation

Evaporation

Temperature Inversion Layer Cool Air

Cool Water

Coast Range

Fresno Great Central Valley

Sierra Nevada

Owens Valley

Inyo-White Mountains (Schoenherr, 2017)

In addition, pollution produced from specific locations areas spreads to other areas because of the wind (See Figure 2.7: Wind Patterns). High temperatures intensify the seriousness of air pollution, aggravating the health of vulnerable communities. Research shows “strong positive correlations of PM2.5 components with temperature” (Fisher, Zhang, Leibensperger, & Jacob, 2012, p. 3141) and “temperature is positively correlated with sulfate” (Tai, Mickley, & Jacob, 2010) . Temperature also “modulates surface concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone (O3), indirectly affecting premature mortality attributed to air pollution” (Fang, Mauzerall, Liu, Fiore, & Horowitz, 2013). Ozone in Fresno is one of the cities most impacted by Ozone Pollution (See Map 2.4: Ozone Pollution in California).

Figure 2.7

Wind Patterns

Wind Rose Mean Wind Speed

MPH 1.3-4 4-8 8-13 13-19 19-25 25-32

Wind Rose Mean Wind Speed N N

W W

California Air Resources Board https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/

California Air Resources Board

(CARB, 2018)

1.3 4-8 8-1 131925-

Map 2.4: Ozone Pollution in California

OREGON 70 EPA Standard

101

Fresno

Ozone (8 hr. ppb)

Sacramento

San Franciso

NEVADA Fresno

99 5

High 68

Los Angeles

Low 26 Freeways

San Diego 0

0.5

Mile

2.2

Water Conditions Drought Conditions

Groundwater Conditions

Drought has generally been defined by Due to the decrease in snowpack over the years, meteorologists as a low precipitation rate causing Fresno has relied heavily on groundwater pumping severe water shortage for “some activities, for sustaining its agricultural production. Because of populations or ecological system” (US EPA, 2017). this, the groundwater levels have decreased over Drought in California is a very familiar topic, especially time. While the levels are better today than they in recent years, damaging agriculture, water supplies, were in the 1980s, they are still worse than the and energy production (California Department of average (See Figure 2.8: Groundwater Levels in Water Resources et al., 2015). At the center of the Fresno). The 12 depletion of groundwater has not only damage, Fresno is one of the cities 64% most impacted 63% by affected the water levels but also contributed to drought (See Map 2.5: Drought in California). The land subsidence (Gallowa & Riley, 1999). As the 58% 56% 56% 10 plants, crops, and animals are affected by the lower water table drops, land also subsides, making the groundwater table and shrunken streamflow. Central Valley more of a valley and more susceptible Furthermore, there is an increased risk of wildfires to threats like 8 air pollution (see Figure 2.9: History of due to the desiccation of the vegetation in arid areas Water Table in Fresno) (USEPA, 2016). According to Cal Fire, 14 of the top 20 Fresno has a program to attempt recharging 38% 6 largest California wildfires happened after the year groundwater in Fresno called Recharge Fresno (City 2000 (State of California, 2017). of Fresno, 2017). However, the Soil Agricultural In addition to the increasing risk of wildfires, Groundwater Banking Index (SAGBI), which is a 4 26% drought also affects vulnerable communities. suitability index for groundwater recharge on According to the U.S. Drought Monitor maps in 2017, agricultural land, has shown that Fresno’s SAGBI California was in its 5th year of an extreme drought, 2 rating class is moderately poor (ranking 29-49 out impacting rural communities that depend on of 100). Therefore, Fresno has a lower ability to MAF/Year agricultural production (USDM, 2017). According to No Data capture water to recharge the underground water 0 UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences, direct table (California Soil Resource Lab & University of costs of this past drought will be about 1929-1934 1976-1977 agricultural 1987-1992 2007-2009 California, Davis, 2018). $1.84 billion and 10,100 direct seasonal jobs.

Sacramento Valley Runoﬀ Groundwater % Average 1901-2009

Figure 2.8

San Joaquin Valley Runoﬀ

Levels in Fresno % Average 1901-2009

2014-2015(Min)

1976-1977

Average

100 150

2016-2017

200 250

1982-1983(max)

Depth to Water (ft) 19

3 19 0 3 19 5 4 19 0 4 19 5 5 19 0 5 19 5 6 19 0 6 19 5 7 19 0 7 19 5 8 19 0 8 19 5 9 19 0 9 20 5 0 20 0 0 20 5 1 20 0 15

(City of Fresno Water Division, 2016)

2016-2017

200

1982-1983(max)

250 Depth to Water (ft)

Figure 2.9 19

3 19 0 3 19 5 4 19 0 4 19 5 5 19 0 5 19 5 6 19 0 6 19 5 7 19 0 7 19 5 8 19 0 8 19 5 9 19 0 9 20 5 0 20 0 0 20 5 1 20 0 15

History of Water Table in Fresno

0ft 20ft 40ft

Fresno’s water table has dropped more than 100 feet in the past 70 years.

60ft 80ft 100ft

City of Fresno Water Division Water Quality Annual report 2016

120ft 140ft

Fresno’s water table has droupped more than 100 feet in the past 70 years Fresno water table 12

Figure 2.10

64% 63% Drought Sensitivity in Fresno

12 10

56% 56%

Millions Acre Feet / Year

10 8

58%

56%

64%

63%

58%

56% 38%

8 6

38%

6 4 4 2

26% 26%

MAF/Year 2 0 MAF/Year

(City of Fresno Water Division, 2016)

No Data 1929-1934

1929-1934

1976-1977 1976-1977

Sacramento Valley Runoﬀ % Average 1901-2009 Sacramento Valley Runoﬀ % Average 1901-2009

1987-1992 No Data 1987-1992

2007-2009 2007-2009

San Joaquin Valley Runoﬀ % Average 1901-2009 San Joaquin Valley Runoﬀ % Average 1901-2009

(City of Fresno Water Division, 2016)

3 19 0 3 19 5 4 19 0 4 19 5 5 19 0 5 19 5 6 19 0 65 19 7 19 0 7 19 5 8 19 0 8 19 5 9 19 0 95 20 0 20 0 0 20 5 1 20 0 15

3 19 0 3 19 5 4 19 0 4 19 5 5 19 0 55 19 6 19 0 6 19 5 7 19 0 7 19 5 8 19 0 85 19 9 19 0 9 20 5 0 20 0 0 20 5 1 20 0 15

0 2014-2015(Min) When additional effects are considered, “losses to all and the Central Valley Project diversions that 50 1976-1977 Average economic sectors will be as high as $2.74 billion and reduced the amount of imported water from the 0 2014-2015(Min) nearly100 21,000 total jobs” (Richard, Duncan, Josué, Jay, & Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta to central and 50 1976-1977 Average California (California Department of Daniel, 2015, p. ES-2). Southern 150 100 2016-2017 Drought is also aggravated by the shortage of Water Resources, State of California, & Natural 200 imported water, which causes other problems such Resources Agency, 2010). Since then, the Central 150 1982-1983(max) 250 2016-2017 as200 the overdraft of groundwater. During the drought Valley has not received its requested allocations Depth to Water (ft) between 2007–2009, the Central Valley required a as1982-1983(max) it had prior to 1989 when drought was not as 250 vast amount of freshwater from the Sacramentosevere (California Department of Water Resources Depth to Water (ft) San Joaquin River Delta. However, in order to protect et al., 2015) (See Figure 2.10: Drought Sensitivity species and accommodate the rest of California, in Fresno). The Department of Water Resources 0ft there were restrictions on the State Water Project (2012) states, “In the long period between 1990 19

20ft 0ft 40ft

Map 2.5: Drought in California

OREGON

101

Sacramento

NEVADA

San Franciso

Fresno

Exceptionally Dry

Extremely Dry Severely Dry Moderately Dry

Los Angeles

Abnormally Dry Freeways

San Diego 56

0.5

Mile

2.2

and 2012, the Central Valley Project only took over 75% or more of their supplies in 8 years since the drought and environmental regulation needs.â€? Surprisingly, the total agricultural revenues have not fallen during this tough time of food-production. To supply agriculture with enough water, the drought led to an overuse of groundwater to compensate for the lack of surface water and imported water, which is an unsustainable strategy and not secure in dealing with long-term drought (Christian-Smith, Levy, & Gleick, 2015, p. 499). The worst drought on record for the state of California just ended at the beginning of 2017, which occurred from 2011-2017 (Grad, 2017). According to the US Forest Service (2016), 102 million trees died in this drought, with 62 million dead in 2016 alone. This long period of drought also brought strain to the city of Fresno and to its groundwater resources.

Ecological Conditions Drought and human development have impacted the soil production rates in the Central Valley as evidenced by increases in temperature and decreases in moisture (California Soil Resource Lab & University of California, Davis, 2018). Agricultural development has significantly decreased the wetlands of the Central Valley, causing more soils to become bare. The wetlands once provided a film of water over the soil which kept carbon stored underground instead of seeping into the atmosphere (Davidson & Janssens, 2006) . With the development on these wetlands, the ecology supported by the wetlands has suffered. Due to the dramatic changes in their environment, most of the remaining vegetation had to compete for the small reservoirs of water left or adapt to the changes. Much of the native vegetation has not adapted to extreme drought tolerant conditions and differing soil conditions. Endemic species such as the Valley Oak and Blue Oak are vulnerable to the effects of climate change in the Central Valley because this is the only place they grow. The Valley Oak in particular

requires a constant nearby water source to survive so it is not as drought tolerant as the Blue Oak (Kueppers, Snyder, Sloan, Zavaleta, & Fulfrost, 2005). Like the Oaks, moisture-sensitive plant species are vulnerable to climate change and plant communities will shift over time (Kueppers et al., 2005; Lenihan, Drapek, Bachelet, & Neilson, 2003). Changes in temperature and precipitation cause a change in the structure, composition, and productivity of vegetation, and may cause more intense and frequent wildfires (Lenihan et al., 2003). As humans contribute more frequently to climate change, the only place for vegetation to survive will be along the coast ranges (Loarie et al., 2008). Thus, the plant and animal communities living in the near Fresno will face more stressful conditions. The change in plant communities and limited water supply forces wildlife to move to and live in more constricted spaces. By limiting the areas of habitats for various species, many animals have become extinct, endangered, or threatened. The drought has decreased the water supply for wetlands, causing the birds to migrate to different lands. (Duffy & Kahara, 2011). In addition, the loss of scrubland has caused endemic species to find limited areas of livability. The Fresno Kangaroo Rat is actually endemic to a small area between the Merced and Kings River, but currently, the only known area the Fresno Kangaroo Rat can be found is the Alkali Sink reserve. (Culbertson, 1946). The decrease in biodiversity has resulted in negative effects on air, water, and soil quality in California (Duffy & Kahara, 2010). Survival of both plant and animal species depends on pollinators, predators, nutrients, and procreation; however, human alteration of plant communities will cause more problems before climate change does (Duffy & Kahara, 2010).

2.2

California Compared to Fresno: Sociocultural Conditions Job Opportunities and Income Agriculture Agriculture is vital to the economy of Fresno, providing jobs and transporting goods to and from the city. Drought has increased and occurred more often in recent years compared to pre-industrial times (Grad, 2017). In recent years, the drought has impacted resources, and thus the agricultural industry as well (Lee, Gryze, & Six, 2011) . Because of the drought, the State of California has issued constraints on water usage, limiting the water supply to the Central Valley (Duffy & Kahara, 2011; MedellínAzuara, Howitt, MacEwan, & Lund, 2011). Due to limited water, many farmers cannot grow as much as they want and end up suffering financially (MedellínAzuara et al., 2011). In this case, the farmers also cannot offer many jobs to the residents of the project area. The increase in summer temperatures due to climate change causes the soil to dry up faster (O’Neal, Nearing, Vining, Southworth, & Pfeifer, 2005) . This dry soil ends up eroding quicker and lacking the proper nutrients for plant growth (O’Neal et al., 2005). Collectively, these problems financially impact farmers and affect the ecology of plants (Deschenes & Kolstad, 2011) .Since the recession of 2008, many farms have become abandoned and farmers have had to look for work elsewhere.

Poverty The US Census Bureau decides the Federal Poverty Level each year. Poverty occurs when a person or family’s collective income before taxes is less than the poverty level (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, 2015). Those in poverty are often unable to afford resources or prevention

from challenges such as high temperatures or air pollution. For example, those in poverty may be unable to afford costs associated with cooling, leaving them vulnerable on hot days (Kjellstrom, Holmer, & Lemke, 2009). These issues are threats in Fresno, where poverty is in the 95th percentile of the worst census tracts in California (See Map 2.6: Poverty Rate in California).

Unemployment In 2008, the United States faced an economic recession which increased the unemployment rate, and while the rate declined to 4.6 percent in California, the rate in Fresno is still 7.7 percent (Bureau of Labor Statistics Data, 2018). Fresno has one of the worst cases of unemployment in California (See Map 2.7: Unemployment Rate in California). Drought is an example of a condition that affects the unemployment rate, especially in areas like Fresno that rely heavily on agriculture. Drought has caused the destruction of crops, leading to the unemployment of agricultural workers (Panoo, 2017). A report conducted by California State University, Fresno (2015) explains that the recent drought has also affected the economy in Fresno associated with agriculture. Unemployment causes people to migrate to other locations to find work, affecting the economy from a smaller workforce.

Map 2.6: Poverty Rate in California

OREGON

14.3 4.9

CA Fresno Poverty Rate Percent of People in Poverty

101

25.5 6.2

Sacramento

NEVADA

San Franciso

Fresno

High 95 95PTCL PTCL

Los Angeles

Low 5PTCL 5 PTCL Freeways

San Diego 0

0.5

Mile

Map 2.7: Unemployment Rate in California

OREGON OREGON

4.5 52

Fresno CA Unemployment Percent of People Rate Unemployed

101

83 8.1

Sacramento

NEVADA NEVADA

San Franciso

Fresno Fresno

99 5

High 95PTCL 95 PCTL

Los Angeles

Low 5PTCL 5 PCTL Freeways

San Diego 60

0.5

Mile

2.2

Health Issues

Low Birth Weight

The air quality from transportation and industry causes and aggravates various diseases, such as, cardiovascular disease, asthma and low birth weight in infants (EHP & NIH, 2010; Gibson, 2015). In addition, temperature increases can worsen the impacts of air pollution from local industries and traffic.

Low Birth Weight infants (LBW) refers to babies who weigh less than about five and a half pounds (2500 grams) at birth (SCH, 2017). A large study that covered the entire state of California for a period of eight years investigated the impact of air pollution on LBM. The researchers observed consistent positive and significant associations between the risk of LBW and metrics of primary traffic-related pollution through modeling and analyzing data (Laurent et al., 2016) .The condition of LBW in Fresno is worse than in California (See Map 2.9: Low Birth Weight in California).

Cardiovascular Disease Cardiovascular disease (CVD) refers to heart-related health issues that involves locked or narrowed blood vessels. It is formed by heart disease, heart failure, stroke, or hypertension (high blood pressure) (CDPH, 2017). There are many findings of the relationship between CVD and air pollutants, including carbon monoxide (CO) and ozone, from the mid-1900s (Lorna et al, 2012). Air pollutants aggravate existing heart issues and trigger new problems. Although the 606 Studio was not able to determine the cardiovascular rates of Fresno compared to California, the effects of CVD such as hypertension rates were measured. In Fresno, hypertension prevalence was 23% compared with California rates of 21% (Mull & Shaheen & HughesCromwick, 2006).

Asthma Asthma is a chronic lung disease that “inflames and narrows the airways” and can be triggered by poor air quality (NIH, 2018). For example, O3 has been shown to increase the risk of symptoms of asthma and reduce morning peak expiratory flow rates in children with lower birth weights (Amann, 2008). Studies also show that CO and NOx increase the risk of development of asthma and decrease lung function for children, (Brugge, Durant, & Rioux, 2007). Some scholars pointed out that “air pollution is convincingly associated with many signs of asthma aggravation” (Koenig, 1999, p. 717). While asthma can affect anyone, it is more dangerous for children with asthma because their lungs have higher respiratory rates than adults (Sheffield, Knowlton, Carr, & Kinney, 2011). Asthma rates in Fresno are among the worst in California (See Map 2.8: Asthma Rates in California).

Heat-Related Illnesses Temperature rises have been hotter and longer than in the past, and contribute to health issues (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, 2015). Summers increasingly become long and hot, and winters increasingly turn short and warm in many places. The effects of these changes in urban areas are much worse than in rural areas because of their dense population, busy traffic, tall buildings, large parking lots and the lack of green spaces (Bowler, Buyung-Ali, Knight, & Pullin, 2010; Nowak & Greenfield, 2012; Pataki et al., 2006). Those elements allow temperature to continue to rise in cities, and the high temperature significantly affects the health of the locals (Eberly & Anderson, 2006). The hot weather can continue for weeks and even months in the City of Fresno. Last year, temperatures over 86°F occurred from May to October and there were 132 days that contained temperatures over 85°F, with the highest temperature being 110°F (Weather Underground, 2018). It is a very bad condition for public health because these temperatures are allowing air pollutants to impact health, especially in the summer months (Haines & Patz, 2004, p. 100) . This heat poses a health threat to people who are at risk of heat-related illness and deaths, The rising temperatures can increase body 61

Map 2.8: Asthma Rates in Fresno are Among the WorseOREGON in California

101

Fresno

Asthma Rate (per 1000 people)

Sacramento

San Franciso

NEVADA Fresno

99 5

High 95PTCL

Los Angeles

Low 5PTCL Freeways

San Diego 62

0.5

Mile

Map 2.9: Low Birth Weight in OREGON California

101

4.9

6.2

Fresno

Low Birth Weight Rate (per 100 infants)

Sacramento

NEVADA

San Franciso

Fresno

High 95PTCL

Los Angeles

Low 5PTCL Freeways

San Diego 0

0.5

Mile

2.2

temperatures to dangerous levels. In general, the body temperature of adults is from 97oF to 99oF, but the body temperature of babies and children is from 97.9oF to 100.4oF (WebMD, 2018). Higher temperatures can lead to fevers that cause or aggravate other diseases. Heat stroke is a common illness when human bodies are exposed to high temperatures for a long time. Other symptoms of heat exhaustion include dizziness, fainting, fatigue, headache, nausea, vomiting and paleness (Panoo, 2017). Elders (65+) and children (14-) are more vulnerable than other groups. Elderly people who are 65 and older are more prone to heat because their bodies are unable to handle sudden changes in temperature. According to most research, the “most deaths during heat waves are cardiovascular in origin” (Kenney et al, 2014, p 1894). According to Kenney et al. (2014) “temperatures above the 90th percentile in California were found to increase risk of excess mortality by 4.3% for every 5.6°C increase in apparent temperature” (Kenney et al, 2014, p 1892). Children who are younger than 10 are also at a higher risk during days of extreme temperature because they have a higher circulating blood volume and their body temperatures rise ﬁve times faster than an adult (Panoo, 2017). In addition to the elderly and children, jobs such as agriculture and construction that are conducted outdoors are exposed to the elements. With Fresno’s temperatures rising over the past few years, many people are vulnerable to the heat and many have even died (Eberly & Anderson, 2006). Studies show that those who work outdoors are exposed to a number of negative damaging elements like the sun and air contaminants, which can lead to skin cancer (Beard et al., 2003; Madgwick, 2015). Compared to the rest of California, Fresno has a higher percentage of agricultural and food processing workers, making it more susceptible to heat-related illnesses (United States Census Bureau, 2015).

Greenspace While Greenspace is not one of the criteria to receive funding, it is an important factor for Fresno. With Fresno’s sweltering heat, communities that do not have access to shade or parks are severely in need. The National Recreation and Parks Association’s (NRPA) goal for the United States is 10 acres per 1000 people (NRPA, 2018). Although that may be an unattainable goal, California has 4 acres per 1000 people. However, Fresno has only 1.5-2 acres of park spaces per 1000 people, making it twice below that of California (See Map 2.10: Park Acres per 1000 Residents in Fresno).

FOWLER AVE

CLOVIS AVE

PEACH AVE

WILLOW AVE

MAPLE AVE

CEDAR AVE

FIRST ST

BLACKSTONE AVE

PALM AVE

WEST AVE

MARKS AVE

BRAWLEY AVE

MILBURN AVE

POLK AVE

GRANTLAND AVE

Map 2.10: Park Acres per 1000 Residents in Fresno

SHEPHERD AVE

NEES AVE

BULLARD AVE

180

CLOVIS

SHAW AVE

SHAW AVE ASHLAN AVE

ASHLAN AVE

168

SHIELDS AVE

MCKINLEY AVE BELMONT AVENUE

VENTURA AVE

WHITES BRIDGE AVE

CALIFORNIA AVE CHURCH AVE

41 EN LD GO ST H ST F E

ELMAVE

ST VD BL

WALNUT AVE

NORTH AVE

Acres Park/ 1000 Residents 0-2 2-4 4 - 10 10 +

Railroad Freeways Primary Street

Fresno

1.5-2

10 EASTON

1.5

6 Mile

2.2

Fresno Compared to TCC Area: Environmental Conditions

UHI impacts the environment and those who are exposed to environmental elements. Debbage and Shepherd (2015) explained that “increasingly warm urban environments pose serious threats to human health because they amplify near surface ozone concentrations, reduce air quality, enhance anthropogenic energy consumption and increase heat related fatalities by magnifying the severity of heat waves” (p 181). UHI has contributed to a significant amount of heat-related deaths, and affects those especially sensitive to heat such as the elderly and children (Eberly & Anderson, 2006). All impervious surfaces of urban areas, such as roofs, roads, parking lots, pavements, etc. contribute to the heat island effect. Among those impervious surfaces, asphalt and concrete are the most common, and a significant contributor to the UHI because they have low albedo and high volumetric heat capacity, which results in surface temperatures reaching upwards of 60°C on hot

Urban Heat Island effect Impervious surfaces of the urban areas are also impacted by the increase of urban temperatures. While temperature varies in these areas, urban areas area typically hotter than suburban areas and produce something called the urban heat island effect (UHI). This effect occurs when areas with less permeability and vegetation lead to a decrease in evaporative cooling (Gill, Handley, Ennos, & Pauleit, 2007). UHI can cause the temperature to rise from 37.4°F to 50°F higher than in rural areas because of the quantity of dark, impermeable surfaces (See Table 2.2: Urban Surface Covers). The phenomenon affects almost every major city on a global scale, including Fresno. UHI is intensified by the use of manmade materials, indicating that UHI is worse in urban areas (Mohajerani et al., 2017) .

Table 2.2

Urban Surface Covers

Surface Cover

Structure Roofs

21%

Roadways

16%

Parking Areas

16%

Other Pavement

Trees / Tree Canopies

19%

Non-Tree Vegetation

15%

Uncovered Land / Dirt

Other Pervious

Type of Surface

60%

40%

Impervious

Pervious

Surface Cover

Shaded

Non-Shaded

Structure Areas

99%

Roadways

10%

90%

Parking

10%

90%

Other Pavement

24%

76%

Pavement (All Types)

13%

87% (Williams et al, 2010)

2.2

summer days (Mohajerani et al, 2017). Compared to rural areas, urban areas have greater heat absorption and retention, less plant transpiration and water evaporation from the soil, and less water penetration because they have a higher percentage of impervious surfaces and lower percentage of pervious surfaces (Yan, Wang, Hao, & Dong, 2012). A surface cover report of the City of Fresno estimates the main environmental problems of the city that contribute to UHI. Most of the area is covered by impervious surfaces at a 60:40 ratio to pervious surfaces (Williams et al, 2010) (See Map 2.11: Urban Heat Island Effect in Fresno). Moreover, roughly one third of impervious surfaces are structure roofs and roughly two thirds are pavement, and roughly four fifth of pervious surfaces are vegetation (Williams et al, 2010). Trees and other plant species cover around 24% of the city surface, while roofs, roads, parking areas, and other pavements cover 60% of the city surface (Google Maps, 2017) . The report mentions that at the ground level, impervious surfaces are generally not shaded by tree canopies (Williams et al, 2010). Based on the 606 Studio analysis, the areas with the worst UHI are in the downtown area, where there is less coverage and more structures. In addition, 90% of roads and parking lots are uncovered. The report also mentioned that 61% of pavement materials are used in Fresno are asphalt (Williams et al, 2010).

Air Pollution Through analyzing the traffic-related air pollution and the wind direction, the studio found that south part of Fresno has the worst prevalence of air pollution. Sources of Traffic-related air pollution are

especially high due to the junction of the 99, 41, and 180 freeways (See Map 2.12: Traffic-Related Air Pollution in Fresno). In addition, the typical wind direction in Fresno goes from north to south (See Figure 2.7: Wind Patterns), causing the air pollution to travel to the TCC project area.

Water Fresnoâ€™s pattern of pumping groundwater has had significant effects, not only in Fresno, but also in California. Efforts have been made to capture water and infiltrate it using water basins (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, 2018). These water basins exist within Fresno, as well as within the TCC Project area. While only 2% of the area in Fresno contains water basins, 8% of the TCC project area contains water basins (See Map 2.13: Water Basins in Fresno).

Ecology From site visits, the 606 Studio identified symptoms of chlorosis on trees, which points to strain on the plants. From the Geographic Information System data, the 606 Studio found a lack of diversity in plant species and communities, especially in the TCC project area (See Map 2.14: Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) in Fresno). The map depicts the lack of dense vegetation and areas of barren land. Altogether, the natural ecology has transformed into a homogenous state with a lack of biodiversity.

FOWLER AVE

CLOVIS AVE

PEACH AVE

WILLOW AVE

MAPLE AVE

CEDAR AVE

FIRST ST

BLACKSTONE AVE

PALM AVE

WEST AVE

MARKS AVE

BRAWLEY AVE

MILBURN AVE

POLK AVE

GRANTLAND AVE

Map 2.11: Urban Heat Island Effect in Fresno

SHEPHERD AVE

NEES AVE

BULLARD AVE

180

CLOVIS

SHAW AVE

SHAW AVE ASHLAN AVE

ASHLAN AVE

168

SHIELDS AVE

MCKINLEY AVE BELMONT AVENUE

VENTURA AVE

WHITES BRIDGE AVE

CALIFORNIA AVE CHURCH AVE

ELMAVE

ST VD BL

F Increase

EN LD GO ST H ST F

WALNUT AVE

NORTH AVE

Temperature Increase 5.8 Temperature Increase 0.09 Railroad Freeways Primary Street

Fresno

3.4

TCC Area

3.4 EASTON

1.5

6 Mile

FOWLER AVE

CLOVIS AVE

PEACH AVE

WILLOW AVE

MAPLE AVE

CEDAR AVE

FIRST ST

BLACKSTONE AVE

PALM AVE

WEST AVE

MARKS AVE

BRAWLEY AVE

MILBURN AVE

POLK AVE

GRANTLAND AVE

Map 2.12: Traffic-Related Air Pollution in Fresno

SHEPHERD AVE

NEES AVE

BULLARD AVE

180

CLOVIS

SHAW AVE

SHAW AVE ASHLAN AVE

ASHLAN AVE

168

SHIELDS AVE

MCKINLEY AVE BELMONT AVENUE

VENTURA AVE

WHITES BRIDGE AVE

CALIFORNIA AVE CHURCH AVE

E VD BL

ELMAVE

Air Pollution(Kg/Km)

EN LD GO ST H ST F

WALNUT AVE

NORTH AVE

60-600 201-300 301-400 401-700 >2000 Railroad Freeway Primary Street

EASTON 0

1.5

6 Mile

FOWLER AVE

CLOVIS AVE

PEACH AVE

WILLOW AVE

MAPLE AVE

CEDAR AVE

AVE

PALM AVE

WEST AVE

MARKS AVE

BRAWLEY AVE

MILBURN AVE

POLK AVE

GRANTLAND AVE

Map 2.13: Water Basins in Fresno

D AVE RD R ER SHEPHER

AVE

A D AVE AR LARD BULLA BULLARD BU

180 18 0

CLO C CL CLOVIS LOVIS LO OVIS OVIS S

W AVE SHAW

H W AVE SHA SHAW ASHLAN AVE

LAN AVE LAN HLAN ASHLAN ASHL

168 6

SHIE SHIELDS IELDS L S AVE LDS

SH SHIELDS AVE

EY AVE INLEY MCKINLEY BELMONT MONT NT AVENUE

VENTURA AVE

GE AVE GE IDGE IDG BRIDGE WHITES BRIDG WH

RNIA AVE FORNIA FORNIA CALIFORNIA CALIF H AVE RCH RCH HURCH CHURCH CHUR

Water Basin Wate Channel Chan Flood Zone Study Area Stud Railroad Railr Freeways Primary Street

Fresno

TCC Area

1.2% 1.8% EASTON

1.5

6 Mile

VD BL

Percent of Total Land Area

E AT ST

ELMAVE

EN LD GO ST H ST F

WALNUT AVE

TH AVE TH ORTH NORTH NORT

FOWLER AVE

CLOVIS AVE

PEACH AVE

WILLOW AVE

MAPLE AVE

CEDAR AVE

FIRST ST

BLACKSTONE AVE

PALM AVE

WEST AVE

MARKS AVE

BRAWLEY AVE

MILBURN AVE

POLK AVE

GRANTLAND AVE

Map 2.14: Normalized Difference Vegetation Index in Fresno

RD AVE SHEPHERD

S AVE NEES

AVE BU BULLARD

180 18 0

CLO C CL CLOVIS LOVIS OVIS OVIS S

W AVE SHAW

H W AVE SHA SHAW ASHLAN AVE

LAN AVE LAN HLAN ASHLAN ASHL

168 6

SHIE SHIELDS IELDS L S AVE LDS

SHI S SH HIIEL H ELDS ELD LD L DS AVE

EY AVE INLEY MCKINLEY BELMONT MONT NT AVENUE

RA AVE U UR TUR T ENTU VEN VE VEN

GE AVE GE IDGE IDG BRIDGE WHITES BRIDG WH

RNIA AVE FORNIA FORNIA CALIFORNIA CALIF H AVE RCH RCH HURCH CHURCH CHUR

41 EN LD GO ST H ST F VD BL

ELMAVE

E AT ST

WALNUT AVE

TH AVE TH ORTH NORTH NORT

Percent of Dense Vegetation or Barren Land >0.2 (Dense Vegetation) <0.1 (Barren Area) Study Area Railroad Freeway Primary Street

Fresno

21%

TCC Area

10%

Fresno

TCC Area

14% EASTON

1.5

6 Mile l

2.2

Table 2.3

Comparison of Disadvantaged Factors Fresno

TCC Area

6255 p/mi2

5810 p/mi2

69%

93%

$44,545

$21,015

Renter Occupied

46%

63%

Under 14 years

24%

27%

Over 65 years

11%

Population Density Minority Median Income

Fresno Compared to TCC Area: Sociocultural Conditions Overlapping of Disadvantaged Factors The 606 Studio analyzed the factors associated with health to find the highest concentration of impacted disadvantaged communities. The studio overlapped asthma, cardiovascular disease, low birth weight, median income, renter-occupied households, minorities, and population density (See Appendix A.3). The TCC project area had an extremely high number of collective disadvantages compared to Fresno (See Map 2.15: Overlap of Disadvantaged Factors in Fresno). While the map allowed the studio to visualize areas of concern, a table comparing Fresno and the TCC Project Area allowed quantities to be expressed (See Table 2.3: Comparison of Disadvantaged Factors).

Greenspace In Fresno, 52% of residents are within a quarter-mile walk to a park, while in the TCC Project Area, only 31% are within the same distance. Furthermore, the availability of parks can be measured to determine the acres of greenspace per 1000 residents. In Fresno, there are 1.5-2% of park acres per 1000 resident, and within the TCC project area, the few acres of parks must accommodate the 29,000 people (See Map 2.10: Park Acres per 1000 Residents in Fresno).

FOWLER AVE

CLOVIS AVE

PEACH AVE

WILLOW AVE

MAPLE AVE

CEDAR AVE

FIRST ST

BLACKSTONE AVE

PALM AVE

WEST AVE

MARKS AVE

BRAWLEY AVE

MILBURN AVE

POLK AVE

GRANTLAND AVE

Map 2.15: Overlap of Disadvantaged Factors in Fresno

SHEPHERD AVE

NEES AVE

BULLARD AVE

180

CLOVIS

SHAW AVE

SHAW AVE ASHLAN AVE

ASHLAN AVE

168

SHIELDS AVE

MCKINLEY AVE BELMONT AVENUE

VENTURA AVE

WHITES BRIDGE AVE

CALIFORNIA AVE CHURCH AVE

41 EN LD GO ST H ST F E

ELMAVE

ST VD BL

Amount of Disadvantaged Factors

WALNUT AVE

NORTH AVE

High Amount of Disadvantages Low Amount of Disadvantages Railroad Freeways Primary Street

Fresno

Mid-High

TCC Area

High EASTON

1.5

6 Mile

2.3

Conclusion Fresnoâ€™s unique history offers insight into how it was formed, developed, grown, and divided. These phases in its history illustrate the environmental and sociocultural factors that exist today. As a city that meets the criteria as a disadvantaged community, Fresno is burdened by environmental and sociocultural conditions. The TCC project area, located in the south part of Fresno, is one of the most disadvantaged areas in Fresno, and the TCC projects within this area can help to address the issues and potentially prevent the impacts of climate change from exacerbating these conditions.

2.3

Street view of the crossing of MLK Blvd and Church Ave showing the potential to improve liveability

CHANGE IMPACTS 03 CLIMATE ON FRESNO 3.1 Climate Change Impacts in Fresno 3.2 Sources of GHG in Fresno 3.3 Conclusion

Fresnoâ€™s history of transportation development, agriculture practices, and industrial innovation has contributed to some of the many challenges Fresno faces. As mentioned in Chapter 1.2, according to the Climate Change Metrics developed by the EPA (2016), the key greenhouse gases created by human activities are Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous oxide (N2O), and Fluorinated gases (F-gases) (US EPA, 2015b). These GHGs impact communities who are already disadvantaged by exacerbating the existing challenges like high temperatures and poverty. This chapter discusses the sources of GHGs and their impacts on Fresno, making the case for landscape strategies to address these challenges.

Sources of GHG include Industries around Fresno

3.1

Climate Change Impacts in Fresno Fresno meets the criteria as a disadvantaged community based on its current conditions. The TCC area is one of the most affected locations in Fresno, making it the most ideal place to implement TCC projects. Climate change aggravates environmental problems, which makes conditions worse for disadvantaged communities. While the previous chapter discussed the individual environmental and sociocultural conditions in Fresno, this chapter integrates the impacts, showing the connection between the environment and people.

Impacts on Temperature Climate change can be measured directly through temperature changes, precipitation, and other metrics. Global climate change was already established by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007) through Global Climate Models (GCMs), indicating that it is very likely (greater than 90% probability) that extreme heat, precipitation and drought events will become more frequent (IPCC, 2007). The Institute of Climate Change, Oceans and Atmosphere (ICOA) at California State University, Fresno produced a prediction report documenting the trend of climate change in Fresno County and surrounding counties. The report predicted Fresno County could experience more severe conditions in the aspects of increasing average temperature of 2-6 °F, increasing in the number of days

of extreme heat (over 104 °F), decreasing in the availability of state water from snow melt, increasing risk of dry years, increasing flood, increasing wildfire, and increasing “bad” air days by 2050 (Climate Wise, 2010) .

Urban Heat Island With the increase of temperatures associated with climate change, urban heat islands will occur more in areas with large amounts of impermeable and dark-colored surfaces. These impacts pose threats on disadvantaged and vulnerable communities that are susceptible to heat-related illnesses. UHI also increases the prevalence greenhouse gas emissions, intensifying the problems. (US EPA, 2014).

Impacts on Air Pollution The relationship between air pollution and climate change falls into two categories. First, most of the air pollutants caused by vehicles and fuel combustions come with greenhouse gas emissions, so while this air pollution is produced climate change impacts are also intensified. Second, climate change intensifies the seriousness of air pollution, perpetuating this cycle. Those with asthma and cardiovascular health issues are susceptible to these impacts as air pollution greatly affects their health (Guarnieri & Balmes, 2014).

People escape the heat of downtown in the shade provided by trees

3.1

Impacts on Water Drought Threats Many studies have tested how climate change relates to drought, and Gustafson & Sturtevant (2013) postulate that the most immediate effect of climate change occurs as drought. As a central city of the San Joaquin Valley, Fresno has faced the adverse effects of this exceptionally dry period through problems like water shortages (USDM, 2017). These drought trends will not stop as climate change progresses. Some scientists have projected that climate change will increase the frequency and intensity of droughts, and severe droughts in recent years have exacerbated California’s water problems (Gustafson & Sturtevant, 2013; Klos, Wang, Bauerle, & Rieck, 2009). Ten largescale and multi-year droughts have happened since 1900, and three of which happened after 2000 (Fox, 2013). Therefore, California will face frequent droughts more than any time in the history.

The receding water levels apparent in the land at Millerton Lake north of Fresno

As temperatures rise from climate change, drought will be more prevalent, threatening vulnerable communities in cities like Fresno. The continued drought will bring more negative impacts on disadvantaged farm communities that are already exposed to poverty, food insecurity, job insecurity, and access to basic social services. Fresno’s reputation as titan in agricultural production faces threats with the persistent drought.

Groundwater Threats California’s groundwater recharge will also suffer consequences due to the rising of regional temperature from global climate change. The water system in California is weak from global warming because it cannot rely on melted mountain snow as its water sources (Vicuna & Dracup, 2007). The overall increase in temperatures has caused the snowpack to melt earlier in the year than it should (Koopman, Nauman, & Leonard, 2010). Fresno is geographically

3.1

located at the foot of the Sierra Nevada mountains, which uses the surface water and groundwater from the melted snow. The amount of the cityâ€™s groundwater will decline due to increased water demand and a lack in groundwater recharge. Furthermore, the low groundwater table will cause other issues such as land subsidence. Due to the severe drought in recent years, the water table continues to decline quickly as people adapt to the lack of surface water by over-drafting the groundwater. According to the annual water quality report of Fresno in 2016, the cityâ€™s water table has dropped more than 100 feet in the past 70 years (City of Fresno Water Division, 2016). Groundwater overuse has caused new issues, which further contribute to the damage of the drought. Since climate change caused renewed aquifer system compaction and land subsidence, there are serious operational, maintenance, and construction-design issues for the California Aqueduct and other major infrastructures. Those issues negatively impact many projects such

as Delta-Mendota Canal (DMC), and other waterdelivery and flood-control canals in the San Joaquin Valley (Sneed and Brandt, 2015). These issues will be serious in the future because climate change contributes to the decrease in water availability. The surface water also faces serious issues caused by drought. For example, high temperatures cause water to evaporate quicker, causing more carbon dioxide and more water vapor which acts like a greenhouse gas (Rind, 1998). Since a major part of the surface water is now being imported into the city, transpired by crops or evaporated from the soil, the shortage of surface water becomes more severe than ever (Sneed and Brandt, 2015). Therefore, the amount of surface-water outflow from the valley has been reduced compared to predevelopment conditions. Furthermore, the shortage of surface water also impacts the groundwater recharge, which is lower than previous eras. Because of the exhausted groundwater

3.1

pumping in the San Joaquin Valley, the aquifer systems have become shallower than in the past. This system is then infiltrated by water that contains chemicals and salts from agricultural processes (Galloway, Riley, 1999). Because of more intense precipitation events and increasing rain-on-snow events, more intense runoff and flooding will appear according to the predictions by scientists (CA Natural Resources Agency, 2009). Eventually, water pollution will increase from urban storm water runoff and discharge from agricultural lands (Edinburg, 1994). Thus, understanding those processes to mitigate negative environmental impacts is crucial for the win against climate change.

Impacts on Ecology Climate change impacts the natural environment of Fresno in various ways. Anthropologic factors have accelerated climate change at a rate faster than the natural ecosystem can sustain (Allen-Diaz, 2000).

As mentioned earlier, climate change has caused the increase in drought periods and temperature fluctuations, putting a strain on the distribution of water resources. The fluctuation of temperature also impacts the native plant communities like wetlands, as well as wildlife and soil. Therefore, climate change contributes to the decrease of water distributed for natural resources and the fluctuations in temperature throughout the year, and both impact the natural functions of the native ecosystem. If actions are not taken to counter such impacts and enable the ecology to adapt, then the ecosystem will continue to suffer and die, further impacting the lives of humans. The effects of climate change include temperature rises and longer drought periods. The rise in temperature combined with loss of moisture will cause the soils to decompose carbon at a faster rate (Parton et al., 1995) and release it into the atmosphere. Therefore, the management of soil must also be considered to make sure the carbon in

Scrublands at Mendota Wildlife Area indicates the vegetation of a plant community in the Central Valley close to Fresno

3.1

soil does not seep into the atmosphere at a faster rate and further contribute to climate change. The increase in the wildfires will continue to scorch the vegetation, damage roots that hold soil together, and increase the susceptibility to mudslides. Furthermore, climate change has decreased the amount of snowpack, increasing rainfall and causing more soil erosion and mudslides from runoff (Nearing, Pruski, & Oâ€™Neal, 2004). Climate change causes soils to react in ways that contribute further to air pollution from carbon emissions and changes in the ecosystem from erosion. Overall, the two direct impacts of climate change on the ecology of Fresno are the drought and temperature fluctuations. The drought causes vegetation and wildlife to compete for the limited water supply. The temperature fluctuations cause strain on vegetation, wildlife, and soil. Vegetation dies off from the lack of water and an increase in temperature (Duffy & Kahara, 2010). These two impacts cause wildlife to compete for habitat and struggle to survive in quickly changing environments (Allen-Diaz, 2000). The soil also contributes further to greenhouse gas emissions due to increased temperature and decreased moisture (Davidson & Janssens, 2006). The increasing development in Fresno poses an immediate threat to biodiversity while climate change will pose a longterm threat (Duffy & Kahara, 2010). Therefore, climate change impacts must be addressed immediately and long-term impacts must be prevented through design.

Impacts on Agricultural Workers Job Security The drought has become more severe in recent years because the increase in greenhouse gas emissions has caused the climate to change the precipitation patterns of California (Lenihan, Drapek, Bachelet, & Neilson, 2003). Furthermore, climate change has altered the duration of seasons which impacts the growth of plant species (Lobell, Torney, & Field, 2011). In some cases, some plants end up fruiting earlier because spring-like conditions start earlier (Lobell et al., 2011). In other areas, like Fresno, the heat is too intense and crops die, causing owners to sell their

farms and fire employees (Richard, Duncan, JosuĂŠ, Jay, & Daniel, 2015). As these patterns of climate change impacts continue, more farms will be lost and more agricultural workers in Fresno will face unemployment.

Impacts on Health Health issues in Fresno have been aggravated by climate change. Pollution that comes from transportation and industry such as PM2.5 and O3 affect vulnerable populations who suffer from diseases like asthma. However, GHGs that come from these sources also have different impacts such as temperature increases. While various sources may produce different types of pollution, they both impact vulnerable people and perpetuate the impacts on these communities. The most vulnerable communities include the elderly, children, and outdoor workers, and as climate change continues, these communities will also continue to suffer from the impacts.

Conclusion The increase in greenhouse gases produces environmental impacts both globally and locally. Global climate change affects the air quality, hydrology, ecology and temperature of inland urban areas. Fresno suffers from these environmental impacts, not only because of its urban environment, but also because of land uses like agriculture and transportation which further contribute to GHG emissions. Furthermore, temperature increases from anthropogenic sources aggravate the effects of GHG emissions, causing a greater increase in local temperatures.

3.2

Sources of GHG in Fresno While addressing global climate change is not solely the responsibility of Fresno, there are sources of GHG emissions in Fresno that can be addressed. In accordance with the Energy Information Administrationâ€™s (EIA) categories, greenhouse gas emissions sources by economic sectors include agriculture, industry, commerce, residences, transportation, and electricity generation (US EIA, 2017). The 606 Studio examined the various sectors in Fresno, using average emission rates from land uses in Fresno (See Map 3.1: Sources of GHG Pollution in Fresno). As shown in Chapter 1, there are other GHGs that contribute to climate change, but CO2 is the main GHG produced from human sources. The discussion of CO2 emission in the city of Fresno will follow the categories listed (See Table 3.1: Sources Emissions in Fresno), and other greenhouse gases will be analyzed based on the location of specific emission sources.

Table 3.1

Source Emissions in Fresno Area Acreage

Agriculture

N/A

CO2 Emission MTCO2/year N/A

Industry

12,072

556,674

Commerce & Public Service

24,342

756,253

Residence

41,688

690,645

Transportation

783

1,899,799

Power Plant

N/A

432,728

FOWLER AVE

CLOVIS AVE

PEACH AVE

WILLOW AVE

MAPLE AVE

CEDAR AVE

FIRST ST

BLACKSTONE AVE

PALM AVE

WEST AVE

MARKS AVE

BRAWLEY AVE

MILBURN AVE

POLK AVE

GRANTLAND AVE

Map 3.1: Sources of GHG Pollution in Fresno

SHEPHERD AVE

NEES AVE

BULLARD AVE

180

CLOVIS

SHAW AVE

SHAW AVE ASHLAN AVE

ASHLAN AVE

168

SHIELDS AVE

MCKINLEY AVE BELMONT AVENUE

VENTURA AVE

WHITES BRIDGE AVE

CALIFORNIA AVE CHURCH AVE

E VD BL

ELMAVE

Railroad Freeway Primary Street

Tcc Boundary

EN LD GO ST H ST F

WALNUT AVE

NORTH AVE

Public Facilities Residential Greening Commercial Industrial Biomass Combustion Power Plant

EASTON

1.5

6 Mile

3.2

Agricultural Sources

Commercial Sources

Studies show that CO2 emissions in agriculture areas are not only from soil, fertilizer and pesticide use, but also from factories, fuel and oil for tractors, equipment, trucking and shipping, and electricity for lighting, cooling, and heating (Neugeldt, et al, 2006; Dalgaard, et al, 2011). Analysis from 606 Studio shows that a few agricultural land-use parcels that exist within the boundary of Fresno. However, most of the agricultural land-use surrounds the whole city and some cultivated ground within the city, indicating that agriculture can influence the emissions within Fresno. For instance, groundwater is pumped from the underground reservoirs and transported for use in irrigation for commercial and residential agriculture (Harter, 2017).

