Rhea Davis | Urban Planning Portfolio by rhea.davis

Rhea Davis URBAN PLANNING PORTFOLIO 2019

Portfolio Contents PROJECTS Neighbourhood Development Plan

Response to RFP

Internship Work

Calgary Metropolitan Regional Growth Plan

RESEARCH AREAS How can Inclusionary Zoning address the need for Affordable Housing in Calgary?

Manchester Eco-District: Calgaryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first mixed-use low carbon district

CONTEXT

A partnership between the Federation of Calgary Communities (FCC) and the University of Calgary, initiated a placemaking project for the communities of Westgate, Rosscarrock and Glendale. Purpose

DESCRIPTION

• Identify demographics, needs and amenities unique to each community.

Project Name Neighbourhood Development Plan

• Engage with residents and community association members to gather concerns and feedback.

Studio Community Planning Studio MPlan II

• Propose a community vision plan that will be a comprehensive source of guidelines and policies for the neighbourhood. TOWARDS

Context map

AIRDRIE

Softwares used GIS | Base maps, transit density and walksheds, stormwater accumulation, tree density Microsoft Excel | Analysis tables and charts

HWY NO.2

Nose Hill Park &

Calgary International Airport

TOWARDS COCHRANE

& &

Edworthy Park

Adobe Illustrator | Maps and planar visualizations

TRANS CANADA HWY & & & &

Adobe Photoshop | 3D visualizations

& & &

BLUE LINE LRT

& &

& &&& &

& &

Westbrook Mall

Mount Royal University

Skills gained Environmental, census and market analysis

Community visioning Public engagement

&& &

Downtown

TOWARDS

2.5

5 km

Glenmore Reservoir

OKOTOKS &

Technical report writing

My contribution

• Conducted site studies to analyze factors affecting land use, employment, housing and environment. • Produced ‘open space system’ and ‘public realm enhancement’ vision plans, both of which are elaborated in the following pages. • Engaged in two open houses to identify community issues and gather residents response to the final proposal. 1

S I T E A N A LY S I S

Housing type by amount of land used

5min walkshed from local transit stops

Pedestrian-traffic collisions (1996-2012)

More than 8 2 - 8 collisions 1 - 2 collisions

65%

82%

15% 8%

12% 4%

2% Land area used

13% Number of residents

Apt

Duplex

Townhouse

Single family

Higher density housing uses land 3 times more efficiently than single family

Overall well-serviced by transit, deficient in the NW quadrant

0.45

0.9 km

Eastern side prone to collisions due to poor signals and crossings Drainage pattern and stormwater accumulation zones

Risk analysis map

wT r ail

45 St SW WESTGATE

ROSSCARROCK

33 Street SW

Sarcee Trail SW

GLENDALE

0.45

0.9 km

Flood prone areas located in the NE and SE quadrant

37 Street SW

17 Ave SW

N 0

!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!! ! ! !!! ! !! !! !!

!!!

Community green spaces & tree density

! ! ! !! !!!! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!! !!! ! !! ! !!!!! ! ! !!!! ! !!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! !!! !! !!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! !!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!!!! ! ! ! !! !! !!! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !! !! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! ! ! !!! !! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !! ! ! ! !!! ! !!! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !!! !! !! !!!! !! ! ! !!! !!! !! !! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! !!! ! !!! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !!!!!!! ! !!! !! !! !! ! !! !!! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!!! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !!!!!! !!! !!!!!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!! !!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !!!!! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! ! !!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! !!! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !! !!!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!!!! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !!!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !! !! ! !! !! !!!!! !! !!! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! !!! ! !! !!!! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! ! !!!! ! !! ! !!! !!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! ! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! !!! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! !!! ! !!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! !!!! !!!! !!!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !!!! !! ! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!! !!! !!! !! !!!!! ! ! !! !!!!! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !!!!! !! !!!! ! !!! !!! !!!!!! ! !! ! !!! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!!! !! !!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! !! ! !!!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! !!!! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! ! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! !! ! !!! !! !! !! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!! !!! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!! !!! !!! ! !! ! !!! ! ! !!!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! !!!!!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! !! ! !! !!! ! !! !! ! !!!! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! !!! ! ! !! !!!!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!! !!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! !!! ! !! !!! ! !! !! !!! ! !! !!!!!!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! !!! ! ! !! !! !!! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! !! !!! !!! ! !! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! !!!! !! !!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!! !!! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! !!! ! ! !! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!! ! !! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !!!!! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !!!! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !!! !!! ! ! !! ! !!!! !! ! ! !!!!!! !! !! !! !!! !!!!!! !!! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! !!! !! !! ! !

26 Ave SW

WESTGATE

Potential for street improvements

GLENDALE

Potential to improve facilities and connections to green spaces Potential to locate community amenities Develop intensification strategies around major nodes

ROSSCARROCK

! !! ! !

0.45

0.9 km

! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !!! ! !!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

No. of trees/ha W

! !!!

!!!

Tree plantation and open space density required in the NE quadrant 2

BO W

O P E N S PAC E SYS T E M P L A N

Guiding Principles

Accessible open spaces

Stormwater management strategies

Inclusive programs

Cleanliness and safety standards

Each green space is envisioned to provide a natural and welcoming setting that is accessible to different age groups and mobility levels. This category also aims to protect, enhance and preserve the existing urban biodiversity of the communities.

Typologies and programming

37 Street SW

wT r ai

45 Street SW

Sarcee Trail SW

17 Avenue SW

26 Avenue SW

(Visualizations for Park 1 and 2 are shown on the next page)

Neighbourhood parks

Active play elements

Community event spaces

Community activities

School playgrounds

Dog parks

Sports related spaces

Design improvements

Visualizations for the proposed improvements

IMPROVEMENTS 1. Fully enclosed playing area for pedestrian safety

Winchester Crescent SW

2. Double-gated entries for added safety 3. Improved pathways for more useful connections

3 1

4. Dense vegetation to mitigate noise concerns for surrounding residents 5. Bio-retention pond for stormwater collection

47 ST SW

45 ST SW

Park 1 - Proposed dog park programming ( Open space at 45 St SW, Westgate) IMPROVEMENTS WESTGATE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION

1. Staging areas for community gathering activities

8 Ave SW 1

2. Flexible use of the open space to provide multiple playing options

3. Accessible pathways leading to activities

WESTGATE SCHOOL

4. Street trees and shrubs form barrier between main roads and the open space 5. Proposed community garden for Westgate community association

2 4 10 Ave SW

Park 2 - School playground programming (Westgate school - Westgate)

PUBLIC REALM ENHANCEMENTS

Guiding Principles Provide a pedestrian focussed network

Enhance community character

The focus is on providing pedestrian-friendly, vibrant and convenient places for locals to gather, shop and socialize.

Improve user experience

This category also aims to establish a high-quality public realm that will help in fostering a unique identity for the residents.

