A Film on Dyke Marsh Wildlife Preserve

You are invited to see

On the Edge

     a new documentary film about          

Northern Virginia’s

       

Dyke Marsh 

      Wildlife Preserve

March 21, 7 p.m., John F. Kennedy Center premiere, at the D.C. Environmental Film Festival, Washington, D. C.; free

March 28, 7:30 p.m., Old Town Theater, 815 King Street, Alexandria; $5.00

On the Edge explores the history of Dyke Marsh, its birds, fish, plants and other natural resources, and its value.  The film examines the threats to the marsh and opportunities for conservation.  It includes comments by U. S. Virginia Senator John Warner and U. S. Virginia Congressman Jim Moran, among others.  

For more information,  visit the Friends of Dyke Marsh website at www.fodm.org or the DC Environmental film festival at

www.dcenvironmentalfilmfest.org

The Dyke Marsh Wildlife Preserve, just south of Alexandria on the western shoreline of the Potomac River in Fairfax County, is a one of the largest naturally-occurring freshwater tidal marshes in the national park system.  A 380-acre wetland, Dyke Marsh is a remnant of the extensive marshes that once lined the river but have been lost to human activity.  Congress preserved it in 1959, saying that here, wildlife values should be “paramount.”   Naturalist Louis Halle wrote in the 1940s that Dyke Marsh was “the nearest thing to primeval wilderness in the immediate vicinity of the city [Washington].”

To get to Dyke Marsh:  Travel south on George Washington Memorial Parkway past Old Town Alexandria; turn left at signs for Belle Haven Marina/Dyke Marsh Wildlife Preserve 

2005 White House Conference Participation Nominees

2005 White House Conference Participation Nominees

Glenn Eugster, Partnerships Office, NPS-NCR

February 21, 2005

• Margaret Maizel, Director, ONEIMAGE, LLC. 

1810 Linden Lake Road, Fort Collins, Colorado,80524

Phone:  (970) 407-0506; FAX: (970) 407-0512;Cell:  

(970) 227-4703

Co-author of Washington Post Study, “Green, More or Less” which shows impacts of land use change on green space.  Assists communities and private coroprations to use Geographic Information Systems to make better decisions.

• Nancy Stahoviak, County Commissioner Routt County, Colorado. 

P.O. Box 35 773598, Steamboat Springs, CO 80477; (970)879-0108

Successfully working with landowners to conserve lands.  Project is a nationally recognized sustainable development model.

• Robert E. Engstrom, Robert Engstrom Properties, 4801 West 81^st

Street, Suite 101, Minneapolis, MN 55437 (612)893-1001

For more than 45 years this nationally recognized developer has championed projects that embrace open space, preserve natural features, and are minimally disruptive to the natural order.  Noteworthy residential and neighborhood projects include the Fields of St. Croix and Summit Place, both recognized by the Urban Land Institute.

• Blaine Bonham, Director, Pennsylvania Horticulture Society’s 

City Green Program, Philadelphia, PA.  100 North 20^th Street, 5^th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19103-1495.

One of the leaders of the oldest horticulture society in America.  A pioneer of city greening efforts and urban parks and neighborhood revitalization.

• Andy Lipkis, Executive Director, Tree People, Los Angeles, CA.

Tree People, 12601 Mulholland Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90210

(818)753-4600

A national leader in trees, green space restoration, education and water conservation.  Has developed cost-benefit models to show how conservation is economically possible.

• Leslie Sauer, Practitioner, formerly of Andropoggon 

Associates, Hunterdon County, NJ. Andropogon Associates,

10 Shurs Lane, Philadelphia, PA 19127 

Leading expert in ecological design solutions to development.  Specializes in use of native plants and working with nature.

• Anne Whiston Spirn, Professor and Practitioner, Massachusetts 

Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA., 36 Maolis Road, Nahant, MA 01908

International leader in ecological planning and design of projects involving community leaders and youth.  Recent work in West Philadelphia is especially noteworthy.

