ABOUT URBANARIUM

Our future well-being relies on intelligent

city building. This requires an engaged and
informed citizenry.

The goal of Urbanarium is to provide the

Metro Vancouver community with a platform
for making dialogue around urban issues
accessible - how our urban systems and
the forces acting on them work, what urban
futures might happen and what we can do to
affect those outcomes. We are a place where
people can get reliable information without
political or ideological bias.

We create tools and projects to discover

more about ourselves and our city.

The Vancouver Urbanarium Society is a

registered non profit society.

Urbanarium. For smart cities.

THE MISSING MIDDLE COMPETITION:
A SMART CITIES PUBLICATION
Published by:
Vancouver Urbanarium Society
598 W Georgia Street,
Vancouver, BC
Canada V6B 2A3
Visit our website at: www.urbanarium.org

© 2020 Vancouver Urbanarium Society and

its Contributors

All rights reserved.

The drawings and information contained

herein are not intended for, nor to be relied
upon, for construction or related purposes.
The drawings, photographs, plans,
materials, and other printed reproductions
herein are the property of the Contributors
who produced them. Any use, reproduction,
or copying of these materials without
the express written consent from these
Contributors is an actionalbe breach of the
copyright of those Contributors.

Editors: Shirley Shen, Jesi Carson

Design: Haeccity Studio Architecture

ISBN: 978-1-7770176-0-6 (Book)

ISBN: 978-1-7770176-1-3 (Digital)
CONTENTS
FOREWORD GIL KELLEY.................................................................................................. 6
INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................7
ABOUT THE MISSING MIDDLE COMPETITION.................................................................. 8
POLICY IMPACT PROPOSAL BRUCE HADEN....................................................................10
PROJECT INDEX...........................................................................................................12
WINNING PROJECTS
FIRST + PLANNER’S PRIZE HAECCITY STUDIO ARCHITECTURE......................................14
SECOND PRIZE HAPPY MIDDLE ................................................................................... 20
THIRD PRIZE GOODALE ARCHITECTURE....................................................................... 26
THIRD PRIZE ALTFORMA............................................................................................. 32
HONORABLE MENTION MIZA ARCHITECTS................................................................... 38
HONORABLE MENTION COLUMBA................................................................................ 42
HONORABLE MENTION WORKSHOP ARCHITECTURE..................................................... 46
HONORABLE MENTION TOAD....................................................................................... 50
HONORABLE MENTION CODY LOEFFEN, YVES POITRAS................................................. 52
SPECIAL MENTION LORINC VASS, DAIHI YAMASHITA, QIONGYU NEAL LI......................... 56
SPECIAL MENTION SEAN MCEWEN ARCHITECT............................................................ 58
SPECIAL MENTION IAN ROBERTSON, JAMES BLIGH, SIMON CHAN................................. 60
JURY COMMENTS........................................................................................................ 62
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................................ 64
 FOREWORD
The Missing Middle Competition was a ground-breaking event in envisioning the future shape and
vitality of the region’s low and moderate density neighbourhoods. Thoughtfully curated and engaging,
it was sharply focussed on perhaps the most timely of topics; rethinking urban form, housing
affordability, and the general health and vitality of the low and moderate density neighbourhoods
that make up so much of the region’s land mass and shape so much of the daily life of our region’s
residents.
By challenging mostly young and independent design teams to think about combining multiple
household types and tenure, new housing forms and ways to enliven the surrounding neighbourhood
context, the design teams were able to come forward with compelling designs that have great appeal
to area residents, planners, designers, builders and policy-makers for “gentle infill” solutions that can
help us all envision a better future.
For practitioners, the successful entries also offer specific thoughts on regulatory constraints that
ought to be revisited in order to realise these infill designs and improve our neighbourhoods. The
Missing Middle Design Competition’s results announce another step in our region’s quest for urban
livability.

GIL KELLEY FAICP

GENERAL MANAGER | PLANNING, URBAN DESIGN & SUSTAINABILITY
CITY OF VANCOUVER

6
INTRODUCTION
In 2018 Urbanarium held an international design competition to develop and
present exciting options for addressing Metro Vancouver’s unprecedented
housing affordability crisis and social health challenges with outstanding
design and social innovation.
This document contains both the insight and policy recommendations
gathered from the various competition entries for adding innovative density
to existing single family zones. Included are the winning projects located in
one of four sites in Vancouver, Port Coquitlam, Burnaby and Surrey.
Results from this competition inform our Policy Impact Proposal (page
10), suggesting five small shifts in current zoning policy that can contribute
to housing affordability and vibrancy in communities, while maintaining
existing character.
Winning projects can be referenced by location, as well as by finance and
tenure type, using the Project Index (page 12).

7
ABOUT THE MISSING MIDDLE COMPETITION
CONTEXT
No one argues that the Vancouver region faces a housing
affordability crisis, yet large single-family houses and
high-rise condo tower construction is booming. Housing
starting in the mid-range, offering densification in
existing single-family neighbourhoods is missing.
Vancouver was number 15 of 17 least-affordable world-
wide cities surveyed in 2016. In 2017, Vancouver’s
density map revealed that single-family neighbourhoods
occupy one third of the city’s land area yet house only
9% of its residents. Many of these leafy, quiet precincts
throughout the region are adverse to any form of
densification. In 1976 it took about 5 years of average
family income to save a housing down payment. The
average today in Canada is 13 years. In Metro Vancouver,
it’s 27 years; more than double the national average. In
2016, regional rental vacancies varied from punishing
rates of only .6 percent to 1.4 percent.
“When everyone from major banks and business groups to
organized labour, academics, politicians, housing providers,
and social rights and poverty eradication activists, agree that
the situation puts both prosperity and social integrity at risk,
you know you have a wicked problem on your hands. And
wicked problems don’t get solved in silos.”
BRUCE HADEN ARCHITECT AIBC, HUMAN STUDIO
COMPETITION CO-ORGANIZER & JURY CHAIR
DESIGN BRIEF JUDGING CRITERIA
This competition focused on small lot interventions, with a) Affordability Innovation
each entrant working on one of four sites in Vancouver,
Proposed designs create affordable housing options and
Port Coquitlam, Surrey or Burnaby in British Columbia,
specify legal or other tools such as rental covenants
Canada. The sites each consist of four city blocks, two
needed to support the proposed solutions.
blocks away from major arterials with bus routes and

Regional municipalities are now developing affordable

housing strategies because they are unable to sustain
the middle-income earners needed to fuel regional
economies. It’s also difficult to attract young citizens.
Affordable housing advocates suggest options such as
enacting a focused national affordable housing strategy,
securing more land through community land trusts and
equity contributions from the community housing sector
and government to develop more affordable housing.
8
each site is two lots long. Entrants proposed detailed
options for redevelopment of 1-2 lots in the assigned
neighborhood and a master plan for the 4-city block
context area.
This was not about density alone, but rather generating
inspiring neighbourhood possibilities for a single lot
landowner or a pair of neighbours to create affordable,
higher density, low rise options that support socially
contributing housing.
b) Social Innovation
Proposals create options for reducing the current crises
of social isolation, and supports interaction between
community members.
c) Design Innovation
This competition at heart is not a beauty contest, but
great design that supports the two core objectives above
and is exciting, affordable, and sustainable.
WHAT IS THE MISSING MIDDLE? Missing Middle Housing consists of multi-unit housing typologies with
densities between a single family home and high density / high-rise buildings.

ACCESSORY DWELLING
/ TOWNHOUSE / ROW HOUSES

HIGH RISE DEVELOPMENT

COURTYARD APARTMENT

SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED

ALT. SMALL SCALE

TRIPLEX/ QUADPLEX

MID RISE MULTI-UNIT

SEMI-DETACHED DUPLEX

HIGH DENSITY MIXED USE

LIVE / WORK

URBAN VILLAGE

9
POLICY IMPACT PROPOSAL BRUCE HADEN
ARCHITECT AIBC, HUMAN STUDIO
COMPETITION CO-ORGANIZER & JURY CHAIR

Housing in Vancouver is dominated by high density tower FIRST, THE BAD NEWS:
forms and low density single family zones. The Missing Middle
competition was held to generate ideas for filling the gap WE CAN’T
between those two divergent housing types by generating
ideas for introducing new types of housing into single family
DENSIFY
neighbourhoods around Metro Vancouver. OUT OF THE
Through the learning and ideas brought forward by the
Missing Middle Competition, specific recommendations
To help address the affordability challenge through
densifying single family neighbourhoods we need
AFFORDABILITY
have been developed to improve and enhance the range
of housing available to current and future residents.
mechanisms to either extract financial value from
densification to support other housing and / or to reduce CHALLENGE
This Policy Impact Proposal outlines our findings and the market desirability of units through covenants or
five recommended changes to zoning and policy that other means.
constrain the opportunity to build Missing Middle housing.

LESS $
10
 reduces the risk of NIMBYism and reduces the “lottery winner”
phenomenon.

1.
It’s time to be bold on this issue!
REZONE BROADLY, NOT IN POCKETS

Rezoning in small areas will simply bump up land values $$$

relative to lower2 zoned neighbours in other areas. Large $$$

$$$
VS

scale
Mandate a very low (bestrezoning reduces
= zero) number thestalls
of parking riskonof
siteNIMBYism and reduces $$$

theunits,
This allows better “lottery winner”phenomenon.
better site plans and lower construction
cost. It keeps new units out of the speculative market, encourages
transit use and walking. The people hardest hit by the affordability
crisis, such as millennials, are least attached to the idea of owning

NEXT, THE GOOD NEWS: cars.

2. 3
It’s also time to be bold on this issue! REDUCE PARKING REQUIREMENTS DRAMATICALLY

FIVE SIMPLE
Mandating a very low (best = zero) number of parking stalls
<
Make the buildable envelope
on site allows bigger
for better units, by reducing
better required
site plans and lower setba
construction cost. It keepsallowable
new units outheight
of the speculative

POLICY CHANGES market, encourages transit use and walking. The people
hardest hit by the affordability crisis, such as millennials,
This
are allows
least better
attached units,
to the idea and way
of owning cars.more design optio

WOULD
3.
REDUCE REQUIRED SETBACKS & INCREASE ALLOWABLE

ALLOW FOR THE HEIGHT (A LITTLE)

Making the buildable envelope bigger by reducing required

EXPANSION OF setbacks 2and increasing allowable height slightly allows for

better units and way more design options.
Reintroduce mixed use in single family zones by allowing both small commercial

MISSING MIDDLE
spaces and live work.

We zoned out the corner store – let’s bring it back! And let artists or

4.
accountants set up shop as well.
REINTRODUCE MIXED USE IN SINGLE FAMILY ZONES BY

HOUSING:
ALLOWING SMALL COMMERCIAL SPACES & LIVE WORK

Part of the missing middle is live work and small scale flex /
1 1
commercial spaces. We zoned out the corner store – let’s
Remove implicitRemove implicit and explicit barriers to different forms of social o
back!asand
bring it such Andexplicit barriers
let artists
such
co-housing
or to
as shared
and
different
accountants
co-housing
forms
setofup
and shared
social organization
shop on
multi-generational
multi-generational living livin
the street as well.This allows the opportunity to maximize the sharing of space a
This allows the opportunity to maximize the sharing of space and of
financial and nonfinancial
financialand non financial resources
resources

5.
ENCOURAGE DIFFERENT FORMS OF SOCIAL ORGANIZATION
LIKE CO-HOUSING & SHARED MULTI GENERATIONAL LIVING

Removing implicit and explicit barriers to different forms

of social organization allows the opportunity to maximize
sharing of space and financial and non-financial resources.
11
PROJECT INDEX
Colour indicates location, with Vancouver being yellow, Burnaby blue, Port Coquitlam pink and
Surrey orange. Project statistics including tenancy, finance type, building area and net density can
be compared to averages in each city. Additional averages and block systems from Brooklyn and
Barcelona are added for reference. Projects are described in detail on the following pages of this
publication, as identified by the page numbers in this index.

BURNABY URBAN GRID BURNABY URBAN GRID BARCELONA URBAN GRID BARCELONA URBAN GRID BROOKLYN BROWNSTONE URBAN GRID BROOKLYN BROWNSTONE URBAN GRID
1:10000 1:10000 1:10000 1:10000 1:10000 1:10000
2.5 STOREYS
2.5 STOREYS 3-4 STOREYS
FAR: 0.6
FAR: 0.6 FAR: 1.569'
40% COVERAGE 69' 273' 69' 69' 273'
728' 728'
616' 40% COVERAGE616' 50% COVERAGE
VANCOUVER BURNABY BROOKLYN

69'

69'
26 52 14 42 46 56

49'

226'
280'

280'

273'

273'

83'
58'
69'

69'
BURNABY TYP. BLOCK BURNABY TYP. BLOCK BARCELONA (CERDA GRID) TYP. BLOCK BARCELONA (CERDA GRID)
BROOKLYN
TYP. BLOCK
BROWNSTONE TYP. BLOCK BROOKLYN BROWNSTONE TYP. BLOCK
1:2500 1:2500 1:2500 1:2500 1:2500 1:2500

66' 139' 110' 66' 66' 139' 57' 110'

102' 66'
102' 57' 57' 102' 102' 57'
STREET STREETSTREET STREET STREET STREET STREET STREET
57' 122' 20' 122' 57' 57' 122' 20' 122' 57'
STREET LANE STREET STREET LANE STREET
BURNABY URBAN GRID BARCELONA URBAN GRID BROOKLYN BROWNSTONE
1:10000 1:10000 1:10000
2 STOREYS 2.5 STOREYS 5-6 STOREYS
FAR:0.5 FAR: 0.72 FAR:69'3.0 273' 69'
728
40% COVERAGE 50% COVERAGE 616' COV: 50%
BURNABY TYP. BLOCK SECTION BURNABY TYP. BLOCK SECTION
BARCELONA TYP. BLOCK SECTION BARCELONA TYP. BLOCK SECTION
BROOKLYN BROWNSTONE TYP. BLOCK SECTION BROOKLYN BROWNSTONE TYP. BLOCK SECTION
PORT COQUITLAM 1:1500
SURREY
1:1500 1:1500 1:1500
BARCELONA
1:1500 1:1500