Cleanliness and safety standards

8 Ave SW

37 ST SW

Bo w

10 Ave SW Example of a pedestrian-oriented building layout Vehicular access

Public realm

Parking areas

Pedestrian access

Landscape zones

Tra il S

Visualizations for the proposed improvements

Existing view (37 St SW - Rosscarrock)

5 5

1 2

2 3 5

View of the street after the proposed improvements IMPROVEMENTS 1.

Narrow and less dense trees planted to frame the street while not obstructing driverâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s visibility.

2. Landscaped zone planted with trees and shrubs to form a barrier between the sidewalk and the main street.

3. Sidewalk widened to 3.0 m in front of commercial buildings. 4. Frequent pedestrian crossing zones to improve walkability. Signalled and raised crosswalk to improve driverâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s visibility and pedestrian safety. 5. Street furniture such as bus stop, seating, waste bins and lighting to improve pedestrian experience. 6

PUBLIC REALM ENHANCEMENTS

Laneway Pedestrian Network

The communities currently suffer from traffic congestion and vehicles travelling at high speeds during peak hours, making an unsafe pedestrian environment. The envisioned laneway pedestrian network is a connected rear laneway system that can be shared by pedestrians, children, cyclists and cars using the concept of woonerf. The idea is to integrate such a space into the existing urban environment to provide faster and convenient pedestrian connections while utilizing it as an extension of the residential backyards. Community engagement feedback and Strava heat map tools were used to identify corridors that are currently being frequented by pedestrians and cyclists.

Designated laneways for proposed improvements High frequency transit and cycling routes

Community Open spaces

Existing laneways

Existing regional greenway

Proposed laneways for improvements

Other improvement areas

Wide and unobstructed sidewalks

Pedestrian-oriented seating options

Quality street frontages

Visualizations for the proposed improvements

Existing view of a laneway in Westgate

4 2

View of the laneway after proposed improvements IMPROVEMENTS 1.

Pathways shared by pedestrians, children, cyclists and cars. Improved pathway made with porous paving material.

2. Buffer between laneway and property fence line planted with shrubs to improve water permeability.

3. Seating options and adequate lighting provides user comfort and safety. 4. Permeable green fencing adds to the pedestrian experience while securing the residential property.

RESPONSE TO RFP

Purpose

• Assess and review the components of a Request for Proposal (RFP) • Understand the project context and policy framework

DESCRIPTION Project Name Response to RFP

• Draft a business proposal that highlights project issues and goals

North Penticton Area Development Plan

• Outline methodologies implemented for accomplishing tasks

Course Professional Practice

• Provide a budget and task breakdown

Softwares used Adobe Illustrator | Maps Adobe Photoshop | Image edits Adobe InDesign | Report compilation

Skills gained Business case writing Task management Budget management

Methodology

This category provides a breakdown of tasks and documents to be included in the Work Plan document if the proposal is selected. Tasks such as: 1. Roles and responsibilities breakdown

5. Engagement strategies

2. Neighbourhood analysis

6. Risk Management plan

3. Policy framework analysis

7. Change Management plan

4. Stakeholder communication plan

Process Flowchart

JUNE 2019

AUGUST 2019

FEBRUARY 2020

DECEMBER 2019

AUGUST 2019 MEETING ONE • Public engagement • Identify issues and opportunities • What We Heard report

SEPTEMBER 2019

DECEMBER 2019

MEETING TWO • Community visioning exercise • Identify stakeholder goals • Feedback report

MEETING THREE • Steering Committee • Presentation of draft proposal • Feedback report

PROJECT START-UP

SITE ANALYSIS

DRAFT ARP DEVELOPMENT

FINAL ARP SUBMISSION

• Workplan strategy preparation

• Context analysis

• Neighbourhood vision

• Team roles and responsibilities

• Existing conditions report

• Sustainability Principles

• Preparation and submission of the booklet report

• Initial meeting and walkabouts

• Urban character analysis

• Land use and density change

• Policy framework analysis

• Neighbourhood profile

• Open space policies

• Economic analysis

• Environmental protection policies

• Environmental analysis

• Mobility and parking changes

• Traffic study

• Servicing and utility plan

• Accessibility study

• Phasing of development

• Comparative land use maps

• Zoning bylaw changes

• Issues and opportunities report

• Impact assessment of proposal

• Final presentation to the Council and Steering Committee • Open House for public viewing

Scheduling and Budgeting

An outline of the proposed timelines, including delivery dates and milestones, is shown using a Gantt chart. An itemized budget is also provided to show the total fee for the services. 18

Budget Breakdown

Project Schedule

Senior

Task

Task name

Start Date

End Date

Lead person

2019 May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

2020 Jan

Feb

March

April

May

Total estimate Project start up

Start up

11-Jun-19

Policy framework analysis Project understanding Project goals and objectives Workplan strategy

Site Analysis

30-Jun-19

20-Aug-19

Meeting One: Public engagement

08-Sep-19

Meeting Two: Visioning exercise Smith W. Team

Draft ARP Development

15-Sep-19 Team Lisa H. Karen J. Karen J. Karen J. Jai S. Jai S. Emily M. Karen J. Jai S.

Draft ARP report submission

12-Dec-19

hrs

PROJECT START-UP

$1,000

$1,500

$140

Policy framework analysis

$1,200

Initial meeting and walkabouts

$1,000

$300

$140

SITE ANALYSIS

$1.500

$11,550

$4,060

$ $1,500

hrs

Tech $

$600

hrs

$280

Stakeholder meetings and presentation

$500

$300

DRAFT ARP DEV PHASE

$3,250

174

$26,100

$5,600

$500

$600

Land use and density proposal

$2,000

$9,000

$2,100

Open space and environmental protection strategies

$3,000

$840

Public realm strategies

$250

$3,000

$840

Mobility strategies

$250

$7,500

$1,260

Servicing and utility plan

$1,500

Phasing strategy and impact assessment

$250

$1,500

$560

FINAL ARP PROPOSAL PHASE

$1,400

Existing conditions mappng

$250

$2,250

$840

Urban character analysis

$250

$1,800

$560

Neighbourhood profile

$1,800

$560

$1000

$7,800

Traffic study

$1,500

$980

Report development

$500

$7,500

Accessibility analysis

$1,200

$700

Final presentation with stakeholders

$500

$300

Key issues identification

$250

$1,200

Site visits

$750

$1,800

$420

TOTAL

$1,400 $0

$47,850

$12,530

$17,500

$95,700

$25,060

Meeting Three: Steering Committee Smith W. Emily M.

