Nathanael Hoelzel

Problem: For many cities and planners, adopting smart-growth sprawl-containing strategies is associated with the conversion of relatively inexpensive industrial-zoned land to land zoned for mixed-use commercial and residential redevelopment. This can weaken the urban economic base, reduce the supply of good-job producing land, and contribute to industrial-sector suburban sprawl. Purpose: We expose smart growth's blind side by revealing the lack of attention to urban industrial redevelopment in planning practice. We expand the smart growth dialogue by describing a) the impacts on productive urban industrial land of adopting smart policies, and b) local government measures to protect urban industry while pursuing smart growth. Methods: We review the recent local industrial policies of 14 cities and 10 practice-oriented smart growth publications with local economic development components to reveal the disconnect between urban industrial development and smart growth approaches. We compare elements of adopted local industrial policies from selected cities with commonly accepted smart growth principles to illuminate the challenges smart growth policies pose for protecting and revitalizing urban industrial areas. Results and conclusions: Our review of cities initiating local industrial policies reveals that significant amounts of industrial land have been converted to other uses as cities pursued smart growth. The smart growth literature provides little to no acknowledgment of the need to coordinate urban industrial development practices with other mainstay smart growth activities. Although development pressures to convert industrial land to higher densities and other uses persist, the national economic crisis has led to a call for strengthening manufacturing. There has also been a decline in the nonindustrial infill development that epitomizes smart growth projects. Together these trends present opportunities and challenges for city and regional planners to change smart growth approaches. Takeaway for practice: Industrial land is at risk in cities. Recent efforts to reduce this risk, such as explicit local policies to preserve industrial land and jobs while also pursuing smart growth, illustrate how challenging it is to attract new manufacturers and prevent further industrial decline in urban neighborhoods. Pursuing smart growth and sustainable urban industrial development should not be an either/or proposition, and requires approaches that explicitly safeguard productive urban industrial land and discourage industrial sprawl.

Electronic waste (e-waste) recycling is a critical sector for sustainable urban industrial systems. U.S. residents and businesses generate an estimated 3.2 million tons of electronic waste each year; most is not recycled and is generated in urban areas. However, adoption of state environmental regulations for e-waste recycling is increasing. Between 2003 and mid-2011, 25 states passed e-waste laws. There are a growing number of e-waste collectors and certified processors in U.S. urban areas. While the landscape of e-waste recycling is changing, there is little analysis on the economic impacts of this industry. The research presented here synthesizes e-waste management policy developments and growth of the e-waste recycling industry. We present an economic impact analysis at the metropolitan level through constructing an extended input-output (IO) model that specifies an e-waste recycling sector. In a case study, we examine changes in e-waste recycling activities in the Seattle metropolitan area and provide simulation results of new regional economic impacts.

Abstract Vapor intrusion is an environmental health hazard caused by the influx of volatile chemicals from the subsurface that eventually contaminate the indoor air in overlaying buildings. This often overlooked exposure pathway of hazardous chemicals is a significant environmental health hazard. The EPA estimates that there are 374,000 contaminated sites in the United States that could potentially be sources of vapor intrusion. Local planners and the planning process are important and necessary during land use decision-making to ...