Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDTS-10-142 - Review of Urban Design Awards REPORT REPORT TO: Development and Technical Services Kitchener DATE OF MEETING: August 23, 2010 SUBMITTED BY: Alain Pinard, Interim Director of Planning PREPARED BY: Heather Holbrook, Planner (Urban Design) (519-741-2324) WARD(S) INVOLVED: All DATE OF REPORT: August 10, 2010 REPORT NO.: DTS-10-142 SUBJECT: 2010 URBAN DESIGN AWARDS PROGRAM REVIEW RECOMMENDATION: That the revised Urban Design Awards Program as outlined in Development and Technical Services report DTS-10-142, be endorsed. BACKGROUND: The Urban Design Awards program was established in 1988 to honour developments throughout the City of Kitchener that were designed and built in a manner which enhances the public realm. The awards have been well received by industry professionals as well as the general public and have increased the awareness of the importance of urban design to the public realm. In October 2009 City Council endorsed the following recommendations as part of Development and Technical Services Report DTS-09-144: 1) That the presentation of the next scheduled Mike Wagner Heritage Awards and the Urban Design Awards be deferred to October 2011; and, 2) That Planning staff review the Mike Wagner Heritage Award and Urban Design Award programs to determine if a change in presentation and/or award venue is merited; and further, 3) That Planning staff review the Mike Wagner Heritage Award and Urban Design Award criteria and processes to better reflect current urban design trends and city initiated urban design policies. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Based on the review of the existing program and programs offered in other municipalities, staff recommend that a revised Urban Design Awards Program be endorsed that modifies eligibility requirements and judging, introduces new award categories and specific evaluation criteria for ïí ó ï certain new categories; modifies the number of awards to be issued; modifies the overall award process; and changes the venue for future award ceremonies. Minor changes to the text in the Urban Design Manual, communication materials and nomination forms will be required to reflect the changes to the program. Staff intend to implement these changes for the 2011 Urban Design Awards. These changes will contribute to a more meaningful, expedient and transparent award program. Summary of Recommended Changes Existing Program Proposed Program Rationale for change Open only to Site Plan Open to a broader range of Expand the breadth of projects applications. project types. worthy of recognition. One category. Seven categories. Create an “apples to apples” structure by which to evaluate projects. Three types of awards (Awards One type of award (Award of Reduce the number of awards to of Excellence, Awards of Merit Excellence). be presented and increase the and Nomination Awards). meaningfulness and prestige of the award-winning projects. No limit on the number of awards A limit of one award of Reduce the number of awards to presented bi-annually. excellence per category bi-be presented and increase the annually.* meaningfulness and prestige of the award-winning projects. No limit on the number of parties A limit of six awards total for any Cost reduction. eligible for recognition for one one award winning project.* award winning project. Call for nominations is sent to Call for nominations is sent to a Increase the number of eligible Site Plan applications by broader audience and advertised nominations. Make more efficient mail and an ad is posted in the in more media outlets. use of staff time. KW Record and online. Judging Committee comprised of Expanded to include a Increase staff involvement in the industry experts. representative from a post-determination of final awards. secondary institution, economic Provide continuity from the staff development and planning staff. subcommittee to the final judging committee. Staff subcommittee pre-screens Staff subcommittee makes final Expedite review process. all nominations and Judging decision for some categories, Committee makes final decision and pre-screen nominations for on all nominations. other categories (Judging Committee makes final decisions). Evaluation Criteria based on the More specific Evaluation Criteria Increase transparency and clarify Urban Design Manual. for some categories. criteria. Formal award ceremony held Formal award reception held Maintain public awareness of the with the Mike Wagner Heritage with the Mike Wagner Heritage program and award winning Awards in Council Chambers on Awards in a venue other than projects while reducing the a televised Council night. Council Chambers. Staff will amount of Council time required. summarize award-winning projects at a televised Council meeting. *intended limits; the total number of awards to be determined by the Judging Committee ïí ó î REPORT: The purpose of this report is to review the existing Urban Design Award Program and recommend revisions to the existing award process and judging criteria to increase the relevance, transparency and efficiency of the current award program. The report also recommends changes to the presentation