Application to Department of Housing and Urban Development Responding to Notice of Funding Availability Regarding HUDs Sustainable Communities Regional

Planning Grant Program FY2010 [Docket No. FR-5396-N-03] Category 1 Application Large Metropolitan Region (Central Massachusetts) HARNESSING SOCIAL NETWORKS AND INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES TO VISION AND PLAN A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE FOR CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS August 2010 APPLICANT Institute for Energy and Sustainability (IES) 16 Claremont Street, Worcester, MA 01610 Phone: 508-751-4639 Fax: 508-751-4600 Contact: Vincent DeVito, Exec. Director, <vdevito@energyandsustainability.com> OTHER CONSORTIUM MEMBERS Clark University Central MA Regional Planning Commission (CMRPC) Central MA Metropolitan Planning Organization (CMMPO) City of Worcester Worcester Regional Transit Authority (WRTA) Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) Central MA Regional Employment Board (CMREB) Community Health Link (CHL) MA Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) (Potential Member) INVOLVED STAKEHOLDERS (Partial List) Worcester and the 39 Towns in the CMMPO Region Many, Diverse Social Networks in the Region MA Governors Development Cabinet

ii ABSTRACT Our broad-based consortium of public and private entities representing Central Massachusetts proposes to conduct regional planning for sustainable development in Central Massachusetts, as specified in Funding Category 1 of the NOFA. The region consists of the city of Worcester and 39 surrounding towns. It has urban, rural, and intermediate areas, and is highly diverse in terms of economic, cultural, ethnic, and political indicators. Our proposed work will yield a general, regional plan with coordinated elements across sectors and jurisdictions, while also creating, or establishing a basis for, many other beneficial outcomes including those specified in Section I.E of the NOFA. The planning process will engage, empower, and activate social networks across the region. The resulting plan will call for an array of specific actions and will identify funding streams for those actions. Endorsement of the plan will be sought through citycouncil and town-meeting votes, to ensure a durable commitment to implementation. The proposed planning will yield many benefits both in our region and nationally. In Central Massachusetts there is significant and growing awareness of needs and opportunities for sustainable development. Our consortium is ready and eager to translate that awareness into actionable plans. At the same time, sustainability issues in this region are similar to those exhibited in many other parts of the United States. We will address sustainable-development needs and opportunities using an approach that not only enhances sustainability in our region but also provides a model for application in other regions. Our approach is pioneering in two major respects. First, it will provide an unprecedented degree of community engagement in visioning and planning, by empowering social networks across the region, by employing cutting-edge information, communication, and education technologies (ICETs), and by supporting many smallscale local initiatives that demonstrate the benefits of sustainability planning. Second, our approach will provide a test-bed and showcase for Commonwealth of Massachusetts policies and programs on sustainability, which address issues ranging in scope from local to global. In this way, we will show how regional planning can meet local needs while also being compatible with sustainability planning at state, national, and global levels. A basic premise of our proposal is that diverse social actors can work in concert to achieve new goals that are broadly beneficial. Specifically, we will engage and assist diverse stakeholders to assess prevailing trends, envision alternative futures, compare the costs and benefits of alternative pathways to the future, choose a regional-development pathway that is comparatively sustainable, and create a plan to implement that pathway. In the latter part of the process, endorsement of the plan will be sought through city-council and town-meeting votes. During the process, vulnerable, diverse, and traditionally under-represented groups will have a place at the table, together with business leaders, local governments, regional agencies, community-based NGOs, and other actors. Clearly, the interests and perceptions of these various actors will differ. Also, the process of visioning and decision-making must accommodate both top-down and bottomup dynamics. Top-down dynamics will reflect the concerns of regional agencies and state and federal governments, which include global issues such as climate change, energy security, and biodiversity. Bottom-up dynamics will reflect concerns that are salient in towns and neighborhoods, including issues related to housing, education, waste management, access to transportation, and other factors. In this complex social environment, developing consensus on a preferred pathway for regional development, accompanied by actionable planning elements, is a major challenge. To meet the challenge, we will empower members of social networks across the region and will employ state-of-the-art ICETs. Existing social networks will be involved and empowered by

iii soliciting their inputs, enhancing their capacities, and linking them with each other. A professional cadre of Community Sustainability Planners, assisted by youth apprentices, will facilitate this process. Members of social networks will be involved via schools, community health centers, business associations, town governments, and other points of connection. For example, youth will be engaged through high schools, assisted by teachers with an interest in sustainability. Sustainability Support Funds will be established that help to finance many small-scale local initiatives demonstrating the benefits of sustainability planning. Once people are engaged and empowered through social networks, they must grapple with the complexities of sustainable development. Government agencies have articulated broad policies of sustainability, such as the Livability Principles set forth in the NOFA, and entities such as ICLEI have published guidance for sustainability planning. Yet, there is limited experience with translating sustainable-development policies into preferred pathways and actionable plans at local and regional levels. To assist the participating citizens as they pursue this task, we will provide them with data-management and ICET tools that are tailored for the task. These web-accessible tools will include a GIS-based Atlas and a Decision Support System. Using these tools in facilitated settings, participants will be able to quickly understand the future implications of continuing an existing trend or choosing an alternative pathway. Those implications will be expressed through an array of quantitative and qualitative indicators, many of which can be displayed graphically. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has established policies and programs related to sustainability, which will provide a framework for our regional planning work. For example, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2008 specifies a process of setting Massachusetts-wide limits for greenhouse-gas emissions at 10-year intervals from 2020 forward, culminating in a 2050 limit at least 80 percent below the 1990 level. Our planning timeline will employ the same 10-year steps from 2020 to 2050. Also, the Commonwealth has established principles for smart growth and sustainable development, which will provide general guidance for our work in Central Massachusetts. State legislation now under consideration (i.e., CLURPA) would enhance the use of the Commonwealths sustainability principles by local governments. Our planning work in Central Massachusetts will provide a test-bed and showcase for the Commonwealths policies on sustainability, demonstrating that regional planning can meet local needs while being fully compatible with sustainability planning at higher levels of government. Major investments that enhance sustainability are already being made in our region. For example, the City Square project in downtown Worcester is a mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly development near the Union Station intermodal transportation center. This project involves $470 million of private capital and $90 million of public investment. We are confident that our proposed planning work will catalyze many such projects across a range of scales, leveraging substantial private investment, revitalizing the regional economy, and providing numerous employment opportunities. In sum, we will create an actionable, regional plan that integrates land use, economic & workforce development, transportation, and infrastructure investments. The plan will empower and enable the diverse communities of Central Massachusetts to address interdependent challenges including: economic competitiveness and revitalization; social equity, inclusion, and access to opportunity; energy use and climate change; and public health and environmental impacts.

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. CAPACITY OF APPLICANT CONSORTIUM AND RELEVANT ORGANIZATIONAL EXPERIENCE (Rating Factor 1) (a) Organizational Capacities and Qualifications (b) Capabilities and Qualifications of Key Personnel 2. NEEDS & EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM (Rating Factor 2) (a) Overview Needs & Opportunities (b) Needs for Sustainability Planning in Central MA (c) Opportunities Accessible Through Sustainability Planning in Central MA (d) Project Objectives 3. SOUNDNESS OF APPROACH (Rating Factor 3) 3.0 BACKGROUND 3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED REGIONAL PLAN FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (a) General Contents of the Plan (b) Ways in Which this Plan Will Advance Sustainable Development in the Region (c) Use of Scenario Planning to Sharpen the Regional Visioning Process (d) Incorporating the Six Livability Principles (e) Response of the Plan to Needs Described in Section 2 (Rating Factor 2) (f) The Plans Leverage of Regional Economic Assets to Advance Sustainability 3.2 PROCESS TO DEVELOP A REGIONAL PLAN FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (a) Community Engagement Approach (b) Assessment of Existing Conditions and Trends (c) Data to be Used in Developing a Regional Vision (d) Strategy for Addressing Barriers to Sustainability (e) Achieving Regional Consensus in Support of the RPSD (f) Implementation Strategy for the RPSD (g) Establishing and Tracking Metrics of RPSD Implementation 3.3 GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT (a) Formal Structure of the Consortium (b) Roles of Consortium Members (c) Partner Commitments and Potential Partners (d) Data Management Plan (e) Ensuring Implementation of the RPSD

v 3.4 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE (a) Timeline for Developing the RPSD 3.5 APPLICANTS BUDGET PROPOSAL 3.6 HUDS DEPARTMENTAL POLICY PRIORITIES 3.6.1 CAPACITY BUILDING AND KNOWLEDGE SHARING (a) Increasing the Skills and Technical Expertise of Partner Organizations (b) Sharing Knowledge Among Partners 3.6.2 EXPAND CROSS-CUTTING POLICY KNOWLEDGE 4. MATCHING AND LEVERAGING RESOURCES (Rating Factor 4) 5. ACHIEVING RESULTS AND PROGRAM EVALUATION (Rating Factor 5) (a) Objectives, Milestones, and Metrics (b) Adaptive Management (c) Overall Project Evaluation

