ECO-City Planning Methods and Tools

Creating an Eco-City: Methods and Principles Page 1 of 19

Creating an Eco-City: Methods and Principles Sebastian Moffatt, The Sheltair Group Inc., Vancouver, Canada

1. Introduction A number of cities around the world have begun the long walk towards sustainable urban development. While the destination may be far, and the best pathways not yet known, a number of new planning methods and principles are proving useful. This paper will examine these ‘eco-city’ methods and principles, and focus on how they differ from the best current practices for urban planning. What becomes clear is that moving cities towards ecological sustainability will require plans that address a broader scope of issues than normal, over a longer time frame, and with greater accountability. In addition, a number of planning tools and strategies may greatly enhance chances of success. Before examining the new planning methods and principles it is worth mentioning two important limitations that planners face in adopting any of the approaches presented in this paper.

Limitations on the applicability of eco-city planning methods

One major limitation to creating eco -cities is the current failure of planning practice to adequately cope with urban growth management, to create functional, liveable neighbourhoods and to maintain the urban infrastructure - regardless of ecological goals. Until we have the basic elements of good planning in place, it is doubly difficult to a new set of environmental goals. Moreover, the same obstacles that have frustrated good planning practice during the 20th century, will likely frustrate efforts to create eco-cities in the 21st century. These obstacles include:

? ? inadequate financial and human resources within planning departments, ? ? lack of facilitators and information for conducting an effective public

process, ? ? lack of comprehensive and up-to-date Master Plans, ? ? an excessive reliance on private developers for initiating urban renewal,

and for adopting better design methods, ? ? the emphasis given to short-term capital costs as opposed to life cycle

costs, and the lack of accounting for non-monetary indirect costs; ? ? lack of analytical and forecasting tools for modelling and evaluating urban

development scenarios. This list goes on, and is familiar to anyone who has become involved in the often-painful process of creating and implementing master concept plans for urban areas. A United Nations report on world cities, prepared for the Second International Habitat Conference, profiled cities around the world and concluded that even prosperous, developed cities like Tokyo and Ne w York are now unable to manage their infrastructure, or to properly plan for the future. No wonder that so many of the fast-growing cities in less wealthy countries are having difficulty. A key strategy for eco-city planners, therefore, is to take adva ntage of environmental initiatives to simultaneously enhance overall urban planning capabilities. Recent experience with developing Green Building Guidelines for the city of Santa Monicai, California illustrates this strategy. As part of creating a new set of building regulations and guidelines for meeting ecological and environmental goals, it was found possible to rationalise existing ordinances, and to streamline the entire permitting and inspection process for the city.


A second limitation to creating eco-cities is the lack of consensus on what is meant by eco -city. This limitation may disappear with time, but for moment, we have no common destination, and this limits the applicability of methods and tools. An increasing number of people are concern ed about the urgency and magnitude of the global ecological crisis, and have concluded that long-term ecological health is a fundamental precondition to the health and prosperity of cities. However such concerns may be a minor concern for many cities involved with ‘green’ initiatives and improving the urban environment. To illustrate differences in philosophy, consider three eco-city types:

1. ‘Watermelon’ Eco-Cities: (Green on the outside only) Many cities using the term are concerned exclusively with issues of liveability. Their goal is to preserve or enhance the urban environment so that it is greener, more varied, easier to look at and to walk through, and more friendly for people (as opposed to cars). Emphasis is given to such goals as increasing the amount and quality of public open space, preserving agricultural land, identifying environmentally sensitive areas, and creating environmental amenities within the city for enjoyment of the public.

2. ‘Teenage’ Eco-Cities: (Progressive, concerned about overcoming limits) Many cities are concerned primarily with how to overcome bio-physical limits, so that economic growth and increased levels of consumption can be sustained. Their problems typically relate to a shortage of land for housing, air pollution, scarcities of fresh water, congested roads, landfill closures, degradation of water quality in the local river or lake, and concerns about the increasing costs or unreliability of power and fuel. Thus emphasis is given to such goals as increasing the in frastructure carrying capacity to satisfy the long-term plans for economic growth. Larger and more advanced transportation infrastructure and wastewater treatment systems are expected to correct pollution of air and watersheds.

3. Healthy Eco-Cities: Many cities have embraced the concept of sustainable development within their official plans –if only in words. Recognition is given to the rights of future generations, and thus eco-city planning becomes an extension of an enlightened social policy. Historically the urban environment has been compromised in an effort to achieve short-term social and economic goals. Thus the new philosophy is to adopt a balanced approach that provides economic and social benefits, while simultaneously ensuring long-term ecological health, stewardship of resources, and adaptability. This is sometimes called the win-win-win strategy. Although optimistic, it claims to also be pragmatic, since only healthy, productive cities are truly sustainable..

It is not possible, nor nece ssary to obtain agreement on what constitutes correct eco-city goals. However a key strategy for avoiding confusion in eco -city planning is to encourage each eco-city to collaborate with others. Collaboration

5

Sustainable UrbanDevelopment

EcologicalSocial

Economic

•ResourceConservation

•Equity•Opportunity

•Livability

Synergy


will sensitise decision-makers to the differences in approaches, and lead inevitably to a deeper understanding of the issues and options. International groups like ICLEIii, and the European Sustainable Cities and Towns campaign, have brought together hundreds of cities that share goals for improving environmental performance. The worldwide movement for Local Agenda 21 initiatives has involved over 2000 cities. The Natural Stepiii program has been highly successful in helping governments and businesses reach agreement on the four basic principles that must underlie environmental policies. All these campaigns are extremely useful in providing cities with a common orientation and deeper understanding.