69'
20 50 58 32 38 60
280'

273'
12

69'
 MICRO-OP BETTER TOGETHER INVISIBLE DENSITY
1ST PRIZE + PLANNERS AWARD HONOURABLE MENTION HONOURABLE MENTION
HAECCITY STUDIO ARCHITECTURE MIZA 21

Tenure: Co-Operative Tenure: Co-Housing Tenure: Hybrid Typology

Finance: Shared Equity Finance: Trade land for green space Finance: Conventional
Dwellings: 11 units
14 Dwellings: 7 units
Height: 35 ft, 3.5 storeys
38 Height: 12.8 m, 4 storeys 52 Dwellings: 12 units / 2 lot development
Height: 9-10.5 m

THE PEOPLE’S PLAYBOOK CO-OP POD HOUSE S^3

SECOND PRIZE HONOURABLE MENTION SPECIAL MENTION
HAPPY MIDDLE COLUMBA TEAM CONTINGENT

Tenure: Ownership / Rental Tenure: Collective / Shared Spaces

Finance: Community Land Trust Tenure: Co-Operative Finance: Community Land Trust
Dwellings: 3-12 units Finance: Community Land Trust Dwellings: 40 inhabitants
20 Height: 2-3 storeys 42 Dwellings: 16 units, 56 inhabitants 56 Height: 46 ft, 3 storeys
Height: 11.4 m, 3 storeys

CONVIVIAL DENSITY EXTRA SPECIAL THE MIXING MIDDLE

THIRD PRIZE HONOURABLE MENTION SPECIAL MENTION
GOODALE ARCHITECTURE PLANNING EXTRA SPECIAL SEAN MCEWEN

Tenure: Co-Operative Tenure: Rental / Sales Tenure: Own / Rent

Finance: T.O.D. / Car sharing Finance: Conventional Finance: Family Land Trust
Dwellings: 20 units Dwellings: flex 5-9 units Dwellings: 6 units
26 Height: 9.5 m, 2.5 storeys 46 Height: 9 m, 2.5 storeys 58 Height: 40 ft, 3.5-4 storeys

AROUND THE CORNER POCO VILLAGE MORE, WHAT IS IT

THIRD PRIZE HONOURABLE MENTION GOOD FOR?
ALTFORMA TOAD
SPECIAL MENTION
MORE IS GOOD
Tenure: Mixed Use Tenure: Condo / Rental
Finance: Private & Public Finance: Conventional Tenure: Ownership
Dwellings: 6 adaptable units
32
Dwellings: 17 units
Height: 13.2 m
50 Height: ~45 ft, 3 storeys
60 Finance: Via Rezone
Dwellings: 20-32 dwellings
Height: 4 storeys

13
microop
FIRST & PLANNERS PRIZE
HAECCITY STUDIO ARCHITECTURE:
SHIRLEY SHEN, TRAVIS HANKS, JORGE
ROMAN, JOHN RODDICK, MARK GEORGE

LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Burnaby Co-op Shared 7 units 35 ft

Equity 3.5 storeys

Increasing affordable housing in metro Vancouver requires

the provision of additional units that break from existing
models of development and financing, while shifting the
culture around tenure and ownership. We propose a zoning
amendment for the ‘buffer zones’ - the first three blocks
flanking arterials - between mixed use / commercial zones
and single family neighbourhoods.

Signaling the residential renewal that will help affordably

house future generations, zone “R-5R” would specifically
address the land value speculation that has arisen along with
densification. In order to ease the transition of R5 zones,
guidelines would cultivate a new typology that can both co-
exist with detached homes, and form a cohesive community
after propagation.

14
MICRO-OP | HAECCITY STUDIO ARCHITECTURE

15
MICRO-OP | HAECCITY STUDIO ARCHITECTURE
IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS
ENABLE PLANNING & APPROVAL PATHS UPDATE ZONING & DESIGN GUIDELINES
A streamlined approval process will collapse fees and wait times for Renewal zones will continue to allow 1 and 2 family buildings, but will
projects using pre-vetted plans. Municipalities can further incentivize prioritize development that transitions toward village communities of taller,
uptake of renewal development by providing guides and enablement more compact forms. Live/work uses off lanes and commercial activity at
activities for interested citizens. Any loss of revenue from waived block ends are encouraged.
development fees will be more than offset by the additional property and
income taxes generated. 1.5 m
LANE

0.6 m 1.5 m
2.7 m
REGENERATIVE BUILDING TYPOLOGY
5.8 m
This approach to distributed density can be described
as multiplication through division. Like mitotic cell 1.5 m

division, a single ‘mother’ cell begets two

new ‘daughter’ cells. Exterior form and 0.6 m
15.2 m max COURTYARD
expression will be unique to each 3.7 m
development, and interior layouts
Total building depth: 25.9 m max
are straightforward and 9.1 m min 8.3 m
Courtyard: 9.1m min
adaptable.
Side yards: 0.0 m & 2.0 m or 1.0 m either side
15.2 m max
Flat roof Massing Envelope STREET
1.7

1.7
2.7 1.8 m 2.0 m
6.1
Sloped roof massing envelope

2.7

6.1
1.7

1.7

ACTIVATE STREETSCAPES CO-OPERATIVE TENURE & DELIVERY

Car ownership can be downplayed in favor of shared vehicles and low- The free market has had its chance. Instead of relying solely on supply to
impact forms of transportation because R-5R zones are close to transit, drive housing costs down, R5-R directly lowers the effective cost of housing
commerce, and services. Pedestrian-oriented streetscapes, and celebrated and amenities per household.
laneways improve neighbourhood connections and character.

Existing Street: Proposed Street Conventional Stratified OWNER

- 45 Parallel parking spaces / block - 41 Parallel parking spaces / block Development:
- Dedicated bike path OWNER
- 7.6 m fire access path
MARKETING OWNER
1.1 m 1.1 m 3% PROFIT
1.1 1.9 0.3 2.4

1.1 1.9 0.3 2.4

1.9 m 1.9 m DEVELOPER

3.1 m 2.7 m 10-20% PROFIT REALTOR OWNER
3.1

3.1

3% PROFIT
4.9 m INVESTOR RENTER
4.9
4.9

7.9 m
m
7.9
7.9

6.
7
2.

6.4 m INVESTOR RENTER

m

6.4
6.4

3.1 m
1.9 m 1.8 m
1.8 1.2
1.8 1.2

1.1 m 1.1 m Proposed Co-op

Development:
COOP MEMBER
Existing Lane: Proposed Lane: DEVELOPMENT COOP MEMBER
- Not pedestrian friendly - Pedestrian friendly CONSULTANT
COOP MEMBER
1.7 m CO-OP ENTITY 5% FEE
1.7

COOP MEMBER
1.7

2.7 m NON-PROFIT
6.1 m
2.7

6.1
2.7

6.1

1.7 m ADMIN COOP MEMBER

1.7
1.7

3% OVERHEAD
COOP MEMBER
16
 Accelerated processing jump starts By occupying the areas typically assigned Courtyards can stay separated, or open
renewal, while aggregation of to front and rear yards, the new typology is up to adjacent lots to create micro-
collective knowledge continues to build offset from existing structures, reducing parks, fostering healthier and more
momentum. encroachment issues as the block evolves. social environments.

Nested co-op models can self-organize Pooling resources and equity reduces
block-wide shared services and the burden of land value on individuals,
amenities to ease household spending making it easier for people to “buy into” -
on incidentals or stay in - the neighbourhood.

MATURE TREES

MICRO-OP CONSULTANT CORNER STORE

BIKE SHOP

MICROPARK

LENDING LIBRARY
A w approach anticipates a future less ACCOUNTANT DOGGY DAYCARE
centered around car ownership. Naming SEAMSTRESS
lanes helps addressing, celebrates paths as
places, and honours past heros.

CO-BLOCK RECYCLING CENTRE

MICROBREW
CAR SHARE SHARED LAUNDRY
CABINET MAKER

CHILD CARE SENIORS GROUP

BAKERY
CORNER GROCERY
MATH TUTOR

Street frontage will be variable as Up-sizing or down-sizing is easily

the block develops, but over time will accomplished within the Micro-Op or Co-
approach a more continuous façade while Block, allowing for aging-in-place and
maintaining a low- to mid-rise expression. multi-generational communities.

Reduced parking requirements, improved Car shares and metered parking Combined corner lots facilitate
bike ways, and increased traffic calming concentrated along the ‘feeder streets’ deeper spaces for neighborhood
measures enhance street life and promote of R5-R zones decrease traffic and businesses while maintaining the 17
healthy commuting. support neighbourhood businesses. scale and continuity of street frontage.
 Micro-Ops can get rebates on utility upgrades
by implementing renewable energy sources, as MEET THE NEIGHBOURS
well as qualify for Green Loans.

Shared roof decks are a great
space for community gatherings
and gardening.
ALAN & CONNIE NGUYEN, 75, 72
Occupation: Retired on pension
Household income: $47,000 / year
Needs: to downsize from their single family home,
but stay in the neighbourhood where they’ve lived
for 40 years.
RONNIE, MEREDITH, DYLAN & LORETTA
FENSTERMACHER, 51, 47, 12 & 14
Occupation: Self-employed (Dad), Exec. Assistant (Mum)
Household income: $90,000 / year
Needs: affordable 3 bedroom unit, close to Burnaby
Middle School, with easy access to cars.

NADINE FONSECA, 25 PHILIPPA COOK, 40

Occupation: SFU graduate student / part-time jobs Occupation: Archivist at the Burnaby Public Library.
Household income: $25,000 / year with family Household income: $40,000 / year
assistance Needs: a vibrant neighbourhood close to work where
Needs: affordable housing off campus. she can have a socially-engaged lifestyle.
Roofs are shaped to control and
collect water instead of shedding onto
neighbouring property. This orientation
is also more suited to bring light into the FRANK CHING & DIEGO MORALES, 34 EUGENE & CARLY MARTEL, 38 & 5
centre of lots running in the North-South & 35 Occupation: Self-employed
direction. Occupation: Consultants Household income: $50,000 / year
Household income: $70,000 / year Needs: Eugene is a single dad and wants an apartment
A 30’ roofline break maintains a Needs: Recently relocated to BC for work, they want with access to a yard for Carly to play in.
sensitive, residential streetscape, an open community with a quiet, outdoorsy feel.
while allowing for additional height
set back from the street.

STRATEGIES HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY

ALLOW INNOVATIVE LAND USE POLICY HOUSEHOLD INCOME HOUSING + TRANSPORTATION COST CO-OP INCOME CO-OP EXPENSES
$ / MONTH $ / MONTH (% OF AFTER TAX INCOME) $11,100 / MONTH / MONTH
Long lots mean that building mass can be split and
be pushed to lot lines, reclaiming underused green MORTGAGE
$8,885
spaces for community connection. This results in a $7,500 $1,800 rent (24%)
productive rethink of yards, setbacks, and laneways. $500 carshare (7%)

This approach allows for increased households per

lot while preserving outdoor space.

$6,400 $1,600 (25%) OPERATIONS

INCENTIVIZE SHARED OWNERSHIP MODELS $500 carshare (8%) $1,000
CONTINGENCY
Prioritize small-scale, owner-occupied $500
developments by allowing relaxations and density PROPERTY TAXES
$350
bumps to non-profit co-operatives. These Micro-Ops $5,800 $1,500 (26%)
(non-program, non-subsidized co-ops) would free $400 carshare (7%)

households from individual mortgages, pool equity,

and share amenities. $4,200
$1,400 (34%)
$400 carshare (10%)
SUPPORT CO-BLOCK VILLAGE STRUCTURES
$4,000 $950 (24%)
Each property can also join a co-operative “Co- $150 carshare (4%)
Block” structure, transforming each block into a
? $3,300
self-sufficient village. This village-ing model allows $850 (26%)
Co-Blocks to pool development fees locally for $150 carshare (5%)

immediate upgrades block by block. $2,100 $800 (38%)

$100 carshare (5%)
18
 Phillipa loves to bike. Now everything Each property is owned by a Micro-Op
she needs is within biking distance, and that acts a single owner, de-commodifying
street improvements means faster, housing stock, and facilitating tier 2
0/36 safer trips. redevelopment many years in the future.
LOTS >
CO-OPS
Eugene runs a neighborhood business ROSSER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
on Madison Ave. The shop is next to Multiple Micro-Ops form the Co-Block
public parking and gets foot traffic from organization, tapping into collective
Hastings. knowledge, resources, and amenities offered
5/33 on other blocks across the neighbourhood.
LOTS >
CO-OPS

Co-Block membership is also available

to undeveloped properties in order to
facilitate transition to the new typology.

14/33
LOTS >
CO-OPS

GILMORE COMMUNITY SCHOOL

27/32
LOTS >
CO-OPS
Nadine is earning her Masters at SFU.
Four days a week she walks 7 minutes to
the bus stop on Hastings, and takes the 95
Bus for another 15 mins to campus.

Alan and Connie like to walk down the

lane to do their grocery shopping at the
local corner store. They check on the Car shares are a good fit for Frank and
community planter boxes as they go. Diego’s flexible work schedules. An
abundance of sharing options allowed them
to sell their car to help pay for buy-in.

On Tuesdays and Thursdays, Meredith

carpools the Block kids to school before
commuting 20 mins to work.

While developers can build single family

Full implementation of zoning changes
homes with lane houses in R5-R, only
would result in an increase of 100
No5 FIRE HALL
owner-occupied co-ops are granted full
households per hectare in R5-R zones.
relaxations of height, setbacks, and FAR. EXISTING BIKEWAY

Allowing no strata development in R5-R By concentrating building massing along

will nurture small-builder ‘stretch’ streets and lanes, open spaces are
projects and streamline future growth. consolidated and democratized, maximizing
privacy, security, and accessibility.