NOTE: Appendices are provided separately. These include a Bibliography. Documents cited here are listed in that Bibliography.

vi LIST OF ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS CHL Community Health Link CLURPA Comprehensive Land Use Reform and Partnership Act CMMPO Central MA Metropolitan Planning Organization CMR Central MA Region CMREB Central MA Regional Employment Board CMRPC Central MA Regional Planning Commission CP Community Planning CPSD City Plan for Sustainable Development CR Community Resources CSF Community Support Fund CSP Community Sustainability Planner CWG Community Working Group DHCD MA Department of Housing and Community Development DOT US Department of Transportation DSS Decision Support System EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EPA US Environmental Protection Agency GHG Greenhouse Gas GIS Geographic Information Systems HUD US Department of Housing and Urban Development ICET Information, Communication and Education Technology ICLEI International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives IES Institute for Energy & Sustainability IRSS Institute for Resource and Security Studies IWRM Integrated Water Resource Management Act LP Livability Principles LPSD Local Plan for Sustainable Development MA Massachusetts NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NOFA Notice of Funding Availability RPSD Regional Plan for Sustainable Development SC Sustainable Communities SD Sustainable Development SSF Sustainability Support Fund UN United Nations VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled WPI Worcester Polytechnic Institute WRTA Worcester Regional Transit Authority

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 1 1. CAPACITY OF APPLICANT CONSORTIUM AND RELEVANT ORGANIZATIONAL EXPERIENCE (Rating Factor 1) (a) Organizational Capacities and Qualifications Through the Applicant, Institute for Energy and Sustainability (IES), this Consortium makes a Category 1 application for a Large Metropolitan Region. The region, described hereafter as Central Massachusetts (MA), consists of the City of Worcester and 39 surrounding towns. This region corresponds to the jurisdictions covered by the Central MA Regional Planning Commission (CMRPC) and the Central MA Metropolitan Planning Organization (CMMPO). Figure 1 shows the region and the six sub-regions specified by CMRPC. Figure 1: The Central Massachusetts Region (CMRPC/CMMPO Region)

Our Consortium is a broad-based, multi-jurisdictional and multi-sector partnership that brings together government entities and non-profit partners. We meet the eligibility requirements of Section III.A of the NOFA. The Consortium and its Members will perform the roles specified in Section III.B of the NOFA. A detailed description of the structure of our Consortium, and the roles and responsibilities of its Members, is provided in Section 3.3 of this Application. An organizational chart is provided in Figure 2 (see below), and letters of commitment from confirmed Consortium Members appear in the Appendices. Massachusetts is widely recognized as a leader in science and education, and a hub of innovation and entrepreneurship. Central MA is a consistent driver of this reputation, as evidenced by its internationally recognized universities, its record of breakthroughs in biotechnology and medical science, and its classic New England sense of hardiness a long-standing, local interpretation of sustainability. In the current era, that tradition is manifested by widespread awareness of the imperatives of sustainability, and a desire to seize the opportunities that sustainable development offers. Major investments that enhance sustainability are already being made in Central MA. For example, the City Square project in downtown Worcester is a mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly development near the Union Station intermodal transportation center. This project involves $470 million of private capital and $90 million of public investment. Our Consortium expects to catalyze many future investments. We are: Institute for Energy and Sustainability (IES) (Applicant) Clark University Central MA Regional Planning Commission (CMRPC)

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 2 Central MA Metropolitan Planning Organization (CMMPO) City of Worcester Worcester Regional Transit Authority (WRTA) Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) Central MA Regional Employment Board (CMREB) Community Health Link (CHL) MA Department of Housing and Community Development (Potential Member)

In combination, we have the diverse expertise, and the demonstrated ability to collaborate, that are needed to respond to this NOFA. Consortium Members have extensive experience with relevant projects. These include: leveraged state, federal and corporate partnerships (IES); multi-year, multi-jurisdictional planning (CMRPC); the $25 million Kilby-Gardner-Hammond community revitalization project (Clark University); the $20 million-plus rebuilding of Union Station intermodal transportation center (City of Worcester); and serving the public-transportation needs of 35 communities (Worcester Regional Transit Authority). Members of the Consortium have worked together in many ways. For example, IES is represented on the City of Worcesters Energy Task Force, while Clark University hosts a building-energy working group that represents IES, the City of Worcester, and various other entities. WRTA, the City of Worcester, and CMRPC are closely intertwined through a long history of transportation and community planning and data sharing. (Figure 2 Organization Chart appears on the following page.) The Institute for Energy and Sustainability (IES) has the mission of expanding and attracting clean technology business and practice in Central MA. IES was founded in 2009 through partnerships and commitments involving Congressman Jim McGovern, MA Lt. Governor Tim Murray, Clark University, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, and industry leaders including National Grid, Wal-Mart, and WinnCompanies. Clark University was founded in 1887 as the first all-graduate school in the United States. It is a private, liberal-arts and research university, committed to scholarship that addresses social imperatives in a global context. Clark enrolls approximately 2,200 undergraduate and 900 graduate students. Graduate students from around the world are engaged in innovative research that transforms communities. The Central Massachusetts Regional Planning Commission (CMRPC), formed in 1963, is the designated planning entity for the Central MA region. CMRPC provides municipal and regional planning for land use and transportation, as well as a variety of community development services, transit planning for the regions transit authority, geographic information services (GIS), and other programs. The Central MA Metropolitan Planning Organization (CMMPO) was established in 1976 to undertake the comprehensive, continuing, and cooperative transportation planning process required by the US Department of Transportation. CMRPC is one of ten members of the CMMPO and is also the staff to CMMPO. The City of Worcester offers residents the resources of a metropolis with the more livable scale of a mid-size city. It has a remarkable concentration of world-class colleges and universities. With a population just over 180,000, it is home to 10 colleges and universities, with more in neighboring communities. Thirty-eight percent of jobs in the city are in education or medical fields, and 36 percent of residents aged 25-34 have a bachelor or post-graduate degree.

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 3 Figure 2: Organization Chart (See Section 3.3 for Details)

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 4 The Worcester Regional Transit Authority (WRTA) serves a population of over half a million, in 35 communities. It maintains a fleet of 48 buses including 4 clean diesel-electric hybrid buses for 23 fixed routes in Worcester and 10 of the surrounding communities. WRTA also provides para-transit service and other special services for the elderly and disabled in the region. Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), founded in 1865, is one of the nation's oldest technological universities. WPI enrolls about 3,400 undergraduates and 1,100 graduate students and offers degree programs in science, engineering, business, the social sciences, and the humanities and arts. WPI implements its tradition of theory and practice with an innovative academic structure that features the Global Perspective Program and rich project experiences. The Central MA Regional Employment Board (CMREB) is a public/private partnership serving the needs of employers and employees in Worcester and 37 surrounding communities. Its purpose is to develop and deploy systems that ensure individuals have the skills necessary to meet the demands of regional employers, while also ensuring that employers have access to these skilled individuals. Community Health Link (CHL) is a multi-service, non-profit organization whose mission is to promote, maintain, and restore the dignity, well being and mental health of individuals and families in Central MA. CHL serves more than 16,500 persons annually, and has partnered with HUD for nearly 20 years. Its personnel participate in many planning processes, representing the perspectives of vulnerable, diverse, and traditionally under-represented populations. (b) Capabilities and Qualifications of Key Personnel Our Consortium includes a large body of capable, experienced personnel. Biographical information about senior personnel is provided in the Appendices. To illustrate this diverse capability and experience, selected information about some key personnel is provided here. Vincent DeVito (IES) is executive director of IES and an attorney with Bowditch & Dewey. He served as US Assistant Secretary of Energy for Policy and International Affairs, and holds a JD from MA School of Law. Megan DiPrete (CMRPC) is community development manager at CMRPC. She has more than 20 years of relevant experience, and has worked as a town planner in several MA communities. She holds a Masters in Public Administration from the Univ. of New Hampshire. Timothy Downs (Clark University) is an associate professor of Environmental Science and Policy. His areas of expertise include sustainability policy analysis and multi-stakeholder processes. He received a PhD from the University of California at Los Angeles. Joel J. Fontane, Jr. (City of Worcester) is director of Planning & Regulatory Services. His division provides analysis for the Citys community development, housing, and economic development programs. He holds a Masters in Urban Planning from NY State Univ. at Buffalo. Yelena Ogneva-Himmelberger (Clark University) is an assistant professor of GIS for Development and Environment. Her areas of expertise include applications of GIS and remote sensing. She received a PhD from Clark University. Paula Gutlove (IRSS sub-contract to Clark University) is deputy director of IRSS. She has 25 years of worldwide experience leading civic-engagement programs, for which she has been commended by diverse bodies including the US Department of State and the Kellogg Foundation.

