Seaton Neighbourhood Planning

Transcription

1 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Background Report Prepared For: City of Pickering Prepared By: The Planning Partnership ay 2010

2

3 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Contents 1.0 ntroduction 2.0 The Central Pickering Development Plan: Policy-based mplementation Process 3.0 Urban Design and Sustainability 4.0 Definining a Sustainable Program for Seaton 5.0 Sustainability: andatory versus ncentives 6.0 Where do we set the bar? 7.0 ncentive-based Programs: What are the Rewards? 8.0 Sustainable Goals, easurements and Delegation of Authority 9.0 Tools to mplement Sustainability 10.0 Next Steps

4

5 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning 1.0 ntroduction The City of Pickering is undertaking a neighbourhood planning exercise as required under the Central Pickering Development Plan for the neighbourhoods within Seaton. This neighbourhood planning exercise will result in detailed neighbourhood plans and policies to guide the form and nature of development in accordance with the Central Pickering Development Plan. This includes protection of the natural heritage system; integration of cultural heritage resources; provision for a full range of housing opportunities; creation of walkable mixed-use neighbourhoods, and establishment of densities which can support transit. These neighbourhood plans and policies will be approved by the City of Pickering and incorporated into the City s Official Plan. As part of this work, the Central Pickering Development Plan requires background work in a number of areas, one of which is a review of sustainability principles, measures, and actions that can be applied to the Seaton neighbourhoods. ay 2010 BACKGROUND REPORT page 1

6 2.0 The Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP): Policy-based mplementation Process The Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) sets out broad sustainability principles that are to be achieved in Seaton, such as: a. Fostering a healthy natural environment; b. Encouraging a healthy built environment; c. Ensuring economic health; d. Creating opportunities for education and public awareness; e. Fostering social and cultural well-being; and, f. Providing appropriate measures for monitoring and measuring success. These principles, which are to be translated into performance measures and are to be incorporated into the Neighbourhood Plans, include: Building and 3. Cultural heritage conservation 4. Accessibility for the disabled; and, 7.. At this time, the CPDP is the prime policy driver on sustainability and is establishing high expectations for a sustainability program. t might be viewed that these principles set out the higher order directives and are more in the nature of goals and objectives found within Official Plan and Secondary Plan documents, and should be considered mandatory. 3.0 Urban Design and Sustainability n order to achieve the sustainability principles set out in the CPDP, it is essential to understand that good urban design plays a key role in creating sustainable communities. Essentially, the built environment and the way it is designed can influence a person s life style choices, which, when considered on a much broader scale, can contribute to either the success or failure of achieving sustainability goals within a. For example, factors such as the proximity between housing and jobs, the walking distance to the grocery store, the availability of frequent bus service, and the provision of a connected pedestrian system with street trees and furniture are key aspects to providing transportation options, a mix of land uses, and connected pedestrian-friendly routes. However, not only do these features influence one s choice on a very personal level, but their overall implications will certainly be felt -wide when considered as a whole. As such, good urban design will certainly assist in achieveing the sustainability goals for Seaton. The key elements of good sustainable urban design include: Compact, pedestrian friendly urban form; Building mixed-income walkable neighbourhoods with a diversity of housing mix and transportation options; ncreasing density in key areas to support transit and encourage the reduction of automobile usage; Creating visible and accessible range of open space opportunities; Using infrastructure investments wisely and set performance criteria for allocation of government funds. On the other hand, the performance measures are more specific and could form the basis of a sustainable guideline, or the utilization of a third party rating system. These measures should be a combination of mandatory and optional incentivebased measures, and will be discussed further in this report. page 2