• Ann Swanson, Executive Director, Chesapeake Bay Commission

60 West Street, Suite 200, Annapolis, MD 21401; 410-263-3420;

FAX 410-263-9338; Cell 410-507-0857

Leading advocate of the internationally recognized Chesapeake Bay effort.  Expert in community-based approaches to integrating ecological, cultural and economic objectives and finding ways to balance science, politics, and civic engagement

• Robert Yaro, Executive Director, Regional Plan Association, 

New York, New York, 4 Irving Place, 7^th Floor, New York, NY 10003; (202)253-2727

Nationally recognized expert in heritage areas, regional development and conservation strategies.  Work in Connecticut River Valley has been used as a model globally.

• Frederick Steiner, Dean, School of Architecture, University of 

Texas  Goldsmith Hall, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712-1160

One of the leading advocates for community-based regional planning and sustainable development.  Merges research and academic study with applied best practices.  Has assisted state, local and private sector projects across the U.S.

• Fred LeBlanc, Environmental Planner, The Woodlands Operating 

Company L.P. 2201 Timberloch Place, The Woodlands, Texas 77381. (281)719-6121

One of the first private natural/ green infrastructure efforts in the US.  As a result of the integration between nature and the economy The Woodlands is one of the most desired residential and commercial communities in Texas. 

• Steve Gordon, Lane Council of Governments, West Eugene, 

Oregon. Lane Council of Governments, 99 East Broadway, Suite 400, Eugene, Oregon 97401-3111; (541)682-4283

Has lead a local effort to integrate wetlands and riparian areas into the cities redevelopment.  Pioneer effort in conflict avoidance.

• Randal Arendt, Principal, Natural Lands Trust, Media, PA.

Hildacy Farm, 1031 Palmers Mill Road, Media, PA 19063

(610)353-0517

National leader in developing and implementing an approach to designing housing and commercial developments to meet economic goals and protect open space.

• Tim Beatly, Professor, University of Virginia, Richmond, VA.  

Professor of Sustainable Communities, School of Architecture, University of Virginia, P.O. Box 400122; Charlottesville, VA  22904-4122; voice: (434) 924-6457; fax:   (434) 982-2678

e-mail: tb6d@virginia.edu

Internationally known author of “Green Urbanism” which illustrates international best practices that can be, and are being, applied in the US.

• Judith LaBelle, Executive Director, Glynwood Center, Cold 

Spring, NY.  PO Box 157, Cold Spring, New York, NY 10516; (845)265-3338

Leads a private non-profit that assists U.S. communities with sustainable agriculture and ecological and economic regeneration plans through the creative use of teams of outside experts from the US and other countries. Recent work is emphasizing sustainable agriculture.

GREEN SPACE: NOT AN EMPTY NEED

GREEN SPACE: NOT AN EMPTY NEED

Steve Twomey   
Column: STEVE TWOMEY
March 27, 1997; Page D1Didn't go straight to work yesterday. Went for a drive in the country. True country still lies within the boundaries of my county, Montgomery, and in no time I was parked on the shoulder of a one-lane road called Sugarland. Of the 809,500 people who inhabit Montgomery, I saw all of two, walking way off near the western horizon. Under a big sky, farms dotted the undulating earth in every direction. I had passed a sign a couple of miles back: Agricultural Produce: The Pride of Montgomery County.

