Urban Form Analysis

Canberra’s Sustainability Performance

June 2010
Urban Form Analysis
Executive Summary - Key Results of the Analysis
How sustainable is Canberra’s urban form?
What can we learn from Canberra’s existing urban form when designing
new developments and suburbs?
The aim of this analysis is to understand the Four case study areas in Canberra and three
performance of Canberra’s existing urban form with international showcases in urban sustainability
the objective to aid in future decisions about how to were analysed according to a range of sustainability
plan Canberra. indicators in four main themes:
This study provides baseline sustainability information
on existing development. This information and the
Land Use
additional understanding will assist in choosing future Compact layout and efficient land use
urban forms that use land more efficiently, conserve
more natural resources, ensure social diversity and Resource Use
equity and connect to important services such as Efficient energy and water use
transport options, employment opportunities and
community facilities. Diversity
Housing choice and socio-demographic mix
ACTPLA has undertaken a comparative analysis of
seven different subdivision patterns in Canberra and
overseas. Connectivity Type A - Reid, Canberra Central
Movement and amenity Historic low to recent medium-density residential development

Type B - Kingston, Canberra Central Type C - Gungahlin, Gungahlin Type D - Weston, Weston Creek
Historic medium to recent high-density, mixed-use development Recent greenfield low to medium-density residential development 1960’s and 1970’s greenfield low-density residential development

Comparison of the four Canberra areas Key insights from the comparison with
showed that: international examples were:
there
 is no ‘average’ Canberra suburb with each Land use
area reflecting the planning philosophy at the time; The overseas examples have two to ten times
none
 of these four areas performs outstandingly more land-efficient neighbourhood design than the
across all of the performance indicators; Kingston case study area, the most land-efficient of
the Canberra studies. Freiburg Vauban and Dockside
the
 Kingston case study area is the most land-
Green reduce their land use for transport by having
efficient;
perimeter roads and minimising car traffic within the
the
 higher density areas in Kingston and Reid use development.
less land, water and energy per person to provide
housing, open space, pedestrian networks and Resource use - energy and water
other amenities; District scale co-generation plants and low-energy
however,
 the predominant use of electricity from building design reduce the carbon emissions from
the grid to heat apartment buildings in these areas operating the dwellings to a level significantly below
results in comparatively high greenhouse gas the Canberra examples. A publicly visible stormwater
emissions; management and rainwater retention concept was
applied across the developments.
all
 study areas lack diversity in terms of design
and social mix, mix of dwelling types, tenures and Type F - Freiburg, Vauban Germany Diversity
household types. A model in sustainable urban redevelopment in late 1990’s
Hannover Kronsberg showcases diversity in design
by offering a mix of types, tenures and sizes on a
section scale and therefore achieved a balanced
social mix. Freiburg Vauban is dominated by two- to
four-storey row-houses and apartments for families
with children. Dockside Green achieves a narrower
social mix with four to ten storey buildings with one
and two-bedroom apartments.

Connectivity
Car dependency in the international areas is reduced
by providing rapid public transport in combination
with neighbourhoods that have walkable distances
to local essential services and quality design of the
T E - Hannover,
Type H KKronsberg
b Germany
G T G-D
Type Dockside
k id GGreen, C
Canada
d public realm, where pedestrian friendly spaces are
linked and buildings have a diversity of forms and
Visionary urban planning with exceptionally high ecological standards Greenhouse gas neutral harbourside prdevelopment.
sizes.
Urban Form Analysis

Canberra

Gungahlin

Reid

Kingston

Weston
Urban Form Analysis - Type A
Canberra Example - Reid, Canberra Central
REID is located in the inner north of Canberra. This development was
established in the 1920s according to Garden City principles, characterised by
walkable suburbs where housing is sited within generous open space.

Building Footprint - 18%

Private Open Space - 35%

Semi Public Open Space - 7%

Road Verge - 24%

Road - 15%

Public Open Space (parkland) - 1%

Land Use Comparison Land Use Map

SNAPSHOT
Suburb Reid ACT
Division Canberra Central
Area of tile study 14.4 Hectares
Residential dwellings 519
Study area population 695
Year of initial development 1920’s
Territory Plan zoning
RZ1 Suburban, RZ4 Medium Density Residential, Community Facilities, SZ1 Transport

COMPACT LAYOUT AND

EFFICIENT LAND UTILISATION
Performance indicator Unit of measurement

Built Form v Open Space Private Space v Public Space Population density
Gross dwelling density
48 residents per ha urban area
36 dwellings per ha urban area
Reid features a range of different building footprint patterns (white); Private open spaces (blue) exist both as semi private space facing Net dwelling density 60 dwellings per ha developable land
these patterns are a result of a mix of housing types, including the streets, shared apartment courtyard spaces and fully private
Occupancy rate 1.3 occupants per dwelling
single detached houses, townhouses and apartment blocks. individual back yards.
Developable land 60% of the urban area
Building footprint 18% of the urban area
Private open space 35% of the urban area
Semi public open space 7% of the urban area
Road reserve 39% of the urban area
Road 15% of the urban area
Verges 24% of the urban area
Public open space 1% of the urban area
Public and semi-public open space 14 m2 per resident

URBAN ECOLOGY, ENERGY AND WATER

Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Annual residential greenhouse gas emissions 5.4 tonnes CO2 per resident
from onsite building operation 7.3 tonnes CO2 per dwelling
Annual residential energy use 22 GJ per resident
30 GJ per dwelling
residential electricity use 4.8 MWh per resident
6.5 MWh per dwelling
residential natural gas use 5 GJ per resident
6 GJ per dwelling

Green Space Building Height and Road Reserve Annual commercial energy use 1.4% of overall energy use
3,835 MJ per m2 commercial space
A generous amount of green space (shown in blue) is created A variety of single (light grey), low rise (mid greys) and multistorey Annual residential potable water use 86 kL per resident
in Reid through a combination of wide street verges and well building heights (black) coexist in Reid. Taller buildings typically
established green private open space. address busier street frontages whilst low rise often face on to 116 kL per dwelling
secondary suburban streets. Annual commercial potable water use 0.5% of overall potable water use
3.6 kL per m2 commercial space
Ratio pervious to impervious open space 1.6 pervious : 1 impervious
public and private
Green open space 64% of the urban area
public 29% of the urban area
private 35% of the urban area
Tree canopy in the urban area (overall) 36% of the urban area
public 15% of the urban area
private 21% of the urban area

