In the 21st century, cities have increasingly been centered as key spaces within sustainability movements. Modern urban sustainability practices can be categorized into two distinct forms: 1) “gray” approaches that leverage technology and infrastructure to lessen environmental impacts and reduce GHG emissions (e.g., denser development, high-speed public transit, building energy efficiency improvements), and 2) “green” approaches that preserve or create green spaces within the urban environment (e.g., parks, street trees, urban forests). In 2019, the city of Minneapolis passed its 2040 Comprehensive Plan, which calls for a substantial increase in density and elimination of single family zoning. Following the plan’s publication, there was an outcry of public concern, emphasized by a dismissed lawsuit brought forward by local environmental organizations arguing that increasing density would harm urban water, air, wildlife, and ecosystems. We systematically coded and analyzed newspaper articles from several local sources to understand how Minneapolis residents perceive this potential conflict between green and gray forms of sustainability, as evidenced by reactions to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Our results suggest that residents do perceive conflicts between green and gray sustainability goals, and in this case, the outcome was mediated by the legal system. Although the lawsuit was dismissed, conflict surrounding green and gray sustainability approaches persists in Minneapolis, affecting current public discourse and policy debates. Understanding conflicts surrounding the policy making process within urban sustainability movements can help future efforts better anticipate and navigate hurdles in sustainability-related planning.
