Integrate Education in Planning

Take this important twitter conversation and make the point that the entire discussion misses real world implications on what more housing means. It means more real people. That means that some of these real people will be school age. Can you provide a detailed briefing note that illustrates Vik's thesis?

LiveableCityPlanning Ltd @LcpVan · Dec 30, 2023 “Zoned Capacity” is a fictional concept, usually employed by people who prefer to frustrate new development under the NIMBY pretext that “everything is fine; our (1927) plans allow for enough new development; don’t change anything”. Same folks love the old n’hood Visions: Bill McCreery @Bill_McCreery · 15h 1/ Here's a lovely example of how Michael misuses social media comments to create confusion and mistrust. "“Zoned Capacity” is a fictional concept,..."Really, tell us why this term, which has been used by planners for decades, is fictional? LiveableCityPlanning Ltd @LcpVan · 15h The "Zoned Capacity" debate is a misguided attempt to portray any unused density on sites under existing land use zoning as "viable floor space" that could be redeveloped for new housing. It suits the voices who argue that our current planning regime is sufficient to accommodate… Show more Tom Davidoff @TomDavidoff · 13h Right. Let value in current use be Xp and let new value be F(p-c). No way redevelop unless F*(p-c) is greater than X*p. But I suppose "zoned capacity" assumes X gets built if p is greater than c, a much weaker condition. Bill, what are your thoughts on that issue? Robert Renger @rrrobbberttt · 8h Wow, impressive little equations with undefined variables from the economics professor. Presumably the building blocks for the study and predictions our BC housing minister has been quoting. Peter Dowdy @cosmopolite · 8h They seem straightforward… F: former use X: zoned capacity p: price c: cost to redevelop

I assume p and c are $/area and F and X are developed / zoned capacity Tom Davidoff @TomDavidoff · 3h Yeah, I meant X for existing, F for allowable fsr. The last X I wrote should have been an F. Robert Renger @rrrobbberttt · 1h So, all that to simply make the trite observation that, at any given point in time, it’s not economically feasible to develop all pre-zoned or planned land.

Everyone knows that the Broadway Plan, for example, will be developed over time, not overnight. Peter Dowdy @cosmopolite · 1h That is part of the observation, which is a pretty important critique of zoned capacity arguments. The other observation is that the delta between existing and zoned use controls viability; i.e. small upzones have a higher bar for viability Robert Renger @rrrobbberttt · 1h Actually, in the real world, beyond simplistic economic models, the progress of development is much more complicated than that. Peter Dowdy @cosmopolite · 54m Thanks for your polite and earnest explanation. I had never realized the map is not the territory - honestly I was struggling with how I could live on a globe that was literally small enough to hold in my hands! Tom Davidoff @TomDavidoff · 40m So is zoned capacity the difference between current and potential? Potential only? Somewhere between potential and current? Something else? And how does this destroy the “supply narrative?” Robert Renger @rrrobbberttt · 27m The supply narrative destroys itself. No matter how much land is up-zoned, market developers won’t supply the affordable housing that is needed.

Even your own study only claims it will slow the increase in the cost of currently too-expensive housing. Robert Renger @rrrobbberttt “our model would result in six to 12 per cent lower prices and rents than what they would have been without the provincial legislation.”

Prices will still go up, just not as much as if the government had done nothing. The claim is uncheckable From vancouversun.com 9:03 AM · Jan 2, 2024 · 16 Views

Peter Dowdy @cosmopolite · 9m It’s not possible to prove a counterfactual but it is possible and important to make predictions. Do you apply this level of rigour to your own predictions? For example, you can’t prove prices will go up if nothing is done, even though that’s very likely the case.

Briefing Note: Real-World Implications of Housing Policy and School Infrastructure

Subject: Analysis of Twitter Conversation on "Zoned Capacity" and Housing Policy

Background: A recent Twitter conversation involving multiple stakeholders, including urban planners and economists, centered around the concept of "Zoned Capacity" in urban development. The discussion involved technical and economic aspects of urban planning, with a focus on housing development, redevelopment feasibility, and the implications of current planning regimes. However, a crucial aspect missing from this conversation is the real-world implications of increased housing on the demographics of a community, particularly concerning school-age children.

Vik Khanna's Thesis: Urban planning and education infrastructure alignment must be integrated into housing policies. Increased housing inevitably leads to an increase in population, which includes school-age children. This demographic change necessitates corresponding developments in educational infrastructure.

Analysis:

1. Population Dynamics: New housing developments, especially in urban areas, attract families. This influx leads to an increased demand for educational facilities. Existing school resources may become strained without proper planning.

2. Educational Infrastructure: The emphasis in urban planning discussions is often on housing and commercial development. However, educational infrastructure is a critical component that must be incorporated into these plans. Schools are not just educational facilities but also central to community development and social cohesion.

3. Proactive vs. Reactive Planning: Currently, educational infrastructure planning is often reactive – responding to demographic changes rather than anticipating them. A more integrated approach, where school facilities planning is incorporated into initial housing and community development plans, would ensure smoother transitions and better-prepared communities.

4. Community Impact: Schools play a significant role in community identity and cohesion. They are not just places of learning but also hubs of community activity and engagement. Overlooking the need for educational infrastructure in urban planning could lead to disjointed communities and missed opportunities for holistic development.

5. Economic Implications: Well-planned educational facilities can attract families and investments to an area, stimulating economic growth. Conversely, a lack of educational infrastructure can deter potential residents and negatively impact local economies.

6. Legislative Perspective: Reviewing Canadian housing bills (e.g., Bill 44, Bill 46, Bill 47) reveals a gap in addressing educational infrastructure. There's a need for legislation that explicitly integrates school facilities planning with housing and urban development policies.

Recommendations:

• Integrated Planning Approach: Advocate for a legislative framework that mandates the integration of educational infrastructure planning in all housing and urban development policies.
• Community Engagement: Engage with community members, including parents and educators, in the urban planning process to understand and anticipate educational needs.
• Collaboration with Educational Authorities: Urban planners and housing developers should work closely with school boards and educational authorities to align development plans with educational needs.
• Long-Term Vision: Adopt a forward-looking approach in urban planning that considers the long-term educational needs of a growing population.

Conclusion: The Twitter conversation highlights the complexity of urban planning discourse, particularly around housing development. However, it misses a critical aspect of urban development – the need for concurrent educational infrastructure planning. As Vik Khanna's thesis suggests, integrating educational infrastructure into urban planning is not just beneficial but essential for creating sustainable, cohesive, and thriving communities.