PEOPLE’S PLAYBOOK WHEN USED FLEXIBLY AND CREATIVELY BY EXISTING AND NEW HOMEOWNERS IN VARYING PLAYS OVER TIME,

WHEN USED FLEXIBLY AND CREATIVELY BY EXISTING AND NEW HOMEOWNERS IN VARYING PLAYS OVER TIME, THE
PLAYBOOK MOVES WILL PRODUCE:

Collective Solutions for Inclusive, Social Neighbourhoods INCLUSIVE SOCIABILITY LONG-TERM AFFORDABILITY FREEDOM TO CHOOSE

Our regional housing challenge is urgent. Too often, top-down redevelopment and cookie-cutter prescriptions People have the time and space for People can afford - and thrive in - their homes People have the freedom to create diverse
fail to produce the flexible forms that meet the needs and incomes of a diverse population. spontaneous trust-building encounters with for a long time, either as renters or owners. housing forms to meet their needs.
neighbours from many walks of life.
Let’s empower more people to become makers of their own neighbourhoods.

Our solution: A Playbook that gives neighbours a catalogue of ‘moves’ to create their own ‘plays’ and to
creatively collaborate and do more with their land.

Over time, these ‘plays’ result in walkable, transit-friendly, medium-density neighbourhoods that offer
long-term affordability, inclusive sociability and the continuing freedom for homeowners to make and
choose the housing that suits them.

THE CHALLENGE PORT COQUITLAM HOUSING PLAN HOW THE PLAYBOOK WORKS POLICY AND DESIGN MOVES

We took a user-centric approach to the Missing Middle Challenge. We
interviewed five families who live in Port Coquitlam, and conducted
an online survey. We also referenced a trove of user stories from our
team’s work in small-scale development and cohousing projects.
Key Insights:
• The modern family is increasingly diverse, with changing lifestyles
and needs.
• Housing supports intergenerational living. In the next
decade Millennials, Gen Xers, and Boomers will be mixing.
• Many Boomers want to age in place, but they see little
option except to cash out and leave their community to
downsize elsewhere.
• Many people, especially Millennials, are interested in
sharing space and resources.
• Current zoning and economic incentives don’t produce the quantity
and variety of housing forms that diverse modern families need.
• The current production model for homes leaves most people
stuck being consumers of housing, rather than active makers
empowered to create homes that are just right for them.
• People want more convenience and access to transit and
amenities, but current neighbourhood density doesn’t provide
sufficient tax base or customers to produce these benefits.
DWELLINGS /
HECTARE
Current
The Playbook reflects the aspirations of Port Coquitlam’s 2015
Housing Action Plan, but could be easily replicated in other
municipalities.
The policy and design ‘moves’ push what’s currently permissible
in Port Coquitlam’s RS1, RS2 and RS4 zones. These changes
are necessary to achieve four of the six directions outlined in the
Housing Plan:
• Expand opportunities for housing within residential
neighbourhoods
• Increase options for ground-oriented housing
• Protect and expand rental housing
• Address housing needs of a growing senior population
Building FSR Front Interior Exterior Lane Min. Separation
Height Setback Side Setback Side Setback Setback Between Lane / Street Dwelling
1. The Playbook is a catalogue of policy and design ‘moves’ that 1. Provide more support to small-scale development projects, especially those that
support the principles of long-term affordability, inclusive involve collaboration between neighbours.
sociability, and the freedom for homeowners to make housing
choices.
2. The Playbook posits a crucial engine for affordability: the
establishment of the PoCo Community Land Trust (‘PoCo
1.1 Allow coach houses and other lane-facing buildings to be strata titled if the purchaser is a
non-profit that places a covenant on the unit for long-term, affordable rental. ü
CLT’), a non-profit organization that partners with community-
minded homeowners to co-develop lots in single family home
neighbourhoods. PoCo CLT becomes an ever-larger owner and
operator of secure-tenure, covenanted, permanently affordable
3 1.2 On single lots, allow up to 3 strata units and up to 0.9 FSR, if at least 1 strata unit is owned by
a non-profit organization that places a covenant on the unit for long-term rental housing. ü ü
infill rental housing across the community.
3. Neighbours can leverage these new policy and design ‘moves’
on their own or in partnership with PoCo CLT to create win-
win ‘plays’ that solve their own financial and household needs,
8
1.3 On double lots, allow up to 8 strata units and up to 1.2 FSR, if at least 2 strata units are owned
by a non-profit organization that places a covenant on the units for long-term rental housing. ü ü
while growing more inclusive, socially vibrant neighbourhoods. 1.4 On double lots, where one is at the end of a block, allow up to 12 strata units and up to 1.5
4. Neighbourhood improvements and amenities will be financed
through Community Amenities Contributions (CAC) on
12 FSR if the project is: a) developed as secure-tenure rental housing or co-op housing; or b)
developed by a cohousing group, with at least 2 strata units owned by a non-profit organization
that places a covenant on the units for long-term rental housing.
ü ü ü
increased-density redevelopments. Non-profit owners of
permanently affordable rental may benefit from grants from
the CAC fund, as they are creating a much-needed community
housing amenity. Other improvements and amenities include
1.5 Add city services and addressing to coach houses and other lane-facing buildings.
ü ü
laneway improvements and shared parking facilities.
2. Create long-term affordability for people to stay in place with a variety of tenure
forms.
2.1 Establish a community land trust (CLT) to collaborate with homeowners who wish to add

