Please provide a policy summary for the site below. A 12-storey (38 metres) resi

Please provide a policy summary for the
site below. A 12-storey (38 metres) resi

Please provide a policy summary for the
site below. A 12-storey (38 metres) residential development with retail at
grade is proposed on an assembly of sites (937, 939, 949 Gerrard St. E. and 338
Pape Avenue).
What policy documents currently
apply to the site? Please include the top five (5) most significant
Among those policies that do apply,
which three do you think will be most important to
assessing the development on this site? Give a brief
description why you chose each.
This is a warm-up. This week’s groups
will be the ones you have for the final
presentations.

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should be in a short essay format (including an introduction and a conclusion paragraph). It has to be single-spaced and the title page and/or references do not count against the page limit. Here is what needs to be answered.
a) Identify and discuss the main thesis of the author(s): what they are arguing and what they found. (3 points)
b) Why did the author(s) write this material? (1 points)
c) What competing perspectives might exist to this reading response? Have others found similar results and/or arrived at similar conclusions? In particular, how does this reading compare to other assigned readings? (4 points)
d) Did the reading lead you to have broader questions (e.g. about transportation policy)? (2 points)
Readings:
(Required) Northey, Rodney. “The Integration of Environmental and Planning Law: the New Era of Ontario Infrastructure.” Journal of Environmental Law and Practice, Vol. 21, pp. 305-349 (just read pp. 1-28).
(Required) Ma, Zhao, Dennis R. Becker, and Michael A. Kilgore. Barriers to and opportunities for effective cumulative impact assessment within state-level environmental review frameworks in the United States.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol 55, No. 7, pp. 961-978.
(Required) Sciara, Gian-Claudia, Jacquelyn Bjorkman, Elizabeth Stryjewski, and James H. Thorne. 2017. “Mitigating environmental impacts in advance: Evidence of cost and time savings for transportation projects.” Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 50, pp. 316-326.

The Problem You are a policy analyst working for the Mayor of Toronto. An enviro

The Problem
You are a policy analyst working for the Mayor of Toronto. An enviro

The Problem
You are a policy analyst working for the Mayor of Toronto. An environmental coalition, working on problems of solid and hazardous waste, has convinced a key group of Councilors that a tax should be imposed on bottled water, specifically those held in plastic bottles. One of their proposals is a 50-cent tax on these beverages.
They assert that the public currently subsidizes these drinks through both the container (through solid waste system required for their proper disposal) and the water itself (most bottled water is lightly filtered tap water, bottled in the city it is sold in, with very low bulk water fees paid to the local water utility).
Environmentalists argue that over two billion plastic water bottles are used annually in Canada alone. These bottles are associated with extensive litter problems both on land and in waterways. While the bottles are technically recyclable, there is little market for this recycled plastic and as such, separating and disposing of it represents a cost to the municipality. At the same time, a great deal of these bottles do not find their way into recycling bins – according to a Toronto Sun report, as few as 50 per cent of the water bottles Torontonians consume everyday are actually being recycled. That means as many as 65 million empty plastic water bottles per year end up as garbage in a landfill waste site. In some communities the percentage of water bottles that end up in landfills can be as high as 80 per cent.
Some municipalities have pursued bans on bottled water sales. Concord, Mass. banned the sales anywhere in the City. Several other cities, including Toronto, have banned sale of bottled water in many civic facilities.
Other jurisdictions have chosen to pursue taxes rather than bans. These cities include New York and Chicago as well as others. While these taxes and bans are relatively new, they appear to have some effect on consumer choice. For example, a University of California, Berkeley study showed that consumers decreased bottled water purchases by 3% due to a tax of 6-cents per bottle and that the decreased buying rates were maintained even when the tax was removed. Environmentalists argue that bottled water bans and taxes can push people to use available tap water and bring refillable water bottles when they are on the go. Advocates for the poor are concerned that this higher cost for bottled water might hit low-income earners unfairly as many may be living and working in areas where public water dispensers are not available.
In your analysis, proposals should be focused on a tax rather than a ban. Local environmentalists argue that a tax on bottled water will reduce its use and generate significant revenue for the City. With these proposals in mind, your assignment is to explore the efficacy of the proposed 50-cent tax per botted on all bottled water sold in the City.
First, you should gather some basic data, which are publicly available, and develop some back-of-the-envelope calculations, checking the environmentalist’s claims for orders of magnitude (in terms of reduction in the sale of bottled water and the revenue potentially generated by the tax).
Second, analyze the impact of the tax on individuals or households? To what extent are alternatives available? Are the alternatives more environmentally sound? Are they more or less affordable to households? Third, explore the problem from a societal perspective – assess the policy’s impact on local governments (waste collection costs, revenue generation, tax collection methods) and the related industries (grocery stores, pharmacies, take-out restaurants, etc.).
The Assignment
Be sure to begin it with a short executive summary, and give a recommended course of action: Adopt the tax, kill it, or delay and study it some more. If you are going to urge a delay, be sure to spell out exactly how you will use staff time to learn more about the problem and the possible policies that could be adopted.
The memorandum should be a maximum of five (5) single-spaced, written pages or 25 PowerPoint slides. Concision is encouraged, but take care in how you approach and communicate your analysis and recommendations, Short shouldnt mean simplistic or poorly throught-out.

