Unlocking Development Potential on the

Phoenix Canals: A “Toolkit” ApproachA project of Arizona State University's Urban Planning Studio 361

Meha�y, Michael (Principal Investigator)Ageno, Alex * Ari�ana, Amanda * Begay, Shaina * Bryant, Jonvieve * Bubenheim, Stephanie * Carriere, Paul * Charles, De'Ondre * Comfort, Chelsea * Fulmer, Ryan * Glimcher, Brandon * Guzman, Jose * Hanley, Drew * Hernandez, Tino * Horton, Jaycen * Johnson, Daniel * Johnson, Nick * Langton, Will * McCann, Ryan * McKenzie, Joshua * Meisenheimer, Joey * Nielson, Kent * Pechous, Matthew *

Sanchez,Mia-Tasha * Sefcik, Joey * Sheldon, Daniel * Shell, Taylor * �ompson, Jeremy * Winkle, Ryan * Zaimes, John

Arizona State UniversityNovember 30, 2011

Unlocking Development Potential on the

Phoenix Canals: A “Toolkit” ApproachA project of Arizona State University's Urban Planning Studio 361

Abstract

Phoenix-area stakeholders, designers and planners have come together to propose a remarkable series of plans for high-quality, equitable redevelopment adjacent to Phoenix-area irrigation canals. However, implementation will require tools to overcome a number of daunting barriers. We report on a research project to develop proposed implementation tools and concepts for opportunity sites along the canals, and we assess stakeholder feedback gathered on these proposals. We conclude with recommended further steps for implementation.

Note: �is report covers one of three related projects with a focus on developing functional tools to unlock development potential in key in�ll areas of the City of Phoenix, conducted by faculty and students at the ASU School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning. �e others are:

Unlocking Development Potential on the Phoenix Light Rail Line: A “Toolkit” ApproachAssessing and Promoting Walkable Development on the Phoenix Light Rail Corridor

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are grateful to our stakeholders for their generous time in giving us ideas, expertise, comments and critiques as we have developed this research.

Carol Johnson, City of PhoenixEmily Talen, Phoenix Urban Research LaboratoryEd Lebow, City of PhoenixWylie Bearup, City of PhoenixJoseph Perez, City of PhoenixJim Duncan, SRPBob Gooch, SRPDan Klocke, Downtown Economic Development, Community Food Connections Keith Dyson, Team Ride and BikeReid Butler, Butler Development Diane Brossart, Valley ForwardCraig Demarco, Chelsea's KitchenKamil Kaloush, ASUHarvey Bryant, ASUNan Ellin, University of Utah[Partial List - TBC]

And other anonymous residents and business owners

Introduction

�e City of Phoenix today has a remarkable asset: over 180 miles of irrigation canals within its city limits, o�ering signi�cant potential for waterfront development. Many of these sites are well-located near existing jobs, services and other amenities, and many would likely feature a wide range of transportation choices, including walking, bike, light rail and bus, as well as shorter trips by car. Mixed in�ll development at these sites could make substantial contributions to jobs and economic development, more e�cient use of existing infrastructure, appealing and livable new neighborhood centers, and more economically and environmentally sustainable land use.

Recognizing this opportunity, planners have o�ered a series of detailed proposals for development along the canals (e.g as documented in Ellin et al., 2008). Some areas have already been redeveloped, such as the Waterworks at Arizona Falls (a remarkable new community center). �e adjacent community of Scottsdale has also successfully redeveloped a portion of the Arizona Canal just east of the Phoenix city limits, near Camelback Road.

At the same time, there are many barriers to canal redevelopment. �e many owners, agencies and stakeholders along the canals have complex and often con�icting requirements, and ownership patterns are often fragmented. �ere is a chicken-and-egg problem with the creation of viable markets, which can be eaiser to create in green�eld conditions. �e entitlement process itself can be complex and uncertain – and uncertainty in development translates into risk, which translates into cost.

More speci�cally, the complex structure of incentives and disincentives – regulatory, policy, technical, and so on - often makes it very challenging to redevelop these in�ll sites, and often favors exurban green�eld sites. Compounding these long-term challenges, there are severe short-term challenges from the current depressed real estate market, and availability of development capital. Both near term and long-term, if the bottom line is an unacceptable assurance of pro�t for an unacceptable level of cost and risk, projects will simply not be built.

Yet we believe the evidence shows that these barriers are not insurmountable. Tools do exist to unlock the potential of these and other development sites – tools that realign and increase incentives, reduce regulatory barriers, streamline entitlements, address technical requirements, and coordinate the generation of viable markets. But these tools must be coordinated with each other, within a kind of “toolkit” system. �ey must be made available in an easy to use, “plug and play” format. First – the scope of the present project – they need to be identi�ed, along with the speci�c challenges they are meant to address.

We believe the present environment is an opportune time to identify and assemble these tools, for two reasons. First, the current downturn does provide some “breathing room” to prepare a more orderly planning process, including any needed regulatory changes, site assembly, and other preparations. Second, some of these tools will still be useful in the short term, in encouraging smaller-scale, “bottom-up” growth along the canal, which may already be viable in a more modest form in some cases. �is growth can help to catalyze future stages of growth in a more incremental, orderly, well-adapted pattern.

Engagement by the City of Phoenix

In light of these issues, the authors of the present report were engaged by Senior Planner Carol Johnson of the City of Phoenix to complete a report on the status of canalscape development, with a speci�c focus on proposed design guidelines, and to o�er recommendations. �e authors committed to complete the following tasks, and report the results to the City:

1)Review previous work completed on “canalscapes” and make preliminary identi�cation of implementation issues and resources.

2)Engage with canal-area stakeholders, and/or representative groups of them, and evaluate their assessment of the Canalscape proposals. What do they like? Not like? Visually? Aesthetically? Functionally?

3)Identify the largest concerns over implementation. For example, funding needs, fragmentation of properties, easement and rights issues, agency coordination issues, etc.

4)Identify the preferences and concerns relating to possible design standards. How do we promote synergies that lead to mutual economic bene�ts, without compromising individual initiative and ability to exploit opportunities?

5)Tentatively identify concepts, tools and methodologies that might best meet the needs and concerns identi�ed.

Methodology

For the �rst phase of work, the team reviewed the previous canal development proposals, and identi�ed opportunities and challenges within them. Each student researcher selected a particular topic, representing a challenge or opportunity, and conducted research on that topic. At the same time, each student researcher identi�ed stakeholders that would likely provide the most relevant feedback on that area of research.

Next, the team developed a questionnaire, a sample of which is included in the Appendix. �e questionnaire asked stakeholders about their general understanding of the canal development opportunities, their perceptions of waterfront development relative to other US cities, and their perception of challenges. �en they were asked to comment in more detail on the existing proposals – not only the aesthetic issues, but other issues of implementation regarding technical requirements, costs, and related issues.

�e stakeholders were then asked to comment on existing and proposed City of Phoenix design standards and guidelines for the canal areas, as well as other implementation concerns. Finally, each student investigator asked speci�c questions about their own area of research. Stakeholders were also free to make additional comments, which were recorded.

We have compiled a summary of the questionnaire results herein, and the original questionnaires are also archived for future research. Students discuss their own area of research in the appendices, and there is additional discussion of the questionnaire results there.

Finally, the research team convened to develop its conclusions and recommendations, as re�ected in this report, and in a presentation made to the City.

Findings: �e Nature of the Barriers on the Phoenix CanalsMany of the barriers we have identi�ed are common to any in�ll project in almost any city. Some of these barriers are more challenging in the Phoenix region, in part because the region has developed a major portion of its economy around edge or “green�eld” development, and existing tools, skills and resources are still geared largely to support this class of development. By contrast, tools to support in�ll development have limited availability or, where they do exist, limited functionality in the present environment.

�e barriers we identi�ed are summarized below. �ese include familiar barriers for any in�ll project, as well as particular barriers for the Phoneix canal areas.

!" Fragmented land ownership and control patterns. Several large agencies and jurisdictions control much of the land along or adjacent to the canals, including SRP, APS and the City of Phoenix. �ey present a complex and sometimes con�icting mix of regluations and requirements for use of their sites or sites adjacent to them. (�ese requirements are logical and necessary, but in combination they have the e�ect of limiting coordinated land use changes.) Other owners may have sites that are too small or too fragmented to present workable sites.

#" Regulatory complications from mixed-use and in�ll development, made more complicated because of the mutiple agencies and jurisdictions, with the result that this form of development is likely to be much slower and more costly than green�eld development.

$" Uncertainty in the entitlement process, in part because of the regulatory complexity, and also because of high scrutiny and potential opposition by stakeholders. Meanwhile, the public process does not yet provide substantial support for more walkable mixed-use, compact in�ll development.

%" Relative cost of higher-density projects, especially when structured parking is needed to ful�ll parking requirements or expectations.

&" Competitive advantages for suburban edge development relative to in�ll development. �ese include natural advantages (such as lower development costs) and arti�cial advantages (such as lower permit fees and other e�ective subsidies). �is has the e�ect of making in�ll development relatively uncompetitive, and more di�cult to �nance and sell.

'" “Chicken and egg” problem of weak markets in areas where amenities have not yet been developed (e.g. lack of groceries, etc) and where there are negative aspects of amenities within existing neighborhoods (e.g. long stretches of empty canals, etc).

And there is one other factor that is very important at the present time, but may become less important as �nancial markets stabilize:

(" Lack of capital for larger, more conventional development projects. �ere are notable exceptions in student housing and multi-family rental, but other markets are likely to remain weak for the

foreseeable future.

Overcoming the Barriers: Changing the Structure of Incentives and Disincentives

To understand the tools and strategies needed, we should begin by noting that every act of development occurs within a context of incentives and disincentives. �ese, and all the other resources and requirements, play a fundamental role in determining how much a development costs, in relation to how much it is rewarded. Since no developer is in business to lose money, if we want to see good development in a given area, we need to do what we can to ensure that the rules, requirements and incentives work to make the project �nancially rewarding.

Moreover, these rules, requirements and incentives all interact together to determine whether the ultimate outcome is �nancially rewarding. It may not matter if a developer wants to use a given incentive, if another rule or condition prohibits its use. �is overall structure can be likened to a computer's “operating system” – the speci�c “software,” or in this case the development program, has to operate within the overall set of rules, standards and incentives. So the parts of this “operating system” include all the laws, rules, fees, standards, and all other parameters that govern what can be done and where, and for what cost and reward.

For most projects, the market itself provides perhaps the most obvious set of incentives and disincentives – namely, whether buyers (or renters) are prepared to pay a price su�cient to cover all the costs of development, plus a competitive pro�t. �e more they are willing to pay above the threshold of pro�tability, the more there is an incentive for that development to occur. Conversely, if they are not willing to pay enough to make a minimum threshold project, then developers say the project “doesn't pencil” - and in most cases, it simply doesn't get built.

But market behavior does not arise in a vacuum. Buyers have their own set of incentives and disincentives, which often depend on conditions set by the public sector. Construction and expansion of public infrastructure (roads, water, etc) is clearly a major incentive to development, and a disincentive when that infrastructure becomes inadequate. Other sources of buyer incentives and disincentives include the cost of resources and services, the structure of tax policy, and the “pricing signals” of such services as toll roads and parking charges.

Buyers also have non-economic incentives, of course, including neighborhood aesthetic appeal, amenities, convenience, attractiveness, and peer-group desirability. �ese in turn are sensitive to public investments in area services and amenities, and the perceived quality and e�ort made by the public sector in things like schools, parks, streetscapes, public transportation and other amenities. Many of these conditions develop slowly, and are di�cult (and usually expensive) to change quickly.

�ere are also important incentives and disincentives in the cost of development itself. �is includes the cost of planning and entitlement, the cost of regulatory requirements, the cost and complexity of construction, and – one of the most signi�cant for the public sector – the cost structure of development fees, including infrastructure system development charges, which are in theory supposed to reimburse the public sector for the costs of development that it bears. But these fees are often consciously structured in a way that incentivizes suburban edge development, which is intended to generate new tax base and additional economic activity. �e regulatory and entitlement process is often also greatly

streamlined in smaller suburban jurisdictions, adding more powerful incentives to this form of development.

But there is a growing concern that these incentives are, in e�ect, subsidizing development today by passing costs o� to tomorrow's taxpayers and citizens, who will have to bear the costs of infrastructure operation and repair, as well as rising costs of energy and water, the health impact of air pollution, and other such “externalities” (costs passed on to others). �ere is an analogy to the unsustainable debt sutiation the country has found itself in – indeed, the 2008 “mortgage meltdown” began in these very exurban communities, as rising energy prices and other returning “externalities” pushed many homeowners into default.

As a result, many people have become interested in the advantages of in�ll development in lowering future costs to taxpayers and citizens of development. Most people support at least a viable choice for buyers between exurban car-dependent communities, and in�ll communities with greater transportaiton choice. But the regional economy has historically been heavily dependent on exurban and green�eld development, along with its system of standards, rules, expectations, fees, and other elements of the regional development “operating system.” Such systems are very slow to change, and they often exhibit a condition known as “lock-in” – the incentives tend to reinforce and to perpetuate the same patterns of activity.

�erefore it is not a surprise to see that while many in�ll sites stand vacant, including many adjacent to the canals, the overwhelming volume of development activity in the Phoenix region remains at the suburban edge. �is pattern of uneven regional development re�ects an uneven playing �eld when it comes to incentives. If the public sector wants to see a more spatially e�cient form of development that makes greater use of existing inner-city resoures, and likely lowers worrisome externality costs – which seem likely to hit future taxpayers and citizens especially hard - then it must examine the steps needed to re-balance the equation of incentives and disincentives.

�erefore we can express the steps that the public sector can take, in partnership with private and NGO entities, to help overcome the in�ll development barriers previously summarized:

!) Work to overcome fragmented land ownership patterns by creating partnerships that can identify and assemble “opportunity sites.” Provide incentives for owners to collaborate with each other and with other developers to create coordinated development. Implement codes and other incentives that provide maximum �exibility in use, while assuring maximum coordination of form. (We will have more to say about this important issue below.)

#) Streamline and coordinate regulations and requirements for mixed-use and in�ll development, by establishing a set of uni�ed and coordinated requirements, and by o�ering pre-approved types that overcome regulatory barriers.

$) Increase certainty in the entitlement process by providing a clear framework, and clear, workable regulatory requirements such as zoning codes. Provide a more formalized process for public and stakeholder involvement that increases neighborhood con�dence in the quality of the result.

%) Lower the relative cost of higher-density projects, by easing parking requirements and other major drivers of cost. Work to reduce cost through economies of standardization in the process.

&) Level the playing �eld relative to suburban edge development by eliminating hidden subsidies and requiring all development to pay its true cost to taxpayers and citizens. Examine fees and other

“pricing signals,” and consider tools such as “feebates” to equalize incentives for in�ll development. Consider targeted public investment catalytic projects across a range of scales (a few large, many small, etc.) to promote additional growth.

') Overcome the “chicken and egg” problem of weak markets by identifying areas with weak amenities (e.g. isolated canal areas) and by incentivizing needed amenities that can be provided reasonably (e.g. activities, amenities, safety measures along the canals). Build on existing resources to create desirable amenities, if necessary through modest means (e.g. food vendors, artist studios, galleries, etc).

() Compensate for lack of capital for larger, more conventional development projects, by incentivizing smaller, pay-as-you-go development, and by preparing sites for incremental development as capital becomes more available.

All of these issues are interrelated, and the speci�c tools developed to address them must also be interrelated and coordinated. Moreover, they must be made available within a coordinated planning framework that is sensitive to the varying requirements of di�erent development sites.

Speci�c Stakeholder FeedbackAs noted, we interviewed a range of stakeholders, including representatives of government agencies, private developers, area businesses, NGOs and private citizens. Our �ndings are summarized at the end of the Appendix section (Appendix 30). We can summarize them here:

1.�ere is generally strong support for the concept of canal-oriented development and its potential contribution to quality of life and sustainable development within the Phoenix region. But there is also notable skepticism about whether canal redevelopment will move beyond “pretty plans” into reality.

2.Where there is awareness of the Canalscape project speci�cally – which is highest among already involved area stakeholders – there is generally good support for these proposals. However, there is limited awareness among members of the general public.

3.Some members of the general public expressed concerns about gentri�cation, congestion and other possible problems from development. Others expressed concerns about existing levels of crime and safety, parking requirements,

4.Representatives of key agencies expressed willingness to work through existing regulations and requirements to achieve innovative new developments.

5.But there is also notable concern from these agencies that all parties must understand the realities, and �nd ways to work through them.

6.�ere is notable concern from key agency stakeholders that speci�c design standards may be premature at this time, since more basic issues of process and access must be addressed �rst.

7.Among general stakeholders, there was uncertainty about the implications of proposed design standards,

Conclusions and Recommendations

A number of key conclusions loom large in our recommendations. First, perhaps most signi�cant, Jim

Duncan, Senior Analyst for SRP, reported to us in his stakeholder interview that any structures that front onto the canals would need to coordinate with them regarding access and use, and SRP would not likely favor a city-administered form-based code. Clearly this issue should be explored further to clarify and identify a consensus approach.

�e City does provide an informational document outlining the approval process for canal-oriented development, and referring to required SRP reviews (City of Phoenix, 2011). But given the complexity of these and other highly technical requirements, and the goal of encouraging good development in a challenging economic environment, we suggest that the City should consider a more pro-active approach.

We suggest that the City consider partnering with SRP to develop a uni�ed approach to development along the canal, o�ering a resource for coordinated design, and including education and outreach. As an alternative to a complex set of design standards or guidelines, the also city might o�er streamlined entitlement paths, such as a set of agreed-upon design models that could be quickly approved.

�erefore:

Recommendation One: Consider forming a partnership, led by the City and SRP (and other key stakeholders if appropriate) to streamline and coordinate development along the canal. Consider creating a joint o�ce to take this forward. Partner with other stakeholders to forge a set of models and tools that can overcome the barriers to development.

Second, many of the barriers that need to be overcome can be done so best through pilot projects, where the complex mix of issues can be resolved under actual conditions, and stakeholders can view and evaluate the results. �ese projects will also serve to catalyze other developments around them. �erefore:

Recommendation Two: Partner with willing developers on a series of small (or larger in some cases, if resources permit) pilot projects that will serve as “research and development” projects for both canal development speci�cally, and in�ll development more generally.

�ird, the surrounding community has many unmet needs, but also has untapped capacity to engage in smaller-scale development and related economic activity. �ey have a right to be engaged in the public provess for development within their own community, of course. Moreover, they represent a vital asset in the development process, not only as potentially informed supporters of projects, but as economic development agents in their own right. �erefore:

Recommendation �ree: Create an ongoing stakeholder engagement process that will not only build involvement and support for development, but tap the capacity of the community to generate its own development at a range of scales. �is may take the form of a community design center or other resource “clearinghouse”.

Fourth, the Phoenix area o�ers good examples of older models that incorporate many coordinated solutions to mixed-use, livable, sustainable development. In some cases, these models can be easily developed, adapted and personalized -- a key need for small developers. Most important, they can greatly simplify otherwise complex development models with too many “moving parts.” �is can mean

the di�erence between a successful project, and one that succumbs to a too-complex technical and regulatory process. �erefore:

Recommendation Four: Identify and make available a series of design prototypes, covering a range of issues and opportunities on the canalscape. Use existing simpli�ed types, and develop them as pre-approved or streamlined models that can be easily personalized, using decorative artwork and other inexpensive custom touches.

Fifth, in an environment of daunting barriers to in�ll development in general, and canalscape development in particular, we believe that any regulatory changes must be developed very carefully so as to convey more incentives than disincentives. As noted, the City of Phoenix is now considering elements of “form-based coding” – a kind of zoning code that is more liberal on use but more prescriptive on form, especially at the public frontage. But we believe that any such innovation must provide three essential bene�ts: one, greater reulatory certainty; two, greater �exibility in responding to market conditions; and three, greater likelihood of increased property values as the result of coordinated area development.

�e last point bears some discussion. Many property owners are resistant to the proposition that zoning codes will restrict what they can do with their property. But if the ingredients above are met, then they will likely enjoy a greater opportunity to develop a successful project at maximum value – or, if they so choose, to sell to others who will do so. Studies show clearly that buyers will pay more for an individual property if it is located in an area with coordinated, attractive development – precisely the goal of form-based codes.