N
Speculative development is further Mixed use buildings along ‘feeder streets’
disincentivized by allowing no lot assembly (those connecting to arterials) promote COMMUNITY POLICE STATION
except at corners (maximum 2 lots), and no local services and allow more capital to
resale for 5 years following construction. stay within the neighbourhood. 19
PEOPLE’S COLLECTIVE
SOLUTIONS FOR
INCLUSIVE SOCIAL
PLAYBOOK: NEIGHBOURHOODS VIEW AT DORSET AVE & VINCENT ST

Having a few
more people in the
neighbourhood means
we have more stores and
restaurants to walk to!

SECOND PRIZE I’m so glad we

can afford a
unit in a friendly
HAPPY MIDDLE: HARLEY GRUSKO, MICHELLE neighbourhood.

HOAR, WILMER LAU, KATHY MCGRENERA,

CHARLES MONTGOMERY, LESLIE SHIEH,
MARK SHIEH, ELSA SNYDER, RUFINA WU
LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Universally accessible
units and common
Port Ownership / Community 3-12 2-3 room on ground floor.
Coquitlam Rental Land Trust units storeys

Our regional housing challenge is urgent. Too often, top- COUTYARD AXO

down redevelopment and cookie-cutter prescriptions fail to

produce the flexible forms that meet the needs and incomes
of a diverse population. Let’s empower more people to
become makers of their own neighbourhoods.
Hey Maryam! Tell my
kids it’s dinnertime
Our solution: A Playbook that gives neighbours a catalogue over here!
of ‘moves’ to create their own ‘plays’ and to creatively
collaborate and do more with their land.
Soft social spaces for light
We took a user-centric approach to the Missing Middle interactions with neighbours.

Challenge. We interviewed five families who live in Port

Coquitlam, and conducted an online survey. The Playbook
reflects the aspirations of Port Coquitlam’s 2015 Housing
Action Plan, but could be easily replicated in other
Municipalities.

A variety of plays are possible. We illustrate the Playbook

with examples of 3 plays, each reflecting the circumstances
of different families.
20
 PEOPLE’S PLAYBOOK | HAPPY MIDDLE

POCO COHOUSING COURTYARD

Let’s host a potluck in the co-hous-

ing common house tonight!

You know, with all the support

from our neighbours, we saved
$1500 on childcare this month.

So Lily, remember Mrs.

Lowe is picking you up
from school today and
bringing you to the BBQ
party while mom goes to Hmm...I wonder if the shared camping
her meeting, okay? gear is available this weekend. Weath-
er’s looking pretty sweet.

21
VIEW ACROSS LANEWAY Without the Community Land POLICY AND DESIGN MOVES
Trust, there’s no way I could
have stayed in this ‘hood.
1. Provide more support to small-scale development projects, especially those that involve collaboration between neighbours.

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.

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.

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
8
a non-profit organization that places a covenant on the units for long-term rental housing.

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 FSR
12 if the project is: a) developed as secure-tenure rental housing or co-op housing; or b) developed
Where’s my car?
A block away in our 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.
shared parking lot!
1.5 Add city services and addressing to coach houses and other lane-facing buildings.

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
permanently affordable rental units. CLT will own and manage the rental units to provide long-
term affordable housing.

2.2 Fast track development approval for proposals that incorporate at least one dwelling unit that
Cozy courtyards where features long-term affordable rental housing.
kids run free.
END BLOCK AXO
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.

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.
Turning unused alleys
into intimate streets.
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.

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

VIEW FROM LANEWAY HOUSE DECK 3.5 Provide “Good Neighbour Grant” of $500 per year, per property, as credit toward property tax for
neighbours who remove fences between adjacent lots.

Let’s go play in
Yes kids, see if the
the back yard!
neighbours’ kids 4. Decouple parking requirements from individual property. Instead solve for parking at neighbourhood scale.
are playing soccer
down there.

4.1 Reduce on-site minimum parking requirement from 2 per dwelling unit to 1 per dwelling unit.

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).

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).

22
 PEOPLE’S PLAYBOOK | HAPPY MIDDLE

3 8 12

LAURIER AVENUE

SEF

CO
ET

ET

VINCENT STREET

AS
RE

TON
TRE

TM
ST

S
OL S

ER
ON

TRE

ID
GT

IA
RPO

ET
LIN

N
RO
L

LIVE
WE

AD
DORSET AVENUE

2017078

Building FSR Front Interior Exterior Lane Min. Separation

Height Setback Side Setback Side Setback Setback Between Lane / Street Dwelling
Current Proposed
DWELLINGS / PROPOSED
HECTARE 19 65 ZONING 7.5m 0.50 7.5m 10% 20% 1.0m @ Grade 7.5m
10.5 m 1.5 Max 3.25m
(7.5m Wall)

23
PEOPLE’S PLAYBOOK | HAPPY MIDDLE

PLAY 1 PLAY 2
3 8

Maryam’s Main House + Coach House Frank Family and Wong Family’s Main House + Rear Townhomes
Maryam is a widower in her 70s. She has lived in Port Coquitlam for 30 years. Maryam renovates her home into two The Frank Family and Wong Family are neighbours. The Franks are downsizing whereas the Wongs are a growing
2-bedroom strata units. She keeps one unit for herself and sells the other at market value. She sells a portion of her young family. They assemble their two single family lots and build a main home with four strata units, and a lane-
land to the PoCo Community Land Trust that builds a 2-bedroom coach house and rents it to Maryam’s caretaker. facing townhouse complex with three strata units.

N G FAM w + June
Current Proposed WO ILY dre
An

M ARYA M
FSR
0.5 1.2
Current Proposed
FSR
0.5 0.9 NUMBER OF
New main house: Two
UNITS & MIX 3-bedroom and two
2-bedrooms strata units n + E ric a M art h
Original home renovated to include rda ris + a
Jo Ch
NUMBER OF two 2-bedroom strata units Three new townhouse strata
units (two units owned by
UNITS & MIX New 2-bedroom coach house, strata PoCo CLT)
titled, owned by PoCo CLT e + A le x
Jak

PARKING PARKING
NK FAM
FR A I LY BA RBA RA W BF
RA NK +
.+ FA
.Y
ON RO M
$ $

IL
Y
, Ida + M
yna a
Re x
Exterior decks
+ porches are
encouraged

Communal
outdoor space
Decks + balconies provide casual overlook to
Carports appear more the street + shared outdoor spaces
‘open’ + provide relief along
Project takes advantage of the
the lane
reduced front yard setback to
A frontyard addition makes allow for covered carports +
1m setback
use of reduced front yard extra living area
enables a privacy
setback + provides a
buffer + clearance
neighbourly face
from vehicles

Units have ground

access to encourage
socialization

Units have ground

access to encourage
socialization

24
 PEOPLE’S PLAYBOOK | HAPPY MIDDLE

PLAY 3 VIEW DOWN LANEWAY

12

Lowe Family, Kent Family, and the PCO Cohousing Group’s Multi-Family Cohousing Ok, call the gang.
Street hockey in 10!

The Lowe Family and Kent Family have been neighbours for over 20 years. They would like to stay in the neighbourhood but their houses are too big for
the now retired couples. The PoCo Cohousing Group has been looking for property and is increasingly faced with escalating land prices. The Lowes and
Kents decide to assemble their adjacent lots (one of which is a corner lot), sell the combined lot to the PoCo Cohousing Group, and join as members, for
a total of ten households.The two remaining units are sold to PoCo Community Land Trust as long-term affordable rental housing.

n + S yl vie i, A
isha, Po o
So it turned out that having
S ta Al y a
a few more people made our
Current Proposed neighbourhood friendlier. Dude, it’s not an
FSR
0.5 1.5 We contributed to the
shared parking lot a
alley. It’s a street
now!
block away, so we could
get more space for living.
Unit mix (total units = 12):
NUMBER OF
12 strata units, 2 of which are owned
y + Rodney , Eric, Jo + E
UNITS & MIX by PoCo CLT. A combination of 1, 2 Am an ll e
and 3-bedroom units. us

n
PARKING $ $ $ $ $ $ $

W E FA MI NT FA MIL We pulled down our fences, and

LO LY KE Y
suddently we had a block-long park! The laneway house paid for
Skylights provide natural daylighting + views
my retirement, and the Com-
munity Land Trust found a
dear couple to live here.

Exterior walkway enables natural ventilation for all

The co-housers at the
rek + Chong Keith
De end of the block invited
A variety of roof forms are encouraged
us for a potluck. I told
them we are brining
martinis!

Suki a n th a
Sam

Zak
+ Anne A li + J es s

Exterior covered porch

encourages neighbourly
interaction VIEW OF SHARED COMMON YARD

Breezeway connects courtyard to street Shared common house physically connects

provides a visible main entry street to courtyard. A shared amenity space
for group functions.
25
CONVIVIAL
DENSITY
THIRD PRIZE
GOODALE ARCHITECTURE PLANNING:
DAVID GOODALE AIA, LEED AP
LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Vancouver Co-op T.O.D./Car sharing; 20 9.5 m

Tenant Manager/ units 2.5 storeys
Transit coordinator

The fundamental strategy: To push a no-elevator walk-up

concept, (2 story + mezzanine), to its maximum reasonable
density around a sun-inviting garden courtyard which is
permeable to the neighborhood, pursuing both affordability
and sociability. The conditions necessary to affordable
density, (small units, car-sharing, literal physical intimacy,
zoning/setback modifications), can all contribute - along
with the choreography of landscape - to a fine-grained
material street rhythm and a seductively walkable
neighborhood. With caring orchestration, low-rise density
has its own natural aesthetic and pedestrian vitality. The
typology is particularly suited to the working young, singles,
and the elderly, where courtyard noise generation would
find a natural daily discipline/limit. Additionally, units are
planned to set sleeping areas up/back from the courtyard.
Roof profiling/massing is developed in the master plan to
maximize sun entry into the courtyards. A walk through the
neighborhood will fuse the experience of urbanity with a
continuous linear park.
26
CONVIVIAL DENSITY | GOODALE ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING

27
 V I E W L O O K I N G N O R T H T O P R O J E C T G A R D E N / C O U R T Y A R D E N T R Y V I E W L O O K I N G S O U T H

CONVIVIAL DENSITY | GOODALE ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING

PROJECT PRO FORMA S E C T I O N P E R S P E C T I V E T H R O U G H P R O J E C T S I T E (L E F T U N I T S E C T I O N C U T A

QUANTITY UNIT RATE $ TOTAL J

A. LAND / LOT PURCHASE H
12,688 SQ FEET $491.26 / SQ FT $ 6,233,107
SUB TOTAL LAND COSTS (rounded) $ 6,233,100

J
B. HARD COSTS
L
DEMOLITION NA LUMP SUM NA $ 25,000
GROSS CONSTRUCTION: 17,610 SQ FEET $ 165 / SQ FT $ 2,905,650
SITE / LANDSCAPE 5,584 SQ FEET $ 14 / SQ FT $ 78,176
RIGHT OF WAY PARKING 2,000 SQ FEET $ 10 / SQ FT $ 20,000 J
L
SUB TOTAL HARD COSTS $ 3,028,800
J
C. SOFT COSTS / DEVELOPMENT
ARCH / ENGIN COSTS 3.2 % x $ 3,277,560 $ 96,600
DEVLPMT LOAN INTEREST * 7.0 % x $ 4,016,000 $ 281,000
FEES, INSURANCE NA LUMP SUM NA $ 35,000
SOILS, LAND-RELATED NA LUMP SUM NA $ 71,000
FEES, PERMITS NA LUMP SUM NA $ 70.000
SOFT COST CONTINGENCY NA LUMP SUM NA $ 25,000
LEASE-UP COSTS NA LUMP SUM NA $ 50,000 M K
C K M
DEVELOPER FEE NA $ 280,000
E
SUB-TOTAL C1 SOFT COSTS (30%) $ 908,600

SUB-TOTAL: PROJECT COST $ 10,170,500 F D

D.1 ESCALATION** (Hard) 1.3 %/Qtr 2 QTR = 2.6 % $ 78,700 L

A
L J J
L J L J
TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 10,250,000 C
B
E. REVENUE (YEARLY) G G
STUDIO/ALCOVE 9 D.U. 9 X $ 825/DU X 12 $ 89,100 G G
1 BEDROOM/MEZZANINE 6 D.U. 6 X $1050/DU X 12 $ 75,600
2 BEDROOM 3 D.U. 3 X $1300/DU X 12 $ 46,800
3 BEDROOM 2 D.U. 2 X $1600/DU X 12 $ 38,400
L J
TOTAL REVENUE FROM RENT $ 249,900 J L
J L
L J
OPERATING EXPENSES (YEARLY)
LEGAL, ACCTG, INSUR 20 D.U. $ 200 / UNIT $ 4,000
REAL ESTATE TAXES 20 D.U. $ 1,000 / UNIT $ 20,000
UTILITIES, GARBAGE 20 D.U. $ 550 / UNIT $ 11,000
REPAIRS, RESERVES 20 D.U. $ 500 / UNIT $ 10,000
PROPERTY/LANDSC MGMT*** 20 D.U. $2,O00 / UNIT $ 35,000
LEASING 20 D.U. $ 12O / UNIT $ 2,000 W E S T N E I G H B O R H O O D E A S T N E I G H B O R H O O D
SUB-TOTAL OP EXPENSES $ 82,000 C O U R T Y A R D TYPOLOGY T O W N H O M E / R O W H O U S E T Y P O L O G Y

NET INCOME FROM OPERATIONS $ 167,900

NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLAN
ANNUAL MORTGAGE DEBT SVC $4,016,000 X 3.04% $ 122,000

