Towards A Sustainable Built Environment For British Columbia

TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA: SYNTHESIS OF FINDINGS

Prepared by:

For:

October 13, 2015

Cover Photos Credit: Peter Whitelaw

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Is BC’s built environment sustainable? Are we making progress? How does change really occur? How can we accelerate positive change? These are some of the questions that this research report attempts to answer. Purpose The Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia’s (REFBC) mission is to transform land use attitudes and practices through innovation, stewardship, and learning – with one identified focus area being the built environment. Through grant funding and other programs, REFBC helps make changes that lead to a more sustainable built environment in BC. This report is the culmination of a research study with the following aims: • • •

understand the state of BC’s Built Environment movement through literature research, interviews and focus groups, articulate a theory of how change happens in the built environment, and use these insights to generate strategic recommendations for where and how REFBC and others can intervene most effectively in the Built Environment system to accelerate change.

The State of BC’s Built Environment The research tells a complex story that includes frustratingly slow progress in some areas, pockets of incredible innovation (some leading to wider progress), and some hopeful signs that overall understanding, attitudes and practices are changing for the better. The intent exists amongst all levels of policy makers and built environment professionals to make positive, lasting change towards sustainability. This is evidenced by progressive policies and plans on the books (e.g. BC Carbon Tax, Metro's Regional Growth Strategy, many community OCPs and ICSPs), the introduction of progressive green building codes/guidelines, asset management frameworks and affordable housing programs. It is clear that sustainability is deeply embedded into the work of built environment professionals across BC.

i

However, in many cases the implementation of policies and plans appears to be stalled, frustrated by a number of factors including inadequate funding (especially for transit and active transportation), low energy prices that undermine the business case for renewable energy, investments in major road infrastructure that conflict with gains made through sustainable land use development, and a growing distrust in government coupled with a NIMBY attitude towards neighbourhood infill and intensification. In some cases, legislation that governs planning and development is impeding innovation that some municipalities and developers want to move forward with. In other cases, there is a lack of consistent funding/focus of effort – for example, a number of green building retrofit programs have been tried but resulted in limited take up. Even where progressive plans have been fully implemented or are beginning (and there are many notable examples) real evidence of outcomes −in terms of transportation mode shifts, GHG emission reductions or improved health − is missing, again with notable exceptions. One example that surprised us is that despite the decades of discussion about, and investment in transit and active transportation in the Lower Mainland, the percentage of single occupant vehicle trips in the region remains unchanged since the 1990s. In many cases, we simply do not have the information to know what is going on, especially outside the major urban centres, either because the data is not collected or is not readily available. Despite this scarcity of tangible progress, what is most promising is the high level of knowledge (amongst both professionals and the public) about built environment sustainability and the immense wellspring of capacity and enthusiasm for making positive change. The fact that this hasn’t always resulted in tangible, on-the-ground progress speaks to the lack of alignment between different actors, and policies and incentives that are working at cross-purposes. As one interviewee put it, “We need to translate public dialogues (about climate resilience and affordability for example) into something viable and game changing.”

Vision and Definition The complex, multifaceted nature of the built environment makes a simple story or definition of sustainability seem trite. Professional and public participants seem to know intuitively that we need to move in a particular direction but defining a destination or exactly how far we need to go (targets) is incredibly challenging. As one wise participant noted “sustainability is an emergent property of a social conversation”. In other words, we cannot define the destination (a sustainable built environment) with any precision in advance of trying to get there – we can only set out on the journey and learn both where we are going and how to get there as we travel. Reflecting this understanding, the vision for a Sustainable Built Environment that emerged from conversations with BC leaders in the field is distinctly two-pronged, including both physical components and a process and attitude shift to get us there. It recognizes that the built environment is part of a larger socio-economic system and must respond to and fit within its context and supporting ecosystems.

ii

A Vision for BC’s Built Environment A “sustainable built environment” is one where people can have a great quality of life without undermining the natural systems that support us. It is a place that is resource efficient, resilient, prosperous, equitable, healthy, safe, attractive and authentic. It is characterized by: 1. Land use patterns that give people easy access to shops, services, recreation and employment, and protect natural and working lands; and comfortable, welldesigned places and spaces. 2. Transportation systems that support high levels of walking, cycling, transit, and low-impact goods movement. 3. Diverse housing that meets the full spectrum of needs related to age, access, and affordability. 4. Smarter, less expensive buildings and infrastructure that are regenerative in terms of their energy and resource use. This sustainable built environment is a product of a society that values natural systems and people first and foremost. It functions in harmony with natural systems and cycles, respecting nature’s limits and meets the diverse needs of our communities. It emerges from a social conversation that seeks to resolve trade-offs and drive innovation, so that development is aligned with core community values.

“Of course it is about making significant improvements in terms of energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, water management etc. (i.e. we have to live within the limits of the natural systems) but it also requires paying attention to equity and affordability.”

iii

A Theory of Change for the Built Environment Change in the Built Environment happens in multiple, often seemingly mysterious ways, at different scales and timelines. A number of different theories have been developed that can help to partially explain how change occurs and how to facilitate transformative change. This study examined previous “Theory of Change” work done for the REFBC, and adapted and expanded it for the Built Environment. The report includes a review and application of Market Transformation Theory (how to drive innovations into mainstream practice); Force Field Analysis (reviewing factors driving or preventing change), and Systems Thinking (which interventions have the greatest leverage affect and how change propagates through relationships within social networks). We provide a brief explanation of each of these theories before applying them as a decision-making lens to help prioritize suggestions made by research participants. In spite of current ads and slogans, the world doesn't change one person at a time. It changes as networks of relationships form among people who discover they share a common cause and vision of what's possible. This is good news for those of us intent on changing the world and creating a positive future. Rather than worry about critical mass, our work is to foster critical connections... Through these relationships, we will develop the new knowledge, practices, courage, and commitment that lead to broadbased change. – Margaret Wheatley and Deborah Frieze, 2006

Strategic Interventions This research has culminated in a series of recommendations that can influence positive change in the Built Environment. More specific recommendations are included for each subsystem of the built environment. These priorities are borne out of the observation that BC generally has good policies and plans in place, but is struggling to act effectively on them, so that we have improved little in terms of performance. This observation suggests that there is enough professional knowledge and stakeholder support to put plans and policies in place, but not enough support from the public and other key players to drive concerted action. There is considerable inertia in the system, and some key barriers to be overcome. There are also specific parts of the built environment in which focus is needed now. Based on the research, five general strategies for change were identified, along with six areas on which particular focus is recommended. ALIGN THE FINANCIAL RULES OF THE SYSTEM WITH SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES 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: •

iv

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.

SUPPORT AND COORDINATE NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOS) 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: •

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 FOR TOP SUSTAINABILITY PRIORITIES •

v

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: o Transit o Infrastructure renewal o Flood protection o Climate adaptation

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 mechanisms that allow for calculated risks and don’t penalize risktakers, 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.

BUILD PUBLIC AWARENESS OF AND SUPPORT FOR THE SUSTAINABLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT 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.

vi

•

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). PRIORITY TOPICS Many valuable interventions were identified through this project; even after applying the prioritization filters outlined in the Theory of Change, the list remains long. Beyond this formal prioritization system, we recommend the following six topics be a focus of efforts in the immediate future. Each is detailed in the relevant section that follows (in brackets for each topic):

vii

•

Stronger regional planning (Integrated Communities)

•

Improved 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)

•

Radically improved market penetration of all green retrofits (Buildings and Infrastructure)

•

Gradually and intentionally re-balancing funding from roads and motor vehicles towards transit and active transportation (Transportation)

•

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

viii

CONTRIBUTORS The authors would like to thank the following contributors for participating in this research by survey, focus group, and/or interview: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

ix

Alex Taylor, Dillon Consulting Andrea Fletcher, Real Estate Institute of BC Andrew Curran, TransLink Anna Mathewson, City of Surrey Anthony Perl, Simon Fraser University Brendan McEwen, City of Richmond Bronwen Geddes, Naut'sa mawt Tribal Council Bud Fraser, UBC Sustainability & Engineering, Campus & Community Planning Catriona Hearn, LEES+Associates Chad Hershler, Deer Crossing The Art Farm Chani Joseph, DIALOG Charles Montgomery, Happy City Cheeying Ho, Whistler Centre for Sustainability Chris Johnston, Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd. Christine Callihoo, Associated Engineering Coro Strandberg, Strandberg Consulting Dale Mikkelsen, UniverCity, SFU Community Trust Dan Paris, The Uprising Development Ltd. Dana Moraes, Skidegate Band Dave Murray, Canadian Water Resources Association Dave Waldron, Synapse Strategies David Block, City of Terrace Deborah Curran, Faculty of Law and Environmental Law Centre, University of Victoria DG Blair, Stewardship Centre for BC Dolores Altin, Take Out Planning + Design

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Donnella Sellars, Fraser Basin Council Eesmyal Santos-Brault, Recollective Eli Enns, Tla-o-qui-aht Tribal Parks, Indigenous Peoples and Community Conserved (ICCA) Consortium Emmanuel Machado, Town of Gibsons Franc D'Ambrosio, D'Ambrosio architecture +urbanism Gordon Price, SFU City Program Graham McGarva, VIA Architecture Guy Dauncey, BC Sustainable Energy Association Howie Charters, Colliers International Ione Smith, Upland Consulting Jake Fry, Smallworks Studios and Laneway Housing Inc. James Pratt, Principal, James Pratt Consulting Jason Chu, Township of Langley Jaspal Marwah, Metro Vancouver Jeff Cook, Beringia Community Planning Jeff Fisher, Urban Development Institute Jennie Moore, BCIT Jill Atkey, BC Non-Profit Housing Association Jim Bailey, City of Vancouver Jim Vanderwal, Fraser Basin Council Joan Chess, Fraser Basin Council Julie Pavey, District of North Vancouver Karen Hemmingson, BC Housing Kay Teschke, University of British Columbia Keane Gruending, SFU Centre for Dialogue Kelly Gesner, Landworks Consultants Inc.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

ii

Kira Gerwing, VanCity Credit Union Lourette Swanepoel, Stantec Margaret Eberle, Metro Vancouver Mark Sakai, Greater Vancouver Home Builders' Association Mary Storzer, BC MCSD Maureen Cureton, VanCity Credit Union Michael A. von Hausen, MVH Urban Planning and Design Inc Michel Labrie, Local Practice Architecture + Design Norm Parkes, BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure Patricia Bell, Community Energy Association Ray Cole, Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability, UBC Richard Campbell, BC Cycling Coalition Rob Turnbull, Street to Home Robert Brown, Catalyst Community Developments Society Robert Warren, Kerr Wood Leidal

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

•

Sarah Farina, Broadleaf Consulting Sean Pander, City of Vancouver Shauna Sylvester, SFU Centre for Dialogue Sophia Xian, BC Housing Tania Wegwitz, BC Transit Theresa Beer, David Suzuki Foundation Tiina Watt, City of Prince George Tim Tewsley, Recollective Consulting Timothy Welsh, HUB Cycling Todd Litman, Victoria Transport Policy Institute Tom Lancaster, Metro Vancouver Tom-Pierre Frappé-Sénéclauze, Pembina Institute Tsur Somerville, UBC Centre for Urban Economics and Real Estate, REFBC Professorship in Real Estate Finance, Sauder School of Business, UBC Warren McKay, Cool North Shore Society

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... i Contributors ......................................................................................................................................................ix 1

Introduction and Purpose...................................................................................................................... 1

2

Scope, Research Methods, and Limitations....................................................................................... 3

3

ii

2.1

Scope.................................................................................................................................................. 3

2.2

Methods............................................................................................................................................. 4

2.3

Limitations ........................................................................................................................................ 4

The Built Environment: Description and Vision of Sustainability ............................................... 5 3.1

Definition .......................................................................................................................................... 5

3.2

Vision ................................................................................................................................................. 7

4

Status and Trends in BC’s Built Environment ................................................................................... 8

5

Public Opinion Research on the Built Environment ..................................................................... 19

6

A Strategic Lens for Priority-Setting ................................................................................................. 21

7

Transformative Strategy for the Sustainable Built Environment .............................................. 23 7.1

Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 23

7.2

Overarching Priorities .................................................................................................................. 23

7.3

Integrated Communities ............................................................................................................. 27

7.4

Buildings, Energy and Infrastructure........................................................................................ 31

7.5

Housing............................................................................................................................................ 37

7.6

Transportation ............................................................................................................................... 40

8

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 44

9

Appendices ............................................................................................................................................. 46 9.1

References ...................................................................................................................................... 46

9.2

Potential Interventions................................................................................................................ 54

iii

1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE There is tremendous potential in the Real Estate Foundation of BC’s mission to contribute to “resilient, healthy communities and natural environments.” This report supports that mission by helping readers understand the current state of BC’s “built environment” and the movement to advance sustainability within it, articulating a theory of how change happens in the built environment, and then generating strategic recommendations for where and how REFBC and others can intervene most effectively to accelerate the shift towards a sustainable future. The assessment of the current state of the built environment in BC tells a complex story that includes frustratingly slow progress in some areas, pockets of incredible innovation and progress and some hopeful signs that understanding, attitudes and practices are changing for the better. The key question emerging from the research is can our efforts be scaled up to achieve sustainability in time to assure prosperity and a great quality of life for generations to come. As one interviewee put it, “We need to translate public dialogues (about climate resilience and affordability for example) into something viable and game changing.” The purpose of this project is to identify strategies to do just that. This report contains: • • • •

A description of the built environment as a system and a vision of a sustainable built environment in BC A summary of current status and trends in the built environment in BC A summary explanation of the strategic lens used to set priorities A strategy identifying priorities for actions or interventions that should accelerate the movement towards a sustainable built environment.

