Liveable density - built form crucial variable

NRU
March 29, 2017
By Andrew Cohrs

New research is making it easier to understand what built form and density look like in relation to provincial growth policies in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, but density is only one element when building complete communities.

“Density is a bit of an abstract concept and yet there are a variety of reactions, quite emotional in many cases, to the word and we wanted to give people a look and feel for density in existing communities,” Canadian Urban Institute director and report co-author Jeff Evenson told NRU.

Launched by the institute last week, Visualizing Density combines mapping, census data and drone photography to create five case studies of density and built form in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The case studies are drawn from various parts of the region, and profile communities at different stages of implementing the Growth Plan. They include an area of Leslieville in Toronto, the Uptown Core neighbourhood in Oakville, downtown Burlington, a portion of the Cornell neighbourhood in Markham and the Barrel Yards in Waterloo.

The analysis of the case studies illustrates how housing design plays an integral role in accommodating population increase, creating complete communities and meeting –or not– provincial growth policies.

“What we really wanted to do was [show] what ... these density targets in the Growth Plan look like in
existing communities. ... And secondly, we wanted to create a methodology for measuring density at the neighbourhood and at the community scale in the context of the Growth Plan that could be replicated by others,” Evenson said.

Each case study includes residential and employment densities-both of the overall area and of a few sample blocks within the area. Aerial photographs and maps show housing form-detached,attached, mid-rise, highrise- and neighbourhood features such as transit stops,
open space, greenspace, retail stores and restaurants. In this way the case studies illustrate the housing forms and neighbourhood characteristics that can be achieved with differing levels of density.

Canadian Urban Institute researcher and report co-author Ariana Cancelli told NRU that including community features enabled an additional layer of analysis.

“We started thinking that density was the precursor to having things like amenities and walkability. But then we realized that you can have density but you don’t necessarily have walkability and amenities. ... While the increasing number of people can help to support certain types of amenities, like retail, schools, things within walking distance, if the streets and the communities aren’t designed in a way that facilitates walkability... density wouldn’t be enough [to create a complete community].”

The research identified six ingredients that are essential if complete communities are to evolve: walkability, housing diversity, greenspace/open space, amenities, neighbourhood design and transit.

“More density is inevitable in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. ... Density and community evolve over time but you want to make sure that the forms are in place so that they evolve in the right direction. ... Density without design and planning is meaningless,” Evenson said.

Official plan policies and zoning by-law regulations should be flexible enough to permit different housing types within the same area, Evenson said. Cancelli agrees, saying that a variety of building types is the best way to meet density targets while also creating liveable neighbourhoods.

Following on this research, Canadian Urban Institute plans to establish a density lab where further analysis of Growth Plan policies can be undertaken.