Feedback report

$8,750 No. of project team members

Draft ARP report submission

20-Dec-19

Preparation Presentation to Steering Committee

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

$2,000

$900

$1,330

Subtotal

Preparation

$630

GST (5%)

Administration and logistics

$420

23-Dec-19

Final ARP Development

03-Jan-20

Report Compilation Final presentation Open House for public viewing Final ARP Submission

12-Sep-19

Neighbourhood vision Sustainability Principles Land use and density change Open space policies Environmental protection policies Mobility and parking changes Servicing and utility plan Phasing of development Zoning bylaw changes Impact assessment of proposal

Meeting Three

Tech

hrs

30-Aug-19

Feedback report

Final ARP Development

Issues and opportunities report

25-Aug-19

Preparation Community visioning exercise

Draft ARP Development

Junior

hrs

Facilitation during open house and workshop

Neighbourhood vision

Smith W.

Meeting Two: Visioning exercise

$70.00

Senior

Site Analysis

Preparation What We Heard report

$150.00

Task

Martin B. Smith W. Smith W. Jai S. Jai S. Karen J. Martin B. Martin B. Karen J.

Issues and opportunities report

$250.00

Junior hourly rate

Workplan document submission

01-Jul-19

Context analysis Existing conditions report Urban character analysis Neighbourhood profile Economic profile Environmental analysis Traffic study Accessibility studies Comparative land use maps

Meeting One: Public engagement

Senior hourly rate Tech hourly rate

Karen J. Jai S. Jai S. Karen J.

Workplan document submission

June

Junior

hrs

NORTH PENTICTON AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN

ft blank intentionally)

Team Emily M. 20-Feb-20

$138,260.00 $6,913.00

Disbursements (7%) PROJECT TOTAL

Final ARP submission

$9,678.00 $154,851.20

(OFFICIAL ALLOCATED BUDGET $185,000)

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Rethinking Height Standards for Mid-Rise Buildings in Calgary 14

NO. OF STOREYS

DESCRIPTION Project Name Internship work Firm CivicWorks Planning + Design

Softwares used Microsoft Excel | Base chart Adobe Illustrator | Maps and charts Adobe Photoshop | Image edits SketchUp | 3D visualizations

Skills gained Application brief for DP Public engagement Area Structure Plan visioning Precedent research Policy analysis

Community Centre

Community Mid-Rise

Neighbourhood Mid-Rise

CALGARY

Affordable Housing Policy

TORONTO

New urban pattern

Historic Areas

VANCOUVER

HALIFAX

PORTLAND

NEW YORK

Building height range (min - max)

The study aims at rethinking the current height ranges of MidRise buildings which will ease the introduction of this typology not only in inner-city communities but also in mature suburban neighbourhoods. It explains how the classification adopted by the Developed Areas Guidebook is restrictive for developers and more arduous for establishing The City’s vision. The research examines cases that have successfully achieved height standards for medium-density intensification. The precedents highlight the use of pedestrian-scale studies, sunlight studies, street width studies and neighbouring land use designations to establish the height standards. Lastly, the paper urges for a refined range of adaptable building heights for urban and suburban neighbourhoods. It encourages The City to conduct specific studies and establish a standard for MidRise buildings, which will allow for a clear and no-conflict approach to introducing density in strategic parts of any community. My contribution

• Studied municipal by-laws and standard guidelines adopted by various cities for Mid-Rise buildings and shortlisted cities that allowed us to compare and identify what was lacking in Calgary’s case. • Analyzed Mid-Rise building height ranges in major North American cities and prepared a graph (shown above). • Prepared a draft research report

11 11

In order to fully describe long-term change, the ASP depicts growth and venue diversification in both large and small scale (or fine grain) detail. Large scale, big picture growth is introduced at the District level, six unique divisions of the plan area that will grow or change in different manners. Fine grain comprehensive design of these Districts has been completed as well. General timeline estimates have been made for the major built form improvements contemplated for the site, which are also tied to the arrival of a new piped servicing network.

TERM

Pre-Servicing: No Associated Timeline

Short to Medium Term

Medium Term

SPRUCE MEADOWS AREA STRUCTURE PLAN

Medium to Long Term

Project introduction

PLAN DISTRICTS

PHASE

CHANGES & I

Phase 0

1 2 3 4 5

Mare & Foal B Ferrier & Secu Tournament S Meadows on Relocation of

Phase 1

6 7 8 9

Slope Adaptiv Five New Com New RE/MAX New Intimate

Phase 2

q New Maintena

Phase 3

w e r t y

Phase 4

u Field House C

Phase 5

i Farmer’s Mark o Post-seconda

BUILT FORM CHANGES + IMPROVEME STONEY TRAIL SW

The Spruce Meadows Area Structure Plan (ASP) aims to outline a 30 year vision of Spruce Meadows as a diversified sports and entertainment destination. It focusses on utilizing new and upgraded infrastructure and diversifying on-site amenities.

Hotel Conference C All Canada Ri New Hoecker Time Faults P

STONEY TRAIL S

JAMES MCKEVITT GRADE SEPARATED OVERPASS

SPRUCE MEADOWS GREEN

Parking & Operations Support District

Equestrian & Agricultural/ Animal Support District

Equestrian & Agricultural/ Animal Support District Good Friends & Good Commerce District

Parking & Operations Support District

Sports & Entertainment District Parking & Operations Support District

Agricultural Education District

Parking & Operations Support District

Equestrian & Agricultural/ Animal Support District

CIT Y OF CALGARY

M.D. OF FOOTHILLS

Equestrian & Agricultural/ Animal Support District

24 ST SW

SPRUCE MEADOWS WY SW

TOURNAMENT LN SW

24 ST SW

Sports & Entertainment District

198 AVE SW

Equestrian & Agricultural/ Animal Support District

ASP Boundary

Sports & Entertainment District

ASP Boundary

City of Calgary / M.D. of Foothills Boundary

Good Friends & Good Commerce District

City of Calgary / M.D. of Foothills Boundary

Future Stoney Trail Alignment

Equestrian & Agricultural / Animal Support District

Future Stoney Trail Alignment

Transportation Utility Corridor

Agricultural Education District

Transportation Utility Corridor

Parking & Operations Support District

Placemaking art from Stoney Trail extension

My contribution

• Attended in-house meetings and a site visit with the client to understand the project and client needs. • Prepared hand-drawn maps showing vehicular access, pedestrian access, new amenities and planned districts for client meetings which were used in client meetings.

Parking lot 4 redesign including retail units and a promenade

Ron Southern Way shared street concept

• Prepared hand-drawn visualizations which were included in the Nov 2018 Open-house boards.

All Canada Ring redesign to support large outdoor events 12

A P P L I C AT I O N B R I E F F O R T H E J A K E

Introduction

A brief was created on behalf of UrbanStar to outline a redevelopment (The Jake) in the community of Bowness in Calgary. The document outlines both context and planning analysis to support Land Use Redesignation and Development Permit Application for this project. Site Area

21,590 sq ft

Building footprint

10,083 sq ft (45% coverage)

Storeys

Height

22m

Dwelling units

Parking

+/- 73 stalls

Concurrent Land

Developme

urbanstarcapital.com

5. CORRIDOR PROXIMITY

My contribution

Is the site located along or within close proximity to an existing or planned corridor or activity centre?