It can be used to: • Support strategic planning; • Help prioritize grant-making by REFBC and others; and, • Guide development of new or different programs/activities.

1

2

2 SCOPE, RESEARCH METHODS, AND LIMITATIONS 2.1 SCOPE This project considers trends, drivers of and barriers to sustainability in the built environment, and identifies and prioritizes potential interventions to advance sustainable development. For the purposes of the research, the built environment is defined as encompassing the places and spaces created or modified by people for human habitation and use, including public spaces, housing, workplaces, roads, and other infrastructure that support human settlement and daily life. For this study we have divided the built environment into four linked subsystems: • • • •

Integrated Communities (land use patterns, open space, density, urban form etc.) Housing (including market, non-market, rental and ownership.) Buildings, Infrastructure & Energy (water/sewer/stormwater infrastructure, energy infrastructure, building design, etc.) Transportation (movement networks and systems including roads, trails, sidewalks, paths, transit, cars and other vehicles, etc.)

Integrated Communities

Buildings & Energy

Sustainable Built Environment

Transportation

Housing

This scope, together with a description of the built environment as a system, is detailed further in Section 3.

3

2.2 METHODS Research activities included: • •

A review of readily available reports and studies about the state of BC’s built environment; Inquiries with experts in relevant fields, including professional practitioners and academics: • Interviews with 23 experts; • Focus groups with 28 experts; and • A survey with 60 experts.

Results were analysed and interpreted, based on professional judgement in the context of professional practice in the field. Prioritization methods are described more fully in the body of the report. This research was supplemented with public opinion research about the Sustainability of the Built Environment conducted by McAllister Research.

2.3 LIMITATIONS The accuracy and completeness of the report is limited by the authors’ ability to access and review available reports, and the representation of knowledge and wisdom through participants in the interviews, focus groups, and survey. In general, sources and information were preferred if they: related directly to BC and/or were indicative of performance that could be expected across the province; offered a strategic perspective and credible data/information about the state of affairs in BC; and, if they represented a fair, balanced, credible perspective. Top-line statistical information was used, where available, to paint a picture of current status and trends, acknowledging that the selection of this data is valueladen. Many of the source documents describe in far greater detail the status, trends, barriers, and drivers of change which may be useful in future to REFBC and other audiences. Given time and space constraints, it was not possible to reflect that level of detail in this report. Readers are encouraged to consult the list of references include in the Appendix and review source documents for more information. The topic of the sustainable built environment movement in BC is huge. Given the breadth of this topic, this document cannot paint a complete picture of the state of the Built Environment in BC, nor can it recommend with certainty interventions that will work. However, the authors hope it provides enough information to encourage further reflection and discussion that can be used to build up a more complete picture over time, and that it can offer useful guidance for strategies that are more likely to bear fruit.

4

3 THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT: DESCRIPTION AND VISION OF SUSTAINABILITY 3.1 DEFINITION REFBC defines the built environment as the buildings and infrastructure that support human settlement, ranging in scale from buildings and green space to neighbourhoods and cities, including supporting infrastructure, such as water supply, energy networks and transportation. Simply put, it is the physical stuff of which our communities are made. For this study we supplemented this definition of the built environment as a series of physical elements that support human settlement with the idea that these elements are related as a built environment system that itself is part of a broader natural system or series of ecosystems. We divided the built environment system into four linked sub-systems that interact with each other. The four sub-systems are: • • • •

Integrated communities (land use patterns, public space, density, urban form etc.) Housing (market, rental, non-market, etc.) Buildings, energy and infrastructure (water/sewer/stormwater infrastructure, energy infrastructure, building design, etc.) Transportation (movement networks, roads, sidewalks, paths, vehicles, etc.)

The performance of the built environment – and its sustainability – rests in large part on how people behave and interact with the built environment, in other words, how they use, shape, and maintain it. People: • • •

Use the built environment by moving, occupying, playing, learning, and working; Shape the built environment by planning, designing, building, renovating, and demolishing; and, Maintain the built environment by operating and repairing components.

REFBC’s influence on the built environment is largely indirect, occurring through interventions that influence the social system (laws, policies, knowledge, capacity building, convening organizations etc.). If successful, these interventions have a positive influence on the shape and performance of the built environment. Other actors, such as architects, planners, local politicians, developers and builders, of course, have a more direct (although often less systematic) influence on the built environment. Finally, the Built Environment influences society’s cultural norms and behaviours, reshaping our expectations and understanding of what is possible. The diagram on the next page illustrates these different elements and relationships. "We shape our buildings, and afterwards our buildings shape us” (Winston Churchill)

5

A Systems View of the Built Environment Movement and REFBC Interventions REFBC

A “sustainable built environment” enables people to have a great quality of life without undermining the natural systems that support us. It is a place that is resource efficient, resilient, prosperous, equitable, healthy, safe, attractive, and authentic. It is characterized by:

6

1.

Land use patterns that give people easy access to shops, services, recreation and employment, and protect natural and working lands; and comfortable, well-designed places and spaces.

2.

Transportation systems that support high levels of walking, cycling, transit, and low-impact goods movement.

3.

Diverse housing that meets the full spectrum of needs related to age, access, and affordability.

4.

Smarter, less expensive buildings and infrastructure that are regenerative in terms of their energy and resource use.

3.2 VISION Creating a simple story and definition of a sustainable built environment proved challenging. The complex, multifaceted nature of the built environment makes a simple story or definition of success trite. Professional and public participants seem to know intuitively that we need to move in a particular direction but defining a destination or exactly how far we need to go (targets) is incredibly challenging. As one wise participant noted “sustainability is an emergent property of a social conversation”. In other words, we cannot define the destination with any precision in advance of trying to get there – we can only set out on the journey and learn both where we are going and how to get there as we go. The vision that emerged from conversations with BC leaders in the field is distinctly twopronged, including both a practical set of components that we are working towards as well as hinting at a process and attitude to get us there. In practical terms, it recognizes that the built environment is part of a larger socio-economic system and must also respond to and fit within its context and supporting ecosystems.

A Vision for BC’s Built Environment A “sustainable built environment” enables people to have a great quality of life without undermining the natural systems that support us. It is a place that is resource efficient, resilient, prosperous, equitable, healthy, safe, attractive, and authentic. It is characterized by: 1. Land use patterns that give people easy access to shops, services, recreation and employment, and protect natural and working lands; and comfortable, well-designed places and spaces. 2. Transportation systems that support high levels of walking, cycling, transit, and lowimpact goods movement. 3. Diverse housing that meets the full spectrum of needs related to age, access, and affordability. 4. Smarter, less expensive buildings and infrastructure that are regenerative in terms of their energy and resource use. This sustainable built environment is a product of a society that values natural systems and people first and foremost. It functions in harmony with natural systems and cycles, respecting nature’s limits and meets the diverse needs of our communities. It emerges from a social conversation that seeks to resolve trade-offs and drive innovation, so that development is aligned with core community values.

7

4 STATUS AND TRENDS IN BC’S BUILT ENVIRONMENT This study revealed a complex story that includes frustratingly slow progress in some areas, pockets of incredible innovation and progress, and some hopeful signs that attitudes and practices are changing for the better. Overall, local and Provincial government policy and the work of practitioners shows good intent to support the sustainable built environment. However, there is a wide gap between intent and action with performance in some areas being poor. Generally, the level of understanding of sustainability among policy makers, professionals, and the general public is broader and deeper than it was 15 years ago. However, in the opinion of many research participants progress has stalled as policy makers and professionals have struggled to “connect the dots” with the public and at the political level, in order to implement changes that have significant impacts.

“We need to translate public dialogues (about climate resilience and affordability for example) into something viable and game changing.”

While BC is similar to the rest of North America, we have a strong history of leadership in sustainability. BC is similar to most other parts of North America in many respects. Broadly, BC shares a similar culture, economic system, technology, and high level of development and urbanization. But the province is also unusual in its history and leadership on sustainability. Perhaps the most important land use decision in BC was the establishment of the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) in 1973, which strictly limited non-agricultural development in large areas of otherwise prime developable land. This has not only protected valuable farmland but shaped more compact communities in BC as compared to those in neighbouring Washington and Alberta. 1 This vision of compact, complete communities linked by frequent transit networks, surrounded by protected green space has been a hallmark of planning in BC and has consistently translated into successive regional growth plans with strong urban containment boundaries in many areas. More recently, former Premier Gordon Campbell’s leadership on climate change led to the creation of BC’s Carbon Tax and a score of related initiatives, which have together helped shape a leadership position for the Province on climate mitigation. In addition,

1

Sightline Institute, Sprawl and Smart Growth in Greater Vancouver: A Comparison of Vancouver, British Columbia, with Seattle, Washignton, September 12, 2002, http://www.sightline.org/research/sprawl_smart_van/.

8

Vancouverism” 2 has been promoted to cities around the world as a way to develop efficiently while maintaining high quality of life for families. Despite this history and leadership, BC continues to face challenges in making progress towards a sustainable built environment. The information collected as part of this research tells a clear story. While there has been some notable, albeit uneven, progress, thirty years into the “age of sustainable development,” BC continues to face the same challenges that many other jurisdictions in North America face. There are many examples: • • •

• •

BC residents and businesses continue to emit far more greenhouse gases than can be sustained if we are to keep global average temperature increases below 2 degrees Celsius. BC residents use well over 300 litres/person/day of precious drinking water, well above the Canadian national average. Transportation authorities have not been able to make real progress in shifting people into transit and active modes of transport, away from driving. With major Provincial investments in new road infrastructure and the failure of the recent transit referendum to secure additional stable transit funding, there is a danger that BC’s leadership position on sustainable land use and transportation planning is eroding. Housing affordability is often described in crisis terms in major centres. Improving energy performance of existing buildings has been slow and will not achieve necessary targets without strong interventions.

Even the energy- and carbon-efficiency improvements of new buildings is being questioned, and the financial sustainability of our basic infrastructure is a major concern as local government investment has fallen behind, especially in smaller communities. Last but certainly not least, the much-lauded leadership position of Metro Vancouver (vs. other Pacific Northwest centres) in terms of land use density is slipping, according to Sightline’s most recent report.3

“[A major barrier is] the lack of linkages between our transportation and land use plans.”

Fortunately, the news is not all bad. Interest in and knowledge of climate mitigation and adaptation are strong and growing, particularly among professionals, where provincial planning and engineering associations and others have woven it into professional practice standards and positions. Although green building does not yet dominate the market, it is growing rapidly due to a coordinated effort on the part of advocates and industry leaders. The Province recently raised the bar for new construction by incorporating much higher standards into the most recent Building Code. 2

“Vancouverism” is characterized by mixed-use developments, typically mid-rise buildings with a commercial podium topped by narrow residential towers on a fine-grained block pattern with midblock lanes. This creates the urban density to support mass public transit, and a livable urban environment is supported by a variety of park spaces, view corridors, and family-oriented housing. 3

9

Ibid.

Similarly, cross-disciplinary efforts to drive “active transportation” from health, GHG emissions, cost, and other perspectives have led to policy changes. These changes are occurring in many communities, at the Provincial level, and in health authorities, where the links between the built environment and health are now much better recognized. Higher levels of awareness and knowledge, coupled with improved coordination among major players, suggests that in many sectors the foundations may be in place to support an accelerated shift towards sustainability. There are some particularly bright spots… The City of Vancouver and parts of many other cities have seen gains in active transportation, mix and density of use, green building, and infrastructure. They have also leveraged development to support investments in community infrastructure like improved parks and open spaces and affordable housing. It can be argued that residents of these “smart growth” or “compact” communities have a higher quality of life, lower environmental impacts, and can live lower-cost lifestyles as lower cost transportation helps balance higher housing costs. While other jurisdictions may be reluctant to acknowledge “the Vancouver model,” plenty of lessons can be learned from its leadership and its successes. With the adoption of Greater Vancouver’s Livable Region Strategic Plan (1996), which proposed compact centres connected by transportation corridors, BC found itself a leader in linking land use and transportation policy. Following on that landmark, Smart Growth BC’s leadership in the 1990s and 2000s, together with efforts of universities and a host of other organizations, accelerated knowledge and understanding of smart growth benefits and tools, leading to more sustainable community plans and policies. Water sustainability in the built environment, climate adaptation, and green buildings are also bright spots, due to leadership and coordinated action spanning government, academia, industry, and non-profit sectors. The rapid adoption of integrated stormwater management planning and the success of the LEED program in driving green building are strong evidence of positive, if not completely successful, approaches from which to learn. It is encouraging that the Province is working on its Climate Leadership Plan 2.0, and that discussions are already underway to create a voluntary “stretch code” for local governments wanting to improve energy efficiency of buildings. In some cases where governments are struggling to make progress alone, 'third sector' (mission driven organizations) are filling the gaps not addressed by government or business. In spite of (and perhaps because of) funding shortfalls, these organizations are adapting and becoming more entrepreneurial, and are building up their board and member capacity to withstand shocks and create more resilient communities. Finally, technological changes in renewable energy and electric vehicles internationally may offer a way to reduce carbon emissions from transportation and avoid the need for more major electrical generation projects over the next few decades. It remains to be seen if these technologies will fulfill their promise.