However, we suggest that such coding be developed carefully, with as straightforward and simple a set of regulations as possible. Rather than a long, complex set of provisions, the code may perhaps combine simpli�ed types (see Recommendation Four) and more �exible “packaged” design options. (For example, see the “pattern language” proposal included in a separate research report prepared for light rail in�ll, prepared as part of the Phoenix Urban Research Lab, and titled “Unlocking Development Potential on the Phoenix Light Rail Line: A 'Toolkit' Approach.” �erefore:

Recommendation Five: Develop code reform carefully, and in a way that serves to remove development barriers rather than creating additional ones. Consider using simpler, coordinated types and �exible “design packages,” rather than extensive regulatory language.

Sixth, as the title of this report suggests, and as discussed earlier, we have concluded that tools are needed to overcome the barriers to good development, and that there is a need to coordinate such tools into “toolkits” that allow them to be used easily and in combination – what has been termed “plug and play.” Such resources need to be made available to a range of potential developers across a range of project sizes and types.

Many of these tools and toolkits already exist – for example, form-based design codes – but there is still a need to coordinate them, and adapt them to the particular requirements of canal-oriented development. In other cases, there may be a need for new tools and approaches, based on new opportunities or challenges.

We have done research on a number of such tools, and sought evaluation from our representative

stakeholders. �e summary reports on these elements and their feedback can be found in the Appendix. While this is by no means an exhaustive list of the resources needed, we hope it provides a �rst step in demonstrating concrete tools and how they might function to facilitate good development on the canal.

Such resources might be made available through a user-friendly Design Center, with both a physical o�ce and a web presence. We suggest this is important to provide access to the tools and skill to use them, as well as capacity to develop in a peer-to-peer, capacity-building format. (In fact some of the tools are focused speci�cally on that goal.)

�is initial list of tools and toolkits is as follows (listed alphabetically by researcher):

1.Urban Heat Island Reduction and Albedo Enhancement Tools (Alex Ageno)2.Complete Streets Tools (Amanda Ari�ana)3.Accessory Dwelling and Live Work Tools (Shaina Begay)4.Age-Friendly Design Checklist (Jonvieve Bryant)5.Agency Coordination Strategy (Stephanie Bubenheim)6.Sustainable Food Tools (Paul Carriere)7.Safety and Security Design Toolkit (De'Ondre Charles)8.Regeneration strategy toolkit (Chelsea Comfort)9.Land Ownership Opportunity Diagnostic Tools (Ryan Fulmer)10.Gap Finance Tools (Brandon Glimcher)11.Capacity-Building Resource Center Tools (Drew Hanley)12.Small-Scale Vending Tools (Tino Hernandez)13.Community Visualization Tools (Jaycen Horton)14.Development Incentive Tools (Daniel Johnson)15.Bicycle Network Planning Tools (Nick Johnson)16.Green Screen Tools (Will Langton)17.Water Feature Design Models (Ryan McCann)18.Food Cart Options (Josh McKenzie)19.Landscape patterns (Joey Meisenheimer)20.Shading Device Toolkit (Kent Nielsen)21.Native and Non-Allergenic Plants (Matthew Pechous)22.Community engagement tools (Mia Sanchez)23.Business Readiness Diagnostic Tools (Joey Sefcik)24.Market development checklist (Daniel Sheldon)25.Healthy Community Design (Taylor Shell)26.Targeting Food Venues (Jeremy �ompson)27.Sprawl Retro�t Checklist (Ryan Winkle)28.A�ordable Housing Strategy Tools (John Zaimes)

�erefore:

Recommendation Six: Develop an evolving “toolkit” of tools that are adapted to overcoming the barriers and exploiting the opportunities of canal-oriented development. Make these tools available through a coordinated resource that combines a physical o�ce and a web-based collection of resources.

We note that much more remains to be done to change the “rules of the game” and to provide resources to facilitate good development along the canals and in adjacent areas. We hope that this outline suggests a useful outline of the concrete opportunity ahead, to move from a promising set of good design ideas, to a new era of thriving, livable canal-oriented developments.

REFERENCES

Ellin, Nan et al. (2009) “Canalscape: An authentic and sustainable desert urbanism for metro Phoenix.” Accessed November 26, 2011 at http://canalscape.org/exhibit-publication/publication/

City of Phoenix Zoning Code (Canal Design Guidelines) (1996). Section 507 Tab A. http://www.public.asu.edu/~safeldma/Canalscape/COPCanalZoning.pdf Accessed November 28, 2011.

Salt River Project (2011). Canal Multiple Use. Information website. http://www.srpnet.com/water/canals/use.aspx. Accessed November 28, 2011.

City of Phoenix (2011). Process for Review of Projects Utilizing SRP Canal Bank Right of Way. Informational document. http://phoenix.gov/planning/rezfrm25.pdf Accessed November 28, 2011.

APPENDIX ONE: Urban Heat Island and Albedo Tools Alex Ageno

Introduction

�is portion of the report considers urban heat island and albedo issues for canal-oriented development, and tools and resources available to address them. Since sustainability is a main focus of the Canalscape proposal, a toolkit for Urban Heat Island is a key resource for implementation.

Arizona’s climate is a big factor in deciding what tool works best. Phoenix is considered a desert, and is primarily comprised of weather ranging from 43.4 F to 104.2 F. Following is a graph that displays the weather year-round in Phoenix:

Research documented by the EPA makes it clear that the Urban Heat Island (UHI) e�ect is primarily caused by material that absorbs solar radiation (“low albedo”) and re-emits it as heat, rather than re�ecting it back into space (“high albedo”). Secondarily, UHI results from trapped air between buildings and other structures, which acts like a greenhouse. Since Phoenix is generally a very hot climate with has many more days of cooling than of heating, the primary focus is on reducing heat, not conserving heat (which would be the case for cool climates).

�e next step would be to determine what aspects of Urban Heat Island would be best for the Canalscape. Since a likely objective of the Canalscape project would be to build along it through form based codes, the most likely albedo increase would be on the buildings and structures, using high-re�ectance materials and colors. Changing the asphalt of the Canalscape poses more of a trick than the buildings themselves; due to the fact that the material already exists and is di�cult to change with re-pavement. However, new cement can also be planned for higher albedo values as well.

Albedo values of various materials. Note that albedo is measured on a scale of 0 to 1. 1 is the number givento a surface that re�ects ALL light. 0 is the opposite; ALL light is absorbed. Source: Huang and Taha, 1990

Albedo Toolkit for buildings

We consider here �ve simple tools to reduce UHI, in a demonstration “toolkit” that can be used for Canalscape development. (A more complete toolkit could be developed in collaboration with experts in the �eld, such as ASU's Kamil Kaloush.) �e tools are:

Paving ColorsPaving SurfacesCool RoofsBuilding SurfaceUrban Form

A quick rule to note:

Along with color, mass is the most important aspect of building materials. �e mass of materials matters as much as the colors of the buildings. Just as very light colors have high albedo and low contribution to UHI, materials that have a much lower mass also absorb and re-radiate much less heat. (Imagine a black rock next to a black piece of plastic of the same size out in the sun: the rock will likely be much hotter!) �at is a general rule, and one of the main objectives that one must strive for in order to reduce UHI.

Paving Colors, Paving Surfaces

A “cool” pavement is generally one that has a light color. It may also have a porous surface and/or have lower mass. Gilbert, AZ de�nes a cool pavement as something that “…utilize coloration, materials, porosity and processes that increase solar re�ectivity to reduce surface heating and also to promote cooling through increased air �ltration and evaporation.” �e best pavements in this respect have lighter colors, usually by using a lighter color of aggregate. Porous concrete surfaces can also be relatively lightweight, aiding in cooling. In particular, the type of pavement that the Canal could use is a permeable concrete using white Portland Cement.

Porous surfaces are bene�cial because they aid in evaporation, which absorbs heat energy and provides cooling. �ese surfaces have other bene�ts for water quality, by helping to recharge the ground with rainwater, and reducing runo� that may damage water quality in the canals. As noted earlier, lightweight surfaces also aid in reducing absorption and re-radiaiton of heat. Another option is the use of natural light-colored and permeable materials in the design of paths. �is might be a suitable alternative if changing the pavement proves to be impractical. �e use of white rocks and green landscaping materials can help lower albedo as well, without having to physically tear up the concrete. In addition, this can also add natural beauty, as it changes the physical form in visually interesting ways. �is type of element included in a form-based code can be both inviting and sustainable.

Cool Roofs and Potential of Green Roofs

�e most basic roof that can be implemented is a cool roof, which is a roof that is painted with light colors in order to re�ect light, rather than absorb it. For the Canalscape, the following cool roof would be a good start in order to help with the roof. �is roof is from Cool Roo�ng, and the cool roofs they o�er focus on customer satisfaction and o�er many di�erent roofs for every need, including single-ply roo�ng, roof coatings, and shingle roo�ng.

http://www.thecoolroo�ngcompany.com/

Green roofs, however, are not recommended. Green roofs, while they may work in areas like Oregon, do not work in Arizona. Because of their high mass, they act as heat sinks. �e mass of the roof slowly emits the heat at night, raising nighttime temperatures. A cool roof, however, has a low amount of mass and is much more suited for the hot weather. �e only way a green roof would work in the near future is if there is a way to use lightweight systems such as, say, hydroponics, in order to reduce the mass. (�is might also reduce the water requirement, andother serious drawback of green roofs.)

Roofs used for cooling

While a cool roof may or may not work in the context of form-based codes, the simple idea would be to simply paint the roofs in a light color, which at the same time have the potential to blend into the increased focus on an aesthetically pleasing physical form. �is can be implemented with something such as re�ective coating. Re�ective coating, in particular, is a good choice. In one study conducted by EPA, re�ective coatings were shown to increase the albedo around 0.2 to 0.6. �anks to the coating, the temperature of the roofs lowered considerably.

Building Surfaces

With the roofs and paving readily created in order to re�ect heat, building colors also must follow suit. Generally, the types of colors that should be used are lighter colors. While white may not be aesthetically attractive to everyone, one can substitute other light shades.

Urban Form

With all the heat re�ected o� of buildings, where exactly is the heat going to go? What would happen if the heat gets trapped in the area due to the combination of building forms (the urban form)? It will build up just as it would in a greenhouse. �is is why urban form is one of the most important concepts of UHI.

In addition, huge areas of dark asphalt for roads and parking lots is another enormous contributor to UHI in the Phoenix area. Where structures trap the air – such as freeways with sound walls – this only compounds the problem. Vehicles are also generators of heat, and their emissions are contributors to the Greenhouse E�ect – another important source of rising temperatures in its own right. �e evidence is showing that sprawling urban forms are major contributors to these problems.

Of course there are other reasons to avoid urban sprawl. While some of the e�ects of sprawl may not a�ect the Canalscape, the low-density, spread out form generally compounds UHI problems, as well as other ine�ciencies that cause excess energy consumption (forther compounding UHI). It wastes space and may discourage businesses and buildings from grouping e�ciently with one another, which can discourage such urban bene�ts as mixed-use land use, transportaiton choice and connectivity.

A walkable, connective urban pattern can still provide for the right amount of space for heat to go back into the atmosphere, thus lowering UHI. Connectivity can allow combined energy uses and reduced land and energy consumption, whereas with sprawl, this is much more di�cult to achieve. On the other hand, buildings that are close together should be carefully designed for summer shading, and avoiding the “canyon e�ect” - again, trapping air between buildings and causing excessive heating. �is can be a problem in areas with rows of taller buildings (e.g. Central Avenue).

Other Issues

In general, the use of plants is not especially bene�cial to UHI unless they are designed to provide shade, reduce energy and cool the area. However, the total impact of irrigation and other issues must be assessed with care, as one does not want to use even more energy, when the intention was to use less energy. (Note: plants on a building surface, AKA “green screens,” are discussed in another section of this report.)

�e canalscape o�ers the opportunity to move air across the water and provide potential cooling, according to Kamil Kaloush of ASU. �is shoud be investigated with SRP to see if this would cause concerns about loss of water. (�e actual water loss for local area cooling would be modest.)

Gaps between buildings should be designed to control heating from trapped air, especially in east-west orien- tations. Shading devices can be staggered to reduce solar gain. �ey can even provide space for solar PV systems.

Stakeholders identi�ed and consulted for this work:

Kamil Kaloush, ASU Professor of Civil Engineering. He has consulted with the EPA in this work, and would be happy to provide information for a “toolkit” to be developed by the City.

Harvey Bryan, ASU Professor of Architecture. He has done extensive work with Urban Heat Island and design resources, especially for building design and shading devices.

APPENDIX TWO: Complete Street Tools Amanda Ari�ana

Introduction

�e development of the Phoenix metropolitan area appears to be in a spiral of sprawl. Places are located further away from each other, which makes the use of private vehicles necessary. Paradoxically, it seems, the more private motor vehicles are used, the more congestion increases. Even though sidewalks are provided, not many people use them since sprawl growth means places are too far to reach by foot. Sidewalks are also considered plain and unattractive for pedestrians. In addition, it seems nobody wants to walk on sidewalks during summer time as they lack shade and other cooling functions.

In addition to these streetscapes being unattractive, pedestrians also feel (and are) unsafe, since vehicles travel faster due to the wide space provided on the roads. Each year, there are pedestrians or cyclists killed in accidents while crossing the street because drivers are used to speeding. In fact, there are a number of areas in Phoenix that do not appear to need wide streets at all, as not too many cars are passing by.

Background

One solution to overcome this issue is by implementing “road diets.” �e term “road diet” refers to the removal of travel lanes from a roadway and utilizing the space for other uses and travel modes. �is improvement could generate bene�ts for the users of all modes of transportation, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit riders (citation). �e goal is to create what is sometimes called “complete streets” - not just for cars, but for other modes and users.

Based on statistics from the 1980’s, Pennsylvania DOT engineers measured the statistics of accidents occurrence. �e study showed roadways with four lanes produced more accidents. �e engineers decided to reduce the lanes from four into three. As the change was made, 95% of the local residents opposed it, reasoning that it would a�ect their travel time.

After the construction was completed, data collection and new time-lapse photography began to show the results. �e data showed that dangerous conditions resulting in crashes decreased to nearly zero. Nearly 95% of local residents who feared the change later said they were thankful to the Pennsylvania DOT for making the change.

But at present, the economic environment is not supportive of the means of funding such projects. Project designs can still proceed, but nevertheless, short term and long term costs need to be taken into account.

Connection to the Canalscape Project

�e Canalscape project proposed several di�erent programs to redevelop the canals as the result of engagement with the community. In the current situation, nobody would want to walk on the canal because it is dangerous. No streetlights are available along the canal and most neighborhood and commercial areas are facing away from it. �is is in stark contrast with other cities: Amsterdam has 47 canals, Venice 125, and yet Phoenix has 181 (citation). �e main objective for the project is to enhance

the community welfare, safety, and health.

It is said that “road diets” could be a key part of a new “form-based” zoning code. New streetscaping, lanes, and improvements in building codes could also be included. In connection with the Canalscape, “road diets” may help to increase safety on the roads that intersects the canal. It is known that accidents sometimes occurred at intersections with the canals, and some cars have even fallen into the canals (citation). With “road diets”, the City could minimize the cause of such accidents.

Planning Proposal

�ere are �ve features that we propose should be added to the “road diet” structure:! Reduced lane widths/number! Added bike lanes! Widened sidewalks or streetscaping! On-street parking with bulb outs! Planted median or islands in the middle of roadways

Change in Lanes

Most current roadways in Phoenix contain four lanes and above, and many arterials have six or seven lanes. As the City seeks to create more transportation choice, manage transportaiton demand and reduce the number of excessive automobile trips, this number of lanes is likely to prove to be a waste of space.

Bike Lane

�e city of Phoenix wants to be more “bicycle friendly” in order to decrease congestion produced by transportation. Adding bike lanes into the plan for “road diets” or into other streets will be bene�cial for cyclists who will be more able to access more places. �e bike lane has to be designed in a way that it is safe to bicyclists from getting hit by cars. An example is by adding curbs to separate the bikeways from roadways or on-road protected cycle track.

Widening Sidewalks or Streetscaping

Widening sidewalks could be bene�cial in many areas by providing space for more activities for the pedestrian. Sidewalks should contain shading, seating areas, aesthetic amenities such as pavements and planting, street lights, and periodic small retail destinations in order to attract pedestrians. However, looking at the long-term cost, it is better to have something that does not require long-term maintenance. Instead of plants, simple sidewalk pavement and art works or sculptures

may be more appropriate. Where planting is used, it should require low-maintenance and very low irrigation.

On-Street Parking

In addition to bike lanes, it is also bene�cial to provide street parking in some areas. Often this feature is especially bene�cial when it is provided in front of retail areas. Besides parallel parking, bulb outs could also be used in order to provide a border between the roadway and buildings, and shorten the crossing distance for pedestrians.

Islands or Planted Medians

Instead of putting lanes in the middle of the roadway, it is safer to have planted islands or medians in order to prevent accidents. �e islands can include low-maintenance planting to add more aesthetic essence and shading if possible. Turn lanes can then be inserted leading up to intersections.

Notes on Stakeholder Interview

To get feedback on implementing “road diets”, it is important to conduct stakeholder interviews and assess the concerns of those who would be required for implementaiton. For this project, we spoke to Wylie Bearup, Phoenix Street Transportation Director, as a key stakeholder in regards to transportation engineering. According to his report, “road diet” projects are already under way in the city and an active area of work.

�e 15th Avenue happens to be the place where the “road diets” project has taken place. Its main goal is to maintain safety, slow tra�c movement, gain bicycle mobility, and provide bu�ers for pedestrians. As the project is operational, there are few complaints from residents about slowed travel time.

Also, Mr. Bearup mentioned the economic reality in relation to the long-term issues. Funding “road diets” projects is costly. When they include planting, they require long-term maintenance. An example is on Baseline Road where materials are su�ering because the city could not keep up with the regular maintenance cost. So, it is important to carry on the project with low-maintenance materials.

Contact information:

Wylie Bearup, PE, PhDStreet Transportation Director/ City EngineerAddress:200 West Washington Street , 5th FloorPhoenix, Arizona 85003-1611Phone:602-262-6136Fax: 602-495-2016wylie.bearup@phoenix.gov

APPENDIX THREE: Accessory Dwelling and Live Work tools and types Shaina Begay

*****An accessory dwelling can combine a small commercial use oriented to the canal.

Introduction

�e City of Phoenix has over 180 miles of canals, a fact that most members of the community don't know. In fact, the canals often seem to be mistreated, forlorn and abandoned. Yet from a physical evaluation the canalscapes can o�er shade, areas for socialization, and sense of place. From research I believe the canals can o�er much more to the community.

But there is a need to create activities along the lengths of the canals, which often include large residential areas that do not have opportunities for in�ll development. �ese areas will not be able to create the kind of activity that will allow the canals to liven the place and attract the community, creating economic growth and togetherness.

My idea is therefore to allow persons living along the canals to create accessory dwellings in their backyards or in their garages, oriented to the canals. �ese dwellings could be used for live/work priorities, and also a way to get involved with the community and helping with the need for small-scale, neighborhood based economic development. �is is in line with the broader goal of “capacity-building” within central Phoenix.

My survey of stakeholders demonstrated that the canals are pictured by many as dirty, unsafe, long stretches of land that are not important because they are unclean and only used for shortcuts and biking/running. �e implementation of accessory dwellings in residents' backyards will create a sense of place and “eyes on the canal,” making the canals a safer and more attractive place to be at any time of the day. I strongly believe accessory dwellings will attract the community and could also create jobs for individuals located around the canals who currently have restricted opportunities, so it could make lives much easier.

In many cases the parcels of land on which the canals are located are not being used in an e�cient manner or are not being used in a bene�cial way. �e use of accessory dwellings in the areas along the canals would put the empty spaces into good use, bene�tting the residents and the community. Currently there is not much surrounding the canals which have resulted in the poor conditions which the area is in. So by allowing in�ll of accessory dwelling units on existing residential properties, the areas along the canals which are in the backyards of the residents would serve as another important land use. �is structure could accommodate a number of uses such as a co�ee shop, gallery, or other small retail space.