I turned onto Montevideo Road, which dipped into the wooded valley of Dry Seneca Creek, which was anything but dry. An elegant farm manse appeared, an older building of brick constructed in the Federal style. The barn that went with it was actually red. With the creek in the foreground, the setting was a painting.
By then, I had an answer.
The question was Til Hazel's.
John T. "Til" Hazel Jr., the area's best-known developer, posed it in Sunday's paper, in the opening segment of a fascinating three-part series on growth by Stephen C. Fehr, Glenn Frankel and Peter Pae. Told that the Washington area converts an average of 28 acres of open space to residential, commercial or industrial use every day, Hazel replied:
"So what?"
Hazel went on: "The land is a resource for people to use, and the issue is whether you use it well. . . . Is the goal to save green space so the other guy can look at it? How about job growth? How about the tax base? How about the ability to get to work? How about the ability to find a place for your kid to work?"
He seemed to suggest, in other words, that if the landscape is giving way to what we need, the daily total of evaporation isn't very important. Twenty-eight acres a day? So what, they're being well used.
So what?
Because who wants to go for a drive amid subdivisions?
Urban/suburban people like me over-romanticize the rural. Many years ago, I went to Denio Junction, essentially a service station-cum-restaurant surrounded by ranches in the most remote corner of Nevada. The idea was to chronicle how satellite dishes were changing backwater ways, and I expected to find grave fear that the tube was chipping away at old bonds and injecting too much of the modern. What I found was joy. Rural life was boring as hell, residents said, and they loved having TV.
But it's not being overly romantic to say that having the countryside within an easy drive is one of life's needs. Not as much as a job is, certainly, or a roof over your head or food on the table, but there is something unquantifiably beneficial about being able to wash your eyes in green, inhale the aroma of a plowed field and feel -- for a while, anyway --less boxed, more alone. It beats the office.
Who doesn't crave wide-open spaces? I bet even Til Hazel does. But each day's bite of 28 acres makes the open spaces a little less wide, a little harder to find, a little farther away. The daily total does matter.
There's just one tiny obstacle to reducing it.
"We keep having babies every day," Gus Bauman said by phone.
Bauman, the former head of Montgomery County's Planning Board, meant that growthis neither good nor bad, but inevitable. People happen. A no-growth stance is pointless. Moreover, because the District has all but collapsed as a place for the middle class, thegrowth will head for the frontier because people want "cheaper housing, safer neighborhoods and better schools," Bauman said.
"And that is the American dream," he said, "and there's nothing wrong with it."
There is not.
It is elitist to deny a lifestyle to the next family. If it wants a single-family detached home on a little piece of land, it ought to be able to get it. The issue is whether it's really necessary to gobble up 28 acres of landscape every day to provide such housing and to provide the roads, schools, malls, restaurants, offices, parking lots, libraries and recreation centers that go with it, so much of it so unattractive.
I doubt it is necessary. One look at any subdivision suggests it isn't. There's usually no place to walk, because destinations are spread far and wide over the landscape. Jobs aren't nearby. Entertainment isn't nearby, nor retail. Everything requires a car.
Government could nudge developers into creating more communities geared toward feet. And government could use public dollars to channel growth to older areas already touched by roads, utilities and other public facilities but perhaps now underutilized because the development action has moved outward.
And maybe, if we all live long enough -- by which I mean a century or two -- the District will be nudged into becoming a place people flock to instead of flee, because it'll have great jobs, safe streets and good schools for all. That would save some land out there on the margins.
The daily loss of acreage matters for another reason. Even if you hate green space, you probably like green money, and it costs millions for government to provide the infrastructure of sprawl. A garbage route that serves 10 houses on five acres each is going to be longer than one that serves 10 houses on a half-acre each.
"Government should guide {growth} for fiscal reasons, if no other," Bauman said.
Myself, I remain fond of the convenient country-drive reason for saving open space. I need the peace.
Incidentally, there go 28 more acres.

The Future: Looking at Growth Scenarios in a Public Forum

To: OPPE-OPPE Everyone
cc:
Subject: Presentation this Wednesday from 1:00 to 2:00 in the EPA
Auditorium

The Future:  Looking at Growth Scenarios in a Public Forum

Last March, The Washington Post ran a series of front page articles
examined historical trends in land use and projecting where growth will to
occur by the year 2020 based on local land use plans.  Because no single
agency keeps tabs on the loss of green space in the Washington region,
The Post worked with the National Center for Resource Innovations (NCRI),
a private, nonprofit educational organization funded by Congress to supply
geographic information to policymakers.

Please join Steve Fehr from The Washington Post and Margaret Maizel from
the Center for Resource Innovations, Wednesday, March 11 from 1:00 to 2:00
in the EPA Auditorium  to discuss  their partnership  using GIS and
Internet technologies to provide citizens with information describing the
collective effects of future plans for growth by local governments in the
Washington DC region; the impact that the series has had since it was
published; and the opportunities for the federal government to help
integrate data and provide the information that is necessary to facilitate
leadership and direction on these controversial issues.

Steve Fehr has been a reporter for 22 years -- 13 years with the Kansas
City Star and the last nine years with the Washington Post.  He was born
in Kansas City but grew up in the sprawl capital, Los Angeles.  Fehr
graduated from the University of Missouri.  At the Post  he has been a
transportation reporter and, more recently, on a special projects team.
He lives in the planned community of Reston.

