Closing session: visit of Pratt Institute to Rotterdam RDM Campus

Transcription

DRAFT REPORT March 2014
Closing session: visit of Pratt Institute to
Rotterdam RDM Campus - Brooklyn
Rotterdam Waterfront Exchange Project
And farewell of Piet Dircke as Professor Urban Water
Management at Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences
“Building Climate Resilient Communities”
Next Steps in developing community based knowledge networks & practice
oriented research programs
RDM Campus, Rotterdam, March 20th 2014
Closing session of the visit of Pratt Institute to Rotterdam,
RDM Campus Brooklyn Rotterdam Waterfront Exchange Project, March 20, 2014
1
Content
1.
Speakers and VIP participants ......................................................................................................... 3
2.
Background “Building Climate Resilient Communities” .................................................................. 4
3.
Program March 20, 2014 ................................................................................................................. 5
4.
Opening ........................................................................................................................................... 6
5.
Lessons learned for global communities in delta cities .................................................................. 7
6.
RAMP and related environmental management programs .......................................................... 11
7.
Rebuild by Design: preliminary experiences with the BIG-U ........................................................ 13
8.
Education, Innovation & Climate Resilient Communities in NYC .................................................. 17
9.
Panel Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 19
10.
Building Resilient Communities in a G2G Network Context ..................................................... 22
11.
Students from Pratt University and Rotterdam University ....................................................... 24
12.
Conclusions and closing remarks .............................................................................................. 25
13.
Ceremony of signing of the MOU .............................................................................................. 26
2
1. Speakers and VIP participants
Ronald Shiffman, FAICP, Pratt Institute, Faculty Pratt Programs for Sustainable Planning and
Hon.AIA
Development
Damaris Reyes
Executive Director, GOLES, Lower Eastside, New York
Lilah Mejia
Disaster Relief Coordinator, GOLES, Lower Eastside, New York
Gita Nandan
Pratt Institute, Faculty, Pratt Programs for Sustainable Planning and
Development
Jaime Stein
Pratt Institute, Faculty.
Academic Coordinator, M.Sc. Sustainable
Environmental Systems. RAMP Director
Ayse Yonder
Pratt Institute, Faculty, Pratt Programs for Sustainable Planning and
Development
Zehra Kuz
Pratt Institute, Faculty, Undergraduate Architecture
Alisa Pizarro
Community Organizer, Red Hook Initiative, Red Hook, Brooklyn, NY
Jherelle Been
Social Justice Fellow, Red Hook Initiative, Red Hook, Brooklyn, NY
Anthony Schloss
Director of Community Initiatives, Red Hook Initiative, Red Hook,
Brooklyn, NY
Ian Marvy
Executive Director, Added Value, Red Hook, Brooklyn, NY
Jeanne DuPont
Executive Director, Rockaway Waterfront Alliance. Rockaway, Queens,
NY
Renae Diggs
Community Intern, Rockaway Waterfront Alliance. Rockaway, Queens,
NY
Jeroen Aerts
Institute for Environmental Studies, VU Amsterdam University
Arnoud Molenaar
Manager, Rotterdam climate Proof Program, City of Rotterdam
Matthijs Bouw
Director One Architecture BV
Joost Groen
Department of International Trade and Strategy, Dutch Ministry of
Economic Affairs
Arjan Braamskamp
Economic Officer – Portfolio Water & UN, Consulate General of The
Netherlands
Gabrielle Muris
Director RDM Campus, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences
Piet Dircke
Professor Urban Water Management at the Rotterdam University of
Applied Sciences, ARCADIS Global Director for Water Management
Many invitees from Rotterdam University, the city of Rotterdam, ARCADIS and others visited the
ceremony on March 20, 2014. RDM Director Bert Hooijer was unable to join due to illness.
3
2. Background “Building Climate Resilient Communities”
Climate adaptation and flood protection in NYC drew a lot of attention after Superstorm Sandy. As
often the case after a disaster, Sandy has created a basis for discussions pertaining to climate
adaptation, flood mitigation and increasing resiliency in densely-populated urban and waterfront
communities. It has become apparent that a substantial contribution to a more sustainable, feasible
and affordable resiliency can only be achieved through a long term development strategy that
embraces a multitude of societal considerations.
Resilient waterfront communities are not merely resilient because of its flood and climate-resilient
strategy, but resiliency manifests itself in the affected communities through socio-economic,
environmental, educational, technical and policy-related variables. Knowledge is power and the
exchange of that knowledge about climate adaptation and mitigation is crucial.
Objectives
The objective of this half-day seminar is to continue and further establish the foundation for a
K2K network that was laid over the last two years in Rotterdam and New York during several similar
NYC-Dutch events. A network that compliments and builds upon the existing G2G platform between
Rotterdam/the Netherlands and New York and facilitates solutions to present- and future day
resiliency development challenges for communities in urbanized settings.