�is proposal would then allow relatively low-cost creation of a sense of places along the canal which would also serve to engage the residents in cmmunity-building. It could then create a domino e�ect, attracting more activity, and providing a positive impact on neighborhood economic growth.

In our stakeholder feedback, we found that many people liked the idea of a live-work accessory dwelling unit along the canal. Jim Duncan of SRP expressed tentative support for the concept, but

noted that the units would not be able to rely upon legal access from the canals. �ey would also not be able to front directly on the property line, but would need to set back behind yards or terraces.

�e live-works can front on small yards with access to the canals.

APPENDIX FOUR: Age-Friendly Checklist Jonvieve Bryant

Introduction

Phoenix is well-known as a city of retirees and a growing population of aging citizens. It follows that any new development should be carefully assessed for its age-friendly characteristics. �is is an active area of research and development in urban plannign around the world today (WHO 2011).

Downtown Phoenix has a variety of amenities, some of which only cater to certain individuals. By establishing a speci�c design checklist the Canalscape project could be utilized by a more diverse population including aging populations.

Aspects that could be seen as contributing to an Age-Friendly site include

! accessible pavements and entries! seating! lighting! greenspace! sidewalks! mixed use

�e site of this project is the perfect location in which a check-list can be implemented. �e location of the canal is right o� of 40th and Van Buren, which makes it accessible by both car and public transportation (ie. light rail, bus). �e uses around the site include a hotel, a junior college, and an airport parking lot. �ese uses contribute to the potential foot-tra�c that would be bene�cial to success of this project. Implementing an Age-Friendly check-list would make the design of this space desirable for all walks of life.

Age-Friendly Uses can be seen as a great tool for any community, and implementing this idea into the Canalscape could become an importsnt pilot project for the city. Not only does it improve quality of life for aging populaitons, it creates more diversity, and more quality of life for all residents. Events like farmer's markets, boat races, and other public events would accommodate greater diversity, allowing for the community to gather in this shared space.

Creating a space that is Age-Friendly also requires careful design. Since the public spaces in the Canalscape are outdoors, and largely unprotected, we have to consider how to make the spaces comfortable for all seasons. Adding canopies and trees would allow for this space to useable in warmer weather. �e design of accessible pedestrian thoroughfares would be a crucial amenity. For this the use of art and various forms of paving could make this space aesthetically appealing for residents and city goers. In order to incorporate children, splash pads could be used in kid friendly areas of the project. �is would accommodate activities for multi-generational family members.

Age-Friendly Checklist

Overview: �e goal of this checklist to incorporate guidelines established by WHO, World Health Organization’s “A Guide to an Age-Friendly City” into a new checklist that can be implemented into

the Canalscape Project. �e implementation of this Age-Friendly Checklist would allow for the space to be enjoyed by all walks of life. Currently the amenities found in Downtown Phoenix cater to certain age groups. With the implementation of this checklist a new standard would be implemented in regards to creating Age-Friendly Projects. Arizona is a popular retirement locale, and a destination for many senior travelers because of our landmarks, weather and seasonal attractions.

�e establishment of an Age-Friendly checklist would enforce speci�c guidelines on the design of this project. Creating a speci�c checklist that includes pavement design, green space, safety, services, roads, and cycle paths are key elements in the design of any project. �e site of this project is located on a major arterial that is surrounded by both public transportation and civic use, and this is an asset that can be built on and made more age-friendly. �e ADA and EPA have speci�c guidelines that can be implemented into an Age-Friendly Checklist.

In regards to planning a Child-Friendly Area there are shared characteristics that can be seen while planning an Age-Friendly area. Key community components include safety, walkability, mixed use, social participation, transportation and green space. �ese two notions of planning can be combined and with implementation can create a versatile space, with these elements of a diverse and multi-age space the community can be built to age with its citizens.

Outdoor Space! Seating! Shade! Public Art! Maintained Landscape! Lighting for safety! Adequate Pavement! Tra�c Calming Roads! Railings that prevent falling into canal! Sidewalks! Mixed-Use

Transportation! Public transportation must be a�ordable and readily accessible ! Lighting surrounding stops! Security Personnel for evening surveillance! Adequate space for various modes of travel (i.e-bike lanes, and sidewalks) ! Adequate parking spaces! Designated handicap parking areas

Housing! A�ordable Housing! Variety in Types (i.e apartments, townhomes, condominiums)! Proximity to public transportation and civic centers

Respect and Social Inclusions

! Age-Varying Activities! Free activities, or lost cost admissions for activities! Easy access for impaired individuals! Safe locations of activities! Time varying events! Adequate information given about set events! Sites of events should be readily accessible via alternate forms of transportation! Inclusion of all ages during various events

Civic Participation and Employment! Options for volunteering! Various options for elderly employment ! Non-age discriminating positions! Adequate schedules which accommodate employees! Training available for retirees

Communication and Information! A basic, e�ective communication system that reaches residents of all ages! Various forms of communication that are readily understood by residents! Printed information-including o�cial forms, television captions and text on visual displays – has large lettering and the main ideas are shown by clear headings and bold-face type.

! Print and spoken communication are short and concise using familiar words in straightforward sentences

Community Support and Health Services! Health and community service facilities are safely constructed and fully accessible! Clear and accessible information is provided about health and social services for older people

! All sta� are respectful, helpful and trained to serve older people! Economic barriers impeding access to health and community support services are minimized

! Health services are easily accessible by various forms of transportation ! Voluntary services by people of all ages is encouraged and supported

See also:"Checklist of Essential Features of Age-friendly Cities." World Health Organization, 2007. http://www.who.int/ageing/publications/Age_friendly_cities_checklist.pdf. Accessed on the web, 28 November 2011.

APPENDIX FIVE: Agency Coordination StrategyStephanie Bubenheim

Introduction

�e Salt River Project (SRP) owns and maintains 131 miles of canal in Arizona. �e main use of the water in the canals has been historically for irrigation throughout the Valley; however, in recent years demand for urban use has surged. Canalscape projects need access to the land immediately next to the canals in order for proposed ideas to become reality, and the major stakeholder restricting that process is SRP. My research topic was to explore SRP to �nd out what part(s) they have contributed to so far in the canalscape process as well as what they will allow planners to do with the proposed area and what ideas they would limit, with a focus on irrigation, safety, and building next to the canal.

Upon initial investigation and research it was found that SRP has already taken a signi�cant role in canalscape proposal development. Each project and idea has to be run through SRP; a declared partner, to make sure the design is compatible with SRP’s maintenance and operational needs. �e canals bring 325,851 gallons of water to the metro area a year and SRP is protective of it. �ey restrict water being taken out of the canal for other uses unless it is somehow rerouted back into the canals. �e canals also house a type of carp �sh from China used to eat weeds and plant life at the bottom of the canals to help keep it clean. �e company needs a special permit to release the �sh into the canal and is protective of their sustainable idea of using �sh instead of equipment for cleaning; eliminating them from the equation is impossible.

�e senior analyst of water engineering for SRP is Jim Duncan, a major stakeholder in the canalscape development. Upon interviewing Jim at the SRP headquarters many questions were answered about ideas and policies regarding SRP’s association with the canals. Jim stated that SRP is intrigued with new ideas focused on the canals, especially canalscape; however, they did have numerous guidelines and restrictions for what could be placed around the canal area.

My main focus throughout the interview was what we as planners would be allowed to do with the area next to the canal. Jim often used the term “canal multiple use” meaning anything added to the canals, which could include anything from a sidewalk to a building. �e main rule with SRP is that anything can be built adjacent to the canal (if it does not rely on the canal property for access) but structures in or on the canal banks have to be very carefully reviewed. Even bridges have to be reviewed to make sure a height requirement was met for machinery to get through the canals with ease. SRP requires the banks to be certain width for canal maintenance in order for their large trucks to maneuver through when needed as well. Vegetation and trees added right along the canal are also almost never allowed because they interfere with repairs and maintenance such as moving �sh during times when parts of the canals need to be emptied. Jim also noted that unless the idea proposed is directly on the canal banks, SRP technically has no say in it and the city has the right to review and approve or deny.

�e city and SRP essentially have to work hand in hand with each other concerning canalscape and canal multiple use. �ey work together as equals because SRP is not a sub-jurisdicton but a quasi-jurisdictional authority. Any ideas need to be presented to both sides to a�rm all requirements are met. But SRP is reluctant to allow developments directly on the canal banks unless it is an area where where little to no maintenance has to be done. One example of this is the quarter mile stretch of Scottsdale Waterfront, considered a special case.

Irrigation and safety were also areas I wanted to investigate further with this stakeholder. �e main purpose of the canals is to �lter water into the valley for irrigation which covers 20,000 acres. Since the canal supplies water for irrigation it would be assumed that the water could also be used for irrigating plants along the banks; however, this is not the case. Most of the banks along the canals such as the Arizona Canal are considered “o� project” meaning no irrigation water is supplied there. Other ideas such as rain water collection should be examined to supply water sustainably to plant life along the canals.

Aside from irrigation, pedestrian safety is also a common question surrounding the canals that have had a bad reputation. At present users are strongly discouraged from swimming in the canals, in part because steep sides make it di�cult to get out of the water. Signs are placed strategically along the banks declaring to swim at your own risk.

I asked Jim Duncan if fences or other means would be allowed along the canals for extended safety if the canals were to become congested with pedestrians. His reply was that no types of fences at all are generally allowed to be built separating the waterway from the banks because it would get in the way of operations and maintenance. It is conceivable that they might approve easy to remove fences to SRP, such as a fence with posts tied together by rope that would be easily maneuverable. We noted, however, that leaving the canal entirely exposed seems dangerous, especially if more families with children start using the canal. Fences also provide a feeling of security and protection, and increase the chances of individuals and families to travel the banks of the canals.

During the meeting we asked Jim his thoughts on the canalscape report already drafted by Nan Ellin and the proposals within. He liked the proposals, but noted that SRP was not heavily involved in developing the proposals, though SRP provided some funding, and their name and logo were used on the report. After listening to the many restrictions SRP sets forth, it seems clear they would not allow some of the ideas proposed without some very careful negotiations to address complications (for example, cutting into the canal and leading water into a separate semicircle pathway right next to the canal, and having trees lining the banks). We asked if a set of guidelines could be produced which planners could follow for the area along the canals. Jim stated that there are already guides available, but each idea actually has to be reviewed on a case by case basis because circumstances are di�erent across each section along the canal.

When asked about the proposal to extend downtown-style design standards, Jim said he had never heard of them before. He was also under the impression that the 1990s design standards had been waived, further suggesting that SRP and the city should have a more structured partnership in taking forward canal redevelopment projects.

http://www.srpnet.com/water/canals/use.aspx

Concluding Recommendation

In view of the critical need for agency coordination, we recommend that a partnership o�ce be formed, led by the City and SRP (and other key stakeholders if appropriate) to streamline and coordinate development along the canal. �ese agencies can partner with other stakeholders to forge a set of models and tools that can overcome the barriers to development.

APPENDIX SIX: Sustainable Food Toolkit Paul Carriere

Introduction

In Phoenix and around the nation, there is a growing problem of unsustainable agricultural practices, rising food prices, and ever worsening eating habits of the American public. As Phoenix continues to sprawl, farms are pushed further and further from the urban core creating the need for further food transportation distances in turn driving up the cost of food. �ere is also the issue of food deserts within urban areas de�ned as an environment unsupportive of health and is characterized by barriers that restrict access to healthy foods.

Phoenix, in particular, has several food deserts within the city limits that make nutritious food inaccessible to certain portions of the general public. �e most likely victims of this are usually lower income families. If one cannot a�ord to own a car, food choices are limited to unhealthy, yet abundant, sources such as fast food. �is has detrimental e�ects on society as a whole with rising health costs and underlying issues of social injustice. As Phoenix strives to obtain a more sustainable urbanism, It is of high importance to facilitate an abundance of healthy, organic food growing practices. �is type of growing practice creates a potential to make healthy food available to the general public and also foster many other community building bene�ts. I aim to assess the canal in order to determine whether community gardens and farmers’ markets can be successful in the area, through the use of a food desert assessment tool as well as other research venues.

�e combination of canal and transportation oriented development brings with it tremendous opportunity for sustainable urban farming and farmers markets. Canals bring about the perfect opportunity to use some of the small open spaces within a public development as community gardening plots due to the close proximity to water. Some of the canal divided lots are perfect for this because of their odd shapes. As mentioned in the original canalscape proposal there is also the opportunity for �oating plots which would add an additional dimension of beauty to the canalscape.

As examples from cities like Vancouver B.C. have shown, garden plots tend to bring communities together and create a sense of ownership and pride to the locals. �is has also fostered grassroots e�orts in many cities like Chicago, which extend into the schools of the community and teach children about the origins of their food, in turn giving them a better respect for nature and their environment. Phoenix is at a point where there is a need for the same type of grassroots catalyst to get the ball rolling.To identify key issues surrounding food supply and the potential lack thereof, I have assembled a food desert assessment tool. I have also used this tool in assessing the potential for farmers market and community gardens the location at 40th street and Washington. When determining the location of a farmers market it is important to consider:

-Proximity to grocer-Proximity to residence-Median income-Distance from a light rail station-Is it accessible to vendors-Is there available space-Do current zoning regulations permit vending

�e toolkit for locating public gardens is similar. One must consider-Proximity to residents, interested in participating-Availablility of permanent land-Access to water-Access to gardening supplies-Soil quality/availability of compost-Sources of education-Funding

I am proposing that during the design phase of this project we consider certain areas that can be utilized for both the purpose of farmers markets as well as community gardens where we see �t. �is will add to the sense of place as well as foster further sustainable agriculture practices throughout the valley while also bringing the community together.

APPENDIX SEVEN: Safety and Security Design Toolkit De'Ondre Charles

Introduction

One of the most signi�cant barriers to canal-oriented development is that the area surrounding the proposed canalscape revisions lack safety features that will make neighborhood residents and canalscape users feel (and be) safe. Upon a canalscape walkthrough, many concerns were noted. �ere is a lack of monitoring and activity, and there are areas with litter and abandoned properties. One essential requirement is to eliminate the actual and apparent threats to personal safety.

Aside from creating more development activity and “eyes on the canal” - which, as studies show, can make urban areas feel and be safer from crime – other strategies to address security are good lighting, cameras, and emergency call boxes. �e canalscape design should be done according to the standards set by Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED), a national standard for secure urban environments.

�e second safety feature that should be implemented is a safety barrier to prevent people, animals, and other objects from falling into the canal. �is can be accomplished with either a physical or nonphysical (vegetative barrier). �e physical barrier could be a solid Plexiglas like see-through material, to keep from obstructing the canalscape view, with railing. Another design would be a railing system with just 3-4 horizontal rails underneath. Placement of these two barrier types could run the entire length of the canal.

It was noted in an interview with SRP that they do not favor any obstruction to easy maintenance of the canals. �erefore a solution would need to be found that could allow these barriers to be quickly and easily removed. (�e obligation to remove them would fall on the users of the canal, not SRP, though SRP might do so with reimbursement.)

�e alternative to the physical barrier is the visible non physical barrier. �is barrier would consist of entirely dense vegetative growth. Both sides of the canal with a distance of four feet from the edge of the canal to the point were people are able to get closest to. As per city zoning regulations the plants would be drought tolerant.

Again, SRP has concerns about this but does allow it in certain places where it does not interfere with canal operations.

I believe the best option for canalscape is the non-physical visual barrier. One �aw with the physical barrier is the maintance. With the current �nancial constraints on the states budget the best way to get the project o� the ground is to implement items that do not require much maintenance. A rail also might encourage pedestrians to lean against or sit on and heighten the risk of falling over.

With the non-physical barrier, people have a clear obstructed visual view of the canal as well as a visual stopping barrier. �e visual barrier is not new to canal and other water features in design. �e San Antonio river walk is one example. �e majority of the rivers edge has no boundaries and is only blocked by a fence when it passes restaurant dining. In Phoenix, Arizona Papago Park also uses this system with a non-physical barrier as well as many other city �shing ponds around Maricopa County.

Implementing photovoltaic solar panels for energy feature will increase Canalscapes chances of approval. �e panels could be placed on top of lights. Lights need to be placed strategically in the path of bicycle and running paths so that one side of the canal will remain lit even when the park is closed. �e panels would also power emergency phones attached to the light pools. �e parking in the canal should be restricted to one side of the canal as well as restaurants and any other businesses. �is allows for a separation of congestion between loitering and actual park activities.

Stakeholder Feedback

Stakeholder feedback regarding the safety aspects of Canalscape has as expected been focused on crime. �e stakeholders both worry about the transients and other adult illegal actions migrating further down Van Buren to Canalscape. �ey believe Canalscape would attract people to the park after hours for illegal activities like drug use, prostitution, and gangs. �e best way to ease these fears is to install gate like barriers at the entrance to prohibit vehicles from entering after hours. As mentioned above the park would be lit on just one side of the canal the entire nighttime hours. As with many other recreation areas the site rules would be posted on boards at the park entrances. Alcohol would be allowed but would require a permit.

Canalscape safety features encompass design features to protect pedestrians. A nonphysical barrier would not intrude on the view of the canal and cost less to install. Clean energy concepts allow phone calls for emergency’s and lighting for night safety. In order for canalscape to prosper, the stakeholders must feel that they are genuine participants in having the �nal say. Stakeholders must truly believe that the project will not lower property values and increase dangerous behavior.

APPENDIX EIGHT: Regeneration ToolkitChelsea Comfort

Introduction

In developing a regeneration toolkit, one of the �rst steps is to understand and engage with the surrounding demographic, and what will be utilized to the utmost e�ciency. �ere have been past projects that have been abandoned, turned into untouched, desolate parts of the city. �e goal of regeneration is to make more of this wasted urban asset, and the damage to human lives that it leaves. We need to learn from the evidence of what has succeeded in the past, adapted to our own conditions.

One valuable case study is the redevelopment of Granville Island, an unattractive and declining industrial district in Vancouber, B.C.

In the early 1900’s, the port of Vancouver was continuously growing, so in an attempt to stabilize the sandbar, the commission approved a reclamation project for an industrial area. Within a decade, obscene industrial factories that mainly served construction and shipping sectors, occupied every lot on the island. After the attacks on Pearl Harbor, the island was in serious decline after factories started burning down and people started to relocate. In the 1970’s, the federal government’s intent was to transform this declining 37-acre wasteland to one of the most successful urban redevelopments in North America.

Today, Granville Island is a people-friendly, mixed-use, private and public exhibition space that provides its locals and tourists with a extensive public market, a boutique hotel, an Art university, a brewing company, performing arts theatres, galleries, and shopping areas. Transportation to and around this island includes ferry service, water taxis, and streetcar railway. Granville Island now sustains a thriving, healthy ecosystem. Nature has regenerated itself, with the help of the Government of Canada, the City of Vancouver and private developers. �anks to the e�orts of several visionary people, the dream for a unique urban oasis is a thriving reality, and will continue evolving and shaping itself into the future.

In researching water regeneration projects that have succeeded, one common denominator I have noticed is restoring and celebrating pieces of the location's history. �e San Antonio Riverwalk helps to support tourism at the Alamo, and Granville Island reuses aged factories. An idea for the Phoenix canal project would be to embrace the history of the ancient, hand dug, Hohokam tribe canal system. 1500 years ago the Hohokam built a pioneer version of our modern Arizona canal system. �ey made use of the landscape with 200 species from the Sonoran desert. �is is a terri�c precedent for us. Integrating and building on history allows locals and visitors to feel connected to the location, and creates a unique experience that visitors can't get anywhere else.

A regeneration toolkit can be a key resource for a project such as the canalscape. It can support the creation of small scale markets, artist incubator spaces, food carts, and other low-cost elements. �e hardest part about this is to �nd the right types of artists, markets, and food carts that will thrive and bring prosperity to the local surrounding community. It is key to introduce a unique environment that draws people to the location. History shows that these are the places that people want to travel to, return, and spread the word abotu.

Granville Island appeals not only to tourists, but to the local community. It does this by incorporating a rotating day vendor schedule that specializes in the needs of the community members. �is allows for a completely new experience every time you visit. �ey also have a very user- friendly website with weekly updates for people to plan a perfect vacation locals that want to get away. �e farmers market changes with the seasons also allowing diversity for its community members.