DEBT SERVICE COVERAGE (DCR = NET INC/ DEBT SVC) 1.38****

MASTER PLAN NARRATIVE MASTER PLAN LEGEND VIEW LOOKING EAST FROM SUBJECT SITE DOWN ZONING CONSIDERATIONS ZONIN
4 0 t h S T R E E T P R O M E N A D E T O N E W G R E E N S W A Y
*Assumes land equity $6,233,100 and loan of $4,016,000
CONTEXT: SUSTAINABILITY AND CHANGE PREFACE COMPONENT
The planning solution recycles the best of the existing neighborhood – primarily its landscape
**Excludes land & soft cost; taken to midpoint of 12 month construction
and garden life style – as this way of life remains a nurturing one. The fundamental sustain- 0m 5m 25 m 50 m Evolutionary development of the West Neighborhood will require the least public/private
WEST NEIGHBORHOOD
CENTRAL GARDEN
able gesture of the solution is to achieve a 40 DU/acre density while enriching the public collaboration. The narrowing of the existing right of way will retain the existing street trees and
***Assumes one resident is paid property manager / transportation coordinator
landscape and ground-intimate character of the original neighborhood – in a way that does utilities; and the construction of planters, new trees, and street fleet parking will be at the
(Courtyard Typology)

not overwhelm, but indeed, is more miniaturized through scale, cadence, and detail.
****Favorable DCR, well above 1.25. Potentially, rents could be lower; or tenants expense of the developer under the purview of the City.

could be offered to pay mildly elevated rents to plan,

progressively purchase
For example the existing pattern of street trees - (in the same alignment) - is both
formalized and intensified in the master creating a continuous canopy equity
for both street
The East Neighborhood will require City purchase of 6 lots for the purpose of a neighbor-
hood Greensway / linear park. The service lanes will be, at the expense of the developer, trans-
and sidewalk. Additionally, the master plan proposes a minimal front setback in the East A SUBJECT PROJECT SITE formed into streets of the same scale and character, (including street trees), as the other pre-ex-
Neighborhood (ranging from .5 to 1 meter) and a mild setback in the West Neighborhood isting streets in the neighborhood.
(where the lots are deeper – ranging from 1.5 meters to 3 meters). These minimal setbacks B SITE FLEET & ENRICHED TREE ROWS (TYPICAL)
allow a compacted expression of property landscape identity, and of design variety The following table documents zoning/entitlement changes or interpretations that would make
(porches, exterior stairs, and, with zoning changes, modest live-work and public use). the master plan and project design feasible:
C SITE ENTRIES (TYPICAL)
The shift in block orientation from the existing West and East Neighborhoods is reflected COMPONENT PROPOSED MODIFICATION RATIONALE
in the new housing typologies. The West Neighborhood employs courtyard housing with a D CENTRAL GARDEN (TYPICAL) EXISTING 8.2 meter drive aisle -As streeets evolve away from
central garden. The East Neighborhood employs a townhouse/rowhouse typology with a RIGHT OF WAY 5.4 meter parking depth commuter support, narrowing and
shared, walkable central commons. Both typologies leverage prevailing east-west breezes; E FLEX SPACE (TYPICAL) 1.5 meter sidewalk 90 degree parking with rich tree-
both achieve similar densities/FSR values; and both establish disciplined patterns while lining makes them more
allowing for extensive variation in design as the master plan develops. These two types also
(COLLABORATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD RESOURCE ) 1 treed planting area commodious to pedestrian life
follow rich patterns of horizontal urban density (see touchstones at center/bottom of board.) per existing lot and street detail. EAST NEIGHBORHOOD
F PRIVATE INSET SIDE YARD PATIO (TYPICAL) PARKING 1 guest space per 10 units -Personal urban cars are CENTRAL COMMONS
TRANSITION 6 shared fleet spaces per 10 units destroying the planet.
Beyond the above contextual continuity, it would be disingenuous to claim that either the G GREENSWAY / LINEAR WALKING PARK -Their storage, maintenance,
front or side setbacks in the master plan condition will not be….arresting….in contrast to the (incl. 1 accessible per 20 units) insurance impacts make for high
(CONTINUOUS 2-LOT WIDTH ) (up to 3 micro-spaces allowed) social and individual costs.
existing single family dwellings. Mitigating the side impact, (and the resultant shadowing),
in the West Neighborhood, is the alternating pattern of insets for the bedrooms/patios and -Vancouver is well-served by
projections for the unit service cores. Mitigating it in the East Neighborhood is the H NEIGHBORHOOD GROCERY / CAFE 1 enclosed or coverd bike / transit and ride services.
motorbike space per unit -A managed fleet justifies the
commons between the new housing unit blocks – and the breakthrough of southerly daylight
reduction, and allows savings on
to existing /remaining units. J NORTH / SOUTH COMMONS personal vehicle costs (for rent).
(TYPICAL FOR EACH PROPERTY) FRONT SETBACK 1.2 meters minimum setback -Continues a miniaturized
But, clearly, a strong master plan that ushers in a new, dense, and affordable way of urban
WEST NEIGHBORHOOD 2.5 meters maximum setback expression of home and yard.
life will establish new patterns that need to be in sharp contrast to existing ones.
K EAST / PEDESTRIAN PASSAGE DEDICATION -Nurtures concept of
Setback must be landscaped neighborhood permeability,
PARKING or employed for exterior stairs, exploration, with a variety of
The same transportation management system proposed for the project is proposed for the L PRIVATE PATIO OFF COMMONS (TYPICAL) porch, bike/motorbike parking, expressions, details suited to
WEST NEIGHBORHOOD
28
master plan, with increasing efficiencies as collaborative whole-neighborhood management outdoor dining or other amenity project concept.
SIDE SETBACKS
evolves. In the face of climate change and human survival, maintaining (and enforcing) a M CONVERSION OF SERVICE LANE TO NEW that enhances pedestrian life. -Provides opportunities for site
culture of personal car ownership in a city’s core is simply untenable. This same rationale, of and neighborhood socialization.
NEW STREET FRONTAGE / ADDRESSES
reduced car transit, argues against neighborhood streets being commuter-ways, and argues FRONT SETBACK .5 meter minimum setback -Because these lots are shallower,
for a street narrowing that allows 90 degree parking for a modest site-fleet of vehicles. EAST NEIGHBORHOOD 1 meter maximum setback the front setback, in the tradition
of urban townhouses, provides
WALKING, EXPLORATION, ENGAGEMENT Setback must be employed for just enough frontage for territori-
landscape. al expression (landscape, potted EAST NEIGHBORHOOD
The master plan’s open spaces are conceived as a continuously permeable structure for SIDE SETBACKS
plants).
walking freely, including streets, service lanes, and, importantly, project commons and
-The evolutionary gesture for the
courtyards. Even in a small neighborhood, this approach opens an almost unlimited
 CONVIVIAL DENSITY | GOODALE ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING

GROUND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR MEZZANINE FLOOR

31.1 m
L K C K L

G DN
J
F 17
16
H
GROUND FLOOR UP SECOND FLOOR DN MEZZANINE FLOOR Open
to
31.1 m UP
Below

L K C K L
Open
06 UP to
DN Below

05 G DN
J UP
F 15 17 Open
to
16 Below
H UP DN
UP DN Open
07
UP to
18
18 UP Below
UP 14
04 Open
UP 06 UP DN to DN
DN Open
DN Below
to
05 Below
E D UP
15
19
19 UP Open
08 to
Below
UP DN DN Open
07 to
18 Below

37.7 m
14 18 UP
UP
Open
04 to
UP DN
DN Open Below
to
DN
03 Below
E DB UP
19
19 UP
08 13
13
Open
Open DN to
to Below
UP DN Below

37.7 m
09 Open
to
20
20 UP
5.5 m UP 12
12 DN
Below

02 03
B UP UP
13
13 DN
DN Open Open
to to
UP Below Below
DN
21
21 UP
09
10 20
20 UP
5.5 m UP 12
12
Open
02
UP to
DN UP DN
Open DN
DN Below
to
Below
21
21 UP Open
10 to
UP Below
Open DN
01 UP DN to
DN UP DN
Below

Open
to
Open
1.5 m UP Below to
01 UP DN DN Below
11 1.5 m
Open
1.5 m A to
Below
11 1.5 m
M
A

N
N

W E S T 4 0 T H A V E N U E
W E S T 4 0 T H A V E N U E
( V A( VN A CN OC U V
O U VE ER R SS II T EE ) )
T

KEY K
INEY
T EI N
NTTEI NOTNI OS N S PPRR O
OJJ EECCTT D D
AAT AT A PLAN LEGE
P NL DA N L E G E N D D E S I G N N A R R A TDI EV S
EIGN NARR
T H E
T HM EI S M
S I N G M I D D L E
I S S I N G M I D D L E
OVERALL • Ground Level units open to separate social and private garden patios. PREFACE
O V E R A L L Fuse the garden tradition of the existing context with high density dwelling, • •Ground Level
2nd Floor unitsunits open
overlook to separate
Garden with bay social
windowand private
or French garden patios.
balcony. This design solution seeks to push the limits of the walk-up to a maximum comfortable

V A N C O U V E R S I T E
addressing PREFACE
Fuse the garden traditionaffordability, energy
of the existing consumption,
context sociability,
with high density anddwelling,
comprehensive
0m 1m 5m 10 m density, in pursuit of a balanced set of goals:
quality of life. • GROUND-LEVEL-ACCESSED
2nd Floor units overlook Garden with bay window or French balcony. This design solution seeks to push the limits of

V A N C O U V E R S I T E
· A Sustainable Quality of Life
addressing affordability, energy consumption, sociability, and comprehensive UNITS density, in pursuit of a balanced set of goals:
01 3 Bedroom 162 Sq Meters 2 1/2 Storey / Accessible 0m 1m 5m 10 ·m Urban Conviviality
quality of life.
QUALITY OF LIFE GROUND-LEVEL-ACCESSED
02
0103
Studio / Bed AlcoveUNITS
Studio
49 Sq Meters
/ Bed Alcove
3 Bedroom 49 Sq162
Meters Flat
Sq Meters
Flat
2 1/2 Storey / Accessible
U R B A N A R I U M A STREET ENTRY
· Affordability / Diversity
Though the density of the walk-up is now mightily constrained
· A Sustainable Quality of Life
· by building / accessibility
Urban Conviviality

