50

would The

due for In

with

development

experienced the

for The

Design year,

As

of

prosperity

history, shortlisted That

the

the

responded Issue:

authorized

Background:

Recommendation:

Redevelopment

Subject

Presented

Department:

a

September

an

Proposals each

vision

City’s

amount

to

initiation

City

Downtown

practical

Council

phased

emerging

be

a

Inc.

LLOYDMINSTER

local

change

phase

of

Matter:

used

Downtown

of

and

to

and

to

Lloydminster

4Ip.

of

By:

of

in

a

award

champions

of

(RFP)

project:

of

the

tasks

sign

of

Calgary,

Long

study

to

$149955.7Splus

development,

downtown

are:

Area

interviewed.

Samuel

the

a

city

Plan

in

2015,

guide Downtown

RFP.

Downtown

all

Council’s

in

and

the

downtown;

Range

1)

center,

Redevelopment

area,

(DARP)

Area

necessary

2016.

1)

Based

Preparation

the

Alberta,

the

Request

Afolayan

timelines

and

Foundation;

invited

redevelopment

Redevelopment

ultimately

Planning

City

revitalization

the

strategic Area

However,

to

Area opportunity

a

on

Downtown

GST,

02

began

3)

was

City

documents.

multidisciplinary

Report

for

the

to

Redevelopment

A Redevelopment

of

Planning

Proposal

the

submissions,

benchmark

of

holistic

Plan

and

catering

2)

the

priorities.

the

the

Lloydminster’s

Information

successful

Policy;

of

for

that

to

Research

as

Area

process

City

Plan

Request

Council Attachments:

RFD

the

and

help

+

a

growth.

(RFP)

to the .

•

City

statutory

Design

did

(DARP”).

downtown

3) Redevelopment

No:

completed

Implementation/Monitoring

long-term

create

teams

02

Request

Proposal

three

Plan

Mayor

Implementation.

Plan

of

not

of

proponent

Meeting

for

Findings

for

LRP-D01-2018

Planning

To

hiring

Lloydminster

Inc.,

downtown

the

(DARP)

move

Decision

began

a (3)

to

ensure

document

and

for

statutory

Ten

area.

Downtown

provide

tasks.

of

prosperity.

a

proponents

Date:

Report;

Proposal

ahead

+

City

consultant

Calgary,

for

in

(10)

Design

investment,

Plan

02

(RFD)

2014

core

the

Clerk

April

for

a

proponents

document

The

with

Planning

2)

emphasizes

proposal

#2016-09

first

Area

Submission

features

guiding

as

Alberta,

30,

Preparation

were

be

deliverables

who

the

a

Request

2018

Page

multi-

award

Plan

+

is

for

that

the

rich

1 in

of 3 51

LDIALOG p and Option Options: shortlisted provided that The Option At candidates. Design This to Ten The the Committee, proponents: 4 ParioPlan 02 Item 3 2 6 5 1 the the downtown. Planning expertise following (10) RFP 02 current conclusion REP. #2: #1: Inc. LLOYDMINSTER Planning was to proponents Inc.

proponents: 4f1P Award Award Three The all The for + Firm RFP sent TOTAL table Interview Key Quality Project Methodology Financial Evaluation as Design proponents City interview. following Proponent outlined is + of Staff (3) out the the based represents Design Administration the Schedule/Timelines of Inc. from highest on contract contract & Proposal interview Qualifications Criteria February in table on Alberta, in Inc. has the a the scoring the more demonstrated to award represents (content) had RFP. RFP. the process, $146,394.00 $148,307.00 $149,955.75 criteria 12, Saskatchewan prepared the robust This proposals highest to Cost 2018 highest any option used the Request the scope with an one due scoring City cost evaluation to were score REP is of a diligence, and that evaluate of alignment closing and for the with selected Lloydminster proponent, compared British Weight 10% lO% 100% 10% 10% reflects Decision total top an committee date the three competence, expanded scores Columbia Total with by the shortlisted of to (RFD) 89.80 90.38 91.52 the 02 proponents. the Mar current the Score for Planning determined Evaluation information study other 23, each responded skill needs 2018. Page of area. + level the 2 of of 3

52

Governance

Operational

Environmental Budget/Financial

Legal

Option

evaluation

[Date:

City

City

Date: Executive

Prepared

Manager:

Clerk:

Review:

#3:

ILOYDMINSTER

APR

APR

process

by:

,4I)

Manager:

Request

Budget.

Doug

2 Implications:

02018

202018

No

Samuel

Implications:

Dion

Rodwell

Implications:

legal

to

that

Pollard

Rodney

the

Afolayan

review

Administration

______

Regular

N/A

Cumby

N/A

is

______

(l.-.

$150,000.00

required.

Council

%(

/

bring

Meeting

Request

z7

has

back

City

been

,/‘y4”

of

of

additional

for

May

Lloydminster

Decision

budgeted

14Lh,

information

(RFD)

in

the

2018

on

Page

the

3

or

J 3 __-

I

0iit • ‘p , -. ‘ 53

54

AUTHORIZED

PRINT

GST

REPRESENTATIVE

E-MAIL:

CITY:

STREET

CONSULTANT/COMPANY

DOWNTOWN

4420

1-

4

Community

Lloydminster, LLQYDMINSTER

______

,

V

REGISTRATION

50

SIGNATURE

Calgary

ADDRESS:

Andrew,

Avenue

‘In

Development

SIGNATURE

AB/SK

Palmiereo2desiqn.com

CITY

AND

Andrew

NUMBER:

T9V

Suite

TITLE:

NAME:

OW?

Services

Palmiere,

510,

AREA

Closing

Closing

OF

A

255

Andrew

02

17th

RPP

LLOYDMINSTER;

Planning

Date:

time:

Avenue

Palmiere,

MCIP REDEVELOPMENT

—‘

—

March

+ 5:00

-

Design

SW

FAX

PHONE

Principal

p.m.

NUMBER:

23,

Inc.

AS

NUMBER:

2018

MST DATE:

______

ISSUE

REQUEST

403-228-1336,

—

March

TPOSTAL

DATE:

NUMBER I

_____

T2S

FOR

21.2018

Feb

2T8

PLAN

ext

PROPOSAL

2018-01

.*

CODE:

12,

4

‘.

ii: 2018

_____

‘ ‘ 55

dlv 2018)

MARCH

Area

initial

engagement

opportunities,

For online The

PHASE

compile Our with

and this

During PHASE In

comprehensive

by analysis of

PROPOSED provide

(Design

Consulting. and

Our

Dr. economically

and Consulting consisting

have

Lloydminster’s design

public for

02 outlines Area

PROJECT

Founded

assist Hemson

02

Executive

downtown engineering

of

innovative,

this

the

Douglas

Planning

Planning

workplan plan

project

revitalization

project

economics

Regional the Llcydminsler

20101

Redevelopment

data

Redevelopment

partnered

collaborative

the

engagement

2:

Phase

I’

second

of

work.

oversight

Principal).

all

City

will our

PROPOSAL

to

VISIONING

STARTUP

Consulting

in

rapidly TEAM

City

assessment,

of

necessary

be

METHODOLOGY

kick-off team

1991,

to

be

credentials,

activities

and Olson

+

redevelopment landscape

+

feasible

and

1 Planning

and

locally-grown

tasks

strongly ensure

of

DownIown Design

downtown.

phase

led

we with Design

plan, expertise +

SUBM!SStN

of

changing

the

will

Lloydminster

and

EXPERIENCE

the

approach

constraints

For

Summary

by

will

tools,

walking

downtown

(Project

specialists,

Watt

are

on

project

which

be

Plan,

Plan

firm

project

the

to

and

of

Russell

Simon

the

(02), coordinate

Area

Principal)

community-led.

and

(02)

the

pleased

led architects,

experience,

the

create

necessary

and proper

Consulting

engineering

specializes

fiscally

for

Redevelopmont and

and

project.

will

Waft

tour,

Director),

identify by

ideas,

is

is

project,

Advisory

planning,

information.

Kong

their

that

communications

a

divided

Mathews

Lloydminster

in

Andrew

use

be highly

a

and

multidisciplinary

to

and

finalize

combination

Consulting

developing

downtown

sound

an

supported

will

and

community.

this provide

planners,

The

strengths,

will

environmental

to

we

methodology,

initial will

and

Committee valued in

Group,

Plan team,

into

impact

public

develop

as

We

to

provide

Palmiere

will economic

the

work

Plan

from

be

(April—May

Chris

such,

inform

five

startup

will

this

conduct

planning

supported

must

Vision.

Group

Alt

a

places.

urban

engagement,

by

for

and

the

planning,

of

Hemson

weaknesses,

Downtown

distinct

be

This

techniques.

proposal

a

management

we

Guebeñ

Hardwicke

our

engineering

the

firm

public

high-quality,

to

Downtown

(Urban

be

working

Hemson

and

scientists,

meeting

and

and

designers,

envision

(April—July

proposal

deliver

expertise

an

We

City

driven

and

2018)

financial

phases:

by

budget

and

to

of

will a 2 a

a

to draft

developing The

Our PHASES:

after

changes, to the

PHASE During

October

of

During

PHASE

the

the

solicit

economic

downtown. Attractive

City will

what “story

has expertise with

Linkages to engagement, to

look easy-to-use, stakeholders

both strong to

many of

online

Effective Sto and provide

Comprehensive

draft

workplan final

conclusion

of

provide engage public

keep

document

downtown,

be

experience

Phase

Phase

4: 3:

attract

guidance.

the

100.

projects.

like

planning

future

feedback

phase

Plan

different

2018)

DELIVERY

REFItIEMENT DEVELOPMENT

maps”,

tools, and

focused

visual

opportunities

stakeholders

the

Plan

in

engagement

with

use

with

development

a as

visualization

4

provides 3

with

develop

the

and

design

Plan:

simple

of

and

we

we

attractive

component

to of

and

wide

our

with

Through

policy and

of

2-D

urban

groups

Installations,

develop

the

economic

on

with

the

on

retain the

Council,

will

will

online

traditional

public

team

partners

other

those

the

and

project

of

Draft

and

City

educational

interface

project.

conduct

several conduct

linking

changes

environment.

an

and

for

high-quality,

within will

City.

online

format.

3-D

excels

streetscape a

considerations.

tools, and

online

engagement.

1

audience

and

approaches

and

for

contributing

draft

partners

include

of

development.

will

can

planning renderings (January—February

workshops

advantages

(October—December

small

Advisory

demonstrating

the

for

public

the a

coordinating

design

map

and

in

include

With

Plan,

deeper

access

resources,

materials

people

the

Plan,

community,

group

several

design

as

applications,

desirable

informed

engagement

improvements respect

and

use

and

products.

that

possible,

Committee.

feedback,

presenting

make

supporting

can

information

Our

will

to

Our

to

discussions,

of

review

design

for

Our

guidelines

will

approaches

interested

engage

any

the

provide

all

online

methods

to

to

review

and

necessary

uses

the

from

help

team

be

the

final

City

and

and

2019)

Our

with

input,

City

activities

used

the

tools

analysis

in

2018)

(August—

public

ages

the

will in

a when

of

revisions

as

revise

the

an

final

to use

56

Appendb

Appendix

Financial

Project

Proposed

Project

Key Corporate

Confirmation

Executive Cover

Table

Staff

Page

Schedule

of

Understanding

+

A:

B:

Methodology Summary

Contents

Qualifications

Qualifications

Resumes

Project

of

Compliance

Profiles

+

Experience

with

Mandatory

Requirements

30

31

20

21

14

7

4

2 1 57

MARCH Guy Confirmation of Lloydminster

20181

per:

LLOYD

company, written

Should

CANCELLATION

This

4420—50

PROFESSIONAL The

Company extend CERTIFICATE

COMPANIE5

applicable

510, Lloydminster,

Calgary,

02 NAMED

CO

LT

A R

PROPOSAL

Planning

certificate

City 255

______

the

claims

Errors

or

notice

SADD I

Downtown

alter

its

of

AB

INSURED: policy.

SUBMISSION Professional

-

Letter

Avenue

agents

17

&

Lloydminster

Made

TYPE

to

T2S

the

is

and

Omissions AFFORDING

INSURANCE

HOLDER:

Avenue

the

SK/AB

issued LIABILITY

Area

coverage

of

or

“A”

218

Form

Design

certificate OF

Redevelopment

representative.

Uability

as

Compliance

INSURANCE

TOV

SW

Liability

a

matter

afforded

Inc.

0W2

BROKERS

COVERAGE:

holder

policy (and

Plan

of

by

be

information

named

Beazely

Lloyd’s

others

the

cancelled

LTD.

policies

above,

of

Canada

with

as

CERTIFICATE

only

before London

NUMBER

per

below.