In addition to industry, CO2 emissions in commercial sectors in Fresno are produced by energy consumption on site for heating, cooking, lighting, pumping water, etc. (Wang & Lin, 2017). By using GIS data, the 606 Studio found the city of Fresno’s commercial area is about 24,342 acres and the total CO2 emission is 756,253 MTCO2E/YEAR.

Industrial Sources CO2 emissions produced by industrial processes comes from three sources: (1) electricity and fossil fuels burned on site, (2) chemical, metallurgical, and mineral transformation processes not associated with energy consumption, and (3) waste management activities (Chang, and Lin, 1998). The 606 Studio examined Fresno’s electrical usage in the industrial area to estimate the CO2 emission level. Using GIS to analyze census data, the total industrial area in Fresno makes up about 12,072 acres in 2010. The total electrical demand within the Fresno’s planning area is 2.9 billion kWh/year. According to EPA (2017), 25% is used in the industrial sector. Therefore, 748 million kWh/year is consumed by industrial production. The CO2 emission is about 556,674 MTCO2E/YEAR (EIA’s calculator).

Agricultural sources such as crops in Fresno Industrial sources such as processing plants in Fresno contributes to GHG Emissions

Commercial sources such as shopping districts in Fresno

3.2

Residential Sources

Other GHG sources

Residential CO2 emissions come from electrical usage, onsite energy generation and burning fuels for heating, cooking, lighting, pumping water etc. (Thuy & Limmeechokchai 2015). The 606 Studio found that the city of Fresno’s residential area is 41,688 acres. Th erefore, total CO2 emissions is 690,645 MTCO2E/ YEAR.

According to various literature, nitrous oxide (N2O) mainly comes from direct soil emission correlated to fertilizer application in agriculture areas, industrial process, and solid waste (Neugeldt, et al, 2006; EIR, 2017). Methane (CH4) is from livestock on farms (compost), landfill, and industrial processes (EIR, 2017). Fluorinated gases (F-gases) do not naturally occur, but are caused by industrial processes and air conditioners used in residential and commercial areas (EIR, 2017). Methane (CH4), Nitrous oxide (N2O), and Fluorinated gases (F-gases) were examined by the 606 Studio through emission locations. Agriculture areas, industrial areas, livestock farms, dairy factories, landfill bases, and waste transfer stations are all located in and around the city, and are other sources that produce greenhouse gas.

Transportation Sources According to the EPA’s report of global greenhouse gas emissions data (2017), the transportation sector primarily involves fossil fuels burned for road, rail, air, and marine transportation. Regarding Fresno, the 606 Studio examined the emission from vehicles that use fossil fuels By utilizing GIS data from US Census Data as well as the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Calculator, the 606 Studio found that motor vehicles’ CO2 emission is 1,899,799 MT CO2E/YEAR in Fresno (US EPA, 2015a). Also, the GIS-based transportation road network map shows the high-density road network in the Downtown Fresno area; therefore, the CO2 emissions in the downtown are most likely higher than other areas.

Electricity Generation Sources According to the EPA’s report of global greenhouse gas emissions data (2017), electricity production through burning of coal, natural gas, and oil contributes to CO2 emission. The 606 Studio examined three fossil fuels used in the production of electricity in power plants for the Fresno area, which could produce 432,728 MTCO2E/YEAR.

Conclusions Based on the 606 Studio’s data collection and calculation, the greatest amount of local CO2 emissions in Fresno is primarily produced through transportation. The next highest producers in order are commercial, residential, industrial and electricity power plants . Other GHG sources are mainly located in the downtown area and south industrial areas. the Downtown and Southwest parts of Fresno have a high concentration of these sources of pollution. Climate change mitigation and adaptation solutions will focus on addressing these sources as well as adapting to the impacts caused by the pollution, making the downtown and southwest areas the focus of the project’s objectives.

Residential sources such as apartments in Fresno Transportation sources such as vehicle emissions in Fresno

Electrical sources such as lights in buildings and street sides in Fresno

3.3

Conclusion GHGs and air pollutants mainly result from agriculture, industry, commerce, residences, transportation, and power plants in the city of Fresno and contribute to high temperatures and the reduction of air quality. In addition, climate change that is triggered by the GHGs affects the cityâ€™s environmental conditions and socio-economic status, specifically regarding air, water, the ecosystem, temperature, agriculture, residential income, and health issues. The impacts are significant for the residents of

Fresno and the TCC area. The next chapter will discuss how the 606 Studio has collected and developed metrics from the California Air Resource Board (CARB) and other sources to measure GHG emissions mitigation and adaptation methods from transportation, water, urban greening, soil and recycling waste. The 606 Studio also found applications to help disadvantaged communities in Fresno reduce climate change impacts.

3.3

Aerial view of processing plants in Chinatown and highway 99 near the residential area of Southwest Fresno

04 METRICS FOR LANDSCAPE STRATEGIES 4.1 Transportation

4.2 Water Management 4.3 Urban Greening 4.4 Soil Management 4.5 Waste Diversion 4.6 Conclusion

Chapter 3 explained that the challenges disadvantaged communities face will be exacerbated by climate change. In order to help these communities fight the causes and impacts of climate change, actions must be taken to provide measurable change to the environment. Although landscape designers and practitioners provide strategies that provide some benefit, measuring the effectiveness of those strategies has been lacking. Also, due to the variation in human behavior, success rates for helping communities are difficult to quantify. Finally, there has been a lack in adequate policies that address measurable landscape strategies. Being able to quantify the impact different design strategies would enable practitioners to create more impactful projects and help those projects get funded. As a core aspect of the project, Measurable Change identifies these opportunities for evidence-based design and provides tools to measure design strategies. By using methods and measurements that mitigate GHGs, provide adaptation, and provide cobenefits, designers and other practitioners can help these communities experience measurable improvements to their environment. To develop metrics of climate change mitigation of in the form of GHG reduction, the Transformative Climate Communities program (TCC) worked with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop quantification methods to be used by agencies receiving Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund appropriations (CARB, 2017d). Building on these metrics, the 606 Studio has developed additional metrics for the measurement of climate change mitigation, adaptation and co-benefits of the landscape strategies. This Chapter discusses how the CARB and 606 Studio metrics provide methodologies and calculations to measure the GHG reductions of landscape architectural strategies related to Transportation (4.1) Water Management (4.2), Urban Greening (4.3), Soil Management (4.4), and Waste Diversion (4.5). This chapter also presents the metrics developed by the 606 Studio to measure how landscape actions can help people adapt to the impacts of climate change. Finally, the co-benefits of landscape actions are assessed to explain the additional benefits for local inland communities.

Aerial View of the Railroad dividing Downtown and Chinatown in Fresno

4.1

Transportation Transportation accounts for 27% of all Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the United States (US EPA, 2015b). The main impacts of transportation are the generation of heat from vehicles, air pollution, and the emission of CO2, a major component of GHG gases. CARB provides documentation to measure the potential mitigation of GHGs from transportation. Landscape architecture methods can produce strategies for transportation that mitigate traffic-related emissions, provide methods for adaptability as well as co-benefits for disadvantaged communities.

example, urban heat islands are increasing, and weather patterns like severe heat waves and temperature fluctuations put vulnerable people at risk of heat-related mortality and sickness (Eberly & Anderson, 2006). These effects especially occur in communities with economic disadvantages because they are unable to afford amenities for reducing the effects of severe conditions.

Transportation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The GHGs emissions that result from transportation vary because different types of vehicles generate different amounts of GHG emissions. The most common types of transportation in Fresno are passenger vehicles, public buses, trucks and trains. Miles driven by these vehicles are measured in passenger miles (miles), which is one mile traveled by one passenger. According to the EPA (2017), the CO2 emission rate is 411 gCO2/ passenger mile from a typical passenger car, 55 gCO2/passenger mile from a typical public bus, 170 gCO2/passenger mile from a commuter rail, 121 gCO2/passenger mile form a subway train, and 137 gCO2/passenger mile from longdistance trains (See Table 4.1: Model Year 2017 Ratings). CO2 emissions from passenger cars varies

Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation As mentioned in Chapter 2, transportation produces a significant amount of GHG emissions, particulate matter, chemical pollutants, and heat in urban areas. All these outputs weaken human health and the environment (Amann, Derwent, & Forsberg, 2008; Brugge, Durant, & Rioux, 2007). Transportation also contributes to increases in temperature in urban areas. An average passenger car driving one mile generates 10,274 Joules of energy, the same amount of energy to light a 60-watt lightbulb for 2.5 minutes (EPA 2017). Therefore, if an average passenger car drives 32 miles per day, it produces 328,767 Joules of energy to its surrounding every day, or the same amount of energy to power a lightbulb for 82 minutes (US EPA, 2015b). This energy leads to an increase in local temperature and warms the surrounding environment. Due to high ownership rates of vehicles and the prevalence of people driving alone rather than carpooling, transportation increases the GHGs that contributes to climate change. For 98

Current Emission Rates of Various Types of Transportation Petroleum-Based Vehicles

based on types, makes, years, and models. The federal government publishes a record and rating of CO2 emissions by make and model.

The best vehicles produce low emissions of 0-204 gCO2/per mile and receive a rating of “10,”, while the worst vehicles can put out over 614 gCO2/per mile and receive a rating of “1.” Reducing the driving miles of personal fossilfuel-burning vehicles is one method of reducing GHG emissions. Other ways include using EVs and carpooling.

4.1

Table 4.1

Model Year 2017 Ratings Example Cars

CO2

Rating

MPG

≥ 44

0-204 g

38-43

205237 g

Mitsubishi Mirage = 226 g

Ford Fusion Hybrid FWD = 210 g

33-37

238273 g

Mitsubishi Mirage G4 = 226 g

Hyundai Sonata = 286 g

30-32

274301g

Honda Fit = 281 g

27-29

302335 g

Toyota Camry = 316 g

23-26

336395 g

MINI Cooper S Chevrolet Honda Accord = Countryman All4 Colorado 2WD = 350 g = 346 g 411 g

20-22

396456 g

Subaru WRX = 456 g

17-19

457539 g

Chevrolet Colorado 2R2 4WD = 506 g

MercedesBenz Metris (Passenger Van)= 413 g

15-16

540613 g

Ford F150 RAPTOR 4WD = 546 g

Ford Transit T150 Wagon = 552 g

Roush Performance F150 = 699 g

GMC Savana 3500 2WD (Passenger) = 716 g

≤ 14

(g/mile)

≥ 614 g

Small Cars

Large Sedans Pickup Trucks

Vans

Toyota Prius c = Toyota Prius c = 193 g 158 g

Ford Fusion = 446 g

Grand Canyon 4WD = 449 g

(https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.shtml)

4.1

Electric Vehicles With the rise of electric and hybrid vehicles claiming to be zero-emission and partial zeroemission vehicles, analysis must be conducted to determine the indirect emissions of such vehicles. While EVs may produce zero emissions from the actual vehicle at the time of driving, the production of electricity that powers the cars produces greenhouse gases (US EPA, 2015a). The US EPA provides a calculator to measure the indirect GHG emission rates of an electric car using national averages. An EV typically uses 34 kWh to drive 100 miles, and with the national rate of electricity production, the EV produces 250 gCO2/ passenger mile. The amount of GHGs produced are based on the national average of GHG emissions from the generation of electricity (1,041 lbsCO2/ MWh), but California produces more sustainable electricity than the rest of the United States, making the indirect emissions of EVs less than the national standard (525 lbsCO2/MWh) (US EIA, 2017b). In order to assess the indirect GHG production from EVs in California, a discussion is necessary on how electricity is generated, transmitted, and distributed to users. Electricity is generated from power plants that use different types of resources for energy. The most common types are coal, natural gas, hydro power and nuclear power, but renewable sources are being used more frequently such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric sources (US EPA, 2015a). The types of fuels used varies greatly by states and regions in the United States. Nationally, 65% of electricity is generated using fossil fuels, “about 20% from nuclear energy and 15% come from renewable

100

energy sources” (US EIA, 2017a). In California, the rates of using renewable resources for electricity generation are higher. California ranks third in the nation for using hydroelectric generation, second in using renewable resources to generate electricity, and first in generating electricity from solar, geothermal, and biomass resources (US EIA, 2017b). In the process of electricity production, transmission, and distribution, the generation of electricity is the primary cause of GHGs and the number one source of GHG production in the US. (US EPA, 2015b). Energy is used to transmit the electricity to substations, which is then distributed to consumers. This process involves energy used in a power station (kWh) which in turn produces GHGs (lbs. CO2/kWh), as shown as the EPA Emission Factor (F) (See Figure 4.1: Indirect GHG Emissions from Electric Vehicles). In the United States, the average production of CO2 from electricity is 1,041 lbs./MWh (US EIA, 2018). However, since California utilizes other sources of energy besides coal, the GHG rates are lower than that national standard at 525 lbs. of CO2/ MWh. The formula describing the production of GHGs from one passenger mile of an EV is described in Figure 4.1. As an example, an average electric car can travel 100 miles per one charge (34kWh). In California, the total CO2 emissions of an EV is 80 gCO2/passenger mile, substantially less than the 250 gCO2/passenger mile national estimate from the EPA. A conventional vehicles is "a type of light-duty vehicle with an internal combustion engine, typically either a gasoline-fueled spark ignition engine or a diesel-fueled compression ignition engine” (Exxon Mobil, 2018, p. 50). The GHG reductions from EV in California compared to conventional vehicles is described in Figure 4.1.

4.1

Figure 4.1

Indirect GHG Emissions from Electric Vehicles

GHGEV REDUCTIONS

ERCV - EREV

EREV

EV (F)454 x 100 1000

Where ERCV = emission rate from a conventional vehicle EREV = emission rate from EVs in California.

EV = Electric vehicles mileage rate (kWh/100miles) F = Amount of emissions from a factory (lbs of CO2/MWh) 454 = Conversion factor for pounds to grams (CARB, 2017)

Climate Change Mitigation Through Transportation Methods Reducing driving miles of personal petroleumbased vehicles is one major method of reducing GHG emissions. One way to do this is by replacing personal petroleum-based vehicles (GHGDisplaced Autos) with alternative forms of transportation (GHGNew/ Expanded Service Vehicle) such as carpooling, public transportation, using EVs, biking, and walking (Hamilton & Wichman, 2015).

CARB Methodology Petroleum-based Vehicles While petroleum-based vehicles differ, their impact is calculated using the same two factors: measurement of vehicle miles traveled per person (VMT) and emission factors (EF). The GHG reductions can occur because either there are more people using a vehicle, thus reducing VMTs. In 2016, 76.4% of people drove alone, 13.5% carpooled, and 4.9% worked at home (Data USA, 2017).

Cars are typically single-passenger vehicles while buses, shuttles/vans, and trains contain move many people simultaneously. GHG reductions can also occur because the emission factor of a mode of transportation is less than another mode, thus reducing the EF. The relative climate impact of trains depends on what fuel they use, the load they are carrying and the distance they are traveling. A diesel train with a light load traveling a short distance might produce high emissions per passenger, whereas an electric train traveling at capacity of long distances would produce very little GHG per passenger mile (CARB, 2017c). These various factors contribute to the GHG emissions and reductions from petroleum-based vehicles. CARB distinguishes between each vehicle type, including cars, buses, shuttles/vans, and provides formulas to calculate the CO2 emissions for vehicles that use fossil fuels (See Figure 4.2: Petroleumbased Transportation Metric). The formulas for estimating the GHG emission from petroleumbased vehicles are based on standard GHG emission rates for vehicles (See Table 4.1: Model Year 2017 Ratings). 101

Figure 4.2

Petroleum-based Transportation Metric DxRxAxL

AutoVMT

CO2ePASSENGER CAR

AutoVMT x AVEF

CO2eTRANSIT BUS

BVMT x BEF

CO2eSHUTTLE/VAN

SVMT x SVEF

CO2eTRAIN

TVMT x TDEF

GHGREDUCTIONS

GHGDISPLACED AUTOS - GHGNEW/EXPANDED SERVICE VEHICLE

Where AutoVMT = average annual vehicle miles traveled of auto vehicles in miles per year D = Days of operation per year R = average unlinked daily ridership A = adjustment factor to account for transit dependency L = length (miles) of average auto trip reduced CO2ePASSENGER CAR = Car emissions AVEF = auto vehicle emission factor in gCO2e per mile CO2eTRANSIT BUS = Bus emissions BVMT = average annual vehicle miles traveled of transit bus based on project data BEF = bus emission factor in gCO2e per mile

CO2eSHUTTLE/VAN = Shuttle/Van emissions SVMT = average annual vehicle miles traveled of shuttle or van based on project data SVEF = shuttle or van emission factor in gCO2e (gm/CO2) per mile CO2eTRAIN = Train emissions TVMT = average annual vehicle miles traveled of train based on project data TDEF = train emission factor in gCO2e per mile

GHGREDUCTIONS = Annual GHG emission reductions GHGDISPLACED AUTOS = Emissions from Displaced Autos GHGNEW/EXPANDED SERVICE VEHICLE = Emissions from new and expanded service vehicles

(California Air Resources Board, 2017)

102

Figure 4.3

Electric Vehicle Metric GHGCV - GHGBEV

GHGREDUCTIONS

x UL

GHGCV

VMTFLEET x EFCV

GHGBEV

VMTFLEET x EFBEV x PBEV VMTFLEET

Where GHGREDUCTIONS = the annual emission reductions (MTCO2e/year) GHGCV = the GHG emissions from conventional vehicles (grams (g) CO2e/year) GHGBEV = the GHG emissions from BEVs (gCO2e/year) UL = the useful project life (3 years) EFCV = the emission factor for a conventional vehicle (gCO2e/mile) EFBEV = the emission factor for a BEV (gCO2e/mile) PBEV = the percentage of the project vehicles that are BEVs or FCEVs

Vehicles x (Trips/Day) x (Miles/Day) x (Days/Year) VMTFleet = the annual VMT for the fleet (vehicle-miles/year) Vehicles = the number of eligible advanced technology vehicles Trips/Day = the average number of one-way trips driven per day per vehicle Miles/Trip = the average number of miles travelled per trip Days/Year = the number of days per year that vehicles would be available for us Emission factor based on the type of vehicle as well as other factors such as the calendar year, vehicle category, model year, and type of fuel

(CARB, 2017)

Electric Vehicles (EVs) CARB also provides documentation to calculate the GHG reductions through the use of EVs (CARB, 2014). The metrics provided in the quantification methodology for low carbon transportation describe the reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMTreductions) from various forms of EVs (See Figure 4.3: Electric Vehicle Metric). EVs are categorized into three categories: plug-inhybrid electric vehicles (PHEV), battery electric vehicles (BEV), and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEV) (CARB, 2017d). The equations in Figure 4.3 calculate the ERs of EVs as well as determine the difference between conventional vehicle emissions. In this equation, a useful life (UL) is determined as three years, based on CARB's classification. Through a series of equations formed through the Well-to-Wheel GHG Emission Analysis, mitigation is calculated based on replacing gasoline and diesel with alternative fuels. (Elgowainy et

al., 2010). However, unlike the 606 Metric for EVs, CARB does not account for indirect emissions.

Active Transportation CARB also provides documentation in the Active Transportation section that describes methods to calculate impacts of bike lanes, bikeshares, and pedestrian facilities. As a form of active transportation, the use of these methods does not involve the production of GHGs. The impact of active transportation must be measured in relation to VMT that would be replaced. Other factors influence the VMT reductions and must be considered.

103

4.1

Bike Lanes

Bikeshares

CARB provides a formula to estimate the automobile VMT reduced because of bike infrastructure (See Figure 4.4: Bike Lanes and Bikeshare Metrics). The formula is formed from the understanding that traffic density changes the outcome of GHG reductions, but also considers the type of town through the adjustment factor. University towns are more likely to utilize a bike lane whereas older residents are less likely (Handy, Xing, & Buehler, 2010). This equation can be applied to any of the proposed projects that have bike lane.

In addition to the measurement reduction achieved by bike lanes, CARB produced a formula to measure the GHG Emission reductions achieved by bikeshares (See Figure 4.4: Bike Lanes and Bikeshare Metrics). Factors regarding traffic congestion influence these results as well. While bikeshares can be placed in certain areas with high traffic congestion, Hamilton and Wichman (2015) write that the most suitable locations are in â€œareas of residential and commercial concentration, rather than commuting corridorsâ€? (Hamilton & Wichman, 2015, p.15). This allows access to the bikes from

Figure 4.4

Bike Lanes and Bikeshare Metrics BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION x AVEF

BLGHG REDUCTION BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION

D x ADT x (A+C) x L

BSAUTO VMT REDUCTION x AVEF

BSGHG REDUCTION

x UL

BSAUTO VMT REDUCTION Where, BLGHG REDUCTIONS = GHG reductions from implementing bike lanes BLAUTO VMT REDUCTIONS = GHG reductions from vehicles due to bike lanes BSGHG REDUCTIONS = GHG reductions from implementing bike shares BSAUTO VMT REDUCTIONS = GHG reductions from vehicles due to bike shares AVEF = Auto Vehicle Emission Factor UL = Useful Life of the project

x UL

TxAxL volume in trips/day on parallel road). Use applicabe value from project data (Maximum is 30,000) A = The adjustment factor to account for bike/ pedestrian use (use applicable value from Table 4.3) C = The activity center credit (use applicable value from Table 4.4) L = The bike trip length (1.8 miles per trip in one direction) or walking trip length (1.0 miles per trip in one direction) T = The total number of bike trips using bike share bikes expected in the first year of service

D = Days of use per year ADT = Annual average daily traffic (two-way traffic (CARB, 2017c)

104

4.1

Table 4.3 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ADT < 12,000 vehicles per day 12,000 < ADT < 24,000 vehicles per day 24,000 < ADT < 30,000 vehicles per day

Table 4.4

Adjustment Factor Length of Bike/Ped Project (one direction) < 1 mile > 1 & < 2 miles > 2 miles < 1 mile > 1 & < 2 miles > 2 miles < 1 mile > 1 & < 2 miles > 2 miles

For cities >250,000 and non-university towns <250,000 .0019 .0029 .0038 .0014 .0020 .0027 .0010 .0014 .0019

For university towns with population <250,000 .0104 .0155 .0207 .0073 .0109 .0145 .0052 .0078 .0104

Activity Center Credit

Count your Activity Centers. If there areâ€Ś

Within 1/2 mile of Project Area

Within 1/4 mile of Project Area

3 More than 3 but fewer than 7 7 or more

.0005 .0010 .0015

.001 .002 .003

various points rather than simply places bikeshares in the most congested areas. However, placing bikeshares in areas at the beginning and end of a commute (residential and job centers, respectively) is also ideal. Anderson (2014) found that using bikes was more attractive to commuters who face the worst congestion, thus influencing them to avoid the daily commute of congested traffic (Anderson, 2014). While there are still skeptics of bikeshare programs, Fishman (2016) shows that convenience and location has been a major motivator of bikeshare programs (Fishman, 2016).

Fresno Cyclist in Downtown

105

4.1

Summary of Mitigation from Transportation Modes These formulas described in this section can be used to calculate the mitigation of GHG emissions from different modes of transportation. The emission rates of different modes of transportation need to be addressed to assess the success of alternative modes. By increasing the use of EVs, public transit, and bikes, Fresno can provide mitigation, adaption and cobenefits to its community. Using bikes instead of passenger cars can reduce GHG emissions and heat sources that originate from the burning of vehicle engines in an urban area. The effect of bike riding on climate adaptation is not simply for residents riding for leisure, but mainly for those who use bikes as a long-term transportation method, such as commuting, and shopping. In the United States, urban bike riding is estimated to only about 1% of trips (Mason, Fulton, & McDonald, 2015). Since bike riding is not as comfortable or convenient as passenger cars, to encourage bike use, cities must improve cycling infrastructure, such as bicycle parking, protected bike lanes, and greenways (Annis, 2015). By increasing the urban bike riding to 20-30%, GHG emissions and heat from urban passenger cars could be reduced nearly 11 percent by 2050 (Annis, 2015). In addition, the creation of green space, which will be discussed in a later section, can provide shade for bikers, helping them adapt to the heat. Using public transit can reduce GHG emission based on every passenger mile. As stated earlier, passenger cars produce an average of 411 gCO2/ passenger mile, but emissions from public transit range from 55 â€“ 137 gCO2/passenger mile. Public transit produces much lower GHGs per passenger mile than passenger cars because many passengers ride at the same time. For example, â€œU.S. bus transit, which has about a quarter (28%) of its seats occupied on average, emits an estimated 33% lower greenhouse gas emissions per passenger mile than the average U.S. single occupancy vehicleâ€? (U.S. Department of Transportation & Federal Transit Administration, 2010). So, more passengers riding public transit equals lower GHG emissions per

106

passenger mile, which decreases the heat generated. Also, public transit can increase foot traffic, streetlevel retail, and mixed land uses that enable a shift from driving to walking and biking (U.S. Department of Transportation & Federal Transit Administration, 2010). Transit centers are the points that transfer passengers between different modes of transportation. The Federal Transit Administration (2010) explained that households that are close to public transit tended to own fewer cars on average, as they may not need a car for commuting and other trips. Using public transit can reduce GHG emissions through lessening passenger car use. In addition, some people are unable to use bikes and public transit as their daily form of transportation, such those who have jobs that are not accessible through public transportation. Using EVs is an alternative form of transportation because they do not emit GHGs from their tailpipe (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2014). EVs have zero GHG emissions when they drive on roads, compared to petroleum-based passenger vehicles. Furthermore, EVs produce lower GHG emissions than the average gasoline-powered vehicle (with a fuel economy of 27 miles per gallon) (UCS, 2012). The average CO2 emissions of EVs is average of 80 gCO2 passenger mile with the national rate of electricity production. When GHG emissions is concerned, EVs serve as a good alternative mode of transportation.

Adaptation Methods to Reduce the Impacts of Climate Change Caused by Transportation There are many methods to help people adapt to climate change effects that come from transportation in the city of Fresno. Useful methods include using public transportation, EVs and using alternative paving materials on streets. These methods help the disadvantaged communities in the TCC boundary adapt to the impact of climate change by decreasing local temperature and improving local air quality.

4.1

Reducing Local Temperature through HeatReflective Coating Reducing asphalt temperature of roads is a strategy that helps people adapt to the temperature increases caused by climate change. As a black material, asphalt absorbs and retains a huge amount of thermal energy transmitted through sunshine during the day and causes surface temperatures to reach up to more than 70°C (158°F), especially during hot summers (Chen & Ma, 2012). In intense sunlight, “the asphalt pavement becomes considerably hotter than the ambient canopy temperature, the excess heat is radiated back into the atmosphere throughout the day and night, resulting in a higher ambient temperature as compared to rural areas” (Chen & Ma, 2012). Heat-reflective coating (HRC) is introduced as a useful way to reduce asphalt pavement temperature by either spraying a coating material on the surface or by adding it to an asphalt mixture (Xuejuan Cao, Tang, Zou, & He, 2015). An experiment that tests the method found that the application of HRC can significantly reduce the pavement temperature by approximately 8°C (46.4°F) due to the high reflection ability of the coating (Chen & Ma, 2012, p. 740). It is an effective way to reduce asphalt pavement temperature but needs more testing before widespread application.

Reducing Local Temperature through Light-Colored Pavement Lastly, the use of different paving materials can also contribute to adaptation to climate change. The temperature of typical pavement surfaces like asphalt is higher than their surroundings because they absorb more heat when they are exposed to solar radiation. In general, “increasing the solar reflectivity of a pavement surface by using surfacing materials of light color or applying light color coating on dark surfacing materials, can lower the pavement surface temperature” (Li, Harvey, Holland, & Kayhanian, 2013, p. 2). “Cool pavements” (Solaimanian & Kennedy, 1993), or cooling

materials, reduce the surface temperature by significant amount when compared with concrete or asphalt. Reflective or cooling materials are cost effective, environmentally friendly, and passive techniques that contribute to achieving energy efficiency by lowering energy demand for cooling and improving the urban microclimate by lowering surface and air temperatures. The maximum temperature is usually recorded over the course of 15 hrs. and The daily maximum surface temperature, Tsmax, of a pavement has been the subject of much research (Solaimanian & Kennedy, 1993) (Bosscher,1998) (See Figure 4.5: Daily Surface Temperature). This formula shows how using high albedo pavers and permeable pavers reduce the particular area temperature by almost 20°C depending on each individual conditions (Akbari & Konopacki, 2005; Qin, 2015). By inputting information such as reflectivity and percentage of absorption, the Tsmax can reduce. Therefore, using this construction material and strategically locating it can counteract the temperature increases caused by climate change. With the project area’s limited tree coverage, this could be a very effective method for addressing the temperature.

Figure 4.5 Tsmax

Daily Surface Temperature Γ

(1 - R)I0 P√ω

+ T0

Where Γ = the percentage of the absorption to the thermal conduction R = the albedo (or reﬂectivity; this study treats albedo and reflectivity are interchangeable), T0 = the daily zenith solar irradiation (W/m2) ω = 2 π/ (24*3600) (Solaimanian & Kennedy, 1993)

107

4.1

Co-Benefits of Transportation Methods

Public health

While active transportation methods can aid in reducing the vehicle miles driven, there are also a variety of co-benefits that encourage users to adopt these practices. For example, beyond environmental benefits, the EPA (2013) writes that bike riding can improve a person’s health and save money on transportation and fuel. In the following, the environmental, economic and public health benefits of using active transportation are further discussed.

Lastly, the public health of Fresno would be improved by a shift to active transportation. Fresno’s obesity rate is 26.4% compared to California’s 21.3%, which makes it a suitable location to promote biking as an alternative form of transportation (United States Census Bureau, 2015). Also, 78.6% of Latino adults in Fresno are obese, further illustrating the benefit of promoting active transportation in disadvantaged communities (UCLA, 2012). CARB also compiled a list of co-benefits associated with the measurable transportation factors. These co-benefits included benefits like lowering asthma/respiratory disease incidence and lowering transportation user costs (CARB, 2017a). While these co-benefits do not mitigate the GHGs produced by transportation, they are additional benefits associated with the reduction of VMTs and the addition of bike lanes and pedestrian walkways. As an example, CARB explains that the reduction of asthma/respiratory disease incidence is a cobenefit associated with the promotion of Active Transportation (CARB, 2017e). Since criteria air pollutants like ozone, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter are directly linked to 1) the onset and exacerbation of asthma, 2) decreased lung function, and 3) increased asthma-related hospitalizations and emergency department visits,” the introduction of Active Transportation would likely produce a positive effect on asthma and respiratory disease incidence (CARB, 2017e).

Environmental A major contribution of active transportation on climate change is the reduction of VMTs which leads to fewer GHGs produced from petroleum-based products such as combustion engines. This helps to reduce the effects on humans, flora and fauna from temperature and air pollution (See Chapters 2 and 3 for more information). The largest sources of transportationrelated GHGs come from passenger vehicles. For this reason, replacing these vehicles with more sustainable modes of transportation like bike amenities and pedestrian infrastructure would increase the benefits on the local environment and improve the health of local flora and fauna (Allen-Diaz, 2000; Loarie et al., 2008).

Economic In addition to the environmental benefit, economic co-benefits can be realized by using alternative forms of transportation. These economic benefits include reduced expenditures on fuel through using EVs, biking, and walking. EVs can cost an average of $0.04 per mile while the typical passenger car can cost $0.60 per mile (USDE, 2018). While difficult to quantify specific quantities, CARB provides documentation to measure the energy and fuel use shifts and indicates that the use of low carbon transportation would likely provide a positive effect on energy efficiency in terms of dollars per mile (Litke, Roland-Holst, Harb, & Belal, 2017).

108

4.1

Table 4.5

Checklist of Transportation Metrics MITIGATION

Transportation

GHG Reduction

ADAPTATION Temperature Reduction

Air Quality Improvement

CO-BENEFITS Economic

Public Health

Ecology

Electric Vehicles Public Transportation Active Transportation Cool Pavements Carpooling/ Vanpooling

Conclusion As described, CARB and the 606 Studio researched and developed measurement metrics for the mitigation of GHGs, adaptation to impacts of climate change, and co-benefits for disadvantaged communities (See Table 4.5: Checklist of Transportation Metrics). These methods addressed transportation-related sources of GHGs and sought to provide calculations to measure and compare different methods.

109

4.2

Water Management In this section, greenhouse gas emissions related to water production, treatment and transportation will be discussed as well as the measurement of landscape architecture strategies to mitigate, adapt, and provide cobenefits to disadvantaged communities in Fresno. Mitigation methods are presented that utilize water-energy-saving methods while adaptation methods address impacts from drought, groundwater level reduction, and water contamination. The improvement of microclimates through the reduction of temperature will also serve as an adaptive solution. In addition, the combined benefits of all landscape infrastructure related to water management can be used to secure the environmental, economic and social benefits for residents, especially members of disadvantaged communities.

water-energy consumption can reduce CO2 emissions to a certain extent and alleviate climate change. Water-related energy consumption can occur during three phases: transportation, treatment, and on-site usage (Burton & Stern, 1993; CARB, 2017c) (See Figure 4.6: Process of Water-Related Energy Consumption). Different consumption methods correspond to different saving methods: reducing the quantity of water needed from long distance can bring down the transportation energy cost. Using more graywater can reduce water treatment energy cost by lowering clean water need and improving the efficiency of water equipment can further lower on-site water-energy cost (CARB, 2016).

GHG Mitigation through Water Management Methods The Context of Water-Related Energy

Wilkinson (2006) writes that there are four principle energy elements in water systems: â€œ1) primary water extraction and supply delivery (imported and local), 2) treatment and distribution within service areas, 3) on-site water pumping, treatment, and thermal inputs (heating and cooling), and 4) wastewater collection and treatmentâ€? (p. 20) (See Figure 4.7: Water-Energy Use). The GHG emission reduction approach of saving water-energy mentioned by CARB (2017) is mainly focused on the on-site end-use water energy saving. The 606 Studioâ€™s additional contribution focuses on the remaining three elements of the water supply system, which includes primary water extraction and supply delivery (imported and local), treatment and distribution within service areas, and wastewater collection and treatment.

The amount of water-related energy consumption accounts for about 20% of California's electricity (State of California, 2008). As mentioned in Chapter 3.2 (p.88), the power plants that generate energy in Fresno produce 432,728 metric tons (MT)/CO2/year. (one MT is 1,000,000 grams.) This energy use is mainly seen in water infrastructure, such as pumping water over significant elevations, conveying large amounts of water over long distances, treating and distributing that water within a certain area of communities, and treating the wastewater (Wilkinson, 2000). Because "water supply and wastewater services incur a large amount of energy and GHG emissions" (Sudeep, Biju, Hector M, Meenakshi & Bandara, 2014, p. 1), reducing 110

Energy Use in Water System

Figure 4.6

Water Supply Process of Water-Related EnergySysterm Consumption Water-Energy Cost

pumping & conveyance

Import water supplies

Regional Distribution Facilities

pumping processing

pumping & conveyance

Local Water Resouces Surface water & groundwater

distribution

On-site End-use

thermal wastewater collection

Wastewater Station

treat water

Treatment Station

treat wastewater wastewater conveyance

Figure 4.7

Water - Energy Use

There are four main areas of energy use within the water management infrastructure: 1. Primary water extraction and supply delivery (imported and local). 2. Treatment and distribution within service areas. 3. On-site water pumping, treatment, and thermal inputs (heating and cooling). 4. Wastewater collection and treatment.

CARB Metrics The purpose of the CARB metrics is to estimate energy savings and water savings for certified Energy Star products for project measures that are eligible through DWRâ€™s 2016 Water-Energy Grant Program. The primary water-energy saving comes from different appliances in commercial and residential contexts. (CARB, 2017c). In a commercial/ institutional context, water-energy efficiency comes from dishwashers, clothes washers, ice machines, steam cookers, combination ovens, pre-rinse spray valves, faucets, showerheads. In a residential context, water-energy efficiency comes from dishwashers, clothes washers, faucets, and showerheads.

111

4.2

606 Studio Metrics The 606 Studio mitigation metrics of waterrelated energy savings involve the calculations of the total energy use per acre-foot of water used in the TCC area. The studio assessed that the total waterenergy savings is equal to the unit of water-related energy-use times the amount of water savings. To calculate the total energy cost per acre-foot of water in the project area, the first piece of information needed is how much water the city uses from each source. Second, the amount of energy used by the city for water conveyance or pumping must be determined.

Primary Water Extraction and Supply Delivery (Imported and Local) The Central Valley Project (CVP) uses natural waterways and constructed facilities to convey water. To deliver this water to users in Central and Southern California, "it conveys water through the ecologicallysensitive Sacramento– San Joaquin River Delta (Delta), which is upstream of San Francisco Bay" (Bureau of Reclamation, 2008, p. iii) (See Map 4.1: Water Conveyed from the CVP). During a normal year, the CVP project can supply 60,000 acre-feet surface water to Fresno per year. (City of Fresno Public Utilities Water Division, 2017). Another major surface water supply resource is the Fresno Irrigation District (FID), which is headed by the District’s Water Master who oversees twenty Water Systems Operators who are responsible for the delivery and maintenance of the waterways during times when water is most used. The District has 800 miles of canals spread over 245,000 acres of land within Fresno County” (Fresno Irrigation District, 2017). According to the data collected from the City of

112

Fresno's Public Utilities Water Division, FID can supply 120,000+ acre-feet per year (Recharge Fresno, 2017). The Local water supply amount is the groundwater supply plus the surface water supply. Groundwater is Fresno’s primary source of water and the City of Fresno operates roughly 260 wells throughout the region that, together, historically have supplied as much as 200 million (614 acre-feet) of water per day to more than 500,000 residents (Recharge Fresno, 2017).

Wastewater Collection and Treatment Fresno uses about 135,000 acre-feet of water per year, and less than 18% of the water used in Fresno is recycled water (about 24,000 acre-feet per year) (Hostetter & The Fresno Bee, 2015). Increasing the use of recycled water for landscape irrigation and other non-potable uses is an important component for the future of Fresno. To reduce demands on both groundwater and surface water supplies, Fresno plans to use 25,000 acre-feet per year of recycled water by 2025 (Recharge Fresno, 2017). Commercial and residential uses are the major sources of wastewater in the Fresno/Clovis urban area. According to proposal by Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF), about 12-15% of the wastewater that is cleaned by the RWRF is able to directly be reused by farmers (City of Fresno: Department of Public Utilities, 2016). These factors informed the 606 Studio in compiling a metric for water management.

Map 4.1: Water Conveyed from the CVP

OREGON

S ie

Sacramento

NEVADA

San Franciso n Sa n ui aq Jo r ve Ri

Fri an t

Fresno

Kings

Cana l

River

rn Ke

t n

r Rive

Los Angeles

CVP Canal Freeways

San Diego 0

0.5

Mile

113

Figure 4.8

Water Energy Use per Acre-Foot in Specific Location

GHGREDUCTIONS

GHGEMISSIONS x Water Volume

GHGEMISSIONS

0.52 x ENCITY (ENWS + ENWCT)

ENCITY

(WS + WCT) WS

WIMPORT + WLOCAL

WLOCAL

WGROUND + WSURFACE

ENWS

ENIMPORT + ENLOCAL

ENLOCAL

ENGROUND + ENSURFACE

ENWCT

ENWC + ENWT

Where, GHGreductions = CO2 emission reductions (MT CO2e per acre foot) GHGemissions = Total GHG emissions (MT CO2e per acre foot) Water Volume = Volume of water saved (acre feet) 0.52 = Conversion factor (MT per kWh) WS = Total water supplies (acre feet) WCT = Total water collection for treatment (acre feet) WIMPORT = Total imported water (acre feet) WLOCAL = Total local water use from ground

and surface water (acre feet) WGROUND = Total groundwater use (acre feet) WSURFACE = Total surface water use (acre feet) ENCITY = Energy use from total water supply management (kWh/acft) ENWS = Energy use from water supply distribution (kWh) ENWCT = Energy use from water collection and treatment (kWh) ENIMPORT = Energy use from importing water supplies (kWh) ENLOCAL = Energy use from distributing local water (kWh) ENGROUND = Energy use from distributing groundwater (kWh) ENSURFACE = Energy use from distributing surface water (kWh) ENWC = Energy use from wastewater collection (kWh) ENWT = Energy use from wastewater treatment (kWh)

Summary of Water Management Mitigation Metric The water-energy use can be calculated to find the GHG emission reductions from capturing water onsite (See Figure: 4.8: Water Energy Use per AcreFoot in Specific Location). As mentioned earlier, the total water-energy consumed includes pumping, treatment, and conveyance. From a landscape architecture point of view, there are many ways to deal with climate change through water energy saving. For example, graywater or recycled water can be used onsite to reduce the 114

extra pumping water. In practice, the irrigation water for community parks can be collected through adjacent residential graywater systems. During the wet season, stormwater can be stored in the pond of a park and reused as irrigation water during the dry season. Like solar-driven water retrieval, reusing water can be implemented on the site to reduce the water usage and then save city water treatment plant energy costs.

4.2

Adaptation to Climate Change through Water Management Methods Adaptation Methods Drought Adaptation As explained in Chapter 2, the city of Fresno is facing the after affects of serious drought. Because of the drought, more groundwater must be pumped in order to meet demand. To adapt to this dry weather, water-saving methods can be adopted such as rain gardens, bio-swales, drought-tolerant green roofs, and graywater recycling. These methods keep the existing water on site for future use and lower the need to import water from other regions.

Recharge Groundwater Aquifer In certain areas, using drywells to manage stormwater can aid aquifer recharge (Edwards, Harter, Fogg, Washburn, & Hamad, 2016). Distributed stormwater collection coupled with managed aquifer recharge (DSC-MAR) can also be used as an approach to deal with the lower groundwater levels, an issues that is affected by climate change (Beganskas & Fisher, 2017). Since the urban area of Fresno has a very high impermeable surface covering, changing or breaking the paving material to increase the land surface permeability should be the first step to help recharge aquifers. The major areas of increasing permeability of land surfaces should be areas with high infiltration rates and low contamination.

(which all use transpiring plants) can keep the moisture at the soil surface, which could cool down the temperature through evaporation. Also, creating wind tunnels by using landscape methods like green corridors can cause quicker rate of surface water evaporation, creating a pleasant microclimate area.

606 Studio Adaptation metrics The 606 Studio provides three metrics that measure the adaption to climate change in terms of water. These metrics are: temperature cooling, runoff collection, and aquifer recharge. Each of these metrics responds to the impacts of climate change and provide local benefit to the disadvantaged communities in Fresno.

Temperature Cooling As mentioned above, by creating wind tunnels to move over the surface of water, quicker water evaporation can cause increased temperature cooling. Thus, the air temperature after evaporation produces a wind chill effect. This approach provides a response to rising temperatures caused by climate change (See Figure 4.9: Wind Cooling).

Figure 4.9 TWC

Wind Cooling

13.13 + 0.62T - (13.95 - 0.486T)v0.16

Cooling Down Temperature to Create Pleasant Microclimate Transpiration is the release of water vapor by plants and soil. This process creates a cooling microclimate (Akbari, 2009). Studies show that wind tunnels can be used to accelerate water evaporation and heat transfer process, which often apply in passive cooling buildings for energy saving (Zhang, Chao, Zheng, & Huang, 2017). Based on this research, stormwater management, Low Impact Development (LID) and green infrastructure

Where TWC = Temperature from wind cooling T = air temperature in (oC) v = wind speed 10m above ground (m/s)

(Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science, 2017)

115

4.2

Graywater Reuse

Economic

The graywater runoff can be collected and reused for infiltration and reuse. Based on the GIS hydrological analysis tool, the amount of water from runoff collection is calculatable. (Detailed analysis shown in Chapter 5).

The economic benefits exist in two phases: during the construction and after the construction. As a form of green infrastructure, climate change mitigation and adaptation solutions discussed in this section must be installed and maintained after installation. During these two phases, jobs are created and workers need to be hired, either locally or from other cities. Job opportunities can be calculated off of the estimated construction costs of the project. People from local communities can gain short-term employment during the construction phase and long-term employment maintaining the project over time. Finally, reducing the use of faucet water and reusing graywater for irrigating plants, for instance, results in cost savings.

Recharge Aquifers One question that guided the 606 Studio regarding water was, “How much water can be saved and used to recharge the groundwater aquifer?” The equation of the calculation is: the amount of water to recharge aquifer = the area of rechargeable land X infiltration rate X runoff amount in this area. (Detailed analysis shown in Chapter 5).