19
Proposed

65
PROPOSED
ZONING 7.5m 0.50 7.5m 10% 20% 1.0m @ Grade 7.5m
permanently affordable rental units. CLT will own and manage the rental units to provide long-
term affordable housing. ü ü
10.5 m 1.5 Max 3.25m
(7.5m Wall)
2.2 Fast track development approval for proposals that incorporate at least one dwelling unit that
features long-term affordable rental housing. ü
3 8 12

3. Support spaces and programs that spark social interactions between neighbours.

3.1 In order to maintain the future possibility of neighbours joining adjacent backyards,
redevelopments must maintain a backyard or middle yard area.
ü ü
3.2 On redevelopment projects, allow new buildings to be increased in height if they are decreased
in depth, to create more shareable yard space. Allowable overall FSR for the site does not
change with this design allowance.
ü ü
3.3 Reduce minimum front yard setback to 3.25 metres. This setback is supported by architect Jan
Gehl’s studies that found Canadians were most likely to socialize in front yards with this setback. ü
LAURIER AVENUE

3.4 Ensure that each household has easy, unrestricted access to shared semi-private ground space.
ü
SEF T

CO

ü ü
VINCENT STREET

3.5 Provide “Good Neighbour Grant” of $500 per year, per property, as credit toward property tax
ET

AS
T

ON
REE
RE

TM

for neighbours who remove fences between adjacent lots.

ST

STRE

ER
L ST
N

ID
O

IAN
GT

ET
RPO
IN

4. Decouple parking requirements from individual property. Instead solve for parking at
RO
LL

LIVE

AD
WE

neighbourhood scale.

DORSET AVENUE
4.1 Reduce on-site minimum parking requirement from 2 per dwelling unit to 1 per dwelling unit.
ü
4.2 Establish shared parking facility at central location such as school parking lot. Facility shall be
responsive (e.g.: use stacking technology to respond to changes in demand over time). ü ü ü

2017078
4.3 Give homeowners who redevelop land the option to further reduce on-site parking requirements
in exchange for contribution to shared parking facility (payment in lieu of parking). ü ü
 PLAY 1 3 PLAY 2 8 PLAY 3 12

M A RYA M N K FA M N G FA MIL E FA MIL T FA MIL A li + J e s s

MEET MARYAM FR A ILY WO Y MEET THE FRANK FAMILY AND WONG FAMILY LOW Y KEN Y MEET THE LOWE FAMILY, THE KENT FAMILY, AND THE POCO COHOUSING GROUP
THE PLAYERS THE PLAYERS THE PLAYERS
Maryam is a widower in her 70s. She has lived in Port Coquitlam for 30 years. She paid off her The Frank Family and Wong Family are neighbours. The Franks are downsizing whereas the Wongs The Lowe Family and Kent Family have been neighbours for over 20 years. Both couples’ adult
mortgage five years ago. She is land-rich but cash poor. She would like to live independently but is are a growing young family. children live far away and visit during holidays. When they retire, they hope to travel more and visit
feeling increasingly vulnerable, both socially and financially. She has a part-time caretaker, Reyna, their children for extended periods of time. They would like to stay in the neighbourhood but their
They assemble their two single family lots and build a main home with four strata units, and a
who currently rents and travels an hour by transit to care for Maryam. houses are too big.
lane-facing townhouse complex with three strata units. In the main house, the Franks have a
Maryam renovates her home into two 2-bedroom strata units. She keeps one unit for herself and 2-bedroom unit and offer a 3-bedroom unit to their adult son and his family. The Wongs have a The PoCo Cohousing Group has been looking for property that is close to transit and an elementary
sells the other at market value to a young professional couple who is priced out of the single family 3-bedroom unit and offer a 2-bedroom unit to grandparents. school. The group is increasingly faced with escalating land prices and have not been able to find a
home market. property.
Two of the townhouse units are owned by PoCo CLT and rented to working families, and the third unit
, Id a + M + Alex Maryam sells a portion of her land to the PoCo CLT. PoCo CLT builds a 2-bedroom coach house and R AN K + F A RBA R A W is owned by close friends of the Wongs. rek + Cho ng Keit h A
Z ak + nne The Lowes and Kents decide to assemble their adjacent lots (one of which is a corner lot), sell the
yna ax J a ke BF AM +B De
Re RO .Y
. ON
combined lot to the PoCo Cohousing Group, and join as members, for a total of ten households.
rents it to Reyna and her two school-aged kids. There is a large middle yard shared by all residents. In good weather, the yard is alive with kids