18600233

but

POLICY

and

failure

Policy)

the

Mandatory

Limited

confers

The

(100% expiration

4

to

insurance

mail

no

by

August

of

EFFECTIVE

rights

OF

such

authority

POLICY

limits

date

DATE

afforded

INSURANCE

9,

notice

upon

thereof,

2017

shown

Requirements

LloudSadd

the

shall

of

is

350,

P:

Calgary,

Lloyd

BROKER:

subject

certificate

the

Various

403.444.0950

Dated:

EXPIRY

impose

August

on

521

issuing

Sadd

POLICY

Policy)

to AB

-

9,

no

the

Underwriters

3rd

holder.

DATE

March

company

Insurance

2019

T2P

obligation

terms, Avenue

i’[

3T3

This

22,

will

conditions

$2,000,000 $2,000,000

_e

certificate

or

2018

Brokers

endeavor

SW

liability

at

A

and

of

does

Ltd.

NiN0PD

LIMIT

to

Annual

Per

exclusions

any

mail

not

Claim

kind

30

Aggregate

amend,

upon

days

of

the the 58 02

CSIO 3 BROKER OTHER AUTOMOBiLE UEUATION EXCESS Calgary 510, bui Should Caneda 10 COMMERCIAL 5* 3 C C Architects U C Q Q Q C Q D Lloydminster Q This 4420 Am,: The AUTHORIZED 0 subec AUrHORIZED ISSUER Q or SIGNATURE This AaAlnouoeILEsLzasEDtN PLANNING DAYS PNOvOE condlons faitin TEIO/ITS CERTIFICATE CROSS HRDAI7OYc&IS F-OA’CIiJTOYOSUS PaimnA EMPLOYERS PRODUCTS cLAIMS BROBERAGEIAGEMCY DESCRIPTION ALL LEaSED CERTIFICATE XSEO 708 CSIO CooI City isto Samuel — WHERE certificate any TYPE OA’C LIABILITY 50th Brokedink to - LIABILITY of CLIENT LLABILrW MADE to INsun.OcE QECL certify 1 CanedaBrokelinklnc..BeitjInelranch all Office A/’OMceLES LEGAL of ith Llcydminster OF mel ‘DESIGN AND/OR Avenue u.n THE REPRESENTATiVE terms, REPRE5EN7AIIW Afolayan OF the Aw.oeaIS LWBILIIY of LIABILITY Ave GENERAL any UABUTY - INSURED that suds fly INSURANCE (Premises) ebove CERTIFICATE Qfl ID: AUTHORIZATION Inc. HOLDER- (SPECIFY) OF SW is COMPLETED EXItlSflA sxdusia,s cot,Uad the O2PLA.1 notce . issued OPERATIONSILOCATION5IAUTOMOBILESISPECIAL NC Beltine desctibed IC pa/ides EHEESSOF BE0UIREO occURRENCE LIABILITY FULL shall or OPERATICNr NAMEAND as aM other tmLaanna Branch OF of Impose This po)des NAME a irnurarsce conditons LIABIUW Al mailer document AS certificate Intact (uik SI Intact 00 AND -— be MAILING Pen, - Lgebon canceled of haled 52498 of Insurance — INSURANCE Insurance AND MAILBAG INSURANCE. w,th Information CASE such CERTIFICATE b&ow respect POLICY does ADDRESS policies. or before Conpany ADDRESS Company. liablity have not COMPANY to I t NUMBER the CODE POSTAL wl,id, 2018109 beeti only amend, of expiration - any issued this and bInd cantfnte 1211 extend confers Lçon date to T9V ITEMS —______the 0E4 LIMITS WVYNL&V0 EFFECTIVE 2018102102 2118102102 thereof, the 0W2 Insured OF or DATE may TO no company, . after

I

I [ SHOWN WHICH be rights 4420 the

Altn: The 3 Lloydminster Calgary 510, CONTACTNuMeERSI 02 5 0MG TYPE TYPE nnd LIABILITY issued the ssuing ADDITIONAL PlannIng City INSURED’S but Samuel VYYWJ.IWDO — 255 2019/02102 2019/02102 ta Ma/n Mardi THIS 50th upon only coverage EXPIRY above of egenta MAY DATE or -17 company Lloydminstor wtth_reaped_to Avenue may CERTIFICATE Afolsyan & 21. Avenue the for HAVE Design or pertain. FULL 2018 PASURED NO. NO. the representatives. certificate PROPERWOMIAGE BODILY DMLI& SOOtY afforded cGAAUENCIALCENERALLIAS,Ln, hONCWIE0A1flu PO.LLTON wiT Q OR AGGREGATE EACH It/WEE AGGREGATE PROOUCTSMI0COMPtITEO BODILY MEDICAL SW poicy Inc. BEEN NAMEAND (403) PERSOIAL u.slLrw endeavour PERSONALMA0 the_apenstcn._oIH,s INSURANCE The NARY PARRY NJURY OCCURRENCE INJURYUID APPLIES S NAME penod (t.n 245-8743 PAThIENTS LEGAL uaLrrY 02010. - insurance REDUCED EIARILADORESS by MO holder (PERACCIDENT) COVERAGE YEN INJURY UASUTY the to PRCPERTY .GENERAI.AGGREGAIZ . AND MAILING bidiceted ADVERTiSING EACH FERSG.i Cain malI (but Alberta RDPmW LIA8IUIY policies dollar, and aftonded MAILBAG ocCuRRENcE only UNITS -- Named_Ineured) 30 Al tar BY OPERATION not#vithstandng days at ADDRESS DAMAGE imposes Srndy kpen@Dmkedinkca INJURY TYPE TYPE unless PAID respect by OF below. wriTten ADDRESS ct the UASJLFIV Fax Ini.nra CLAIMS Inoficated to pa/ides no OEO. rUce the liabIlity opinIons any Opnlera. to desoted NO. No. otherwise) rew*nnta, the POSTAL (403) orme cert:Scate on 55.000.000 $5,000,000 $5000000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 5500 A’mI A INSURANCE $10,000 the herein 244-8085 Named nta ISV coo T2S insurer. Ens ha/der, reserved. is OF Insured) 0W2 218 — 59 MARCH City of

20181 LloydmLntter APPI A PROPOSAL. Li.’ t.c Downtown Pcc.ccccic.s tUBMISSiON Area al Redevelopment r1.ac1-rs incr Plan

wrc ta:..-IIv APPI tar., fa,.—I Ftc.ii lii ‘.ic’i 1ao1 N3rne r , H :‘““—) \i’... r.4..it:w’.Jj: 4,ir—ei :i;:I. nd

:1 Profile Atdres . 6

- Mr -14A 1 npr lAifti 3M

Liii Andrew Cir jiw;1 —

Nfl Palmiero 60 02 T F E ANDREW Calgary, 510 Principal,

CONTACT

Corporate

Firm Q PLANNING 4032281320 4032281336 [email protected] 255 AB

17th Profiles • Urban PALMIERE DESIGN 125 INFORMATION Ave 218 S INC W

+ Qualifications

Regional 2

Planning

+ Experience Architecture first awards Journal With facilitate Landscapes/Paysages recognized evaluated The publications and projects development to Design accessible employs promotes framework essential urban cultural economics. modelling, wise endeavours. environmental intersection 02’s and in specializes and 02 regional consisting . responsible rigorously PLANNING prize firm Latin highly environmental extensive stewardship unique design. Competition. for of forms throughout plans is the Geographic character in America, public in Landscape image a valued landscape manner. of for worldwide. in the The of and combination virtual including design leader At analyze landscape of the + provide development. to solutions knowledge, natural experience 2008 broad DESIGN effective firm’s understanding Landscape detailed analysis, planning of places. the scientists. detail of in and Canada, the The existing Information Beijing architecture the the and regional habitats Landscape artistic solutions firm’s 02 (Canada). (02)is that land, public architects, designs. firm in of use place, site 02 Urban has managing and and and a creative Design integrate Olympic 02’s comprehensive the conditions highly works inspiration has while of Founded designs. won scales, a and communication 3D advanced design and reflect advanced providing multidisciplinary United Systems Planning Architecture been work The and computerized processes at planners, national visual, (Japan), allows across design, complex Landscape finer ecology, land firm’s of planning, and featured in involves States, and for rapidly technology 1991, a (GIS), (USA), engaging, technology for scales, use enhance scales, contemporary and sustainable extensive technology as to service urban with interdisciplinary projects (USA), culture, processes. plans aid well Asia, the the in international changing including ecological visualizations firm International Nikkei natural multiple human from in tirm designers, as the is Africa, and The the results reflect to to and large be and 02 61 MARCH

OIly

T

o Caigaiy,

ALFRED

#310,3016-5

E Manager,

CONTACT

403

aguebeflwaflconsuilinggmup.com 403 of Lioydminsier

2dB

S

5

273

809 AS I

PROPOSAL

GUEBERT

9001

9254

Consulting

S

Transportation

T2A

INFORMATION

Avenue

x722

I

61<4

•

Downtown V’IA”rr

SUaMISS:ON

SiAc, NE

Area Group

nedeveiopmenl t9SS

Plan a a

a

specialization clients engineering and and our Watt

planning We Our

Saskatchewan. retain We

complex software.

individual simulation

engineers

provide comprehensive

people

has WAlT

GPS construction

project

Transportation

Assessments,

Road

Intersection Lethbhdge,

Noise SimTraffic, Engineering

Microsimulation

County Functional

Municipal

have

utilize

clients’

traffic

technicians

transportation

been

Consulting

survey

the

CONSULTING

and

that

managers,

the

and

Safety

a

and

Studies

We

a

small

clients

the

and

engineering

programs

multitude

institutions

needs

full

highest

experience includes

equipment

supervisors.

Transportation traffic

multi-faceted also

best

include:

VISSIMNISUM)

Planning

land

service

Red

Design

work

We firm

project-specific

with

Group

and

including

Impact

and

have

and survey

team

operate

Modelling surveyors

GROUP

engineering

level

Deer,

approach

of

a and professional

in

their

priorities

experience.

in

broad engineering

Geometrics

most

transportation

communities has

the

to

with

consists

of

Alberta,

storm

Assessments Crossfleld,

technicians,

For

advanced

projects.

Signal

technical

projects. expertise

30

currently

as

both

Planning

appropriate

range

30

personally

and

that

years

a

water

and

practice.

information

specialist

years,

of

British

public

engineers,

Timing

Analysis

has

/

consulting

of

We

12

are

Traffic

transportation

Nevertheless,

of

and

such

has

and

to

and

management

planning

transportation

civil

our

professional

experience

are

Waft

develop

constantly

and

Columbia

involved

technology,

a

Some

Rocky

and

professional

Traffic

as

transportation

team

managers,

technologists,

Control

(Synchro/

highly

systems.

land

private

Consulting

Calgary,

Phasing

firm.

and

areas

View

and

of

surveyors,

with

responsive

and

we

with

striving

over

traffic micro

modeling

engineers

sector

planning implement

from

of

senior

service.

still

80

Group

and

to to HEMSON CONSULTING LTD.was established in 1983 and C)f&j provides expert advice in the areas of economic and H]TstS demographic forecasting, strategic long-range planning, economic development, real estate and municipal finance. Working primarily for the public sector, our major clients include various agencies of the Province of Ontario and municipal governments across the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton (GTAH).In Western Canada, Hemson has undertaken a number of assignments in recent years, including TheCity of CONTACT INFOP..1ATlON Edmonton, the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo, the City of Regina and the Saskatchewan Ministry of Highways and RUSSELL MATHEW Infrastructure. Partner Hemson is among the most well informed firms in Canada 30 St. PatrickStreet, Suite 1000 concerning economic and demographic growth outlooks, Toronto,ON M5T3A3 growth management and long-range planning and planning to conform to the 2006 Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater E [email protected] Golden Horseshoe (the Growth Plan). Hemson undertaken T 416 593-5090 has numerous forecasting. assignments. for municipalities. and F 416 595-7144 other public sector agencies throughout Canada, in particular studies to determine forecast demand for various land-use, infrastructure and municipal financial planning purposes.

