Developing strategies for mainstreaming sustainability

The objective of this project was to progress the process of mainstreaming sustainable residential development. For the purpose of this report, mainstreaming is defined as the increased acceptance and adoption of sustainable design strategies and technologies by the majority of the building industry and its consumers, the broader community. To achieve this objective the report aims to identify and verify where possible the barriers to mainstreaming sustainable residential development and to recommend solutions to overcome such barriers. The project focussed on three areas Greenfield residential development rather than urban renewal. Institutional constraints (process, people, regulatory etc) more than socio-cultural (education, perception, etc) or technological. The four service areas of Water, Waste and Materials, Transport, and Social sustainability. Interviews of a broad and representative cross section of the development community were combined with other research and related work. This research and consultation was then built on and tested at a workshop involving a similarly representative group. In this report there are four levels of detail related to the key project findings Constraint categories and sub-categories (Shown in Figure 1). For each category, priority constraints, key findings and recommendations (Shown overleaf and in the relevant report section). For each category, all identified and verified constraints (Shown in the summary matrices in the relevant report section). For each identified and verified constraint, contextual detail including ideas for solutions, examples of where the constraints have been overcome and remaining questions surrounding each constraint (Shown in Appendix A). Four major categories of constraint emerged from the interviews and initial research along with associated subcategories

Regenerating the Suburbs: A model for compact, resilient cities

Australia’s major cities face a number of growing challenges, such as accommodating population growth while containing urban sprawl, catering for an ageing population and keeping housing affordable. Cities must reduce their ecological footprint to remain liveable, resilient and economically competitive. Yet accommodating increased densities in urban areas is a fraught issue that often sees planners, developers and local communities in conflict. Meanwhile, housing affordability is in crisis, fuelled by an inadequate supply of housing close to jobs and a taxation system that favours investors. The Reserve Bank has suggested “the answer.. lies in more innovative and flexible use of the land that we have so that the marginal cost of adding more stock of dwellings is lower.” This paper explores a model for compact urban living that helps to address a range of these challenges. It’s a mainstream, small-scale adaptation of the ‘co-housing’ concept: single-dwelling suburban blocks are adapted to accommodate 2 or 3 smaller dwellings with some shared spaces, reducing the overall physical and environmental footprint per household. Households are likely to come together through their own social networks. This is just one solution in a broader suite of necessary planning approaches, but is affordable, in step with changing household structures and social trends, and may hold a key to ‘humanising’ density increases in urban/ suburban areas. It may also help to enable an informal ‘sharing economy’ that could reduce living costs and improve economic resilience. Despite the potential, this model is not well enabled via current regulatory systems. This paper explores the opportunities and barriers, with a focus on the NSW planning system, and recommends greater flexibility in some key planning instruments

Market Research: Tenancy Fitout Material Procurement Attitudes and Practices

The Better Buildings partnership (BBP) has previously investigated the tenancy processes that generate waste successive cycles of fitout, de-fit, make good and re-fit. This research project has been commissioned to explore why waste occurs in commercial building fitouts and what can be done about it, with a particular focus on the materials that dominate the fitout waste stream. The characteristics of each material and aspects of its usage are explored to determine how to improve reuse and recycling rates. The Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) conducted in-depth interviews with 15 industry participants for this study, ranging from architects and property managers through to contractors and manufacturers. We also reviewed literature to provide context, however we found the available literature somewhat limited in terms of its currency, depth and local relevance. It is the interview conversations that provide a rich picture of the myriad issues and day-to-day problems that make it hard to institute a less wasteful, circular economy. The study attempts to place the problems in the context of the whole system to highlight possible solutions

Sustainable Affordable Housing - Submission to Inquiry into First Home Ownership

The Institute welcomes this opportunity to submit comments to the Commissions Inquiry evaluating the affordability and availability of housing for first home buyers. The Institute for Sustainable Futures is a self-funded research and consulting institute of the University of Technology, Sydney. The Institutes mission is to support and create change towards sustainable futures by working with government, industry and the community. Social sustainability, sustainable housing and sustainable urban infrastructure for energy, water and transport are all key parts of this mission.1 This submission seeks to evaluate the affordability and availability of housing for first home buyers within the framework of ecologically sustainable development (ESD). It is in two parts. Part I: Submission provides the framework. Part II: Comments on the Commissions Issues Paper provides more details on this framework under the broad headings used in the Commissions Issues Paper

Meeting Report: Knowledge and Gaps in Developing Microbial Criteria for Inland Recreational Waters

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has committed to issuing in 2012 new or revised criteria designed to protect the health of those who use surface waters for recreation. For this purpose, the U.S. EPA has been conducting epidemiologic studies to establish relationships between microbial measures of water quality and adverse health outcomes among swimmers. New methods for testing water quality that would provide same-day results will likely be elements of the new criteria. Although the epidemiologic studies upon which the criteria will be based were conducted at Great Lakes and marine beaches, the new water quality criteria may be extended to inland waters (IWs). Similarities and important differences between coastal waters (CWs) and IWs that should be considered when developing criteria for IWs were the focus of an expert workshop. Here, we summarize the state of knowledge and research needed to base IWs microbial criteria on sound science. Two key differences between CWs and IWs are the sources of indicator bacteria, which may modify the relationship between indicator microbes and health risk, and the relationship between indicators and pathogens, which also may vary within IWs. Monitoring using rapid molecular methods will require the standardization and simplification of analytical methods, as well as greater clarity about their interpretation. Research needs for the short term and longer term are described