cultivating an inclusive community...complete communities and ourwinnipeg guide development and...

1

CULTIVATING AN INCLUSIVE COMMUNITYA Community Vision for Winnipeg’s Fort Richmond Neighbourhood

CITY 7410: Planning Design I - Neighbourhood/Community PlanningFall 2016

Levan King-CranstonCalvin SoSonikile TemboColin Thompson

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWe would like to acknowledge the following people and groups for their guidance and expertise in making this report possible:

• Dr. Orly Linovski, Assistant Professor, Department of City Planning, University of Manitoba• Janice Lukes, City Councillor, South Winnipeg-St. Norbert Ward• Fort Richmond-University Heights Neighbourhood Association• Jonathan Hildebrand, Campus Planner, Campus Planning Office, University of Manitoba• Denisa Gavan-Koop, Planning Consultant, Richard Wintrup & Associates• Barry Stone, Director, Student Residences, University of Manitoba• Anna Weier, Sustainability Engagement Coordinator, Office of Sustainability, University of Manitoba• Jessie Klassen, Transportation Planner, Office of Sustainability, University of Manitoba• Richard Mahé, Planner, Riel Community, City of Winnipeg• James Platt, Senior Planner, City of Winnipeg• Kerniel Aasland, Sessional Instructor, Department of City Planning, University of Manitoba• University of Manitoba Graduate Students’ Association• Dr. Dwayne Baker, Post-Doctoral Fellow, Department of City Planning, University of Manitoba• Dr. Richard Milgrom, Associate Dean, Head and Associate Professor, Department of City Planning, University of Manitoba• David Patman, Senior Transit Planner, Winnipeg Transit

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page(s)i. Acknowledgements 21.0 Introduction 4 1.1 Purpose 6 1.2 Vision 7 1.3 Goals 7 1.4 Guiding Documents and Funding Options 82.0 Neighbourhood Analysis 10 2.1 Location and Boundaries 11 2.2 Demographics 12 2.3 Community Services 12 2.4 History and Built Form 13 2.5 Housing Types 13 2.6 Green Space 14 2.7 Transportation 15 2.8 Age-Friendly Infrastructure 16 2.9 Community Social Activity 17 3.0 S.W.O.T. Analysis 184.0 Stakeholder Engagement 20 5.0 Case Studies 226.0 Community Vision (Strategies and Recommendations) 287.0 Limitations 408.0 Conclusion 419.0 Glossary 4210.0 References 4411.0 Figures 46

4

1.0 INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

2

5

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Fort Richmond is zoned mostly R1, which is single family residential. Rooming houses are illegal in R1 zoning, which means that the rooming houses that do exist in Fort Richmond would be illegal. Residents of Fort Richmond expressed concerns with the existence of illegal rooming houses in the neighborhood: unkempt lawns, piles of trash, deterioration of the sense of community, lack of enforcement, among other things.

We recognize the work the community association has done in trying to alleviate the problem of rooming houses in Fort Richmond. Many residents have contacted the City of Winnipeg to have bylaw officers inspect potential rooming houses. This work is important and we encourage the residents and the community association to continue their work. The following report attempts to build off of the work currently being done, and offer other avenues that may help to address the issue of rooming houses in Fort Richmond.

The issue of rooming houses is part of the broader issue of affordable housing in the city of Winnipeg, and in particular near the University of Manitoba. The vacancy rate is 3% for the city of Winnipeg is 2% for the neighborhood of Fort Richmond. There is a lack of reliable data on rooming houses in Fort Richmond, but we suspect that many people choose rooming houses because of low cost, proximity to University of Manitoba and amenities on Pembina, and flexibility with rental arrangements.

Our research of rooming houses in Fort Richmond led us to the view that the issue of rooming houses is complex, with the responsibility to address the issue spread across numerous stakeholders. This complexity means that there is not one specific thing that will solve the issue; but rather, a holistic approach that can adequately address the complexity of the rooming house issue. So the strategies we outline in this report are diverse; we believe that the accumulation of all these strategies will significantly contribute to addressing the issue of rooming houses in Fort Richmond.

This research led us to the issue of rooming houses. Rooming houses are houses with multiple tenants each renting separate bedrooms, with each bedroom typically having its own lock, and the other rooms are shared (e.g. kitchen, bathrooms, etc.). Each occupant typically has their our own rental agreement with the landlord, and the landlord may or may not live in the house.

INTRODUCTION

Figure 1: Context map showing Fort Richmond in Winnipeg

5km

6

1.1 PurposeThis report was prepared by four Masters of City Planning students at the University of Manitoba: Levan King-Cranston, Calvin So, Sonikile Tembo, and Colin Thompson, as part of CITY 7410: Neighbourhood/Community Planning. It describes a community vision for the neighbourhood of Fort Richmond, located south of the University of Manitoba’s Fort Garry Campus in Winnipeg. It aims to address the concerns of the community as presented to us by community members and our analysis of the neighbourhood, such as affordable housing with respect to rooming houses, community relations, and transportation.

We performed the following tasks in developing our community vision for Fort Richmond::- Neighbourhood Analysis: A brief analysis of Fort Richmond to become familiar with the neighbourhood.- S.W.O.T (Strength Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) Analysis: Mapped out areas in and around Fort Richmond to identify potential for changes in infrastructure and green space.- Stakeholder Evaluation: Researched strategies and methods to engage with relevant stakeholders.- Case Studies: Researched cases from other cities to better understand the strengths and challenges facing Fort Richmond.- Community Vision: All the research and analysis done led to the development of a community vision that proposes strategies for the concerns shared by the community.

INTRODUCTION

7

7

1.2 Vision

1.3 Goals

Based on the recommendations outlined in this document, Fort Richmond could evolve into an age-friendly inclusive community that reflects its cultural diversity, while encouraging accessibility and good relationships within the neighbourhood and with external stakeholders.

This vision will be realized by supporting, preserving, and improving affordable housing, community relations, and transportation. It would also address the two primary concerns from residents: Illegal rooming houses and university relations.

Affordable Housing: Ensuring all Fort Richmond residents have access to safe and legal housing, fostering an inclusive and accessible community.

Community Relations: Creating a connected neighbourhood where members support each other and have strong relationships with external organizations. These relationships are important to strengthen the inclusiveness and diversity of Fort Richmond.

Transportation: Providing infrastructure options that benefit all residents and promote access and mobility within and beyond the community of Fort Richmond.

INTRODUCTION

8

1.4 Guiding DocumentsThe Province of Manitoba and the City of Winnipeg have put in place various tools, resources, and guiding documents for the planning and development of the province and city. We used these documents to guide the development of our strategies for Fort Richmond.

The Planning Act is a legal document from the province of Manitoba. Municipalities are described as ‘creatures of the province’, as the only legal authortiy municipalities have is what the province grants.

Complete Communities and OurWinnipeg guide development and planning in Winnipeg for the next 25 years, including designing complete communities and creating sustainable infrastructure. They are the blueprint to develop Winnipeg into a vibrant and resilient city.

We used the Quality of Life tool highlighted in these documents to direct our strategies and recommendations.

The Municipal Planning Guidelines for Secondary Suites is relevant to Fort Richmond because secondary suites could help to create age-friendly neighbourhoods and allow people to age in place.

Winnipeg’s Transportation Master Plan is the long-term guiding document for creating a sustainable transportation network. It guides our infrastructure recommendations, focusing on complete streets, improved public transit, and creating more travel options for Fort Richmond residents.

With a projected increase in population and job growth, Winnipeg needs a transportation network that can efficiently move residents from point A to point B.

INTRODUCTION

9

Manitoba Business Start Program is a loan guarantee program with an education component. Loans to new owner-managed businesses are provided through participating financial institutions and guaranteed by the Manitoba Government.

