REFBC Sustainable Built Environment Initiative – Feb 18 ... Feb 18 Stakeholder Workshop... · ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVE – FEB 18, 2016 STAKEHOLDER WOR KSHOP ... Sustainable Built

REFBC SUSTAINABLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVE – FEB 18, 2016 STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP REPORT Accelerating Progress Towards a Sustainable Built Environment

Prepared by: For:

Revised May 16, 2016

Page 2 of 35

Sustainable Built Environment Stakeholder Workshop: REPORT

[page intentionally blank]

Page 3 of 35


TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 4

WORKSHOP CONTEXT AND OVERVIEW ................................................................................. 6

ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................................................ 6

RESULTS .................................................................................................................................... 7

CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS ............................................................................................ 17

APPENDIX A: PRELIMINARY PRIORITIES PRESENTED TO PARTICIPANTS ............................ 18

APPENDIX B: PROPOSED COLLABORATION MODEL ............................................................ 27

APPENDIX C: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ..................................................................................... 30

APPENDIX D: SCAN OF EXISTING COLLABORATION THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT IN BC ...... 33

Page 4 of 35


SUMMARY

Communities of all sizes have a role to play in shaping a sustainable future for our province. That’s why The Real Estate Foundation of BC (REFBC) has identified the built environment as a priority area for research and grant-making. Building on research conducted in 20151 and as part of its “Sustainable Built Environment Initiative”, REFBC held a stakeholder workshop on February 18, 2016 to answer the question “How can we accelerate progress of the sustainable built environment movement?” by

• developing a deeper shared understanding of this problem and possible solutions, • deciding where to focus efforts, • exploring a common foundation for moving forward collaboratively, and • beginning to identify partners who want to join/lead this effort with REFBC.

The workshop was attended by 72 people from 57 organizations and consisted of two key activities:

1) reviewing preliminary priorities for action; and 2) exploring a proposed model for cross-sectoral collaboration.2

Scope: The project scope is BC wide. For the purposes of REFBC’s research and grant-making, the built environment includes:

• Integrated communities, • Housing, • Buildings, infrastructure and energy, and • Transportation.

Priorities for Action: To frame the discussion, participants reviewed a preliminary list of eleven priorities for interventions in the Built Environment. The top five emerging from the workshop were:

• Align the Financial Rules of the System with Sustainability Objectives; • Support and Coordinate Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and others; • Secure consistent senior government funding; • Build Public Awareness of and Support for the Sustainable Built Environment; • Support Smart Growth principles through improved integration of transportation and land use

planning, regulation and implementation to better support sustainable communities.

1 http://www.refbc.com/projects/2015/built-environment-bc 2 The Sustainable Built Environment Initiative examined four sectors: 1) Housing 2) Energy and Infrastructure 3) Transportation and 4) Integrated Communities.

Page 5 of 35


Collaboration Proposal: Workshop participants were also presented with a proposal for a framework of cross-sectoral collaboration based on research conducted by Modus as part of the SBE Initiative. The proposed collaboration framework consists of two components:

1. Platform for Collaboration: A loose collaboration, led by a committed, funded organization (this could but does not need to be REFBC). Its purposes would be to:

o provide a secure home and leadership for the collaborative initiative o create a venue for gradually increasing the level of collaboration o catalyze growing public understanding and support for change

2. Linked Collective Impact Initiatives: A series of effective, coordinated, focused “Collective

Impact” initiatives that link to and function together to be more than the sum of their parts.

The discussion of the collaboration proposal was wide-ranging. Participants wholeheartedly (and unanimously) endorsed the need for a collaborative organization or network and virtually all of them expressed interest in participating. In many cases, comments reinforced the initial proposal and/or added detail and nuance to it. The discussion also surfaced a number of good recommendations for refinement and implementation, and identified a number of useful models and case studies to draw from. The main recommendations for refinement were:

• Invest in the convening process • Natural conveners should lead the effort • Use a whole systems approach • Involve various funder(s) and ask them to provide support for capacity-building • Involve a diverse set of participants, including decision-makers/influencers, reflecting the built

environment system • Have a strong backbone organization • Governance of the collaborative should provide strong coordination, connection, momentum-

building and link between general and specific (sectors or geographies) • Incorporate strong monitoring and reporting to demonstrate success • Balance breadth and depth: there is interest in looking at broad issues over the long term, but

need to have focus on defined, actionable, measurable projects

In addition, participants suggested that REFBC could be a good candidate as a convener, and that this need not mean it would also be the leader long-term: leadership can emerge from the convening process. REFBC could also provide funding for research and provide the initial backbone organization and resources.

Page 6 of 35


WORKSHOP CONTEXT AND OVERVIEW

In 2015, the Real Estate Foundation of BC (REFBC) launched the “Sustainable Built Environment” initiative to understand progress to date and public perceptions, and to explore a possible role for REFBC in encouraging the changes needed to achieve sustainability in the built environment in BC. The research, conducted as Phase 1 of the initiative3, found that significant progress has been made in policy, and there were a few great success stories on the ground, but that despite significant effort and attention by many organizations over the last 20-30 years, BC’s built environment itself is generally not becoming more sustainable. While some public values align with sustainable built environment principles, there is some confusion about what sustainability means for the built environment and whether that is desirable, and public opinion is shaped in part by the terms used to describe a sustainable built environment.

Given these results, REFBC continued its work into a second phase of work, focused on shifting from policy to action. The second phase involves setting priorities, exploring First Nations work further, and exploring collaboration amongst many different built environment stakeholders. As part of this work, REFBC hosted a workshop on Feb 18, 2016 with interested organizations to communicate research findings, and consult stakeholders on appropriate priorities and a proposed collaboration model.

The focus of the workshop was to answer the question “How can we accelerate progress of the sustainable built environment movement?” by:

• developing a deeper shared understanding of this problem and possible solutions, • deciding where to focus efforts, • exploring a common foundation for moving forward collaboratively, and • beginning to identify partners who want to join/lead this effort with REFBC.

ACTIVITIES

The workshop was attended by 72 people from 57 organizations interested in BC’s sustainable built environment, with representatives at tables from each of four key sectors: housing (2 tables); integrated communities (3 tables); buildings, infrastructure and energy (3 tables); and transportation (1 table).

The workshop agenda was:

1. Introduction (10 mins) 2. Phase 1 Research Approach and Results (20 minutes, presentation + Q&A) 3. Explore Preliminary Priorities (60 minutes, table discussions by sector and report-back) 4. Break (15 minutes) 5. Collaboration and Movement Research Summary (10 minutes)

3 http://www.refbc.com/projects/2015/built-environment-bc

http://www.refbc.com/projects/2015/built-environment-bc

Page 7 of 35


6. Discuss Collaboration Proposal (60 minutes, table discussions (mixed sectors) and plenary discussion)

7. Closing remarks (5 minutes)

To explore preliminary priorities, participants broke into groups of approximately eight people. They first reviewed a list of the priorities and discussed them. They were then asked to individually select their own top three priorities, and then to compile them as a group to give the group’s top three for their sector. These were shared and then discussed with other groups in a plenary session.

The priorities are discussed in the ‘results’ section below and listed in Appendix A.

To explore collaboration, a proposed collaboration model was presented to participants, who then discussed it and answered the questions about it:

• Do you see the need for this type of collaboration? • Does this seem like an effective structure to have the impact we’re hoping to have? • What is needed to make the proposed structure a success? • Would your organization be interested in collaborating in a structure like this? • Where do you see you or your organization fitting in?

The proposed collaboration model is described in Appendix B.

A follow-up survey was sent to participants after the session to request feedback about the session and to ask for further comments. Comments received via this survey are integrated with those received at the workshop.

