Verdichten im Inneren
http://www.umverkehr.ch/sites/default/files/2015.03.25_umver...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_consolidation
Urban consolidation describes the policy of constraining further development and population growth to within the boundaries of preexisting urban areas rather than expanding outward into suburban areas. Urban consolidation seeks to increase the population density of a given urban area by expanding upward, redeveloping preexisting buildings and lots, and constructing new facilities in available spaces. It is theorized that discouraging urban sprawl and encouraging further development of housing units in preexisting urban areas will lead to a net gain in social and economic prosperity (e.g. more accessible public transportation, more efficient use of public utilities, and increased affordability of housing).[1]
A major feature of modern urban consolidation practices is the incorporation of urban green space and open space areas.

http://www.greenbuildinglawblog.com/2010/08/articles/regulat...
Without deeply analyzing the nicities of wastewater management, the resistance to the 25th street station project appears to be mainly one of local vs. chain. But I am wrestling with the more baasic regulatory concept of incentivizing inner city development because it is green, even if it does not embrace green building practices.
Work with me here. Cities are inherently green. One of my favorite New Yorker articles of all time was David Owen's 2004 piece on why New York City is sustainable. The argument for 25th Street Station's green cred goes like this "If the 25th Street Walmart project comes to fruition, your average Baltimorean will have greater access to retail within walking or short driving distance. No need to go to the suburbs to shop, wasting fossil fuel and requiring expensive additional infrastructure. In addition, it provides an amenity which makes inner city living more attractive."