Medium to Long-term objective: to develop a (virtual) Community of Practice, a lean and mean,
functional and relevant knowledge network with Rotterdam and NYC (and other comparable cities)
Universities and knowledge institutions. This K2K network could be part of the G2G network of the
C40’s Connecting Delta Cities Network, led by Rotterdam and NYC.
In addition, the network should strive to provide a knowledge database on topics relevant to
members of the K2K/CDC-network. This knowledge should not only be scientifically sound, but also
available in the form of shared best practices and experiences, tools and operation methods that
allow global cities to address community resiliency-related challenges in a process-matter / step-bystep approach.
4
3. Program March 20, 2014
1300 – 1310
Opening & Welcome
Host: Mrs. Gabrielle Muris, Director RDM Campus, Rotterdam University of Applied
Sciences.
Chairman: Mr. Piet Dircke, Professor Urban Water Management at Rotterdam
University of Applied Sciences, ARCADIS Global Director for Water Management
1310 – 1330
Climate Resiliency and flood protection in NYC after Sandy, lessons learned for the
global communities in delta cities; Professor Jeroen Aerts, Institute for
Environmental Studies, VU Amsterdam University
1330 – 1350
Pratt’s Recovery, Adaption, Mitigation and Planning Initiative (RAMP) and related
sustainable environmental management programs ; Jaime Stein, Academic
Coordinator, Sustainable Environmental Systems and RAMP Director
1350 – 1410
Rebuild by Design: some preliminary experiences with the BIG-U, community driven
flood protection for Manhattan as part of the HUD Design competition; Matthijs
Bouw, Director of One Architecture, co-lead of the BIG Team
1410 - 1430
Education, Innovation & Climate Resilient Communities in NYC- a social, economic
and environmental approach; Prof. Ron Shiffman, FAICP, Hon.AIA , Pratt Programs
for Sustainable Planning and Development, Pratt Institute and founder of RAMP
1500 – 1530
Panel Discussion led by Prof. Ron Shiffman: Community Engagement & Awareness,
Creating Resilient Communities.
1530 – 1550
Building Resilient Communities in a G2G Network Context: the Connecting Delta
Cities program and the Rockefeller Foundation 100 Resilient Cities Campaign; Mr.
Arnoud Molenaar, Manager Rotterdam Climate Proof Program, City of Rotterdam
1550 - 1620
Intermezzo: students from Pratt University and Rotterdam University of Applied
Sciences present their vision on climate resilient communities
1620 – 1650
Panel Discussion, led by Piet Dircke: MOU between Pratt Institute’s RAMP Initiative
and RDM Community of Practice: a promising next Step from both a K2K as well as a
G2G perspective.
1650 – 1700
Conclusions and closing remarks by the Chairman Mr. Piet Dircke, at his farewell as
Professor Urban Water Management at Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences.
Ceremony of signing of the MOU between Pratt Institute’s Recovery, Adaptation,
Mitigation and Planning Initiative and RDM Centre of Expertise, Rotterdam University
of Applied Sciences
1700 – 1715
5
4. Opening
Host: Mrs. Gabrielle Muris, Director RDM Campus, Rotterdam University of
Applied Sciences
Today is the closing session of a cooperation that started in 2009, during the
Henry Hudson 400, the Brooklyn Waterfront knowledge exchange sighted a
MOU.
Chairman: Mr. Piet Dircke, Professor Urban Water Management at Rotterdam
University of Applied Sciences, ARCADIS Global Director for Water Management
6
5. Lessons learned for global communities in delta cities
Climate Resiliency and flood protection in NYC after Sandy, lessons learned
for the global communities in delta cities. By: Professor Jeroen Aerts,
Institute for Environmental Studies, VU Amsterdam University.
Probabilistic approaches for evaluating flood risk management options in New York City
Summary by: Jeroen C.J.H. Aerts, W.J. Wouter Botzen, Kerry Emanuel, Ning Lin, Hans de Moel and Erwann
Michel-Kerjan.
Large-scale flood-related disasters in cities as diverse as New York City (2012), Manila (Philippines;
2012; 2013) and Brisbane (Australia, 2011) vividly illustrate that coastal mega-cities show
increasing vulnerability to storm surge flooding . For instance, global losses from all natural
catastrophes in 2012 are estimated at USD160bn; Hurricane Sandy’s damage and recovery costs
to New York and New Jersey alone was $62bn. Projected sea level rise and subsidence may
further increase the frequency and/or severity of extreme floods. As population density in flood
prone coastal zones and mega cities continues to grow with 25% in 2050.
We propose here a novel scientific approach to develop and evaluate options to reduce flood risk
in NYC. At the heart of the method is a probabilistic flood risk model developed for the city. This
model is based on the HAZUS MH4 methodology using detailed database for NYC and applying
flood depth-damage curves to calculate potential damage to buildings and vehicles at the census
tract level (for a particular inundation scenario). This is done for many different synthetic
inundation scenarios, varying from extreme low probability events to more frequent storms. For
this, 549 inundation scenarios are produced by a new coupled hurricane – hydrodynamic –
inundation model. By combining these 549 damage estimates and estimated storm frequencies,
the expected annual damage, or risk, is calculated. In addition to the flood risk to buildings, the
risk to other categories (like infrastructure) in parts of NJ and indirect economic effects were
added based on observed consequences of Hurricane Sandy). Altogether, this study estimates, for