02 PLANNINO • OESIGN INC 9

62

63

MARCH will

cLty renderings

dimensions.

communicate

component

The

CREATIVE

Good

and

long opportunity,

needs,

develop

We

local efficient

parcel

INNOVATIVE neighbourhoods,

that

district. life.

creative engagement,

commitment

great

solutions

building of We

public

revitalization,

interested

Redevelopment Our

and

EXPERTISE range Key

of

urban

visualizations

stakeholders that

present

implement

build

inform

use

feature

offer

have

team’s

Our

healthy

contribute team

I

term. successfully

201B accountability

loydminster

regions,

planning

of

of

art.

and

rigorous are

I

Strengths

use

policy planning

design,

planning great

PROPOSAL

a

places.

policy,

land

extensive

at

GRAPHIC

planning

of

unique

The

and

in

prominently

informative

easy

planning

of

help

IN

communities

We

multiples

fiscal

POUCY

of

highly

to

making

connectivity, and

planning

to

I

our

communities

cities,

DOWNTOWN

frameworks focus

Downtown the

2-0 must

to

community

have spatial

sUBMiGS:CN

planning

environmental

and communities

for

Plan.

the

to

We

from deliver

solutions

frameworks

the

combination

planning

responsibility,

urban

land

decisions

qualified

and

experience

communicate

through

DESIGN.

the

PLANNING

and

development

be

the understand

and

cities

of

extensive

success

scales

the

graphics! ideas

Area

analysis

in

public

3-0 easy

our

base,

design,

public

Lloydminsters

design

communities

and

the

Past streetscape

Redevelopment

open

great

address

and

that

REDEVELOPMENT

aspirations! practice

—

graphics, policies

professionals

for

and

to

and

development

V’

design,

strategic

transportation

maintain

and

to

and

of

responsibility,

in

projects

AND

experience

design

understand.

promote

and

professionals: the

.

and

protection

space,

the

images places

understand

design

land

I,’: skills

investment

policy

pattern

recommend

vitality

the

long-term

ANALYSIS

evaluation

that

is myriad

i/Al

are

economics,

and use

Pian

to

with

contribution

work their expertise

and

tull

economic

to

have sustainability,

Downtown

concepts

and

adept

in

reflect quality

shape

of

of

are

these

live.

planning,

two

of

in

range

of

an

expertise

elements

resources

A

cities

is choice,

an

plan

and

successfully and

preparing

the

natural

PI.ANNING

fundamentally

critical sustainability

uncompromised

our

We

at

methods

policy

and

community

entire

and

of

products

to

for

of

Plan.

developing

quality

community

to

and vitality,

ability

life,

have

Area

coordinate

of

three

elements

downtown

economic

build

staff

key

to

capital,

of

tools

city

a and

over

lheir

We

single

the

to

of

to

to

built the

10

across

as

successfully The

support

demand

economic tools

ExPERTISE them,

allow

comments webpage. A

storytelling,

maps” other

materials

the

allow

properties, engagement the

a a We

GIS SUPPORTIVE

have venues

mapping

openly innovative

We

meaningful Bluff Canadian

computer

community

COLLABOPATIVE concepts

time

impacts

combine

web simple

variety

fiscal

downtown

ability

have

have

project

applications.

sketching

also

ranged

Urban

attributes

people

interested

without

browser. Alberta

-

and

for

responsible

assessments

interactive

projections

of

but

of

extensive

a

applications

for

the

provide

and

projections

to

Story Institute

software

public

on

participants proven

IN

open

policy

team

web-based way,

maps, honestly.

to

Design

completed

the

take

from

robust

to and

WEB-BASED

powerful

LAND

having

the

clearly

and

ideas.

context

to

access

relevant

Users

stakeholders

maps

Plan.

we

spaces,

is

communication

PUBLIC

engagement

As

ownership

progress

decisions

an

create

project

track

figures,

Canada.

of

experience

online

highly

with

Framework.

web

ECONOMICS

and

and

work

part

Our

avenue to

By

visualize

Planners

and

for

of will

One

will

analytical

and

and

to

tools

a

refer

to record

the

efficient

the

involving

long-term

mapping

visual

active

of

municipal ENGAGEMENT methods

variety

specific

to

experienced TOOLS

exhibits

be

generate

summarize

land

and

downtown

effective

of

view

explore

this

before

illustrative

impacts

provide

of

for

to

will able

to

the

processes,

policy

(CIP)

and

demand text

representations

in

the

the

and

We

people project,

learn

the

and

of

be

AND

growth.

of

the

Plan.

to

the

to

application

that

will

strategic

the

planning

expertise

long-term

Plan

in

ideas

information

projects.

are

method information.

used

progress

award-winning

potential

query all

full-fledged

of

rendering

concepts

design

Plan

community

about

an

FINANCIAL

revitalization.

allow

incorporate ability

in Plan

project

skilled

growth

to

requirements,

document.

we

efficient,

Hemson

regards

and

as

including

make

information

information

will is

key

planning

Is process.

the

educational

and

These

developing

of

of

projects,

population

to

discuss

finalized.

the in

participants

to

capabilities

and

of

that

develop

facilitated,

the

City

attributes

support

This

ongoing

enterprise

providing

ANALYSIS

delivery

to

in

communities

proposed

attractive

has

use

compelling

analyze

tools

Bow

These

the

a

Plan

land

interests

and

tool

to

real

concerns

as

of

and

about

and

2013

web

to

from

and

“story

well

the

of

will

and

of

real

of

with the 64 •those 02 Together, InnoVisions’ In with development cohesion downtowns 02 planning the unique hamlets, County e: stunning SUMMARY p: Deputy Rome Byron REFERENCE 20

MACKENZIE

Relevant

Plan

Design Mackenzie PLANNING setting 15-2016 [email protected] 780.928.3983 was hamlets streetscape travelling to Peters, combination sought Chief retained contracting for landscapes some for out these DESIGN and of the economic COUNTY future the strategy

Administrative + Fort GET to of complementary to region. INC.

corridors Projects to and

economic Economic mai

of County 02 and façade

oldest I for Northwest FORT urban development the Planning Mackenzie plenty of and development the compilation Officer, European VERMILLION La design and design development Crete economic frameworks of Territories. La

+ Streetscape tourism Design

guidelines Development Mackenzie and team Crete County, and settlements of strategic strategy, + potential Fort to offer an opportunities LA (02) In guide in undertake in economic CRETE, 2015, Vermillion. for the conjunction County visually to the economic design 02 oversee in county. of Mackenzie Alberta, central these engaged AB an for a The TEAM was approved engagement, functional (urban TIME The Key action Subconsultant: Lead redevelopment. Mackenzie 02’s Fort 02 infrastructure opportunity site and principles 02’s and hosted conditions, project Staff: resulting facade maintained Vermilion long-term streetscape approach AND Consultant: steps design), by BUDGET of design Trevor numerous County, met design assessment for the council. guidelines streetscape requirements, and goals, Andrew to development From policy InnoVisions as all designs. Davison designs for La 02 La major guidelines agreed including sidewalks, Crete The as stakeholder Planning Crete, public integration. Palmiere encourage well and project project offer design) (Project In and and (economic helping furnishings the as strategy an of emphasized + comprehensive Fort a roadways appropriate implementation sustainable (project contract. milestones Design budget detailed engagement Manager), consistency Vermillion’s guide development development) and (urban oversight) was and action the rigorous programming and vegetation, design Chris 5152,250, vision crosswalks, solutions sessions design, streetscape in plan has plan. built Hardwicke for analysis practices. and been and short form public and to for for and of

65

MARCH

extensive

downtown the

future

From

the

Contracted

Plan

02

and significant,

interventions

percent

The

however,

2013

Despite

affecting SUMMARY a

Town

p: TOWN

Manager

Khalid

REFERENCE

Redevelopment

High

[email protected]

403.652.2110

Planning

development flooding.

cultural

severe

20181

(ARP).

April

dealt

flood

of

OF

Mohammed

of

extensive

High

PROPOSAL

thousands

the

of

engagement

River

HIGH

through

area High

a

forcing

flooding

in

Not

risks,

vitality

Planning

+

serious

and long

2014,02

River

0

a-, Design

and

only

RIVER

River’s

SURMISS:ON

of

it

innovative

term

infrastructural

several

November

of

was

a

Downtown

revitalize

in

of

was

blow

and

detailed

High

(02)

I

fit

Southern

process

residents

businesses

impacts

HIGH

led

also

this

Development

to

businesses

worked

River

a

solutions

the

a

RIVER,

team

ARP

the

Plan

of

Downtown

chance

with

of

Alberta

2014,

Town

would damage,

and

core

an

the

of

to

were

AR

the

the

consultants

opportunity

provide

to

flood

ol

to

of

to

02

I

survive

Services

Area people

during

2014-2015

able

ensure

the

local

close

High

improve

Area

as

conducted

proved

community.

many

to

necessary

economy.

River,

Redevelopment

their

the

the

of

rebuild;

the

to

to

the

High

aftermath

summer

as

to

economic

doors.

support

address

deeply

an

90

be

River

of

of

(Project

and Sub-consultants:

Key Lord

and TEAM

delivered TIME

policy, This

Lead

the

no

sustainable,

streetscape,

inclusivity,

comprehensive

Growth

live, years.

as

implementation

voices

public

into to

Encompassing

From

inform

deviation

an

citizen’s

design).

utility

Staff:

the

work

project

Cultural

AND

Consultant

economic,

Community

The

urban

and

of

Manager),

Management

final

on

the

nearly

coordination)

and

BUDGEt

Douglas

connects

ARP

private

budget

of

re-energized

from

Bunt

time.

land

document.

design,

Resources

MT

vision,

play

High

short,

and

strategies,

builds

500

cultural

use,

this

&

Carruthers 02

Visioning

Michael

investment

Olson

are

was

Associates

River

innovative

people,

principles

participants

streetscape

Planning

Strategy

medium,

budget

and

upon

‘TI

enhanced

(cultural

for

and

(Project

future.

to

Magnan

urban

the

approximately

workshops

the

assert

and

Architecture

civic

was

in

to

+

ARP and

engagement,

and

(transportation

High

High

Design

planning),

provides

were

design,

design.

through

reaffirm

Director),

required.

centre.

their

objectives

(urban

long

is

River

River

structured

heard

to

collective

(land

term

engagement)

Emerging

the

(architectural

guidelines

Opportunities online

an

design)

$500,000,

Town

BSEI

Andrew

for

The

the

and

downtown’s

opportunity

policies

use

of

and

the

project

ARP

the

webmaps,

(engineering

to

Plan

translated

planning

vision

next

mobility),

from

guide

Palmiere

ARP

for

and

fosters

and

and

control

30

was

the

to

for a

for

role

and

the a 66

03

02. framework.

engagement

and

community to

met manner to

02 vision

public transform SUMMARY

the

AWARDS

award

Calgary Bow Canadian

Tamara

e:

p:

REFERENCE

Bow CITY

Framework Bow

PLANHING

the

highly-specific

[email protected]

403.283.6985

Planning

goal

demonstrate

potential

this

to

to

OF

for

design

space.

(2013)

Bluff

with Bluff

Council

requirement.

was

tee

CALGARY

to

revitalization

a Institute

DESIGN

required

Meeting corridor

& the

+

techniques

is

Resource

to

solutions

team

The

Bluff

Design

a develop

INC

Innovation

community

citizen-initiated

how

desires

project

of I

during

CALGARY,

that

along

individual

Planners

Installation

citizen-based

(02)

and

in

Planning

Urban

an

and

all

and

the

resulted

the

the

•

worked

functional

fund.

urban

stakeholders :

..hs

to

a

same

unique

engagement

AB

Light

needs

longer

New

develop

Committee

project

engagements,

Working

I

design

in

2011-2012

in

terms

Design

and

Rail

initiatives

a

and

concerns

a framework

consultation

community-centered

highly

the

Transit

Emerging

funded

framework

understood those

—

with

process.

urban

a

collaborative

can

large

the

communicated

line

of

developed

by

that

design

facilitate the

Initiatives

process

community

the

into

variety

that

responds

concerns

City

a

would

great

of

by of

‘3

TEAM

(Project delivered

Key architecture, deviation to

This

Sub-consultant: TiME

Lead laneway corridor’s 02

as

Recommendations history. surveys,

successful a

ideas. weeks

Drive, supplemented which

their storefront

the

collect

text

the

a

developed

design

Staff:

project woonerf,

comments

AND

Consultant:

development message

triangular

The

were

over

feedback.