RESULTS

The following presents a summary of results. As a summary, it represents the most salient results, compiled from more detailed raw data. Generally, comments were captured directly in the summary if they were repeated by participants, and if they were particularly relevant to REFBC’s guiding questions for the session.

PRIORITIES

Details on the priorities considered by participants are in Appendix A. Their top priorities based on table responses were:

• SI.1 “Align the Financial Rules of the System with Sustainability Objectives” – priority for all sectors.

• SI.2 “Support and Coordinate Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and others“ – priority for integrated communities, housing, and buildings-infrastructure-energy,

Page 8 of 35


• SI.3 “Secure consistent senior government funding” – priority for housing, buildings-infrastructure-energy and transportation.

• SI.5 “Build Public Awareness of and Support for the Sustainable Built Environment” – priority for integrated communities, housing and buildings-infrastructure-energy.

• TI.6 “Support Smart Growth principles through improved integration of transportation and land use planning, regulation and implementation to better support sustainable communities” – priority for housing and transportation

Table 1 summarizes the raw voting, one vote per table. There were three Buildings, Infrastructure, and Energy tables, two Housing tables, one Transportation table, and three Integrated Communities tables. The top priorities were based on a combination of total votes, weighted votes (to correct the imbalance in representation by sector) and number of sectors with strong interest (at least 2 or more).

Table 1: Priorities Voting Results

Sectors (# of tables)

Interventions to be Prioritized TOTAL Buildings, Infrastructure and Energy (3)

Housing (2)

Transportation (1)

Integrated Communities (3)

Cros

s-Se

ctor

al In

terv

enti

ons

SI.1: Align the Financial Rules of the System with Sustainability Objectives

7 3 2 1 1

SI.2: Support and Coordinate Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and others

5 1 1 3

SI.3: Secure Consistent Senior Government Funding for Top Sustainability Priorities

3 1 1 1

SI.4: Scale Up Sustainable Practice 3 3

SI.5: Build Public Awareness of and Support for the Sustainable Built Environment

6 2 2 2

Page 9 of 35


Sectors (# of tables)

Interventions to be Prioritized TOTAL Buildings, Infrastructure and Energy (3)

Housing (2)

Transportation (1)

Integrated Communities (3)

Sect

or-S

peci

fic In

terv

enti

ons

TI.1: Strengthen regional planning (Integrated Communities)

3 3

TI.2: Improve management of infrastructure assets, especially the application of lifecycle costing, and ideally the application of triple-bottom line or full-cost accounting (Buildings and Infrastructure):

TI.3: Radically improve market penetration of all green retrofits (Buildings and Infrastructure)

TI.4: Gradually and intentionally re-balance funding from roads and motor vehicles towards transit and active transportation (Transportation)

TI.5: Increase market penetration of medium-density, small-scale, and affordable housing forms that are in keeping with comfortable community character (Housing, Integrated Communities)

1 1

TI.6: Support Smart Growth principles through improved integration of transportation and land use planning, regulation and implementation to better support sustainable communities. (Integrated Communities and Transportation)

2 1 1

NOTE: The priorities handout was printed double-sided, and most votes were for the items on the front side of the handout, so while it is not possible to verify this, the priorities on the front side may have been over-weighted in voting.

Page 10 of 35


Some groups also noted the rationale for their choices or made related comments, and post-workshop comments also provided more useful guidance. This is summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Summary of Rationale for and Comments About Priorities

Interventions to be Prioritized Rationale and Comments

Cros

s-Se

ctor

al In

terv

enti

ons


• Foundational • Account for value nature provides • Clear business case with carbon pricing • Alternative forms of land tenure, taxation could help


• Make sure this really does include others: NGOs are not enough, needs to include diverse organizations

• Mobilize capacity rather than have them in competition • Build community servicing assets • Need a broad coalition to move policy and practice • Ensure broad outreach and participation, diversity


• Address capacity challenges re. transportation in small urban centers and towns

SI.4: Scale Up Sustainable Practice • Related to SI.1 and SI.5 • Don’t know how to achieve transferability and scalability


• Need focus on values and language to get public buy-in • Create pressure to reduce public and professional acceptance

of status quo buildings • Counter resistance to density • Make it fun, use experiential learning • Key to getting political support • Expand the definition of “sustainable” to include the 4 R’s

(Restorative, regenerative, revitalizing, reconciliation.)

Sect

or-S

peci

fic In

terv

enti

ons TI.1: Strengthen regional planning (Integrated

Communities) • Scale requires effective regional response • Lots of targeted initiatives will fall out of regional planning • Reconciliation (not just with First Nations but also to our

relationship to the earth) is central to this work


Page 11 of 35


Interventions to be Prioritized Rationale and Comments

TI.3: Radically improve market penetration of all green retrofits (Buildings and Infrastructure)

• Don’t neglect the new construction sector, which drives innovation and learning that are important to renovation and retrofit

TI.4: Gradually and intentionally re-balance funding from roads and motor vehicles towards transit and active transportation (Transportation)

TI.5: Increase market penetration of medium-density, small-scale, and affordable housing forms that are in keeping with comfortable community character (Housing, Integrated Communities)

TI.6: Support Smart Growth principles through improved integration of transportation and land use planning, regulation and implementation to better support sustainable communities. (Integrated Communities and Transportation)

• Sustainable transportation is about land use and location choice

Other • Regulatory change should also be considered as a priority – in the buildings sector ongoing regulatory efforts are fundamental to enabling change

In the plenary session following table discussions, participants made observations about the results and added some cross-cutting comments; following the session, some participants also sent comments by email or via a participant evaluation form. Additional comments included:

• There has been a huge culture shift in the last few years around transportation (transit, cycling), especially with the younger generation, but the transportation infrastructure is falling behind.

• Focus on transportation supply first, then pricing, not the other way around. • Language: the word sustainable (as in SBE) not being enough, going far enough… It’s not enough

not to just do no harm, but need to improve the system. Sustainability needs to consider the 4R’s: Restorative, regenerative, revitalizing, reconciliation.

• Thinking strategically about how you move the needle; building capacity from the bottom up. • Small communities are really struggling, lack the tax base to do anything – need to help small

communities come up to the same level as larger ones • Don’t forget social dimension/Equity, no one element of society should bare the biggest burden • Metrics/Data, missing regional data and measurement also a priority • Emphasize and unbundle green space

Page 12 of 35


• Stronger role for the Province re: setting legal perk measures • What's missing— how to get Aboriginal voice around BE at the table. Also, how to indigenize

public spaces/kiosks for sharing history and stories of FN in public spaces • REFBC looking at the Truth & Reconciliation Report for informing ways to incorporate findings

in our BE work. • It is not apparent how the issue of cultural diversity / ethnicity / voice is captured in the

proposed recommendations, specifically in relation to the needs of urban and rural indigenous people in BC.

• Mobilizing the private sector in a collaborative way with government and NGOs is critical • Bringing senior government to the table to work with local experts and organizations is a good

role for REFBC • The priorities are good / appropriate • Vulnerable populations whose priorities are basic needs like food and housing were not

engaged; this may have skewed priorities vs. green buildings for example One table recommended that as a next step in exploring possible First Nations needs, REFBC should review the Truth and Reconciliation report and link it to SBE interventions.

PROPOSED COLLABORATION FRAMEWORK

An initial concept for a collaboration model was proposed to workshop participants. It consisted of a “platform for collaboration” – a loose collaboration, led by a committed, funded organization – which supports “linked collective impact initiatives” - a series of effective, coordinated, focused “Collective Impact” initiatives situated within the larger system and process, that explicitly link to and function together. The platform for collaboration would provide central leadership, coordination, capacity-building, sustainability reporting, and public communication. The initiatives would be chosen based on opportunity, leadership, and shared vision, and would ideally be multi-objective and/or cross-sectoral. Details are provided in Appendix B.

