Red Fields to Green Fields: Los Angeles

Dakotah BertschMike BoucherEran JamesAbby Jones

June 2011

Dakotah BertschMike BoucherEran JamesAbby Jones

June 2011

Red Fields to Green Fields

Los Angeles

All images, unless otherwise indicated, produced by the 606 Design Team

Red Fields to Green FieldsLos Angeles

Design TeamDakotah BertschMike BoucherEran JamesAbby Jones

Faculty AdvisorsProf. Karen Hanna, MA, FASLA, FCELA, Primary AdvisorDr. Lee-Anne Milburn, MLA, PhD, ASLADr. Susan Mulley, MA, MLA, PhD

606 Design StudioDepartment of Landscape ArchitectureCalifornia State Polytechnic University, Pomona

AcknowledgementsThe Red Fields to Green Fields Team would like to thank the many individuals and agencies that helped contribute to this document. Without their guidance and support this book would not have been possible.

Our Steering Committee:

Jessica Gudmundson Occidental College Urban and Environmental Policy InstituteTori Kjer The Trust for Public LandCarrie Sutkin Verde Coalition Stephanie Taylor Verde Coalition & Green LA Coalition

Additional Partners:

Carol Armstrong Los Angeles River ProjectKevin Caravati Georgia Tech Research InstituteEdith de Guzman TreePeopleBen Feldmann Mia Lehrer + AssociatesJoseph Goodman Georgia Tech Research InstituteJoy Kwong USC Graduate StudentMia Lehrer Mia Lehrer + AssociatesJason Neville Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los AngelesSimon Pastucha Los Angeles Department of Urban Planning Urban Design StudioCarol Teutsch TreePeopleEnrique Velasquez Los Angeles urban planner

Our classmates who have been a great source of inspiration and support.

iExecutive SummaryOverviewAlthough the average American has not benefited from the recent recession, this slump presents an opportunity for revitalizing neighborhoods and improving the quality of life of United States cities. Inspired by Frederick Law Olmsted, Michael Messner of the Speedwell Foundation introduced the idea of Red Fields to Green Fields (R2G) as a plan for taking distressed properties (red fields) off the real estate market and turning them into parks and green space (green fields). The recent recession presents a timely opportunity to acquire and develop these distressed properties at reduced prices.

Converting distressed properties into parks will help stimulate economic recovery as well as improve the environmental and social health of communities. Several studies have shown that parks tend to increase home values (Anderson and West 2006, Crompton 2004, Nicholls 2004, Lutzenhiser and Netusil 2001, Ridell 2001, Bolitzer and Netusil 2000, Correll et al. 1978). In addition, parks attract tourists and residents who contribute to local commerce, and parks increase public health by creating more walkable neighborhoods, enhancing community identity, and providing opportunities for mental relaxation and physical recreation. Furthermore, parks can perform vital environmental services such as treating stormwater, reducing heat island effect, and improving air quality.

Los Angeles Real EstateThe recent economic recession had drastic consequences for Los Angeles real estate market. From 2007 to 2008, home prices in Los Angeles fell by almost 26% (SCAG 2009). While Los Angeles economy will gradually improve, the 2011-2012 Economic and Industry Report by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LACEDC) forecasts that major sectors will continue to suffer, particularly in the construction and real estate industries (Sidhu, Ritter, and Guerra 2011). Non-residential real estate is expected to experience low construction activity, high vacancy rates, declining lease rates, and falling property values (Sidhu et al. 2011). Implementing Red Fields to Green Fields in Los Angeles (R2G-LA) would improve this situation by creating jobs and increasing real estate values.

Los Angeles Park InequalityAs the second-largest city in the United States, Los Angeles is an important and influential city. However, compared to other large cities in the United States, Los Angeless parkland falls short both in terms of its percentage of the Citys land area and in terms of park acres per resident (Trust for Public Land 2010). While a few large tracts of parkland do exist, such as Griffith Park (4,310 acres), parks are not distributed equally throughout the City, being especially deficient in lower income neighborhoods (Sherer 2003). Many communities lack a park within walking distance, which is a significant factor contributing to park usage (Giles et al. 2005). In Los Angeles only 30% of the Citys four million residents live within mile of a park, compared with 80% and 90% for residents in Boston and New York, respectively (Sherer 2006).

Without parks nearby, many people do not have adequate facilities to exercise, relax outdoors, connect with nature, or congregate with friends and family. The expected population growth of the city puts further pressure on the Los Angeles limited park resources (Ganga and Lin 2007). Coupled with the fact that there is little land remaining to develop (NLCD and NED 2010), it is imperative to provide innovative solutions to providing park space.

Red fields to green fields addresses other issues that affect the social and ecological health of Los Angeles in addition to park inequality and a glut of vacant commercial properties. These issues include polluted waterways and threatened water sources, increased temperatures due to the heat island effect, poor air quality, lack of alternative forms of transportation, and lack of healthy food options.

606 MethodThe R2G-LA method involved inventory and analysis at different scales, from the regional scale of the City of Los Angeles to the neighborhood scale to the site scale, each informing the next. At the regional scale, large issues facing the City such as water pollution, the heat island effect, and air pollution were investigated. Three neighborhoods were then chosen from within a 126 square mile zone of greatest need, comprised of park-poor,

ii Red Fields to Green Fields Los Angeles

economically disadvantaged communities (the City of Los Angeles is 498 total square miles). Demographics, land use, circulation, red fields and other characteristics were inventoried in each neighborhood. In each of the three neighborhoods, the 606 team identified red fields. Characteristics of the red fields were noted such as size, slope, and proximity to commercial corridors, and red fields were analyzed for their suitability to different green field types based on these characteristics. The final scale was the site scale, or individual red fields. At this scale, four red field sites were chosen for example green field designs. Data gathered at each of the three scales, along with additional site scale inventory, analysis, and programming development, was used to develop design concepts and illustrations for each of these sites. Expanding again to the regional scale, site scale designs provided the opportunity to envision and quantify the regional-scale benefits that would result from the transformation of numerous site-scale red fields throughout the City.

Area of NeedThe focus of R2G-LA was on the most park-poor and economically disadvantaged neighborhoods in Los Angeles. A park-poor area was defined as having three acres or less of parkland per 1,000 people based on census tract data. An economically disadvantage area was defined as census tracts with a median household income 80% of the state median household income. These two guidelines were based on Prop 84 funding standards (California Department of Water Resources 2006). This proposition has been instrumental in providing funding for parks and nature facilities in California. Mapping was done in ArcMap using census data from 2000 and land use data from Esri and SCAG. Most of the city was deemed park poor. Economically disadvantaged areas were found surrounding downtown, south along the harbor freeway, in the San Fernando Valley, and scattered in smaller pockets throughout the city. Therefore, the boundary of economically disadvantaged areas, which was also typically the most park-poor, defined the area of need for this study.

Red FieldsRed Fields in Los Angeles come in various forms. These are parcels of land that, for various reasons, are not functioning at their highest civic capacity -- especially given the increasing demand for public use and environmental services for the growing urban

population (Ganga & Lin 2007). In order to locate and document red fields, the 606 team ground-truthed three neighborhoods within the area of need: Lincoln Heights, Westlake, and Florence. Field work consisted of site visits in which the three neighborhoods were traversed by car and foot in order to identify and document potential red fields.

Prior to ground-truthing, commercial real estate information was provided by CoStar, a Washington, D.C. based provider of commercial real estate information and analysis. This data showed the location of commercial properties in the neighborhoods. However, while ground-truthing, many vacant lots and distressed properties were identified which were absent from the CoStar data. Documentation of the sites included photography, notes, mapping in Google, and GIS mapping. In order to record land-use as well as assessed land values, economic and ownership data for these properties was researched using Zimas, a Los Angeles City web site. GIS modeling using parcel data from the City of Los Angeles Assessors Office (2010) gave information about red field parcel sizes.

Eight square miles were ground-truthed in the neighborhoods of Lincoln Heights, Florence and Westlake. The total number of red fields found in all the neighborhoods was 138 sites, with a total area of 67 acres. Each neighborhood had a set of red fields of varying sizes and quantities. The average red field size was 0.5 acres.

Green FieldsGreen field solutions were developed based upon social and ecological objectives determined by inventory and analysis at the regional and neighborhood levels. The four broad categories of green fields include urban agriculture, recreation, community, and ecology. Most green fields were found to be capable of the four broad categories. Further refinement created suitability of red fields to each green field solution which was then mapped over the three neighborhoods. This established the most suitable sites for each green field type. However, green field categories are not exclusive, as green fields are meant to be multifunctional, and although one green field solution may dominate a site, a site can typically contain a mixture of several green field solutions.

iii

SuitabilityInformation about the red field sites was then gathered in order to understand the general characteristics of red fields and their suitability for different green field types. This inventory included relative sun exposure, size, average slope, buildings present, land-use designation, proximity to network of planned bike lanes, and proximity to Metro stations and major commercial intersections (nodes). Much of this inventory was conducted using GIS modeling.