In downtown Phoenix, we see great poptential – many local shops and food carts that are uniquely situated and o�er distinguished characteristics that we can't experience anywhere else. �e hardest part is to discover what people want. �is is why careful survey work and/or websites for local community members to utilize will be key ingredients of success.

APPENDIX NINE: Opportunity Site Assembly Diagnostic Tool Ryan Fulmer

Introduction

�e land site selection for the location of the �rst stage of the Canalscape includes many factors that both limit and favor development of the project. Each factor must be weighed against the others in the �nal site decision. It was decided early on in the project that the general location to be consider was on Washington Street between 38th & 44th Street. �is is a very diverse area that includes high amounts of Sky Harbor Airport tra�c including the new SkyTrain, hotels, industrial sections, small residential areas to the north and a large community college. A key advantage of this site is that it is one of only two areas where the light rail intersects with the canal system resulting in a great alternate mode of transportation in the area. �e introduction of the light rail to this area has sparked quite a bit of recent development such as hotels, and airport services. Adding the Canalscape project would an outdoor meeting and social area for people who are drawn by these recent developments such as travelers utilizing the hotels and SkyTrain once it opens.

As can be seen from the image, the land parcels are quite diverse ranging from very small to large in area size. Our initial stage of the project would most likely not require a huge amount of land, but would more so be a showcase of what the Canalscape can be if done right. Another limiting factor is that large parcels of land are substantially more expensive than a smaller sized parcel. A second limiting factor in regards to size is that if a large land parcel is purchased it will require much more invested capital to develop the whole parcel otherwise sections may be void of development only being limited by funding. With this in mind I �rst started my analysis of the parcels by attempting to �nd a parcel that would meet our needs in terms of size.

�e second step of my land analysis was to evaluate the owners of the land to determine which owners may be willing to part with their land if given an o�er to purchase. It is to be assumed that parcels of land which contain large amounts of existing development would not be ideal because the owner would have a higher asking price since investment had been made and high amounts of development would limited the possibilities of our project. In hopes of obtaining land as easily as possible it would be wise to deal with as least amount of owners as possible. If we attempt to strike up a deal with more than 1-2 owners the process would not doubt become overly complicated. In conclusion of this step it was determined that our ideal parcel should have low amounts of investment in place, and the least amount of owners as possible. An area of land such as the one to the left would require dealing with 8+ owners who will have di�ering view points and may not favor certain types of development. It would be a task unto itself just to get them all to agree on a selling price and other decisions. �is area of land in comparison to the other would be much easier to deal with in terms of owners agreeing to sell and would save a project manager a lot of time in dealing and negotiating with the owners. �e area of land is just as large as the one above but has less than half the owners.

�e third step to the land analysis was to evaluate the certain attributes each parcel would include that either could enhance or complicate the projects development. Since the Canalscape project is based on the canal it was essential to use a parcel of land that was adjacent to the canal itself. Another reason why

the Washington Street areas was chosen was the light rail so it would be a major goal of the land selection to include the fact that a light rail stop should be within walking distance to the selected land site. �ere site should also be easily accessible by other means too. For example bicyclist may be cycling down the canal and should be able to stop and secure their bikes and enjoy the Canalscape area. �is same rule applies to area business people who may wish to take a short stroll to the site and enjoy their lunch in the outdoors. In the end the site must be free of barriers that would possibly discourage any segment of the population from using the Canalscape.

After considering all of the factors explained above and evaluating the land area of which we wish to locate the project I have come to a conclusion on a potential property that can meet our needs fairly well on all levels. �e property that I believe will be ideal for our project is located on the north side Washington Street just to the west of the canal. I believe that this site could not be perfect for the �rst stage of the canal scape project for many reasons. Firstly and most important is that is is along a wonderful section of the canal that would also include a view of the Washington Street bridge going over the canal.

�e above outlined 4 parcels of land are all commonly owned by a Briggs Philip according to public information available on the Maricopa County Assessor’s website. �e prices per parcel are as follows:

Parcel ID Cost124-08-042-B$5,500124-08-041 $15,000124-08-040 $213,342124-08-042-C $106,000TOTAL COST: $339,842

�is is not a selling price for the properties but rather it is an assessed value based on 2012 prices and it should be noted that values for the given area have been decreasing in the range of 10-20% annually. �is could be used as leverage when trying to persuade the owner into a deal. Over all it should be noted that the value of these parcels is substantially lower than that of other nearby parcels because there is very little development which has taken place on the properties. It also appears that the owner Briggs Philip was given this land for the cost of $10 in 2003 as noted in the property deed so his overall investment into the property is minimal and thus may be willing to part with the land fairly easily.

�e land parcel does have some major advantages that would favor our project. It is approximately 800 feet from the nearest light rail stop to the east. Which would be a great asset to the projects and would no doubt aid to Canalscapes success giving people who are not only nearby the chance to enjoy it. �e parcel out lined above would also provide users of all types with ease of access. Pedestrians would be able to enter from all 3 sides and could draw students and workers from nearby places. In addition the canal path running along the parcels would give cyclists a easy point of entry. I think this site would also allow much �exibility in terms of what it could host. �ere would be ample room for a few food cart vendors and picnic tables and also the possibility to host small arts and craft show of something similar.

APPENDIX TEN: Gap Finance Tools Brandon Glimcher

Introduction

My part of the project focused upon �nancing strategies for development in the canalscape area. �ere is not much around the canal currently except for industrial buildings. �e goal, for me, was to �nd people in the area or the community who could potentially help with making the canalscape area a better place and somewhere people would like to go. During my research of the canalscape, I found that it is the longest canal in the world. Amsterdam has the second biggest canal. �ey have really done a lot with theirs. Phoenix has the ability to make something great and to really use the canal more. But, to make this happen we need funding.

Avenues for funding that I examined include local improvement districts, tax increment �nancing, storefront improvement grants, bank �nancing, family loans, Internet based grants, foundation grants and development funds are all possible areas. As far as development goes, I think development funds would be the most appropriate. �ere are many companies in the area that would have interest in a project like this. One stakeholder who is in the business of commercial real estate and property management stated that the development of canalscape would “really look nice.” He deals with investment of development and properties every day, and believes this could be successful. Another option would be bank �nancing, but that could be tougher as many banks are not lending at the moment. Applying for a small loan could be very help as well as private investors that would like to see something done with the canalscape area.

I think the canalscape area has enormous economic potential if approached correctly. With years of contribution from many di�erent people, eventually we will have a canal area that is better than Amsterdam that we can call ours. �e city and community need to be aggressive about the development and the approach to problem-solving, including �nancial hurdles.

APPENDIX TWELVE: Capacity-Building Resource Center Drew Hanley

Introduction

Many city building incentive programs o�er an expedited permitting time. But in this current market it seems that time, is no longer of the essence. People, in general, have a lot of time on their hands, but lack the skills necessary to add resiliency and sustainability to their existing neighborhoods (Neighborhood Works ®). Corporations have the means of hiring a consulting company to design or redesign an area, but many neighborhoods lack those means necessary to know what makes a vibrant community. Vibrant communities also come with vibrant price tags. �is in turn leaves out all but the elite members of society. �ere needs to be an organization to bridge city o�cials and citizens of the community together. �is organization needs to promote good city form while making building easier for the end user. �is organization would be CHANGE (Community Hope and Adaptable Neighborhood Growth Education). In addition to connecting o�cials with laymen, CHANGE would function to strengthen communities through neighborhood involvement, to create jobs by training opportunities, and to establish character through cohesive planning. Each community can become it’s own classroom in which growth and development, at the neighborhood scale, can occur. At this level, a locality can, with a little help, decide what is best for itself and make real and visible changes within their community.

As no two neighborhoods are alike, each community should be given leeway to shape their space as they see �t. By addressing multiple areas within a community and how they interact with one another, CHANGE would help to organize and help initiate positive change from inside the community. CHANGE’s only agenda would be to foster that move to resiliency by giving the community the tools to manifest and create its own vision and character. CHANGE would also help guide a community into economic sustainability by working to establish a bond between neighbors, including, but not limited to, networking and social equity building tool kits. As it would be impossible to repair a house without tools or knowledge, neighborhoods need tools and knowledge to do maintenance at the local level. CHANGE will work with neighborhoods and educational institutions, to foster the growth of the individual and the community. �e addition of collegiate research would not only identify �aws in the system, but also would provide a study environment for blossoming students. In turn, this research goes to better serve the community with widespread observations and insight. Using this knowledge, CHANGE will continuously work to mold and adapt to each participating neighborhood to meet the needs of the community.

Despite recent innovations in technology, the disconnection, in many cities between city o�cials, utility companies and neighborhoods is all too apparent. Fifteen villages compose the city of Phoenix’s four hundred and seventy �ve miles and nearly one and a half million people (2010 Census). If divided equally, this constitutes almost one hundred thousand people per village. �is is simply too great a number for a typical individual of the community to be heard over the constant throng of special interest groups that currently overwhelm meetings, hearings and other public functions (Saunders).

�e current system of neighborhood management is disconnected and mostly ine�ective at best. According to Carol Johnson, a senior planner with the city of Phoenix, there is no current system that connects residents of the city with the city o�cials needing to reach them (Johnson).

Most neighborhoods, in sprawling communities, lack the structure in which to govern themselves into sustainability and away from eventual decay. During a survey process, asking Phoenix residents about their neighborhoods, over eighty percent of the people surveyed, reported knowing less than �ve of their neighbors within a one mile radius. Not only are the city o�cials alienated from the neighborhoods, but also the neighbors are alienated from each other.

Compounding the problem of the separation of an individual from his or her neighbors is the separation of an individual from healthy food. When the closest access to quality food is more than one mile away, residents without automobiles are at a disadvantage (USDA). When something as essential as access to food is neglected, it raises an eyebrow to all the other things sustainable neighborhoods need in order to succeed.

Employment is another necessity, yet many residents commute as much as an hour each way to work every day (Woolsey). �e most recent response from city o�cials to commuting has simply been to widen the roads. �is poses a few questions: will current patterns continue? When there is no more room to broaden the freeways, will planners then start to address the problems of functional segregation in sprawling cities?

Social equity seems to be a staple of almost any small community. In Montana, a state sprinkled

with small towns and cities, poverty rates are higher than the national average but community members are well connected. Perhaps hardships are more visible in smaller communities. �is may be a contributing factor to a greater willingness for one neighbor to help another.

In addition to a general unwillingness to help one another, many big city neighborhoods lack any sense of congruity or togetherness. Many new subdivisions have signs and foliage at the entrances, but lack events and activities for residents within the compounds’ interiors. Active adult communities o�er many amenities; these communities however, are restricted to only “of age” members. A healthy neighborhood should not be solely for the elderly, wealthy or any one group. Every person, in every city, deserves the freedom to live in a safe, friendly and sustainable community.

On the following page is an outline in which city o�cials and community members connect and engage each other in order to make communities more resilient and sustainable. Although this structure would help a community to develop its own “Canalscape”, any community could bene�t from its utilization.

�e CityAgents would work directly with city o�cials to de�ne geographic boundaries, establish

community websites, and make growth easier for the bene�t of the city and the community. Without the support of city o�cials CHANGE can never become a reality.

�e CommunityIn order to establish a bond between agents of CHANGE and community members, agents

need to address several facets of the community. Among these are income potential, current and achievable diversity, and community need. Once agents establish a relationship with the community the real work can begin.

CHANGE

�e organization of CHANGE would work to connect communities with city o�cials as well as with each other. �rough constantly evolving frameworks CHANGE would serve as a social and educational platform on which neighborhoods and city o�cials can stand and work together for the betterment of the whole city. Listed below are some of the issues Change will address in each participating neighborhood.

Generators of Support“�e Website”Strength and Need AssessmentsEstablishing a Neighborhood Board�e Plan

Crisis PlanningSustainable Planning

Education“How To” WorkshopsFunding

Ongoing Research

It is important to keep in mind that, houses, communities, and cities are in a state of constant �ux and evolution. Continuous research within a community will help to promote growth and resiliency, while combating stagnancy and decay. New and established neighborhoods will work to reinforce their own sustainability through an “open door” policy with educational institutions. �is approach will not only meet the needs of the community and individual, but also will foster educational growth and understanding. Although it is of great bene�t to the community, for new ideas and enthusiastic attitudes from educational institutions, it also bene�ts the students and institutions.

Class ProjectsInternship OpportunitiesPortfolio DevelopmentVisiting Professors

Evolution

Much like cities and communities evolve, so do the ideas of CHANGE. To obtain a detailed and current document please email biohomedesign@yahoo.com. As the report is in excess of thirty pages it is impossible to explain it in three.

APPENDIX THIRTEEN: Tools for Small-Scale Vending Tino Hernandez

Introduction

�e previous Canalscape project did not explore the bene�ts of mobile vending such as food carts, and we have looked into the possibioities of this resource to help to support incremental cana development. Mobile vending provides an easy temporary source of goods. �ey locate as a cluster and attract many pedestrians. A location on the side of a canal would be a good place in order to create a hub of venders. Venders such as food carts are starting to get very popular in large cities. Mobile venders have the bene�t of being able to locate with a permit on properties zoned C-3, A-1 or A-2. No infrastructure has to be provided for venders other than a paved surface and parking. Connection of a mobile vending unit or a mobile food vending unit to a source of electricity, water, or sewer at a mobile vending operation site is prohibited unless a permit has been obtained from the Development Services Department.

Why Food Carts?

Food carts are great for the community; they support small, locally owned businesses. �ey allow people to have small startup business who might not have the capital or credit to start a restaurant. Food carts bene�t the city downtown by creating a vibrant, cultural and ethnically diverse community. Food carts complement restaurants, cafes, retail, farmer markets because it attracts lots of pedestrians.

Food carts are a form of mobile kitchens or restaurants that set up on the street to sell food to local pedestrians. Food carts are very popular and found in large cities around the world. �ey have an advantage over restaurants, which is the mobility without being in a �xed location they can go were pedestrian tra�c is highest and more bene�cial.

Food carts o�er a variety of food option with each one having its distinct menu. �is o�ers an assortment of food for pedestrians, allowing them to have options other than burgers from a franchise. �e type of food also determines the style of the cart and there are two di�erent styles. One lets venders sit or stand inside and serve food through a window. �e second allows venders to use the inside for storage for tables and chairs also housing cooking equipment and a grill.

Portland's Case Study

Portland is home to almost �ve hundred carts o�ering a variety of culinary experiences. �ese carts started forming clusters around the city on empty parking lots and vacant lots. �ey are commonly referred to as pods. Many chefs can get their name out and provide great a�ordable meals without a major investment. �is is possible thank to the low start up coast and simple licensing process in Multnomah County.

Some of the factors contributing to the success of food carts in Portland are thanks to the economy. �is bad economy has caused people to search for a lower cost option opposed to restaurants. Most carts are constructed and operated by their owners, and since Portland Oregon has no sales tax construction material, restaurant equipment are cheaper. Oregon is a farming state providing low cost ingredients locally. �e carts have become a tourist attraction. Local investment on T.O.D has helped

with foot tra�c and provides an environment not suitable for fast food restaurants with drive-through.

Simple, easy to use guides shoud be created for those who might want to start their own food cart, in commonsense, approachable language. Following is an outline of suggested text to illustrate this kind of tool:

So You Want to Start a Food Cart Business

First of all, speak to other vendors and observe how they operate, to get an idea how they run. What works, and what doesn't? Visit food vendors several times a week in order to get an accurate idea of the volume of business. Many people only visit food carts/trucks during special events and the volume at those events are not always the typical �ow for a vendor. You'll want to know how to set up a food cart in a more permanent locaiton where you'll have steady business.

Tool Kit: How to Stat a Mobile Food Business

! FoodCreate a business planFind out what type of food you will sellCreate a Menu (keep it simple)Find out where you well get your ingredients (Farmer Markets are ideal)Determine demand by conducting surveys, taste test etc..

! CompetitionCheck out the competitionDetermine if there is a competitor with similar menuAfter checking out the competition, change business plan or menu, if needed

! Location/ClientsFigure out who your clientele would be (ethnicity, gender, age depending on menu)Demographics help to determine location

! CostStart Up" Cart/Truck(news, used, custom)" Equipment" Insurance" Licenses/Fees/Permits (http://phoenix.gov/LICNSVCS/licmvend.pdf)Continuation" Maintenance " Insurance" Licenses/Fees/Permits" Traveling (gas etc.)" Supplies" Payroll

APPENDIX FOURTEEN: Community Visualization Engagement Tools Jaycen Horton

Introduction

Visualizing and understanding the full impact of a project prior to implementation is a key obstacle in creating the optimal urban plan. Without a proper visualization tool, and strict adherence to its corresponding and meticulous implementation/development methodology, a project may conclude (and wrongfully proceed) on an individual basis with great variability- as opposed to concluding with a maximized reduction on perceptual di�erences. Where instead there needs to be a communistic agreement on end results, such variability imposes an unnecessary demand on the human imagination to make up for the lack of concrete details. E�ectually, and harmoniously, there is an increased probability for the occurrence of mistakes- which is resultant from both miscommunication and misinformation. However, competent visualization strategies, that both most accurately portray a community’s ideas, and minimize the induced mass of human delusions, may o�er itself as the remedy to such con�icts.

Unfortunately, in terms of approach, many projects lack a necessary and universal cohesive, and/or a missing communal visualization education; resultantly, decisions continue to spring from uncertainty. As proposed, an online community resource center that seeks to engage, educate and integrate a community, and its relevant project stakeholders, should be developed. Within this proposed community resource center, there should also exist an independent resource wing, geared speci�cally for:

! Visualization think-tanks! Strategic visualization creation! Visualization deployment ! Communal discussion on a project and its relative model(s)/simulation(s)! And educational visualization resources and tutorials ! �is resource wing shall seek to bring forth the most proper, and accurate, communication of ideas, optimal project execution strategizing, and an enhanced awareness/education of the vast array of available visualization tools and strategies.

Background

To date, there are a number of regularly exercised strategies that are used for visualization. However, a grand amount of these tactics rely heavily, and improperly, on solitary perceptions and interpretation. Such execution methodologies include, but are not limited to the following:

! Blueprinting that involves non-true aspect ratios ! Static computer modeling! Static computer simulations! Hand-drawing! and non-computer, or non-true, 3D modeling

Corresponding with each of these practices is a wildly varying perception (and resultantly interpretation) that may induce dramatic problems in communication, or in moving forward with

the project.

However, there are also a number of proper visualization strategies that are utilized- including, but not limited to, the following:! Dynamic computer 3D modeling with true aspect ratios! Dynamic computer simulations with corresponding dynamic modeling! On-the-�y interpretative modeling! Interactive computer modeling and simulations! and truly virtual models/simulations

Each of the aforementioned visualization strategies (or any combination/derivative thereof) denotes a practice permitting dynamic manipulation (which allows for communistic involvement) as well as the manifestation of a model with a true aspect ratio (which allows for the minimization of unnecessary perceptual variance).

Initial research and development

After a valid amount of research it became conclusive, and fair, that the strategic visualization methodology for Arizona’s canal development should simulate closely to that of Arizona State University’s Decision �eater. For reference, the following is Decision �eater’s mission statement:Decision �eater is a world-class research facility and decision lab for exploring and understanding decision-making in uncertain times. By using state-of-the-art visualization, simulation and solutions tools, we enable decision-makers to address today’s challenges and conquer tomorrow’s emerging issues.(DT.ASU.EDU)

Decision �eater o�ers 7 screens in a 260 degree rounded shape, powered by digital 3D IMAX projectors, as well as a multitude of rooms with videoconferencing/remote-presence capabilities. �is space is powered by parallelized computing servers and Windows/Linux machines, which are all capable of pushing any multitude (or combination) of dynamic, virtual, and manipulable models onto the screens. Decision �eater has also begun to extract their models and simulations into web-portable versions, allowing for greater accessibility, and e�ectually a greater potential for intelligible multi-way conversations. Each of these di�erent aspects are derivative of an apt visualization strategy, and thus the visualization capabilities of Decision �eater became conclusively persuasive.