Funding OptionsThe Province and City have funding options that allow for some of our strategies for Fort Richmond to be realized, in addition to regular municipal, provincial, and federal funding.

Winnipeg’s Community Incentive Grant Program is designed to encourage non-profit community organizations to undertake improvements, or purchase capital assets that are available for public use (City of Winnipeg, 2016).

INTRODUCTION

10

2.0 NEIGHBOURHOOD ANALYSIS

NEIGHBOURHOOD ANALYSIS

8

11

2.1 Location and Boundaries

Pembina @ South Perimeter Hwy

Kilkenny Dr underpass

Pembina @ Dalhousie north

Kilkenny Dr underpass

South Perimeter Hwy

Pem

bina

Fort Richmond is located south of the University of Manitoba’s Fort Garry Campus in the south end of Winnipeg. Its borders include Pembina Highway to the west, the University of Manitoba to the north, the Red River to the east, and Perimeter Highway to the south (Figure 2).


Figure 2: Fort Richmond boundaries

1km

12

2.3 Community ServicesFort Richmond has various public services (Figure 5) like three schools, eight facilities classified as daycare/nursery, six churches and other commercial services like banks, clinics, postal services and restaurants. Students interviewed expressed that their reason for living in the area is its proximity to the University of Manitoba and its necessary week to week amenities like Superstore, Sobeys, Canada Post and banks.

2.2 Demographics

The importance of demographic information is to show Fort Richmond’s change in population, age, and migration patterns. Many social outcomes are impacted by demographic information. For example, the high student-aged population in Fort Richmond (Figure 3) corresponds with the fact the neighbourhood has a variety of schools, including elementary, secondary, and postsecondary institutions. Fort Richmond is also rich in culture as shown in the distribution of visible minorities (Figure 4).

All data was taken from the 2011 Census. Please note that due to reliability issues in that census year and the national household survey being voluntary, data given may be slightly inaccurate. Data for students may have been underrepresented as well.

Community Center

School

Daycare/Nursery

Church

Commercial strip


Figure 3: Fort Richmond age distribution Figure 4: Fort Richmond visible minorities

1km

Figure 5: Map of Fort Richmond showing public services

10

13

2.5 Housing TypesFort Richmond is predominantly zoned R1 (single-family housing - Figure 7), and many of these houses have large front yards, driveways, and trees located on the property. As shown in Figure 8, there are pockets of R2 (two-family housing) and RMF (multi-family housing) in the neighbourhood, mainly on Dalhousie Drive closer to Pembina Highway. The neighbourhood has apartments and Condos as shown below (Figure 6).

2.4 History of Built FormFort Richmond was developed over 800 acres of land in the mid-1960s in Winnipeg’s south end. At the time of construction, it was considered to be a fully integrated community stretching south from the University of Manitoba campus to the Perimeter Highway, and was said to provide the “best residential location in Greater Winnipeg” (Winnipeg Free Press, 22 March 1965). In 1965, the development was one of the largest of its kind in Western Canada and advertised as one of its best. (Winnipeg Free Press, 22 May 1965)

The development for the area was designed to provide a well-balanced community served by major arteries, commercial amenities, and recreational facilities. “The park-like development was established around several residential bays, and advertised underground wiring, large stands of trees, and interesting topography” (Winnipeg Free Press, 22 May 1965).


1km

Figure 6: Housing on Silverstone and Dalhousie

Figure 7: Housing on Pasadena Ave Figure 8: Zoning map

14

2.6 Green SpaceFort Richmond has a forested feel; its tree lined streets provide greenery, adding to the aesthetics of the neighbourhood. The neighbourhood has many green spaces with several parks scattered throughout. There are pocket parks, community parks, school parks, and Kings Park. Kings Park is the largest park in Fort Richmond and has several amenities, including an off-leash dog park, sporting infrastructure, and several walking paths that weave throughout the park and along the Red River.


Figure 9: Kings Park pergola

Figure 12: Map showing green space in Fort Richmond

Pem

bina

Hwy

Perimeter Hwy

Silverstone Ave

1km

Figure 11: Alex Bridge Park play area

Figure 13: Section on Dalhousie and Purdue Bay intersection Dalhousie forest

15

2.7 TransportationWinnipeg’s Transportation Master Plan outlines the base transit network as a combination of mainline, express, and feeder routes that maximize coverage and direct travel between destinations.

Four bus routes currently serve Fort Richmond: Routes 72, 137, 162, and 170. Route 72 provides coverage service in the neighbourhood and the adjacent Richmond West neighbourhood. Route 137 provides peak direction travel to/from downtown, and routes 162 and 170 provide daily service between Fort Richmond, St. Norbert, and downtown via Pembina Highway and the transitway.

2%15%

70%

5%


Cycing Path

Transit Network

Pedestrian paved walkway

Transit stop

Pem

bina

Hwy

Perimeter Hwy

Silverstone Ave

Dalh

ousie

Dr

200m

Figure 10: Alex Bridge Park pond

Figure 14: Mode of Transportation for work trips by Fort Richmond residents. (Census 2011)

Figure 15: Bus and active transportation map

16

2.8 Age-Friendly InfrastructureCreating an age friendly neighborhood will allow for all residents to access amenities, and infrastructure uplifting their quality of life. Specifically understanding the number and placement of benches throughout the neighbourhood helps determine which areas are age friendly for pedestrians.

On Dalhousie Drive, there is an average distance of 317 metres between each bench, as calculated from Google Maps. However, Dalhousie between Ryerson and Radcliffe is a 700 metre walking distance with no benches. There is an opportunity to help make this part of fort Richmond more pedestrian friendly by adding more benches.

848 Dalhousie Drive to Baylor measures 290 metres according to Google Maps, however this stretch is open to weather elements due to Baldry Creek Park and Alex Bridge Park. These are examples of opportunities to make Fort Richmond more age-friendly for pedestrians.

700m


Existing bench

640m

265m

520m

335m

Existing Crosswalk

Figure 16: Map of benches and crosswalks500m

17

2.9 Community Social ActivityFort Richmond, through its community correspondent, highlights their events in the Canstar Community Newspaper. The neighbourhood has various active cultural associations, such as the Nigerian and Chinese Associations.

Active Neighbourhood AssociationFort Richmond - University Heights Neighborhood Association (Figure 17) is a volunteer community based organization of homeowners who have come together to address concerns of illegal rentals. These illegal rentals result in poor maintenance of property and unsafe living conditions for tenants.

MulticulturalismOn June 18, 2016 the neighbourhood hosted the Multiculturalism Day event, sponsored by Canadian Heritage (Figure 18). About 15 different multicultural groups and 12 exhibitors made the event “glamorous and exciting” (Canstar, 2016).

Art in the CommunityYisa Akinbolaji, a local artist, facillitated an empowering workshop at a youth summer camp (Figure 19). Through Creative Foundation Inc., Akinbolaji hopes to host a creative workshop in Fort Richmond soon.

Awards and Other Community EventsResidents have reached out to the community to provide settlement advice for new immigrants, clothing, and household supplies for those in need. The Prime Minister’s Volunteer Award is given to a Fort Richmond resident for community leadership.

These community activities reflect the diversity of ages and cultures found in Fort Richmond. There are various spaces used for these activities mainly their green spaces and the Richmond Kings Community Center. Kings Park is also a popular site for social activities and a common destination for cyclists, drivers and walkers in the neighbourhood.


Figure 17: Fort Richmond Neighbourhood Association logo

Figure 18: Multiculturalism celebration with residents

Figure 19: Fort Richmond Art workshop

18

3.0 S.W.O.T. ANALYSIS

S.W.O.T. ANALYSIS

19

S.W.O.T. AnalysisAfter meeting with the Fort Richmond Residents Association, we did a SWOT analysis, an analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the neighbourhood as told by residents and other stakeholders. This list is combined with a SWOT analysis based on a visual analysis of the neighbourhood and data available on Fort Richmond and surrounding areas like the University of Manitoba.