7 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning 4.0 Defining a Sustainable Program for Seaton 5.0 Sustainability: andatory versus ncentives At present, there are several sustainable initiatives, policies, and guidelines that can be applied to Seaton. This study will take into consideration the following: a) Region of Durham current draft Official Plan; b) City of Pickering Sustainable Guidelines, Guideline #1 and Guideline #2, ay 2007 draft; c) Central Pickering Development Plan, ay 2006; d) Highway 407 Employment Lands Study, Jan 2007; e) aster and Servicing Plan, TBD; f) Seaton mplementation Plan, TBD; g) Third party rating systems, including: i. LEED-ND USGBC approved; CaGBC fall of 2010 ii. BREEA buildings iii. Star buildings iv. Green Globes buildings Criteria Different sustainability programs use different performance measures to satisfy their goals. The end goals of reduced: green house gases, carbon fuel reliance, solid waste, and water should be common. Other associated benefits relating to urban design that help to implement the above can include improved public health, social/cultural initiatives and fiscal management. The question of mandatory- versus incentive-based programs depends, to a great extent, on the local jurisdiction, means of governance, and available implementation tools. n the chart below, the following comparison of two programs illustrates this point: City of Pickering Sustainable Guideline #2 LEED 2009 for Neighbourhood Development Required Criteria 52 (60%) Required Prerequisites 12 (21%) Optional Criteria 35 (40%) Credits 44 (79%) Point System Total Points 191 points Total Points 110 Level 1 19 points (10%) Certified 40 to 49 points (36%) Level 2 41 points (21%) Silver 50 to 59 points (45%) Level 3 80 points (41%) Gold 60 to 79 points (55%) Platinum 80 + (73%) As seen in the comparison, the Pickering Guideline relies more heavily on required criteria than on the optional, whereas the LEED-ND program has fewer prerequisites and much greater weight on credits. Given the Ontario context for implementation tools such as Official Plans, Zoning By-laws, Site Plan, Draft Plan of Subdivision, and various guideline documents, the question is: What should be mandated policy in an Official Plan, and what ay 2010 BACKGROUND REPORT page 3

8 should a guideline contain? One example, for discussion purposes, would be that references to existing policies (ie. mix of housing, minimum densities, land use designations, transit corridors) could be contained as mandatory within Official Plan and Neighbourhood Plan documents. At the same time, the more specific and technical sustainable requirements that need measurements and verification become a component of an optional or incentive-based program. This provides the opportunity to reduce mandatory policy requirements while putting more emphasis on the technical measurements through achieving credits within incentive-based programs. The question to be considered is how much gets locked into an Official Plan and how much is discretionary within a guideline. Clear sustainability actions which should be considered when creating a guideline include, but are not limited to: 1. Preferred location of development 1 2. Compact & Diverse Development 3. Walkable Streets 4. ixed-use Neighbourhood Centres 5. Housing and Job Proximity 6. Reduced Automobile Dependence 7. ixed-ncome/diverse Communities 8. Certified Green Building Program 9. Renewable Program & Efficiency 10. Waste Water anagement & Conservation 11. Storm Water anagement 12. Accessibility & Universal Design 13. Heritage Resource Preservation 14. nnovation ncentives The specifics of achieving these goals should be set out through performance measures that can be logically and clearly followed by those who design and build communities as well as those who administer the review process. t should also be noted that the onus of achieving these goals falls equally on the public and private shoulders. 6.0 Where do we set the bar? f the minimum expectation is mandated, then encouragement to achieve higher levels of sustainability must rely on a credit system. And, if the credits are too simple to achieve then we run the risk of just modifying a flawed system. The LEED- ND program generally anticipates attracting 25-30% of the broader marketplace to qualify as certified. Within this sector, 10 to 15% might achieve Silver, 5 to 10% Gold, and 1 to 4% Platinum. The bar is set high, especially for greenfield development, but there are enough participants engaged to demonstrate success is possible and quality of the brand remains high. 7.0 ncentive-based Programs: What are the Rewards? n order to encourage the participation in a sustainability program (that almost always involves increased time and costs), there needs to be a reward. While some may argue that doing the right thing should be reward in itself, it is unlikely that this would stand up in the competitive high-cost and high-risk market place of building. While many developers/builders do want to do the right thing for sustainability they are not prepared to price themselves out of the market without a clear program in mind. t is still the early days of sustainable initiatives. Until there is a broader based public acceptance/demand for sustainable communities, and until there is a more level playing field of mandated policy requirements, the need for incentives, in our opinion, remains. The following comparison of incentives provides examples to consider: 1 While Preferred location of development is a significant goal in any sustainability plan, the very fact that the location of Seaton is predetermined within the Pickering urban area already satisfies this goal. However, this goal has been retained only due to its significant role in sustainable planning, but will be excluded from our on-going goals and measurements review. page 4