Design ExamplesIn order to understand how the conversion of red fields to green fields might work on the ground, site designs were created to serve as examples of the diversity of applications of R2G-LA on red field sites throughout the City. This process involved first the selection of individual sites, then inventory, analysis, program development, synthesis and conceptual design. Finally, design renderings were produced to illustrate the concepts and designs that were developed. Care was taken to ensure that the designs were appropriate applications of green field solutions to the specific site conditions, as well as to the neighborhood context and regional objectives. However, the designs shown in this report are meant as sample park projects; they are included to give ideas for what is possible, not examples of what is intended. When the relevant agencies have sought and received funding, a public involvement program will be utilized while selecting parcels and developing park designs for implementation. Due to the fact that these designs are meant for illustrative purposes, specific opportunities and constraints related to acquisition and property ownership were not included. The properties chosen for design examples may not presently be available, and the designs specified would be modified in response to community input.

ExtrapolationRed field inventories that were collected from the neighborhood study areas via ground-truthing and other means were averaged and extrapolated to the rest of the area of need. Because the neighborhoods were selected to represent a variety of land development patterns commonly found in the area of need, they were able to serve as proxies for other parts of the area that had not been ground-truthed.

Based on the red fields found within the three neighborhoods, it was estimated that within the area of need 17.25 red fields would be found per square mile. Therefore, the 126 square mile area of need would contain 2,174 red fields or 1,087 acres of red fields (the average red field size is acre). The existing park acreage in the area of need is 557.6 acres. If all the area of needs red fields are converted to green fields under R2G-LA, park space would nearly triple in disadvantaged communities of Los Angeles.

BenefitsThe cumulative impact of converting red fields to green fields is anticipated to be transformative for Los Angeles in multiple ways. First, green fields could create an estimated 1,087 acres of park space in 2,174 small parks in disadvantaged communities of Los Angeles by converting small underutilized properties into green fields. As stated above this may increase parks by nearly 50% within the area of need. Implementing R2G-LA will dramatically improve the quality of life and health of the Citys residents by increasing opportunities for physical and mental health. In addition, numerous environmental services could be provided by green fields, such as improving water quality, reducing the heat island effect, improving air quality, and increasing native vegetation. These improvements to social and environmental health are believed to have direct economic benefits with potential for increasing neighborhood property values and stimulating the economy of the city.

iv Red Fields to Green Fields Los Angeles

Figure i1. Red Fields to Green Fields Los Angeles (R2G-LA) seeks to transform park-poor and economically disadvantaged communities throughout Los Angeles by converting underutilized urban sites (red fields) into parks and public spaces (green fields).

City of Los Angeles

v1. Introduction 1.1. Vision

2. R2G Background 2.1. Red Fields to Green Fields 2.2. Case Studies

3. Method 3.1. Method Stages

4. Regional Investigation 4.1. Overview of Los Angeles 4.2. Regional Inventory & Objectives 4.3. R2G-LA Goals and Objectives 4.4. Neighborhood Selection

5. Neighborhood Investigation 5.1. Neighborhood Inventory 5.2. Ground-truthing

6. Red Field Investigation 6.1. Red Field Inventory

7. Green Field Analysis 7.1. Green Field Categories 7.2. Capability Analysis 7.3. Suitability Analysis

8. Site Design 8.1. Site Selection 8.2. Site Design Process 8.3. Site Designs

9. Implementation 9.1. Prioritization Recommendations 9.2. Phases of Development 9.3. Design Considerations 9.4. Green Initiatives

10. Conclusion 10.1. Extrapolation 10.2. Benefits

References

List of Figures

List of Tables

Appendices

Table of Contents

1

5

19

25

55

73

83

107

159

171

182

193

197

198

vi

Introduction

1

Red Fields to Green Fields (R2G) is a contemporary parks initiative with the goal of taking advantage of the current real-estate downturn by transforming foreclosed and underperforming commercial properties into parks and open space. In cities across the country case studies were developed to build support and test the viability of the R2G concept. Los Angeles was one of eleven cities selected. The Red Fields to Green Fields Los Angeles (R2G-LA) case study is being developed by The Verde Coalition with the help of several agencies including the Trust for Public Land, Occidental Colleges Urban and Environmental Policy Institute, Parks for People and the Cal Poly Pomonas Landscape Architecture Department 606 Studio. In addition to helping to develop the case study the 606 studio created this document which documents the background, inventory, analysis, design and implementation of the R2G-LA project.

1

2 Red Fields to Green Fields Los Angeles

Red Fields to Green Fields (R2G) is a national initiative with the goal of taking advantage of the current real estate downturn by transforming foreclosed and underperfomring properties into parks and open spaces that improve the quality of life for urban residents and simultaneously jump-start the economy (Red Fields to Green Fields 2011).

R2G-LA identified four ways that green fields can improve the quality of life for Los Angeles residents: increasing access to recreational opportunities, enhancing community connections, providing healthy food options, and augmenting environmental function in the urban environment.

The vision of R2G-LA is to transform underutilized urban sites into green fields throughout the City of Los Angeles to create cumulative, far-reaching improvements to the Citys social, ecological, and economic health. The focus of this study is on disadvantaged communities, but effects will potentially extend to all parts of the City.

Underutilized sites in Los Angeles, or red fields, come in various forms. They are parcels of land that, for various reasons, are not functioning at their highest civic capacity -- especially given the increasing demand for public use and environmental services from the growing urban population (Ganga & Lin 2007).

As Los Angeles continues its rapid pace of growth and development, few large pieces of accessible land

remain undeveloped (Envicom Corporation 1995). The majority of red fields in the City are comprised of small parcels, often only acre in size, which are interspersed throughout the urban fabric. The landscape of these small urban red fields is a shifting one, as parcels change hands and develop over time. However, during an economic recession the pace of development slows and the cost of real estate is lower. This presents a real opportunity to acquire and transform small urban red fields into public parks and green spaces of various kinds.

Through the examination and analysis of red fields in Los Angeles, various context-appropriate solutions can be developed to transform the sites from red fields to green fields. Green fields benefit the neighborhoods health, environment, and economy. They can provide space for recreation, education, community gathering, local food production, and ecological function. While the amount of green space created from a single acre red field might be insignificant in the context of the entire City of Los Angeles, the net impact of transforming myriad red fields to green fields throughout the City will be profound. The quality of life for residents would improve, especially for those who reside in the many park-poor neighborhoods of the urban core. The benefits of R2G-LA include economic stabilization, more walkable and desirable neighborhoods, improved mental and physical public health, and increased environmental services such as stormwater treatment, reduced heat island effect, and improved air quality.

1.1 Vision

Introduction 3

Figure 11. The vision of R2G is to transform underutilized properties (top) into parks (bottom).

2R2G Background

Image: NASA Photojournal

R2G-LA exists within the broader context of Red Fields to Green Fields (R2G), a national initiative spearheaded by The Georgia Institute of Technology and the Georgia Tech Research Institute, with funding from the Speedwell Foundation and support from a host of other organizations (Red Fields to Green Fields 2011). This section explains the theoretical framework of Red Fields to Green Fields, as well as the case studies that have been produced up to this point, which serve as precedents for R2G-LA.

5


R2G IdeaThe current recession, when viewed with an understanding of the many benefits of parks, can be seen as an opportunity for transformation. Michael Messner, the founder of the Speedwell Foundation, introduced the idea of R2G as a plan for taking distressed properties (red fields) off the real estate market and turning them into parks and green space (green fields). Messner was inspired by Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr., who created many urban parks, such as Central Park (Figure 22) in New York (Messner 2011). These parks were instrumental in improving surrounding neighborhoods and providing economic stimulation (Messner 2011). According to Messner, Parks and managed green space are vital pieces of urban infrastructure that not only improve the quality of life for millions of people but also drive economic growth (Messner 2011, n.p.). Past economic stimulus ventures such as Roosevelts New Deal projects from 1933-1941 and Eisenhowers Federal Highway-Aid Act of 1956, are both examples of how big ideas can offer stabilization of the economy (Kennedy 2009, McNichol 2006). In a similar way, R2G would leverage todays particular economic climate to transform distressed properties into vital neighborhood assets. Converting red fields to green fields would stimulate the economy by replacing under-performing real estate into community assets with the potential for increasing neighborhood property values. At the same time, parks would improve the quality of life in American cities by improving public health and the environment.

