The UDIA Sustainable Urban Development (SUD) Matrix has been established by the UDIA SUD Committee to promote better understanding of a range of aspects of SUD. The Matrix provides links to case studies* and further information about SUD including state, national and international examples.
Use it as a tool to better understanding SUD.
Contact UDIA Policy Officer Thomas Wilson for information about how your company can contribute a case study for inclusion: email@example.com
UDIA welcomes your feedback. Contact UDIA if you have comments to improve the Matrix or you wish to report any problems with the site.
|INFRASTRUCTURE||URBAN PLANNING||BUILDING DESIGN|
|ECOSYSTEMS||Valuing native and endemic flora and fauna as well as landscapes as part of a wider ecosystem||Efficient & sensitive services layout minimises impact on the ecosystem||Understanding and valuing ecosystem opportunities and constraints into integrated urban planning outcomes|
|WASTE||Valuing waste as a resource and understanding the benefits of practicing waste management through avoiding, reducing, re-using, and recycling||Appropriate infrastructure systems provided to enhance, value and facilitate reducing, reusing and recycling waste||Urban design that considers opportunities to reduce waste sent to landfill||Built form outcomes that reduce waste sent to landfill|
|ENERGY & COMFORT||Understanding and valuing energy efficiencies and how it benefits our wellbeing and mitigates the impact of climate change||Structures that lead to energy efficiencies and reduce reliance on traditional supply||Urban planning that reduces the demand for non-renewable energy sources|
|MATERIALS||Understanding and use of materials that reduce the impact on the environment and contribute to human wellbeing.||Infrastructure solutions based on material synergies and choices that are more sustainable||Urban planning that promotes environmentally responsible material usage and synergies||Building design and built form outcomes that showcase environmentally responsible material use|
|WATER||Total water cycle management||Infrastructure solutions supportive of and based upon total water cycle management principles||Total water cycle management integrated into urban planning decisions.|
|COMMUNITY||Good community health and wellbeing can be obtained by engaging with the community to understand and achieve community aspirations, spirit and ownership||Early provision of hard and soft infrastructure to encourage and promote cohesive communities||Urban planning that promotes legible, well connected and accessible communities||Built form solutions and facilities that allow for diversity of demographic profiles, facilitatin community cohesion and intergenerational communities|
|ECONOMY||Valuing local economies and quantifying intangibles as part of the business case.||Hard and soft infrastructure and facilities providing opportunities for economic development||Urban planning that is robust, flexible and able to respond to changing economic conditions
||Initiatives that encourage robust and varied built form uses to stimulate economic prosperity|
|TRANSPORT||Encouraging public transport use and introducing mechanisms to reduce reliance on private cars as the primary mode of transport||Strategies that improve public transport and walking/ cycling infrastructure||Providing a safe and attractive public realm for cyclists, pedestrians and public transport modes to reduce car dependency||Built form facilities and initiatives designed to promote walking and cycling|
|AFFORDABILITY||Promotion of initiatives that provide economic benefits at establishment and over their lifecycle whilst meeting expected functionality and design||Innovations in infrastructure design and use that reduce lifecycle costs while achieving necessary performance targets||Urban planning that provides a measurable net economic benefit for stakeholders relative to business as usual||Examples of building design elements that offer economic, environmental or socio-political benefits while being cost effective at establishment and over their lifecycle, relative to business as usual|
The Urban Development Institute of Australia (UDIA) does not validate or endorse the content of the case studies included in the matrix. Case studies are subject to a peer review by UDIA's SUD Committee and provided for information. The accuracy of the content is the responsibility of the contributing author and any queries regarding individual case studies should be directed to the contact provided in the case study document.
The UDIA SUD Committee reserves the right to periodically review and remove case studies.