Although Decision �eater does grant extremely adaptable, professional, and dynamic capabilities, they only exist in this document to provide a proper outline for successful stakeholder-community communication. In operating/utilizing the community resource center’s visualization wing in a similar fashion as Decision �eater, the Canalscape community, and its stakeholders will wield a visualization utopia, that invokes a continuous exchanging of the model between stakeholders and the community (with the raw model always readily available for manipulation, discussion, and viewing).

Next Steps

As proposed by Drew Hanley, each participating neighborhood should be granted access to a

website that serves as a hub for communication, education, and collaboration. After discussing, and collaborating, with an organization entitled Mapstory I was able to lay the foundation for an apt collaborative crowdsourcing website wing dedicated to the crowdsourcing of visualization resources, strategies, and methodologies.

Within the architecture of this website there shall exist a branch dedicated speci�cally to strategic visualization methodologies. Not only will this allow the community to have admittance to various educational resources and community nodes, but it will also provide neighborhood residents the abilities to:

! Plan collaborative residential activities with the aide of visualization planning! More accurately prepare for a community event through visualization applications and event simulations

! Properly anticipate economic activity with the aide of strategic modeling and simulations! Access a community driven resource center with the ability to upload, download, and stream resources, and conceptualize the future of all land use expansion, growth, development, or restoration

APPENDIX FIFTEEN: Opportunity Site Assembly Diagnostic Tool Daniel Johnson

Introduction

In�ll developments in Central Phoenix often hit barriers because there are relative incentives for developers of fringe developments who may not pay the full cost of public infrastructure investments – a way of encouragingn e onomic development around fringe and suburban developments. Other factors include mortgage interest subsidies under the federal income tax system and failure to price congestion externalities on roadways linking metro centers and fringe communities. �ere are di�culties in obtaining necessary �nances for developers, regulatory policies, land assembly and cost of land, resistance from local residents, public perceptions of increased density, and unwillingness to condemn targeted sites.

Financing Barriers

Because in�ll and redevelopment projects are often concerned with providing amenities such as transit and pedestrian orientation, access to retail and employment opportunities and green space and residential dwelling units located above commercial development, the capital lending markets consider such projects as risky. New in�ll projects do not �t the development pro�le of high-end o�ce development, for example, in many urban core areas. Private �nancing sources are generally more expensive than the standardized capital lending markets available on the urban fringe.

Regulatory Barriers

Zoning ordinances are one of the most common barriers for developers in in�ll areas. Conventional zoning codes tend to encourage lower-density, single-use and automobile dependent land use. Zoning codes limiting densities and building heights may work in direct con�ict with the types of high density or mixed-use projects suitable for in�ll areas. When zoning codes are not conducive to in�ll development, developers must pursue rezoning ordinances or numerous variances which can impact a project to the point where it may be no longer �nancially feasible to build.

Another barrier is the complexity of the planning review and permitting processes. Most municipal codes and regulations prohibit or discourage mixed use, narrow streets and driveways, and wider sidewalks. �e time and complications associated with lengthy review processes are usually compounded in in�ll areas.

Land Assembly Barriers

�e inability to assemble land in parcels large enough to attract developers can come as a disadvantage for in�ll development. Small projects on small parcels may not be economically feasible for developers. Urban parcels can also be complicated because of multiple land owners and a variety of existing land uses. With a current and accurate vacant property inventory, cities can market themselves to potential developers and take the guesswork out for developers looking at vacant lots.

Resistance from Local Residents

Vacant or deteriorated buildings can pose barriers to in�ll development because these structures may attract criminal activity. A public safety risk deters potential developers who may perceive that it may be impossible to attract people without substantial public reinvestment in the surrounding area. Plans of increasing densities in existing neighborhoods are often of concern. Neighbors are concerned that the health and safety of residents of the area will not be compromised by the development. Neighbors may be opposed to in�ll due to perceptions of increased tra�c and parking concerns.

Incentives for In�ll Development

Fragmented metro tax base promotes low density development patterns and fosters unnecessary outward movement with new houses on the fringe and housing vacancies accumulating on the urban core. As the tax base disintegrates in the urban core, crime rises and services drop. As an incentive to in�ll development, providing a regional land use plan and a regional tax base with managed growth may redirect growth back to the urban core.

Education of Citizens Regarding In�ll

In reviewing the literature on in�ll, one of the �rst steps to consider when developing an In�ll plan is to involve the community so that they can be educated regarding in�ll development and be involved in creating an in�ll vision. Most of the cities that have successful in�ll or downtown development have engaged their citizens, elected o�cials, stakeholders, businesses and the media in the process of constructing an in�ll plan, including a vision, that re�ects their community character. When communities have an agreed-upon vision, con�ict is reduced when projects are proposed and conform to the vision. Community groups that have been educated and involved in long range planning in their neighborhoods are better equipped to review and comment on speci�c in�ll projects being proposed. Trust develops with involvement and the community understands and is in agreement with necessary actions to speed up in�ll development, such as streamlining the development process or “by right” zoning regulations. Recommendations include creating partnerships with other agencies to develop an education program for the public, including elected o�cials and community groups, about in�lldevelopment. �e program should include techniques, possibilities and results of successful in�ll in other areas.

Regulatory Incentives

To improve the appearance of cities, zoning incentive systems, which separate land uses, came into use in the 1950s and 1960s. But today, some rigid zoning codes make it di�cult to meet such planning goals as mixed land use and to meet social objectives, such as a�ordable housing and day care. Zoning began as an experimental technique to improve community design, and has changed and grown into a common tool used to meet a range of planning objectives.

One important regulatory incentive for in�ll is zoning codes. Some of the features of in�lldevelopment are neighborhood and pedestrian-friendly design, mixed land uses, and parkingreductions. Zoning regulations and guidelines should contain incentives to insure qualitydevelopment. Revision of related codes used in the development review process, including thesubdivision ordinance, street drainage, and landscaping standards, and �re and building codeswill help streamline the process. A survey of the literature regarding regulations and in�ll development reveals that streamlining the in�ll development process is one of the most important incentives. In

addition, providing a sta� person to guide developers through the regulatory process reduces the time, e�ort and cost that developers spend on their projects.

By using overlay zoning in addition to the regulations of the base zone, we and modify the regulations of the base zone. For example, in the canalscape site, adding an alternative design density overlay to allow increased residential density development that meets canalscape design compatibility requirements within our speci�ed overlay zone.

Land Assembly and Cost of Land Incentives

To address the challenges faced by cities in relation to their vacant, abandoned and underused land, several incentives for successful in�ll development include keeping an accurate and updated inventory of properties along with their market value and zoning while also identifying ownership and making this database publicly available. Creating an e�cient process for acquisition, disposition and redevelopment of land. Making sites large enough for redevelopment through clustering. O�er short term �nancing, subsidies, or tax bene�ts to attract private investment. Utilizing natural or historic assets and marketing the community as an appealing place to live and do business.

Incentives to Overcome Resistance from Neighbors

Trust among neighbors, city o�cials and developers must be established through the education and involvement of all groups. One incentive is to involve the community in developing a plan for in�ll. In the process of development of the in�ll plan, the community must be educated about the public bene�ts of in�ll and the tradeo�s between more sprawl and compact development, such as mixed use, transit and importance of density to create a more vibrant urban area. If the urban core of a city doesn’t have residential units, or has low density residential units without pedestrian and transit activity, it won’t have the features to make it a vibrant commercial center. Cities have designed density development as an incentive for in�ll, with the reduction of crime in mind, by placing adequate lighting and front porches in high density development such as apartments and townhouses. Urbanist Jane Jacobs, in �e Life and Death of Great American Cities, made arguments for density and for community designs that put more eyes on the street. A public education campaign is needed as an incentive for overcoming neighborhood resistance, and in cases where the inequities are more perceived than real and to correct faulty assumptions.

APPENDIX SIXTEEN: Bicycle Network Planning Tools Nick Johnson

Introduction

�e canals provide a great source of recreation for the citizens of Phoenix and surrounding municipalities. �e current multi-use paths can be used to avoid busy streets and it could be a potentially better way to travel though the Phoenix area on bike or foot. �e trails intentions are to provide recreation and ease from vehicle tra�c, but they are not performing at their fullest potential and could use many improvements. Improvements such as better connectivity, safer crossings, signage, recreational amenities, and lighting would improve the trek for bicyclist and pedestrians along the canal. With the applied improvements the canal multi-use paths could be of great value to the city and its citizens.

Limitations and Improvements

�e current conditions of the canal bike and walk ways are too narrow, unconnected, provide obstacles, and also have many safety concerns. With so many limitations along the canals, it interferes with providing the citizens of Phoenix a useful form of transport and recreational trail. One of the major concerns of the bikeways along the canals is the disconnected paths that are not always paved nor connect well to other municipalities in the Phoenix area. �e Grand Canal is a good example of inconsistencies seen with the paths in the Phoenix.

(MAG)

Due to the unpaved paths, this limits the type of bikes that can travel along the canal. Also, unpaved paths can create air pollution from dust particulate matter. Other issues associated with the path include the few underpass and overpasses provided. �is creates a safety issue with bicyclists and motorist. It will also interrupt the �ow of their journey when introduced with so many street crossings. Another safety issue along the canal bed is the amount of lighting provided. Lighting would not only allow for bikers and pedestrians using the paths at night to see where they are going, but could also double as a directional way�nding lights for night use.

�ose who use the canal bikeways frequently pointed out that there are obstacles such as gates that you have to go around and slow down to get passed when trying to continue along the canal. �e purposes for the gates are to prevent any other vehicles, other than SRP vehicles, from driving along the canal bank. SRP �nds that the gates are also a problem because the service vehicles must stop and unlock the gate to get access to the canal. It would be ideal for both bicyclist and SRP to do without gates, but there still has to be a barrier to keep other motorist. To improve this situation, municipalities can request SRP remove any gate that is blocking pedestrian �ow, but there would need to be a replacement barrier. Replacing gates with a pole barricade would increase the �ow of bicycle tra�c, while still deterring cars away from the canal.

�e SRP Aesthetic fund currently only allows for few changes to be funded by SRP. Some of those changes that SRP is willing to provide include underground power lines and bike friendly gates. �e possibility for this fund to provide canal emenities such as bike lanes and vegetation are still under consideration.

Improvements for the multi-use paths along the canal can come from many changes, but there could also be changes that will make the paths use more enjoyable for those who use them. Providing water stations, bike racks, seating, and bathrooms along the multi-use paths would make traveling easier and also promote a longer travel distance.

Intersections

While using the paths along the canal, one of the major interruptions is the tra�c of vehicles that interrupts the �ow of bicycle routes. �ere is sometimes no close form of crossing that allows for bikers and pedestrians to cross the intersection of the canal and street. �is leads to an unsafe crossing of the road. �is not only can take a long time to do in order to cross safely, but is also illegal. Providing the appropriate crossing would bene�t bikers and pedestrians by keeping them safe and keep their route uninterrupted.

Crossings

! Midblock crossings:One low cost way to provide a safer crossing for bicyclist and pedestrians are midblock crossings. �ese crossings include a median for refuge for those crossing a busy or wide street. �e crossings could also incorporate �ashing lights on the road to alert motorist before someone is crossing the intersection. With a midblock crossing incorporating medians into the design, the crossing could also promote a nicer streetscape.

! HAWK Crossings:�e HAWK crossing is a High-intensity Activated Crosswalk. �e crossing is common throughout the Tucson area and has been helping pedestrians safely cross for years in the city. �is crossing is similar to a stoplight but only has yellow and red lights that �ash for motorists to alert them that a pedestrian will be crossing the road. �e pedestrian or bicyclist presses a button to cross, and then the crossing �ashes yellow to stop oncoming tra�c. �is is a great use for places that don’t have any sort of crossing or median near. To keep this type of crossing useful for those crossing it would be ideal to make the reaction time for stopping tra�c quicker or almost instant. Also the HAWK crossing should be easy to understand for when drivers are needed to stop or go.

! Underpasses/Overpasses:�e most ideal type of intersection crossing would be an overpass or underpass. Underpasses and overpasses have the ability to keep the �ow of bicyclist uninterrupted. �ey also wouldn’t interfere with vehicle tra�c, allowing both types of tra�c to continue uninterrupted. �ough these are the more desirable types of crossings they are also the more expensive and cost should be taken into consideration.

Signage

! Intersection way�nding:When the canal meets with a road, it is sometimes not close to a road intersection that provides the name of those streets that are crossing each other. �is is why it would be very helpful to bicyclists traveling to be provided with street signs of the street they meet.

! Directional signage:Due to the many streets that the canal crosses, there are many breaks in the paths of the canal. �e path along the canal is also sometimes hard to follow with undirected paths and paved paths that that also switch sides of the canal. Providing directional signage for bicyclist would help with this issue. �e directional signage would steer bikers to stay on the trail of the canal and follow a safe route of getting across intersections they face. With many problems with the �ow of the trail this would be an easy �x to the problem.

�ough there are many limitations that come with improving the multi-use lanes along the canal it is still possible to provide a good source of recreation and transport for the citizens of Phoenix and surrounding municipalities. With multiple improvements it would attract more people to the canals by bike and by foot, keeping the canals watched over and safe for those who use it.

APPENDIX SEVENTEEN: Green Screen Tools Will Langton

Introduction

IntentSummarize the importance of shading on the canals, point out key implementation issues and propose design standards that would aid in a more seamless execution of development along Arizona’s canals.

Background

In recent years SRP has been generous enough to o�er the canal system to take on new purposes other than merely a water delivery system. �is has promoted facilitators of desert urbanism to propose development along Arizona’s 181 miles of canals. Where these proposals, such as the canalscape report, have failed is not in the design and “beauti�cation” of the canals, it is in the problems of implementation. We are here to go beyond exploring possibilities. One area that the canalscape does not fully address is the issue of shading.

Importance

�ose of us who live in the Phoenix area know the incredible summer heat and low rainfall. �e weather channel estimated about 8 inches of rain in the city of Phoenix in 2010 and the National Weather Service reported an average daytime high of 105.3 degrees between June and August. We experience an incredibly dry heat in Phoenix. �ese statistics illustrate the importance that any new development should place on shade.

Systems Summary

�ere are many options available to implement shade into the canals. Each o�er a more comfortable atmosphere for users and lower the amount of evaporation of water from the canals.

Shade Sails can be installed onto footings and posts or hooked onto the sides of new or existing buildings. �ey are a less expensive option especially when footings and posts are not used. Since SRP requires 15 feet of access between the canal and a proposed structure it is recommended that installation using footings and posts not be attempted on the canals. Overhead power lines also pose problems and risks.

Pergolas are an option for shop owners and restaurants that wish to have outdoor seating. Pergolas are usually partially open on top to allow some sun to penetrate the structure but because they have strong roof structures vegetation can be grown on top for complete control of sunlight.

Green Screens are a new type of metal mesh trellising that gives many opportunities for sustainable shade systems. �ey can be placed horizontally and vertically to provide shade throughout the entire day and they are strong enough to allow vines to encompass the entire

structure.

LEED Credits

�e Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design promotes sustainability through a system of green building design standards. It recognizes developers who are environmentally responsible through the LEED Rating System. Below are a few key credits that can by earned by using greenscreen© and other sustainable shade systems.

SS Credit 5.1 (1 point) – Site Development – Protect or Restore HabitatSS Credit 6.1 (1 point) - Stormwater Design – Quality ControlSS Credit 7.1 (1 point) - Heat Island E�ect – NonroofSS Credit 7.2 (1 point) - Heat Island E�ect – RoofWE Credit 1.1(1 point) - Water e�cient LandscapingWE Credit 1.2 (1 point) – Water e�cient Landscaping – No potable water useMR Credit 1.1 (1 point) – Building Reuse – Maintain Existing Walls, Floors and RoofsMR Credit 2 (1-2 points) – Construction Waste ManagementMR Credit 3.2 (2 points) – Materials ReuseMR Credit 4.2 (2 points) – Recycled ContentMR Credit 5 (1-2 points) – Regional MaterialsEQ Credit 4.2 (1 point) – Low-Emitting Materials – Paints and CoatingsID Credit 1-1.4 (1-4 points) – Innovation in Design

Proposals

SRP places a huge emphasis on maintenance truck accessibility when considering improvements made to the canals. �ese proposals consider SRP’s process for the review of projects utilizing canal bank right of way.

Where accessibility of SRP’s maintenance trucks is limited, shade sails should be used only in the manner of spanning from building to building. Sails must not be permanently a�xed to the buildings.

Overhead Green Screens should be used in areas running perpendicular to the canals. �is prevents excessive plant material from falling into the canals.

Pergolas should be used where outdoor dining is permitted. �e property owners have the right to install vegetation onto the structure. �e property owners also have the responsibility of maintenance of landscaping per Phoenix city code.

All proposed systems should consider the sun’s orientation to prevent installation where building façades themselves provide adequate shade. Proposed vegetation for screens and pergolas for the purpose of providing shade:

Antigonon leptopus(Coral Vine)Macfadyena unguis-cati(Cat’s Claw)

Mascagnia lilacaena(lilac orchid)Merremia aurea(yellow morning glory).

Systems Overview

Shade Sails are easily removable/replaceable because they are only connected by hooks, clamps and shackles. �e shade sail is inexpensive and can be replaced in a matter of minutes. Most of the expense is seen in the installation of footings and posts, which are not always required. “SRP requires a minimum of 15 feet from the water’s edge to remain free of improvements so that a truck can drive down the canal bank.”(Rezoning Packet) �is makes installation using posts a problem because they create barriers that intrude on the 15 feet of access that SRP requires for permitting. Because of this it is recommended that shade sails only be installed by spanning them from building to building which eliminates the need for footings and posts.

Shade Sails by TENSHON©! Sun shade and UV protection! 11 standard sizes! Square or triangular shapes! Khaki fabric is polyethylene and mono�lament

! Mold resistant ! Mesh pattern creates small gaps to allow warm air to rise through the fabric

! Flame Spread Index(FSI) - 25

Pergolas are often seen as small scale shading systems attached to the back of houses. �ey can be implemented into the frontage of restaurants to provide comfortable outdoor eating. Additionally, vines can be added to the system to more completely cover the structure, and to lower the outdoor temperature and give a more colorful, cooler environment.

Features and Bene�ts of LiveRoof® Structures.! Materials used in construction are FSC or SFI certi�ed lumber, recycled steel, and �berglass composite columns.

! Cradle to cradle sustainable building system! Features LiveRoof® pre-vegetated system! Factory built structures provide quality assured onsite assembly and reduced construction time.

! Reduce stormwater runo� where previously di�cult, while creating multi-use space.

! Possibilities for passive solar cooling are extensive

! Retro�t existing structures easily with green roof porticos & arcades

Green Screens are versatile and economic trellising. �ey are lightweight but can still hold fully grown vegetation. �e screens require a vine that is tendril in nature. �ese vines would coil around the screen using spring-like stems rather than weaving through the screen’s structure. �ese vines cover area more quickly but are less resistant to strong winds.

Features and Bene�ts of greenscreen© Structures! �ree dimensional welded wire! Standard 2” or 3” thick panels 4’ wide x 6’, 8’, 10’, 12’, or 14’ tall

! Custom applications! Can span between structure members – fences, free standing screens and gazebos

! 2” or 3” depth creates captive growing space! Living tapestries on building façades! Roof Top Gardens! Gra�ti Protection

Plant Material

�e high heat and minimal rainfall in Phoenix make choosing plant material for new construction relatively easy because not many plants survive in this climate. When considering sustainable shade systems that use plant material, such as Green Screens/Walls, Phoenix uses the Sonoran Desert Acceptable Plant List for re-vegetation of lots. �is list is almost exclusively native plants. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, “native plants are those which have evolved over thousands of years in a particular region. �ey have adapted to the geography, hydrology, and climate of that region. Native plants occur in communities, that is, they have evolved together with other plants.”(EPA 2008) �e list of acceptable vines includes; Antigonon leptopus(Coral Vine), Macfadyena unguis-cati(Cat’s Claw), Mascagnia lilacaena(lilac orchid), and Merremia aurea(yellow morning glory). �ese vines can be implemented into many di�erent structures to promote sustainability and provide a cooler, more comfortable environment for users of the canals.

When considering complete re-vegetation solutions to the canals, consult the Sonoran Desert Plant List acceptable for re-vegetation of lots (available on request).