format and venue, in conjunction with the Mike Wagner Heritage Awards. Existing Urban Design Award Program The Urban Design Awards program is intended to honour developments that were designed and built in a manner which enhances the public realm. The program is currently geared entirely towards Site Plan projects. The existing Urban Design Awards program is held bi-annually and offers three award types, including: Award of Excellence, Award of Merit and Nomination Awards. Awards are presented before Council in collaboration with the Mike Wagner Heritage Awards. There is no limit to the number of Urban Design Awards that may be presented. The existing process involves tracking all eligible Site Plan applications; notifying all eligible project team members; the receipt of nominations; short listing and evaluation by a staff sub- committee; evaluation and recommendation by the Urban Design Awards Judging Committee (Judging Committee) comprised of industry experts; and presentation of awards by Council at a televised Council meeting. Short listing by the staff sub-committee and evaluation by the Judging Committee is subject to evaluation criteria defined in the Urban Design Manual. Review of the existing Urban Design Awards Program Award Categories Staff have reviewed Urban Design Awards programs offered by other municipalities including the cities of Hamilton, Ottawa, Toronto, Mississauga, Calgary and Waterloo. Most municipalities that offer Urban Design Awards programs tend to have a number of award categories, specific to different types and scales of developments, and most distinguish between public and private projects. The evaluation criteria for nominees differs slightly from municipality to municipality, but all are based on established design guidelines and principles. The Kitchener Urban Design Awards program currently does not have categories because it is limited to recognizing exemplary Site Plans. The Kitchener program has evaluation criteria based on design guidelines in the Council-approved Urban Design Manual. Staff are recommending that new categories be created to recognize a broader range of types of development, and to ensure that projects are evaluated relative to projects of similar scale and type. This would also improve the fairness and transparency of the design awards. Award Types and Number of Awards Several municipalities offer Awards of Excellence and Awards of Merit, which is similar to the structure of the City of Kitchener’s Urban Design Awards program. Some municipalities recognize all nominees or shortlisted applications, others do not. Some municipalities specify a limit on the number of Awards of Excellence and Awards of Merit to be presented, and some limit the total number of awards that can be presented per project. Some municipalities also specify that the jury reserves the right not to present awards in every category and that the jury may reallocate submissions to other categories at their discretion. The City of Kitchener Urban Design Awards program does not specify a limit on the number of Awards to be presented, nor does it provide such latitude to the jury in the evaluation process. Staff are recommending that the program be modified to eliminate Awards of Merit and only issue Awards of Excellence in each category. This change will reduce the number of awards, thereby increasing their prestige and significance. Staff are also recommending that there be a ïí ó í limit of the number of Awards of Excellence to be presented per category. In previous years the owner of one successful project would have received a large framed award and multiple smaller framed awards were given to the various parties involved in the project (including the consultant, landscape architect, architect, urban designer, planner, contractor, builder, etc). As a cost-savings measure and to simplify the awards, staff are recommending that a modestly sized framed award be presented only to the owner and/or applicant and other involved parties noted in the nomination form (up to a maximum of five additional award recipients for one project). Staff are proposing that the Nomination Award category be eliminated entirely, and that instead all shortlisted nominations be recognized in an Urban Design Awards report and in the presentation to Council and at the Awards Ceremony. It is also proposed that the Judging Committee be given the discretion to issue additional Awards of Excellence in any category where more than one of the eligible projects receive exceptional scores and are equally deserving of recognition. The intent of the proposed changes to the number and types of awards is to maintain the meaning of the awards and not reducing their significance by recognizing too many projects. Eligibility Requirements Most municipalities that offer Urban Design Awards programs specify eligibility requirements that are similar to the Kitchener program. Staff are not recommending any changes to the eligibility requirements except to more clearly define projects that are not eligible and specify the eligibility requirements for new categories. The intent of these recommended changes is to clarify the City’s expectations with regards to