the first time, the annual expected flood loss in detail for NYC, at $174 million/year, if no flood
management measures are implemented. Different measures are evaluated to reduce risk NYC,
varying from large storm surge barriers, to local scale building code and zoning measures.
In 2011 Irene hit the US. In 2012 Sandy hit New York. Hurricanes aren’t that rare, but some
hurricanes are weakened when they approach the city. Sandy turned to the west, which an
uncommon track of hurricanes. In last 120 years there have been 1325 tropical storms and
hurricanes at the west coast of the US:
7
The impact of hurricanes include:
 flooded streets;
 Power lines/plants damage;
 flooded electrical hubs;
 power outages;
 critical infrastructure was a major issue;
 Waste water and drinking facilitates.
Accurately assessing potential damage of a storm is complicated because of the uncertainties in
damage and risk assessment. For example the MIT simulations of 100 year flood zone are larger than
the FEMA 1/100 flood zones, in which it seems like some buildings aren’t flood proof.
Flood forecast in New Jersey: warning people to park their cars in a safe area, but the main entrance
complex of trains was flooded as well, although they expect it to be safe. It proves that forecasting
and risk assessments contain many uncertainties and defining the flood zones seems difficult.
MIT asked for the whole variety of possible storms and based the map below on the points hurricane
model, including 549 possible hurricanes. The shaded colors indicate the possible flooded area under
each of the 549 hurricanes (dark purple).
8
Jeroen Aerts et al. worked on an improved risk assessment:
As shown in the scheme, HAZUS MH4 model can indicate the damage of a storm. Insights in how
much each measure produces the potential damage for each storm. All types of information could be
given: which building will be hit and what will be the potential damage. The rarer the storm, the
lower the probability, the more expensive the damage.
Special Initiative for Rebuilding and Resiliency (SIRR). The map in the sub-urban report, a stronger
and more resilient New York, indicates protection critical infrastructure, moderate enhancement
protection and levees/nourishment. Enhance building codes and small levees for critical
infrastructure. Solutions e.g.:
- Replace the couple wires with glass fiber;
- An inflatable airbag in a tunnel;
- A door of steel which van be closed in Czech Republic; Flood gate at Prague metro;
- Elevated subway entrance in Thailand;
- wetlands in Hong Kong: environmental resilience, wetlands which can absorb flood surges.
- Adaptive Buildings: Rehabilitation old Port Red Hook: allow water to enter the neighborhood;
- Small barriers in Bangkok and Germany;
- Huge storm surge barriers, but consequences for environmental values in the area.
All measures together and connect them in 4 strategies. For each strategy, costs are calculated 10
billion to 23 billion dollars investment costs + maintenance costs.1
If you think about designing resilience measures/barriers, you need an accurate risk assessment. Also
think out of the box, explore measures, and think about measures who last for certain decades.
Consider protection, damage reduction and insurance in exploring a broad pallet of measures.
Develop a strategy for the set of measures which:
is cost effective
maintains flexibility to switch
Some benefits /costs are difficult to value (e.g. environmental values), which are not calculated for
this study.
1
For the exact numbers and cost benefit ratio, check the powerpoint presentation of Professor Aerts.
9
Each infrastructural project has a design life, normally it’s 75 or 100 years. The decision to not build a
barrier because it has an end of life is not an argument. 100 and 150 years would be a good
investment probably. Using nature is not as effective but maybe we can work with nature as the
time limit is less and in the end it will be more effective. You need space for nature solutions and it’s
not everywhere possible. Sandy beaches are suitable, but not everything is suitable.
10
6. RAMP and related environmental management programs
Pratt’s Recovery, Adaption, Mitigation and Planning Initiative (RAMP) and
related sustainable environmental management programs. By: Jaime Stein,
Academic Coordinator, Sustainable Environmental Systems and RAMP Director
Recovery, Adaptation, Mitigation and Planning: RAMP
Summary by: Jaime Stein
The Pratt Programs in Sustainable Planning and Development (PSPD) has a fifty-year history of
working with community-based organizations committed to social, economic and environmental
justice. PSPD has initiated the development of a suite of studios/urban labs, workshops and
conferences, which began in the summer of 2013, called the “Recovery, Adaptation, Mitigation
and Planning [RAMP]” program. The RAMP studios serve matriculated undergraduate and
graduate architectural students and graduate students in planning, preservation, and
sustainability at Pratt, as well as students from other accredited planning and architectural
programs interested in getting credit for participating in these classes. The studios/urban labs are
open to practicing professionals seeking to update their skills as well as community members
interested in issues of resiliency. They center around: Community Planning, Architecture,
Sustainable Business and Green Infrastructure and work with community-based clients hard hit by
Hurricane Sandy to address issues of recovery, sustainability and resiliency.
RAMP started in summer of 2013: Pratt turned it into a collaborative interdisciplinary model.
11
Social and environmental justice are challenges. Most vulnerable areas are encircled in the picture
