EcoDensity: making Vancouver sustainable, livable, affordable
Yesterday, jlousa posted a link to the EcoDensity Draft Charter & Draft Initial Actions.
In my opinion, it's an amazing piece of work. It lists the authors as B. Toderian, R. Howard, and T. Kuhlmann. What an incredible job they've done! It definitely gives me a great degree of confidence in Brent Toderian. Also, Sam Sullivan deserves credit for his political push of the idea. The Draft Charter essentially states that Vancouver will work toward achieving sustainability through a focus on higher density, greener building design, and more effective land use planning. I recommend that if you don't have time to read the whole report at the link above, at least skim through the Draft Initial Actions listed below. Draft EcoDensity Initial Actions (2008-2009) Part I: Raising green standards 1. Greener buildings (4 storeys and over) Achieve a new green standard in rezonings, effective immediately, by requiring at least LEED Silver equivalency for rezonings for buildings to which LEED may be applied (i.e., larger than 600 square meters; typically, these buildings are 4 storeys and over) with an emphasis on the City priorities (e.g., energy efficiency); and consult with the development industry about moving to LEED Gold equivalency or better at an appropriate time. 2. Greater sustainability for Large Site developments Where planning policy or rezonings are undertaken for Large Sites or significant changes to existing CD-1 zones, allow consideration of development beyond the density and/or scale set out in Community Vision Directions or other area policies when the proposal shows exemplary leadership in environmental performance while also addressing affordability, and community amenities. This policy to be immediately effective for rezoning inquiries and applications for which policy development is initiated. 3. Incentives for Green Design To encourage design considerations that improve green performance in the short term, investigate potential energy performance incentives through floor space exclusions that directly relate to green design and technologies, in advance of more detailed strategies through the Green Building Strategy. 4. EcoDensity demonstration in lower density areas Encourage projects that demonstrate an exceptional level of leadership in innovative green design and sustainable practices, by adopting in principle the concept of an Interim EcoDensity Rezoning Policy, that would allow projects that meet specified green criteria to be considered for site-specific rezoning in advance of area planning. Projects would conform to Vision Directions about type, location, and scale. The specific Rezoning Policy would need to be reported back to Council for approval. 5. EcoDensity leadership on City land To show City leadership and to improve understanding of, and generate interest in, emerging sustainability practices, develop a proposal to use City land for one or more EcoDensity demonstrations, at potentially varying scales and that could include a variety of EcoDensity and related features, such as deep green design, renewable energy sources, alternative parking standards, affordable housing, and urban agriculture. 6. Priority to applications with green leadership To encourage the development industry to build at an exemplary level of green, investigate the creation of a prioritised application review system for ultra-green projects to be implemented post-2010. Part II: Developing options for new housing types 7. More options for secondary suites within buildings Develop options to require, allow and/or encourage secondary suites in buildings at all scales, from single family and duplex to apartments in order to increase the density of housing units within current housing forms, as well as create lower-cost rental housing. 8. New options for backyard laneway infill housing Develop options to create a new type of lane-oriented infill, involving features such as implementation on 33’ lots without loss of existing houses; low scale forms; green performance; and rental tenure. 9. New options for arterial mid-rise housing Develop options to create new models of mid-rise arterial housing rather than the current 4-storey model In order to provide more housing close to shops, services, and transit. Part III – Developing supporting tools 10. Enabling District Energy Develop a City-wide renewable energy strategy, including district energy systems, and evaluate specific regulatory and implementation opportunities through consultation and research projects using existing operating budget and contributions by other stakeholders. 