Typical Garden City suburban housing; low rise detached dwelling surrounded by private open space and wide street verges.
Urban Form Analysis - Type A
Canberra Example - Reid, Canberra Central
BRADDON
nu e
ie Ave
Ainsl BRADDON AINSLIE

Ainslie Primary
School
Coo
yon
g

800m radius
Str
eet

REID
400m radius Campbell High
School

Study Area
CITY

REID
DIVERSITY Dwellings and Socio-Demographic Mix
Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Reid
Dwelling types in % of overall dwellings Preschool
Detached house 4%
Semi-detached or terrace 4%
Apartment 1-2 storey 3%
Apartment 3 storeys 57%
Apartment 4 or more storeys 30%

Dwelling size in % of overall dwellings

1 Bedroom 19%
2 Bedrooms 60% CAMPBELL
3 Bedrooms 17%
4 Bedrooms and more 4%

Household composition in % of overall households Connectivity Comparative Snapshot

single 55% The connectivity image above Reid Kingston Gungahlin Weston Hannover Freiburg Dockside
couple w/o kids 22% indicates how far can you get from
couple with kids 3% the centre of the study area in a:
single parent 7% 5 minute walk People per ha Urban Area
groups 11%
10 minute walk

Population by age cohort in % of overall population 5 minute cycle

Land Take per Person (m2)
0-19 yrs 12%
Pedestrians and cyclists can
20-39 yrs 49% follow a choice of routes in and
40-59 yrs 24% around this urban form, which is
characterised by a high quantity Public Open Space per Person (m2)
60 yrs and over 15%
of pedestrian pathways. A range
of amenities – several educational
Tenure type in % of overall dwellings facilities, open spaces and shops -
are situated within walking distance Road per Person (m2)
Fully owned 13%
of the Reid study area. The main
Purchased 7% city transport interchange is over
Rented 76% 1km away.
Water use per Person (kL)
Rent/Buy Scheme 0%

Owner occupancy rate 16% of all residents

Public and social housing dwellings 16% of all residential dwellings CO2 Emissions per Person (t per year)
Low income households
(gross weekly income less than $650) 9% of all households
High income households Low Income Households (%)
(gross weekly income of $2,500 or more) 9% of all households

CONNECTIVITY Movement and Amenity SUMMARY

Performance indicator Unit of measurement High performance
Distance from centre of study area to:
• Efficient land use with a population density of 48 residents per hectare and the lowest land-take per person with 206 m2 including
nearest major public transport node building footprint, open spaces and road corridors.
(bus interchange) 1.2 km walking distance • High degree of green open space (64 per cent of the urban area) with predominantly pervious surfaces for rainwater penetration and
nearest rapid bus stop 1.8 km walking distance more than one third of the urban area covered by tree canopies.
nearest school 0.5 km walking distance • Parks, shops and schools mostly in 5 minutes walking distance with a generous pedestrian network in place.
local shop, group or town centre 0.5 km walking distance
nearest green open space (public or Moderate performance
semi-public) 0.4 km walking distance • Moderately high potable water use of 86 kL per resident is driven by the high watering requirements of the private gardens in the
Canberra city GPO 1.3 km road distance suburban blocks of the area.
Length of bicycle network per ha 5m • Diversity is addressed to a limited degree with 90 per cent of the dwellings being apartments with 2 bedrooms and rental tenure for
medium income households. The age of the population is moderately balanced with the potential to better target families with children.
Length of pedestrian network per ha 227 m
Intersection density 23 intersections per hectare
Low performance
• Mostly electricity operated apartment buildings with reverse-cycle air conditioning and electric hot water appliances performing badly in
terms of carbon emissions (as opposed to gas heating) resulting in 5.4 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per resident.
Urban Form Analysis - Type B
Canberra Example - Kingston, Canberra Central
KINGSTON is located in the inner south of Canberra. The area was established
in the 1920s, with newer development extending to the foreshore of Lake Burley
Griffin at the turn of this century.

Building Footprint - 27%

Private Open Space - 13%

Semi Public Open Space - 3%

Road Verge - 22%

Road - 33%

Public Open Space (parkland) - 2%

Land Use Comparison Land Use Map

SNAPSHOT
Suburb Kingston ACT
Division Canberra Central
Area of tile study 21.8 Hectares
Residential dwellings 785
Study area population 1018
Year of initial development 1920’s
Territory Plan zoning
RZ5 High Density Residential, CZ1 Core zone, CZ2 Business, CZ5 Mixed Use, PRZ1
Urban Open Space, TSZ1 Transport

COMPACT LAYOUT AND

EFFICIENT LAND UTILISATION
Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Built Form v Open Space Private Space v Public Space Population density 47 residents per ha urban area
Kingston is characterised by a range of building footprint sizes Private open space (in blue) in Kingston varies in size and layout
Gross dwelling density 36 dwellings per ha urban area
(shown in white), from modest single dwellings through to the larger according to the building type; new apartments share large internal
footprints created by commercial buildings. . courtyards and older dwellings are set within modest private yards. Net dwelling density 83 dwellings per ha developable land
Occupancy rate 1.3 occupants per dwelling
Developable land 43% of the urban area
Building footprint 27% of the urban area
Private open space 13% of the urban area
Semi public open space 3% of the urban area
Road reserve 55% of the urban area
Road 33% of the urban area
Verges 22% of the urban area
Public open space 2% of the urban area

URBAN ECOLOGY, ENERGY AND WATER

Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Annual residential greenhouse gas emissions 3.6 tonnes CO2 per resident
from onsite building operation 4.7 tonnes CO2 per dwelling
Annual residential energy use 14 GJ per resident
18 GJ per dwelling
residential electricity use 3.3 MWh per resident
4.3 MWh per dwelling
residential natural gas use 2 GJ per resident
3 GJ per dwelling

Green Space Building Height and Road Reserve Annual commercial energy use 57% of overall energy use
564 MJ per m2 commercial space
A combination of private and public green space in Kingston Kingston’s multistorey building heights (mid grey) reflect the
medium density residential and commercial zoning of the area. The Annual residential potable water use 66 kL per resident
produces a distinctive landscape of green spaces, consisting of
native and exotic established vegetation. new Kingston Foreshore buildings increase in height compared to 129 kL per dwelling
earlier Kingston developments. Annual commercial potable water use 43% of overall potable water use
1.5kL per m2 commercial space
Ratio pervious to impervious open space 1 pervious : 1.7 impervious
public and private
Green open space 37% of the urban area
public 16% of the urban area
private 21% of the urban area
Tree canopy in the urban area (overall) 20% of the urban area
public 9% of the urban area
private 11% of the urban area

Medium density residential living; Kingston apartments.