Margaret Maizel is one of the founders of the National Center for Resource
Innovations (NCRI)  a national non-profit organization established with
congressional funding through the Cooperative State Research Education and
Extension Service, of USDA in 1990. NCRI's mission is to build information
systems for public and private decision-makers at national-to-local
levels.  As the Executive Director of NCRI-Chesapeake, Margaret develops
federal, state, and local partnerships  to integrate data and provide new
and essential tools for assessing and predicting effects of decision
making on natural resources and ecosystems.  As a member of the Clarke
County, VA Planning Commission for 11 years and its chairman for two, she
co-authored the county's Comprehensive Plans and its ordinances addressing
growth management, agricultural lands protection, and the protection of
ground water and other environmentally sensitive areas. She also started
the GIS facility for the county in 1987, and chaired the VA Governor's
Commission on Mapping, Surveying and Land Information.

For background on the Post Series visit  http:\\www.washingtonpost.com and
search the sections and features menu for Regional Growth Map, then click
on  "Growing Pains: Changing Landscapes"  Also, check out NCRI's
homepage:  http:\\idt.net/~ncri

For more information contact Jamal Kadri at  260-3848

Twelve Things We Could Do for Green Infrastructure in Metropolitan Washington, DC

“Securing the Region’s Green Infrastructure: 

The Challenge, The Tools”

September 9, 2004 

12 noon to 1:45 p.m.

Sponsored by the Environmental Law Institute Forum 

1616 P Street, NW

Washington, DC

Twelve Things We Could Do for Green Infrastructure in Metropolitan Washington, DC

Glenn Eugster, Assistant Regional Director, Partnerships Office, National Capital Region, National Park Service

Background

As we look at the metropolitan Washington, DC region, its watersheds, cities and communities, and the condition of our parks, open spaces and recreation areas, we need to ask ourselves four questions.

1.  What is the current park, open space and recreation area situation?  (i.e. How much green infrastructure is your metropolitan, or micropolitan, region losing per day?)

What alternatives are possible?

What can cities and other government agencies and

private sector organizations do to protect, manage and use parks, open space, recreation areas and sustainable practices?

4.  Most importantly, what are we, as individuals, prepared to do about the current situation?

In metropolitan Washington, DC Congress, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, NPS-National Capital Region, and others, decided to create a “Green Infrastructure Demonstration Project” to respond to the situation, explore alternatives and take action. (http://www.mwcog.org/committee/committee/)

During this two-year effort we learned:

 Metropolitan Washington DC will lose 28 to 43 acres acres of open space everyday from 1997 to 2020.  

 Normal metropolitan growth does not provide open space although land is abundant.  Parks, open space and recreation areas are often the residual product of the development process.

 Experience reveals that parks, open space and recreation area planning, protection, management and use should emphasize the total green space system, rather than individual isolated parks, natural areas, greenways, trails and recreation areas. 

 A green infrastructure approach to parks, open space and recreation areas is a way to recognize land for it’s ecological, recreational, cultural, economic, and conservation values and functions.  It seeks to prevent, rather than ameliorate, the degradation of natural lands, air, water, the countryside, parks, recreation areas, farms and forests.  Green infrastructure can be used to clean land, water, and air, replenish the human spirit, and help to sustain and regenerate the economy.

The project partnership involved seven primary organizations and more than 600 representatives from various local, states, regional, and federal government agencies and private groups and businesses.  It used a variety of forums, workshops, technical assistance, and status reports to share information and communicate.

The following list of twelve alternatives has been prepared based on input from the participants in the demonstration project.  These actions offer promise for “Securing the Region’s Green Infrastructure".

Things We Could Do

Build an integrated GIS green infrastructure database.

The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments "Green Mapping Forum" idea was developed to catalogue existing mapping efforts in the region. COG is planning a forum this fall.

National Capital Planning Commission, Casey Trees and DC are putting together a data atlas that would be the first step in a "state of the District" report for a spring symposium. Basically, it's pulling together all the data that various groups have collected, getting agreement on what we have, and figuring out what else needs to be developed.

Establish locally relevant indicators to monitor green 

infrastructure gains and loses.

The Chesapeake Bay Program has a system of indicators that are used to monitor the progress of the Bay protection and restoration effort.  The Bay indicators could be used as a model for parks, open space and recreation areas.