Manager),

mews.

and

on

from

experience

where

BUDGET

Douglas

engagement

of

place-based

2,500

strategically

budget

time.

land

two

great

LRT

this

a

the

implementation feedback

about

pocket

set

Intelligent

individuals

interactive

An

use

02

people

Maff

separation,

engagement

budget

Olson

include

public

was

of

of

Iron

as

Planning

planning,

a

the

priority

Williams

parks,

process

dynamic, engagement

a

for

located

Sketch

contributed

(Project

hotline,

spaces.

functional,

corridor,

was

Futures

an

approximately

were

community

projects

active

McHugh a

+

required.

urban

techniques.

of

central

throughout

is

(urban

Design

competition,

welcome

chalk

Director),

community-minded

these

Installations

viewed

(engagement) and

living

cohesive

processes

over

design,

that

markings,

Bluff

Statement

design)

civic

design

(landscape

The projects

as

park

$44,000,

2,000

to

will

Andrew

In

the

access,

space,

project

one

enter

engagement)

walking

just

destination.

included

be

charrelles

at

corridor

in

different

will

of

online

Memorial

key

seven

Calgary’s Boards,

and

Palmiere and

9A

the

was

contribute

and

corridor.

to

tours,

Street

provide

most

no a

to the

67

MARCH

cry

redevelopment

winning

address

infrastructure

communication.

landscape

02 We

highly

Redevelopment

Key

Jason

Yousaf

Russell

Staff

Spitzer

(Lloydminster)

Elisabeth

Chase Simon Alfred

Chris

Hemontika

Rakshya

Rachelle Chris

Douglas

Andrew

ol

will

have

Lloydmlnster

20181

qualified

Gulinao

Hardwtcke

Bevan

Guebert

Sabot provide

Shah

Kong

Staff

team

Mathews

PROPOSAL

the

assembled

Palmiere

Olson

Gauchan

Hofbauer-

Dillon

architecture,

Rana

real

I

components

has

Downtown

planning. project

personnel

SUB.lISSON

Plan

eastate

WATT

+

extensive

a

Qualifications

for

Area

strong

management

will

urban

impact

oversight,

loam, Transportation

Economic Senior

Economics

Role

assessments transportation

context,

Operations

of analysis

team, control,

Engineering Engineering

visualizations, policy

Urban

visualizations, Lloydminster.

of

Planner! Urban

Communications

Heard

streetscapes

Design

control,

Project

project

Project

to

Redevelopment

transportation

address

of

public

experience

develop

the

multidisciplinary

economic

development

design,

development,

Reports

Economic

Designer

analysis, Designer;

deliverables,

review

Principal;

coordination

review

Director;

Manager;

engagement

requirement.

project

review

Engagement

Consultant,

the

Lead;

Manager;

Project

and

Lead;

and

the

assessments

support

coordination

P[an

of

engagement

As

of

Analyst;

transportation

and

in

of

Issues

data

I

engineering

policy

development

and

deliverables

Consultant

Downtown

expertise

economics overall

Planner;

and content

prime

coordination

downtown

economic

of

engineering

financial

writing

presentation

with

Manager;

engineering

activities,

analysis,

for

local

HEMSON

Engagement

demand

team

recommendations Our

Support;

development

project

client, planning

consultant,

expertise

of

and

development

and

knowledge

award-

in

analysis,

and

deliverables

deliverables

and

urban

of

Area

coordinatIon

of

and

oversight planning,

coordination

writing

policy

development

engagement with

and

development

forecasts

oversight

support

of

renderings

deliverables,

financial will

policy

design

materials

for

urban

client,

Load:

of

policy

recommendations

of

support

urban

transportation

of

and

development

engineering

for

24 and

impacts

and

oversighi

guidelines

coordInation

with

renderings

writing

with

and

support

planning

of

quality

prior Additional

to

and

of design

the The

pages.

projected

provides

quality

assessment

financial

What

voiect

the

project

period

the

table

to

project

of

and

We

work

and

development

all

individual

below

hours

staff

of

LconthbutionJ

commencing.

the

will

may

as

defines

project.

be

well

contributions

be

reviewed

21%

4% 2% 10%

3% 11% 20%

2% of

7%

6%

2%

11%

2%

2%

employed

as

maps

the

Team

average

role

with

and

bios

of

as

to

figures.

each

the

workload

a

provided

Workload

provide

percentage

City

team

The

Project

support

allocation

on

2% 16%

3%

2%

2% 15%

5% member

4%

5%

8%

8%

2%

1% 9%

addition

Allocation

following

of

Manager

total

for

and

over

of

writing staff 68 02

PLANNING,

Planning

Andrew

Senior Project

Rachalle

Rakshya Engagement Urban

Project

02 Chris City

IIOYDMIN

Urban Committee CITY

DESIGN Planning

Project

OF Hardwlcke

Advisory

Designer

Design

Planner Manager

INC

Paimlen

Gauchan Lead Dillon

Manager STEP

+

Lead

Design (sad +

+

Support

Engagement

Ptannerl

Hemonbka

Urban

Chris

Planner

Gulinao

De&gner/

Project

Douglas

Rena

Director Olson ‘5

Watt

Transportation Transportation

Alfred

Project

Simon

Wansportatlon

Splizer

Elisabeth

Operations

Chase

Consulting

Guebert

Kong

Sabot

Manager

Hofbauer

Manager

Group

Lead

Yousal

Economics

Consultant Senior

Consultant

Jason

Economics Russell

Hemson

Bevan

Economics

Shah

Mathew

Consulting Lead 69 years. as Andrew experience and the solutions Andrew His of from As ANDREW cultural defined Studio. and worked MARCH cliv and PROJECT development experienced publications and Canada. Canadian Design instructor the and Landscape specializing elements, refresh, conviction ecology. inspiration. advanced As Douglas culture respectful landscape DOUGLAS

PROJECT Team Arts, a a of CEO experience International same is consultant Slovenia, the is a Principal Queens Lloydminsler 20181 Diploma a He an Central at and both vibrancy, by in holds also member International enrich and holds His within His pncposai- adjunct has time, PALMIERE, the at and Africa, MANAGER technology, His DIRECTOR of environmental that OLSON, architecture,

in Architecture Bios He art, in the and work in holds team in President cultural through policy a University University, as at a designs American landscape a our Geography, as in creates I all to add with manmade refined mutti-slakeholder and Master DoAnfown Association Harvard 02, well Doctor of has Central social 5u8MSS:ON Forest professor his a phases is leadership a understanding ODES, the vitality planner development leading are has Certificate Andrew Association won approach as underpinnings, + MCIP, to are interdisciplinary sustainable of ability PLANNING Canadian of discourse founded of of throughout Technology. Areo detailed planning, degree Societies appeared a America, University responsibijity ecological 02, of Urban several landscapes MLA, inspired Bachelor to Design Calgary. from APP in for planning Redevelopmenl planning of manages the to philosophy Douglas the Canadian Public is in CSLA from promote the and on implementation. site of Institute and national a environments Public Faculty of urban and degree of China, LEAD in by landscapes Graduate belief the He Landscape local of University design, history natural Landscape He and Regional firms multiple the and the community Participation need creative directs Arts the collaboration isa and United Plan has design, Participation is University complex understanding, municipalities that surrounding of Colombia, from intersection design, of awards. firm’s extends member and rooted to and economic processes Environmental a served Planners. School international the great Master reflect Planning of States design. Harvard that Ecology. a and nature, and Planning Architects Calgary. Master firm’s Douglas from design, technicat in (IAP2) over of inspire places as of his Mongolia, and the landscape of and of and from context. of Manitoba vitality, the an concept and Design and degree work University and, extensive 16 ecology, He creative science, be public has are and valued is at in 76 the and SENIOR also for and Dalhousie and Rachelle quality Intemational RACHELLE St. Review an An Chris Toronto. Francisco, streets, plans, Taiwan; include complex for Studies, study Spaces in that International Planners projects the philosophy Chris Council CHRIS Practitioner Fellow building an URBAN engagement linkages urban growth New inspiring Active Johns, accomplished Urban Excellence Masters broader is Psychology has urbanism holds combines Hardwicke for a feasibility design assessments of HARDWICKE, York; Panel community planning. wayfinding, for member exhibitions DESIGN for PLANNER served is and Chris such holds between urban New the the Transportation. Designer University a Vancouver internationally Newcastle, Recreation, DILLON, extends Canadian speaker, of in principles Certificate Association Downtown Architecture and, City and Urban and projects, as is and Urban led in Urban a projects. as his from studies, a LEAD Master of the Community is His of municipal facilitator, the the publications policy, vehicle a + Emerging a with the design, at university place from Design Saskatoon MPLAN member ENGAGEMENT along Waterfront and Chris Registered B.ARCH, work Design the Design Urbanism. and steering the Public Copenhagen, of Canadian in across and Association’s over degree of He transit healthy University the implementation implementation recognized Public Dieppe to of branding, Helsinki. with with has urban Public Forum GreenTapia: approvals public has bring sociat Spaces, in Planning design 20 program Planning, of training B.ES, committee Canada such spoken the that degrees high-profile the oriented in Master years Participation managed Chris Professional cities. Institute Biennale, design integrated Urban Participation in consultation change UK He Downsview of LEAD won corridor of B.A., as New through New Activity in Award at Initiatives of Calgary. facilitates is and is public about and the The His Plan Fine in the design, guided the experience. Towards a Planning guidelines, and strategies. MCIP, Delhi, of of York, planning Art sessional Canadian and a commitment the overseas, Good urban the University for Premiers Planners. studies, member design Art, of healthy award & places from Planner urban History Van Rachelle renewal. Merit. (IAP2) Park Urban coordinator APP, Kaohsiung, a Toronto New Award by innovation complete Environmental Recognized Life: a planning from the the Alen studies Sustainable winning design. thinking campus to Design lecturer He FIUD Institute York, urban cities emphasizes of and Form Award New principle of and embracing the This is Centre to Institute Toronto a San city in and in that the and to in of 70

02

to

concentration team

During

in CHRIS giving excellent

Christopher analyzing and various

URBAN firms alleviate

Professionally, importance on

Her and that

in where

Bachelor

Rakshya At

URBAN RAKSHYA

with

Network engagement translating for

Edmonton through

Plan, includes communication

planning.

public planning,

her projects

Canada

Rachelle use

PlANNING,

Urban

Toronto.

study

02,

a

neighbourhoods,

time

urban

industrial

Planners,

Included planning,

design clean

on

in

Integrated

her

she

engagement

GULINAO, Rachelle

his

scales

Calgary

DESIGNER.

DESIGNER

Community

the

and

urban

loads

Studies

covering

spent

work

Strategy)

is

team

in

has

and

transportation

direct

graduate

planning

GAUCHAN,

She

had

language

(The

This

DESON complex

a

Architectural

of

holds

proposal

IAP2.

Australia.

graduate

and

architecture, worked

in

design.

designing. urban

KPMB

designing

for

suffered

and

player

design

Rakshya

at has

the

research

Ribbon

manages

and

and

Urban

experience

Mobility from

Inc

creates

MPLAN,

these

the

a

comprehensive

One

and

opportunity

further

worked

knowledge,

studies,

Master

experience

planning

Planning

generate

Toronto and

design,

downtowns

PLANNER

Architects

for

and in

Halifax

the

Her

and M.ARCH,

from

of

the Her

Design,

by

firms

of

both

has

planning,

sustainable

in

engaging

Plan,

Studies

allowed

Rakshya

Rachelle’s

University plans.

competent priority

BA

master’s

Green,

increaser

current

master sustainable

City

work

of

relation across

the

Christopher

conceptualizing,

worked

heritage

including

private

Regional

has

and

concepts

Planning

interest

Green

and

to

of

anchored

University

Rachelle

BAS

and

Her

extends

and

and

taught

her

planning

Breathe:

work

Urban

Toronto

community

planning

urban

is

scales,

food

visuals

to

a

research

of

at

primary

her

recent

Brook and

working

storm-water

Bachelor

to planning,

communicator

Network

cities.

the

Masters

in

Calgary.

NORA Municipality

various

degree

design,

in

and

security

perform

knowledge

had

urban

Design

her

water

public

offers

across

site

design

in

writing

(Parkland

of

to

projects,

Edmonton’s

Mcllroy

experience

projects.

challenges

training

In

to

the

interests

Waterloo

was

improve

with

mapping,

Architects

and

planning,

with

of

addition

Plan),

in

architecture

urban planning.

infrastructure

be

environmental

extensive

sectors

as

opportunity

and

numerous

studies

Architecture,

Arts

projects

focused

plans

system

the

environment.

an

part

a

Inc.

(Centre

in

leads

Strategy).

while

The

parks

desIgn

design

is

the

with

at

to

Green

of

in

land

at

City

to 02

a

public

a of

‘7

offered Sustainable

cities. her

environment—with evidence-based facilitation

health brings

Her Improvement development

projects

Lab government. Geography

combination Hemontika As

Hemontika URBAN include, and

HEMONTIKA assisting the

University Green, works 02,

City

Christopher Technology

Municipal on

project

Industrial study

an

industrial

work

University

experience

equipped

Christopher

public

of

Hemontika Urban

abroad

by

on

experience

Calgary

and

through

explored

PLANNER

Dawson

including

with

on

promoting

a

Park

of Land

skills

engagement

holds

brings

variety

and

the

Calgary

in

and

graphic

of

Calgary, Designer site

She

and

RANA,

Plans

the

program

of

her

Melbourne

in

working work South

Mayor’s

Alberta

Corporation.

to Economics

policies

worked

his

Calgary’s

landscape

&

redevelopment,

a

Calgary

also

has

University

strategy

with

four

Area

with

creatively of

+

the

Oleskiw

Master

and

team

(Active

physical

MPLAN, visualization,

ENGAGEMENT

in

design

and

contributed

Macleod

I

works

years

goal

design

with

academic

Structure

Health private

Planner

Urban

with

preparation.