Co-benefits of Water-Related Strategies

Public-Health

Environmental

As mentioned in the Section 3.3.1 and 3.3.2, climate change increases the temperature, water contamination, and the urban heat island, all of which negatively impact the public’s health. However, if the stormwater management infrastructure can be installed and all the runoff can be cleaned by the bioswales before recharging the aquifer, the pollutants will be reduced from the water and prevent the groundwater from being contaminated. In addition, implementing evaporation pools and wind tunnels will decrease the local temperature and counteract the increase in heat. Therefore, the climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies related to water enable Fresno to ameliorate the groundwater contamination and counteract the rise in temperature, thus lessening climate change's impact on the public's health.

Fresno, like many other cities that use a great amount of groundwater from aquifers, is facing the challenge of ground subsidence, which impacts residential building integrity and residents’ safety. Pando and et, al. (2013) found that pumping water from a confined aquifer or artificially modifying the natural hydrological regime could cause building settlement (Pando, Pulgar, and Gutiérrez-Claverol, 2013). As mentioned in this section, the 606 Studio Adaptation Metrics can correct ground subsidence issues to some extent by recycling wastewater, reusing gray water, collecting stormwater, and managing aquifer recharge. By utilizing stormwater management approaches (e.g., biofiltration swales, pervious pavement, green roofs, rain gardens) that capture, detain, infiltrate, and filter runoff, water quality can be enhanced (Roy et al., 2014). All these stormwater management approaches can be used to improve urban water quality and enhance the environment (Chiandet & Xenopoulos, 2016).

116

4.2

Conclusion This section discussed the production and mitigation of GHGs related to water management as well as the methods to measure adaptation and the co-benefits (See Table 4.6: Checklist of Water Management Metrics). Climate change mitigation methods were discussed using water-energy savings while adaptation methods were shown by solving climate change impacts from drought, groundwater

Table 4.6

level reduction, and water contamination. The creation of microclimates through the reduction of temperature will also serve as an adaptation method. In addition, the combined benefits of all landscape infrastructure related to water management can be used to secure the environmental, economic and social justice for disadvantaged communities.

Checklist of Water Management Metrics MITIGATION

ADAPTATION

CO-BENEFITS

Water-energy Drought Groundwater Temperature Water Quality Public Ecology Economic Saving Adaptation Recharge Decrease Improvement Health

Water Stormwater Reuse Graywater Recycling Water Infiltration

Water capture can help reduce the need to import water and reduce the energy needed to transport , which lowers GHG emissions from energy plants

117

4.3

Urban Greening According to the CARB section of urban greening, tree planting mitigates GHG gases through carbon sequestration and by reducing the carbon amount in atmosphere (CARB, 2017b). CARB provides calculators to measure the net GHG reducing benefits using tree planting. In addition, there are other metrics not mentioned in CARB which can help to mitigate the GHG emission effects. These metrics produced by the 606 Studio use green spaces and related strategies to reduce the energy consumption directly related to GHG emission, as well as promote the use of bike and pedestrian traffic instead of petroleum-based vehicles, as covered in the transportation section 4.1. Furthermore, the 606 Studio developed the co-benefits to measure the additional environmental, economic, or public-health benefits.

Urban Greening on streetside can provide shade and reduce the UHI

118

The Carbon Cycle The carbon cycle is an intricate process that involves carbon sources and carbon sinks. Carbon sinks--such as the ocean, forests and underground deposits, have the capability to absorb CO2 from atmosphere (Humpenรถder et al., 2015). Carbon stored in the ground in the form of fossil fuels has recently been released at unprecedented rates leading to anthropogenic climate change. Afforestation, replacing destroyed forest or creating new ones, is one potential way of sequestering the released carbon (Montenegro & Arora, 2011). Much of the space previously occupied by forests has been replaced by either agriculture or urbanization, making urban zones optimal sites for carbon sequestration (Montenegro & Arora, 2011). Preventing the removal of existing trees as well as the planting of trees creates urban forests, which also have other important benefits, such as urban cooling and shade production. Decreasing the amount of carbon cities emit can reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (Nowak & Greenfield, 2012). The amount of carbon stored can be increased dramatically by keeping trees alive, protecting open spaces, replacing dead trees, planting more trees in urban open space, and removing impervious surfaces to plant more trees (Tao et al., 2015). Planting urban trees and keeping these trees alive are important strategies to mitigate climate change. An equally important yet often overlooked mitigation strategy is addressing plant maintenance and proper use of plant materials, such as wood and compost. While trees store carbon, maintaining trees produces

4.3

Urban Greening in small spaces can help cool the ambient temperature of the surrounding neighborhood

carbon so utilizing management strategies that do not use fossil fuels is important (Vicente-Vicente, GarcĂaRuiz, Francaviglia, Aguilera, & Smith, 2016a). Strategies such as keeping wood on site can prevent dead trees from composting and releasing the carbon into the atmosphere (Vicente-Vicente et al., 2016a).

Shade Provision and Evaporative Cooling Besides the carbon storage via tree planting, another method of GHG reduction that has been used in the past is the usage of shade trees to reduce the energy use in buildings (FTCC 2017-2017). Since the late 1800s, urban centers have been responsible for 1421% of the rise in unadjusted minimum temperatures (Hausfather et al., 2013). Built-up areas began to replace vegetation and urban centers became warmer than the suburbs, causing an over-reliance on energy

to create cooling (Goodridge, 1989). From 1965 to 1989, urban temperatures in many US cities were increased by about 1Â°C (Rosenfeld & Rosenfeld, 1998). A reintroduction of vegetation is one way of helping to provide shade to these hot areas. In a recent study, researchers removed large urban settlements in US metropolitan areas planted additional trees, and observed the differences in temperature at a particular place and time (Taha, 1996). There are many benefits connected with the shade of trees. Some of these include improvement in the quality of life, quality of air, decrease in temperature, increased property value, decreased rain run-off, thus protection against floods (Mcpherson et al., 1997).

119

4.3

Figure 4.10 NET GHG BENEFIT

GHGESC

Urban Greening Metric CTREE - CREMOVED + ERSHADE - GHGEQUIPMENT âˆ‘ (ERCTCC, i x Qi) x (1 - 0.03)10 - YC i

Where, Net GHG Benefit = GHG emission reductions from urban greening CTREE = Carbon storage in planted trees CREMOVED = Carbon storage in trees not expected to survive ERSHADE = Emission reductions from energy savings due to tree shading GHGEQUIPMENT = Emissions of equipment to plant and maintain trees GHGESC = GHG benefit from energy savings estimated using the CTCC ERCTCC = Annual emission reductions from energy savings from project tree i 40 years after project start (from the CTCC)

1000

x 20

Q = Quantity of trees planted with the characteristics of tree i 0.03 = Mortality rate (3% annual) 10 = Years after planting with greatest risk for mortality YC = Years of establishment and replacement care provided by project (The maximum value for the purposes of this equation is 9 years. CNRA requires a minimum of 10 years for establishment and replacement care at the project location, so the calculator is set to a default of 9 years to represent the maximum value.) i = Project tree planted 1000 = Conversion factor from kg to MT 20 = Years adjusted for annual energy savings output at year 40. (California Air Resources Board, 2017)

GHG Mitigation through Urban Greening Methods Trees can mitigate GHGs in a few ways. One method involves the sequestration of carbon in a tree. The other is to reduce the temperature and thus energy production is by strategically planting trees to shade buildings. As described in CARB, the GHG benefit from emission reductions from energy savings is calculated as the total annual energy. Trees, therefore can benefit the ecosystem through long-term mitigation of carbon from ecosystem (Ko, Lee, Mcpherson, & Roman, 2015).

CARB Metrics To calculate carbon sequestration from tree planting and energy saving from tree shade, CARB provides formulas for calculation (See Figure 4.10: Urban Greening Metric). This formula calculates the 120

GHG mitigation from urban greening by identifying factors such as the age of tree and emission reductions from shade.

CUFR and i-Tree Tools The Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) program includes trees in their quantifiable methods to sequester carbon (CARB, 2017b). Specifically, the TCC manual lists two sets of tools for quantifying the mitigative impacts of trees, both of which were developed by the USDA. The first was developed by the Center for Urban Forest Research (CUFR), and is called the CUFR Tree Carbon Calculator (CTCC). This tool is an excel-based model, which uses info such as tree age and type to calculate amount of carbon stored. The second tool is called i-Tree, and focuses on the amount of canopy coverage and groundcover within a given area. This tool uses points selected by

4.3 an online mapping tool and generates benefits for trees (USDA, 2011). As explained in the guidelines of i-Tree documents, this tool has limitations because it is based on area of canopy and thus doesn't account for the age, health or type of tree. i-Tree is a good explanation of the general benefits of trees.

606 Studio Metrics GHG Mitigation from Tree Characteristics, Maintenance and Wood Production In addition to CARB's metrics, there are other metrics that can be used or can be considered for treebased mitigation strategies. The US EPA developed data sheets based on various tree factors which the 606 Studio used for calculating the carbon sequestration per tree (US EPA, 1998) (See Table 4.7: Tree Species and Carbon Sequestration). While this table is helpful, factors may cause results to vary. For example, street trees may not be maintained as much as nursery trees, which may cause a variation in the survival of trees (Vogt, Watkins, Mincey, Patterson, & Fischer, 2015). Also, a 10-year-old fast-growing tree has survival factor of 0.589 (US EPA, 1998. p 8), but this number may vary depending on factors like soil PH, watering habits, and space to grow (Shigo, 1996). Although the EPA and CARB metrics consider tree type, survival rate, and use of wood, they do not provide output of CO2 resulting from maintenance and machinery (Vicente-Vicente et al., 2016a).

Table 4.7

Tree Species and Carbon Sequestration

A. B. C. Species Characteristics Tree Number Refer to Appendix Table 1 Age of Age 0 Trees Tree Growth Name Type Rate Planted (H or C)

Vegetated landscapes are often thought of as sequestering carbon, but their benefit can also be reduced or erased depending on how they are planted and maintained. For example, trees often produce leaf litter, and if organically maintained, these leaves would be used in the landscape which prevents recycling transportation and can help return carbon to the soils. Furthermore, leaving leaves in place or hand raking them avoids the GHG produced by leaf blowers and other equipment (Bliss, 2010). More broadly, methods of maintenance such as human power and electric tools provide mitigation of GHGs that would be generated from combustion engine driven machinery. Using local workers and staging tools locally reduces the need to transport people and equipment during construction and maintenance, thus reducing GHG emissions. Designs that require less maintenance, reuse material onsite, and can be maintained with hand tools, all reduce GHG emissions. There are other models for measuring GHG mitigation from trees such as the tool developed by McPherson and Simpson (1999). This tool can be used by professional or volunteer tree planters to measure the effect of urban forests on atmospheric carbon dioxide (McPherson & Simpson, 1999). However, due to time constraints, the 606 Studio did not thoroughly examine and provide the equation for use.

(S, M, or F)

D. Survival Factor

Refer to Appendix (App.) Table 2

E. Number of Surviving Trees CxD

G. F. Carbon Annual Sequestration Sequestered (lbs) Rate ExF (lbs/tree) Refer to App. Table 2

Total Pounds of Carbon Sequestered Total Pounds of Equivalent CO2 Sequestered X 3.67 Equivalent CO2 Sequestered in Short Tons /2000 (US EPA, 1998)

121

4.3

Adaptation to Climate Change through Urban Greening Methods Parks and Open Space Park and open spaces also play an important role in reducing urban heat in the surrounding communities which are affected by climate change (Brown, Vanos, Kenny, & Lenzholzer, 2015. Many studies have shown how the open green space effects in temperature reduction (Bowler et al., 2010). Studies show that urban parks can help in reducing the temperature by 1-2°C, and can sometimes be as much as 7°C cooler than the surrounding urban areas without green space forming what is called a “park island effect “(Jauregui, 1990). There are various methods that study the factors of the park cooling effect and how much it can lower temperature (Xin Cao, Onishi, Chen, & Imura, 2010) (See Figure 4.11 : Park Cooling Intensity). The same method can be used when comparing the temperature of a park with the temperature of an area near the park.

Figure 4.11

Park Cooling Intensity

∆T

Tu-Tp

Where ∆ T= differrence in temperature Tp = the average LST (land surface temperature) inside the park (°C) Tu = the average temperature in an urban area with the 500m buffer outside the park (°C) The same method can be used when comparing the temperature of a park with the temperature of an area outside the park.

(Cao et al.2010)

122

Urban forests can help keep cities within a healthy temperature range, although the exact temperature reduction from urban forests is difficult to measure. The extent of the effect varies in space and in time, which complicates the issue, but large parks or tracts of urban trees can cool daytime summer air temperatures by about 10°F (Mcpherson et al., 1997). Increasing the green cover of cities by 10% or more could help counterbalance the local temperature rise projected for coming decades as climate change manifests (Gill, Handley, Ennos, & Pauleit, 2007). Plants cool the surface of the planet in two ways: they cool the air by transpiring water through their leaves and they also moderate the temperature of the ground surface by shading it from direct sunlight. Both processes have the greatest impact on sunny summer afternoons (Akbari, Pomerantz, & Taha, 2001). Lowering temperatures through urban greening can help people adapt to the negative impacts of climate change, including reducing heat-related illnesses. Cultural Arts District Park in Downtown provides shade for users

4.3

Co-benefits of Urban Greening Methods

Economic

Hamblin (2014) writes, "Trees in urban areas are substantially more important than rural trees" (Hamblin, 2014). Urban areas typically have more impervious surfaces and fewer trees than in rural areas (Rosso et al., 2017). Co-benefits of urban greening (Sallis et al., 2015) (See Table 4.8: Urban Greening Co-benefits) can save lives through healthy living (Eberly & Anderson, 2006).

Urban greening has economic costs for private and public entities (Sallis et al., 2015). The natural sequestration of carbon reduces the amount of mechanical sequestration techniques needed to reduce carbon levels, thus reducing costs. Also, the filtering of air pollutants increases health and reduces medical costs for those who would suffer from health problems like asthma. Shading buildings and people decreases the amount of electricity needed to cool environments, saving money on cooling costs (Akbari et al., 2001).

Environmental Urban greening filters air pollutants and improves environmental air quality (Hamblin, 2014). Urban greening also improves wildlife and habitat, enhancing the biodiversity of the area (Taha, 1996). Water quality is also improved as trees filter pollutants and allow for water infiltration. Finally, shade cools the local environment, providing a microclimate in areas that would otherwise be too hot for vulnerable communities (Akbari et al., 2001).

Table 4.8

Public Health In addition to climate change mitigation from capture of carbon dioxide and climate change adaptation provided from shade, there are various co-benefits of tree use. One co-benefit involves removal of pollutants other than carbon dioxide (Hamblin, 2014). Since pollution-related respiratory

Urban Greening Co-Benefits

Outcome

Description

Physical Health

Chronic Diseases, Obesity

Mental Health

Depression, Anxiety, Well Being

Social Benefits

Community Relation

Environmental Sustainability Benefits

Carbon Dioxide Mitigation, Pollutants

Safety/Injury Prevention

Crime, Violence, Injury, Pedestrian/Bicycle and Car Crashes (Sallis et al., 2015)

123

4.3

problems increase with increases in heat, methods like urban greening can have positive impacts on respiratory related disease, and other heat-related diseases (Bowler, Buyung-Ali, Knight, & Pullin, 2010; Wood, Hooper, Foster, & Bull, 2017). Measuring decreases of pollutants in landscape maintenance by mulching instead of using chemical fertilizer and by replacing pesticides with integrated pest management could be a new metric of co-benefits. The ability of trees to capture pollutants in their foliage makes trees a good metric for removing pollution. Overall tree shading and exposure to green spaces helps counteract the temperature increases caused by climate change as well as health benefits like the reduction of asthma rates and protection of vulnerable populations (Koenig, 1999). Moreover, residents' quality of life can be improved when urban greening is used to revitalize neighborhoods Open space for parks to Improve quality of life through tree planting

124

(US EPA, 2013). Nowak and Greenfield (2012) found that trees prevented 850 human deaths and 670,000 cases of acute respiratory symptoms in 2010 alone. That was related to 17.4 million tons of air pollution removed by trees and forests, which physically intercept particulate matter and absorb gasses through their leaves (Hamblin, 2014). Thus, urban greening overall improves the quality of life.

Conclusion Urban greening offers a range of benefits associated with mitigation, adaption and co-benefits (See Table 4.9: Checklist of Urban Greening Metrics). Retaining and maintaining the existing trees and planting of new trees addresses climate change in two ways: urban forests store carbon in the plant rather than releasing it to the atmosphere, and

4.3

shading areas with trees lowers the temperature, and reduces the reliance on fossil fuels and electricity to cool areas. I-Tree (See appendix for detail of tool). CTCC provides quantification methods to calculate GHG mitigation, but tree choice and the carbon cost of maintenance needs to be considered. Urban greening also helps people adapt to the impacts of

Table 4.9

Checklist of Urban Greening Metrics MITIGATION

Greening

climate change such as temperature increases. Finally, urban greening can provide co-benefits like improving quality of life and health, as well as promote the use of public and active transportation, thereby helping residents of Fresno lead healthy, productive lives.

Carbon Sequestration

ADAPTATION Temperature Decrease

Air Quality Improvement

CO-BENEFITS Economic

Public Health

Ecology

Trees Other Vegetation

125

4.4

Soil Management

Besides sequestering carbon from tree cover, other uses of the land can be implemented to sequester carbon. Different ways of treating soil can help to sequester carbon as well as provide benefits for ecology and agriculture. In agriculture, using cover cropping as management technique for soil erosion, soil fertility, water, weed, pests, biodiversity in agroecosystem (Bavin, Griffis, Baker, & Venterea, 2009) would increase the amount of soil organic carbon (SOC) content (Mitchell et al., 2015). Plant cover management techniques help increase sequestration rates at a low cost for farmers (Vicente-Vicente, García-Ruiz, Francaviglia, Aguilera, & Smith, 2016b). Leaving urban soils on site instead of disposing them as waste will act as carbon sink for sequestering soil (Manning & Renforth, 2013), because the emissions of moving the

Properly managed soils along streetsides can act as carbon sinks

126

soil and compacting new soil is avoided. The management of brownfields can be managed properly by government regulations so the soils can potentially act as carbon sinks (Manning & Renforth, 2013). “Constructed wetlands can be used as a passive remediation process” (Manning & Renforth, 2013, p. 140) for removing contaminants and capturing carbon. Wood burial is an accelerated form of the evolutionary process because it involves people burying dead wood (thus containing carbon in the wood) instead of waiting for soil to form over it naturally (Ning, 2008). The management of wood burial would have to be considered to make sure habitat is not lost or damaged too severely (Ning, 2008). However, this technique is “low tech, low cost, distributed, easy to monitor, safe, and reversible” (Ning, 2008, p. 11) The rate of SOC sequestration is higher in soils

Shaded soil in parks can help cool the ambient temperature when retaining water

of cool and humid than warm and dry climates, heavy or clayey than light or sandy texture, containing 2:1 expanding lattice than those with 1:1 fixed lattice minerals, and those with deep than shallow soil. (Lal, Negassa, & Lorenz, 2015) Therefore, using wet and cool soils to store carbon helps mitigate carbon emissions. Changing the landscape through constructed natural landscapes can also help the people and wildlife adapt to climate change. The co-benefits of these measures include a healthier atmosphere, increased biodiversity, soil improvement, and increased job opportunities.

Below are equations derived from CARB and the additional scholarly articles for carbon sequestration, reduction, and emission rates. These methods include the mitigation of carbon emissions by using soil. However, to use these equations, site-specific data must be acquired for current land use and soils. For soils, samples should be taken and measured using equations below.

127

4.4

GHG Mitigation through Soil Management Methods CARB Metrics (Construction Wetlands Metric) Using CARB equations, planners and designers can determine the benefit from constructed wetlands using three steps: Step 1: The first step is to Estimate GHG emission reductions and carbon sequestration potential at maturity. The wetland is expected to reach maturity prior to the end of project life. Step 2 – Estimate GHG emissions Step 3 – Estimate the Net GHG benefit (CDFW & CARB, 2014, p. 3).

Figure 4.12a

CARB provides equations that address the difference in mitigation rates between emissions from current land use and emissions from proposed land use and construction (See Figure 4.12: Constructed Wetland Metric). These equations factor all the elements associated with the proposed management of soil in a wetland.

Constructed Wetland Metric

NET GHG BENEFITS

GHGREDUCTIONS - GHGEMISSIONS

GHGREDUCTIONS

ERLANDUSE + ∑ CSEQ.i i

ERLANDUSE

(ECO2 + [ECH4 x 25] + [EN2O x 298]) x PA

∑ CSEQ.i

BIOMASS + SOIL ORGANIC CARBON

BIOMASS

(CSEQ.POST-PROJ - CSEQ.PRE-PROJ) x PA x 3.67

SOIL ORGANIC CARBON

([CSEQ.POST-PROJ - CSEQ.PRE-PROJ] x PA x 3.67) PROJECT LIFE

GHGWETLANDS+ (GHGEQUIPMENT / PROJECT LIFE)

GHGEMISSIONS GHGWETLANDS

(ECO2 + [ECH4 x 25] + [EN2O x 298]) x PA

GHGEQUIPMENT

∑ (FUELi x EFi)/1000 i

(CDFW & CARB, 2014)

128

4.4

Figure 4.12b

Constructed Wetland Metric (continued)

Net GHG Benefit = Net annual GHG benefit (MT CO2e per year) GHGreductions = Annual carbon sequestration and emission reductions (MT CO2e per year) GHGemissions = Total annual GHG emissions (MT CO2e per year) ERland use = GHG emissions avoided from the existing land use (MT CO2e per year) Cseq.i = Carbon sequestration rate for carbon pool i (MT CO2e per year) i = Carbon pool (biomass or soil organic carbon) ECO2 = Measured emissions of CO2 (MT CO2 per acre per year) ECH4 = Measured emissions of CH4 (MT CH4 per acre per year) 25 = Global warming potential of CH4 EN2O = Measured emissions of N2O (MT N2O per acre per year) 298 = Global warming potential of N2O PA = Project area (acres) Cseq.post-project = Carbon sequestration rate from post-project (i.e., mature wetland) conditions (MT C per acre per year) Cseq.pre-project = Carbon sequestration rate from pre-project (i.e., baseline) conditions (MT C per acre per year) 3.67 = Conversion from C to CO2e Project Life = Time expected for the increase in capacity to be realized (years). If such data is not available, the applicant may include an estimate based on best available science and provide a justification or use a default of 25 years. GHGwetlands = GHG emission rate for mature wetland ecosystem (MT CO2e per year) GHGequipment = GHG emissions from restoration equipment (MT CO2) Fueli = Estimated fuel use for vehicle or equipment i (gallons) EFi = Emission factor from Table 4.10 for fuel type used by vehicle or equipment i (kg CO2/gallon) 1000 = Conversion from kg to MT (CDFW & CARB, 2014)

129

4.4

Table 4.10

Fuel CO2 Emission Factors

Fuel Type

Emission kg CO2/gal

Aviation Gasoline Biodiesel (B100) Crude Oil Diesel 1, 2, 4 Ethane Ethanol (E100) Isobutane 6.29 Jet Fuel (Jet A or A-1) Kerosene Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) Methanol Motor Gasoline n-Butane Propane Residual Fuel Oil (#5,6)

8.31 9.45 10.28 10.18, 10.21, 10.96 6.01 5.75 6.29 9.75 10.15 5.79 4.15 8.78 6.58 5.59 10.21, 11.27

Emission kg CO2/therm Natural Gas

5.30

Construction process emits CO2

(CARB, 2017)

Soil Cracking indicates faster sequestration rates due to high temperatures

606 studio Metrics Soil Sequestration The 606 Studio utilized equations used by Vicente et al. (2016) in the experiments they conducted on soil sequestration rates (See Figure 4.13: Soil Sequestration Metric). Since the research on soil carbon sequestration is still new and limited, measurements of soil samples need to be taken on site to determine soil organic carbon. To calculate soil carbon (C) sequestration rate (tC ha-1 yr-1), the change in the soil organic carbon (SOC) stock (tC ha-1) needs to be calculated. The SOC is taken from the soil organic matter (SOM). Then the efficiency of soil carbon sequestration (SCSR) can be calculated for annual emissions.

130

4.4

Wood Burial Carbon storage

Figure 4.14 Wood Burial Metric

The 606 Studio also found that burying wood before it decays and releases its sequestered carbon is an effective method of mitigating GHG emissions. According to Ning (2008), a 10m x 10m hole 25m deep with 5m of topsoil and 20m of wood (typical midlatitude forest wood) burial could store 500 tons of carbon (p.11). Therefore, an equation for estimation of stored carbon using wood burial is needed (See Figure 4.14: Wood Burial Metric). Cities can bury wood from street trees that have grown too large or fallen in storms and need to be replaced. The carbon stored in the wood varies by species. More research is needed to create an accurate figures for all types of wood.

Figure 4.13

(m)(tCwood) rd

tC stored

tC stored = the total tons of Carbon stored. m = the volume of burial space under topsoil (m3) tCwood = the tons (MT) of Carbon stored in type of wood rd = rate of decay of type of wood in years (Ning, 2008)

Soil Sequestration Metric

SOIL C Sequestration Rate

Ct - Ct’ t

SOC stocks (t C ha-1) j

∑ di x pi x SOCi 10 i=1

SOC stocks (t C ha-1)

SOC

0.58 x SOM

p (t m-1)

1.84 – 0.443 log 10(SOC (g C kg-1 soil) Soil Sequestration Rate Annual Organic C input

Ct = SOC stocks (t C ha-1) at the end of experiment Ct’ = SOC stocks (t C ha-1) the start of the experiment t = the duration of the experiment (years).

x 100

di = soil depth (meters) pi = bulk density (t m-3) When bulk density not provided use p (t m-3)

SOCi = SOC concentration (g C kg-1 soil) for the different soil layers (from i to j soil layers) The SOC stock is the sum of the stocks for the k soil layers considered in each study. SOM = Soil organic matter

E = efficiency of soil C sequestration (Vicente et al., 2016)

131

4.4

Adaptation to Impacts through Soil Management Methods Communities who are exposed to high temperatures are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Proper soil management such as restoring and building wetlands decreases local temperatures, helping people adapt to the heat while in those environments (Manning and Renforth, 2013). Also, preventing the burning of wood improves air quality and helps those who have asthma and other health conditions.

Co-benefits

Conclusion By involving methods that treat and manage soil, proper soil management can provide benefits. Constructed wetlands and wood burial are viable examples that mitigation GHGs and provide adaption and co-benefits (See Table 4.11: Checklist of Soil Management Metrics). While some strategies like constructed wetlands may sequester carbon, overall emission rates need to be factored into the equation unless more specific site data is acquired. Soil sequestration is a beneficial way to help fight climate change and help designers assess the effectiveness of their projects.

Soil management has some very important co-benefits. With the incorporation of constructed wetlands, biodiversity is improved and wildlife habitat is restored. Wood burial save costs on transporting wood to other locations. Finally, soil management can help improve people's health and quality of life by giving them the opportunity to experience wetland wetlands and wildlife, (Manning & Renforth, 2013).

Table 4.11 Soil Constructed Wetland Recycled Soil Wood Burial Soil Cooling

132

Checklist of Soil Management Metrics MITIGATION

ADAPTATION

Carbon Sequestration

Temperature Decrease

CO-BENEFITS Economic

Public Health

Ecology

4.5

Waste Diversion Using Recycling materials leads to emission reductions of air pollutants, when people recycle materials, the need for production of new materials is reduced, and the carbon stored in the recycled material remains solid enough for longer span of time. Therefore, recycling avoids the emissions generated from producing new materials. Moreover, some materials also sequester carbon for the long term (Turner, Williams, & Kemp, 2015).  Although transport and disposal emissions were considered, they were not as significant in terms of emission reductions as production avoidance (Turner et al., 2015). The tables below show the benefits of recycling waste materials according to Turner (2015). Figure 4.13: Wood Burial Metric shows the net reductions from recycling, and Table 4.5: Material Emission Factors shows the added benefit of carbon sequestration in significant materials (Turner et al., 2015). Furthermore, recycling waste materials provides a way for people to actively contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

Figure 4.15

GHG Mitigation through Recycling 606 Studio Mitigation Metrics Recycling helps mitigate the carbon emissions used for production of new material. These charts will help in calculating the benefits of using recycled materials and encouraging community to adopt recycling (See Table 4.12: Recycled Material Emission Factors). Step 1 - Identify the recycled material to get the emission factor. Step 2 - Measure how much of the material to recycle. Step 3- Multiply the number of tons by the emission factor. Step 4- Add all totals acquired from following the previous three steps. By following those steps, the emissions avoided from recycling waste materials can be determined (See Figure 4.15: Waste Diversion Metric).

Waste Diversion Metric

GHGAVOIDED

∑ [(EFRM)R]

Where, GHGAVOIDED = GHG emission avoided new production EFRM = Emission factor of recycled material (kgCO2e/t) from table 4.12. R = tonnes of recycled material

133

4.5

Table 4.12 Waste Material Type Glass Paper Card Mixed paper & Card Books & Yellow Pages Steel Cans Aluminium Cans & Foil Mixed Cans & Scrap Metal Aerosols Fir Extinguishers Gas Bottles Bicycles Mixed Plastics Mixed Plastic Bottles Polyethylene Terephthalate High-Density Polyethylene Polyvinyl Chloride Low-Density Polyethylene Polypropylene Wood Large Domestic Appliances Small Domestic Appliances Cathode-Raytube Flourescent Tubes & Light Bulbs Fridges & Freezers Automotive Batteries Post-consumer Batteries Car Tires Vans/Large Vehicle Tires Mixed Tires Furniture Rubble Soil Plasterboard Vegetable & Mineral Oil Composite Food & Beverage Cartons Mattresses Paint Textiles & Footwear Carpets Absorbent Hygiene Products

Recycled Material Emission Factors Net Emission kg CO2/t -314 -459 -120 -123 -117 -862 -8143 -3577 -3577 -673 -673 -3577 -1024 -1084 -2192 -1149 -1549 -972 -1184 -444 -866 -1349 -228 -779 -853 -435 -205 -435 -636 -671 -444 -2 27 4 -2759 -452 -1241 86 -3376 -10 0

+ C Sequestration kg CO2/t -491 -128 -132 -124

-244

-760 -904 -777 -244 -43 -55 -12 -260 -1353

-139 -27 (Turner et al., 2015)

134

4.5

Co-Benefits By preventing the purchase of new materials, recycling can provide co-benefits in the form of economic savings. Table 4.12 shows materials that store a significant amount of carbon. People can recycle durable items like wood, stone, and metal to be reused many times. For example, wood can be reused multiple times before burned or be buried under earth to slow decomposition. Waste Diversion can efficiently mitigate emissions and benefit society (See Table 4.13: Checklist of Waste Diversion Metrics).

Table 4.13

Checklist of Waste Diversion Metrics MITIGATION

Waste Diversion

Carbon Sequestration

ADAPTATION

CO-BENEFITS Economic

Public Health

Ecology

Recycled Materials Recycling Bins Recycling bins helps lower carbon emissions

135

4.6

Conclusion The impact climate change has on the community of Fresno is significant, but landscape architecture methods can provide some measurable, evidence-based solutions that can manage the causes and effects of climate change. For example, using alternative forms of transportation such as biking and walking, reduce the emissions and pollution. By being energy efficient with water use, residents can act sustainable and feel cooler instead of relying on imported water to meet their needs. Through urban greening, disadvantaged communities can engage in carbon sequestration in trees, experience a cooler local environment and be encouraged to engage in shaded, protected, active transportation. By participating in land sequestration, Fresno can sequester carbon through the soil and create a cleaner

Fresno can prevent the waste associated with the production of new materials and find new uses for old items. In order to present relevant and practical information, the 606 Studio sought to develop a package including metrics for mitigation, adaption, and co-benefits. Designers and practitioners are challenged with the task designing projects that will produce measurable outcomes. Measurable Change introduces a system of evidence-based design tools to be used by future professionals. By utilizing these methods and metrics, practitioners can create more impactful projects that will measurably help disadvantaged communities, especially in cities like Fresno. The next chapters will discuss average benefits for different elements and functions as well as adaptive benefits to help the most disadvantaged communities in the TCC area.

Recycling Truck Transporting Waste Materials in Fresno

136

137

05 METRIC TYPOLOGIES 5.1 Transportation Typology

5.2 Water Management Typology 5.3 Greening Typology 5.4 Soil Management Typology 5.5 Waste Diversion Typology 5.6 Conclusion

139

Chapter 4 described in detail the methods and metrics developed by CARB and the 606 Studio for measuring mitigation of GHG emissions, adaptation to the inevitable impacts of climate change, and additional co-benefits. To enable practitioners to readily create designs that measurably fight climate change, the 606 Studio developed metric units based on these methods that demonstrate the quantifiable impacts of elements (e.g. bike lanes, trees, shade, etc.) and functions (e.g. carbon sequestration, stormwater collection, soil cooling, etc.) on the environment. Metric units in this book are defined as units of measurement created by inserting average quantities into the metric formulas (e.g. 100 feet of bike lane = 1,299,993 gCO2/yr reduced). These units can be used as starting points for planners and designers developing projects that address climate change. To explore and illustrate how the elements and functions relate to each other, the studio also developed demonstration landscapes. While research points to the benefits of all the elements and functions, some are not possible to quantify at this time, and are highlighted as opportunities for further research to calculate.

Typologies Typologies (e.g. Transportation, Urban Greening, etc.) in this book are defined as groupings of 1) physical elements and functions relating to a particular aspect of the landscape as well as 2) the associated metric units. At the end of each typology is a demonstration landscape which shows the elements and functions of each typology. This demonstration landscape shows the mitigative potential of each typology within a city block. The Transportation Typology includes bike lanes, bike shares, electric vehicles, bus stops, carpooling, and cool pavements. The Water Management Typology includes water infiltration, stormwater collection, and graywater recycling. The Greening Typology includes carbon sequestration and shading, and the Soil Management Typology contains constructed wetlands, recycled soil, wood burial, and soil cooling. Finally, the Waste Diversion Typology involves the reusing of materials and incorporation of recycling bins. Together, these typologies provide practitioners with measurable units to use in creating landscapes that quantifiably contribute to reducing climate change and its impacts.

606 Typology Team working on developing Metric Typologies

140

141

5.1

Transportation Typology

Transportation and circulation set the framework for the landscape and create the largest proportion of climate-changing GHGs. As discussed in Chapter 3.2, Fresno produces 1,899,799 MT CO2/year in transportation-related GHG emissions. Transportation in Fresno has many of the same elements and challenges as other cities, making Fresno a good study city for arid, inland communities. With three intersecting freeways, multiple truck routes and train systems, the TCC area, like many urban areas, needs measurable landscape strategies to address the climate impact of each of these forms of transportation. To address these challenges and opportunities, the 606 Studio used the metric formulas from Chapter 4 to develop metric units for bike lanes, bikeshares, bus transit, bus stops, and carpooling. The studio also explored the potential for quantifying the impact installing cool pavement and encouraging electric vehicle use.

Bike lanes After compiling the metrics for bike lanes, (See chapter 4.1) the 606 Studio developed a standard measurement for the climate impact of 100 feet of bike lanes. 100 feet was chosen as the measurement because it represents a block of space that is small enough for designers to apply to almost any project and easy to multiply and divide. As a general tool to work with, the unit was developed from the bike lane metric, and should be used to identify the average GHG reductions from bike lanes. Specific GHG reduction amounts from particular bike lanes on particular sites should be calculated, inputting site-specific numbers into the formulas shown in Figure 4.4. The 606 Studio used example numbers based on the average quantities for California

142

and defaults supplied by CARB to calculate the average GHG emission reductions from implementing bike lanes. (See Figure 5.1: Bike Lane Unit). This unit for measuring the GHG reductions of a 100-foot bike lane provides designers with a starting point to plan and create conceptual designs for mitigation. However, as a project is refined, designers need to take in to account various site-specific factors that impact the actual GHG reductions. For instance, a residential neighborhood may have fewer activity centers or points of interest, which decreases the likelihood of a person biking, and thus of the amount of GHG reduced. Also, the total length of a bike lane changes the GHG reduction amount. In order to acquire the most accurate GHG reduction numbers as a project progresses, designers should input site-specific factors into the full formulas provided for bike lanes.

Bikeshares To create the bikeshare unit, the 606 Studio used the equation from Figure 4.4. To calculate the average GHG emission reductions from implementing bikeshares, the studio input average numbers in to the equation (See Figure 5.2: Bikeshare Unit). Based on these averages, the studio calculated the unit for bikeshares shown in the output in Figure 5.2. This number greatly increases with the addition of more bikeshare bicycles over the course of years.

Figure 5.1

Bike Lane Unit

Equation BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION x AVEF x UL

BLGHG REDUCTION BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION

D x ADT x (A+C) x L

Input 3,163 x 411 x 1

BLGHG REDUCTION BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION

365 x 134,594 x (0.0019+0.0015) x (100/5280)

Where, A = 0.0019 (adjustment factor based on ADT and AVEF = 411 (average emission rates for conventional population) vehicle (US EPA, 2014) C = 0.0015 (factor based on the average activity centers UL = 1 year in a populated city) D = 365 (days of use per year) L = 100 feet (based on the 606 Studio unit of ADT = 134,594 (the average ADT counts from the top measurement) 10 most populated cities in California) (CalTrans, 2017; World Population Review, 2017)

Output 100 feet of bike lane = 1,299,993 gCO2/yr reduced

Figure 5.2

Bikeshare Unit

Equation BSAUTO VMT REDUCTION x AVEF

BSGHG REDUCTION BSAUTO VMT REDUCTION

x UL

TxAxL

Input 328.5 x 411 x 1

BLGHG REDUCTION BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION Where, AVEF =411 (average emission rates for conventional vehicle (US EPA, 2014) UL = 1 year

365 x 0.5 x 1.8 A = 0.5 (default) L =1.8 miles per trip in one direction T = 365 days of bike trips expected in the first year of service

Output 1 bikeshare = 135,013.5 gCO2/yr reduced

143

5.1

Figure 5.3

New/Expanded Bus System

Equation DxRxAxL

AutoVMT CO2ePASSENGER CAR

AutoVMT x AVEF

CO2eTRANSIT BUS

BVMT x BEF GHGDISPLACED AUTOS - GHGNEW/EXPANDED SERVICE VEHICLE

GHGREDUCTIONS

Input AutoVMT

365 x 1,156,540 x 0.83 x 40

BVMT

365 x 300,228 x 0.5 x 5.1 CO2ePASSENGER CAR

14,014,951,720 x 411

CO2eTRANSIT BUS

279,437,211 x 2,769

GHGREDUCTIONS Where D = 365 days R(Auto) = 1,156,540 daily trips (Federal Highway Administration, 2017) A(Auto) = 0.83 (default for commuter service) L(Auto) = 40 miles for auto trips (Bureau of Transportation, 2017) R(B) = 300,288 average unlinked daily ridership (American Public Transportation Association, 2017)

5,760,145,156,920 - 773,761,637,259 A(B) = 0.5 (default for local bus service) L(B) = 5.1 miles for bus trips (CARB, 2017a) AVEF = 411 gCO2e per mile BEF =2,769 gCO2e per mile GHGDISPLACED AUTOS = CO2ePASSENGER CAR GHGNEW/EXPANDED SERVICE VEHICLE = CO2eTRANSIT BUS

Output New/expanded bus system = 4,986,383,519,661 gCO2/yr reduced

144

Figure 5.4

Bus Stop Unit

Equation DxRxAxL

AutoVMT CO2ePASSENGER CAR

AutoVMT x AVEF

CO2eTRANSIT BUS STOP

AutoVMT x BEF GHGDISPLACED AUTOS - GHGNEW/EXPANDED SERVICE VEHICLE

GHGREDUCTIONS

Input 365 x 15 x 0.5 x 2.5

AutoVMT CO2ePASSENGER CAR

6,844 x 411

CO2eTRANSIT BUS STOP

6,844 x 64 2,812,844 - 438,016

GHGREDUCTIONS Where D = 365 days of use per year R = 15, average boarding per bus stop per day (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2018; USDE, 2018). A = 0.5, adjustment factor for local streets L = 2.5, average distance of a far ride (CARB, 2017a)

AVEF = 411 gCO2e per mile BEF = 64 gCO2e per mile GHGDISPLACED AUTOS = CO2ePASSENGER CAR GHGNEW/EXPANDED SERVICE VEHICLE = CO2eTRANSIT BUS STOP

Output 1 Bus Stop = 2,374,828 gCO2/yr Bus Transportation For calculating the GHG reductions for bus transportation, the 606 Studio used the equation from Figure 4.2. Using average amounts, the studio calculated the quantities for the reduction of Vehicle Miles from a car by using a bus (See Figure 5.3: New/ Expanded Bus System Unit). Using the quantities from the AutoVMT, the studio calculated the GHG emissions from an average transit bus. Finally, the studio calculated the GHG reductions by subtracting the bus emissions from car emissions. From these average

calculations, the studio determined the output. The 606 examined how much potential one bus stop had at reducing GHGs. The formula in Figure 5.4 looked at the GHGs reduced by a bus, but converting that formula into the GHG reductions from one bus stops required more research. The 606 Studio input information into the formula from Figure 4.2. The VMTs from a bus and standard passenger vehicle were multiplied by emission factors to get the total GHG emissions produced per passenger mile (See Figure 5.4: Bus Stop Unit). 145

5.1

After calculating the equation with the updated factors, the GHGs from an average bus ride were subtracted from the emissions from an average car ride. This quantity provides the average GHG emission reductions based on the averages for bus stops in California. This metric unit can still be modified by future practitioners using site-specific data.

Figure 5.5

Carpooling Calculating the GHG mitigation for shuttle/ carpooling was similar to calculating buses, as shown in Figure 4.2. By inputting averages for shuttles/ vanpools and comparing the difference with single passenger vehicles, the 606 Studio calculated the output for carpooling (See Figure 5.5: Carpooling Unit).

Carpooling Unit

Equation DxRxAxL

AutoVMT CO2ePASSENGER CAR

AutoVMT x AVEF CO2ePASSENGER CAR x (n-1)

GHGREDUCTIONS(n)

Input 365 x 1,156,540 x 0.83 x 40

AutoVMT CO2ePASSENGER CAR

14,014,951,720 x 411

GHGREDUCTIONS(2)

5,760,145,156,920 x (2-1)

GHGREDUCTIONS(3)

5,760,145,156,920 x (3-1)

Where D = 365 days of use per year R = 156,540 average unlinked daily ridership (American Public Transportation Association, 2017)

A = 0.5 (default) L = 40 commuting miles (CARB, 2017a) AVEF = 411 gCO2e per mile n = number of passengers

Output 2 passenger = 5,760,145,156,920 gCO2/yr reduced 3 passengers = 11,520,290,313,840 gCO2/yr reduced 4 passengers = 17,280,435,470,760 gCO2/yr reduced 146

Figure 5.6

Electric Vehicle Unit

Equation GHGREDUCTIONS

GHGCV - GHGBEV

GHG

VMTFLEET x EF VMTFLEET

Vehicles x (Trips/Day) x (Miles/Day) x (Days/Year)

Input GHGREDUCTIONS

3,390,750 - 660,000

GHGCV

8,250 x 411

GHGEV

8,250 x 80 VMTFLEET

1 x (5 Trips/Day) x (5.5 Miles/Trip) x (300 Days/Year)

Where EFCV = 411, based on the average emission rates for conventional vehicles (US EPA, 2014) EFEV = 80, based on the 606 Studioâ€™s calculation for indirect GHG emissions for electric vehicles (See Figure 4.1)

Output 1 Electric Vehicle = 2,730,750 gCO2/yr Reduced EVâ€™s

Cool Pavements

From the data provided in Figure 4.1, the GHG emission reductions from electric vehicles is expressed in the formulas. To calculate the VMTs from conventional vehicles and electric vehicles, the 606 Studio used averages of mileage and GHG Emissions (See Figure 5.6: Electric Vehicle Unit) Since EVs utilize electricity stations instead of gas stations, practitioners can also plan for EV charging stations. The 606 Studio modified formulas from Figure 4.1 to calculate the annual GHG reductions from one EV charging station (See Figure 5.7: Charging Station Unit). By using EV charging stations as a metric unit, designers can readily apply the average emission reductions based on the typical daily use and charging rates.

A method of adaptation which provides a reduction in ambient temperature involves the use of various pavement materials, as discussed in chapter 4.1. While this method may vary depending on many factors, the equation from Qin (2015) states that the temperature can be reduced to 2OF through the use of different paving materials and paints. While this may seem small, compounded with shade and other cooling techniques can be a significant adaptation benefit for those exposed to heat. This method of adaptation offers a general reduction of temperature, but measuring the specific reductions for a unit requires additional research and analysis.

147

5.1

Conclusion The 606 Studio developed a demonstration landscape for the Transportation Typology (See Figure 5.8: Transportation Typology) that shows the mitigative potential on an average urban city block. This diagram shows the metrics units associated with each of the functions and elements of the Transportation Typology. Using elements like bike lanes, bikeshares, shuttling/carpooling, bus systems, and electric vehicles, the 606 Studio was able to measure the mitigation from the metric units. Although cool pavements provide adaptation benefits, calculating the exact temperature reduction needs to be expanded upon by future practitioners.

Figure 5.7

Metric units are a a tool that can be used as starting points for planners and designers developing projects that address climate change. While the units only use standard measurements based on averages, inputting site-specific data into formulas can provide the most accurate results the produce the most beneficial outcomes.