Recession BackgroundThe United States economy is slowly recovering from the worst recession since the Great Depression (United States Congressional Budget Office 2011). Triggered in 2007 by a significant rise in mortgage delinquencies and followed by a sharp drop in housing prices in certain

parts of the United States, the recession slowed economic activity and employment around the world (Bernanke 2009). Although the U.S. recession officially ended in June of 2009, the nations economy continues to struggle, with the Congressional Budget Office predicting that production and employment are likely to stay well below the economys potential for a number of years (2011, n.p.). Faulty lending practices for real estate were the root causes of the recession and crippled the real estate market. A glut of vacant and foreclosed properties remain on the market with continued poor fundamentals [underlying economic forces] for most types of commercial real estate (Bernanke 2011, n.p.) (Scott 1990).

2.1 Red Fields to Green Fields

Figure 21. Vacant commercial property in Los Angeles

R2G Background 7

Figure 22. Central Park, in New York, was an inspiration for Red Fields to Green Fields.


Economic Health

Parks and other publicly owned lands are not traded on the real estate market like homes or commercial property and therefore the actual value of parkland can be difficult to gauge. Several methods have been used to estimate their economic worth. One, known as hedonic pricing, links the ecological and recreational value of parks to something that is traded on the marketplace -- usually nearby home values (Shoup and Ewing 2010). Estimating a parks worth helps local leaders justify new acquisition costs and debt obligations that are associated with new park creation. Although economic modeling techniques have become more sophisticated, the concept of hedonic pricing is not new, and it has been used since the formative years of park development in the late nineteenth century (Crompton 2004).

In 1873 Central Park Commissioners in New York City reported that after paying off the acquisition and development costs of Central Park the City received a net profit of $4.4 million in incremental tax revenue related to the park (Crompton 2007). Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr., who designed and developed Central Park, was well

Figure 23. Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, CA; parks provide space for recreation.

aware of the economic benefits of parks, and his firm advocated to developers the value of leaving land aside for park development (Crompton 2007).

As statistical tools and economic models have become more robust in the twentieth century there has been a series of studies examining the economic benefits of parks, most done within the past thirty years (Crompton 2004). Several studies have shown increases in home values associated with park proximity (Anderson and West 2006, Crompton 2004, Nicholls 2004, Lutzenhiser and Netusil 2001, Ridell 2001, Bolitzer and Netusil 2000, Correll et al. 1978). A study in Portland, Oregon in 2000 found that a park located within 1,500 feet of a home increased its sale price by $845 to $2,262 (in 2000 dollars) (Bolitzer and Netusil 2000). The study also found that the size of the park was a significant factor in raising the homes sales price (Bolitzer and Netusil 2000). A study done in Boulder, Colorado, in 1978 found that for every foot one moves away from the greenbelt (a ring of parkland surrounding a city), the price of a residential property decreased by $4.20 (Correll et al. 1978). The same study

Benefits of Parks and Green Space

R2G Background 9

found that the greenbelt increased the aggregate property values of an adjacent neighborhood by $5.4 million resulting in $500,000 extra annual property tax revenue (Correll et al. 1978). The purchase price of this greenbelt was roughly $1.5 million and therefore the accrued tax revenue over three years could pay back the initial cost (Correll et al. 1978).

Premiums for homes near parks can vary, and depend on several factors beyond proximity, including the size of the park, the amenities found there, and the density and land use of the surrounding neighborhood. In rural or suburban areas where supply of outdoor space is high, whether in the form of a private yard or easy access to wildlands, demand for park space is low compared to dense urban settings (Crompton 2004). Thus, residents in dense urban areas put a higher value on park proximity than residents in suburban or rural areas (Andersen and West 2006). In addition, the size and type of park are factors influencing home premiums. Large natural area parks had the largest effect on home sale prices in comparison to small urban and specialty parks (Crompton 2004, Lutzenhiser and Netusil 2001). Busy active parks or parks that are poorly maintained have been shown to decrease home values (McConnell and Walls 2005, Crompton 2004).

Hedonic pricing is a helpful method in estimating the economic value of parks; however, it is unable to provide more specific information about how much residents value certain park amenities (McConnell and Walls 2005). Another method to estimate the economic value of parks is contingent valuation (Breffle et al.1998). In this method, people are surveyed and asked how much they are willing to pay for a park or open space. In Boulder, the amount that residents were willing to collectively spend to purchase a 5.5 acre undeveloped parcel for park creation was $174,000 more than the amount that a construction company had recently paid for it (Breffle et al.1998). In general, studies using either contingent valuation or hedonic pricing show the high value of preserving parks and open space (McConnell and Walls 2005).

In addition to the value that parks add to nearby real estate, parks also have other economic benefits. City parks, such as San Antonios Riverwalk Park or New Yorks Central Park, often become important tourism draws that contribute to local businesses (Waits 2005). The availability of parks and recreational facilities can be significant factors for companies in deciding where to relocate (Crompton 2000). And, according to a 3-year Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project, increasing tree cover by 10% can lower total energy use for residential heating and cooling by 5-10% annually, saving $50-$90 per dwelling unit (McPherson 1994).

Figure 24. Parks provide habitat.


Social Health

Parks play an important role in improving physical health. Exercise and diet are important factors in physical health, and people are more likely to exercise when they have access to parks (Gies 2006). People who engage in regular physical activity have a reduced risk of premature death; reduced risk of coronary heart disease, hypertension, colon cancer, and non-insulin-dependent diabetes; improved muscle strength, joint structure, and joint function; reduced body weight; and healthier cardiovascular, respiratory, and endocrine systems (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 1996).

Obesity is a serious public health issue in the United States, with associated medical costs of over $100 billion, and 300,000 premature deaths per year attributed to it (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 2001, Allison, Fontaine, Manson, Stevens, and VanItallie 1999). Physical health, especially related to obesity, is also closely tied to diet (Gies 2006). Parks with community gardens provide healthy, inexpensive or free produce to gardeners and the community at large (Gies 2006).

Additionally, parks provide a place for children to play outdoors, which has many positive effects on childrens health, both short and long term (Louv 2005). Physical benefits of children playing in nature include improved balance, coordination, and blood pressure (Louv 2005, Cole-Hamilton, Harrop and Street 2002). Studies have shown that children who play outdoors are more likely to engage in physical activity when older, which can help prevent obesity, alleviate stress and depression, and decrease risk-taking behaviors such as drug use (Louv 2005, Cole-Hamilton et al. 2002). The popularity of playgrounds with natural settings and elements has risen as a response to the growing issues of obesity, nature deficit disorder, learning deficiencies, and behavioral problems that children now face (Jansson 2010, Jost 2010, Shackell, Butler, Doyle, and Ball 2008).

Having nature in public landscapes is essential to psychological health as well. It is well established that plants have a role in mental health (Frumkin 2001). Public green spaces improve mood, effectiveness, social behavior, cognitive functioning, and work performance (Kuo 2001). Any amount of access to parks, even if only a limited view of trees or grass, has been shown to decrease the stresses and fatigue that are associated with living in an urban environment (Kuo 2001). In fact, the field of horticultural therapy, which is in use today, has evolved as a form of mental health treatment based on the

therapeutic effects of gardening (Gies 2006).

Parks and green space settings are especially important for child development. Children in urban environments tend to suffer from nature-deficit disorder, which means that, because of lack of access to green spaces, they miss out on growth opportunities (Louv 2005). Play is necessary for cognitive development throughout childhood (Isenberg and Quinsenberry 2002, Moore, Goltsman and Iacofano 1987). Physical activity has been shown to positively influence alertness, grades, and behavior, as well as brain development and capacity for learning (University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center 2007, Louv 2005, Cole-Hamilton et al. 2002, Praag 1999). Outdoor play is necessary for children to learn about nature, the larger world, and the connection of people to place (Stephens 2007, Louv 2005). Furthermore, childrens ability to deal with stress, manage risks, and interact socially without conflict decreases when they are deprived of play in nature (Louv 2005, Cole-Hamilton et al. 2002). Some researchers hypothesize that the recent rise in ADD and ADHD stems from children having less access to optimal outdoor play environments (Louv 2005). Activity in park settings has been shown to improve the ability of children with ADD to concentrate (Taylor 2001). Independent play also promotes self-esteem, self-awareness, and responsibility (Chancellor 2007, Cole-Hamilton et al. 2002). While streets have historically been used for play in urban environments, the importance of parks as play areas has risen as increased automobile use has reduced the number of streets that are play-friendly and safe (Staempfli 2009, Chancellor 2007).

Parks can also be important community centers and strengthen the bonds between local residents. Green common spaces lead to stronger social ties (Kuo 1998). Community gardens especially contribute to social stability and sense of community (Englander 2001).

When people work together toward shared goals, such as working in a community garden or creating a park from a vacant lot, they get to know one another, trust one another, look out for one another, and feel invested in their neighborhood... [this] lead[s] to concrete community improvements such as fewer homicides and other violent crime; fewer property crimes, including graffiti; reduced juvenile delinquency; higher educational achievement; lower rates of asthma and teen pregnancy; and better response to the communitys needs by central governments because they see a united front. (Sherer 2004, p.18)

R2G Background 11

Figure 25. Hudson River Greenway, New York City; exercise is important for physical health.