47 AVE NW

MU-2 h16 f3

• Corridor Proximity Map

46 AVE NW

85 ST NW 77 ST NW

79 ST NW

MU-1 h16 f3

M-CG

The Jake is located on Bowness Road NW Main Street, the boundaries of which were identified by The City of Calgary in consultation with citizens. One of the takeaway issues from this engagement work was that the “Main Street is underbuilt, more density is needed to support businesses.” The project team agrees with this takeaway and is proposing a high quality designed six storey building. THE JAKE

BOWNESS ROAD NW

MU-2 h16 f2.5

69 ST 65

NW ST

300 600

1200 metres

33 AVE NW

32 AVE NW

800 metres

M-CG

R-C2

M-U1

Multi-Residential - Contextual Grade-Oriented District

Residential - Contextual One / Two Dwelling District

Mixed Use - General District

M-C1

R-CG

M-U2

Õ Ì ,iÃ `i Ì > ÌiÝÌÕ> Ü *À w i ÃÌÀ VÌ

,iÃ `i Ì > À>`i "À i Ìi` w ÃÌÀ VÌ

Mixed Use - Active Frontage District

M-C2

Main Streets Boundary

The Jake site

33 AVE NW

BOWNESS ROAD NW

SARCEE TRAIL NW

0100 200

NES S

34 AVE NW

CEN

34 AVE NW

MU-2 h20 f4

73 ST NW

36 AVE NW 77 ST NW

MU-1 h16 f3

The map shows The City’s rezoning strategy to catalyze growth along the Main Street corridor. Land parcel map was extracted from GIS and The City’s data was utilized to create this colour coded map.

The Bowness Community Profile, published by The City of Calgary notes that population growth in Bowness between 2009-2014 was only 6%, compared to 12% for the rest of Calgary. This informs the project team that there is an opportunity for population growth along the Main Street, supportive of nearby local businesses. The Community Profile also outlines that the average age in Bowness is 40, versus the average age of 36 for the rest of the City. There is a need to provide more high quality housing options for first time home buyers to move into the community and also better downsizing options for aging residents.

RIV

Bowness Road NW Main Street has not yet been rezoned, but The City has proposed its rezoning strategy, outlined in the figure on this board. The project team generally understands the timeline for this City-led rezoning to occur in 2019. The Jake proposal seeks to lead this process by establishing a high quality precedent in Bowness that will establish appropriate intensification targets and catalyze growth needed to support the Main Street.

Õ Ì ,iÃ `i Ì > ÌiÝÌÕ> i` Õ *À w i ÃÌÀ VÌ

• Public Art Ideas and Images The developer was investing in a public art installation at the southeast corner of the site, as shown in the diagram. The aim was to introduce a sculpture that reflects the natural beauty of Bowness.

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT BY THE NUMBERS

STREET PARKING OCCUPANC

<=50% NW

• Transportation Impact Maps and Info-graphics

ST 66

>65% - 80% >80% - 90%

1. Traffic volume and road classification study

BIA boundary (Bowness Rd NW between 62 and 65 St NW)

Jake

>90%

found that the roads are more than capable of accommodating the additional traffic generated by The

The project team has also heard co members regarding a lack of on-str The map above depicts street park on average per day.

>50% - 65%

The blocks immediately adjacent to less than 50% on-street parking occ Paired with the investment that Urb floorplates of underground parking stalls for 66 units, the impact that T parking perspective is quite small.

2. Street parking occupancy study

34 AVE NW

BO W

affirms that the traffic generated through the AM and PM peak post development produce a negligible impact on traffic volumes.

RIVER VALLEY SCHOOL EARLY LEARNING CAMPUS

CR ES CE NT

3. Transporation impact study

B CR OW ES W CE AT NT ER NW

33 AVE NW

BOWNESS RD NW

63 ST NW

found that parking on the majority of the street side was underused

This information was derived from Study, conducted in November 201 - 8:30pm). It found that parking is e the BIA boundary, with greater than occupied during the peak period, w 2:00pm - 3:30pm. Outside of the B occupancy measured approximate period and approximately 51% thro day. Parking on the majority of side to be underused.

0100 100

300 300

800 metres

Street parking occupancy study found that parking on the TRANSPORTATION IMPACT BY THE NUMBERS majority of the street side was underused TRANSPORTATION IMPACT BY THE NUMBERS TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STATEMENT DAILY LINK VOLUMES & ROAD CLASSIFICATION BOWNESS ROAD NW NEIGHBOURHOOD BOULEVARD

55% BO

POST DEVT VOLUME CAPACITY BOWNESS RD NW WEST OF 60 ST

60 ST NW

BOWNESS ROAD NW

RIVER VALLEY SCHOOL EARLY LEARNING CAMPUS

COLLECTOR ROAD

POST DEVT VOLUME CAPACITY 33 AVE NW WEST OF BOWNESS ROAD

Existing Daily Traffic Volume: 1,250 Projected Daily Traffic Volume: 1,500 Maximum Daily Guideline Capacity: 8,000

BOWNESS ROAD NW ARTERIAL STREET

67%

POST DEVT VOLUME CAPACITY BOWNESS RD NW SOUTH OF 33 AVE

The traffic volume review indicates that both Bowness Road NW and 33 Avenue NW currently carry less volume Peak Hour than what is outlined in their respective classifications and more than capable of accommodating the additional traffic Vehicle Trips generated by the site upon buildout.

33 AVE NW

16%

JA K

33 AVE NW

Existing Daily Traffic Volume: 12,300 Projected Daily Traffic Volume: 12,400 Maximum Daily Guideline Capacity: 22,500

Transportation Impact Statement (TIS) was completed by Bunt & Associates Transportation Planners and Engineers in March 2018 to determine the impact o Daily traffic A volumes along Bowness Road NW and intersection operationand conditions before and after development. This chapter of the Brief provides high level results that were derived from this study. The TIS 33 Avenue NW were calculated measured post LOC Application development against their respective maximum daily volume guidelines outlined in the City of Calgary Design Guidelines for Subdivision Servicing 2014 to determine the TRIPS GENERATED BY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON-SITE PARKING impact The Jake would have on daily traffic flow.

Existing Daily Traffic Volume: 13,300 Projected Daily Traffic Volume: 13,470 Maximum Daily Guideline Capacity: 20,000

The PM peak hour projection generates the most vehicular The projecttrips teamtohas heard the community and fromfrom The Jake at buildout.that The trips generated there are safety concerns from traffic flow, visibility, and through the day anda PM peak produce negligible impact on streetscapeDaily perspective at the (see corner of page). Bowness Road NW Link Volumes next at 60 Street NW, despite the daily link volumes being able to accommodate traffic. Many solutions were suggested by Bunt & Associates for this intersection, but none are ideal. The two most plausible solutions proposed would either be to close access to Bowness Road NW from 60 Street NW Peak Hour (requiring local residents to determine alternate routes) or Alternate to convert the intersection to an all-way stop, which could Mode increase traffic delays along Bowness Road NW, particularly Trips during the afternoon rush. The expected trips using alternative means of transportation generated by the proposed development in and out of the site both in the AM and PM peak hours.