11. Amenity tools Pursue additional policy tools for obtaining public benefits through development and for providing public benefits in order to ensure that growth is accompanied with adequate community amenities. Part IV: Moving toward a long-term more sustainable city pattern 12. Plan for the longer term Develop a program that will provide a city-wide context for determining where and how to make land use changes beyond existing plans and policies, in order to further improve sustainability, affordability, and livability – the program to start with mapping the city’s existing development pattern and plans, as a base for broad public discussion of additional opportunities and options. 13. Amenity strategies for the longer term Develop a program, involving all City departments, for a comprehensive amenity strategy review, starting with documenting existing standards, delivery mechanisms, capacities, and plans, and using this as a base to evaluate and develop new strategies, with public input. Part V: Accountability 14. Measurement tools Continue to investigate and develop tools to measure ecological footprint performance at various scales and contexts, and indicators to assess and report on Vancouver’s progress. 15. Panel Set up a Panel of advisors comprised of Vancouverites including academics, builders, interest groups, and residents from across the city, to provide advice as needed to further the goals of EcoDensity. 16. Progress Report Structure Prepare a structure to assess progress and success in meeting the commitments of the EcoDensity Charter which may include an occasional EcoDensity ‘summit’ and a report card prepared at arms-length. ---- One last thought I have is that there seems to be a lot of focus throughout the document on engaging the public. Action 15 above, calling for the creation of a panel which includes interest groups, is especially interesting. Would now be a good time to resurrect Canadian Mind's idea of creating such an interest group (the Vancouver Metropolis Initiative)? I mean, with the combined knowledge and passion of the people on here, we'd probably be very well qualified to provide meaningful input to the panel. |
heh, first time I've ever seen my name mentioned at random, thanks for the credit. :D
Anyways; aside from transit issues, and my unfailing desire to eliminate view cones, this is another reason why I wanted the group formed in the first place. so we can get our own consensus on issues, and jump at the chance to make things happen. The fact that we've been invited to do so in this case makes me feel even stronger that we should get started. We've already got a pool of well informed people, plus a place to discuss ideas, so why not get it started? |
Quote:
|
probrably wouldn't. But I don't think it would be a one man operation. And as there are probrably a dozen or more people on here with a better education regarding city planning and architecture than I; they'd be the ones that hash-out the consensus and make it legitimate/understandable as far as presenting it to the panel would go.
|
Quote:
But, what cracks me up is the following ... um brilliant response to eco-density by COPE councillor Cadman::haha: _________________________________________________________________ VANCOUVER/CKNW(AM980) - Vancouver City Councillors spent hours debating “eco-density” Tuesday, as the City attempts to create a policy surrounding the yet-to-be defined term. Opposition Councillors say the entire process is “backwards” because instead of creating a policy and then naming it, the Mayor decided to name a concept and then attempt to define it. COPE Councillor David Cadman says the policy so far is “tepid,” and doesn’t even go far enough to address the challenges of climate change, “Let’s look at our City and say, what does a one meter, a two meter, and a three meter rise of sea mean? Have we done that? Well, it strikes me as elementary that if you want something to be sustainable, you don’t want it to be underwater.” Public consultations on the draft eco-density charter will be held in the new year. |
^ then we'll build dikes...or pull a Venice with that tide gate thing.
|
MacDonald is the developer behind The Hudson and The Capitol - so the construction of a 40 storey tower is not beyond his reach.
Quote:
|
I don't see why people find this so surprising - construction has a lot of fixed costs - so the ability to build more won't make a massive impact on the price of a unit.