nominations. Evaluation Process The evaluation process for most municipalities is similar to the City of Kitchener Urban Design Awards evaluation process which is a two step selection process involving a staff subcommittee and formal judging committee comprised of a cross section of industry experts. The selection process is proposed to be retained unchanged for some categories and some new categories will have a slightly modified selection process. The intent of the recommended changes for some categories is to expedite the review and evaluation process. Some larger municipalities (namely Toronto and Calgary) solicit private sponsorship to fund the award program including a Gala for the presentation of awards. Although staff would welcome sponsorships, staff are not actively pursuing private sponsorship at this time irrespective of the proposed changes to the program. Staff approximate that there is sufficient budget funding to cover costs associated with the revised award process and final award presentation ceremony and reception. Staff intend to investigate sponsorship opportunities in the future to supplement the base funding. Communications/Public Awareness Other municipalities advertise the awards online and through various community and public newspapers. Currently, the City of Kitchener promotes the awards online, with an ad in the Record and distributes nominations materials to all projects that have received Site Plan approval within the prescribed timelines. The process of tracking applications requires significant staff time and resources. Staff are recommending that the notification process be modified to notifying proponents of approved Site Plans at the time of approval by including information about the Urban Design Awards program in a letter that is sent at the time of final approval. This approach will make more efficient use of staff time. Staff intend to continue with the current notification practice for the 2011 Awards (because tracking has already been underway) and roll out the recommended nomination approach for the 2013 awards. Staff are also recommending that the practice of running advertisements in the Record and on the ïí ó ì website continue, and that other communication tools be considered (such as coverage in community newspapers, social networking, media releases and a call for nominations to targeted groups). Most municipalities provide profiles of award-winning projects of previous years online, and host award ceremonies to recognize and increase the public profile of exemplary design projects. One municipality also automatically enters Award of Excellence winners to the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada’s Urban Design Awards competition. The City of Kitchener Urban Design Awards nomination process requires that shortlisted nominees submit a display panel summarizing the project, many of said display panels are posted at City Hall. Some award winning projects from years past are profiled on the City’s website. The award ceremony has previously been held at a televised Council meeting. Staff recommend that City’s practice of posting exemplary projects online and at City Hall be retained. Staff recommend that the formal award ceremony be held in a separate venue than City Council Chambers. A summary of the award winning projects would be presented at a televised Council meeting. This would maintain the public awareness of the program and public recognition of award winning projects. Proposed Revised Urban Design Awards Program Proposed Award Categories and Proposed Eligibility Requirements and Evaluation Criteria Staff are recommending the creation of a new categorized award framework as outlined below. A maximum of one Award of Excellence per category (except the Urban Elements Category, where the maximum is five Awards of Excellence) may be presented on a bi-annual basis. Additional Awards of Excellence may be issued where more than one nominated project is exceptional and worthy of recognition. The number of projects per category to be recognized as being short listed is subject to the number and quality of eligible nominations received. The number of awards given will be at the discretion of the Judging Committee and staff subcommittee. Awards will not be granted to nominations that do not meet the eligibility requirements. The Judging Committee and staff subcommittee reserve the right not to present awards in every category and can reallocate the nominations into categories that they consider most appropriate. One project may be eligible for more than one award category (but shall not receive more than three awards total). For each award winning project one award will be issued to the owner and/or applicant and up to five awards may be presented to supporting parties involved in the project. The award categories are: Low rise Buildings Mid to High rise Buildings These Urban Design Awards categories recognize a building or group of buildings that demonstrate urban design excellence and creativity through a sensitive understanding of the context, site plan, massing and pedestrian amenities. Buildings of all uses are eligible, including residential, mixed use, commercial, institutional, governmental