on the previous page. It’s all about people. Post disaster we are very weak in rebuilding elevating
communities. Partnering with community members, leaders, students via innovative financing
workshops etc. are ways to rebuild these communities. Also training hosted for property managers,
building structures, partnership training/course together with FEMA funded centre.
Pratt provides opportunities to work in an interdisciplinary way.
In summer 2013 courses were focused on Red Hook to provide community with a toolkit, from
different groups like architecture, urban design, construction management, historic preservation,
sustainable environmental systems, facilities management etc.
RETI is a sort of RDM Campus in Red Hook. It stands for Resilience, education, training, innovation
and incubation. It’s a workforce development and business innovation initiative working towards a
more equitable and resilient Red Hook.
Resilience Extravanza: a toolkit to educate and empower students in the face of climate change.
Greater China Town 2020: Envisioning a stronger community via 1. Observation (interviews), 2.
Ideation (playing cards with educational tips on it), 3. Execution (2020 intervention in China Town), 4.
Game night (testing 2020 cards at thanksgiving dinner).
The RAMP timeline started in October 2012 and ends in June 2014; One of the aims is to teach young
people about how to negotiate and work regarding recovery, adaptation, mitigation and planning.
Series of workshops has been planned including topics like how to react do a hurricane, how to deal
with wind and water. The workshops are held with 4 different groups, one of these groups focuses
on how to deal with resilience of public housing (e.g. floors, electricity). How do we make sure that
community centers and open space are used properly? The working groups are a cooperation with
students, faculties and community leaders. Training and outreach include for example the FEMA
training.
12
7. Rebuild by Design: preliminary experiences with the BIG-U
Rebuild by Design: some preliminary experiences with the BIG-U,
community driven flood protection for Manhattan as part of the HUD
Design competition. By: Matthijs Bouw, Director of One Architecture, colead of the BIG Team2
The Big U around Manhattan
Summary by: Matthijs Bouw
The Big U is a protective system around Manhattan, driven by the needs and concerns of its
communities. Stretching from West 54th street south to The Battery and up to East 40th street,
the Big U protects 9.5 continuous miles of low-lying geography that comprise an incredibly dense,
vibrant, and vulnerable urban area. The proposed system not only shields the city against floods
and stormwater; it provides social and environmental benefits to the community, an improved
public realm. For Phase 3 of Rebuild by Design, the Big U Team created separate but coordinated
plans for three contiguous regions of the waterfront and associated communities, regions dubbed
compartments. Each compartment comprises a physically separate flood-protection zone,
isolated from flooding in the other zones, but each is equally a field for integrated social and
community planning. The compartments work in concert to protect and enhance the city, but
each compartment's proposal is designed to stand on its own. Each was designed in close
consultation with the associated communities and the many local, municipal, state and federal
stakeholders; each has a benefit-cost ratio greater than one; and each is flexible, easily phasable,
and integrable with existing projects in progress.
The BIG U is a collaborative competition.
A total number of 10 teams have been studying the
question about resiliency post Sandy.
“You need to build communities, not structures.”
We might need to reconceptualize Manhattan;
integrated and developed from communities. Series of
resilient community districts (housing, jobs, parks,
public space), because the more social community the
more resilient.
2
For visualization and designs have a look at the 127 sheets of the powerpoint of Matthijs Bouw
13
We should organize programs that could be built on infrastructure. Incremental, compartmentalized,
community-driven, integrated, leveraged (invest money in flood protection and you get lots of other
benefits with it).
The BIG U: Social Infrastructure
The BIG Team proposes to rethink infrastructure as an amenity. The team calls it: social
infrastructure. Infrastructure in the United States, as traditionally conceived, has not been civic,
accessible, designed with interaction with the public in mind; rather, it has been imposed from
without on our cities on a large scale, sometimes with terrible consequences for the urban
experience. The Big U combines the mandate to create large-scale protective infrastructure with a
commitment to meaningful community engagement. It fuses ‘Robert Moses’ hard infrastructure
with 'Jane Jacobs' locally-based, community-driven sensitivity. The Big U's flood-protection will
not look like a wall, and it will not separate the community from the waterfront. Rather, the very
structures that protect us from the elements will become attractive centers of social and
recreational activity that enhance the city and lay a positive groundwork for its future.
After the Big U was selected by the Rebuild by Design Jury for the 3rd phase of the competition,
the BIG Team, at the suggestion of the Mayor’s Office, decided to focus first on the Lower East
Side. Here a large, vulnerable population lives in the floodplain.
14
As mentioned in the summary, the combination of Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs: city propose an