APPENDIX EIGHTEEN: Water Feature Design Models Ryan McCann

Introduction

In the desert, water is life and something very important needed to survive. From that basic knowledge I wanted to focus my aspect of the canal around water. Water is something that is pleasing to the eye and can create a sense of relaxation. �e main aspect of my part of the report is dealing with the aesthetics of the water in the canal. If the water is nasty and gross who is going to want to spend time around it? Along the canal around 44th street and Washington the water is not very pleasing; however it has the potential to do so.

Design Models �e �rst part of making the canal a great place where people would actually want to come to would be to clean out the canal multiple times throughout the year. �e only time SRP goes in and cleans out all the debris is when they do a dry zone where they block the water at certain parts of the canals in order to do repairs. Since they don’t do that often, we need to go in at least once a month to get all the trash and other misc debris out of the water. �at would take out the shopping carts and street signs and other garbage that people have thrown in there. �e �sh that are supposed to be

cleaning it aren’t doing a very good job. �e canal just north of the area after the little dam is clean and looks great. We want to achieve that kind of water quality if we want people walking along the canal. When we walked the area as a class it was disgusting and not fun to walk by. By cleaning the canal on a regular basis it would give the water and the canal a cleaner look which by doing something so simple would make a huge di�erence just on its own.

A possible next aspect is derived from the Water Fire concept in Providence. If we could put �re pits in the canals as an attraction more people would come to the canal at night. It could also attract people if there were local business along the canal so they would bene�t from this idea. We could put permanent �re holders in the water or we could make removable ones and put them in when we have an event. �e biggest implementation with this idea is the fact it has to be done when the area is a dry zone. SRP doesn’t know when this area will next be up for repairs. But if and when it goes dry up it would be very easy to implement

this and install the �re pits to the bottom of the canal. Fire catches peoples eye and it relaxes them. Also if you think about how beautiful the re�ection of the �re on the water would be, it would truly be something that would draw people to the area thus hopefully boosting the economy around the area.

Another idea in regards to aesthetics would be to at night have lights shining on the water that change colors to re�ect a holiday or seasons or special events. Similar to what is currently do on Tempe Town Lake, the light rail bridge has multi colored LED lights that shine onto the water at night and when the lights hit the water and the re�ection is moving in the water it is a beautiful seen. During di�erent times of the year they change to colors to re�ect whatever season it is. For example around 4th* +, *-./0* 123* /45216*62473*

839:*;2413:*<79*=/.3)*>,*;3*?+./9*?83<13*12<1*/++@*</+75*123*?<7</*41*;+./9*54A3*41*<*;2+/3*94,,38371*/++@*

<1*74521:*8<1238*12<7*<*?833B0*6?<80*;<138*;<0)*C3*;+./9*2<A3*1+*?+D3*.B*;412*<*;<0*1+*4761<//*123 *

/45216*</+75*123*=<7@6*+,*123*?<7</*;24?2*<83*?+7?8313*6+*1230*9+*7+1*614?@*+.1*6+*D.?2*<79*<11<?239 *

123D*.7938*123*/411/3*=849536*+A38*123*?<7</6)*E11<?2475*123D*.7938*123*=849536*;+./9*=3*<7*3<60*1<6@*1+*

<??+DB/462)*>7*835<896*1+*3/3?184?410*,+8*123*/45216:*;3*?+./9*2<A3*6+/<8*B<73/6*</+75*,+8*123*?<7</*47 *

+8938*1+*@33B*?+616*9+;7*,+8*123*?<7</)*F+7147.475*+7*;412*/45216*123*<83<*73396*1+*=3*=31138*/4521*.B*6+*

41G6*47A41475*1+*B3+B/3*<79*7+1*9<8@*<79*6?<80)*H3+B/3*7339*1+*,33/*?+D,+81<=/3*;<71*1+*;</@*9+;7*41)*E//*

+,*12363*/411/3*124756*9+73*1+531238*+8*3A37*I.61*+73*+,*123D*;+./9*23/B*D<@3*123*?<7</*D+83*47A41475 *

<79*<*=3<.14,./*B/<?3*1+*=3*<8+.79)

APPENDIX NINETEEN: Food Cart Resources Josh McKenzie

Introduction

�e food cart industry o�ers a unique way of revitalizing the economic potential of the canal using an inexpensive, easily implementable kind of development. �ese are small mobile businesses that can easily be placed anywhere from vacant lots to backyards adjacent to the canal. �is o�ers another one of the bene�ts the food cart industry provides. By being so mobile they can easily used to develop underutilized land around the canal. As seen with the Phoenix farmers market, which has helped spur the businesses around that area, the same could be done for the canals with food carts.

Empty lots and under utilized land adjacent the canal can be used to vitalize the area both economically and socially. �e �rst step in creating permanent self-sustaining businesses is by creating an environment in which they will thrive, and the food carts can do just that. �ey can move into open land in clusters or hubs and begin to draw the public in. Combined with other canal scape features these hubs have the potential to become destinations of their own.

By creating theses hubs they will draw more businesses into the area, which in turn create more pedestrian foot tra�c. �e additional people to the area will have the e�ect drawing even more businesses thus creating self-perpetuating cycle. �e majority of food cart owners say they would one day like to open a stationary business and the canal could o�er that opportunity. �e mobile carts in these hubs could then give way to more permanent structures.

I recommend the city do all it can to help stream line the process of starting up a food cart. As well as helping create an environment that will help these businesses thrive. To do so can have a profound e�ect on the canal as well as the area itself. To miss this opportunity could mean taking away the means to building a strong economic canal scape.

�e use of the food carts as the beginning of the in�ll of the canal scape is a logical step and one that can be tried without too much ventured. �e typical food cart cost as little as 2,000 to start and given the mobile nature of this particular industry if the area doesn’t give enough revenue they can simply move locations. An empty lot can provide the springboard for venders and area. �e owners of these particular types of businesses have expressed their wish to move from mobile food carts to operating in a more stationary local such as a storefront. I spoke to four owner operators of food carts in the valley and they all had this in common. If there businesses were pro�table enough in that particular area they all said that if the time when they could transition from mobile to stationary building say in a store front they would stay in the same area. �ey also indicated that if the carts were to be placed in close proximity to each other that combined draw would increase their business. �e venders I spoke to also mentioned that located close to home. �is indicates that if these hubs were to be located along the canal that a majority of the operators would be from around that neighborhood. �us increasing the income of the surrounding area. �ey also indicated that any local they would consider would need to have a considerable amount of foot tra�c before they would move there. Given the site upon the canal we are proposing developing has that potential.

With the School so close and the non-food businesses in the area and the lack of eateries in the area we can postulate that they would be happy to have a variety of venders so close. I spoke to three students

at Gateway College and all three said they would welcome food venders and would gladly eat from them. Since all the businesses along the canal face away from the canal the business owner I spoke to in the area neither thought the venders would have a positive or negative e�ect upon their patronage. �e venders in the area would have only a positive e�ect upon the canal.

Recommendations

1. Create regulations and laws that would allow a food cart culture to come together and thrive along the canal.2. As much as allowed change current zoning laws to permit food cart to operate in close proximity.3. Create incentives to potential venders so that they will locate near the canal.

APPENDIX TWENTY: Landscape Patterns Joey Meisenheimer

Introduction

�roughout this semester we have evaluated many examples of developments which have succeeded such as the River Walk in Texas and Mill Ave in Tempe. We have evaluated these developments from the amount of walkability to the amount of green space. �roughout the course of the class we have discussed many examples of urban design scale. With having an enormous impact on connectivity and basic “�ow” scale is becoming an essential factor in making a city functional. While most of these speci�c idea’s mean nothing by themselves, when used together they create a more sustainable living environment. Our goal as a class has been to come up with a proposal to the city of Phoenix on where and how this development will be built. We have met with stakeholders and real estate developers to discuss the importance of this project and o�er to them a part in making the project successful. Our goal now is to bring together these stakeholders and use their speci�c tools to get this project moving.From the beginning I have emphasized a more walkable community; a community that thrives o� the social interaction and networking. �is development (if built in the designated area) will act as a midpoint between Tempe and Phoenix giving those who work in both cities a place to shop, mingle, party, or act as a rest stop if needed for those who need a break. We must take key aspects form other sustainable developments speci�cally form based codes which have given those developments a more walkable and sustainable area. �e 40th st canal project is a fragile one, the area has great potential; however, due to the demographics we have to take certain steps to promote safety and a sense of comfort to its visitors. When you look at Mill you will see it does an amazing job at creating safety by having open area’s with bright lighting and path’s which generate pedestrian tra�c during all parts of the day. Mill thrives o� the college, its accessibility to its citizens has an immense impact on the streets life, however, with more accessibility comes more congestion. Mill has done a great job at creating open seating area’s with shading on and o� the street to give its pedestrians comfort and a sense of welcoming. By using these tools we see on mill and implementing then into the 40th st canal project we can create another live able sustainable living area.

Also, urban landscape is the thread which holds the city together. Public spaces are the center or living room of this development. A place where people can congregate and enjoy the higher quality of life than public space gives them inside the city. "�e measure of any great civilization is its cities and a measure of a city's greatness is to be found in the quality of its public spaces, its parks and squares." (John Ruskin)

In conclusion, we need to bring a wide variety of stakeholders together, from solar panel experts to recycled building material to use in the development. By taking examples form mill and other urban landscapes we can create a sustainable development which will thrive for years to come.

APPENDIX TWENTY-ONE: Shading Device ToolkitKent Nielson

Introduction

�e Phoenix metropolitan area has over 100 miles of canal systems which supplies the people of Phoenix with water. However, these canals have been used solely for water distribution and have never been fully taken of advantage of as far as building along the canals is concerned. �e new canalscape project will allow for building and new growth along the canals like in Italy and Greece which have �ourished.

In order to design and build a project like this there are many factors and pieces that go into it. �e Phoenix area is sunny most of the year and because of this, things that provide shade are needed. �e Phoenix area has sprawled and the population has continued to grow and because of that has caused an even greater urban heat island e�ect. �e Phoenix area has seen some of its highest temperatures of all time. �ings like this need to be factored into this project.

�ings like trees, green screens, and light colors not only help shade the area but help cool it down as well. Also, because there is sun most of the year, solar panels can be used for solar energy. �e solar industry has been booming recently so there are many options for a project like this in regards to using solar panels on buildings and other things like canopies and umbrellas. Incorporating things like overhangs, canopies and awnings allow for mixture of other things like mister systems and solar panels which can be mounted on them. �e overhangs can have solar panels on top of them in order to provide energy for lighting for walkways and for the buildings themselves while at the same time providing shade. �e city of Phoenix’s canalscape project talks about doing things like changing the colors of the roofs and buildings to lighter colors to re�ect the sun. Intertwining these things will be needed if the canal project is going to be e�cient.

�e easiest way to provide shade is by planting trees. An article called “Smart cooling ideas, trees for natural temperature control” discussed how trees provide shade, habitat, beauty, and are resilient. �ese are all things needed for a good canalscape and can all be provided by simply planting trees. �e city of Phoenix and its surrounding areas are experiencing urban heat island e�ect which is resulting in even higher temperatures. Shade trees can mitigate the urban heat island e�ect. �e article stated that trees help cool the air through evapotranspiration which is the evaporation of water from leaves. Trees also shade buildings which allows for using less energy to cool them. Many other things go into planting trees like which types of trees to plant and where to plant the trees.

�ere are a range of trees that do well in desert climates including the afghan pine which can grow to 80 feet tall and 30 feet wide and requires little water. Other trees like mesquite and palo verdes which are common in Arizona also can provide good shade. �e milmosa or silk tree is another tree that can provide shade along the canal and requires little water and are very beautiful. �e list of trees that are under the Phoenix code that are eligible to be planted at the canalscape are:

Acacia species – acacias Caesalpinia species – mexican birds, yellow, cascolateChilopsis linearis – desert willowChitalpa tashkentensis – chitalpa

Dalbergia sisso – indian rosewoodEbenopsis species – tex/mex eboniesFraxinus greggii – little leaf ashLeucaena retusa – golden leadballLysiloma species – desert fernOlneya tesota – IronwoodPine species – pinesParkinsonia species – Palo VerdesProsopis species – mesquites Pistacia species – pistacheQuercus species – oakSophora species – mountain laurel Ulmus species – elm.

�e two trees on this list that are very common in Arizona are the palo verde and the mesquite trees. �ey would be great for the canalscape because they require very little water and not only look nice but provide shade and cooling.

Where to plant the trees is also very important. Because of the fact that the trees will be close to the canal and building you want to plant them far enough to the point where the roots of the trees will not break into the canals or rip apart the sidewalks. �e distance they are planted from buildings and the height of trees are also very important. �e trees need to be planted in places where the sun will be coming in like from the east or west in order to provide shade in the areas the sun hits near building. Also the angle of the sun during summer and winter months also needs to be thought of when planting trees. �e sun comes in at di�erent areas during di�erent times of the year so planting the trees in areas which will help cool in the summer and provide warmth in the winter is necessary.

Arizona Awnings is a company based in Phoenix that has been serving Arizona for over 80 years. �is company is a good source for the canal project because they design and build custom awnings and shade products. �ey provide free consultations and have a great satisfaction guarantee. Streamline solar company would be a great company to do solar for the project. �ey are based in Arizona and California and have an o�ce in Scottsdale which is fairly close to where the proposed canal project is.

Streamline solar gives free solar consultation in order to keep costs down and make customers happy. Here is a little background on Streamline Solar.

PROPOSAL AND SYSTEM DESIGN- Not all PV systems are alike. Our 5-kilowatt system is not always the "other guys" 5-kilowatt system. PV modules and inverters can and will di�er greatly in quality and cost. �e same holds true for racking and mounting systems and monitoring systems. Costs will also vary based on foreign or domestic product sourcing as well. A Streamline Solar proposal will list the manufacturer, model and quantity of each item we are proposing to ensure you can compare our system with others you might obtain. In many cases, we will propose two systems. Streamline Solar will design a PV system that not only �ts your needs, but also your budget.

INSTALLATION PROCESS- Streamline Solar will take care of all of the required permits, engineering and incentive paperwork required for your system. Once we have local permits and utility approval in hand, Streamline Solar's team of professional installers will complete your project and

handle all of the inspections for you. References for treesSunset Western Garden BookPlant for Dry ClimatesPhoenix AMA Low Water Use/ Drought Tolerant PlantsNote: All sizes and calipers of plant material to comply with Arizona Nurseryman Standards.3

APPENDIX TWENTY-TWO: Native and Non-Allergenic Plant Toolkit Matthew Pechous

Introduction

�is section of the report provides resources for landscaping and design that is aimed at creating areas that are safe, inviting, and friendly. We can do this by selecting landscaping methods that are safe for the public as well as pleasant. �e features of the landscaping will be visually pleasing to the visitors as well as safe because the vegetation used has no thorns and creates no allergies. �e parks design will also help create the key dynamics: safe, inviting, and friendly. �is will be done by using wide sidewalks, lighting, bathrooms, and other important public amenities.

Safety is a particular issue on the canalscapes because SRP has noted that it has a great concern about liability issues for the public, and it requires insurance by those who create canalscape development. In turn, insurance carriers will have a great concern about safety. But residents will also be concerned about attractiveness.

All of the trees and plants that are used in this report produce no allergies and they have no thorns. Along with the trees and plants that were chosen for the project, they o�er very low maintenance. �e low maintenance of the vegetation used in this project will create a cost e�ective project while maintaining a high level of visual satisfaction for the users. All of the trees that are picked will provide ample amounts shade to protect from the scorching desert sun. �e plants used for the report will captivate the people that visit the park with beautiful foliage. �e foliage from the plants will create a pleasant experience through the use of color and placement. �e plants were also strategically picked so that the visitors of the park can experience the beautiful foliage throughout the year. Another factor that will ensure return visits from the foliage is that all of the plants used in this report attract native wildlife. http://amwua.org/plants_index.html

TreesEvergreen Elm:

• 30’hx30’w • Umbrella like• Provides shade• None allergenic• No thorns

Chilean Mesquite

• 30’hx30’w• Tall and thick• Provides shade• None allergenic• No thorns

Afghan Pine

• 50h’hx30’w• Tall and thick• Provides Shade• None allergenic• No �orns

Live Oak

• 40’hx50’w• Wide crown• Provides shade• None Allergenic• No thorns

Shrubs/Plants

Yellow Bird of Paradise:

• 6’hx5’w• Flower color: yellow and red• Flowers: spring-fall• None allergenic• No thorns

Baja Fairy Duster:

• 5’hx5’w• Flower color: red powder pu�s• Flowers: spring-fall• No thorns• None allergenic

Black Dahlia:

• 3’hx4’w• None allergenic• Flower Color: rose purple clusters• Flowers: spring to fall• �orns: None

Flattop Buckwheat:

• 1’hx2’w• None allergenic• Flower color: pale pink to white• Flowers: spring-fall• �orns: None•

Another important dynamic of the landscaping is creating a safe, inviting, friendly area. �is can be done through the implementation of wide sidewalks, benches, use of lighting, and other public amenities. �ese key features will assure the success of the park.�e use of sidewalks throughout the park will help transform the area into a safe, inviting, and

friendly area. �is will be done by adding wide sidewalks that will create enough room for people to walk side by side, as well as room for people to pass by with comfortable amounts of space. Tempe Town Lake does a great job of this. �e parks sidewalks are wide enough for multiple people. �e pathways are 12-foot wide concrete paths.

• www.tempe.gov • www.aznow.biz/real-estate/canalscape-envisions

An inviting area can also be created through public amenities such as benches, trash cans, drinking fountains, and bathrooms. �ese public amenities are an absolute necessity for the success of the park. �ese vital amenities will o�er the visitors an inviting atmosphere. Shaded benches will o�er visitors a place to relax and hide from the hot sun. �e strategic placement of trash cans will help the aesthetic appearance of the park by leaving it litter free and o�ering a place where trash can be disposed of. Bathrooms are a very important factor for the park. An area of this size is going to need public restrooms to create an inviting area. Another important factor for Arizona parks is drinking fountains.

For all of the activities that will be taking place in this park, drinking fountains are an absolute necessity. Drinking fountains need to be place strategically throughout the park where they can be accessed.

�e canalscaping site must also make people feel safe. �is can be done by using ample amounts of lighting and eliminating blind spots in the park. Lighting can be placed throughout the park in a smart and strategic way. �e lights can be placed so there are no dark spots in the park. �e lighting in the park can also be placed in a smart manner so that fewer lights can be used and electricity can be saved. �e lights used in the park can be place on higher poles so that the light can radiate farther. Lighting in the park can also be used to eliminate blind spots. Blind spots must be eliminated during day and night in order to create a safe and friendly environment. Blind spots can easily be eliminated through the placement of landscaping and buildings. �ese tactics will help eliminate criminal activities while creating a safe and friendly environment.

APPENDIX TWENTY-THREE: Community Engagement Tools Mia Sanchez

Introduction

Phoenix, Arizona has more miles of canal then Venice, Italy -- yet, unlike Venice, we chose to not capitalize on this wonderful resource for livable development. Instead of gondolas we see abandoned shopping carts. Instead of bustling activity we see vacant land. What can be done to change this? How do we regenerate the canal area?

�ere are many stakeholders who will have to be part of the process of forming agreements, solving problems, and identifying needed resources. �ese should be identi�ed through a community mapping process, and contacted to assess their degree of interest, expertise and resources. �is report provides a brief description of some of the most signi�cant, and their possible role. Some of these will be very signi�cant stakeholders, such as the City of Phoenix and the Salt River Project (SRP), the utility agency that manages the canal banks for the federal government.

�e Arizona Falls Hydroelectric Project is a project headed by SRP and is a prime example of converting the Phoenix canals into multiple use sites. �is project provides recreational trails and landscaped pathways along the canals for the public, and even serves as an educational source related to hydro generation, canal area history, and alternative energy. Much can be learned from this project in regards to transforming a once barren area into a recreational multiple use area.