9 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program City of Pickering Sustainable Guidelines LEED-ND Program Toronto Green Standard Star Homes Caledon Green Development ncentive Program East Gwillimbury Regent Park, TCH a) California s Emerging Rebates Program; b) arylands Green Building Tax Credit; c) New Jersey s Smart Future Planning Grant Program; d) Portland Green nvestment Fund; and e) SanDiego Green Building ncentive Program ncentive 1. Recognition by the City beyond Level One; 2. arketing opportunities (this will apply to all programs); 3. Possible access to federal/provincial green funds; 4. Other incentives to be explored. 1. ndependent third party review; 2. nternational brand recognition, general market acceptance and acknowledgement; 3. Track record of 119 registered communities throughout Canada; and, 4. Backing of CaGBC and various private/public agencies. 1. Achievement of Tier 1 and Tier 2 status are eligible for a refund of 20% of Development Charges paid to the City. 1. Third party inspection; 2. Star label and certificate issued to homeowner; and, 3. Reduction of 20%-40% in utility costs. 1. Proposes financial incentives for builders for commercial and industrial buildings who incorporate pre-qualified green technologies or LEED certification; 2. Blends public programs with third party rating system. 1. andated Star for Homes and LEED Silver for industrial, commercial, institutional and high-rise buildings; and, 2. Relies on incentives of Star and LEED % reduced water; 2. 75% reduced energy; 3. 80% reduction in green house gases; % solid waste diversion; and, 5. Savings of several million dollars per year in operating costs for over 2,000 assisted housing units to TCH. 1. Rebates; 2. Direct funding for Systems; 3. Low interest loans; 4. Tax credits; 5. Home Equity Loans and Lines of Credit; 6. Expedited approvals; 7. Direct project funding; and, 8. Reduced building permit fees. ay 2010 BACKGROUND REPORT page 5

10 ncentives, often several per program, are helpful in encouraging market transformation. f a complete sustainability program was mandated, the expectation of achieving sustainable goals might be high, but realistically the chances of finding support for such a program by the private and public sector would be very low. The carrot-and-stick approach is a necessary means of balancing appropriate public standards with innovation and investment from the private sector. This is a transition phase, and while imperfect, it lays the groundwork for a degree of acceptance that must be established as even tougher standards will be needed in the future. 8.0 Sustainable Actions, easurements & Delegation of Authority The following chart sets out specific goals which demonstrate high levels of influence and intervention in the design and creation of new communities such as Seaton, in order to ensure a high order of sustainability. The chart indicates the goals to be achieved in order to satisfy the CPDP sustainability principles, identifies the corresponding CPDP performance measure, establishes the associated sustainable/initiative program, defines the enabling authority for implementation, identifies the suggested approach for measurement, and provides a preliminary indication of whether the measurement could be mandatory or incentive-based. The task of refining the components of the chart is an on-going process, and the preparation of sustainability guidelines that will identify measurable performance standards and define whether they are mandatory versus incentive-based, will be undertaken in odule 3 of this study. page 6

11 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Sustainable Goal Corresponding CPDP Performance easure Sustainable nitiative/ Program Enabling Authority easurement Approach andatory/ ncentivebased & Voluntary 1. Compact and Diverse Development Accessibility for the disabled; Density / FS Built form mix and distribution Land use mix and distribution Establish min/max densities Strategic locations Variety of building types Proximity to services/transit/ jobs Parking locations Variety of uses Proximity to various land uses 2.Walkable Streets Accessibility for the disabled; Pedestrian connectivity Built form along street frontage Pedestrian comfort Continuous sidewalks Desirable streetscapes Proximity to services/transit/ jobs Building entrance location Building height/ratio to street width Parking lot/garage locations inimize blank walls All weather provisions (ie. canopies) Street trees/canopy Sidewalk width Street furniture Active street frontages ay 2010 BACKGROUND REPORT page 7

12 Sustainable Goal Corresponding CPDP Performance easure Sustainable nitiative/ Program Enabling Authority easurement Approach andatory/ ncentivebased & Voluntary 3. ixed-use Neighbourhood Centres 4. Housing and Job Proximity 5. Reduced Automobile Dependence Pedestrian systems Transit systems Community design Land use mix and distribution Density distribution Transportation Accessiblity Transit systems Pedestrian systems Bicycle systems Car share programs Public Public Public Accessibility Proximity Pedestrian safety Provision of services Central destination and pick up point Higher order transit Frequency of service Central location Accessibility ix of land uses Resident proximity Diversity of land uses ix of uses Distance between different land uses Range of densities (max/ min) Range of affordability Variety of modes Distance between housing and jobs Transit service availability Accessibility Resident proximity to transit stop Frequency of service ntegration Proximity to destination Safety Defined routes Proximity to destination Bicycle storage Provision for car share parking spaces Dedicated parking spaces for car share programs Resident proximity to vehicle-sharing program page 8