U R B A N A R I U M
-Comprehensively shape the public environment as a rich ground plane experience. codes - which militate common exiting and elevators above ·two stories - the walk-up
Affordability type,
/ Diversity
0204 Studio / Bed Alcove
Studio / Bed Alcove49 Sq49 Meters Flat
Sq Meters Flat B GARDEN A STREET ENTRY particularly in this context, suggests rich solutions that optimize the qualitative goals of the
QUALITY OF L
-Employ IFE
courtyard/garden landscape to create layers, depth, delicacy.
05
0306
Studio / Bed Alcove
Studio / Bed
46 Sq Meters
Alcove46 Sq49
Flat
Sq Meters Flat competition program. Though the density of the walk-up is now might
-Comprehensively shape the public environment as a rich ground plane experience. Studio / Bed Alcove Meters Flat codes - which militate common exiting and elev
0407 Studio
Studio / Bed
/ Bed Alcove50 Sq49
Alcove Sq Meters
Meters Flat Flat C ALLEY ENTRY
-Use density to create a fine-toothed texture and rhythm.
0508 Studio
Studio / Bed
/ Bed Alcove47 Sq46
Alcove Sq Meters
Meters Flat Flat B GARDEN A SUSTAINABLE QUALITY OF L I F Eparticularly in this context, suggests rich solutio
-Employ courtyard/garden landscape to create layers, depth, delicacy. Vancouver’s environmental traditions are closely allied with competition
the beauty ofprogram.
her landscape.
0609 Studio
Studio/ Bed
/ Bed Alcove47 Sq46
Alcove Meters Flat
Sq Meters Flat D GARDEN PATIO TYPICAL Thus, a first principle of the design solution is to provide each walk-up an intimacy with the
0710 Studio
Studio/ Bed Alcove
/ Bed Alcove49 Sq50Meters Flat
Sq Meters Flat C ALLEY ENTRY ground plane; and to envision both the project and the neighborhood as an extended,
S O Ca Ifine-toothed
-Use density to create A B I L I T Y texture and rhythm. 11 3-Bedroom 135 Sq Meters 2 1/2 Story / Accessible A SUSTAINABLE QUALITY O
-Employ simple unit geometries, maximizing flexibility of use/tenant. 08 Studio / Bed Alcove 47 Sq Meters Flat E PRIVATE PATIO TYPICAL inter-linked garden experience.
TOTAL 729 Sq M Vancouver’s environmental traditions are close
09 Studio / Bed Alcove 47 Sq Meters Flat D GARDEN PATIO TYPICAL The project is organized around a central Garden. Living areasThus, a first
partake of principle of the design solution is to
garden views
-Employ shared courtyards and greenways, facilitating interaction. 102ND-FLOOR UNITS
Studio / Bed Alcove 49 Sq Meters Flat F F L E X S P A C E (Kitchen, Shop, Music Room, Study/Library)
SOCIABILITY ground
(and terraces in the case of ground level units); sleeping areas plane;
partake and to
of secluded envision both the project a
rear
11 12 3-Bedroom
1-Bedroom 76 Sq135 Sq Meters
Meters Mezzanine 2 Bedroom
1/2 Story / Accessible
-Generously
-Employ simple unit open maximizing
geometries, all units to garden spaces.of use/tenant.
flexibility G TRASH E PRIVATE PATIO TYPICAL terrace views - both conditions providing a daily intimacy with landscape.garden experience.
inter-linked
13 1-Bedroom TOTAL77 Sq Meters
729 Sq Mezzanine
M Bedroom
14 1-Bedroom 77 Sq Meters Mezzanine Bedroom In this context, micro-sizing of units was not deemed an appropriate evolutionary move.
-Develop rich pedestrian infrastructure, encouraging exploration. The project is organized around a central Garde
-Employ shared courtyards and greenways, facilitating interaction. 15
2ND-FLOOR UNITS
1-Bedroom 76 Sq Meters Mezzanine Bedroom H F A NFCLEE X
GROUNDS / MAINTEN S P A C E (Kitchen, Shop, MusicInstead,
Room, theStudy/Library)
program, while partial to studios and one-bedrooms, maintains a
16 1-Bedroom 68 Sq Meters Flat modest but comfortable unit scale. (and terraces in the case of ground level units);
-Allow live-work, joining walkability with tangible interaction. 12 17 1-1-Bedroom
Bedroom 100 Sq76 Sq Meters
Meters Mezzanine
Mezzanine Bedroom Bedroom terrace views - both conditions providing a daily
-Generously open all units to garden spaces. J SECURED STORAGE G TRASH
1318 1-Bedroom
2-Bedroom 77 Sq77 Sq Meters
Meters Mezzanine
Bed Alcove & MezzanineBedroom
Bedroom URBAN CONVIVIALITY
-Integrate the elderly/disabled, including space for family/caretaker.
1419 2-Bedroom
1-Bedroom 76 Sq77
Meters Bed Alcove
Sq Meters & MezzanineBedroom
Mezzanine Bedroom Sociability In this context, micro-sizing of units was not dee
-Develop rich pedestrian infrastructure, encouraging exploration. K SECURED BICYCLE / MOTORBIKE STORAGE
1520 1-Bedroom
1-Bedroom 77 Sq76
Meters Mezzanine
Sq Meters Bedroom Bedroom
Mezzanine H GROUNDS / MAINTENANCE - All unit entries are off the Garden, and the Garden and its unit terraces will provide areas
Instead, the program, while partial to studios an
21 1-Bedroom 77 Sq Meters Mezzanine Bedroom of respite with chance social crossings.
16 1-Bedroom 68 Sq Meters Flat
A F F Owalkability
-Allow live-work, joining RDABIL I T tangible
with Y interaction. TOTAL 704 Sq M L SMART / MINI CAR P A R KI N G S P A C E S* ( 3 ) - The permeability of units - (many with operable walls to modest but comfortable
through-passage, through- unit scale.
17 1- Bedroom 100 Sq Meters Mezzanine Bedroom
-Avoid expense of elevators through all 2 1/2 story walk-ups.
18GROUND-LEVEL 2-Bedroom 77 Sq Meters Bed Alcove & Mezzanine Bedroom J SECURED STORAGE views, through-breezes) - is both an environmental and a social gesture.
AUXILIARY SPACES M COVERED BICYCLE PARKING - The modest Flex Space - as the neighborhood develops -Uallows RBA forNcollaborative
CONVIVIALITY
-Integrate the elderly/disabled, including space for family/caretaker. 19FLEX SPACE* 2-Bedroom
-Minimize impact of land costs through high DU/Acre ratio. See Note Below 20 Sq76 Sq Meters
Meters EnclosedBed Alcove & Mezzanine Bedroom programming; where a single block might have the following Sociability
shared resources: a shop,
20STORAGE 1-Bedroom
Bikes / Motorbikes 24 Sq77 Sq Meters
Meters Mezzanine Bedroom
Mini-Garages K SECURED BICYCLE / MOTO RB I K E Schef/kitchen;
a contracted T O R A Ga music
E room; a library/study --all both functional
All unit entriesand
aresocial
off the Garden, and the Ga
-Minimize per-tenant construction costs through small, efficient units. N PARKING S P A C E S* (11) opportunities.
21 STORAGE 1-Bedroom
Tenant Storage Units 12 Sq 77 Sq Meters
Meters Locked Mezzanine
Units Bedroom of respite with chance social crossings.
TRASH Including Recyclabes 14 Sq Meters
AFFORDAB I L I Tcost
-Minimize Y of cars through managed transportation (see below). TOTAL 704 SqEnclosed
M / Conditioned
L SMART / MINI CAR P A R KI N G S RPSA
DIVE I TC
Y E S* ( 3 ) - The permeability of units - (many with opera
MAINTENANCE Yard and Janitorial 12 Sq Meters Enclosed
-Avoid expense of elevators through all 2 1/2 story walk-ups. *TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT & MAINTENANCE views, through-breezes) - is both an environm
Integral with real urban conviviality is diversity of social experience.
TOTAL 74 Sq M
GROUND-LEVEL AUXILIARY SPACES - The typical unit design flexibly supports a wide range of -livingThe modestas
modalities Flex Space - as the neighborhoo
suggested
-Minimize impact of land costs through high DU/Acre ratio.
PARKING Parking is minimized and relegated to theM Cway.
right of O VTenants
E R EinDthis B I C Y C L will
neighborhood E PARKI N G
by the furnishing plans - supporting all ways of life that areprogramming;
not either noisy or
where a single block might hav
FLEX SPACE*
Managed Fleet See NoteSpace
Accessible Below 20 Sq Meters
1 Space AdaptedEnclosed
Public Right of Way
MANAGED TRANSPORTATION not own/store cars here. All cars in the neighborhood will be a shared, collaboratively large-family-based.
STORAGE Bikes / Spaces
Standard Motorbikes 4 Spaces
24 Sq Meters
AdaptedMini-Garages
Public Right of Way managed fleet. The rationale for this approach is as
a contracted chef/kitchen; a music room; a lib
-Provide no personal vehicle parking other than limited guest parking.
-Minimize per-tenant construction costs through small, efficient units. STORAGE Tenant Storage
Compact Spaces Units 12 Sq Meters
4 Spaces AdaptedLocked Units
Public Right of Way N P A follows:
R K I N G S P A C E S* ( 1 1 ) - Even extended families are accommodated in the two accessible frontal units.
opportunities.
- The private lots are freed from car storage and can thus maximize their buildable livable - Allowing Live/Work throughout the neighborhood would enliven the ground plane and
-Employ cooperative vehicle pool with a transportation/property manager.
-Minimize cost of cars through managed transportation (see below).
TRASH
Guest Spaces
MAINTENANCE
Including
Smart / Mini Recyclabes
Spaces
Standard Spaces
Yard and Janitorial
TOTAL
14 Sq Meters
3 Spaces
2 Spaces
12 Sq Meters
14 Spaces
Enclosed
On-Site off of Alley / Conditioned
Adapted Public Right of Way
Enclosed
area.
- Reducing the burden of individual car ownership, insurance, maintenance by spreading
*TRANSPORTATION
the costs of fewer total cars over the whole MANAGEMENT
community will increase tenant buying&power
MAINTENANCE
provide further opportunities for entrepreneurship, interaction, and sustenance.
DIVERSITY 29
-Reduce required parking accordingly in a spirit of local and global citizenship. AFFORDABILITY Integral with real urban conviviality is diversity o
TOTAL 74 Sq M and ability to use more income for rent. - The narrow, deep units make for maximizing the unit count, (DU/Acre), somewhat
- The typical unit design flexibly supports a wi
-Provide ample secured, covered bicycle/motorbike parking. PARKING
CONSTRUCTION GROSS AREA - Idle, sitting individually owned cars across the neighborhood are an overall social
Parking is minimized and relegated to the right of way. Tenants defraying in
thethis
highneighborhood
land value. will by the furnishing plans - supporting all ways
Managed
GROUNDFleet
LEVEL Accessible
Gross Space
Footprint 1 Space
660 Sq Meters Adapted Public Right of Way inefficiency. - The walk-up approach obviates elevators and exit stairs.
not own/store cars here. All cars in the neighborhood will be a shared, collaboratively
MANAGED TRANSPORTATION 2ND LEVEL Gross Footprint
Standard Spaces 734 Sq
4 Meters
Spaces Adapted Public Right of Way - The repetitive, stacked plumbing cores provide constructionlarge-family-based.
economies.
-Provide no personal managed fleet. The rationale for this approach is as follows: - Even extended families are accommodated i
E N vehicle
E R G Yparking
C O Nother
S U Mthan
P T Ilimited
O N guest parking. MEZZANINE Gross Footprint 242 Sq Meters In early days of the master plan, each project’s tenants will contract an on-site manager. - Developing cooperative models of maintenance, governance, and transportation
Compact Spaces 4 Spaces Adapted Public Right of Way - inThe
Collectively the tenants will purchase shares private
a fleet lots areand
of 14 vehicles freed
will from
pay thecar storage and can thus
on-site maximize
management their buildable
- (eliminating livable
expensive car-warehousing) - -canAllowing Live/Work
all contribute throughout the neighbor
to sustained
-Achieve high DU/Acre for efficient local infrastructure / public utilities. TOTAL 1636 Sq M
Smart / Mini Spaces 3 Spaces On-Site off of Alley manager’s salary. This salary will be feasible due to the reduction in individual car /
area. operational affordability. provide further opportunities for entrepreneu
CONVIVIAL DENSITY | GOODALE ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING

30
CONVIVIAL DENSITY | GOODALE ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING

31
AROUND THE Location: Surrey Site Competition Boundary

CORNER CO-HOUSING FOR

YOUNG FAMILIES

THIRD PRIZE

King George Blvd

ALTFORMA: CEDRIC JAQUES YU, SHANE WU
80th Street

LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

EXAMPLE
LAYOUT
Surrey Mixed Use Private & 17 dwellings 13.2 m
Public

The “middle” affords varying possibilities of form and new models

of housing to provide affordability while addressing suburban
challenges of mobility and social connection. This proposal
reconfigures 2 lots into a 17 unit collective community to support
multi-generational dwellings with roughly 40 adults and 25-30
children in a suburban mixed-use mews.

Robust community life is vital and enhanced by spaces designed to

foster social exchange, chance encounter, and resource sharing.
Projects like this hinge on unit requirement relaxations in exchange
for greater shared space as well as on reclaiming underutilized Vancouver lots Surrey lots
lane
front and side yards.

A crowdsourced or participatory landscape design promotes

community engagement. Semi-private niches feed into a green street street

garden forming the spine of the community. A cozy firepit, 33’ x 120’ 100’ x 120’ 66’ x 263’
(10 x 36.6m) (30.5 x 36.6m)
vegetable garden, long table dinners, are all imaged here. A shared (20 x 80 m)

kitchen anchors the garden and is supplemented by corner retail
serving the neighborhood.
Reducing the land cost factor by converting 2 single family homes to
Lot Rationale
Surrey lots are unique from Vancouver lots because they rarely
contain a laneway. Coupled with large plot sizes and greater street
setbacks due to dykes, residential streets are non-places that lack
quality definition in the public to private edges.

17 units, resources can be allocated to service value-added design, The focus of this proposal is on long corner “front-back” lots.

1.0 Side by Side lot

community amenity, and support affordable housing solutions for
private and public development models.
32
Among all lot types these provide the greatest street surface to land
area ratio. Per dollar of land cost, front-back lots have the potential
to provide the most daylight and street facing solar exposure.
Corner lot to road edges are often 6.5 meters from the property line
with an added 6 meter setback. This proposal seeks to relax setback
requirements by half with potential build-to-line conditions to define
street edges.
At least two configurations exist for the side by side lot - A
corner type and an in-block type. In-block configurations rep-
resent approx 85% of lot types in the urban fabric. The pair of
20x40 lots form a 40x40 lot configuration.
2.0 Front to Back lot
80 x 20 meter lot configurations have the greatest street expo-
sure to area ratio. Due to the unique configuration with 3 edg-
es, it defines 2 corners simultaneously and becomes valuable
as setting the pace for setbacks and future block structures

Human Scale
( 1.4 FSR )
Corner lots in Surrey often have additional area given to dykes creating
extremely wide street sections. Front yards are a wasteland - unpleasant
and expensive. By relaxing the front and side yard setbacks, corner lots
can “heal” the undefined public and private edge with defined walkways,
planting, bikeways, or parking where required.
The grain of many corner lots have a side facade fronting the length of
the site. This creates an awkward open termination to the block structure.
This proposal creates 3 “fronts” with doors opening to all sides in 3-4
storey buildings. Parking is at grade to integrate into the character of
the surroundings and promote social encounter. Variation on height and
elevation as well as material create a finer grain on the elevation for a
human scale.
Vegetation and connection to natural elements are linked to increased
health and well being.
EXAMPLE
LAYOUT
2 X 2 GRID
Housing with
Community in mind
An outdoor pathway serves as a social link between the
residents, with designed elements to foster social connectivity for
children and for adults. An underground parkade is specifically
avoided to increases movement along the green spine and
promote neighbourly chances encounters.
The flex corner contains 400 sf of shared amenity space -
childminding, a community living room, or shared kitchen room
for social events.
Units are designed with both street and mew access and
sightlines to activate the internal realm. It offers a safe and
intimate playspace for children and social space for families to
eat together, connect, and socialize.
community
Private
Crowdsourced
Landscape design
Participatory design in the landscape design both influence
the shape and function of the landscape area. Include the
community in designing their future home. Children have the
opportunity to design the play spaces, and families can decide
what types of features and spaces are to be included.
Urban gardens, firepits, longtables for outdoor eating, BBQ
areas, playgrounds, sandpit, rose garden, covered picnic
zones. By crowdsourcing the content, sense of ownership and
increased potential for social connections is promoted.
This also bolsters community responsibility in maintenance.
Tending to the garden requires consistency however so
depending on the community, residents can enlist the help of
gardening from the caretaker suite flex configuration.
3
2
neighborhood 1 Solar Harvest:
Rooftop solar heating and optional PV
panels offer renewable sources of energy
Public
2 Central Plant:
Hot water heat recovery and air ventilation
across households provide reduce load
eCo Strategies through synergies.
3
Natural Cross ventilation:
eCo-Housing employs both passive and active design All 18 units take advantage of natural cross
elements to reduce energy use, increase energy efficiency, and ventilation for summer cooling and in
promote a culture of sustainable living. reducing mechanical cooling loads.
With a mews lane, each unit has two facade openings which
allow passive ventilation for summer cooling. Higher insulation Passive House Standard
25-35% Energy savings from R40 walls and
standards reduce overall envelope heat loss. A shared central R30 flooring construction with higher
plant creates efficiencies in energy recapture and use. airtightness standards
Bike and Car shares are integrated into the design to reduce
Smart Metering
automobile reliance. A flex corner with a programmable retail Units equipped with real time display of
or community space promotes sub-urban walkability, local energy use and automated kit to facilitate
movement, and a potential reduction to car dependency. energy efficiency
Urban gardening, sharing and cooking in the community
space decreases food waste and promotes knowledge sharing
around sustainable living. 33
 AROUND THE CORNER | ALTFORMA
A’

B’

34
 AROUND THE CORNER | ALTFORMA
PL PL

Section B’ Unit Mix

20 % Market - Mew
2 Bed 3 Bed + 4 Bed 4 Bed + 5 Bed
(Multi-generational)
850-950sf 1050 sf 1480 sf 1130-1510sf 2250 sf

1 - 2* 1
1 2 20% Rental Market
4 2 2 20% Rental Subsidized
1 2
8 X 2-3 Bedroom 8 X 4-5 Bedroom
40% Market
Section A’ Total: 17 Units Townhouse
(38 Adults & 25 Children +/-)
Mew House Townhouse Rental Apartment Community Corner (Flex)

Bike + Car Share

L2
L1

Neighborhood Cafe
or Retail
L1
L2 L4
L1(a)

L2 The expanded corridor allows

flexibility for unit layouts and Co-working Space or
B1 ensures adequate facade
surface area in anticipation of Child Minding
The 1 1/2 storey mew house is adjacent lot development.
L1(b) Community
designed with the possibility of
bedrooms on each level for multi- These spaces become niches flex space
generational families. for bike storage, planting, and
L3 social space while providing
Units minimums are designed with sight-lines through the mews.
Caretaker or Visitor Unit
shared space in mind
L3
L1(c)
AROUND THE CORNER | ALTFORMA

+2.5 +2.5 +2.5 2 2

1 5 1 4

34m (111’) +/-

+2.5
+2.5 +2.5 1. From 1 - 5 - 1 section ratio to 2 - 4 - 2
134a Street

134 Street
+2.5
+2.5 +2.5 +2.5 +4.5

+4 +2.5

+4.5
+3.5 +3.5

81 Street 19m
2. Reclaim the front yard with reduced setbacks

+2.5 +2.5 +2.5 +2.5 +2.5 +2.5

Site Area: 1557 sq.m Building Area: 2182 sq.m Parking: 15 (2 carshare) Bike Storage: 15 3. Reduced Sideyard Setback- Dykes to Ped Paths

+4 Levels
+3 Levels

At grade parking integrates into the

Variation of materials and rhythms in hybrid surroundings while promotes movement Community Amenity / Retail Corner
zones to create visual interest and a human scale. on the ground for chance encounters.