Another organization/project that can provide helpful insight, especially in the stakeholder engagement area, is A.R.T.S, which stands for adaptive reuse of temporary space. �is organization is a “dirt lot activation program” that addresses the local issue of unsightly vacant spaces. �e organization is mainly volunteer based. It is an organized force of active citizens concerned with positively renovating their city. A.R.T.S cleans up and spreads mulch, donated from local landscaping companies, over dirt lots scattered around the metropolitan area. �is turns the dry dead dirt into a more nutritious area that encourages plant growth. Most of these dirt lots are owned by corporate stakeholders waiting to sell their property. A.R.T.S negotiates a deal that provides the city with more aesthetically and environmentally appealing lots, and also doesn’t interfere with potential land deals on the owners part because it can so easily be built over or removed. �is organization not only has experience with dealing with a local community of stakeholders, but also has experience dealing with outside corporate stakeholders.

Both educational and community empowering, the Valley of the Sun�owers project merges the best of both worlds. Similar to the A.R.T.S organization, the Valley of the Sun�owers project activates vacant lots in the downtown Phoenix and transforms them into �elds of sun�owers. �ese sun�owers are harvested by high school science students, who press the seeds for oil and create biodiesel fuel for their hybrid solar/biofuel vehicle project. After the students harvest these sun�owers, the community then gathers together to plant them. �is not only encourages citizens to take pride in their community but also to take action in bettering it.

Both the A.R.T.S organization and the Valley of the Sun�owers project were created out of the Roosevelt Row Community Development Corporation (CDC), a non-pro�t organization established to “further unique the character and assets of the area, to advocate for the continuing role of the arts in

the revitalization of downtown Phoenix, and to foster a dense, diverse and walkable urban environment.” I propose we partner with the organization to build o� of what the Arizona Falls Hydroelectric Project did to the some of the Phoenix canals. �is organization has avidly contributes to the city by creating and hosting positive and community engaging events. A partnership with them would aid in transforming the dry, vacant land that currently is an eye sore into a sustainable, community engaging, and recreational hotspot.

Currently, the canals in Phoenix do not give a positive impression. Many citizens report that they are uninviting, dirty, and avoided by citizens. In order to change this perception we must get the community involved in their makeover. By doing so we will be allowing them to take matters into their own hands and provide them the tools to make the change they want to see in their own community. �is empty and stagnant land can be transformed into community gardens, house food trucks, provide a place for farmer’s markets, host community events, and be a place for leisure and recreation.

By reactivating this land we may in turn reactivate the local urban economy. �e rejuvenation of the area along the canal can potentially draw more businesses if they see a lot of activity going on in the area. Property near the canal could also go up in price since the area along the canal will no longer be dead and vacant but lively and green. �ere is so much potential, but the bottom line is that whatever is implemented must be for the bene�t of the local community and must begin with their support and participation.

APPENDIX TWENTY-FOUR: Business Readiness Diagnostic Tools Joey Sefcik

Introduction

Arizona State University has partnered with the City of Phoenix in exploring initiatives to begin research on the projected area and feasibility for future development. �is task has enlisted many di�erent outlooks to properly assess the scenario and recommend the best approach for the pocket of revitalization. In this particular instance the City of Phoenix desires to assess the blocks between 40th and 44th street along the Canal running through Washington and Van Buren. Upon the projects completion the ultimate goal is to start a thriving economic foundation for the community that reside in the immediate area. In order to fully prepare and reach this maximization of economic wealth we must analyze the businesses that are currently in the area as well as the community as a whole.

To better understand the market in which persons conduct business for small grocery outlets and basic simple needs we must understand the geographic area of the proposed site. After consultation with multiple real estate experts whose primary responsibility is to lease and �nd tenants for commercial real estate locations, I learned that the proximity to competing industries is actually highly sought after in an attempt to undertake the territory from its competition. As well they have instilled the importance of being separated from its own companies branches yet in an area that services the proper �scal and demographic regions. Each company and industry has di�erent desires, and necessities as its business plan in order for it to become successful. �ey have also discussed the theory that persons do not cross freeways if they aren’t obligated to do so. Instinctively a person will travel slightly further down his or her own street rather than drive over or under a freeway to get to the other side. Businesses have used this approach in many aspects in order to isolate regions and declare new economic triumphs. In the theory by Jane Jacobs she discusses this topic declaring that freeways isolate communities and creates a rift within the city and community economically and socially as well.

�e Canalscape site is located near two freeways, to the North and the East, as well Sky Harbor Airport to the South. �is isolation has created a pocket within the community that can be seen as a positive business opportunity for certain industries who have the potential to thrive in the area. In order to determine this looking at the general demographics of the region is the key to determining business readiness.

Its low density, a mere 9,000 within a one mile radius, is low compared to other parts of the Phoenix region, and very low by international standards. �e median household income of $35 thousand dollars eliminates businesses that cater to a higher standard per se. Using the majority races as a business tool to decide whether an industry �ts in the area helps us determine that Hispanic an Caucasian populations would be best �t to cater a successful business. As well this area serves a population with 78 percent of the households being family oriented along with the age of the population at 77 percent under 50 years. �e annual household expenditure on retail tops $57 million, coupled with non-retail of $76 million.

�is area currently has to utilize distant shops and activities in order to spend $133 million per year on retail and non-retail shopping. If we are to take a look at the area as a whole we can see restaurants and shops outside of the local trade area as de�ned by experts and theories, which are being used. �ere is a market to place shops that are underserved in the area. According to the data entertainment and food

constitute the highest grossing expenses in the area. �e $21 million in food and $8 million in entertainment can be contained locally by the implementation of the Canalscape.

�e scale of redevelopment – especially in the early years -- will certainly not approach other major retail developments (e.g. Tempe Marketplace) due to the lack of population within the area and lack of diversity of amenities. However, the light rail and the public transportation will help to build a catchment for the Canalscape by supporting more residential development (e.g. apartments, a�forable etc).

�e area has positive characteristics that can utilized by professional business assessors in order to determine the feasibility of the project and prospective businesses for the area. In order for the community surrounding this project to properly sustain itself, the economic foundation must be set with the formation of the Canalscape to instill the groundwork’s for a proper revitalization. Analyzing the businesses to determine its readiness would best be suited by the demographics and the correlation to surrounding businesses.

APPENDIX TWENTY-FIVE: Market Development Checklist Daniel Sheldon

Introduction

Phoenix has a stigma as one of the nation’s least sustainable cities, but is slowly embracing a new type of community where everyone can live, work, shop and play. �e solution is to create a denser urban environment that allows all these activities to �ow and evolve with the city. A major issue that has to be looked at is the residential development and the di�erent ways it can be incorporated with commercial spaces. �is tool kit can be used as a check list when looking into the development of residential spaces combined with commercial uses as well as community planning outside of the urban realm. Also these questions apply to all developers and planners despite the social and �nancial status of the intended project as well as the surrounding areas such as the CanalScape project.

1.) Land use- What can the proposed land potentially be used for and what can the various types of land be sold for?

2.) What is the highest and best use of the proposed land, what use will provide the highest yield/ Pro�t?

3.) Understanding market trends and the proposed future development of the neighborhoods and surrounding neighborhoods/ community involvement (charettes)

4.) Building incentives for developers provided by local municipalities.

Encouraging local municipalities to provide motivation such as building incentives for planners, architects, and developers is crucial. Understanding the motivations of the public and private sectors and providing incentives accordingly. Certain areas such as the proposed CanalScape location are underdeveloped and most residential developers would shy away from projects that utilize a�ordable housing. �is is a vicious cycle that has to and can be stopped. By understanding what drives public and private developments is extremely important. Incentives have to be provided to builders in order for our lower income communities to grow and �ourish.

�e incentives that need to be provided all depend on the condition, location and the surrounding areas. Higher income areas will produce residential developments with a higher cost of living and the need for government building incentives will decrease. On the opposite side of the spectrum low income/ high crime areas will produce more a�ordable living spaces which in return means less money for the developers. Providing building, tax, and property incentives will be the only way to obtain a private development �rms to be interested in these projects.

When looking to develop a residential community whether it is mixed use of not, the proposed

piece of property should be assessed and used for the best possible use that will provide the highest return. If we are to move towards a more sustainable urban life style residential space has to be provided and mixed in with commercial use, but it has to be done right and the proper research must take place in order for it to be a success for the developer and the surrounding community. For example the photo above is a great example of a mixed use development. �e Scottsdale Water Front is a very successful development that is locating in the fashion square district of Old Town Scottsdale, AZ. �e developers of the Water Front took advantage of the limited amount of space and assessed its potential by looking into the market trends for mixed-use living as well as comparing surrounding real estate values. As a result the Scottsdale Water Front is a successful development of luxury condos as well as commercial use and the street level, that promotes a more sustainable urban living environment. You can see that with developments like this and many others in Arizona it is possible to create a more urban living environment while exploiting the amazing canal network that runs through and connects most of Arizona.

Looking at successful commercial and real estate development �rms such as Phillips Development and Realty http://www.pdrllc.com/ it is clear that understanding and implementing these four basic questions and doing your due diligence is vital to any development. PDR is an excellent example of a development company that takes into consideration not only themselves and their �nancial gain but the communities well being and sustainability as well.

APPENDIX TWENTY-SIX: Healthy Community Design Taylor Shell

Introduction

Healthy Community Design, as outlined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is based on the following principles:

! Mixed land use and more land density to shorten distances between homes, workplaces, schools and recreation

! Transportation alternatives including bicycle trails, sidewalks and mass transit! A�ordable housing so that people of all income levels can a�ord to live in healthy communities! Town centers close to where people live so they can walk or bike to shopping, everyday errands, places of worship and social activities

! Greenspace, trails and parks to provide more opportunities for contact with nature.

�e advantages of living in a community designed for health are numerous, ranging from less dependence on personal automobiles and more use of alternative transportation, to greater opportunities for outdoor activity and increased social capital. All of these characteristics foster lifestyles that enhance one’s physical, mental and social health, and should be integral to the design of our Canalscape area to ensure the livability and vitality of these spaces.

Current Conditions

At present, many portions of the canal areas are underutilized, and surrounding neighborhoods have fallen victim to the poor planning practices of previous years. �e Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s list of sprawl characteristics feature several traits that hinder Healthy Community Design, the following are said characteristics that are applicable along the Canalscape area:

! Low land use mix so that homes are spread apart form workplaces, recreation or schools, making the distances that people have to travel longer

! More dependence on the automobile! Fewer sidewalks and bike paths! �e consequences of urban sprawl contributes negatively to community health in that there becomes:

! More driving and less physical activity! More air pollutants from automobiles! More injuries form car crashes and pedestrian accidents! Less sense of community! Less contact with nature! More greenhouse gases contributing to climate change

To remedy these cumbersome factors, the Canalscape area needs to be designed in a way that minimizes and reverses the e�ects of these contributors to poor community health.

Implementation

As development becomes more focused on the area adjacent to our waterways, it has been recommended that the following be implemented to ensure the health of the communities that spring from the Canalscape areas:

! Frequent linkages must be established to the urban fabric surrounding the canalscape area, connecting the waterways to existing neighborhoods, employers, public parks, and other public spaces. Canalscape development should not be isolated, but rather serve as a puzzle piece that �ts in the surrounding community.

! Connections to existing transit facilities so the canal area becomes a more convenient destination or place to reside.

! Pedestrian and bicycle paths must be well-shaded, well-maintained, and have a general sense of appeal to promote walkability.

! Pedestrian and bicycle paths should be convenient to use, bicycle or pedestrian trips that require less e�ort become more attractive than automobile trips, reducing dependence on automobiles in the canal area.

! Zoning for mixed land uses along the Canal, enabling homes, employment, and recreational spaces are less distant, requiring less travel.

! Extensive use of pocket parks and public spaces along the canal to promote physical activity and recreation

! Integrate vegetation and green spaces to create a more relaxing Canalscape, contributing to mental health

! Work with community members and groups, establish community garden programs along the canal, to provide healthy food choices for locals and to promote community interactions

! Coordination with businesses and restaurants along the canal to provide outdoor seating and gathering areas, promoting interaction among community members

! Encourage local community groups to be active in the area and take ownership of their neighborhood through Adopt-A-Path programs and other beauti�cation projects

! Work with City of Phoenix Housing o�cials to ensure that a�ordable housing is present within the canal area.

! Establish commercial hubs and centers of activity around the canal, providing jobs, shopping and gathering spaces close to residences.

Conclusion

With the presence of more walkable paths, a mix of land uses, and other elements of Healthy Community Design, the canalscape area can become a vibrant, attractive place to work, live and play while countering the negative consequences of sprawl that have greatly a�ected the Phoenix Metropolitan Area.

APPENDIX TWENTY-SEVEN: Targeting Food Venues Jeremy �ompson

Introduction

In this section of the report, I would like to address the frequency of food venues in the surrounding areas. I went on the Internet and drew a one mile circle with our project as the middle of the circle. In the one-mile circle, there was only one restaurant that was inside, but it was located at the very edge of the circle. Meaning, if you were interested in walking for a meal, the minimum you would be walking is one mile. I went to the near by campus of Gateway Community College and asked students what they thought about the lack of food venues near campus. Gateways campus is approximately one mile to the west of our projects location. �e students that I talked to had a lot to say about the lack of food venues, one student stated, “during my long day at school, I look for something to eat between each class to keep me satis�ed and the way to �nd food is to travel in a car.” Students like this felt strongly about this topic and told me that they would support any project in the area that would be supplying a food venue that was in walking distance. During my time on the Gateway campus, I did not talk to a single student that wasn’t interested in the idea of bringing near by food venues.

After my series of questions, I then asked the students what type of food venues they would prefer to see in the surrounding areas. Many of the students showed no interested in one particular venue, but they wanted something and it didn’t matter what. A small group of students expressed interest in fast food venues. �ey stated that a fast food restaurant would bene�t them in many di�erent ways. �ese students told me that they were willing to put aside the health issue with fast food so they could take full advantage of the amount of time they would save between classes. �e last group of students that expressed a large interest in speci�c food venues was the students interested in a healthier choice. �ese students told me that if this project brings food venues to the area, they would love to see a healthy option, such as a fresh market. With a food market located near by, students have the ability, along with the local residents, to eat and shop a healthier way. �is market would be located near the campus and neighborhood acting as the primary grocery store and healthiest lunch option. While walking through this section of the canal, markets could be a great aspect to the overall goal. Markets give a healthy and sustainable approach to food providers. Often, markets have fresher and healthier foods that may not be found in your local grocery store.

With this said, it is very important to study the area, the surrounding businesses, and the residential neighborhoods to decide what type of market would �t best. In the residential neighborhood, it is primarily single-family housing and its economic status is lower class. I feel that the residential neighborhood could draw a lot of attraction to our canal scape, if the market we chose meets their demands. To the west of our section of the canal, there is a section of run-down and lower class small businesses (such as an auto repair shop, tire shop and a junkyard). With the creation of this canal scape, these businesses will have the opportunity to eat in a healthier setting. With the attraction of people to these fresh markets, an economic impact will have a great e�ect for these surrounding businesses. Perhaps the buildings that have poor quality characteristics will gain the �nancial business needed to address the overall appearance of their building. �e economic impact in the this area would give these small struggling businesses an extra boost to overcome their struggles and meet new �nancial limits.

To the direct east, there is group of commercial o�ce buildings and I feel that these businesses will play

a major role in our creation of the canal scape. In order to develop a market, it will take the support of this major commercial building. With the creation of this project, this commercial building will have a direct relationship with the canal scape. With the construction of a food market, the commercial business could have some major bene�ts. One, the food venue will attract its employees for lunch by giving them the option of a healthier and more conveniently located meal. Also, these buildings sit to the direct east of the canal giving them water front property, which for the future could mean a higher property value.

�erefore, with the creation of this project, students, residents, small business owners and the large commercial businesses will all bene�t from the food markets that are included in the creation of this canal scape. �e lack of food venues currently in the area is a pain that these local people have been su�ering from for a long time. �is project will give these people the opportunity to chose a healthier and more convenient food choice. �e bene�ts of a market are outstanding and will impact the entire neighborhood in many di�erent ways. �is project gave the students at Gateway Community College a small amount of hope that a near by food venue was potentially coming and would meet their demands.

APPENDIX TWENTY-EIGHT: Sprawl Retro�t Checklist Ryan Winkle

Introduction: Encouraging Urban In�ll and Walkability

Increasing concern with the e�ects of urban sprawl, caused by ine�ective land use policy, lack of access to public transportation and the lack of walkable, a�ordable housing near transportation and city centers has led city planners to try to �nd methods of encouraging urban density. �e three methods that I am examining in this report are development existing and future public transportation, urban in�ll and sprawl repair around project centers and local connections to public transit as well as public development policy and codes regarding land use speci�c to the project area. �e area of interest in this case speci�cally is the canal that intersects the light rail line in between 40th street and 44th street on Washington Street and 40th street between Washington St. and Van Buren Street. Access to public transportation has historically played a role in how our cities have developed and has been documented to increase density in areas where the ease of use factor involving public transportation is present.

Interesting and Urban In�ll and Walkable streets have been shown to increase public use and neighborhood density when combined with a mixed land use policy and access to shared services. Public policy and zoning regarding strategic mixed use development, transportation policy discouraging the use of automobiles and cost based programs encouraging shared space, shared services and social justice awareness increases density. �ese basic ideas will then be set against real factors around the future development and exploration of the existing canalscape project and future additions to hotspots in urban development around Phoenix Arizona.

Here is a map of the area around a section of the canalscape development project. �e red area is what I have titled the triangle of opportunity. �e blue area is the predetermined area for the existing canalscape project. �e areas in yellow are areas that I feel need to really be developed with walkability and density in mind to ensure proper access to the canalscape project by users.

Public transportation. Within the last 10 years city planners and urban developers have began changing the patterns in which land is used to re�ect the unintended environmental and economical consequences of urban sprawl caused by the automobile oriented development that has been heavily promoted since the 1950’s. “Smart Growth” and “New Urbanism” emerged as planning buzzwords, “transit oriented developments” (TODs), which promote re-densi�cation, walkability, and transit use via the concentration of housing and retail around transit nodes, have cropped up in cities around the

nation. Transit oriented development within the United States has fast become the method of promoting smart growth patterns amongst currently existing sprawl patterns further introducing new life and vitality into these sprawl settings as well as into declining inner city neighborhoods. Development around these tra�c nodes o�er increased lifestyle choices through the use of mixed use neighborhoods, goods and services located within walkable distances and access to transit connectivity. Other factors that raise the need for a good transit system are the increase in the price of gasoline, the current economic situation and large amount of rush hour congestion. Another important reason for the push for TOD’s is the idea of “Quality of Life” and the e�ect of daily lengthy auto commutes on peoples lifestyle choices. Many Americans spend too much time getting too and from work robbing them of time with their families and friends. (Transportation Research Board 2004) Modern theories in urban planning mixed with the growing demand of consumers for easy to use public transit has increased the attention placed on adopting new techniques in the application of planning and transit oriented development and the creation of dense, healthy, and sustainable communities. In this case speci�cally, the area around the light rail stop just west of 44th street on Washington is an excellent opportunity for transit oriented development because of its almost direct access to the canal chosen for the canalscape project and even more importantly because of the access way from the light rail stop to Phoenix Sky Harbor airport. �is area will act as sort of a �rst view for travelers just arriving to Phoenix and using the light rail to get to their destination. �e second area for TOD would be the roadways that have direct access to the canalscape project. �ese are the streets between 44th street and 40th street on Washington and 40th street between Washington street and van buren street. �ese areas can be in�lled with mixed use development and surrounding streets can be made more walkable. Ito would even be bene�cial if some connections were made diagonally through the neighborhood/businesses in between these streets and the canal itself.