Strengths

- Proximity to the University of Manitoba- Abundance of green space- School grounds are clean and well kept- Churches provide services such as ESL and donations of water and clothing for the community- The community centre provides activities for all people- Close proximity to amenities- Active community neighbourhood association

Weaknesses

- Some streets do not have connecting and consistent sidewalks, as a result pedestrians are often seen walking on the road- Amenities on Pembina are not within walking distance for some residents - Transit is not frequent, especially on Sundays- Disconnected bike paths- Poor relationship with the University of Manitoba- Lack of affordable legal student housingOpportunities

- Bus Rapid Transit has the potential to increase the catchment area for students to live further but still get to the university efficiently- The City has committed to the rehabilitation of Kings Park- Engaged councillor and association- Southwood lands will provide more housing options for students- Fort Richmond has active cultural groups that meet together for events like celebration of multiculturalismThreats

- Unstable funding sources for expansion of community association responsibilities- Difficulty of managing diverse interests- Elections every four years, creating potential change in leadership- Restrictive zoning bylaws

S.W.O.T. ANALYSIS

20

4.0 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

21

Rooming Houses and Affordable Housing ConcernsMajor issues brought up include the legality of rooming houses, poor maintenance of some homes, and obstacles in renting legally, such as possible language barriers, lease commitments, and the lack of co-signers.

ParkingSome residents expressed concerns about parking in the neighbourhood, in particular illegal parking on side streets and on top of lawns.

Sense of CommunityThere were concerns about new developments in Fort Richmond, and the negative effect they could have on the sense of community as well as an influx of a transient population. There was also a general concern that the sense of community that Fort Richmond historically had was being threatened.

Relations with the University of ManitobaResidents in Fort Richmond were concerned about a lack of action between the residents association and the University of Manitoba, regarding housing and integration of incoming students. There has been an increase in student-aged residents moving to Fort Richmond due to its proximity to the university.

We had interactions with stakeholders in our community vision process, including the:

- Fort Richmond - University Heights Neighbourhood Association- University of Manitoba (Ancillary Services, Office of Sustainability, Campus Planning)- City of Winnipeg (Planning, Property, and Development Department, Winnipeg Transit)- Office of Councillor Janice Lukes

The biggest issue facing the community, according to some stakeholders, is the legality of rooming houses and affordable housing concerns. Other common themes include parking, sidewalks, new developments, sense of community, quality of built environment, and relations with the University of Manitoba.

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

Figure 20: Word cloud created showing words most spoken in community meeting

22

5.0 CASE STUDIES

CASE STUDIES

23

15

5.1 Neighbourhood Association funding model - Community Services Thrift Store - Gibsons, BC

Sunshine Coast Community Services was formed in 1974 to strengthen individuals, families and their community through leadership, innovation and support. The organization values collaboration, accountability, respect and equity. Their core principles are to highlight the unique strengths of individuals and families, make a positive difference for everyone and ensure residents are not taken advantage of through abuse or other means.

The Community Treasures Thrift Shop is one of the revenue generators of the organization. Everything in the store is donated and all sales go to funding services offered like age in place programs, welcoming of immigrants, food bank, community gardens and visitors center.

Suburban Neighbourhood Association model - Coronation Community Association - Scarborough, ON

Coronation Community Association (CCA) was created from a neighbourhood meeting where neighbours shared concerns about the lack of capital funding and support for surburban neighbourhoods. The residents describe their neighbourhood as “one of the most beautiful areas in the city, rich in culture, recreation and environmental resources”. They had seen neighbouring communities band together to make their neighbourhoods safer and enrich their lives. The association was formed by ten volunteers in October 2005. The neighbourhood has well over 4500 homes, four churches, seven schools, five parks, and 80% of their food and shopping needs are found within a walking distance.

The CCA Community Events Committee sponsors a variety of events designed to bring the community together in pleasurable ways such as BBQs, tours, live music, and an annual plant exchange.

CASE STUDIES

Figure 21: Sunshine Coast Community Services Thrift Store

24

Frequent Transit Network in Metro Vancouver - Vancouver, BC

Translink in Vancouver and Société de transport de Montréal (STM) both have frequent transit network maps online. Translink’s map highlights routes with 15-minute service during the daytime 7 days a week, while STM highlights routes with 10 minute service between 6am and 9pm on weekdays.