2. How Eco-City planning methods differ from the current Best Planning Practices For convenience the typical urban planning process can be summarised in four stages:

1. Scope and Goal setting 2. Research and Analysis 3. Concept Design, and 4. Implementation

I will briefly review each of these stages in terms of how eco -city planning might change best practices. The review is not intended to be comprehensive, and reflects the author’s personal experiences with eco-city planning.

Stage 1. Methods for Scope and Goal Setting

Current planning practice tends to focus on urban form, land use, transportation, and provision of social services like affordable housing. Invariably eco-city planning involves a broadening of scope. Eco -city planners must explore integrated resource use, including the relationships between the natural environment and the systems for energy supply, watershed management, solid waste management, and urban agriculture. While a century ago it was normal for cities to have responsibility for such systems, now we see the expertise concentrated in a collection of utilities, regional authorities and other single-focus groups. Creating an eco -city means that the city must move back into a leadership position, - something that is not always welcomed by other agencies, or by the city’s own overworked planners and engineers, who may lack familiarity with the new territory. Three new areas of planning are especially important – yet difficult - to include in the scope of an eco-city plan:

1. Energy infrastructure –Cities in northern Europe, and elsewhere, have demonstrated the advantages of urban plans that address energy systems, as opposed to focusing only on energy conservation and efficiency initiatives. As the energy marketplace is deregulated, and becomes diverse, all cites will face new choices about their energy partners and their mix of energy sources, and how energy commodities are converted stored and transferred. Such choices can radically alter the energy efficiency of the entire city. For example the City of Toronto has an estimated energy efficiency of 50%, while the City of Helsinki, which using the waste heat from energy generation to heat 90% of the housing, achieves an efficiency of 68%. iv In future the involvement of cities in energy systems planning will become an important strategy for enhancing the competitiveness of local industry, and for ach ieving goals for housing affordability and cleaner air. Large,


centralised energy grids of the 20th century are likely to be replaced by a more diverse and decentralised system. The decentralisation offers benefits such as reduced transmission and conversion losses, lower and slower capital costs, and increased potential for co-generation and renewable energy. We can expect to see new urban developments like schools, hospitals, community centres and housing clusters become nodes in such a “distributed” energy supply system. These changes provide indirect economic benefits to cities, in a similar fashion to energy conservation and efficiency investments. Solar water heating, district heat and power systems, micro -cogeneration, and methane production are all ways of spending energy dollars locally. The benefits include job creation, local self-reliance and community economic development.

2. Urban Industrial Ecology: Eco-city planning should go beyond industrial

land use zoning and designation of industrial parks, and instead involve planners in localised industrial strategy. Like a natural ecology, an urban-industrial ecology should be carefully designed to create no waste. Instead resources (or nutrients) should cascade through different processes (or organisms). If the local industry uses lots of water, urban planners must look for other industries that can locate nearby, and reuse the same water. If the local agriculture creates lots of fibre waste, urban planners look for industries that can use the fibre for other uses, or as a source of energy. If local office buildings need to be cooled in winter, planners must consider locating smaller buildings nearby so the waste heat can be pumped to where it is beneficial. Such industrial strategies can only be created by cities that partner with their pillar industries, and with local educational institutions, and with specialist-consulting teams. The goal of such partnerships is to explore opportunities for re-use of waste resources, by developing new scenarios for urban energy and mass flows. The research involves examining the marketplace, industrial processes, local resources, skills, and infrastructure. Not an easy task, but the environmental benefits of such waste utilisation and improved system efficiencies are likely to exceed any other eco-city initiative. .

3. Watershed Management: Jurisdictional boundaries for urban planning typically exclude substantial portions of the city’s watershed. This can increase uncertainty and risk of failure. Eco -city- policies need to be based upon reliable predictions of water availability and quality – issues that can only be considered in the context of the watershed. In an effort to improve planning, a number of states and nations now insist upon watershed p lanning as a parallel exercise to urban planningv. A watershed plan analyses all of the water flows in and out of the watershed (creating a water balance) and attempts to allocate the limited resources equitably. The plan should also match the quality of water to the end use, and create watershed-wide policies to minimise risks of flood, disease, and drought. The absence of watershed planning is especially problematic for the many cities trying to conserve scarce water resources. Without an effective wa tershed plan, the city is unable to optimise investments and address wasteful practices by industry and farms.