IL

G
The two remaining units are sold to PoCo CLT as long-term affordable rental housing, and PoCo CLT

Y
playing and neighbours socializing. becomes a voting member of the cohousing group.
OWNERS’ FINANCIAL POSITION POST DEVELOPMENT
The twelve resulting households share a central courtyard, and a 700sf indoor common house that
After renovation and sales, Maryam’s own strata unit has a market value of $595,000 (current OWNERS’ FINANCIAL POSITION POST DEVELOPMENT combines shared laundry, kitchen, and a multi-purpose room where kids play and where gatherings
$690,000) and she receives approximately $193,000 cash proceeds. After the redevelopment, the Frank Family and Wong Family’s own strata units has a market value of and regular shared meals are held. The mix of singles, couples, families and seniors makes for a
$879,000 each (current $690,000). Each family receives approximately $91,000 cash proceeds. vibrant and supportive community.
25 YEARS ON
Reyna continues to care for Maryam. When Maryam passed away at home, she left no heirs. In her rd an + Eric a ri s + Mar tha d r e w + Ju n e 25 YEARS ON St a
n + Sy lvie
i, A is h a , P o oy a S u ki OWNERS’ FINANCIAL POSITION POST DEVELOPMENT
Jo Ch An Al
will, Maryam gave PoCo CLT first right of refusal to buy her 2-bedroom strata unit, which it does, After the redevelopment, the Lowe Family and Kent Family’s own strata units has a market value of
The Wongs’ eldest daughter and her family buys the townhome unit from the family friends. The
doubling the amount of permanently affordable housing on the lot.
Wong grandparents have passed, and the Wong parents move into their 2-bedroom unit, while their $700,000 (current $690,000). Each family also receives approximately $382,000 cash proceeds.
younger son’s family moves into the 3-bedroom. Much more of their type of redevelopment has
occurred in the neighbourhood, which has resulted in livelier main streets and vibrant, activated
laneway streets.
25 YEARS ON
Ten years after the redevelopment, when one of the 2-bedroom units goes on the market, one of the
Lowe’s children moves in with her wife and two young kids.
Fifteen years after the redevelopment, the cohousing group’s immediate neighbours - who had
+ Ro d n ey E r i c, J o + E antha
A my a n, ll e Sam become friends with many of the residents - decide to redevelop their home, build a coach house in
u s n
partnership with PoCo CLT, and take down their fence to create a larger shared courtyard with the

S
co-housing complex.
Where 25 years ago there had only been three households on three lots, there are now 15, happily
socializing, sharing and supporting each other through the phases of their lives. During that time,
cohousing has become a popular form of redevelopment in Port Coquitlam, and all of them contain
at least two units of long-term, affordable rental housing.

Current Proposed Current Proposed Current Proposed

FSR FSR FSR
0.5 0.9 0.5 1.2 0.5 1.5
Unit mix (total units = 12):
Original home renovated to include two New main house: Two 3-bedroom and two 12 strata units, 2 of which are owned
NUMBER OF 2-bedroom strata units NUMBER OF 2-bedrooms strata units NUMBER OF by PoCo CLT. A combination of 1, 2 and
UNITS & MIX New 2-bedroom coach house, strata titled, UNITS & MIX Three new townhouse strata units (two units owned UNITS & MIX 3-bedroom units.
owned by PoCo CLT by PoCo CLT)

