<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
  xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
  xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">

<channel>
<title>Water/Front : Responses</title>
<description>Design Observer ::Â Join the Discussion</description>
<link>http://places.designobserver.com/feature/water-front/10227/</link>
<dc:language>en-us</dc:language>
<dc:creator>Design Observer Group</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-12-29T02:51:08-05:00</dc:date>
<copyright>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0</copyright>




<item>
	<title><![CDATA[Responding to "Water/Front"]]></title>
	<description><![CDATA[The State of Maryland's pioneering "Critical Area" legislation provides a useful perspective on urbanized waterfronts within the broader context of policies to protect the Chesapeake Bay estuary. This 1984 legislation defines the "critical area" as all lands within 1000 feet of tidal waters or adjacent tidal wetlands. While strictly limiting development in areas designated for resource conservation, the legislation recognizes the importance of promoting the vitality of urban waterfronts in places like Baltimore and Annapolis. Sprawl is recognized as a grave threat to the estuary.  Reinvestment and redevelopment in existing urbanized areas is the alternative. Cities and towns from one end of the Bay to the other have realized the amenity value of their waterfronts. The Critical Areas program complemented by 'Smart Growth' legiislation and early adoption of stormwater management regulations exemplify 25 years of sound water front policy.]]></description>
	<author>Charles Brenton, RLA</author>
	<link>http://places.designobserver.com/feature/water-front/10227/#comments</link>
	<dc:date>2009-12-29T02:51:08-05:00</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
	<title><![CDATA[Responding to "Water/Front"]]></title>
	<description><![CDATA[I'm always skeptical when I see an article that touts waterfront development as most of them make little mention of the ecosystem of the respective water--whether that be a river, a lake or a bay.  So I was delighted to see an article that furthers my own interest and writings on waterfront development from an ecological perspective.  Hooray for Nina-Marie Lister! <br />
<br />
At the time I wrote my two waterfront articles for Urban Land (Aug & Oct 07) and linked on Planetizen, I found that Portland, OR and Toronto seemed to be doing the most to take the ecosystem into account.  The present article bears my instinct about Toronto out.<br />
<br />
Some of us are just starting a Water Initiative within CNU and I will send a link to this article to those involved--as this is just the kind of topic we will pursue.  I'm not sure from a quick reading that I believe that all of the players covered in the article are taking the most ecological approach, but I was thrilled with the fact that the ecosystem was at least addressed.<br />
<br />
I would love to hear more about what role native plants have played in the restoration of the riparian area.<br />
Mary Vogel<br />
www.plangreen.net]]></description>
	<author>Mary Vogel</author>
	<link>http://places.designobserver.com/feature/water-front/10227/#comments</link>
	<dc:date>2009-11-09T20:09:31-05:00</dc:date>
</item>



</channel>
</rss>

	