Identify and discuss the main thesis of the author:what they are arguing and what they found.

Identify and discuss the main thesis of the author:what they are arguing and what they found.

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should be in a short essay format (including an introduction and a conclusion paragraph). It has to be single-spaced and the title page and/or references do not count against the page limit. Here is what needs to be answered.
a) Identify and discuss the main thesis of the author(s): what they are arguing and what they found. (3 points)
b) Why did the author(s) write this material? (1 points)
c) What competing perspectives might exist to this reading response? Have others found similar results and/or arrived at similar conclusions? In particular, how does this reading compare to other assigned readings? (4 points)
d) Did the reading lead you to have broader questions (e.g. about transportation policy)? (2 points)
Readings:
(Required) Verweij, Stefan, Oscar Loomans, and Wim Leendertse. “The Role of the Public Partner in Innovation in Transport Infrastructure PPPs: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Nine Dutch DBFM Projects.” Public Works Management and Policy, Vol. 25 (1) pp. 5-32
(Required) Siemiatycki, Matti. 2015. “Public-Private Partnerships in Canada: Reflections on twenty years of practice.” Canadian Public Administration, Vol. 58, No. 3, pp. 343-362.
(Required) Siemiatycki, Matti. 2023. “Public-Private Partnerships: Is a reassessment underway?” Ontario 360 Policy Solutions for Ontario’s Prosperity. https://infrastructureinstitute.ca/wp-content/uplo…
( Required) González-Medrano, Mario and Tomás García Martín. 2021. “Analysis of public- private partnership models in high-speed railway transport in Portugal.” Transport Research Procedia, Vol. 58, pp. 29-36

Team Assignment# 1: Five Page Briefing Note Prepare the following: As a Planner

Team Assignment# 1: Five Page Briefing Note
Prepare the following: As a Planner

Team Assignment# 1: Five Page Briefing Note
Prepare the following: As a Planner in a municipality or provincial ministry, you have been asked to prepare a short (5 pages, single-spaced) Briefing Note on either of the two topics set out below. Building on class #1 discussions of “The Perfect Implementation Plan”, the note should contain:
• A SMART Problem/Purpose Statement
• Well-researched background (with citations)
• A creative implementation plan with SMART, numbered Recommendations
• A MECE Issue Tree (in Appendix
Project: Activating a Revitalization Plan for the Dundas-Sherbourne Neighbourhood
The Issue Tree (Outline of Plan)
SMART Problem Statement → MECE Recommendations → SMART Implementation Plan
What Needs to be Delivered
Proposed revitalization plan for Dan Harrison
Plan for acquiring 214-230 Sherbourne Street
Full-scale community engagement process
These may become 3-point plan
Task 1: SMART Problem/Purpose Statement
SMARTSpecific, not general
Measurable
Action-oriented
Relevant to the issue
Time-bound
Example: To reduce bird deaths associated with high buildings by 70% within 5 years by updating bird safety guidelines.
To do:Make sure it doesn’t turn into a sales piece for my recommendations – must remain neutral
Give a hint of where money/resources will come from
Task 2: Background Research
How did we get here?Decision history
Key considerationsFocuses on 3 things to tackle in recommendations (3-point plan)
Describe, in full sentences, our plan
Shape of the problem
Other relevant policies
History of Dan Harrison complex and 214-230 Sherbourne
To do:Do not make it terribly long
Challenges here must align with rule of three in plan
Task 3: MECE Issue Tree
3 recommendations
Mutually Exclusive, Comprehensively Exhaustive
Two dimensions:Mutually Exclusive: each heading cannot overlap; must deal with separate issues
Comprehensively Exhaustive: must address the problem statement in a comprehensive and exhaustive manner; will we address the problem statement? – address minimum 80% of the problem
Task 4: SMART Recommendations
Must be numbered and smart
Recommendation 1:3 sub-points
Timeframe, resources, funding
Recommendation 2:3 sub-points
Timeframe, resources, funding
Recommendation 3:3 sub-points
Timeframe, resources, funding
Take these off the right-hand side of the issue tree

Describe the process of gentrification, including the conditions that lead to a

Describe the process of gentrification, including the conditions that lead to a

Describe the process of gentrification, including the conditions that lead to a neighborhood being targeted for gentrification and the changes that occur through this process. Who wins and who loses when a neighborhood becomes gentrified? https://youtu.be/0gjZrXyoaQY