The discussion of the collaboration proposal was wide-ranging. Participants wholeheartedly endorsed the need for collaboration and virtually all of them expressed interest in participating. In many cases, comments reflected the initial proposal and/or added detail and nuance to it. The discussion also surfaced a number of good recommendations for refinement and implementation, and identified a number of useful models and case studies to draw from.

Table 3 summarizes and groups participant comments as recommendations. It reflects comments received via survey, following the workshop.

Table 3: Collaboration Findings

Collaboration Questions Summary of Responses • Do you see the need for

this kind of collaboration?

• Yes • More specifics are needed now, so we can understand more clearly what it is we

are supporting

Page 13 of 35


Collaboration Questions Summary of Responses • Does this seem like an

effective structure to have the impact we’re hoping to have?

• What is needed to make the proposed structure a success?

Natural conveners should lead

• Other organizations with similar mandate/structure to REFBC? PICS Conveners

Various funder(s) should be involved, at least providing support for capacity-building

• Look to McConnell Foundation for capacity-building grant programs • Capacity – building support is very helpful + useful grant linked to building

coalition + collaborative • Battery Association (?)

A diverse set of participants, including decision-makers/influencers, should be involved, reflecting the built environment system

• More than one person from each org involved • Populate with decision makers/influencers; • Need a mix – gov’t, industry + NGO w/ common vision that can move forward • Broad participation – feeling heard (gender, age, ethnicity, SES) • This is particularly useful for NGOs (overlap redundancies, struggle to

coordinate, e.g. CLP) • Participants should include: Fraser Basin Council, Partnership for water

sustainability, Environmental Law Centre (UVic), Dialog, Metro Vancouver, Pembina

• Pembina keen to be a part of platform + linked initiatives • Community Energy Association already works in collaborative way in part

because energy crosses all discussions groups convened today. We can bring energy + GHG perspective to all groups.

Use a whole systems approach

• Need for whole systems-approach • Systems mapping so helpful + then specific focus areas should be shared with

leadership that reports back to larger SBE network

Have a strong backbone, but be wary of creating competition for funding

• An anchor, or backbone organization (from Collective Impact research) • Central leadership could be good – can’t please/involve everyone • Single, central leader (esp. funder e.g. REFBC) could create false hierarchy &

competition for $

Incorporate strong monitoring and reporting to demonstrate success

• Recording & monitoring is key • Assess the mandates, goals and actions of each organization to get specific

measurables

Page 14 of 35


Collaboration Questions Summary of Responses • Good measurement framework for process and those on the ground • Evidence:

• That collaboration is working/functioning • That the SBE is improving (e.g. metrics, measured course corrections)

• Demonstrate and community early successes – stories are good way from engaging the public

Governance should provide strong coordination, connection, momentum-building and link between general and specific (sectors or geographies)

• Form follows function: Strategic initiatives < - - > collaborative platform • Interaction of loose + formal collective impact • Strong governance & resources to operate • Add secretariat to coordinate the current collaborative initiatives; this vehicle is

lacking • Someone to maintain momentum + connect groups on projects, ensuring

funding + resources for projects • Define specific priorities to get engaged participants (need a common goal) • Design, facilitation + engagement must be done independently, impartially • Define decide and evaluate the equity and equality of voice • Consider a charter or other mechanism to sustain collaboration and

communication • How do you put sectors & geographies to share knowledge AND be effective? • For collective impact initiatives, use a private sector approach to convening a

“project team” in order to produce a “product” in order to fulfill the objective of the “contract”.

• Overarching approach within them able to focus on particular topics/issues + bring in specific experts + capacity for each issue. Can involve joint funding.

• Need commitment by partners of time and resources.

Balance breadth and depth: there is interest in forming a foundation to look at broad issues, but need to have focus on defined, actionable, measurable projects

• Balancing act for the design process: how can we restrict focus so that we can have breadth and depth and creativity in the process

• Work both within sectors and cross-sectorally • Connect leadership and collective groups; • Leadership rather than being loose has to be tight and have continuity and

commitments away from the table, a sound terms of reference, and design/engagement/facilitation has to be impartial and safe place for consensus process

• Strong sentiment to not be talk fest and has to build on what’s already been done

• Focus: • + can set decision makers in room + prepare action institutional

Page 15 of 35


Collaboration Questions Summary of Responses • - can be siloed • thought leader forum and institutional change

• Breadth: • + innovative cross-silo ideas • - too general to set institutional decision makers • labs and grassroots action • Build collaboration focused on a specific barrier or gap

Invest in the convening process:

• Scale leadership structure; start as convener • Need an anchor to galvanize and convene. • Convening will take time. Key success factors:

• keeping on top of what is and is not working and making course corrections. Need sustainability metrics to help guide these decisions.

• Test theory on the ground…is this really a movement (maybe shouldn’t be)? Is the idea (SBE) too big for collaboration?

• Establishing common ground & visioning what success looks like. Build this on understanding of gaps and barriers being addressed by collaborating.

• Need clear outcomes for individual organizations involved in collaboration.

• Many organizations already have mandate to work collaboratively. They need to have clarity around their roles, resources available/required, etc.

• Organic growth around a common vision can develop an effective collaborative

• Keep supporting groups that are already collaborating & convene groups – the influencers + influenced. Examples: CEA work, QUEST BC Caucus

• Define function: collaboration is great, but organization mandates are limiting • Steps to build understanding and clarify proposal:

• Follow-up sessions (online/offline/face-to-face) • Develop/use a single framework (e.g. Collective Impact) • Further convening

Other:

• Anticipate the need to allow time for systems change & gradual alignment • If cross BC regional approach, different approach in small communities • Resource adequately • Not sure who the audiences are for this overall initiative • Can we inspire a youth component?

REFBC could:

• Commit to being a convener, and then leadership will emerge from there • Provide funding for research

Page 16 of 35


Collaboration Questions Summary of Responses • Provide initial backbone and resources • Start the process and maintain momentum

• Would your organization be interested in collaborating? If so, then how do you see your organization fitting in?

• Virtually all participants supported this kind of collaboration • FBC and QUEST expressed specific interest in helping and/or playing a major

role

• Other notes • Good examples of similar collaboration structures to review include: o Portland smart growth initiative – coalition aimed to achieve 5-6

key priorities; was in place for 20 years then disbanded o QUEST national caucuses o Constellation model for collaborative social change o Forest Stewardship Council o BC Hydro’s Community Energy Manager program o The Amp (Co-location space) o Innoweave o Rental housing index project o Moving in a livable region initiatives o BC Stewardship Centre "Community of practice" for environmental

stewardship – overlaps and useful results http://www.stewardshipcentrebc.ca/portfolio/community-of-practice/

PARTICIPANT FEEDBACK ABOUT THE SESSION

Participants gave the workshop generally good ratings, as shown in the charts below.

Venue and food

Fair Good Excellent

Presentations

Fair Good Excellent

Discussions

Fair Good Excellent

https://stepupbc.ca/sites/default/files/downloadable-material/Constellation-prototype_0.pdf

http://www.stewardshipcentrebc.ca/portfolio/community-of-practice/

http://www.stewardshipcentrebc.ca/portfolio/community-of-practice/

Page 17 of 35


However, while participants recognized that the session was purposefully short to make it easier for people to attend, we consistently heard that the session was too short to allow participants to absorb and properly react to the information and ideas presented, and that the table exercises were too complicated for the time allotted to them. Other comments about the session as a whole included:

• More inclusion on private sector, academia, and the public would have been useful. • Good session • I thoroughly enjoyed the cross-sector discussions

Overall, participants noted a strong enthusiasm for the opportunity to come together at the workshop and have a chance to discuss these big picture, cross sectoral topics with their built environment colleagues.

CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS

The well attended stakeholder workshop validated the built environment research conducted by REFBC in 2015. Five top priorities were identified for accelerating progress towards a more sustainable built environment:

• Align the Financial Rules of the System with Sustainability Objectives; • Support and Coordinate Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and others; • Secure consistent senior government funding; • Build Public Awareness of and Support for the Sustainable Built Environment; • Support Smart Growth principles through improved integration of transportation and land use;

planning, regulation and implementation to better support sustainable communities.

The workshop also demonstrated significant support for the concept of a collaborative network or organization built around the principles of Collective Impact, including a backbone organization and set of linked collective impact initiatives.

Based on these results, it seems that REFBC has support to continue to build the Sustainable Built Environment Initiative by:

1. Reporting back to participants with this report and keeping them informed; 2. Refining and strengthening the proposed collaboration model based on comments from

participants; 3. Examining a suitable governance and leadership structure for a collaborative organization; and 4. Determining sources of funding to resource the initiative.

Many participants (both at the workshop and subsequently) have expressed their appreciation for this opportunity to come together with their built environment colleagues to discuss these important high level, strategic interventions.

Page 18 of 35


APPENDIX A: PRELIMINARY PRIORITIES PRESENTED TO PARTICIPANTS

Phase 1 of the Sustainable Built Environment initiative identified many interventions. To help focus efforts, the project team applied “theories of change” to determine those with the strongest potential for leverage or impact. These “preliminary priorities” included Strategic Interventions (SI) relevant across all sectors, as well as Targeted Initiatives (TI) within a particular sector but with strong cross cutting influence.

A key goal of the workshop was to review these preliminary priorities and further refine where to focus efforts. In the workshop, each sector received a separate handout showing the Strategic Interventions and Targeted Initiatives, along with specific additional interventions for their sub-system (for reference only). These are compiled together in this Appendix.

A) STRATEGIC INTERVENTIONS (SI) – all sectors

Six general strategies for change were identified as priority strategic interventions that could influence positive change across Built Environment systems. They are borne out of the observation that BC generally has good policies and plans in place, but needs to build stronger support from the public and other key players to drive concerted action.


Financial considerations are a powerful shaper of behaviour: individuals and organizations will often shape their behaviour and investments to minimize costs and/or maximize profit. This means that aligning financial tools (taxes, grants, incentives, fees, investments, pricing, etc.) with sustainability objectives can reshape behaviour throughout the system: small interventions like these can have large results. Examples include:

• Align resource pricing with sustainability objectives. Increase carbon price, link water costs to usage, increase electricity prices, and/or use road pricing (balanced with cost reductions elsewhere). This will send more appropriate price signals to the market, encouraging investment in sustainable technology and resource-saving behaviour.

• Expand the use of full-cost, life-cycle accounting, including expansion of costing considerations to include ecological and social services. For example, development approvals could require applicants to include clear anticipated payback periods for costly investment and the anticipated financial obligation a municipality takes on.


NGOs are already effective in many ways, but struggle with two key issues: the increasing focus of funders on project funding (vs. operational funding), and the presence of many organizations with similar, sometimes overlapping mandates. Furthermore, there is little coherent information on progress towards sustainable built environments in BC. Four interventions are recommended to address these:

Page 19 of 35


• Collect and communicate research on sustainability performance. Identify key performance indicators and support an on-going measurement program to help all organizations in the field keep abreast of leading practices and on-the-ground performance.

• Set goals and targets – well articulated goals and targets can be powerful tools of change if decision-makers have the focus and confidence to follow through, apply the necessary resources, and learn and adapt when mistakes are made or targets not reached. In BC it is often not clear where we are trying to get to because there is not a well articulated set of sustainability targets that all organizations can work towards. These goals can help NGOs, business, and government to align their efforts.

• Secure On-Going Funding for NGOs – provide stable, consistent funding for NGO operations, freeing them to lead larger, more complex and/or more effective projects, and to collaborate more effectively. In particular, provide on-going operational funding for coordinated multi-organizational efforts that lead to “collective impact.”

• Collaborate for Change – Closer collaboration, coordination and alignment among NGOs (and with government) promises more effective action. Because Smart Growth and integrated, walkable communities deliver a set of environmental, economic and social benefits, we should be able to build a broad coalition of supporters across many sectors. This would be a non-partisan movement that benefits all BC communities.


Secure Consistent Senior Government Funding – Senior government funding waxes and wanes as different priorities become known. In the case of the built environment, however, it is clear that a substantially higher level of on-going funding is needed in a few key areas if progress is to be made. These include:

• Transit • Infrastructure renewal • Flood protection • Climate adaptation

SI.4: Scale Up Sustainable Practice

Many “green” practices have been proven locally, nationally, and/or internationally but have yet to reach the mainstream in BC. A key issue was the need for practices currently considered “innovative” or “leading” in BC to become common practice – fulfilling one contributor’s vision that sustainable practice is “just the way we do things.”

• Build a province-wide knowledge base of best practices, policies, programs, incentives, and technologies to facilitate knowledge transfer between communities and as a way to measure progress.

• Support projects that incorporate an educational component and drive the learnings into policy and practice via professionals, elected officials, and others. Those that incorporate experiential learning may be particularly effective (see intervention below).

• Support Risk-Taking & Learn from Failures – Innovation and transformative change doesn’t happen without risk-taking but that is usually discouraged in favour of “best practices”. We need

Page 20 of 35


mechanisms that allow for calculated risks and don’t penalize risk- takers, along with a cultural shift in government to value innovation and risk-taking more, with a safe and supported space to document and learn from mistakes.


The public often lack awareness of sustainable practice, or they perceive conflicts between their interests and/or values and practices that support sustainable outcomes, for example, the almost universal negative reaction to the idea of increased residential density. It is important that the public learn how sustainable practice aligns with their values. It is also important that professionals learn how to more closely align sustainable practice with public values in order to build support for new ways of doing things. Building public awareness and support for a sustainable built environment is a major effort that cannot be done by a single organization, but may be supported by better research about values and perceptions, as well as by coordinated communications and education.

• Learn about Values-Practice Alignment – Involve communities in decisions about the built environment, so that the decisions better reflect their values and they learn more about sustainable practice. Research community values in relation to the built environment, identifying where values appear to align and conflict with sustainable practice. Develop a better understanding of the values that drive less sustainable policy and practice, so as to be able to shape communications to address those values.

• Communicate More Effectively – Communication and education are common recommendations; this research recommends specifically to design and deliver communications that effectively reach, engage, and affect audiences. One element of this is to focus on positive multiple benefits, aligned to local values, like job security, community character, happiness, and wellness. Another is to tell stories that communicate emotion and context rather than simply providing information.

• Experiential Learning – Imaginative pilot/demonstration projects can engage the public, professionals and key influencers through experiential learning of the sustainable built environment. Especially useful are creative learning experiences that deepen public and professional understanding of the problem and potential solutions, align with common values and interests, and have a strong communications/education component (see Red House, Green House Text Box).

Page 21 of 35


B) TARGETED INITIATIVES (TI) – Sector Specific

(Referred to as ‘Priority Topics’ in Oct. 2015 Synthesis Report)

Beyond the general “Strategic Interventions”, six “Targeted Initiatives” relating to individual sectors rose to the top in terms of their influence, the size of the gap being addressed, timeliness, and the progress of the sector along the market transformation curve.

