Pittsburgh is the most livable city again, at least according to Places Rated. It’s also been listed as number three in a list of cities of the future. I remember once a few years back being told by a fellow in the Bahamas that I was from the “future” when I told him I lived in San Francisco. Now San Francisco is only second most livable and doesn’t even rank on the cities of the future list.

The rankings that place Pittsburgh at the top are actually pretty consistent. Pittsburgh has never ranked lower than 14 and been named “most-livable” twice. Just last year the Economist Intelligence Unit named Pittsburgh, tied with Cleveland, as the most livable.

They know what we have.

I guess if Pittsburgh were a laundry detergent, the most popular would be the most sold. That’s apparently not the case with cities though. It was only a few weeks ago the news came that some sixty thousand people voted with their feet and left Pittsburgh between 2000 and 2006. Had they stayed to see the rankings they might still be here. Despite last year’s rankings, folks also left Cleveland.

Maybe they don't know what they had.

READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE

Eric Miller on 04.28.07 @ 12:54 PM PST [link]  

A little more on Allegheny CenterThe urban-renewal experienced by urban America from the 1950s onward is generally accepted today as failed policy. Where once urban streets were closed off to auto traffic and traffic loops and underground garages added, a new paradigm would bring back a street grid. Today “restoring the grid” is an often-heard catch phrase when taking about re-revitalizing urban areas.

FULL ARTICLE

Eric Miller on 04.27.07 @ 01:06 PM PST [link]  

“It’s Pittsburgh again,” sighs David Savageau, editor of the 25th Anniversary Edition of Places Rated Almanac: The Classic Guide for Finding Your Best Places to Live in America. “That’s the best metropolitan area in the United States. I was pulling for New York this time around, but it wasn’t to be. Alas.”

Don’t misunderstand Savageau. He’s fond of Pittsburgh. In 1985, when the almanac ranked it No. 1, the New York Times sent a reporter out to investigate the fuss: “With its breathtaking skyline, its scenic waterfront, its cozily vibrant downtown, its rich mixture of cultural amenities, its warm neighborhoods and its scrubbed-clean skies, it no longer is the smoky, smelly, gritty milltown of yesteryear,” he wrote back.

There are few places in the United States that Savageau — who has produced six editions of Places Rated Almanac before this one — hasn’t enjoyed visiting. “Each city is appealing in its own way. But there’s something special about New York,” he asserts. “It’s packed with polite people, and there’s always something to do there. And New Yorkers’ response to 9/11 was, of course, heroic and set an example for everyone else in the country. I do wish that New York had won the distinction of being the ‘best metropolitan area in the United States.’ But the statistics speak for themselves. Pittsburgh comes in first place, and New York – as well as New York’s fans and supporters — will have to settle for being number 18.” Savageau refuses to manipulate statistics to rig the outcome, but he’s glad to explain how the rating system works. There are 379 officially-defined metropolitan areas. Four out of five of us live in one of them.

Each of those metro areas is rated and ranked on nine factors that influence the quality of a place: ambience, housing, the local economy, transportation, education, health care, crime, recreation, and climate. For example, the “ambience” category includes such factors as good restaurants and bookstores, historic districts, cultural and artistic assets, and “people” features like diversity and politics that contribute to a place’s look and feel. The “transportation” category assesses commuting time, public transit, and how easy it is to get into and out of each metro area by air, rail, and Interstate Highway. When Savageau sifts through all the categories, and all of the rankings, he comes up with his Top 40 metropolitan areas by mean score. The top ten are:

1. Pittsburgh, PA
2. San Francisco, CA
3. Seattle, WA
4. Portland, OR
5. Philadelphia, PA
6. Rochester, NY
7. Washington, DC
8. San Jose-Sunnyvale, CA
9. Boston, MA
10. Madison, WI


That ranking system is unique to the Places Rated Almanac. This year’s almanac, like its predecessors, provides what Savageau calls “a snapshot of a moving target.” That is, major areas are dynamic and don’t sit still for statistical portraits. Everyone loved to hate New York – until September 11, 2001. And everyone loved Louisiana and Mississippi – until Hurricane Katrina. “The dynamic nature of the metropolitan areas keeps Places Rated Almanac fresh, year after year,” Savageau explains. “And, since this is the first edition that I’m self-publishing, this might be my personal favorite edition of all. Of course, I’m still hoping that New York earns the number one metropolitan area slot in the future. Who knows? Maybe it will happen in the book’s next edition.”

