Making greening happen in consolidating cities

Transcription

1 Making greening happen in consolidating cities Derrimut Google maps 2016 Joe Hurley, Kath Phelan, Marco Amati - RMIT University Alex Saunders, Bryan Boruff University of Western Australia

2 Clean Air and Urban Landscapes research hub

3 Issue Context - Making greening happen in consolidating cities

4 Issue Context - Making greening happen in consolidating cities

5 Issue Context - Making greening happen in consolidating cities

6 Issue Context - Making greening happen in consolidating cities

7

8 Work Program - Making greening happen in consolidating cities 1. Policy Review: review of current policy and strategy for urban forest enhancement with respect to land-use planning. 2. Spatial analysis: Analysing urban development scenarios under consolidation pressure. Comprehensive city scale assessment of urban forest against land-use. 3. Scenario modelling: Model land-use and urban forest policy/regulation, and urban development; test implications of different policy and urban development scenarios. Source: Melbourne Urban Forest Strategy

9 Policy Review

10 Policy Review National level: Limited role in city management, but growing interest in liveable cities Expressed need for increased greening (2016) Smart Cities and Suburbs; City Deals. State level: Primary control of land-use planning. Little reference to urban forest in state planning strategies. Little to no coverage in state planning regulation. However, increasing efforts in some jurisdictions to address the urban forest: Data and information provision Policy review Regulatory mechanism review

11 Policy Review Local Government: Most active level of government when it comes to action of urban forest and land-use planning Most of the activity is about LG managing trees on their own land (esp open space and council properties); and the street network. Many have relatively loose engagement with ideas to encourage trees on private land. But there are an increasing number of strategies looking at the formal role LG can play as a critical actor in land-use planning and development assessment.

12 Policy Review Research question: To what extent do local government urban forest policies make a clear connection to land use planning policies to protect and enhance the urban forest? Final sample comprised 18 urban forest strategies produced by local governments since 2008 in four Australian mainland states and available online

13 Policy Review Goals: Variable: managing their urban trees; protecting the urban forest; and protecting and enhancing urban forest. One municipality would generally like its jurisdiction to be well-treed Others are more comprehensive in their vision for a resilient, healthy and diverse urban forest. Defining the urban forest as an integrated canopy. City of Perth

14 Policy Review Framing the problem: Most adopt the language of sustainability to describe the value of urban forests. A number refer to liveability and health; two refer to spatial social justice, identifying equitable tree distribution as an important goal. Most frame urban development as one of the rationales for producing forest policies. 4 talk generally about urbanisation and development pressure; 12 cite variations of density, urban consolidation or urban intensification as impacting negatively on urban forests. But framing is variable: prominence variously given to biodiversity, heat island, amenity, health, equity, urban development pressure.

15 Relationship between planning policies and urban Local government urban forest strategies forest strategy 1. Planning policies sit above urban forest strategy Banyule City Council, Vic: Urban Forest Strategic Plan (2014) City of Belmont, WA: Urban Forest Strategy (2014) 2. Planning policies integrated / inform / are aligned with urban forest strategy 3. Planning policies and urban forest strategy align with other policy areas 4. Urban forest goals similar to planning, but strategy does not include ref to planning policies 5. Urban forest goals similar to those in planning, but strategy only refers to very specific programs or regulatory controls rather than planning policies City of Armadale, WA: Urban Forest Strategy (2014) City of Bayside, Vic: Tree Strategy (2011) City of Greater Geelong, Vic: Urban Forest Strategy (2015) City of Newcastle, NSW: Urban Forest Policy (2008) City of Perth, WA: Urban Forest Plan (2016 draft) Town of Bassendean, WA: Urban Forest Strategy (2016 draft) City of Melbourne, Vic: Urban Forest Strategy (2011) City of Burnside, SA: Urban Tree Strategy (2014) City of Sydney, NSW: Urban Forest Strategy (2013) City of Marrickville, NSW: Urban Forest Strategy (2011) City of North Sydney, NSW: Urban Forest Strategy (2011) 6. Urban forest strategy is a tree management plan, City of Darebin, Vic: Urban Forest Strategy (2013) connection to land use planning is regulatory City of Mitcham, SA: Tree Strategy (2016) City of Port Phillip, Vic: Greening Port Phillip (2010) City of Unley, SA: Regenerating Unley's Urban Forest (2015) 7. Trees-first approach to all policies Brimbank City Council, Vic: Urban Forest Strategy (2015)