**************** Quote:
|
Quote:
http://www.historicplaces.ca/images/...2609_view0.jpg |
Quote:
|
EcoDensity raises fears of crowding without amenities
Frances Bula, Vancouver Sun Published: Monday, February 11, 2008 VANCOUVER I The city is getting international admiration for its catchily named EcoDensity initiative, but some city residents are nervous about what it means for them. As the city heads into the home stretch of public consultation on what will become an "EcoDensity Charter," resident groups have banded together to express their concern that the policy -- marketed as a way to make Vancouver a more environmentally sustainable city by promoting compact living and green building -- may result in density just being shoved into their neighbourhoods. As well, they worry there isn't enough emphasis on creating affordable housing or complete neighbourhoods with libraries, transit and community services to go with the density. Those are some of the points that a consortium of 23 neighbourhood groups has made in a formal letter to city council, in an effort to modify the final EcoDensity Charter, which is due to be voted on at the end of the month. "The concept isn't bad, but we want a sustainable city, not just a dense one," said Mel Lehan, a veteran Kitsilano resident activist, who speaks behalf of groups from Southlands to Commercial Drive and Dunbar to southeast Vancouver. Lehan said people feel the process is being rushed through and they fear that the new charter will mean that "we will have 40-storey towers that will be built in the middle of nowhere." As well, they don't like a postscript added by Coun. Suzanne Anton to consider taller buildings in the city's heritage neighbourhoods of Chinatown, Gastown and the Downtown Eastside. City planning director Brent Toderian said he can understand why the proposed EcoDensity Charter is provoking fear and skepticism. "It's an unusual process and it was launched in an unusual way, so it's a challenge for the community," said Toderian, who inherited the job of putting the initiative into action when he started his job as planning director a year and a half ago. Mayor Sam Sullivan had announced the EcoDensity initiative as a way to launch the World Urban Forum in Vancouver the previous June, somewhat to the surprise of some of his councillors. "There are concerns about the politics and process and that's making it a challenge for us," Toderian said. However, he said he and his staff are meeting with every community group that wants to meet with them and he is reassuring them that the EcoDensity Charter will not override the local plans most Vancouver neighbourhoods developed over the past decade as a part of CityPlan. Instead, he said, the new charter will allow planning staff to push for environmental initiatives that complement existing policy or where policy is vague. "I think we can do a lot that is different but is not incompatible," Toderian said. Some resident groups are cautiously willing to give him, and the city, the benefit of the doubt. Colin Gray, chairman of the Dunbar Visions group, which developed the west-side neighbourhood's local plan 10 years ago, said Toderian met the group before Christmas and allayed some of their fears. On the other hand, Gray said, residents hear about proposals to build seniors' residences in their neighbourhood that are much higher than the current four-storey limit. "There's this pressure to use the seniors' card to get more height. It just feels like there's huge pressure to get higher density." But Gray said his group is waiting to see how events evolve. "We're nervous, but we'll play a little bit longer." fbula@png.canwest.com |
How we grow remains the key to a city's livability
Craig McInnes Vancouver Sun Saturday, February 16, 2008 In many ways, Vancouver can fairly claim to be a world-class city. But in terms of size, it's still strictly Smallville. Not only does it not make the global top 10 in population, it may not even sneak into the top 100, depending on how the urban boundaries are measured. For sheer size of a metropolitan region, nothing beats the megalopolis of Tokyo/Yokohama, an urban area that has more than 33 million people -- roughly the entire population of Canada. For a single city, Mumbai -- formerly Bombay -- on the steamy west coast of India takes top spot with somewhere around 14 million souls. BC Stats estimates the population of Metro Vancouver to be about 2.3 million. But as some neighbourhood groups reacting to Vancouver's proposed EcoDensity initiative are pointing out, bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. EcoDensity is based on the notion that growth is inevitable and that sprawl is hard on the planet, especially when climate change is factored in. Although the sappy catchphrase was recently coined, it's actually based on principles that city planners have been following since citizen action kept freeways from plunging downtown in the 1970s. The no-name version led to thousands of new residents living the city core in a phenomenon that has been largely responsible for Vancouver's enviable reputation as one of the most livable cities in the world. Increasing population in existing neighbourhoods -- known as densification -- makes a number of good things happen. More people mean more potential riders for public transit. More riders means that buses can run more often. That means less waiting time, which makes riding buses more attractive, which means more people will use them, which means they can run more often, and so on. Pretty soon, there are enough riders to support rapid transit, so you can travel longer distances