Figure 26. Rio de Los Angeles State Park, Los Angeles; parks contribute to social and environmental health.

Furthermore, research supports the idea that social capital is increased through community involvement in neighborhood parks (Gies 2006).

Environmental Health

Parks and green spaces significantly improve environmental conditions in urban areas. Trees and plants improve air quality by producing oxygen and absorbing pollutants (Nowak and Crane 2006). Parks and green space also have the potential to benefit urban water by treating stormwater and increasing infiltration. Green surfaces are more permeable than pavement, and this has the effect of reducing stormwater runoff and increasing the amount of water that infiltrates the soil to groundwater basins and aquifers (Davis 2005). In addition, vegetation is important for removing pollutants from runoff, improving the quality of stormwater before it reaches waterways (Davis 2005). Numerous best management practices are available for implementation in parks and public spaces, which are directed at managing runoff and improving water quality (Davis 2005). These solutions can be of significant benefit to cities by helping to meet water quality standards and improving the safety and availability of public waters. Trees and green space also reduce the heat island effect by reducing the amount of urban surfaces that store solar heat, and by cooling the air through evapotranspiration (United States Environmental Protection Agency 2009). Tree canopies can reduce mid-day air temperatures above ground by 1.26 to 2.34 degrees F (Souch and Souch 1993).

Providing habitat for native species can also be an important function of parks and green space. Urban development displaces native species of plants and animals, many of which have become endangered or extinct (Murphy 1986). In southern California, whole ecosystems are now marginalized and endangered that once thrived in the lowlands, riparian corridors and coastlines where cities have developed (Haslam 1990). According to the field of landscape ecology, patches and corridors in the urban matrix such as parks and greenbelts can play an important role in providing habitat connectivity, thereby increasing the chances of survival for native species (Snep, Opdam, Baveco, Wallis, DeVries, Timmermans, Kwak and Kuypers 2006).

Global warming is expected to threaten human health with more frequent and more intense heat waves and increased prevalence of infectious diseases (National Assessment Synthesis Team 2000, Patz 2000, Epstien 2000, Patz et al. 2000). Current measured environmental impacts of global warming include ice melting, especially at the poles; decline in arctic species populations; increase in sea level rise; increase in precipitation; and outbreaks of certain pest insect species (National Geographic 2011). Predicted impacts include continued sea level rise and ice melting, more erratic and catastrophic weather, floods and drought, less available fresh water, as well as extinctions and ecosystem changes (National Geographic 2011). Vegetative growth in parks and other green infrastructure counteracts global warming by taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and storing it as woody tissue and soil organic matter (Billups 2001).

R2G Background 13

Figure 27. El Pueblo, Los Angeles; parks strengthen communities.


Miami

Philadelphia

WilmingtonDenver

Cleveland

Atlanta

The Speedwell Foundation has partnered with the Georgia Institute of Technology and the Georgia Tech Research Institute to create case studies for major cities and metropolitan areas throughout the United States (Red Fields to Green Fields 2011). Developed in conjunction with local organizations, these case studies are the ground work for obtaining funding for implementation. The case studies show visions of how green fields would impact each city by creating jobs, increasing property values, and improving the quality of life for residents. Each case study is different and responds to the unique condition of each urban area. The following six case studies were produced in 2010 in the first round of the Red Fields to Green Fields project.

Figure 28. First round of Red Fields to Green Fields case studies

2.2 Case Studies

R2G Background 15

Parks Redefine and Transform Commercial, Industrial and Residential Real Estate

Denver has experienced rapid population growth in recent years. However, while the population is increasing, jobs and park space per resident are declining. The Denver case study focuses on the real estate crisis by targeting the oversupply of housing and declining housing sales, as well as high commercial vacancy rates and high bankruptcy rates. The Denver strategy is to concentrate green fields in two opportunity areas: the South Platte River Corridor and Transit Oriented Developments. For more information, see Red Fields to Green Fields: Denver (Georgia Institute of Technology 2010b). rftgf.org

Denver, CO

Parks Solve the Urban Real Estate Crisis

Atlanta, GA

The Atlanta Case Study was the first to be developed. It puts forth the original model of Red Fields to Green Fields, wherein under-utilized residential and commercial real estate assets are transformed into public parks. The benefits are perceived to be two-fold: improve the quality of life for residents of the City by addressing the issue of park-poverty, while also improving the Citys economy by taking distressed commercial properties off the books of failing banks and increasing property values in communities surrounding parks. For more information, see Red Fields to Green Fields: Atlanta (Georgia Institute of Technology 2010a). rftgf.org

Figure 29. Image from Atlanta case study Figure 210. Image from Denver case study


Cleveland, OH

Parks Transform Neighborhoods and Waterfronts

In contrast to cities like Los Angeles or Denver, the population of Cleveland has declined by 53% from 1950 to 2008. In response to its population decline and the loss of manufacturing jobs, Cleveland is diversifying its infrastructure and revitalizing its downtown. The case study highlights a series of existing proposals for parks, park systems, and redevelopment projects that are mostly along major riparian corridors and abutting the waterfront. This includes planned parks, extensive trail extensions, relocation of the port to open up the waterfront, public square redesign, a regional park system plan, and downtown redevelopment. For more information, see Red Fields to Green Fields: Cleveland (Georgia Institute of Technology 2010d). rftgf.org

Parks Rescue and Restore Economic, Environmental and Public Health

Miami-Dade County is a very large metropolitan area with a host of issues. The population is growing as urban centers densify, putting neighborhood green space at a premium. The area ranks high in troubled real estate, bank failures, and unemployment rates. This case study concentrates on the Miami-Dade County Parks and Open Space System Master Plan initiative, which is a 50-year plan for a connected park system. For more information, see Red Fields to Green Fields: Miami (Georgia Institute of Technology 2010c). rftgf.org

Miami-Dade, FL

Figure 211. Image from Miami-Dade case study Figure 212. Image from Cleveland case study

R2G Background 17

Much like Cleveland, Philadelphia has suffered from population decline due to the loss of manufacturing jobs since the 1950s as well as migration to the suburbs. The percentage of jobs in the manufacturing sector has shrunk by 90% since 1950. There has been a resurgence in downtown living over the last decade; however, much of the City still suffers from neglect, poverty and segregation. Industrial properties are increasingly unoccupied. Furthermore, some areas of the City are drastically under-served by parks compared to other areas. The case study for Philadelphia focuses on conversion of those stranded industrial lands left behind by the shift in the economy as a way to leverage existing park plans. Park proposals such as a regional trail and a riverfront park are used as examples of projects that could be stimulated by Red Fields to Green Fields For more information, see Red Fields to Green Fields: Philadelphia (Georgia Institute of Technology 2010e). rftgf.org

Philadelphia, PA

Creating Jobs and Investments for Philadelphia

Wilmington, DE

Urban Greening Program Revitalizing Neighborhoods into Vibrant, Healthy Communities

The Wilmington case study looks at the West Sides southeast quadrant. Problems include high rates of foreclosures, vacancies, low property values, a cycle of disinvestment, limited parks and open space, and poor public health. The case study highlights existing components of the West Sides community development strategy, including support for housing rehabilitation and home ownership, providing quality rental housing, and redeveloping commercial districts. The case study also includes a summary of various components of an existing network for park restoration and greening, including public-private partnerships, City programs, grassroots leaders, and volunteers. For more information, see Red Fields to Green Fields: Wilmington (Georgia Institute of Technology 2010f ). rftgf.org

Figure 213. Image from Philadelphia case study Figure 214. Image from Wilmington case study

3Method

The R2G-LA method was informed by the work of James A. LaGro Jr. (2001), John T. Lyle (1999) and Ian McHarg (1969). These landscape architect scholars set the precedent of using layers of mapped information and various scales to examine important biological and social factors (LaGro 2001, Lyle 1999, McHarg 1969). The R2G-LA method began with inventory and analysis at the regional scale, which resulted in regional objectives. Then inventory and analysis were conducted at the neighborhood scale in order to better understand red fields and their conditions on the ground. Individual sites were then investigated for design at the site scale. This allows for appropriate solutions at the neighborhood and site scales of design, based on inventory and analysis at broader scales. Finally, expanding to the regional scale after site scale design provided the opportunity to envision and quantify the regional-scale benefits that would result from the transformation of numerous site-scale red fields throughout the city.

19


1. RegionalInventory and Analysis

A series of citywide maps were created in GIS to better understand the different social and environmental factors affecting the city of Los Angeles. These included hydrology, transportation, topography, pollution, land use, and population density maps. In addition, economically disadvantaged communities and parkland per 1,000 people were mapped to identify the areas of the city most in need of economic stimulus and additional parkland. Literature research was also performed on these and other regional topics in Los Angeles such as park inequality, real estate, heat island effect, food options, native vegetation, and green initiatives. See Chapter 4.2: Regional Inventory and Objectives for more information.