PARKING PARKING $ $ PARKING $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Quantity Unit Rate Total $
LAND Quantity Unit Rate Total $ Quantity Unit Rate Total $ Quantity Unit Rate Total $
34'
LANDx 130' Land Value 410.8 sm $ 1,602 $ 658,000 1 LAND LAND
MAIN HOUSE + COACH HOUSE, 3 UNITS TOTAL 34' x 130' Land + Building Value
Value 410.8 sm $ 1,602 $ 658,000 2
690,600 1 MAIN HOUSE + REAR TOWNHOMES, 7 UNITS TOTAL 68' x 130' Land Value Quantity
821.7 Unit
sm $ Rate
1,602 $ Total $
1,316,000 1 CO-HOUSING, 12 UNITS TOTAL 68' x 130' Land Value Quantity
821.7 Unit
sm $ Rate
1,602 $ Total $
1,316,000 1
PROFORMA 34' x 130' Land + Building Value
DENSITY
$ 690,600 2
PROFORMA LAND
68' x 130' Land + Building Value
68' x 130' Land Value 821.7 sm $ 1,602 $
$ 1,381,200
1,316,000
2
1 PROFORMA LAND
68' x 130' Land + Building Value
68' x 130' Land Value 821.7 sm $ 1,602 $
$ 1,381,200
1,316,000
2
1
FSR
DENSITY 0.9 68' x 130' Land + Building Value
DENSITY $ 1,381,200 2 68' x 130' Land + Building Value
DENSITY $ 1,381,200 2
FSR (Main House) 0.6
0.9 FSR in Two-lot Development 1.2 FSR in 2 Lot Development 1.5
FSR (Coach House)
(Main House) 0.3
0.6 DENSITY
FSR (Main Building) 0.85 DENSITYof Units
Number 12
Total NumberHouse)
FSR (Coach of Units 3
0.3 FSR
FSR in Two-lot
(Rear Development
Townhomes) 1.2
0.35 FSR in 2 Lot
Required Development
Number of Parking Spaces 1.5
12
Total Number of Car UnitsStalls 3 FSR (Main
Number Building)
of Units 0.85
7 Number of Units 12
Total Number of Car Stalls 3 FSR (RearNumber
Required Townhomes)
of Parking Spaces 0.35
7 Required
PARKINGNumberPAYMENT of Parking
IN LIEU Spaces 12
ALLOCATE PORTION OF LAND TO CLT, CLT BUILDS Number of Units 7 Provided Parking Stalls 5
% Land for Coach
ALLOCATE PORTION House OF LAND TO CLT, CLT BUILDS 30% Required
PARKINGNumber
PAYMENTof Parking
IN LIEUSpaces 7 PARKING
Parking PAYMENT
Payment IN LIEU
in Lieu $ 20,000 stall 7 $ 140,000
Land
% Land Price
for for Coach
Coach House
House 123.3
30% sm $ 1,602 $ 197,400 Provided Parking Stalls 5 Provided Parking Stalls 5
Land Price forDiscount
CoachtoHouseCLT 25%
123.3 sm $ 1,602 $ 49,350
197,400 PARKING PAYMENT
Parking Payment IN LIEU
in Lieu $ 20,000 stall 2 $ 40,000 Parking
BUILD AND Payment in LieuCO-HOUSING BUILDING
STRATIFY $ 20,000 stall 7 $ 140,000
Selling Interest
Land Price in Land
Discount to CLT at Discount
to CLT 25% $ 148,050
49,350 Provided Parking Stalls 5 Build Main Building Hard Costs $/sm 1232.5 sm $ 1,668 $ 2,055,300
Coach
Selling House
InterestHard Costs
in Land to CLT at Discount 121.2 sm $ 1,937 $ 234,702
148,050 Parking Payment
BUILD MAIN in Lieu AND REAR TRIPLEX
BUILDING $ 20,000 stall 2 $ 40,000 BUILD AND
Build Main STRATIFY
Building CO-HOUSING
Soft Costs $/sm BUILDING 1232.5 sm $ 567 $ 698,802 3
Coach House Hard Soft Costs
Costs 121.2 581
sm $ 1,937 $ 70,411
234,702 3 Build Main Building Hard Costs $/sm 986.0 sm $ 1,721 $ 1,697,280 Build Main Building
Debt Financing Hard Costs $/sm
for Build $ 1232.5
2,894,102 sm $ 1,668 $ 2,055,300
Cost toHouse
Coach Build Coach House (incl Land)
Soft Costs 121.2 sm $ 581 $ 453,163
70,411 3 BUILD MAIN
Build Main BUILDING
Building AND REAR
Soft Costs $/sm TRIPLEX 986.0 sm $ 585 $ 577,075 3 Build MainCost
Financing Building Soft Costs
(10 Months $/sm
Construction) 1232.5
10 sm
mo $3.04%
567 $ 698,802
73,317 3
Rental
Cost toIncome of Each
Build Coach Coach
House (inclHouse
Land) $ 1,125 mo $ 453,163 4 Build Main Building
Debt Financing Hard Costs $/sm
for Build $ 986.0
2,314,355 sm $ 1,721 $ 1,697,280 Debt
Total Financing
Build Costfor Build
(Excluding Land) $ 2,894,102 $ 2,827,419
Gross
Rental Return
Incomeon of Capital for CLT
Each Coach House $ 1,125 mo 3.0% 4 Build MainCost
Financing Building Soft Costs
(10 months $/sm
Construction) 986.0
10 sm
mo $3.04%
585 $
$ 577,075
58,630 3 Financing
Total Costs Cost (10 Months Construction) 10 mo 3.04% $ 73,317
2,967,419
Gross Return on Capital for CLT 3.0% Debt Financing
Total Build Costfor Build
(Excluding Land) $ 2,314,355 $ 2,332,986 Total Build Cost (Excluding Land) $ 2,827,419