TI.1: Strengthen regional planning (Integrated Communities):

Under BC legislation, regional authority is weaker than Provincial or municipal authority. In practice, poor regional coordination has contributed to divergent transportation and land use policy and investment, leapfrog development, and incoherent development patterns. Stronger regional planning would support greater regional alignment with sustainable development patterns. Achieving this alignment may involve a number of interventions, the most obvious of which may be Provincial law reform and improved multi-interest negotiation within regions. Mechanisms to share costs and benefits of development across jurisdictions may also be needed.


Municipalities in BC and across Canada are facing an unprecedented “infrastructure deficit” created by chronic underfunding of maintenance and end-of-life replacements, which has the potential to bankrupt some of them. Lifecycle-based asset management is a proven approach being adopted. Asset Management BC is leading this effort, and REFBC may be well-positioned to help them accelerate resolution of this key issue.

TI.3: Radically improve market penetration of all green retrofits (Buildings and Infrastructure):

Through the new Building Code, LEED, Built Green, and other major initiatives, significant progress has been made on environmental performance of new buildings in BC. However, “deep green” retrofitting older buildings has proven much more challenging, and because older buildings represent much of BC’s building stock, this is a significant gap in the shift to green buildings.

TI.4: Gradually and intentionally re-balance funding from roads and motor vehicles towards transit and active transportation (Transportation):

Funding for roads remains much higher than that for the more efficient modes of moving people: transit, walking and cycling. Transit funding has stagnated while demand and ridership have increased, leading to highly efficient service delivery. Bicycling’s share of funding in most jurisdictions lags their mode share, and bicycle mode share, which is dependent in part on the availability of safe cycling routes (ideally separated from traffic), likely needs additional funding to increase. Given the level of interest in many communities the aging of the Baby Boomer generation, and the efficiency of our transit providers, now is an ideal time to invest more in transit, cycling and walking.

TI.5: Increase market penetration of medium-density, small-scale, and affordable housing forms that are in keeping with comfortable community character (Housing, Integrated Communities):

Page 22 of 35


In many communities, development is focused at either end of the density spectrum: expensive, inefficient single-family houses and large-scale mid- or high-rise towers that are poorly received by communities and poorly governed. The “missing middle” of the housing spectrum is an opportunity to deliver desirable housing in forms that are more acceptable to residents, possibly also at a pace of change that is more comfortable. This may involve a suite of interventions, from understanding public values and interests better to professional education to business model shifts and updated regulations. It could be supported by renewed Smart Growth momentum (see Strategic Interventions)

TI.6: Support Smart Growth principles through improved integration of transportation and land use planning, regulation and implementation to better support sustainable communities. (Integrated Communities and Transportation):

The efforts of the Province, regional governments, and municipalities as well as the development community are often poorly coordinated, especially when linking land use and transportation. Much of the public is now familiar with and value suburban development patterns, but don’t recognize the downsides and has little experience living in more walkable communities. A coordinated effort is needed to create stronger policy, planning, and project alignment and to help the public understand the value of shifting to the more sustainable patterns of use envisioned through Smart Growth. (Integrated Communities and Transportation)

C) SPECIFIC ADDITIONAL INTERVENTIONS BY SECTOR

The following specific interventions for each sector were also included in the participants’ packages of information. However, we didn’t try to incorporate these into the overall prioritization exercise; they were only provided for reference.

BUILDINGS, INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENERGY

• Reduce or eliminate split incentives: Support adoption of Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing, and research and promote the use of other tools to eliminate the split incentive between developers and buyers, and between owners and renters.

• Include operating costs/efficiency, including transportation costs and/or energy intensity in real estate disclosure statements and other key real estate information and communications.

• Convene and coordinate leading organizations in the green building field to improve effectiveness as a group.

• Get better information about the state of water, wastewater infrastructure

• Advocate for increased funding for infrastructure renewal, especially where it can support sustainable land use and transportation patterns

• Expand industry capacity to deliver Passive House buildings through promotion of Passivhaus design, showcasing examples, training professionals and trades, and encouraging adoption of supportive guidelines and/or codes.

Page 23 of 35


• Systematically improve the flow of lessons learned from leading practices to the whole industry to help accelerate scaling up from practices considered innovative in BC (may be proven elsewhere, e.g. Passivhaus) to business as usual practice.

• Develop sustainable infrastructure guidelines and standards that can be taken advantage of during regular infrastructure upgrades and replacement.

• Find opportunities to document and learn from experience, including both failures and successes.

• Promote and help accelerate locally appropriate renewable energy production and distribution.

• Support on-going development and upgrading of enhanced building codes, moving green building from voluntary to regulation as practices become proven in the field.

• Support on-going development and upgrading of voluntary (stretch) building codes, to cement worthwhile innovations and maintain momentum in the evolution of green building practice.

• Develop a common public vision of and desire for regenerative buildings, through a combination of top-down and bottom-up dialogue.

• Create high-profile, fun and experiential initiatives that showcase and celebrate success of deep green buildings prominently and publicly.

• Develop a strong understanding of and value for green and regenerative buildings among realtors, and help them to champion benefits to their clients.

• Develop public and business understanding of sustainability including a lifecycle perspective on building/operating costs.

• Clearly communicate the financial implications of decisions, especially of land use and infrastructure decisions.

• Support accelerated adoption of effective asset management practices by local governments

• Support integration of sustainability considerations into asset management (should be a current priority as asset management training ramps up in BC)

• Research and development of tools for deep green retrofits.

• Support new form and tenure options in BC, in particular for housing.

HOUSING

• Design and implement a comprehensive approach to reducing land speculation, such as an escalating property transfer tax on top-end real estate sales (over $3 million), a tax on properties that are flipped within a year of purchase, and an escalating series of fines for owners that leave properties empty.

• Create more tools for local governments and non-governmental organizations to support affordable housing, such as a Regional Housing Trust Fund to support non-governmental organizations in building non-market housing, affordable co-ops, and rental housing. Lobby for financing of rental housing (e.g. the Capital Regional District’s Regional Housing Trust Fund).

• Shift housing price ownership criteria to include Total Cost of Ownership to better link costs and benefits of house location, construction materials, and operational/ maintenance considerations.

Page 24 of 35


• Coordinate activities among NGOs and governments. Help NGOs and local governments learn together about best practice, to scale up good practice.

• Support more consistent local government housing policy.

• Advocate to senior government to renew a more significant role in the housing sector via a national housing strategy, increased funding for non-market housing, etc.

• Educate and communicate affordability more effectively and holistically with professionals. Ideas include awards, housing essays, how-to guides, policy examples, and pilot projects. Need to adapt tools and solutions from larger communities to smaller communities, while also sharing what works across communities.

• Further explore potential for green affordable housing, targeting reduced building lifecycle costs and improved occupant health.

• Educate and communicate affordability more effectively and holistically with the media and the public to counter resistance to density and non-market housing development and to adjust public expectations on housing size and consumption, with a goal of people accepting more housing forms and tenures “in their backyard.”

• Expand implementation of existing policy tools, such as mandating non-market and/or rental housing, allowing for increased density on single-family lots, allowing developers to easily add density for rental housing, incentives for building quality rental housing, Provincial rebates or incentives to support low-to-moderate income market housing, and allowing sensitive infill in neighbourhoods (laneway homes, houseplexes, micro-suites, secondary suites, infill along transportation corridors, and more compact housing forms).

• Develop and implement a comprehensive approach for local governments and transportation agencies to reduce development of highway-oriented commercial, strip mall, and single-family development that does not support compact, walkable, and complete communities.

TRANSPORTATION

• Support location-efficient mortgage programs

• Advocate to the Province for funding, incentives, and tools that support active transportation and transit, including mileage-based insurance, road pricing, a flat percentage of road infrastructure funding going towards active transportation and transit (e.g. equal to or greater than the current mode share, with a plan to raise funding gradually until the mode share reaches an established target).