Urban Form Analysis - Type B
Canberra Example - Kingston, Canberra Central
TELOPEA
PARK

reet
s St
Gile
We 800m radius
ntw
orth
Ave
nue

BARTON
400m radius

t
tree
es S
Daw
Le
ich
ha
rd Telopea Park
tS
tre School
et

KINGSTON

Study Area

DIVERSITY Dwellings and Socio-Demographic Mix KINGSTON

Performance indicator Unit of measurement

Dwelling types in % of overall dwellings
Detached house 1%
Semi-detached or terrace 4%
Apartment 1-2 storey 23%
Apartment 3 storeys 41%
GRIFFITH
Apartment 4 or more storeys 30% St Clares
College
Dwelling size in % of overall dwellings
1 Bedroom 12% St Edmunds
2 Bedrooms 73% College
3 Bedrooms 15%
4 Bedrooms and more 0%

Household composition in % of overall population Connectivity Comparative Snapshot

single 40% The connectivity image above Reid Kingston Gungahlin Weston Hannover Freiburg Dockside
couple w/o kids 28% indicates how far can you get from
couple with kids 5% the centre of the study area in a:
single parent 3% 5 minute walk People per ha Urban Area
groups 21%
10 minute walk

5 minute cycle
Population by age cohort in% of each age cohort Land Take per Person (m2)
0-19 yrs 6% Pedestrians and cyclists can follow
20-39 yrs 69% a choice of routes in and around
40-59 yrs 19% this urban form although dedicated
cycle paths are limited. Connectivity Public Open Space per Person (m2)
60 yrs and over 7%
and proximity to shops and rapid
public transport is excellent with
Tenure type in % of overall dwellings walking distances of less than
400m. Access to a selection of Road per Person (m2)
Fully owned 9% educational facilities and open
Purchased 17% spaces is also good.
Rented 73%
Water use per Person (kL)
Rent/Buy Scheme 0%

Owner occupancy rate 18% of all residents

Public and social housing dwellings 1% of all residential dwellings CO2 Emissions per Person (t per year)
Low income households
(gross weekly income less than $650) 2% of all households
High income households Low Income Households (%)
(gross weekly income of $2,500 or more) 50% of all households

CONNECTIVITY Movement and Amenity SUMMARY

Performance indicator Unit of measurement High performance
Distance from centre of study area to:
• Efficient land use given it is a mixed use area with a population density of 47 residents per hectare and a small land-take per person of
nearest major public transport node 214 m2 including building footprint, open spaces, road corridors and commercial zones.
(bus interchange) 1.7 km walking distance • With 3.6 tonnes per year the lowest CO2 emissions per resident for operating the dwelling.
nearest rapid bus stop 0.2 km walking distance • Lowest potable water use per person (66 kL per year) due to low garden watering requirements.
nearest school 1.0 km walking distance • Shops, parks and rapid bus lines within 5 minutes walking distance and a school within one kilometre walking distance.
local shop, group or town centre 0.1 km walking distance
nearest green open space (public or Moderate performance
semi-public) 0.5 km walking distance • Despite higher densities and mixed-use zones a higher proportion of pervious green open spaces than the low-density Gungahlin
Canberra city GPO 5.6 km road distance example.
Length of bicycle network per ha 1m
Length of pedestrian network per ha 159 m Low performance
Intersection density 27 intersections per hectare • With predominately rented two bedroom apartments there is a lack of diversity in building types, sizes and tenures.
• Dwellings mainly caters for high-income single or young couples without children and there is a lack of choice for medium income
families with children.
• There is no bicycle network in place.
Urban Form Analysis - Type C
Canberra Example - Gungahlin, Gungahlin
GUNGAHLIN is located 13km north of Canberra Central within the district of
Gungahlin. It’s Canberra’s newest town centre (commencing 1993), and has an
expected final population of 90,000.

Building Footprint - 27%

Private Open Space - 35%

Semi Public Open Space - 0%

Road Verge - 22%

Road - 12%

Public Open Space (parkland) - 4%

Land Use Comparison Land Use Map

SNAPSHOT
Suburb Gungahlin ACT
Division Gungahlin
Area of tile study 18.7 Hectares
Residential dwellings 231
Study area population 617
Year of initial development 1998
Territory Plan zoning
RZ3 Urban Residential, PRZ1 Urban Open Space, TSZ1 Transport

COMPACT LAYOUT AND

EFFICIENT LAND UTILISATION
Performance indicator Unit of measurement

Built Form v Open Space Private Space v Public Space

Population density 33 residents per ha urban area
Gross dwelling density 13 dwellings per ha urban area
Gungahlin is characterised by linear strips of compact buildings Private open space in Gungahlin (blue) is very compact, consisting Net dwelling density 20 dwellings per ha developable land
(white) aligned with a regular street pattern. Long strips of built of narrow strips of individual front and rear yards.
Occupancy rate 2.7 occupants per dwelling
space are surrounded by narrow strips of open space (blue).
Developable land 62% of the urban area
Building footprint 27% of the urban area
Private open space 35% of the urban area
Semi public open space 0% of the urban area
Road reserve 34% of the urban area
Road 12% of the urban area
Verge 22% of the urban area
Public open space 4% of the urban area

URBAN ECOLOGY, ENERGY AND WATER

Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Annual residential greenhouse gas emissions 3.6 tonnes CO2 per resident
from onsite building operation 9.5 tonnes CO2 per dwelling
Annual residential energy use 26 GJ per resident
69 GJ per dwelling
residential electricity use 2.3 MWh per resident
6.0 MWh per dwelling
residential natural gas use 18 GJ per resident
48 GJ per dwelling
Annual commercial energy use n/a

Green Space Building Height and Road Reserve

no commercial uses
Annual residential potable water use 76 kL per resident
Street verges and local park areas (blue) supplement the amount of A consistent low building height (shown as light grey) is retained 201 kL per dwelling
private open space available to residents. Plantings throughout the throughout the Gungahlin study area.
Annual commercial potable water use n/a
Gungahlin town centre are both exotic and native.
no commercial uses
Ratio pervious to impervious open space 1 pervious : 2.3 impervious
public and private
Green open space 30% of the urban area
public 11% of the urban area
private 19% of the urban area
Tree canopy in the urban area (overall) 9% of the urban area
public 2% of the urban area
private 7% of the urban area

Gungahlin streetscape framing views to surrounding hills.