Sprawl Repair. Sprawl, as a planning strategy, is dated and not functional. As a new era of urban planners we are now faced with the idea of the development of dense and transit oriented , walkable cities amongst countless American cities that are designed and still encourage urban sprawl. �e current economic recession of the United States compounded by the current real estate crisis has added new urgency to the problem of urban sprawl. At this point it would be unsustainable to abandon these sprawl areas but it would be equally unsustainable and irresponsible to keep developing in this fashion. Sprawl is not �exible and will not by itself change into a bustling and robust walkable community. Sprawl must be repaired through inclusive urban design, forward thinking public policy and smart growth incentives. �e current urban set-up of many of the cities on the United states consists mostly of large paved parking areas, groups of chain restaurants, strip malls, big box shopping centers and cookie cutter neighborhoods. �ese forms of sprawl contribute to higher energy costs, higher costs for services, a higher incidence of obesity and chronic diseases and overall a larger carbon footprint. Some options for repairing sprawl areas to interesting and walkable urban environments include the conversion of commercial developments or single use residential units that exist near important tra�c corridors into neighborhood centers, important town centers and maybe even a regional center. Secondly, strip malls and expansive commercial areas can be converted into mixed use transit networks and transit oriented development corridors as well as in�lling the area with mixed use development. Districts that have a high focus on commuter tra�c can be converted using the development of transit nodes, tra�c calming strategies and areas of mixed use development. Challenges to sprawl repair are similar to many responsible, forward looking projects, the initial investment. Sprawl repair becomes more feasible when analyzed from a long term perspective and when compared to conventional suburban development. Sprawl repair not only encourages density but also increases the walkability and urban functionality of an area. Speci�cally for this area there are many areas that are over parked and or open lots that can be utilized for urban in�ll and sprawl repair. Here I have highlighted some areas that may be considered.

Public Policy and zoning. As many modern city planners have demonstrated, the way that we have used land across the United States starting with Euclidian style zoning have directly contributed to the evolution of a myriad of problems by encouraging low density developments while at the same time creating large amounts of separation of uses. Euclidian zoning practice is responsible for the generation of urban sprawl leading to areas of low density, negative environmental e�ects, high economic costs and many instances of social injustice. �e continuation of this style of zoning prevents the rehabilitation of the urban environment, creates wide spread pollution, contributed to the loss of open farm land and wilderness, encourages racism and segregation based on economic status. Euclidian zoning also stretches the resources of municipalities too thin leaving them to choose between raising property taxes or letting infrastructure decay. New Urbanists have began developing alternative zoning codes or “Smart codes” that seek to build mixed-use, compact neighborhoods. New Urbanism as a method of planning has a focus on community place making, a reduction in automobile use and the creation of densely populated, walkable neighborhoods, that contain a mix of housing, work places and commercial places. Criticisms of New Urbanist ideas include that idea that dense living and shared space reduces the feeling of privacy. �e other criticism of New Urbanism is that while promoting inclusivity with

mixed use and walkable neighborhoods these places actually start to exclude people because as the values of the property goes up these neighborhoods become home to the rich and a�uent Caucasian residents.

APPENDIX TWENTY-NINE: A�ordable Housing Strategy Tools Zohn Zaimes

Introduction

�e site our class has chosen, 44th Street and Washington Avenue, is located near a plethora of industrial and o�ce parks, and the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport. �e location is also along the Phoenix Lightrail and is just north of where the extension of the sky harbor airport is being built. With such a heavy focus on industry and jobs, there is a lack of housing and community in the area. When driving down Washington Avenue from Mill Avenue to Central Avenue you pass several automotive services, corporation headquarters, metal services, and heavy equipment services. �ere are few retail, parks, and housing, making the avenue deserted and unsafe at night. Improvements can be made to the corridor by adding retail, parks, and housing to accommodate the needs of not only workers in the area, but residents as well. With a scarce amount of housing the area citizens are forced to drive several miles to meet their needs. Implementing these improvements will not only attract people into the area, but also provide a better quality of life for the people living there today.

Limitations and Improvements

�e proposed site at 44th Street and Washington Avenue today is occupied by private ownership, which may be hard to negotiate with them to make these improvements. Solutions to potential disengagement of business owners would be just compensation, o�ering them housing or commercial space, or helping relocate their business within the area. Another limitation is that the city of Phoenix laid o� 30 percent of its housing development sta� in 2005 and were experiencing empty public housing units at 10 percent in 2007 and around 800 of the 2500 a�ordable housing units are vacant for more than 6 months. �is may make the process of incorporating public housing di�cult and may take longer than needed. A solution would be to provide apartment homes that fall near the median price per month of the apartments in the 85034 zip code. Having a�ordable housing sponsored by HUD would provide us money to build these units, and having a�ordable rental properties will bring in people who are trying to save money or aren’t as in need as other households.

Design and Location

Apartments, live/work spaces, and patio homes should be provided and carefully placed throughout the site. Apartments should be a�ordable, well designed, and �t the needs of the residents. Apartments units should contain adequate space, sunlight, variety of �oor plan choices, units of all sizes ranging from studios to four bedrooms, and using smart design practices to bene�t the tenant. �is will bring in households from all di�erent sizes and incomes to provide a more diverse environment. Amenities such as views, sunlight, laundry facilities, child services, and �tness facilities should be provided to attract households and provide them with their needs. Apartments should be located within a quarter mile of the lightrail stops, no taller than four or �ve stories to save money on building costs, and allow easy access to parking.

Live/work spaces should be provided for residents to save money and carry their business at home. Live/work spaces will also encourage residents to be more involved with the community and participate in programs and organizations that may better their community. Live/work spaces should be located near other retail and commercial businesses, along the canal, or along major arterial roads.

Patio homes should be provided for households that may have be well o�. Patio homes will appeal to households who want to live in the area and are willing to pay a higher price. Patio homes should be placed farther from lightrail stops, along the canal, or near parks and other public spaces.

Community

Housing on the proposed site should not only provide people with amenities and services that meet their needs, but also provide and help instill a sense of community. Political �gures, planners, and developers cannot create a sense of community, but may provide the power, tools, and infrastructure to do so. Developing a sense of community will help residents protect their community and keep it safe of crime, make sure local issue’s are put to notice, and create activities and organizations that residents may participate in and enjoy together. Creating a diverse, a�ordable, and pleasant community will be achieved by providing a�ordable housing, which will �rst move people into the development through HUD. Demographics of the area show over half of the households have a high school degree or less, have household incomes of less than $30,000, are from Hispanic decent, and use a private vehicle to commute to work. A�ordable housing is a necessity in implementing the Canalscape project, and will appeal to local residents and employee’s working in the area. By providing housing for members in the community will help bring residents into the area and allow for the community to live amongst each other in a more social way, creating a more happy, safe, and healthy lifestyle.

HUD Involvement

�e involvement of HUD will help provide housing for lower income households in the community and metropolitan area. HUD provides a�ordable housing to lower income elderly, lower income mentally and physically disabled, and lower income families. All three households should be implemented into the Canalscape project, and should be disbursed through as to not create a concentration of lower income residents in one area. All three types of households will bene�t from site because of the lightrail and public transportation, proximity to health centers, and access to publics space and businesses. Some of the strategic goals in HUD’s 2012 general section include meeting the need for quality a�ordable rental homes, building inclusive and sustainable communities free from discrimination, and utilizing housing as a platform for improving quality of life. �ese goals that HUD has made for the 2012 �scal year are goals that may be achieved with the site at 40th Street and Washington Avenue.

Cost

With the sponsor of HUD the government will help pay for the implementation and building of a�ordable housing in Canalscape. Building fewer than 5 stories will also save money on structure costs as oppose to higher buildings, and provide a moderate density that won’t overwhelm the area with tra�c congestion. Advertising of housing should be placed along the lightrail , nearby roads, and highways to attract people into the area.

Future Development

Our site for Canalscape will promote a more walkable, pedestrian friendly environment that will meet the needs of people living on the site and throughout the metropolitan area. �e involvement of HUD

and a�ordable rental properties will attract more people into the area and encourage growth to occur. Preparing for growth around 40th Street and Washington Avenue will require zoning changes and redevelopment sites. �ere is also vacant land near the site along highway 202 which will help accommodate the need for people. Future growth should contain a compact, urban density that will continue to promote pedestrian activity, and provide enough parking for residents and visitors. Community members, HUD, and government o�cials will need to monitor the area and make sure housing is maintained at an a�ordable level, and rental units don’t become too high for residents.

APPENDIX THIRTY: Stakeholder Engagement Reports

We met with a range of stakeholders in the area, representing public agencies, institutions, NGOs, businesses, and citizens. We have compiled surveys and notes from these discussions for review on request.

Key stakeholder feedback:

! Most stakeholders support the concept of canal-oriented development – some do so strongly and enthusiastically. Many note its potential contribution to quality of life and sustainable development within the Phoenix region.

! At the same time, there is notable skepticism about whether it will ever go forward, given the challenges. �ere is a perception that proposals maybe stuck in the stage of “pretty plans” while the needed resources are not available to proceed.

! Where there is awareness of the Canalscape project – which is highest among already involved area stakeholders – there is generally very good support for these proposals. However, there is limited awareness among members of the general public. Again, there is notable skepticism about whether these proposals can be implemented successfully.

! Some stakeholders expressed concerns about gentri�cation, congestion and other possible problems from development.

! Agency representatives expressed willingness to work through existing regulations and requirements to achieve innovative new developments.

! However, there is also notable concern that all parties must understand the realities, and �nd ways to work through them. �is was especially notable on the part of SRP, which is the agency that administers the canal properties on behalf of the Federal government.

! At the same time, among agencies and businesses, we found a general sense of good will and support for the concepts, and willingness to collaborate to achieve development of which people can be proud.

! Some stakeholders expressed disappointment that Phoenix development did not utilize more sustainable and energy–e�cient measures, which they believe is an economic opportunity for the region.

! Safety along the canals is a major concern – they are empty and feel dangerous at present. How can this change?

! Several stakeholders noted concerns about parking and its requirements. How can this be met along the canals?

! Some businesses expressed concern about competition from new development.! Some stakeholders noted that there are tools available that have not yet been used fully – e.g. incentives for foreign investors.

APPENDIX THIRTY-ONE: Sample Survey

J483?14+76*1+*61.93716K**L63*12363*M.3614+76*<6*<*5.493*1+*47138A43;*123*B386+7)**N+.*9+7O1*2<A3*1+*<6@*

3A380*M.3614+7*P*4,*0+.*</83<90*@7+;*123*<76;386*Q/4@3:*6<0:*;2+*123*+85<74R<14+7*46:*416*;3=6413*31?"*

0+.*?<7*I.61*,4//*47*123*M.3614+76*0+.863/,)

>718+9.?3*0+.863/,*8+.52/0*<6*,+//+;6K**ST3//+:*>*<D*<*B/<77475*61.9371*<1*EUL:*<79*;3O83*9+475*<*

B8+I3?1*1+*5<1238*47B.1*,8+D*836493716*<79*61<@32+/9386*+7*B+664=/3*,.1.83*93A3/+BD371*47*H2+374V)**W.8*

3DB2<646*46*+7*;2<1*123*?+DD.7410*;<716:*<79*+7*;2<1*123*=<884386*D4521*=3*1+*=31138*M.</410*

93A3/+BD371)**J+*0+.*D479*4,*>*<6@*0+.*<*,3;*M.3614+76X**Y246*62+./97O1*1<@3*/+7538*12<7*<=+.1*!Z*

D47.136)[

>)*CTW*YT\N*E]\

**

'" E83*0+.*<*B8+B3810*+;738*</+75*123*?<7</:*<*837138:*<*=.647366*+;738:*+8*+1238*B8+B3810*

61<@32+/938X**E83*0+.*47A+/A39*;412*<7*+85<74R<14+7*47*123*<83<X

(" T+;*/+75*2<A3*0+.*=337*47*1246*/+?<14+7X

^" T+;*/+75*2<A3*0+.*=337*47*H2+374VX

_" >,*<BB/4?<=/3:*?<7*0+.*13//*.6*<*=41*<=+.1*0+.8*37138B8463*+8*+85<74R<14+7:*<79*416*=<?@58+.79X**QE*

/47@*1+*<*;3=6413*;+./9*=3*,473)"

*

!Z" T<A3*0+.*=337*47A+/A39*;412*?83<1475*<70*B/<?36*</+75*123*?<7</:*+8*47*123*53738</*<83<X**>,*6+:*

?<7*0+.*936?84=3*123D*=843,/0X*

>>)*CTEY*YT\N*YT>`a

^) T<A3*0+.*23<89*<=+.1*B8+B+6</6*12<1*2<A3*=337*D<93*1+*8393A3/+B*123*?<7</6:*+,,38475*<*7.D=38*

+,*493<6*,+8*8393A3/+BD371*B8+I3?16X

^" E83*0+.*<;<83*+,*<*B8+B+6</*?<//39*SF<7</6?<B3[X

! J+*0+.*2<A3*<*53738</*+B474+7*+7*<70*+,*12363*B8+B+6</6X**QC3*;4//*<6@*0+.*,+8*6+D3*931<4/39*

+B474+76*47*<*D+D371)"

! J+*0+.*@7+;*<=+.1*U]HO6*B8+B+639*B/<76*1+*B+664=/0*<66461*;412*93A3/+BD371*</+75*123*?<7</X*

>,*6+:*9+*0+.*2<A3*<7*+B474+7*+7*1246X*

! >*;+./9*/4@3*1+*62+;*0+.*6+D3*B8+B+6</6*9+73*=0*A<84+.6*B3+B/3:*<79*531*0+.8*?+DD3716)*b4861:*

B/3<63*I.61*54A3*D3*0+.8*53738</*4DB83664+76*+,*123*B8+B+6</6*<6*,<8*<6*0+.*?<7*13//*P*;2<1*0+.*

/4@3:*9+7O1*/4@3:*,33/*;+88439*<=+.1:*,33/*46*<*A380*5++9*493<:*<79*6+*+7)**H/3<63*9+7O1*;+880*<=+.1*

<70+73*=3475*2.81*=0*?8414?46D)**>*;<6*7+1*47A+/A39*47*<70*+,*12363*B8+I3?16*<79*>*;4//*@33B*0+.8*

49371410*?+7,493714</c

*N+.8*?+DD3716X**QC2<1*0+.*/4@3:*9+7O1*/4@3:*<83*?+7?38739*<=+.1*P*<70*<6B3?1*<1*<//"

N+.8*?+DD3716X**QC2<1*0+.*/4@3:*9+7O1*/4@3:*<83*?+7?38739*<=+.1*P*<70*<6B3?1*<1*<//"

N+.8*?+DD3716X*QE5<47:*;2<13A38*?+D36*1+*D479)"

N+.8*?+DD3716X

N+.8*?+DD3716X

N+.8*?+DD3716X

N+.8*?+DD3716X

YT\>]*]\EFY>W`U*YW*H]\F\J\`YU)))

d3/+;*<83*B2+1+6*,8+D*63A38</*+1238*?41436*12<1*2<A3*6.??366,.//0*93A3/+B39*</+75*12348*;<138;<06)))

U?+1169</3

U<7*E71+74+

W@/<2+D<*F410

')*T<A3*0+.*=337*1+*<70*+,*12363*93A3/+BD3716*=3,+83:*<79*4,*6+:*9+*0+.*/4@3*123DX

()*J+*0+.*1247@*H2+374V*2<6*123*B+13714</*1+*9+*6+D312475*64D4/<8*</+75*416*?<7</6X**

^)*J+*0+.*1247@*H2+374V*62+./9*9+*6+D312475*64D4/<8X

_)*J+*0+.*1247@*12383*<83*D<I+8*4DB394D3716*1+*H2+374?*93A3/+B475*416*?<7</6*47*1246*;<0X**>,*6+:*?<7*

0+.*6.DD<84R3*=843,/0*;2<1*1230*<83X

*

!Z)**C2<1*@4796*+,*93A3/+BD3716*;+./9*0+.*D+61*/4@3*1+*633*</+75*123*?<7</6X**Qb33/*,833*1+*<DB/4,0)"

!) H<8@6e83?83<14+7e+B37*6B<?3X

#) ]361<.8<716X

$) U2+B6X

%) f<8@31e58+?380X

&) ]36493714</

') E,,+89<=/3*836493714</X

() Y23<138eD+A436X

^) d<86e?/.=6X

_) F+DD38?4</e479.6184</*.636X

!Z) W12386Xggggggggggggggg

b\\JdEFa*W`*UY]\\YUFEH\*hL>J\i>`\U

!!)*>7*!__(:*123*F410*<9+B139*936457*61<79<896*<79*5.493/4736*12<1*<BB/0*1+*123*?<7</*<83<6)**Y2363*?<7*

=3*,+.79*47*U3?14+7*&Z(:*Y<=*E*+,*123*?410*R+7475*+8947<7?3)**C383*0+.*<;<83*+,*12363*5.493/4736X

!#)*>*;+./9*/4@3*1+*<6@*0+.*1+*54A3*0+.8*12+.5216*+7*63A38</*,3<1.836*+,*12363*61<79<896*<79*5.493/4736)*

Y230*<83*4//.618<139*47*123*,+//+;475*B<536)**H/3<63*/31*D3*@7+;*4,*0+.*2<A3*<70*?+7?3876*<=+.1*12363*

61<79<896:*+8*<70*B+6414A3*83<?14+76*1+*123*61<79<896:*<79*<70*+1238*?+DD3716)

gggU18+75/0*U.BB+81**ggg*U.BB+81**ggg*`3.18</***ggg*WBB+63**ggg*U18+75/0*WBB+63****F+DD3716K

*

ggg*U18+75/0*U.BB+81**ggg*U.BB+81**ggg*`3.18</***ggg*WBB+63**ggg*U18+75/0*WBB+63****F+DD3716K

gggU18+75/0*U.BB+81**ggg*U.BB+81**ggg*`3.18</***ggg*WBB+63**ggg*U18+75/0*WBB+63****F+DD3716K

gggU18+75/0*U.BB+81**ggg*U.BB+81**ggg*`3.18</***ggg*WBB+63**ggg*U18+75/0*WBB+63****F+DD3716K

gggU18+75/0*U.BB+81**ggg*U.BB+81**ggg*`3.18</***ggg*WBB+63**ggg*U18+75/0*WBB+63****F+DD3716K

gggU18+75/0*U.BB+81**ggg*U.BB+81**ggg*`3.18</***ggg*WBB+63**ggg*U18+75/0*WBB+63****F+DD3716K

gggU18+75/0*U.BB+81**ggg*U.BB+81**ggg*`3.18</***ggg*WBB+63**ggg*U18+75/0*WBB+63****F+DD3716K

gggU18+75/0*U.BB+81**ggg*U.BB+81**ggg*`3.18</***ggg*WBB+63**ggg*U18+75/0*WBB+63****F+DD3716K

!$)**Y23*F410*+,*H2+374V*2<6*B8+9.?39*<*SJ+;71+;7*F+93[*12<1*,3<1.836*618331,8+71*936457*61<79<896)*

>*;+./9*/4@3*1+*62+;*0+.*1246*^jB<53*9+?.D371*<79*531*0+.8*?+DD3716*+7*123*61<79<896)*

QC8413*?+DD3716*=3/+;)"

>fHi\f\`YEY>W`

QWB14+7</*P*,+8*93A3/+B386*<79e+8*B.=/4?*<537?436"*W.8*?+//3<5.36*<1*EUL*2<A3*=337*;+8@475*1+*

493714,0*93A3/+BD371*B8+?36636*<79*1++/6*12<1*D4521*D<@3*41*3<6438*1+*93A3/+B*123*@4796*+,*B8+I3?16*+7*

123*?<7</*12<1*123*/+?</*?+DD.7410*;+./9*;<71*1+*633)**Y246*63?14+7*93</6*;412*12<1*6.=I3?1)

!%)*C2<1*9+*0+.*=3/43A3*<83*123*=455361*2.89/36*1+*5++9*93A3/+BD371*</+75*123*?<7</X

!) i<?@*+,*=<7@*,47<7?475

#) ]35./<1+80*83M.483D3716eB38D411475

$) H8+B3810*+;738624B*46*,8<5D37139

%) H3+B/3*9+7O1*;+8@*1+531238*

&) W1238ggggggggggggggg

!&=)*C24?2*+,*123*,+//+;475*4DB/3D371<14+7*1++/6*9+*0+.*1247@*D4521*=3*23/B,./*1+*6B.8*93A3/+BD371:*

<79*;20X

') H8+B3810*1<V*<=<13D3716

() H.=/4?jB84A<13*B<81738624B6

^) Y<Vj47?83D371*,47<7?3*Q5+A387D371*,47<7?475*B<49*+,,*=0*47?83<639*B8+B3810*1<V36"

_) i+?</*>DB8+A3D371*J46184?1

!Z) F+j+B38<14A3*93A3/+BD371

!!) F+DD.7410*i<79*Y8.61

!#) W1238gggggggggggggggg

(INDIVIDUAL SECTIONS HERE...)