RENOVATE AND STRATIFY MAIN HOUSE Financing
Total CostsCost (10 months Construction) 10 mo 3.04% $
$ 58,630
2,372,986 Total Costs
COSTING AND VALUATION $ 2,967,419
Land Sales Income
RENOVATE to Landowner
AND STRATIFY MAIN HOUSE $ 148,050 Total Build Cost (Excluding Land) $ 2,332,986 Common House 65.1 sm
Renovate Main House Hard Costs $/sm
Land Sales Income to Landowner 248.6 sm $ 646 $ 160,446
148,050 Total Costs
COSTING AND VALUATION $ 2,372,986 COSTING
Floor Area AND
of AvgVALUATION
Unit 97.3 sm
Renovate Main House Hard Soft Costs
Costs$/sm
$/sm 248.6 sm $ 646194 $ 48,134
160,446 Floor Area of Average Unit 140.9 sm Common House
Market Value of Avg Unit (Total Area * $/sm)/# Units 65.1
1232.5 sm $ 6,885 $ 707,200
Debt Financing
Renovate for Renovation
Main House Soft Costs $/sm $ 248.660,530 sm $ 194 $ 48,134 COSTING AND
Market Value of VALUATION
1 Unit 986.0 sm 6240 $ 878,949 Floor
Cost ofArea of Avg
1 Unit, CLTUnitPurchases Units at Cost 97.3
$ 4,348,619 sm $ 362,385
Financing Cost (4
Debt Financing formonths Construction)
Renovation $ 460,530 mo 3.04% $ 613 Floor Area
Cost of of Average
1 Unit, Unit
CLT Purchases Units at Cost $ 140.9
3,754,186 sm 7 $ 536,312 Market Value ofofAvg
Rental Income EachUnit
CLT(Total
UnitArea * $/sm)/# Units $ 1232.5 1,000 sm
mo $ 6,885 $ 707,200 4
Total Renovation
Financing Cost Construction)
Cost (4 months 4 mo 3.04% $ 209,193
613 Market Value of 1 Unit
Rental Income of Each CLT Unit $ 986.0
1,250 sm
mo 6240 $ 878,949 4 Cost
GrossofReturn
1 Unit,on
CLT Purchases
Capital for CLT Units at Cost $ 4,348,619 $ 362,385
3.3%
Total Renovation Cost $ 209,193 Cost
GrossofReturn
1 Unit,on
CLT Purchases
Capital Units at Cost
for CLT $ 3,754,186 7 $ 536,312
2.8% Rental Income of Each CLT Unit $ 1,000 mo 4
VALUATION Rental Income of Each CLT Unit $ 1,250 mo 4 Gross Return on Capital for CLT
REVENUE 3.3%
Market Value of Main Strata Unit
VALUATION 158.0 sm $ 3,765 $ 595,000 Gross Return on Capital for CLT
REVENUE 2.8% Market Value of 8 Units 8 $ 5,657,600
Market Value of Main Strata Unit 158.0 sm $ 3,765 $ 595,000 Market Value of 3 units 3 $ 2,636,846 REVENUE
Less: Realtor and Legal Fees to Sell 8 Units 1.5% $ (254,592) 5
REVENUE REVENUE
Less: Realtor and Legal Fees to Sell 3 Units 4% $ (316,421) Market Value
Revenue fromofSales
8 Units
of 8 Units 8 $ 5,657,600
5,403,008
Market Value of Secondary Strata Unit
REVENUE 90.5 sm $ 4,303 $ 389,640 Market
RevenueValue
fromofSales
3 units
of 3 Units 3 $
$ 2,636,846
2,320,424 Less: Realtor
Revenue fromand
SalesLegal
of 2Fees
UnitstoatSell
Cost8 Units
to CLT 1.5%
2 $ (254,592)
724,770 5
Less: Realtor
Market Value ofand Legal Fees
Secondary Strata Unit 4%
90.5 sm $ 4,303 $ (15,586)
389,640 Less: Realtor and
Revenue from SalesLegal
of 2Fees
UnitstoatSell
Cost3 Units
to CLT 4%
2 $
$ (316,421)
1,072,624 Revenue from Sales of 8 Units
Total Revenue $ 5,403,008
6,127,778
Revenue fromand
Less: Realtor Selling
LegalSecondary
Fees Strata Unit 4% $ 374,054
(15,586) Revenue from Sales of 3 Units
Total Revenue $
$ 2,320,424
3,393,049 Revenue from Sales of 2 Units at Cost to CLT 2 $ 724,770
Revenue from Selling InterestSecondaryin Land toUnit
Strata CLT $ 148,050
374,054 Revenue from Sales of 2 Units at Cost to CLT 2 $ 1,072,624 Total Revenue
CURRENT HOMEOWNERS, FINANCIAL POSITION $ 6,127,778
Total
RevenueRevenue
from Selling Interest in Land to CLT $ 522,104
148,050 Total Revenue
CURRENT HOMEOWNERS, FINANCIAL POSITION $ 3,393,049 Total Revenue from Development $ 6,127,778
Total Revenue $ 522,104 Total Revenue from Development $ 3,393,049 CURRENT
Less: CostsHOMEOWNERS,
from Development FINANCIAL POSITION $ (2,967,419)
CURRENT HOMEOWNERS, FINANCIAL POSITION CURRENT
Less: CostsHOMEOWNERS,
from Development FINANCIAL POSITION $ (2,372,986) Total
Cash Revenue
Proceedsfrom
fromDevelopment
Development $ 6,127,778
3,160,359
Total Revenue
CURRENT from Development
HOMEOWNERS, FINANCIAL POSITION $ 522,104 Total Revenue
Cash Proceedsfrom
fromDevelopment
Development $
$ 3,393,049
1,020,063 Less:Market