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 5 Stephen ONeil (WRTA) is executive director of WRTA. Prior to joining WRTA, he spent thirty years working for the City of Worcester on economic development and neighborhood issues. John A. Orr (WPI) is professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, served as provost of WPI from 2007 to 2010, and chairs the WPI Presidents Task Force on Sustainability. He received a PhD in Electrical Engineering from the Univ. of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Gordon Thompson (IRSS sub-contract to Clark University) is executive director of IRSS and a senior research scientist at Clark. His interests include a range of technical and policy issues related to sustainability. He received a DPhil in applied mathematics from Oxford University. Jeffrey T. Turgeon (CMREB) is executive director of CMREB. He has extensive experience designing and implementing workforce development programs, some related to alternative energy and sustainability. Recently, he has overseen a $2M three-year USDOL grant. Philip J. Vergragt (Clark University) is a professor emeritus of Technology Assessment at Delft Univ. of Technology, and a research professor at Clark. He obtained a PhD in chemistry from Leiden University. His interests include technological innovation for sustainability. Leah Bradley (CHL), MSW, LCSW, is director of Housing and Program Development for CHL. She analyzes the demographics and needs of the nearly 17,000 clients served by CHL each year. In addition, she manages over $4 million of HUD housing funding. 2. NEEDS & EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM (Rating Factor 2) (a) Overview Needs & Opportunities Rating Factor 2 measures (NOFA, page 39) the extent to which an Applicants proposed work addresses documented challenges relating to the core purpose of the Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program. The NOFA describes these challenges as deleterious impacts that result from the absence of fully effective regional planning for sustainability in the geography of the applying consortium. Thus, regional planning for sustainability can lead to the meeting of needs that would otherwise go unmet, thereby improving the conditions of life in a region and reducing adverse impacts from human activities. In other words, sustainability planning can unlock opportunities for improved welfare and prosperity. Accordingly, our Consortium views sustainability planning from the perspective of opportunities as much as we view it from the perspective of needs. That approach is reflected in the following discussion. (b) Needs for Sustainability Planning in Central MA The NOFA requires an Applicant to provide regional data in the following categories: Housing Costs; Environmental Quality; Transportation Access; Socioeconomic Inequity; Economic Opportunity; Fresh Food Access; Healthy Communities; and Area of Severe Economic Distress. We provide the required data in the HUD form for Rating Factor 2. Central MA has urban, rural, and intermediate areas, and is highly diverse in terms of economic, cultural, ethnic, and political indicators. The region exhibits adverse, sustainability-related trends that are shared by many communities across the United States. For example, a 2020 Growth Strategy study by CMRPC identified problems including suburban sprawl, strip development, loss of farmland and forestland, and a lack of mechanisms to control development with regional impacts (CMRPC, 2004). In the present economic downturn, these problems are exacerbated by unemployment and economic insecurity, which are especially stressful for vulnerable populations.

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 6 The present salience of sustainability as a public-policy issue began with the work of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, 1987). During the subsequent years, citizens and governments have increasingly recognized the need to organize human affairs within the context of a finite Earth. One manifestation of that need is human-induced, adverse change in the climate (IPCC, 2007). Other signs of stressed ecosystems are also evident. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment determined that 15 out of the 24 ecosystem services that it examined are being degraded or used unsustainably, including fresh water, capture fisheries, air and water purification, and the regulation of regional and local climate, natural hazards, and pests (MEA, 2005). By abusing ecosystems in this manner, we deplete renewable resources that are essential to human life. Non-renewable resources are also being depleted. For example, a growing body of analysis predicts a peak in world oil production within the next few decades (GAO, 2007). These problems are often global and long-term, and may not be immediately apparent in a Central MA community. Yet, their indirect effects can be significant in our region. Economic insecurity, violent conflict, disease epidemics, rising energy prices, and a shifting balance of trade can directly or indirectly threaten Central MA if the imperatives of sustainability are ignored. Conversely, a local commitment to sustainability would address local problems, help to insulate our region from global problems, create new economic opportunities, improve the quality of life, and provide models for wider application. (c) Opportunities Accessible Through Sustainability Planning in Central MA In MA, we are fortunate that the Commonwealth of MA government has active programs to promote sustainability. These programs are guided by sustainable-development principles, articulated by the MA Governors office, under the following headings: (i) Concentrate development and mix uses; (ii) Advance equity; (iii) Make efficient decisions; (iv) Protect land and ecosystems; (v) Use natural resources wisely; (vi) Expand housing opportunities; (vii); Provide transportation choice; (viii) Increase job and business opportunities; (ix) Promote clean energy; and (x) Plan regionally. The Commonwealths statutes, policies, and programs will provide a framework for our regional planning work. For example, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2008 specifies a process of setting MA-wide limits for greenhouse-gas emissions at 10-year intervals from 2020 forward, culminating in a 2050 limit at least 80 percent below the 1990 level. Our planning timeline will employ the same 10-year milestones from 2020 to 2050. State legislation now under consideration (i.e., CLURPA) would enhance the use of the Commonwealths sustainability principles by local governments. Our planning work in Central Massachusetts will provide a test-bed and showcase for the Commonwealths policies on sustainability, demonstrating that regional planning can meet local needs while being fully compatible with sustainability planning at higher levels of government. (d) Project Objectives Consistent with the preceding discussion of needs and opportunities, our Consortium will pursue three categories of objectives in the context of this Application. Our first category of objectives is to conduct Consortium Activities over the 3-year duration of the planning project that we propose here. Our second category of objectives is to achieve, by the date of completion of Consortium Activities, a set of Planning Outcomes. One such outcome will be a Regional Plan for Sustainable Development (RPSD). That plan will flow from, and be accompanied by, strengthening of visioning and planning capabilities in municipalities and many other entities across Central MA. The strengthened capabilities will also be Planning Outcomes. Our third category of objectives is

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 7 to promote Sustainability Outcomes. Some of those outcomes may occur during this project, but most will occur after project completion. All will occur within our planning horizon of 2050. The RPSD and the accompanying strengthened capabilities in Central MA will provide the initial basis for achieving the Sustainability Outcomes. Members of our Consortium expect to play significant roles in advancing those outcomes over the coming decades. Consortium Activities will include the eleven types of Eligible Activities specified in Section III.E of the NOFA (pp 22-28) with the exception of type No. 8 (Engage in site-specific planning and design of capital projects or programs), which applies to Category 2 Applicants only. Details of Consortium Activities are provided in Sections 3-5 of this Application. The Planning Outcomes and Sustainability Outcomes that we seek are in three groups. The first group consists of eight Mandatory Outcomes specified by HUD in Section V.A of the NOFA (page 58) and with slightly different language in Section I.E (pp 9-10). The second group consists of outcomes from a list (with eleven entries) of Additional Potential Outcomes Identified by HUD, which appears in Section V.A of the NOFA (pp 58-59). The third group consists of General Outcomes Identified by Our Consortium. We will, of course, seek the Mandatory Outcomes. The Additional Potential Outcomes Identified by HUD are interdependent, and would all be expected to flow from the implementation of a well-crafted, holistic RPSD. Accordingly, we will seek each of these outcomes. We will also seek the General Outcomes Identified by Our Consortium. The Planning Outcomes in that group include the RPSD and enhancement of various regional capabilities, as discussed above. The Sustainability Outcomes in that group may evolve during the project. At present, they are: (i) A reversal of the present adverse trends in sustainability of ecosystem services directly and indirectly pertaining to Central MA; (ii) A trend of reduced emissions of greenhouse gases directly and indirectly attributable to Central MA; (iii) A trend toward diminished depletion of non-renewable resources directly and indirectly used by Central MA; (iv) A trend of economic development in Central MA that enhances prosperity, opportunity, and satisfying employment across all sectors and social groups; (v) A trend in evolution of physical and social infrastructure that improves the quality of life across all social groups; and (vi) Functioning of Central MA as a showcase and test-bed for sustainability options including those promoted by the Commonwealth of MA. 3. SOUNDNESS OF APPROACH (Rating Factor 3) 3.0 BACKGROUND Planning for sustainability starts with recognizing the legitimate, local needs of diverse groups in a population while also recognizing the supra-local and global nature of many present challenges, such as adverse climate change. For many people, concepts of livability focus on local needs such as access to affordable housing, healthy food, options for public and private transportation, jobs, and education. These needs, which are undoubtedly important, must be viewed together with other important goals, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions, protecting biodiversity, and promoting healthy and sustainable lifestyles. Grappling with these diverse needs requires planning in more than the traditional sense. The process will involve capacity building, public education, and carefully facilitated visioning exercises through which the various stakeholders recognize a common, sustainable vision for a region, embedded in a vision of a larger, sustainable society. Such a process can, and should, build upon the existing assets that support regional planning.