DENSITY

When a proposed development is located within 150.0 meters of frequent transit service, the bylaw required number of parking stalls is reduced by 25%. The Jake is located near bus stops that allow it to qualify for this reduction, lowering the bylaw required parking to fourtythree (43) stalls. Please see the graph below, which depicts the bylaw requirements for vehicle and bicycle parking, and how The Jake surpasses these requirements. PARKING PROVIDED FOR THE SITE

REQUIRED PARKING STALLS REQUIRED WITH 25% REDUCTION

STALLS PROVIDED

Bicycle stalls: 43

TOTAL PROVIDED

39 Transporation impact study

3. MAILERS TO AREA RESIDENTS Postcards and letters were hand delivered to area residents and stakeholders within a block radius in any direction from the project site. This strategy was used to introduce the project to area residents on May 3, directing them to the website, email inbox, and project phone line with any questions they had. Another mailer was hand delivered to area residents on June 7 to provide project updates and invite residents to the June 21 Open House.

1. Designed and hand-delivered postcards to residents within a block radius from the project site. 2. Organized and installed the on-site signage in advance to the Open House event. 4. ON-SITE SIGNAGE

Installing on-site signage early in the application process (May 3) allowed the project team to communicate directly with surrounding community members and area visitors. The signage directed visitors to the website and was updated in advance of the Open House to invite residents to the event.

3. Designed the layout of the Open House boards and prepared stationery for the day of the event.

4. Contributed to a draft What We Heard Report after the engagement from feedback received from the attendees.

BYLAW REQUIRED PARKING RATIO

TOTAL REQUIRED

Residential stalls: 66 + Visitor stalls: 7 = Total: 73

Traffic volume and road classification study

• Open House Arrangements

USE

Parking Stalls

(top left) Invitation postcards; (bottom left) Open house boards and set-up; (right) On-site signage 45

CONTEXT

04 DESCRIPTION

Calgary region is expected to have a population influx of 1 million people by 2040. This project is aimed at showcasing the analysis behind distribution of growth, establishing a regional growth boundary and policy planning for the pattern of settlement in the new areas. Purpose

• Identify growth regions for 2040

Project Name Calgary Metropolitan Regional Growth Plan

• Study provincial goals and exemplary principles in land use and infrastructure.

Studio Regional Planning Studio MPlan II

• Propose a regional Metropolitan area.

Softwares used GIS | Base maps

growth

plan

for

Calgary

• Draft policies for specific sections showing the process of policy development, method and period of implementation, and success indicators

Adobe Illustrator | Maps and planar visualizations

Crossfield Irricana

Airdrie

Cochrane

Skills gained Population projection and demographics analysis

Calgary

Chestermere

Housing demand analysis Policy planning Black Diamond

Okotoks

Turner Valley

High River

Boundary based on the existing economic, social and ecological regions

Demographic profile of the projected population Gender breakdown 1,000,000

Projected Population Influx by 2040:

Age characteristics

Family characteristics

Household income

Age characteristics

Family characteristics

Household income

Projected 2040 Population

11%

49%

11%

25%

Projected 2040 Population

27%

50%

50% 42%

25%

Projected 2040 Population

22%

36%

28%

23%

0 - 19 years

Single person

$10,000 - $49,999

20 - 34 years

Married couple

$50,000 - $79,000

35 - 64 years

Couples with children

$80,000 - over $100,000

65 years and above

Single parents

Target growth areas 250,000

Calgary

770,000

200,000

14%

150,000

77%

100,000

50,000

Airdrie Cochrane Chestermere

0 ’01-’06

’06-’11

’11-’16

’16-’21

’21-’26

’26-’31

’31-’36

’36-’41

142,000 69,000 17,000

YYC region

14% 7% 2%

1,000,000

Based on the population projection from 2001 - 2040, the areas with the highest population increase - Calgary, Airdrie, Cochrane and Chestermere, were selected as the target growth areas. For the scope of the project, 100 percent of the growth was distributed in these areas.

Economic diversification

A conscious decision was made to diversify the economy from the existing oil-based energy sector to other high yield sectors. It is to strengthen the economic condition and stabilize the unemployment rates currently prevailing in the region.

Other hi-tech industries Services Real estate development

Transportation & Logistics Small businesses Alternative energy

The proposed economic plan supports building local economy by supporting small businesses and new entrants.

Healthcare research Hi-tech agriculture

Oil & Gas Decline

Moderate increase

High increase

Calgary

Housing density 2018 - 2040 Household income

Housing mix

38%

Above 125k

40% LowD

23%

80-125k

29%

10%

30-80k

33%

Under 30k

27%

MidD

HighD

Calgary

Airdrie

Increase in population

770,000

142,000

Cochrane 69,000

Chestermere 17,000

Additional no. of housing units

297,000

50,600

26,600

5,000

Additional land required

6,200 ha

1,100 ha

594 ha

121 ha

Approx. density

48 uph

46 uph

44 uph

41 uph

Form-based landuse typologies

Calthorpian principle encourages co-location of a range of land uses that are supported by a sustainable form of transportation. It encourages conscious intensification to promote social interaction and economic vitality in a given area. The precedents shown below adhere to the Calthorpian principle of community building and are used to study the land use mixes.

Low-density 25 uph

Mid-density 70 uph

200m

High-density 115 uph

30m

100m

Garrison Woods, Calgary

The Altair, Wellington

Dockside Green, Victoria

Area: 64 ha; Units: 1600

Area: 1 ha; Units: 71

Area: 12 ha; Units: 1380

Status: Completed

Status: Partially completed

Uses: Single-detached, Townhouses, Apartments, Open spaces, Retail and Schools

Uses: Townhouses with 2,3,4 storeys and Open spaces

Uses: Residential, Retail, Offices and Industrial

LRT corridor

Commercial

High-tech industry

100m

500m

1 km

Orenco Station, Portland

Vaughan Mills Mall, Vaughan

Big Bend Business Park, Burnaby

Area: 55 ha

Retail Area: 12 ha

Area: 33 ha

Status: Completed

Status: Proposed

Uses: Retail, Offices and High/ medium/low density residential

Uses: Retail and High/medium density residential

Uses: Business/Teck park, Office spaces, Retail and Low density residential

REGIONAL GROWTH PLAN MAP

Strategies for Regional Growth Plan

Implement an urban growth boundary

Integrate efficient infrastructure systems

Encourage co-location of land uses

Preserve and enhance existing natural features

Airdrie & North Calgary

Airdrie 14%

Cochrane 7%

Calgary 77%

Chestermere 2%

South Calgary (Seton)

Low density residential

High-tech industry

Medium density residential

Secondary highway

High density residential

LRT corridor

Manufacturing

Commercial 18

POLICY PLANNING - NEW SETTLEMENT AREAS

Factors affecting the policy

This mind map shows the factors affecting policies regarding new settlement areas and their inter-relationship. The top three factors identified are elaborated below

Population growth

1. Population growth: Development pressure due to population growth affects the capacity and cost of infrastructure services. Infrastructure services

2. Infrastructure services: Infrastructure network influences the structure, shape and location of new settlement areas. 3. Development costs: It includes costs associated with buying developable lands, providing new infrastructure services and building new communities.