burnaby lake

deerlake

troutlake

lostlagoon

sasamatlake

buntzenlake

n o r t h a r m f r a s e r r i v e r

so

ut h a r m

f r a s e r r i v e r


p i t t r i v e r


i nd

i an

ar

m

be d

we

l l ba

y

b u r r a r d i n l e te n g l i s h b a y

bo

un

da r y b a y

m u d b a y

s e m i a h m o o b a y

c ap

i l an

o l

ak

e

f a l s e c r e e k

whonnocklake

edmonds st braid st

marine dr

marine way

hwy 1

hwy 1

hwy 1

hwy 1

hwy 1

hwy 1

hwy 1

fraser hwy

fraser hwy

fraser hwy

fraser hwy

fraser hwy

fraser hwy

willingdo

nave

royal oakave

imperial st

clinton stbo

undary rd

140th st

152nd st152nd st

200th st

192nd st

tyne stse marine dr

n fraser way

royal ave

brunette ave

walker ave

burris st

kingsway

8th st

canada way

6th st

ewen ave rive

r rd

scott

rd

scott rdscott rd

boyd st

nw marine

dr

wesbrook m

all

universityblvd

w 10th ave

w 16th ave w 16th ave

hastings st

lill

ooet

rd

dollarton hwy

marine dr

hwy 1

hwy 1

hwy 1

3rd st main stesplanade

lions

gat

e bri

dge

second

narrow

s bridge

hwy 1

hwy 1

hwy 1

marine dr

mount seymour pky

lonsdale ave

grand blvd

gaglardi waycla

rke rd

saint johns st

barnet hwy

barnet hwy

parker st

hastings st

dundas st

terminal ave

lougheed hwy

broadway

broadway

king george blvd

king george blvd

king

geo

rge

blvd

king george blvd

96th ave

88th ave

lougheed hwy

dewdney trunk rd

dewdney trunk rd

panorama dr

bedwel

lbay

rd

east rd

ioco rd

sunnyside rd

parkway

blvd

lougheed hwy

harris rd 224th st

dewdney trunk rd

lougheed hwy

lougheed hwy

lougheed hwy

hwy 10 bypass

hwy 10

64th ave

north bluff rd

20th ave

152nd st

thriftave

68th ave

hwy 10

24th ave

hwy 99

hwy 10

hwy 91

hwy 91

hwy 99

hwy 99

hwy 99

hwy 99

64th ave

langley bypass

76th ave

72nd ave

100th ave

104th ave

golden ears

way

production

way

kingsway

king edward ave

macdo

nald st

arbutus st

cambie st

cambie st

main st

fraser stmain st

fraser st

knight stknight st

clarkdr

victoria drno. 6 rd

comm

ercialdr

renfrew st

e co

lum

bia

st

north rd

spur

away

ave

cape horn av

e

nootkast

hwy 1canada way

e 22nd avekincaid st

burke st

joyc

e st

sloca

nst

granville st

oak stoak st

granville st

7th ave

railway ave

hwy 99

no.3 rd

w 4th ave

w 41st ave

w 49th ave e 49thave

se marine dr

oak street

bridge

moncton st

granville avegranville ave

westminster hwy

cambie rd cambie rd

alderbridge way

westminster hwy wes

tmin

ster

hwy

hwy 91

hwy 99

e 49th ave

w 41st ave

dunbarst m

ackenzie st

west blvd

sw marine dr

sw marine dr

hwy 17

hwy 17

hwy 17

hwy 99

george massey

tunnel

kerr st

Renfrew

Marpole

Phibbs Exchange

VCC–Clark

Rupert

Waterfront

Edmonds

MapleMeadows

Joyce–Collingwood

Royal OakColumbia

Patterson Braid

White Rock Centre

NewWestminster

Commercial–Broadway

Broadway–City Hall

29th Avenue

SFU Loop

YVR–Airport

Knight St–Marine Drive

Scott Road

Nanaimo

Burrard

VancouverCity Centre

Aberdeen

King Edward

Olympic Village

Templeton

Sperling–Burnaby Lake

Richmond–Brighouse

Main Street–Science World

Park Royal

Lonsdale Quay

South SurreyPark & Ride

MatthewsExchange

Scottsdale

Steveston

Haney PlacePitt Meadows

Lincoln

LougheedTown Centre

Gateway

Surrey Central

King George

GuildfordExchange

Yaletown–Roundhouse

MarineDrive

Sea Island Centre

Lansdowne

StanleyPark Loop

Granville

Stadium–Chinatown

Gilmore

Boundary Loop

Holdom

Production Way–University

BrentwoodTown Centre

Lake City Way

Sapperton

Kootenay Loop

Capilano University

Dunbar LoopOakridge–41st AvenueLangara–

49th AvenueMetrotown

UBC Loop

Bridgeport

22nd Street

Newton Exchange

Langley Centre

Coquitlam Central

Lafarge Lake– Douglas

Inlet CentreMoody Centre

Burquitlam

vancouver

richmond

delta

surrey

langley

whiterock

mapleridge

pittmeadows

burnaby

newwestminster

belcarra

anmore

portmoody

northvancouver

westvancouver

coquitlam

d o w n t o w n

park royal

lonsdale

lynnvalle y

brent wood

metrotown

edmonds

guildford

fleet wood

new ton

cloverdale

semiahmoo

aldergrove

willoughby

portcoquitl am

coquitl amcentre

lougheed

oakridge

l adner

Legend

The Frequent Transit Network (FTN) is a network of corridors that have transit service every 15 minutes or better, during at least all of the following times:

– Monday to Friday: 6:00–21:00 – Saturdays: 7:00–21:00 – Sundays and holidays: 8:00–21:00

Frequent Transit Network

Fast, Limited-Stop Services

Frequent bus service, with limited stops.

B-Line

General Locations of Regional City Centres and Municipal Town Centres

Future SkyTrain

Stops on these streets have combined Regular Bus services at FTN levels as described above

FTN

High frequency rail service. Early morning to late evening.

Canada Line


Expo Line


Millennium Line

Frequent Transit Network in Metro Vancouver

For transit information call 604.953.3333 or visit translink.caFrequent Transit Network – Effective December 19, 2016

CASE STUDIES

Figure 22: Metro Vancouver Frequent Transit map

25

5.4 Secondary Suites - Winnipeg, MB

In 2010, Manitoba Housing recognized the need to increase the amount of affordable rental units in Winnipeg. They implemented a program that gave applicants a forgivable loan for 50 per cent of the total construction cost or renovation of a secondary suite up to $35,000 per suite. The program continued until 2014.

A secondary suite must have its own entrance to the living space, as well as a kitchen, bathroom, and living area. It is possible for these suites to be connected to the main house, although other plans do include suites that are detached. Furthermore suites when rented must be at an affordable price to help combat the temptation of the nearby illegal rooming houses within the neighborhood.

The addition of a secondary suite may add value to the home when exploring selling options in the future. Secondary suites also provide other housing options that open more opportunities for people to age in place.

Secondary Suites offer one more option for homeowners looking to evolve their current residence into a resilient space prepared for aging. In addition, some secondary suites are temporary, therefore this would not alter the neighbourhood character or be part of a property assessment.

Densification is gained through the addition of secondary suites, which creates possibilities for single family dwellings to accommodate more people. These suites are ideal for the aging population, allowing seniors to age in place. “Aging in place is the ability to live in one’s own home and community safely and independently as one ages” (Morley, 2012, pg.489).

CASE STUDIES

Figure 23: Garden Suite illustration

Figure 24: Secondary suite illustration

Figure 25: Laneway housing illustration

Figure 26: Plan view of secondary suite illustration

26

5.5 Homeshare Program - Oxford, UK

Homeshare is a program that is very common in the United Kingdom. It is essentially an exchange of services, such as a householder offering accomodation to a homesharer in exchange for an agreed level of help. The main advantage with this system is that both parties benefit from it.Most programs are run by agencies that work to manage the application process, provide guidelines, and identify needs within their communities. Many aim to enable older people to age in place by remaining independent in their homes.

Some homeshare programs, such as those in Spain, are being run by Universities where student accomodation on campus is scarce.

How it works: - The agency pairs up a homeowner and a home sharer

- The homesharer receives their own room in the home plus shared use of kitchen and bathroom and often the living room and garden as well - Most homesharers give ten hours of service per week - If the homesharer is doing more than house hold duties and caring for the homeowner, they are given a small payment

A significant percentage of the residents in Fort Richmond are elderly and could benefit from services offered by a similar program. Also, this could be a possible solution to the lack of affordable housing in the neighbourhood that is causing an escalation in the rooming house problem.

A program like this not only benefits elderly people and students but others like people needing assistance, people looking for additional income and the community at large.

“Homeshare is the exchange of housing for help. It recognises that two people have needs and

something to give.” (Homeshare international)

CASE STUDIES

Figure 27: Helping hand visual representation

27

The placemaking process capitalizes on a local community’s assets, inspiration, and potential. “It results in the creation (or promotion) of quality public spaces that contribute to people’s health, happiness, and well-being” (pps.org).

Project for Public Spaces offers various tools used to improve community space and interaction. The ‘What makes a great place?’ diagram shown above is a tool that provides a framework with which to work when judging how successful spaces are and how they could be improved. The four general qualities are Sociability, Use and Activities, Comfort and Image, and Access and Linkages. Each of these qualities has questions that help in the evaluation of space.

We analyzed these four and because of what we heard at community meetings, decided to use the Sociability quality in evaluating Fort Richmond.

5.6 Placemaking - Project for Public Spaces - New York, NY

Sociability: ‘When people see friends, meet and greet their neighbours, and feel comfortable interacting with strangers, they tend to feel a stronger sense of place or attachment to their community.’ Fort Richmond residents expressed in the community meeting that they have experienced a decline in this ‘sense of community’, that they once knew their neighbours and interacted with them but that doesn’t happen anymore. They attribute this change to the illegal rooming house issue.

An increase in relevant community activities and more opportunities for strangers to become neighbours could help restore the sense of community Fort Richmond residents once felt. PPS proposes eleven principles for creating great community places that could allow for this type of interaction, some of which are identifying talent and need in community, looking for partners, and having a vision.

CASE STUDIES

Figure 28: Placemaking tool

Figure 29: Signs for events Figure 30: Children painting on road Figure 31: Celebration of cultural events Figure 32: Street Art

28

6.0 STRATEGIES

STRATEGIES

18

29

6.1 IntroductionThis section highlights the overall and the specific strategies we recommend for Fort Richmond. Our analysis and case study process revealed many possible strategies that could play a part in solving the issues that were highlighted in the community meeting. Some of these strategies like development of a secondary plan, we have not gone into detail, instead we have given a brief outline of who the actors would be in the implementation of the plan. Table 1 shows all the strategies that were considered for this community vision. However, we only expand on the strategies we think are the strongest.

Each Strategy has a summary box that outlines the actors, resources, implications and barriers of each of these strategies.

R

A

I

B

Actors: An actor is anyone that would play a role in the implementation of the strategy.