Eric Miller on 04.26.07 @ 04:43 AM PST [link]  

Trade-in the SUV, use florescent light bulbs, turn down your thermostat. These are just some of the things we’re being told we can do to reduce our impact on global warming. But according to a new report from the National Wildlife Federation, “A Gardeners Guide to Global Warming,” there are also many things you can do in the garden that will help combat this serious and potentially devastating environmental problem caused by our voracious appetite for fossil fuels. And the spring gardening season is the perfect time to get started.

A report from international climate scientists released in February of 2007 projects that the Earth’s average temperature will rise by 4-11 degrees before the end of this century if our dependency on fossil fuels continues unabated. Another report from this same prestigious group of scientists says that changes are happening faster than expected and the harmful effects of global warming on daily life are already apparent. (see chart below for projected changes in your region).

As any gardener knows, even just one degree difference between 32 and 33 degrees Fahrenheit over a period of time can make a huge difference in a garden. Scientists are now finding what many gardeners have already been noticing; earlier leaf out and bloom times, earlier emergence of butterflies and other insects, and arrival of new bird species at the backyard feeder.

Many of the “hardiness zone maps” that gardeners rely on to identify which plants to choose for their gardens are already being adjusted to account for the impacts of global warming. The Arbor Day Foundation recently shifted Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and part of Michigan from Zone 5 to a warmer Zone 6 along with other zone changes.

In many states, the climate change may be so intense that states may no longer have a favorable climate for their official state tree or state flower before this century is out. Imagine Virginia or North Carolina without the flowering dogwood; Louisiana without bald cypress and magnolia; Kansas without the sunflower; or Ohio without the Ohio buckeye (see table below for list of official state trees and flowers in jeopardy).

Changes in climate due to global warming will no doubt create some enormous new challenges for gardeners given the strong relationship between our garden plants and climate variables such as temperatures and rainfall. As numerous studies show, any potential benefits from a longer growing season will only be outmatched by a host of problems.

Heavier downpours and more intense storms will lead to extensive flooding in vulnerable areas. At the other extreme, severe drought conditions plaguing parts of the nation over the past few years lead to watering restrictions for our gardens. With global warming, lack of sufficient water for gardens will become even more of a problem. Droughts and heat waves also encourage some of the most damaging garden pests such as aphids, spider mites, locusts and whiteflies. Garden weeds such as dandelion and lambsquarters are expected to thrive with global warming.

While weeds and pests in the garden can be frustrating and time consuming to control, the invasive species encouraged by global warming can wreak absolute havoc in a garden as they gain more of a foothold. Scientists estimate that global warming will enable 48 percent of the invasive plants and animals in this country to move further north as temperatures rise.

While predictions for global warming are dire, they are not inevitable. With ninety-one million households engaged in lawn and garden activities in this country, gardeners are both guardians and stewards of our environment. The National Wildlife Federation’s report demonstrates that gardeners can play a big part in the solution to global warming.

While the following conservation practices aren’t new to many gardeners, they are made ever more important now given the threat of global warming.

Reduce the threat of invasive species and incorporate a diversity of native plants into your landscape. Global warming will contribute to a dramatic expansion of invasive, non-native plants and animals, which are able to take advantage of weakened ecosystems and out-compete native species. Gardeners can play an important role in minimizing the threat of invasive species expansion by removing invasive plants from the garden and choosing an array of native alternatives.