Charging Station Unit

Equation CSREDUCTIONS

(ERCV â€“ EREV) x (MPC) x (D) x (S)

Where CSREDUCTIONS = Annual GHG reductions from one charging stations ERCV = average emission rates from conventional vehicle EREV = emission rates from electric vehicle

MPC = vehicle miles traveled per charge D = days of use per year S = total number of stations

Input CSREDUCTIONS

(411 â€“ 80) x (114) x (365) x (1)

Where ERCV = 411, based on EPA averages (US EPA, 2014) EREV = 80, based on the 606 Studio Metric in Figure 4.1 MPC = 114, based on the average miles traveled per EV charge (USDE, 2017)

D = 365 S=1

Output 1 EV Charging Station = 13,731,300 gCO2/yr reduced 148

Figure 5.8

Transportation Typology

Carpooling/Vanpooling 2 people

3 people

4 people

5,760,145,156,920 11,520,290,313,840 17,280,435,470,760 gCO2/yr gCO2/yr gCO2/yr

Bike Lanes Bus Stops

1,299,993 gCO2/ yr/100ft

2,374,828 gCO2/yr

Bike Shares EV Charging Station 13,731,300 gCO2/yr

135,013.5 gCO2/yr

Cool Pavements N/A

149

5.2

Water Management Typology In Chapter 4, the 606 Studio developed water-energy metrics to calculate the GHG emissions reduced by water management methods. On average, for areas in California that pump groundwater and import water from other sources, the total amount of GHG emissions released in the provision of one acrefeet of water is 1.5 metric tons of GHG emissions. The Water Management Typology in this chapter explains the reduction of GHGs and the adaptive benefit each water management approach can produce. The three elements in focus in the Water Management Typology are water infiltration, stormwater collection and graywater recycling.

Stormwater collection Collecting and reusing stormwater reduces GHG emissions by reducing the energy expended to move and pump water. To calculate this reduction, the GHG emissions produced from pumping groundwater or transporting water must be identified. To find the average GHG emissions from water-energy use, the 606 Studio used the formula from Figure 4.10. From this calculation, the studio determined that the average GHG Emissions from water energy in California (See Figure 5.9: Water Unit). Although this metric unit is helpful for average quantities, practitioners should use an equation and site-specific data to calculate the stormwater volume and collection and reuse potential of their project. (SWV) (See Figure 5.10: Stormwater Volume). Stormwater reuse also provides qualitative adaptation benefits such as evaporative cooling, but the quantification of this benefit needs to be future developed.

150

Life graywater recycling Graywater is water that drains from washing machines, showers, or bathroom sinks (Alliance for Water Efficiency, 2016). The key to determining the potential GHG reduction from graywater recycling is understanding the water use per person and the potential reuses. By inputting average numbers into the equation in Figure 4.8, the studio calculated the water unit (See Figure 5.9: Water Unit). Although this metric unit is a helpful average, practitioners should calculate the amount of graywater available and the potential for reuse based on project specific information (GWDoccupants) (See Figure 5.11: Graywater Volume). The 606 Studio used the formula described below to estimate the volume of landscape able to be irrigated by graywater (GWV). This area can be input into the equation in order to determine GHG reductions. Different elements in the Water Management Typology can be used in residential, mixed-use and downtown contexts. Some sites are more suitable for specific elements and are discussed in further detail in Chapter 6.5.

5.2

Figure 5.9

Water Unit

Equation GHGREDUCTIONS

GHGEMISSIONS x Water Volume

GHGEMISSIONS

0.52 x ENCITY

Input GHGREDUCTIONS

1,014,347 x 1

GHGEMISSIONS

0.52 x 1,950,668

Where, Water Volume = 1 acre foot 0.52 = Conversion factor (MT per kWh) ENCITY =1,950,668 kWh/acft, the typical city energy use in the average city in Northern California (Schwarzenegger & California Energy Commission, 2006)

Output 1 acre foot of water reused = 1,014,347 gCO2/yr reduced

Figure 5.10 SWV (gallons)

Figure 5.11

Stormwater Volume (the area (sqft) of water collected) x (annual rainfall depth (inches)) x (0.623 conversion factor)

Graywater Volume

GWVIRRIGATION

(GWDOCCUPANTS) / (evapotranspiration rate x plant factor x 0.623 conversion factor)

GWVOCCUPANTS

(number of occupants) x (estimated flow demands for each occupant)

Where, GWDOCCUPANTS = Volume of water produced from users

GWDIRRIGATION = Volume of water needed for irrigation

151

5.2

Figure 5.12 AQ

Aquifer Recharge (the area of rechargeable land) * (infiltration rate) * (runoff amount in the area)

Water infiltration As discussed in Chapter 4.2, designing to increase water infiltration can help mitigate climate change by recharging the aquifer and thus lowering the need for imported water, which has a significant carbon footprint. The equation which calculates the amount of water able to recharge an aquifer (AQ) is shown in Figure 5.12: Aquifer Recharge. Recharging groundwater aquifers provides adaptive benefits like cooling and prevention of land subsidence. While these may lead to mitigation such as preventing more groundwater pumping or imported water, this calculation needs to be further developed.

Conclusion The Water Management Typology, which describes the metric units for water infiltration, stormwater collection and graywater recycling is shown in Figure 5.13: Water Management Typology. While water infiltration provides an adaptive benefit, calculating the specific benefits of this metric unit needs further development.

152

Figure 5.13

Water Management Typology

Stormwater Collection 1,014,347 gCO2/yr/acft

Water Infiltration N/A

Graywater Recycling 1,014,347 gCO2/yr/acft

153

5.3

Greening Typology

As mentioned in Chapter 4.3, expanding the urban forest has the potential to sequester carbon and a number of adaptive benefits like shade. The Greening Typology includes the functions of shading and carbon sequestration. The 606 Studio developed metric units for these functions using California average figures. However, further development of these functions can be conducted by evaluating the adaptive benefits of shade.

Carbon Sequestration The 606 Studio uses a formula from CARB (Figure 4.10) that calculates the Net GHG benefit from tree planting. Although inputting specific numbers into the equation provides the most accurate GHG benefit, the 606 Studio chose average quantities of different types of trees to give practitioners with average numbers to work with. The 606 Studio reviewed the City of Fresno's street trees and selected trees that required less water (and thus less GHGs) The studio chose trees that provided carbon sequestration, shade for pedestrians who are walking or sitting near public transportation stops, as well as shade for buildings, reducing the energy consumption. As mentioned in Chapter 4.3, survival rates can depend on different factors such as maintenance. Well-maintained trees survive longer, causing the survival factor to increase. As a basis for this unit, the 606 Studio used Quercus virginian (Qv) (Southern Live Oak) for a fast-growing tree and Cupresses arizonian (Ca) (Arizona Cypress) for a moderate-growing tree. These trees were chosen as sample trees based on the City of Fresno's Street Tree List (City of Fresno, 2017). Using the calculation from i-Tree

154

and information on tree age, growth, type, and survival factors of the tree species, the studio calculated the amount of carbon sequestration (See Figure 5.14: Tree Carbon Sequestration Unit). Although variations may exist due to the survival factor, future research can develop factors to account for discrepancies such as the differences between survival rates of street trees and nursery trees (Roman & N. Scatena, 2011).

Shading The duration and quality of shade a tree provides is dependent on how far it is from a building or object as well as other factors such as spread, crown, leaf structure, and transparency (Brown, Vanos, Kenny, & Lenzholzer, 2015). The USDA provides as shading calculator which assesses the amount of hours shaded per day based on these factors (USFS & USDA, 2014). However, due to the unavailability of the calculator at the time of printing, the 606 Studio was unable to acquire specific results. Fortunately, Barlow and Harrison (1999) provided calculations for shade information for general oaks and cypress trees. Using this calculator, the studio input the information and found that the Quercus virginian (fast-growing tree) can shade an area at least 16 feet away for 8.5 hours and up to 48 feet away for 4.5 hours, and the Cupresses arizonian (moderate-growing tree) can shade at least 16 feet away for 6.7 hours and up to 48 feet away for 2.1 hours (Barlow & Harrison, 1999). While these numbers for trees are averages, further research can improve on measuring the effectiveness of shade based on the tree's height, spread, and distance from the shaded structure or person.

5.3

Figure 5.14

Tree Carbon Sequestration Unit

Equation A. B. C. Species Characteristics Tree Number Refer to Appendix Table 1 Age of Age 0 Trees Tree Growth Name Type Rate Planted (H or C)

(S, M, or F)

D. Survival Factor

Refer to Appendix (App.) Table 2

E. Number of Surviving Trees CxD

G. F. Carbon Annual Sequestration Sequestered (lbs) Rate ExF (lbs/tree) Refer to App. Table 2

Total Pounds of Carbon Sequestered Total Pounds of Equivalent CO2 Sequestered X 3.67 Equivalent CO2 Sequestered in Short Tons /2000

Input A. B. C. Species Characteristics Tree Number Refer to Appendix Table 1 Age of Age 0 Trees Tree Growth Name Type Rate Planted

D. Survival Factor

Refer to Appendix (App.) Table 2

E. Number of Surviving Trees

G. F. Carbon Annual Sequestration Sequestered (lbs) Rate ExF (lbs/tree) Refer to App. Table 2

(H or C)

(S, M, or F)

0.589

19.3

11.367

0.576

7.4

4.262

CxD

Output Sequestration of one fast-growing tree = 18,143 gCO2/yr reduced Sequestration of one moderate-growing tree = 7,076 gCO2/yr reduced

155

5.3

Conclusion Figure 5.15: Greening Typology shows the demonstration landscape with metric units that can calculate the carbon sequestration of different types of trees. These metric units should be used by designers as starting points to measure the benefit of fast-growing and moderate-growing trees. In addition to providing general carbon sequestration amounts, shading can prevent the use of cooling costs. However, the shading calculations need further development to be able to quantify mitigative benefits.

156

Figure 5.15

Greening Typology

Shading N/A

Carbon Sequestration Mod-growing Species 7,076 gCO2/yr

Fast-growing Species 18,143 gCO2/yr

157

5.4

Soil Management Typology Soil management can provide mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits within the city landscape. However, due to the variance in soil composition and conditions, some of the methods require on-site testing in order to estimate impact, and cannot be distilled down to a metric unit. The Soil Management Typology includes soil mitigation from constructed wetlands, recycled soil, wood burial, adaptation from moist soil, and co-benefits from construction wetlands.

Wood Burial An important metric unit of the Soil Management Typology involves the burial of wood. As mentioned in Chapter 4.3, the burial of wood postpones decomposition, thus preventing the escape of CO2 into the atmosphere. Figure 4.14 provides the formula used to calculate the carbon stored in wood. Using tons of Carbon stored in typical midlatitude wood, the 606 Studio developed a metric unit for wood burial (See Figure 5.16: Wood Burial Unit). Designers and planners can use this metric unit to calculate the effectiveness of including wood burial in their projects. Although currently uncommon, wood burial is an effective method of lowering GHG emissions and can be incorporated into projects.

Recycled Soil Using recycled soil from the site is another method that mitigates GHGs through soil. Filling a site with new soil produces GHGs from transporting the soil to the site. Therefore, mitigation can be achieved by measuring the number of cubic feet of soil used from the existing site. Figure 4.13 illustrates the formula 158

that measures the Soil Sequestration Rate, and the 606 Studio developed a metric unit based on average sequestration rates (See Figure 5.17: Recycled Soil Unit).

Constructed wetlands Soil can sequester and retain carbon to reduce emissions into the atmosphere. Constructed wetlands can be developed to lower emissions. While they produce some emissions, compared to other land uses, constructed wetlands can be developed to comparably reduce emissions by containing carbon in soil under water (Manning & Renforth, 2013). However, when implementing constructed wetlands, soil tests must be taken to determine the existing land use and calculations must be made for wetland emissions in an inland environment (Vicente-Vicente et al., 2016). Carbon emissions can be reduced and readily calculated using Figure 4.12a (Turner et al., 2015). By using Figure 4.13 for finding soil sequestration rates, the 606 Studio developed an equation for finding the emission reductions of one square foot of constructed wetlands (See Figure 5.18: Constructed Wetland Soil). Although soil samples are required to attain accurate SOC levels, this formula allows designers to quantify how effective their designs are at GHG reductions.

5.4

Figure 5.16

Wood Burial Unit

Equation (m)(tCwood) rd

tC stored

Input (1)(0.0762) 5

tC stored Where, m =1cubic foot tCwood = 0.0762 tons of Carbon stored in type of wood rd = 5

Output 1 cubic foot of buried wood = 15,240 gCO2/yr emissions reduced

Figure 5.17

Recycled Soil Unit

Equation ∑ [(EFRM)R]

GHGAVOIDED

Input ∑ [(55)0.074]

GHGAVOIDED Where, EFRM = 55 Emission factor(kgCO2e/t) from table 4.5. R = 0.074 tonnes of recycled material

Output 1 cubic foot of recycled soil = 4,074 gCO2 emissions reduced

Figure 5.18 1sqft

Constructed Wetland Soil (SCSRPOST – SCSRPRE) x (acres of project area /43,560) * 3.67 159

5.4

Soil Cooling Shaded, moist soil compared to warm, dry soil can help cool the ambient temperature (Lal, Negassa, & Lorenz, 2015). If the 606 Studio had an effective metric for soil cooling, it could be used in concert with the water and greening metrics to measure the total impact of storing water in the landscape. However, there is a lack of data and modeling on the cooling impact of shaded and moist soil. For this reason, more research needs to be conducted by future practitioners.

Conclusion The Soil Management Typology include soil mitigation from constructed wetlands, recycled soil, wood burial, adaptation from moist soil, and cobenefits from construction wetlands (See Figure 5.19: Soil Management Typology). These elements and functions present average GHG emission reductions, but future research must be conducted using sitespecific calculations in order to accurately measure the potential mitigative and adaptive impact of soil.

160

Figure 5.19

Soil Management Typology

Soil Cooling N/A

Constructed Wetlands N/A

Wood Burial 15,240 gCO2/ yr/ft3

Recycled Soil 4,074 gCO2/ft3

161

5.5

Waste Diversion Typology

Waste Diversion metrics from Chapter 4.5 provide mitigation and co-beneficial solutions within the city landscape. The most impact from Waste Diversion comes from recycling materials and reducing the emissions from production new materials. Recycling and reusing items can also reduce the amount of transportation needed for waste, thus reducing more GHGs.

Recycled Materials By providing recycling bins along the streetside, pedestrians can easily recycle as they travel within the city. Reusing recycled materials prevents the carbon stored in those materials from returning into the atmosphere (Turner et al., 2015). Therefore, features such as benches, shade structures, and playgrounds can reduce GHG emissions by incorporating recycled materials. Figure 4.15 shows the avoided GHG emissions from recycling. Shade structures have the potential to reduce GHGs by reusing existing materials instead of producing new ones. Using Table 4.9 which shows the average emissions or various materials, the 606 Studio developed a metric unit for the use of recycled aluminium

Figure 5.20

for shade structures (See Figure 5.20: Recycled Materials Unit [Aluminium]) (using aluminium as example). Although the Waste Diversion Typology can be used by designers, it can also be applied by residents at home. Using Table 4.9, the 606 Studio calculated that a full, 25-gallon recycling bin of materials has the potential to prevent GHG emissions from the production of new materials. Figure 5.21: Waste Diversion Typology displays the GHG emission reduction by recycling typical materials such as paper, plastic, aluminum, and glass.

Conclusion The Waste Diversion Typology includes the use of recycled materials, and recycling bins (See Figure 5.21: Waste Diversion Typology). Reusing materials instead of disposing of them avoids the construction of new materials, thus reducing GHG emissions. Variations in data may exist such as the amount of emissions reduced from avoiding transportation of new materials. However, the Waste Diversion Typology explains good examples of GHG mitigation.

Recycled Materials Unit (Aluminium)

Equation âˆ‘ [(EFRM)R]

GHGAVOIDED

Input GHGAVOIDED

âˆ‘ [(8,143)0.074]

Where, EFRM = 8,143 Emission factor(kgCO2e/t) from table 4.5

R = 0.074 ton of recycled material

Output 1 cubic foot of recycled aluminium = 602,582 gCO2 emissions reduced 162

Figure 5.21

Waste Diversion Typology Recycling Bins

Paper 43,605 gCO2/25-gal bin

Plastic 102,980 gCO2/25-gal bin

Aluminium

Glass

29,830 773,585 gCO2/25-gal bin gCO2/25-gal bin

Recycled Materials N/A

163

5.6

Conclusion Chapter 4 and 5 are related in a unique way. The formulas and checklists in Chapter 4 can be used to assess the impact of each element and function with regards to mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits. Chapter 5 uses these formulas to develop typologies of metric units. These metric units use average data and quantities to calculate the average impact of an element or function in the landscape (See Figure 5.22:

Figure 5.22

Summary of Measurable Units). By using both tools, the 606 Studio ascertained quantifiable measurements of mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits. Using metrics from Chapter 4 as well as the metric units in Chapter 5, designers and planners can evaluate (See Table 5.1: Checklist of Metrics) the potential impact of their designs, demonstrating their contribution to addressing climate change.

Summary of Measurable Units Transportation

Carpooling/Vanpooling 3 people

2 people

EV Charging Station

Bus Stops

4 people

5,760,145,156,920 11,520,290,313,840 17,280,435,470,760 gCO2/yr gCO2/yr gCO2/yr

13,731,300 gCO2/yr

2,374,828 gCO2 /yr

Bike Lanes

Bike Shares

Cool Pavements

1,299,993 gCO2/yr/100ft

135,013.5 gCO2/yr

N/A

Stormwater Collection

Water Management Graywater Recycling

Water Infiltration

1,014,347 gCO2/yr/acft

N/A

Greening Carbon Sequestration

Shading

Mod-growing Species N/A

7,076 gCO2/yr

Constructed Wetlands

Soil Management Recycled Soil Wood Burial 4,074 gCO2/ft3

N/A

15,240 gCO2/yr/ft3

Fast-grow Species 18,143 gCO2/yr

Soil Cooling N/A

Waste Diversion Recycling Bins Paper

Plastic 43,605 102,980 gCO2/25-gal bin gCO2/25-gal bin 164

Aluminium

Recycled Materials Glass

29,830 773,585 gCO2/25-gal bin gCO2/25-gal bin

N/A

5.6

Table 5.1

Checklist of Metrics MITIGATION

Transportation GHG

Reduction

ADAPTATION Temperature Reduction

CO-BENEFITS Air Quality Improvement

Economic Public Ecology Health

Electric Vehicles Bus Stops Bike Lanes/ Bike Shares Cool Pavements Carpooling/ Vanpooling

Water Management

Water-energy Saving

Drought Ground Water Temperature Water Quality Economic Public Ecology Adaptation Recharge Decrease Improvement Health

Stormwater Collection Graywater Recycling Water Infiltration

Greening

Carbon Sequestration

Temperature Decrease

Air Quality Improvement

Economic Public Ecology Health

Trees Other Vegetation

Soil Management

Carbon Sequestration

Temperature Decrease

Economic Public Ecology Health

Constructed Wetland Recycled Soil Wood Burial Soil Cooling

Waste Diversion

Carbon Sequestration

Economic Public Ecology Health

Recycling Bins Recycled Materials 165

VISION AND 06 MEASURABLE APPLICATION 6.1 Goal and Objectives 6.2 Analysis 6.3 Landscape Criteria 6.4 606/TCC Vision Plan 6.5 Urban Contexts 6.6 Conclusion

167

Chapter 1 presented an overview of the 2018 606 Studio Project: Measurable Change. That chapter introduced climate change, GHG emissions, global, national, and state policies, and the TCC initiative. After explaining the goals, methods and approaches to helping Fresnoâ€™s disadvantaged communities in addressing regional and local impacts of climate change, Chapter 2 described the background of Fresno, diving into its history and current conditions that qualified it to be a disadvantaged community that deserves funding support from the TCC program. Chapter 3 explained the sources of GHG emissions in the Fresno area and how they will continue to impact disadvantaged communities in Fresno unless changes are made. Chapter 4 focused on the development of Measurement Metrics in five major areas: transportation, water, greening, soil and recycling, that bring most impact to landscape architecture practice. explaining how to quantify impacts of landscape strategies and actions. Finally, Chapter 5 presented Metric Typologies along with metric units that illustrate how to measure mitigative benefits of practical landscape design strategies. This chapter builds on the findings from the previous chapters and focuses on identifying opportunities and constraints for the City of Fresno and local communities in the TCC area to implement landscape design strategies most appropriate to address climate change issues. The project Goals and Objectives (6.1) are restated and help guide the integration of the project. Using the goals and site analysis methods, the 606 Studio identified issues and opportunities related to impacts of climate change, as well as environmental and social challenges within the TCC area (6.2) and developed criteria and overarching strategies to address those issues (6.3). Then, the studio designed a strategic vision plan (6.4) that represents where the landscape and design strategies can be implemented in the TCC area to reduce impacts of climate change and improve overall quality of life there. Finally, the studio developed urban contexts (6.5), which apply the metric typologies from Chapter 5 into the unique urban contexts of the TCC area. This highly integrated chapter presents strategies to address relevant issues in Fresno as well as strategies future designers and planners can use to measure the efficacy of projects. 606 Typology Team beginning analysis on the TCC project area

168

169

6.1

Goal and Objectives As introduced in Chapter 1, the goal of the entire 606 Project for 2018 is: Develop landscape planning and design strategies that utilize measurement metrics to help vulnerable populations mitigate greenhouse gas emission and adapt to the inevitable impacts of climate change in Fresno, California. Along with the goal mentioned above, the 606 Studio also developed studio objectives as described in Figure 1.7 (p. 27). Embedded within these overarching goals and objectives are planning objectives, which have been developed through regional and local data collection and analysis to guide the development of a vision plan for the TCC area of the City of Fresno (See Figure 6.1: Project Workflow). The Planning Objectives are: • Analyze the impacts of GHG emissions and pollution on the environmental and biological functions of the plan area • Identify the most vulnerable communities affected by the changes in environmental functions • Identify the impacted areas of largest concern for disadvantaged communities • Develop a strategic vision plan of appropriate landscape strategies to address the challenges in the TCC area With these objectives in mind, the 606 Studio gathered biophysical and sociocultural data to identify and analyze the impacted areas. After analyzing the issues and identifying the most impacted areas, design strategies and criteria were implemented on the project site.

170

Figure 6.1 Communities in inland areas face challenges associated with climate change. Opportunities exist to enhance the livability and response to climate change. Develop landscape planning and design strategies that utilize measurement metrics to help vulnerable populations mitigate and adapt to climate change issues in Fresno, California.

Project Workflow VISION Planning Process

DATA MINING GOALS

1. Compile and develop metrics to counter climate change that measure landscape actions for planning and design 2. Develop a master plan that integrates all projects for maximum impact using indicators as a guideline 3. Produce design alternatives for selected projects that exhibit measurable landscape solutions to the causes and impacts of climate change

ANALYSIS

OBJECTIVES

Air Quality Water Conditions Thermal Conditions Park Poor Areas Vulnerable Communities Circulation

Reduce Temperature Improve Air Quality Increase Greenspcae Increase Connectivity Improve Water Management

Use criteria and metrics to maximize adaptation and mitigation actions with co-beneďŹ ts

C URBAN CONTEXT

1. Analyze the impacts of GHG emissions and pollution on the environmental and biological functions of the plan area

3. Identify the impacted areas of largest concern for disadvantaged communities

CRITERIA & STRATEGIES

VISION PLANNING

4. Provide the City of Fresno with practical suggestions for future landscape planning and design projects that address climate change issues

2. Identify the most vulnerable communities aďŹ€ected by the changes in environmental functions

Biophysical Socio-cultural Metric Development

Downtown Context Mixed-use Context Residential Context

PLANNING OBJECTIVES DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

Lessons Learned and Future Recommendations Assessment of Design Process

4. Develop a strategic vision plan of appropriate landscape strategies to address the challenges in the TCC area 171

6.2

Analysis From large-scale to small-scale, the 606 Studio discovered relevant data and information through data mining, which helped the studio execute further analysis to support the development of design strategies. Specifically, the studio collected geospatial data and information from diverse resources, such as traffic data from California’s traffic census program, soil data from USDA’s Soil Survey, summertime satellite images of Fresno area from NASA’s Landsat 8, water management and public works data from City of Fresno and Census Data from ESRI Business Analyst, which was originally from the Census Bureau. (California Department of Transportation, 2017; NASA, 2018). From using CalEnviroScreen 3.0 (OEHHA, 2015), Chapter 2 illustrates the general environmental and sociocultural issues of Fresno such as air pollution, lowering groundwater levels, drought issues, ecosystem degradation, and disadvantaged communities with high unemployment and poverty rates. All these main issues led the studio to thoroughly analyze air quality, water conditions, circulation and public transportation, thermal conditions, park availability, and vulnerable communities in the TCC area. This analysis uncovered the specific challenges and opportunities of the TCC area through the data and information collected and mentioned above. 606 Team Working on Analysis

172

Urban Zones Highway 99 and the High Speed Rail physically divide up the TCC area into three parts: Downtown, Chinatown, and Southwest Fresno (See Map 6.1: TCC Area Zones), which causes the segregation of these zones. After conducting a site visit to the TCC area, the studio summarized each zone’s responsibility or function for the city. The Downtown area is a multifunction area which acts as a core for the whole city to attract people from different areas. This zone needs comprehensive revitalization as it has been abandoned for a long time largely due to flight of business to new commercial area north of downtown. People use the downtown area for service, entertainment, and shopping. Chinatown, a mixed-use area, is an intermediary space which can connect the Downtown and Southwest areas by providing auxiliary and supplemental functions to Downtown and convenient transportation to unite Downtown and Southwest Fresno. Southwest Fresno, a primarily residential zone, should be a livable space for its residents and offer a revitalized environment that protects the vulnerable people in disadvantage communities from environmental contamination and the impacts of climate change.

Map 6.1: TCC Project Area Zones

180

Downtown Chinatown Southwest Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 173

6.2

Air Quality Chapter 2 illustrated how PM 2.5 and Ozone are major air pollutants in the city of Fresno, and these pollutants are primarily generated by industrial processes and auto vehicles (EPA, 2017). This results section demonstrate that of all the sources discussed in Chapter 3.3, transportation is the biggest source of GHG emissions. The 606 Studio examined that traffic-related air pollution in the TCC area by using annual average daily traffic (AADT) data from Californiaâ€™s traffic census program (California Department of Transportation, 2017) (See Map 6.2: Traffic-Related Air Pollution in TCC Area). There are two steps to process the data. First, the studio applied the AADT data to each road in GIS to get a traffic volume pattern map. Then, based on the vehicle emission model (Lin & Lin, 2002) and emission coefficients of pollutants table (see Appendix), the studio assumed all vehicles were private, light-duty gasoline vehicles (PLDGV) and calculated trafficrelated air pollution on each road to get final result which shown in Map 6.2. The results showed that, in addition to the air pollution caused by freeways 99 and 41, the top 5 streets with the most traffic-related air pollution are Fulton, Jensen, Tulare, Ventura, and Tuolumne streets. The total pollutant amounts (CO+NO+PM+SO) for the streets respectively are 293, 273, 245, 178, 171 kg per km (1km = 0.621 mile).

174

In Chapter 2, Map 2.12 shows that industrial land use is located in the north and southeast direction of TCC area, which means the wind, which mainly blows from northwest to southeast (See Figure 2.7) will bring the industrial air pollutants into the TCC area. In addition to the air pollutants on the project area, traffic on the transportation networks also produces GHG emissions, as mentioned in the Chapter 3.2. This analysis informed the 606 Studio about the most impacted areas and transit corridors that need intervention. To prevent air pollution from further impacting vulnerable communities, polluted air needs to be blocked or absorbed. Also, people need a safe, connected network to protect them from harmful air pollutants in their daily commute, especially pedestrians, bikers and those who rely on public transportation. Finally, as shown from Chapter 4, improving greenspace is essential in protecting vulnerable population like elders and children against harmful air pollutants.

Map 6.2: Traffic-Related Air Pollution in TCC Area

180

High

Traffic-related Air Pollution

Low

(Kg/Km)

Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 175

6.2

Water Conditions Chapter 2 discusses the water challenges in Fresno such as groundwater and drought conditions. Since drought has led to more groundwater pumping, water will become scarcer unless it is managed differently. The 606 Studio considered many factors to identify the ideal locations for water management. These factors included surface elevation, surface slope rate, groundwater table elevation, surface permeability, soil type, storm water pipes size and location, land use, and level of water pollution (See Appendix A). In Chapter 2, Map 2.14 illustrates the existing water basins, channels, and flood zones in Fresno. This background information aided the studio in developing an analysis for the TCC area. Utilizing GIS data from the City of Fresno, the surface elevation information was gathered from the contour map, and the regional water flow direction became apparent (See Appendix A). The slope and flow direction analysis was also helpful in providing information that identified the direction of surface water flow on the TCC area. To determine the project siteâ€™s topography, the 606 Studio obtained the Fresno Digital Elevation Model (DEM) data from USGS, then conducted a geospatial analysis in ARCGIS (USGS, 2018). A combination of the surface elevation and slope and flow direction analysis identified the locations to capture most stormwater. The groundwater pipe analysis shows how storm water flows through underground water pipes during rain events (Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control

176

District, 2018). The analysis process combined a map of the existing stormwater inlets with the pipe diameter to determine the amount of storm water that could be collected and transported through the network (See Map 6.3: Hydrology of TCC Area). Within the TCC area, there are existing recharge facilities (See Map 6.3). By analyzing soil maps of the project area, the 606 Studio identified areas suitable for additional ground water recharge facilities based on the permeability of the existing soil (See Appendix A). The studio evaluated areas ideal for implementing water capture and infiltration in the downtown business area, as well as graywater recycling and underground water recharging in Chinatown and Residential zones (See Map 6.3). This analysis revealed the challenges associated with water in the TCC area. In underground pipes, water mainly flows from the northeast to the southwest. Since more water is drawn during times of drought, better water management that replenishes groundwater is necessary to prevent continual pumping during drought times. In addition, water management is needed in order to use existing water onsite instead of water from other sources.

Map 6.3 Hydrology of the TCC Area

180

Ground Water Flow Surface Water Flow Existing Detention Basin Potential Water Collection Project Zone Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 177

6.2

Thermal Conditions One of the more obvious phenomena of climate change is the unprecedented increase of temperature in places like Fresno (See Map 2.11). These increases, as discussed in Chapters 2 and 3, aggravate existing issues like heat-related diseases and asthma, especially in disadvantaged communities. To decide where to spend limited resources to reduce temperatures and provide cooling to outdoor spaces, the 606 Studio identified the locations with the most frequent occurrence of health-threatening levels of heat (105 degrees) (See Map 6.4: Surface Temperature within TCC Area) and the greatest concentration of vulnerable residents (adults over 65 and children under 14) (See Map 6.6: Vulnerable Communities in Project Area). There were two steps involved in this analysis. The first was to develop a thermal pattern map which showed the spatial distribution of temperatures. The second step involved is matching the high density of vulnerable populations with the thermal map to get the target zone. Specifically, through through GIS tools such as spatial analysis, the studio processed the Landsat 8 data of June 2017 from NASA to calculate the land surface temperature of the city (NASA, 2018). The result shows that Fresno’s land surface temperature in the summer ranged from 69.8° F to 126.6 ° F. The difference varied greatly because of the variation of land surface cover material, producing an inverse effect (i.e. the higher percentage of vegetation coverage, the lower land surface temperature). In the project area, there are four areas that are partially occupied and have many vacant lots. These vacant lots contribute to high ground temperature in these areas. The areas are: Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, MLK park, South Elm Ave commercial zone, and the High-Speed Rail segment in Chinatown. All these four areas have a common feature which is low vegetation coverage (See Map 2.15). Although Southwestern Fresno communities have more tree canopy than

178

average, there are also some hot spots within the communities that are highly populated such as the communities to the south of church avenue and in between MLK Blvd. and S. Elm Street. According to the 606 Studio’s literature review in Chapter 2.2, seniors over 65 years old and children younger than 14 years old are more sensitive to high temperatures and are in areas with high temperatures. By analyzing Fresno’s demographic data, the studio calculated the high-density areas of vulnerable communities (See Map: 6.6 Vulnerable Communities in Project Area). Reclassifying the thermal map and vulnerable communities into 10 levels, and using the GIS raster calculator to match them up, the studio identified the vulnerable communities most impacted by high temperatures. The concentrations of vulnerable communities are shown in dark red in the south parts of study area, Chinatown, and part of Downtown (See Map: 6.6 Vulnerable Communities in Project Area). The areas most impacted are the target zones for intervention to lower temperature and providing cooling spaces using landscape architecture solutions. For the vulnerable communities, the 606 Studio planned on landscape strategies that deal with temperature in areas that are most affected by temperature increases. This analysis presented the areas with the most impact on vulnerable communities. In order to address the impacts on communities, a decrease in ambient temperatures is needed to reduce the urban heat island effect. Areas that provide shade and evaporative cooling need to be implemented to help reduce temperatures. Finally, as mentioned in Chapter 3, since GHG emissions increase temperatures, addressing emissions can also reduce temperatures and protect vulnerable communities.

Map 6.4: Surface Temperature within TCC Area

180

69.8째F - 105 째F 105 째F -126.6째F Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 179

6.2

Park Poor Areas As discussed in Chapter 4, green spaces and trees can help mitigate GHG emissions through carbon sequestration, thus reducing the impacts of climate change. However, when trees are sparse, the surrounding communities are more susceptible to the effects of heat and harmful pollutants. Through site visits and thorough research on Fresno, the 606 Studio discovered that the city lacks adequate park space. Areas that do contain park space lack in appropriate amenities for the community (City of Fresno, 2017a). The City of Fresnoâ€™s park master plan mentioned that in Fresno, almost 54% people lack access to green spaces within a walkable distance (a quarter mile) from their residence and almost 13% parks are only covered with tree shade (City of Fresno, 2017a). The 606 Studio conducted a park poverty analysis to find the current conditions of park space for residents in the TCC area. First, the studio selected parks only, omitting other green spaces and open spaces. The criteria for selecting parks was to choose parks measuring an acre or more, while retaining areas like the Cultural District Park in Downtown Fresno, which measured 0.754 acre. From this analysis, the studio found that The TCC area only contains 8 parks that add up to a total of 35 acres (See Map 6.5: Park Poverty in TCC Area). With the

Table 6.1

Park Amenity Preferences

Park Amenity

Voted For

Picnic Area

52%

Community Garden

43%

Dog Park

42%

Soccer Field

37%

Splash Pads

36% (Fresno Parks Vision for 2050, 2016)

180

population of the project area at 39,281, the amount of park density is 0.89 acres per 1000 people, worse than the standard for California (4 acres per 1000 people), and much worse than the US average (10 acres per 1000) people (NRPA, 2018). By using the service area tool in the network analysis tool set, the 606 Studio created a quartermile boundary along the street network and around the exiting parks in the TCC area. The studio chose this measurement because, in an arid climate like Fresno, it is more difficult for pedestrians to walk more than a quarter mile (about a 10-minute walk). The studio then assessed the population within an accessible walking distance, and conducted an overlay analysis. This analysis calculated the connection between park and population density and park area/population density x 1000 (to account for people). This formula was applied using GIS to find out the park acres per 1000 people for each census blockgroup. The percentage of the population in the TCC area with access to parks is 12.4%, and even those parks are overburdened by the amount of people they serve (City of Fresno, 2016a) (See Map 6.5: Park Poverty in TCC Area). The 606 Studio evaluated the disproportion of parks and residents and concluded that there was a need to strategically plan for green spaces in the TCC area, especially in areas with high temperature and large amounts of vulnerable communities (See Map: 6.6). In addition to strategically locating green space, the studio suggests upgrading the existing green spaces with all amenities, connecting the green spaces with the largest number of users, and adding shade trees to existing parks that lack them. From the Fresno Parks Vision for 2050, the community voted on the most needed amenities in parks (See Table 6.1: Park Amenity Preferences) (City of Fresno, 2016).

Map 6.5: Park Poverty in TCC Area

180

High Density Medium Density Low Density Existing Park Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 181

6.2

Vulnerable Communities Chinatown. Since both children and the elderly are very susceptible to the impacts of pollution, this area is a large area of concern for these communities. As mentioned earlier, children are more vulnerable to air pollution and high temperatures than those over fourteen, making this area suitable for intervention. Overall, the TCC area has a higher concentration of vulnerable communities living in the center of the project area and expands towards the Chinatown, MLK, and permaculture project sites. When designing the nearby sites, the needs of these communities are considered to help them fight climate change impacts. These communities need strategies that help reduce the ambient temperature during the intense heat in the summer. Finally, children and elders who do not drive need opportunities to engage in safe, active transportation such as walking and biking.

As discussed in Chapter 2.2, elders (65+) and children (14-) are more vulnerable than other groups. Furthermore, within the context of Fresno and under the discussion of issues of climate change, the 606 studio defines vulnerable communities as elders over 65 years and children under 14 years of age. Compared to Fresno, the TCC area has similar proportions of vulnerable people (See Table 6.2: Comparison of Vulnerable Communities). Elderly people who are 65 and older are more prone to heatrelated illnesses (Kenney et al, 2014, p 1894). According to Kenney et al. (2014), children who are younger than 10 are also at a higher risk during days of extreme temperature (Panoo, 2017). Therefore, the 606 studio analyzed the distribution of elders and children in the TCC area. The Vulnerable Communities map area (See Map 6.6: Vulnerable Communities in TCC Area) depicts the number of elderly over 65 and children under 14 living in the TCC area. In the southern part of project area, a high number of vulnerable communities live in two different areas: 683 people south of East Church Ave and between MLK Jr Blvd and South Elm Ave, and 267 people on the corner MLK Jr Blvd and East Annadale Ave. Within the TCC area, a higher percentage of children under fourteen live near the airport to the north and by the permaculture and MLK sites to the southwest. The higher percentage of elderly over 65 years live in downtown and in

Table 6.2

182

Comparison of Vulnerable Communities Fresno

TCC Area

Under 14 years

24%

27%

Over 65 years

11%

Map 6.6: Vulnerable Communities in the TCC Area

180

683

>120

Vulnerable People (<14, >65 years old)

Railroad Site Projects

267

Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 183

6.2

Circulation The beginning of this section explains the disconnection of the three urban zones on the TCC area because Highway 99 and the High-Speed Rail act as dividers, separating the area into 3 pieces (See Map 6.1). To reunite these bifurcated areas, a circulation analysis was necessary. In this section, the existing conditions of each road, bike lanes, bus lines, and points of interest were taken into consideration. First, the 606 Studio examined the AADT data from Californiaâ€™s traffic census program and identified that the top 5 roads with the highest traffic volume are Jensen, Tulare, Fulton, Ventura and Tuolumne streets (California Department of Transportation, 2017) (See Map 6.7: High Traffic Volume in TCC Area). These streets are considered main streets on the TCC area that support vehicle traffic. Also, since trafficrelated air pollution (See Map 6.2) is produced by traffic on these main streets, some landscape approaches like vegetated barriers could be applied on those streets to reduce pollution. Second, through on-site observations and examining data from the City of Fresno, the 606 Studio identified and documented existing bike lanes (See Map 6.8: Existing Bike Lanes in TCC Area) and used this information as a foundation to develop a more optimized bike lane system (City of Fresno, 2016b). Third, the studio

184

collected land use data from the City of Fresno and Google Earth to identify the points of interest (schools, parks, grocery stores, shopping malls, cultural and historical buildings, and senior centers) on TCC area (City of Fresno: Development and Resources Department, 2018; Google, 2018) (See Map 6.9: Points of Interest in TCC Area). After analyzing the circulation analysis in the TCC area, the 606 Studio found that improving the active circulation system (pedestrian and bicycle systems) can help connect residents, especially vulnerable people, to the most desired destinations. Also, the active circulation systems need to be protected from harmful pollutants that threaten these vulnerable communities.

ol u

180

99 a ur

High Taffic Volume Streets (Top 10)

Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 185

Map 6.8: Existing Bike Lanes in TCC Area

180

Existing Bike Way Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0 186

0.25

0.5

1 Mile

Map 6.9: Points of Interest in TCC Area

180

School Park Grocery Shopping Mall Cultural Building Senior Center Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 187

6.3

Landscape Criteria After analyzing the existing conditions in the TCC area, the 606 Studio identified the critical challenges for the vulnerable communities: disconnected urban zones, trafficrelated GHG and air pollution emissions, lowering groundwater levels, high surface temperature, park poverty, and vulnerable communities who are most impacted by environmental and sociocultural conditions. Thus, the 606 Studio formed criteria for a vision plan that can address these issues in order to bring benefits for vulnerable and disadvantaged communities. The criteria are listed as following: 1. Reduce Ambient Temperature 2. Improve Air Quality 3. Increase Greenspace 4. Increase Connectivity 5. Improve Water Management To fulfill these criteria, the 606 Studio used the research conducted in Chapter 4 about transportation, water, greening, soil, and recycling materials to develop landscape design strategies which will guide the identification of landscape elements and functions able to be implemented in the TCC area. The studio categorized these elements and functions into three main strategies: circulation (bike lanes, light-colored pavement, public transportation, etc.), water management (stormwater management, graywater management, and groundwater infiltration, etc.), and greening (parks, trees, bioswales, etc.). Each of these strategies fulfills one or more of the criteria and address the challenges identified in the TCC area.

Circulation The incorporation of an interconnected circulation network addresses the issues of disconnection presented in Chapter 6.2. By improving bike lanes, pedestrian infrastructure, 188

and public transportation, the 606 Studio demonstrates how the circulation strategy meets the criteria by increasing connectivity and accessibility in the TCC area.

Active Transportation (Bike lanes and Pedestrian Circulation) The existing circulation within the TCC project site contains bus routes and bike lanes, but they are disconnected from residents and points of interest. A bicycle lane is an example of an element that addresses many issues from climate change. Riding bicycles reduces the GHGâ€™s that would come from cars, promotes health, and decreases congestion and heat that comes from cars.

Using Light-Colored Pavement The use of light-colored pavement is not a new concept, but the impacts have recently been measured. With the lack of permeable surfaces and the impossibility to obliterate all pavement, the use of light-colored pavement provides a feasible alternative rather than asphalt and other non-reflective surfaces. The light-colored pavement reflects light and heat instead of containing it in the surface. This decreases the ambient temperature and provides a more pleasant walking and biking experience.

Public Transportation/Carpooling/Shuttle Those who are unable to walk far or bike can utilize public transportation, carpooling, or a shuttle service. By remining inside a vehicle, passengers are able to avoid the poor air quality outdoors. Furthermore, these forms of transportation can increase the connectivity by connecting home points to points of interest.

Road islands, greenspace, and other minimally used spaces around Fresno have Circulation, Water Management, and Greening Potential

Potential for designated bike lanes for users

Potential for Improved Pedestrian Circulation

Potential for Light-Colored Paving to reflect heat

189

6.3

Graywater Recycling

Water Management With the past droughts and heat waves in Fresnoâ€™s history, the management of water is essential in order to address climate change. Criteria for water management involves the use of graywater from residents and businesses as well as planning for rain events and planning how to utilize stormwater. The 606 Studio planned for wastewater treatment methods, the installation of bioswales, and groundwater recharge, utilizing measurable water management techniques.

Stormwater Management With groundwater as the primary source of water in Fresno (City of Fresno, 2017b), effective stormwater management can improve water management in the TCC area. Capturing stormwater onsite through the use of rain gardens or rain barrels can aid in better management of surface water instead of pumping more groundwater.

Opportunity to capture and reuse

190

Graywater recycling is a method that can improve water management. By reusing water from sinks, showers, and washing machines, residents and businesses can use graywater recycling to reduce the need to pump or convey more groundwater, a problem Fresno faces (See Chapter 2.2). With the average residential water use in Fresno at 83.8 gallons per person (KPCC, 2017), there are opportunities for better management of graywater. In addition, graywater can be stored and reused to water plants, thus contributing to better urban greening.

Groundwater Recharge Groundwater can be recharged in a few ways. First, by capturing water onsite, water can permeate and infiltrate into the underground wells, filling the depleted groundwater resources. Second, water from catch basins and storm drains can be diverted into areas of water retention, allowing water to further percolate from and infiltrate the soil. Both options improve water management, but also reduce ambient temperature as water evaporates while it infiltrates the soil.

Potential Bioswales in Open Spaces

Groundwater Recharge through water capture

6.3

Greening

Bioswale Installation

Creating greenspace in the most needed locations addresses a variety of concerns. Greening involves the ecological aspects that connect natural systems with human-made systems. Integrating greening with systems like circulation and water provides the maximum benefit for people and the environment.

The use of bioswales accomplishes a variety of goals. First, they allow vegetation to grow, increasing greenspace and contributing to native wildlife. In addition, by keeping water onsite, bioswales reduce temperature, since the evaporation rate is higher than on impermeable surfaces (Li, Harvey, Holland, & Kayhanian, 2013). Finally, they improve water management, allowing water that falls from the sky and comes from gutters to remain onsite, permeating through the soil.

Planting Trees First and foremost, planting trees increases greenspace, a criterion much needed in the TCC area. Trees also provide shade and evaporation, creating a microclimate that decreases ambient temperature. Planting trees allows for better infiltration of water as well as a buffer from air pollution and traffic. As discussed in Chapter 4, trees sequester carbon from the surrounding environment, thus mitigating the localized presence of CO2 and other air pollutants. This reduces the GHGs that increase temperature. When planted to shade bike lanes and pedestrian infrastructure, trees can also increase connectivity by acting as green corridors.