Regional

that

as

as

Australia.

an

a

implementation

of

Faculty

a

Park

of from the

Neighbourhoods

urbanism

Bachelor

of

a

and

of

engage

the

with

honourable

activity impact He

BA

Planning

Projects

thinking

creating

Services,

study

Calgary

sector,

Design

work

Lands

Royal

at

is

City

Master

Queen’s

planning

Plans,

utilizing

research

Land

The

to

conceptual

02,

of

also

His

SUPPORT

a

area.

the

experience

Through

stakeholders. Current

of

Environmental

of

applications

Melbourne

WalkABle

non-profit Master

Awards.

Intern

broad

strategies

degree

Christopher

in

affordable

Development

a

final

Calgary’s

Neighbourhood

Arts

aimed

built

Plans,

mention

collaboration

guest the

University.

This

projects,

and

in

master’s

with

in

range

Alberta

projects

Canada),

walking.

and

FranklinlMeridian

Plan.

planning

from

project

at Prior

Human

innovative

Ribbon

studio

Alberta

in

and

and

Institute

the

improving

at

and

social

Civic

and

Through policy

of

the

the

Design.

to

Through

municipal

Proposals.

Calgary

studio

workshop

challenging

sustainable

critic

earned

she

joining

with

its

of

Innovation

2015

program,

of

influence

at a 71 MARCH

CLIV

of

experience The

Board working

legal Chase

construction

Watt

field Chase

construction, CHASE

transportation

OPERATIONS

signal years

expertise

networks; sector

modal

including way

achieved

ALFRED

Consulting

Alfred

as

British

ENGINEERING Watt

of

a Lloydminster

I that

2018

including

and Professional Consulting’s

loydminsler

of

of

timing;

handles

is

solutions

has

work,

Columbia

Consulting

SABOT

I

directly

experience

PROPOSAL the

GUEBERT,

allows Manager

construction

a

ITE,

include:

conceptual

over

as

reputation

Group.

Lloydminster

survey

and

GPS,

functional

MANAGER

TAG

Senior

legal

J

systems;

the LEAD

Downtown

the

10

with that

SUBMLSSION

is

Branch

Traffic

Alberta

now

traffic

of

has years’

and

day

He

and

and

active

project

PING,

services.

includes

all the

help

Crew

and

for

is

projects.

branch

involved

to ITS

Area

clients

Laser

construction

and

planning

analysis;

Transportation

Operations

a

office

experience

managing

day

build and

Construction

in

professional

functional

Chief

PTOE

Canada. team

Redevelopment

operational

many

both

As

operations

Scanning.

Saskatchewan,

office

as

better

offers

him

Chase

Operations

to

in

of

a

traffic

public

professional

the

find

Project

multi-modal

in

projects

His

Engineer

in

planning

surveys,

in

communities.

both

various

Ltoydminster,

is

Geomatics

engineer,

the Association.

Plan

innovative,

Division

primary

signal

road

He

sector

a of

Director

residential

Geomatics

Manager.

the

recently

Manager,

in

safety

(PTOE)TM.

and

engineering

for

high-level

design;

a

associations,

office

and

areas

at

corridors

collaborative

registered

Intelligent

is

Division

Watt

multi-

on

AIf’s

reviews.

private

opened

certified

Alberta.

His

while

and

of

the

traffic

He

36

and

has in

18

impact

Group,

and

AutoTurn),

estimates. transportation.

preparation analysis, engineering,

transportation

Ms.

ELISABETH and

including

retail, Consulting

support at

Simon’s (M.Sc.) specializing

Simulation After

irlA;’oilTAl:clN a

SIMON

studying

ENGINEERING

WEST

vast

Parks

Vissim)

Hofbauer-Spitzer

circulation

obtaining

EAIJ

industrial

amount

assessments,

she

research.

KONG,

of

transportation-related

Canada

traffic

at

cLAiRE

traffic

modelling

She

a

model,

has

Group,

the

and

of

HOFBAUER-SPflZER,

in

wide

traffic

contract

projects

Transportation

of

MSC,

is

PROJECT

During studies,

PARK

forecasting,

been

his

University

development

impact

ArcGIS

and

experienced

experience

Before

variety

PARAMICS,

he

B.Sc.

modelling, ANALYST

ARO

software

P.ENG

involved

network The

-.

has has

her

documents

in

punuc studies,

safety

software.

joining

degree

of

Austria. MANAGER

City

ten

of

been

career,

traffic

institutional,

Calgary in

REALM

projects

years

Engineering.

in

(Synchro/SimTraflic,

and

analysis

in

review,

of

experience

during

using

involved

traffic Watt

various

in

using

Calgary.

she

Since

She

noise

MSC

design 1999,

PIJ-

as

of

at

Consulting

the

has

and

throughout

well

noise

his

experience

was

AutoGad/Civil

and

I

a

joining

studies

analysis,

cnV

in

residential,

Simon Microscopic

.::

‘1

graduate

specializing

Master

Since

worked

operational

as

over

included

Simon

responsible functional

OF

studies, construction

CALGARY

Watt

200

including

continued

joining

Group

of

civil

Alberta.

on has

in

Sidra,

level

Science

employment

projects

commercial/

traffic

Consulting

parking

3D

many

design.

design

Traffic

gained

in

reviews I

CALGARl

Watt

for

in

(md.

Visum

traffic

2aDl,

traffic

cost

and in AS 72

02

Association

He

municipal municipal

Besides significant JASON

development

Mr. the

SENIOR a

the

12

the

Mr.

growth

potential strategies projects,

Mr.

PLANNING as

planning,

professional

in

undertaken ECONOMICS

RUSSELL

Mr.

Professional

virtually

years

well

has

Bevan

Royal

Mathew long-term

need

Mathew

Russell

also

BEVAN,

as management

•

professional

ECONOMICS

of

for to

DESIGN

primarily

finance

and

Institute

finance,

MATHEW,

other

is and

experience

every

professional

conferences

presented Mathew,

plan

growth

is

has

specific

an

experience

feasibility

LEAD

growth

demographic

a

Land special

INC

MES,

Associate

communities

Registered

also

for

municipality

matters

of

economic

in

management

additional

Economist

MSCPL,

lands

the a

Chartered

work,

BA directed

studies

anticipated

CONSULTANT

in

planning

at

Partner

and

consulting

several

preparation

in

and

numerous

at

Partner

for

growth

Mr.

growth

Professional

and

Ryerson

impact

RPP

seminars

have

in

in

most

long-term

urban

at

Bevan

(PLE)

Surveyors

policy

the

Ontario

disciplines

economic

Hemson,

in

related

at

typically

management,

experience,

management.

Greater

a of

Municipal

assessment,

Hemson

of

lands

and

and

community,

has

the

studies.

and

growth

and

urban

Planner

planning

a

York

firm’s

lectured

(MRICS).

has

and

forecasts.

involved

including

he

member

Golden

across

with

Finance

has

The

development. 3D

management

Universities.

to

has

urban

(APP),

long-range

determining

determine

years

assignments

over

also

on

municipal

Horseshoe

Canada.

assessing

of

He

planning

Officers

of

has the

19

with

for

Planners economic

Planners also with

Mr. for

OCP,

Ministry number

and VOUSAF

professional

Mr. presented

ECONOMICS

the

municipalities

Shah

Shah

real

the

the

undertaken

the

Regional

of

US

forecasts

of

estate

SHAH,

Institute

(CIP)

traffic

is

is

impact

employment

before

Highways

a

a

Green

experience

member

Consultant

CO4SULTAf1T

as

development.

zone

MUP,

Municipality

a

well

across

the

studies

(OPPI)

for

number

Building

forecasts

and

the

Canadian

as APP

of

and

In

and

the

a

Canada.

at

City

for

Infrastructure

of

LEED

urban

Council

Hemson

economic

Ontario

various

the

of

economic

Mr.

of

for

Wood

Network

Regina’s

Accredited

Canadian

planning,

Shah

He

the

(USGBC).

with

Professional

clients

assisted

Saskatchewan

Buffalo.

development

has

development

as

of

over

DesignRegina

well

Institute

public

Asset

worked

across

Professional

five

Mr.

He

as

Managers.

policy

has

forecasts

Mathew

years

Ontario.

on

of

studies

and

a of 73 City

MARCH

The

actions

Plan, downtown document

community. A

cultural development,

must A

successful

Redevelopment

effective,

As

the

the

as and

analysis,

information

build culture

Currently,

Collective rejuvenation centre,

as

rejuvenation growth. and

50th

The

gas

Project

Saskatchewan

number multi-faceted,

of

a

the

The the

Implementation

A

Support

Streetscape

Real Character

Built Objectives

Mulitmodal

Plan

project

Plan

businesses

activity

has City

Lloydminster community

2018

this

Avenue.

summary

unite

oft

heart

next

to and

Community

considerations. and

I

Much

Estate

form of

will consistently

PROPOSAL

of

and

initiative

will

actionable

of

implement

the

that

Revitalization,

Lloydminster, built

this

has

revitalization.

through events. Lloydminster

for step,

the

in

of

include:

While

considerations

project,

effort

provides

be

Understanding

The

City

infrastructure

I

considerations

the

Areas

of

transportation

not

this for

Downtown

of

social

generated

base,

border,

form

family

Analysis

Plan into

SUSMSSION

destination

and

developed

this

a

Integrated

existing

must

community

region,

downtown

is

which

the only

growing

Downtown

Phase

engagement

Vision

Plan:

strategies

the

in

and

called

will

this public

to

growth

experienced

and

and

friendly

City

a

which the

Area

captures

Development

belong

be

downtown

platform

but

address

has

spans

will

urban

vision.

of

the

carry

in

1

Rejuvenation

downtown cultural

nedev&opment

midst

considered

will

for

Downtown

improvements,

community.

are

downtown

for

realm

of

the

contains

by

cane

approach

ultimately

aimed

city’s

runs

and

revitalization

is

atmosphere

Area

the

networks

the

be

to

retail,

forward

for

design important

across

the

home

community.

the

of

activities,

these

for

everyone.

the

site

moderate

be

through

Downtown

project

design

identified

ideal

resources

and

a

Redevelopment

community, to

community’s

future

attributed

dining,

of

multi-year

practical

major

design to

Ptan

draw

conditions

in

Lloydminster:

the

with

land

position

elements

is

the

position

the

Since

of

location

about

Plan

and

for

needed

built

of

Alberta

the

the

work.

data

and

interest

economic

Downtown

markets

champion more

The

to

It

entertainment,

policies

the

developing

parking

and

policies

2014,

is

downtown

downtown

policies

high

a

28000

to

social

the

downtown

the

collection,

expected

Plan

for

as

foundation

community.

to

vision people

oil

and

for

and downtown

population

create

a

area

Plan

the this

A

and

must

service

and

of

people

and

Area

energy

for

an

will

the

along

that

a

and of

20

they

to to

to-understand The The

a safe

stakeholders

accessible, and transportation

residents and benefits to

Revitalization and streetscapes

accommodate human-scale

and

demonstrating the

practical a investment

Design Our base,

into determine Investment

businesses,

strategies capital

opportunities by activities

in shaped

revitalization. champions

identify reflect

whole—a

marketing

feel

showcase

encourage realizing

the

underutilized

Plan public

cultural

shopping.

experience

the

Plan team

need

for

and

a

the

Plan.

in

Guidelines

the

future.

around

sense

and

everyone.

will

will

are

will

the

and

to

for

will identify

opportunities collective

realm

their

and

place

include

in roles

elements,

document

and

and

understand

challenges

build

the

Our

proud support

and

downtown downtown,

visitors

encouraging

for

be

to

realizing

context-appropriate

route,

maps,

deliver

will

of Design

multiple

how

the

the

redevelopment.

aspirations

area attracting

understand

design

concise,

new

and growth

of

ownership

project

where

built

actions

on

that

make

clear

The

idea

community.

community

of, the

vision

and

visualizations,

and

the

underbuilt

community

as

investment

Guidelines

a

and

form

this

and

for

support

uses.

neighbourhood

Plan

of

plan

that

businesses that

for

with

what

a

language,

team

and

will

will

the

downtown’s

residents

to

potential

unique

free

a

redevelopment,

reinforce

new

vision.

of

visitors

investment

for

must

and

downtown

eliminate

will we

support

encourage

memorable

be

downtown

built add

the

and

it

will

the

of the

partners,

businesses.