Development costs

Assumptions affected by the identified factors Development pressure Infrastructure capacity Development cost

Projected Population growth of 1 million Age, Education level, Occupation & Income of projected demographic profile Growing industries in target economic sector Growth areas in Calgary, Airdrie, Cochrane & Chestermere Mixed-use, mixed-income & mixed-age Calthorpian typologies

Objective

To ensure development of new settlement areas to accommodate the population increase of 1 million in a manner that emphasizes compact form and encourages building healthy, vibrant and well-connected communities. Strategies

1. Utilize form-based codes at different scales and locations to introduce healthy mix of housing, jobs and transportation facilities. 2. Encourage development controls that integrate housing, jobs and transportation facilities 3. Encourage private sectors to build mixed communities around transit facilities. 4. Promote a range of housing types, densities and affordability levels. 19

Information

Financial

Legal

Implementing tools Zoning

To promote mixed-use developments around transit with efficient job-housing balance

Density bonus

To encourage density in new areas for efficient use of services in prime locations

Transit incentives

To encourage commercial and residential developments within urban nodes

Financial incentives Employment incentives Map new areas Market the region Phasing strategy

To encourage local businesses to operate in new areas To enhance job creation in new areas

To guide development in new settlement areas To promote the region as a liveable area To guide development of new settlement areas in accordance with existing infrastructure facilities

Time frame 5 yr

10 yr

15 yr

20 yr

2 yr: capacity study, phasing strategy 8 yr: smart growth program for 40% of the population 10 yr: smart growth program for 60% of the population

Success indicators

1. Ridership count from transit stations in new areas 2. Percentage increase in job and population density in new areas compared to existing community statistics 3. Resale turnover to guage residentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; satisfaction with new communities 4. Satisfaction surveys to measure effectiveness of housing - job - transportation mix

New settlement areas

05 DESCRIPTION Research Title How can Inclusionary Zoning address the need for Affordable Housing in Calgary? Course Affordable Housing

Softwares used Adobe Illustrator | Infographics and charts Adobe Indsign | Poster layout

Skills gained Research and referencing Analytical thinking Technical writing

Summary

‘Inclusionary Zoning’ is a zoning regulation which requires marketrate residential developments to have a specified amount of affordable housing units as a condition of development approval. The most pressing challenge facing Calgary’s affordable housing sector is inadequate housing supply. If no action is taken to combat this, an estimated 111,000 households are expected to need affordable housing by 2021.

Housing completion

Single, Semi

Row, Apt

Total

2015

395

650

1045

2016

189

435

624

2017

111

458

569

Table 1. Calgary city completions by dwelling type Percentage inclusion

Number of units based on low amount of completion

Number of units based on high amounts of completion

10%

15%

20%

130

Table 2: Number of affordable units produced using IZ in Calgary

A basic analysis performed using dwelling completions in Calgary revealed that the inclusionary policy might produce approximately 43 to 130 units per year. In comparison to CHC’s average of 14 units per year, the inclusionary model has potential, and the City should work with the developers to implement the policy. Higher property prices affect the rental demand, and so it is crucial to ensure that the housing produced and rented, responds to the local incomes and not just on the market demand driven by investors. To ensure the economic viability of the projects, the City should also consider cost-offsetting arrangements such as density bonusing, quicker processing of approvals and permits, relaxing parking requirements, reducing development fee and property tax. Inclusionary zoning has the potential to create affordable units and reduce the housing stress especially on the far side of the housing continuum. 21

AFFORDABLE HOUSING PEOPLE AND PLACES How can Inclusionary Zoning address the need for Affordable Housing in Calgary?

INCLUSIONARY ZONING

HOUSING NEEDS IN CALGARY

Inclusionary Zoning is a land-use policy that requires developers to make a certain percentage of the units within their market-rate residential developments to be available at prices or rents that are affordable to specified income groups as a condition of development approval.

With the current housing market in Calgary not producing homes for low-income households and the City prioritizing in eliminating chronic homelessness, it has left behind 4000 qualifying households on CHC’s waitlist. If inclusionary requirements can help house the low- and moderateincome groups, then it would be a productive use of existing resource.

COMPONENTS OF INCLUSIONARY ZONING Development size & type

Inclusionary Requirements

Developer Incentives

Length of Affordability

In-Lieu Payments

Monitoring & Administration

90,000

42,000

Households overspending on shelter & earning less than $60,000/year

Inclusionary Zoning definition: Schuetz, J., Mettzer, R., & Been, V. (2007). The effects of inclusionary zoning on local housing markets: Lessons from the San Francisco, Washington DC and Suburban Boston areas. Research Gate. Components of IZ: Mah, J. (2009). Can Inclusionary Zoning Help Address the Shortage of Affordable Housing in Toronto? Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks.

Households in core housing needs

2,500

111,000

units/year expected increase in the shortage of aﬀordable units

Households will need Aﬀordable Housing in 2021

Data retrieved from: Calgary Affordable Housing Needs Assessment, 2015; National Household Survey, 2011; Calgary Homeless Foundation, 2014; Statistics Canada, 2013. Calgary Housing Company. (2017). Annual Report 2017. Retrieved from http://calgaryhousingcompany.org/wp-content/uploads/CHC-Annual-Report-2017_Final.pdf. Icons from Noun Project: Mortgage by Gilbert Bages; Earthquake by Arthur Shlain; Home by Rose Alice Design; trend by Travis Avery; Future by Xinh Studio; Arrow by unlimicon dollar by shashank singh.

American cities

Canadian cities

PROGRAM MODELS AND CITIES THAT IMPLEMENTED INCLUSIONARY ZONING Toronto, ON

Vancouver, BC

Montreal, QB

STRINGENT with no incentives or options

MANDATORY with buy out option & exemptions

MANDATORY with incentives

VOLUNTARY with incentives

San Francisco, CA

Denver, CO

Boston, MA

Seattle, WA New York City, NY

Program model: Schuetz, J., Mettzer, R., & Been, V. (2007). The effects of inclusionary zoning on local housing markets: Lessons from the San Francisco, Washington DC and Suburban Boston areas. Research Gate; Clayton, F. A., & Schwartz, G. (2015). Is Inclusionary Zoning a Needed Tool for Providing Affordable Housing in the Greater Golden Horseshow? Toronto: Centre for Urban Research and Land Development. This chart should be used with caution.