Composition of the Design Team A ‘team’ approach to design is an essential element of all good planning practice. The team approach involves creating an interdisciplinary group that works together, far more closely than traditional planners and architects. By working closely, right from the start, solutions are often created that cross professional and discipline boundaries, and satisfy a greater number of planning objectives. Special effort is often required to solicit participation by individuals with the specialised knowledge and skill required for eco -city planning. The scope of the plan may require expertise in energy systems, water, industrial process and building technology. An additional effort is also required to ensure that the design team has adequate public input, since eco-city planning must establish and emphasise a new vision for the community, - a vision based upon a shared set of values. Eco-city planning begins with asking the public such question as “What kind of community you want your children to live in when they grow up?”. Often the diff iculty with involving public in such a visioning process is the poor access to information, or inappropriate information products, or long, boring technical meetings that punish anyone who tries to play a part. New tools are needed to make visioning more fun and to help people think about the long-term impacts of current lifestyles. Public participants, and experts alike, need to be coaxed outside the “box” of everyday concerns. In this context it is worth considering the benefits of using new concepts a nd software tools that may help to enliven and educate visioning exercises.

Concepts and Tools for Visioning One especially powerful concept is the ‘ecological footprint’vi a term which refers to the area of fertile land (or water) needed to biologically produce all the resources consumed by a community and to assimilate all the wastes, indefinitely. While planners sometimes try to use footprints as an evaluation tool, the concept is best used as a means of raising awareness and helping people adopt a new paradigm during the visioning stage of planning.

1. Invent A Future (for the next forty years)

Values and BeliefsGoals and Targets

4. Scenario De-briefing (at the endof your 40 year scenario)

Priorities

2. Choose Policies (for 1 decade)?Transportation ?Lifestyle ?Labour ?Housing ?Agriculture

?Land Use ?Government ?Industry ?Water

Environmental Sub-Models

3. ViewConsequences(at the end of the

decade)

? Ecology? Air Quality? Water Quality? Natural Hazards? Habitat? Footprint? Energy? Land Use? Transport? Housing? Agriculture? Economy? Labour? Demography? Government? Industry

Land UseGoals

Repeat 2 & 3for each

WorldViews

EconomicActivity

PopulationGrowth

Politics

Human Activity Sub-Models

Land Use TransportationHousing Labour

SocialServices

Consumption Economy

Air Quality Water Quality Natural Habitat

Conceptual Framework used by QUEST visioning software


General Definition

Working Principles

Spheres of Sustainability

Categories

Goals

Objectives

Indicators and Targets

EXAMPLE: Ecology Solid Waste Maximize the diversion of all wastes from disposal Reduce the generation of solid wastes at source Per capita waste disposal (200 kg/person/year)

Software tools may also help to create new visions. Software can create credible and fascinating scenarios of the future, that sensitise public and decision-makers to the impacts of urban design choices on their issues of greatest concern. One example of a visioning tool is a software product called Questvii, developed by the University of British Columbia, Canada. Applications of Quest are limited to a handful of communities so far. However initial resp onse suggests that this type of tool may be highly effective in engaging people in eco -city planning, and increasing understanding. Quest is an interactive modelling program that allows users to actively explore different possible scenarios of the future for their region. The product has the look and feel of a computer game. Users can express their own values by choosing issues of importance. By making further choices about population growth, urban form and technology, they can generate futures that are reported back to them in a newspaper-like format, writing from decades in the future.

Pyramid frameworks for creating new directions

A comprehensive conceptual framework is another tool that can be used to assist in steering an effective public process. Frameworks create a mental map for setting and justifying specific environmental recommendations. The framework becomes the underlying structure through which cities can transcend motherhood statements and provide tangible, measurable targets for designing and assessing the performance of a community. Frameworks have recently achieved considerable success in helping diverse groups reach consensus and create bold visionsviiiix. A typical framework can be represented as a pyramid that has, at its top, a definition of sustainable urban development, the fundamental principles of eco -city planning, and the creation of a unique “vision’ for the community. From this

pinnacle, the Framework divides into a spreading tree of elements, at increasing levels of specificity. The key elements are linked as follows: from the definition of sustainable urban development a number of principles are derived. These principles are used to define sustainability in the ecological, economic, and social spheres, and to set

A Conceptual Framework for Eco-

city Planning


priorities. These three spheres are organised into related subject categories, which represent general subject areas that organise the range of possible concerns into convenient topics for policy. Some categories reflect different parts of the physical world (air, water, land), while other reflect sectors and services (transportation, housing). Each category is subsequently divided into a series of goals, which represent broad statements that elaborate on the ultimate condition desired. These goals are themse lves further separated into specific objectives, which indicate the direction of change desired. Each objective leads to one or more performance indicators for which targets are set. Indicators represent a conceptual tool that can measure progress towards (or away from) objectives. Most eco -city plans require about 30 core indicators for rating the overall performance of the community. Indicators should be standardised if possible, to permit easier comparisons, and they should be practical to measure and monitor. The indicators provide a means for creating benchmarks . The planners and public can look back in time to establish trends, or compare their current performance with other communities. Most importantly, the indicators provide a means of setting targets that establish in very specific terms the desired level of performance. At the bottom of the pyramid, are precedents that describe how other communities have improved performance through application of specific environmental policies and adoption of new technologies. Precedents can be packaged as slide shows, case studies, web pages or testimonials. Regardless, they ae especially useful in educating people, and making decision-makers comfortable with the idea of eco-city targets.