2. NeighborhoodsSelection

In order to conduct more refined inventory and analysis, three Los Angeles neighborhoods were selected for further study. The neighborhoods were selected from within the focus area of communities that had been identified as both low in parkland per resident and economically disadvantaged. In addition, the steering committee provided recommendations on neighborhood choices based on politics and ongoing projects. A typology map of the focus area was created to ensure that the selection of neighborhoods would be representative of the diverse conditions within focus area communities. Boundaries for neighborhoods were based on the Los Angles Times Neighborhood Map of Los Angeles County (LA Times 2011). See Chapter 4.4: Area of Focus for more information.

3.1 Method Stages

site scale

neighborhoodscale

regionalscale

Figure 31. Scales of investigation

Method 21

Inventory

Inventory of each neighborhood was conducted using GIS maps to identify important features, including: parks, schools, bike routes, bus routes, metro stops, land use, water flow, and topography. Information about demographics and existing park services was also researched for each neighborhood. In addition, for-sale real estate data from CoStar, a commercial real estate information company, was mapped to identify potential red fields. Analysis of this information led to decisions about where to focus ground-truthing efforts. See Chapter 5.1: Neighborhood Inventory for more information.

Ground-truthing

Ground-truthing is the process by which the Studio 606 team inventoried each neighborhood on foot and by car to further identify red fields and to understand neighborhood characteristics. Ground-truthing consisted of verifying CoStar data on the ground and identifying additional vacant lots and abandoned buildings not listed by CoStar. Notes were taken and sites were photographed. Additionally, driving and walking routes were mapped and the red field locations were recorded in Google Maps and using GIS. See Chapter 5.2: Ground-truthing for more information.

3. Red FieldsInventory

Ground-truthing provided additional red field data that was georeferenced in GIS using parcel data provided by the Los Angeles County Office of the Assessor. Parcel data for each red field was then transferred from GIS to Microsoft Excel spreadsheets, and the overall distribution and average size of red fields was calculated for each of the neighborhood study areas. See Chapter 6.1: Red Field Inventory for more information.

Capability

In order to understand the opportunities and constraints of each red field site, a list of site characteristics was developed based on the requirements for four basic green field types: urban agriculture, recreation, community, and ecology. Red fields were then mapped according to their characteristics. Additionally, criteria for capability were determined for each category of use, and red fields were

mapped according to their capability using GIS models. See Chapter 7: Green Field Analysis for more information.

Suitability

The suitability of each site was refined by using additional criteria including, size, vacancy, proximity to bike lanes, and proximity nodes, to prioritize red fields for each use category. Using GIS models, all red field sites were assigned priority levels in each of the four categories of use. The result was a series of neighborhood maps for each category of use, in which red fields are ranked by priority level. See Chapter 7.3: Suitability Analysis for more information.

Site Selection

Four red field sites were then selected for further inventory, analysis and design. These four sites were chosen to represent a broad range of conditions and possible programming, including the four green field types established in the suitability stage. All of the sites were chosen from among the most suitable sites identified previously. See Chapter 8.1: Site Selection for more information.

4. Site DesignSite designs were produced to illustrate concepts, design possibilities, and benefits of the R2G-LA vision at the site scale. Designs for each of the four selected sites were developed based on additional site inventory, analysis, program development, and synthesis. Schematic designs produced included 3D models, axonometric views, elevations and perspective renderings. See Chapter 8: Site Design for more information.

5. ExtrapolationExtrapolation was used to understand the regional-scale benefits of transforming red fields to green fields. An estimate of the number of red fields that one would expect to find in the entire focus area was calculated by extrapolating average acres of red fields in the neighborhood study areas to the larger area of disadvantaged communities. From this, anticipated environmental, social, and economic benefits were estimated. See Chapter 10.1: Extrapolation for more information.


Selection

Inventory

Ground-truthing

Park inequalityFood optionsTransportationWaterNative vegetationHeat island eectAir pollutionReal estate

Environmental healthSocial healthEconomic health

Area of need: economically disadvantaged and park-poor communitiesTypologies: land use and population densityThree representative neighborhoods Westlake Lincoln Heights Florence

DemographicsParksSchoolsBike routesBus routesMetro stopsLand useWater owTopographyCoStar data

Toured neighborhoodsMapped walking and driving routesIdentied red elds

:

vacant lots abandoned buildingsDocumented each red eld site

RegionalNeighborhoods

Inventory

Goals & Objectives

RegionalRegional

Mapped in GISNumber of parcelsSite characteristics

slope sun commercial zoning size vacancy proximity to bike lanes proximity to nodes

Regional

Capability & SuitabilityAnalysis

Inventory

Green Field TypesUrban AgricultureRecreationCommunityEcology

Red Field Characteristics slope sun commercial zoning

size vacancy proximity to bike lanes proximity to nodes

Red FieldsSite SelectionFour sites chosen frommost suitable red elds

Site AnalysisProgramming

Schematic Designs

Site Design

Extrapolation

1 2 3

4

5

Figure 32. R2G-LA method diagram

Method 23

Selection

Inventory

Ground-truthing

Park inequalityFood optionsTransportationWaterNative vegetationHeat island eectAir pollutionReal estate

Environmental healthSocial healthEconomic health

Area of need: economically disadvantaged and park-poor communitiesTypologies: land use and population densityThree representative neighborhoods Westlake Lincoln Heights Florence

DemographicsParksSchoolsBike routesBus routesMetro stopsLand useWater owTopographyCoStar data

Toured neighborhoodsMapped walking and driving routesIdentied red elds

:

vacant lots abandoned buildingsDocumented each red eld site

RegionalNeighborhoods

Inventory

Goals & Objectives

RegionalRegional

Mapped in GISNumber of parcelsSite characteristics

slope sun commercial zoning size vacancy proximity to bike lanes proximity to nodes

Regional

Capability & SuitabilityAnalysis

Inventory

Green Field TypesUrban AgricultureRecreationCommunityEcology

Red Field Characteristics slope sun commercial zoning

size vacancy proximity to bike lanes proximity to nodes

Red FieldsSite SelectionFour sites chosen frommost suitable red elds

Site AnalysisProgramming

Schematic Designs

Site Design

Extrapolation

1 2 3

4

5

4Regional

Investigation

As the second-largest city in the United States, Los Angeles is an important and influential city. The City of Los Angeles was selected as one of five cities for the second round of R2G case studies because of its regional and national presence. An understanding of the unique aspects and issues of the City was necessary to develop appropriate objectives. In this section the city of Los Angeles and the Citys major issues are documented. Additionally, goals and objectives for R2G-LA are developed based on a broad understanding of these regional issues and opportunities in the City.

25


Landscape and PeopleLos Angeles is a large metropolis with a population of 3.8 million people (Perry and Mackun 2001). The City has been growing since the late 19th Century, expanding rapidly through the 20th Century (Gumprecht 1999). From 2000 to 2010 the population grew by 2.7% (Perry and Mackun 2001). With people from 140 different countries speaking up to 92 different languages, the City is quite ethnically diverse (LAUSD Human Resources Division 2004). While the urban areas surrounding Los Angeles are characterized by sprawling development patterns, Los Angeles has a relatively high density among U.S. cities, with an overall population per square mile of 7,877 (Census 2000). Table 41 shows the nine largest U.S. cities in 2000 (population over 1 million) by population density (Census 2000).

Today Los Angeles covers approximately 470 square miles (LADOT 2009). It is situated primarily in the Los Angeles Basin, although the city boundary extends north to include parts of the Santa Monica Mountains and San Fernando Valley. To the south, a narrow corridor of the boundary also extends to include the Los Angeles Harbor at San Pedro. Steep mountain ranges, including the San Gabriel, Santa Monica, Santa Susana, and Verdugo Mountains, surround the urban area on all sides except to the southwest where the land and the ocean meet (Given Place Media 2011a). See figure 41.

The urban area itself is highly developed. Approximately 76% of the area within the City boundary is developed land (Figure 49). Of the 24% of undeveloped land, only 1.4% is able to be developed and the rest is open space such as the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area and Griffith Park (Envicom Corporation 1995). Various land use types occupy the developed land area. Approximately 40% is residential, while 8% is industrial and 4% is zoned commercial (Envicom Corporation 1995). In fact, the predominant land use found in the city is single family residential (Envicom Corporation 1995).