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 8 3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED REGIONAL PLAN FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (a) General Contents of the Plan Section III.E of the NOFA indicates (pp 22-26) that our RPSD should, at a minimum, encompass: (i) Adoption of a housing plan; (ii) Incorporation of equity and fair housing analysis into regional planning; (iii) Regional transportation planning; (iv) Water infrastructure planning; (v) Environmental planning; (vi) Planning for economic development activities; (vii) Scenario planning; and (viii) Comprehensive climate change impact assessment. Our Consortium will address these and a range of other imperatives. Moreover, the process we will employ to create the RPSD over a 3-year period will strengthen relevant capabilities for visioning, pathway assessment, and actionable planning in municipalities and many other entities across Central MA. The RPSD and the accompanying, enhanced capabilities will be Planning Outcomes, as discussed in Section 2(d), above. Those outcomes will establish a basis for pursuit of Sustainability Outcomes over a timeline of 10-year steps from 2020 to 2050. The various Planning Outcomes and Sustainability Outcomes that we will pursue are in three groups as described in Section 2(d). Working with many stakeholders, our Consortium will create a general RPSD with coordinated elements across sectors (housing, transport, water, sanitation, energy, public health, etc.) and jurisdictions (towns, or sub-regions of the Central MA region). The plan will call for an array of specific actions and will identify funding streams for those actions. To encourage community engagement in the planning process, we will divide the Central MA region into six sub-regions. The City of Worcester will be one of these sub-regions. Boundaries of the sub-regions may conform to the existing CMRPC sub-regions shown in Figure 1. A Community Sustainability Planner (CSP) will be employed by our Consortium to serve each subregion. The six CSPs will work with local stakeholders to develop planning elements specific to the sub-regions. Those planning elements will have some of the attributes of a complete, subregional plan. Worcester, in particular, is likely to have a well-developed sustainability plan for its territory. The various planning elements, for sectors and jurisdictions, will be combined into a multi-layered, overall plan for Central MA. Thus, the RPSD will be a synthesis of smaller-scale or sector-specific planning elements. Mutually reinforcing planning efforts will operate in parallel to inform each other. Necessarily, national and international scales will be used for the larger geo-political and ecological contexts in which the region resides. The RPSD and its constituent elements will answer seven basic questions: (i) What is to be done (topics, activities); (ii) how will it be done (methods/approach/process); (iii) where (settings); (iv) when (timeline); (v) with whom (stakeholders); (vi) why (justification); and (vii) with what resources (people, information, funding, technology)? As discussed in Section 2(c) of this Application, statutes, policies, and programs of the Commonwealth of MA will provide a framework for our regional planning work. That framework includes the ten sustainable-development principles articulated by the MA Governors office, and the Global Warming Solutions Acts planning timeline of 10-year intervals from 2020 to 2050. Our RPSD will reflect those principles and use that timeline. Various other sources of knowledge will guide the creation of the RPSD. One source will be the Sustainability Planning Toolkit developed by ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA in

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 9 collaboration with the City of New York's Mayor's Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability. Another source will be the landmark Agenda 21 document produced by the first Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. A third source will be the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) impact-assessment model that is applied to predict and mitigate significant impacts of development actions. The NOFA will be a fourth source. From such sources, one can readily prepare a list of issues to be addressed in sustainability planning. The list would include energy use, public health, housing, land use, transportation, potable water, economic revitalization, social equity, and many other issues. While such lists can be helpful, a systems-based approach is needed to integrate issues so as to reveal interconnections and synergies among them. That approach can show how a particular planning measure or set of measures can achieve multiple objectives, sometimes at surprisingly low cost. Our planning process will consistently employ a systems-based approach. In sum, our Consortium will create an actionable, regional plan that integrates land use, economic & workforce development, transportation, and infrastructure investments. The plan will empower and enable the diverse communities of Central Massachusetts to address interdependent challenges including: economic competitiveness and revitalization; social equity, inclusion, and access to opportunity; energy use and climate change; and public health and environmental impacts. (b) Ways in Which this Plan Will Advance Sustainable Development in the Region Our RPSD, and the process that creates it, will advance sustainable development in Central MA in four major ways. First, the RPSD itself will provide a roadmap to guide sustainable-development investments during the period up to 2050. Second, the visioning process underlying the RPSD will show the multiple benefits that would flow from appropriate investments. Third, the process that creates the RPSD will strengthen visioning and planning capabilities across Central MA, which will greatly facilitate implementation of the RPSD over the coming decades. Fourth, extensive engagement and empowerment of diverse stakeholders during the planning process will create buy-in, build trust, and establish a shared commitment to the plan. As discussed in Section 3.1(a) above, the RPSD will be an actionable plan with coordinated elements across sectors and jurisdictions. It will call for an array of specific actions and will identify funding streams for those actions. Its planning horizon of 2050 is far enough ahead to allow long-term anticipatory action, but not so far as to render scenarios unrealistic and model predictions too uncertain. Within that horizon, people can feel a sense of meaningful connection to their childrens and grandchildrens futures. The coordinated elements of the RPSD across sectors and jurisdictions will apply at overlapping scales. That approach is necessary for socio-political and technical reasons. Most people relate best to their local area and its issues. This is especially true in the case of vulnerable groups, for whom local neighborhood assets and liabilities govern their health and well-being. At the same time, jurisdictions and institutions (e.g., the City of Worcester, CMRPC, HUD) operate at larger scales. Most, if not all, sustainable-development issues (e.g., water, energy, transport, climate change) have different meanings at different scales. For example, integrated water resource management (IWRM) has one meaning at watershed scale, another from the perspective of a towns water demand, and yet another in the context of a regional water supply system. Our capacity-building efforts will also proceed at overlapping scales. For example, consistent with sustainable-development theory and practice (Downs, 2007; Downs, 2008), our planning