10

…but significant barriers to progress remain in many areas. Despite important pockets of progress, BC has been slow to scale-up innovations and pilot projects to create province-wide progress. In part this is because of the varied geography, culture, economic base and size of communities across the Province, but is it also a reflection of a risk-averse culture and a lack of consistent funding and focus to drive broad adoption of sustainable practices and technologies. The complex issue of affordable housing is one area in which significant barriers exist. The issue of housing affordability is related to income inequality, which has been rising across the country for some years, but is also influenced by issues of mental health, drug addiction, family structure, aging, labour market policy like minimum wage levels, and the shift to parttime and casual work. A myriad of Federal and Provincial policy directions, a growing demand to live in attractive and liveable cities, and broad economic shifts are driving the continuation of the affordability crisis, which is exacerbated in high growth centres experiencing high and rising land values. Housing accessibility and visitability 4, key related design issues made more urgent by the aging population, also contribute to the complex challenge of providing adequate housing for BC residents. There is some hope provided by recent municipal and NGO efforts to create affordable rental housing through policy and direct investment, but shortterm prospects for resolving the affordable housing crisis are poor. Long-term prospects likely hinge on senior government involvement and on global economic shifts that cannot be predicted. A key issue, related partly to the design of the built environment, is social isolation in major centres. In part, this has been linked to the design of apartment buildings and the interface between multi-family sites and public spaces, but it will take some time to understand the causes and implications of social isolation. Given that buildings last a long time, the current built environment is likely to contribute to the problem for years to come. Urgent action may be needed to understand the built environment dimensions of social isolation and to quickly set guidance in place for the design of new, more socially-oriented buildings and neighbourhoods. Existing buildings are a key challenge from an energy perspective as well. Without rapid, sustained, and strong interventions at a policy and practice level, energy use and GHG emission related to BC’s building stock will remain at unsustainable levels. A rapid scaling up of action is called for, together with a host of supporting efforts to create the financial, human, and cultural capital needed for success.

4

Visitability refers to single-family or owner-occupied housing designed in such a way that it can be lived in or visited by people who have trouble with steps or who use wheelchairs or walkers. (www.visitability.org, accessed September 3, 2015)

11

An increased emphasis on public engagement has had both positive and negative implications. In BC, as elsewhere across North America, the trend towards more and better community involvement in local government decision-making continues, much of which affects the built environment. This is improving some decisions, while slowing some processes due to “Not In My Backyard” (NIMBY) responses. In addition, social media and online tools have become a critical element in public engagement. Online tools extend the reach of engagement processes; demand more resources, skills, and capacity from organizers and participants; and, offer new ways for communities to organize and influence decisions, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse for sustainability. This suggests that fresh approaches are needed for community engagement if we are to develop new and varied forms of housing in existing communities. Small communities face similar issues as large communities, but with different priorities, opportunities and constraints for action. Small communities face many of the same issues as larger communities – infrastructure deficits, high water use, poor energy performance, and transportation dominated by single occupant vehicles for example. However, many small communities are shrinking while larger ones are growing, leaving small communities with fewer levers for change. Economic stability and resilience are key goals for rural and small communities in BC with a history of boom-bust cycles driven by international commodity markets and business models which extract resources over a single generation. 5

“Small communities, [are] looking for moderate, manageable growth.”

While challenges remain, First Nations are emerging as a powerful force in shaping the built environment. There is strong alignment between First Nations traditions and sustainability, potentially a strong foundation for a sustainable built environment for First Nations. However, colonization, residential schools, the federal Indian Act and subsequent legislation have left most communities severely stretched, struggling to meet basic needs and often lacking adequate basic infrastructure. With limited resources, their priorities often focus on mental and physical health, leaving little space for other concerns. Peri-urban and urban communities are in the best shape, but the built environment for many Nations is in poor condition, a problem only made worse as population growth puts pressure on reserve infrastructure and buildings. Despite the colonial history, First Nations are emerging as a powerful force in shaping the built environment. Empowered by recent legal recognition of rights and title, the signing of significant modern day treaties such as those with the Nisga’a and Tsawwassen, and the

5

The Fraser Basin Council in a 2014 study identified small town priorities for the built environment as higher density suitable for a small town, protection of drinking water and protection of agricultural land, and found that many small town staff and elected officials surveyed thought that addressing these priorities was not very realistic.

12

relatively new ability to create their own land codes, First Nations are beginning to shape the built environment to fit with their own powerful visions of sustainability. There is a lack of coherent information about what is going on. Compiling this report was challenging, in part because of the complexity of the topic but also because there is a lack of reliable, consistent reporting on a set of sustainability metrics across the Province. The demise of the long-form census and lack of funding for organizations such as Statistics BC means that we just don’t know how well (or poorly) we are doing in many key areas. While larger jurisdictions like Metro Vancouver have put in a place a comprehensive monitoring and reporting system for sustainability, and the Community Energy and Emissions Inventory contains some useful primary and secondary indicators, there is a lack of readily available reporting on many important aspects of sustainability in the built environment, especially for smaller communities.

13

14

DRIVERS OF CHANGE & BARRIERS TO CHANGE The broad drivers of and barriers that have affected the current status and trends are described below in two tables. The first table provides an overview of the built environment as a whole, and the other one provides a summary for each of four elements of the built environment: Integrated Community Planning; Housing; Buildings, Energy and Infrastructure; and Transportation.

Environmental

Drivers of Sustainability

Barriers to Sustainability

•

•

• •

Technical / Professional Literacy

• • •

Technological

Legal

Economic

15

•

• • • • •

Climate change awareness and professional endorsement Agricultural and geographic constraints to urban development Linking better environmental health to improved human health Rating systems and standards Professional practice standards

Internet-based and “smart” technology Rapid innovation in the renewable energy sector Updated Provincial legislation (Building Code, Water Sustainability Act) 3C legislation for social enterprise

Business case for “green” Market interest in sustainable products Possible global shift to strengthening domestic markets (vs. exports)

• • •

Long lag from GHG emissions to climate change, and from water use to water supply depletion Global scale of climate problem “Invisible” nature of built environment systems Steep topography, restricting transportation options and separating communities

•

Some professions lack relevant sustainability literacy

• •

•

Socially isolating technology (e.g. TV) Relatively early days of renewable energy and netmetering technology and operational systems Lack of skills (e.g. asset management, small-site redevelopment) Upfront costs of re-investment in new technologies

•

Regulatory constraints or prohibitions

•

Perceived financial risk of practices unproven in the local market Low cost of energy Split incentive between costs paid by developers and benefits accrued by purchasers High land values in attractive neighbourhoods can exacerbate affordability challenges compact communities aim to overcome

•

• • •

Drivers of Sustainability

• • Social & Cultural

• • •

Hope for the future (the essence of the concept of sustainability) Millennials seeking durability and long-term value Social entrepreneurialism Aging population (driving more walkable, accessible built patterns) Increased interest in preventative health coupled with better understanding of the links between health and the built environment

Barriers to Sustainability

• • • • • •

• • Organizational & Relational

• •

Effective convening and coordination in some areas Adequate supporting funding Strong government – NGO – business relationships

• • • • • •

Political

• •

•

Local government support Support of established business organizations (e.g. for Metro Vancouver transit, affordable • housing)

• •

16

Lack of clear definition of or vision for sustainability Cultural preference for driving, single-family homes, and low density High diversity can make dialogue more difficult Culture of convenience and comfort Resistance to paying full cost of services Complexity and lack of transparency around actual costs vs. public or government subsidies/incentives Federal and Provincial withdrawal of funding for social (e.g. housing) and environmental (e.g. pollution prevention and monitoring) programs Poor coordination, collaboration in some areas Lack of organizational capacity and financial resources – collaboration is “side-of-desk” Lack of knowledge about current performance Most organizations focus on one sub-system of the built environment (e.g. housing, transportation) Federal funding constraints on environmental NGOs Softening Provincial focus on sustainability and climate Disconnect between political drivers of Provincial and Federal decisions, and those driving community sustainability Entrenched opposing organizations, e.g. NGOs and/or some industry associations Weak regional government authority Growing mistrust of government and desire for low taxes

The table below summarizes broad drivers of and barriers to achieving the vision of the sustainable built environment for the four physical elements.

Integrated Communities

Housing

17

Drivers of Sustainability

Barriers to Sustainability

• Complete Communities: Green Communities Act, Climate Action Charter, Community Energy and Emissions Inventory, demand for urban living from young adults and seniors, and urban containment boundaries and the Agricultural Land Reserve. • Urban Design: community and tourist-driven demand for downtown revitalization, urban design training for professionals, and unsuccessful superficial beautification strategies leading to more integrated urban design. • Industrial Land: Provincial investment, Port-led planning, and regional planning (growth strategies). • Agricultural Land: support for local food production, a new generation of farmers/food advocates, and the Agricultural Land Reserve. • Healthy Communities: measured health outcomes based on lifestyles, socio-economic health gap measures, technical assistance and capacity building, and not-for-profit organizational leadership. • Eco-Industrial Networking: pilot studies, local government support for concept.

• Complete Communities: conservative development finance, developer aversion to risk, lack of well-funded and effective long-term community engagement, misalignment between planning regulation/standards and long-range policy, perceptions that sustainability is more expensive, separation of land use and transportation planning, and weak regional planning. • Urban Design: engineering street standards that favour automobile speed rather than balance of uses, community desire for fast automobile movement, the slow place of redevelopment, and market demand for suburban type development. • Industrial Land: competing market demand and lack of protection for industrial lands. • Agricultural Land: escalating land values, development pressures, as well as competing uses for carbon sequestration and energy projects. • Healthy Communities: the existing built form and challenges with behaviour and culture shifts. • Eco-Industrial Networking: lack of leadership from the private sector and the challenge of locating and involving potential tenants. • Housing Affordability: market demand for single-family homes, low vacancy rates, expensive renovation of rental stock, development charges and local government regulations/requirements, infill construction costs, lack of growth of new affordable housing stock, community perceptions about higher density, downloading from senior levels of government, and global market influences. • Housing Choices: community resistance to density and developer/lender risk aversion.

• Housing Affordability: historically low interest rates, innovative non-profit organizations and local government regulations and investments, housing agreements supporting affordable housing, inclusionary zoning, reduced development fees, conversion control and demolition control policies, density bonusing, and alternative development standards. • Housing Choices: demand from Millennials and seniors, sensitive infill strategies, multi-family secondary suites, support for 6-storey wood-frame construction, and new housing models.

Buildings, Infrastructure & Energy

Transportation

18

Drivers of Sustainability

Barriers to Sustainability

• Buildings: increased knowledge and experience of practitioners (supported by professional organizations), improvements to the BC Building Code and new regulatory powers for energy efficiency, market and community demand for green/heritage buildings and healthy indoor environments, energy-related incentive programs, reduced technology costs, and high land values driving renovation. • Infrastructure: full-cost recovery Development Cost Charges, property tax incentives, preferential utility charges, shifts towards Integrated Stormwater Management Plans, increased practitioner experience with designing sustainable stormwater management systems, and observable changes in local climate. Recently introduced asset management requirements. • Energy: the BC Carbon Tax, improved understanding and technical skills to deliver renewable energy and district energy projects, and lower costs of producing renewable energy.

• Buildings: poor understanding of the business case for green buildings, split incentives for builders/owners and owners/renters, relatively long payback periods, lack of postoccupancy monitoring and reporting, poor building code compliance, slow updates to the BC Building Code for new technologies, lack of training/knowledge among building operations staff for optimizing performance of green buildings, and the high cost to retain heritage buildings. • Infrastructure: downloading from federal government without funding for infrastructure upgrades, difficulty of coordination for integrated resource recovery, regulations and standards that prohibit water and wastewater innovation, and relatively low requirements for wastewater treatment in BC. • Energy: the low cost of fossil fuels, district energy systems need higher densities than are in most BC communities, resistance to higher energy pricing, and perceptions of environmental impacts.

• Transit Use: Millennials and seniors wanting transit access, better partnerships between municipal and regional governments, public and local political support for increased transit investment, and increased efficiency of transit providers. • Cycling: increased public support for infrastructure funding, increased interest in cycling, increased interest in healthy lifestyles. • Car-Sharing and Electric Vehicles: new interest in the sharing economy, financial incentives, interest from Millennials, increased emission standards, public interest, and BC’s renewable electricity supply. • Goods Movement: desire for fuel cost savings and increased awareness of technologies and driving techniques for fuel efficiency.