Opportunity to Plant Trees in open fields for mitigation

Conclusion The criteria developed in this section (Reduce Ambient Temperature, Improve Air Quality, Increase Greenspace, Increase Connectivity, Improve Water Management) aided the 606 Studio in developing strategies that address the issues from Chapter 6.2. These strategies (Circulation, Water Management, and Greening) consisted of elements and functions that fulfilled the criteria. The next section will explain how and where the strategies were incorporated into a vision plan to address the challenges in the TCC area.

Greening Buffers can help people mitigate and adapt

Greening Freeways can help people mitigate and adapt

191

6.4

606/TCC Vision Plan The 606 Studio aimed to use landscape planning process to develop a strategic vision plan to deal with climate change-related environmental and social issues in the TCC area. The 606/TCC Vision Plan addresses the issues as identified in Chapter 6.2 by incorporating landscape strategies from Chapter 6.3 into the optimum locations of the TCC area. The vision plan also explains how typologies as groupings of landscape elements and functions can provide mitigation, adaptation, or co-benefits to communities in the TCC area. the vision plan includes three major landscape networks: circulation, water management, and greening (See Map 6.10: Vision Plan Diagram).

192

Map 6.10: Vision Plan Diagram

180

Pedestrian Bike Way Main Street Proposed Water Infrastructure Existing Waterbody Potential Greenspace Schools Existing Greenspace

Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 193

6.4

Circulation Network As mentioned in Chapter 6.2, there area two main issues related to the current transportation system. First, the disconnected urban zones caused by the 99 freeway and high-speed rail separates the whole TCC area into three pieces: Downtown, Chinatown, and Southwest Fresno. Second, as discussed in Chapter 3.2, the transportation sector produces a large amount of GHG emissions, which urgently needs to be addressed. An optimized circulation system (See Map 6.11: Vision Plan Circulation) proposed by 606 Studio addresses these issues above, and provides extra protective benefits for public health. The proposed circulation system consists of main streets for auto vehicle use, as well as bike lanes and pedestrian circulation for active transportation. Since the main streets contain the highest traffic volume, they directly unite Downtown, Chinatown, and Southwest through the existing circulation network. The vision plan proposed to greatly improves these major connecting spines to accommodate all modes of transportation and improve its environmental quality. The bike lane system was developed by building upon the existing network. The 606 Studio first incorporated bike lanes where there were gaps in the network to make biking more user-friendly. The goal for pedestrian circulation was to connect people to points of interest (See Map 6.9) and help residents reach these destinations. Overall, all these three aspects work together to realize the dynamic connection not only among zones but also within each zone. Additionally, the circulation strategy encourages the use of active transportation methods, which reduces GHG emissions (See Figure 5.1). Also, combining metric typologies of water management and greening, vulnerable communities can achieve adaptation and co-benefits to deal with climate change in the transportation. For example, vegetated buffers along street could absorb GHG, provide shade for pedestrians and bikers, prevent air pollutants from transportation, and contribute to stormwater capture.

194

Map 6.11: Vision Plan - Circulation

180

Pedestrian Bike Way Main Street Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 195

6.4

Water Management Network Chapter 6.2 described the major environmental issues within the TCC area based on the analysis of the 606 Studio. The issues within the site involve drought, poor water management, and high temperatures. The water management network addresses these issues in the TCC area (See Figure 6.12: Vision Plan Water Management). The network utilizes two methods to improve water management within the TCC area: stormwater management and groundwater recharge. Streets like California Ave. and W. Kearney Blvd. were ideal locations to implement best management practices like stormwater management because the flow of water converged on these streets (See Map 6.3). The blue lines depicted in Map 6.11 illustrate the avenues ideal for stormwater management methods like bioswales. By keeping stormwater on these sites, bioswales help reduce the ambient temperature through evaporation and increase greenspace. Since the flow of the water moves from northeast to the southwest, the most ideal locations for groundwater recharge are in the southwest parts of the TCC area (See Map 6.3). These areas of groundwater recharge are depicted as blue polygons and are potential infiltration basins. Capturing and infiltrating water reduces the need for over-pumping groundwater or importing water from elsewhere. In addition to addressing the criteria, the water management network encourages the use of typologies, as discussed in Chapters 5.2. These typologies discussed further in Chapter 6.5, show how stormwater and graywater recycling can mitigate GHGs in different urban contexts. Furthermore, water management helps vulnerable communities adapt to climate impacts by reducing the ambient temperature through stormwater management.

196

Map 6.12: Vision Plan - Water Management

180

Proposed Water Infrastructure Existing Waterbody Railroad Project BD Project Street

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 197

6.4

Greening Network The analysis in Chapter 6.2 uncovered issues within the TCC area such as poor air quality, park poverty, increased temperature, and vulnerable communities. in addition, as discussed in chapter 3.2, the area contains a large amount of GHG emissions from a range of sources. In order to address these issues, the 606 Studio developed a greening network to reduce the ambient temperature, improve air quality, increase inadequate greening, increase connectivity, and improve water management. Map 6.13: Vision Plan Green Space shows the existing green space, schools, and potential green spaces. The areas for potential greening consist of current vacant lots and underutilized spaces. The locations of vulnerable communities (See Map 6.6), points of interest (See Map 6.9), and the hottest areas (See map 6.4) were also used in developing what areas needed shade. Residents who live nearby and desire a quick walk to the grocery store need to be assured that their pedestrian experience is safe from the heat and air pollution. Green corridors, adjacent to Highway 99 and the High Speed Rail, fulfill a few criteria. First, they increase the greening that is extremely lacking in the TCC area. Second, they are designed to prevent air pollution brought by the wind (See Figure 2.7) from impacting vulnerable communities. They also reduce ambient temperatures, preventing heat generated by transportation to impact the local surroundings. These patches of existing and potential greening as well as connected green corridors create an integrated, greening network. Another element of the greening network is a bioswales which, in conjunction with the water management network, serves to improve water management. These bioswales, located at the base of the green corridors, reduce ambient temperatures and create connectivity to other green spaces. In addition to addressing the issues presented in Chapter 6.2, the greening network uses the typologies developed in Chapter 5.3 to mitigate GHGs through carbon sequestration (discussed in more detail in Chapter 6.5). The greening network also provides 198

a microclimate that helps vulnerable communities adapt to the heat of climate change.

Conclusion These well-connected networks of circulation, water management and greening synergistically work together to form an ideal vision plan for the TCC area (See Map 6.14: Rendered Vision Plan). Informed by the analysis of the TCC area, the vision plan addresses the needs of the communities in order to 1) reduce ambient temperature, 2) improve air quality, 3) increase greenspace, 4) increase connectivity and 5) improve water management. While it is apparent that specific projects and locations will be funded, the 606 Studioâ€™s vision is a recommendation on the most suitable locations for specific strategies. The next section will discuss the different Urban Contexts, which quantify the effectiveness of the proposed strategies within the different contexts of the TCC area.

Map 6.13: Vision Plan - Greening

180

Potential Greenspace Schools Existing Greenspace Railroad Site Projects Street Projects

0.25

0.5

1 Mile 199

200

201

0.5

2 Mile

Map 6.14: Rendered Vision Plan

6.5

Urban Contexts Chapter 5 discussed Metric Typologies that contain metric units for measuring the average impact of landscape elements and functions within a site. The 606 Studio applied these Metric Typologies into various zones of urban neighborhoods in the TCC area. These Urban Zones include Downtown, Mixed-use, and Residential Contexts. Because of the uniqueness of each zone, each context has a different implementation and measurement of the elements and functions from the Metric Typologies. Within Fresno, the Urban Contexts generally applies to the Downtown, Chinatown, and Southwest zones, respectively. The Urban Contexts are primarily used in this book as a way to measure the mitigation, explain adaptation, and describe co-benefits of the typologies within Fresnoâ€™s TCC area. Mitigation of elements and functions were measured using the equations from Chapter 5. Within each context, a table provides the GHG emission reductions from specific elements and functions. Each Urban Context also describes the adaptations and co-benefits of elements and functions within the typologies. Designers and planners can use Urban Contexts in other cities to assess the efficacy and cost of their own designs. In addition, cities can also use Urban Contexts to assess the potential GHG reductions of different land use projects, thus complying with state mitigation requirements and securing funding for disadvantaged communities.

202

Downtown (Downtown Fresno) Context In zones like Downtown Fresno, there is a high density of local businesses, offices, and high-end, multi-family residential buildings. Transportation hubs exist in the downtown area such as the bus and train stations, as well as public spaces like urban plazas and parks. The Downtown Context was developed to address the uniqueness of this downtown area (See Figure 6.2: Downtown Context).

Transportation Typology Table 6.3: Mitigation of Downtown Context shows the GHG emissions reduction from incorporating the Transportation Typology (bike lanes, bus stops, and pedestrian sidewalks) within the Downtown Context. These numbers are result of a calculations based on the 100feet unit of measurement described in Chapter 5.1. The Transportation Typology in downtown zones provides adaptive and co-benefits which connect bicycle infrastructure to bus depots, ensuring smooth transition from pedestrian-tobike or from bike-to-bus. With the future of the High Speed Rail, the connection to train will be even more essential. The implementation of cool pavements reduces the UHI from buildings and surrounding pavement. The Downtown context shows the accessibility for pedestrians, allowing them to easily move around in highly-populated areas.

6.5

Water Management Typology The Water Management Typology in downtown zones has the potential to utilize graywater from local businesses, reducing the amount of water needed from offsite. Table 6.3 shows the amount of GHG emission reductions from using stormwater collection, graywater recycling, and water infiltration. Water Management within the Downtown Context can also provide adaption and co-benefits to users, residents, and visitors. By capturing the stormwater onsite, evaporative cooling reduces UHI, helping people adapt in hot weather. Also, businesses that recycle graywater reduce the need to use other water sources, thus providing co-benefits through cost savings.

Greening Typology The Greening Typology can be applied to the Downtown Context by reducing GHG emissions through carbon sequestration. Table 6.3 describes the mitigative benefits from planting trees. Planting trees provides shade and reduces the need for electricity-produced

Table 6.3

cooling. This adaptive feature also produces a cobenefit for business owners in the form of savings on cooling costs. Planting trees also absorbs air pollutants from local transportation and industry, protecting pedestrians from the poor air quality.

Conclusion Within the Downtown Context, different typologies are applied to provided mitigative benefits. Figure 6.2 represents a city block within downtown zone, and the visible elements and functions are calculated. By using Transportation Typologies (bike lanes, bus stops, and pedestrian infrastructure), Water Typologies (stormwater collection and recycled water), and Greening Typologies (tree planting), the total mitigation of the Downtown context is 1,097,544.43 gCO2 /year (See Table 6.3).

Mitigation of Downtown Context

Typology

Equation

Input

Output (gCO2/yr)

Stormwater collection

GHGEMSSIONS x SWA

34.7 x 13,154.40

456,457.68

GHGEMSSIONS x GWAOCCUPANTS

34.7 x 15,000

520,500

GHGEMSSIONS x AQ

34.7 x 123.10

4,271.57

3,750,375 - 584,000

3,166,375

Graywater recycling (15 restrooms) Water Infiltration Bus Stop

GHGDISPLACED AUTOS - GHGNEWEXPANDED SERVICE VEHICLE

Bike lane (200')

BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION x AVEF x UL

152 x 411 x 1

62,472

Pedestrian Path (400')

BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION x AVEF x UL

304 x 411 x 1

124,944

GHGsequestration x Trees

18,143 x 17

308,431

Trees

203

Figure 6.2 Downtown Typology

Downtown Context Stormwater Collection

Graywater Recycling

Bike Lane

Bus Stops

Pedestrian Path

Trees

Water 4,643,451.25 gCO2 reduced

1 Bus Stop 3,166,375 g CO2

15 restrooms Graywater Recycling

520,500 g CO2

400’ Pedestrian Path 124,944 g CO2

71.77 ft 3 Water

7,699.13 ft Stormwater Collection 456,457.68 g CO2

4,271.57 g CO2

200’ Bike Lane 62,472 g CO2

17 Trees 308,431 g CO2

204

6.5

Mixed-Use (Chinatown) Context Mixed-use zones, such as Chinatown, differ from downtown zones in that they contain shopping centers and commercial businesses. Access to public transportation and shaded pedestrian walkways is essential, especially for the elderly who may not drive cars. For those who do drive, they often travel by car to mixed-use zones and park in parking lots. Designers and builders can utilize the Mixed-Use Context to focus on the unique aspects mixed-use zones such as the availability of open spaces, parking lots, and a busy public transportation center (See Figure 6.3: Mixed-Use Context).

Transportation Typology In the Mixed-Use Context, The Transportation Typology, which utilizes bike shares, bus stops, electric vehicles, and pedestrian infrastructure can help mitigate GHG emissions. Table 6.4: Mitigation of Mixed-use Context Illustrates the mitigation of the Transportation Typology within the Mixed-use Context. The Transportation Typology also provides efficient circulation in and between the zones, while

Table 6.4

helping residents adapt to the impacts of climate change and provide co-benefits. Using public transportation and electric cars reduces the exposure to air pollutants and improves local air quality. Also, biking and walking reduces fuel costs for residents.

Water Management Typology The Water Management Typology can be applied in mixed-use zones by using functions like stormwater management and groundwater infiltration. Bioswales are ideal in mixed-use zones because they are adjacent to streets and pedestrian sidewalks. Bioswales can also provide aesthetic curb appeal. Table 6.4 calculates the mitigation from stormwater collection and groundwater infiltration. In addition to the mitigative benefits, the Water Management Typology within the Mixed-use Context provides adaptive benefits such as reducing the ambient temperature through evaporation. Also, residents can reuse stormwater and save on water costs.

Mitigation of Mixed-Use Context

Typology

Equation

Input

Output (gCO2/yr)

Stormwater collection

GHGEMSSIONS x SWA

34.7 x 11,893.46

412,703.06

GHGEMSSIONS x AQ

34.7 x 557.32

19,339.00

Water Infiltration

3,750,375 - 584,000

3,166,375

Bus Stop

GHGDISPLACED AUTOS - GHGNEWEXPANDED SERVICE VEHICLE

Bikeshare Electric Vehical Charging Station

BSAUTO VMT REDUCTION x AVEF x UL x bikeshares 328.5 x 411 x 3

405,040.5

(411 â€“ 80) x (114) x (365) x (6)

82,637,460

Pedestrian Path (400') Trees Wood Burial

(ERCV â€“ EREV) x (MPC) x (D) x (S) BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION x AVEF x UL

304 x 411 x 1

124,944

GHGsequestration x Trees

18,143 x 13

235,859

(m)(tCwood) rd

(3,120)(.0762) 5

47,548,800 205

Figure 6.3 Commercial Typology

Mixed-Use Context Stormwater Collection

EV Charging Station

Bike Share

Bus Stop

Pedestrian Path

Trees

Water Wood Burial

134,550,520.56 gCO2/yr reduced

1 Bus Stop 3

11,893.46 ft Stormwater Collection 412,703.06 g CO 2

3,166,375 g CO 2 400â€™ Pedestrian path 124,944 g CO 2

13 Trees

3 Bike Share

235,859 g CO 2

405,040.5 g CO 2

6 EV Charging Station

557.32 ft 3 Water

82,637,460 g CO 2

19,339.00 g CO 2

13 Wood Burial 47,548,800 g CO 2

206

6.5

Greening Typology

Residential (Southwest Fresno) Context

The Greening Typology provides mitigation through carbon sequestration of trees. Table 6.4 shows the mitigative benefits from the trees within the Mixed-use Context. Although bioswales are composed of plants and can provide mitigation, the details are shown under water infiltration. The Greening Typology in the Mixeduse context provides shading for bikers, pedestrians, and those waiting at bus stops. Greening also improves local air quality, providing adaptive benefits to residents within the Mixed-use Context.

Residential zones consist of low to high density homes, and in the TCC area, Southwest Fresno is the most common residential zone. With residential zones utilizing 83 gallons/day/person and increasing the use of electricity, these areas have very different opportunities to deal with GHG emissions. Residents can take charge of their own responsibility, taking small but significant steps to fight climate change (See Figure 6.4: Residential Context).

Soil Typology

Transportation Typology

The Soil Typology within the Mixed-use Context shows the mitigation of GHG emissions from wood burial (See Table 6.4). Although other forms of mitigation such as soil sequestration and constructed wetlands are possible, they were not feasible to apply to the Mixed-use context. Designers can use soil samples and formulas from Chapters 4 and 5 to determine the mitigation from soil sequestration.

The Transportation Typology can be applied to residential zones by using bike lanes, bus stops, and pedestrian infrastructure. As mentioned in chapter 4.1, properly located bike shares can affect the success of bike lanes. Also, Elements like public transportation can also be utilized in residential zones, further connecting circulation and reducing VMTs. In the Residential Context the GHG emission reductions are shown in Table 6.5: Mitigation of Residential Context. Within the Residential Context, the Transportation Typology allows for an interconnected circulation network that integrates pedestrian circulation, bus stops, and bike lanes. Using these forms of transportation instead personal vehicles also provides cost savings, especially when there is an interconnected network.

Conclusion Within the Mixed-Use Context, different typologies are applied that provided mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits. Figure 6.3 represents a city block within mixed-use zone, and the visible elements and functions are calculated. By using Transportation Typologies (bikeshares, bus stops, electric vehicles, and pedestrian infrastructure), Water Typologies (stormwater collection and groundwater infiltration), Greening Typologies (tree planting), and Soil Typologies (wood burial), the total mitigation of the Mixed-use context is 130,674,008.15 gCO2/year. Although not all typologies were depicted within Figure 6.3, Typologies like Soil and Waste Diversion can be used by future designers and planners.

Water Management Typology The Water Management Typology can be used in residential zones in a variety of ways. Residents can make their yards and lawns rain gardens, capturing stormwater onsite and keeping it for water infiltration and evaporative cooling. Another

207

6.5

opportunity in these areas is to use graywater on alkaline-tolerant plants, allowing landscape architects design yards suitable for graywater. The mitigation form the Water Management Typology is shown in Table 6.5. The Water Management Typology within the Residential context also provides adaptation and cobenefits to residents. By capturing stormwater on their properties or reusing graywater, residents can reuse water and save on water costs. Also, rain gardens provide a cooling effect, thus helping residents adapt to the high temperatures.

Greening Typology

Soil Typology

Conclusion

The Residential Context uses wood burial, a function from the Soil Typology. By burying wood on their properties instead of burning or shredding removed tree material, residents can reduce the GHG emissions from the decomposition of wood. The Soil Typology can also be used by residents to keep soil moist, which reduces the ambient temperature. While constructed wetlands are not possible on this Residential Context, some rural areas, such as those in Southwest Fresno are suited to implement constructed wetlands.

Table 6.5 Typology

Within the Residential Context, different typologies can applied that provide mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits. Figure 6.4 represents a city block within a residential zone and the calculated elements and functions. By using Transportation Typologies (bike lanes, bus stops, and pedestrian infrastructure), Water Typologies (stormwater collection, graywater recycling, and groundwater infiltration), Greening Typologies (tree planting), and Soil Typologies (wood burial), the total mitigation of the Mixed-use Context is 48,054,487.92 gCO2 /year.

Mitigation of Residential Context Equation

Input

Output (gCO2/yr)

GHGEMSSIONS x SWA

34.7 x 12,280.29

426,126.06

GHGEMSSIONS x GWAOCCUPANTS

34.7 x 375

13,012.5

GHGEMSSIONS x AQ

34.7 x 1,333.61

46,276.27

GHGDISPLACED AUTOS - GHGNEWEXPANDED SERVICE VEHICLE

3,750,375 - 584,000

3,166,375

Bike lane (200')

BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION x AVEF x UL

152 x 411 x 1

62,472

Pedestrian Path (400')

BLAUTO VMT REDUCTION x AVEF x UL

304 x 411

Stormwater collection Graywater recycling (5 houses) Water Infiltration Bus Stop

Trees Wood Burial 208

The Greening Typology is also very feasible in residential zones. By using carbon sequestration from planting trees, the Residential Context contributes to GHG mitigation (See Table 6.5). Greening also provides adaptation and co-benefits to residents. One possible use of greening is by using trees to shade a home, thus reducing cooling costs. Also, trees filter the air pollutants from nearby sources, thus protecting residents from air pollution.

124,944

GHGsequestration x number of Trees

18,143 x 11

199,573

(m)(tCwood) rd

(3,120)(.0762) 5

47,548,800

Figure 6.4 Residential Typology

Residential Context Stormwater Collection

Graywater Recycling

Bike Lane

Bus Stops

Pedestrian Path

Trees

Water Wood Burial

51,587,578.83 gCO2/yr reduced

1 Bus Stops 5 Houses Graywater Recycling 13,012.5 g CO 2

11 Wood Burial 47,548,800 g CO 2

11 Trees

3,166,375 g CO 2

400’ Pedestrian Path 124,944 g CO 2

199,573 g CO 2 12,280.29 ft 3 Stormwater Collection 426,126,06 g CO 2

200’ Bike Lane 62,472 g CO 2 1,333.61 ft Water

46,276.27 g CO 2

209

6.6

Conclusion The vision plan and Urban Contexts offer different solutions for professionals who are interested in addressing climate changes issues through design. The vision plan provides an interconnected network that utilizes the landscape strategies in a way that most benefit those who are disadvantaged. The Downtown, Mixed-use, and Residential Contexts explain situations in which the Metric Typologies would apply. Downtown, mixed-use, and residential Zones differ with regards to the benefit they provide the community. Each offers a different context in which different typologies can be maximized. Focusing on Transportation, Water Management, Greening, Soil, and Waste Diversion Typologies, designers can incorporate strategies into the various land uses contexts of cities. Although some elements and functions were not able to be portrayed within the Urban Contexts, the Downtown, Mixed-use, and Residential Contexts provide an example of how the Metric Typologies can be applied to different contexts to provide mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits for disadvantaged communities. By utilizing Urban Contexts, designers can quantify their contribution to mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits brought by their planning and design solutions. These tools provide a framework with which future planners and policy-makers can expound on, making communities strong in the face of climate change. The checklist will act as a guide for deciding which element or function would be most useful (See Table 6.5: Checklist of Metrics).

210

6.6

Table 6.3

Checklist of Metrics MITIGATION

Transportation GHG

Reduction

ADAPTATION Temperature Reduction

CO-BENEFITS Air Quality Improvement

Economic Public Ecology Health

Electric Vehicles Bus Stops Bike Lanes/ Bike Shares Cool Pavements Carpooling/ Vanpooling

Water Management

Water-energy Saving

Drought Ground Water Temperature Water Quality Economic Public Ecology Adaptation Recharge Decrease Improvement Health

Stormwater Collection Graywater Recycling Water Infiltration

Greening

Carbon Sequestration

Temperature Decrease

Air Quality Improvement

Economic Public Ecology Health

Trees Other Vegetations

Soil Management

Carbon Sequestration

Temperature Decrease

Economic Public Ecology Health

Constructed Wetland Recycled Soil Wood Burial Soil Cooling

Waste Diversion

Carbon Sequestration

Economic Public Ecology Health

Recycling Bins Recycled Materials 211

FOR MOVING 07 DISCUSSION FORWARD 7.1 Lessons Learned

7.2 Recommendations

213

7.1

Lessons Learned The 606 Studio worked on a project that dealt with regional and local issues brought about by climate change, one of the topics at the forefront of society. It researched the literature and precedent cases and developed new methods of measuring the effectiveness of land use and landscape design strategies regarding climate change, which are new and unfamiliar to many planners, designers, and decision-makers. While working on this project, the studio faced challenges and obstacles that caused it to revise and readdress concepts. Throughout the development of the project, the studio documented the challenges and lessons learned associated with the project to help those interested in similar efforts to avoid the same problems. This year's 606 studio focused on developing a measurable metrics system and landscape design typologies and strategies for communities affected by issues of climate change. The lessons learned by the studio were categorized into various categories, such as inventory and analysis and the design process.

606 Team set up the project context visually for further development

214

Inventory and Analysis Literature Reviews As the 606 Studio began to research climate change, the history of Fresno, and its current conditions, it conducted a literature review that covered the most important topics. Towards the beginning of the project, the studio researched anything and everything related to the project, sifting essential information from less important information. While at times this process involved developing material that was not used in the final product, the studio learned that a thorough exploration of topics helps to create a more comprehensive picture. While not all information was relevant to the project, the literature review helped to narrow the scope of the project and made for a more compelling argument. The studio also found that there was a lack of existing literature on measurable metrics for addressing the causes and impacts of climate change. While some research provides tools to measure mitigation, such as the carbon sequestration of trees, the research lacked

7.1

a consistent standard and measurement regarding landscape design strategies. Although CARB provided some measurements for strategies, the studio found that accessing and using the system would prove challenging, especially for designers and uneducated persons.

Case Studies Before the studio began providing solutions and strategies, it collected relevant case studies that addressed the topics covered in Measurable Change. Whether the case studies covered alternate forms of transportation, temperature-reducing paving materials, or rooftop gardens, the studio collected ideas and stored them as potential tools to be applied to the project. These case studies (See Appendix B) helped the studio learn what ideas have worked in the past. However, a more comprehensive examination of relevant case studies would have most likely helped the studio make more evidence-based claims.

Regional inventory Regional inventory that involved Fresno was substantially valuable to improve the context of the project. However, acquiring GIS data from various sources was painstaking, since the city of Fresno had limited resources to offer the team. The inventory produced by the 606 Studio provided a strong defense and rationale for the project. The studio used data sources like EnviroScreen3.0 Data, which was helpful on a large-scale, and used Census Tract data. However, since the TCC area had a more local than regional scale, the studio had to utilize more precise data such as block group and census block data from the city of Fresno and other local sources. Understanding the different scales of data helped the studio to make more accurate decisions. In addition, the studio found that there was a substantial amount of data already conducted on similar topics. This data aided the studio and prevented unnecessary work from being conducted. In some areas, the studio did not thoroughly examine the existing data but created its own data, thus increasing the time spent on the project. The studio learned that conducting proper literature reviews is essential to an efficient workflow.

Site Inventory Since the TCC project area boundary was selected prior to the 606 Studio’s involvement, the studio was able to focus on those specific parameters for design. While there may have been other areas in Fresno equally as disadvantaged as the TCC area, the 606 Studio had to work within the boundary and create a case for why the boundary should have been chosen. The lesson learned from this aspect of the project was that decisions are often made politically, and designers must work within the scope offered to them. In addition to the politics surrounding the project, the studio was faced with the challenge of accessing sufficient data for a thorough site analysis. Although some cities provide a vast amount of data regarding their own city, there was a dearth of relevant data for the studio to analyze and utilize. Much of the data was general and, within the time of the project, the studio was only able to acquire a limited amount of site-specific data.

Terminology One of the more confusing aspects of this project was developing terminology that the entire team could agree on. From the research conducted, some sources used terms differently than other sources, creating confusion for studio members. The studio had to decide on terms, define them clearly, and use them consistently throughout the project. For example, CARB used the term “indicators” to describe the tools for measuring elements and functions. This term is misleading because the tools do not indicate, but rather measure. For this reason, the 606 Studio termed these tools, “metrics.” The studio also developed a glossary to provide definitions of ambiguous terms.

Project Scope Toward the beginning of the project, the 606 Studio developed goals, objectives, and criteria that guided the process and direction. Although the focus of the project was on climate change, developing a clear direction for the project was challenging and was modified over time. The team learned that 215

7.1

acquiring information highly depended on the scope of the project; making the scope clear at the beginning would prevent wasting unnecessary resources on researching other areas. However, the studio also learned that acquiring information that could be relevant was important, even if not immediately useful. Deciding what information was relevant to the scope was a delicate process, and the studio often refined its goals and objectives to refocus the project.

Community Outreach and Interviews The team met informally with some of the residents of Fresno, gaining insight on the personality of the city. While the information gathered was merely qualitative, the studio learned that these anecdotal stories did provide opinions and examples that fueled the narrative. Since the 606 Studio was not able to secure funding for the project, trips to Fresno were limited, severely limiting the opportunities to interact with the community. The studio had to make decisions from an outside perspective, limiting its confidence in implementing effective strategies that would help the community. Although funding was limited, the studio could have spent some time building relationships and staying in contact with these sources. The studio learned that emails and phone calls are valuable resources when travel is limited.

Working with Local Agencies and Organizations City Agencies While there were few opportunities to interact with the city of Fresno, those opportunities provided the team with insights into the motivations and goals of the city. The city attempted to include the studio in the TCC process, but the city members still seemed unclear on how to involve the Studio. There was a verbal claim to fund the studio, but no official contract was developed. These uncertainties could have been better resolved earlier in the process to help identify the role of the 606 Studio in the process of the TCC initiative. Another lesson learned from this experience was the importance of clarifying what the studio is capable of and how much it has the potential to help cities and other organizations. 216

Landscape Architecture Firms The 606 Studio met with a design firm that was working on one of the TCC projects in Fresno. Intending on helping to provide data to support the design for this firm, the studio presented research and metrics. Although the studio provided a solid defense of the metric measurements, it neglected to adequately address the human component of the project. The design firm expressed the desire to see statistics and pictures of affected populations. This opportunity helped the studio understand the various audiences involved in projects and how to adapt to address different perspectives. The studio could have involved designers and professionals in all stages of the project in order to ensure that the concerns of all parties were addressed. This lesson also applied to the studio's interaction with the community because some residents have different needs and motivations than design firms or city governments.

Design Process Graphic Development The design process involved the entire 606 Studio overlaying maps and tracing them out to find out common themes and areas of interest. This process was iterative and taught that the research informed what areas would be in focus. For instance, the literature review, which discussed the urban heat island, needed to be overlaid with the temperature map and the vulnerable communities map to find out the hottest land temperature that would affect the most people. These methods were most appropriate with a rational and logical flow to them.

Team Dynamics From the start of the project, there were various aspects of the team dynamic that had to be addressed. Each of the six members in the group came from a different social and cultural background. This aspect brought challenges, such as language barriers and cultural expectations. For some, the design was more important, but for others, representation and implementation were of the utmost importance. Even though these issues were evident, the studio was able to work as a team and

7.1

contribute these unique perspectives to the project as a whole. The studio took personality assessments; results helped each member to understand one another better. More team-building activities that involved trust and communication could have helped the team focus on important topics instead of being distracted by the minor issues. Another lesson the studio learned regarding team dynamics was how to best spend time interacting with faculty and other studio members. Over the course of the project, there were a number of times studio members discussed issues with faculty. While these challenges were real at times, the complaints and issues detracted from completing the project. Some complaints took time away from the ability for faculty to provide helpful comments on the project. Over time, the studio learned to choose which issues were worth debating and which issues members could compromise on. However, many times, the studio could have better spent its time focusing on what was essential rather than debating minor issues that were not essential to the scope of the project.

Design Purpose The design process involved synthesizing vast amounts of data digitally and manually, focusing on relevant material to be used in the design. Unlike some designs which focus mainly on the aesthetics of a project, the 606 Studio was constantly confronted with the purpose of the design: Develop measurable landscape strategies to help disadvantaged communities that face the effects of climate change. While there were many directions that could have stemmed from the original goal, the studio learned to keep the focus of the project at the forefront, only designing elements that advanced the purpose of the project.

Developing design principles based on research and site visits

606 Team interviewing community event leader for information

217

7.1

Measurable Metrics Although taking on the task of quantifying strategies was the purpose of the project, the studio was overwhelmed with the amount of existing information on the topics researched. Some strategies were able to be measured within the time allotted to the studio, while others would have needed much more time to adequately quantify. The studio had to decide which topics were possible to pursue, qualifying in the book the inability to address everything. Chapter 5 was particularly challenging for the studio. This chapter focused on using standard averages to find metric units. Within the time available the studio found averages for each element and function within each typology. Finding the most accurate quantities was challenging and many assumptions had to be made. While the purpose of

606 Team meeting with City of Fresno Officials

218

the metric units was to give designers a starting point when designing, acquiring the most accurate information requires inputting accurate, site-specific data into the formulas from Chapter 4.

Concept Cohesion Toward the end of the project, the studio found areas within the book that lacked coherence and connection. While each chapter fulfilled an individual purpose, each was also part of a complete idea that needed to address the overarching goals and objectives. For instance, the ideas of metrics, typologies, and designs involved different methods and data, but they all had to fulfill a role within the book as a whole. The studio made every effort to connect concepts from different chapters to make this complex content comprehensible.

7.2

Recommendations Policy-Makers Implement ordinances that designers must follow to better plan for climate change impacts The 606 Studio developed typologies that can provide measurements for mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits. An approach to design that other cities have chosen is to create landscape and building ordinances that designers must abide by to receive approval. These ordinances can be based on the metrics that can calculate GHG emission reductions, ensuring that design projects meet a standard of GHG emission reductions.

Utilize methods like rent-control to prevent gentrification in development areas One potential downfall with the implementation of the TCC projects is the potential to attract people from outside of Fresno. Often, the influx of outsiders increases property values, gentrifying the existing residents and destroying the culture. Gentrification-prevention methods such as rent control and land trusts can help poorer residents avoid the rising costs associated with development.

Implement Land Trusts instead of Land Banks One problem with the current state of Fresno is the buildings in Downtown Fresno that are owned but appear abandoned. These buildings have been bought by owners, with the purpose of developing once property costs rise. However, during this time, the downtown is filled with abandoned buildings, and developers refuse to initiate development. In addition to preventing this kind of practice, policy-makers can encourage land trusts, providing incentives for NGOs to develop land that benefits the existing community.

Improve and Enforce the Utilization Metrics for Designing Landscapes that Provide Mitigation, Adaptation, or Co-benefits While the measurement system discussed in this book provides a defense for evidencebased design, it can be improved upon to make it easier for designers to readily apply metrics to their designs. As policy-makers, city and state governments can promote and enforce the use of metrics in designs. For example, after the California drought in 2017, the city of Los Angeles required that landscape designs could only be approved if the design complied with the Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA). MAWA limits the amount of water that can be applied to a landscape based on its size. Similar to the way water has been regulated in California, policy-makers can enforce strict conformity to a system that ensures that landscape designs provide mitigation, adaptation, or co-benefits to a landscape.

Develop Funding Programs to Assist Businesses, Agencies, and Local Groups in Providing Mitigation, Adaptation, and Cobenefits Government subsidies can help encourage businesses and groups to participate in fighting climate change. Like cap and trade, which penalizes those who pollute more and helps those who pollute less, funding programs can assist these organizations in taking responsibility for their contribution to climate change. Also, developing programs that provide funding brings more awareness to climate change and fosters community participation

219

7.2

Local Businesses Be active in the community

Utilize methods such as parklets to utilize vacant space and encourage active transportation

Businesses have the potential to be members of the community, contributing to the culture and growth of other organizations. Some cities in southern California, such as Fullerton and Brea, have initiated citywide serve days in which communities and businesses partner together to meet needs of residents. This partnership allows culture to thrive and communities to connect with each other. As mentioned above, businesses can take ownership of their contribution to climate change and provide ways to help provide mitigation, adaptation, or co-benefits. For instance, businesses can create parklets outside their stores that provide seating and shade for pedestrians. This strategy that provides shade (i.e. adaptation) can be something that inspires other businesses to participate, fostering a sense of community. For parking spaces that use meters, cities can partner with businesses and allow them to use parking spaces for free if they provide parklets or other benefits.

Local businesses are often concerned with the provision of adequate parking for customers (Emerson, 2017). While parking may be one of the top concerns of business owners, other main concerns include a better mix of retail storefronts and attractive streetscapes (Wakefield Planning Board & Abacus Architects & Planners, 2004). Businesses can improve streetscapes and encourage pedestrian activity by way of storefront parkletsâ€” converted parking spots into spaces that often include outdoor seating and bike racks. While it might seem counterproductive to remove parking from a storefront, parklets encourage traffic for businesses, and often result in unplanned food or beverage purchases (Jaffe, 2014). City governments can provide incentives for businesses, encouraging local pedestrian and bike activity.

Local businesses and land owners along Fulton Corridor in Downtown

220

7.2

Landscape Architects Modify design typologies that can provide measurable outcomes for future designs Landscape architects have the potential to design spaces that improve the environment and promote healthy living. The metrics and typologies developed in Measurable Change can be tools utilized by designers to provide measurable outcomes that benefit clients. While clients may not be as concerned with GHG emissions, they may be motivated to incorporate these typologies because of their adaptation benefits (e.g. shade and air quality) and co-benefits (e.g. cost savings and health improvements).

Participate in community development initiatives when designing With the future development of the High-Speed Rail and TCC projects, communities in Fresno may face new changes that alter their environment. Many communities in Fresno are already disadvantaged, and the changes made need to be in the best interest of the residents. Landscape architects can work with these communities, ensuring that the input of residents is acquired and valued when making design decisions.

Improve urban environments for more than just vehicles by utilizes the Landscape Architects need to incorporate Community Culture

size in places like Fresno Street (entering Downtown from Chinatown)

221

08 REFERENCES 8.1 Glossary

8.2 Bibliography

223

8.1

Glossary A

Adaptation – “Adjustment or preparation of natural or human systems to a new or changing environment which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities” (US EPA, 2016).

Carbon Footprint -The total amount of greenhouse gases that are emitted into the atmosphere each year by a person, family, building, organization, or company. A person’s carbon footprint includes greenhouse gas emissions from fuel that an individual burn directly, such as by heating a home or riding in a car. It also includes greenhouse gases that come from producing the goods or services that the individual uses, including emissions from power plants that make electricity, factories that make products, and landfills where trash gets sent.

Albedo – “The amount of solar radiation reflected from an object or surface, often expressed as a percentage” (IPCC, 2014, p. 118). Anthropogenic – “Made by people or resulting from human activities. It is typically used in the context of emissions that are produced as a result of human activities” (NASA, 2018b). Atmosphere – The air surrounding the Earth, described as a series of shells or layers of different characteristics. The atmosphere, composed mainly of nitrogen and oxygen with traces of carbon dioxide, water vapor, and other gases, acts as a buffer between Earth and the sun (NASA, 2018b).

B Biomass – “Organic nonfossil material of biological origin. For example, trees and plants are biomass” (NASA, 2018b). Biodiversity – The totality of genes, species, and ecosystems in a region or the world (NASA, 2018b).

224

Canopy – The tree cover in urban setting, canopy size somehow determines the heat reduction in urban settings, it’s the areas surface cover. Cap and trade system – “A system that sets an overall emissions limit, allocates emissions allowances to participants, and allows them to trade emissions credits with each other” (US EPA, 2005). Carbon sequestration – “The uptake and storage of carbon. Trees and plants, for example, absorb carbon dioxide, release the oxygen and store the carbon. Fossil fuels were at one-time biomass and continue to store the carbon until burned” (NASA, 2018b). Carbon Dioxide - A naturally occurring gas, and also a by-product of burning fossil fuels and biomass, as well as land-

8.1

use changes and other industrial processes. It is the principal human caused greenhouse gas that affects the Earth's radiative balance. It is the reference gas against which other greenhouse gases are measured and therefore has a Global Warming Potential of 1 (US EPA, 2016). Carbon Tax - A charge on the carbon content of fossil fuels. California Air Resources Board - Also known as CARB, it’s a “clean air agency”. CARB's mission is to promote and protect public health, welfare, and ecological resources through effective reduction of air pollutants while recognizing and considering effects on the economy (CARB, 2017). Climate - Climate in a narrow sense is usually defined as the "average weather," or more rigorously, as the statistical description in terms of the mean and variability of relevant quantities over a period of time ranging from months to thousands of years (US EPA, 2016). Climate Change -Climate change refers to any significant change in the measures of climate lasting for an extended period of time. In other words, climate change includes major changes in temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns, among others, that occur over several decades or longer. Climate Variability – “Variations in the mean state of the climate on all spatial and temporal scales beyond that of individual weather events. Variability may be due to natural internal processes within the climate system (internal variability), or to variations in natural or anthropogenic external forcing (external variability)” (IPCC, 2014, p. 121). Co-Benefit – “The positive effects that a policy or measure aimed at one objective might have on other objectives. Co-benefits are often uncertain and depend on a number of circumstances and factors” (IPCC, 2014, p. 121).

Conventional Vehicle – “A type of light-duty vehicle with an internal combustion engine, typically either a gasoline-fueled spark ignition engine or a diesel-fueled compression ignition engine” (Exxon Mobil, 2018).

D Direct GHG Emissions – Deforestation – “Those practices or processes that result in the conversion of forested lands for non-forest uses.? Deforestation contributes to increasing carbon dioxide concentrations for two reasons: 1) the burning or decomposition of the wood releases carbon dioxide; and 2) trees that once removed carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in the process of photosynthesis are no longer present” (US EPA, 2016).

E Ecosystem – “Any natural unit or entity including living and non-living parts that interact to produce a stable system through cyclic exchange of materials” (NASA, 2018b). Emissions -The release of a substance (usually a gas when referring to the subject of climate change) into the atmosphere. Emissions Factor – A mode of scaling emissions to activity data in terms of a standard rate of emissions per unit of activity (e.g., grams of carbon dioxide emitted per barrel of fossil fuel consumed, or per pound of product produced). Enteric Fermentation – “Livestock, especially cattle, produce methane as part of their digestion. This process is called enteric fermentation, and it represents one third of the emissions from the agriculture sector” (US EPA, 2016). 225

8.1

Environment – “The complex of physical, chemical, and biological factors in which a living organism or community exists” (NASA, 2018b).

Global Warming – “The recent and ongoing global average increase in temperature near the Earth’s surface” (US EPA, 2016).

Evapotranspiration – “The combined process of evaporation from the Earth's surface and transpiration from vegetation” (US EPA, 2016).

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) – “Any gas that absorbs infrared radiation in the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases include, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone chlorofluorocarbon, hydrocarbon, perfluorocarbons, Sulphur hexafluoride” (US EPA, 2016).

F Fluorinated Gases – “Powerful synthetic greenhouse gases such as hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride that are emitted from a variety of industrial processes. These gases are emitted in small quantities compared to carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), or nitrous oxide (N2O), but because they are potent greenhouse gases, they are sometimes referred to as High Global Warming Potential gases” (US EPA, 2016). Forcing Mechanism – “A process that alters the energy balance of the climate system, i.e. changes the relative balance between incoming solar radiation and outgoing infrared radiation from Earth. Such mechanisms include changes in solar irradiance, volcanic eruptions, and enhancement of the natural greenhouse effect by emissions of greenhouse gases” (US EPA, 2016). Fossil Fuel – “A general term for organic materials formed from decayed plants and animals that have been converted to crude oil, coal, natural gas, or heavy oils by exposure to heat and pressure in the earth's crust over hundreds of millions of years” (US EPA, 2016). G GHG sink - Any physical unit or process that stores GHGs; usually refers to forests and underground/deep sea reservoirs of CO2 (US EPA, 2005, p. 83). 226

Greenhouse Effect – “Trapping and build-up of heat in the atmosphere (troposphere) near the Earth’s surface. Some of the heat flowing back toward space from the Earth's surface is absorbed by water vapor, carbon dioxide, ozone, and several other gases in the atmosphere and then reradiated back toward the Earth’s surface. If the atmospheric concentrations of these greenhouse gases rise, the average temperature of the lower atmosphere will gradually increase. See greenhouse gas, anthropogenic, climate, global warming” (US EPA, 2016).

H Heat Island – “An urban area characterized by temperatures higher than those of the surrounding non-urban area. As urban areas develop, buildings, roads, and other infrastructure replace open land and vegetation. These surfaces absorb more solar energy, which can create higher temperatures in urban areas” (US EPA, 2016). Heat stroke - occurs when the body's heat regulating mechanisms-including convection, sweating, and respiration-fail. The likelihood of heat stroke increases when air temperatures are higher than skin temperature, and when individuals are low on fluids. During a heat stroke, body temperatures can be raised to the

8.1

point at which brain damage and death can result unless cooling measures are quickly taken.

I Indirect Emissions – “Indirect emissions from a building, home or business are those emissions of greenhouse gases that occur as a result of the generation of electricity used in that building. These emissions are called "indirect" because the actual emissions occur at the power plant which generates the electricity, not at the building using the electricity” (US EPA, 2016). Intergovernmental Panel on climate Change (IPCC) - International body of climate change scientists. The role of the IPCC is to assess the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to the understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change (US EPA, 2005, p. 84)

J Joule. It’s a scientific unit of work or energy. The energy required to push with a force of one Newton for one meter.

L Low Birth weight - The term “low birthweight” (LBW) is typically used for any infant weighing less than 2,500 grams (5 pounds, 8 ounces) at birth (HHS-HSRA, 2015). Weight is a critical health measure because LBW children are more prone to death and disability than their counterparts (EPA,2017).

M Methane (CH4) – “A hydrocarbon that is a greenhouse gas with a global warming potential most recently estimated at 25 times that of carbon dioxide (CO2). Methane is produced through anaerobic (without oxygen) decomposition of waste in landfills, animal digestion, decomposition of animal wastes, production and distribution of natural gas and petroleum, coal production, and incomplete fossil fuel combustion” (US EPA, 2016). Metrics - The techniques of measurement of the impacts and its effects and how to improve the effects. Metric Ton – “Common international measurement for the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions. A metric ton is equal to 2205 lbs or 1.1 short tons” (US EPA, 2016). Metric Units - units of measurement that apply averages to metric formulas to be used as a starting points for planners developing projects that address climate change Mitigation – “Reducing climate change – involves reducing the flow of heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, either by reducing sources of these gases (for example, the burning of fossil fuels for electricity, heat or transport) or enhancing the “sinks” that accumulate and store these gases (such as the oceans, forests and soil). The goal of mitigation is to avoid significant human interference with the climate system, and “stabilize greenhouse gas levels in a timeframe sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner” (NASA, 2018a) Mobile Combustion - Burning of fuels by transportation devices such as cars, trucks, trains, airplanes, ships, etc. (US EPA, 2005). 227

8.1

Natural Gas – “Underground deposits of gases consisting of 50 to 90 percent methane (CH4) and small amounts of heavier gaseous hydrocarbon compounds such as propane (C3H8) and butane (C4H10)” (US EPA, 2016).