Higher average temperatures and changes in precipitation patterns will enable some of the most problematic species, including kudzu, garlic mustard, purple loosestrife and Japanese honeysuckle, to move into new areas. In addition, global warming will contribute to more severe infestations and habitat damage from both native and exotic insect pests, including black vine weevil, gypsy moth, bagworm and mountain pine beetle.

Contact your local/state native plant society to find out what plants are native to your area or check out NWF’s web site for a listing at www.nwf.org/backyard/food

Limit water consumption. In many parts of the country, more severe heat waves, droughts and declining snowpack due to global warming will cause a considerable reduction in available water resources. There are a number of ways to reduce water consumption in your garden, which will be particularly important when water resources become scarce. Actions that can help include mulching, installing rain barrels, watering only in the morning and evening to avoid mid-day evaporation and using drip irrigation.

Compost kitchen and garden waste. Composting kitchen and garden waste can significantly reduce your contribution to global warming pollution, especially methane, a highly potent greenhouse gas. It also provides an excellent source of nutrients for your garden, which reduces the need for chemical fertilizers that pollute water supplies and take a considerable amount of energy to produce.

Establish a “green roof” and plant trees around your house. Planting rooftop gardens and planting trees near your home can significantly shield your home from the elements, reducing energy use for air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter. One study showed that shade trees can reduce energy use for air conditioning by up to seventy percent. Trees also absorb and store carbon dioxide (CO2), which is the gas primarily responsible for global warming. Over an average life-span for a tree, it can remove a ton of CO2 from the atmosphere.

Develop a rain garden. Gardeners can reduce water pollution associated with heavy downpours by developing rain gardens, which capture stormwater runoff and help prevent it from entering local lakes, streams and coastal waters.

Reduce the use of gasoline-powered yard tools. Another important change you can make is to avoid using gasoline-powered tools such as lawn mowers, weed eaters and leaf blowers. Instead, use electric-powered or, better yet, human-powered tools such as push mowers, hand clippers and rakes. If this seems daunting, you might consider replacing some of your lawn with low maintenance shrubs, bushes or a native wildflower patch.

Improve your energy efficiency. One of the best ways to reduce your contribution to global warming pollution is to use more energy-efficient products. In your backyard alone, there are a number of actions you can take, including replacing regular outdoor light bulbs with compact fluorescents, installing outdoor automatic light timers and purchasing solar-powered garden products. You can increase the availability of energy efficient garden products as well as native plants by encouraging local home and garden retailers to carry these items.

Contact your elected officials. Gardeners can voice their concerns about global warming to their local, state and federal government representatives urging them to implement strong action plans to combat global warming.These actions can include: placing mandatory limits on global warming pollution, raising fuel economy standards for cars and SUVs, investing in clean and efficient energy technologies, requiring utilities to generate a share of their electricity from renewable energy sources, developing programs to reel in suburban sprawl and expanding recycling programs.

The more global warming pollution we allow to build up in the atmosphere, the greater the risk that we will disrupt the natural systems on which humans and wildlife rely. Fortunately, solutions are readily at hand and gardeners can make a major contribution to implementing those solutions so that the beauty and utility of our gardens will endure for future generations.

According to Suzanne DeJohn with the National Gardening Association, who wrote the Afterword for the report, “Individual gardeners may think they can’t make a real difference. But imagine if all – or even half – the estimated 91 million gardeners nationwide took steps to reduce their energy consumption. Each of us can do our part in our own landscape.”