• Work with engineers to develop more accurate traffic models, to choose new standards for multi-modal transportation as the default option, and to include urban design since transportation is fundamental to place-making.

• Work with schools to teach kids about safety, cycling proficiency, bike to school programs, and transit to create the “new normal.”

• Communicate to elected officials and the public the relative costs of public investment in road and non-road infrastructure to generate support for more and more consistent transit and active transportation funding. One example is using pilot projects to show how attractive walkable

Page 25 of 35


communities are and a social media campaign to show great streets.

• Work with businesses and chambers of commerce to communicate the business case of selecting more sustainable locations.

• Conduct and share research on the land use mix and density required for varying levels of active transportation and transit success, how both affect community amenities and public benefit, and what the economic impact of poor planning is on taxpayers.

• Work with smaller and more rural communities to implement urban growth boundaries and create solutions for regional transportation patterns.

• Advocate to the Province for funding, incentives, and tools that support active transportation and transit, including mileage-based insurance, road pricing, a flat percentage of road infrastructure funding going towards active transportation an transit (e.g. equal to or greater than the current mode share, with a plan to raise funding gradually until the mode share reaches an established target).

• Lobby the Province (MOTI) so that priorities align with sustainable transportation patterns in regions and in communities, including always including multi-modal considerations in street design and urban design considerations in infrastructure studies.

• Work with more urban and suburban local governments to price parking and implement zoning changes to achieve 20 units/acre to support local and regional transit.

• Municipalities need to commit to a level of density around transit stations before they are built. Focus on suburban areas to design and implement retrofit strategies to make them more complete, compact, and walkable communities while also supporting regional movement patterns.

INTEGRATED COMMUNITIES

• Support better private and public realm development through a variety of incentives, not just DCCs

• Support new financing options in BC, such as tax increment financing to help smaller infill projects and neighbourhood energy projects.

• Renew momentum on Smart Growth by developing a coordinated multi-sectoral approach to drive action on the sustainable built environment

• Advocate for increased senior government funding for the integration of climate adaptation considerations into planning for all communities, including flood protection.

• Adapt interventions so that they are appropriate for more rural areas and small/medium communities outside the Lower Mainland, such as work done by Smart Growth on the Ground. More research is needed on homeowner energy efficiency, costs/benefits of various housing forms, models for collaborative home ownership, district energy density requirements, and compact land use/transportation linkages.

• Research the environmental, economic, and social benefits and trade-offs of various densities of development to support community engagement.

• Use metrics for all buildings to inform consumer choice, such as building energy ratings, water labels, walking/transit scores, and cost/benefit to taxpayers).

Page 26 of 35


• Invest in meaningful, impactful public dialogue on perceived and actual trade-offs for more sustainable built forms (as well as the cost of the status quo), to involve more diverse and balanced perspectives than are typically represented in planning and development processes.

• Communicate to the public the benefits of more sustainable built forms using example projects that show how and why the intervention is relevant to them. Use visuals, models, videos, and other methods as a complement or replacement of text communications.

• Advocate for broader regional powers and local government authority to regulate. Ideas include performance-based zoning and taxation that does not subsidize sprawl.

• Support increased regional coordination and cross-jurisdictional ties between regions to address transportation, resource use, water management, school capacity, and other issues that need to be managed at the regional level.

• Support new form and tenure options in BC, in particular for housing.

• Achieve environmental and social goals through smaller-scale and infill development that is supported by neighbourhoods, rather than large-scale development.

• Promote better integration of transportation, land use, and infrastructure systems. Ideas include requiring a qualified Urban Designer for proposals over a certain size, setting a target mode split and minimum levels of transit service for neighbourhoods, to require a commitment to a certain density before transit stations are built, identify minimum zoning required to reach population targets without expanding the land base, and to tie- in transit with road investments and land use planning.

Page 27 of 35


APPENDIX B: PROPOSED COLLABORATION MODEL

The following describes the model that was proposed at the Feb 18th workshop.

CONTEXT FOR COLLABORATION ON BC’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT

The context for effective collaboration with respect to the sustainable built environment in BC can be described by a number of factors:

• Lack of clarity on the meaning of sustainability • Lack of a shared vision and clear goals for a “sustainable built environment”. • Complexity in the built environment (many interrelated components and actors) meaning it is hard

to know where to focus efforts and interventions; • Variable levels of collaboration and conflict between related sectors, and among NGOs, different

levels of government, and business. • Presence of good intent and local government policy but significant challenges with

implementation and achievement of results.

THE CASE FOR COLLABORATION

While questions remain and tensions between different approaches will need to be resolved, there is a strong case collaboration. It has the potential to:

• Improve understanding of the system, increasing potential for impact. • Improve relationships among participants with overlapping interests and values. • Support development of a clear, shared vision among participants and with a wider audience. • Build greater support for initiatives by linking them to objectives/interests of a range of

collaborators and their constituencies. • Have a major influence on public opinion and drive social shifts much more strongly than individual

efforts. • Develop and disseminate better knowledge, informing better decisions. • Leverage scarce resources to focus on critical interventions.

PROPOSAL

Based on our research, we believe that a framework for long-term collaboration consisting of a loose platform for collaboration combined with tight “collective impact” initiatives has the potential to effectively spark change. This is shown as a diagram and described in more detail on the next page.

Page 28 of 35


Platform for collaboration: A loose collaboration, led by a committed, funded organization (this could but does not need to be REFBC)

1. Purpose: o provide a secure home and leadership for the initiative o create a venue for gradually increasing the level of collaboration o catalyze growing public understanding and support for change

2. Initiation: o Begin by defining a purpose for collaboration that is relevant to interested parties. This

should focus on overcoming barriers to the shift from policy to action, including public perceptions and values.

o Acknowledge the diffuse nature of sustainability and the breadth of the built environment as challenges to effective cross-sectoral collaboration.

o Build from, and work towards strengthening, a core of shared or overlapping values and goals.

o Build on current and recent collaborations and relationships. o As much as possible, engage organizations with the power to make required changes –

including all levels of government. 3. Elements:

o Coordination, including regular communication: maintaining regular communications with collaborators, focused on maintaining a strong case for collaboration; capacity-building; performance reporting; and identification of potential Collective Impact initiatives.

o Focused and flexible participation: Involve organizations that can comfortably play a variety of roles, from activists/advocates to professional advisors, maintaining a shared

Page 29 of 35


understanding of these roles and setting appropriate expectations for different organizations. Work to involve all interested parties involved in the system, and if their participation is not appropriate, identify and reflect their interests and needs in analysis and solution-building.

o Capacity-building: Builds skills and knowledge in seeing the larger system and long-term process and our place in it.

o Shared measurement: Regular measurement and accessible public reporting of progress and performance. Maintenance of a strong understanding of how public values relate to sustainability in the built environment, including the level of public support (vis-à-vis social or political thresholds).

o Continuous learning: Using systems thinking coupled with strong, pragmatic mapping of interested parties, understand and respond to both technical and relational aspects of the movement for a sustainable built environment.

o Public communication: strong public communication (and support of consistent communication by others) to establish the need for change (as a difference between public values and what the system is delivering), describe “good” solutions, and communicate successes.

Linked Collective Impact Initiatives: A series of effective, coordinated, focused “Collective Impact” initiatives situated within that larger system and process, that explicitly link to and function together to be more than the sum of their parts. These:

1. Are appropriate to the relevant stage of the social change process (e.g. the level of public support for “sustainability” as a paradigm shift that solves our recognized social problems, and the level of public support relating to the issue at hand).