Neighborhood Cafe - Child minding - Co-working

Roofline variation fits into suburban context and
allows for 3-4 storey buildings with options for 1/2
36
storey gables for greater density
Massing Broken into Smaller Windows and doors fronting Event space - Bookshare Space - Shared Toolshed
Scale to fit into neighbourhood
Character and increasing natural
the street enhance “eyes on the Carshare - craft studio - Yoga Studio - Gym
street” and CPTED principles
light and vegetated groundplane
 AROUND THE CORNER | ALTFORMA

“Children are one third of our

population and all of our future”

“There is no power for change

greater than a community
discovering what it cares about.”

“We shape our buildings,

and afterwards, our buildings
shape us”

37
BETTER
TOGETHER
HONOURABLE MENTION
MIZA ARCHITECTS: DAVID ZEIBIN, MICHAEL
WARTMAN, DAMI LEE, WARREN SCHESKE

LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Surrey Co-housing Co-housing / Trade 11 units 12.8 m

land for green 4 storeys
space

Driven by a co-housing approach and a community typology

based on aggregation that provides opportunities for
aging in place, this project creates a diversity of unit types
to accommodate families and their extended relatives
(grandparents, aunts, uncles), students, and singles and
couples looking for a starter space who will later need
to grow their space with their families. The project also
provides a model for commercial insertions through a
street-oriented “mortgage helper” (or Commercial Retail
Unit, in more conventional terms). The space may be used
as a community space for the building and neighbourhood,
or leased out to small businesses such as a café, beauty
salon, professional services office, or retail establishment.
This approach aims to focus on the benefits of increased
density and foster greater interaction between neighbours
to stimulate exchange of ideas and create resilient
communities that look out for each other.

38
 BETTER TOGETHER | MIZA ARCHITECTS
Print
Shop

Cafe

Insurance

135 Street
Notary
Thai

135a Street
Food

Driving Daycare 80a Ave

School

134a Street

Best Western

Robins CIBC
Donuts

80th Ave Community Beauty Salon

Kitchen

Gas

LEGEND
Pizza +
Curry
Commercial Floor Area
Physiotherapist
79a Ave Accountant Commercial Property

Developed Residential Floor Area

Bakery Co-housing Developed Property

City Developed Linear Park

134a Street

City Purchased Property

B
Street facing Commercial units provide an
A opportunity for locally owned and operated small
businesses to thrive.

D Pedestrian walkway through the Co-Housing

C B site connects laneways that are converted to
linear parks.
134a Street

Existing pedestrian paths are connected to City

developed linear parks drawing foot traffic into
C the block and away from vehicles creating lively
E and safe communities.

City land buybacks allow for more dynamic linear

D
parks with space more residents.

Multiple Co-Housing projects in one block allow

E
further pedestrian oriented connectivity.

39
BETTER TOGETHER | MIZA ARCHITECTS

1 BED

2 BED

3 BED

4 BED
Ground Level — 1:150 Second Level — 1:150 Third Level — 1:150 Attic Level — 1:150

CROSS SECTION
 BETTER TOGETHER | MIZA ARCHITECTS

1 DD MMM 2016 REVIEW

NO DATE DESCRIPTION
ISSUES + REVISIONS

SEAL

DR AFT
NOT FOR
ON
CONS TR UCTI

TOP LEFT: FLOOR PLANS AND UNIT MIX PROJECT TITLE

BOTTOM LEFT: PERSPECTIVE OF SHARED OUTDOOR SPACE CIVIC ADDRESS

XXXX XXXX, CITY, BC

FAR LEFT: PERSPECTIVE VIEW THROUGH PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY

PROJECT CODE STATUS
### SD
SCALE DATE
1 : 50 24 JUN 2017

TOP RIGHT: CROSS SECTION SECTIONS

A501
SHEET

BOTTOM RIGHT: ECONOMICS DIAGRAM

FAR RIGHT: PERSPECTIVE OF EXTERIOR VIEW

41
CO-OP
POD
HONORABLE MENTION
COLUMBA TEAM: ALBERTO SUAREZ, SOFIA
MARTINEZ, PAT MCCLAIN, IAN MARCUSE,
NOHA SEDSKY, MILENE VALLIN
LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Burnaby Co-op Community 16 units 11.4 m

Land Trust 56 inhabitants 3 storeys

Pod is an organic way of growing and development. Pod means

being part of something bigger without losing identity. It is a
container of smaller pieces. This natural relationship between
elements inspired us to conceive of a pod-like system of
affordable housing development. Housing co-operatives have
proved throughout decades that they are a very successful
model, socially integrative, financially and operationally efficient.
Co-ops could be the strong plant from where small pods can
grow. Several co-ops could be expanded in the near future,
developing new buildings and adding affordable units of different PANDORA STREET PANDORA STREET

sizes to their existing portfolio. This new building (a) would

30.15

LOT 4268 LOT 4272 PROPOSED LOT

4.00

37.1m x 20.1m 37.15m x 10.05m 37.10m x 30.15m

belong to the main co-op (A) sharing financial and operational

resources. The new building will be owned and developed by
37.15
37.10

31.10

the Community Land Trust Foundation of BC. It would then be

governed and managed by the co-op. Pods would be physically SETBACK LINE
2.00

small coops integrated and associated with the life of a larger

2.00 26.15 2.00

30.15

coop, located at a short distance from each other. There can be a ORIGINAL SITE/ 2 lots COMBINED LOT/ setback lines ORIGINAL SITE / 2 lots PROPOSED SITE/ 1lot PROPOSED SITE/ 1 lot
FSR=0.6 FSR=1.5 (no social space) FSR=1.3+ social mixed courtyard
few pods, or many pods, or even an alliance of many pods.

42
 CO-OP POD | COLUMBA TEAM

PANDORA STREET

THE CONCEPT
30.15
2.05 26.00 2.15

GARAGE EXIT 1
dn 14.5 2.7 8.8
4.00

14.5 4.2 7.3

MAIN ENTRANCE
BEHIVES GARDEN

8
8
TYPE
B

TYPE
B

MOTHER CO-OP CO-OP POD

up
TYPE TYPE
2.5

A2 A dn

21
dn

21
TYPE
D
37.10

37.15

TYPE
30.95

TYPE
B

TYPE
20

up
up
ramp 16%

4
4
dn
dn
dn
COMMUNITY GARDEN

TYPE
E
TYPE
D

6
6
COMMUNITY ROOM

7 4.5 14.5
2.20
7%

PARKING ENTRANCE
30.15

GROUND FLOOR
1

Ground Floor Second Floor Third Floor 43

 CO-OP POD | COLUMBA TEAM

EQUITY
CONTRIBUTION

MOTHER CO-OP NEW CO-OP

ANNUAL
SURPLUS REVENUE EXPENSES
TRANSFER

7.20 7.20

7.00 7.00

FINANCING NET OPERATING

BEDROOM BEDROOM
LIVING LIVING
BEDROOM BEDROOM

Mortgage Payment INCOME

Loan 1 Payment

50

50
12

12
81

81
5

5
(Vancity Pre-Development Funds: 50%

8.10

8.10

760

760
870

870
7.40

7.40

not payable during the first 5 years)

1220 1220

510

510
WD WD

Loan 2 Payment
(Vancity Community Foundation: not

1015

1015
payment period of 5 years)
990 990

UNIT TYPE A UNIT TYPE A UNIT TYPE A1 ( accesible UNIT TYPE unit) A1 ( accesible unit)
1 1
AREA 51.1 SM ( 550 SF) AREA 51.1 SM ( 550 SF)
2 AREA 57.8 SM ( 622 SF)
2 AREA 57.8 SM ( 622 SF)

5.25 5.25 5.25 5.25

CAPITAL COST (CAD)

7.20

7.00

Construction rates established on The Missing Middle Competition rules.

DN DN

BEDROOM BEDROOM

BEDROOM

CAPITAL COST 5.179.404

LIVING

BEDROOM
7.40

7.40

LAND COST 3.537.200

50
12

81

8.90

8.90
5

CAPITALIZED RENT UP 5.065

8.10

760
870
7.40

UP UP

1220

TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS 8.721.669

510

WD

MASTER BEDROOM MASTER BEDROOM

EQUITY PROVIDED BY CO-OP 1.200.000

1.50

1.50
1015

990
VANCITY PDF + INVESTOR LOANS 1.700.000
Unit
1 type A
UNIT TYPE A
AREA 51.1 SM ( 550 SF)
Unit
2 type A1
UNIT TYPE A1 ( accesible unit)
AREA 57.8 SM ( 622 SF)
Unit
3 type B3 84.4TYPE
UNIT TYPE B / AREAUNIT SM B(908
/ AREA
LOWER FLOOR 38.3 SM (412
SF) 84.4 SM (908 SF)
LOWER
SF) /FLOOR
UPPER 38.3
FLOORSM
46.2
(412
SMSF)
( 497
/ UPPER
SF) FLOOR 46.2 SM ( 497 SF)

(1 BR - 550 sf) 5.25

(1BR - 622 sf) 5.25
(2 BR - 908 sf)
Accessible FINANCIAL ALTERNATIVES Tabla 1

6.65 6.65 BEDROOM

6.65 6.65
DN
No underground parking and building on city land were
consider as potential alternatives after the competition

CO-OP POD CO-OP POD CO-OP POD

7.40

BEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM

NO U/G PARKING NO U/G PARKING

8.90

ON CITY LAND
UP

FSR 1.3 1.3 1.3

7.10

7.10

GROSS FLOOR AREA (sf) 24.122,77 15.360,87 15.360,87

8.60

8.60

MASTER BEDROOM
NUMBER OF UNITS 16 21 21

CAPITAL COST ($) 5.179.404 3.902.078 3.902.078

1.50

LAND COST ($) 3.537.200 3.537.200 0

MASTER BEDROOM
MASTER BEDROOM
EQUITY CONTRIBUTION ($) 1.200.000 1.200.000 1.200.000
UNIT TYPE B / AREA 84.4 SM (908 SF)
1.50

1.50

3 LOWER FLOOR 38.3 SM (412 SF) / UPPER FLOOR 46.2 SM ( 497 SF)
VANCITY LOAN ($) 300.000 300.000 300.000

INVESTORS LOAN ($) 1.400.000 0 0

MOTHER CO-OP ANNUAL TRANSFER ($) 200.000 200.000 0

Unit type
6
D 6TYPEUNIT
UNIT D / AREA
TYPE D
103.5
/ AREA
SM103.5
( 1,114
LOWER FLOORLOWER
SMSF)
AREA 46.7
FLOOR
( 1,114 SF)
SMAREA
( 503
46.7
SF) SM
/ UPPER
( 503
FLOOR
SF) / 56.8
UPPERSM
FLOOR
( 61156.8
SF) SM ( 611 SF)

(3 BR - 1114 sf)
CO-OP POD | COLUMBA TEAM

45
EXTRA
SPECIAL
HONOURABLE MENTION
WORKSHOP ARCHITECTURE: HELENA
GRDADOLNIK, DAVID COLUSSI, ELAINE
CHAU, KELLIE CHIN, THOMAS PETCH
LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Burnaby Rental / Conventional Flex 5-9 units 9m

Sales 2.5 storeys

Our proposal builds on the success of the Vancouver Special but
increases its density, flexibility and sociability to make a housing
type that is EXTRA SPECIAL.
Extra Special housing provides a dwelling size between the
single-family house and a condo or apartment home. The form
provides the flexibility to support different cultural traditions
and living arrangements. It also unlocks multiple ownership
combinations that range from one multi-generational household
living on-site to six owners with three secondary suites.
We propose a new zoning category called Residential Extra
(RX) when two lots are combined to create a corner lot at least
fifty feet wide. As a next step for gentle density, we decided to
work within many of the current zoning parameters including
the overall building envelope and setbacks. RX zoning allows
increased lot coverage and more dwelling units. Bordered by
two streets and a laneway, the corner site allows for direct
access to multiple dwellings and there is minimal shadow
impact to adjacent properties.
The Vancouver Special – a low-cost housing type design prevalent in the region The range of unit sizes and combinations in our proposal provides market
since the 1970s, had a form that was a direct expression of maximizing the choice, tenure options, and the flexibility to meet the changing needs of a multi-
existing zoning bylaws. These houses are over two levels – with the main living generational or ‘found’ family, and for co-living between seniors or single
areas on the second floor and often a secondary unit on the main floor. people. This flexibility provides social and economic benefits: elder care and
childcare are significant costs in urban areas, while sharing meal prep can help
The Extra Special form is also a physical expression of the proposed RX zoning.
First-floor overhangs and second-floor patio spaces were successful elements with busy schedules.
that we carried over from the Vancouver Special. We also kept the front door
and stair configuration, which allows the two top floors to be connected into one
larger home, or for individual access to two separate homes.
The Extra Special design has a garden-level pass-through and courtyard that
brings sunlight into the homes and makes the garden-level units accessible.
Patios and openings have been carefully arranged to maximize privacy (no
direct facing windows), but to also develop a sense of shared ownership and
community amongst the homes. The composition of the exterior facade hints at
the potential for linking units, both vertically and horizontally.
We are inspired by the Brooklyn Brownstone that can adapt to changing
needs from larger dwelling units to multiple apartments and back. In every
configuration, the Brownstone still provides high quality living spaces for all
of its residents. For the Extra Special design, we borrowed its subtle sectional
relationships – in particular the stoop, tall front stairs that serve as a gathering
place, with the garden level entrance tucked underneath.