Ozone – “Ozone, the triatomic form of oxygen (O3), is a gaseous atmospheric constituent. In the troposphere, it is created by photochemical reactions involving gases resulting both from natural sources and from human activities (photochemical smog). In high concentrations, tropospheric ozone can be harmful to a wide range of living organisms. Tropospheric ozone acts as a greenhouse gas. In the stratosphere, ozone is created by the interaction between solar ultraviolet radiation and molecular oxygen (O2). Stratospheric ozone plays a decisive role in the stratospheric radiative balance. Depletion of stratospheric ozone, due to chemical reactions that may be enhanced by climate change, results in an increased ground-level flux of ultraviolet (UV-) B radiation” (US EPA, 2016).

Natural Variability – “Variations in the mean state and other statistics (such as standard deviations or statistics of extremes) of the climate on all time and space scales beyond that of individual weather events. Natural variations in climate over time are caused by internal processes of the climate system, such as El Niño, as well as changes in external influences, such as volcanic activity and variations in the output of the sun” (US EPA, 2016). Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) – “Gases consisting of one molecule of nitrogen and varying numbers of oxygen molecules. Nitrogen oxides are produced in the emissions of vehicle exhausts and from power stations. In the atmosphere, nitrogen oxides can contribute to formation of photochemical ozone (smog), can impair visibility, and have health consequences; they are thus considered pollutants” (US EPA, 2016). Nitrous Oxide (N2O) – “A powerful greenhouse gas with a global warming potential of 298 times that of carbon dioxide (CO2). Major sources of nitrous oxide include soil cultivation practices, especially the use of commercial and organic fertilizers, fossil fuel combustion, nitric acid production, and biomass burning. The GWP is from the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4)” (US EPA, 2016).

228

P Particulate matter (PM) – “Very small pieces of solid or liquid matter such as particles of soot, dust, fumes, mists or aerosols. The physical characteristics of particles, and how they combine with other particles, are part of the feedback mechanisms of the atmosphere” (US EPA, 2016).

R Recycling. Collecting and reprocessing a resource so it can be used again. An example is collecting aluminum cans, melting them down, and using the aluminum to make new cans or other aluminum products.

8.1

Snowpack – it’s the total amount of snow and ice on ground, which was built up in winter season, and melts during the summer and spring season.

Vulnerability “The degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. Vulnerability is a function of the character, magnitude, and rate of climate variation to which a system is exposed; its sensitivity; and its adaptive capacity” (US EPA, 2016).

Soil Carbon -A major component of the terrestrial biosphere pool in the carbon cycle. The amount of carbon in the soil is a function of the historical vegetative cover and productivity, which in turn is dependent in part upon climatic variables.

T TCC - The Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Program - an effort by the state of California to mitigate issues of justice that exist in the California’s Cap and Trade Program. Typology – Is defined as groupings composed of physical elements and functions relating to a particular aspect of the landscape as well as the associated metric units. U United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) – Signed in 1992 at the Rio Earth Summit, the UNFCCC is a milestone Convention on Climate Change treaty that provides an overall framework for international efforts to (UNFCCC) mitigate climate change (US EPA, 2005). Urban Contexts - Downtown, Mixed-use, and Resident Contexts that use metric typologies to measure mitigation, explain adaptation, and provide co-benefits within urban areas.

229

8.2

Bibliography Executive summary and chapter 1 Akbari, H., & Konopacki, S. (2005). Calculating energy-saving potentials of heat-island reduction strategies. Energy Policy, 33(6), 721– 756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2003.10.001 Akbari, Hashem, & Rose, L. S. (2001). Characterizing the fabric of the urban environment: A case study of Metropolitan Chicago, Illinois and Executive Summary. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7hq4p0z9 Annis, R. (2015, December 22). Bicycles Can Be a “Huge Part” of Combating Climate Change. Retrieved December 19, 2017, from https://www.bicycling.com/culture/advocacy/b icycles-can-be-a-huge-part-of-combatingclimate-change CARB. (2017). Greenhouse Gas Quantification Methodology for the California Transportation Commission Active Transportation Program. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/ctc_atp_finalqm_16-17.pdf College of Environmental Design. (2017, September 20). Landscape Architecture: Graduate Program Guide for Prospective Students. Retrieved December 12, 2017, from https://livecsupomonamy.sharepoint.com/personal/wli_cpp_edu/Do cuments/Document/20172018/GraduateProgram/Admission/Admission Packages/Program_Guide/MLA_CPP_Program _Guide-signed.pdf?slrid=8ab5359e-7094-4000c699-621aec3bfbf5 Koenig, J. Q. (1999). Air pollution and asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 104(4), 717–722. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0091-6749(99)702800 Li, H., Harvey, J. T., Holland, T. J., & Kayhanian, M. (2013). The use of reflective and permeable pavements as a potential practice for heat island mitigation and stormwater management. Environmental Research Letters, 230

8(1), 015023. https://doi.org/10.1088/17489326/8/1/015023 OEHHA. (2015a). CalEnviroScreen 3.0 Results. Retrieved December 11, 2017, from https://oehha.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappvi ewer/index.html?id=4560cfbce7c745c299b2d0 cbb07044f5 OEHHA. (2015b, December 15). Poverty [Text]. Retrieved October 13, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/poverty OEHHA. (2016). Unemployment. Retrieved October 15, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/unemployment Pataki, D. E., Alig, R. J., Fung, A. S., Golubiewski, N. E., Kennedy, C. A., Mcpherson, E. G., … Romero Lankao, P. (2006). Urban ecosystems and the North American carbon cycle. Global Change Biology, 12(11), 2092– 2102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652486.2006.01242.x Strategic Growth Council Fact Sheet. (2018). California Strategic Growth Council. Retrieved June 16, 2018, from http://sgc.ca.gov/vision/docs/20180530-SGCFact-Sheet.pdf USDA. (2014). i-Tree | Climate Change Resource Center. Retrieved May 9, 2018, from https://www.fs.usda.gov/ccrc/tools/i-tree Yan, H., Wang, X., Hao, P., & Dong, L. (2012). Study on the microclimatic characteristics and human comfort of park plant communities in summer. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 13(Supplement C), 755–765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2012.01.069

Acevedo-Garcia, D., Osypuk, T. L., McArdle, N., & Williams, D. R. (2008). Toward A PolicyRelevant Analysis Of Geographic And Racial/Ethnic Disparities In Child Health. Health Affairs, 27(2), 321–333. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.27.2.321

8.2 Administration, A., & Oceanic, N. (2009). A dry riverbed in California. Retrieved from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Calif ornia_Drought_Dry_Riverbed_2009.jpg Akbari, H., & Matthews, H. D. (2012). Global cooling updates: Reflective roofs and pavements. Energy and Buildings, 55(Supplement C), 2–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.02.055 Akbari, H., & Rose, L. S. (2001). Characterizing the fabric of the urban environment: A case study of Metropolitan Chicago, Illinois and Executive Summary. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7hq4p0z9 Aldy, J. E. (2017). Policy surveillance in the G-20 fossil fuel subsidies agreement: lessons for climate policy. Climatic Change, 144(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1505-0 Anderson-Teixeira, K. J., & DeLucia, E. H. (2011). The greenhouse gas value of ecosystems. Global Change Biology, 17(1), 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652486.2010.02220.x Bodansky, D., & Diringer, E. (2010). The Evolution of International Regimes: Implications for Climate Change (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 1773828). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1773828 Bogost, I. (2017, August 28). Houston’s Flood Is a Design Problem. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archi ve/2017/08/why-cities-flood/538251/ Boone, C. G., Buckley, G. L., Grove, J. M., & Sister, C. (2009). Parks and People: An Environmental Justice Inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99(4), 767–787. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045600903102949 Bradbear, C., & Friel, S. (2013). Integrating climate change, food prices and population health. Food Policy, 43, 56–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.08.007 CalEPA. (2017, April). Designation of Disadvantaed Communities Pursuant to Senate Bill 535. Retrieved January 2, 2018, from https://calepa.ca.gov/wpcontent/uploads/sites/62/2017/04/SB-535Designation-Final.pdf California Strategic Growth Council. (2017). Transformative Climate Communities

Guidelines. Retrieved December 15, 2017, from http://sgc.ca.gov/GrantPrograms/Transformative-ClimateCommunities-Program.html CARB. (2016). The Governor’s Climate Change Pillars: 2030 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals. Retrieved December 15, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/pillars/pillars.htm CARB. (2017). Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds Quantification Materials. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/quantification_jb081817-5alt.htm CEG. (2016). State Route 99 Realignment Will Make Way for High-Speed Rails | Construction Equipment Guide. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from https://www.constructionequipmentguide.co m/state-route-99-realignment-will-make-wayfor-high-speed-rails/30243 Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. (2017, October 5). California Cap and Trade. Retrieved March 8, 2018, from https://www.c2es.org/content/california-capand-trade/ Center for Resource Efficient Communities. (2017, August 18). Methods to Assess CoBenefits of California Climate Investments: Climate Adaptation Enhancement. Retrieved December 1, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/ucb_lit_rev_on_climate_adaptatio n.pdf Cleland, C. L., Tully, M. A., Kee, F., & Cupples, M. E. (2012). The effectiveness of physical activity interventions in socio-economically disadvantaged communities: A systematic review. Preventive Medicine, 54(6), 371–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.04.004 College of Environmental Design. (2017, September 20). Landscape Architecture: Graduate Program Guide for Prospective Students. Retrieved December 12, 2017, from https://livecsupomonamy.sharepoint.com/personal/wli_cpp_edu/Do cuments/Document/20172018/GraduateProgram/Admission/Admission Packages/Program_Guide/MLA_CPP_Program _Guide-signed.pdf?slrid=8ab5359e-7094-4000c699-621aec3bfbf5 231

8.2 Connolly-Boutin, L., & Smit, B. (2016). Climate change, food security, and livelihoods in subSaharan Africa. Regional Environmental Change, 16(2), 385–399. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-015-0761-x Crowley, T. J. (2000). Causes of climate change over the past 1000 years. Science, 289(5477), 270– 277. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5477.270 Cyril, S., Smith, B. J., Possamai-Inesedy, A., & Renzaho, A. M. N. (2015). Exploring the role of community engagement in improving the health of disadvantaged populations: a systematic review. Global Health Action, 8(1), 29842. https://doi.org/10.3402/gha.v8.29842 D’Amato, G., Cecchi, L., D’Amato, M., & AnnesiMaesano, I. (2014). Climate change and respiratory diseases. European Respiratory Review, 23(132), 161–169. https://doi.org/10.1183/09059180.00001714 De Leon. (2012). Senate Bill No. 535. Retrieved March 11, 2018, from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/1112/bill/sen/sb_05010550/sb_535_bill_20120930_chaptered.pdf DI. (2018). Design Intelligence Quarterly: America’s Best Architecture and Design Schools 20172018. Retrieved April 2, 2018, from https://store.di.net/collections/reports/produc ts/americas-best-architecture-and-designschools-2017-2018 EEA. (2007). Climate change policies. Retrieved November 21, 2017, from https://www.eea.europa.eu/downloads/24fa6 c01bc4777ed4b83d41dafb73098/1481638799 /policy-context.pdf EHP, & NIH. (2010, April 22). A Human Health Perspective on Climate Change. Retrieved December 11, 2017, from https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/materials/a_ human_health_perspective_on_climate_chang e_full_report_508.pdf Ellis, M., & Taylor, J. (2014). After the 2010 rains: changes in reporting rates of birds in remnant woodland vegetation in the central wheatbelt of New South Wales, Australia, from drought to post-drought. Australian Zoologist, 37(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.7882/AZ.2014.007 232

Executive Office of the President. (2013, June). The President’s Climate Action Plan. Retrieved January 31, 2018, from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/d efault/files/image/president27sclimateactionp lan.pdf FTCCC. (2017). Fresno Transformative Climate Communities Collaborative. Retrieved November 17, 2017, from http://transformfresno.com/ Gill, S. E., Handley, J. F., Ennos, A. R., & Pauleit, S. (2007). Adapting Cities for Climate Change: The Role of the Green Infrastructure. CLIMATE CHANGE AND CITIES, 33(1), 115–133. Greshko, M., & 2017. (2017, August 8). Climate Change Now Impacting U.S., Government Report Warns. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/08 /climate-change-government-draft-reviewusa-environment-spd/ Haines, A., & Patz, J. A. (2004). Health Effects of Climate Change. JAMA, 291(1), 99–103. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.1.99 Hamburg. (2017). G20 Leaders ́ Declaration: Shaping an interconnected world. Retrieved February 28, 2018, from http://europa.eu/rapid/pressrelease_STATEMENT-17-1960_en.htm Hidalgo, J., Masson, V., Baklanov, A., Pigeon, G., & Gimeno, L. (2008). Advances in Urban Climate Modeling. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1146(1), 354–374. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1446.015 Hornick, M. (2015, April 2). Early strawberry crop weathers drought. Retrieved April 3, 2018, from https://www.thepacker.com/article/earlystrawberry-crop-weathers-drought IISD. (2009). Summary of the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference. Retrieved April 23, 2018, from http://enb.iisd.org/vol12/enb12459e.html IPCC. (2007). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/pu blications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_wg 1_report_the_physical_science_basis.htm Jacobson, L. (2016). Yes, Donald Trump did call climate change a Chinese hoax | PolitiFact.

8.2 Retrieved April 24, 2018, from http://www.politifact.com/truth-ometer/statements/2016/jun/03/hillaryclinton/yes-donald-trump-did-call-climatechange-chinese-h/ Klos, R. J., Wang, G. G., Bauerle, W. L., & Rieck, J. R. (2009). Drought Impact on Forest Growth and Mortality in the Southeast USA: An Analysis Using Forest Health and Monitoring Data. Ecological Applications, 19(3), 699–708. Koenig, J. Q. (1999). Air pollution and asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 104(4), 717–722. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0091-6749(99)702800 Linder, S. H., Marko, D., & Sexton, K. (2008). Cumulative cancer risk from air pollution in Houston: disparities in risk burden and social disadvantage. Environmental Science & Technology, 42(12), 4312–4322. Lobell, D. B., Torney, A., & Field, C. B. (2011). Climate extremes in California agriculture. Climatic Change, 109(1), 355–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0304-5 Mace, M. (2017). After wettest July on record, Tucson monsoon ended on long dry note. Retrieved January 26, 2018, from http://tucson.com/news/local/after-wettestjuly-on-record-tucson-monsoon-ended-onlong/article_d924c00d-aa51-5cbc-b470b1fd860d11c6.html Mcgarrity, S. (2017, July 31). Cap & Trade in OntarioCap & Trade in Ontario. Retrieved April 30, 2018, from http://efficiencyengineering.com/cap-trade-inontario/ McNeill, A. B. (2010). Assessing Climate Change Impacts on the United States. Hauppauge: Hauppauge : Nova Science Publishers, Inc. McPhate, M. (2017, April 12). California Today: Reasons to Love Fresno. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/12/us/calif ornia-today-reasons-to-love-fresno.html Mookerjee, M. (2017). Three Essays on Climate Change and Air Pollution (Ph.D.). Cornell University, United States -- New York. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/192378 2613/abstract/E6291BD5AC994330PQ/1

MSFC, J. W. : (2015, June 9). What Are Climate and Climate Change? Retrieved January 25, 2018, from http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/58/features/nasa-knows/what-is-climatechange-58.html NAP. (2011). America’s Climate Choices. Washington, D.C. : National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12781 NASA. (2018a). Climate change causes: A blanket around the Earth. Retrieved January 29, 2018, from https://climate.nasa.gov/causes NASA. (2018b). Global climate change adaptation and mitigation. Retrieved January 30, 2018, from https://climate.nasa.gov/solutions/adaptationmitigation NATURE. (2014, April 30). Climate change: Monsoon wet spells get wetter [Research Highlights]. https://doi.org/10.1038/509011e NG, & Society, N. G. (2011, January 21). Urban Heat Island. Retrieved November 17, 2017, from http://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclope dia/urban-heat-island/ OEHHA. (2015a, December 15). Educational Attainment [Text]. Retrieved November 7, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/educational-attainment OEHHA. (2015b, December 15). Pesticide Use [Text]. Retrieved November 7, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/pesticide-use OEHHA. (2015c, December 15). Poverty [Text]. Retrieved October 13, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/poverty OEHHA. (2017). CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Retrieved January 31, 2018, from https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/calen viroscreen/report/ces3report.pdf Pardo, J. M., Lozano, A., Herrera, G., Mulas, J., & Rodríguez, Á. (2013). Instrumental monitoring of the subsidence due to groundwater withdrawal in the city of Murcia (Spain). Environmental Earth Sciences, 70(5), 1957–1963. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-013-2710-7 233

8.2 Pataki, D. E., Alig, R. J., Fung, A. S., Golubiewski, N. E., Kennedy, C. A., Mcpherson, E. G., … Romero Lankao, P. (2006). Urban ecosystems and the North American carbon cycle. Global Change Biology, 12(11), 2092–2102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652486.2006.01242.x PTI. (2014, April 30). Increase in extreme wet, dry monsoon spells: Stanford study. Retrieved January 27, 2018, from http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/econo my/macro-economy/increase-in-extreme-wetdry-monsoon-spells-stanfordstudy/article5962317.ece Rosenberg, D. E., Kopp, K., Kratsch, H. A., Rupp, L., Johnson, P., & Kjelgren, R. (2011). Value Landscape Engineering: Identifying Costs, Water Use, Labor, and Impacts to Support Landscape Choice. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 47(3), 635–649. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17521688.2011.00530.x SACBEE. (2017). Central Valley urged to be ready to ‘evacuate quickly’ as another storm approaches. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from http://www.sacbee.com/news/weather/article 133714379.html Sagan, C., & Chyba, C. (1997). The Early Faint Sun Paradox: Organic Shielding of UltravioletLabile Greenhouse Gases. Science, 276(5316), 1217–1221. SCPR. (2014, October 22). California drought: The tough, complicated battle for cheap water. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from https://www.scpr.org/programs/taketwo/2014/10/22/39940/california-drought-thetough-complicated-battle-fo/ Siade, A., Nishikawa, T., & Martin, P. (2015). Natural recharge estimation and uncertainty analysis of an adjudicated groundwater basin using a regional-scale flow and subsidence model (Antelope Valley, California, USA). Hydrogeology Journal, 23(6), 1267–1291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-015-1281-y State of California. (2018). California Climate Change Legislation. Retrieved February 28, 2018, from http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/state/legisla tion.html 234

Stead, N. (2014, October 30). Future forecasting: landscape architects might save the world. Retrieved January 30, 2018, from http://theconversation.com/futureforecasting-landscape-architects-might-savethe-world-32219 Stern, D. I., & Kaufmann, R. K. (2014). Anthropogenic and natural causes of climate change. Climatic Change, 122(1–2), 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-1007-x Sudeep, N., Biju, G., Hector M, M., Meenakshi, A., & Bandara, N. (2014, May 23). Water– energy–greenhouse gas nexus of urban water systems: Review of concepts, state-of-art and methods. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.doc uments/41393185/Waterenergygreenhouse_g as_nexus_of_urban20160121-130788pqqqx.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYG Z2Y53UL3A&Expires=1511161742&Signature= RFo9uCAYdsr7b1HpfZLXIy72H7k%3D&respon se-contentdisposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DWater _energy_greenhouse_gas_nexus_of_urb.pdf UNFCCC. (2014a). 20 Years of Effort and Achievement. Retrieved April 23, 2018, from http://unfccc.int/timeline/ UNFCCC. (2014b). Copenhagen Climate Change Conference - December 2009. Retrieved November 21, 2017, from http://unfccc.int/meetings/copenhagen_dec_2 009/meeting/6295.php UNFCCC. (2017). Climate Get the Big Picture. Retrieved November 21, 2017, from http://bigpicture.unfccc.int/ UNFCCC. (2018). UNFCCC eHandbook. Retrieved April 23, 2018, from http://bigpicture.unfccc.int/ United States Census Bureau. (2015). U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts selected: Fresno County, California. Retrieved November 7, 2017, from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/ CA,fresnocitycalifornia/HSG010216#viewtop United States Congress. (1990). Clean Air Act 42 U.S.C. § 7401-7671. Retrieved April 24, 2018, from https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE2013-title42/html/USCODE-2013-title42chap85-subchapI-partA-sec7401.htm

8.2 US EPA. (2014a). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Climate Change Adaptation Plan. Retrieved January 31, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/20 1508/documents/adaptationplans2014_508.pdf US EPA. (2015a, May 29). What is the Clean Air Act [Collections and Lists]. Retrieved October 25, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-actoverview/clean-air-act-text US EPA. (2015b, December 23). Overview of Greenhouse Gases [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved December 19, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overviewgreenhouse-gases US EPA, O. (2014b, June 17). Learn About Heat Islands [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved April 3, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/heatislands/learn-about-heat-islands USDA. (2014, August). U.S. Forest Resource Facts and Historical Trends. Retrieved January 16, 2018, from https://www.fia.fs.fed.us/library/brochures/do cs/2012/ForestFacts_1952-2012_English.pdf USDA. (2016). Drought Impacts on California Crops. Retrieved April 3, 2018, from http://caclimatehub.ucdavis.edu/wpcontent/uploads/sites/320/2016/03/factsheet 3_crops.pdf Water Eduation Foundation. (2018). Groundwater. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from http://www.watereducation.org/aquapedia/gr oundwater Wikimedia. (2016). Hotter Droughts. Retrieved from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hott er_Droughts_(25350313304).jpg Wikipedia. (2018, February 2). Yokuts. In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yo kuts&oldid=823671404 WNA. (2017, June). Policy Responses to Climate Change. Retrieved November 21, 2017, from http://www.worldnuclear.org/information-library/energy-andthe-environment/policy-responses-to-climatechange.aspx

Zhang, Y.-X., Chao, Q.-C., Zheng, Q.-H., & Huang, L. (2017). The withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris Agreement and its impact on global climate change governance. Advances in Climate Change Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accre.2017.08.005

Chapter 2 AIP. (2018). The Discovery of Global Warming. Retrieved September 29, 2017, from https://history.aip.org/climate/timeline.htm Alexander, K., & Ellis, J. (2011, March 8). Fresno’s population rose 15.7% in decade. McClatchy - Tribune Business News; Washington. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/855952 494/abstract/956866AF55FC4DEDPQ/1 Allen-Diaz, B. (2000). Biodiversity is critical to future health of California’s ecology and economy. California Agriculture, 54(2), 26–34. Anderson-Teixeira, K. J., & DeLucia, E. H. (2011). The greenhouse gas value of ecosystems. Global Change Biology, 17(1), 425– 438. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652486.2010.02220.x Avalos, A. (2010). Migration, Unemployment, and Wages: The Case of the California San Joaquin Valley. Contemporary Economic Policy, 28(1), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14657287.2009.00159.x Bae, C.-H. C., Richardson, H. W., Miller, P. D., & Gurran, D. N. (2004). Urban Sprawl in Western Europe and the United States. Florence, UNKNOWN: Taylor and Francis. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csupom ona/detail.action?docID=4817449 Barbour, M. G., Keeler-Wolf, T., & Schoenherr, A. A. (2007). Terrestrial vegetation of California. Beard, J., Sladden, T., Morgan, G., Berry, G., Brooks, L., & McMichael, A. (2003). Health Impacts of Pesticide Exposure in a Cohort of Outdoor Workers. Environmental Health Perspectives, 111(5), 724. Benjamin, M. (2016). Fulton Mall groundbreaking raises hopes of revitalizing downtown Fresno. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from

235

8.2 http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article 62826522.html Boneham, M. A., & Sixsmith, J. A. (2006). The voices of older women in a disadvantaged community: Issues of health and social capital. Social Science & Medicine, 62(2), 269– 279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.06.0 03 Boone, C. G., Buckley, G. L., Grove, J. M., & Sister, C. (2009). Parks and People: An Environmental Justice Inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99(4), 767–787. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045600903102949 Bowler, D. E., Buyung-Ali, L., Knight, T. M., & Pullin, A. S. (2010). Urban greening to cool towns and cities: A systematic review of the empirical evidence. Landscape and Urban Planning, 97(3), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.05. 006 Brown, P. T., Li, W., Cordero, E. C., & Mauget, S. A. (2015). Comparing the model-simulated global warming signal to observations using empirical estimates of unforced noise. Scientific Reports, 5, srep09957. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep09957 Bureau of Labor Statistics Data. (2018, January 12). Local Area Unemployment Statistics. Retrieved January 22, 2018, from https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LAUMT062342 000000003?amp%253bdata_tool=XGtable&ou tput_view=data&include_graphs=true Calavita, K. (2000). The Paradoxes of Race, Class, Identity, and “Passing”: Enforcing the Chinese Exclusion Acts, 1882-1910. Law <html_ent Glyph="@amp;" Ascii="&"/> Social Inquiry, 25(1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17474469.2000.tb00149.x CalEPA, & OEHHA. (2017, January). CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Retrieved December 11, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/calen viroscreen/report/ces3report.pdf California Department of Transportation. (2002). Growth Response Study. Retrieved May 17, 2018, from https://www.fresno.gov/transportation/wp236

content/uploads/sites/13/2016/10/SJVGRSPhase-1.pdf California Department of Water Resources. (2018). Groundwater. Retrieved March 28, 2018, from https://www.water.ca.gov/WaterBasics/Groundwater California Department of Water Resources, Natural Resources Agency, & State of California. (2015). Drought in California. Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://www.water.ca.gov/-/media/DWRWebsite/Web-Pages/WaterBasics/Drought/Files/Publications-AndReports/Drought-in-California.pdf California Department of Water Resources, State of California, & Natural Resources Agency. (2010). California’s Drought of 2007– 2009. Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://www.water.ca.gov/-/media/DWRWebsite/Web-Pages/WaterBasics/Drought/Files/Publications-AndReports/Californias-Drought-of-200709AnOverview.pdf California High-Speed Rail Authority. (2008, July 17). Implementation Plan. Retrieved December 19, 2017, from https://web.archive.org/web/20080910174725 /http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/images/c hsr/20080123171537_ImplementationPlan.pd f California Soil Resource Lab, & University of California, Davis. (2018). Soil Agricultural Groundwater Banking Index. Retrieved May 5, 2018, from https://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/sagbi/ California State University, Fresno. (2015). Impact of the Drought in the San Joaquin Valley of California. Retrieved December 14, 2017, from http://www.fresnostate.edu/academics/droug ht/documents/Fresno%20State_Executive%20 Summary%20with%20Infographics_FINAL.pdf Calvarese, M., & Stockdale, S. (2005). Land-use change and preservation in Fresno’s Armenian Town, 1916–2005. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.calstate.edu/handle/1021 1.2/2765 Castillo, A., & Fresno Bee. (2016). Fresno’s long history of substandard housing: poverty, sprawl, racism, neglect. Retrieved May 23, 2018, from

8.2 http://www.fresnobee.com/news/specialreports/housing-blight/article75581792.html CDFA. (2016a). California Agricultural Production Statistics. Retrieved March 14, 2018, from https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/statistics/ CDFA. (2016b). California Agricultural Statistics Review. Retrieved March 14, 2018, from https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/statistics/PDFs/2016R eport.pdf CDPH. (2017). Heart Disease Prevention. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/ DCDIC/CDCB/Pages/HeartDiseasePrevention. aspx Chang, Y. F., & Lin, S. J. (1998). Structural decomposition of industrial CO2 emission in Taiwan: an input-output approach. Energy Policy, 26(1), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(97)00089X Christian-Smith, J., Levy, M. C., & Gleick, P. H. (2015). Maladaptation to drought: a case report from California, USA. Sustainability Science, 10(3), 491–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-014-0269-1 CHSRA. (2012). Watershed Evaluation Report. Retrieved March 27, 2018, from http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/programs/merce d-fresnoeir/final_EIR_MerFres_CPointC_SumApnB.pdf CHSRA, & US Department of Transportation. (2012, February). Watershed Evaluation Report: Merced to Fresno Section. Retrieved March 27, 2018, from http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/programs/merce d-fresnoeir/final_EIR_MerFres_CPointC_SumApnB.pdf City Data. (2016). Fresno, California. Retrieved May 2, 2018, from http://www.citydata.com/city/Fresno-California.html City Data. (2018). Fresno: Economy - Major Industries and Commercial Activity, Incentive ProgramsNew and Existing Companies. Retrieved March 28, 2018, from http://www.city-data.com/us-cities/TheWest/Fresno-Economy.html City of Fresno. (2017). Recharge Fresno. Retrieved March 31, 2018, from http://www.rechargefresno.com/

City of Fresno Water Division. (2016). Water Quality Annual Report 2016. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from https://www.fresno.gov/publicutilities/wpcontent/uploads/sites/16/2016/11/CCR2016.p df Cleland, C. L., Tully, M. A., Kee, F., & Cupples, M. E. (2012). The effectiveness of physical activity interventions in socio-economically disadvantaged communities: A systematic review. Preventive Medicine, 54(6), 371–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.04.004 Climate Wise. (2010, July). Future Climate Conditions in Fresno County and Surrounding Counties. Retrieved January 31, 2018, from http://climatewise.org/images/projects/fresno -report-projections.pdf Clough, C. W. (1984). Fresno County in the 20th century: from 1900 to the 1980s (1st ed.). Fresno, Calif.: Fresno, Calif. : Panorama West Books. Crowley, T. J. (2000). Causes of climate change over the past 1000 years. Science, 289(5477), 270– 277. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5477.270 Culbertson, A. E. (1946). Observations on the Natural History of the Fresno Kangaroo Rat. Journal of Mammalogy, 27(3), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.2307/1375426 Cyril, S., Smith, B. J., Possamai-Inesedy, A., & Renzaho, A. M. N. (2015). Exploring the role of community engagement in improving the health of disadvantaged populations: a systematic review. Global Health Action, 8(1), 29842. https://doi.org/10.3402/gha.v8.29842 Dalgaard, T., Olesen, J. E., Petersen, S. O., Petersen, B. M., Jørgensen, U., Kristensen, T., … Hermansen, J. E. (2011). Developments in greenhouse gas emissions and net energy use in Danish agriculture – How to achieve substantial CO2 reductions? Environmental Pollution, 159(11), 3193–3203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2011.02.024 Data USA. (2017). Fresno, CA. Retrieved May 9, 2018, from https://datausa.io/profile/geo/fresnoca/#category_transportation Davidson, E. A., & Janssens, I. A. (2006). Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon 237

8.2 decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440(7081), 165–173. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 Debbage, N., & Shepherd, J. M. (2015). The urban heat island effect and city contiguity. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 54(Supplement C), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.201 5.08.002 Deschenes, O., & Kolstad, C. (2011). Economic impacts of climate change on California agriculture. Climatic Change, 109(1), 365–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0322-3 Duffy, W., & Kahara, S. (2011). Wetland ecosystem services in California’s Central Valley and implications for the Wetland Reserve Program. Ecological Applications ECOL APPL, 21. https://doi.org/10.1890/091338.1 Eberly, T., & Anderson, B. (2006). A fatal summer: The first major heat wave in the Valley in nearly a century led to 36 heatrelated deaths in Fresno, Kings, Madera and Tulare counties. McClatchy - Tribune Business News, 1. Ewing, R. (2013). Measuring Sprawl and Its Impacts. Fang, Y., Mauzerall, D. L., Liu, J., Fiore, A. M., & Horowitz, L. W. (2013). Impacts of 21st century climate change on global air pollution-related premature mortality. Climatic Change, 121(2), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-0130847-8 Fisher, J. A., Zhang, L., Leibensperger, E. M., & Jacob, D. . (2012). Meteorological modes of variability for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) air quality in the United States: implications for PM2.5 sensitivity to climate change. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://doaj.org/article/0f2f651807e34080860 11a57c2dfad82 Fox, M. A., University of California, S. B., & Global and International Studies. (2013). Living local in global climate change: drought and poverty in California’s San Joaquin Valley. Santa Barbara, Calif.: University of California, Santa Barbara. Retrieved from http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver =Z39.882004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissert 238

ation&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:1 548240 Francis, M. (1999). The California landscape garden: ecology, culture, and design. Berkeley, Calif.: Berkeley, Calif. : University of California Press. Fresno, B. (2016). Fresno’s long history of substandard housing: poverty, sprawl, racism, neglect | The Fresno Bee. Retrieved May 17, 2018, from http://www.fresnobee.com/news/specialreports/housing-blight/article75581792.html Fresno County Farm Bureau. (2007). Fresno County Ag. Retrieved April 16, 2018, from http://www.fcfb.org/Fresno-Ag/Fresno-Ag.php Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District. (2018). About Us. Retrieved May 3, 2018, from http://www.fresnofloodcontrol.org/home/abo ut-us/ FTCCC. (2017). Fresno Transformative Climate Communities Collaborative. Retrieved November 17, 2017, from http://transformfresno.com/ Gale, T. (2006). Fresno facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about Fresno. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from http://www.encyclopedia.com/places/unitedstates-and-canada/us-politicalgeography/fresno Gallowa, D., & Riley, F. S. (1999). San Joaquin Valley: California Largest Human Alteration of the Earth’s Surface., 1182, 23–34. Ganzel, B. (1999). Agricultural High Technology after World War II. Retrieved May 23, 2018, from https://livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe40s/ machines_08.html Gibson, J. (2015). Air pollution, climate change, and health. The Lancet Oncology, 16(6), e269. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70238X Google. (2018). Fresno. Retrieved March 31, 2018, from https://www.google.com/maps/place/Fresno,+ CA/@36.7842433,119.8133788,31293m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m 4!1s0x80945de1549e4e9d:0x7b12406449a3b 811!8m2!3d36.7377981!4d-119.7871247 Grad, S. (2017, February 23). Most of California is out of the drought. Retrieved December 7,

8.2 2017, from http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-medrought-gone-20170223-story.html Greenblatt, J. B. (2015). Modeling California policy impacts on greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Policy, 78(Supplement C), 158–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.12.024 Guarnieri, M., & Balmes, J. R. (2014). Outdoor air pollution and asthma. Lancet (London, England), 383(9928), 1581–1592. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)606176 Gustafson, E. J., & Sturtevant, B. R. (2013). Modeling Forest Mortality Caused by Drought Stress: Implications for Climate Change. Ecosystems, 16(1), 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-012-9596-1 Gyory. (1998). Closing the gate: Race, politics, and the Chinese Exclusion Act. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Retrieved November 18, 2017, from https://cppprimo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primoexplore/fulldisplay?docid=01CALS_ALMA7139 4177230002901&context=L&vid=01CALS_PUP &lang=en_US&search_scope=EVERYTHING&ad aptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&isFrbr=tru e&tab=everything&query=any,contains,Gyory, %20A.%20(1998).%20Closing%20the%20gate: %20Race,%20politics,%20and%20the%20Chin ese%20Exclusion%20Act.%20Chapel%20Hill:% 20University%20of%20North%20Carolina%20 Press.&sortby=rank&facet=frbrgroupid,includ e,152629400&offset=0 Haines, A., & Patz, J. A. (2004). Health Effects of Climate Change. JAMA, 291(1), 99–103. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.1.99 Hamidi, S., Ewing, R., Preuss, I., & Dodds, A. (2015). Measuring Sprawl and Its Impacts: An Update. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 35(1), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X14565247 Hasselmann, K. (1976). Stochastic climate models Part I. Tellus, 28(6), 473–485. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.21533490.1976.tb00696.x Heathcock, A. (2014, October 12). How California’s Central Valley went from breadbasket to wasteland. Retrieved December 21, 2017, from http://theweek.com/articles/443170/how-

californias-central-valley-went-frombreadbasket-wasteland Hidalgo, J., Masson, V., Baklanov, A., Pigeon, G., & Gimeno, L. (2008). Advances in Urban Climate Modeling. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1146(1), 354–374. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1446.015 Holcombe, R. G., & Williams, D. W. (2010). Urban Sprawl and Transportation Externalities. The Review of Regional Studies; New Brunswick, 40(3), 257–272. Hostetter, G. (2015, May 20). Fresno still on bottom of municipal parks ranking. Retrieved November 17, 2017, from http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article 21487467.html Huerta, N. (2014). Fast Facts on California’s Agricultural Economy. Retrieved April 16, 2018, from http://ajed.assembly.ca.gov/sites/ajed.assemb ly.ca.gov/files/Fast%20Facts%20on%20Califor nia%27s%20Agricultural%20Economy.pdf Hughes-Cromwick, P., Mull, H., & Shaheen, M. (2006). The Burden of Chronic Disease in Fresno. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from https://altarum.org/sites/default/files/uploade d-publicationfiles/06_project_report_hsd_healthy_fresno.pd f Hunt, T. (2017, July 25). New spin on high-speed rail: Fresno becomes bedroom community for Silicon Valley. Retrieved November 17, 2017, from https://www.pleasantonweekly.com/blogs/p/2 017/07/25/new-spin-on-high-speed-railfresno-becomes-bedroom-community-forsilicon-valley IPCC. (2007). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/pu blications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_wg 1_report_the_physical_science_basis.htm Johnson, M. P. (2016). Environmental Impacts of Urban Sprawl: A Survey of the Literature and Proposed Research Agenda. Environment and Planning A. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3327 Johnson, S., Haslam, G. W., & Dawson, R. (1993). The great central valley: California’s heartland. Berkeley: University of California Press. 239

8.2 Juliet, C.-S., Morgan C., L., & Peter H., G. (2011, June). Impacts of the california drought from 2007 to 2009. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from http://pacinst.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/02/ca_drought_impacts _full_report3.pdf Kaye, L. (2013, April 17). Climate Change in the San Joaquin Valley and Our Future Food Supply. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/04/climatechange-san-joaquin-valley/ Keeler, G. (2008, May 25). Saroyan is a prominent thread in Fresno’s Armenian tapestry. McClatchy - Tribune Business News; Washington. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/465068 549/abstract/B24A0F2DB874479BPQ/1 Kelley, P. A., Williams, D. F., & Phillips, S. E. (2005). Documenting Ecological Change in Time and Space: The San Joaquin Valley of California. Retrieved May 20, 2018, from http://esrp.csustan.edu/publications/pubhtml. php?doc=mvz2003&file=mvzmss.html Kelly, A. E., & Goulden, M. L. (2008). Rapid shifts in plant distribution with recent climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(33), 11823–11826. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0802891105 Kenney, L. W., Craighead, D. H., & Alexander, L. M. (2014). Heat Waves, Aging, and Human Cardiovascular Health. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 46(10), 1891–1899. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.00000000000003 25 Khan, A. (2018). Mad about L.A.’s air quality? Blame common products like hairspray and paint, not just cars. Retrieved February 17, 2018, from http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/l a-sci-sn-la-smog-petroleum-20180215story.html Kidsdata. (2017). Infants Born at Low Birthweight. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from http://www.kidsdata.org/topic/301/lowbirthw eight/table#fmt=91&loc=2,127,347,1763,331,3 48,336,171,321,345,357,332,324,369,358,362,3 60,337,327,364,356,217,353,328,354,323,352,3 20,339,334,365,343,330,367,344,355,366,368,2 65,349,361,4,273,59,370,326,333,322,341,338, 240

350,342,329,325,359,351,363,340,335&tf=73& sortColumnId=0&sortType=asc Kil, S. H. (2012). Fearing yellow, imagining white: media analysis of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Retrieved November 18, 2017, from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/ 13504630.2012.708995 KING, P. H. (1988, April 28). Dream Unravels : Fresno: Rise and Fall of Urban Mall. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/1988-0428/news/mn-3089_1_pedestrian-mall Kjellstrom, T., Holmer, I., & Lemke, B. (2009). Workplace heat stress, health and productivity – an increasing challenge for low and middleincome countries during climate change. Global Health Action, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.3402/gha.v2i0.2047 Koenig, J. Q. (1999). Air pollution and asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 104(4), 717–722. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0091-6749(99)702800 Koopman, M., Nauman, R., & Leonard, J. (2010, April). Projected Future Climatic and Ecological Conditions i n San Luis Obispo County. Retrieved February 6, 2018, from http://www.lgc.org/wordpress/docs/adaptatio n/slo/SLOModelReport_FINALsmall.pdf Kroeber, A. L. (2007). Handbook of the Indians of California. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Pub. Kueppers, L. M., Snyder, M. A., Sloan, L. C., Zavaleta, E. S., & Fulfrost, B. (2005). Modeled regional climate change and California endemic oak ranges. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(45), 16281–16286. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0501427102 Laurent, O., Hu, J., Li, L., Kleeman, M. J., Bartell, S. M., Cockburn, M., … Wu, J. (2016). Low birth weight and air pollution in California: Which sources and components drive the risk? Environment International, 92–93(Supplement C), 471–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2016.04.034 Lee, J., Gryze, S. D., & Six, J. (2011). Effect of climate change on field crop production in California’s Central Valley. Climatic Change,

8.2 109(1), 335–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0305-4 Lenihan, J. M., Drapek, R., Bachelet, D., & Neilson, R. P. (2003). Climate Change Effects on Vegetation Distribution, Carbon, and Fire in California. Ecological Applications, 13(6), 1667–1681. https://doi.org/10.1890/025295 Linder, S. H., Marko, D., & Sexton, K. (2008). Cumulative cancer risk from air pollution in Houston: disparities in risk burden and social disadvantage. Environmental Science & Technology, 42(12), 4312–4322. Loarie, S. R., Carter, B. E., Hayhoe, K., McMahon, S., Moe, R., Knight, C. A., & Ackerly, D. D. (2008). Climate Change and the Future of California’s Endemic Flora. PLOS ONE, 3(6), e2502. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0002502 Lobell, D. B., Torney, A., & Field, C. B. (2011). Climate extremes in California agriculture. Climatic Change, 109(1), 355–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0304-5 Lusvardi, W. (2015, January 28). Fresno beats SF, San Jose in economic growth. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://calwatchdog.com/2015/01/28/fresnobeats-sf-san-jose-in-economic-growth/ Madgwick, P. (2015). Sun exposure and skin cancer health advice for outdoor workers. The Safety & Health Practitioner; Borehamwood, 33(4), 28-29,4. McIntyre, Z., & McKee, K. (2012). Creating sustainable communities through tenure-mix: the responsibilisation of marginal homeowners in Scotland. GeoJournal, 77(2), 235–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-0099322-5 McNeill, A. B. (2010). Assessing Climate Change Impacts on the United States. Hauppauge: Hauppauge : Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Medellín-Azuara, J., Howitt, R. E., MacEwan, D. J., & Lund, J. R. (2011). Economic impacts of climate-related changes to California agriculture. Climatic Change, 109(1), 387–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0314-3 Miller, H. (1985). From Greenbush Spring Flows the History of a City Called Fresno. Fresno Past & Present, The Journal of the Fresno City and County Historical Society, 27(2), 9–10.