infrastructure all over Manhattan, the community impact will make it vital.
It is important to look at all different plans for the area. All these plans are interesting because they
have been developed or judged by the local communities. Low East Side Master plan includes all
good points of the existing plans.
The BIG U: Working with the community
To better understand the needs of the communities in Lower Manhattan, The BIG Team analyzed
earlier, non-flood-related projects in the area, projects such as the East River Esplanade, The
People’s Plan (a reaction to the Esplanade), and the Blueway Plan. Since the community was
actively involved in the design of these projects, the projects tell the story of what the community
finds important. In addition, many elements of these plans are already under way. On the Lower
East Side (LES), the BIG Team worked intensively with LES-Ready, an umbrella organization of
twenty-five community groups. A joint planning committee prepared a series of workshops at
various locations in the neighborhood. At the first workshops, the community debated the merits
of various approaches, using the BIG Team’s models of different prototypical solutions. In the
second series of workshops, the results of these discussions were incorporated in two possible
integral design solutions for each compartment. Once again these designs were discussed at
length by community groups. Many people from the community attended these workshops as
well as the party at the end of the process.
Implementation of the proposal can start in any of the three compartments. This flexibility, part
of the essence of the Big U, allows implementation to start swiftly. The compartmental design
makes it possible to respond to any unresolved issues that might come to light in design
development simply by changing the order of implementation while the issues are addressed.
Raising the integration between stakeholders and their objectives to a high level will take time. To
achieve this, the BIG Team has developed a ‘toolbox’ that demonstrates how resilience measures
can achieve other objectives: more amenities, housing preservation, jobs, and better public space.
Using this toolbox, an even more integrated and comprehensive strategy for the ‘towers-in-thepark’ can, over time, be developed with the community.
Discuss options which you could think about in terms of flood protection in community groups.
- A series of design concepts: a bridging berm, better connections, width and landscape the
bridges.
- East West bridge: When time comes, a long term vision FDR Park has to be developed. FDR will
be covered in the future.
- Two bridges side: different conclusions, it’s to the south. People wishes were very clear regarding
access to the water and they didn’t want a wall that block their view.
- Public housing with a lot of open space, why don’t we use these open spaces to place a berm,
improve landscaping of campuses by this, protect interlaying area and more gentle connection
the waterfront. It shouldn’t be too high, why not a little bit of flood protection? Community
15
-
should stay on the campus, so reprove the building, new smaller buildings, ground floors for
community spaces.
Other option: don’t block the views under the FDR, maybe deployable barriers. Deployable are
tricky to use (picture with parking and color people).
Two bridges is very much part of the area, we work very closely with Smith house residents.
Smith houses: they really like the glass option, activated word under the FDR (option 1).
Toolbox of different components:
More benefits: public space, work together with the toolbox etc. How can all benefits be linked?
16
8. Education, Innovation & Climate Resilient Communities in NYC
By: Prof. Ron Shiffman, FAICP, Hon.AIA , Pratt Programs for Sustainable Planning
and Development, Pratt Institute and founder of RAMP
Summary of the Presentation of Prof. Ronald Shiffman, FAICP, Hon. AIA at RDM, 20 March, 2014
Social, economic and environmental justice issues associated with climate change and sea level rise must be
addressed as well as the physical and economic issues. Weather related events don’t discriminate, but the
ways in which we respond to these crises often do. Those nations and industries that have been the major
contributors to global warming are not those that will be the ones most dramatically impacted by their
actions, but the responsibility to act is still theirs and we must find ways to hold them accountable.
The history of anti-poverty efforts and the civil rights movement in the mid-1960’s in the United States, and
the relationship of those movements to the animation of low- and moderate-income communities and
people of color to act on their own behalf and fully participate in the decisions that affect them taught us
how important substantive community participation was in addressing public policy, planning and
development issues. Applying those lessons and public engagement processes to mitigation and adaptation
efforts should bring about positive results.
Community-based planning and development, and the full participation of people in those processes, should
not be used as an excuse for government inaction. What we need is a blend of the Dutch model of
governmental intervention, or what many call “top down” planning, with the US model of community-based
activism, which was borne out of the absence of an effectively engaged national effort, or what many refer to
as “bottom-up” planning. The importance of substantive community engagement and the process of
community building to reinforce the social and economic infrastructure is as important as investing in the