Urban Form Analysis - Type C
Canberra Example - Gungahlin, Gungahlin

AMAROO

800m radius

GUNGAHLIN

400m radius
Ho
rs
Pae
rk
Dr
ive

Yerrabi Pond

Gundaro
o Drive

GUNGAHLIN

Study Area

DIVERSITY Dwellings and Socio-Demographic Mix

Performance indicator Unit of measurement Gungahlin Town
Dwelling types in % of overall dwellings Centre
Detached house 75%
Semi-detached or terrace 6%
Apartment 1-2 storey 19%
Apartment 3 storeys 0%
Apartment 4 or more storeys 0%

Dwelling size in % of overall dwellings

1 Bedroom 0%
2 Bedrooms 0%
3 Bedrooms 36%
4 Bedrooms and more 64%

Household composition in % of overall households Connectivity Comparative Snapshot

single 12% The connectivity image above Reid Kingston Gungahlin Weston Hannover Freiburg Dockside
couple w/o kids 25% indicates how far can you get from
couple with kids 51% the centre of the study area in a:
single parent 8% 5 minute walk People per ha Urban Area
groups 3%
10 minute walk

5 minute cycle
Population by age cohort in % of overall population Land Take per Person (m2)
0-19 yrs 32% The grid network of streets and
20-39 yrs 43% paths offers a choice of movement
40-59 yrs 21% options within and around the study
area, allowing residents excellent Public Open Space per Person (m2)
60 yrs and over 4%
connectivity to local open spaces.
Connectivity and proximity to other
Tenure type in % of overall dwellings amenities – education, shops and
public transport – is characterised Road per Person (m2)
Fully owned 8% by distances over 1km.
Purchased 62%
Rented 30%
Water use per Person (kL)
Rent/Buy Scheme 0%

Owner occupancy rate 71% of all residents

Public and social housing dwellings 2% of all residential dwellings CO2 Emissions per Person (t per year)
Low income households
(gross weekly income less than $650) 12% of all households
High income households Low Income Households (%)
(gross weekly income of $2,500 or more) 22% of all households

CONNECTIVITY Movement and Amenity SUMMARY

Performance indicator Unit of measurement High performance
• With 3.6 tonnes per year the lowest CO2 emissions per resident for operating the dwelling.
Distance from centre of study area to:
• Achieves the most balanced results in terms of social mix of age and income groups and household types, as well as diversity in building
nearest major public transport node
types.
(bus interchange) 1.4 km walking distance • Pocket parks are distributed well across the area and are in a few minutes walking distance to the dwellings.
nearest rapid bus stop 0.8 km walking distance
nearest school 2.4 km walking distance Moderate performance
local shop, group or town centre 1.1 km walking distance • Given the low density character of the area, due to high occupancy rates it achieves moderate results in population density with 33
nearest green open space (public or residents per hectare and a moderate land-take of 303 m2 per resident.
semi-public) 0.1 km walking distance • Due to smaller gardens and predominantly paved areas there is a fairly low per capita water use of 76 kL per year at the expense of poor
rainwater penetration and a lack of green amenity.
Canberra city GPO 12.6 km road distance
• Rapid bus lines and bus interchange services are within 10 minutes walking distance of the area, the school is within 15 minutes walk.
Length of bicycle network per ha 0m
Length of pedestrian network per ha 172 m Low performance
Intersection density 29 intersections per hectare • The second highest average building footprint per dwelling (215 m2).
• Despite low densities and reasonable open spaces, there is a lack of impervious and green open spaces and a lack of mature trees, in
particular in public open spaces.
• Although the pedestrian infrastructure has been put in place, it takes the residents longer to walk to the nearest shops in the town centre
(2,400 m walking distance).
Urban Form Analysis - Type D
Canberra Example - Weston, Weston Creek
WESTON is located west of Canberra Central within Weston Creek. Weston
Creek town centre was established in the late 1960s, with the then National
Capital Development Commission describing Weston Creek as ‘one of the most
picturesque parts of the National Capital’.

Building Footprint - 14%

Private Open Space - 40%

Semi Public Open Space - 0%

Road Verge - 12%

Road - 9%

Public Open Space (parkland) - 25%

Land Use Comparison Land Use Map

SNAPSHOT
Suburb Weston ACT
Division Weston Creek
Area of tile study 16.1 Hectares
Residential dwellings 202
Study area population 85
Year of initial development 1970
Territory Plan zoning
RZ1 Suburban, NUZ3 Hills Ridges and Buffer Areas, PRZ1 Urban Open Space, TSZ1
Transport

COMPACT LAYOUT AND

EFFICIENT LAND UTILISATION
Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Built Form v Open Space Private Space v Public Space Population density 13 residents per ha urban area
Weston Creek features a regular pattern of fine grain building Private open space is provided to each dwelling. Generally Gross dwelling density 5 dwellings per ha urban area
footprints. The built form defines linear blocks of open space (roads consistent setbacks create uniform streetscapes and space at the
Net dwelling density 10 dwellings per ha developable land
and back yards). front of dwellings, and larger areas of private open space behind.
Occupancy rate 2.4 occupants per dwelling
Developable land 54% of the urban area
Building footprint 14% of the urban area
Private open space 40% of the urban area
Semi public open space 0% of the urban area
Road reserve 21% of the urban area
Road 12% of the urban area
Verge 9% of the urban area
Public open space 25% of the urban area

URBAN ECOLOGY, ENERGY AND WATER

Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Annual residential greenhouse gas emissions 6.4 tonnes CO2 per resident
from onsite building operation 15.4 tonnes CO2 per dwelling
Annual residential energy use 39 GJ per resident
93 GJ per dwelling
residential electricity use 4.7 MWh per resident
11.3 MWh per dwelling
residential natural gas use 22 GJ per resident
52 GJ per dwelling

Green Space Building Height and Road Reserve Annual commercial energy use n/a
no commercial uses
Weston Creek exemplifies the 1960s approach to local landscape Building heights are uniformly low rise (light grey). Road reserves Annual residential potable water use 111 kL per resident
development, with buildings set in bushland. Native vegetation is also align with open space corridors.
268 kL per dwelling
continued throughout streetscapes and urban open spaces.
Annual commercial potable water use n/a
no commercial uses
Ratio pervious to impervious open space 2.3 pervious : 1 impervious
public and private
Green open space 70% of the urban area
public 43% of the urban area
private 27% of the urban area
Tree canopy in the urban area (overall) 37% of the urban area
public 16% of the urban area
private 21% of the urban area