The complete Gardeners Guide to Global Warming can be found HERE

Eric Miller on 04.22.07 @ 02:52 PM PST [link]  

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg presented PlaNYC: A Greener, Greater New York in a sweeping policy speech containing 127 separate initiatives at the American Museum of Natural History. PlaNYC is designed to achieve the sustainability goals that the Mayor laid out in a December 12, 2006 speech at the Queens Museum. Those goals include: housing an additional 1 million New Yorkers affordably; increasing access to parks, playgrounds and open spaces; reclaiming brownfields; developing critical backup systems for our aging water network to ensure reliability; providing additional reliable power sources and upgrading our existing power plants; reducing water pollution so we can open our waterways for recreation; and reducing our greenhouse gas emissions by 30%. Earlier this month, the Mayor released New York’s first-ever comprehensive inventory of greenhouse gas emissions, which was the first step towards achieving major emissions reductions.

Included in the proposals is a plan to add one million new trees to the city by 2017 in oreder to reduce air pollution, cool temperatures and help improve the city's long term sustainability.

Read More

Eric Miller on 04.22.07 @ 02:32 PM PST [link]  

The push is on to convert as many incadescent lightbulbs to energy-saving models. Because other lightbulbs can last longer, the move can save you money too! According to the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), a nonprofit organization that focuses on energy policy, replacing a 75-watt incandescent light bulb with a 20-watt compact fluorescent would result in the same amount of light but would save 1,300 pounds of carbon dioxide and save customers $55 over the life of the bulb (while the life of one 75-watt incandescent bulb is roughly 750 hours, the life of a compact fluorescent is a whopping 10,000 hours). Meanwhile, incandescent bulbs use 750 kWh over 10,000 hours, while compact fluorescents use only 180 kWh.

In addition, a utility can give away a compact fluorescent lamps more cheaply than it can fuel its existing power plants, which is why Southern California Edison, for example, has given away more than a million such lamps.
Spread the word about the importance with this new design available in the New Colonist Marketpace!

Eric Miller on 04.18.07 @ 11:59 AM PST [link]  

WHAT: The Greater Cleveland Partnership (GCP), the Greater Akron Chamber of Commerce, the Youngstown-Warren Regional Chamber, and the Cuyahoga County Mayors and Managers Association host a forum on eminent domain, including a discussion of its use for economic development purposes.

WHO: The program includes Jeff Finkle, president and CEO of the International Economic Development Council in Washington, D.C., and a panel discussion with Youngstown Mayor Jay Williams, Hudson Mayor William Currin, who is also president of the Northeast Ohio Mayors and Managers Association, and Parma Heights Mayor Marty Zanotti. Dave Lieberth, chief of staff for Akron Mayor Don Plusquellic, will moderate.

Invited guests include members of the General Assembly; Cleveland City Council; economic development experts; and mayors, city managers and county commissioners from Northeast Ohio

WHEN: Monday, April 23, 2007, from 8 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.

WHERE: Corporate College East

4400 Richmond Road

Warrensville Heights, Ohio 44128

Eric Miller on 04.18.07 @ 05:30 AM PST [link]  

Global climate change presents a serious national security threat that could affect Americans at home, impact U.S. military operations and heighten global tensions, according to a study released by a blue-ribbon panel of retired admirals and generals.

The study, “National Security and the Threat of Climate Change,” explores ways projected climate change is a “threat multiplier” in already fragile regions of the world, exacerbating conditions that lead to failed states—the breeding grounds for extremism and terrorism.

The CNA Corporation, a nonprofit research and analysis organization, brought together eleven retired four-star and three-star admirals and generals to provide advice, expertise and perspective on the impact of climate change on national security. CNA writers and researchers compiled the report under the board's direction and review. The full report will be available on SecurityAndClimate.cna.org.

The Military Advisory Board members come from all branches of the armed services. The board includes a former Army chief of staff, commanders-in-chiefs of U.S. forces in global regions, a former shuttle astronaut and NASA administrator, and experts in planning, logistics, underwater operations and oceanography. One member also served as U.S. ambassador to China.

Military Advisory Board members said they remain optimistic that climate change challenges can be managed to reduce future risks. The first step recommended in the study is for the national intelligence community to include comprehensive assessments of climate change in future security plans, just as agencies now take into account traditional but uncertain threats.