Add: Costs from
ValueDevelopment
of 2 Units Retained by Homeowner 2 $ (2,967,419)
1,414,400
Less: Costs from
Total Revenue fromDevelopment
Development $ (209,193)
522,104 Less:Market
Add: Costs from
ValueDevelopment
of 2 Units Retained by Homeowner 2 $
$ (2,372,986)
1,757,897 Cash Proceeds
Residual from Development
Land Value $ 3,160,359
4,574,759
Cash
Less: Proceeds
Costs fromfrom Development
Development $ 312,911
(209,193) Cash Proceeds
Residual from Development
Land Value $
$ 1,020,063
2,777,960 Add:
Less:Market
OriginalValue of 2 Units
Property ValueRetained by Homeowner 2 $ 1,414,400
(1,381,200)
Add:
CashMarket
Proceeds Valuefromof Development
Unit Retained by Homeowner $ 595,000
312,911 Add:
Less:Market
OriginalValue of 2 Units
Property ValueRetained by Homeowner 2 $
$ 1,757,897
(1,381,200) Residual
Land Lift Land Value $ 4,574,759
3,193,559
Residual
Add: MarketLand Value
Value of Unit Retained by Homeowner $ 907,911
595,000 Residual
Land Lift Land Value $
$ 2,777,960
1,396,760 Less: Original Property Value
CAC Contribution 75% $ (1,381,200)
(2,395,169)
Less: Original
Residual LandProperty
Value Value $ (690,600)
907,911 Less:
Less: Original Property Value
CAC Contribution 60% $
$ (1,381,200)
(838,056) Land
Cash Lift
Proceeds from Development $ 3,193,559
3,160,359
Land
Less: Lift
Original Property Value $ 217,311
(690,600) Land Lift
Cash Proceeds from Development $
$ 1,396,760
1,020,063 Less: CAC Contribution
2 Homeowner's Cash Proceeds Remaining 75% $ (2,395,169)
765,190
Less: CAC Contribution
Land Lift 55% $ (119,521)
217,311 Less:
2 CAC Contribution
Homeowner's Cash Proceeds Remaining 60% $
$ (838,056)
182,007 Cash
Market Proceeds
Value offrom Development
Homeowner's 2 Units Retained 2 $ 3,160,359
1,414,400
Cash
Less: Proceeds from Development
CAC Contribution 55% $ 312,911
(119,521) Cash Proceeds
Market value offrom Development
Homeowner's 2 units retained 2 $
$ 1,020,063
1,757,897 2 Homeowner's Cash Proceeds Remaining $ 765,190
Homeowner's
Cash ProceedsCash Proceeds Remaining
from Development $ 193,390
312,911 2 Homeowner's Cash Proceeds Remaining $ 182,007 1 Bedroom - 70 sm 2 Bedroom - 80 sm 3 Bedroom - 110 sm Market
Notes Value of Homeowner's 2 Units Retained 2 $ 1,414,400
Market Value of
Homeowner's CashHomeowner's Unit Retained
Proceeds Remaining $ 595,000
193,390 Market
Notes value of Homeowner's 2 units retained 2 $ 1,757,897 1. Bare Land Cost (BC Assessment) Ref: 3425 Vincent Street
Market Value of Homeowner's Unit Retained $ 595,000 2 Bedroom - 105 sm 1. Bare Land Cost (BC Assessment) Ref: 3425 Vincent St 1 Bedroom - 70 sm 2 Bedroom - 80 sm 3 Bedroom - 110 sm Notes
2. Building and Land Cost (BC Assessment)
Notes Notes
2. Building and Land Cost (BC Assessment) 1.
3. Bare
34% ofLand Cost
Hard (BCDeveloper
Costs. Assessment) Ref:to3425
needs Vincent Street
be hired.
1. Bare land Cost (BC Assessment) Ref: 3425 Vincent St
Notes 1. 34%
3. Bare of
Land
softCost (BC
costs. Assessment)
Developer needsRef: 3425
to be Vincent St
hired. 2.
4. Building andfor
30% of inc. Land Cost (BC
household Assessment)
making $40k/year
2 Bedroom - 105 sm 2 Bedroom - 125 sm 3 Bedroom - 175 sm 1 Bedroom - 70 sm 2 Bedroom + Den - 90 sm 3 Bedroom - 110 sm
2.
1. Building
Bare landand land
Cost (BC Cost (BC Assessment)
Assessment) Ref: 3425 Vincent St 2. 30%
4. Building and Land
of income for Cost (BC Assessment)
a household making $50k/year 3. Co-housing
5. 34% of Hardhas Costs.
lowerDeveloper needs to be hired.
realtor fees.
3.
2. 30% of Hard
Building CostsCost (BC Assessment)
and land 3. 34% of soft costs. Developer needs to be hired. 4. 30% of inc. for household making $40k/year
2 Bedroom - 121 sm 2 Bedroom - 90 sm 2 Bedroom - 158 sm 4.
2 Bedroom - 105 sm 2 Bedroom - 160 sm 3 Bedroom - 210 sm 4. 30% of income for a household making $50k/year 1 Bedroom - 70 sm 2 Bedroom + Den - 90 sm 3 Bedroom - 130 sm 5. Co-housing has lower realtor fees.
3. 30% of income
Hard Costsfor a household making $45k/year
4. 30% of income for a household making $45k/year