Weston Creek sits within a bushland setting which connects to adjacent ridges and buffers.
Urban Form Analysis - Type D
Canberra Example - Weston, Weston Creek

WESTON
HOLDER

800m radius
Tugg
e
ranon

LYONS
g Exp
ressw

WESTON 400m radius

ay

LYONS

Weston Primary
School

Study Area

Cooleman

DIVERSITY Dwellings and Socio-Demographic Mix Court

Performance indicator Unit of measurement

Dwelling types in % of overall dwellings
Detached house 96%
Semi-detached or terrace 4%
Apartment 1-2 storey 0%
Apartment 3 storeys 0%
Apartment 4 or more storeys 0%

Dwelling size in % of overall dwellings

1 Bedroom 0%
STIRLING
2 Bedrooms 0%
3 Bedrooms 28%
4 Bedrooms and more 63%

Household composition in % of overall households Connectivity Comparative Snapshot

single 26% The connectivity image above Reid Kingston Gungahlin Weston Hannover Freiburg Dockside
couple w/o kids 31% indicates how far can you get from
couple with kids 43% the centre of the study area in a:
single parent 0% 5 minute walk People per ha Urban Area
groups 0%
10 minute walk

5 minute cycle
Population by age cohort in % of overall population Land Take per Person (m2)
0-19 yrs 16% Connectivity to open space is
20-39 yrs 24% very high within this urban form.
40-59 yrs 34% A network of roads and dedicated
cycle paths allows movement Public Open Space per Person (m2)
60 yrs and over 27%
through the study area, although
like Yerrabi the distances to other
Tenure type in % of overall dwellings amenities such as shops and public
transport are over 1km. Road per Person (m2)
Fully owned 65%
Purchased 31%
Rented 4%
Water use per Person (kL)
Rent/Buy Scheme 0%

Owner occupancy rate 92% of all residents

Public and social housing dwellings 0% of all residential dwellings CO2 Emissions per Person (t per year)
Low income households
(gross weekly income less than $650) 0% of all households
High income households Low Income Households (%)
(gross weekly income of $2,500 or more) 42% of all households

CONNECTIVITY Movement and Amenity SUMMARY

Performance indicator Unit of measurement High performance
Distance from centre of study area to:
• A vast amount (70 per cent) of the urban area represents green open spaces with buildings set in bushland, large front setbacks and
nearest major public transport node generous backyards.
(bus interchange) 1.0 km walking distance
nearest rapid bus stop 1.7 km walking distance Low performance
nearest school 0.6 km walking distance • Low population density with only 13 residents per hectare and with 800 m2 per person, nearly four times the land-take of Reid and
local shop, group or town centre 1.6 km walking distance Kingston.
nearest green open space (public or • The highest average building footprint per dwelling (270 m2).
semi-public) 0.2 km walking distance • With 6.4 tonnes per year the highest carbon emissions per resident from heating and cooling.
Canberra city GPO 12.5 km road distance • Highest potable water consumption per resident (111 kL per year) due to watering requirements of generous gardens.
Length of bicycle network per ha 34 m • Narrow housing choices with detached houses for medium to high income households only.
Length of pedestrian network per ha 83 m • Aging population with 61 per cent of the population being 40 years and older.
Intersection density 11 intersections per hectare
Urban Form Analysis - Type E
International Example - Hannover Kronsberg, Germany
KRONSBERG is located to the southeast of Hannover, the state capital of Lower Saxony.
Developed for the World EXPO 2000 the Kronsberg district presents a comprehensive
example of visionary urban planning and construction with exceptionally high ecological
standards, above-average quality of accommodation and semi-natural open space design.

Building Footprint - 16%

Private Open Space - 23%

Semi Public Open Space - 13%

Road Verge - 29%

Road - 9%

Public Open Space (parkland) - 10%

Land Use Comparison Land Use Map

HANNOVER KRONSBERG currently has a population of around 6,800 people.

The first two development phases, Kronsberg-Nord and Kronsberg-Mitte,
delivered more than 3,000 dwellings. Almost 3,000 jobs are located in the
immediate vicinity with bank and data processing companies. The new
residential area, the adjacent commercial areas with their numerous new
service industry jobs, and the neighbouring countryside create an urban
spatial unity

SNAPSHOT
Suburb Hannover, Kronsberg
Area of tile study 21.4 Hectares
Residential dwellings 810
Study area population 1830
Year of initial development 1999

The following comparison is based on land use data from a study area of 21.4 hectares
located in the northern part of the development (see Aerial Image on the right page).

Built Form v Open Space Private Space v Public Space Urban ecology, energy and social data are based on Kronsberg averages. Water data is
based on Hannover average household consumption.
The appearance of the district is shaped by its wide-meshed rectangular Diverse building designs create distinct areas that are grouped around
grid layout, which creates frames for a variety of block structures. The a neighbourhood park and bordered by park corridors or green zones.
grid layout of the blocks, the avenue-like streets and the open space
planning unite various construction forms and designs
Emphasis is placed on good open space design, and semi-public inner
courtyards and private outdoor areas are available for almost every COMPACT LAYOUT AND
EFFICIENT LAND UTILISATION
home.

Performance indicator Unit of measurement

Population density 85 residents per ha urban area
Gross dwelling density 38 dwellings per ha developable land
Net dwelling density 73 dwellings per ha residential area
Occupancy rate 2.3 occupants per dwelling
Developable land 52% of the overall urban area
Building footprint 16% of the overall urban area
Private open space 23% of the overall urban area
Semi public open space 13% of the overall urban area
Road reserve 38% of the overall urban area
Road 9% of the overall urban area
Verge 29% of the overall urban area
Public open space 10% of the overall urban area

URBAN ECOLOGY, ENERGY AND WATER

Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Annual residential greenhouse gas emissions 0.9 tonnes CO2 per resident
from onsite building operation 2 tonnes CO2 per dwelling
Green Space Building Height and Road Reserve Annual residential energy use 16 GJ per resident
Interconnected public, semi-public and private areas close to the Low land take was a key design feature with compact urban form and 36 GJ per dwelling
homes offer differing green and open spaces with rainwater retention perimeter development. Transport Development Areas with maximum Annual residential potable water use 51 kL per resident
and infiltration areas integrated in the design. Perimeter developments buildings heights of four to five storeys along the light rail corridor
116 kL per dwelling
with inner courtyards and internal paths offer secluded communal green to the north-west links the development with the city. The densities
spaces and safe play areas for children. and buildings heights decrease to two or three storeys towards the The energy concept for the development consists of the following components:
countryside to the south-east. • Low Energy construction methods with quality assurance, monitoring and skills
qualification measures.
• Two decentralised gas-boosted cogeneration plants provide heat for space heating
and warm water for all households.
• Renewable energy sources are utilised: Three wind turbine facilities with an overall
capacity of 3.6 MW, solar collectors and photovoltaic facilities on roofs.
• Innovative technology by solar passive houses, solar district heating, and
microclimate zones.