13 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Sustainable Goal Corresponding CPDP Performance easure Sustainable nitiative/ Program Enabling Authority easurement Approach andatory/ ncentivebased & Voluntary 6. ixed ncome/ Diverse Communities 7. Certified Green Building Program Accessibility for the disabled; Social/ economic diversity Range of household sizes Range of age groups Building practices ixed tenure Affordable units Diversity of housing types ix of bachelor/familyoriented units Provision for senior/ retirement homes Provision for/proximity to daycare Standards for new buildings Standards for retrofits Star LEED-NC, LEED-C & S, LEED-H Certified rating programs 8.Renewable Program and Efficiency On-site renewable energy production Solar, wind, geo exchange, biomass production Districting heating and cooling Solar orientation Heat island reduction Conservation Consider alternative energy sources such as solar, geo-exchange, and district energy. Ashrae Program easure percentage of renewable energy easure amount of annual heating and cooling from DC aximize street/block/ building alignments Photovoltaic / thermal Streetscape planting Consider reflective or green roofs ay 2010 BACKGROUND REPORT page 9

14 Sustainable Goal Corresponding CPDP Performance easure Sustainable nitiative/ Program Enabling Authority easurement Approach andatory/ ncentivebased & Voluntary 9. Waste Water anagement & Conservation Cultural heritage preservation Reduce pollution from wastewater Water-efficient Landscaping Set target for waste water reduction Outdoor landscape irrigation/rain capture Landscaping materials Reduce potable water use Track waste water diversion and reuse percentages On-site treatment facilities Encourage water reuse 10. Storm water management Cultural heritage preservation; Reduce impact on natural systems Reduce flooding mprove water quality Public Public Pond location and size Pond design (quality and quantity) Reduce runoff (ie. recharge, rain water harvesting, etc.) Coordinated overland flow routes to SW facility itigate at-source Permeable sources Rain water harvesting aintain appropriate vegetative cover Design of SW facilities (quality/quantity) Enhance ground water infiltration (ie. bioswale, naturalized overland flow routes, etc.) page 10

15 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Sustainable Goal Corresponding CPDP Performance easure Sustainable nitiative/ Program Enabling Authority easurement Approach andatory/ ncentivebased & Voluntary 11. Accessiblity and Universal Design 12. Heritage Resource Preservation Accessibility for the disabled; Cultural heritage conservation Universal design features (all ages and needs) Built form Preserve heritage buildings and cultural landscape features Easy-to-grip handles, levers, etc. inimum door opening sizes otion detector lighting Home design (ie. bedrooms on main floor, open concept design) Entrances from street (ie. no step) Access to transit and services Adaptive reuse of heritage/historic buildings Extent/appropriateness of revisions to exterior of heritage buildings Utilize/preserve heritage landscape and significant features 13. nnovation ncentives Demonstrate new innovation or ability to exceed current sustainable standards Accessibility for the disabled; Cultural heritage preservation Encourage exmplary performance and innovation ay 2010 BACKGROUND REPORT page 11

16 9.0 Tools to mplement Sustainability An extensive list of incentive-based programs was set out in Section 7.0 of this report, and included both Canadian and American examples. Aside from incentive-based programs, more specific tools in Ontario, for example, include: a.) The Planning Act Section 41, Site Plan Control has been modified to permit municipal enforcement of sustainable design features as applied to the exterior of buildings and to streetscapes. b.) Official Plans The Region of York has included a number of sustainable initiatives in its new Official Plan. Prior to the final preparation of the Plan, an extensive education and consultation process on sustainability was undertaken. Various reports were released that built up support and included: 1. Climate Change in York Region: Adapting to a Different Reality; 2. Best Practices for New Communities; and, 3. York Region Sustainability Strategy: Towards a Sustainable Region. The York Region approach to sustainability, which constitutes 25% of the approved document, utilizes the triple bottom line approach. The sustainability sections of the Official Plan are framed in the context of natural environment, healthy communities and economic vitality. Their approach also embraces a fusion of urban design and sustainable requirements to achieve their goals. Their policies may be regarded as the next generation of increased mandatory requirements to achieve sustainable goals Next Steps 1. Consider public input of the Public Sustainability Workshop, and define elements for inclusion in the Neighbourhood Plan review; 2. Consider the recommendations of the Seaton mplementation Plan; 3. Consider the recommendations of the aster Servicing Plan; 4. Prepare Neighbourhood Plan Policies - i) Define what mandatory sustainable actions should be included within the policies; and, 5. Prepare Neighbourhood Plan Sustainable Performance Standards and Guidelines - i) Assess comprehensive list of sustainable performance measures; ii) Define components that should be mandatory or set out as prerequisites to a credit system; iii) Define the performance measures that will form the basis of a guideline or incentive-based program; and, iv) Assess the form of possible incentives and an implementation program. page 12

17 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning ay 2010 BACKGROUND REPORT page 13