SOCIAL RATIONALE
• PoCo CLT helps Maryam
navigate redevelopment
processes
• Maryam maintains social
bonds with friends and
neighbours
• Reyna removes two hours of
commuting per day, cutting
costs and leaving more time
with family and friends
• A young couple is able to
purchase the 2-bedroom strata
unit, adding age diversity to
the neighbourhood
AFFORDABILITY
RATIONALE
• The sale of the coach house
and one bedroom strata unit
provides Maryam with financial
security
• PoCo CLT owns and manages
the coach house. Monthly rent
is $1,125 (30% of income for
household making below-medi-
an $45,000/year).
SOCIAL RATIONALE SOCIAL RATIONALE Skylights provide natural daylighting + views
• The Franks and Wongs are • The Lowes and Kents
brought closer with extended are able to maintain their
family. All family members existing neighbourhood
Exterior decks + porches are benefit from support for aging social bonds while building a
encouraged in place, childminding, and new, supportive, and diverse
other types of emotional and community around them
financial support. comprised of seniors, singles,
couples and families with
• Both families get to maintain
children Exterior walkway enables
existing social bonds with local
natural ventilation for all
friends and schoolmates, and • An intentional community
extend them to their expanded Communal outdoor space model of housing is
family group. established into the neighbour- A variety of roof forms are
hood, giving other neighbours encouraged
new ideas for their properties.
Decks + balconies provide casual
overlook to the street + shared
outdoor spaces
AFFORDABILITY AFFORDABILITY
Carports appear more ‘open’ + RATIONALE Project takes advantage RATIONALE
provide relief along the lane of the reduced front
• Main household’s costs • Smaller units sizes reduce
yard setback to allow for
are reduced through sharing costs, allowing people to buy
A frontyard addition makes use of covered carports + extra
of resources, childcare and into formerly inaccessible
reduced front yard setback + provides living area
eldercare. neighbourhood
a neighbourly face
• PoCo CLT owns and manages • Many households’ costs
1m setback enables
a privacy buffer two townhouse units. Monthly reduced by sharing resources,
rent is $1,250 (30% of income childcare or eldercare.
+ clearance from
for household making less than
vehicles • PoCo CLT owns and manages
median $50,000/year).
2 of the units. Monthly rent
is $1,000 per unit (30% of
income for household making
$40K/year).

