I think it's a great idea, but I think the hardest part of the plan won't be coming up with a plan- it will be convincing anyone to listen. Since its inception
Permaculture has remained outside of the traditional structures of power and authority. Doing so was intentional, according to Bill, meant to avoid the kind of slowdown, red tape and cooption that would likely result from mixing with the Man. The downside to that though, I think, is that the chances of any city taking our advice without the support of every sort of certified 'expert' seems extremely low. Since we have no institutional authority as permaculturists, any plan would probably need endorsement/approval by city planners, civil engineers, structural engineers, lawyers, scientists etc etc.
I think a more effective and timely approach might be to try and work with one or more of the university programs coming together to do this same thing; University Washington has an '
Institute for Hazard Mitigation, Planning and Research', for example. Something like that might be a way to get
Permaculture solutions into that broader conversation.
I still think it's a wonderful mental exercise though, and I bet if you were to select a city and start to collect all the necessary data (climate including max/min temps, elevation, annual rainfall, incidence of rainfall, first/last frost dates, wind, chance of specific natural disasters etc, history, economy, culture, current city layout, infrastructure, governmental structure, relevant state, county and city law, that kind of thing), some of the great minds on this site would throw in their hats.