CASE STUDIES OF TWO CANADIAN CITIES Evaluation Criteria

Vancouver

Montreal

Inclusionary Zoning Policy

Section 565.1 of the Vancouver Charter

Article 123 of the Loi sur l’amenagement et l’urbanisme (LAU); Article 89 of the Montreal Charter

Development size and type

New neighbourhoods

Residential projects greater than 200 units; Major zoning change; Municipally or publicly owned land

Inclusionary Requirements

20% of the units in new neighbourhoods be designed Strategy for the Inclusion of Affordable Housing in New for non-market housing, with atleast 50% of these units Residential Projects, 2005: 30% of new residential geared towards families. housing to be affordable

Buy out option

Limited option for cash in-lieu

Cash in-lieu is accepted for flexibility

Funding

Provincial: BC Housing; Federal: None

Length of affordability

Sites are leased to non-profit sponsors by the City for 60 years

Provinvial: Affordable Housing Quebec, AccesLogis; Federal: CMHC

Implementation date

1988

2005

Affordable housing units produced in inclusionary projects

Approx. 19.7% of the total affordable housing projects

App. 20% of the total affordable housing projects

Perpetuity is assumed

Comparative Analysis: Schuetz, Mah, J. (2009). Can Inclusionary Zoning Help Address the Shortage of Affordable Housing in Toronto? Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks, Mah, J., & Hakworth, J. (2011). Local Politics and Inclusionary Housing in Three Large Canadian Cities. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 57-80.

MODEL FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN CALGARY WITH INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS Development stage

Developer owned land

65 - 97 units/yr

based on 2015 & 2016 housing completion records

(rental and ownership)

Land

Trust fund

- 15% set aside requirement - Bonus density - Relaxed parking requirement - Cash in-lieu payment

Increased length of aﬀordability Builds at net-zero proﬁt Monitoring -

People in need Low to moderate income households

After Development

- Rent collected at 10% below market rate - Rent collected at 30% of income (RGI) - Rent Supplement - Fixed rent

social business model

Before Development

- Faster approval - Waive fee

Federal, Provincial, City funds and cash in-lieu collections

City owned land

Calgary Housing Corporation or AHCC or NGO

app. 110 units/ yr

based on CHC Annual report 2017, AHCC Annual report 2016

Deep and shallow core needs households - Income supplement - Disability, oldage, veterance assistance - Home ownership down payments

Icons from Noun Project: land by Alexander Skowalsky; Approval by Thomas'; Key by David; House by Enshia. Mah, J. (2009). Can Inclusionary Zoning Help Address the Shortage of Affordable Housing in Toronto? Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks. Calgary Housing Company. (2017). Annual Report 2017. Retrieved from http:// calgaryhousingcompany.org/wp-content/uploads/CHC-Annual-Report-2017_Final.pdf. The inclusionary units are based on high and low scenario from the 2015 & 2016 housing completion report by CMHC, these values should be treated with caution.

RHEA DAVIS | 30048376 | MPLAN INSTRUCTOR : SASHA TSENKOVA

Inclusionary Zoning Summary Poster 22

Purpose

• Plan for Manchester industrial district with a futuristic outlook • Provide analytical research to support integrated systems in the proposal.

Manchester Eco-District

DESCRIPTION

The proposal included new benchmarks for low carbon urban Renewable en development in Calgary, adhering to six principles throughout the Calgary’s planning process:first mixed use low-carbon district

Project Title Manchester Eco-district: Calgary’s first mixed-use low carbon district

Wind Wind energy energy

100% renewable energy

Fair share ecological footprint

Scandinavian levels of equity

Course Urban Infrastructure

Solar energy Wind energy Solar energy

80% GHG reduction

Softwares used Adobe Illustrator | Infographics and charts

Implementing clean energy technologies provides Mixed useManchester 1 Residential the opportunity to foster an environmentally responsible, energy 5 - 12 storeys Oﬃce space efficient and economically prosperous community. The proposed 2 - 3 storeys Light industrial community will obtain all its energy from renewable sources byGeo-exchange 1 storey Geo-exchange 50 AVE SW installing on-site and off-site equipment. Mixed use 2 MA CLE OD

Transportation

Wind energy

BLACKFOOT TR SE

Energy infrastructure analysis

Biomass Plant Solar energy

Biomass plant Biomass Plant Geo-exchange

Skills gained Diagramming programs

Alternatives to car use

Land cycle use plan + typologies Energy

TR S

Adobe Indsign | Poster layout

Zero waste to landfill

Residential 5 - 12 storeys Oﬃce space 2 - 3 storeys Retail 1 storey

Community st Jobs breakdown

Res. (high) Residential 1 - 12 storeys

Electricity Solar energy

Manchester Community Res. (med)

Biomass Plant Heat

15%

Retail

29%

Oﬃce

56%

Industrial

Residential 1 - 8 storeys Industry

Geo-exchange

Light indust. GLENMORE TR Annual electricity 1,353,722 demand from residents Land use breakdown Jobs breakdown MWh/year and jobs

15%

Electricity from solar8% Retail panels 9%

Road 728,640

Light industrial 1 - 4 storeys

Source of heat 0

300 km

MWh/year

Energy required from12% geoexchange Oﬃce

Industrial

1,104,851 MWh/year

Industrial

47%

Promoting walking and cycling reduces the amount of vehicular travel Residential

23 56%

Mixed use 1

14%

Energy required from windfarms

70% Geo-exchange

Mixed use 2

Energy from sections 684,867 Street 10% Park MWh/year community waste 29%

30% Biomass Open spaces

420,823 MWh/year

Source of electricity 56% Solar energy 15% Biomass

Using shared electric vehicles 29% reduces the amount of Wind energy (oﬀ-site) greenhouse gases emitted An additional LRT station in

Transportation mode share the community facilitates 37% Transit 20% Walk 10% Bike

getting around without a car

CO2 released during combustion in power plant

Biomass heat energy system •

Trees take up CO2

Works on the principle of cogeneration which allows simultaneous generation of heat and power

Supply pipe

Return pipe

•

Cost-effective and fuel efficient system of energy production

•

Provides flexible fuel choices. Incentives required to catalyze alternate fuel choices

STEAM TURBINE Steam runs turbine

Reduces output energy cost and increases energy security

•

Case study: Igelsta, Sweden

Return pipe BOILER

Plant

•

Works on the principle of drawing energy from underground - a 100% Fair share relatively Scandinavian constant and warm energy renewable energy ecological footprint levels of equity source