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 10 process will provide for the enhancement of several distinct types of capacity. A given capacity might support specific activities in a sector, a sub-region, or the region as a whole. Relevant types of capacity include: (i) political and financial capital; (ii) human resources; (iii) information resources; (iv) policy making; (v) appropriate technology and infrastructure; and (vi) enterprise development (products and services, especially local ones). Each type may have small, operational parts. For example, in a particular sub-region the building of political capital might involve a sustainable-development education program for local K-12 schools, or a sustainabledevelopment awareness program on local radio and TV. (c) Use of Scenario Planning to Sharpen the Regional Visioning Process As discussed in Section 3.2(a) and elsewhere in this Application, our Consortium will engage and assist diverse stakeholders in Central MA to assess prevailing trends, envision alternative futures, compare the costs and benefits of alternative pathways to the future, choose a regionaldevelopment pathway that is comparatively sustainable, and create an actionable RPSD to implement the chosen pathway. The process will lead to the Planning Outcomes discussed in Section 2(d), above, which include creation of the RPSD. Those outcomes will, in turn, establish a basis for pursuit of Sustainability Outcomes over a timeline with 10-year milestones from 2020 to 2050. Assessment of prevailing trends will involve forecasting. When alternative futures are envisioned, they will be expressed as scenarios, which represent alternative pathways to the future. For each scenario, costs and benefits will be assessed. In light of this information, stakeholders will choose a preferred pathway. Then, back-casting will be used to identify the actions and steps necessary to achieve the preferred pathway. Finally, those actions and pathways will be captured in a RPSD and its elements by sector and jurisdiction. Thus, development and assessment of scenarios will be an important component of the visioning and planning process. Clark University will play a key role in this work, guiding the development of realistic scenarios, deploying tools and models to assess the costs and benefits of scenarios, compiling inputs from other Consortium Members, and generally providing scientific and technical support. To assist stakeholders with scenario development, scenario assessment, and related tasks, we will employ state-of-the-art information, communication, and education technologies (ICETs). With technical support from WPI, Clark University will develop and deploy web-accessible ICET tools tailored for this project. For example, a GIS-based Atlas will be a primary access point for data, and a means of visualizing data. Also, a Decision Support System will access and process data to support trend analysis, scenario development and assessment, and back-casting. (d) Incorporating the Six Livability Principles The six Livability Principles (NOFA, page 7) are: (i) Provide more transportation choices; (ii) Promote equitable, affordable housing; (iii) Enhance economic competitiveness; (iv) Support existing communities; (v) Coordinate policies and leverage investments; and (vi) Value communities and neighborhoods. These principles will provide important guidance in all aspects of our work, especially scenario development and assessment. They will serve as general criteria that stakeholders can use in choosing a preferred scenario. The six Livability Principles complement the sustainable-development principles articulated by the MA Governors office, which are discussed in Section 2(c) of this Application. Both sets of principles provide general criteria for plan development. We will use those general criteria as one

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 11 basis for a more detailed, precise set of criteria, which we will develop with engaged stakeholders through an interactive, iterative process. Our outcome objectives, discussed in Section 2(d) of this Application, will provide a further basis for criteria development. (e) Response of the Plan to Needs Described in Section 2 (Rating Factor 2) Section 2 of this Application describes needs and opportunities for sustainability planning in Central MA. From these needs and opportunities, we have distilled project objectives as discussed in Section 2(d). Those objectives, which include the pursuit of Planning Outcomes and Sustainability Outcomes, will set the fundamental direction of our visioning and planning work. Given that context, our RPSD will necessarily respond to the needs described in Section 2. Moreover, as our visioning and planning unfolds, and engages a growing number of stakeholders, the needs will be specified with progressively greater precision and accordance with stakeholder perspectives. Needs and priorities for action will be determined across a range of scales: neighborhood; town; city; and region. Those fine-grained needs and priorities will drive the elements of our RPSD. (f) The Plans Leverage of Regional Economic Assets to Advance Sustainability As mentioned in Section 1(a), above, major investments that enhance sustainability are already being made in Central MA, such as the City Square project in downtown Worcester. Our Consortium expects to catalyze many future investments. Those investments will build on the regions existing assets, which include vibrant intellectual centers such as WPI and Clark University. Consortium Members and some of the stakeholders whom we will engage have expertise in accessing and mobilizing additional local, regional, state, and national economic assets that can support new investments. These assets include public- and private-sector investment agencies and entities, as well as non-profit agencies with a sustainable-development focus. Diversified funding sources foundations, federal, state, and local granting agencies, and private investors and venture capitalists will be key players in the assessment, planning, and capacity-building enterprise. To illustrate regional opportunities, sustainable development of the City of Worcester will inevitably involve brown-fields redevelopments. These sites are traditionally viewed as liabilities but can be transformed into assets. Doing so as an integral part of a regional planning process will allow investors to more fully understand the positive and negative impacts of alternative uses. More generally, Central MA has exciting and powerful potential as a new green-business epicenter home to a new Green Innovation Revolution just as it was the heartland of the US Industrial Revolution in the 1800s. 3.2 PROCESS TO DEVELOP A REGIONAL PLAN FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (a) Community Engagement Approach A basic premise of our proposal is that diverse social actors can work in concert to achieve new goals that are broadly beneficial. Specifically, we will engage and assist diverse stakeholders to assess prevailing trends, envision alternative futures, compare the costs and benefits of alternative pathways to the future, choose a regional-development pathway that is comparatively sustainable, and create an actionable RPSD to implement that pathway. During the process, vulnerable, diverse, and traditionally under-represented groups will have a place at the table, together with business leaders, local governments, regional agencies, community-based NGOs, and other

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 12 actors. Clearly, the interests and perceptions of these various actors will differ. Also, the process of visioning and decision-making must accommodate both top-down and bottom-up dynamics. Top-down dynamics will reflect the concerns of regional agencies and state and federal governments, which include global issues such as climate change, energy security, and biodiversity. Bottom-up dynamics will reflect concerns that are salient in towns and neighborhoods, including issues related to housing, education, waste management, access to transportation, and other factors. In this complex social environment, developing consensus on a preferred pathway for regional development, accompanied by actionable planning elements, is a major challenge. To meet the challenge, we will empower members of social networks across the region and will employ stateof-the-art information, communication, and education technologies (ICETs). Existing social networks will be involved and empowered by soliciting their inputs, enhancing their capacities, and linking them with each other. Relevant social networks will include members of parentteacher associations (PTAs), chambers of commerce, groups that campaign for environmental protection, and a host of others. These diverse social entities represent a vast pool of social capital that is deeply rooted in the history of the United States. We intend to mobilize this social capital for the task of creating a RPSD, to enhance the pool of social capital in significant respects, and to create a framework that directs this capital to the decades-long task of sustainable development in Central MA. Thus, innovative, substantive community engagement is a sine qua non for creation of our RPSD. Without such engagement, the planning process will not succeed, and will end in frustration like many well-intentioned efforts in the past. An important lesson from the fields of communityscale and international development, is that all stakeholders including local residents and marginalized groups with much to gain and lose, but also business leaders, policy makers and regulators must feel a shared sense of ownership of the planning process and its outcomes. The necessary joint ownership can only stem from meaningful involvement in all phases of the assessment and planning process, and its outcomes. Our community-engagement approach includes two major features designed to meet this requirement. First, we will hire, train and coordinate a team of six Community Sustainability Planners, each representing one of the six sub-regions described in Section 3.1(a) of this Application. The CSPs will connect in meaningful ways with their local communities, organize local capacity building, facilitate visioning and planning sessions, and promote local sustainability demonstration projects. They will wear the face of local communities and be trusted, respected members of those communities. Consortium members will mentor and train the CSPs, and graduate students from Clark University will support their work in the respective communities. The CSPs will each receive training from Clark University in community sustainability planning during the course of this project, potentially leading to certification, and will be trained to train others in this role, which will serve to propagate capability in sustainability planning. The CPSs will be pivotal assets who will engage and support many local actors (e.g. town boards of selectmen) and network vigorously in their sub-regions. Second, we will establish two Sustainability Support Funds (SSFs) to support stakeholder engagement in sustainability planning. These Funds are described in Section 3.3(a) of this Application. The Community Sustainability Support Fund will provide financial support for many, small-scale, local initiatives demonstrating the benefits of sustainability planning in this region. The Town Sustainability Support Fund will provide financial support to towns in Central MA for activities related to sustainability planning.