This

The

says.

land

are

thoughtfully

stewardship both

connections,

be

in community,

will

asset

jargon,

even

Public

use.

work

around

downtown.

are

development

and

alike

downtown

the

and

are assisting

qualities

urban

Plan

interesting

Plan

in

a

consider

The

character

shaped

unnecessary

eager

healthy

that

the

For more

is

be downtown,

that

excited

to

with

figures.

streetscapes

to

engagement

stakeholders,

places

welcoming

will

will

expected

and

Plan

Lioydminster

supported

innovative

retaining

downtown

design.

the

stop,

will

We

includes

the

to

integrate

excitement

ol

also

for the

include

and

Engagement

both and

investment

easy community. build

community

itself

bolster

and

experience. to built

will

and

for

City

the

of

explore,

community

be

clearly

invest,

sparked

and

a

Downtown

to

socializing assess

barriers

the

navigable

existing

for

social

form

identity

must

Plan,

to

a

useful

walkable,

Urban

and

by that

must

change to

yet

social

the

major

and

identify

all as

for

easy-

be

by

tax

be

as to 74

O

respond we

project Working

opportunities. and

communication

solutions

inspires Creative

Committee,

downtown

Plan can

PUBLIC

to community

who

processes downtown

understand

Community and

lively

of

guidelines appropriate

want

an

Place-making. downtown

social

identify

community

a

showcases

circulation

Economic architecture,

Integration.

The

OVERVIEW

innovative

principles:

community Proposed

PLANNING

centre

sharing

arrival

will

urban

Communications

make

position

that must

revitalization

to

design

infrastructure

develop

outset,

ENGAGEMENT

ownership,

strategic

visit

to

closely

and

for represents

•

in

for

setting.

meaningful

feel information

DESIGN

where

will

Lloydminster.

emerging

revitalization

to

as

Vitality.

the

must

locally-grown

more

and

and

liveability,

to

design

retail,

a

and

Dialogue.

effective

it

An

economics,

create

an

vibrant

ownership transform

it

as

cotlaboratively

downtown,

a

plan

with The

the

the

will effective

NO.

explore.

form

attractive

opportunities

comprehensive

partners,

about

a

of

dining,

excellence.

Methodology

model

instills

The

wider

community,

be

the

Downtown to downtown

early

City

a

trends,

framework

contributions

downtown.

engagement

to

culture,

the

functional,

AND

foster

constantly

Listening

the

project,

community’s

Plan

Together

the

help

staff

over

civil

Plan

entertainment,

Attractive

ideas.

In

foundation

region.

creativity, that

stakeholders,

and

location

coMMUNIcATIoN

project,

the

project

downtown

will

economic

create

people

engineering,

and

and

the

must

other

for

create

Design

Lloydminster

should

project.

as

will we

We

reclaim

engagement to

attractive

The

with

evaluated Plan.

investment

the

economic

is

it’s

to

for

and

will

streetscapes

and

needs,

will

be

blend

and

a

cities

stay

vital

collective

of

planning

the

an

Advisory

Plan

the

the

needs

businesses

express

clearly

create

into

We

vitality

frame

any

While

learning

will

and

develops

the

and

area

for Plan.

informed

community

planning,

look

City,

design,

and

downtown

using

are

a

coordinate

meaningful

and

downtown

culture

must

vitality.

developing the

to

community

in

that

and our

the

outlined

a

and

process

to

vision

committed

locally-

the

time-sensitive

Committee,

signal

plan

physical

from

adjusted

wider

and

the

for

work

engagement

durable

be

that

and

people

position

Advisory

and

landscape

in

that

following

practical,

design

driven

for

the

that

a

the

at

thrive

public

will with

as

sense

a

and

gem

to

the

the

by

in

2!

will

work,

incorporate events

Public only

feedback

key

and on

Place-based

and

complementary

presence media

SocIal

and

interested

us

on website.

tools on-the-ground

interactive Online

ideas to

the tour

Advisory the

undertaken

project

we the

proposed

We

Memorable community. generate

approaches.

In

already

houses,

better

the

gather

addition

those

be

produce.

locations

engagement

following:

will

evocative look

encourage

comment

include

and

and

and

and

held

presence

community

open

in

media.

engagement.

recognition

work

are,

and we

Online

workshop

the

they understand

on

on

targeted

ideas

materials

Committee

demonstrate

feedback

stakeholders.

activities

mapping

to

to

“sounding

early

booths

The

propose

Twitter

thematic

ensuring

houses

project

community

tone

Consistency

to

with

We

engagement.

generate

think

traditional

questions,

on

We

“doing”.

feedback

and

surveys

material

solicit

already

elements

process

will

in

locations

the

of

webpage.

will

feedback

and

that with

need

the

to

or

and

share

tool

on

existing

I

meet

site

identity.

incorporating

that

City’s

We

elements

build walking

on-site

boards”

kiosks

ensure

workshops.

the

how

ideas,

project.

momentum

complement

will

in the

Facebook,

that

will

that

engagement

we

improvement.

and and

from

will

and

their

everyone

of

place and

they

project

upon

allow

Advisory

project

Through

the

allow

will and

shares

our

project

initiate

at

develop topic-specific

they

participation.

receive feedback.

We

high

conceptual

and

engage

tour

ideas

Targeted

of

community

local

value

coordinate

for

engagement

exchange

the

the will

the

people

will

at

decentralized

temporary quality

team

as

Drop-in

is

this

in

and

key

discussion

materials

the

strong for

events, any

strong

Committee

community

feedback

integrate

activities

in

Plan.

maintained.

online

the

well

resonate

people

These

the

project

project

the

workshop.

questions

existing

to

time.

to

community

‘thinking”

design

as

This

information

vision This

open

engagement

refine

realities,

visual

downtown

downtown.

digitally

social

engagement

but

regular

approach

tools

installations

in

where

A

and

like

on and

through

with

messages

will

will

all

will

may

simple,

engagement

project

to

houses

will the

has

materials

project

open

will

build

of

will

include

gather

provide

not

the

pinpoint

A

to

and

be

they

updates

ensure following

also

can

the

been

walking

allow

and

with

more

help

include

on

move

work

in

a us integrated into the project. We willconduct these events in an A scope checklist, approved by the client at the open format with visual materials to allow for free discussion. beginning of the project, clearly defining project A range of different activities willencourage attendees to deliverables contribute feedback in creative ways, and all events willbe o Defined change order management procedures for family-friendly,accessible, welcoming and comfortable. addressing scope changes and budget additions a Regular cost control reporting, provided to the client Educational materials. We willdevelop targeted education as requested materials to ensure that the conversation about the downtown a Weekly internal project review and time tracking is tangible and free of planning jargon. These materials will measures help different people in the community understand what the a Expense claims and disbursements monitored weekly downtown Plan includes, and what it could mean in their through web-based time and cost tracking software day-to-day lives. a Regular internal project cost control reviews by the managing partner A “What We Heard” Report. After each major engagement event, we willprovide a summary of the ideas and feedback COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT received. At the end of the project, this feedback willbe We firmlybelieve that a clear understanding between the client. compiled into a “What We Heard Report”. This sumary consultants, and stakeholders is paramount to the completion willinclude an analysis of key themes, highlight areas of a successful project. of community agreement and divergence, and describe how community feedback was incorporated into the Plan. We will provide regular project progress reports, schedules, The document willalso reflect on the effectiveness of the and status reports that outline: engagement process itself, and outline any lessons learned to inform the implementation of the Plan. Summary of project progress * Performance reporting PROJECTMANAGEMENT Deliverables completed We have the project management skills that ensure our Deliverables remaining, progress, and expected delivery clients receive quality products that meet their needs in a dates timely manner at agreed costs. We are committed to strong Issues affecting specific deliverables, the project communication and transparency to keep clients up-to-date on schedule, budget, or any other relevant project aspects project timelines and any issues encountered. We are committed to documentation standards, Allmaterials QUALITYMANAGEMENT provided will be clear and concise, address relevant issues, As Project Manager, Andrew Palmiere, has superior project present a logical structure and analysis, and be audience management skills and is proficient at coordinating and leading appropriate. all project personneL Our firm’s quality management process includes: RISK MANAGEMENT We willuse the following risk assessment processes to support Quality planning and regular project reviews the firm’s risk response planning as part of the development of undertaken by the project manager the work plan and ongoing project management activities: A commitment to providing continuity of personnel named in the proposal throughout the project a A critical path analysis to define a project critical path A quality control plan to ensure that both document matrix, which the project team willuse and closely accuracy and version control is established monitor to confirm adherence to the project schedule A quality assurance review of all project deliverables and prioritize allocation of resources, and documentation Qualitative and quantitative risk analyses to jointly Clear and concise direction provided to all define any major project risks, potential points of failure, subcontractors throughout the project and appropriate mitigation measures. Risk monitoring and response planning to outline COST MANAGEMENT actions required to address project conflicts and Our cost control processes include: issues identified in the risk analysis if they arise. These measures will be agreed upon during work plan creation.

City oIL loydminslar Downtown Area Redevelopment Plan I MARCH20101 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

22

75 76

02

off

compilation

City activities

and

During

PHASE reports,

Manager,

Management

five

We

PROJECT

TASK

1.2 1.1

PLANNING

walking

transmitted

to

Phase

response

Phase

stakeholders. City,

developed will

Phase

developed

be

Phase

Phase

coordinated

project

propose

Communication

to

phases:

Council,

Committee

with

and downtown

kick-off

Coordinate

identified,

startup Conduct

discuss

Phase

1,

be

regular

the as

•

STARTUP

and

WORK

assessed,

DESIGN 4:

5:

3:

2:

1:

workshop

planning

tour

Advisory

of

Advisory

defined

a

Delivery.

to

Refinement. Visioning.

Startup.

Development.

of

1

key

meeting

and

available in

comprehensive

and

and

and

to

feedback

we

with

project

project

with the

1NC

partnership

and

PLAN

tour

the

staff,

project

reviewed

all

will

finalize

project

in and

the

Plan.

the

opportunities

the

Committee,

City.

final

The

the

The

coordinate

phone

as

project

Existing

Project

detailed

City.

vision

received

This

final

The

project

well

project

final

a

will

The

with

Work

with

DESCRIPTION

with

with We meetings

opportunities, look

members considerations. timelines,

stakeholders We

and

agenda

scope

draft

work

Phase

as

include for

information,

document

Advisory

background

proposed

the

work

the

and

will

will

will

other

deliverables

work

Communication

success

Plan

a

the

to and

Plan

downtown

plan.

community,

highlight of

kick-off community.

attend

will

items

be

other

downtown

planning

constraints

monthly

and

and

work

and

planning

with

project

initiated

will

Committee.

also

will

and

in Plan

will

as

City

partners

as

roles

Engagement

a

the

be

the

the research

coordinated

startup

and

be

include

well

will

walking

well

partners,

include

management

progress will

will

staff.

revised

City

project

area.

with

the

and

submitted

will

and

solicit

Plan,

be

will

as

as

be

be

and

meeting

Project

As responsibilities

be

the

previous

the

a

the

tour

detailed

with

in

feedback

and

kick

part

In

content

attended

the

discussion

of

to

projects

23 this

identification

review

Advisory

on

of

walking

with

by

the

major

project

that

committee of

eowTo

Engagement

City

Committee

major

issues

have

tour,

of

staff. objectives.

BLUFF

project

we

met

and

Key will URBAN

DESIGN

I DELIVERABLES •

FRAUFWORK

detailing walking

received

from

Memo items meeting

Memo

the

summarizing

containing

tour

and

the from project I

CITY

feedback

and

immediate tour OF

startup workshop,

cALGARY

minutes

attendees

the

action I CALGARY

AR I 77 MARCH2081

City

TASK

1.5

1.4 1.3 of

Lloydminstor

data

Compile

Communication

Engagement

Develop

Plan

Develop Project

PROPOSAL

I

Downtown Work

preject detailed

SuBMissioN

and Plan Ares

Redeveiopment

DESCRIPTION

My

City

project

throughout

We We

and

background

Advisory

and Committee,

project.

stakeholders

and We

From deadlines

meeting.

the

Transportation

Population

Environmental tenant

Cadastral

Land

Relevant

Outline

Confirm

Include

communicated Identify

Integrate

will Identity

will

will

initial

information

opportunities.