Stage II: Methods for research and analysis

Conventional best practice for urban planning uses the research and analysis stage to create a program for the site. The program integrates the site features and history with the goals of the stakeholders. Usually the research process includes an analysis of the surrounding areas, an inventory of existing conditions, an identification of opportunities and a character study of the different areas or neighbourhoods. This information is then combined with market and demographic research. Eco-city planning requires the same research process, but with greater emphasis on data collection and analysis. Ideally the research and modelling becomes a parallel activity, providing input continuously to the design team. Special attention needs to be given to understanding carrying capacity, both for the natural environment and the built environments. The carrying capacity is a type of ‘constraint’, to be satisfied by the design concept. Part of the challenge or program for eco -city designers is to achieve the city’s social and economic objectives, without exceeding the natural limits imposed by the ecosystems, and with a minimum of new capital investment in infrastructure. Thus the research stage is a time to establish key limits and threshold values, and explain the nature of each constraint. In reality it is almost impossible to undertake research to define capacity constraints during the urban planning process. It is beyond the capability of the average design team to locate and collect data on the carrying capacity, costs


and environmental impacts of the urban infrastructure. Each city and region is unique. Specialists may already have examined the capacity of specific water sources, and the limits of existing plants and pipes, but nobody will have a good understanding of how changes in population and technology will impact long-term infrastructure costs and resource requirements. Over the longer term our research methods and tools will no doubt improve, and allow planners to better understand capacity constraints and to forecast the impacts of growth. In the meantime, how is it possible to create eco-city programs? Part of the solution may be for cities to adopt an Environmental Management System (EMS), as opposed to a ‘one-shot’ eco-city plan. Urban EMS is a more proactive approach. Rather than simply trying to mitigate environmental damage through goal statements and periodic environmental impact assessments, an EMS integrates goals into ongoing policy and management. Urban EMS works similar to the EMS now being widely adopted by industry, like the ISO 14001 standard. However the built environment is far more complex than any industrial product or process, and contains many site-specific interactions and relationships. EMS includes 1) data collection, organisation and analysis; 2) the monitoring of performance; 3) setting appropriate and challenging targets for environmental improvement and restoration; and 4) creating feedback systems for ensuring responsibility and accountability. Basically it is a rigorous method for ensuring environmental policy is fully integrated into city operations. The foundation to an urban EMS is a relational database that organises detailed data at both the building and the urban scales. A comprehensive urban database needs at least dozen files, reflecting all the key elements of an urban system, including weather, infrastructure systems, population, buildings and linear infrastructure. These files are common to eco-city plans anywhere in the world, and are graphically displayed below.

© 1999

SolidWaste

Potable Water

Weather

Residential Buildings

Industry

LinearInfrastructure

Demographics

EnergySupply

Transportation

Land Use

CommercialBuildings

Waste

Such databases need to fit together, like a series of Russian dolls, providing data on resource consumption at each scale. A minimum level of detail is needed for populating each database, and the challenge is to find ways to fulfil data needs


Indictors and Benchmarks forSolid Waste

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Per capita waste disposal (kg / person year)

Best City inCanada

(Belleville,Ontario)

Vancouver 1990(prior to recycling

programs)

Vancouver1996

Nearby City(Seattle)

Target forResidential

Project

CurrentVancouver

Goal

00 10 30 50 70 90 110 130 150

Organic waste processed within neighbourhood (kg /person year)

Best City inCanada(Guelph ,Ontario)

NearbyDemonstrationProgram (Kent-

AggasizMountain)

GreaterVancouverRegional

District 1996

Vancouver 1990

Target forResidential

Project

using existing data sources. Tremendous amounts of data exist in the tax assessment records, utility records, GIS files and weather files. Most of it never used to assist in planning work. Once a community database is organised, it can be used with modelling and aggregation tools to profile the performance of the city in all indicator areas. A web-based version of such a database is now under development for the Fraser Valley Region, next to Vancouver. The database is designed for easy updates and additions. Thus it should provide planners and public with regular feedback on performance of specific neighbourhoods, or the city and region as a whole. An example of solid waste indicators, generated from such a database, is shown opposite.

A Pattern Language Good planning practice requires that researchers investigate patterns in the landscape and culture. Designers can then use the patterns as themes for urban renewal and growth. Eco-city planning expands the search for patterns to include the natural ecosystems, and their relationship with human settlements. Why is the city located on a flood plain or wetland, instead of on a hillside? Why did the traditional architecture use large roof overhangs? How has the river been affected by the industrial history, and what kind of riparian ecosystem might be recreated in a rehabilitated river? It is also worthwhile to look at the successful natural ecosystems in the area for models and patterns that can influence urban form and function. How high are the highest trees in the area? – and is this therefore an appropriate height limit for typical buildings? What kinds of local plants and animals work well together? – and is it possible to use a similar combination of species and shapes for creating green spaces and cityscapes?

3. Stage III: Methods for Design Planning and design is a creative process that involves analysing a lot of information, experimenting with many options, pursuing hunches, looking for new patterns and ultimately proposing a concept which appears to satisfy the program. Creating eco -city designs follows the same design process but can benefit from a number of new design techniques and strategies.

Target Setting

One of the most effective design tools for creating eco -cities is target-setting. Targets are intended to be challenging, but feasible performance goals for the concept plan. They are directions, not standards, and not all targets need by achieved.