As part of its five specific recommendations for action, the Military Advisory Board stated that “the path to mitigating the worst security consequences of climate change involves reducing global greenhouse gas emissions.”

Retired Navy Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, a shuttle astronaut and former NASA administrator, said in the report that “unlike the challenges that we are used to dealing with, these will come upon us extremely slowly, but come they will, and they will be grinding and inexorable.” Truly also notes that “maybe more challenging is that climate change will affect every nation, and all simultaneously. This is why we need to study this issue now, so that we'll be prepared and not overwhelmed by the required scope of our response when the time comes”



Environmental Threats Have Security Implications
The report recognizes that unabated climate change could bring an increased frequency of extreme storms, additional drought and flooding, rising sea levels, melting glaciers and the rapid spread of life-threatening disease. While these projected effects are usually viewed as environmental challenges, the Military Advisory Board has looked at them from the perspective of national security assessments and has identified them as serious risk factors for:

massive migrations
increased border tensions
greater demands for rescue and evacuation efforts
conflicts over essential resources—including food and water

Such developments could lead to direct U.S. military involvement, the board found.

Eric Miller on 04.16.07 @ 03:04 AM PST [link]  

If you thought you were seeing more riders during your daily public transit trips, it’s not your imagination. The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) announced recently that Americans took 10.1 billion trips on local public transportation in 2006 – the first time in 49 years. Over the last decade, public transportation’s growth rate outpaced the growth rate of the population and the growth rate of vehicle miles traveled on our nation’s highways.

Public transit use is up 30 percent since 1995. That is more than double the growth rate of the population (12 percent) and higher than the growth rate for the vehicle miles traveled on our roads (24 percent) during that same period. In 2006, public transit ridership grew 2.9 percent over 2005. To put the 10.1 billion public transportation trips in perspective, transit trips outnumber domestic airline trips by 15 to one.

Light rail (modern streetcars, trolleys, and heritage trolleys) had the highest percentage increase among all modes, with 5.6 percent increase in 2006. Some light rail systems showed double digit increases in ridership: San Jose (36.6 percent); Minneapolis (18.4 percent); New Jersey (20.1 percent); Saint Louis (16.2 percent); Philadelphia (10.8 percent); and Salt Lake City (14.2 percent).

Ridership on heavy rail posted the second largest increase at 4.1 percent. The five heavy rail systems with the highest increase in ridership for 2006 were: Los Angeles (10.8 percent); New Jersey (10.1 percent); Staten Island, NY (9.4 percent); Atlanta (6.3 percent); and Chicago (4.5 percent).

Commuter rail posted the third largest increase at 3.2 percent. The five commuter rail systems with the highest ridership growth rate in 2006 were: rail system servicing south Florida based in Miami (21.3 percent); rail system servicing Pennsylvania based in Harrisburg, PA (18.9 percent); rail system between South Bend, IN and Chicago (10.7 percent); commuter service that runs between Stockton and San Jose, CA (8.8 percent); and Shore Line East rail service based in New Haven, CT (8.3 percent).

Other modes saw increases in ridership. Demand response (paratransit) ridership increased by 2.9 percent and the transit bus increased by 2.3 percent. In fact, there were major increases by some large bus agencies in the following cities: Seattle (12.1 percent); San Antonio (9 percent); Dallas (8.3 percent); Los Angeles (6.2 percent); and Houston (6.1 percent).

complete report

Eric Miller on 04.12.07 @ 12:42 PM PST [link]  

Green roofs--roofs topped with gardens of various sorts rather than shingle or tar--are an essential part of our urban future. They ameliorate heat-island effects as well as the effects of pollution and excessive paving, as well as provide habitat for many of the other species we are crowding off the Earth.

There is a Green Roofs conference and trade show taking place in Minneapolis later this month, which will include several tours of green roof installations in that city. Highly recommended for all who care about life on ths planet!