4.1 Overview of Los Angeles

Los Angeles is located in an area with a Mediterranean climate, resulting in a long hot, dry season and a short cool and wet season (Wolch, Joassart-Marcelli, Pastor, and Dreier 2005). The mean rainfall for the city is a little under fifteen inches per year (Given Place Media 2011b). Although the average rainfall is low, the winter wet period includes intense storms that frequently cause flooding, debris flows, and, historically, drastic changes of course for rivers and streams in the area (Wolch, Joassart-Marcelli, Pastor and Dreier 2005, Gumprecht 1999). The City straddles three primary watersheds: The Los Angeles River, Ballona Creek, and the Dominguez Channel. The Los Angeles River runs through the City for 32 miles, almost all of which is channelized (City of Los Angeles 2007).

Table 41. Population density of nine largest U.S. cities (Census 2000)

U.S. City Population per sqr. mile

New York 26, 403

Chicago 12,749

Philadephia 11,233

Los Angeles 7,877

San Diego 3,772

Dallas 3,470

Houston 3,372

San Antonio 2,808

Phoenix 2,782

Regional Investigation 27

10

110

105

405

101

210

2

170

5405

118

10

405

90

110

110

101

5

5

710

0 5 10Miles

2.5

Los Angeles CityBoundary

Santa Monica Mountains

Griffith Park

Downtown Los Angeles

San Gabriel Mountains

Angeles National Forest

Verdugo Mountains

San Fernando Valley

Santa Susana Mountains

Los Angeles Basin

San PedroLos Angeles Harbor

Pacific Ocean

Figure 41. Map of Los Angeles (adapted from ESRI 2004 and Google 2011)

Los Angeles River


EconomyThe Los Angeles metropolitan region has one of the largest economies in the world. The estimated gross domestic product (GDP) of the Los Angeles metropolitan region for 2008 was $792 billion, putting it ahead of nations such as Australia and Poland (PricewaterhouseCoopers 2009). Leading economic industries in Los Angeles County (2007) include: tourism and hospitality, with 456,000 workers; professional and business services, with 288,000 workers; international trade, with 281,000 workers; entertainment, with 244,000 workers; and wholesale trade and logistics, with 199,000 workers (LACDC 2011). Los Angeles County is also the largest manufacturing center in the United States, with 376,500 workers in that sector, which produces apparel, fabricated metals, food products, aerospace products, and navigation products (LACDC 2011).

The City of Los Angeles is known for its high standards of living. However, the City as a whole includes a large economically disadvantaged population. In 2000 the

percentage of persons living below poverty level in Los Angeles was 22.1%, which was higher than both the County, at 15.3%, and the State, at 14%, and double the national level of 11.3% (Census 2000).

The recession has had a serious impact on employment in the Los Angeles region (Figure 44). In December of 2006, Los Angeles Countys unemployment rate was at a low of 4.3%, and by July 2010 it had soared to 13.4% (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 2011). The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) reports that 9,237 jobs were lost in Los Angeles between the years of 2006 and 2008 (SCAG 2009).

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

Figure 42. Californias unemployment rate has risen over the past decade (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 2011)


4.2 Regional Inventory & ObjectivesImproving real estate conditions and providing a more equitable distribution of parkland are hallmarks of the R2G initiative. This project also presents an opportunity to target other social and environmental challenges in the City of Los Angeles. The challenges identified by the 606 team that R2G-LA is able to address include the citys lack of open space, distressed real estate market, environmentally unsustainable water management strategies, auto-centric transportation system, urban heat island effect, limited healthy food options in disadvantaged communities, and decimated native vegetation. Additionally, there is an opportunity to align with and support current green initiatives in the City. In order to achieve the vision of improving environmental, social, and economic systems, objectives have been developed for each issue, which will guide the design of green field solutions. A description of each issue and the related objectives follows.

Social HealthPark Inequality

Compared to other large, dense cities in the United States, Los Angeles parkland falls short both in terms of its percentage of the Citys land area and in terms of park acres per resident (Trust for Public Land 2010) (Figure 43). While a few large tracts of parkland do exist, such as Griffith Park (4,310 acres), parks are not distributed equally throughout the city, being especially deficient in lower income neighborhoods (Sherer 2003). In Los Angeles, low income neighborhoods tend to be occupied by people of color (Pincetl 2003). On average, while white neighborhoods have 31.8 acres of park space for every 1,000 people, African-American neighborhoods have only 1.7 acres per 1,000 people, and Latino neighborhoods have only 0.6 acres per 1,000 people (Pincetl 2003).

Many communities lack a park within walking distance, which is a significant factor contributing to park usage (Giles et al. 2005). In Los Angeles only 30% of the

Citys four million residents live within mile of a park, compared with 80% and 90% of residents in Boston and New York, respectively (Sherer 2006). Without parks, many people do not have adequate facilities to exercise, relax outdoors, or congregate with friends and family. In addition, as the Citys population is expected to grow well into the 21st century, this puts further pressure on the citys limited park resources (La Ganga and Lin 2007). Coupled with the fact that there is little land remaining to develop, it is imperative to provide innovate solutions to providing park space.

Objective:

Improve equitable access to green space

Figure 43. Acres of parkland per 1,000 residents (Trust for Public Land - City Park Facts 2010) Total park acres includes city, county, metro, state, and federal acres within the city limits.

0

6

2

4

8

10

12

Washington D

C

Seattle

Boston

San Francisco

Los Angeles

New York

Chicago

Miami


Food Options

Los Angeles County was the most productive agricultural county in the United States until the 1950s, when urban development began to out-compete agriculture for land (Gumprech 1999). This has lead to issues of access to healthy, nutritious food in inner city communities (Gies 2006). Inner city grocery stores tend to get the lowest quality vegetables and meat (Eisinger 1998). Grocery stores in disadvantaged areas often sell spoiled meat and vegetables, suffer from broken refrigerators, and do not consistently stock their shelves with healthy options (Chung and Myers1999). A 1995 study in the City of Los Angeles found that, on average, there were less than half as many full service grocery stores per resident in low income urban communities than in the City as a whole (Cotterill and Franklin 1995). Many of these communities experience higher prices for lower quality produce because of the lack of competition between stores (Shaffer 2002).

Lack of access to healthy food options results in health issues such as obesity. In general, overweight people are more likely to die prematurely than people who maintain a healthy weight. Research directly links obesity to cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancer (Krupa 2001). Recent increases in cases of Type II diabetes can be

attributed largely to consumption of too many high-fat, high-protein foods, which are cheap and readily available, and not enough fruits and vegetables, which are expensive and can be scarce in low income areas (Los Angeles County Public Health Services 2004). Studies show that a change in diet to include more fruits and vegetables and fewer high calorie processed foods could prevent as many as 35% of the annual deaths attributed to cancer (Los Angeles County Public Health Services 2004).

Objectives:

Increase equitable access to healthy food options

Provide opportunities for local agriculture

Figure 44. Food sources in low income areas in Los Angeles (California Center for Public Health Advocacy 2007)

Figure 45. Fast food restaurant in South Los Angeles (image: Google 2011)

Fast Food Restaurants 49%

Farmers Markets 1% Produce Stores 6%

Super Markets 12%

Convenience Stores 32%


Transportation

Transportation in Los Angeles has been dominated by automobile use since the early twentieth century (Starr 2005). As the Citys population has ballooned over the years, the reliance on cars as the main form of transportation has resulted in congested freeways and some of the highest levels of air pollution in the nation (American Lung Association 2011). Furthermore, the prevalence of automobiles and auto-centric street design does not contribute to a pedestrian-friendly environment (Lewyn 2008). Unfortunately, an auto-centric transportation system creates inequality for residents without cars and limits the ability of residents to chose alternative transportation modes such as walking, bicycling, and mass transit. In order to address the current issues and anticipate future challenges, it is imperative that the City develop a more equitable transportation system.

Public transportation in Los Angeles has a history that dates back to 1873 (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2011). At that time many private owners of public transit were in operation, and transit systems included horse cars, cable cars, incline railways, steam trains, electric streetcars, interurban cars, trolley buses, and gas or diesel powered buses. At the beginning of the twentieth century Los Angeles still had a fairly extensive trolley system, but it reached its peak use in 1924 and steadily declined with the rise of automobiles (Starr 2005). Trolley ridership had halved by 1933, and the trolley system was completely dismantled by 1960

(Wolch et al. 2005). By 1919, more automobiles were owned by Los Angeles residents than in any other city in the United States (Wachs 1984). This was due largely to the good weather in Southern California since cars in the early 1900s were open to the elements. According to Boehle (2010), after World War II the use of automobiles increased because of attractive advertising, inexpensive gasoline and an increase in suburban living.

The auto-centric transportation system in Los Angeles is inefficient. Annual vehicle miles traveled in the City of Los Angeles have increased by 13% from 1999 to 2009 (Census 2010). The percentage of commuters who traveled more than an hour to work increased by 4% from 1990 from 2009 (Census 2010). In Los Angeles County, annual hours of delay per capita increased from 31 in 1982 to 56 in 1999, which resulted in more than 1.1 million gallons of wasted fuel and a total delay-related cost of $12.5-billion (Wolch, Pastor, and Dreier 2004). The transportation sector in California is responsible for the greatest fossil fuel consumption and highest levels of air pollution compared to other sectors (California EPA Air Resources Board 2010, SCAQMD 2008).