The Trust for Public Land has identified "Measurables to Determine the Excellence of an Urban Park System".  Their recently published survey includes Washington, DC parks.

Put a face on green space loses!

Analysis reveals that we lose somewhere between 28-43 acres of green space per day in the metropolitan Washington, DC region and this trend will continue at least until 2020.  Yet, there is rarely a public outcry.  Loses need to be converted from abstract statistics to more personal-values.  Loses need to be documented and publicized using a "poster-child" approach that draws attention to the losses and encourages action to prevent further loss of green space.

Eat your green space!

Do your food purchases help to protect the scenery? Does the money you spend on food benefit local producers? Do our purchasing practices encourage closer links between the consumer and the local products they buy?  Are there ways that we can recognize the need to encourage and sustain vital rural agricultural and fisheries industries now, and for future generations?

The Local Food Project at Airlie, VA. works to link food buyers and producers in the same geographic region.

The Business Alliance For Local Living Economies (BALLE), with a chapter in Baltimore, helps promote locally owned independent businesses through marketing, networking and advocacy, and sharing information about socially and environmentally responsible business practices. 

Showcase and demonstrate on the ground success. 

Many leaders have interest in learning more about green infrastructure approaches being used in the metropolitan region. Close-to-home success stories are a way to demonstrate the benefits of green infrastructure and highlight the implementation process.  The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments has designed a 13-stop tour of various examples of existing "best Management Practices (BMP's)" that are helping to sustain our green infrastructure.

Equip all advocates and decision-makers with basic green 

infrastructure protection, restoration, management, funding tools.

As leaders respond to public concerns about the loss of green infrastructure communities are increasingly interested in focusing on tools and solutions to the loss of open space and the types of open space or green infrastructure that are most needed for a healthy community and region.  Jim McElfish of the Environmental Law Institute is the lead author of a new ELI guide -"Nature Friendly Ordinances" - that is one of the sources of information that people can use to help themselves save and protect green space. 

Build a network of green infrastructure practitioners, 

at all levels of the government and the private sector, with depth and breadth.

The future of the region's green infrastructure depends on people. Knowing who the key decision-makers, practitioners, community advocates, subject matters experts, public land managers, and civic associations leaders are can help protect and manage green space. The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments has produced a printable version of a "Who's Who in Green Infrastructure" directory" for regional community parks, green space and recreational agencies and organizations. The directory lists the names, addresses, telephone, telefax and e-mail contact information numbers of the most important green infrastructure contacts in the region.  The directory is indexed by green infrastructure category and will be accessible on COG’s website through a download format.

Create a public-private Metropolitan Washington Green 

Space/ Green Infrastructure Alliance.

The metropolitan Washington, DC region doesn't lack government agencies or private groups with an interest or a responsibility for green space.  Hundreds of organizations and agencies are involved in making decisions that affect the region's green infrastructure.  Unfortunately no one group or government speaks for green infrastructure or all the green space interests.

The San Francisco Bay communities in California created a Greenbelt Alliance "to make the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area a better place to live by protecting the region's greenbelt and improving the livability of its cities and towns".  Since 1958 they have worked in partnership with diverse coalitions on public policy development, advocacy and education.

9. Continue to afford leaders with an open and non-

Judgmental platform to discuss green infrastructure status and trends, techniques, programs, etc.

Nearly 500 community, government and private sector leaders participated in a series of green infrastructure forums over the last two years.  Participants indicated that the forums had value and were a no-decision-making platform for discussing common interests and innovative solutions to regional problems and opportunities.  The forums proved to be a way to showcase local experts and those from afar.

Link together related green infrastructure campaigns

The region's green space agenda has many related but seemingly disconnected pieces to it.  Different agendas often draw energy, resources and attention away from the common aspects of green infrastructure and blur priorities.  Different but related green space campaigns for parks, green roofs, low-impact development, invasive plants, submerged aquatic vegetation, greenways, cultural landscapes, forest buffers, wildlife habitat, wetlands protection, and trail corridors, would benefit from being linked as part of a larger green infrastructure system.

 Support and participate in regional green

infrastructure events.