Targets are not easily accepted by designers, because they limit freedom and impose an awkward set of numbers on top of a process that is largely conceptual and intuitive. However targets are probably worth the trouble. For example the City of Vancouver established a set of targets in 1998, with assistance from the author, that were used to guide a development plan for a new downtown community. The City of Vancouver’s targets are shown on the following page. Once the design team had committed to targets, the result was a much greater level of creativity and effort than would otherwise occur. The planners and architects confessed that the targets caused them to explore environmental design concepts far more thoroughly, especially in the areas where targets were challenging, such as water conservation, sewage treatment and energy supply systems. Research into the impact of targets on the design process confirms this conclusion.x The targets force designers to break habits, and think about completely new approaches. They are also a means of efficient management within a large team – similar to ‘results oriented’ management, or ‘management by objectives’. They help designers concentrate on the priority areas. And finally, ambitious targets help a city to create a powerful new public image that can be a source of pride, and a competitive advantage over other cities.

Concept engineering

Concept engineering refers to the broad thinking required to explore technical options for providing urban services. Concept e ngineering is especially important to eco -city planning, since the ‘off-the-shelf’ solutions are no longer desirable. Engineers must look for elegant solutions that achieve synergy amongst a variety of goals. At the same time, they must consider adaptabil ity, and the possibility of diverse technologies for meeting the same need. In eco-city planning, there is no “best” application, but rather an adaptable approach that can respond to environmental surprises. This type fo concept engineering is not easy for most engineers, who by nature and training tend to be cautious, and reductionist. A number of concepts and tools are worth describing, as a means of encouraging engineers to participate. Plan for integrated systems : Concept engineering can benefit from looking for opportunities to integrate elements of the city. Stable natural ecologies are highly integrated systems. If our built environment is to become sustainable, it too will tend towards complexity and integration. Integration can occur between the end-use demands, like a low-flush toilet) , and the supply infrastructure, like water reservoirs. Integration occurs between technologies within buildings; for example energy used for lighting also contributes significantly to space heating. Integration occurs between sectors, for example the location and design of housing influences the transportation system. Integration also occurs between different resources. For example, one of the biggest energy sources in some communities is the energy used to pump water; and therefore water consumption is linked to energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, electricity costs and power generation requirements. A good place to begin concept engineering therefore, is to consider how further integration might produce better design concepts.


Leapfrog over outdated technology Conceptual breakthroughs are possible today that allow cities to leapfrog outdated technology, while saving costs, improving the environment and enhancing the quality of life. For example : ? ? A city chooses to cancel plans for telephone and cable networks using poles,

pipes and wires. Instead the area is serviced using an advanced wireless communications systems. The result is capital cost savings, reduced environmental impact, and much more rapid access to technology.

? ? A city chooses to cancel plans for a centralised mechanical sewage treatment plant; instead develops on-site, passive filtration for modules of new buildings. The result is lower capital costs, no need for a piped system, no impact on the river, and the creation of many water re-use opportunities for the treated effluent, including: toilet flushing, irrigation in community gardens, localised water amenities like ponds and canals, and water for industrial processes.

Many such solutions are intimately related to decisions about urban form, open space and land use. Thus concept engineering for all urban services may be sometimes be a primary consideration in the design process.


EXAMPLE OF ENVIRONMENTAL TARGETS (Vancouver, S.E. False Creek) CATEGOR

Y GOAL OBJECTIVE INDICATOR & TARGET

SOLID WASTE

1. Maximize the diversion of all wastes from disposal

1. Reduce and manage the generation of neighbourhood waste

200 Kg / person / year (Per capita waste disposal) 80 kg / person / year (Organic waste produced and processed within

SEFC)

TRANS-PORT.

2. Minimize the need to travel outside the neighbourhood for basic needs

2. Increase proximity of housing to key activity centres

100% of dwelling units (Percentage within 350m of basic shopping needs and personal services)

3. Increase pedestrian, bicycle and transit amenities within the neighbourhood

60% of street area (Percentage that is dedicated to walking, cycling, and transit uses)

3. Promote a regional balance of jobs and housing

4. Increase the match of housing types and affordability to needs of workers in major regional employment centres

30% of dwelling units (Percentage that are affordable, relative to the income distribution and family size of those working in the downtown

core and Broadway corridor)

4. Provide attractive alternatives to automobile travel for trips outside the neighbourhood

5. Increase the convenience of public transit

100% of residential stock (Percentage within 350m of transit service)

ENERGY

5. Maximize sustainable and efficient us e of energy resources

6. Reduce non-renewable energy consumption

288 kWh/m2/year (Non-renewable energy used by Multi-unit Residential Buildings)

284 kWh/m2/year (Non-renewable energy used by Office Buildings)

7. Increase neighbourhood generation of renewable energy

5% of energy consumption (Renewable energy generated within Southeast False Creek)

8. Increase the diversity of energy sources used in SEFC

90% of all buildings (Percentage of buildings connected to a District Energy System)

6. Minimize need to expand energy infrastructure

9. Reduce peak loads placed upon energy infrastructure

33 W/m2 (Peak electrical power demand for buildings)

AIR

EMISSION

7. Minimize harmful emissions in the air

10. Reduce concentrations of ground level ozone (smog)

3392 km/year (Automobile kilometers traveled by residents of SEFC)

11. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 1498 kg (CO2 emissions from energy used for transportation)

12. Reduce chemical and biological contaminant emissions indoors

25% of dwelling unit (Percentage of buildings designed and built with basic features that minimize indoor pollutant levels)

SOIL

8. Minimize the health and environmental risks from contaminated soils

13. Increase the comprehensiveness of soil remediation options analyses

Minimum seven (Number of key strategies included in a Soils Options Analysis)

9. Maximize the productivity of local soil

14. Increase soil productivity

0 kg (Quantity of leaves and organic debris transported from Southeast False Creek)

12.5% of produce consumed (Amount of produce grown within

Southeast False Creek neighbourhood)

WATER 10. Maximize the efficient use

of fresh water 15. Increase the efficient use of

municipal water indoors and outdoors

100 litres / person / day (Average residential municipal potable water use)

11. Minimize water pollution 16. Reduce / manage surface run-off flows

54% (Average imperviousness of the total site area)

12. Minimize need to expand existing water infrastructure

17. Reduce loadings and flows to Wastewater Treatment Plants

25% (Percentage of sewage treated within SEFC

GREEN SPACES

13. Maximize site biodiversity 18. Increase the quality and quantity of habitat provided for a range of appropriate species

Min. 30 (Number of bird species surveyed in SEFC)

60% (Amount of open space with significant habitat value)

14. Maximize vegetative cover and biological productivity

19. Increase vegetative cover on the site

25% (Percentage of total neighbourhood roof area designed to carry plant life)

15. Maximize restoration of aquatic environments

20. Increase quality and availability of marine and foreshores habitats

80% of foreshore (Percentage with habitat value)

21. Increase the presence of naturalized freshwater ecosystems

Daylight Columbia Creek (Daylighting of stream courses)

BUILDING

16. Optimize street layout and building placement

22. Increase appropriate siting of buildings to contribute to community energy efficiency

75% (Percentage of dwelling units and commercial spaces with good solar orientation)

17. Maximize the efficient use of material resources

23. Increase the useful life of buildings and materials

30% (Percentage use of salvaged and / or recycled materials, components, systems)


Analyse the end-uses at finer scales Increasingly it is possible to change the nature of city infrastructure and urban form by addressing building scale technology. Radical changes in housing design such as autonomous housing, or green housing, or work -at-home housing, or co-housing or flexible housing, can impact transit design, parks and green space, potential for district energy, demand for community centres and so on. Eco-city designs must therefore include finer scale worked-out examples as part of urban master plans, and analyse their relationship to the larger features of the city plan.

Minimise risk of technical failures A number of techniques may be used to facilitate the acceptance of unfamiliar technologies that may be proposed as part of the design concept. The basic strategy is to reduce the perceived risk, by:

1. Including pilot tests, so that significant changes are introduced in stages, and are carefully evaluated befo re widespread adoption.

2. Including contingency plans for new systems, that clearly outline the approach to resolving failures

3. Use of precedents, well documented, that ensure nothing is planned that has not been proven to work well in another location.

Consider Decentralized Systems Eco-cities can often benefit from adopting decentralised systems for urban services. The large centralised grids for electricity, gas, water, drainage and communications are likely to be replaced during the 21st century, with distributed systems that will be more cost effective, adaptable and resource -efficient. A decentralised infrastructure often presents opportunities for piggybacking investments, and re-using resources. The widespread success of open, on-site storm water management systems illustrates well the advantages. Capital costs of open systems are about 30% less than conventional curb and gutter and piped systems. At the same time the city benefits in multiple ways from the added green space and water amenities.

Scenario Planning and Capacity Analysis

Tools for scenario planning are evolving but have not been used extensively for eco-city planning. Most such tools are GIS and database software applicationsxi that include layers of information on resource use and associated emissions. These types of tools can be referred to as urban Forecasting Information Systems (FIS). The underlying purpose of an Urban FIS is to enable designers and planners to estimate the direct and indirect performance of buildings at varying spatial scales and in a variety of futures. This is accomplished through enabling the generation and comparison of any number of urban development scenarios, complete with different building design options. For example, imagine a designer who wish es to minimise the negative impacts of energy emissions over the lifecycle of a housing development. Different design scenarios occur by adding more or less energy-efficient envelopes, or by on-site use of renewable energies, or by incorporating work-at-home facilities. Different futures might include a change in economic conditions like the imposition of carbon taxes, a change in demographics like an influx of immigrant families, or a change in the surrounding infrastructure like the extension of a light rapid transit system. Since all of these futures are plausible, and since they are also outside of the control of the designer, the object is to use the FIS to identify the design scenario which performs best in the largest number of ‘plausible’ futures. Without


FIS, such planning is impossibly expensive and time consuming. With FIS, it becomes possible to creatively explore the relative performance of different scenarios, and to use this feedback to optimise the design objectives. Unlike two-dimensional GIS, Urban FIS is designed to create scenarios and present data in “four” dimensions. If the first two dimensions are location, then the third dimension is the dynamic performance of the objects (roads, buildings, treatment plants), and the fourth dime nsion is the performance of these objects at different points in time. The next threshold in planning technology is the creation of a bottom-up urban FIS model that can use a community database to predict in real time the actual costs, resource consumption, and emissions associated with development plans. Essentially the model of simulates the interaction of these elements, and aggregates the net impacts on resource use, costs and emissions. This means capturing dynamic relationships between sectors, between resources, and between supply and demand systems. Models of this type developed by the author have proved capable of predicting resource consumption and impacts with a confidence of + 10%, for specific urban developments, or whole communities. Unfortunately the current state of the art does not provide planners or designers with access to a multi-resource, multi-sector model. Instead what has been occurring is a slow evolution towards such a model, as a wide variety of more specific applications are used for design and planning purposes.