• Transit Use: political conflict and statutory limitations on transit funding, low Provincial funding priority, lack of public understanding about level of public investment in road infrastructure compared to transit infrastructure, eroded public trust in TransLink, and suburban built form that doesn’t support adequate ridership levels. NIMBYism has made developing around major transit investments challenging. • Cycling: inadequate funding, limited infrastructure, and safety concerns. • Car-Sharing and Electric Vehicles: technological limits, public perceptions about electric vehicles, regulatory barriers for car sharing services, and limited viability for car sharing in suburban contexts. • Goods Movement: global economic influences, public perception that highway investment should be public and rail investment should be private, and separated land uses encouraging more transportation demand.

5 PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH ON THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT In July 2015, MacAllister Opinion Research conducted a poll of BC residents about sustainability in the built environment. The poll reached 1,701 respondents across 4 regions of the province, weighted to be representative. It has a margin of error of +/- 2.5%, 19 times out of 20. A full report of this research is anticipated in fall 2015. Based on the preliminary analysis, the following are some interesting highlights that illustrate the types of findings from the poll. • • • • • • • • •

•

• •

Metro Vancouver residents and “Gen-Xers” rated their quality of life significantly lower than the average British Columbian British Columbians born in 1990s are not big on their current community or neighbourhood Vancouver Island Retirees are the most satisfied with community all around Older adults are much less optimistic about the future of their communities Green space and being close to shopping are the top sources of satisfaction for people Young adults like the “hustle and bustle”, older adults less so Gen X and Y are more enthusiastic about “public transportation” Words matter: people prefer “Smart growth” to “Compact communities”, and both (not surprisingly) are preferred over “High density” Respondents welcome both single-family housing and low-rise apartments and townhomes as some, most, or all of the housing mix in a community; by contrast, respondents were comfortable with high-rises and estate housing being some, little, or none of the housing mix Respondents see BC as being more sustainable than Europe, about the same as the rest of Canada, and much more sustainable than US communities. One possible explanation is that people may relate “sustainability” primarily to a clean environment, e.g. clean air and water and access to green space, rather than a broader definition that would consider energy and resource use, social, and fiscal considerations. Top concerns were: cost of housing, taxes, waste, and water use (this last may have been top-of-mind because of the summer’s hot, dry weather) Respondents felt strongly about the level influence of different actors: o Some have too much: non-resident property owners, developers, senior government o Other have too little: business owners, residents, citizens

It is anticipated that the professional and public aspects of this Sustainable Built Environment research will be compared and combined to provide deeper insights into how to promote sustainability in the built environment.

19

20

6 A STRATEGIC LENS FOR PRIORITY-SETTING Shifting BC towards a more sustainable built environment is a process of massive and complex change necessitating political, cultural, technical, organizational, legal, and other interrelated efforts. In our complex society, organizations interested in a sustainable future need to understand what most needs to be done, and then to establish their role and priorities strategically as they work to contribute to this change. As part of this research, we articulated a theory of how the built environment changes, linked to the Real Estate Foundation of BC’s (REFBC) broader Theory of Change / Impact Assessment work. Given the complexity of human society and its interactions with the built and natural environments, this theory is a highly simplified model of real change processes. However, it offers a “useful” description of systems and processes that meshes with how REFBC understands its role as an organization and the world around it. Its essence is this: • • •

•

The built environment is a system, and is itself part of the larger system that is human society, nested within the natural environment. Priorities for change should draw on Systems theory by focusing on influential points of leverage within the system. Market Transformation theory offers a useful way of understanding how changes progress through society, considering a range of factors that affect the rate and depth of adoption of new products and practices. Another useful simplification is to apply Force Field theory, which focuses on forces driving change and barriers to change; a strategy can be based on strengthening drivers and/or weakening barriers, and this can be related to points of leverage within a system. Acting within a large, complex social system, any organization must assume that others are contributing alongside it, in order to move from successful outcomes to seeing impacts on the ground. Organizations can coordinate and align action, or they may conflict with one another. Understanding the degree of alignment and the level of influence of the main actors is important to effective action. With a systems understanding of change, the organization can also choose the most effective “leverage points” for change.

With these main points in mind, a “strategic lens” is proposed to help with prioritization. Made up of a series of filters, it focuses primarily on the first three points above. While the filters are listed in order from broadest to most specific, they should be considered holistically. For instance, there may be cases where there is only a small gap but where there is an appropriate intervention with great potential to close the gap; such an intervention may be as attractive as a valuable intervention that aims to make small gains on closing a much larger gap.

21

Figure 1: Filters to Prioritize Interventions

• • • • •

Size of gap? Relevant and timely? Appropriate? Influential? Aligned with REFBC?

POSSIBLE INTERVENTIONS

PRIORITIES

The proposed prioritization filters are described more fully below. 1. Size of gap: How much of a difference is there between BC’s current performance and a “sustainable” vision or target? 2. Timeliness and relevance: Drawing on Force Field theory, what are the primary, most relevant barriers to and drivers of change? In what ways does the current context or trends make this a good time/opportunity to intervene? 3. Appropriateness: Drawing on Market Transformation theory, how much has the market / society transformed, and what does that tell us about which interventions will be most effective at this stage of transformation? 4. Influence: Drawing on Systems theory, what interventions will be the most effective? This question focuses on the points in the system where there is most leverage for change. In addition: • What market actors have the most influence? • What change in the system will have greatest ripple effects? • What change is most feasible, given social, political, and other barriers? 5. Alignment: Do the proposed interventions line up with REFBC’s mission and resources, or should others be encouraged to take the lead? These filters have been used to focus the interventions listed in this report from those recommended to us by research contributors or that emerged from analysis and reflection on the research.

22

7 TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY FOR THE SUSTAINABLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT 7.1 INTRODUCTION This section brings together the different elements of the research to recommend a set of priority interventions that organizations in the overall “movement” working towards a more sustainable built environment in British Columbia can pursue to help transform BC’s Built Environment. We start with a series of more general interventions that apply across all the elements of the Built Environment. Then, using the Strategic Lens for Priority Setting described in the previous chapter, we identify some high priority interventions for each sub-system of the built environment (integrated communities, transportation, buildings & infrastructure and housing).

7.2 OVERARCHING PRIORITIES These priorities are borne out of the observation that BC generally has good policies and plans in place, but is struggling to act effectively on them, so that we have improved little in terms of performance. This observation suggests that there is enough professional knowledge and stakeholder support to put plans and policies in place, but not enough support from the public and other key players to drive concerted action. There is considerable inertia in the system, and some key barriers to be overcome. There are also specific parts of the built environment in which focus is needed now. This section summarizes five general strategies for change, and then highlights six specific focus areas. ALIGN THE FINANCIAL RULES OF THE SYSTEM WITH SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES 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: •

23

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 the correct price signals to the market, encouraging investment in sustainable technology and resource-saving behaviour.

“I would rather have high energy costs and less regulations than more regulations and low energy prices. This way the market can pick the most cost efficient technologies and approaches - as opposed to regulators picking winners and losers.”

•

Expand the use of full-cost, lifecycle 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.

SUPPORT AND COORDINATE NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOS) 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: •

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. This effort could be led by NGO’s or the Province, and would be updated regularly.

•

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-related targets that all organizations can work towards. These goals can help NGOs, business, and government to align their efforts.

•

Secure Consistent NGO Funding – provide stable (multi-year), 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 really do 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 FOR TOP SUSTAINABILITY PRIORITIES •

24

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 few key areas require substantial and increased on-going funding if progress there is to be made. These include: o Transit o Infrastructure renewal o Flood protection o Climate adaptation

Funding should ideally be prioritized in areas where action will reduce senior government costs in other areas. A well-known example is changes to the built environment to enable easy access by walking, cycling and transit (active transportation), which are correlated with improved health outcomes and hence lower health care costs. SCALE UP SUSTAINABLE PRACTICE Many “green” practices have been proven locally, nationally, and/or internationally. A key issue identified in this research 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. There is a need for a suite of information resources that takes great research, and innovations from leading municipalities and packages these into user-friendly guides/databases for different audiences. The knowledge base should consider the varying needs of large and small areas, as well as rural and urban areas. The knowledge base should also be living, meaning that professionals from many sectors (architecture, banking, investing, insurance, healthcare, environmental health, construction, landscaping, etc.) are involved in developing and disseminating the new best practices, policies, programs, incentives, and technologies.

“[We] need a better information and resource base to understand the patterns, costs and values of development occurring in our region.”

•

Support pilot projects that incorporate an educational component to disseminate learnings to professionals, elected officials, and others. Those that incorporate more direct engagement and/or experiential learning may be particularly effective (see intervention below).

“I think it is critical that we take a holistic approach that covers all three of the "legs" of the sustainability stool.”

25

• 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 mechanisms that allow for calculated risks and don’t penalize the 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.

BUILD PUBLIC AWARENESS OF AND SUPPORT FOR A SUSTAINABLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT The public often lack awareness of sustainable practice, or they perceive conflicts between their interests and/or values and practices that support sustainable outcomes (the most obvious example is the almost universal 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 that 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 so that 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; the key is to design and deliver communications that effectively reach, engage, and affect their audience. One element of this is to focus on positive multiple benefits, aligned to local values, like job security, community character, happiness, and wellness.

•

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

Red House/Green House – A Public Experiment to Promote Passivhaus One research participant told us a story that has important lessons for making positive progress in the Built Environment. The City of Brussels organized a demonstration project that used two brightly coloured model houses - a red house with standard construction techniques and insulation values and a highly insulated green house built to Passivhaus standards. Organizers placed a large block of ice inside and waited to see how long each block would take to melt. The “experiment” was widely promoted and created a lot of curiosity and media attention for public and professional alike – people even started to place bets on how much longer the ice in the green house would last (it turned out to be a lot longer). The experiment created a lively public discussion about the benefits of a fairly technical subject, greatly increasing public awareness and knowledge not only of the Passivhaus system of building but the whole topic of energy efficiency and climate change. Between 2007 and 2015, Brussels has constructed 243 Passivhaus homes, prior to 2007 there were none.

26

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). PRIORITY TOPICS Many valuable interventions were identified through this project, even after applying the prioritization filters outlined in the Theory of Change, the list was long. Beyond this formal prioritization system, we recommend the following six topics be a focus of efforts in the immediate future. Each is detailed in the relevant section that follows (in brackets): • • • • •

Stronger regional planning (Integrated Communities) Improved 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) Radically improved market penetration of all green retrofits (Buildings and Infrastructure) Higher and more consistent funding levels for transit (Transportation) Increased market penetration of medium-density, small-scale, and affordable housing forms that are in keeping with comfortable community character (Housing, Integrated Communities)

7.3 INTEGRATED COMMUNITIES Land use patterns that give people easy access to shops, services, recreation and employment, and protect natural and working lands; and comfortable, welldesigned places and spaces.

STATUS, TRENDS, GAP Planning for Integrated Communities (or Smart Growth) has come a long way in the last two decades. The concepts of smart growth and new urbanism have been widely embraced by government officials, professionals and to some extent the public although there is a small number of vocal detractors seemingly influenced by the US land rights movement. There has been a resurgence of interest in urban living driven by the recognition that compact, mixed use, walkable communities offer increased convenience, better health outcomes, transportation choice and access to a broader array of entertainment and services. Despite these successes which have led to real improvements in health, livability, environmental and economic development outcomes in some places, results have been mixed throughout the Province with some communities and parts of many communities continuing to build single use, automobile dominated neighbourhoods with little variety in choice of housing and transportation. Resistance to infill and intensification is also a common theme especially where taller building forms are proposed. Where Smart Growth has been most successful in the Lower Mainland, it is dogged by high housing prices fuelled in part by the attractiveness of these places (see Housing Topic). As one research participant noted, ‘the demand for living in compact, mixed-use walkable communities is now far exceeding supply.’

27

“Because some BC communities are so livable, they have created an affordability challenge (everyone wants to live there). They must be responsive to this dilemma by allowing and encouraging more affordable, compact forms of housing.”

APPROPRIATENESS The diagram below situates the progress of various aspects of Integrated Community Planning on a market transformation curve, showing that a number of categories of intervention are still in the innovation/early adopter stage while others are almost mainstream. A shift to a more sustainable built environment will require consolidation of successes in regional planning and creating new mixed-use neighbourhoods/communities and moving forward with more innovative approaches such as the use of financial tools to shape development patterns and retrofit the suburbs and encourage infill & intensification of existing areas.\

ALR Regional Planning / Urban Containment

Infill & Intensification Mixed use neighjbourhoods Public perception Financial Tools

28

RELEVANCE AND TIMELINESS The primary drivers and barriers to sustainability are listed in the table below. Momentum towards more integrated communities is strong, and is a reason to think that continued investment in this area is valuable. Concern over climate change, health of an aging population, demand for livable, walkable communities and transportation choice area all factors suggesting that continued investment in this sector in the coming years is timely.

Drivers of Sustainability

Barriers to Sustainability

•

•

•

• Integrated Communities

•

•

•

29

Complete Communities: Green Communities Act, Climate Action Charter, Community Energy and Emissions Inventory, demand for urban living from young adults and seniors, and urban containment boundaries and the Agricultural Land Reserve. Urban Design: community and tourist-driven demand for downtown revitalization, downtown beautification strategies, urban design training for professionals. Industrial Land: Provincial investment, Port-led planning, and regional planning (growth strategies). Agricultural Land: support for local food production, a new generation of farmers/food advocates, and the Agricultural Land Reserve. Healthy Communities: measured health outcomes based on lifestyles, socio-economic health gap measures, technical assistance and capacity building, and not-for-profit organizational leadership. Eco-Industrial Networking: pilot studies, local government support for concept.