16 Policy Review Key strategies to integrate urban forest and planning: Connect urban forest policies to land use planning framework. Highlight where planning policies do/should identify the role of trees. Address planning s current treatment of trees as an unconsidered back end constraint. City-wide review of planning policies to increase urban forest objectives integration. City of Armadale

17 Policy Review Brimbank: Proposes that trees should be at the forefront of Council s decision making process, to improve liveability throughout Brimbank. Proposes a strong planning regulatory approach to require developers to plant trees. Council should work closely with developers to apply a vegetation first approach to increase canopy cover.

18 Policy Review Recent State initiatives - Victoria Lots of pressure on state government to act on urban forest. Metro strategy Plan Melbourne Refresh release in March First inclusion of urban forest and urban green objectives. Immediately followed by amended zone rules with new minimum garden requirements. However, not much stronger than existing.

19 Policy Review Key lessons: Despite ongoing trend to centralise planning control at state level, a lack of state engagement on the intersection of urban planning and the urban forest. Local government leading strategy and policy innovation, but lack ability to influence at metro scale. Of the leading LGAs, there is significant diversity in approach to objectives, monitoring, strategy and action. Lack of information to inform strategy making, especially for suburban councils; and a lack of information other than on council controlled land. Lack of state support for action though assessment tools; policy frameworks and regulatory mechanisms.

20 Spatial Analysis

21 National framework for green space mapping and monitoring Our objectives for green space mapping and monitoring: Viable as a nationally consistent, comparable approach. Scalable from metro to local; with fine grained analysis possible. Allocate green cover to major land ownership/use categories and street networks to inform policy and strategy response. Set baselines, benchmarks, targets and allow monitoring and evaluation over time, based on available data. Investigate relationship between urban greening and other spatial information such as land-use to inform policy and strategy development.

22 National framework for green space mapping and monitoring Sampling vrs Census Sampling (e.g. i-tree or field sampling) is low cost and robust, but lacks detail and cannot translate cover to landuse. Census options include LiDAR, satellite imagery and 3D photography. LiDAR has high accuracy, but expensive and limited data availability. Satellite imagery lacks sufficient detail for land-use analysis 3D photography is cost effective, allows for detailed cover analysis, is readily available (inc historical archive to 2008).

23 Perth Pilot - method

24 Perth Pilot sample results 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 - Area of Greenness by Type (ha) Grass Shrubs Trees (3-10m) Trees (10-15m) Trees 15m plus Area (ha) Percentage Total Study Area (ha) 170, % Total Measured Green Area (ha) 48,000 28% Grass (ha) 17,900 10% Shrubs 11,100 6% Trees (3-10m) 13,700 8% Trees (10-15m) 3,800 2% Trees (15m Plus) 1,600 1% 24

25 Perth Pilot sample results 25,000 Distribution of Greenness by Land Use (ha) 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 - Grass Shrubs Trees (3-10m) Trees (10-15m) Trees 15m plus

26 LGA Comparison Belmont (C) Fremantle (C) Canning (C) Vincent (T) Murray (S) Kwinana (T) Swan (C) Cockburn (C) Mandurah (C) Serpentine-Jarrahdale (S) Gosnells (C) Rockingham (C) Joondalup (C) Cottesloe (T) Wanneroo (C) Bayswater (C) Stirling (C) Perth (C) Bassendean (T) Victoria Park (T) Melville (C) Mosman Park (T) East Fremantle (T) Subiaco (C) South Perth (C) Waroona (S) Claremont (T) Nedlands (C) Cambridge (T) Peppermint Grove (S) Kalamunda (S) Armadale (C) Mundaring (S) Tree Percentage Shrub Percentage Grass Percentage

27 Perth Pilot sample results Residential areas, percentage cover of trees over 3m Transport land use, percentage cover of trees over 3m

28 Change over time: All land uses, change in cover by type of greenness 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 - Grass Shrubs Trees 3-10m Trees 10-15m Trees 15m Plus Any Tree Any Green