Exterior covered porch

DESIGN RATIONALE DESIGN RATIONALE
• Prioritizes the retention of • Neighbours develop
neighbourhood ‘built’ character and build themselves, in
and resident ‘characters’ partnership with PoCo CLT,
who helps navigate redevelop-
• Encourages aging in place
ment processes
and the inclusion of new
mixed income residents to the • Back-end of single-family lot
neighbourhood. is maximized for family-friend-
ly housing
• By building main house
higher and shallower, and
decreasing front setback, more
shared middle yard space is
created.
2017078
DESIGN RATIONALE encourages neighbourly
interaction
Units have ground access to • Focuses on opportunities of
encourage socialization lots at end-blocks, combined
with cohousing, to receive
more density
• Incorporates social design
with shared indoor and outdoor
spaces, and exterior hallways
that connect non-ground units Breezeway connects courtyard
• Prioritizes the retention of to street provides a visible Shared common house
Units have ground access to main entry physically connects street
neighbourhood residents and
encourage socialization includes new mixed-income to courtyard. A shared
amenity space for group
residents
functions.
• Encourages neighbours and
small groups to develop and
build themselves
VIEW ACROSS LANEWAY POCO COHOUSING COURTYARD
Without the Community Land Trust, Let’s host a potluck in the co-housing
there’s no way i could have stayed in
this ‘hood. common house tonight!

Where’s my car?
A block away in our
shared parking lot!
So Lily, remember Mrs. Lowe
is picking you up from school
today and bringing you to the
BBQ party while mom goes to
her meeting, okay?
Hmm...I wonder if the shared camping
gear is available this weekend. Weather’s
looking pretty sweet.
You know, with all the support
from our neighbours, we saved
$1500 on childcare this month.

END BLOCK AXO Cozy courtyards where kids run free. I get to play with Jo
and Ellen!

Woof!

Sometimes I like to keep an eye on

the street without talking to anyone.

Turning unused alleys into intimate

streets.

We pulled down our

fences, and suddently we
had a block-long park!
Yes kids, see if the neighbours’
The laneway house paid for my kids are playing soccer down there.
retirement, and the Community (Phew. Time for some Netflix)
Land Trust found a dear couple
to live here.
We contributed to the shared park-
ing lot a block away, so we could get
more space for living. So it turned out that having
a few more people made our The co-housers at the end of the
neighbourhood friendlier. block invited us for a potluck. I
Ok, call the gang. Street told them we are brining martinis!
hockey in 10!

Dude, it’s not an alley. It’s a street now! Let’s go play in the back yard!

VIEW DOWN LANEWAY VIEW OF SHARED COMMON YARD VIEW FROM LANEWAY HOUSE DECK

COUTYARD AXO VIEW AT DORSET AVE & VINCENT ST

Having a few more people

in the neighbourhood
means we have more stores
and restaurants to walk to!

Hey Maryam! Tell my kids it’s

dinnertime over here!

Soft social spaces for light

interactions with neighbours.
I’m so glad we can
afford a unit in a friendly
neighbourhood.

Universally accessible units and

2017078 common room on ground floor.