Mohajerani, A., Bakaric, J., & Jeffrey-Bailey, T. (2017). The urban heat island effect, its causes, and mitigation, with reference to the thermal properties of asphalt concrete. Journal of Environmental Management, 197(Supplement C), 522–538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.03.09 5 NAP. (2011). America’s Climate Choices. Washington, D.C. : National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12781 Nearing, M. A., Pruski, F. F., & O’Neal, M. R. (2004). Expected climate change impacts on soil erosion rates: A review. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 59(1), 43–50. Neufeldt, H., Schäfer, M., Angenendt, E., Li, C., Kaltschmitt, M., & Zeddies, J. (2006). Disaggregated greenhouse gas emission inventories from agriculture via a coupled economic-ecosystem model. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 112(2), 233–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2005.08.024 NIH. (2018). Asthma. Retrieved April 1, 2018, from https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/healthtopics/asthma NRPA. (2018). NRPA Park Metrics. Retrieved May 3, 2018, from https://www.nrpa.org/publicationsresearch/ParkMetrics/ NYT. (1964). Fresno Creating Pedestrian Mall: It Will Close Six Blocks of Downtown Street. New York Times, p. R10. OAKLAND. (2016). preliminary resilience assessment. Retrieved January 10, 2018, from http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/ ceda/documents/report/oak057651.pdf OEHHA. (2015a). CalEnviroScreen 3.0 Results. Retrieved December 11, 2017, from https://oehha.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webapp viewer/index.html?id=4560cfbce7c745c299b2 d0cbb07044f5 OEHHA. (2015b, December 11). Air Quality: PM2.5 [Text]. Retrieved November 7, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/air-quality-pm25 OEHHA. (2015c, December 15). Educational Attainment [Text]. Retrieved November 7, 2017, from 241

8.2 https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/educational-attainment OEHHA. (2015d, December 15). Pesticide Use [Text]. Retrieved November 7, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/pesticide-use OEHHA. (2015e, December 15). Poverty [Text]. Retrieved October 13, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/poverty OEHHA. (2016). Unemployment. Retrieved October 15, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/unemployment Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. (2015, December 15). Linguistic Isolation [Text]. Retrieved November 2, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicato r/linguistic-isolation O’Mara-Eves, A., Brunton, G., Oliver, S., Kavanagh, J., Jamal, F., & Thomas, J. (2015). The effectiveness of community engagement in public health interventions for disadvantaged groups: a meta-analysis. BMC Public Health, 15(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1352-y Panoo, A. (2017). Heat advisory issued, Valley Children’s nurse says children more susceptible to illness. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article 160200964.html Parton, W. j., Scurlock, J. m. o., Ojima, D. s., Schimel, D. s., Hall, D. o., & Scopegram Group Members. (1995). Impact of climate change on grassland production and soil carbon worldwide. Global Change Biology, 1(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652486.1995.tb00002.x Pataki, D. E., Alig, R. J., Fung, A. S., Golubiewski, N. E., Kennedy, C. A., Mcpherson, E. G., … Romero Lankao, P. (2006). Urban ecosystems and the North American carbon cycle. Global Change Biology, 12(11), 2092–2102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652486.2006.01242.x Pau, S., Macdonald, G. M., & Gillespie, T. W. (2012). A Dynamic History of Climate Change and Human Impact on the Environment from 242

Keālia Pond, Maui, Hawaiian Islands. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(4), 748–762. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2011.65285 3 Preston, W. L. (1981). Vanishing landscapes: land and life in the Tulare Lake Basin. Berkeley: Berkeley : University of California Press. Richard, H., Duncan, M., Josué, M.-A., Jay, L., & Daniel, S. (2015, August 17). Economic Analysis of the 2015 Drought For California Agriculture. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from https://watershed.ucdavis.edu/files/biblio/Fin al_Drought%20Report_08182015_Full_Report_ WithAppendices.pdf Rind, D. (1998). Just Add Water Vapor. Science, 281(5380), 1152–1153. Sagan, C., & Chyba, C. (1997). The Early Faint Sun Paradox: Organic Shielding of UltravioletLabile Greenhouse Gases. Science, 276(5316), 1217–1221. SCH. (2017). Low Birthweight. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from http://www.stanfordchildrens.org/en/topic/de fault?id=low-birthweight-90-P02382 Schoenherr, A. A. (2017). A Natural History of California: Second Edition. SGA. (2014). The Sprawl Index. Retrieved December 11, 2017, from http://old.smartgrowthamerica.org/document s/fresnosprawl.pdf SGC. (2016, November 23). 20161206-Final Statement of Fresno. Retrieved November 17, 2017, from http://sgc.ca.gov/resource%20files/20161206FINALSTATEMENTOFREASONS.pdf Shannon, M. (2017, May). Southwest Fresno Specific Plan. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wpcontent/uploads/sites/10/2016/10/Southwest FresnoBookPublicReviewDraft051017red.pdf Sheffield, P. E., Knowlton, K., Carr, J. L., & Kinney, P. L. (2011). Modeling of Regional Climate Change Effects on Ground-Level Ozone and Childhood Asthma. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 41(3), 251–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2011.04.017 Siade, A., Nishikawa, T., & Martin, P. (2015). Natural recharge estimation and uncertainty analysis of an adjudicated groundwater basin

8.2 using a regional-scale flow and subsidence model (Antelope Valley, California, USA). Hydrogeology Journal, 23(6), 1267–1291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-015-1281-y Sierra Camp. (2016). Disadvantaged Communities in the Sierra Nevada Region. Retrieved November 17, 2017, from https://static1.squarespace.com/static/555637 7fe4b0799dab4ec704/t/5807f58df7e0abd4e5 5d005a/1476916630845/New+Sierra+CAMP_D AC+Fact+Sheet_2016_10_19.pdf Silveria, C. (2010). An Urban Morphology of Fresno, California: Its Structure and Growth. Retrieved November 19, 2017, from http://publish.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?art icle=1735&context=honorstheses Smith, J. B., & Mendelsohn, R. O. (2006). The impact of climate change on regional systems: a comprehensive analysis of California. Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA: Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA : Edward Elgar Pub. Smith, W. (2004). Garden of the sun: a history of the San Joaquin Valley, 1772-1939 (2nd ed.). Fresno, CA: Fresno, CA : Linden Pub. State of California. (2012). Reports on the Third Assessment from the California Climate Change Center. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from http://climatechange.ca.gov/climate_action_te am/reports/third_assessment/index.html State of California. (2017). About Cal Fire. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from http://calfire.ca.gov/about/about Tai, P. ., Mickley, & Jacob, D. (2010). Correlations between fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and meteorological variables in the United States: Implications for the sensitivity of PM2.5 to climate change. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://www-sciencedirectcom.proxy.library.cpp.edu/science/article/pii/ S135223101000539X Thuy, V. T. H., & Limmeechokchai, B. (2015). Analyses of Energy use and CO2 Emission in Residential Sector: Case Studies in Thailand and Vietnam. Energy Procedia, 79, 290–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.11.488 Tomkiewicz, M. (2011). Climate Change: The Fork at the End of Now. Highland Park: Highland Park : Momentum Press.

United States Census Bureau. (2010). 2010 Census U.S. Retrieved December 19, 2017, from https://www2.census.gov/geo/docs/mapsdata/data/gazetteer/2010_place_list_06.txt US EIA. (2017, October 10). California. Retrieved November 27, 2017, from https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA US EPA. (2014a, April 9). Criteria Air Pollutants [Policies and Guidance]. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/criteria-airpollutants US EPA. (2014b, August 12). Clean Air Markets [Collections and Lists]. Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets US EPA. (2016, January 12). Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved January 25, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/globalgreenhouse-gas-emissions-data US EPA. (2017a). EPA’s Endangerment Finding. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/20 1608/documents/endangermentfinding_health.p df US EPA. (2017b, March 4). EPA’s Endangerment Finding: Climate Change Facts. Retrieved September 29, 2017, from https://web.archive.org/web/20170304110423 /https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/Downl oads/endangerment/EndangermentFinding_Cl imateChangeFacts.pdf USDM. (2017, 5). U.S. Drought Monitor. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from http://drought.unl.edu/MonitoringTools/USDr oughtMonitor.aspx USGS. (2017, November 29). 2012-2016 California Drought: Historical Perspective. Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://ca.water.usgs.gov/californiadrought/california-drought-comparisons.html Walker, J. (2009). Historical Persepectives. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from http://historical.fresnobeehive.com/2009/11/b efore-fulton-mall/ Wang, A., & Lin, B. (2017). Assessing CO2 emissions in China’s commercial sector: Determinants and reduction strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 164, 1542–1552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.058 243

8.2 Water Eduation Foundation. (2016). Tulare Lake Basin. Retrieved October 13, 2017, from http://www.watereducation.org/aquapedia/tul are-lake-basin Weather Underground. (2018). Weather History for Fresno. Retrieved March 31, 2018, from https://www.wunderground.com/history/airp ort/KFAT/2017/1/1/CustomHistory.html?dayen d=31&monthend=12&yearend=2017&req_city =&req_state=&req_statename=&reqdb.zip=&r eqdb.magic=&reqdb.wmo= WebMD. (2018). What is Normal Body Temperature? Retrieved May 24, 2018, from https://www.webmd.com/first-aid/normalbody-temperature Willocks, L. J., Bhaskar, A., Ramsay, C. N., Lee, D., Brewster, D. H., Fischbacher, C. M., … Scott, E. M. (2012). Cardiovascular disease and air pollution in Scotland: no association or insufficient data and study design? BMC Public Health, 12(1), 227. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-227 Wooldridge, S. A., Done, T. J., Thomas, C. R., Gordon, I. I., Marshall, P. A., & Jones, R. N. (2012). Safeguarding coastal coral communities on the central Great Barrier Reef (Australia) against climate change: realizable local and global actions. Climatic Change, 112(3–4), 945–961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0229-z Yan, H., Wang, X., Hao, P., & Dong, L. (2012). Study on the microclimatic characteristics and human comfort of park plant communities in summer. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 13(Supplement C), 755–765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2012.01.069 Zuk, M. (2013). Health Equity in a New Urbanist Environment: Land Use Planning and Community Capacity Building in Fresno, CA. Retrieved December 10, 2017, from https://search.proquest.com/openview/99ab6 828d7722a45ba4f26ebdd7a19c3/1?pqorigsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

Chapter 3

244

AIP. (2018). The Discovery of Global Warming. Retrieved September 29, 2017, from https://history.aip.org/climate/timeline.htm Allen-Diaz, B. (2000). Biodiversity is critical to future health of California’s ecology and economy. California Agriculture, 54(2), 26–34. Anderson-Teixeira, K. J., & DeLucia, E. H. (2011). The greenhouse gas value of ecosystems. Global Change Biology, 17(1), 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652486.2010.02220.x Avalos, A. (2010). Migration, Unemployment, and Wages: The Case of the California San Joaquin Valley. Contemporary Economic Policy, 28(1), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14657287.2009.00159.x Beard, J., Sladden, T., Morgan, G., Berry, G., Brooks, L., & McMichael, A. (2003). Health Impacts of Pesticide Exposure in a Cohort of Outdoor Workers. Environmental Health Perspectives, 111(5), 724. Bowler, D. E., Buyung-Ali, L., Knight, T. M., & Pullin, A. S. (2010). Urban greening to cool towns and cities: A systematic review of the empirical evidence. Landscape and Urban Planning, 97(3), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.05. 006 Brown, P. T., Li, W., Cordero, E. C., & Mauget, S. A. (2015). Comparing the model-simulated global warming signal to observations using empirical estimates of unforced noise. Scientific Reports, 5, srep09957. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep09957 Bureau of Labor Statistics Data. (2018, January 12). Local Area Unemployment Statistics. Retrieved January 22, 2018, from https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LAUMT062342 000000003?amp%253bdata_tool=XGtable&ou tput_view=data&include_graphs=true California Department of Water Resources, Natural Resources Agency, & State of California. (2015). Drought in California. Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://www.water.ca.gov/-/media/DWRWebsite/Web-Pages/WaterBasics/Drought/Files/Publications-AndReports/Drought-in-California.pdf California Department of Water Resources, State of California, & Natural Resources

8.2 Agency. (2010). California’s Drought of 2007– 2009. Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://www.water.ca.gov/-/media/DWRWebsite/Web-Pages/WaterBasics/Drought/Files/Publications-AndReports/Californias-Drought-of-200709AnOverview.pdf California State University, Fresno. (2015). Impact of the Drought in the San Joaquin Valley of California. Retrieved December 14, 2017, from http://www.fresnostate.edu/academics/droug ht/documents/Fresno%20State_Executive%20 Summary%20with%20Infographics_FINAL.pdf CDPH. (2017). Heart Disease Prevention. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/ DCDIC/CDCB/Pages/HeartDiseasePrevention. aspx Chang, Y. F., & Lin, S. J. (1998). Structural decomposition of industrial CO2 emission in Taiwan: an input-output approach. Energy Policy, 26(1), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(97)00089X City of Fresno. (2017). Recharge Fresno. Retrieved March 31, 2018, from http://www.rechargefresno.com/ City of Fresno Water Division. (2016). Water Quality Annual Report 2016. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from https://www.fresno.gov/publicutilities/wpcontent/uploads/sites/16/2016/11/CCR2016.p df Climate Wise. (2010, July). Future Climate Conditions in Fresno County and Surrounding Counties. Retrieved January 31, 2018, from http://climatewise.org/images/projects/fresno -report-projections.pdf Crowley, T. J. (2000). Causes of climate change over the past 1000 years. Science, 289(5477), 270– 277. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5477.270 Culbertson, A. E. (1946). Observations on the Natural History of the Fresno Kangaroo Rat. Journal of Mammalogy, 27(3), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.2307/1375426 Dalgaard, T., Olesen, J. E., Petersen, S. O., Petersen, B. M., Jørgensen, U., Kristensen, T., …

Hermansen, J. E. (2011). Developments in greenhouse gas emissions and net energy use in Danish agriculture – How to achieve substantial CO2 reductions? Environmental Pollution, 159(11), 3193–3203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2011.02.024 Davidson, E. A., & Janssens, I. A. (2006). Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440(7081), 165–173. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 Debbage, N., & Shepherd, J. M. (2015). The urban heat island effect and city contiguity. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 54(Supplement C), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.201 5.08.002 Deschenes, O., & Kolstad, C. (2011). Economic impacts of climate change on California agriculture. Climatic Change, 109(1), 365–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0322-3 Duffy, W., & Kahara, S. (2011). Wetland ecosystem services in California’s Central Valley and implications for the Wetland Reserve Program. Ecological Applications ECOL APPL, 21. https://doi.org/10.1890/091338.1 EIA, C. (2018). Data Tools, Apps, and Maps. Retrieved May 10, 2018, from https://www.eia.gov/tools/ Fang, Y., Mauzerall, D. L., Liu, J., Fiore, A. M., & Horowitz, L. W. (2013). Impacts of 21st century climate change on global air pollution-related premature mortality. Climatic Change, 121(2), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-0130847-8 Faunt, C. C., Sneed, M., Traum, J., & Brandt, J. T. (2015). Water availability and land subsidence in the Central Valley, California, USA. Hydrogeology Journal, 24(3), 675–684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-015-1339-x Fisher, J. A., Zhang, L., Leibensperger, E. M., & Jacob, D. . (2012). Meteorological modes of variability for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) air quality in the United States: implications for PM2.5 sensitivity to climate change. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://doaj.org/article/0f2f651807e34080860 11a57c2dfad82 245

8.2 Fox, M. A., University of California, S. B., & Global and International Studies. (2013). Living local in global climate change: drought and poverty in California’s San Joaquin Valley. Santa Barbara, Calif.: University of California, Santa Barbara. Retrieved from http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver =Z39.882004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissert ation&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:1 548240 Gallowa, D., & Riley, F. S. (1999). San Joaquin Valley: California Largest Human Alteration of the Earth’s Surface., 1182, 23–34. Gibson, J. (2015). Air pollution, climate change, and health. The Lancet Oncology, 16(6), e269. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70238X Google. (2018). Fresno. Retrieved March 31, 2018, from https://www.google.com/maps/place/Fresno,+ CA/@36.7842433,119.8133788,31293m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m 4!1s0x80945de1549e4e9d:0x7b12406449a3b 811!8m2!3d36.7377981!4d-119.7871247 Grad, S. (2017, February 23). Most of California is out of the drought. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-medrought-gone-20170223-story.html Greenblatt, J. B. (2015). Modeling California policy impacts on greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Policy, 78(Supplement C), 158–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.12.024 Guarnieri, M., & Balmes, J. R. (2014). Outdoor air pollution and asthma. Lancet (London, England), 383(9928), 1581–1592. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)606176 Gustafson, E. J., & Sturtevant, B. R. (2013). Modeling Forest Mortality Caused by Drought Stress: Implications for Climate Change. Ecosystems, 16(1), 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021012-9596-1 Haines, A., & Patz, J. A. (2004). Health Effects of Climate Change. JAMA, 291(1), 99–103. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.1.99 Harter, T. (2017, March 19). Post-drought groundwater in California: Like the economy after a deep “recession,” recovery will be slow. 246

Retrieved November 3, 2017, from https://californiawaterblog.com/2017/03/19/p ost-drought-groundwater-in-california-likethe-economy-after-a-deep-recessionrecovery-will-be-slow/ Hasselmann, K. (1976). Stochastic climate models Part I. Tellus, 28(6), 473–485. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.21533490.1976.tb00696.x Hidalgo, J., Masson, V., Baklanov, A., Pigeon, G., & Gimeno, L. (2008). Advances in Urban Climate Modeling. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1146(1), 354–374. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1446.015 Hughes-Cromwick, P., Mull, H., & Shaheen, M. (2006). The Burden of Chronic Disease in Fresno. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from https://altarum.org/sites/default/files/uploade d-publicationfiles/06_project_report_hsd_healthy_fresno.pd f IPCC. (2007). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/pu blications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_wg 1_report_the_physical_science_basis.htm Juliet, C.-S., Morgan C., L., & Peter H., G. (2011, June). Impacts of the california drought from 2007 to 2009. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from http://pacinst.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/02/ca_drought_impacts _full_report3.pdf Kaye, L. (2013, April 17). Climate Change in the San Joaquin Valley and Our Future Food Supply. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/04/climatechange-san-joaquin-valley/ Khan, A. (2018). Mad about L.A.’s air quality? Blame common products like hairspray and paint, not just cars. Retrieved February 17, 2018, from http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/l a-sci-sn-la-smog-petroleum-20180215story.html Kidsdata. (2017). Infants Born at Low Birthweight. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from http://www.kidsdata.org/topic/301/lowbirthw eight/table#fmt=91&loc=2,127,347,1763,331,3

8.2 48,336,171,321,345,357,332,324,369,358,362,3 60,337,327,364,356,217,353,328,354,323,352,3 20,339,334,365,343,330,367,344,355,366,368,2 65,349,361,4,273,59,370,326,333,322,341,338, 350,342,329,325,359,351,363,340,335&tf=73& sortColumnId=0&sortType=asc Kjellstrom, T., Holmer, I., & Lemke, B. (2009). Workplace heat stress, health and productivity – an increasing challenge for low and middleincome countries during climate change. Global Health Action, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.3402/gha.v2i0.2047 Koenig, J. Q. (1999). Air pollution and asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 104(4), 717–722. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0091-6749(99)702800 Koopman, M., Nauman, R., & Leonard, J. (2010, April). Projected Future Climatic and Ecological Conditions i n San Luis Obispo County. Retrieved February 6, 2018, from http://www.lgc.org/wordpress/docs/adaptatio n/slo/SLOModelReport_FINALsmall.pdf Kueppers, L. M., Snyder, M. A., Sloan, L. C., Zavaleta, E. S., & Fulfrost, B. (2005). Modeled regional climate change and California endemic oak ranges. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(45), 16281–16286. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0501427102 Laurent, O., Hu, J., Li, L., Kleeman, M. J., Bartell, S. M., Cockburn, M., … Wu, J. (2016). Low birth weight and air pollution in California: Which sources and components drive the risk? Environment International, 92–93(Supplement C), 471–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2016.04.034 Lee, J., Gryze, S. D., & Six, J. (2011). Effect of climate change on field crop production in California’s Central Valley. Climatic Change, 109(1), 335– 353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-0110305-4 Lenihan, J. M., Drapek, R., Bachelet, D., & Neilson, R. P. (2003). Climate Change Effects on Vegetation Distribution, Carbon, and Fire in California. Ecological Applications, 13(6), 1667– 1681. https://doi.org/10.1890/025295 Loarie, S. R., Carter, B. E., Hayhoe, K., McMahon, S., Moe, R., Knight, C. A., & Ackerly, D. D. (2008).

Climate Change and the Future of California’s Endemic Flora. PLOS ONE, 3(6), e2502. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0002502 Lobell, D. B., Torney, A., & Field, C. B. (2011). Climate extremes in California agriculture. Climatic Change, 109(1), 355–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0304-5 Madgwick, P. (2015). Sun exposure and skin cancer health advice for outdoor workers. The Safety & Health Practitioner; Borehamwood, 33(4), 28-29,4. McNeill, A. B. (2010). Assessing Climate Change Impacts on the United States. Hauppauge: Hauppauge : Nova Science Publishers, Inc. NAP. (2011). America’s Climate Choices. Washington, D.C. : National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12781 Nearing, M. A., Pruski, F. F., & O’Neal, M. R. (2004). Expected climate change impacts on soil erosion rates: A review. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 59(1), 43–50. Neufeldt, H., Schäfer, M., Angenendt, E., Li, C., Kaltschmitt, M., & Zeddies, J. (2006). Disaggregated greenhouse gas emission inventories from agriculture via a coupled economic-ecosystem model. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 112(2), 233–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2005.08.024 NIH. (2018). Asthma. Retrieved April 1, 2018, from https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/healthtopics/asthma OAKLAND. (2016). preliminary resilience assessment. Retrieved January 10, 2018, from http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/ ceda/documents/report/oak057651.pdf Panoo, A. (2017). Heat advisory issued, Valley Children’s nurse says children more susceptible to illness. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article 160200964.html Parton, W. j., Scurlock, J. m. o., Ojima, D. s., Schimel, D. s., Hall, D. o., & Scopegram Group Members. (1995). Impact of climate change on grassland production and soil carbon worldwide. Global Change Biology, 1(1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652486.1995.tb00002.x Pataki, D. E., Alig, R. J., Fung, A. S., Golubiewski, N. E., Kennedy, C. A., Mcpherson, E. G., … 247

8.2 Romero Lankao, P. (2006). Urban ecosystems and the North American carbon cycle. Global Change Biology, 12(11), 2092–2102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652486.2006.01242.x Pau, S., Macdonald, G. M., & Gillespie, T. W. (2012). A Dynamic History of Climate Change and Human Impact on the Environment from Keālia Pond, Maui, Hawaiian Islands. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(4), 748–762. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2011.65285 3 Richard, H., Duncan, M., Josué, M.-A., Jay, L., & Daniel, S. (2015, August 17). Economic Analysis of the 2015 Drought For California Agriculture. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from https://watershed.ucdavis.edu/files/biblio/Fin al_Drought%20Report_08182015_Full_Report_ WithAppendices.pdf Rind, D. (1998). Just Add Water Vapor. Science, 281(5380), 1152–1153. Sagan, C., & Chyba, C. (1997). The Early Faint Sun Paradox: Organic Shielding of UltravioletLabile Greenhouse Gases. Science, 276(5316), 1217–1221. SCH. (2017). Low Birthweight. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from http://www.stanfordchildrens.org/en/topic/de fault?id=low-birthweight-90-P02382 Schoenherr, A. A. (2017). A Natural History of California: Second Edition. Shannon, M. (2017, May). Southwest Fresno Specific Plan. Retrieved November 9, 2017, from https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wpcontent/uploads/sites/10/2016/10/Southwest FresnoBookPublicReviewDraft051017red.pdf Sheffield, P. E., Knowlton, K., Carr, J. L., & Kinney, P. L. (2011). Modeling of Regional Climate Change Effects on Ground-Level Ozone and Childhood Asthma. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 41(3), 251–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2011.04.017 Smith, J. B., & Mendelsohn, R. O. (2006). The impact of climate change on regional systems: a comprehensive analysis of California. Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA: Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA : Edward Elgar Pub. 248

State of California. (2012). Reports on the Third Assessment from the California Climate Change Center. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from http://climatechange.ca.gov/climate_action_te am/reports/third_assessment/index.html Tai, P. ., Mickley, & Jacob, D. (2010). Correlations between fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and meteorological variables in the United States: Implications for the sensitivity of PM2.5 to climate change. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://wwwsciencedirectcom.proxy.library.cpp.edu/science/article/pii/ S135223101000539X Thuy, V. T. H., & Limmeechokchai, B. (2015). Analyses of Energy use and CO2 Emission in Residential Sector: Case Studies in Thailand and Vietnam. Energy Procedia, 79, 290–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.11.488 Tomkiewicz, M. (2011). Climate Change: The Fork at the End of Now. Highland Park: Highland Park : Momentum Press. US EIA. (2017, October 10). California. Retrieved November 27, 2017, from https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA US EPA. (2014a, April 9). Criteria Air Pollutants [Policies and Guidance]. Retrieved February 7, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/criteria-airpollutants US EPA. (2014b, August 12). Clean Air Markets [Collections and Lists]. Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets US EPA. (2016, January 12). Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved January 25, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/globalgreenhouse-gas-emissions-data US EPA. (2017, March 4). EPA’s Endangerment Finding: Climate Change Facts. Retrieved September 29, 2017, from https://web.archive.org/web/20170304110423 /https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/Downl oads/endangerment/EndangermentFinding_Cl imateChangeFacts.pdf USDM. (2017, 5). U.S. Drought Monitor. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from http://drought.unl.edu/MonitoringTools/USDr oughtMonitor.aspx

8.2 USGS. (2017, November 29). 2012-2016 California Drought: Historical Perspective. Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://ca.water.usgs.gov/californiadrought/california-drought-comparisons.html Vicuna, S., & Dracup, J. A. (2007). The evolution of climate change impact studies on hydrology and water resources in California. Climatic Change, 82(3–4), 327–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9207-2 Wang, A., & Lin, B. (2017). Assessing CO2 emissions in China’s commercial sector: Determinants and reduction strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 164, 1542–1552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.058 Weather Underground. (2018). Weather History for Fresno. Retrieved March 31, 2018, from https://www.wunderground.com/history/airp ort/KFAT/2017/1/1/CustomHistory.html?dayen d=31&monthend=12&yearend=2017&req_city =&req_state=&req_statename=&reqdb.zip=&r eqdb.magic=&reqdb.wmo= Willocks, L. J., Bhaskar, A., Ramsay, C. N., Lee, D., Brewster, D. H., Fischbacher, C. M., … Scott, E. M. (2012). Cardiovascular disease and air pollution in Scotland: no association or insufficient data and study design? BMC Public Health, 12(1), 227. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-227 Wooldridge, S. A., Done, T. J., Thomas, C. R., Gordon, I. I., Marshall, P. A., & Jones, R. N. (2012). Safeguarding coastal coral communities on the central Great Barrier Reef (Australia) against climate change: realizable local and global actions. Climatic Change, 112(3–4), 945–961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0229-z Yan, H., Wang, X., Hao, P., & Dong, L. (2012). Study on the microclimatic characteristics and human comfort of park plant communities in summer. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 13(Supplement C), 755–765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2012.01.069

Chapter 4 AAFA. (2017). Climate and Health Concerns for Asthma and Allergies. Retrieved December 10,

2017, from http://www.aafa.org/page/climateand-health.aspx Akbari, H. (2009). Cooling our Communities. A Guidebook on Tree Planting and Light-Colored Surfacing, 246. Akbari, H., & Konopacki, S. (2005). Calculating energy-saving potentials of heat-island reduction strategies. Energy Policy, 33(6), 721– 756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2003.10.001 Akbari, H., Pomerantz, M., & Taha, H. (2001). Cool surfaces and shade trees to reduce energy use and improve air quality in urban areas. Solar Energy, 70(3), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-092X(00)00089X Allen-Diaz, B. (2000). Biodiversity is critical to future health of California’s ecology and economy. California Agriculture, 54(2), 26–34. Amann, M., Derwent, D., & Forsberg, B. (2008). Health Risks of Ozone from Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution. Albany, SWITZERLAND: World Health Organization. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csupom ona/detail.action?docID=434236 Anderson, M. L. (2014). Subways, Strikes, and Slowdowns: The Impacts of Public Transit on Traffic Congestion. The American Economic Review; Nashville, 104(9), 2763–2796. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.cpp.edu/10.125 7/aer.104.9.2763 Annis, R. (2015, December 22). Bicycles Can Be a “Huge Part” of Combating Climate Change. Retrieved December 19, 2017, from https://www.bicycling.com/culture/advocacy/b icycles-can-be-a-huge-part-of-combatingclimate-change ARB. (2018). Auction Proceeds Co-benefits Page. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/cobenefits.htm ARB, & CARB. (2014). Greenhouse Gas Interim Quantification Methodology for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Wetlands Restoration for Greenhouse Gas Reduction Grant Program Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund Fiscal Year 2014-15. Retrieved May 9, 2018, from 249

8.2 https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/cdfwwetlandsqm.pdf Asgarian, A., Amiri, B. J., & Sakieh, Y. (2015). Assessing the effect of green cover spatial patterns on urban land surface temperature using landscape metrics approach. Urban Ecosystems; Salzburg, 18(1), 209–222. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.cpp.edu/10.100 7/s11252-014-0387-7 Ballantyne, A. P., Alden, C. B., Miller, J. B., Tans, P. P., & White, J. W. C. (2012). Increase in observed net carbon dioxide uptake by land and oceans during the past 50 years. Nature, 488(7409), 70–72. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11299 Barbour, M. G., Keeler-Wolf, T., & Schoenherr, A. A. (2007). Terrestrial vegetation of California. Bavin, T. K., Griffis, T. J., Baker, J. M., & Venterea, R. T. (2009). Impact of reduced tillage and cover cropping on the greenhouse gas budget of a maize/soybean rotation ecosystem. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 134(3), 234–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2009.07.005 Beganskas, S., & Fisher, A. T. (2017). Coupling distributed stormwater collection and managed aquifer recharge: Field application and implications. Journal of Environmental Management, 200, 366–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.05.05 8 Bernard, S. M., Samet, J. M., Grambsch, A., Ebi, K. L., & Romieu, I. (2001). The potential impacts of climate variability and change on air pollutionrelated health effects in the United States. Environmental Health Perspectives, 109(Suppl 2), 199–209. Bliss, S. (2010, Autumn). Leave the Leaves. Earth Island Journal; San Francisco, 25(3), 64. Bowler, D. E., Buyung-Ali, L., Knight, T. M., & Pullin, A. S. (2010). Urban greening to cool towns and cities: A systematic review of the empirical evidence. Landscape and Urban Planning, 97(3), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.05. 006 Brown, R. . D., Vanos, J. K., Kenny, N., & Lenzholzer, S. (2015, March). Designing urban parks that ameliorate the effects of climate... Retrieved April 9, 2018, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273 250

524508_Designing_urban_parks_that_amelior ate_the_effects_of_climate_change Brugge, D., Durant, J. L., & Rioux, C. (2007). Near-highway pollutants in motor vehicle exhaust: A review of epidemiologic evidence of cardiac and pulmonary health risks. Environmental Health, 6, 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-6-23 Burton, F. L., & Stern, F. (1993). Water and wastewater industries: Characteristics and DSM opportunities. Ca, V. T., Asaeda, T., & Abu, E. M. (1998). Reductions in air conditioning energy caused by a nearby park. Energy and Buildings, 29(1), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S03787788(98)00032-2 California Emergency Management Agency, Natural Resources Agency, Federal Emergency Management Agency, California Energy Commission, & California State University, San Luis Obispo. (2012). Planning for Adaptive Communities. Retrieved December 1, 2017, from http://resources.ca.gov/docs/climate/01APG_P lanning_for_Adaptive_Communities.pdf California Energy Commission. (2016, November 3). California’s Declining Reliance on Coal. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/trackin g_progress/documents/current_expected_ene rgy_from_coal.pdf California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. (2017). Learning By Doing. Retrieved December 12, 2017, from https://www.cpp.edu/~aboutcpp/whycpp/learning-by-doing.shtml Cao, Xin, Onishi, A., Chen, J., & Imura, H. (2010). Quantifying the cool island intensity of urban parks using ASTER and IKONOS data. Landscape and Urban Planning, 96(4), 224–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.03. 008 Cao, Xuejuan, Tang, B., Zou, X., & He, L. (2015). Analysis on the cooling effect of a heatreflective coating for asphalt pavement. Road Materials and Pavement Design, 16(3), 716–726. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2015.10263 83 CARB. (2017a). Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds Co-benefit Assessment Methods.

8.2 Retrieved November 21, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/cobenefits.htm CARB. (2017b). Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds Quantification Materials. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/quantification_jb081817-5alt.htm CARB. (2017c). Greenhouse Gas Quantification Methodology for California Air Resources Board Low Carbon Transportation Program Car Sharing and Mobility Options in Disadvantaged Communities Pilot Project. Retrieved April 11, 2018, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/carb_csmo_finalqm_16-17.pdf CARB. (2017d). Greenhouse Gas Quantification Methodology for the California Natural Resources Agency Urban Greening Grant Program. Retrieved December 27, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/cnra_finalqm_16-17.pdf CARB. (2017e). Greenhouse Gas Quantification Methodology for the California State Transportation Agency Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program. Retrieved December 4, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/tircp_qm_16-17.pdf CARB. (2017f). Greenhouse Gas Quantification Methodology for the California Transportation Commission Active Transportation Program. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/ctc_atp_finalqm_16-17.pdf CARB. (2017g, August 14). Greenhouse Gas Quantification Methodology for the Strategic Growth Council Transformative Climate Communities Program. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/sgc_tcc_finalqm_16-17.pdf CARB. (2018, April 20). Asthma/Respiratory Disease Incidence Draft Co-benefit Assessment Methodology. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/draft_asthma_am.pdf Center for Resource Efficient Communities. (2017, August 18). Methods to Assess Co-

Benefits of California Climate Investments: Climate Adaptation Enhancement. Retrieved December 1, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/ucb_lit_rev_on_climate_adaptatio n.pdf Chandler, D. (2016). Can today’s EVs make a dent in climate change? Retrieved December 20, 2017, from http://news.mit.edu/2016/electric-vehiclesmake-dent-climate-change-0815 Chen, Z., & Ma, D. (2012). Effectiveness of Solar Heat Reflective Coatings in Reducing Asphalt Concrete Temperature. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 40(5), 20120069. https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE20120069 Chiandet, A. S., & Xenopoulos, M. A. (2016). Landscape and morphometric controls on water quality in stormwater management ponds. Urban Ecosystems, 19(4), 1645–1663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-016-0559-8 Churkina, G., Brown, D. G., & Keoleian, G. (2010). Carbon stored in human settlements: the conterminous United States. Global Change Biology, 16(1), 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652486.2009.02002.x City of Fresno. (2016, December). City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan. Retrieved November 27, 2017, from https://www.fresno.gov/publicworks/wpcontent/uploads/sites/17/2016/09/170022Fres noATPFinal012017.pdf City of Fresno. (2017). Street Tree List. Retrieved April 9, 2018, from https://www.fresno.gov/publicworks/wpcontent/uploads/sites/17/2016/09/StreetTreeL ist.pdf City of Fresno: Department of Public Utilities. (2016). Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF). Retrieved May 9, 2018, from https://www.fresno.gov/publicutilities/facilitie s-infrastructure/fresno-clovis-regionalwastewater-reclamation-facility-rwrf/ City of Fresno, & FAX. (2017, November). FAX Route Restructuring. Retrieved April 6, 2018, from https://www.fresno.gov/transportation/wpcontent/uploads/sites/13/2017/09/FAX-RouteRestructure-Sudy-WS-PPT-110517-GV10.pdf 251

8.2 citypark, F. (2017). Park Acres Per Resident. Retrieved May 28, 2018, from https://energycenter.org/equinox/dashboard/ park-acres-resident Clough, C. W. (1984). Fresno County in the 20th century: from 1900 to the 1980s (1st ed.). Fresno, Calif.: Fresno, Calif. : Panorama West Books. College of Environmental Design. (2017, September 20). Landscape Architecture: Graduate Program Guide for Prospective Students. Retrieved December 12, 2017, from https://livecsupomonamy.sharepoint.com/personal/wli_cpp_edu/Do cuments/Document/20172018/GraduateProgram/Admission/Admission Packages/Program_Guide/MLA_CPP_Program _Guide-signed.pdf?slrid=8ab5359e-7094-4000c699-621aec3bfbf5 CPPLA, UCLA Department of Landscape Architecture, & City of LA Bureau of Sanitation. (2013). Grass. Retrieved December 12, 2017, from http://www.lastormwater.org/wpcontent/files_mf/grasssummaryreport.pdf Data USA. (2017). Fresno, CA. Retrieved May 9, 2018, from https://datausa.io/profile/geo/fresnoca/#category_transportation Davey, P. A., Olcer, H., Zakhleniuk, O., Bernacchi, C. J., Calfapietra, C., Long, S. P., & Raines, C. A. (2006). Can fast‐growing plantation trees escape biochemical down‐ regulation of photosynthesis when grown throughout their complete production cycle in the open air under elevated carbon dioxide? Plant, Cell & Environment, 29(7), 1235–1244. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13653040.2006.01503.x de la Barrera, F., Reyes-Paecke, S., & Banzhaf, E. (2016). Indicators for green spaces in contrasting urban settings. Ecological Indicators, 62(Supplement C), 212–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.10.027 Duffy, W., & Kahara, S. (2011). Wetland ecosystem services in California’s Central Valley and implications for the Wetland Reserve Program. Ecological Applications ECOL APPL, 21. https://doi.org/10.1890/091338.1 252

Eberly, T., & Anderson, B. (2006). A fatal summer: The first major heat wave in the Valley in nearly a century led to 36 heatrelated deaths in Fresno, Kings, Madera and Tulare counties. McClatchy - Tribune Business News, 1. Edwards, E. C., Harter, T., Fogg, G. E., Washburn, B., & Hamad, H. (2016). Assessing the effectiveness of drywells as tools for stormwater management and aquifer recharge and their groundwater contamination potential. Journal of Hydrology, 539, 539–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.05.059 EHP, & NIH. (2010, April 22). A Human Health Perspective on Climate Change. Retrieved December 11, 2017, from https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/materials/a_ human_health_perspective_on_climate_chang e_full_report_508.pdf Elgowainy, A., Han, J., Poch, L., Wang, M., Vyas, A., Mahalik, M., & Rousseau, A. (2010, June). Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles. Retrieved May 9, 2018, from https://www.afdc.energy.gov/pdfs/argonne_p hev_evaluation_report.pdf Exxon Mobil. (2018). 2018 Outlook for Enrgy: A view to 2040. Retrieved May 9, 2018, from http://cdn.exxonmobil.com/~/media/global/fil es/outlook-forenergy/2017/2017_outlook_for_energy_glossa ry.pdf Fishman, E. (2016). Bikeshare: A Review of Recent Literature. Transport Reviews, 36(1), 92–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2015.10330 36 Fresno Irrigation District. (2017). Departments. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.fresnoirrigation.com/index.php?c =16 Gill, S. E., Handley, J. F., Ennos, A. R., & Pauleit, S. (2007). Adapting Cities for Climate Change: The Role of the Green Infrastructure. CLIMATE CHANGE AND CITIES, 33(1), 115–133. Gómez F., Jabaloyes J., & Vañó E. (2004). Green Zones in the Future of Urban Planning. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 130(2), 94– 100. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)07339488(2004)130:2(94)

8.2 Goodridge, J. (1989). Air temperature trends in California: 1916 to 1987. Chico, Calif.: publisher not identified. Gregory McPherson, E., & Simpson. (1999). Carbon Dioxide Reduction Through Urban Forestry: Guidelines for Professional and Volunteer Tree Planters. Retrieved May 6, 2018, from https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/topics/urban_fores try/products/cufr_43.pdf Hamblin, J. (2014). How Trees Actually Improve Your Quality of Life. Retrieved January 25, 2018, from http://www.citylab.com/housing/2014/07/how -trees-can-improve-your-quality-oflife/375238/ Hamilton, T., & Wichman, C. (2015). Bicycle Infrastructure and Traffic Congestion: Evidence from DC’s Capital Bikeshare (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 2649978). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2649978 Handy, S. L., Xing, Y., & Buehler, T. J. (2010). Factors associated with bicycle ownership and use: a study of six small U.S. cities. Transportation; New York, 37(6), 967–985. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.cpp.edu/10.100 7/s11116-010-9269-x Hausfather, Z., Menne, M. J., Williams, C. N., Masters, T., Broberg, R., & Jones, D. (2013). Quantifying the effect of urbanization on U.S. Historical Climatology Network temperature records: QUANTIFYING URBANIZATION BIAS IN USHCN. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 118(2), 481–494. https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018509 Heathcock, A. (2014, October 12). How California’s Central Valley went from breadbasket to wasteland. Retrieved December 21, 2017, from http://theweek.com/articles/443170/howcalifornias-central-valley-went-frombreadbasket-wasteland Hostetter, G., & The Fresno Bee. (2015, February 15). Recycled water project adds to Fresno water-rate debate. Retrieved May 9, 2018, from http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article 19535397.html Humpenöder, F., Popp, A., Stevanovic, M., Müller, C., Bodirsky, B. L., Bonsch, M., …

Rolinski, S. (2015). Land-Use and Carbon Cycle Responses to Moderate Climate Change: Implications for Land-Based Mitigation? Environmental Science & Technology, 49(11), 6731–6739. https://doi.org/10.1021/es506201r Jauregui, E. (1990). Influence of a large urban park on temperature and convective precipitation in a tropical city. Energy and Buildings, 15(3), 457–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-7788(90)90021-A Johnson, S., Haslam, G. W., & Dawson, R. (1993). The great central valley: California’s heartland. Berkeley: University of California Press. Kenney, L. W., Craighead, D. H., & Alexander, L. M. (2014). Heat Waves, Aging, and Human Cardiovascular Health. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 46(10), 1891–1899. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.00000000000003 25 Ko, Y., Lee, J.-H., Mcpherson, E. G., & Roman, L. A. (2015). Long-term monitoring of Sacramento Shade program trees: Tree survival, growth and energy-saving performance. Landscape and Urban Planning, 143, 183–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.07. 017 Kotthaus, S., & Grimmond, C. S. B. (2012). Identification of Micro-scale Anthropogenic CO2, heat and moisture sources – Processing eddy covariance fluxes for a dense urban environment. Atmospheric Environment, 57(Supplement C), 301–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.04.0 24 KPCC, 89 3. (n.d.). City Of Fresno August water use. Retrieved June 28, 2018, from http://projects.scpr.org/applications/monthlywater-use// Lal, R., Negassa, W., & Lorenz, K. (2015). Carbon sequestration in soil. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 15(Supplement C), 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.09.002 Li, H., Harvey, J. T., Holland, T. J., & Kayhanian, M. (2013). The use of reflective and permeable pavements as a potential practice for heat island mitigation and stormwater management. Environmental Research Letters, 253

8.2 8(1), 015023. https://doi.org/10.1088/17489326/8/1/015023 Litke, S., Roland-Holst, D., Harb, M., & Belal, S. (2017, October 13). Energy and Fuel Costs. Retrieved December 6, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/ucb_lit_rev_on_energy_fuel_cost.p df MacRebur. (2017). MacRebur. Retrieved April 13, 2018, from http://www.macrebur.com/wpcontent/uploads/2017/11/MR_products_web. pdf Manning, D. A. C., & Renforth, P. (2013). Passive Sequestration of Atmospheric CO2 through Coupled Plant-Mineral Reactions in Urban soils. Environmental Science & Technology, 47(1), 135–141. https://doi.org/10.1021/es301250j Mason, J., Fulton, L., & McDonald, Z. (2015). The Potential for Dramatically Increasing Bicycle and E-bike Use in Cities Around the World, with Estimated Energy, CO2, and Cost Impacts. Retrieved December 19, 2017, from https://3gozaa3xxbpb499ejp30lxc8wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/11/A-Global-High-ShiftCycling-Scenario_Nov-2015.pdf Maus, J. (2016, July 20). Over 2,300 trips taken on Biketown bike share in first 24 hours. Retrieved April 7, 2018, from https://bikeportland.org/2016/07/20/over2300-trips-taken-on-biketown-bike-share-infirst-24-hours-187922 Mcpherson, E. G., Nowak, D., Heisler, G., Grimmond, S., Souch, C., Grant, R., & Rowntree, R. (1997). Quantifying urban forest structure, function, and value: the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. Urban Ecosystems; Salzburg, 1(1), 49–61. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.cpp.edu/10.102 3/A:1014350822458 McPherson, E. G., & Simpson, J. R. (2003). Potential energy savings in buildings by an urban tree planting programme in California. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2: 73-86, 2, 73–86. McPherson, E. Gregory, & Simpson, J. R. (1999). Carbon dioxide reduction through urban forestry: guidelines for professional and 254

volunteer tree planters (No. PSW-GTR-171). Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station. https://doi.org/10.2737/PSW-GTR-171 Mcpherson, E., & Simpson, J. (1995). Shade trees as a demand-side resource (Vol. 12). McPherson, E.G., & Young, R. (2010). Understanding the challenges of municipal tree planting | Treesearch. Retrieved July 4, 2018, from https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/381 07 Mees, H.-L. P., & Driessen, P. P. J. (2011). Adaptation to climate change in urban areas: Climategreening London, Rotterdam, and Toronto. Climate Law, 2(2), 251–280. https://doi.org/10.1163/CL-2011-036 Mitchell, J. P., Shrestha, A., Horwath, W. R., Southard, R. J., Madden, N., Veenstra, J., & Munk, D. S. (2015). Tillage and Cover Cropping Affect Crop Yields and Soil Carbon in the San Joaquin Valley, California. Agronomy Journal, 107(2), 588–596. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj14.0415 Montenegro, A., & Arora, V. K. (2011). Small temperature benefits provided by realistic afforestation efforts. Nature Geoscience, 4(8), ngeo1182. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1182 NACTO. (2017). Bike Share in the US: 2010-2016. Retrieved April 6, 2018, from https://nacto.org/bike-share-statistics-2016/ Nemitz, E., Hargreaves, K. J., McDonald, A. G., Dorsey, J. R., & Fowler, D. (2002). Micrometeorological Measurements of the Urban Heat Budget and CO2 Emissions on a City Scale. Environmental Science & Technology, 36(14), 3139–3146. https://doi.org/10.1021/es010277e Ning, Z. (2008). Carbon sequestration via wood burial. Carbon Balance and Management, 3(1), 1. Nowak, D. J., & Greenfield, E. J. (2012). Tree and impervious cover change in U.S. cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 11(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2011.11.005 Nowak, D. J., Greenfield, E. J., Hoehn, R. E., & Lapoint, E. (2013). Carbon storage and sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the United States.