Resources: The City of Winnipeg, Province of Manitoba and organizations like University of Manitoba may have resources that could be valuble for the implementation of a strategy.

Implications: What would the implementation of the strategy mean for Fort Richmond?

Barriers: What are the barriers that the actors or the neighbourhood may face in the implementation of the strategy.

STRATEGIES

30

GOAL STRATEGYACTORS

P M I Pv A ST LT

Affordable Housing: Ensuring all Fort Richmond residents have access to safe and legal housing, fostering an inclusive and accessible community.

Affordable Housing Bylaw (City of Winnipeg Charter Amendment) that allows for modification of specified development requirements

X X

Restructuring of university finances to allocate base funding for housing X X X

Construct one student residence building with <300 spaces through traditional long-term financing

X X

Secondary plan for Southwood Lands should include stipulation for affordable housing X X

Future student residences via public private partnership X X X X

Community Relations: Creating a connected neighbourhood where members support each other and have strong relationships with external organizations. These relationships are important to strengthen the inclusiveness and diversity of Fort Richmond.

Use the City of Winnipeg’s Community Incentive Grant Program for a thrift store to fund relevant community services through the Fort Richmond Residents Association

X X X

Create a Fort Richmond Secondary Plan to manage change in the built environment X X X

Consider collaboration in provision of intergration services for new residents, especially students moving into the neighbourhood

X X

Create a rental coordinator position within the residents association, funded by revenue from the community thrift store, to help inform tenants and landlords about their responsibilities and funding opportunities for legal rental housing options like secondary suites

X X

Transportation: Providing infrastructure options that benefit all residents and promote access and mobility within and beyond the neighbourhood.

Create a frequent transit network map for Winnipeg Transit (see map below) X X

Remove route 162 from the Fort Richmond neighbourhood (providing service on Pembina to St. Norbert instead) and improve service on routes 72 and 137 to supplement the service loss

X X X

Clearly identify “coverage” and “core” routes for Winnipeg Transit and set frequency guidelines for each

X X

Create a separated bike lane on Dalhousie Drive north leg between Silverstone and Pembina X X

STRATEGIES

Table 1

31

6.2 Student Housing at The University of Manitoba

STRATEGIES

With increasing enrollment, especially international enrollment (UofM Ancilliary Services, 2016), at the University of Manitoba, demand for housing near the University will likely increase. Student residences are generally built by either long term financing options, public private partnerships, or endowment (Moodys 2015). People have expressed concern that the private market is not meeting the housing needs of students, and that the university should provide more housing to meet those needs.

We recommend the construction of one student residence with at least 300 units to meet current demand. The waitlist for student residents was 375 last year, so there is demand for on campus housing. University of Manitoba should begin the process of constructing a student residence through long term financing to meet current demand. The construction of a student residence provides needed supply, which may help to alleviate the demand for housing near the University of Manitoba.

Actors: University of ManitobaResources: Long-term financing, restructuring of university financial model, public private partnerships (P3s)Implications: Increasing supply of student housing in the universityBarriers: Long-term financing options are very expensive and the issue of affordable housing may still remain, lack of sufficient funds for student housing, P3s take control out of the hands of the university

We recommend a restructuring of the financial model, so that student housing receives base funding. University of Manitoba Student Housing operates through Ancillary Services and does not receive any base funding from the university. Ancillary Services operate on a cost recovery basis, so it generates revenue from things like the pharmacy store and parking. This revenue can then be used to pay for student residences.

We recommend engaging in Public Private Partnerships to meet future demand. Public Private Partnerships (P3s) are becoming increasingly popular in Canada. There is currently a P3 taking place at St. John’s College, which shares land with the University of Manitoba. Although Ancillary Services do not generate sufficient revenue to construct student residences with capital, it does have ample valuable land. In the case of student residences, the public would provide the land and the private would provide the resources to develop that land.

Figure 33: University of Manitoba

32

6.3 Southwood Lands

Southwood Lands are currently used as green space for nearby communities. The Lands used to be owned by Southwood Golf and Country Club, but the University of Manitoba purchased them in 2011. The University of Manitoba Campus Planning Office is currently developing a secondary plan for the Lands, which will act as a guide for the development of the Southwood Lands. At this point, it is unknown what Southwood Lands will look like, however based on our conversations with the Campus Planning Office, there will likely be a mixture of commercial and residential uses.

We recommend the secondary plan for Southwood Lands stipulate that 20% of total residential units planned for Southwood Lands be affordable housing units. This stipulation should be in effect for the first five years of development, after which it can be reviewed. This recommendation does not mean that every new residential unit has to include 20% affordable housing, but rather, of the entire amount of residential units planned for the first phase (i.e. first five years) of development, 20% would need to be affordable housing. We believe this approach would allow significant flexibility to the developer, while also providing strong guidelines that ensure affordable housing in Southwood Lands. (cont’d)

STRATEGIES

Figure 33: Southwoodlands rendering

Actors: University of ManitobaImplications: Providing more affordable housingBarriers: Household income vs. per capita income in defining affordable housing

33

6.4 Regulatory FrameworkThe Manitoba Planning Act was amended in 2012. Notable among the amendment is a change that gives municipalities legal grounding to create a bylaw that requires new residential developments to include a specified amount of affordable housing. The only condition for implementing this bylaw is that the bylaw includes a definition of ‘affordable housing’. The City of Winnipeg has not yet created such a bylaw.

We recommend that the City of Winnipeg begin the process of creating the bylaw that requires new residential developments to have at least 10% affordable housing. The creation of this bylaw would mean that new residential developments are required to have affordable housing. The amount of affordable housing is at the discretion of the city, though we recommend the amount be no less than 10%.

The issue of rooming houses in Fort Richmond is part of the larger issue of affordable housing in the City of Winnipeg, so this bylaw can help to address this larger issue, which then permeates to Fort Richmond. This bylaw would affect any new residential development, including the previously discussed Southwood Lands and any residential development that may occur along Pembina Highway.

STRATEGIES

Figure 35: City of Winnipeg logo

Figure 34: Province of Manitoba logo

Actors: City of WinnipegResources: City of Winnipeg CharterImplications: Providing more affordable housing for Fort Richmond and Winnipeg as a wholeBarriers: Bylaw creation can be a lengthy process, clear definition of affordable housing needed, support of city council

The Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation defines affordable housing as shelter that costs less than 30% of before tax household income. The problem with this definition is that household income is likely to be greater than per capita income and students may or may not be part of a ‘household’. Thus, we recommend the average per capita income for 18-35 year olds be calculated using the forthcoming 2016 census. Anything less than 30% of this per capita income should be considered affordable.

34

Fort Richmond Treasures Community Services Thrift Store

6.5 Community RelationsAs mentioned in the analysis, Fort Richmond has several engaging events that bring the community together, as well as active community members that serve the community by donations, mentorship and other forms of support. We recommend that Fort Richmond have more cultural and community programming geared to students, considering a significant percentage of the community’s population is between ages 20 and 24. Programs like cultural events and events arounds school holidays, when international students likely dont have somewhere to go to celebrate the holidays, would encourage students to know their neighbours .

The current neighbourhood association could increase its focus and include roles like rental and event coordinators and a consistent communication liason between Fort Richmond and the University of Manitoba, adjacent neighbourhoods, and the City of Winnipeg. The purpose of the event cordinator position is to promote positive community relations and a sense of community that is inclusive and the purpose of the rental cordinator position is to ensure that tenants are aware of their rights and responsibiities and have signed manditory forms like the Tenancy Agreement before starting to rent.

We recognize that an increase of responsibilities and change in structure of the neighbourhood association would require funding. Therefore, we propose a for-profit thrift store with start-up funding from the City of Winnipeg’s Community Incentive Grant Program. The thrift store would not only act as a revenue generator but also a central hub of information and connection for all residents.