Success is often a state-of-mind and our green space work is often influenced by the perception of what is going on.  Periodic green infrastructure events, such as conferences, workshops, forums, or special activity events (i.e. tree plantings, etc.) are a way to create synergy and send a message to service providers that things are happening in metropolitan Washington.  As partners convene these gatherings it is important to show support and participate.

For example, DC will host the Third Annual "Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities Conference, Awards, & Trade Show" on May 4-6th, 2005 in Washington, D.C. This event will bring together experts from diverse fields across North America, and around the world. The conference will raise awareness of the many benefits of green roofs, share new research findings and provide information on the latest designs, implementation techniques and products. It will be a great opportunity to broaden networks and develop new business contacts while building more sustainable cities through green roof implementation.

 Celebrate green infrastructure. 

Panel discussions, meetings, conferences, reports and resolutions don't mean anything unless they lead to actions that make a difference.  Creating opportunities to celebrate the many varied values and functions of green infrastructure is essential to the green infrastructure movement.  It creates a connection with the places that need protection and management and the people that care about them.

For example, events such as the Potomac Conservancy's "Growing Native: Get Nuts for Clean Water" effort, the Committee of 100's special "Tour of the Fort Circle Parks-Civil War Defenses of Washington" and Washington Park's and People's "Washington Ridge Crossing" walk are but a few of the ways that people are taking action, sharing success and celebrating the values of green infrastructure.

For Further Information: For information on the Metropolitan Washington Green Infrastructure Demonstration Project and this list of alternatives contact: Glenn Eugster at NPS, National Capital Region, 1100 Ohio Drive, SW, Room 350, Washington, DC 20242. By telephone call (202) 619-7492.  By e-mail write: glenn_eugster@nps.gov

Metropolitan Washington DC Green Infrastructure Mapping Assessment Forum September 14, 2005 Worksheets

Metropolitan Washington DC 

Green Infrastructure Mapping Assessment Forum

September 14, 2005

Worksheets

STRATEGIC COLLABORATION

• Getting neighborhood level information to various agencies and entities
• “Green” projects database – DC Planning
• DC energy has a LEED-oriented database, only 11-12 projects
• Challenge because it is technical
• Challenge because different agencies have different categories of green projects, or partial green projects, but there is no central definition/umbrella
• Different agencies in DC manage different slides of green – hurdle to info sharing/analysis
• Collaboration between private/nongovernmental (ex. #1, Casey Trees) and public actors.  Ex. #2: Anacostia partnership (religious)
• DC creating umbrella “green” policies to consolidate what it means and give consistency to concept for all.
• Green Infrastructure Plan is still a good way to describe the concept.  Allows regional, local groups, etc. to inform decision-makers.  Provides visual and quantitative information.  Example: Maryland conservation purchase.
• 2 problems:

• Integrating government and others – integrating all the disparate pieces
• Regional picture

• Plan gives you a structure to hang onto

• GI solves specific problems, e.g. stormwater (achieved through a plan) – stormwater justifies GI

• Technical issues (hard engineering)
• GI is a new term, but is a good umbrella
• GI is not a plan in Maryland, not a mandate.  This has contributed to its success.
• Allowed it to be sold at local level
• Not other administrative level
• GI info and guide is palatable, a plan is not
• Opens it to greater collaboration: tourism, transportation, heritage information
• Need web-based geo-database

• Access!
• Local data must be consolidated and shared and parsed before regional discussions can happen – “must be scalable”
• Collaboration opportunities – need a ‘meeting place’

• Enabled by a state mapping effort, with counties & counties working together – this can lead to a GI plan
• Needs to be a mechanism for jurisdictions to sit down and talk and unite GI vision
• Citizen driven: advocate for this mechanism
• Justify GI by highlighting services it provides.  Ex: urban forests help meet ozone attainment goals.
• What does GI do?  These services will justify it.
• Group/guide/convening GI has long been discussed.  A regional committee at COG where people share.
• But you need a regional vision.
• A plan can be prescriptive and cause friction/problems.  The information is the real deal.
• Question about the MD program: Are counties using it?  Answer: some more than others, but there are others making crazy decisions.
• It has put GI into the vernacular.
• Encourage local governments to create and be willing to disburse the data.