Objectives:

Improve connectivity for alternative forms of transportation

Figure 46. Traffic on the Hollywood Freeway in Los Angeles


Environmental HealthWater

The hydrology of the Los Angeles Basin is based on dynamic physical processes. Water flow is dominated by the slopes of the Transverse Mountain Ranges surrounding the Basin, which are relatively young mountains that experience a high rate of uplift and erosion (LACDPW Water Resources Division 2006). The steep mountain slopes promote rapid concentration of runoff once soils are moistened to capacity (LACDPW Water Resources Division 2006). River systems such as the Los Angeles River historically served to transport eroded sediment from these mountains to valleys below, forming the coastal plains on which the majority of the Los Angeles urban area is now located (Given Place Media 2011, LACDPW Water Resources Division 2006, Gumprecht 1999). Therefore, most soils in Los Angeles are composed of highly porous rock, sand, and silt deposits, which in some areas are as deep as twenty or thirty thousand feet (Given Place Media 2011, LACDPW Water Resources Division 2006, Gumprecht 1999). The permeability of alluvial soils ensures that most streams often flow underground (LACDPW Water Resources Division 2006). Despite the intermittent nature of streams, concentrated storms frequently have resulted in floods and debris flows, especially when mountain

slopes have been denuded by forest fires (LACDPW Water Resources Division 2006, Gumprecht 1999). These dynamics make the rivers of the area erratic and unpredictable (Gumprecht 1999). In fact, before being channelized, the Los Angeles River was a wide braided stream, which would variably drain to the Santa Monica Bay or join with the San Gabriel River, while for most of the year it disappeared underground before reaching the Pacific Ocean (LACDPW Water Resources Division 2006, Gumprecht 1999).

Since the Los Angeles urban area has developed extensively on and around natural drainages such as the Los Angeles River, enormous effort has gone into protecting the built environment from flood and debris damage (Gumprecht 1999). Most of the Los Angeles River and its tributaries have been constricted to concrete channels or underground pipes, while numerous dams and debris basins have been built to catch and control sediment (LACDPW Water Resources Division 2006, Lewis 2006). This extensive storm drain system was designed to convey a specific amount of water away from urban areas in a certain amount of time (LADPW Watershed Protection Division 2009). However, as

Figure 47. Los Angeles River after a heavy rain


Figure 48. Los Angeles River at low flow

imperviousness due to urbanization has increased, the volume of run-off has increased, and the concentration time of urban runoff has decreased -- factors that stress the capacity of the original system and increase the likelihood of flooding (Water Environment Federation 1996).

In most cases the storm drains convey runoff directly to the Los Angeles River and the Pacific Ocean, and non-point-source pollutants are carried to the sea without an opportunity for natural biofiltration or bioremediation (LADPW Watershed Protection Division 2009, Gumprecht 1999). This results in waterways that are impacted by toxic pollutants as well as lack of vegetation, providing little opportunity for wildlife habitat and riparian vegetation that might otherwise take advantage of natural drainages (LADPW Watershed Protection Division 2009, Paul and Meyer 2001). Contact with vegetation, soil, and permeable surfaces is an important way to improve the quality of stormwater runoff (LADPW Watershed Protection Division 2009).

Furthermore, in addition to being very costly, this channelized system impedes the recharge of groundwater aquifers. It is estimated that only 16% of precipitation in the Los Angeles Region currently percolates to groundwater, while 50% flows directly through the stormwater system to the ocean as urban runoff (LASGRWC 2010). Coupled with impeded groundwater

recharge, extraction from the groundwater basins due to population demands has led to saltwater intrusion from the Pacific Ocean, which is currently stalled by injecting fresh water into the ground (Johnson 2007).

Los Angeles is experiencing fresh water shortages, and the supply is at risk. Currently, only 11% of the city of Los Angeles water supply comes from local groundwater, while 35% comes from the Owens Valley via the Los Angeles Aqueduct, and 53% is purchased from the Metropolitan Water District which primarily sources its water from the Colorado River, Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and the California Aquaduct, which in turn gets its water from reservoirs in the Sierra Nevada (Villaraigosa 2008).The Citys Plan, put forth by Mayor Villaraigosa in 2008 responds to water shortages and indicates a number of factors that put the Citys water supply at risk, including: a large and growing population; the State Water Resources Control Board Mono Lake decision, along with the Owens Lake Dust Mitigation Project and other mitigation and restoration projects that limit the Los Angeles Department of Water and Powers ability to export from the Eastern Sierra; a Federal Court ruling to protect the delta smelt, which may limit the ability of the Metropolitan Water District to take from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta by as much as one third; contamination of the San Fernando Valley groundwater supply; and the potentially destabilizing factor of climate change (Villariagosa 2008).


Figure 49. Developed and undeveloped land in Los Angeles (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2005)

0 5 10Miles

2.50 5 10Miles

2.5

10

110

105

405

101

210

2

170

5405

118

10

90

110

110

101

5

Open Space

Developed

Griffith Park

Santa Monica Mountains

Downtown Los Angeles

Verdugo Mountainss


Figure 410. Los Angeles watersheds and rivers (USGS 2002)

Upper Los Angeles River

Ballona Creek

0 5 10Miles

2.5

Los Angeles River

Ballona Creek

Garapito Creek - Frontal Santa Monica Bay

Frontal Santa Monica Bay - San Pedro Bay

Dominguez Channel

Big Tujunga Creek

Rivers and Streams


The Citys Plan proposes numerous water conservation strategies including prohibiting certain uses of water, public outreach, reducing outdoor water usage, water recycling, stormwater capture, cleaning up groundwater basins, and expanding groundwater storage. Additionally irrigation guidelines that limit the amount of water used in landscapes were issued by the City of Los Angeles to ensure compliance of landscape plans to California Assembly Bill 1881s water conservation requirements, which went into effect in 2010 (LADCP 2011).

The citys attitude toward stormwater and the river is changing. According to the Water Quality Compliance Master Plan for Urban Runoff, The City now looks at its rivers, lakes and coastal waters as essential for the quality of life in Los Angeles (LADPW Watershed Protection Division 2009, p.1). Instead of considering urban runoff a nuisance, the City is beginning to value it as a resource for fresh water (LADPW Watershed Protection Division 2009). In 2004 the citizens passed Proposition O, indicating their resolve to improve the Citys water. Proposition O provides funding for projects that would clean up pollution and improve water quality in the Citys watercourses and waterfronts, reduce flooding, and decrease polluted runoff using neighborhood parks. This proposition authorized the City to issue bonds for up to $500 million for land acquisition and improvements, including planning and design, to be paid for by property taxes (City of Los Angeles Bond Measure O 2011).

Legislation and guidelines are now in place to ensure that urban runoff in Los Angeles meets standards for pollution levels. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits are mandated by the Federal Clean Water Act. In 2010 the Los Angeles River was declared navigable by the EPA, which means that, according to recent Supreme Court rulings, it is eligible for full regulatory protection under the Clean Water Act (Quinlan 2010). In addition, there is now increased enforcement of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), which set limits to the amount of pollution a water body can receive and still meet standards (LA Stormwater, LADPW Watershed Protection Division 2009). Over 60 TMDLs affecting Los Angeles are expected to be adopted by 2012 (LA Stormwater, LADPW Watershed Protection Division 2009). For this reason, the City created the Water Quality Compliance Master Plan for Urban Runoff (LADPW Watershed Protection Division 2009) as a 20 year strategy to reduce pollution from urban runoff in Los Angeles using green infrastructure and other means.

The City is also currently working on a Low Impact

Development Ordinance (LA Stormwater). Low impact development, including green infrastructure, stormwater best management practices and permeable surfaces, can improve water infiltration and water quality (Chau 2009). Capturing and infiltrating the first three quarters of an inch of rainfall throughout the region could triple the amount of water that percolates to groundwater basins each year (Chau 2009).

Objectives:

Improve runoff water quality by increasing vegetated surfaces and low impact development

Improve groundwater infiltration and recharge with green infrastructure, low impact development and permeable surfaces

Native Vegetation

Californias topography and climate create one of the planets most biodiverse hot spots (Keator and Middlebrook 2007, Holland and Keil 1995), with nearly 6,000 species and subspecies of plants, and as many cultivars (Theodore Payne Foundation for Wildflowers and Native Plants, Inc. 2009, Holland and Keil 1995). However, in Southern California, many of the plant communities that have evolved to take advantage of the unique microclimates, soils and slopes, are now endangered by widespread development (Keator and Middlebrook 2007).