46
 2
1

47
 EXTRA SPECIAL | WORKSHOP ARCHITECTURE

Division b/w units

TRIUMPH ST.

FLOOR PLANS

UP

DN DN

OPTIONAL RAMP BALCONY ABOVE

POTENTIAL OPENING

UP UP

DN DN
CARLETON AVE.

POTENTIAL
OPENING
WALKWAY AT GRADE

BALCONY ABOVE

POTENTIAL
OPENING
COMMUNAL OUTDOOR
SPACE

DN DN

DN

DN

UP DN

UP
STORAGE

48
 EXTRA SPECIAL | WORKSHOP ARCHITECTURE

CATEGORIES CURRENT ZONING (R5) PROPOSED ZONING (RX)

MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 9.15m (30ft) 15.24m (50ft) - otherwise R5 zoning applies

MAXIMUM FSR 0.6 + 42sqm garage/accessory building 1.2 + 42sqm garage/accessory building

MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE 40% max 55% max

MAX. BUILDING LENGTH 50% of lot length (18.3m/60ft; 19.8m/65ft with garage) 75’-9” (based on setbacks), 80ft w/garage

MAXIMUM HEIGHT 7.4m (24.3ft) flat roof, 9m (29.5ft) for sloped roof 8m (26.25ft) flat roof, 9m (29.5ft) with slope/roof deck

MAX. STORIES ALLOWED 2 duplex/2.5 single-family Up to 3 stories

Front = 6m (19.67ft) No change on E-W streets, 1.83m (6ft) on N-S streets

MINIMUM SETBACKS Side = 1.22m (4ft), 1.83m (6ft) on street No change

Rear/lane = 7.5m (24.6ft) No change

MAXIMUM UNITS Up to 2 per lot (4 over two lots combined) Up to 6 units, 3 with rental suites

MINIMUM PARKING At least 1 space/unit, rental may be waived At least 1 space/unit, no requirement for rental suites

37.2 m 37.2 m

6m 6m
Roof Roof Slope / Parapet Railing
9000 9000
Roof
8000
Property Line

Property Line

Property Line

Property Line
Level 2
5000
Level 2
3500

Level 1
2000

Level 1 Grade
0 0
GARDEN LEVEL
-1000

49
POCO VILLAGE
COMMUNITY FOR THE FUTURE

HONOURABLE MENTION
TONY OSBORN ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN:
TONY OSBORN, ALEXANDER MERCER,
EMILY RENNALLS

LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Port Condo / Conventional 6 adaptable ~45 ft

Coquitlam Rental units 3 storeys

Sometimes the solution to a difficult problem is already

in front of us, hiding in plain sight. Taking inspiration from
older and more traditional methods of development, PoCo
village is a plan to build multi-unit additions onto pre-
existing structures to retain housing stock and preserve
affordability.

New housing has to be flexible and new neighbourhoods

have to be responsive. PoCo Village uses optional lock-off
units that can be joined with neighbouring suites to create
adaptable living solutions. Suites can be expanded as families
grow, sectioned off to be rented separately, or opened to the
streetscape for commercial use. Combined with streetscape
and laneway improvements it is a responsive solution that
transforms a bedroom community into one where life is
shared in the public realm.

50
Phase 1

Existing Plan 1 2 5
Phase 2

UNIT
2A
Phase 3

Third Level Plan 1 2 5

5 10 20

Neighbourhood Plan

UNIT 2D

UNIT 2A
UNIT 2C
UNIT 1B

Second Level Plan

1 2 5

UNIT 1B

UNIT 1A

Isometric Unit Diagram Ground Level Plan 1 2 5

51
INVISIBLE
DENSITY
HONOURABLE MENTION
CODY LOEFFEN, YVES POITRAS

LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Vancouver Hybrid Conventional 12 units / 2 lot 9-10.5 m

Typology development

Missing middle housing often comes in the form of row

housing or midrise typologies that do not evoke the sense of
being a “home” as we have traditionally defined it: a single
detached structure with its own entrance. Our proposal
takes cues from Victorian row housing but aims create a
perceived density that appears to be no higher than that of
the surrounding neighbourhood.
By focusing on the residual and interstitial spaces common to
most developments, we arrive a solution that is seamlessly
integrated with the neighbourhood but allows for affordable
housing to an increased number of families.
We achieve this by manipulating the grade, allowing us to
reduce the perceived density from the street while still
providing 12 family-oriented units. This manipulation of the
ground plane allows all entrances to be accessed at ground
level from the exterior, resulting in zero internal circulation
and achieving 100% efficiency for effective built floor area.

52
THE COURTYARD STREET

The secret to this scheme is its compatibility with

similar future developments. This future condition
creates secondary streets, allowing for the
lowered courtyard units to have their own private
entrances from which to access their homes.

DAYLIGHT FOR ALL

Right: The fully glazed wall of the dining area

frames a view of planted lightwell while the
clerestory above the kitchen brings evening light
deep into the plan.

INHABITING INBETWEEN

Far Right: Pushed back from the street, access to

the lower street-front unit from a sloped landscape
allows for ample daylight to come into the living
room frames a view of a lush planted landscape.
53
INVISIBLE DENSITY
EXISTING CONTEXT
Two lots are combined together in order to
be developed at once. This inherently saves
the space previously allocated to the central
setbacks.
Minimum 2.5m side set-backs ensure that
neighbours, existing and future, will have
adequate daylight access.
54
P.L.
P.L.
LOW DENSITY SINGLE DETACHED HOUSING
Six homes are placed on the site within this
setback: Three along the front street and three
along the back lane. These homes take-on the
typical vernacular of a pitched roof home.
P.L.
P.L.
SHIFT AND CREATE VIEW CORRIDORS
The homes are staggered to allow views
through each other.
The laneways homes are lowered by 1.5m
to reflect a more intimate laneway scale.
CREATING INVISIBLE DENSITY
By raising the rear courtyard 1m and
pushing down the grade along the sides of
the lots down to a depth of 2m, we double
the possible access points to units without
creating a noticeable increase in density
from the street.
 INVISIBLE DENSITY

MEETING TODAY’S CAR-CENTRIC NEEDS COMPATIBLE FOR A CAR-FREE FUTURE MODULATE MASS TO MAXIMIZE SUNLIGHT A FRONT DOOR TO EVERY HOME

The scheme is centered on the ability to
reduce on-street parking today, allowing
for narrower streets and therefore a better
allocation of area towards housing
“TODAY” Scenario: FAR of 1.2
In its future condition, the scheme’s lowered
courtyard is fully built-out. Allowing for
additional density to be easily be integrated
into our communities
“TOMORROW” Scenario: FAR of 1.35
Considering the shadow impacts on the
site as a whole, as opposed to each home
individually, allows the central homes to
increase in height with no shadow impact to
the courtyard homes below or to neighbouring
houses.
8 homes are accessed directly from the
front streets and the back lane.
The remaining 4 homes are accessed
from the lowered courtyard passageways

TODAY: SHARED LANEWAYS

In its built condition today, the

laneway would be biased towards
the pedestrian experience as
opposed to the vehicle’s. Parking
pads for vehicles would delineate
car vs pedestrian space.

Through carefully design centered

on a pedestrian hierarchy, the
laneways can provide vital access
to parking today while allowing
them to become pedestrian
oriented streets tomorrow.

FUTURE PEDESTRIAN STREETS

Reduced parking needs in the future

will allow for the conversion of the
lower court-level parking spaces into
additional units. This will also free
additional laneway space to be used
as patios for some of the homeowners
and permanent street furniture to
create a fully pedestrian public realm.
55
HOUSE S 3
SHARED SOCIAL STORIES

SPECIAL MENTION
CONTINGENT: LORINC VASS, DAICHI
YAMASHITA, QIONGYU NEAL LI
LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Burnaby Collective / Community 40 46 ft

Shared Spaces Land Trust inhabitants 3 storeys

Who can afford to live in the city? Who has the right to make
and re-make its spaces? How is the urban commons divided
and shared?

Proposed as an alternative to both the virtually unattainable

and outmoded ideal of individual homeownership, as well
as the increasingly unaffordable and precarious condition
of rental tenancy, House S3 constitutes a form of collective
habitation that supports both financial security and communal
sociability. Grounded in a culture of sharing, House S3
cultivates its multiple dimensions: sharing space, sharing
time, sharing resources, sharing knowledge. It provides
its residents with both stability and privacy, as well as with
flexibility and sociability. It catalyzes an affordable form of
urban living with access to communal amenities through
fostering a climate of conviviality in which different lifestyles
coexist and form symbiotic relationships. House S3 is a social
platform where the stories of everyday life are shared.

56
Building Massing
Occupied Roof
Private & Collective Spaces
on Four Split Levels
(full buildable envelope,
510 m2 / floor)
Communal & Public
Ground Plane
(with setbacks to
massing, 325 m2)
Light & Air Neighbourhood
Dundas St
Masterplan
Rooftop Skylight
Existing Single-Family House
Exterior Private Window
with Backyard Garage
Interior Translucent Glazing
House S3 Building Type
Interior Transparent Glazing
Expansion & Intensification
of Public Ground Plane
Front / Back Curtain Wall
Other Medium Density
Building Types &
Laneway Homes

Triumph St Existing & Newly Planted

Street Trees

Structure
Concrete / CLT Core

Steel / Wood Column

Exterior LWF Rainscreen Wall

Carleton Ave

Madison Ave
Interior LWF Wall
Social Program
LVL Beam
Private Space Pandora St
Wood Joist
Household Space

Collective Space

Circulation Communal Space

Public Space
Elevator

Interior Stair

Semi-Private Corridor

Egress Stair
Albert St
Entrance Stair

Public Realm
& Landscape
Site Setbacks Back Yard / Parking

Rear Setback: 5 m Pedestrian Thoroughway

Side Setback: 1.5 m Public Amenity Spaces

Front Setback: 2 m Front Yard

with 3 m recess on
Expanded Green Space Hastings St
ground level

0 5 10 20 50 m
THE MIXING
MIDDLE
SPECIAL MENTION
S.R. MCEWEN ARCHITECT: SEAN MCEWEN,
ALYSSA BROSCH, CHRIS TORRES
LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Port Own / Rent Family Land 6 units 40 ft

Coquitlam Trust 3.5-4 storeys

There are no guarantees that providing Missing Middle

developments will deliver affordability. In fact, with our
chronic low average household incomes in Metro, without
mandating inclusionary incentives into new zoning for
middle and low income housing units, the Missing Middle may
actually exacerbate unaffordability as higher-priced new
development replaces older less expensive housing stock.

Possible ground floor adult day Enhanced pedestrian path along Laurier
This submission poses a scenario where a homeowner or care with residential over. Avenue adjacent the school ground. Existing
apartment/
family trust can significantly increase the density on a 33- townhouse
development with
foot lot, if two of the six new units created are guaranteed Possible RA-1 zoning
Zoning: 1.5 FSR
ground floor
to remain low-income rental [at welfare shelter rates], by all-day group w/ a four-storey
height.
child care with
Used as a “base”
means of a Housing Agreement with the municipality. residential over.
development
scenario for
The form of development, not coincidentally, looks a lot land-assembled
property in the
like that of older rooming houses in dense inner-city study area.

neighbourhoods. The density is relatively high, but livability

and streetscape and public realm values are maintained.
With the “Mixing Middle” scenario, the prospect of delivering
Mixed use project at the
mixed income communities is entirely possible. Wellington/Dorset intersection provides
opportunities for small scale commercial The Vincent Street Block
Existing church
sponsors a child
and convenience food stores The site for the proposed single lot owner-builder prototype. care facility.
58
 4th FLOOR

3 Bedroom Family Unit

106.8 sqm

4th FLOOR Family

3 bd / 2 ba

3rd FLOOR
14.3 m

3rd FLOOR
Hallway
Studio 1
2nd FLOOR 37.2 sqm

Studio 2
34.8 sqm

Studio 3 Studio 1 Studio 2 Studio 3

33.4 sqm
GROUND
FLOOR

7.6 m
2nd FLOOR
3 Bedroom Family Unit
134.7 sqm Lobby
TEN SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND DESIGN ADVANTAGES
OF THE HOUSING PROTOTYPE
Family
3 bd / 2 ba
1 No Land Assembly Required. A Multi-Family Rental Housing Development 7.6m
is possible on a 33 by 120 foot lot.
2 Land is pre-zoned, and the approving authority fast-tracks a building
permit. With planning and development checklist Items “checked-off”,
development and building permits could be issued over-the-counter.
3 Form of development is consistent historically with that of many inner-city
suburban housing forms, for example locally, the “Edwardian Box”. 18.9m