• Everyone needs to have shared definitions.
• But, once you articulate GI, you see a lot of spins.
• VA:

• Will wind up with prescriptive maps (product, what’s expected)
• But will also provide raw data = opportunities
• Leverage ideas into implementation
• Leads to enhanced ideas and implementation

• DC:

• Low impact development brochure gets the word out while regulatory/zoning gets up to support GI notions.
• Sharing (LID) specs across jurisdictions is enabled by a GI sharing/vocabulary forever.

• COG:

• Resources assessment vs. “A Plan”

• Let municipalities develop the “plan”
• A plan developed in the late 1990s fell on its face because no one could agree

• Fragmentation issues

• Up to individual jurisdictions, this makes it hard.

STRATEGIC COLLABORATION PRIORITIES (in no order)

• Access to data/information at various scales

• Central clearinghouse of data

• Listserve so people can communicate about who has what

• Does COG have server space to host?
• COG thought about buying data to get around licensing agreement, but they can’t share raw data and everyone has that problem.  Software.

• Basic producers, resource assessments.
• Toolbox of hints/model ordinances at smaller scales.  We all have these, but don’t share them.

• An Alliance – a collaborative mechanism for local jurisdictions to come together/interact on GI issues

• Subcommittee – COG has those for planning, but green issues are not getting its share of attention compared with transportation, for example.
• In absence of a subcommittee, cyberspace/web would be a good place to start.
• The clearinghouse would be its mechanism

• An organization running spatial clearinghouse is burdened by perceived bias
• Needs money – Land Trust Alliance is a model

• ID a vision and why we share it.

• An assessment, not a plan, available at all scales that can be shared.  For example, the Creating GI manual by the Conservation Fund.

• A way of understanding what our mutual goals are.  It’s our values & understanding that are making decisions & why.

MAPPING

• Green infrastructure protocols (data standards, what’s included, what’s not, etc.)

• How to integrate disparate datasets?
• Determine data needs by what one wants to do

• Getting to know each other
• Interact with other, similar efforts (i.e. emergency management)

• Data sharing & housing
• Common resources?
• Common gateway
• What is included?
• Metadata – very important
• Data – maps & opportunities

• Identify key datasets to share
• Information needed for:

• Identifying key locations (targeting, priority)
• What to do with key locations

• Available data for cross-jurisdictional use – coverage, scale, availability, source, technology
• Data consistency across jurisdictions
• Resolution, classification
• Base data standards

• How to deal with data gaps (geographical) across the region?
• High resolution imagery is critical

MAPPING: PRIORITIES

• Public mapping system for D.C. area

• Casey Trees (lead)

• Identify key (available & appropriate) map datasets and associated data standards for each

• COG (possible lead)

• A shared vision based on resource assessments done at varying scales

ADVOCACY

• An education/advocacy effort targeted to local decision makers, elected, appointed, and staff, including planners. 
• Find and nurture champions who may become decision makers, and/or stronger advocates.
• Agreed on the importance of building and/or continue to strengthen the economic arguments for GI. This includes determining the economic values associated with the protection of ecological services.
• Identify and partner with other interests who understand and/or benefit from the protection of GI.  This includes utilities, health groups, NGOs.
• Agreed on the importance of advocating a policy of canopy expansion regionally.
• Agreed on the need to create a greenbelt around the metropolitan area.
• Agreed on the need for an organized citizenry to advocate for regional GI protection.
• Also agreed on the power of the visual to influence how people understand the transformation of the landscape.

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Green Infrastructure Mapping Assessment Forum September 14, 2005

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. 

Green Infrastructure Mapping Assessment Forum

September 14, 2005

1:00-4:00 pm

Metropolitan Washington Council of Government

Training Center, 1^st Floor

777 North Capitol Street, NE,

Washington, DC

(202)962-3200

Agenda

I. Welcome and Participant Introductions, Brian LeCouteur and Glenn Eugster [15 minutes]

II. Overview: “Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Green Infrastructure Mapping Assessment”, Theodore Eisenman [20 minutes]

III. Clarifying Questions/Comments [15 minutes] 

IV. Break-Out Sessions, Theodore Eisenman [60 minutes] 

Groups:

• Mapping
• Strategic Collaboration
• Advocacy 

Others?