Actors: City of Winnipeg, Fort Richmond Neighbourhood AssociationResources: Community Incentive Grant ProgramImplications: Better communication between neighbourhoods and external stakeholdersBarriers: Funding proposed may not be sufficient for the initial funding of two positions in the neighbourhood association

STRATEGIES

Figure 36: Image of community thrift store

35

6.6 Homeshare ProgramThe residents of Fort Richmond shared their concerns about a decline in good neighbourliness. For the purpose of addressing the lack of affordable housing for students in Fort Richmond and improving neighbourhood relations, we propose the development of a homeshare program in which a resident offers accomodation to a homesharer in exchange for an agreed level of help.

As described in case study 5.5, the homeshare program is designed to benefit both the landlord and the tenant. In this case we are proposing the neighborhood association design a program that works best for Fort Richmond. They can advertise this homeshare program in their community newsletter (Canstar), as well as on the University of Manitoba website similarly to how the homestay program is advertised.

Similar to the homestay program, the neighbourhood association would need to draw up guidelines for the tenant and the host, and have application forms for both, that can be advertised in Canstar for residents, through a link on the University of Manitoba website for students, or in person at the community thrift store proposed in the previous strategy. The neighbourhood association would then review applications, collect necessary information (including criminal and child and adult abuse checks from residents), and match residents with students. We propose that this program be strictly for international students and not open to anyone else so as to address the lack of affordable housing for students that we have heard is escalating the rooming house issue.

Unlike the homestay program, there is no rent required by the student, therefore the host can be responsible for paying a fee equivalent to renting out a room to the neighbourhood association for running the program.

Actors: Fort Richmond Neighbourhood Association, University of ManitobaResources: Fort Richmond Community Thrift Store, Canstar, fee paid by hostImplications: More affordable housing options, better relationships with new residents and age-in-place option for seniors.Barriers: More funding may be needed for the neighbourhood association to carry out these duties

STRATEGIES

Figure 37: Image of University of Manitoba and Fort Richmond neighbourhood association logo

36

Existing benchProposed bench

6.7 Age-Friendly Infrastructure - BenchesCreating an age-friendly neighbourhood will allow for all residents to access amenities and infrastructure, uplifting their quality of life. Benches are an age-friendly infrastructure example that would allow seniors to rest while walking in the neighbourhood.

On Dalhousie Drive, there is an average distance of 317 metres between each bench, as calculated from Google Maps. However, Dalhousie between Ryerson and Radcliffe is a 700 metre walking distance with no benches. Another example is the 290 metre distance between 848 Dalhousie Drive and Baylor Drive according to Google Maps, however this stretch is open to weather elements due to Baldry Creek Park and Alex Bridge Park. By adding benches along the two locations, these are examples of opportunities to make Fort Richmond more age-friendly for pedestrians.

With the focus of creating an age-friendly Fort Richmond, we recommend the addition of five benches along major roads running through the neighbourhood, as shown on the map to the right.

STRATEGIES

Figure 39: Visual of street bench

Figure 38: Map of Fort Richmond benches

500m

Actors: City of Winnipeg, Fort Richmond Neighbourhood AssociationResources: Municipal fundingImplications: Better infrastructure in creating an age-friendly Fort RichmondBarriers: Funding for the additional benches

37

6.8 Defining “Coverage” and “Core” Transit Routes

Winnipeg’s Transportation Master Plan outlines the base transit network as a combination of mainline, express, and feeder routes that maximize coverage and direct travel between destinations. However, we believe the current transit network is ineffective in identifying guidelines on “coverage” and “core” routes, and what Winnipeg Transit’s objective is in serving neighbourhoods and improving service along key corridors. York Region Transit has a guideline document that identifies frequency standards for Viva (bus rapid transit) routes, base (core) routes, local routes, and community bus routes, as well as target standards set for these routes. Houston METRO set a goal of allocating 80% of its resources on maximizing ridership in key corridors and 20% on providing coverage to the rest of the city (Llamas, 2016).

We recommend identifying “coverage” and “core” routes for Winnipeg Transit and set guidelines for each, as well as adding a section in the Transportation Master Plan on transit service guidelines, focusing on minimum service standards for “coverage” and “core” routes. The transit system could devote, for instance, 70% of its resources in strengthening the core routes, while 30% would be focused on providing coverage in other neighbourhoods such as Fort Richmond. A clear service guideline can help allocate resources for the city on pursuing ridership or coverage goals, allowing a clear conversation on the purpose of each transit route.

STRATEGIES

Figure 40: York Region Transit has a service guideline document that separates routes into three categories and outlines frequency standards for each.

Actors: City of WinnipegResources: Municipal fundingImplications: Setting clearer guidelines and service standards for current transit routesBarriers: Funding, political willpower to set guidelines

38

6.9 Transportation - Frequent Transit Network Map

Winnipeg’s Transportation Master Plan highlights the importance of transit in creating an alternative to driving, promoting transit-oriented development, and intensification of major corridors in the city. The current transit map categorizes routes as downtown, express, crosstown, suburban, transitway, dial-a-ride transit, and the Downtown Spirit service. While this helps in informing riders on the type of route, it does not provide information on frequency and span of service. A July 2016 study by TransitCenter identified the top two factors people value in transit is frequency and travel time. Without frequent service and reasonable travel times between places, it’s difficult to attract transit riders.

We recommend creating a frequent transit network map for Winnipeg Transit. It would highlight routes with frequent transit service. and provide information for residents on areas with high transit frequencies and could aid incoming residents in choosing neighbourhoods to live, as living in areas with good transit reduces demand for cars. Furthermore, a frequent transit network map can identify neighbourhoods with poor transit service, in which an analysis can be conducted on whether it’s feasible to improve service in the affected communities.

STRATEGIES

Figure 41: Frequent Transit Network Map for Winnipeg Transit showing routes/corridors with 15min or better service weekdays 6am to 9pm

Actors: City of WinnipegResources: Municipal fundingImplications: Tool for riders and planners to identify corridors with frequent transit serviceBarriers: Defining what constitutes frequent service

39

33

6.10 Transportation - Transit Quality Corridor

The City of Winnipeg has identified 11 Transit Quality Corridors, including Pembina Highway. Transit Quality Corridors are corridors that have or are projected to have significant transit presence, such as high frequencies and transit priority measures (Wiebe and Krahn, 2008, pg 2).

With phase 2 of the Southwest Transitway to be opened in 2020, rapid transit service will be closer to Fort Richmond. It would be a good opportunity to improve the core service on Pembina and provide reliable coverage in Fort Richmond. Data from Winnipeg Transit shows high passenger turnover in Fort Richmond outside morning peak periods for routes originating from the university, meaning many passengers boarding at the university alight in Fort Richmond. There is also high passenger turnover on Pembina at Bairdmore/Dalhousie and Kirkbridge/Killarney, both of where routes 72 and 162 intersect (Figure 42).

We recommend eliminating route 162 in Fort Richmond and have all service operate between Downtown and St. Norbert. In return, we recommend improving service on routes 72 and 137 to compensate for the loss of route 162 in Fort Richmond, as well as rerouting route 72’s Killarney branch via Baylor and Dalhousie (following the same routing as route 162 - Figure 43). Route 170 would be unaffected. By keeping route 137, passengers in peak periods would still have direct access to and from the transitway and downtown. Rerouting route 72 allows for passengers boarding on Baylor and Dalhousie to have service maintained. While service on Killarney would be removed, the current stops are lightly used according to transit data and are within walking distance to the Dalhousie stops, which is largely accepted to be under ¼ mile or about 400 metres (Lee, 2011).