2. Are selected based on Collective Impact pre-conditions and the ability to establish shared interests and a common agenda:

o Have a strong potential leader o Capitalize on current initiatives (e.g. Climate Leadership Plan update) and shifts in

senior government priorities if possible. o Are flexible enough to accommodate different approaches and priorities for different

sectors (e.g. improving capacity or focusing on action, choosing broader or narrower participation).

3. Ideally focus on relationships between system elements; that is either they are cross-sectoral (relating different built environment sectors) or are multi-objective (e.g. relating health and climate interests) or both.

4. Create some highly visible, dramatic, positive outputs that foster public belief and hope. 5. Focus on solutions that meet broad interests and minimize trade-offs.

Page 30 of 35


APPENDIX C: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

Barbara McMillan, Executive Director, Cool North Shore

Bea Bains, Manager, business Performance & Technical Solution, FortisBC

Betsy Agar, Research Manager, Renewable Cities

Bob Purdy, Director, External Relations & Corporate Development, Fraser Basin Council

Brent Gilmour, Executive Director, QUEST

Carla Giles, VP, Regional Operations, Canada Green Building Council

Chani Joseph Ritchie, Planner & Sustainability Specialist, DIALOG

Charley Beresford, Executive Director, Columbia Institute

Charlie Bartlett, Sustainability Specialist, Associated Engineering

Charlie Li, Stantec

Dale Mikkelsen, Director, Development, SFU Community Trust

Deborah Curran, Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Victoria

DG Blair, Executive Director, Stewardship Centre for BC

Eli Enns, Director of Operations, Halalt First Nation

Elizabeth Sheehan, President, Climate Smart Businesses Inc.

Elizabeth Tang, Knowledge Transfer Consultant, CMHC

Emmanuel Machado, Chief Administrative Officer, Town of Gibsons

Erik Lees, Planner, LEES+Associates

Erik Blair, Senior Policy & Planning Analyst, Metro Vancouver

Gary McInnis, Director, British Columbia Real Estate Association

Helen Goodland, Principal, Brantwood

Helen Phillips, Chapter Engagement Specialist, Canada Green Building Council

Janine de la Salle, Principal, Urban Food Strategies

Jason Smith, Senior Regional Planner, Metro Vancouver

Page 31 of 35


Jeff Cook, Principal, Beringia Community Planning Inc,

Jennifer Johnstone, President & CEO, Central City Foundation

Jill Atkey, Director, Research and Education, BCNPHA

Jim Vanderwal, Senior Manager, Fraser Basin Council

Joan Chess, Program Manager, Fraser Basin Council

Josha MacNab, BC Director, Pembina Institute

Judy Stafford, Executive Director, Cowichan Green Community

Karen Tam Wu, Program Director, Pembina Institute

Keane Gruending, Communications Manager, Renewable Cities

Kira Gerwing, Manger, Community Investment, Vancity

Laura Milne, Strategic Partnerships, David Suzuki Foundation

Lauren Klose, Senior Policy & Planning Analyst, Metro Vancouver

Lawrence Frank, professor, UBC

Lourette Swanepoel, Senior Associate, Stantec Consulting

Mandy Hansen, Governor, REFBC

Margaret Eberle, Senior Housing Planner, Metro Vancouver

Mark Sakai, Director of Government Relations, Greater Vancouver Home Builders' Assoc.

Meg Holden, Associate Professor Urban Studies, Simon Fraser University

Mel DeJager, Associate, SSG

Michelle Lee, Sustainability Reporting Analyst, BC Housing

Michelle Hoar, Co-Founder, The Tyee & Tyee Solutions Society

Mike Tanner, Director, Partnership for Water Sustainability for BC

Mike Kang, Community Catalyst, Urban Matters

Mukhtar Latif, Chief Housing Officer, City of Vancouver

Norma Miller, Manager of Government Relations, British Columbia Real Estate Association

Patricia Bell, Head of Planning & Director of Education, Community Energy Association

Page 32 of 35


Penny Gurstein, Director, School of Community and Regional Planning, UBC

Richard Campbell, Executive Director, BC Cycling Coalition

Richard Linzey, Director, Heritage Branch, Government of BC

Rita Koutsodimos, Manager, Advocacy & Communications, BC Healthy Living Alliance

Robyn Wark, Team Lead, Sustainable Communities, BC Hydro

Roger Tinney, Planning consulatant, Tinney 7 Associates

Rory Tooke, Community Energy Planner, City of Surrey

Sara Muir Owen, UBC Program Manager, Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions (PICS)

Satnam Manhas, Forest and Ecosystem Program Manaager, Ecotrust Canada

Sherry Yano, Associate Director, Pembina Institute

Stephanie Williams, General Manager, BEST

Stephanie Cairns, Director, Sustainable Communities, Sustainable Prosperity

Stephen Sheppard, Professor, UBC

Steven Whitney, Senior Program Officer, Bullitt Foundation

Tania Wegwitz, Manager of Planning, BC Transit

Thomas Mueller, President & CEO, Canada Green Building Council

Tim Barton, Senior Transportation Planner, Bunt & Associates

Timothy Welsh, Director of Programs, HUB Cycling

Ting Pan, Sustainability Coordinator, Regional District of Nanaimo

Tom Lancaster, Senior Planner, Metro Vancouver

Tom-Pierre Frappe-Seneclauze, Senior Advisor, Pembina Institute

Warren McKay, President, Cool North Shore


APPENDIX D: SCAN OF EXISTING COLLABORATION THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT IN BC

The chart below shows a preliminary snapshot of some of the existing collaborations in the Built Environment in British Columbia, based on the knowledge of REFBC and Modus staff. These collaborations are formal and can be organizations, projects or initiatives. Workshop participants were asked to read and provide comments, clarifications or additions for other existing, relevant, and formal collaborations. Written changes and additions from the workshop are shown in red.

Collaboration

Description

Primary Element

Secondary Elements

Buildings, Infrastructure &

Energy

Housing

Transport Integrated

Communities

BC Hydro Energy Efficiency Roadmap for Existing Part 3 Buildings

BC Hydro is developing a new vision and strategy for transforming the existing building market to realize deep energy savings over the next 20-30 years. The project team will review current market state, market barriers, critical success factors based on best practices from other jurisdictions and propose achievable market transformation measures. A stakeholder committee is advising BC Hydro on the development of a Roadmap to ensure deep energy savings from Existing Commercial (Part 3) Buildings in BC.

Buildings

Pembina Net Zero Buildings Thought Leaders Forums

Pembina’s Buildings and Urban Solutions program works with local governments, utilities, and the real estate industry to build consensus on policies and regulatory changes needed to accelerate uptake of nearly net-zero buildings and deep retrofits in BC. In Spring 2015, they convened a 80-person Thought Leader Forum to test elements of a proposed roadmap for Part 3 buildings; key elements of that roadmap were later included in a multi-stakeholder ‘call to action’ launched jointly with UDI and Architecture Canada, and endorsed by over 90organizations across BC. A second Thought Leaders Forum will be convened this fall to focus on implementation of BC’s climate leadership plan in the built environment focus area.

Buildings

Union of BC Municipalities The Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM) is the advocate for local government in British Columbia. It was formed to provide a common voice for local government. The UBCM Convention continues to be the main forum for UBCM policy-making. It provides an opportunity for local governments of all sizes and from all areas of the province to come together, share their experiences and take a united position.

Cross-Sectoral X X X X

Community Energy Association (CEA)

The “Energy Aware Committee” was established in 1995 through a MOU between three BC Ministries and Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM). In 2003, it incorporated as the Community Energy Association (CEA). CEA became a Canadian registered charity in 2004. Member organizations include governments, transit authorities, utilities and municipal planning organizations. Members participate in Community Energy Association to identify opportunities for collaboration and contribute to common goal of accelerating climate and energy action with local governments.

