Land is different than any other type of property because there is only a finite amount of it. It cannot be moved, manufactured or disposed of. Our laws refer to it as "real property" as opposed to "personal property" or "chattel." All the land in America has been measured (surveyed) and recorded, and this information is maintained by various agencies as a matter of public record. Properties are comprised of one or more parcels with accurately defined boundaries. "Site", however, is a much more amorphic concept. A "site" holds the property at its center, yet includes the influences of the surrounding properties and buildings, infrastructure, and cultural fabric which contribute to its characteristics. Site requirements vary greatly for the three basic building types - domestic, commercial, and institutional. If we wish to build Green, however, there are some site characteristics that apply universally to all.

Site selection is largely an exercise in compromise. Evaluating the available alternatives involves assessing which piece best accommodates the largest number of the most important requirements of the project. So it is with Green. Not all sites are equally Green, yet Green design guidelines are quite specific about property that is inappropriate for development. Projects should not be developed on prime farmland, land located in a flood plane, land containing habitat for any species on the endangered list, land that is near wetlands, and land which, prior to acquisition, was public parkland. In short, do not develop what are referred to as "Greenfields" (undeveloped land). So, you may wonder, what remains? Selection of a previously developed property proves to be the best Green strategy, for it avoids the major negative aspects of outlying development. The development of open areas away from city center cores encroaches on natural habitat; also increases dependence on the automobile for commuting which contributes to water and air pollution. Prime farmland is lost while inner urban sites deteriorate and become wastelands - uninhabitable and un-tillable. Costly infrastructure investments inevitably need to follow outlying developments, increasing the environmental impact far beyond that of the initial development while existing infrastructure lays underutilized. Green brings nature into the city - not the city into nature.

Living in cities and making the city livable is the most direct way to sustainability. The preservation of nature and wilderness is not an exercise in management but one of constraint - nature does best when left alone. The land we do disturb needs to be well utilized. We can do this by constructing or renovating buildings on a previously developed site with projects that meet or exceed densities currently allowed by zoning. The challenge of Green design is to do so while greatly reducing waste of resources and improving the quality of life. This holds the promise for the revitalization of the community by valuing sites that have a pedestrian connection to at least ten Basic Services such as: banks, places of worship, grocery stores, day care, cleaners, fire stations, beauty, hardware, laundry, library, medical/dental. . . all elements we currently enjoy in Broad Ripple. To be Green, all we need to do is get there by walking.

A prime consideration of a Green site is that it affords access to public transportation. As Green as I profess to be, I must confess that I cannot remember when I last rode the bus here in the city. It is not an appealing prospect for me. There is something unglamorous about waiting on a street corner, then climbing into a lumbering, polluting, disheveled, rolling billboard to get from here to there. Yet, when I visit Chicago, I know I could live there and not own an automobile. The difference is that in Chicago, the public transit experience compares favorably to the expressway motoring experience and as a consequence, people use it. The more people use public transportation, the more resources it attracts. It improves through use. Therefore, I hereby vow to ride the bus more often here at home as a positive act toward improving our local public transit system. The more of us who do it, the more it will improve, and the Greener we will become.

The intense competitive nature of development forces developers to avoid contaminated sites (brownfields) like the plague. Yet, remediation of a brownfield is the essence of restorative development. Green favors the rehabilitation of damaged sites as a means of reducing pressure on undeveloped land. Often the additional costs of clean-up can be mitigated by tax incentives and lower initial property cost. Symbolically, this is what Green is all about: repairing the damage of the past, healing the land, and bringing it back to life.