•

• •

• •

Complete Communities: conservative development finance, developer aversion to risk, lack of well-funded and effective long-term community engagement, misalignment between planning regulation/standards and longrange policy, perceptions that sustainability is more expensive/subsidizing of sprawl, separation of land use and transportation planning, and weak regional planning. Urban Design: engineering street standards that favour automobile speed rather than balance of uses, community desire for fast automobile movement, the slow place of redevelopment, and market demand for suburban type development. Industrial Land: competing market demand and lack of protection for industrial lands. Agricultural Land: escalating land values, development pressures, as well as competing uses for carbon sequestration and energy projects. Healthy Communities: the existing built form and challenges with behaviour and culture shifts. Eco-Industrial Networking: the challenge of locating and involving potential tenants.

PRIORITY INTERVENTIONS The following interventions are appropriate to the market transformation segment (e.g. innovators, early adopters), relevant to key barriers and opportunities, and likely to be influential. Those anticipated to be more influential are bolded. A. Economic • •

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.

B. Social/Cultural • • •

•

Achieve environmental and social goals through smaller-scale and infill development that is supported by neighbourhoods, rather than large-scale development. Use metrics for all buildings to inform consumer choice, such as building energy ratings, water labels, walking/transit scores, and cost/benefit to taxpayers). 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.

C. Technical/Knowledge • •

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

D. Legal/Policy • •

30

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

E. Organizational • •

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.

7.4 BUILDINGS, ENERGY AND INFRASTRUCTURE Smarter, cheaper buildings and infrastructure that support renewable use of resources and healthy, connected communities. Green Buildings The green buildings sector has progressed significantly over the last two decades in BC, with widespread use of green building approaches and adoption of a new Green Building Code that includes energy efficiency requirements for Part 9 buildings (typically housing that is 3 storeys or less). There is strong professional support and advocacy, with good knowledge in local governments. As a result, new buildings are much greener than they used to be. With the shift to greener buildings, some large buildings have also become more complex, and may not perform better than before despite modelling predictions. The more challenging part of the sector is green retrofits, especially “deep green” retrofits, which have been slow to be adopted, especially without financial incentives. Despite substantial progress, the building sector in BC is a long way from being zero-impact, let alone generating environmental benefits on a net basis. Social performance is less well understood, but multi-family building design has likely contributed to residents’ sense of isolation, as explored by the Vancouver Foundation in 2012 6.

“At BCIT we have developed a Factor 4 initiative (75% reduction of energy/waste). The North end of our Burnaby campus is a demonstration project – we have achieved ‘factor 10’ for some buildings with an equivalent 90% carbon reductions overall. This has demonstrated that the technology is already available to achieve deep emission reductions in a financially-viable way: the payback on investments has in most cases been within 2 years. Now the question is ‘how can we scale up this kind of initiative to make it mainstream?” (Jennie Moore, BCIT)

6

31

Vancouver Foundation, 2012

The diagram below situates the progress of different parts of the building market on a market transformation curve, showing that a number of parts are still in the innovation stage. A shift to a sustainable built environment will take many decades and will involve learning how “net zero” or “net positive” 7 buildings can become typical construction practice in BC, how to retrofit existing buildings to substantially improve their environmental performance, and how to design multifamily buildings that encourage and strengthen the community of residents.

Green new

Green retrofit Social New: deep green Retrofit: deep green

Infrastructure & Energy The status of “sustainable” infrastructure in BC (including energy distribution and use in communities). The financial sustainability of infrastructure in BC is a major issue due to a history of inadequately accounting for capital assets of local governments; this has been made worse by downloading of responsibilities from senior to local governments without provision of matching resources. Fortunately, there is rapidly growing interest in and adoption of more sophisticated asset management practices, which is producing better information about the financial state of BC local government in terms of capital assets. Three other key trends are interesting: there is growing interest in “Integrated Resource Recovery (IRR)” as a means of deriving more value from infrastructure; decentralized infrastructure is being reconsidered as a valuable option, and climate adaptation is becoming part of professional practice, driving significant change and greater resilience. In other respects, the status varies across infrastructure types: •

7

There is significant progress on low-impact, watershed-based stormwater management, and more progress is anticipated;

“Net zero” buildings produce as much energy and/or resources as they use; “net positive” buildings produce more than they use, usually measured on an annual basis.

32

• • •

There are ambitious water conservation targets, but poor performance in water conservation; Wastewater treatment lags other provinces; and There is substantial progress towards “integrated community energy solutions” combining solutions across all elements of the built environment; however, energy infrastructure – district energy systems and local or on-site renewable energy production – remains a tiny part of BC’s energy production and distribution.

Progress is harder to gauge for infrastructure than it is for buildings. Focused on environmental impacts because infrastructure is so closely tied to resource use, one can speak to the following: •

•

•

•

Stormwater management is being measured more and more in terms of impacts on watershed health, and practices are becoming re-oriented to manage those effectively – the gap appears to be closing, although on-going watershed-based monitoring is needed to better assess this. Water conservation targets, available data, and thresholds of sustainability vary depending on local geography; accordingly, efforts and the gap to what is “sustainable” vary widely. Water sustainability is addressed more comprehensively through REFBC’s Water Sustainability work. Wastewater treatment: Broad performance measurement has focused on the level of treatment (primary, secondary, or tertiary) available to BC residents, assuming that tertiary treatment is generally best and primary worst. By that measure, BC lags other provinces; however, that measure does not address environmental impacts either directly or cumulatively. A more detailed assessment of a gap to “sustainability” was not possible within the scope of this study. Stationary energy infrastructure (i.e. Not transportation-related) remains dominated by large hydroelectricity and natural gas; consequently it is part of the system producing significant GHG emissions from BC communities. The gap between our current system and one relying entirely on renewable energy – the obvious “sustainability” threshold – is significant.

A shift to a sustainable built environment will take some time and will involve first learning what truly constitutes “sustainable” infrastructure and how to achieve that goal. Elements include: fiscal viability on a lifecycle basis; net zero or net positive environmental impacts (on GHGs, aquatic pollutants, nutrients, and water and groundwater flows and temperatures). The diagram below is a first attempt to situate the progress of different infrastructure components on a market transformation curve, showing the variation between them. More work would be required to understand the nuances of infrastructure sustainability in BC, especially when it comes to the intersection between infrastructure, broader resource management, and other built environment systems.

33



Water and Wastewater



Stormwater

Energy

Buildings

The primary drivers and barriers to sustainability for buildings, infrastructure, and energy are listed in the table below.

34

Drivers of Sustainability

Barriers to Sustainability

Increased knowledge and experience of practitioners (supported by professional organizations), the BC Building Code and new regulatory powers for energy efficiency, market and community demand for green/heritage buildings and healthy indoor environments, energy-related incentive programs, reduced technology costs, and high land values driving renovation.

Poor understanding of the business case for green buildings, split incentives for builders/owners and owners/renters, relatively long payback periods, lack of post-occupancy monitoring and reporting, poor building code compliance, slow updates to the BC Building Code for new technologies, and the high cost to retain heritage buildings.

Infrastructure and Energy

Drivers of Sustainability

Barriers to Sustainability

Infrastructure: full-cost recovery Development Cost Charges, property tax incentives, preferential utility charges, shifts towards Integrated Stormwater Management Plans, increased practitioner experience with designing sustainable stormwater management systems, and observable changes in local climate. Recently introduced asset management requirements. Energy: the BC Carbon Tax, improved understanding and technical skills to deliver renewable energy and district energy projects, and lower costs of producing renewable energy.

Infrastructure: downloading from federal government without funding for infrastructure upgrades, difficulty of coordination for integrated resource recovery, regulations and standards that prohibit water and wastewater innovation, and relatively low requirements for wastewater treatment in BC. Energy: the low cost of fossil fuels, district energy systems need higher densities than are in most BC communities, resistance to higher energy pricing, and perceptions of environmental impacts.

Momentum on green buildings is strong, and is a reason to expect that continued investment in this area is valuable. Similarly, interest in sustainable infrastructure is strong, especially in terms of asset management, and there is momentum from the new Provincial Water Sustainability Act initiative, climate change action and global pressure, and strong momentum from a long and successful low-impact stormwater management initiative. PRIORITY INTERVENTIONS The following interventions are appropriate to the market transformation segment, relevant to key barriers and opportunities, and likely to be influential. Those anticipated to be more influential are bolded. A. Economic • Reduce or eliminate split incentives: Support adoption of Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing8, and research and promote the use of other tools to eliminate the split incentive between developers and buyers, and between owners and renters. B. Social/Cultural • Develop a common public vision of and desire for regenerative buildings, through a combination of top-down and bottom-up dialogue.

8

PACE financing is a mechanism through which municipal governments offer loans to consumers and businesses to put towards an energy retrofit; the loans are repaid over an assigned term via an annual assessment on their property tax bill. One of the most notable characteristics of PACE programs is that the loan is attached to the property rather than an individual.

35

• • •

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.

C. Technical/Knowledge • 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. • Include operating costs/efficiency, including transportation costs and/or energy intensity in real estate disclosure statements and other key real estate information and communications. • Research and development of tools for deep green retrofits. • Find opportunities to document and learn from experience, including both failures and successes. • Clearly communicate the financial implications of decisions, especially of land use and infrastructure decisions. • Develop sustainable infrastructure guidelines and standards that can be taken advantage of during regular infrastructure upgrades and replacement. • 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) • Get better information about the state of water, wastewater infrastructure • Promote and help accelerate locally appropriate renewable energy production and distribution

“I think it’s more about leadership and relationships to create the grand purpose that filters down to everyone (part of the culture). In Sweden and Germany, building is a trade/profession/craft.”

D. Legal/Policy • 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.

36

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

7.5 HOUSING Housing choices, are available for the full spectrum of needs related to age, access, and affordability and are located close to employment and community services. The housing sector has not progressed significantly over the last two decades in BC. Housing is becoming less affordable across the province, with the market and local governments unable to fill in gaps left by shrinking Federal and Provincial social housing programs. Although single-family homes have historically dominated new construction in BC and multifamily home construction has remained level for the last decade, the market is shifting in BC’s urban centres. Widespread recognition of the affordability challenge, combined with demographic shifts, is supporting market demand for a greater variety of housing choices. This is being supported by local governments using a variety of policies, controls, and incentives to support higher density and more affordable homes located close to employment and community services. The diagram below situates the progress of various aspects of the housing sector on a market transformation curve, showing that a number of parts are still in the innovation stage. A shift to a sustainable built environment requires close coordination with multi-modal transportation planning and green building construction and retrofits. Demographic transition and successful built examples will help shift public perception and bank financing to support alternative housing models. Policy & Controls

Infill strategies Alternative Tenure Public perception Financing

37

The primary drivers and barriers to sustainability for housing are listed in the table below. Drivers of Sustainability

Barriers to Sustainability

Housing Affordability

historically low interest rates, innovative non-profit organizations and local government regulations and investments, housing agreements supporting affordable housing, inclusionary zoning, reduced development fees, conversion control and demolition control policies, density bonusing, and alternative development standards.

Housing Choices

demand from Millennials and seniors, sensitive infill strategies, multi-family secondary suites, support for 6-storey wood-frame construction, and new housing models.

market demand for single-family homes, low vacancy rates, high cost to renovate rental stock, development charges and local government regulations/requirements, infill construction costs, lack of growth of new affordable housing stock, community perceptions about higher density, downloading from senior levels of government, and global market influences. community resistance to density and developer/lender risk aversion.

PRIORITY INTERVENTIONS

Where we have made progress e.g. requirement to meet energy efficiency standards it's because there are enforcement measures, but on larger plan pieces there is no way to enforce so we need coaching, mentorship, etc. The following interventions are appropriate to the market transformation segment, relevant to key barriers and opportunities, and likely to be influential. Those anticipated to be more influential are bolded. A. Economic •

•

•

38

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 nongovernmental 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.

B. Social/Cultural •

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.”

C. Technical/Knowledge •

•

•

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

There is an intersection between energy efficiency, green buildings, and housing affordability.

D. Legal/Policy •

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.

E. Organizational • • •

39

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. 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.

7.6 TRANSPORTATION A transportation system in which walking, cycling, and transit are highly attractive options for accessing personal needs, goods movement provides efficient access to goods needed by the BC market, and transportation results in few accidents and very low pollutant emissions. Looking Province-wide, there seems to have been little real progress in sustainable transportation in BC over the last two decades. Many local government plans and policies strongly support walking, cycling, and transit, but some gaps still exist in building new and infilling existing areas with sufficient land use mix and density to support walking, cycling, and transit. Furthermore, Provincial plans and budgets prioritize vehicle transportation over transit, leading to increased efficiency but a lack of growth in the share of people who move through and to communities by transit. A re-balancing of transportation priorities continues to be necessary in BC. The diagram on the next page situates the progress of different parts of the transportation sector on a market transformation curve, showing that a number of parts are still in the innovation stage. A shift to a sustainable transportation system will occur more quickly in areas with a walkable, transit-oriented design, and more slowly in areas requiring infill, retrofits and/or regional cooperation.