Energy

PICS – Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions

PICS is a dynamic knowledge network that brings together leading researchers from British Columbia (BC) and around the world to study the impacts of climate change and to develop positive approaches to mitigation and adaptation. PICS partners with governments, the private sector, other researchers and civil society, in order to undertake research on, monitor, and assess the potential impacts of climate change and to assess, develop and promote viable mitigation and adaptation options to better inform climate change policies and actions.

Energy X

SFU – Centre for Dialogue – Renewable Cities

Renewable Cities aims to accelerate the adoption of 100% renewable energy within cities globally and recognizes that an integrated approach to energy efficiency and urban design is required. This five-year plan has been developed through dialogue, with leaders in local government, the private sector, key innovators, thought leaders, and utilities.

Energy X X

QUEST-BC Caucus Solutions Tables

QUEST-BC Caucus Solutions Tables bring together multi-sector senior staff across the province interested in smart energy communities. The Solution Tables identify barriers and solutions to difficult barriers, such as how to address energy renovations in multi-family buildings. They are supported through the Community Energy Association and Climate Action Secretariat.

Energy X

QUEST-BC Caucus The QUEST-BC caucus is a collaboration of local governments, academics, ministries, NGO’s, developers, utilities and others. It is an informal voluntary network, currently chaired by the Ministry of Environment, to share information and identify opportunities to accelerate ICES adoption. QUEST currently has 8 provincial & regional Caucuses across Canada. These Caucuses are independently coordinated and provide a unique venue to build partnerships and advance projects for Smart Energy Communities at the local level.

Energy/ Climate

BC Mayors Climate Leadership Council (BCMCLC)

The BC Mayors Climate Leadership Council is composed of leading mayors from across BC who are committed to climate action. Its purpose is to provide visible and inspiring peer leadership, educate newly elected officials, and engage others by being a positive and non-partisan voice for climate action. The BCMCLC will provide input to the Province’s Climate Action Plan 2.0, enhance skills and leadership capacity to those interested in climate action and prepare locally elected leaders for findings derived from the QUEST-BC Caucus Solutions Table. It is supported through the Community Energy Association and Climate Action Secretariat.

Energy/ Climate X

Community Energy Planning– Getting to Implementation in BC (CEA/QUEST)

Community Energy Planning: Getting to Implementation in Canada is a collaborative initiative spearheaded by the Community Energy Association, QUEST – Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow, and Sustainable Prosperity. The initiative aims to help communities implement their Community Energy Plans (CEP) in order to improve efficiency, cut emissions, and drive economic development.

Energy/ Climate X X

Pembina B.C. Climate Legacy: Charting the Path Forward Together

Pembina, the Real Estate Foundation and other key stakeholders are partnering on a 5-year Climate Legacy project in BC. Phase 1 includes convening a series of dialogues between industry, local government, academia, professional associations and the provincial government to encourage participation in shaping BC’s Climate Leadership Plan. The goal of this engagement is to ensure the CLP’s commitments are in line with the level of ambition needed to meet BC’s targets and ensure BC does its share in advancing national and international action on climate. As the focus shifts to implementation (Phase 2), Pembina will work to ensure that key stakeholders are involved in hammering out policy to meet plan targets and to strengthen public accountability.

Energy/ Climate X X

CALP – Collaborative for Advanced Community Energy Explorer

Community Energy Explorer aims to inform citizens about potentially unfamiliar renewable energy technologies, and to stimulate discussion about the energy choices available to them. It offers clear and compelling visuals of Metro Vancouver case studies, and new information on regional and local energy resources. The project was developed by the CALP and the Elements Lab at UBC in partnership with Metro Vancouver, citizens and staff of the City of Richmond and the City of Surrey and with support from the Neptis Foundation, Vancouver Foundation, the PICS and GEOIDE.

Energy/ Climate X

SFU ACT/ACTPAC SFU’s Adaptation to Climate Change team brings leading experts from around the world together with industry, community, and government decision-makers to explore the risks posed by top-of- mind climate change issues and identify opportunities for sustainable adaptation.

Energy/ Climate

Provincial Government Energy Efficiency Working Group

The Province has facilitated two working groups to deal with common building requirements in local government bylaws that will have no legal effect under the Building Act: the Fire Sprinklers Working Group and the Energy Efficiency Working Group. The Energy Efficiency WG is also influencing the CLP. Building standards branch is leading; LGs Surrey (Rory Tooke) and Richmond sit on it.

Energy/ Climate/Build- ings

BC Healthy Living Alliance Formed in February 2003, the BC Healthy Living Alliance (BCHLA) is a group of organizations that came together with a mission to improve the health of British Columbians. Through leadership and collaborative action, BCHLA advocates for health promoting policies, programs and environments that support the physical and mental well-being of British Columbians.

Health X X

Pacific Housing Research Network

The Pacific Housing Research Network (PHRN) is a provincial organization designed to encourage the development and dissemination of quality housing research and to promote connection among researchers and practitioners in the community.

Housing


Collaboration

Description

Primary Element

Secondary Elements

Buildings, Infrastructure &

Energy

Housing

Transport Integrated

Communities

FBC Smart Planning Initiative

Fraser Basin Council’s Smart Planning for Communities is a BC-wide initiative providing resources and tools to local and First Nations governments for planning socially, culturally, economically and environmentally sustainable communities. It assists rural and First Nation communities to understand integrated community sustainability planning (ICSP), develop plans and implement related actions. It also offers linkages to programs and policy directions at provincial and federal levels (Ministry of Community Development, Ministry of Environment/CAS, UBCM, ANNDC).

Integrated Communities

X X X

Partnership for Water Sustainability in British Columbia

The Partnership helps the Province of British Columbia to implement the Living Water Smart and Green Communities initiatives. This is done through a shared responsibility in delivering the Water Sustainability Action Plan. They have been a catalyst for a ‘design with nature’ approach to land development; and are the steward for Stormwater Planning: A Guidebook for British Columbia.

Stormwater Infrastructure

SFU Centre for Dialogue – Moving in a Livable Region

Moving in a Livable Region is a consortium of businesses, organizations, local governments, and transportation leaders working together to create a long-term sustainable funding regime for transportation in the Metro Vancouver region. The consortium recognizes that a properly funded transportation system is required in order to stay nationally and internationally competitive.

Transportation X

Infrastructure

X

Provincial Health Services Authority (PHSA)

Produced a “Healthy Built Environment linkages toolkit targeted at local government. Could be a good platform for collaboration. Their framework also includes food systems

X Food Systems

SCARP (UBC) Engage students in real world planning/design problems like CityStudio but better

X X X X

SFU/Ecotrust Canada LED (Local Economic Development)

Works in Downtown Eastside Integrated Communities

X

AMP Co-locative space (Vancity-supported) in 212 organizations sharing space, working together (Ecotrust Led Trust) Integrated

Communities

X

BCSEA Energy education (curriculum) Public engagement event on energy efficiency in SpringContact Ali Grovue

Energy X

United Churches Of Canada

Works in Downtown Eastside Building (Churches)

XParishioner Mobilization

Asset Management BC

X

Getting to Ground Breaking (G2G)

Research partnership into process requirements and innovating in residential building approvals in Metro Vancouver. SFU Urban Studies, GVHBA – Metro – municipalities – UDI – developers Housing

X

Documents

REFBC Sustainable Built Environment Initiative – Feb 18 ... Feb 18 Stakeholder Workshop... · ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVE – FEB 18, 2016 STAKEHOLDER WOR KSHOP ... Sustainable Built