For details, see www.greenroofs.org

Richard Risemberg on 04.10.07 @ 04:57 AM PST [link]  

Donwtown Los Angeles, where once they rolled the sidewalks up at 5pm, is becoming one of the hottest properties in the city, according to an article in the Los Angeles Downtown News:

In Downtown Los Angeles, the forecast found that people who want to live near their jobs, and the burgeoning cultural and dining scene, will have even more options this year with 2,430 new apartments set to open. And they're filling up: The Central City recorded the county's highest occupancy rate last year with 98.2%, according to the Casden findings.

In truth, downtown's occupancy rate for non-SRO apartments has always been close to that--the difference is that the last few years have seen a huge boom in both new buildings and conversions of unused commercial space to apartments, condos, and lofts.

Downtown is at last, and again, a place to go to.

Read the entire article at the Los Angeles Downtown News

Richard Risemberg on 04.09.07 @ 05:23 AM PST [link]  

A few years back my friend and I were walking around Pittsburgh's Northside and I was describing everything that had been demolished. At that time the future of some late 19 th Century buildings known as the Garden Theater block was even less certain than it is now. "It's all that's left of downtown (the earlier name for the Northside)." I said. It would seem a light went off in my friends mind. "That's what's wrong with the Northside," he exclaimed, "It lost its downtown."

A small theater once known as Carnegie Hall was the location for a lecture turned April revival about the future of the old center of Allegheny City. The theater, built by Andrew Carnegie, was almost filled--a large crowd for something as mundane as an urban planning lecture. Clearly there is a certain passion out there for the topic, and a yearning for the old days when Allegheny really had a center.

Read the entire article

Eric Miller on 04.08.07 @ 12:55 PM PST [link]  

In a year when the nationwide burden of state-local taxes hit an all-time high of 11 percent of income, Vermont's taxpayers are bearing the heaviest load in 2007, according to the annual study of state and local taxes by the Tax Foundation.

With 14.1 percent of income going to pay all state and local taxes, Vermont ekes out Maine (14.0) and New York (13.8) to take the top spot.

Falling significantly behind the leaders were Rhode Island and Ohio. Hawaii rounded out the top six as the rainbow state continues to fall in the rankings.

Not much has changed at the bottom where Alaska has retained the lowest tax burden every year this decade. New Hampshire, Tennessee, Delaware and Alabama complete the list of the five lowest tax burdens—no changes from last year.

Since 2000, five states have experienced double-digit drops in their tax burden rankings. New Mexico has dropped 29 places, Idaho 23 places, and Utah 19 places. Georgia and North Dakota have dropped 15 and 10 places, respectively.

New Jersey has seen the highest increase since 2000, jumping from twenty-fourth to tenth. Arkansas and Indiana have both risen ten places.

Overall, state and local tax burdens will fully consume 11 percent of the nation's income in 2007—a new record. The previous high occurred in 2005 at 10.9 percent.

"Due to the booming economy, people are paying more taxes—particularly those in states with graduated income tax rates," says the author of the study, Curtis Dubay. "Property tax is also a significant source of revenue. As property values rise, so do tax collections."

Eric Miller on 04.05.07 @ 10:11 AM PST [link]  

According to population estimates released today for all metro areas by the U.S. Census Bureau, the Atlanta metro area gained 890,000 residents from April 1, 2000, to July 1, 2006, the largest numerical gain of the nation’s 361 metro areas.

This Georgia metro area (Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta) was the nation’s ninth largest as of July 1, 2006 with a population of 5.1 million. Overall, six metro areas each gained at least 500,000 people between 2000 and 2006.

Dallas-Fort Worth had the second largest numeric increase at 842,000, and totaled about 6 million people. Houston (with an increase of 825,000), Phoenix (787,000) and Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif. (771,000) rounded out the top five metro area gainers over the time period. The five metro areas experiencing the greatest numeric change between 2000 and 2006 were in the South or West.