conveniently. Putting people downtown means many of them can simply walk to work. That takes a huge strain off the roads and even the transit system. Despite the population growth, Vancouver is the only major city in Canada where the time people spend commuting on average is actually decreasing. At some point, you might decide you can do without a car. According to the latest calculations from the Canadian Automobile Association, that could save you $8,500 a year plus parking, which Colliers International reports is relatively cheap in downtown Vancouver at a little more than $300 a month. That $12,000 a year you save on a car creates another $200,000 in borrowing room when buying a home, based on a six-per-cent mortgage. You'll need that, of course, because the cost of real estate is driven in large part by the attraction of living here. More people also support more amenities, more shops, more restaurants, more entertainment and sports, all the things that put the buzz in big city life. So it's all good, right? Just keep packing them in. Well, back to the world-class thing. The current density in Vancouver is a small fraction of the most compact cities of the world. Mumbai packs in close to 30,000 people per square kilometre. The City of Vancouver is about 5,000. But Mumbai does not make the top 10 list of most livable cities. Manhattan, on the other hand, is such a desirable city that the cost of apartments there has continued its stratospheric rise despite the crumbling housing market in the rest of the country. Manhattan has a density roughly five times that of Vancouver. Still, it's clear that most people who live in Shaughnessy, where the population has fallen by almost 15 per cent since 1971, don't want to live in a sea of highrise buildings. And there is no reason Vancouver should try to emulate New York. It should have its own personality. So regardless of the buzzwords we use, the key to livability is still how we grow. EcoDensity reasonably recognizes that you can't have a city that exists as an island of livability in a world with an increasingly hostile environment. But the 23 neighbourhood groups that have joined together to express their concerns about the EcoDensity initiative, which is due to be voted on at the end of the month, also have a valid point. EcoDensity can't be used as an excuse for wrecking neighbourhoods. But that is still only an argument against bad projects and bad planning, not against bringing new life to old neighbourhoods by recognizing that they are part of a growing city and not immune to change. cmcinnes@png.canwest.com © The Vancouver Sun 2008 |
Who's Been Densified, Who Hasn't
It's time for 'equal density.' Vancouver's Westside should absorb its share. By Erick Villagomez Published: February 18, 2008 TheTyee.ca As one of Mayor Sullivan's many pet projects, EcoDensity has received its fair share of publicity and attention. For those of you "not-in-the-know," the EcoDensity initiative focuses on the idea that population/housing density is intricately related to environmental sustainability, housing affordability, and livability. As the argument goes, housing people closer together reduces urban sprawl and our ecological footprint by making better use of smaller parcels of land. Similarly, with more people within a designated area, higher density allows communities to support local commerce, amenities, and transit. This, in turn, allows for the potential creation of walkable and transit-friendly communities. With regards to housing affordability, the connection to density is related to housing type. In contrast to the typical homogenous single-family neighbourhoods, the belief holds that more diverse, dense house types create more diverse and affordable housing options (due to lowered construction costs, decreased development fees, and fees saved from using existing infrastructure) for a variety of households. Furthermore, this increased density would make new, more expensive energy technologies (i.e. district heating, etc.) more viable. Lastly, and most importantly, the EcoDensity initiative preaches the idea this density must be "strategically" located. And although there are several questions, concerns, half-truths and inaccuracies regarding all aspects of the EcoDensity argument, one of the most deceitful revolves around the seemingly harmless issue of "well-located" density. What's been densified in recent years As most locals know very well, Vancouver has been growing and densifying at an astonishing rate over the past three decades. Buildings have been demolished and neighbourhoods transformed seemingly all over the city. In reality, however, this uniformity of growth, densification, and development is an illusion. In general, Vancouver's growth has largely taken place in either derelict areas or neighbourhoods with minimal political representation -- namely East Vancouver. The formation of the great east-west divide goes back many years and is nothing new to any local resident. But how this has shaped the city itself is a very telling and a relevant story to what EcoDensity really means for the future of Vancouver -- an issue constantly evaded by the City of Vancouver and other avid EcoDensity supporters. The creation of rules and regulations pertaining to building and development often take place behind closed doors. Aside from those brave homeowners who have delved into the murky waters of municipal affairs when applying for building permits, few of us are ever exposed to the effects that municipal policies have on the creation of a city. Jargon-based, poorly written, and overly confusing, reading municipal