Project

Communication

the

the

deliverables

work

review develop

Ptan

This

expectations

use

Committee,

The

initial

proposal

data

and

key

the

a

measures

key

Manager

engagement

and

materials,

municipal

with

with

Plan

district

detailed

and

will

work

the

and

major

project

if

messages

discussions

stakeholders

gaps

a

our

available

be

existing

City

will:

and

property

detailed

data,

Engagement

employment

and

plan

will

consulted

data

project

Plan

milestones;

that

we

of

of

schedule

staff

community

to

including:

reports,

information

be

including

will

success municipal

and will

respond

to

may and

engagement

evaluated Project

data,

to

with

clearly

team.

outline

develop

and

communication

compile

content

and

impact

policies,

to

and

data

the

including

the

partners

road

guide

to

resource Work

21

staff,

document

informed

provided

how

Communication

City

emerging

content

and

an

the

all

to

alignments

and

the

and

Plan

implementation

partners

Engagement

and

required

be

discussed

ability

sales

data

branding

Advisory

studies

throughout

at

of

based

the

methods

deliverable

project

the

deliverables;

and

to

and

startup

develop

on

with

Plan

needs

the

the

I

DELIVERABLES

any

action

this

necessary received,

impacts

Memo

City

submitted

Communication

Engagement

for

Project

Project

approval

information,

remaining

Project

items

detailing

Manager

of

Work

gaps

for

for

gaps,

Manager

for

to

the

approval

and

information

Plan,

identified

the

collecting

the

potential

and

project Plan,

City

data

submitted

to

in the

78

02

provide

that

develop

identify

During

PHASE

2,4

PLANNING

2.3

2.2

2.1

will

visioning

community

Prepare

analysis

Conduct

and

mapping

Develop

plans,

data

Review

Phase

2:

strengths,

the

impact

a

VISIONING

DESIGN

downtown

visualizations

basis

studies

2

for

existing

INC

initial

events

SWOC

the

we

products

for

weaknesses,

will

downtown

community

Vision.

and

conduct

This

information

conducted •

•

•

We Advisory

We

support document DESCRIPTION

‘

•

• “

• • the

•

focus

weaknesses, to

We

for

and

networks and

We

firm

reflected We

the

Plan.

opportunities,

an

engagement

inform

Online

feedback

included

SWOC context,

Posters

Boards 2.2

Posters

Current

will Mullimodal

Areas

High-level

Historic

will Key

the

Important

Redevelopment

revitalization

will

will

material

will

key

visualizations

surrounding

understanding

initial

on

These

develop

Plan,

provide

prepare

open

create

community

review

elements

Committee

several

discussions

in

with

content

and

on

analysis

with

and

and

and

and

business

data

and

derived

the

on

will

and

such

opportunities, activities

the spaces

elements

feasibility

open

high

digital

transportation relevant

the

surveys

the

the

ask

displays

displays communication

Plan,

a

cultural

consider

activities

of

assessment,

key

context

and

generate

basis

SWOC

of

incorporating

as

highlighting

project

developed

SWOC

community,

downtown

walkability

new

visioning

from of

opportunities

spaces.

these

for

types

topics,

existing

base

constraints

about

the

of

documents will

to

of

review,

analysis

resources

questions

outlining of

the

areas,

Report

feedback

previous

streetscapes

allow

project

to

website documents

ideas report

/ map

the

and

A

distribution

the

including:

mapping

activities.

multimodal

routes

in

/

map

Uoydminster.

major

and

current

and

and

templates

and

the high-quality

as

this

downtown.

constraints

of

task

detailing

to

context,

in

major

25

engagement

where well

and

redevelopment

and

booklet

public received.

City

will

we

the

information,

engagement

topics

2.3

developed

that

community

Materials

social

will

as

and

look

data

downtown

points

staff

transportation

possible.

the

thematic

of

to

and

need

revise

will

of

urban

that

urban

to Axalysis

to

the

contribute

and

strengths,

media

relevance

from

will

provide

establish

be

events

to

will

downtown

to

will

in material

this

the

design

design compiled

determine

sites

be

be

maps

task

the

affect

include:

will

new

a

to

I

DELIVERABLES

•

•

for

communication

engagement

Updates

Engagement

supplementary

to A

detailing

describing

Uoydminster a

of A

considered

elements

Memo

policies,

series

SWOC

map

be

interest

events

considered

detailing

booklet

of

the

to

and

Report

of

in

themed

major

online

in

existing

platforms

major

downtown

strategies

and

the

maps,

that

materials

the

topics

in

with

Plan

elements

maps

the

major

includes

plans,

Plan

to be

79

MARCH city

2.6

2.5

of

L.loydminater

2010

Heard

Prepare

visioning

community

Conduct

t

pRopcsAL

Report

I

Oowntown

What

SUBMIsS:cN

activities

4—.

We

Area

Redevelopment

DESCRIPTION

of

Plan, specific

considerations

in

period,

report

From

to We

following:

task

changes

develop

opinions

through

Public A

existing fall

allow

feedback

interest to

time

Initial analysis

A

Small

Committee

provide

Online

will

the

broader

workshop

assess

to

2.5,

Harvest

including

Plan

conduct

directions,

describe

the

feedback

engagement

group

Installations

we

displays,

to

a

in

different

context

opportunities

and

from

public

shared

on

the

the

be

public

will

to

to

Festival

a the a

areas

discussion

made discussions

initial

be

the

open

provide

the

shared

create

series

and

received

to

material,

downtown

activities

Included

downtown

open

surveys,

community

input

view

of

SWOC

house

to

priorities.

to

at

In

at

the

for

agreement,

Vision

the

a

receive

a

key

house

the

activities

received

detailed

public

through

people

with

and

first

SWOC

in

with

locations

and

analysis,

SWOC

Vision

Vision.

the

This

section

provide

the

feedback

26

/

event

major

mapping

workshop

development

to

review

the

during

with

Report,

points Advisory

will

analysis

This

engage

and

to

engagement

such

partners

of

their

the

include

solicit

of

the

will

and

a

of provide

tools

as

community

user-friendly

the

as

feedback

that

contention,

at

and

engagement

include

well

solicit

the

any

a

of

SWOC

to

will

list

the

as

events

The

IDELIVERABLES

engagement A

incorporating

considerations

received visioning

Report,

outcomes

Initial

events A

general

engagement

revised

memo

WALKING

What

outcomes

detailing

from

exercise

SWOC summarizing

-

for

TOUR

We

events

events

the

the

the

for

Heard

102

Report,

feedback

engagement

community

and

the

from

PLM1NING

and

Plan

the

these

DEsIGN -S PHASE 3: DEVELOPMENT During Phase 3 we will build upon the feedback received in the engagement events in Phase 2 to conduct a deeper supporting analysis of the downtown, develop a draft Plan, and review and revise the draft Plan with the City and Advisory Committee.

—,‘.J. DESCRIPTION DEIJVERABLES

3.1 Develop downtown From the community input received in Phase 2, we will The Vision and Objective Vision statement develop a downtown Vision statement, incorporating the section of the Plan, outlining major objectives and goals that were identified. The Vision the community vision for the statement willbe provided to the Advisory Committee for downtown comment and feedback.

3.2 Develop Based on the SWOC analysis and the initialfeedback A memo summarizing major recommendations received from the community, we willconduct an recommendations for urban for streetscape assessment of the downtown streetscape and built form to design with supporting and urban design develop a comprehensive set of urban design guidelines for rationale guidelines the Plan. A detailed rationale document willsupport these recommendations, and willbe provided to the City Project Manager for feedback.

3.3 Develop We willalso provide a detailed assessment of the downtown A memo summarizing transportation transportation network and servicing limitations. A major recommendations for and servicing supporting rationale document willbe provided to the City downtown transportation recommendations Project Manager for feedback, and servicing with supporting rationale

3.4 Develop real estate From an assessment of downtown businesses and • A memo summarizing and economic real estate, we willdetail strategies to encourage land major recommendations development redevelopment and business recmitmentftetention. We will for encouraging downtown recommendations undertake a broad sweep of incentive programs which may redevelopment with have the greatest potential to leverage private investment supporting rationale and in the study area, while complementing the City’s existing financial analysis policies. The rationale for these recommendations willbe documented in a memo and provided to the City Project Manager for feedback.

3.5 Determine Plan From the recommendations detailed in Tasks 3.2—3.4,we will A memo summarizing major policies and develop Plan policies, as well as the necessary framework policies and implementation Implementation for the City to implement these policies. These components steps in the Plan steps willbe reviewed by the City Project Manager.

3.6 Develop Plan Draft We willcompile a Draft Plan from the background • The Downtown Area 1 information developed in Tasks 2.1—2.3,the conclusions Redevelopment Plan Draft from the What We Heard Report from Task 2.6, and the 1, submitted for review Plan materials from Tasks 3.1—35.This Draft Plan willbe reviewed by the City Project Manager prior to submittal to the Advisory Committee.

3.7 RevIew Draft 1 We willreview Draft 1 of the Plan with the Advisory • A memo detailing feedback with Advisory Committee at a workshop to solicit feedback and input, received from the Advisory Committee This review willprovide a general assessment of the Committee, considerations material prior to public engagement, and get support for public engagement, and

for the recommendations in the draft. The changes to necessary revisions to Draft 1 the Draft recommended by the Advisory Committee will be incorporated into the presentation to Council and engagement materials as needed.

02 PLANNING, OESI0N INC. 27

80 81

MARCH City

provide

activities

During

PHASE

t

TASK

4.4

4.3

4.2

4.1

3.8 V:i ot L.Ioydminster

20t0

Committee

the

engagement

outcomes

RevIew

We

addendum

Prepare

engagement

CoordInate

materials

engagement

Develop

Phase

4

Council

Present Plan

I opportunities

PROPCSALSus:SS;CN

is

REFINEMENT

Advisory

Heard

to

Draft

[

4 summarize

Downtown

What

public

and

we

with Report

I

public

will

with

review for

Area

conduct

all the

Redevelopment

participants

major

DESCRIPTION

Project changes

in We

compile

determine will

the

Committee 2.6

including

additional

From a

engagement

‘ gather

We

engagement

web

of DESCRIPTION

provide We

the

desired

of

to

We

include

1

materials

changes

partners,

as

recommended We

•

a

public

informational

with

the

support

will

Small

Online

Public

that

be Draft.

memo the

will

will

Advisory

will

will

mapping

the

elements

submitted

Plan,

input

review

Manager

changes

facilitate

proposed

also

develop

outlines

comments.

the posters

Plan

final

present

to

engagement

input

all

This

to

group

the section

and

as

and to

open

displays,

community

the

for

final

and

feedback

update

the

on

outcomes.

events,

events

Committee

contribute

required.

final

the

tool,

addendum

the

review.

received

submit

Plan

the

policies

and of

pages,

the Draft

communication

community that

for

effectively

changes house!

Plan

discussions

to

approaches

What

for

wider

the

revisions

to

draft

the

the

review.

with

public

to

displays

and

surveys,

consider

the

Draft

directed

allow

and

these

Plan,

activities

review

review

as

City

We project

through Materials

and

public.

Plan. and

the

input

workshop

What

include:

will

recommended

well

recommendations

engagement

ito

use

Heard

people

necessary

Project engagement

action

Advisory

recommendations

including

Council.

detailing

finalize

the

of

for

the

and

These

by

and

We

as

website

2D

Council,

We

Task and

the

to

engaging

Council

will

project

an

feedback Report

28

and

Heard mapping

who

steps

feedback.

solicit

will

Manager

draft

engagement

online

will

the

4.2,

be

Committee

the

to

recommended

3D

incorporate

with

for cannot

outlining

based

document,

by parallel

materials for

activities

the

Report

Plan.

and

into

we

major

feedback

visualizations

stakeholders,

the

survey

the

received

a

the

tools

for

and will

Plan.

engagement

recommended

series

Plan

to

Materials

on

attend

Committee

changes

elements Plan,

the

from

prepare

the

to

Advisory

the

material

to

and Plan

We

and

any

Draft,

which

earlier

on

from

City

Task

as

will

actions

Draft

Draft

of

will

well

an

to

1

I

by

of DELIVERABLES

‘

DELIVERABLES

•

the

the

A

engagement

the

Plan changes

A

engagement

events

Report, A

general

engagement

surveys

Online

and

including Engagement

including

communication

engagement, considerations

received

revisions A

memo

revised

memQ

City

Plan.

memo

review

other

Draft

and

engagement

outcomes

Our

incorporating

to

detailing

summarizing

What

from

map

posters,

to

detailing

1

displays

of

be

stakeholders,

to

outcomes

Draft

outcomes

objective

events

the

and

and

made

reflect

tool

Council,

We

for

Plan

materials,

the

1

from

handouts,

necessary

feedback

and

public

Heard

and

to

public

content,

public

the

with

from

these

and these

82

02

•

the

The

PHASE

5.3

5.2

PLANNINO

5.1

TASK

y’s1

4.6

4.5

document

final

close-out

Conduct

educational

to

materials

materials

and

Provide Council

Present

5-

Plan

materials

educational

Develop

Plan

required Revise

•

phase

the

DELIVERY

DESIGN

educational

Draft

Plan

with

revisions

Plan

Draft

project

of

INC

draft

activities

to

to

for

and

2

the

the develop

as

the

2

project

City.