The Northeast metro area with the greatest numeric change between 2000 and 2006 was New York (seventh overall nationally), while the Midwest metro area with the greatest numeric change over the same period was Chicago (10th overall nationally).

New York was the most populous metro area on July 1, 2006, with 18.8 million people, followed by Los Angeles (13 million) and Chicago (9.5 million). Fourteen metro areas had populations of 4 million or more.

The New Orleans metro area experienced the greatest numeric loss from April 1, 2000, to July 1, 2006, declining 292,000 since 2000 to 1 million on July 1, 2006. It was followed by Pittsburgh (a loss of 60,000) and Cleveland (a loss of 34,000). The New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, La., metro area also had the biggest percentage loss during the same time period at 22.2 percent. It was followed by Gulfport-Biloxi, Miss. (a loss of 7.4 percent) and Weirton- Steubenville, W.Va.-Ohio (a loss of 5.2 percent).

St. George, in the southwestern part of Utah, was the fastest-growing metro area between 2000 and 2006, with a growth of 39.8 percent to total 126,000 on July 1, 2006. Rounding out the top five were Greeley, Colo. (31 percent); Cape Coral-Fort Myers, Fla. (29.6 percent); Bend, Ore. (29.3 percent); and Las Vegas (29.2 percent).

The 50 fastest-growing metro areas were almost evenly distributed between just two regions — 23 in the West and 25 in the South. One metro area, Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, Ark.-Mo., straddled both the South and Midwest regions. Sioux Falls, S.D., was the lone metro area among the top 50 fastest-growing located completely in the Midwest. Of the 50 fastest-growing metro areas, none were in the Northeast. York-Hanover, Pa., the fastest-growing metro area in the Northeast, ranked 95th.

10 U.S. Metro Areas With Highest Numerical Growth: April 1, 2000-July 1, 2006 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, Ga. 890,211
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, Texas 842,449
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, Texas 824,547
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, Ariz. 787,306
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif. 771,314
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, Calif. 584,510
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, N.Y.-N.J.-Pa. 495,154
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, D.C.-Va.-Md.-W.Va. 494,220
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, Fla. 455,869
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, Ill.-Ind.-Wis. 407,133

10 Fastest-Growing U.S. Metro Areas: April 1, 2000- July 1, 2006 St. George, Utah
39.8%
Greeley, Colo. 31.0%
Cape Coral-Fort Myers, Fla. 29.6%
Bend, Ore.
29.3%
Las Vegas-Paradise, Nev. 29.2%
Provo-Orem, Utah 25.9%
Naples-Marco Island, Fla. 25.2%
Raleigh-Cary, N.C. 24.8%
Gainesville, Ga. 24.4%
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, Ariz. 24.2%

More than four-fifths of all U.S. metro areas (305 out of 361) had a larger population on July 1, 2006, than on April 1, 2000. The 50 fastest-growing metro areas between April 1, 2000, and July 1, 2006, all grew by at least 13.8 percent, which is more than double the nation’s total population gain of 6.4 percent during the same time period. As of July 1, 2006, the 361 metro areas in the United States contained 249.2 million people — 83.2 percent of the nation’s population.

Eric Miller on 04.05.07 @ 02:10 AM PST [link]  

A new home buyer survey finds a high rate of customer satisfaction among those who have purchased green homes – and that 63 percent of buyers are motivated by the lower operating and maintenance costs that come with energy- and resource-efficient homes.

NAHB and McGraw-Hill Construction, which conducted the research, released preliminary results of the findings at the 9th Annual National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) National Green Building Conference in St. Louis. It represents the first time the true green home market has been sized, screening out green home owners from a representative panel of U.S. home owners.

These home owners say they are extremely happy with their investments, with 85 percent saying they are more satisfied with their new green homes than with their previous, more traditionally built homes.

The new survey also backs up recent finding by the NAHB Economics staff that interest in green remodeling continues to grow: About 40 percent of those who have recently completed home remodeling or renovation work in their homes reported that they used green products or materials, the McGraw-Hill Construction research found.