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should be in a short essay format (including an introduction and a conclusion paragraph). It has to be single-spaced and the title page and/or references do not count against the page limit. Here is what needs to be answered.
a) Identify and discuss the main thesis of the author(s): what they are arguing and what they found. (3 points)
b) Why did the author(s) write this material? (1 points)
c) What competing perspectives might exist to this reading response? Have others found similar results and/or arrived at similar conclusions? In particular, how does this reading compare to other assigned readings? (4 points)
d) Did the reading lead you to have broader questions (e.g. about transportation policy)? (2 points)
Readings:
(Required) Nixon, Hilary and Asha Weinstein Agrawal. 2019. “Would Americans pay more in taxes for better transportation? Answers from seven years of national survey data.” Transportation, Vol. 46, pp. 819-840.
(Required) Taylor, Brian D. “The Geography of Urban Transportation Finance.” in The Geography of Urban Transportation, Fourth Edition, Susan Hanson and Genevieve Giuliano, Editors. New York: The Guilford Press. Pages 247-272, 2017.
(Required) Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. “Equity of Evolving
Transportation Finance Mechanisms.” Special Report 303. Chapter 2 (pp. 21-36).

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should be in a short essay format (including an introduction and a conclusion paragraph). It has to be single-spaced and the title page and/or references do not count against the page limit. Here is what needs to be answered.
a) Identify and discuss the main thesis of the author(s): what they are arguing and what they found. (3 points)
b) Why did the author(s) write this material? (1 points)
c) What competing perspectives might exist to this reading response? Have others found similar results and/or arrived at similar conclusions? In particular, how does this reading compare to other assigned readings? (4 points)
d) Did the reading lead you to have broader questions (e.g. about transportation policy)? (2 points)
Readings:
(Required) Clifford, Ben and Janice Morphet. 2023. “Chapter 1. Introduction.” in Major Infrastructure Planning and Delivery. London: UCL Press. Pages 1-26.
(Required) Clifford, Ben and Janice Morphet. 2023. “Chapter 2. Origins of the NSIPs regime.” in Major Infrastructure Planning and Delivery. London: UCL Press. Pages 27-48.
(Required) Clifford, Ben and Janice Morphet. 2023. “Chapter 3. The Planning Act 2008 processes.” In Major Infrastructure Planning and Delivery. London: UCL Press. Pages 49-66.
(Required) Jones, Oliver. 2010. “Moving Transportation Reform: An Inside Perspective from the UK.

Tour theme: Brownfields Redevelopment in Toronto’s Lower Don Lands Task: To crea

Tour theme: Brownfields Redevelopment in Toronto’s Lower Don Lands
Task: To crea

Tour theme: Brownfields Redevelopment in Toronto’s Lower Don Lands
Task: To create an urban and regional planning-focused self-guided walking tour for Urban Planning professionals, professors, and students interested in brownfields, redevelopment, and urban environmental management.
Projects to be included:
Toronto Police Services 51 Division
Distillery District
Underpass Park
Corktown Common
West Don Lands (Pan Am Games site)
Portlands Flood Protection Project
Quayside
The student will first conduct research to examine different self-guided tour formats for the tour they are going to develop (smartphone, PDFs, other).
Then, develop maps/routes.
For each project, the student will prepare a brief urban planning-oriented write-up (1 page single-spaced) with information about site history, cleanup, planning and development, financing and other relevant information (as well as on-site must-see features), photos, as well as links to additional research, contacts, and resources.
The student is expected to visit the projects and pre-test the tour.

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should

Reading responses should be no more than two pages. the reading response should be in a short essay format (including an introduction and a conclusion paragraph). It has to be single-spaced and the title page and/or references do not count against the page limit. Here is what needs to be answered.
a) Identify and discuss the main thesis of the author(s): what they are arguing and what they found. (3 points)
b) Why did the author(s) write this material? (1 points)
c) What competing perspectives might exist to this reading response? Have others found similar results and/or arrived at similar conclusions? In particular, how does this reading compare to other assigned readings? (4 points)
d) Did the reading lead you to have broader questions (e.g. about transportation policy)? (2 points)
Readings:
(Required) Sciara, Gian-Claudia and Susan Handy. “Regional Transportation Planning.” in The Geography of Urban Transportation, Fourth Edition, Susan Hanson and Genevieve Giuliano, Editors. New York: The Guilford Press. Pages 113 138, 2017.
(Required) “Policy on Using Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Resources to Build a Better America,” from Stephanie Pollack, Deputy Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/docs/building_a_better_america-policy_framework.pdf).
(Required) “Building Better Transit,” Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/2022-01/FTA-BIL-Implementation-Webinar-Presentation-01-07-2022.pdf)