Main features of the semi-natural decentralised rainwater management system are:

• Rainwater retention basin.
• Hillside avenue to the north with renaturalised watercourse.
• Natural rainwater retention areas.
• Rainwater use concept for inner courtyards.
Vibrant residential development with easy access to open space recreational areas. • Water harvesting and saving concept in school and community centre.
Urban Form Analysis - Type E
International Example - Hannover Kronsberg, Germany

BEMERODE

KRONSBERG

KRONSBERG

WULFERODE

Study Area Aerial Image

DIVERSITY Dwellings and Socio-Demographic Mix

Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Dwelling types in % of overall dwelling
Detached house 5%
Terrace or Row Houses 6%
Apartment up to 3 storeys 66%
Apartment 4 to 5 storeys 23%

Household composition in % of overall households

single 39%
couple w/o kids 24%
couple with kids 28%
single parent 9%
groups 21%

Population by age cohort in % of overall population Comparative Snapshot

0-17 yrs 28% Reid Kingston Gungahlin Weston Hannover Freiburg Dockside
18-59 yrs 64%
60 yrs and over 8%
People per ha Urban Area
Low income households
(recieving public transfer services) 37% of all households
Image courtesy of Karin Rumming, City of Hannover

Land Take per Person (m2)

CONNECTIVITY Movement and Amenity
The development of Kronsberg followed the regional planning principle, according to Public Open Space per Person (m2)
which residential development should occur in the main expand along local rail public
transport routes and be concentrated at urban densities in the catchment areas of the
stops and stations. The three tram stations are within less than 600 metres walking Road per Person (m2)
distance from all the dwellings.
Image courtesy of Karin Rumming, City of Hannover
Along the light rail corridor runs the main access road. This transport corridor
became an attractive location for shops and offices. At the mid-section of the current Water use per Person (kL)
development these uses are concentrated with a shopping centre, a district square, the
‘KroKus’ arts and community centre, a health centre and a church.
CO2 Emissions per Person (t per year)
Early Delivery of Social Infrastructure
Social infrastructure was put in place concurrently with the housing and includes a
primary school with water saving concept and photovoltaic installation, three children Low Income Households (%)
Image courtesy of Karin Rumming, City of Hannover
day care facilities and around 17 units for community use. Community units for
local groups are located on the ground floor of apartment buildings as a result of a
compulsory agreement with the developers.

Varied Architecture and Accommodation SUMMARY

Over forty architectural and open space planning offices applied very different Exemplary performance
approaches and design solutions, in many cases after design competitions.
• Diversity in design and high quality public realm achieves a balanced social mix in terms of household composition (singles, couples,
family with children) and household income (37% low income).
Balanced Social Mix and Social Infrastructure • Early delivery of social infrastructure (school, child care, parks, community spaces) concurrently with housing.
Diverse design with a mix of types, tenures and sizes on a fine, section scale was • Landscape design ‘City as a habitat’.
applied to achieve a balanced social mix. Key concepts were flexible residential design • Low carbon urban design with low energy and passive houses, renewable energy sources, CHP district heating and rapid public
to cope with changing housing needs, a mixture of large and small apartments, and transport.
apartments suitable for families and for new lifestyles. The objective was to avoid social
segregation by applying various forms of delivery model, tenures and social housing.
Web Links
http://www.hannover.de/de/umwelt_bauen/bauen/bauen_lhh/oekobauen/oemobakr/modkrons/kroliter/rotebuch.html
http://connectedcities.eu/downloads/showcases/kronsberg_hannover_handbook.pdf
http://www.rudi.net/node/7346
Urban Form Analysis - Type F
International Example - Freiburg Vauban, Germany
VAUBAN, a former French military base in Germany’s southwest, was
redeveloped as a model sustainable urban district in the late 1990s with a focus
on reduced car use, high ecological standards of buildings and co-building
initiatives to improve affordability.

Building Footprint - 21%

Private Open Space - 25%

Semi Public Open Space - 9%

Road Verge - 5%

Road - 4%

Public Open Space (parkland) - 36%

Land Use Comparison Land Use Map

FREIBURG VAUBAN’S new district is 41 hectares in size with 1,800 dwellings,

5,000 residents and 600 permanent jobs. It largely consists of two to four
storey row houses and walk-up apartments. Approximately two thirds of
the developments have no garages and front-door parking provisions. As of
2009 around 70% of the households had chosen to live without a private car.
A tram network and two bus lines connect the residents with the surrounding
area. Most individual blocks were sold to small cooperatives of owner-
occupiers, each comprising between 3 and 21 households, which were
responsible for the detailed building design of their shared property. This
generated diverse architectural and open space designs in a fine-grain mix of
lot sizes suitable for varying building types from single-family terrace houses
to 20-unit apartment buildings. Besides the owner cooperatives, there is a
number of rental units, both with and without public subsidies.

SNAPSHOT
Suburb Vauban Freiburg, Germany
Area of tile study 11.1 Hectares
Residential dwellings 524
Built Form v Open Space Private Space v Public Space Study area population 1462
The housing types include two to four storey row-houses and Semi-public spaces such as access galleries, community gardens
Year of initial development 1998
apartment buildings. All houses are built to a compulsory low and community facilities are a visible feature of the neighbourhood.
energy standard, some of them exceeding the performance to Streets and other public spaces are playgrounds for children and
places for social interaction. The following comparison is based on land use data from a study area of 11.1 hectares
Passivhaus or even Plus Energy Standard. Zoning prohibits the
construction of parking space on the site of the house. located in the southern part of the development (see Aerial Image on the right page).
Urban ecology, energy, water and social data are based on Vauban averages.