In a survey of NAHB builders that the company conducted last year, McGraw-Hill Construction estimated that 2 percent – or $7.4 billion – of the residential construction market contained green building elements, such as energy efficient windows. According to this new research, 0.3 percent of all existing United States homes are truly green, constructed using several different green building design features and products, a market sized at approximately $2 billion.

The research also found that:

- The new green home owner is affluent and well educated, in his/her mid forties and married, and also more likely to be from the Southern or Western states. Women are also more likely to be green homeowners.

- 63 percent report lower operating and maintenance costs as the key motivation behind buying a green home. Additionally, nearly 50 percent said they are motivated by environmental concerns and their family’s health.

- More than 60 percent of those surveyed say that consumer awareness, additional costs and the limited availability of homes are obstacles to green homes gaining a bigger market share.
However, when looking at the “biggest” obstacles, green homeowners view education as the biggest hurdle to overcome.

Eric Miller on 04.04.07 @ 12:19 PM PST [link]  

The Supreme Court acknowledged in Massachusetts v. EPA that the consequences of climate change are "serious and well recognized" and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's arguments for not setting enforceable standards for greenhouse gas emissions from new automobiles were unreasonable. The American Planning Association (APA), the national association representing more than 41,000 planners, is pleased with the decision.

"Planners will increasingly be left to solve problems caused by global warming, but have little authority to regulate carbon emissions," said Jason Jordan, APA Policy Director. "The decision reaffirms the necessity of EPA's role in dealing with the problem and supports planning efforts to reduce vehicle emissions by encouraging community developments that favor mass transit, and to protect communities from the side effects of climate change such as the increasing frequency and intensity of natural disasters."

The majority of the Court in the 5-4 decision acknowledges that the "EPA has been charged with protecting the public's 'health' and 'welfare,'" and must take responsibility for regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act or provide sound reasons for not doing so.

The American Planning Association, along with the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Counties, the International Municipal Lawyers Association, and several cities, filed an amicus brief in support of the state of Massachusetts. The brief, written by Timothy Dowling of the Community Rights Counsel, references APA's energy and sustainable community policy guides that encourage local communities to plan for development that reduces greenhouse gas impacts and urge federal action to better regulate emissions.

Eric Miller on 04.03.07 @ 06:23 AM PST [link]  

"On behalf of the nation's mayors, the United States Conference of Mayors highly praises the Supreme Court's decision to give the EPA the authority to regulate gas emissions, which will undoubtedly benefit every American city from coast to coast.

"We are glad that the EPA has been granted authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases because they are an important piece towards solving the climate protection puzzle, and hope that the federal government will provide long overdue resources.

"Mayors believe that they have a moral and inherent obligation to take local action to reduce carbon emissions by changing human behavior in cities, especially in the absence of federal support. Therefore, hundreds of mayors have endorsed the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, which seeks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 7% from 1990 levels by 2012. Back in June 2005, mayors submitted an amicus brief urging the federal government to enact policies to help decrease global warming. Earlier this year, the U.S. Conference of Mayors launched the Mayors Climate Protection Center to strictly focus on reducing greenhouses gases and protecting the environment. Additionally, many of our nation's mayors have provided strong leadership for other mayors on how to protect our environment locally including Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels and Carmel Mayor James Brainard.

"We look forward to working more closely with the EPA to help solve a grave problem and play a more active role in reducing carbon emissions in U.S. cities."

In September 2006, the California Attorney Generals Office filed suit in San Francisco federal court against leading U.S. and Japanese auto manufacturers for creating vehicles whose emissions are the largest single source of greenhouse gasses in California. "The manufacturers automobiles have contributed to an international global warming threat that has damaged Californias resources, jeopardized environmental health and cost millions of dollars to address current and future negative effects."

Eric Miller on 04.02.07 @ 03:59 PM PST [link]