STRATEGIES

5km

Transit Quality Corridor

Figure 44: Winnipeg Transit Quality CorridorsFigure 43: Proposed routes

Figure 42: Current routes

Actors: City of Winnipeg, Province of ManitobaResources: Municipal and provincial fundingImplications: Strengthening the Pembina corridor while maintaining reliable coverage in Fort RichmondBarriers: Social equity concerns; riders in Fort Richmond alighting on Pembina and downtown lose direct bus ride during the day on Monday to Saturday

40

7.0 LIMITATIONSWe outlined challenges for each recommendation in our last section, however there are general limitations that encompass the entire report.

EconomicThere were several financial constraints in our recommendations ranging from lack of individual funds to funding for organizations and large-scale projects. Many recommendations outlined in the report cannot be implemented without sufficient funding. The allocation of resources is limited and sometimes out of stakeholders’ controls. Stakeholders are at the whim of market trends, economic fluctuations, and economic policies that aren’t aligned with everyone’s needs.

PoliticalThe issues and recommendations presented are beyond the lengths of a political cycle, and there is no guarantee that future political representatives will support the implementation of our recommendations. Also, there are provincial and federal policies that can negatively impact Fort Richmond and are beyond the scope of municipal politics.

ScopeThis report was completed within the span of one university term, meaning the scope of the report is limited. If more time was allocated to develop strategies and recommendations, there could be a more thorough analysis resulting in a more complete collection of recommendations for Fort Richmond.

LIMITATIONS

41

8.0 CONCLUSIONThis report presents a community vision for Fort Richmond, located south of the University of Manitoba. The goals of this vision include creating more affordable housing, improving community relations, and enhancing infrastructure in the neighbourhood and beyond, while addressing concerns raised by community members and our analysis of the neighbourhood. However, we acknowledge that limitations beyond our scope may hinder the realization of some strategies, and we believe that further analysis is required in creating a more complete set of guidelines for a vibrant Fort Richmond.

CONCLUCION

42

9.0 GLOSSARYPlace-Making: A process that uses a community’s assets, inspiration, and potential to create/promote quality public spaces that contribute to people’s health and well-being (pps.org).

Private Sector: Regulated by government, but controlled by private actors.

Public-Private Partnership: A partnership between a public institution (e.g: a university) and a private organization (e.g: developer). Also known as a P3.

R1 Zoning: Zoning for single-family residential.

R2 Zoning: Zoning for two-family residential.

RMF Zoning: Zoning for multi-family residential.

Secondary Plan: Plan for a specific neighbourhood or community that guides future development.

Secondary Suite: “A type of rental housing located on a property that would normally accommodate a single-family detached house” (Government of Manitoba, pg. 3).

Short Term: 6 months - 3 years.

Transit Priority: Infrastructure that prioritizes the movement of transit over other vehicles.

Zoning: Designation of land for specific uses.

Affordable Housing: Safe and stable housing available to all members of society, regardless of income.

Association: People that come together as an organized group, to work towards a variety of goals.

Basement Suite: A suite under the main floor of a single-family home.

Core Route: A transit route that serves a main corridor of a city, with high frequency as the main objective.

Coverage Route: A transit route that serves to make transit accessible for residents who are far from main corridors.

Community Relations: The valuable interactions between various members of the community, and the stability of those interactions going forward.

Frequency: The amount of time between two scheduled buses on a route.

Garden Suite: A suite detached from a single-family home, often located in the backyard.

Green Space: Any form of vegetation used for recreational or aesthetic purposes.

Infrastructure: Physical structures utilized by people that form the necessities of everyday life.

Institutions: Social, political, and/or educational organizations. They are often large and expansive, with their existence formalized in some way.

Laneway House: A suite located above or in place of a detached garage.

Long Term: <3 Years.

GLOSSARY

34

44

10.0 REFERENCESAbout Your House: Garden Suites. (2014). Retrieved from https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/odpub/pdf/65009.pdf?fr=1441901300719

Bliss, L. (2016, August 18). A Year After a Radical Route Rethink, Houston’s Transit Ridership Is Up. CityLab. Retrieved from http://www.citylab.com/commute/2016/08/houston-bus-system-ridership/496313/

City of Winnipeg. (2016, October 11). Community Incentive Grant Program (C.I.G.P.) - Recreation and Leisure. Retrieved from http://winnipeg.ca/cms/recreation/cigp.stm

City of Winnipeg. The City of Winnipeg Community Incentive Grant Program Application & Guide. Retrieved from http://www.winnipeg.ca/cms/recreation/pdfs/CIGP_Brochure_10_web.pdf

City of Winnipeg (2013, September 25). The City of Winnipeg Housing Policy. Retrieved from http://winnipeg.ca/ppd/pdf_files/housing_policy.pdf

City of Winnipeg (2010, July 8). City of Winnipeg: Planning, Property & Development Department: Zoning. Retrieved from http://www.winnipeg.ca/ppd/zoning.stm

City of Winnipeg (2011). Winnipeg Transportation Master Plan. Retrieved from http://winnipeg.ca/finance/pdfs/ipd/TMPExecutiveSummary.pdf

City of Winnipeg (2011) Complete Communities. Retrieved from: http://www.winnipeg.ca/interhom/CityHall/OurWinnipeg/pdf/CompleteCommunities.pdf

City of Winnipeg (2011) OurWinnipeg. Retrieved from: www.winnipeg.ca/interhom/CityHall/OurWinnipeg/

City of Winnipeg (2015) Winnipeg Pedestrian and Cycling Strategies. Retrieved from: www.winnipeg.ca/publicworks/pedestriansCycling/strategiesActionPlan/default.stm

Coronation Community Association. Retrieved from http://www.coronationca.com/CCA_home.php

Ernst Young (2012) Building the Student Experience Report Retrieved from: http://www.ey.com/in/en/industries/industry-reports-2

Finley, B. (2014). Backyard Living: Developing A Strategy For Canadian Municipalities To Implement Laneway Housing Programs Through An Evalution Of Western Canadian Precedents.

Fort Richmond – University Heights Neighbourhood Association. Retrieved from: http://www.neighbourhoodassociation.ca/

Google Maps. (2016). Retrieved from http://maps.google.com/

Government of Canada. Canada Volunteer Awards. Retrieved from: https://www28.rhdcc-hrsdc.gc.ca/inet-inet/pmva-ppmb/40/index-eng.do

Janice Lukes. Spring Fling poster. Retrieved from: http://janicelukes.ca/event/spring-fling-community-bbq-concert/

Llamas, J. (2016, January 26). Houston’s Groundbreaking New Transit System. Strong Towns. Retrieved fromhttp://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/1/25/texas-transportation-funding-its-not-all-bad-news

Moody’s Investors Service (Feb 2015) Global Higher Education - Student Housing: Universities Globally Pursue Multiple Strategies for Student Housing. Retrieved from : https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-P3-college-student-housing-projects-increasingly-under-university-management--PR_327759

Municipal Planning Guidelines for Secondary Suites. (n.d.). Retrieved November 15, 2016, from http://www.gov.mb.ca/ia/plups/pdf/mpgss.pdf

REFERENCES

45

Province of Manitoba. The Planning Act Handbook. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.mb.ca/ia/plups/pdf/pah.pdf

Seattle Transit Blog. Wonky Applications of Transit ‘Walk Distrances’. Retrieved from https://www.seattletransitblog.com/2011/06/22/wonky-applications-of-transit-walk-distances/

Statistics Canada (2011) 2011 Census and Natitonal Household Survey. Fort Richmond (1 Tract). Retrieved from https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/

Sunshine Coast Community Services. Community Services Thrift Store. Retrieved from http://sccss.ca/shop/

TransitCenter (2016). Who’s On Board 2016: What Today’s Riders Teach Us About Transit That Works. Retrieved from http://transitcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/TransitCenter-WOB-2016.pdf

Translink. Frequent Transit Network in Metro Vancouver. Retrieved fromhttp://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documents/plans_and_projects/ftn/Frequent%20Transit%20Network%20Map.pdf

University of Manitoba Campus Planning Office (2016) Presentation to University of Manitoba Master of City Planning Students about South Wood Lands

University of Manitoba Ancilliary Services (2016) Presentation to University of Manitoba Master of City Planning Students about Student Housing.