“In order to get people out of their cars, there need to be viable alternatives in terms of needs and expectations.” “A sustainable community caters to many modes, and doesn't focus on one as a panacea. The balance point is critical - if you get too dogmatic on one then you lose the others. You need balance and coexistence so you can serve different needs.”

40

Transit

Electric Vehicles

Cycling Goods Movement

The primary drivers and barriers to sustainable transportation are listed in the table below.

Transit Use

Cycling CarSharing & Electric Vehicles

Drivers of Sustainability

Barriers to Sustainability

Millennials and seniors wanting transit access, better partnerships between municipal and regional governments, public and local political support for increased transit investment, and increased efficiency of transit providers.

political conflict and statutory limitations on transit funding, low Provincial funding priority, lack of public understanding about level of public investment in road infrastructure compared to transit infrastructure, eroded public trust in TransLink, and suburban built form that doesn’t support adequate ridership levels. NIMBYism has made developing around major transit investments challenging. inadequate funding, limited infrastructure, and safety concerns.

public support for infrastructure funding, increased interest in cycling, increased interest in healthy lifestyles. new interest in the sharing economy, financial incentives, interest from Millennials, increased emission standards, public interest, and BC’s renewable electricity supply. desire for fuel cost savings and increased awareness of technologies and driving techniques for fuel efficiency.

Goods Movement

41

technological limits, public perceptions about electric vehicles, regulatory barriers for car sharing services, and limited viability for car sharing in suburban contexts. global economic influences, public perception that highway investment should be public and rail investment should be private, and separated land uses encouraging more transportation demand.

Momentum on cycling and electric vehicles is strong, with both being supported by technical support, funding programs, and public support. Many communities have a latent demand for transit and no resources to address it. Sustainable goods movement remains hard to define. PRIORITY INTERVENTIONS The following interventions are appropriate to the market transformation segment, relevant to key barriers and opportunities, and likely to be influential. Those anticipated to be more influential are bolded. A. Economic •

•

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). Support location-efficient mortgage programs

B. Social/Cultural • •

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

C. Technical/Knowledge • •

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. 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.

D. Legal/Policy •

•

42

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

E. Organizational •

•

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

7.7 FIRST NATIONS The challenges faced by First Nations in BC are many, and the built environment is not the highest priority for them at the moment. Preliminary research as part of this project was not adequate to recommend specific interventions, as the socio-economic system affecting the First Nations is very different from the one affecting other communities. Organizations familiar with the issues and opportunities are encouraged to coordinate efforts to improve outcomes more rapidly. Elements of support for First Nations may include: • • • •

43

Guidance for coordination with neighbouring local governments (guidance for local governments is equally important) Addressing key funding gaps and barriers Tracking the built environment disparities between First Nations and other communities (e.g. boil water advisories, power interruptions) Securing increased professional and community capacity to improve their built environments

8 CONCLUSION This research tells a complex story that includes frustratingly slow progress in some areas, pockets of incredible innovation (some leading to wider progress), and some hopeful signs that overall attitudes and practices are changing for the better. There is strong intent to make positive, lasting change towards sustainability, and it is clear that sustainability is deeply embedded into the work of built environment professionals across BC. However, in many cases the implementation of policies and plans appears to be stalled, frustrated by a number of factors. Even where progressive plans have been fully implemented or are beginning (and there are many notable examples) real evidence of outcomes −in terms of transportation mode shifts, GHG emission reductions or improved health − is usually missing. There is a gap between intent and action, and a need to translate ideas into viable and game-changing practice. Although a coherent, coordinated effort is unlikely given the complexity of the system and the number of actors, a number of elements representing a movement for built environment sustainability are in place. Efforts to coordinate action in each sub-system of the built environment, and to identify and strengthen strategic links between them are important, as are efforts to link built environment action to other key public interests (e.g. health, economy). This research took a systems perspective to the question of how to accelerate movement towards a sustainable built environment. That perspective suggests changes to systems fundamentals are critical to success: changing goals and “rules” of the system. These high leverage changes include strengthening regional planning; providing long-term funding for collective or coordinated initiatives; supporting influential funding and pricing shifts; freeing local governments and others to innovate; accelerating knowledge transfer; and targeting shifts in public and stakeholder beliefs and attitudes. As expressed in the quote below, this last is perhaps the most important change to pursue The sense of urgency in the sustainable built environment movement is high. British Columbia has a strong foundation in plans and policies, with accompanying knowledge and awareness among many professionals. Building support and systems change for the broader application of this knowledge and intent is our next challenge.

“My vision is one in which there is first an integration of thought in the realization that humanity is not disconnected from the natural world. There is an acceptance that ‘everything is one and everything is interconnected.’ It's a worldview, a way of processing information. So it first happens in a paradigm shift.” 44

45

9

APPENDICES

9.1 REFERENCES Albert, Marika. Affordable Housing for BC’s Capital Region: Tools for the Future. Community Social Planning Council. November 2012. http://www.communitycouncil.ca/sites/default/files/CSPC_Report_Tools_for_the_Future_FIN AL_NOV15.pdf Alexander, Don and Ray Tomalty. Sprawl: BC Sprawl Report 2001. Smart Growth BC, 2001. http://www.smartgrowth.bc.ca/publications/ResearchReports/tabid/155/Default.aspx Alexander, Don, Ray Tomalty, and Mark Anielski. BC Sprawl Report: Economic Vitality and Livable Communities. Smart Growth BC, 2004. http://www.smartgrowth.bc.ca/Portals/0/Downloads/Sprawl2004.pdf Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia. A Changing Climate in British Columbia: Evolving responsibilities for APEGBC and APEGBC Registrants. January 27, 2014. www.apeg.bc.ca/climatechange Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia. Report of the Climate Change Task Force. February 2010. https://www.apeg.bc.ca/APEGBC/media/APEGBC/Sustainability%20and%20Climate%20Ch ange/APEGBC-Climate-Change-Task-Force-Report.pdf Austin, M.S., D.A. Buffett, D.J. Nicolson, G.G.E. Scudder, and V. Stevens eds. “Taking Nature’s Pulse: The Status of Biodiversity in British Columbia.” Biodiversity BC, 2008. http://www.biodiversitybc.org/assets/pressReleases/BBC_StatusReport_Web_final.pdf B.C. Road Builders & Heavy Construction Association. Building the Road Ahead: Reinforcing the Link Between a Modern Highway Infrastructure and a stong B.C. Economy. No date. http://www.roadbuilders.bc.ca/pdf/building-roadahead-nov21.PDF BC Chamber of Commerce. “Protection of Industrial Lands for Future Prosperity.” BC Chamber of Commerce Website. Accessed 2013. http://www.bcchamber.org/policies/protectionindustrial-lands-future-prosperity-2013 BC Food Systems Network. Bill 24, Agricultural Land Commission Amendment Act, 2014: Key Issues at a Glance. April 2, 2014. http://bcfsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2014-0402-BCFSN-analysis-of-Bill-24-ALC-Amendment-Act.pdf BC Healthy Living Alliance. On The Path To Better Health. March 2014. http://www.bchealthyliving.ca/wp-content/uploads/bchla-path-final-mar14-screen.pdf BC Hydro Powersmart. Sustainable Communities Program at a Glance. January 2015. https://www.bchydro.com/content/dam/BCHydro/customer-portal/documents/powersmart/local-government-district/a12-149-scp-at-a-glance-hires.pdf

46

BC Hydro. “EVs in BC: A Few Facts (Infographic).” BC Hydro Website. Accessed April 30, 2015. https://www.bchydro.com/content/dam/BCHydro/customer-portal/graphics/info-chartsgraphs/electric-vehicles-in-bc-facts-infographic.pdf BC Provincial Agricultural Land Commission. British Columbia’s Agricultural Land Reserve: The Future of Farmland Regulation – Trends and Issues (presentation slides). BC Land Summit, May 15, 2014. BC Transit. “Annual Report – 2013/14.” BC Transit. March 2014. http://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/Annual_Reports/2013_2014/pdf/agency/bct.pdf BC Transit. “Carbon Neutral Action Report – 2013.” BC Transit. http://bctransit.com/servlet/documents/1403640520083 BC Transit. “Fast Facts.” BC Transit Website. Accessed April 20, 2015. http://bctransit.com/*/about/facts BC Transit. “Shaping Our Future: BC Transit’s Strategic Plan – 2030.” BC Transit. http://bctransit.com/servlet/documents/1403640530607 BC Trucking Association. “Environment.” BC Trucking Association Website. Accessed April 27, 2015. http://www.bctrucking.com/industry/environment BC Trucking Association. The British Columbia Trucking Industry: Proudly Serving BC …and YOU. No Date. http://www.bctrucking.com/sites/default/files/52713_bcta_brochure_online.pdf BC Water & Waste Association and Urban Systems. Are our Water Systems at Risk? Assessing the Financial Sustainability of BC’s Municipal Water and Sewer Systems. February 2015. http://bcwwa.org/resourcelibrary/Are%20Our%20Water%20Systems%20at%20Risk%20%20Full%20Report.pdf BC Water & Waste Association. Position Statement and Issues Analysis Paper for Asset Management (Draft). March 2015. http://bcwwa.org/resourcelibrary/AM%20Position%20Statement%20DRAFT-09MAR_15.pdf Bell, Patricia, Peter Robinsion, and Dale Littlejon. Community-based Renewable Energy in BC: A Snapshot. Community Energy Association, May 9, 2014. http://communityenergy.bc.ca/?1=bc-community-renewable-energy-snapshot Bender, Gregory. “The Canada Green Building Council Sustainable Communities Toolkit: A Best Practices Guide to Applying Sustainable Principles in Your Municipality.” Plan Canada 52, no. 1 (2012): 14-18. Biodiversity BC. “Taking Nature’s Pulse: The Status of Biodiversity in British Columbia.” Biodiversity BC, February 2008. http://www.biodiversitybc.org/assets/Default/Biodiversity%20BC%20LTA%20Insert.pdf British Columbia Water & Waste Association, Water Sustainability Committee and Canada. British Columbia. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. Water Sustainability Action Plan for British Columbia: Framework for Building Partnerships. February 2004.

47

http://www.dawsoncreek.ca/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2011/08/386_WaterSustainabilityActionPlanforBC.pdf Business Council of British Columbia. “Water – Blue Gold.” Environment and Energy Bulletin 5, no. 1 (2013): 1-10. http://www.bcbc.com/content/746/EEBv5n1%20%20Water%20FINAL.pdf Campbell, Charles. Forever Farmland: Reshaping the Agricultural Land Reserve for the 21st Century. David Suzuki Foundation, 2006. http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/downloads/2006/DSF-ALR-final3.pdf Canada Green Building Council and McGraw Hill Construction. Canada Green Building Trends: Benefits Driving The New and Retrofit Market. 2014. http://www.cagbc.org/cagbcdocs/resources/CaGBC%20McGraw%20Hill%20Cdn%20Marke t%20Study.pdf Canada. British Columbia. “Housing Strategy for British Columbia: A Foundation for Strong Communities.” Housing Matters BC, January 2104. http://www.housingmattersbc.ca/docs/HousingMattersBC_2014.pdf Canada. British Columbia. Ministry of Community Development. Intergovernmental Relations and Planning Division. Frequently Asked Questions: Local Government (Green Communities) Statutes Amendment Act, (Bill 27) 2008. [Victoria, BC], June 2008. http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/intergov_relations/library/Bill27_Green_Communities_FAQs.p df Canada. British Columbia. Ministry of Community Development. Resources from Waste: A Guide to Integrated Resource Recovery. 2009. http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/infra/library/resources_from_waste.pdf Canada. British Columbia. Ministry of Community, Sport & Cultural Development. “Green Communities.” Government of BC Website. Accessed April 22, 2015. http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/pathfinder-greencommunities.htm Canada. British Columbia. Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development. Intergovernmental Relations and Planning Division. Development Permit Areas for Climate Action: A Guide for Energy Conservation, Water Conservation and GHG Emissions Reduction. November 2011. http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/library/dpa_guide/dpa_guide.pdf Canada. British Columbia. Ministry of Environment. “Carbon Neutral Action Reports.” Government of BC Website. Accessed April 22, 2015. http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/climate-change/reports-data/carbonneutral-action-reports Canada. British Columbia. Ministry of Environment. “Climate Change Impacts.” Government of BC Website. Accessed April 22, 2015. http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/climate-change/reports-data/climatechange-impacts Canada. British Columbia. Ministry of Environment. Living WaterSmart: British Columbia’s Water Plan. 2008. http://www.livingwatersmart.ca/docs/livingwatersmart_book.pdf