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 13 Together, the CSPs and the two Funds will support a wide-ranging effort to identify, engage, and empower the broadest possible cross-section of local actors. Special attention will be given to traditionally marginalized groups, including minorities, low-income and economically disadvantaged communities, youth, seniors, recent immigrants, and refugees. Part of the outreach effort will include after-school offerings at high schools to engage youth. High-school teachers will be offered training by Clark University, potentially leading to certification to run broad-based sustainability awareness and action programs. Clark graduate students will participate in after-school programs and assist teachers in running them. Youth participation will provide eligibility for summer employment as part of a Youth Sustainability Corps, which will work with the CSPs to engage in broad public outreach, education, and engagement in support of the planning process. The CSPs will connect with social networks through a variety of access points including libraries, senior centers, houses of worship, VFW centers, Rotary groups, etc. The CSPs will also connect in other ways with each other, with Consortium Members, and with Involved Stakeholders. Our general approach is informed by community-health and disaster-relief efforts that successfully employ networking processes. From our considerable experience of communitybased research and planning (Downs et al, 2009; Gutlove and Thompson, 2006), we know that fostering trust and communication is fundamental to a successful partnership, and that this begins when facilitators (CSPs, in this instance) listen respectfully to people expressing needs, interests, and concerns in their own terms. We will employ facilitated dialogue and listening sessions to share information about the full spectrum of sustainable-development issues from employment to ecology and reveal points of contact between what local people care about most, the terms they use, and the interests of other stakeholders. (b) Assessment of Existing Conditions and Trends The central thrust of our proposed project is to engage and assist diverse stakeholders so as to assess prevailing trends, envision alternative futures, compare the costs and benefits of alternative pathways to the future, choose a regional-development pathway that is comparatively sustainable, and create an actionable RPSD to implement that pathway. Thus, assessment of existing conditions and trends is the first step in a visioning and planning process that will culminate in an actionable, widely-endorsed RPSD. Figure 3 (see below) provides a flow chart for the process we envision. Details of the flow chart will evolve as the project unfolds, consistent with our use of adaptive management (see Section 5 of this Application). As shown in Figure 3, the first nine steps will yield the RPSD. Steps 10 and 11, which will occur after completion of our project, will address RPSD implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and iterative adaptation. During the assessment of existing conditions and trends, Consortium personnel will work closely with many regional and sub-regional stakeholders to gather baseline data for chosen indicators. The same indicators, and the accompanying data, will be carried forward through the full process. For example, they will be used to compare the sustainability of alternative scenarios. They will also be used for post-implementation monitoring. In this way, metrics and their accompanying data will be applied strategically, coherently and cost-effectively. Historical data and official forecasts will be used to establish trends. GIS will represent spatial-temporal trends in map layers showing different times and spatial distributions. Baseline data will include information about existing plans (e.g., town master plans, CMRPC transportation plans).

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 14 Figure 3: Process for Visioning, Plan Development, and Implementation

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 15 (c) Data to be Used in Developing a Regional Vision As mentioned in Section 3.2(b), above, the indicators and data used to assess existing conditions and trends will be carried forward through the full process of visioning and planning. Additional indicators and data will be added as necessary, in a manner that is consistent with the taxonomy of the initial indicators. As shown in Figure 3, ongoing consideration of indicators and data needs will be built into the process. During the project period, Consortium operations will involve the acquisition, generation, and management of large amounts of data. Relevant data will consist of quantitative and qualitative information, much of which can be displayed graphically. Section 3.3(d) of this Application describes how data will be acquired, archived, and made available through web-accessible ICET tools tailored for this project. (d) Strategy for Addressing Barriers to Sustainability One potential barrier to a sustainable-development transition is lack of public awareness of needs and opportunities for sustainability. Our community-engagement approach, described in Section 3.2(a) of this Application, is designed to overcome this barrier. The approach is highly innovative, and to our knowledge is unique in the United States in its scope and scale. Another potential barrier is misalignment of our process with existing frameworks (statutes, regulations, policies, institutions, practices, etc.) that influence planning. To overcome this barrier, we will take great pains to ensure that our RPSD and its elements are actionable within existing frameworks. For example, as shown in Section 3.3(b) of this Application, CMRPC will mentor Consortium colleagues, CSPs, and engaged stakeholders regarding planning opportunities and constraints, and will review planning elements and the overall plan as they emerge from the visioning process, to ensure that they are actionable. A third potential barrier is the perception or reality of significant negative impacts accompanying an alternative pathway. Relevant impacts could include residential and small-business displacement, or loss of jobs in one sector if priority is assigned to another sector. These, like other significant negative impacts, will be revealed, alongside positive ones, during our scenarioassessment process. Alternatives will be compared comprehensively and openly using stakeholderchosen, sustainability-based impact criteria. Tradeoffs among alternatives will be made explicit, and decisions supported by the analysis will be made transparently. Once a preferred scenario is chosen, the RPSD will provide for mitigation of negative impacts. (e) Achieving Regional Consensus in Support of the RPSD As discussed in Section 3.2(a), above, a basic premise of our proposal is that diverse social actors can work in concert to achieve new goals that are broadly beneficial. We recognize, however, that developing consensus on a preferred pathway for regional development, accompanied by actionable planning elements, is a major challenge. To meet that challenge, we will empower members of social networks across the region and will employ state-of-the-art ICETs. Existing social networks will be involved and empowered by soliciting their inputs, enhancing their capacities, and linking them with each other. A professional cadre of Community Sustainability Planners, assisted by youth apprentices, will facilitate this process. The CSPs, and other Consortium personnel, will assign a high priority to consensus building. Training in relevant skills will be provided to Consortium personnel and participating stakeholders. During the third phase of RPSD development, as discussed in Section 3.4(a) of this Application, consensus-building

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 16 activities will reach a peak of intensity. The Consortium will contract for an independent consensus-building process in that phase, to ensure cross-regional buy-in to the final RPSD. Our visioning and planning process will have social and technical components. The social component will deliver facilitated dialogue and shared, concerted effort. The technical component will deliver ICET tools to enable the process and assist in resolving differences. Once a fuller understanding of needs, benefits, costs, and tradeoffs is shared, resolution and conciliation are not guaranteed, but are much more likely. (f) Implementation Strategy for the RPSD The RPSD and its elements will call for an array of specific actions and will identify funding streams for those actions. The timeline and process for implementation will be linked to the timeline and process of the MA Global Warming Solutions Act, thus leveraging the resources that MA will apply to implementing that Act. Implementation of the RPSD will yield Sustainability Outcomes that become evident at various times over the period until 2050. The RPSD will specify the attributes of the expected Sustainability Outcomes, will provide metrics to assess achievement, and will set forth a monitoring & evaluation process. An adaptive-management process will be built into the RPSD, allowing it to adjust to changing conditions. Implementation of the RPSD and functioning of the monitoring & evaluation and adaptive-management processes will be beyond the scope of this project. However, this project will substantially strengthen relevant planning capabilities across Central MA, and will enhance awareness of the benefits of sustainable development. Those assets will assist implementation of the RPSD. Also, Members of our Consortium expect to be intimately involved in RPSD implementation over the coming decades. (g) Establishing and Tracking Metrics of RPSD Implementation As discussed in Section 3.2(f), above, the RPSD will call for specific actions along a timeline of implementation. The RPSD will establish metrics for accomplishment of those actions. Also, the RPSD will specify the attributes of the expected Sustainability Outcomes, will provide metrics to assess the achievement of those outcomes, and will set forth a monitoring & evaluation process that applies to both actions and outcomes. Implementation of these and other aspects of the RPSD will be assisted by the factors described above. 3.3 GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT (a) Formal Structure of the Consortium Our Consortium combines private and public entities. It consists of an Applicant and other Consortium Members. The Applicant (IES) and one of the other Consortium Members (Clark University) will each coordinate a major aspect of Consortium Activities. IES will be the Coordinator of Administration, Management, and Operations. Clark University will be the Coordinator of Programs. For budgetary purposes, all confirmed Consortium Members other than IES will be Sub-Contractors of IES. The full Consortium is: Institute for Energy and Sustainability (IES) (Applicant, Consortium Member, and Coordinator of Administration, Management, and Operations) Clark University (Consortium Member, and Coordinator of Programs) Central MA Regional Planning Commission (CMRPC) (Consortium Member) Central MA Metropolitan Planning Organization (CMMPO) (Consortium Member) City of Worcester (Consortium Member) Worcester Regional Transit Authority (WRTA) (Consortium Member)

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 17 Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) (Consortium Member) Central MA Regional Employment Board (CMREB) (Consortium Member) Community Health Link (CHL) (Consortium Member) MA Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), MA Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development (Potential Consortium Member)

