Comparative Analysis of Material Criteria in Green Certification Rating Systems and Urban Design Guidelines

Green certification rating systems have been developed for building-scale sustainability since 1990s, and several systems such as BREEAM, LEED and CASBEE are widely used. They have kept upgraded and recently adapted to the large-scale development. BREEAM Communities, LEED Neighborhood Development and CASBEE for Urban Development are examples implemented respectively in UK, USA and Japan. Also, as the notion of green urban design gains more significance, city governments have set its own green standards in urban design guidelines, based upon studies of green certification rating systems. This paper focuses on comparative analysis of material criteria embedded for sustainable urban design in BREEAM Communities, LEED ND and CASBEE UD with urban design guidelines recently issued for multiple cities including London, New York, Tokyo and Seoul. The paper examines differences of material assessment criteria, evaluation parameters, and descriptions in green certification rating systems and urban design guidelines. Materials are categorized into: (1) building (2) infrastructure (3) landscape. In analysis of urban design guidelines, the top master plans are overviewed in addition to the supplementary guidelines for investigation of detailed material criteria. In conclusion, overview of investigated material criteria is discussed to summarize current features and weakness as balanced material assessments for the sustainable urban development


Goals
To focus on material assessment criteria in green certification rating systems and descriptive standards on materials in urban design guidelines Strategies 1. Identifying and comparing material criteria in green certification rating systems including BREEAM Communities, LEED ND and CASBEE UD by adopting the concept of three legs of sustainability 2. Outlining material requirements in urban design guidelines of New York, London, Tokyo and Seoul 3. Comparing the material criteria for building, infrastructure and landscape of all the guidelines with the previously discussed green certification rating systems

Analysis of Material Criteria in BREEAM Communities, LEED ND and CASBEE UD
7 CASBEE UD has the highest ratio of material assessment items in its rating system compared to LEED ND and BREEAM Communities

Comparative Analysis of Detailed Items
Circle of sustainable materials is adopted as a tool [ Table 2]

BREEAM Communities
Assessment criteria grouped into five categories Considered in three steps from step 1 establishing the principles, step 2 determining the layout to step 3 designing the details.
LEED ND Addressing five topics CASBEE UD Classifications of environment, society, and economy as major criteria of assessment by adopting the Three Legs of Sustainability in its structure

Material Criteria in Green Certification Rating Systems: BREEAM Communities, LEED Neighborhood Development and CASBEE for Urban Development 2.Analysis of Material Criteria in BREEAM Communities, LEED ND and CASBEE UD
All of rating systems cover the three spheres of sustainability BREEAM Communities and LEED ND -focusing on more on reuse of existing infrastructure and buildings, achieving environmental resources and social preservation CASBEE UD -approaching materials as resources to be saved and recycled but also as factors attributing other environmental sustainability and harmonized urban structure

The Greater London Authority (GLA), London Plan(2004)
Spatial development strategy (SDS) focusing on sustainability and spatial plan Under the legislation of GLA Act 1999, the London Plan take account of three cross-cutting themes: economic, social, environmental. It forms part of the development plan for Greater London. 32 London boroughs' local plans need to be in general conformity with the London Plan, and its policies guide decisions on planning applications by councils and the Mayor.

The Greater London Authority (GLA), London Plan(2015)
8 chapters: Context and strategy, Places, People, Economy, Response to climate change, Transport, Living places and spaces, Implementation, Monitoring and review Of total 121 policies, 11 material-related policies 6 polices in Response to Climate Change + 5 polices in Living Spaces and Places

The City of New York, PlaNYC (2007)
To address its long-term challenges including the forecast of 9.1 million residents by 2030, changing climate conditions, an evolving economy, and aging infrastructure Comprehensive sustainability plan for a greener, greater New York

The latest version of PlaNYC (2011)
Launched 127 initiatives in ten categories: Housing and neighborhoods, Parks and public space, Brownfields, Waterways, Water supply, Transportation, Energy, Air quality, Solid waste, and Climate change. Some of initiatives are related into materials, but the major issue is about managing waste in the city rather than about design and construction materials.

The High Performance Infrastructure Guidelines (2005)
To manage design and construction of streetscape and public right of way projects About design and construction rather than overall city plan

Department of Design and Constructions (DDC) of New York City, Sustainable Urban Site Design Manual (2008)
Addressing landscape opportunities associated with building projects and offers an introduction to more environmentally, economically, and socially responsible urban site design practices for New York City capital projects

The Master Plan for City Planning (2004)
Official plan to define the urban development policy, the disaster prevention policy and the development and maintenance policy of urban residential areas Future vision of the city Foundation for drafting individual city plans as obligatory

Bureau of Environment, Tokyo Metropolitan Environmental Master Plan (2008), and Guidelines for consideration regarding urban planning (2008)
To promote commitment to climate change, increase and conservation of green areas in the city, recycled use of resources, a better air quality, and a solution to negative legacy of the environment, including soil contamination Listing measures under three major sectors, organized as: Creation of a high quality and more comfortable urban environment (QC); Ensuring a healthy and safe environment (HS); Preservation of subsistent foundation of all living being (PF)

Guidelines for consideration regarding urban planning
Aiming to present the items for urban planning that private and public companies should consider at the phase of planning and implementation.
Functioning as a checklist to assess the environmental system.
Organized in three parts: common items for consideration applicable to the urban planning, major items considered on the basis of regional characteristics of each zone of Tokyo and major items for consideration on the basis of each characteristic of the various operations involving urban planning

General differences between Seoul and other three cities
London, New York and Tokyo • Urban master plans and design guidelines in close associations to set up criteria sectors, to describe requirements and to specify measures, evenly in infrastructure, landscape and building materials Seoul • no green certification system for urban development, which can be the basis to set up the urban design guidelines with detailed measures • All of Seoul's top Master Plan, and urban design guidelines as well as district-level master plans and guidelines show inconsistent aims and sectors for sustainability assessment

Research Summary
To compare urban guidelines of each city with green certification rating systems: Analysis uses the proposed circle of sustainable materials as a study protocol.

Urban Design Guidelines of Tokyo
Specifying material requirements as per regions and project types, as well as materials at different scales of urban design Without items as a preservation strategy

Seoul
Least items for sustainable materials in its urban guidelines Not involving the material selection and uses in infrastructure No strategy and measure to develop and implement resource recycling

Research Summary
• London and New York have detailed material criteria in their top master plans.
• Tokyo has supplementary urban design guidelines specifying most sustainability issues in materials.
• Most of items in material criteria interact with green certification rating systems.
• Similarly to green certification rating systems, Life Cycle Cost isn't integrated in material criteria in none of urban design guidelines.

Conclusions
The circle of sustainable materials is proposed as a tool for comparative analysis of green certification rating systems, and urban design guidelines of London, New York, Tokyo and Seoul In the tool, evaluation criteria includes three major sectors of environment, economy and society to embrace the concept of sustainability.

Materials are categorized
into building materials, landscape materials and infrastructure materials to cover all of material elements available in urban developments.

Overview of material criteria in green certification rating systems and urban planning guidelines
To summarize current system features and their weakness as balanced material assessments for the sustainable urban development