The author Amy Nagengast is a doctorial student at Carnegie Mellon University in Civil and Environmental Engineering focusing on sustainability issues. The author’s thesis is that greenfields actually use more resources than brownfields because they are usually further away from the center from the city. Also, brownfield areas use more public transportation and have a lower average of driving time compared to greenfields where cars are used more often. The paper was probably written for someone who is into environmentalism and enjoys reading highly academic papers.
Because of the amount of data and the amount of graphs and tables, the paper is not intentionally biased. Her conclusion is completely result based as well. The strength of this paper is that its sources are based on data. The weakness of her paper is that she doesn’t propose a solution. She just makes it known that a problem exists in the way people perceive brownfields and greenfields. This paper supports my thesis because there are quite a lot of bikers who reside at the Gowanus. The brownfield of the Gowanus is not an area populated by cars, however less than a mile away; the Barclays Center, which has more traffic than before the center was built. In terms of relevance to my project, this will help me illustrate the point that there is usually a green movement in areas of higher pollution.
Nagengast, Amy, Chris Hendrickson, and Deborah Lange. “Commuting From U.S. Brownfield And Greenfield Residential Development Neighborhoods.” Journal Of Urban Planning & Development 137.3 (2011): 298-304. Academic Search Complete. Web. 19 Oct. 2012.
http://ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=65302823&site=ehost-live
It also supports the idea that it makes economic sense to try to clean up the Gowanus rather than economically develop currently undeveloped spaces elsewhere.