Coastal sage scrub, or southern coastal scrub, is the endangered plant community which makes up the majority of the historical vegetation that dominated the Los Angeles Basin before urban development replaced it (Keator and Middlebrook 2007). Coastal sage scrub is influenced by ocean air and is adapted to dry summers by being drought tolerant and often drought deciduous (Holland and Keil 1995). In addition, coastal sage scrub as well as many other plant communities in Southern California are adapted to fire regimes as some species depend on heat for seed germination (Holland and Keil 1995). Fire also provides niche opportunities for colonizing species in coastal sage scrub that are out-competed by longer living species over time (Holland and Keil 1995). The structure of the coastal sage scrub community includes shrubs less than six feet in height and a rich understory layer of herbaceous


perennials, grasses, annuals and bulbs (Landis 2011). The predominant species of coastal sage scrub are low, fragrant shrubs with soft stems and thick leaves such as California sagebrush, black sage, purple sage, and white sage (Keator and Middlebrook 2007). Other prominent shrubs include lemonade berry, laurel sumac, chaparral yucca, coyote brush, coffeeberry, California buckwheat, encelia sunflower, and prickly pear (Landis 2011, Keator and Middlebrook 2007, Holland and Keil 1995).

Coastal sage scrub communities in southern California are a major component of a complicated mosaic of grasslands, coastal scrub, chaparral, coastal live oak woodlands, and riparian woodlands (Holland and Keil 1995). Riparian woodland communities occur along streams and waterways which course through the drier sage scrub (Keator and Middlebrook, 2007, Holland and Keil 1995). Western sycamore, white alder, black walnut, cottonwood and willow species are often found in riparian habitat (Landis 2011, Keator and Middlebrook 2007). Moving inland, the ocean influence is weaker, temperatures

are higher, the weather is drier, and coastal sage scrub gradually gives way to chaparral (Holland and Keil 1995). Chaparral species tend to be taller and woodier evergreens with smaller, harder leaves than sage scrub (Landis 2011, Holland and Keil 1995). Common chaparral species include chemise, manzanita, scrub oak, ceanothus, toyon, coffeeberry, live oak, sugarbush, poison-oak, and yerba santa (Landis 2011, Holland and Keil 1995).

Unlike the overlap between coastal sage scrub and chaparral, the divide between coastal sage scrub and grassland is usually pronounced, separated by a bare unvegetated zone, likely a combination of allelopathy and rodent and bird foraging (Holland and Keil 1995). Grasslands occur from sea level to approximately 4000 feet in dry mountain regions, commonly on terraces and flat areas (Holland and Keil 1995), whereas sage scrub is more often found on slopes (Landis 2011, Holland and Keil 1995). Grasslands native to Southern California tend to have perennial grasses with deep root systems (Emory 2011). Native grasses include needle grasses,

Figure 411. Native California plant community In the San Gabriel Mountains


California fescue, and California oatgrass (Emory 2011). The transitional zone between hot, dry grasslands and moist, cool upland forests is dominated by southern oak forests with trees 15-70 feet tall (Holland and Keil 1995). Oak forests, typically dominated by coast live oak, blue oak, Engelmann oak, valley oak, or other oak species, are most dense where water is adequately available and more openly structured in drier areas (Holland and Keil 1995).Using native vegetation has many benefits. One of these is creating a unique sense of place that speaks to location, microclimate, soils, and species co-evolution (Keator and Middlebrook 2007). Because native plants are adapted to the hot, dry summers and wet winters of Los Angeles, they require less water, and may therefore be more affordable to maintain (Theodore Payne Foundation for Wildflowers and Native Plants, Inc. 2009, Keator and Middlebrook 2007). In addition, native vegetation offers diversity and aesthetic beauty as well (Theodore Payne Foundation for Wildflowers and Native Plants, Inc. 2009). Some of the best foundation shrubs and trees, most appealing foliage plants, and longest blooming flowers are native to California (Keator and Middlebrook 2007). Native vegetation also attracts native animal species such as butterflies and hummingbirds, that enhance the users experience of nature.

Objectives:

Enhance peoples connectivity to nature to enhance the sense of place

Reincorporate native plants and habitat into the urban environment

Figure 412. Historic native plant communities of Los Angeles (adapted from MPGIS U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Mid Pacific Region 1996)

0 5 10Miles

2.5

Chaparral

Coastal Sagebrush

Coastal Saltmarsh

Mixed Hardwood Forest

Southern Oak Forest

Southern Seashore Communities

Figure 413. Coastal sage scrub in the Transverse Mountain Range


Heat Island Effect

The rise in temperatures in urban areas compared to nearby rural surroundings is known as the heat island effect (U.S. EPA n.d.). This urban climate condition is the result of the high thermal mass of concrete and asphalt, trapped air between tall buildings, and heat emitted from cars and air conditioners (U.S. EPA n.d.). Los Angeles is a large, expansive city with hundreds of miles of roadway and thousands of buildings. Most of the wild land and vegetation that was originally here, except for some inaccessible hills and protected lands, has been paved over for development. Figure 49, pg. 34 illustrates the extent of development in Los Angeles by mapping the amount of impervious surfaces, such as sidewalks, buildings, and roads. All this development has raised the average temperature in the City. High temperatures in the summer have increased from 97F in the 1930s to 105 in the 1990s (U.S. DOE 1996). Areas of the city with limited trees and green space are particularly vulnerable to temperature increases. Average summer temperatures in downtown Los Angeles, for instance, are 5F warmer than surrounding suburban and rural lands (Brasuell 2007).

Heat islands have significant physical health implications. The resulting higher temperatures increase the number of heat-related deaths and illnesses in summer months (Reid, et al. 2009). As temperatures increase so does smog, resulting in poorer air quality. The United States Department of Energy (1996) reports that every degree of temperature rise above 70F in Los Angeles results in a 3% smog increase. Los Angeles has also been listed as one of the top United States cities most vulnerable to health problems from temperature rises (Reid et al. 2009).Mitigation measures to reduce urban heat islands focus on

two solutions: increasing urban vegetation and increasing the reflectivity of man-made surfaces (Rosenthal, Crauderueff and Carter 2008). Roughly one third of Los Angeles is covered by tree canopy or grass and soil (McPherson, et al. 2011), but distribution is uneven. High density residential, commercial, and industrial areas are low in tree canopy cover. Increasing the amount of parks and green space throughout the City, especially in districts currently low in trees, can reduce the heating of Los Angeles and improve the health and quality of life for residents.

Objective: Reduce the heat island effect by increasing

parks and open space for areas in need.

Figure 414. Heat island effect in Los Angeles is exacerbated by overdevelopment.

Figure 415. Yearly high temperatures in Los Angeles (US Dept. of Energy 1996)

1930

95 F

100 F

105 F

1950 1970 1990

Yearly High Temperatures in Los Angeles source: Heat Island Project, Berkeley National Laboratory


California carbon dioxide, particulate matter from fossil fuels, and land use changes have the greatest impact on global warming (Electric Power Research Institute 2003). California emits 54 million tons of carbon dioxide annually from fossil fuel burning (California EPA Air Resources Board 2010). Compared to commercial, industrial, residential, and electrical sectors, the transportation sector of California uses the most fossil fuels and accounts for 36.5% of greenhouse gas inventories (California EPA Air Resources Board 2010). Global warming in Southern California is predicted to intensify weather extremes and storm events, increase temperatures, increase potential for wild fires, and negatively impact agriculture (Electric Power Research Institute et al. 2003).

Furthermore, climate change and associated temperature and pollutant increases exacerbate air quality (Iacobellis, Norris, Kanamitsu, Tyree, Cayan and Scripps Institution of Oceanography 2009). The topography of southern California, with valleys surrounded by mountain ranges, produces regularly occurring temperature inversions and chronic air quality problems (Iacobellis et al. 2009).

Figure 416. Air pollution over downtown Los Angeles

Air Pollution

The South Coast Air Basin, the air quality monitoring region in which Los Angeles is located, has the poorest air quality in the U.S. (SCAQMD 2008). The main source of air pollutants is the burning of fossil fuels (USEPA 2011, SCAQMD 2008). Air pollutants that are regularly monitored and controlled in California include particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5), ozone, sulfur dioxide, sulfates, carbon monoxide, and lead (SCAQMD 2008). Most of these pollutants cause respiratory damage and impairment or cardiac problems, and the effects range from fatigue to death (California EPA Air Resources Board 2009). Diesel fuel emissions are responsible for the greatest toxic risks in Southern California (SCAQMD 2008). According to national ranking of 277 metropolitan areas by the American Lung Association (2011), Los Angeles ranks highest in ozone pollution levels throughout the year, second highest in year-round particle pollution, and fourth highest in short-term particle pollution.

Additionally, the burning of fossil fuels is the largest source of greenhouse gases and accounts for 79% of global warming potential (EPA 2011).

Red Fields to Green Fields: Los Angeles

Documents

Transcript of Red Fields to Green Fields: Los Angeles