8.2 Environmental Pollution, 178, 229–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.019 Nowak, D. J., Hirabayashi, S., Bodine, A., & Greenfield, E. (2014). Tree and forest effects on air quality and human health in the United States. Environmental Pollution, 193, 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2014.05.028 Pando, L., Pulgar, J. A., & Gutiérrez-Claverol, M. (2013). A case of man-induced ground subsidence and building settlement related to karstified gypsum (Oviedo, NW Spain). Environmental Earth Sciences, 68(2), 507–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-012-1755-3 Passengers per Vehicle per Day (ppvpd). (n.d.). Retrieved May 21, 2018, from https://ppiaf.org/sites/ppiaf.org/files/docume nts/toolkits/UrbanBusToolkit/assets/1/1c/1c12 .html Priceconomics Data Studio. (2017, March 1). Public Bike Sharing: Analyzing the Usage Data in US Cities. Retrieved April 7, 2018, from https://priceonomics.com/public-bike-sharinganalyzing-the-usage-data-in-us/ Pucher, J., Komanoff, C., & Schimek, P. (1999). Bicycling renaissance in North America?: Recent trends and alternative policies to promote bicycling. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 33(7), 625–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-8564(99)000105 Recharge Fresno. (2017). Fresno’s Water Supply Portfolio. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from http://www.rechargefresno.com/watersupply-portfolio/ Remais, J. V., Hess, J. J., Ebi, K. L., Markandya, A., Balbus, J. M., Wilkinson, P., … Chalabi, Z. (2014). Estimating the Health Effects of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Strategies: Addressing Parametric, Model, and Valuation Challenges. Environmental Health Perspectives (Online); Research Triangle Park, 122(5), 447. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.cpp.edu/10.128 9/ehp.1306744 Roman, L., & N. Scatena, F. (2011). Street tree survival rates: Meta-analysis of previous studies and application to a field survey in Philadelphia, PA, USA (Vol. 10). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2011.05.008

Roman, L., & Scatena, F. N. (2011). Street tree survival rates: Meta-analysis of previous studies and application to a field survey in Philadelphia, PA, USA | Request PDF. Retrieved July 4, 2018, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238 003598_Street_tree_survival_rates_Metaanalysis_of_previous_studies_and_application _to_a_field_survey_in_Philadelphia_PA_USA Rosenberg, D. E., Kopp, K., Kratsch, H. A., Rupp, L., Johnson, P., & Kjelgren, R. (2011). Value Landscape Engineering: Identifying Costs, Water Use, Labor, and Impacts to Support Landscape Choice. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 47(3), 635–649. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17521688.2011.00530.x Rosenfeld, R., & Rosenfeld, A. H. (1998). Cool communities: strategies for heat island mitigation and smog reduction. Energy, 28(1), 51–62. Rosso, F., Pisello, A. L., Castaldo, V. L., Fabiani, C., Cotana, F., Ferrero, M., & Jin, W. (2017). New cool concrete for building envelopes and urban paving: Optics-energy and thermal assessment in dynamic conditions. Energy and Buildings, 151(Supplement C), 381–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.06.051 Rouhani, O. M., Niemeier, D., Knittel, C. R., & Madani, K. (2013). Integrated modeling framework for leasing urban roads: A case study of Fresno, California. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 48(Supplement C), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2012.10.005 Roy, A. H., Rhea, L. K., Mayer, A. L., Shuster, W. D., Beaulieu, J. J., Hopton, M. E., … Amand, A. S. (2014). How Much Is Enough? Minimal Responses of Water Quality and Stream Biota to Partial Retrofit Stormwater Management in a Suburban Neighborhood. PLOS ONE, 9(1), e85011. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085011 Sallis, J. F., Spoon, C., Cavill, N., Engelberg, J. K., Gebel, K., Parker, M., … Ding, D. (2015). Cobenefits of designing communities for active living: an exploration of literature. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 12, 30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0188-2 255

8.2 Shahidan, M. F., Shariff, M. K. M., Jones, P., Salleh, E., & Abdullah, A. M. (2010). A comparison of Mesua ferrea L. and Hura crepitans L. for shade creation and radiation modification in improving thermal comfort. Landscape and Urban Planning, 97(3), 168–181. Shashua-Bar, S.-B., & Shashua-Bar, L. (2000). Vegetation as a climatic component in the design of an urban street: An empirical model for predicting the cooling effect of urban green areas with trees. Energy, 31(3), 221–235. Shigo, A. (1996). HOW TREES SURVIVE. Retrieved from http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/shig o/SURVIVE.html Siade, A., Nishikawa, T., & Martin, P. (2015). Natural recharge estimation and uncertainty analysis of an adjudicated groundwater basin using a regional-scale flow and subsidence model (Antelope Valley, California, USA). Hydrogeology Journal, 23(6), 1267–1291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-015-1281-y Solaimanian, M., & Kennedy, T. W. (1993). PREDICTING MAXIMUM PAVEMENT SURFACE TEMPERATURE USING MAXIMUM AIR TEMPERATURE AND HOURLY SOLAR RADIATION. Transportation Research Record, (1417). Retrieved from https://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=389656 State of California. (2008). Managing An Uncertain Future: Climate Change Adaptation Strategies for California’s Water. Retrieved April 5, 2018, from https://www.water.ca.gov/LegacyFiles/climate change/docs/ClimateChangeWhitePaper.pdf Sudeep, N., Biju, G., Hector M, M., Meenakshi, A., & Bandara, N. (2014, May 23). Water– energy–greenhouse gas nexus of urban water systems: Review of concepts, state-of-art and methods. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.doc uments/41393185/Waterenergygreenhouse_g as_nexus_of_urban20160121-130788pqqqx.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYG Z2Y53UL3A&Expires=1511161742&Signature= RFo9uCAYdsr7b1HpfZLXIy72H7k%3D&respon se-contentdisposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DWater _energy_greenhouse_gas_nexus_of_urb.pdf 256

Taha, H., Akbari, H., & Rosenfeld, A. (1991). Heat island and oasis effects of vegetative canopies: Micro-meteorological fieldmeasurements. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 44(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00867999 Taha, Haider. (1996). Modeling impacts of increased urban vegetation on ozone air quality in the South Coast Air Basin. Atmospheric Environment, 30(20), 3423–3430. https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(96)00035-0 Takebayashi, H. (2017). Influence of Urban Green Area on Air Temperature of Surrounding BuiltUp Area. Climate, 5(3), 60. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli5030060 Talen, E. (2002). Pedestrian Access as a Measure of Urban Quality. Planning Practice & Research, 17(3), 257–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/026974502200005634 Tao, Y., Li, F., Liu, X., Zhao, D., Sun, X., & Xu, L. (2015). Variation in ecosystem services across an urbanization gradient: A study of terrestrial carbon stocks from Changzhou, China. Ecological Modelling, 318(Supplement C), 210– 216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.04.0 27 Turner, D. A., Williams, I. D., & Kemp, S. (2015). Greenhouse gas emission factors for recycling of source-segregated waste materials. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 105(Part A), 186–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.10.0 26 UCLA. (2012). UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from http://healthpolicy.ucla.edu/programs/healthdata/Pages/overview.aspx Union of Concerned Scientists. (2014). Global Warming Emissions and Fuel-Cost Savings of Electric Cars (2012). Retrieved December 20, 2017, from https://www.ucsusa.org/cleanvehicles/electric-vehicles/emissions-andcharging-costs-electric-cars US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, & USBR. (2008, March). Water Supply and Yield Study. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvp/docs/watersupply-and-field-study.pdf

8.2 U.S. Department of Transportation, & Federal Transit Administration. (2010). Public Transportation’s Role in Responding to Climate Change. Retrieved December 19, 2017, from https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/fi les/docs/PublicTransportationsRoleInRespond ingToClimateChange2010.pdf US EIA. (2017a, April 18). What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source? Retrieved November 27, 2017, from https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=42 7&t=3 US EIA. (2017b, October 10). California. Retrieved November 27, 2017, from https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA US EIA. (2018). United States Electricity Profile 2016. Retrieved April 4, 2018, from https://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/unitedsta tes/index.php US EPA. (2009). Where Does My Electricity Come From? Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://blog.epa.gov/blog/2009/09/wheredoes-my-electricity-come-from/ US EPA. (2013a, April 8). About Smart Growth [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/aboutsmart-growth US EPA. (2013b, April 30). Bike To Work [Collections and Lists]. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/whatyou-can-do/bike-to-work US EPA. (2014a, May). Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey= P100LQ99.pdf US EPA. (2014b, June 17). Heat Island Impacts [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/heat-islands/heat-islandimpacts US EPA. (2014c, June 17). Using Trees and Vegetation to Reduce Heat Islands [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved December 19, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/heatislands/using-trees-and-vegetation-reduceheat-islands

US EPA. (2015a, December 16). Climate Change Indicators: Greenhouse Gases [Reports and Assessments]. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/climateindicators/greenhouse-gases US EPA. (2015b, December 29). Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sourcesgreenhouse-gas-emissions US EPA. (2016, March 1). Workplace Electric Vehicle Charging Stations in California’s South Coast [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/cati/workplace-electricvehicle-charging-stations-californias-southcoast US EPA. (2017a). EPA’s Endangerment Finding. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/20 1608/documents/endangermentfinding_health.p df US EPA. (2017b). Water-Energy Connection. Retrieved April 5, 2018, from https://www3.epa.gov/region9/waterinfrastru cture/waterenergy.html US EPA, 1998. (1998). Method for Calculating Carbon Sequestration by Trees in Urban and Suburban Settings, 16. US EPA, O. (2013, April 8). National Award for Smart Growth Achievement [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved December 7, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/nationalaward-smart-growth-achievement USDA, I. tree. (2011). iTree Canopy Technical Notes. Retrieved May 23, 2018, from https://canopy.itreetools.org/resources/iTree_ Canopy_Methodology.pdf USDE. (1998). 1998 Sequestration Worksheet, 16. USDE. (2017). Electric Vehicles: Learn More About the Label. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/label/learnmore-electric-label.shtml USDE. (2018, April 3). Alternative Fuels Data Center: Charging Plug-In Electric Vehicles at 257

8.2 Home. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from https://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_ charging_home.html Vicente-Vicente, J. L., García-Ruiz, R., Francaviglia, R., Aguilera, E., & Smith, P. (2016). Soil carbon sequestration rates under Mediterranean woody crops using recommended management practices: A meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 235(Supplement C), 204–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.10.024 Vogt, J. M., Watkins, S. L., Mincey, S. K., Patterson, M. S., & Fischer, B. C. (2015). Explaining planted-tree survival and growth in urban neighborhoods: A social–ecological approach to studying recently-planted trees in Indianapolis. Landscape and Urban Planning, 136(C), 130–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.11. 021 Wilkinson, R. (2006). METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYSIS OF THE NERGY INTENSITY OF CALIFORNIA’S WATER SYSTEMS, AND AN ASSSESSMENT OF MULTIPLE POTENTIAL BENEFITS THROUGH INTEGRATED WATERENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph240 /spearrin1/docs/wilkinson.pdf Wood, L., Hooper, P., Foster, S., & Bull, F. (2017). Public green spaces and positive mental health – investigating the relationship between access, quantity and types of parks and mental wellbeing. Health and Place, 48, 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2017.09. 002 Yan, H., Wang, X., Hao, P., & Dong, L. (2012). Study on the microclimatic characteristics and human comfort of park plant communities in summer. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 13(Supplement C), 755–765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2012.01.069 Zhang, L., Feng, Y., Meng, Q., & Zhang, Y. (2015). Experimental study on the building evaporative cooling by using the Climatic Wind Tunnel. Energy and Buildings, 104, 360– 368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.07.038 258

Zhao, M., Kong, Z., Escobedo, F. J., & Gao, J. (2010). Impacts of urban forests on offsetting carbon emissions from industrial energy use in Hangzhou, China. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(4), 807–813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.10.01 0

Chapter 5 2010 Conditions and Performance - Policy | Federal Highway Administration. (n.d.). Retrieved May 21, 2018, from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/2010cpr/cha p1.cfm 2017-City-Population-Rank.pdf. (2017). Retrieved May 19, 2018, from https://www.cacities.org/ResourcesDocuments/About-Us/Careers/2017-CityPopulation-Rank.aspx ALPOLIC. (2016, January 19). Lions Park: Citizen Architects Transform Their Community. Retrieved March 26, 2018, from http://www.alpolic-americas.com/lions-park/ American Public Transportation Association. (2017, September 1). Transit Ridership Report: Second Quarter 2017. Retrieved May 21, 2018, from http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Doc uments/Ridership/2017-q2-ridership-APTA.pdf Anciaes, P. R., & Jones, P. (2018). Estimating preferences for different types of pedestrian crossing facilities. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 52, 222– 237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2017.11.025 Ari. (2015, March 3). The Amateur Planner: Bus efficiency: Passengers per Bus. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from http://amateurplanner.blogspot.com/2015/03 /bus-efficiency-passengers-per-bus.html ASLA. (2010). Rooftop Haven for Urban Agriculture. Retrieved April 10, 2018, from https://www.asla.org/2010awards/377.html Astec Energy Star. (2010). Heat Reflective Paint – ASTEC Paints. Retrieved May 18, 2018, from http://www.astecpaints.com.au/heatreflective-paint.html

8.2 Boyer, M. (2012). Rural Studio’s Lions Park Playscape in Alabama is Made from 2,000 Recycled Steel Drums. Retrieved March 26, 2018, from https://inhabitat.com/auburnuniversity-rural-studios-lions-park-playscapeis-made-from-2000-recycled-steel-drums/ Brown, R. . D., Vanos, J. K., Kenny, N., & Lenzholzer, S. (2015, March). Designing urban parks that ameliorate the effects of climate... Retrieved April 9, 2018, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273 524508_Designing_urban_parks_that_amelior ate_the_effects_of_climate_change Brugge, D., Durant, J. L., & Rioux, C. (2007). Near-highway pollutants in motor vehicle exhaust: A review of epidemiologic evidence of cardiac and pulmonary health risks. Environmental Health, 6, 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-6-23 Bureau of Transportation. (2017, May 31). National Household Travel Survey Daily Travel Quick Facts. Retrieved May 19, 2018, from https://www.bts.gov/statisticalproducts/surveys/national-household-travelsurvey-daily-travel-quick-facts Burgess, J., Harrison, C. M., & Limb, M. (1988). People, Parks and the Urban Green: A Study of Popular Meanings and Values for Open Spaces in the City. Urban Studies, 25(6), 455– 473. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420988820080631 California Department of Transportation, f. (2017). Traffic Census Program. Retrieved May 19, 2018, from http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/ California Department of Transportation, Division of Transportation Planning, & Office of State Planning. (2002, December). California Travel Trends and Demographics Study. Retrieved May 21, 2018, from https://www.google.com/search?ei=ZIwCW_vY Dsjf0gLmqYLAAw&q=in+san+diego+car+trips+ per+day&oq=in+san+diego+car+trips+per+da y&gs_l=psyab.3...2618.4682.0.4906.10.10.0.0.0.0.119.728. 5j3.8.0....0...1c.1.64.psyab..5.0.0....0.agQoE3Yvh34 California Water Boards. (2018). Water Conservation Portal - Conservation Reporting | California State Water Resources Control

Board. Retrieved May 18, 2018, from https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues /programs/conservation_portal/conservation_ reporting.html CDPR. (2015). Meeting the Park Needs of All Californians: 2015 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. Retrieved April 9, 2018, from http://www.parksforcalifornia.org/data/Calif_S CORP2015_ScreenRes.pdf City of Fresno. (2016). Fresno Parks Vision 2050. Retrieved February 6, 2018, from https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wpcontent/uploads/sites/10/2016/10/FresnoVisio n_ParksMasterPlanweb.pdf CLI. (2008). Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Act of 2008. Retrieved April 9, 2018, from http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextC lient.xhtml?bill_id=200720080AB31 Commonwealth of Massachusetts. (2018). The Big Dig: Project Background. Retrieved April 11, 2018, from https://www.mass.gov/servicedetails/the-big-dig-project-background Conti, M. (2012, July 19). Walking the Labarinth at Armenian Heritage Park. Retrieved April 11, 2018, from https://northendwaterfront.com/2012/07/mai ntenance-firm-hired-for-armenian-heritagepark-not-the-greenway-conservancy/ Department of Water Resources. (2009, September 10). Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Retrieved May 23, 2018, from https://www.water.ca.gov/LegacyFiles/waterus eefficiency/docs/MWELO09-10-09.pdf ESChapter4.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved May 22, 2018, from https://www.metrotransit.org/Data/Sites/1/m edia/pdfs/east_side/ESChapter4.pdf Federal Highway Administration. (2017). National Household Travel Survey. Retrieved May 19, 2018, from https://nhts.ornl.gov/ Gallowa, D., & Riley, F. S. (1999). San Joaquin Valley: California Largest Human Alteration of the Earth’s Surface., 1182, 23–34. Gray, M. (2018). Spin Laundry Lounge. Retrieved April 17, 2018, from https://www.deluxe.com/small-businessrevolution/story/spin-laundry-lounge/ 259

8.2 Green, J. (2011, May 17). How to Design a Bicycle City. Retrieved April 10, 2018, from https://dirt.asla.org/2011/05/17/how-todesign-a-bicycle-city/ Green, J. (2015). Designed for the future: 80 practical ideas for a sustainable world. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Griffin, G. P., & Sener, I. N. (2016). Planning for Bike Share Connectivity to Rail Transit. Journal of Public Transportation, 19(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.19.2.1 Heesch, K. C., Sahlqvist, S., & Garrard, J. (2012). Gender differences in recreational and transport cycling: a cross-sectional mixedmethods comparison of cycling patterns, motivators, and constraints. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 9, 106. https://doi.org/10.1186/14795868-9-106 Hinds, J., & Sparks, P. (2011). The Affective Quality of Human-Natural Environment Relationships. Evolutionary Psychology, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/147470491100900314 Humpenöder, F., Popp, A., Stevanovic, M., Müller, C., Bodirsky, B. L., Bonsch, M., … Rolinski, S. (2015). Land-Use and Carbon Cycle Responses to Moderate Climate Change: Implications for Land-Based Mitigation? Environmental Science & Technology, 49(11), 6731–6739. https://doi.org/10.1021/es506201r Koc, C. B., Osmond, P., & Peters, A. (2016). A Green Infrastructure Typology Matrix to Support Urban Microclimate Studies. Procedia Engineering, 169, 183–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.10.022 KPCC, 89 3. (2017). City Of Fresno August water use. Retrieved May 18, 2018, from http://projects.scpr.org/applications/monthlywater-use// Lal, R., Negassa, W., & Lorenz, K. (2015). Carbon sequestration in soil. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 15(Supplement C), 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.09.002 Lehmann, S. (2014). Low carbon districts: Mitigating the urban heat island with green roof infrastructure. City, Culture and Society, 5(1), 1– 8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2014.02.002 Levenson, M. (2013). Greenway becomes people’s park in Boston. Retrieved October 16, 2017, 260

from http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/08/ 17/rose-fitzgerald-kennedy-greenway-drawsincreasing-crowds-becomes-peoplepark/5gTs1YwnXy22ANvAeNrYrL/story.html Li, H., Harvey, J. T., Holland, T. J., & Kayhanian, M. (2013). The use of reflective and permeable pavements as a potential practice for heat island mitigation and stormwater management. Environmental Research Letters, 8(1), 015023. https://doi.org/10.1088/17489326/8/1/015023 Los Angeles Metro. (2018). News and Media Now. Retrieved May 21, 2018, from https://www.metro.net/news/ METRO. (2014). First Last Mile Strategic Plan. Retrieved February 5, 2018, from http://media.metro.net/docs/sustainability_pa th_design_guidelines.pdf MGC. (2018). About the Greenway. Retrieved March 26, 2018, from http://midtowngreenway.org/about-thegreenway/ Nowak, D. J., & Greenfield, E. J. (2012). Tree and impervious cover change in U.S. cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 11(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2011.11.005 Oak Ridge National Laboratory. (2018, April 30). Transportation Energy Data Book. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from https://cta.ornl.gov/data/index.shtml Recharge Fresno. (2017). Fresno’s Water Supply Portfolio. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from http://www.rechargefresno.com/watersupply-portfolio/ Sallis, J. F., Spoon, C., Cavill, N., Engelberg, J. K., Gebel, K., Parker, M., … Ding, D. (2015). Cobenefits of designing communities for active living: an exploration of literature. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 12, 30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0188-2 Schlanger, Z., & Schlanger, Z. (2017). Legal levels of air pollution are killing the elderly. Retrieved February 3, 2018, from https://qz.com/1166010/air-pollution-even-atlevels-that-meet-national-standards-causespremature-death/

8.2 Schwarzenegger, A., & California Energy Commission. (2006). Refining Estimates of Water-Related Energy Use in California, 95. Spearrin, M. (2012, November 30). Energy Costs of Water in California. Retrieved May 21, 2018, from http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph240 /spearrin1/ SRF. (2018). Midtown Greenway Planning and Design. Retrieved March 26, 2018, from https://www.srfconsulting.com/news/projects/ midtown-greenway-planning-and-design/ TGW. (2018). Greenway Conservancy. Retrieved October 16, 2017, from https://www.rosekennedygreenway.org/about -us/ Thoren, R. (2014). Landscapes of change : innovative designs and reinvented sites. Retrieved from https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/detail.jsp ?Entt=RDM3175572&R=3175572 TPL. (2016). 2016 City Park Facts. Retrieved January 31, 2018, from https://www.tpl.org/2016-cityparkfacts#sm.001g5uhvh7jcdz310n41x1ok0c0t8 Turner, D. A., Williams, I. D., & Kemp, S. (2015). Greenhouse gas emission factors for recycling of source-segregated waste materials. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 105(Part A), 186–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.10.0 26 US EPA. (2014). Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle. Retrieved May 21, 2018, from https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/P100JPP H.txt?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&In dex=2011%20Thru%202015&Docs=&Query=& Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRest rict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear =&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&UseQField=&I ntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&Fi le=D%3A%5CZYFILES%5CINDEX%20DATA%5C 11THRU15%5CTXT%5C00000011%5CP100JPP H.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anony mous&SortMethod=h%7C&MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0&I mageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425 &Display=hpfr&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=

ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Result s%20page&MaximumPages=1&ZyEntry=2# US EPA. (2015a, May 29). What is the Clean Air Act [Collections and Lists]. Retrieved October 25, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-actoverview/clean-air-act-text US EPA. (2015b, August 10). Greenhouse Gases Equivalencies Calculator - Calculations and References [Data and Tools]. Retrieved November 27, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhousegases-equivalencies-calculator-calculationsand-references US EPA. (2015c, August 28). Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator [Data and Tools]. Retrieved November 4, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gasequivalencies-calculator US EPA. (2015d, December 16). Climate Change Indicators: Greenhouse Gases [Reports and Assessments]. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/climateindicators/greenhouse-gases US EPA. (2015e, December 23). Overview of Greenhouse Gases [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved December 19, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overviewgreenhouse-gases US EPA. (2015f, December 29). Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sourcesgreenhouse-gas-emissions US EPA. (2016, January 12). Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved January 25, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/globalgreenhouse-gas-emissions-data US EPA, 1998. (1970). Summary of the Clean Air Act [Overviews and Factsheets]. Retrieved April 7, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/summary-clean-air-act US EPA, O. (2014, April 10). NAAQS Table [Policies and Guidance]. Retrieved April 7, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/criteria-airpollutants/naaqs-table 261

8.2 US EPA, O. (2016, August 30). Air Emissions Sources [Policies and Guidance]. Retrieved April 7, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/airemissions-inventories/air-emissions-sources USDE. (n.d.). Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from https://www.afdc.energy.gov/data/ USGS, & US Department of the Interior. (1990). Precipitation. Retrieved May 21, 2018, from https://nationalmap.gov/small_scale/printable /images/pdf/precip/pageprecip_ca3.pdf Vicente-Vicente, J. L., García-Ruiz, R., Francaviglia, R., Aguilera, E., & Smith, P. (2016). Soil carbon sequestration rates under Mediterranean woody crops using recommended management practices: A meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 235(Supplement C), 204–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.10.024 Water Eduation Foundation. (2018). Groundwater. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from http://www.watereducation.org/aquapedia/gr oundwater Wikipedia. (2018). Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway. Retrieved October 16, 2017, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_Fitzgerald_ Kennedy_Greenway Wold Population Review. (2017). Population of Cities in California (2018). Retrieved May 19, 2018, from http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/calif ornia-population/cities/ Wu, Y., Lu, J., Chen, H., & Wu, L. (2014). Identification of contributing factors to pedestrian overpass selection. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition), 1(6), 415–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-7564(15)302919

Chapter 6 Barlow, J. F., & Harrison, G. (1999). Trees in focus. Retrieved April 10, 2018, from https://www.trees.org.uk/Trees.org.uk/files/d1 /d13a81b7-f8f5-4af3-891a-b86ec5b1a507.pdf Brown, R. . D., Vanos, J. K., Kenny, N., & Lenzholzer, S. (2015, March). Designing urban parks that 262

ameliorate the effects of climate... Retrieved April 9, 2018, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273 524508_Designing_urban_parks_that_amelior ate_the_effects_of_climate_change Brugge, D., Durant, J. L., & Rioux, C. (2007). Near-highway pollutants in motor vehicle exhaust: A review of epidemiologic evidence of cardiac and pulmonary health risks. Environmental Health, 6, 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-6-23 California Department of Transportation. (2017). Traffic Census Program. Retrieved May 27, 2018, from http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/ CARB. (2017a). Greenhouse Gas Quantification Methodology for the California State Transportation Agency Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program. Retrieved December 4, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/tircp_qm_16-17.pdf CARB. (2017b). Greenhouse Gas Quantification Methodology for the California Transportation Commission Active Transportation Program. Retrieved November 20, 2017, from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/aucti onproceeds/ctc_atp_finalqm_16-17.pdf City of Fresno. (2015). Short Range Transit Plan. Retrieved April 11, 2018, from https://www.fresno.gov/transportation/wpcontent/uploads/sites/13/2016/10/SRTP-forUrbanized-Area.pdf City of Fresno. (2016, December). City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan. Retrieved November 27, 2017, from https://www.fresno.gov/publicworks/wpcontent/uploads/sites/17/2016/09/170022Fres noATPFinal012017.pdf City of Fresno. (2017a). Fresno Park Master Plan. Retrieved May 24, 2018, from https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wpcontent/uploads/sites/10/2016/10/FresnoPMP-DRAFT-Executive-Summary_Oct-2017.pdf City of Fresno. (2017b). Street Tree List. Retrieved April 9, 2018, from https://www.fresno.gov/publicworks/wpcontent/uploads/sites/17/2016/09/StreetTreeL ist.pdf

8.2 City of Fresno. (2017c, November). FAX Route Restructuring. Retrieved April 11, 2018, from https://www.fresno.gov/transportation/wpcontent/uploads/sites/13/2017/09/FAX-RouteRestructure-Sudy-WS-PPT-110517-GV10.pdf City of Fresno: 2015-2023 Housing Element. (n.d.). Fresno General Plan. Retrieved May 27, 2018, from https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wpcontent/uploads/sites/10/2016/10/FresnoHER evisedDraftAmendmentPRD012607CLEAN.pdf City of Fresno: Development and Resources Department. (2018). Data from Fresno Fulton Corridor Specific Plan. City of Fresno Water Division. (2016). Water Quality Annual Report 2016. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from https://www.fresno.gov/publicutilities/wpcontent/uploads/sites/16/2016/11/CCR2016.p df Deluxe. (2018). Spin Laundry Lounge. Retrieved April 17, 2018, from https://www.deluxe.com/small-businessrevolution/story/spin-laundry-lounge/ Desimini, J. (2013, May 24). Wild Innovation: Stoss in Detroit. Retrieved March 28, 2018, from https://scenariojournal.com/article/wildinnovation/ FUF. (2018). Benefits of Urban Greening. Retrieved April 9, 2018, from https://www.fuf.net/benefits-of-urbangreening/ Gallowa, D., & Riley, F. S. (1999). San Joaquin Valley: California Largest Human Alteration of the Earth’s Surface., 1182, 23–34. Gill, S. E., Handley, J. F., Ennos, A. R., & Pauleit, S. (2007). Adapting Cities for Climate Change: The Role of the Green Infrastructure. CLIMATE CHANGE AND CITIES, 33(1), 115–133. Google. (2018). Fresno. Retrieved May 27, 2018, from https://www.google.com/maps/place/Fresno,+ CA/@36.7262511,119.8057757,14.04z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x809 45de1549e4e9d:0x7b12406449a3b811!8m2!3 d36.7377981!4d-119.7871247 Griffin, G. P., & Sener, I. N. (2016). Planning for Bike Share Connectivity to Rail Transit. Journal of Public Transportation, 19(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.19.2.1

Heesch, K. C., Sahlqvist, S., & Garrard, J. (2012). Gender differences in recreational and transport cycling: a cross-sectional mixedmethods comparison of cycling patterns, motivators, and constraints. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 9, 106. https://doi.org/10.1186/14795868-9-106 Humpenöder, F., Popp, A., Stevanovic, M., Müller, C., Bodirsky, B. L., Bonsch, M., … Rolinski, S. (2015). Land-Use and Carbon Cycle Responses to Moderate Climate Change: Implications for Land-Based Mitigation? Environmental Science & Technology, 49(11), 6731–6739. https://doi.org/10.1021/es506201r ITE (Ed.). (2010). Designing walkable urban thoroughfares: a context sensitive approach. Washington, DC: Institute of Transportation Engineers. Koc, C. B., Osmond, P., & Peters, A. (2016). A Green Infrastructure Typology Matrix to Support Urban Microclimate Studies. Procedia Engineering, 169, 183–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.10.022 Lal, R., Negassa, W., & Lorenz, K. (2015). Carbon sequestration in soil. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 15(Supplement C), 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.09.002 Lehmann, S. (2014). Low carbon districts: Mitigating the urban heat island with green roof infrastructure. City, Culture and Society, 5(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2014.02.002 Li, H., Harvey, J. T., Holland, T. J., & Kayhanian, M. (2013). The use of reflective and permeable pavements as a potential practice for heat island mitigation and stormwater management. Environmental Research Letters, 8(1), 015023. https://doi.org/10.1088/17489326/8/1/015023 Lin, M.-D., & Lin, Y.-C. (2002). The application of GIS to air quality analysis in Taichung City, Taiwan, ROC. Environmental Modelling & Software, 17(1), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-8152(01)000482 Lusk, A. C., Wen, X., & Zhou, L. (2014). Gender and used/preferred differences of bicycle 263

8.2 routes, parking, intersection signals, and bicycle type: Professional middle class preferences in Hangzhou, China. Journal of Transport & Health, 1(2), 124–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2014.04.001 Manning, D. A. C., & Renforth, P. (2013). Passive Sequestration of Atmospheric CO2 through Coupled Plant-Mineral Reactions in Urban soils. Environmental Science & Technology, 47(1), 135–141. https://doi.org/10.1021/es301250j Maus, J. (2016, July 20). Over 2,300 trips taken on Biketown bike share in first 24 hours. Retrieved April 7, 2018, from https://bikeportland.org/2016/07/20/over2300-trips-taken-on-biketown-bike-share-infirst-24-hours-187922 NACTO. (2017). Bike Share in the US: 2010-2016. Retrieved April 6, 2018, from https://nacto.org/bike-share-statistics-2016/ NASA. (2018, May 23). Landsat Science: Where to Get Data. Retrieved May 27, 2018, from https://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/where-toget-data/ Nowak, D. J., & Greenfield, E. J. (2012). Tree and impervious cover change in U.S. cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 11(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2011.11.005 Nowak, D. J., & Greenfield, E. J. (2018). Declining urban and community tree cover in the United States. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 32, 32–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.03.006 PBS. (2015, June 22). Aquaponic farming saves water, but can it feed the country? Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/aquapo nic-farming-saves-water-can-feed-country Priceconomics Data Studio. (2017). Public Bike Sharing: Analyzing the Usage Data in US Cities. Retrieved April 11, 2018, from https://priceonomics.com/public-bike-sharinganalyzing-the-usage-data-in-us/ Qin, Y. (2015). A review on the development of cool pavements to mitigate urban heat island effect. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52(Supplement C), 445–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.177 Stewart, I. D., & Oke, T. R. (2012). Local Climate Zones for Urban Temperature Studies. Bulletin 264

of the American Meteorological Society, 93(12), 1879–1900. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D11-00019.1 Turner, D. A., Williams, I. D., & Kemp, S. (2015). Greenhouse gas emission factors for recycling of source-segregated waste materials. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 105(Part A), 186–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.10.0 26 USDA, USFS, & CUFR. (2014). CCTC Help Document, 25. USFS, & USDA. (2014). CUFR Tree Carbon Calculator (CTCC). Retrieved April 11, 2018, from https://www.fs.usda.gov/ccrc/tools/treecarbon-calculator-ctcc USGS. (2018). Elevation Mapping With Satellite Imagery - DigitalGlobe. Retrieved May 30, 2018, from http://www.digitalglobe.com/products/advanc ed-elevationseries?gclid=Cj0KCQjwl7nYBRCwARIsAL7O7dE ZV1kAEX6ierpGOzdxKTiA1zjfY0rD19UXB6hdXX Uq1oqoO6EixIEaAkWHEALw_wcB van den Berg, M., Wendel-Vos, W., van Poppel, M., Kemper, H., van Mechelen, W., & Maas, J. (2015). Health benefits of green spaces in the living environment: A systematic review of epidemiological studies. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 14(4), 806–816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.07.008 Vicente-Vicente, J. L., García-Ruiz, R., Francaviglia, R., Aguilera, E., & Smith, P. (2016). Soil carbon sequestration rates under Mediterranean woody crops using recommended management practices: A meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 235(Supplement C), 204–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.10.024 Water Eduation Foundation. (2018). Groundwater. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from http://www.watereducation.org/aquapedia/gr oundwater

Chapter 7 Clough, B. (2017). One day only: Where to eat, drink and shop at Fulton Street’s grand reopening

8.2 party. Retrieved April 14, 2018, from http://www.fresnobee.com/living/fooddrink/bethany-clough/article179576106.html Emerson, S. (2017, March 18). What downtown Redlands business owners have to say about parking. Retrieved April 14, 2018, from https://www.pe.com/2017/03/18/whatdowntown-redlands-business-owners-haveto-say-about-parking/ Gray, M. (2018). Spin Laundry Lounge. Retrieved April 17, 2018, from https://www.deluxe.com/small-businessrevolution/story/spin-laundry-lounge/ Jaffe, E. (2014, October 13). 3 Ways That Turning Parking Spots Into Parklets Helps Businesses. Retrieved April 14, 2018, from http://www.citylab.com/design/2014/10/3ways-turning-parking-spots-into-parkletshelp-businesses/381390/ WEDMP, & Abacus Architects & Planners. (2004, March 30). Wakefield Economic Development Master Plan. Retrieved April 14, 2018, from http://www.wakefield.ma.us/sites/wakefieldm a/files/file/file/chapter7.pdf

Chapter 8 Exxon Mobil. (2018). 2018 Outlook for Enrgy: A view to 2040. Retrieved May 9, 2018, from http://cdn.exxonmobil.com/~/media/global/fil es/outlook-forenergy/2017/2017_outlook_for_energy_glossa ry.pdf Fresno. (2018). MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Retrieved May 9, 2018, from https://library.municode.com/ca/fresno/codes /code_of_ordinances/244921?nodeId=MUCOC HFRCA_CH12LAUSPLZO_ART2ESLAUSDIREAPT H_S12-213MEDEMUFAREDI FTCCC. (2017). Fresno Transformative Climate Communities Collaborative Concept Proposals Under Consideration. Retrieved May 9, 2018, from http://www.transformfresno.com/wpcontent/uploads/2017/09/TCC_CSC4_ProjectS heets.pdf IPCC. (2014a). Annex II Glossary. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from

https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessmentreport/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_Glossary.pdf IPCC. (2014b). Summary for Policy-Makers. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessmentreport/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-forpolicymakers.pdf IPCC. (2018). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from http://www.ipcc.ch/ MARU, J. (1999). Landscape Typology as the Basis for Landscape Protection and Development, 64(4), 6. NASA. (2018a, April 23). Glossary [Text.Article]. Retrieved April 23, 2018, from https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Glossary/? mode=all NASA. (2018b, May 4). Global climate change adaptation and mitigation. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from https://climate.nasa.gov/solutions/adaptationmitigation UNFCCC. (2018). Glossary. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from http://unfccc.int/resource/cd_roms/na1/ghg_i nventories/english/8_glossary/Glossary.htm US EPA. (2005, May). Climate Leaders GHG Inventory Protocol. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/20 15-07/documents/design_princ_gloss.pdf US EPA, C. C. D. (2016, August 9). Glossary of Climate Change Terms [Data & Tools,]. Retrieved May 8, 2018, from https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/glossary .html

265

8.2 Map Data Sources Chapter 2 Map 2.3: data source from CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Available: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/re port/calenviroscreen-30 Map 2.4: data source from CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Available: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/re port/calenviroscreen-30 Map 2.5: data source from CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Available: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/re port/calenviroscreen-30 Map 2.6: data source from CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Available: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/re port/calenviroscreen-30 Map 2.7: data source from CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Available: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/re port/calenviroscreen-30 Map 2.8: data source from CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Available: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/re port/calenviroscreen-30 Map 2.9: data source from CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Available: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/re port/calenviroscreen-30 Map 2.10: data source from City of Fresno census data. Available: https://gis4u.fresno.gov/viewer/ Map 2.11: data source from CalEPA. Available: https://calepa.ca.gov/climate/urbanheat-island-index-for-california/urbanheat-island-interactive-maps/

266

Map 2.12: data source from California’s traffic census program. Available: http://dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/ Map 2.13: data source from City of Fresno GIS data. Available: https://gis4u.fresno.gov/viewer/ Map 2.14: data source from NASA Landsat 8. Available: https://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/landsat-8/ Map 2.15: data source from CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Available: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/re port/calenviroscreen-30 Chapter 3 Map 3.1: data source from City of Fresno General Plan. Available: https://fresno.gov/darm/wpcontent/uploads/sites/10/2016/10/Fresn oHERevisedDraftAmendmentPRD01260 7CLEAN.pdf Chapter 4 Map 4.1: data source from California GIS data. Available: GIS server. Chapter 6 Map 6.1: data source from City of Fresno Downtown Neighborhoods Specific Plan and Southwest Fresno Specific Plan. Available: City of Fresno Downtown Neighborhoods Specific Plan, and https://fresno.gov/darm/wpcontent/uploads/sites/10/2016/10/South westFresnoBookPublicReviewDraft0510 17red.pdf Map 6.2: data source form California’s traffic census program. Available: http://dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/ Map 6.3: data source form City of Fresno Water management construction document. Available: City of Fresno Government

8.2 Map 6.4: data source form NASA landsat 8. Available: https://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/landsat-8/ Map 6.5: data source from City of Fresno General Plan and census data. Available: https://fresno.gov/darm/wpcontent/uploads/sites/10/2016/10/Fresn oHERevisedDraftAmendmentPRD01260 7CLEAN.pdf, and https://gis4u.fresno.gov/viewer/ Map 6.6: data source from CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Available: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/re port/calenviroscreen-30 Map 6.7: data source from Californiaâ€™s traffic census program. . Available: http://dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/ Map 6.8: data source from 606 studio field trip observation Map 6.9: data source from Openstreet Map. Available: https://openstreetmap.org/#map=5/38. 007/-95.844 Map 6.10: Map created by 606 studio Map 6.11: Map created by 606 studio Map 6.12: Map created by 606 studio Map 6.13: Map created by 606 studio

267

09 THE 606 STUDIO 9.1 606 Instructors 9.2 606 Team

269

9.1

606 Instructors Weimin Li, PhD., ASLA Dr. Weimin Li is a member of ASLA, and graduate coordinator and associate professor of Landscape Architecture in California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. Dr. Li specializes in advanced geospatial technologies e.g., geospatial data integration, geospatial analysis, geoprocessing modeling, high-resolution remote sensing image processing and 3D landscape construction, and their application in a wide range of landscape design and planning practices. Li also researches the environmental and social impacts of contemporary landscape design and planning on different dimensions of sustainability and quality of life in urban settings, including stormwater management, urban green space, wildlife habitat conservation, multimodal transportation, neighborhood safety, public health, environmental justice. Dr. Li’s teaching echoes her research interests and includes introductory and advanced GIS, intermediate landscape design, methods and application in landscape architecture, environmental analysis, and advanced eco-systematic landscape design. Dr. Li has a B.S. in Urban and Resource Planning, an M.S. of Physical Geography and a Ph.D. in Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning.

Philip Pregill, ASLA Philip Pregill is a professor of Landscape architecture at California State Polyethnic University, Pomona. He teaches design, theory, history and graphics in both Graduate and Undergraduate programs. He is the director of the Landscape Architecture Italy Program and an author of Landscapes in history: Design and planning in the Eastern and Western Traditions. Philip Pregill has also contributed articles to various venues regarding contemporary applications in landscape architecture. Current research activities include a pending book regarding contemporary pedestrian connections and urban landscapes. He received his B.A. and M.L.A. degrees from University of Oregon. Pregill is a member of the American Society of Landscape Architects.

Steve Rasmussen Cancian, RLA Steve Rasmussen Cancian is a Lecturer in the Department of Landscape Architecture at California State Polyethnic University, Pomona. He leads the firm Shared Spaces, combines organizing, facilitation and design to enable residents and stakeholders to participate in every step of creating their own landscapes, so that they become “co-designers” and “co-owners.” He currently teaches the capstone 606 Studio series and LA 499 Race, Class, Gender and Landscape Design. His practice focuses on design for distinct cultural, gender and class need and desires, with a particular emphasis on designing for improvement without gentrification. He also organizes community design-build projects and youth construction brigades in Boyle Heights and Westlake. Steve was a community and political organizer for 13 years. He holds a degree of B.A. in American history from Columbia university and M.L.A from University of California, Berkeley. 270

9.2

606 Team Christopher Carrillo Christopher Carrillo received a B.A. in Art Studio from the University of California, Davis. While at Davis, his classes in landscape architecture and horticulture inspired him to pursue a degree in landscape architecture. With a Masterâ€™s degree in Landscape Architecture, he hopes to find creative and innovative solutions that address both ecological and social concerns. Due to climate change, the ecosystem has become more vulnerable with impacts affecting both the human and natural environments. Therefore, his main interest in Integrated Urban Ecology guides his designs in a direction that supports the needs of all living organisms in a sustainable manner. He envisions a future of cohesive, comprehensive, and sustainable landscapes that can improve upon solid foundations developed today.

Di Liu Di Liu has a Bachelor of Engineering degree in Landscape Architecture. Her passion in Landscape Architecture integrates both artistic and analytical aspects. She believes that excellent landscape design work should be decided analytically and represent artistically. During her time as an MLA student, she improved her analysis capacity by practicing Data mining and GIS skills through logical and critical thinking process. By studying landscape architecture, she has a solid foundation on environmental planning and design from data collection and spatial analysis to concept design and graphic communication. In her previous academic and internship experience, she has a varied background working on urban design, city park, waterfront park, and climate resilient green infrastructure. She aims to become a strategical environmental-problem solver for landscape design, and a bold innovator and maverick for fine art.

271

9.2

Jingwei Zhou Jingwei Zhou came from a beautiful small town on the east coast of China, its history made it immerse with the colorful culture. But due to unreasonable planning and development of the city and reckless exploitation, that paradise in his memory was bulldozed, leaving only a storage area. The high-speed economic development did not bring a better urban living environment, but presented more problems than before. This situation encouraged Jingwei to start thinking about approaches that can be help. After pursing seven years in his academic studies, Jing Wei has further understanding about the challenges that people face every day. Furthermore, his thirst for knowledge informs his solutions in landscape architecture. Jingwei enjoys that landscape architecture is an integrated profession that responds to the needs of people and combines culture with science to provide a reasonable and beautiful place for people to thrive.

Justin De Vesta Justin De Vesta received his B.A. in Psychology form Biola University and graduated with a Master of Landscape Architecture from California State Polytechnic University, Pomona in 2018. He was the recipient of the 2016 Dangermond Travel Scholarship, the 2016 MENTORES Grant, and the 2017 ONA Scholars Endowment. He was also nominated for the 2018 Olmstead Scholars Program by his department. Justinâ€™s focus in landscape architecture is integrating landscapes with mental health. After working with students on the Autism spectrum for over 7 years and from his research in the M.L.A. program, he has found that an exposure to the outdoors improves cognitive, social and physical health. Justin wants to help design spaces that all people can benefit from and experience in a variety of ways. Using therapeutic gardens and integrated multi-sensory spaces, he believes that a reconfiguration of outdoor spaces and playgrounds with the emphasis on multi-sensory experiences can improve the health of everyone.

Neha Lokhande Neha Lokhande holds an undergraduate degree in Architecture from India and received her Masters of Landscape Architecture from California State Polyethnic University, Pomona. She worked three years in the construction industry in India, and two years in landscape construction. She is interested in sustainable landscapes and how designers can improve the quality of life and the environment by applying Landscape techniques in designing communities. The 606 Studio project has exposed her to know more about designing sustainable communities, and she desires to extend this approach in her future practices.

272

9.2

Yi Li Yi Li received Masterâ€™s degree in Landscape Architecture at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. She received a Bachelor of Environmental Design from Beijing Institute of Fashion Technology, China. Prior to entering graduate school, Yi worked as a landscape designer in China where she gained valuable experience in planning and designing. While attending graduate school, Yi has learned and gained experience through class projects. These hands-on projects have directed her to get an education in the United States. The classes she took helped her understand cities like Los Angeles and deal with public transportation. Other classes provided opportunities to analyze creeks and deal with flooding conditions, open spaces, and green covers. Yi hopes to contribute her knowledge to the local community in the future.

273

9.2

274

The Measurable Change 606 Studio (2018) seeks to provide designers, policy makers and communities with the tools they need to plan evidence-based landscape projects that respond to climate change. Providing technical assistance to Fresno, the studio was part of a collaborative effort to identify the causes, impacts, and solutions to the challenges at regional and local scales brought by global climate change. By utilizing tools to measure the impacts of landscape actions, the studio developed a vision plan for the project area in Fresno. These tools can be used by future practitioners to assess and design spaces that help disadvantaged communities fight the sources and impacts of climate change.

Measurable Change - Cal Poly Pomona - 606 Studio Master's Project - 2018