Routine decisions regarding the Consortiums activities will be made by an Executive Committee with equal representation from IES and Clark University. Higher-level decisions will be made by a Consortium Council consisting of the Executive Committee and a representative from each Consortium Member other than IES and Clark University. Bylaws for the Executive Committee and the Consortium Council will be established prior to commencement of Consortium operations. These bylaws will specify, among other requirements, that the perspectives of vulnerable, diverse, and traditionally under-represented populations are given full consideration in all aspects of Consortium operations. Also, Consortium Member Community Health Link will, as one of its specific tasks, review Consortium activities and work products to ensure that they account for these perspectives. Our Consortium will employ Community Sustainability Planners (CSPs) who will engage with a diverse array of stakeholders through existing social networks. The Consortium will operate a Community Sustainability Support Fund that provides financial support for many small-scale local initiatives demonstrating the benefits of sustainability planning in this region. Also, the Consortium will operate a Town Sustainability Support Fund that provides financial support to towns in this region for activities related to sustainability planning. Decisions about the allocation of financial support from these two Funds will be made by a Funds Committee appointed by the Consortium Council. Funding criteria will be specified by the Council. Those criteria will include a provision that the perspectives of vulnerable, diverse, and traditionally under-represented populations are given full consideration. Many Involved Stakeholders will be engaged by the Consortium. Although not part of the formal structure of the Consortium, they will play vital roles in sustainability planning. The Involved Stakeholders will include: Worcester and the 39 towns in the CMMPO region (Note: Worcester is also a Consortium Member, and towns may receive support from the Town Sustainability Support Fund.) Members of many, diverse social networks in the region (Note: Entities within these social networks may receive support from the Community Sustainability Support Fund.) MA Governors Development Cabinet (Note: This Cabinet brings together the MA Secretariats for Transportation, Labor and Workforce Development, Administration and Finance, Energy and Environmental Affairs, and Housing and Economic Development.) (b) Roles of Consortium Members Roles and responsibilities of each Consortium Member are articulated below. We expect some evolution of these roles during Consortium operations, consistent with our use of adaptive management (see Section 5 of this Application) as a key organizing principle of those operations. The major roles of each Member, as anticipated at the date of this application, include: Institute for Energy and Sustainability: Coordinate administration, management, and operations Interface with HUD, DOT, and EPA Accounting and reporting

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 18 Public affairs and outreach (esp. via a website and new media) Liaison with MA agencies Employment and oversight of 6 Community Sustainability Planners Fiscal management of the Community & Town Sustainability Support Funds Contract for an independent consensus-building process in the 3rd project year, to ensure cross-regional buy-in to final regional plan Contract with a managing editor to prepare a complete, final version of the regional plan

Clark University: Coordinate programs Oversee community-engagement activities, including program management of 6 Community Sustainability Planners, the Community and Town Sustainability Support Funds Develop and deploy information, communication, and education technology (ICET) packages, including a GIS-based Atlas and a Decision Support System Scientific, technical, and data-management support of trend analysis, scenario development and assessment, back-casting, and ICETs Guide convergence of the visioning and back-casting process toward actionable planning elements, incorporating review from CMRPC Compile text, with contributions from all Consortium Members, for planning elements and the overall, regional plan Coordinate adaptive-management processes within Consortium operations Compilation, publication, and dissemination of outcomes & findings Central MA Regional Planning Commission: Mentor Consortium colleagues, CSPs, and engaged stakeholders regarding planning opportunities and constraints Participate in the visioning process, and in articulation of actionable planning elements and the regional sustainability plan Review planning elements and the overall plan as they emerge from the visioning process, to ensure that they are actionable Liaison with Worcester and the 39 towns Endorsement (subject to vote) of the regional sustainability plan Central MA Metropolitan Planning Organization: Represent the CMMPO region within the Consortium Endorsement (subject to vote) of the regional sustainability plan City of Worcester: Employment of 1 Senior Sustainability Planner Assist Clark University in scenario development Participate in the visioning process, and in articulation of actionable planning elements and the regional sustainability plan Facilitate community initiatives supported by the Community Sustainability Support Fund Endorsement (subject to vote) of the regional sustainability plan Worcester Regional Transit Authority: Survey transport trends and identify opportunities to enhance sustainability Assist Clark University in scenario development, and in assessing the transport implications of alternative scenarios

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 19 Participate in the visioning process, and in articulation of actionable planning elements and the regional sustainability plan Small-scale pilot testing of new transport options

Worcester Polytechnic Institute: Technical assistance, review, and testing regarding ICET packages and data management Technology support for pathway visioning via interactive games Facilitate related research and education projects by WPI faculty and students Central MA Regional Employment Board: Survey general and green job opportunities in the region Assist Clark University in assessing the employment implications of alternative scenarios Test mechanisms for job training and placement related to sustainability opportunities Community Health Link: Represent vulnerable, diverse, and traditionally under-represented groups within the Consortium Work with the CSPs to identify stakeholders from vulnerable, minority, and low-income populations to engage in visioning and planning Assist Clark University in assessing the societal-health implications of alternative scenarios MA Department of Housing and Community Development: Interface with MA Governor's Development Cabinet Mentoring and review of the Consortiums regional planning process Endorsement (subject to decision) of the regional sustainability plan We also expect that Involved Stakeholders will perform a number of roles, such as the following: Worcester and the 39 Towns in the CMMPO Region: Participate in the visioning process, and in articulation of actionable planning elements and the regional sustainability plan Facilitate community initiatives supported by the Community Sustainability Support Fund Conduct activities supported by the Town Sustainability Support Fund Endorsement (subject to vote) of the regional sustainability plan Members of Many, Diverse Social Networks in the Region: Participate in the visioning process, and in articulation of actionable planning elements and the regional sustainability plan Conduct many local initiatives supported by the Town and Community Sustainability Support Funds MA Governors Development Cabinet: Mentoring and review of the Consortiums regional planning process Endorsement (subject to decision) of the regional sustainability plan (c) Partner Commitments and Potential Partners Each formal partner (Member) now in the Consortium is committed to proceed with the activities described here, as indicated by the commitment letters provided in the Appendices. The MA Department of Housing and Community Development is a potential Member. At present, there is no intention to recruit additional Members. If a need for such additional Members is identified, and

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 20 suitable entities are interested, their addition to the Consortium will be negotiated through the Consortium Council. We are eager to recruit additional, informal partners in the category of Involved Stakeholders. These could be public or private entities of many different kinds. A major function of the Community Sustainability Planners will be to engage and work with a wide variety of entities in this category. If an entity wishes to make a large contribution in support of the Consortiums mission such as a substantial foundation or corporate grant to a related project that contribution will be reviewed by the Consortium Council to ensure that it is appropriate. (d) Data Management Plan Consortium operations will involve the acquisition, generation, and management of large amounts of data. These data will allow participating stakeholders to assess prevailing trends, envision alternative futures, compare the costs and benefits of alternative pathways to the future, choose a regional-development pathway that is comparatively sustainable, and create a plan to implement that pathway. Relevant data will consist of quantitative and qualitative information, much of which can be displayed graphically. Clark University will receive relevant data from Consortium partners and many other sources, will archive these data with appropriate backup, and will make them available through web-accessible ICET tools tailored for this project. A GIS-based Atlas will be a primary access point for data, and a means of visualizing data. A Decision Support System will access and process data to support trend analysis, scenario development and assessment, and back-casting. WPI will support Clarks work in this area through technical assistance, review, and testing regarding ICET packages and data management. All data will be web-accessible and generally available to the public, although data related to work in progress may be password-protected until the work is completed and data are validated. (e) Ensuring Implementation of the RPSD Implementation of the RPSD will be ensured by a four-part process. First, extensive engagement and empowerment of diverse stakeholders will create and maintain buy-in, build trust, and create a shared commitment to the plan. Second, systematic attention will be given to generating planning elements, and an overall plan, that are actionable within existing or anticipated laws, regulations, and institutions. Third, planning elements will be assessed for economic feasibility, and funding streams to support them will be identified. Fourth, endorsement of the plan will be sought through city-council and town-meeting votes, to ensure durable commitments to implementation by jurisdictions across the region. We expect variations in the specificity of endorsement resolutions. Endorsement of the RPSD will also be sought from the CMRPC, the CMMPO, the MA Governors Development Cabinet, and other public and private entities. 3.4 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE (a) Timeline for Developing the RPSD As discussed in Section 2(d) of this Application, we have three categories of objectives. Each category has an accompanying timeline. The first category is to conduct Consortium Activities over the 3-year duration of the project. The second category of objectives is to achieve, by the date of completion of Consortium Activities, a set of Planning Outcomes. One such outcome will be the RPSD. Another will be the strengthening of visioning and planning capabilities in municipalities and other entities across Central MA. The third category of objectives is to