Each group should identify:

• 3-5 key recommended actions
• the most important next steps to achieve those actions, and 
• the person, group, organization or government leader(s) that will take the next steps

V. Break [15 minutes]

VI. Report Back by Each Break-Out Session, Denise Schlener [30 minutes]

VII. Next Steps, Theodore Eisenman and Glenn Eugster [25 minutes]

Green Infrastructure Tour

Dear Colleagues,

The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and the National Park Service have prepared the attached “Virtual Green Infrastructure Tour of the Washington Metropolitan Area”  The tour is available at in the attached file and at:

http://www.mwcog.org/environment/green/

The tour provides residents and visitors with fourteen examples of existing best management practices that are helping to sustain our local green infrastructure and protect and restore our natural and living resources. 

The Virtual Green Infrastructure Tour was developed as part of the Metropolitan Washington Green Infrastructure Demonstration Project, a collaborative effort between the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and the National Park Service’s National Capital Region.  For additional information contact me or Brian LeCouteur of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments at(202)962-3393 or by e-mail at:  blecouteur@mwcog.org

Open Space, Forest Cover and Livable Communities

Green Infrastructure Forum

Sponsored by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Government's (COG)  The Community  Forestry Network  and the

National Park Service (NPS)

Featuring

Anne Whitson Spirn and Peggy Harwood

Discussing

Open Space, Forest Cover and Livable Communities

 Thursday October 2, 2003

2:00 to 5:00 P.M.

Metropolitan Washington Council of Government's (COG)

777 North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.

1^st Floor Training Center

The event, one of a series of Green Infrastructure Forums and Workshops to discuss park, forest cover, open space and recreation land approaches within the metropolitan Washington region, will feature:

►   A brief overview of the "Metropolitan Washington Green Infrastructure Demonstration Project".

► A presentation on "Green Infrastructure and Livable Communities by Peggy Harwood.

►  Remarks by Anne Whiston Spirn on "Landscape Infrastructure, Natural Processes, and Community

Development".

Anne Whiston Spirn is Professor of Landscape Architecture and Planning at MIT.  She has worked at

Wallace, McHarg, Roberts and Todd http://www.wrtdesign.com/about/values_03.html Planning and Design Firm on diverse projects, including plans for Woodlands New Community in Houston, the Toronto Central Waterfront, and a comprehensive plan for Sanibel, Florida.  Her first book, The Granite Garden: Urban Nature and Human Design, won the President's Award of Excellence from the American Society of Landscape Architects.  Her second book: The Language of Landscape (Yale 1998) extends the ideas presented in The Granite Garden and argues that the language of landscape exists with its own grammar and metaphors.  Since 1984 she has worked in inner-city neighborhoods on landscape planning and community design and development.  She is director of the West Philadelphia Landscape Project, a program that integrates teaching, research, and community service recognized by the White House Millennium Council in 1999. In 2001, Spirn was awarded the International Cosmos Prize for "contributions to the harmonious coexistence of nature and humankind."

Peggy Harwood is currently National Program Manager for the Urban & Community Forestry Staff of the USDA Forest Service in Washington, DC.  Since 1999, she has been helping the U.S. Department of Agriculture coordinate the Green Infrastructure Training Program and related activities by overseeing implementation of priority actions in partnership with The Conservation Fund and a number of federal and state agencies and other interested organizations.  Beginning this year, she will be working with partners to better integrate urban scales and examples into the green infrastructure concept as a component of actions to ensure livable communities.  Peggy has worked for the Forest Service's National Forest System serving as a program manager for the Land Management Planning, Ecosystem Management Coordination, and the Engineering Staffs.  She has coordinated community-based planning for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and interagency activities for weather and land satellite programs in the

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.  Before joining the federal government, Peggy was an associate director at the Council of State Planning Agencies in Washington, D.C. and a program manager for the Environmental Planning Program, Texas General Land Office, in Austin.  

To attend this forum please respond to this e-mail message at: glenn_eugster@nps.gov or blecouteur@mwcog.org or send a note by telefax to (202) 619-7220 or (202) 962-3203.  By telephone call Glenn Eugster at (202) 619-7492 or Brian LeCouteur at (202) 962-3393. Please respond by no later than Friday September 29, 2003.  The Forum is free.