physical infrastructure. One’s neighbors are indeed both first responders and continuous responders.
The proposed exchange between RDM, with its knowledge of infrastructure development/management and
its innovative educational/business incubator and workforce initiatives, and Pratt, with its connection to USbased community development advocates, is a means by which both countries could better prepare for
future climate-related challenges.
Ron Shiffman’s presentation was followed by a panel discussion by community leaders from areas of New
York City that were severely impacted by Super Storm Sandy
We have to think about how to plan this areas by investing in community structures. Working with
communities in education exchange is a way to make it work. We have to deal with problems such as
water, heat, poverty and inequality. It’s a lot harder to talk about poverty. A storm doesn’t
discriminate, but places hit by the storm are mostly places where vulnerable people live. We have to
make sure that the issue of race, economic justice, won’t matter.
17
Rebuild by design teams
The team members were picked by some organizations and some donors. They did not engage the
community. The community was not involved from the start of the process as no local
representatives are part of the teams. “The point of empowerment is not that people should speak
for others, but people should speak for themselves!”
Involve the people
In the 1960’s and 1970’s: investing in communities was an investment in the geographic area instead
of in the people. In 1960’s issues of poverty and justice were addressed; as architects and planners
we began to say what the role of communities shall be in this world. How do you truly engage with
people, finance and techniques that are interests with people. Commit that there won’t be
displacement, but also prevent that it will take place.
Balance
We need to find what the delicate balance is, we don’t want a community with poor education etc.
How do we improve quality of life and people who live there feel the improved quality of life. How
can we turn a crisis into an opportunity? Born of RAMP!
RDM Campus
We are working with young people who work with a network of communities: all possible vulnerable
neighborhoods can be involved. Capture innovation so that we can create great jobs for the people
who need jobs; research education, training on innovation. A comparable approach as in RDM
Campus. Adopt RDM Campus, but by working with community efforts which are already under way,
from bottom up. We are making sure that communities are in the driver’s seat. We need to look at
engaging people, addressing issues of poverty and go beyond our scope.
How to build a resilient community from the base up?
18
9. Panel Discussion
Led by Prof. Ron Shiffman: Community Engagement & Awareness, Creating Resilient Communities.
Panel discussion of community leaders from impacted areas of New York City:
 Anthony Schloss: Director of Community Initiatives, Red Hook initiative: – youth development
organization, Brooklyn
 Alisa Pizarro, Lead Community Organizer 19-24 years old social justice fellows, Red Hood
Initiative, Brooklyn
 Jeanne DuPont: Executive Director, Rockaway Waterfront Alliance, Rockaway, Queens
 Renae Diggs: New community member of Rockaway, immersive practice of urbanism,
Community Intern, Rockaway Waterfront Alliance, Rockaway, Queens
 Ian Marvy: Rockefeller Foundation’s 2013 Jane Jacobs Award and Director of Added Value, Red
Hook, Brooklyn
 Damaris Reyes: Director, GOLES, Lower Eastside, Manhattan: give residents a voice in rebuilding
Lessons on the ground in New York:
Jeanne DuPont: “I remember the silent for a period of time, because lack of
communication, lights, services and connections. I wanted to go to areas who
were hit by fires. We were concerned that they didn’t see what has happened.
It took some time for people to realize what has happened.
The first day after the storm we started phoning people and businesses for
help. We needed boxes, trucks, etc. People disappeared at 17:00h because of the leaving buses. We
set up 3 locations to work. Real on the ground knowledge about peoples living was necessary. Health
care social services came and tried to help. The thing that was most important to us was the fact that
people could work together and tell us where people could sleep, clothing, set up a specific network.”
Damaris Reyes: “I lived in the community that was hit by Sandy. It was
quiet. We went to the office which was flooded underground. Lots of
destruction is underground. I just wanted to turn on the generator and
let people charge their phones. No power, so we lighted a candle light.
Before you know it there are about 100 people on our side walk. I was
overwhelmed by the amount of volunteers, nearly 3000 volunteers and
many households. We did that with nothing, not even a copy machine. All on the ground knowledge.
19
Knowing your community is essential and our ability is how to manage the volunteers on where to go.
We knew that there were seniors. Vulnerable people. First volunteers checked where people where,
what they need, and then they came back with water, batteries, flash lights. We never had done it at
this scale. I had to go out and speak to 200 people at the side walk, thanked them for coming and
made them feel useful. We could give them other experiences and make them feel useful. Take into
account the needs of the people who come to you to help. We learned a lot from these people, the
worst tings bring the best out in people!”
Can you describe what you did and how you did it and who paid for it?