University of Manitoba (2016) Visionary (re)Generation Master Plan. Retrieved From: http://www.visionaryregeneration.com/

Walker, J. (2008). Purpose-driven public transport: creating a clear conversation about public transport goals. Journal of Transport Geography, 16(1), 436-442.

Morley, J. E. (2012). Journal of the American Medical Directors Association: aging in place, July 2012, Vol.13(6), pp.489-492

Olukoju, S. (2016, July 18). Celebrating splash of colours at multiculturalism event. Winnipeg Free Press. Retrieved from http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/our-communities/souwester/correspondent/Celebrating-splash-of-colours-at-multiculturalism-event-387301161.html

Olukoju, S. (2016, September 19). Epiphany Lutheran to hold second giveaway event. Winnipeg Free Press. Retrieved from http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/our-communities/souwester/correspondent/Epiphany-Lutheran-to-hold-second-giveaway-event-394007821.html

Olukoju, S. (2016, July 11). Making art brings people, cultures together. Winnipeg Free Press. Retrieved from http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/our-communities/souwester/correspondent/Making-art-brings-people-cultures-together-400297851.html

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Ministry of Housing (n.d.) The Planning Act. Retrieved from: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page1760.aspx

Policies & Strategies. (2015, February). Retrieved December 14, 2016, from http://www.barrie.ca/Doing Business/PlanningandDevelopment/Policies-Strategies/Pages/Affordable-Housing.aspx

Project for Public Spaces. What is Placemaking? Retrieved from http://www.pps.org/reference/what_is_placemaking/

Province of Manitoba. Manitoba Business Start Program. Retrieved from http://www.gov.mb.ca/jec/emb/smbus/bsp/

Province of Manitoba. The Planning Act. Retrieved from: http://web2.gov.mb.ca/laws/statutes/ccsm/p080e.php

REFERENCES

46

Wiebe, D., & Krahn, D. (2008). On Street Transit Priority Measures – Putting Buses First in Winnipeg. 2008 TAC Conference. Retrieved from http://conf.tac-atc.ca/english/resourcecentre/readingroom/conference/conf2008/docs/l1/wiebe.pdf

Winnipeg Architecture Foundation (2013). 330 Dalhousie Drive. Retrieved from http://www.winnipegarchitecture.ca/330-dalhousie-drive/

Winnipeg Free Press (1965, March 22). Ald. R.A. Wanking Proclaims Fort Richmond Homes Parade.

Winnipeg Free Press (1965, May 22). Public Enterprise Join to Develop Subdivision.

York Region Transit (2006). Transit Service Guidelines. Retrieved from https://www.yrt.ca/en/about-us/resources/2006_Transit_Guidelines.pdf

11.0 FIGURES

REFERENCES/FIGURES

INTRODUCTIONFigure 1: GIS Map - City of Winnipeg - Elizabeth Dafoe Library GIS LibrarianNEIGHBOURHOOD ANALYSISFigure 2: Google Maps - Fort Richmond. Retrieved from https://www.google.ca/mapsFigure 3: Age of population. Retrieved from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/Figure 4: Visible Minorities. Retrieved from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/Figure 5: GIS Map - City of WinnipegFigure 6: Fort Richmond housing - Calvin So, 2016Figure 7: Housing in Fort RichmondFigure 8: Zoning map - Retrieved from City of Winnipeg staffFigure 9: Kings parkFigure 10: Alex Bridge Park - Calvin So, 2016Figure 11: Alex Bridge Park - Calvin So, 2016Figure 12: GIS Map - City of Winnipeg - Elizabeth Dafoe Library GIS LibrarianFigure 13: Section drawing - Sonikile Tembo, 2016

Figure 14: Mode of Transportation. Retrieved from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/Figure 15: Bus and active transportation mapFigure 16: Map of existing benches and sidewalksFigure 17: Fort Richmond – University Heights Neighbourhood Association. Retrieved from: http://www.neighbourhoodassociation.ca/Figure 18: Multiculturalism Day. Retrieved from: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/our-communities/souwester/correspondent/Celebrating-splash-of-colours-at-multiculturalism-event-387301161.htmlFigure 19: Fort Richmond Art workshop – Summer camp. Retrieved from: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/our-communities/souwester/correspondent/Making-art-brings-people-cultures-together-400297851.htmlSTAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENTFigure 20: Words heard in community consultation event. Created and retrieved from: https://tagul.com/createCASE STUDIESFigure 21: Sunshine Coast Community services thrift shop. Retrieved from: http://sccss.ca/shop/Figure 22: Translink. Frequent Transit Network in Metro Vancouver. Retrieved from http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documents/plans_and_projects/ftn/Frequent%20Transit%20Network%20Map.pdfFigure 23: Garden Suite floor plan. Retrieved from: https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/co/acho/acho_013.cfmFigure 24: Secondary Suites. Retrieved from: https://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/urban_planning_and_design/secondary-suites-faq.aspxFigure 25: Laneway housing. Retrieved from: http://www.vancouverheritagefoundation.org/attend-an-event/house-tours/laneway-house-tour/Figure 26: Garden Suite floor plan. Retrieved from: https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/co/acho/acho_013.cfmFigure 27: Helping hand visual representation. Retrieved from: http://newamericamedia.org/2010/08/helping-ethnic-elders-avoid-the-nursing-home-nightmare.phpFigure 28: Placemaking Diagram. Retrieved from: http://www.pps.org/reference/grplacefeat/

47

FIGURES

Figure 29: Sign for events. Retrieved from https://www.pps.org/reference/reference-categories/placemaking-tools/Figure 30: Children painting on the road. Retrieved from https://www.pps.org/reference/reference-categories/placemaking-tools/Figure 31: Celebration of cultural events. Retrieved from https://www.pps.org/reference/reference-categories/placemaking-tools/Figure 32: Street Art. Retrieved from https://www.pps.org/reference/reference-categories/placemaking-tools/STRATEGIESFigure 33: Southwood Lands – Visionary (re)Generation Plan. Retrieved from: http://www.visionaryregeneration.com/media/160520_WEB_Master_Plan.pdfFigure 34: Province of Manitoba logo. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.mb.ca/Figure 35: City of Winnipeg logo. Retrieved from: http://www.winnipeg.ca/interhom/Figure 36: Community services thrift shop. Retrieved from: http://sccss.ca/shop/Figure 37: University of Manitoba image. Retrieved from: https://blushmagazine.ca/tag/university-of-manitoba/Figure 38: Map showing benches in Fort Richmod. Retrieved from: Elizabeth Dafoe Library GIS LibrarianFigure 39: Visual of street bench. Retrieved from: Older man on bench. Retrieved from: http://www.mrcutout.com/index.php/component/content/article/78-cutouts/people-cutouts/732-man-bench-0001Figure 40: York Region Transit has a service guideline document that separates routes into three categories and outlines frequency standards for each. retrived from https://www.yrt.ca/en/about-us/resources/Transit-Service-Guidlines_2016.pdfFigure 41: Frequent transit network map. Retrived from https://www.google.ca/mapsFigure 42: Current routes. Retrived from https://www.google.ca/mapsFigure 43: Proposed routes. Retrived from https://www.google.ca/mapsFigure 44: Wiebe, D., & Krahn, D. (2008). On Street Transit Priority Measures – Putting Buses First in Winnipeg. 2008 TAC Conference. Retrieved from http://conf.tac-atc.ca/english/resourcecentre/readingroom/conference/conf2008/docs/l1/wiebe.pdf