COMPACT LAYOUT AND

EFFICIENT LAND UTILISATION
Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Population density 134 residents per ha urban area
Gross dwelling density 44 dwellings per ha developable land
Net dwelling density 79 dwellings per ha residential area
Occupancy rate 3.1 occupants per dwelling
Developable land 55% of the overall urban area
Building footprint 21% of the overall urban area
Private open space 25% of the overall urban area
Semi public open space 9% of the overall urban area
Road reserve 9% of the overall urban area
Road 4% of the overall urban area
Verge 5% of the overall urban area
Public open space 36% of the overall urban area

Green Space Building Height and Road Reserve URBAN ECOLOGY, ENERGY AND WATER
To create a landscaped neighbourhood was an explicit design The plan departs from the simple inherited grid and creates a Performance indicator Unit of measurement
goal. The design of public green spaces, local streets and the network based on the principle of ‘filtered permeability’. The
Annual residential greenhouse gas emissions 0.5 tonnes CO2 per resident
neighbourhood centre were developed in meetings and workshops network geometry favours active modes of transport such
with residents. as walking and cycling and disadvantages the car. This is from onsite building operation 1.5 tonnes CO2 per dwelling
accomplished by reducing the number of streets that run through Annual residential energy use 10 GJ per resident
the neighbourhood. Most local streets are shared zones and cul-de- 28 GJ per dwelling
sacs.
Annual residential potable water use 9 kL per resident
29 kL per dwelling
Impervious open spaces 80%

The energy concept for the development consists of the following components:
• All houses are built to a compulsory low energy standard of 65 kWh/m2 every year
(German Average 1995-2000: 100 kWh/m2, before: 200 kWh/m2).
• 100 four-storey units are designed to an ultra-low energy building standard
(Passivhaus Standard) that has no conventional heating system and uses internal
heat gains, passive solar gains and heat recovery technology.
• A solar district of at least 100 units comprises plus-energy-houses with solar
collectors for heating and photovoltaic systems that produce a surplus of electricity.
The solar energy surplus is then sold back into the city’s grid and provides a profit
on every home.
Vibrant mixed density residential development with ease of access to open space and communial green spaces.
Urban Form Analysis - Type F
International Example - Freiburg Vauban, Germany
UFFHAUSEN GEWERBEGEBIET SUD UFFHAUSEN

Giles Street GEWERBEGEBIET SUD

FREIBURG
FREIBURG

ST GEORGEN

Study Area Aerial Image

• Buildings with conventional heating systems are heated by a combined heat and
power station burning wood chips.

The water management concept is based on

• Infiltration of rainwater into the ground is provided for 80% of the residential areas
• A new ecological sewage system with vacuum pipes to a biogas plant where it

ferments together with organic household waste and generates biogas which is

used for cooking

• Remaining waste water (grey water) is cleaned and reused for gardening, flashing
toilets etc.

DIVERSITY Dwellings and Socio-Demographic Mix

Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Dwelling types in % of overall dwellings
2 to 4 storey row houses 100%
and apartments

Household composition in % of overall households

single 12%
couple w/o kids 10% Comparative Snapshot
couple with kids 78% Reid Kingston Gungahlin Weston Hannover Freiburg Dockside

Population by age cohort in % of overall population

0-17 yrs 30%
18-30 yrs 4% People per ha Urban Area
31-45 yrs 48%
46-60 yrs 15%
60 yrs and over 3% Land Take per Person (m2)

Low income households 10% of all households

Public Open Space per Person (m2)

CONNECTIVITY Movement and Amenity
An integrated transport system for the city and the region has achieved the following
Road per Person (m2)
modal split:
Walking 21%
Cycling 18%
Public transport 21% Water use per Person (kL)
Cars 39%
Motorcycle 1%
Reduced car usage in Vauban is based on: CO2 Emissions per Person (t per year)
• A zoning for major parts of the development that prohibits the construction of
parking space on the site of the house. Housing units and parking spaces are sold
separately.
Low Income Households (%)
• A liveable street design concept has been applied based on:
• A 30 km/h zone along all main roads through Vauban (as does every residential
street in Freiburg).
• Every road except the main road is a ‘play road’ designed as a 5km/h shared
zone for all residents with pavement widths of 3 to 5 metres and 1 metre wide
pervious and driveable curbs that allow emergency access. SUMMARY
• Bicycle streets that are one way roads for cars and two way streets for
bicycles. Exemplary performance
• Pedestrian-only paths that linking residents to nature, retail and public • Land-efficient road pattern with only 7 m2 of road corridor per resident due to a liveable street design and car access restrictions
transport.
• Low land-take per resident (75 m2) based on minimised road corridor
• Cars may enter the residential streets but only for loading and unloading purposes.
Residents and visitors, too, are expected to park their car in one of the perimeter • Family-friendly compact urban form with 134 people per hectare, two- to four-storey buildings and 80% family households with children
garages and pay for it. • Low carbon design with energy-efficient buildings, renewable energy sources, CHP district heating and rapid public transport
• Car sharing organisation offers its members not only access to cars but also a on
year free pass for public transportation within Freiburg. Web Links
• A light rail line runs down the main street with three stations and 8 to 10 services http://streetswiki.wikispaces.com/Quartier+Vauban,+Freiburg,+Germany
per hour during peak times. It provides access to the city centre in 13 minutes and
to the central train station in 18 minutes. Interchange opportunities are available http://www.cabe.org.uk/case-studies/vauban/
with buses. http://www.greenlivingpedia.org/Freiburg

Fig. Concept of filtering permeability.

Urban Form Analysis - Type G
International Example - Dockside Green, Canada
DOCKSIDE GREEN is located in the City of Victoria, British Columbia,
Canada. This mixed-use harbourside precinct is designed to be a greenhouse gas
(carbon) neutral development.

Building Footprint - 26%

Private Open Space - 13%

Semi Public Open Space - 9%

Road Verge - 9%

Road - 12%

Public Open Space (parkland) - 31%

Land Use Comparison Land Use Map

DOCKSIDE GREEN seeks to be a world-leading model for holistic, closed-

loop design, functioning as a total environmental system in which form,
structure, materials, mechanical and electrical systems are interrelated and
interdependent and largely self-sufficient. When completed, Dockside Green
will showcase energy generating technologies which sustain mixed-use
residential and commercial development including affordable housing, public
open spaces, public art, a mini-transit system, local shops and offices. It
achieved LEED Platinum accreditation for stage 1.