Anthony Schloss: Successful by having being in the neighborhood over 11
years. The occupy movement was very big during that time. Tons and
tons of volunteers showed up. But they also had to cooperate with ‘us’ as
we knew the neighborhood. We were setting that up. We didn’t lose
power. Floors were dry so we could help people in the public housing. We
were knocking on all doors, we had a database of all people. We served
hot meals, supply distribution, sort of medical clinic, this all in a week. A church was available. The
office became a sort of hub of all things. They set up a FEMA station to register with FEMA.
Alisa Pizarro: Lot of people didn’t believe something big would happen, and
stayed home October 29. No light no water no heat for 3 weeks! People stuck
in their apartments; elderly, handicapped and sick people who couldn’t go
out. Volunteers knocked on doors to see who was there and deliver what
people need on daily basis. I was living on 14th floor and I wanted to make
sure I could rise a helping hand to my community. It was very overwhelming!
How do you think that resiliency could be built in community by training, education and support for
your organization and neighbors to function more effectively?
Ian Marvy and Damaris Reyes: We have a large community and oldest resident
communities in New York, lot of groups and associations in the area. What we
did not do well is coordinate and communicate with one another. We asked
who need water or blankets but we didn’t really work together from the
beginning. We needed a local neighbor network who could work together in
any disaster! We would be a strong community as we were each as apart. We
think that everyone did a great job, but by moving forward it is essential that we have a linkage that
go beyond the day by day work. Now we have 26 different organization that have signed a MoU with
LRS including what they have ready to contribute, resources, capacity, ways to train public, issues that
ask for attention, organizationally business continuity plans.
Our organization was not prepared to deal with a disaster like that, so I was glad the disaster wasn’t
even bigger. The fact that the power went off, we lost all our data of the year because of the lack of
power. We, as organization, should be prepared and resilient, and simple things like having your data
online and backups. These community organizations know the neighborhood well as they are there
for a long time. We need to go to residents to ask what we did well, what could be better etc. via
20
surveys. Their input is important for what we come up with in a community. What do we need to do
as a community to prevent, like build by design cooperation, new York rising. And look at this: “here I
am, traveling to the Netherlands to learn and share”.
What do you see as a key planning issue? Which important innovation are you working on?
Jeanne DuPont: having a network, we were focused on environmental issues,
not on technology. Without a network and communication we can’t cooperate
with community and help the community. We set up a solar power kiosk to
charge phone on regular day basis, Wi-Fi in kiosk, training how to use social
media. Safe data on the cloud.
Anthony Schloss: RHI we worked on a long term community plan. Resiliency
comes from education and economic independence, capacity and
knowledge turning into action. Digital storage programme is capacity.
Young adults got a yearlong fellowship, work to maintain and promote
the community network that has been built. Local internet provider to
work with, a platform for communication. 10 young adults started now,
another 10 start next week. They have skills to run it when the network
goes down.
Damaris Reyes: I feel honored to be part of the process. It has been
changing my life forever. :earning experience in the Netherlands;
community comes first. The drive I do is the passion I have for my family,
my community, my neighbors. I’m blessed we have the Pratt students
who learn me a lot. Empowering by the visits to the Netherlands.
Volunteer experience to get community members sign up for a system. I
never realized that this small step could bring me to Pratt and gaining experience with parallels and
similar barriers which we have to overcome in an area which is dangerous. I hope to carry this on
when I return to New York City.
Jeanne DuPont: We have seen many new things in Rotterdam. I hope we can encourage the
government to take on the initiatives. The connection between the communities is important, and
understanding what climate change is all about and how it effects all of us.
Alisa Pizarro: It’s an awesome opportunity and I will take all back to community of Red Hook.
Anthony Schloss: The Dutch as people have a culture of protecting themselves. To meet in the middle,
the bottom up and top down, will work effectively. A good partnership between bottom up and top
down is necessary.
Ronald Shiffman: Sometimes we forget about to engage the other Netherlands, the other America,
time to talk about how it can be done in a more effective way.
21
10.
Building Resilient Communities in a G2G Network Context
The Connecting Delta Cities program and the Rockefeller Foundation 100
Resilient Cities Campaign. By Mr. Arnoud Molenaar, Manager Rotterdam
Climate Proof Program, City of Rotterdam.
The Rotterdam climate approach:
100% climate proof in 2025 + attractive and economically strong city +
holistic approach + Long term vision => Short term Action plan
Rotterdam Climate Change Adaptation Strategy (RAS)
1. Robuust system: maintain and improve
2. Adaptation: small scale solutions on large scale
3. Cooperate and Link in with other activities