48

Canada. British Columbia. Ministry of Municipal Affairs. Growth Strategies Office. Development Finance Choices Guide. October 15, 2000. http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/intergov_relations/library/development_finances_choices00_ guide.pdf Canada. British Columbia. Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. B.C. on the Move: A 10Year Transportation Plan. March 2015. http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/government/aboutthe-bc-government/transportation/bconthemove_part1.pdf Canada. British Columbia. Resource Management Division. Integrated Land Use Planning for Public Lands in British Columbia. February 1997. https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/slrp/policiesguides/Integrated_Land_Use_Planning.pdf Canada. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Housing Market Outlook: Vancouver and Abootsford CMAs. Fall 2014. http://www.cmhcschl.gc.ca/odpub/esub/64363/64363_2015_B01.pdf Canada. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Housing Market Outlook: British Columbia Region Highlights. First Quarter 2015. http://www.cmhcschl.gc.ca/odpub/esub/65442/65442_2015_Q01.pdf Canada. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Housing Now: BC Region. [Ottawa], First Quarter 2015. http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/odpub/esub/61500/61500_2015_Q01.pdf Canada. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Rental Market Statistics. Spring 2015. http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/odpub/esub/64725/64725_2015_B01.pdf?fr=1440441644100 Canada. Environment Canada. 2011 Municipal Water Use Report: Municipal Water Use 2009 Statistics. 2011. https://ec.gc.ca/Publications/B77CE4D0-80D4-4FEB-AFFA0201BE6FB37B%5C2011-Municipal-Water-Use-Report-2009-Stats_Eng.pdf Canada. Fisheries and Oceans and British Columbia. Beyond the Guidebook: Context for Rainwater Management and Green Infrastructure in British Columbia. Water Sustainability Action Plan for British Columbia, June 2007. http://www.waterbucket.ca/rm/sites/wbcrm/documents/media/37.pdf Canada. Fisheries and Oceans, British Columbia, and Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia. Beyond the Guidebook: Implementing a New Culture for Urban Watershed Protection and Restoration in British Columbia. Convening for Action in British Columbia, June 2010. http://www.waterbucket.ca/cfa/sites/wbccfa/documents/media/403.pdf Canada. Natural Resources Canada. CanmetENERGY Communities Group. District Energy Systems Stakeholder Engagement Guide. 2014. https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca/files/energy/pdf/engagementguide_eng_12. pdf Canada. Natural Resources Canada. Electric Vehicle Technology Roadmap for Canada: A Strategic Vision for Highway-capable Bettry-electric, Plug-in and Other Hybrid-electric Vehicles. 2009. http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/399694/publication.html

49

Canadan. British Columbia. Ministry of Community Services. Regional Growth Strategies: An Explanatory Guide. February 2006. http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/intergov_relations/library/RGS_Explanatory_Guide_2005.pdf Canadian Urban Institute. The Value of Investing in Canadian Downtowns. May 2012. https://www.ida-downtown.org/eweb/docs/ValueInvCanDwtn12.pdf Cascadia Region Green Building Council. Living Building Financial Study: The Effects of Climate, Building Type and Incentives on Creating the Buildings of Tomorrow. April 2009. http://livingfuture.org/ilfi/ideas-action/research/finance/living-building-challenge-financial-study Center for Interactive Research on Sustainability. “Integrated Resource Management Using a Water Lens.” Center for Interactive Research on Sustainability Website. Accessed on May 20, 2015. http://cirs.ubc.ca/research/integrated-resource-management-and-sharing/integratedresource-management-using-water-lens Cole, Raymond J. Regenerative Neighbourhoods Project: Narrative of Activities 2014. Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability – University of British Columbia. 2014. http://cirs.ubc.ca/research/research-area/regenerative-neighbourhoods-program Community Energy Association. Integrated Community Energy Solutions: Progress Report – Province of British Columbia. Produced for Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow (QUEST), August 2013. http://www.questcanada.org/sites/default/files/files/ICES%20Progress%20Report%20%20Province%20of%20BC(1).pdf Corps, Chris, Stephen Salter, Wm. Patrick Lucey, and Jon O’Riordan. Resources from Waste: Integrated Resource Management Phase I Study Report. Prepared for BC Ministry of Community Services, February 29, 2008. http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/infra/library/Resources_From_Waste_IRM_Study.pdf CSA Group. National Survey of Canada’s Infrastructure Engineers about Climate Change. Prepared for Engineers Canada, May 2012. https://www.apeg.bc.ca/getmedia/4e003686-63dd-41c2a5d6-27df561b76e4/Engineers-Canada-National-Survey-of-Canada-InfrastructureEngineers-about-Climate-Change.pdf.aspx CSA Group. Supplement to the report on the National Survey of Canada’s Infrastructure Engineers about Climate Change: Breakdown by Jurisdiction of the Results of Survey Questions 4 and 7. Prepared for Engineers Canada, May 2012. https://www.apeg.bc.ca/getmedia/4f42dacca752-4aa7-8337-31f4248436e8/Engineers-Canada-National-Survey-of-CanadaInfrastructure-Engineers-about-Climate-Change-Supplement.pdf.aspx Cycling BC. Strategic Plan 2013-2015: Inspiring People to Ride. October 2013. http://cyclingbc.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/CBC-Strategic-Plan-11-Oct-2013.pdf Eco-Industrial Solutions Ltd. Smart Growth on the Ground Foundation Research Bulletin: Squamish – Eco-Industrial Networking. Design Centre for Sustainability at the University of British Columbia, no. 7 (April 2005): 1-7. http://www.dcs.sala.ubc.ca/docs/sgog_frb_squamish_ein_sec62112411.pdf

50

Eisenberg, David, Sonja Persram, and Katie Spataro. Living Building Challenge: Code, Regulatory and Systemic Barriers Affecting Living Building Projects. Edited by Jason F. McLennan. Cascadia Region Green Building Council, 2009. https://living-future.org/sites/default/files/photos/090729%20code%20paper%20Eisenberg(1).pdf Federation of Canadian Municipalities. Building Prosperity from the Ground Up: Restoring Municipal Fiscal Balance. June 2006. https://www.fcm.ca/Documents/reports/Building_Prosperity_from_the_Ground_Up_Restorin g_Muncipal_Fiscal_Balance_EN.pdf Federation of Canadian Municipalities. Fixing Canada’s Housing Crunch: Now is the Time to Act. 2013. http://www.fcm.ca/home/issues/housing/fixing-canadas-housing-crunch.htm Félio, Guy et al. “Asset Management Primer.” Canadian Infrastructure Report Card, 2014. http://www.canadainfrastructure.ca/ al. “Highlights.” Canadian Infrastructure Report Card, 2012. http://www.canadainfrastructure.ca/ Félio, Guy et al. “Municipal Roads and Water Systems.” Canadian Infrastructure Report Card 1, (2012): 1 – 59. http://www.canadainfrastructure.ca/ Félio, Guy et al. “Project to develop an Intrastructure Report Card for Canada: Project Summary and Update (Presentation Slides).” Canadian Infrastructure Report Card, January 2011. http://www.canadainfrastructure.ca/ Forest Practices Board. Provincial Land Use Planning: Which way from here? November 2008. https://www.bcfpb.ca/sites/default/files/reports/SR34.pdf Frank, Lawrence D. and Kim Raine. Creating a Healthier Built Environment in British Columbia. British Columbia Provincial Health Services Authority, September 2007. http://www.phsa.ca/Documents/creatingahealthierbuiltenvironmentinbc.pdf Fraser Basin Council. “Green Fleets BC.” Fraser Basin Council Website. Accessed May 2015. http://www.fraserbasin.bc.ca/ccaq_green_fleets_bc.html Fraser Basin Council. “Remote Community Implementation Program.” Fraser Basin Council Website. Accessed May 2015. http://www.fraserbasin.bc.ca/ccaq_rci.html Gillen, David. Building for the Future of British Columbia: The Importance of Transporatation Infrastructure to Economic Growth and Employment. Centre for Transportation Studies. November 2012. http://www.sauder.ubc.ca/Faculty/Research_Centres/Centre_for_Transportation_Studies/~/ media/Files/Faculty%20Research/OPLOG%20Division/OPLOG%20Publications/GILLEN/Bui lding%20for%20the%20Future%20of%20British%20Columbia.ashx Go For Green, The Active Living & Environment Program. Making the Case for Active Transportation. Fall 2000. http://www.physicalactivitystrategy.ca/wpcontent/uploads/2008/06/goforgreen-at-factsheet.pdf Gordon, David L.A. and Isaac Shirokoff. Suburban Nation? Population Growth in Canadian Suburbs, 2006-2011 (Working Paper #1). Council for Canadian Urbanism, July 2014. http://www.canadianurbanism.ca/canu_workingpaper1_suburban_nation/

51

Henney and Karly Danielle. “Industrial Ecology and the Capacity for Implementing EcoIndustrial Parks in Richmond, British Columbia.” Masters Thesis, School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, December 2001. HUB. “HUB: Your Cycling Connection – A Historic Timeline.” Excerpt from HUB: Your Cycling Connection 2012-13 Annual Report. 2012. https://bikehub.ca/sites/default/files/imce/hub_annual_report_2012-13_0.pdf HUB. “Projects & Successes.” HUB Website. Accessed April 20, 2015. https://bikehub.ca/aboutus/projects-successes Hume, Mark. “B.C. farmland lost to tree planting for carbon credits is a frightening loss.” The Globe and Mail (Vancouver, BC), April 12, 2015. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/bc-ndp-alarmed-over-farmlandlost-to-tree-planting-for-carbon-credits/article23893267/ Hume, Mark. “Despite being at ‘peak farm,’ land is getting less protection.” The Globe and Mail (Vancouver, BC), May 18, 2014. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/britishcolumbia/despite-being-at-peak-farm-land-is-getting-less-protection/article18741001/ Jantzi-Sustainalytics. Canadian Commercial Real Estate Sustainability Performance Report. Real Property Association of Canada. 2010. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.realpac.ca/resource/resmgr/industry_sustainability__research_reports/jantzi-realpaccdn-comm-re-su.pdf Jarvis. Ian. 20 by ’15: Achieving the Office Building Target of 20 ekWh/ft2/year by 2015. Real Property Association of Canada, September 18, 2009. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.realpac.ca/resource/resmgr/industry_sustainability__research_reports/20-by15final18sept09.pdf?hhSearchTerms=%22%2220+by+%2715%22%22 Jones, Russ. “Shaping Transit’s Future in British Columbia.” Office of the Auditor General of British Columbia Website. Accessed April 30, 2015. http://www.bcauditor.com/online/pubs/ShapingTransit Katz, Diane. “The BC Agricultural Land Reserve: A Critical Assessment.” Fraser Institute, October 2009. http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research-news/display.aspx?id=13485 Kirk & Co. Consulting Ltd. & Mustel Group. B.C. on the Move: A 10-Year Transportation Plan – Public Engagement Summary Report. Prepared for the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation January 2015. http://engage.gov.bc.ca/transportationplan/files/2015/03/BCOTM_Summary-Report_March2015_web.pdf Lees, Erik, Heidi Redman, and Lukas Holy. Healthy Built Environment Linkages: A Toolkit for Design, Planning, Health. Provincial Health Services Authority, October 2014. http://www.phsa.ca/Documents/linkagestoolkitrevisedoct16_2014_full.pdf Litman, Todd. “NCE Cities Sprawl Subsidy Report: Analysis of Public Policies that Unintentionally Encourage and Subsidize Urban Sprawl.” The New Climate Economy, March 2015. https://files.lsecities.net/files/2015/03/NCE-Sprawl-Subsidy-Report-021.pdf

52

Litman, Todd. Twelve Reasons to Support Vancouver’s Transportation Tax. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. March 28, 2015. http://www.vtpi.org/VanTransitTax.pdf Miller, Stacia and Katie Spataro. Making the Switch: Transitioning Toward Integrated Water Management in Puget Sound. Cascadia Green Building Council, August 2013. http://livingfuture.org/makingtheswitch Miro, Alice, Danyta Welch, Marylyn Chiang, Natalie Laframboise, Matt Herman, Robin Burgess, Winnie Yu, and Laurie Ringaert. Planning for the Future: Age-friendly and Disability-friendly Official Community Plans. Union of BC Municipalities, 2010. http://www.ubcm.ca/assets/Resolutions~and~Policy/Policy/Healthy~Communities/Planning %20for%20the%20Future.pdf Moorhouse, Jenny, Katie Laugenberg. Electric Vehicles: Powering the Future. The Pembina Institute. September 2010. http://pluginbc.ca/resource/electric-vehicles-powering-future/ My Health my Community. Transportation in Metro Vancouver. March 2015. https://www.myhealthmycommunity.org/Portals/0/Documents/MHMC%20Transportation% 20and%20Health%20vPUBLIC%2012MAR2015.pdf O’Brien, Andrea (NRG Research Group). British Columbia Cycling Coalition: Cycling Poll, 2013. British Columbia Cycling Coalition. April 22, 2013. http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/bccyclingcoalition/legacy_url/233/bc-cyclingpoll.pdf?1408764326 Peck, Steven. “The Evolution of Eco-Industrial Development.” The Eco-Industrial Advantage 2, no. 1 (2002): 1–16. http://www.cardinalgroup.ca/cein/jan_2002.pdf Physical Activity Strategy. BEAT – The Path to Health. Physical Activity Strategy. Fall 2008. http://physicalactivitystrategy.ca/pdfs/BEAT/BEAT_Publication.pdf Pond, Ellen, Duncan Cavens, Nicole Miller, and Stephen Sheppard. The Retrofit Challenge: Rethinking Existing Residential Neighbourhoods for Deep Greenhouse Gas Reductions. The Collaborative for Advanced Landscape Planning at the University of British Columbia. 2010. http://calp.forestry.ubc.ca/files/2010/02/CALP_REIBC_Retrofit-Challenge_Final_Report.pdf Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada. British Columbia, Protected Areas, Lands and Regulations, Issues and Advocacy. April 2008. http://www.pdac.ca/docs/defaultsource/public-affairs/protected-areas---british-columbia.pdf?sfvrsn=5 Real Estate Institute of British Columbia. Green Homes Sell for More: LEED Introduces Program Designed for Residential Construction (Media Release). No date. http://www.reibc.org/_Library/Documents/Green_Homes_Sell_for_More.pdf Real Property Association of Canada and FPL Advisory. REALpac/FPL Canadian Real Estate Sentiment Survey. First Quarter 2015. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.realpac.ca/resource/resmgr/SentimentSurveys/Q215_REALpa c_Sentiment_Surve.pdf Sandborn, C., ed. Maintaining Natural BC for Our Children: Selected Law Reform Proposals. Victoria, BC: Environmental Law Centre, 2012.