documents -- such as zoning bylaws -- is akin to some kindof water torture . . . slow and annoyingly painful. City Hall's double standard There is much lost, however, through the public's ignorance of these highly influential documents. For it ensures that citizens don't understand how values, biases and prejudices are institutionalized and fossilized into the way we build our cities. Even worse, it allows those familiar with the terminology and processes (an elite minority of community members, politicians and municipal officers) to publicly speak one message while silently communicating another. This issue becomes exceedingly important when discussing a city-wide densification initiative such as EcoDensity. For, although it is touted as pertaining to Vancouver as a whole -- and although there may, in fact, be good intentions behind it -- the reality of it will necessarily be skewed in the direction of wealthy, politically savvy communities and individuals that this city has historically always favoured. Through the 1980s and '90s, a number of important new zoning bylaws -- setting out the rules and regulations to which builder and designers must abide -- were introduced. Several of these bylaws such as RS-7 and RS-5 -- often aggressively pushed by wealthy community associations -- had the calculated effect of deflecting denser developments to East Vancouver. Under the guise of "maintaining the streetscape and local character" and through carefully developed incentives, these policies have served to preserve social homogeneity and the high land values of well-to-do communities through excluding intensification. With limited land to develop and a growing immigrant population, these municipal practices served to direct densification beyond the concerned gaze of its wealthy inhabitants to East Vancouver. This took the form of rampant demolition and replacement of older housing stock that was, more often than not, replaced by poorly designed and built speculative housing or subdivided (legally and otherwise) into several substandard dwelling units. Mapping the lopsided reality At the scale of the city, this lopsided bias is blatantly expressed in the three-dimensional density map above showing population densities -- in dwelling units per acres (du/ac) -- by the block. Drawn in accordance with most recent census statistics, one can see the vast difference in population as one travels from west to east. Given how difficult these bylaws are to change after implemented -- and despite the "intention" to re-visit the RS-5 zoning -- it is fair to say that EcoDensity will serve to exacerbate this biased condition and maintain the status quo. NPA Coun. Suzanne Anton's recent citing of Fraser & 48th and Victoria & 49th as specific areas that could "benefit" from EcoDensity serves to prove the point. Similarly, it is clearly stated throughout the EcoDensity website that the initiative is not intended to overwrite the city plans and community vision documents created by different neighbourhoods. These visions serve to express (and, effectively solidify) the values residents have regarding their neighbourhoods. Thus, for example, it is no surprise that 86 per cent of residents within the Arbutus Ridge/Kerrisdale/Shaughnessy neighbourhoods support maintaining "most single-family areas" within their jurisdiction. Without an ability to address these biases, densification promises to be lopsided. Eastside is doing its share This is no small deal, since most of the East Vancouver neighbourhoods are already within, or close to, the density range that research has shown to be "sustainable" -- that is, densities between 15-20 dwelling units per acre that are enough to support walkable communities with local commerce, economically viable transit and a variety of house types that accommodate a diversity of households. Commercial Drive, Hastings-Sunrise, Main Street and Victoria Drive between 33rd and 54th are excellent examples. Thus, one can reasonably argue that East Vancouver is already "EcoDense" or, at the very least, much closer to "EcoDensity" than its Westside equivalents. Looking at the densities of several of these Westside neighbourhoods -- some of which are the lowest in Metro Vancouver -- it would seem reasonable to asked our heroic leaders at the City of Vancouver to do something truly forward-thing, progressive, and "green." That is, focus its energy on reversing the institutionalized prejudices of the past three decades and stop subsidizing our wealthy patrons' insatiable appetite for "unsustainable" land-use practices. Growing EcoDensity concerns among Eastside neighbourhoods is not a misunderstanding of the intentions of the initiative, as many advocates currently hold. To the contrary, it seems to me that it is simply a manifestation of the fact that these often under-represented citizens will not stand to have green smoke blown in their faces to justify yet another Westside swindle. Related Tyee stories: * City Abandons Its Heritage Gems Vancouver halts program that tied 'eco-density' to restoring historic buildings. * The Myth of Dense Vancouver Stats show city isn't countering flight to suburbs. * Birth of EcoDensity Backlash Angry residents demand voice in upped growth plans. * A City's Fragile Soul The push to slick up Vancouver, and the price. Erick Villagomez is a Vancouver architect and co-founder of Re: Place, a new magazine and website focusing on sustainable urban planning and architecture in the Vancouver region, where this article first appeared. http://regardingplace.com/wp-content...itymap_mid.jpg |
you know thats the 3rd time today ive seen that map..