or industrial. New construction, adaptive reuse and building renovations and expansions are all eligible provided that all approvals are issued and construction work completed by the nomination deadline. Civic Projects Awarded to public sector (government, educational establishments, institutional establishments and public utilities) projects that make a significant contribution to the public realm. Both Civic Buildings and Public Spaces are eligible provided that all ïí ó ë approvals are issued and construction work is completed by the nomination deadline. Public Spaces may include, but shall not be limited to such spaces as streets, courtyards, plazas, trails, parks, bridges and streetscapes. Urban Elements Awarded to a smaller scale component of a building, landscape or urban environment that contributes significantly to the quality of the public realm at a human scale. This category may include but shall not be limited to elements such as street furniture, lighting elements, special installations (ie: wayfinding maps/guides), barrier-free design elements (ie: urban Braille), memorials, public art, paving treatments, gateway features, planters, doorways, fountains, railings, facades, canopies and signage. Both temporary and permanent urban elements are eligible and must be completed, constructed or installed by the nomination deadline. Neighbourhood Design Awarded to approved and built subdivisions within the City that implement the design objectives of the Design Brief for Suburban Development and Neighbourhood Mixed Use Centres. In considering nominees for Neighbourhood Design Awards the Judging Committee will consider the following criteria in their evaluation: Walkability; o Variety; o Placemaking; o Conservation; o Connectivity; o Transit-supportive; o Safety; o Balance; and o Liveability. o Detailed descriptions of each of the above criteria is contained in Appendix A (excerpt from the Design Brief for New Subdivisions and Neighbourhood Mixed Use Centres). Visions / Master Plans Awarded for a plan or study of a significant area within the City that provides a development or redevelopment strategy for urban transformation in the mid to long term. Neighbourhood Concept Plans, Streetscape Plans, Urban Design studies, Urban Design charrette proposals, master plans, redevelopment strategies, community plans, secondary plans, Urban Design briefs and planning justification reports are all examples of eligible projects. To be eligible for submission, the plan or study must have been completed within five years of the submission deadline and should not yet have been implemented to a point of full occupancy. In addition to the base criteria for all Urban Design Awards, the Judging Committee will also consider the following criteria in assessing the merits of the plan or study: Comprehensiveness; o Innovativeness; o Clarity of presentation; and o Alignment with the City of Kitchener policy framework. o ïí ó ê Student Projects Awarded to secondary or post-secondary individual students or groups of students for exemplary theoretical or studio projects relating to urban design and/or the public realm. To be eligible for nomination the project must be Kitchener-based and must have the support of school administration. Student nominations will be evaluated by a staff subcommittee and will be evaluated based on the same criteria as the Visions / Master Plan Award category. Interested students should contact their school administration. Proposed Changes to Eligibility Requirements Staff are recommend minor changes to the eligibility requirements to reflect the new category framework. The Urban Design Manual and nomination forms for the 2011 round of awards will be updated to reflect the recommended revised eligibility requirements as outlined in Appendix B. Urban Design Awards Judging Staff are recommending that the role and composition of the Urban Design Awards Judging Committee be revised as outlined below. Members of the Judging Committee should include: the Director of Planning or alternate, chair of the Development and Technical Services Committee, a representative for the K-W Homebuilders Association, a local Architect, a local Landscape Architect, a local Urban Designer, a local Engineer, a representative of a local post-secondary institution, a staff member from the City’s Economic Development department, the Supervisor of Site Plan Development and a staff Urban Designer or Urban Design Planner. The Judging Committee is responsible for final determination of award winning projects in the following categories: Low Rise, Mid to High Rise and Civic Projects. A subcommittee comprised of City staff (and led by urban design staff) is responsible for narrowing down the field of eligible projects in the Low Rise, Mid to High Rise and Civic Projects categories for the Judging Committee. The subcommittee is also responsible for final determination of award winning projects in the following categories: Neighbourhood Design, Vision/Master Plan and Student Projects. Proposed Overall Award Process Staff are recommending that the overall Urban Design Awards process follow the revised process outlined below. Staff initiates a call for