Full Cost Accounting

Full cost accounting (FCA) is a technique for assigning all costs and benefits, both internal and external, to all parties associated with a proposed development strategy. The internal costs are those for which there is a direct expenditure; the external costs are the social costs borne by third parties and/or society. FCA is a technique to help accountants think ecologically. It has been applied by a number of cities – with limited success - in an effort to create a simple and persuasive economic justification for more sustainable investments. An important benefit of FCA is that it provides a mechanism for allocating costs on a fair and equitable basis by identifying subsidies and by reducing or eliminating inappropriate subsidies. Subsidies can occur at any level of accounting analysis and largely depend on who is paying the costs and who is receiving the benefits. FCA is typically compared with two other levels of accounting: 1. The first level is conventional accounting, which examines direct and indirect

financial costs as well as “recognised” contingent costs. 2. Total Cost Assessment (TCA) expands the analysis to include a broader

range of direct, indirect, contingent and less quantifiable costs. For example, a city engineering department may choose to save costs by purchasing less efficient and less costly aerators for sewage treatment. However from a TCA perspective the savings are false, since another department will have to pay extra costs in order to operate the aerators over the next 15 years.

FCA is, by comparison, the most broad form of accounting, because it expands the analysis to include social costs borne by other groups for which there is no direct transfer of funds.


Policies for Encouraging Lean and Mean Management

1. Focus on facilities communities and ecosystems

2. Emphasise multi-media, multi-stressor solutions

3. Base standards on required performance, not design

4. Emphasise continuous improvement, not bright-line fixed compliance

5. Expand the use of measurement and feedback

6. Increase community involvement in setting goals and evaluating progress

7. Provide different levels o regulation for different levels of performance

8. Use fiscal tools and market incentives whenever possible

9. Regulate at the lowest jurisdiction possible; assign responsibilities to the jurisdiction best able to carry them out

10. Concurrent and coherent policies

Directand

IndirectFinancial Costs

"Recognized" Contingent Costs

A Broader Range of Direct, Indirect Contingent and Less Quantifiable Costs

External Social Costs Borne by Society

Conventional Accounting

Total CostAssessment

Full Cost Accounting

The benefits of FCA and TCA for eco -city plans are often limited. It is rarely possible to monetarise the external costs in an acceptable manner, and thus the benefit cost equations do not change. Instead FCA simply becomes a formal procedure for listing all of the indirect and external costs, and the payers, associated with specific urban design choices. Such lists are useful for discussion. However they may be less effective than other tools, such as identification of indicators and targets for the costs of greatest concern.

4. Stage IV: Methods for Implementation Implementing eco-city plans is a very large subject area, with many policy tools and some excellent articles and booksxii. For example, J. Atcheson, of the USDOE, has established 10 excellent principlesxiii for designing environmental regulations in the 21st century, as shown opposite. One method for implementing eco-city policies that has proven especially effective in the author’s experience, is to create a set of Green Building Guidelines:

Green Building Design Guidelines

Very few cities have specific regulations and guidelines that address the overall environmental performance of buildings, despite the major impact of building design on urban infrastructure and the quality of the environment. Without a set of guidelines, it is probably impossible to achieve only half the targets in a typical eco-city plan. Guidelines can be applied directly to all public sector projects. They can also be enforced in the private sector as building by-laws. More commonly the guidelines become part of a incentives package, wherein special benefits are conferred to developers who comply. It is also possible to implement


Example of Green Building Guideline for Sanata Monica

a revenue-neutral fund, that collects money from developers that fail to implement the guidelines, and distributes funds to those who do. Guidelines can cover a broad range of topics and can address either the development planning process, or the building design process. A recent publication by Sheltair Group for the City of Santa Monica contained 94 separate guidelines for green buildings, and included everything from the site and form of buildings, to energy control systems. Each guideline contains schematics, references, technical guidance and a rating system. A portion of the Santa Monica guidelines are mandated by law. Another set of guidelines recently prepared by the Sheltair Group, in consort with the Korea Housing Institute and the Canadian government, covered site development issues for Korean suburban development, and included 22 guidelines. Ideally cities should prepare such guidelines for both inner city and suburban developments, and include guidelines for both site development and building design. Experience with implementation of guidelines suggests that they work most effectively when they are objective-based, and linked to a framework of goals and targets. Guidelines also work better if they include performance-based evaluation procedures wherever possible, since this allows developers to adopt innovative approaches as long as they still achieve the same intent. Finally, guidelines can benefit from existing technical programs and rating systems developed by other authorities. By referencing such ‘third party’ standards, it becomes possible to simplify the guidelines, and adds support to larger initiatives that may provide better technical support. For example, a number of cities have implemented higher energy standards for buildings by simply specifying that developers achieve a level of performance 30% or 50% better than the national energy codes for buildings.