29 Change over time: All land uses, loss of cover + new dwellings

30 Dr Joe Hurley, RMIT University Questions

31 Work in progress

32 Proximity Analysis

33 Local Planning Scheme Approach Local Planning Scheme Reclassification of Zones Reclassified LPS R-Code Boundaries Combined LPS and MRS LPS/MRS Based Land Use Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) Reclassification of Reserves Reclassified MRS Mesh Blocks LPS Based Greenness Model CSIRO Greenness

34 Local Planning Scheme Approach LPS in Original format Simplified Local Planning Scheme Alex Saunders, Centre for the Built Environment and Health, University of Western Australia 34

35 1,200 1, City of Stirling Local Model 4: Local Level Data Comparison of Mesh Block and LPS Land-use Grass Area (ha) Shrubs Area (ha) Trees (3-10m) Area (ha) Trees (10-15m) Area (ha) Trees (15m Plus) Area (ha) City of Stirling - Regional Model 1,200 1, Residential Commercial Industrial Education Hospital/Medical Parkland Transport Infrastructure Grass Area (ha) Shrub Area (ha) Trees (3-10m) Area (ha) Trees (10-15m) Area (ha) Trees (15m Plus) Area (ha) Other Water 35

36 Aging of suburbs Stratified Aging of Street Blocks, then neighbourhoods Uses mean property age less 1.5 standard deviations to designate age of street blocks (Mesh Blocks) Then uses these defined street blocks as the basis of defining the age of SA1s. Uses Mean MB less 1.5 SDs. Use defined SA1s to define age of SA2. Ages a neighbourhood by the age of the street block rather than the property. Ages a larger neighbourhood by the age of sub-neighbourhoods rather than current property age profile.

37 Aging of suburbs Aging suburbs based around major planning eras Pre 1955 Stevenson-Hepburn Plan 1955 Corridor Plan 1970 Metroplan Liveable Neighbourhoods

38 Modelling policy scenarios

39 Dr Joe Hurley, RMIT University End

40 LGA_NAME_2011 Tree Percentage Shrub Percentage Grass Percentage Mundaring (S) Armadale (C) Kalamunda (S) Peppermint Grove (S) Cambridge (T) Nedlands (C) Claremont (T) Waroona (S) South Perth (C) Subiaco (C) East Fremantle (T) Mosman Park (T) Melville (C) Victoria Park (T) Bassendean (T) Perth (C) Stirling (C) Bayswater (C) Wanneroo (C) Cottesloe (T) Joondalup (C) Rockingham (C) Gosnells (C) Serpentine-Jarrahdale (S) Mandurah (C) Cockburn (C) Swan (C) Kwinana (T) Murray (S) Vincent (T) Canning (C) Fremantle (C) Belmont (C) Total Overall Green Percentage 3a: LGA Level LGA Analysis Comparison Belmont (C) Comparisons by vegetation type Fremantle (C) Canning (C) Vincent (T) Murray (S) Kwinana (T) Swan (C) Cockburn (C) Mandurah (C) Serpentine-Jarrahdale (S) Gosnells (C) Rockingham (C) Joondalup (C) Cottesloe (T) Wanneroo (C) Bayswater (C) Stirling (C) Perth (C) Bassendean (T) Victoria Park (T) Melville (C) Mosman Park (T) East Fremantle (T) Subiaco (C) South Perth (C) Waroona (S) Claremont (T) Nedlands (C) Cambridge (T) Peppermint Grove (S) Kalamunda (S) Armadale (C) Mundaring (S) Tree Percentage Shrub Percentage Grass Percentage 40

41 Proportion of Greenness by Land-use Education Residential Hospital/Medical Infrastructure Industrial Transport 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Green (%) Non-Green (%) 100,000 50,000 0 Greenness in Relation to Non-Green Area (ha) Non-Green Area 2009 Grass Area 2009 Shrub Area 2009 Trees (3-10m) Area 2009 Trees (10-15m) Area 2009 Trees (15m Plus) Area

42 Monitoring and mapping

43 Monitoring and mapping

44 Issue Context - Making greening happen in consolidating cities Proportion of municipalities residential areas zoned NRZ, GRZ and RGZ LDRZ, MUZ 36% NRZ 17% RGZ 1% GRZ 46%