nominations, including advertising in community newsletters, online and in the local newspaper, calling upon Corporate Advisory Committees to nominate projects, notifying targeted groups and providing application information to all Site Plans approved within the nomination deadline; The staff subcommittee reviews eligible projects in the Low Rise, Mid to High Rise and Civic Projects Award categories and narrows the list of eligible projects for the Judging Committee; The Urban Design Awards Judging Committee reviews the short listed eligible projects in the above noted categories to determine final award winners; The staff subcommittee reviews all eligible projects in the Neighbourhood Design, Vision and Master Plans and Student Project Award Categories to determine award winners; and Staff submit a report summarizing the recommendations of the Committees to Council for information. ïí ó é Awards will be presented at a reception, held in conjunction with the Mike Wagner Heritage Awards reception, to be held on a day and in a location that does not conflict with regularly scheduled Council meetings. It is staff’s intent to provide an overview of the award-winning projects to Council at a televised public meeting separate from the award ceremony. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None. CONCLUSION: Staff recommend that the existing Urban Design Awards Program be revised to a categorical framework with modified eligibility requirement and evaluation criteria for the purpose of improving the relevance, transparency and efficiency of the Urban Design Awards program. Staff are committed to proceeding with a revised Urban Design Awards program in 2011. CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS: Sandro Bassanese, Urban Designer REVIEWED BY: Brian Page, Supervisor of Site Plan Development Brandon Sloan, Interim Manager of Long Range and Policy Planning ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Jeff Willmer, Interim General Manager Development and Technical Services Department Appendix A: Design Objectives excerpt from the City of Kitchener Design Brief for Suburban Development and Neighbourhood Mixed Use Centres Appendix B: Recommended Revised Eligibility Requirements ïí ó è APPENDIX A EXCERPT FROM THE DESIGN BRIEF FOR SUBURBAN DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBOURHOOD MIXED USE CENTRES Primary Design Objectives The Design Brief is based on seven primary objectives that form the basis for the City’s design guidelines. The primary design objectives will be applied to all new suburban development with emphasis on subdivision development and community planning: 1. WALKABILITY: to promote walkable neighbourhoods that are well connected to surrounding neighbourhoods and major destinations such as park spaces, schools, shopping centres and employment areas. 2. DIVERSITY: to build neighbourhoods that provide a variety of housing types, park and open spaces and neighbourhoods focal points. 3. CHARACTER: to improve streetscape quality, neighbourhood character and sense of place. 4. CONSERVATION: to strengthen the conservation, stewardship, and integration of existing natural and cultural heritage resources. 5. CONNECTIVITY: to provide multiple, well-integrated route options for all modes of transportation such as walking, biking, transit and cars with direct access to major destinations. 6. TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE: to design and build neighbourhoods that promotes transit usage. 7. LIVABILITY: to promote design solutions that contribute to sustainable practices and healthy, complete communities. The Key Design Guidelines The Design Brief is organized into two major design guidelines sections. The Primary Design Guidelines present a series of general design guidelines that apply to large scale design elements, such as existing site features, the street network and parks and open space system. These large scale design elements are considered structural elements in neighbourhood design. The Secondary Design Guidelines address neighbourhood character and livability issues such as creating pedestrian friendly streets, street tree planting, building design opportunities and park design details. These guidelines provide the necessary details to support the structural elements. Primary (Structural) Design Guidelines • Conserve and integrate natural and cultural heritage resources as prominent neighbourhood features and focal points. Also, create strong views to prominent site features. • Provide an integrated, modified grid street pattern and trail system that connects neighbourhoods and provides multiple street connections to major pedestrian destinations such as transit routes, shopping centres and school sites. • Create walkable neighbourhoods based on a maximum five minute walking distance (400-500 m radius) to key destinations such as parks, schools and shopping areas. • Provide a variety of park spaces within five minutes of most homes with high visibility along public streets and to provide linear park spaces that link to major trails or larger park space. • Provide commercial and mixed use development within a central location. • Incorporate traffic calming features