did anyone hit that ecodensity thing at the library earlier? |
From the Vancouver Sun:
Quote:
|
i dont think a duplex is exactly close quarters.
some people... i tell you |
^ That's a great map. Thankfully I live in a brown area. :)
|
B.C. Construction Show
Construction industry leaders learn about EcoDensity initiative BRIAN MARTIN Source Journal of Commerce correspondent Brent Toderain needs the skills of a high-wire acrobat. As the relatively new Vancouver director of planning, Toderain is performing a balancing act. On one hand, he is dedicated to the city’s well-publicized goal of “EcoDensity” when it comes to residential development. On the other hand, he is sympathetic to the concerns of traditional neighbourhoods, which can be reluctant to embrace densification. On Feb. 13, he spoke to more than 200 leading members of the Vancouver construction industry at the CEO Breakfast kicking off the B.C. Construction Show. Toderain has been described as a passionate advocate for creative city building and at the meeting his passion showed through. “We’ve come a long way in defining EcoDensity,” he said. “Now it is necessary to move towards sustainability. Density done well is our friend.” Toderain said that Vancouver is more prepared for a full discussion on EcoDensity than any other city in North America. He pointed out that Vancouver is an exception when it comes to this subject. “Few politicians have been willing to discuss it,” he said. Increased urban density, he claimed, will lead to: reduced energy use; less urban sprawl; more affordable housing choices; new green design options; improved public health and increased urban vitality, diversity and safety. To make EcoDensity work, Toderain said, requires a marriage between density zoning and green construction. While warning that the city’s move toward increased density “will not necessarily make everybody happy”, he pledged to continue the public dialogue that has been ongoing for about a year. The density changes in Vancouver will not happen overnight. “Changes should be gradual, not sudden. There will always be tensions,” he said adding that the city must consider the needs of future residents as well as the needs of existing residents. His description of density was broad. It included everything from back alley developments such as coach houses to high rise towers. It also included discussion about secondary suites in single family homes. Toderain claimed that Vancouver has no intention of imposing high rise towers on traditional single family neighbourhoods. On the other hand, he explained, people shouldn’t expect to see the city zone areas around transit stations for coach houses. When it comes to green construction, the city will be depending on standards based on the LEED system with different certification such as gold and silver demanded for different types of construction. These types of green building designs will be required. “Whether it happens today or tomorrow it is coming and it is coming more quickly in Vancouver than in the rest of the Lower Mainland,” he said. Toderain echoed many others in the design and construction industries when he told the meeting that green construction does not need to be notably more expensive than traditional methods. “I’ve been told it might cost only one per cent more,” he said. “Others have put the figure up to 20 per cent.” The difference, Toderain said, is in knowing what you’re doing. Contractors, he said will have to become skilled and knowledgeable in green construction methods to remain competitive. Toderain added that densification can benefit the construction industry. It will mean that opportunities for new residential construction remain available in Vancouver. Under traditional density levels, he said, the city will become fully built out before too many more years have passed. Toderain was appointed city planner 18 months ago following a career as manager of city centre planning and design in Calgary. He spoke at the kick off to the B.C. Construction Show, which is a two-day event that annually attracts more than 10,000 people. Additional photos from the show can be viewed on the JOC website at www.journalofcommerce.com |
Since no one has posted it yet, figured I'd share it. Lots of details.
http://www.city.vancouver.bc.ca/ctyc...uments/SC1.pdf |
EcoDensity public consultations are going on as we speak at city hall. Watch the city council live feed right now:
http://cityofvan-as1.insinc.com/ibc/...7/1204/wv150en note that there's only about an hour left. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 7:24 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.