Guidelines can sometimes incorporate targets from an eco -city plan. Such ‘action targets’ may need to be more specific, so they can be understood and applied by designers and developers. For example a planning target related to habitat creation, may be to increase the total number of bird species counted in the neighbourhood. This target can be made into action targets by specifying:

? ? percentage of open space on the site with habitat quality, or ? ? Total length of connected green spaces.

Another example target for creating wildlife habitat is for the city to attract spawning fish to the water body adjacent to development sites. This target can also be broken down into action targets:

? ? average percentage impermeability on the site, or ? ? Percentage of the site employing best management practices for storm

water management. In such ways it becomes possible to operationalize the city’s environmental targets during the design and construction stages.

Allowing for Diversity The diversity of the built environment refers to factors like the mix, tenure and age of housing, and the variety ofmaterials and systems used in a given area. These factors influence the resilience and adaptability of the stock to future situations. In a similar fashion to natural ecologies, some degree of redundancy and diversity is important as a means of surviving changes at acceptable costs. A diversity of housing types, for example, may permit a neighbourhood to house people of all ages and incomes, and thereby contribute over time to a healthier and more sustainable environment. The stock is also may capable of resonding to changes in family size, income, ethnicity and lifestyle. Because of the need for some diversity, there is by definition no “best” design for buildings in a region. Even if one design strategy clearly achieves lowest lifecycle costs, it may be necessary to select a higher cost option in the interests of creating diversity. Applying the principle of diversity is problematic because the effect depends upon the scale chosen for measurement. What is diverse within a neighbourhood, for example, may be extremely homogenous at the larger scale of the city. The appropriate scale depends upon how connected and fluid are the effects of concern are. A diversity of housing types at the city scale obviously doesn’t help if the purpose is to create a mix of housing opportunities within an average walking distance.

5. Conclusions This paper has reviewed a variety of new methods and principles for creating eco-cities. It has concluded that whatever methods are selected, it is important to take advantage of opportunities to increase the planning and management capabilities of city planning departments. It is also wise for cities to join campaigns, and collaborate with other eco -city planners. Eco-city planning involves a number changes in emphasis and approach, relative to what is now considered best urban planning practice. In particular, new concepts and software tools can be used to help cities enliven the public process, and develop longer term, ecological visions. The use of a conceptual framework can help guide the public process, and can also guide some of the research efforts by defining specific indicators of concern. Cities need to take more leadership in such technical areas as energy planning, industrial ecology and watershed management. The creation of urban Environmental Management Systems is a difficult undertaking, but one that promises to provide cities with the


data management and feedback systems needed to fully integrate environmental objectives into ongoing city policy-making. The eco-city design process can benefit from a target setting exercise, and from using tools and databases for scenario analysis. Special attention is required by researchers and planners in order to understand capacity constraints, both for the natural and the built environment. New tools are evolving that can assist in this activity. Concept engineering is especially crucial to include in the design process, and may be used to explore opportunities for increasing integration of systems, for leapfrogging outdated technology, for mitigating risk, and for decentralising infrastructure in ways that encourage re -use of resources and multiple use of capital investments. Adaptability and diversity are also important concepts for consideration during urban design and concept engineering. An especially effective strategy for implementing eco-city plans and achieving environmental targets is to create objectives-based Green Guidelines for the design and construction of buildings and urban development sites. Guidelines are required for both the inner city and suburban areas. The adoption of guidelines can benefit from a flexible approach.


i Moffatt, S. Campbel, E. Holland, M. Green Buildings in a Green Context: Specifying Environmental Performance at the Community Scale, Proceeding of the Green Building Challenge, Vancouver, 1999 ii ii International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, 1996, City Hall, Toronto, Canada iii Hawken, P., Natural Step Program, In Context #41, Summer 1995… iv The Potential for District Energy in Metro Toronto , Metro Toronto Works Dept., CANMET NRCan, Ontario Hydro, 1995 v Guide to Watershed Planning and Management, Economic and Engineering Services Inc., for the Association of Washington Cities, et al, 1999 vi Wackernagel, M., Rees, W. Our Ecological Footprint, Reducing Human Impact on the Earth New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, B.C. 1996 vii Quest report viii Sheltair Group, Environmentally Sustainable Development Guidelines for Southeast False Creek, A Policy Development Tool Kit, 1988, for City of Vancouver ix Whistler Environmental Strategy, Resort Municipality of Whistler, September, 1999 x Pagani, Freda PhD Thesis, UBC xi Web pages exist for Smart Places software, from EPRI, and for Index software, from Criterion Planners and Engineers, xii A good reference on policy implementation is Young, M.D. (1992) Sustainable Investment and Resource Use, Equity, Environmental Integrity and Economic Efficiency, Man and the Biosphere Series, xiii Atcheson, J. Management Systems: Getting Lean, Getting Green in the USA , in Environmental Management Systems and Cleaner Production , R. Hillary, 1997, John Riley & Sons

Documents

ECO-City Planning Methods and Tools