53

Schatz, Akua. Big Ideas for Small Homes (presentation slides). Small Housing BC, no date. Sennett, Richard. “The Spaces for Democracy.” Harvard Design Magazine, no. 8 (1999). http://www.newcommons.com/download-document/51-spaces-of-democracy.html Sightline Institute. Sprawl and Smart Growth in Greater Vancouver: A Comparison of Vancouver, British Columbia, with Seattle, Washignton. September 12, 2002. http://www.sightline.org/research/sprawl_smart_van/ Smith, Regan and Ian Theaker. Planning Green Communities for the Future. Real Property Association of Canada, July 2009. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.realpac.ca/resource/resmgr/industry_sustainability__research_reports/planninggreencommunitiesfutu.pdf Stephens, Kim A., Patrick Graham, and David Reid. Stormwater Planning: A Guidebook for British Columbia. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, May 2002. http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/environment/stormwater.htm The Partnership for Water Sustainability in BC. “Celebrating a Decade of Success: ‘Green Infrastructure Practices Have Moved From Pilot Project to Neighbourhood and Watershed Scale Approaches,’ Reflects Paul Ham, an Early Green Infrastructure Champion.” The Partnership for Water Sustainability in BC Website. Accessed August 23, 2014. http://waterbucket.ca/cfa/2014/08/23/celebrating-decade-success-green-infrastructurepractices-have-moved-from-pilot-project-neighbourhood-watershed-scale-approaches-sayspaul-ham/ The Partnership for Water Sustainability in BC. “Convening for Action in British Columbia.” The Partnership for Water Sustainability in BC Website. Accessed August 4, 2014. http://waterbucket.ca/cfa/2014/08/04/convening-for-action-in-british-columbia-2/ The Vancouver Heritage Foundation. New Life Old Buildings: Your Green Guide to Heritage Conservation. 2008. http://www.cobourg.ca/images/Heritage/hrtg-VHF-GreenGuide.pdf Thompson, David. Suburban Sprawl: Exposing hidden costs, identifying innovations. Sustainable Prosperity, October, 2013. http://thecostofsprawl.com/report/SP_SuburbanSprawl_Oct2013_opt.pdf TransLink. 2004 Greater Vancouver Trip Diary Survey. TransLink. 2004. http://www.translink.ca//media/Documents/plans_and_projects/trip_diary/2004%20Greater%20Vancouver%20Tri p%20Diary%20Survey.pdf TransLink. 2008 Regional Screenline Survey. TransLink. December 2009. http://www.translink.ca//media/Documents/plans_and_projects/trip_diary/2008%20Regional%20Screenline%20S urvey%20Report.pdf TransLink. 2011 Metro Vancouver Regional Trip Diary Survey: Briefing Paper #1 – An Overview of Regional Demand and Mode Share. TransLink. 2011. http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/about_translink/media/2012/2011%20metro %20van%20trip%20diary%20survey%20briefing%201.ashx

54

TransLink. 2014 Base Plan and Outlook. TransLink. October 30, 2013. http://www.translink.ca//media/Documents/plans_and_projects/10_year_plan/2014_base_plan/2014%20Base%2 0Plan.pdf TransLink. 2014 Base Plan Summary. TransLink. October 3, 2013. http://www.translink.ca//media/Documents/plans_and_projects/10_year_plan/2014_base_plan/2014%20Base%2 0Plan%20Summary.pdf TransLink. Cycling for Everyone: A Regional Cycling Strategy for Metro Vancouver. TransLink. June 2011. http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/cycling/regional_cycling_strategy/cycling%20f or%20everyone.ashx TransLink. Strategic Planning Department. 1999 Lower Mainland Truck Freight Study. TransLink. July 2000. http://www.translink.ca//media/Documents/plans_and_projects/urban_showcase/goods_movement/background_re search/Goods%20Movement%20Study%20%20Truck%20Freight%20Study%20Summar y%201999.pdf TransLink. Transport 2040: A Transportation Strategy for Metro Vancouver, Now and in the Future. TransLink. 2008. http://www.translink.ca//media/Documents/plans_and_projects/regional_transportation_strategy/Transport%20204 0/Transport%202040.pdf Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia, 2014 SCC 44, [2014] 2 S.C.R. 256. http://www.fns.bc.ca/pdf/William_en_(SCC-2014).pdf Union of British Columbia Municipalities. “Asset Management Planning Grant Program Launched.” Union of BC Municipalities Website. Accessed December 10, 2014. http://www.ubcm.ca/EN/meta/news/news-archive/2014-archive/asset-managementplanning-grant-program-launched.html University of British Columbia. “Motivating Cycling.” University of British Columbia Website. Accessed April 27, 2015. http://cyclingincities.spph.ubc.ca/opinion-survey/ University of British Columbia. Cycling in Cities Research Team. Cycling in Cities (brochure). University of British Columbia. [2012]. http://cyclingincities.spph.ubc.ca/files/2012/08/OpinionSurveyBrochure.pdf Urban Systems Ltd. and Andrew Wood. The State of Asset Management in British Columbia. Prepared for Asset Management B.C. in partnership with the Ministry of Community and Rural Development and Infrastructure Canada, September 2010. http://www.civicinfo.bc.ca/Library/Asset_Management/Tools_and_Resources/The_State_of_ Asset_Management_in_BC--LGAMWG--September_2010.pdf Vancouver Foundation. Connections and Engagement: A Survey of Metro Vancouver. June 2012. https://www.vancouverfoundation.ca/initiatives/connections-and-engagement Vancouver Sun. “Metro Affordability.” The Vancouver Sun, February 13, 2015. http://www.scribd.com/doc/255686105/Metro-Affordability#scribd

55

Williams-Derry, Clark. Slowing Down: Greater Vancouver’s smart-growth leadership slips. Sightline Institute, May 2008. http://www.sightline.org/research/slowing-down/

56

9.2 POTENTIAL INTERVENTIONS This report included a summary of all interventions raised through survey responses, focus group comments, and research. These summary interventions are shown below and organized into the four elements of the sustainable built environment and sorted from high priority to low priority. The summary interventions were reviewed from the lens of leverage points to intervene in a system. 9 The leverage points, from least impact to most impact, include: • • • • • •

Changes to physical systems: Interventions that affect the inputs or outputs of a physical or natural system, including material stocks and flows. Changes to policies, taxes, standards, and incentives: Interventions that affect negative and positive feedback loops that attempt to correct and positive feedback loops that influence behaviour, such as regulations, standards, taxes, grants, incentives, and policy. Changes to information flows: Interventions that affect who knows what and how information is communicated. Change to the rules of the system: Interventions that change what the rules of a system are (and who makes them). Maintenance of the capacity for innovation and change: Interventions that supports a system’s ability to evolve and self-organize. Changes to goals and core assumptions and beliefs: Interventions that shape people’s fundamental assumptions, values, and beliefs, as well as the goals that a system achieves through feedback loops, information, and self-organization.

The summary interventions were prioritized by assigning a “High,” “Medium,” or “Low” level of impact that the intervention could have on leverage points.

9

Based on: Meadows, Donella. Leverage Points: Places to intervene in a system. Sustainability Institute, 1999. http://www.donellameadows.org/wp-content/userfiles/Leverage_Points.pdf

54

Support the increase of the carbon price, water prices, electricity prices, and road prices to better link costs and benefits.

6

H

5

M

Engage the public and key influencers through daily experience and experiential learning of the sustainable built environment, including pilot projects with high impact. Support increased energy and/or carbon pricing

L

H

H

Priority

H

Changes to goals and core assumptions and beliefs

H

Maintenance of the capacity for innovation and change

Change the rules of the system

Reform law and policy across Provincial and local governments to link costs and benefits of built environment decisions, so that good and bad investments are clear. Development approvals should include clear anticipated payback periods for costly investment and the anticipated financial obligation a municipality takes on. Municipalities need stronger legal authority and regulatory tools to require a sustainable built environment.

Changes to information flows

Changes to policies, taxes, standards, incentives

Intervention

Changes to physical systems

GENERAL

4 3

Contribute to Provincial Climate Plan development and on-going monitoring

H

3

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. The knowledge base should consider the varying needs of large and small areas, as well as rural and urban areas. The knowledge base should also be living, meaning that professionals from many sectors (architecture, banking, investing, insurance, healthcare, environmental health, construction, landscaping, etc.) are involved in developing and disseminating the new best practices, policies, programs, incentives, and technologies.

H

3

Support full-cost accounting for governments, including valuation for ecological services and lifecycle economic decisions.

H

Celebrate leadership that supports social wellbeing, climate change action, and environmental protection.

3 L

M

3

Pressure for reinstatement of Provincial and Federal grant and funding programs for local government and for national flood protection standards and mapping.

H

3

Communicate sustainability-related policy, regulatory, and development changes by focusing on the positive multiple benefits and aligning them to local values, like economic development, happiness, and wellness.

M

2

Investigate where the divergence on values and priorities between Provincial and local government regulations and policies is, along with drivers of progress, so that policy and regulation align to support progress.

M

2

Support a cultural shift in government to value innovation and risk-taking more, with a safe and supported space to document and learn from mistakes.

M

2

Involve communities in built environment decisions and development to increase community ownership of assets and support a healthy democracy.

M

2

55

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

M

Promote better integration of transportation, land use, and infrastructure systems. Ideas include requiring a qualified Urban Designer for proposals over a certain size, target mode split for neighbourhoods and minimum levels of transit service, 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, etc.

M

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

Changes to goals and core assumptions and beliefs

Priority

Change the rules of the system

Changes to information flows

L

Maintenance of the capacity for innovation and change

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

Changes to policies, taxes, standards, incentives

Intervention

Changes to physical systems

INTEGRATED COMMUNITIES

M

H

6

H

5

H

M

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 get past the “usual suspects” (NIMBYs) and involve more diverse and balanced perspectives.

5

M

4

L

H

4

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

H

3

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

H

3

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

M

2

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.

M

2

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

M

2

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

56

M

2

M

2

Changes to goals and core assumptions and beliefs

Priority

Advocate to senior government to renew a more significant role in the sector (i.e. a national housing strategy, increased funding for non-market housing) 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.

Change the rules of the system

M

Maintenance of the capacity for innovation and change

Need to educate and communicate affordability more effectively and holistically with the media and the public to counter resistance to density and non-market housing development. Also need to adjust public expectations on housing size and consumption with a goal of people accepting more housing forms and tenures “in their backyard” by focusing on the benefits.

Changes to information flows

Changes to policies, taxes, standards, incentives

Intervention

Changes to physical systems

HOUSING

M

H

7

M

5

H

M

M

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

4

H

Need to 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.

M

L

M

4

4

Need a comprehensive approach to highway-oriented commercial and single-family development that does not support compact, walkable, and complete communities.

H

3

Need to 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-tomoderate 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).

M

2

Create more tools for local governments and nongovernmental 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.

57

M

2

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

H

Reduce or eliminate split incentives: Support adoption of 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

L

L

H

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

Priority 3

L

3

H

3

3

H

3

3

H

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

M

2 2

Research and development of tools for deep green retrofits Find opportunities to document and learn from experience, including both failures and successes

M

2

M

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

58

H

3

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

Provide incentives for upgrading/redeveloping existing building stock

6

3

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

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

7

H

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

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

M

H

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

Changes to goals and core assumptions and beliefs

H

Maintenance of the capacity for innovation and change

M

Change the rules of the system

Changes to information flows

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

Changes to policies, taxes, standards, incentives

Intervention

Changes to physical systems

BUILDINGS, ENERGY & INFRASTRUCTURE

2

M L

2 1

Lobby the Province for funding, incentives, and tools that support active transportation and transit, including mileage-based insurance, road pricing, a flat 30% of road infrastructure funding going towards active transportation and transit.

H

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 placemaking.

Priority

Changes to goals and core assumptions and beliefs

H

M

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.

Maintenance of the capacity for innovation and change

Change the rules of the system

Changes to information flows

Changes to policies, taxes, standards, incentives

Intervention

Changes to physical systems

TRANSPORTATION

6

M

H

M

6

L

4

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 build. 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.

M

M

4

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

M

M

4

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.

M

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 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.

59

M

4

H

3

M

2

M

2