into the proposed street network to manage traffic and promote pedestrian safety. • Provide a variety of housing types within each neighbourhood with higher densities located within short walking distance of planned or existing transit routes and commercial areas. Secondary (Detailed) Design Guidelines • Recognize major community and neighbourhood streets (collector streets) as priority streets and include special or enhanced design elements such as larger street trees, subdivision entrance features, special building designs or pedestrian scale lighting to reinforce neighbourhood identity. • Encourage special landscaping features such as landscaped medians, enhanced landscaped boulevards and gateway signs located at major neighbourhood entrances. ïí ó ç • Create pedestrian-friendly streets through consistent street tree planting, houses with flushed or recessed garages, varied building setbacks along longer streets and architectural variety and pedestrian scale, decorative street lighting. • Orient lots, primary building facades and building entrances to face public streets with emphasis given to collector and priority streets. Promote “eyes on the street”. • Provide a variety of lot frontages for single-detached housing along each street and block. • Reduce the number of driveways along designated transit routes through alternative forms of housing that require few or no driveways. • Encourage street tree planting. Require one street tree in front of each house, at least three trees on side yards and additional planting along park frontages. Encourage larger street trees at gateway entrances and along priority streets. • Encourage dedicated bicycle lanes along primary collector roads. Also, integrate trails along bicycle routes and promote trails to commercial and employment areas. • Require enhanced building elevations on special priority lots which are located in prominent public view. Priority lots include corner lots, terminating vista lots, lots facing public park spaces or heritage resources and gateway lots located at major neighbourhood entrances or focal points. • Encourage proactive park designs that are highly visible from the public street (minimum 50 per cent street frontage as a guiding principle), which are constructed early in the construction process and include amenities that contribute to a neighbourhood theme. • Locate commercial and institutional buildings close to the street and ensure all building facades relate to the residential neighbourhood or theme. Provide direct access for pedestrians. • Discourage noise walls along major streets in favour of window streets with houses facing the major road or alternative design solutions or land uses along major streets. ïí ó ïð APPENDIX B RECOMMENDED REVISED ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS The Urban Design Awards Program shall be open to all publicly visible or accessible urban development projects in the City of Kitchener. These include buildings or groups of buildings developed for residential, commercial, mixed use, recreational, industrial, governmental or institutional purposes as well as adaptive reuse of existing buildings, building additions or exterior renovations. Parks, open spaces, public utilities, street improvements and civic structures are also eligible. There are also two categories open to recognize exemplary un-built urban design plans and projects (Student Projects and Vision/Master Plan projects). Previously submitted entries for the same category of award are not eligible. Projects that do not have a public realm component (such as private gardens or backyards) are not eligible. Interior design projects are not eligible. The program is open to urban designers, engineers, architects, landscape architects, planners, developers, contractors, consultants, students, owners and the general public who have contributed to Kitchener’s public realm. Nominations for an Urban Design Awards must include: An indication of the category of the nomination; o Confirmation that the project is located within the City of Kitchener; o Confirmation that the project has received all required approvals and is built and o ready for occupancy within the prescribed timelines;* A project abstract describing the following urban design components**: o Project context and Urban Design quality; Pedestrian circulation and created spaces; Landscape concept and features; Site elements; Building design; Signage; Vehicular circulation and parking; and Safety, security and Barrier-free design. Confirmation that the project has not previously been nominated for Urban o Design Awards; and Contact information for the owner and/or applicant and up to five project team o contacts *not an eligibility requirement for nominations for the Vision/Master Plans or Student Project Award categories ** nominations for the Vision/Master Plan and Student Project Award categories must also describe how the project demonstrates the following: Comprehensiveness Innovativeness Clarity of presentation Alignment with the City of Kitchener policy framework. Nominations for Student Project Awards must be acknowledged by and provide contact information for a member of the School Faculty. ïí ó ïï