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 21 promote Sustainability Outcomes. Some of those outcomes may occur during this project, but most will occur after project completion. All will occur within our planning horizon of 2050. The RPSD will set forth a process and timeline for pursuit of Sustainability Outcomes, linked to the process and timeline specified in the MA Global Warming Solutions Act of 2008. Consortium Activities will include: stakeholder engagement in visioning and planning; sustainability demonstration projects; scenario development and assessment; and consensusbuilding and endorsement of the RPSD. These activities will proceed according to a Work Plan with a timeline divided into quarters (3-month periods) over the 3-year duration of the project. An array of tasks will be specified in the Work Plan, linked to: (i) the completion of work products; and (ii) the roles and responsibilities of Consortium Members. Development of the RPSD will involve work in three phases of concentration, which will feature peaks of effort during the first, second, and third years, respectively. During the first phase, stakeholders will be engaged and empowered, the visioning and planning process will be set in motion and refined, and stakeholders will agree on needs, priorities, and metrics. During the second phase, a number of scenarios will be developed and assessed, stakeholders will converge on a preferred scenario, and the elements of the RPSD will begin to take shape. During the third phase, the elements of a RPSD will be refined, a consensus-building process will merge those elements into a broadly-supported RPSD, and endorsement of the RPSD will be obtained from Worcester, the 39 towns, and other actors. Locally-initiated demonstration projects will occur during all three phases. Given the division of our Work Plans timeline into quarters, it will be straightforward to respond to HUDs interest in benchmarks for progress at 6-, 12-, and 24-month intervals, as evidenced in the NOFA and the form for Rating Factor 5. Our articulation of a detailed Work Plan will occur during the first quarter of the project. At that time, it will be possible to match the Work Plan precisely with the personnel availability and other obligations of each Consortium Member, and to incorporate the perspectives of key stakeholders. Consistent with our use of adaptive management, as discussed in Section 5 of this Application, the Work Plan is designed to evolve during the project period. To illustrate the nature of our Work Plan, the Appendices contain a document titled Provisional Work Plan for Citizen Engagement, Visioning, and Planning. 3.5 APPLICANTS BUDGET PROPOSAL Our Consortiums budget for this Application is provided separately. The amount requested from HUD is within the $5 million limit for a Large Metropolitan Region. As discussed in Section 4 of this Application, Members of our Consortium have identified substantial resources that will match the funds requested from HUD. In addition, as further discussed in Section 4, our approach to creating a RPSD will mobilize a large amount of social capital, thereby substantially increasing the positive impacts of HUD funding. 3.6 HUDS DEPARTMENTAL POLICY PRIORITIES 3.6.1 CAPACITY BUILDING AND KNOWLEDGE SHARING (a) Increasing the Skills and Technical Expertise of Partner Organizations Members of our Consortium will substantially increase their skills and technical expertise during the project period, through two effects. First, the aggregate capabilities of the Consortium will grow substantially. Second, capabilities will be transferred among the Members.

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 22 Aggregate capabilities will grow because the Consortium will develop new tools, practices, and knowledge. For example, the ICET tools we develop will provide unprecedented capabilities to facilitate visioning and planning. Our community-engagement programs will have a scope and scale beyond those of any similar programs in the United States to date. Capabilities will be transferred among the Members because they will work together intimately over a period of three years. (b) Sharing Knowledge Among Partners As mentioned in Section 3.6.1(a), above, there will be extensive knowledge sharing among Consortium Members. In part, this will occur informally, through working together. In addition, there will be formal training and mentoring sessions. Finally, the data management plan discussed in Section 3.3(d) of this Application will support widespread sharing of knowledge, within and beyond our Consortium. 3.6.2 EXPAND CROSS-CUTTING POLICY KNOWLEDGE Our proposed project will, in addition to serving the needs of Central MA, provide a model for wider application. More specifically, Central MA will provide that model within the context of Commonwealth of MA statutes, policies, and programs related to sustainability. We intend that Central MA will be a showcase and test-bed for numerous sustainability options, including those promoted by the Commonwealth of MA. Considerable cross-cutting policy knowledge will be generated by our activities. Much of that knowledge will be embedded in data and analyses that will be web-accessible via the ICET tools described in Section 3.3(d) of this Application. In addition, researchers with Clark University, WPI, and other Consortium Members will develop scholarly literature that captures the new knowledge and makes it widely available. 4. MATCHING AND LEVERAGING RESOURCES (Rating Factor 4) Members of our Consortium have identified substantial resources that will match the funds requested from HUD. These resources are described in our budget and the form for Rating Factor 4, which are provided separately. In addition, as explained in Section 3.2(a) of this Application, our approach to creating a RPSD will mobilize a large amount of social capital, thereby substantially increasing the positive impacts of HUD funding. By engaging and empowering diverse social networks that represent a vast pool of social capital, we will mobilize that capital for the task of creating and implementing a RPSD. 5. ACHIEVING RESULTS AND PROGRAM EVALUATION (Rating Factor 5) (a) Objectives, Milestones, and Metrics Discussion of achievements and evaluation necessarily begins by addressing objectives. As discussed in Section 2(d) of this Application, the project proposed here has three categories of objectives. The first category is to conduct Consortium Activities over the 3-year duration of the project. The second category is to achieve, by the date of completion of Consortium Activities, a set of Planning Outcomes. One such outcome will be the RPSD. Another will be the strengthening of visioning and planning capabilities in municipalities and other entities across Central MA. The third category of objectives is to promote Sustainability Outcomes. Some of those outcomes may occur during this project, but most will occur after project completion. All

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 23 will occur within our planning horizon of 2050. The Planning Outcomes and Sustainability Outcomes that we seek are in three groups. The first group consists of eight Mandatory Outcomes specified by HUD. The second group consists of Additional Potential Outcomes Identified by HUD. The third group consists of General Outcomes Identified by Our Consortium. Milestones and metrics of accomplishment of these objectives will be of three types. First, our Work Plan for Consortium Activities, as discussed in Section 3.4(a) of this Application, will specify an array of work products to be completed by particular dates. Each product will be assessed against its specifications. Second, the Planning Outcomes, including the RPSD, will become evident at the end of the 3-year project period. The observed outcomes will be assessed against our goals, discussed in Section 2(d). Third, the Sustainability Outcomes will become evident at various times over the period until 2050. The RPSD will specify the attributes of the desired Sustainability Outcomes, will provide metrics to assess achievement, and will set forth an evaluation process. The functioning of that evaluation process will, however, be beyond the scope of this project. Further information about milestones and metrics regarding Planning Outcomes and Sustainability Outcomes is shown in the form for Rating Factor 5, provided separately. (b) Adaptive Management Ongoing evaluation, with use of the resulting information for course correction, is a central aspect of our proposed planning process. The essential idea (here termed adaptive management and sometimes termed structured learning) is that, when confronting an uncertain future, the ability to learn from experience is critical. Capabilities are needed for monitoring outcomes, for evaluating what works and what doesnt, and for using the knowledge gained to adapt projects and programs. Monitoring, evaluation, and adaptive-management capabilities are built into the design of this project and will serve several purposes: (i) Advance the planning process by assessing the effectiveness of outreach, the adequacy and functioning of networks for communication, the needs for and effectiveness of capacity building, the effectiveness of the use of MA and regional planning resources, and fidelity to the Livability Principles. (ii) Guide and develop lessons from community-inspired planning projects. (iii)Test and improve the ICET tools as they are prepared and put into use. (iv) Provide ongoing feedback for developing the RPSD, regarding coherence among planning elements, consistency with MA guidance and with the Livability Principles, the practicality and likely impact of proposed planning elements, and contributions to a shared purpose in pursuit of sustainability and livability. (v) Establishment of indicators of sustainability, at a fundamental level, that can be used to measure progress and represent a shared purpose amongst the various participants. (c) Overall Project Evaluation Because monitoring and evaluation capabilities are so important as a design element in the proposed project, we will be exceptionally well positioned to provide, in addition to the ongoing evaluation described above, an overall evaluation that encompasses: (i) Critical assessments of the contents and usability of the ICET tools, and suggestions for future development of such tools.

Narrative for Application to HUD from Central MA, August 2010 Page 24 (ii) Lessons learned from community-inspired planning projects. (iii)Lessons learned from the planning process, including suggestions for making the process itself more sustainable, more resilient, and having the capacity to influence implementation and future adaptation of the RPSD. (iv) A critical assessment of the RPSD, with an emphasis on characterizing its practicality, its capabilities for adaptation, its coherence with local and regional concerns and interests, its consistency with MA and national conceptions of sustainability and livability, and its reflection of a shared vision for a Central MA future. (v) An overall set of lessons from the project experience that could inform other planning efforts.