4 Allows for a 6-Unit Development, matching a range of housing needs in

Port Coquitlam.3 Smaller Studio Units for singles, one rented at welfare
36.6m
shelter rates, 2 Multi-Bedroom Family type units, and 1 one-bedroom unit
suitable for a elderly or disabled person, which includes a caregivers unit. GROUND FLOOR
5 Creates a compact transit-oriented low-rise community. Parking is relaxed Lock Off or Caregiver’s
and would feature car-sharing, rather than private vehicle ownership. Studio Apartment
Caregiver
6 Creates a pedestrian-priority community, with public road right-of-way 35.4 sqm Storage +
1 bd / 1 ba
spaces given over to more landscaping and gardening uses. Accessible 1 Bedroom Unit Bike Accessible
79 sqm Parking 1 bd/ 1 ba
7 Fosters an economic model that enhances social stability in existing 10.1m
Services
neighbourhoods, by promoting aging-in-place and access to housing for
children who typically can’t afford to stay in their home communities.
8 Supports the development of new rental housing, that is guaranteed to
remain rental for the long term.
9 Creates, through the mechanism of Housing Agreements, long-term
affordable housing for some households whose only means of shelter 25m
support is through housing assistance.
10 Provides a stable, relatively dense mixed-income community that can
support and foster local commercial businesses and social enterprises. 59
MORE IS
GOOD
SPECIAL MENTION
IAN ROBERTSON, JAMES BLIGH,
SIMON CHAN
LOCATION TENURE FINANCE DWELLINGS HEIGHT

Surrey MASTER PLAN

Ownership Via Rezone 20 - 32
dwellings
4 storeys

Zoning
This project suggests that the and region’sdesign high cost of housing
guidelines
can be reduced by introducing a new shared equity rezoning
Sites previously zoned for Surrey’s Single Family Residential Zone would now:
process to municipal
•Be capablegovernments.
of upzoning to a varietyShared
of densities asequity
described, ininvolves
exchange for shared
equity.
CURRENT NEIGHBOURHOOD DENSITY THINK OF ZONING LIKE A LANDSCAPE DEFINE WALKING DISTANCES
giving shares of•Have
the property to the city in exchange
re-allocate otherwise wasted space towards the public good. for
no setbacks with the inclusion of firewalls or close-spaced sprinklers, to
7825 PEOPLE/KM² DEFINED BY NEIGHBOURHOOD CONDITIONS TO DETERMINE WALKABILITY
•Slow elimination of streets to vehicle-primary access in favour of pedestrians,
more density - effectively
bicycles and newcutting outto fillmuch
opportunities ofthethe
or activate land
new type cost
of space
•First floor garages designed to accommodate future conversion into live/work or
left over.

other mixed uses.

(typically the largest
•Be designed cost of thea basement
to accommodate purchase) for the
level of semi-public new
underground
parking, with accommodations made for future conversion into light industrial or
other mixed uses.
home owners. Furthermore, by owning shares the city will
Social
not be cut off from the increased rationale value of the property that
Missing from much new development is the ‘family friendly’ unit. This has less acute
an effect in areas with average household size closer to one or two than it does to
naturally follows neighbourhoods
a rezoning. with average size greater than four ... quite simply the normal
modern condo development is poorly suited for larger families.
Fundamental to development of healthy and socially inclusive neighbourhoods is a
relationship between unit size and family size, and to enforce this relationship, it is
suggested that a form of zoning referred to as ‘units per acre’ be employed. This acts
Specific to Surrey Newton, the project responds to the
in addition to limitations to FSR and overall envelope to minimize the incentive to
shrink living units to become too small for real families/households, as there are a
finite number of units which can be created on any given site, there is less incentive PULL UP ZONING ENVELOPE NEAR FEATURE PUSH DOWN ZONING ENVELOPE NEAR FEATURES INDIVIDUAL SITE ZONING ENVELOPES ARE CREATED
vehicle-dominated suburb by burying a shared parkade
to try to determine ‘how many hipsters you can fit on the head of a pin” by shrinking
units past healthy sizes. BC Housing has relied on research to inform its minimum
WHICH BENEFIT FROM GREATER DENSITY WHERE DENSITY IS ALLOCATED WITH HEALTH RISK BY THIS ANALYTICAL DENSITY LANDSCAPE

unit sizes per number of bedrooms, and it is suggested that these unit sizes are
underneath cooperating land owners. Burying the parkade
adopted for this site as well.

offers up ground Relationship

space that can instead to neighbours
be filled with
pedestrian-friendly
existingcommunity amenities.
neighbourhoods and neighbours are often Moreover,
priced out and forcedthe
One of the looming issues of the housing affordability crisis is that of displacement -
to move
apart in search of affordable housing. This splits up families, friends, and acquain-
parkade has access to clerestory daylight, allowing for a
tances and splinters social groups.

It is important that any redevelopment on this site in Surrey be entirely opt-in, with
potential transition
eachinto lightableindustrial
homeowner to decide to stayuse to further
or sell/develop. reduce
Tied to this are the Shared
Equity measures to limit land price escalation, and the intent to make all created
units affordable to those that already live in the neighbourhood, so the worst case
commuting. scenario might be that a tenant was displaced to a neighbouring building, with a
guarantee that they pay no more in that building than they do in their current ac-
commodation.

60 New uses THE FSR OF INDIVIDUAL LOTS DIFFERS ACROSS

THE NEIGHBOURHOOD BASED ON DESIRABLE OUTCOMES
CONSOLIDATED LOTS CAN BE TRADED WITH THE CITY
TO CREATE GREENSPACE.
The natural contour and length of most properties conveniently lend themselves to EACH LOT CAN BE DEVELOPED INDIVIDUALLY BASED ON THE
fitting a double-loaded parking garage directly underneath the first floor on the high DENSITY ALLOWED PER LOT. DISPLACEMENT IS AVOIDED BY
side of the property. While critical to meeting Surrey’s current parking requirements, ALLOWING HOUSES TO REMAIN ADJACENT TO THE
the placement of the parking directly below grade presents the opportunity for a ADDITIONAL INFILL DENSITY
GOAL DENSITY: 20-25K PEOPLE/KM²
SINGLE FAMILY LOTS MAY REMAIN
OVER TIME, FURTHER ADJACENT SITES CAN EITHER BE
DEVELOPED OR PURCHASED AT MARKET VALUE TO CREATE
GREENSPACE. DENSITY HELPS CREATE A WALKABLE OVERALL
SITE DENSITY.
 irst floor on the high DENSITY ALLOWED PER LOT. DISPLACEMENT IS AVOIDED BY DEVELOPED OR PURCHASED AT MARKET VALUE TO CREATE
arking requirements, ALLOWING HOUSES TO REMAIN ADJACENT TO THE GREENSPACE. DENSITY HELPS CREATE A WALKABLE OVERALL
opportunity for a ADDITIONAL INFILL DENSITY SITE DENSITY.

5M
eath, in case the IN W
ALK 81 AVE
business. TO N
EWT
ON
ELEM
ENT
ARY

KING GEORGE BLVD

cal suburb, designed
ny streets, forcing
w houses away. LANE
here is an
d spaces, introducing

134a ST

135a ST
134 ST

135 ST
aking the whole
own water leading
o capture and treat.

re will be spaces 80a AVE

streets and
e lost in the absence Relocating parking to lane access
en buildings, with allows the City to reclaim streets
well. as public spaces with imaginative
new futures.

laimed by pedestrian
LANE
ety of future options,
Parking below grade meets

FUTURE LRT STATION

today’s parking needs while
supporting daylit industrial,
mercantile, or live / work
80 AVE occupancies in the future.

Roofscapes can be connected and

made accessible to the public.

TO
ALK
NW ON
5 MI TATI
R E LR S
T
The use of adjacent units along a
FUTU
single-loaded corridor can leave
79a AVE enough green space over to

KING GEORGE BLVD

produce a courtyard view.
134a ST

135a ST
134 ST

1:1000

79 AVE

Eliminating setbacks reduces leftover space that is
not usable by the public. Retaining the same site
coverage with no setbacks yields more usable space
that can be allocated flexibly.
Consolidated properties can offer one lot
for the City in exchange for incentives on
the neighbouring property.
61
JURY COMMENTS
TOM AINSCOUGH
CITY ARCHITECT OF SURREY
The Planner’s Prize responds to social interaction,
affordability and regulatory innovation. The jury
observed compatibility of form, character and scale
within single-family neighbourhoods, in support
of existing residential articulation. We also looked
for opportunities for social interaction on the site
and within the neighbourhood, such as courtyards,
community gardens, live/work spaces, day care options
and corner stores. Unit design was also considered in
terms of social benefits, including flexibility of household
size and the ability to adapt over time.
62
LAURA LEE RICHARD
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING,
CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM
An important criteria for the jury was to look at housing
projects from a planning perspective, in particular how
we add housing stock to our communities creatively,
respectfully and in collaboration with politicians
and residents. Regulatory innovation is an ongoing
challenge, and the submissions in this competition have
pushed the envelope and contributed ideas that will
enrich planning efforts as we rethink and transform our
low-density neighbourhoods.
JOE REKAB
MANAGING PARTNER BTY GROUP
Reviewing submissions from a financial perspective
revealed impressive revenue possibilities, such as
the idea of creating a family land trust to improve
affordability, and the integration of commercial spaces
within residential design. We saw a revitalized interest in
co-operatives, drawing on models that have succeeded
in the past. Ideas for creative financing also stood out,
such as a proposal for long term capital repayment plans.
KAREN MARLER AIBC
PRINCIPAL HCMA ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN
The depth and quality of information within the projects
was exceptional, with many submissions illustrating
complex ideas and concepts through simple graphics.
The jury appreciated the exploration of intergenerational
and co-housing residential models, as well as concepts
that responded to the context of specific municipalities,
such as a Surrey neighbourhood without laneways.
Many ideas are also applicable across varied contexts.
One consistent observation is that the affordability
problem will not be resolved solely through design, and
small changes to single-family zoning bylaws, such as
setbacks, height and massing can support this effort.

JURY MEMBERS
Shelley Craig, Architect AIBC, MAIBC,
Partner, Urban Arts Architecture
Bryn Davidson, B Eng, M Arch, Principal,
Lanefab
DON LUYMES
COMMUNITY PLANNING MANAGER,
CITY OF SURREY
The creation of private and semi-private outdoor space
becomes more challenging as density and lot coverage
increases. Solutions like courtyards present interesting
challenges on smaller lots, but can successfully integrate
sunlight and sociability into a development. Submissions
also offered a range of rooftop activities including
communal space and community gardens. Creating a
flow between the private space and public realm by
integrating the development with setbacks is also an
interesting strategy. As we densify, it will be important
to integrate architectural form with rich outdoor spaces
for people.
Michael Flanigan, Vice-President of
Development & Asset Strategies, BC Housing
and former Director Real Estate Services,
City of Vancouver
Dr Gary Hack, B.Arch., M.U.P., Ph.D.
MassachusettsInstitute of Technology,
L.L.D (honorus causa) Dalhousie University.
Former Dean and Paley Professor Graduate
School of Design, University of Pennsylvania.
Former Chair, Philadelphia City Planning
Commission
Richard Henriquez, Architect AIBC, FRAIC,
L.L.D (honorus causa), Simon Fraser
University, Henriquez Partners Architects
DANIELLA FERGUSSON MCIP
MODUS PLANNING, DESIGN +
ENGAGEMENT INC
Some of these schemes really do look at the big picture
of how we can make our zoning and land use processes
more comprehensive, efficient and easier to use. The
system is broken. Rent has tripled in the last five years.
This is affecting everyone and I applaud submissions who
call attention to these issues. This competition brought
to light inspiration beyond architecture and buildings, to
look at new ways of being in community together, and
leverage models that are already working such as co-
housing and co-ops. Additionally, being on unceded Cost
Salish land, there remain unanswered questions about
what the future of private land ownership could be.
Margo Long, BCSLA, FCSLA, ASLA, LEED
Associate, Principal, PWL Partnership
Landscape Architects
Karen Marler, Architect AIBC, Partner,
Hughes Condon Marler Architecture + Design
Sandra Moore, Architect AIBC, Partner,
Birmingham & Wood Architects & Planners
Nick Sully, Architect AIBC, AAA, Principal,
SHAPE Architecture
BRYN DAVIDSON M ARCH
PRINCIPAL LANEFAB
This competition was a fascinating deep dive into
zoning, pro-forma and a look at how these things unfold
over time. Single lot densification can directly impact
affordability, for example if a young couple builds a
dwelling on their parent’s property, they can do so for
half the cost of a market condo. Unfortunately, much of
our zoning is hostile towards single-family development.
This competition was an incredible opportunity to
say how do we take our leafy, green, pleasant, quiet,
single-family neighbourhoods and turn them into leafy,
green, pleasant, quiet, multi-family neighbourhoods?
These proposals can unlock this potential and open
up opportunities for all income levels, which is an
extraordinary thing.
63
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Urbanarium would like to thank the Founding Donors, Co-
Sponsors, and Supporting Sponsors as their contributions
make it possible to continue our work in presenting
engaging events and programs.

Singleton Reynolds

FOUNDING DONORS Vancity

PFS Studio
MGBA
Brook Pooni Associates
Battersby Howat
HCMA Architecture + Design
UBC SALA
Wesgroup Chris Dikeakos
Creative Mornings Vancouver
Rositch Hemphill Architects D’Arcy Jones Architecture Inc.
AIBC
Henriquez Partners Architects Francl Architecture
Rethink
Marcon Investments Ltd. GBL Architects
GeoSim Systems
James KM Cheng Architects Shift Architecture
Andrew Gruft
City of Vancouver Ramsay Worden Architects
Bruce Haden
Anthem Properties Group Ltd. PWL Partnership Landscape Architects
Bryce Rositch
BTY Consultancy Group Inc Evoke International Design
Kay Levey
Adera Development Corporation Leckie Studio Architecture & Design Inc
Leslie Van Duzer
BC Housing
Marta Farevaag
CMHC
Richard Henriquez
Glotman Simpson

Macdonald Development Corporation

64
CO-SPONSORS

SUPPORTING SPONSORS SUPPORTING SPONSORS

65