Transportation

W TR S

MA CLE OD

•

Industry

Below ground Warmed water pumped back into the system Industry Industry

Ideal for new planned communities Community statistics

29%

Res. (med) Residential 1 - 8 storeys

Road

Mixed use 2

10%

Park

12%

Mixed use 1

14%

Industrial

56%

47%

Industrial

Food Food production Food Food

Bioremediating

fertilizer

Plant

steam

fertilizer

Pharmaceuticals

Food & Beverage

Housing + food infrastructure

Shared streets

400 m from local bus loop stop

Source of heat 30% Biomass

400 m from regional bus route stop

70% Geo-exchange

Green roofs

Rainwater/snow melt collection for agricultural use

Source of electricity 56% Solar energy

VERTICAL CLOSED LOOP SYSTEM 15% Biomass

Greenhouses for local year-round production

29% Wind energy (oﬀ-site)

Community gardens

Transportation mode share

Light industrial 1 - 4 storeys

sludge

sludgeBioremediating Plant

Bioremediating Plant Bioremediating sludge Fertilizer sludge Bioremediating sludge Plant sludge Bioremediating Sludge Bioremediating Bioremediating Plant PlantBioremediating Bioremediating fertilizer Plant Plant plant

sludge

heat & electricity

Light indust. GLENMORE TR

sludge

sludge Food Food production production

CO2

into the ground 800 m from LRT stop to be rewarmed

Land use breakdown

Oﬃce

fibre Paper mill Paper mill fibre Paper mill fibre Fibre fibre fibre Paper mill fibre Paper mill Paper mill Paper mill Paper mill Paper mill Paper mill

CO2 Biomass Non-potable CO2 bio-fuel Plant non-potable uses uses bio-fuel Wastewater bio-fuel Wastewater Wastewater CO2 CO2 bio-fuel Biomass Food &CO2 Beverage Heat Pump WastewaterWastewater Biomass uses heat PlantPlant non-potable non-potable uses& electricity Biomass Plant Wastewater non-potable uses CO2 Wastewater Biomass Plant FoodFood & Beverage non-potable uses Wastewater heat & electricity Biomass Plant & Beverage non-potable uses heat & electricity Biomass Plant Food & Beverage Heat & electricity heat &non-potable electricity uses CO2 Food & Beverage Biomass Plant & electricity non-potableheat uses Food & Food &beverage Beverage heat & & electricity electricity Food & Beverage heat

WalkabilityCooled water goes back

Case study: Beaver Barracks, Ottawa Retail

ﬁbre

Distribution Network

Community

Heat

Geo-exchange Geo-exchange

15%

ﬁbreﬁbre

Foodfertilizer productionFood production (Organic) (Organic) Food compost (organic) compost SolidSolid waste (Organic) waste steam fertilizer compost fertilizer bio-fuel Food Solid waste sludge fertilizer production production CO2 Pharmaceuticals compost production Solid (Organic) waste (Organic) (Organic) fertilizer steamsteam Wastewater sludge Sludge Bio-fuel production steam sludge(Organic) Pharmaceuticals sludge Pharmaceuticals Biomass Plant Pharmaceuticals non-potable uses bio-fuel steam steam Biomass Steam sludge sludge steam Pharmaceuticals Pharmaceuticals Food & Beverage Pharmaceuticals CO2 heatsludge & electricity plant Pharmaceuticals steam bio-fuel bio-fuel sludge Wastewater Pharmaceuticals bio-fuel

Manchester Community Community Manchester Manchester Community Manchester Community Manchester Community Community

Heat

Mixed use 2

Jobs breakdown

commercial products

Food

compost Solid waste Manchester compost sludge (Organic) Solid waste compost compost Community Solid waste Solid Solidwaste waste production

Manchester Manchester Community community Manchester Manchester

Residential 5 - 12 storeys Oﬃce space 2 - 3 storeys Retail 1 storey

Res. (high)

food non-potable uses

irrigation

Heat

Biomass plant Biomass Plant Geo-exchange

Residential 1 - 12 storeys

food

irrigation irrigation compost Solid waste irrigation

Electricity

Biomass Plant Solar energy

BLACKFOOT TR SE

•

commercial products products commercial commercial products commercial products commercial commercialproducts products commercial products commercial products Commercial products

food food food

(Organic)

Financial incentives required to cover captial costs

50 AVE SW

food

irrigation

Electricity

Significantly GHG emissions Zero wastereduces Alternatives to to landfill car use and fossil fuel consumption Mixed use 1

food food

Stormwater Stormwater Stormwater Stormwater Stormwater Irrigation Collection Collection collection Collection Stormwater Stormwater Collection Stormwater Stormwater Stormwater irrigation Collection irrigation Collection Return pipe Collection Collection irrigation Collection Compost irrigation

Electricity

Solar energy

Residential 5 - 12 storeys Oﬃce space 2 - 3 storeys Light industrial 1 storey

HEAT EXCHANGER

Supply pipe

Solar energy Wind energy

•

food

non-potable uses non-potable uses non-potable uses non-potable uses non-potable uses non-potable non-potable uses uses uses non-potable Non-potable uses

Transportation Transportation

Wind Wind energy energy

Land use plan + typologies

HEAT RECOVER BOILER

Material flows + circular Centraleconomy Energy

Renewable energy cycle

80% GHG reduction

Electricity generated Hot water Supply pipe

Calgary’s first mixed use low-carbon district

•

Central Energy Plant Distribution Network

•

GeoExchange system Manchester Eco-District

Wood pellets

Waste wood

37% Transit

Residential

20% Walk

10% Bike

Open spaces

300 km

33% Shared motor vehicle

300 km

Street sections

Solar panels in the community provide 728,640 MWh/year of electricity 20% of all dwellings in the community are comprised of affordable housing

Using shared electric vehicles reduces the amount of greenhouse gases emitted Promoting walking and cycling reduces the amount of vehicular travel

72.7 hectares of local food production has the capacity to provide for 50,000 people

Solar array Tank

An additional LRT station in the community facilitates getting around without a car

Filtration

Shared streets emphasize pedestrian mobility instead of automobile mobility

Greenhouse

Green rooftop

Community garden Sidewalk

Bike lanes

Multi

Drive lanes

Station

LRT right-of-way

Station

Bioswale

CPR

Bioswale

Sidewalk

Bike

4.5 m

3.7 m

2.1 m

3.7 m

4.5 m

1.8 m

Drive lane Bio Drive lane 3m

1.5 m

Bike

Sidewalk

1.8 m

4.5 m

Multi 4.5 m

10.9 m

12.6 m

Sewer Wastewater treatment plant

Bio

2.1 m

2.4 m

4.5 m

6.1 m

Geo-exchange

Leticia Chapa Rhea Davis Jon Maselli Jeremy Tran

By integrating a nexus of water, food, housing, and transportation infrastructure, the Manchester EcoDistrict plan proposes the creation of a self-sufficient, resilient and thriving mixed-use and mixed-income district by 2060. 24