4. Benefits for living environment, society, economy ànd ecology (important to be a green city).
Each measure should add quality to the city. We have to look at small scale solutions and cooperate
with new stakeholders.
During the process it is important to involve communities, church, students, designers. People could
play their cards, visualizing designs, coming to a final design. Several workshops have been
organized.
Is District Zoho Rotterdam’s first climate resilient community? The design and concept could be
upgraded to other districts.
22
Green Adaptation: look at ecological measures: put sediment on a levee, the entire levee with
ecological habitat could result in a win-win-win situation as it is also positive for the water quality.
Wins include new eco-habitats, reuse of sediments, wave reduction and better water quality.
Adaptive waterfront development: floating cities and floating communities.
Connecting Delta Cities Network: lot of
general topics in which exchange is
important. CDC started at the end of
2008.
Local
governments
are
cooperating with knowledge institutes
and consultancies. Framework for
student exchange.
Rockefeller Foundation exists 100 years and supports 100 cities with a 100 million dollars. Rotterdam
and New York are part of the first 33 cities selected. Aim is to facilitate knowledge.
New item for climate resilience: the link between energy resilience, which is not yet on the agenda.
Quick win: exchange of card game experiences between Jaime Stein and Arnoud Molenaar.
23
11.
Students from Pratt University and Rotterdam University
A joint student session on March 18, 2014: with current
cases from NY and Rotterdam. Students exchanged
ideas on how to solve sustainability and integrated
issues in 4 hours. Students found similarities and
differences… 40 students participated, 6 students from
Pratt, Rochaster and Rotterdam University are
attending the panel discussion.
Rotterdam
Flood prevention
Integrated approach
Community participation
New York
Crisis management
Less integrated approach
Less community participation
Review joint session by students: Rotterdam is based on flood prevention, while NYC wants barriers
in the future but their crisis management is very well developed. Rotterdam has very incredible
infrastructure: a small flood gate that turn into a side walk, when flood comes in you can simply turn
it.
Exchange of ideas and meeting in the middle of flood prevention and crisis management. In new York
are we working from crisis management to flood prevention.
Experience the trip with the members of the community groups and then talk to Dutch students,
makes the students from NYC able to take information back to the US.
Community participation: projects start with final users of the projects via workshops with the
community. What they like to see is addressed in the plans. NYC solutions and plans are increasingly
technical, the community should be more involved for particular areas.
National agenda towards water management in The Netherlands: students from NYC mention that
they do not have it in the US. Also the water board is not existing in the US. On a governmental level
community participation is organized in a different way. The Netherlands is institutionalized.
Two different realities about communities. Collaboration: combine good ideas in a plan, address
problems in NYC. Ability to implement, take ideas into practice, practice based way to learn from
each other.
24
12.
Conclusions and closing remarks
Joost Groen, representative of the Dutch Ministry of Economic or Foreign
Affairs: “Our communities are still quit lazy, because we have already
institutionalized the system. Responsibility is important! In Jakarta the
developments are going very fast. Community participation is still lacking in
Jakarta as well, but the communication with governments and engineering is
going well. Involvement of communities is tough. I’m glad to be involved and to
stimulate people to participate in this process.”
Piet Dircke: “The community is much more important than we think! Bring
community leaders to New York? We can work on that. K2K means learning
from each other, and especially from and bout the local situation and
community in the first place.”
During the farewell of Piet Dircke, Director Gabrielle Muris thanked him for his great and dedicated
work at the Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences. The university appreciates Piet’s contribution
especially by the way he brought the international perspective into the water management
education programme.
25
13.
Ceremony of signing of the MOU
A MoU have been signed between Pratt Institute’s Recovery, Adaptation, Mitigation and Planning
Initiative and RDM Centre of Expertise, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, by Prof. Ron
Shiffman and Gabrielle Muris.
Gabrielle Muris, RDM Campus: “Meet face to face and online cooperation to share everything, open
to each and every one, that is important.”
Ron Shiffman, Pratt institute: “Three major elements; delta city curriculum, student exchange,
workshop basis, 5-10 days period, look at joint research. Put education into a build environment, we
want to bring the RDM model to New York City”.
26

Closing session: visit of Pratt Institute to Rotterdam RDM Campus

Transcription

Similar documents

pdf

looking to rent private-sector housing?

DIESEL ENGINES SPARE PARTS REPAIR MARINE OFFSHORE

Kralingse Bos - Beyond Plan B

The Netherlands as a maritime crossroad

Rotterdam pilot location

BULLETIN No.2 21ST EUROPEAN YOUNG GEOTECHNICAL

Business island of europort The Wilhelminapier

Introduction - Plant One Rotterdam

Gashouderstraat € 895,- excl.