SNAPSHOT
Suburb Dockside Green, British
Columbia
Area of tile study 6.05 Hectares
Residential dwellings 1100
Study area population 2200
Year of initial development c. 2006

Built Form v Open Space Private Space v Public Space The following comparison is based on two types of available data: 1. actual performance
Building footprints range in size but all are at an urban scale with Emphasis is placed on shared public spaces. Buildings sit within data for completed phases of the development and 2. aspirational performance
no single detached dwellings. Smaller apartment blocks arranged a network of larger grain semi-private spaces (building courtyards) targets which are planned for but which are not yet completed or data verifying their
in narrow linear bands lie close to the harbour and larger mixed use and public open spaces. Private open space is minimal. Mixed use performance is not yet published.
buildings distributed opposite an open space corridor. street frontages encourage outdoor activity within the public realm.

COMPACT LAYOUT AND

EFFICIENT LAND UTILISATION
Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Population density 288 residents per ha urban area
Gross dwelling density 144 dwellings per ha developable land
Net dwelling density 144 dwellings per ha residential area
Occupancy rate 2 number of occupants per dwelling
Developable land 48% of the overall urban area
Building footprint 26% of the overall urban area
Private open space 13% of the overall urban area
Semi public open space 9% of the overall urban area
Road reserve 21% of the overall urban area
Road 12% of the overall urban area
Verge 9% of the overall urban area
Public open space 31% of the overall urban area

URBAN ECOLOGY, ENERGY AND WATER

Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Green Space Building Height and Road Reserve Annual residential greenhouse gas emissions 0.2 tonnes CO2 per year
A naturalised creek and pond system or ‘greenway’ runs the length A perimeter road provides access to the site and reduces the need from onsite building operation 0.4 tonnes CO2 per dwelling
of the site, terminating in a public amphitheatre. This integrated for on-site road land take. A mix between medium rise and high rise
Annual residential energy use 7 GJ per resident
storm water and urban ecology system uses native and adaptive building heights achieves a high density within a modest site area
species. Green roofs are also provided on site. whilst still providing a high ratio of public open space. 15 GJ per dwelling
Annual residential potable water use 37 kL per resident
73 kL per dwelling

Energy concept for the development

A biomass gasification plant will make Dockside Green the first large community-scale
development in North America to be “greenhouse gas neutral” or better from a building
energy perspective. The process uses wood waste recovered from local mills and
woodworking shops, as well as tree trimmings and deadfall from the region.This will
offset emissions created onsite from electricity and the delivery of waste wood to the
site. Excess heat produced by the biomass plant will be sold off-site to neighbouring
businesses.
Building features providing optimised energy performance include passive building
design (shading and daylighting), insulation, low E double-glazed windows, heat
recovery technology to pre-warm incoming fresh air by capturing the heat from
ventilated air being exhausted, a four-pipe fan coil system for domestic hot and cold
water supply system (providing free cooling), photovoltaic and solar hot water products
Typical Dockside Green development including high density residential built form. and wind turbines recycle or reuse 90% of construction waste on site.
Urban Form Analysis - Type G
International Example - Dockside Green, Canada

DOCKSIDE
VICTORIA WEST GREEN
VICTORIA WEST
DOCKSIDE
GREEN

VICTORIA

VICTORIA
HARBOUR

Study Area Aerial Image

Individual dwelling meters will monitor consumption of cold water, hot water, heat, and
electricity, assisting individual residents to voluntarily conserve energy.
Main features of the water management and treatment systems include:
• The development will treat 100% of its sewage on site and use the treated water for
flushing toilets, landscape irrigation and water features.
• Storm water will be treated through green roofs and flow via a series of connected
central naturalized creeks and waterways which are key public landscape features.
• Potable water consumption will be minimised by using high performance water
fixtures and appliances.

DIVERSITY Dwellings and Socio-Demographic Mix

Performance indicator Unit of measurement
Dwelling types in % of overall dwellings
Detached or semi-detached 0%
Terrace or row houses 0%
Apartment up to 3 storeys 5%
Apartment 4 to 5 storeys 95%
Comparative Snapshot
Dwelling size in % of overall dwellings Reid Kingston Gungahlin Weston Hannover Freiburg Dockside
1 Bedroom 53%
2 Bedrooms 43%
3 Bedrooms 4%
People per ha Urban Area
4 Bedrooms and more 0%
Population by age cohort in % of overall population
0-17 yrs 0%
Land Take per Person (m2)
18-59 yrs 89%
60 yrs and over 11%
Low income households 10%
Public Open Space per Person (m2)
Dockside Green is has limited diversity of housing choice in terms of dwelling size or
type, predominately consisting of apartments. Initiatives to promote diverse housing
ownership and affordability include distributing affordable (subsidised) apartments
throughout the site (10%) and constructing energy efficient buildings with low operating Road per Person (m2)
costs.

CONNECTIVITY Movement and Amenity Water use per Person (kL)

The development will provide a range of transport options which connect it to the
nearby downtown area and reduce car use. Features which reduce car reliance and
promote sustainable transport choices include: CO2 Emissions per Person (t per year)
• Providing a mixed use urban fabric where people can live, work and access social
infrastructure such as shops.
• A car share program using electric vehicles. Low Income Households (%)
• Upgraded bike trails and bike racks in each building.
• A harbour ferry dock facility.
• Transit and a mini-transit shuttle bus.

SUMMARY
• Links and upgrades to existing cycle infrastructure (the Galloping Goose Trail).

Monitoring sustainability performance

Dockside Green has developed a set of performance indicators that will measure the Exemplary performance
performance of the project, assessing whether it is achieving its economic, social and • Innovative technology applied at a neighbourhood scale (e.g. biomass gasification plant , on-site sewage treatment, green roofs and
environmental goals. The indicators are to be monitored and results published on an naturalised creeks) are presented as a sustainability aesthetic highly visible in the public realm.
interactive web page. The City of Victoria will penalise the developer if performance
• First urban development that achieved LEED platinum accreditation.
goals are not achieved. Residential dwellings are also equipped with water and energy
meters which allow them to monitor and adjust their own domestic consumption. • Establishing an online monitoring system accessible for the public that reports and up-dates on the sustainability performance of the
development (http://docksidegreen.visiblestrategies.com/).
Sustainable development practices
Dockside Green has sought to create a model of how developers, municipalities and
Web Links
community, environment and business groups can collaborate to create sustainable http://docksidegreen.com/
developments. Features of this development process model include: http://docksidegreen.visiblestrategies.com/
• Community engagement and transparency. http://www.resourcesmart.vic.gov.au/documents/DockGreenVicCan.pdf
• Conducting sustainability education programs with schools.
• Supporting local businesses and suppliers which supports the local economy (and
reduces CO2 emissions by minimizing transportation needs).
• Creating local employment.
• Communicating sustainability initiatives and sharing knowledge (publishing, the
internet).