All

will

DESCRIPTION

We

project

reports transfer

stakeholder

these

submission. the

with

the

the

noted 2

Based We

DESCRIPTION

prior

These

Manager,

content

the

project

engagement

to

submitted

document

In

Committee

From

of

include

addition

will

develop

Plan

educational

Plan will

actions design

downtown,

Large-format

of

Factsheets, An

and

the development

the

to

project

and

the

the

on

materials

material,

coordinate

produced

interactive

make

all

presentation

Plan,

City

redevelopment

and materials

and

after

the

and

downtown,

recommendations

incorporated

required

guidelines

to

will

presenting

to

to

input,

a

in

Project

educational

format

materials.

second

a as

feedback

the

completion.

the

be

we

incorporating

Task

incorporate

final

detailing

materials

including

will

part

describing

taken

for

changes

City

will of

GIS

online

with

maps

will

hardcopy

4.4,

for

presentation

be

educational

Manager

the

to

of

Draft

make

for

including

Project

data,

then

the the

this

as

reviewed

The Council.

received the

opportunities

into

we

project.

recommended

or

developers

materials

story

to

background

Feedback

part

made

City

final

all

Plan

revisions,

may

will

revisions

final

individual

map

layout

be

provide the

the

made

and

Manager

and

feedback

of

map

provided

revise

Project

spaces

feedback

for

draft

Draft.

include:

from

materials

revisions

from

by books

to

the

electronic

29

approved

files,

to

by

review

Council

the

public

detailing

from

and

based

Plan

create

we

of

Council, the

topics

public

the

material,

Manager

for

for

interventions

to

City

and

the of

will

landowners

to

Plan

from

Council

Advisory

will

for

by

date,

review.

businesses

information the

on

to

the

versions

a

copies

prior Plan

Project

feedback,

in

also

Council.

the

highlights

be

final

we outline

as

public

this

the

research,

City

and

to

reviewed

Plan.

coordinate

to to directed

will

will

version

urban

feedback

of

final

Council,

will

at

and

of

be

Draft

revise

all

This

about

The

and

close-out.

be

of

and

I

I

DELIVERABLES

DEUVERABLES

coordinating

for

A

and versions

required

supporting

Hardcopy

materials Council

Revised final The

Draft

Memo

2

Redevelopment the

Presentation

review

and

2,

including and

Educational The

Redevelopment

identified

binder

to

future

incorporating

presentation

tiles,

Downtown

Council

revisions

diagrams,

4.4

Downtown

3,

above

and

incorporating

educational

of

use

of

to

factsheets,

for

in

and

documentation

the

supporting

any

outlined

be

Tasks

by

the

materials

requested

materials

electronic

submitted

archived

Plan

Area

the

final

of

all

Area

Plan

Final

Plan

31,

Plan

changes

City

and

in

revisions

maps,

the

Plan

the

3.8

Draft

data

Draft

for

by

as

for to 83 CO -o

2018 2019 A May — a -. Oct He. Per Feb o3 15 7579 CD 6 13 20 71 2 tO *7 24 I 6 It 22 22 5 12 19 26 2 6 *6 23 20 7 14 21 26 4 11 If 25 2 a ta 23 30 6 11 20 27 3 10 II 24 Cm 0 -I PROJECT MANAOEANT PM-I Prajed newing, or C __U) CS PM2 Regut pejed nwiagmwit tails -__ 0 ,ProJect startup messing: week of April25 ore / :r CD PHASE I: STARTUP AdvIsory committee tour week of May CD 11 Canon ptj.datwteyn.edlng 6 ‘ a I2 csad.sae bn*-efI aid ,srjed tat w’e, Pd,isa’y Ca,nft.e Delivery of sal Project Wodeplan, Eagagaisent and Caeivmailcadons Pian week ot May13 C ii Derdcp ddajed a PTOj.d Wailsia, I 4 beydap tag6let r Cmnnr.aa,n thai CD

C *3 CflIa pejal di. -0 3 a -0 PHASE 2: VISIONING -C 2.’ flevieaaoRIaig e..tASai,aiddaa Delivey of SWOC Report week of May27 6 -0 22 Deadop mad nwina pmduds aid viwuloelais / 21 CoeOjd SWOC eluk Public engagement week of June97 24 Pr atmtniIydsiaiieg preset a,” Delivery of What We Heard Report week of July B 25 Con&jdjeitydsaeIngalMhlea (4(/ 2-6 Pm attmatWeHead Rn1

PHASES: DEVELOPMENT 3,1 Da-dep doinitawn iva, tt&e,wit 12 Deadep rnye-duIons a rjn aid u.b., dn p.iaiey 11 Derdap trspoiuulai aid aaM(i.I0 i,iiwien. Th Oe.d. — prid, aid anc oerdprwrl ,re,e,dMes , Delivery of nan DeaN I: week of Sepi 23 c-u 35 Odemvdn. Pies pd.oaid trrØpreutuioe meedng C steps / Advisory CommIttee week of Oct 7

3a Derdep thai Dii I - Cotaici meeth’w week of Oct21 31 Raids., Dt I with Adeaary Caiwdee ‘S Peers aid radew Pies Di’ I wits Cand

PHASE 4: REFINEMENT 4.1 DredappNivaigepereit psalMs 42 Coadnd.psMicesgerait di PepnwIsu WeHeed Rn1 tddeidjm 44 Revitweiweetaut eutrepee with lye Advisory Ceiwuttat Public engagement weeks of Nov11 7,- 45 Rerñ.Ra. allured a devdop Pea, DM1 2 Delivery of What We Heard Report addendum: week of Nov25 46 Deudop drMI e3jeeleni nideIds or the Pies Advisory Committee meeUnç week of Dcc 2 Delleety of Men Dnft 2 and metadrdr Dec16 PHASES: JVY aimpofling week of 5 I Prtaasl DM1 2 aid e*niorsd mie a Carrel 52 Peidderaisioristo the Pea, aid nueeirrd psalMs 51 Coeoid pejal desraft alalbe CouncIl meednw week of Jan 6 7,-/ DeDvery or dktel project deRverthiet week of Jan20 Prolect close-out week ol Feb 10

Major project dates

Project commencement April 15,2018 Public engagement #2 week of Nov 11, 2018 Project kickoff meeting week of April25, 2018 Delivery of Plan Draft 2 Dec 16, 2018 Public engagement #1 week of June 17, 2018 Delivery of Plan Draft 3 Jan 20,2019 Delivery of Plan Draft I week of Sept 23, 2018 Project close-out Feb 10, 2019

84

02

expenditures,

Project:

invoice,

Disbursements discussion date

DISBURSEMENTS identified The

be

FEE

includes:

and

disbursements.

comprises

Our

Financial

PLANNING,

accepted

SUMMARY

above

phase proposed

of

TOTAL

SUBTOTAL

DIsbursements PhaseS:

Phase

Phase

Phase

Project

Phase

the

incurred

a-

herein

DESIGN

quotation

with

submission

$142,815

is

after 3:

2:

4:

1:

found

FEE

billed Management

budget

Detver

Refinement VisIoning

Development

Startup

include,

INC

the

will

A

by

the breakdown

-.

City

the

monthly

not

in

.11

(5%)

remains

in

90-day

the

total

of

project

but

fees

be

Project

this

table

guaranteed,

are

of

as

and

—

period,

in

proposal.

$149,955.75

of

team

a

not

Manager on

effect

the

$1,140.75

percentage

r

the

limited

cost

in

the

for

following

the

and

Should

timelines

90

of

S

to, interest

,-‘•--

(excluding

in

may

services

days

$1

$142,815.00

(5%)

the

estimated

$60,480.00

$32,690.00

$25,660.00 $10,020.00

49,956.75

$7020.00

57,140.75

56,945

the

page-

require

following

from

of

and

of

proposal

project

by

the

.00

GST)

This

fees

the

task

further

3,

02’s

FEE

provided

of associated

All The

data.

existing

Printing

carried

including

the

requested approvals

Fees,

Premiums generated

Project telephone

Renderings,

postage

and

Reproduction Communication Transportation

meals

authorized

ASSUMPTIONS

fee

each

meeting

Client

City

other

proposal

SWEFT

levies,

by

draft,

management

of

data

of

and

at

that

from documents,

the

the

for

by

cans

drawings

with

FEN0rM,NGS

facilities, Uoydminster,

travel,

no

models,

duties

and

electronic

provided

the

additional

of

of

final

Firm

is

cost

in

authorities

public

and

professional

and

Instruments

based

Client

studies,

connection

fl

e.g.

plan

or

to

facsimile

refreshments

shipping,

I

and

services,

MACKENZIE

taxes

02.

for

engagement

including

to

on

conveyances

will in

insurance

at

the

mockups

transportation,

including

excess

having

the

be no

for

of with

City.

liability

messages,

following

e.g.

cost

CONW limited specifically

permits,

Service,

plotting

jurisdiction

of

the

a.-,

and

coverage

for

and

required

activities

to

that

insurance,

ms

project

to

02,

long

audio

web-based

assumptions:

licenses

photographs,

of

2 normally

•

lodging

courier

SIflEErSCAPE

requested

hard will

computer

distance

geo-spatial or

equipment

will

for

provide

limits,

copies

service,

be or

and

DESG’1 by 85

00

0a34n a. 0601 SsdII. H41396k. — a RasAoy fbi. 96,sa .,abi Janan Iloan Yo.n44 32I AS3d 0496... On... ES..04 060.96 PaSbin I4.4a4.k. 041041 -23 15—95 OI9al Nit... al_n —I HOlballi. ‘5 $ 494— Ill5n- SI& Man_. Pio 15942 P47 ‘it—n UI P96?I E32394i9 TInA&tl £93909603 r0359 160&gn F6d £5c1004964 £32191310044 F...4260. TI9460 a -san ‘ Iota 1546 0275 tIll 6010 4520 SlID SIlO $112 $332 $200 Ills $215 $165 $055 $045 Ok NI. T at Tad F— oar 60026000464(7 -a.—-— flLI Pl1o,.0 - 11 — 2 2 2 S 14.54500 “LI 1291 -—I_I-_il t-6 — 10 — 56 42.400 31441 HeA.-n Ca 04 2 - 41 0 046041 — — — flo ‘5 M1:ZTAflW a

- a LI C961p94.6313 04 2 2 — 2 2 3 2 - - 54 flno32 ‘2 C—9 641-00.194019150103.9609 C04313119 2 2 - 2 — - - - - I II.00 0 I, Pl[I — — 0t1 wat 4 - — — — - — ‘5 - - 4 - — I 11.30.00 — IA D.nIc 6n6321 — Cann,a,41n P05 I — 3 55 — — - - - — — 92 01.55002 I-S - - I, 2 - - 02 - 20 62.440-32 0.EW60IH.fl1t..0010 4 10 - 14 - -U - It 0 - 4 I ‘2 — 41 11 2 c..t_nl_ 300.03230 I n.-:-:’r -r —-

2.I 6a4.0.110041.w94304 — — 2 16 10 - - 5 0 — 4 - — 43 00.40132 SA 0an,o..41o0a9pl0p.ana2nIn - 2 - 2 IS IS ------ia 1400132 32 Cadc194n.. 3 4 7 4 00 Ii - 0 I I . - - - 11050132

,_4 Plnl6032l9n0-00w3—3-14 - 4 - 00 II ------41 14.14432 25 Ca94513233.bi70016360 — I - II - - Ii — - - — — —

30 Pnn90.1&wtHw4fl0o0.1 - 4 10 ------20 5236000 4ot1oWIS..JC.M t a t 96 32 II 12 I II - 4 . . 544 a- — — — L:.’ 03 •--.

2-1 400143210V.41 0o40 .6091.10 - 3 2 * ------I 11.13232 52 03169 lI100fldalalfl — ao.1a 3496 and ottan w1 2 2 12 - - SO ------Ia 0132032

0.2 32 - 2 - . ------I 10 10 20 24 41 $1403200 2.4 fl,no ISIS. I’d 013961.1 d.o.,I — isbi 332,lnandIIanS 2 - - 0 — 0 ‘2 II ID - - - - 0. 09.012040

as OdonotoePlIllpaI,oknn.oWan0d0p0 - 2 2 10 10 - - - - I IS - - 32 35 914.03,3 I 0.no 2 0 — 23 32 32 0 ‘0 - - - - Ill 001.03232 a? H..03,3Ia,6MIO0C.1n9469. - 4 2 ------2 - 1 1131532 10 F1n.nl.,don,..Pt-05.ft1 .411C.nd - 4 2 ------4 - 0 $1520.00 0.a41141 00316000.0 * a 96 41 41 44 44 II 30 32 II 17 41 24 454 a- C— — — C L: CI.

0lItp 41 11a 190109119103559194. 2 10 . 2 0 I ------20 6253032

42 C135015154144001964 - - I 10 - II ------40 1496032

*3 P,no 44004 966 H—d190dI92s, - - - 4 Is ------20 53.33032

44 Pa .I,sanI OflsSs l Ait7 0.10321.1 - Is 2 — 2 - - — — — — - 2 - I 1.1032 45 0..351511..q..d64.P91039412 2 2 — II 70 0 0 - - — — 0 0 — 70 61.71032

to 0.,o6p 04,3 1094 32010a l 160149 - — 2 I I 0 0 - - — - - — 54 62.04032 &E0.64H....10001 4 II I 32 10 41 24 - - - — I 10 — Ca — fln 430O30 1. 4-1 1Is.

a’ PIs4 Da tad tthntaa4 00t 60 C0,64 4 4 — - — I 01.532-32

52 PnI4 rfl4an 1.1131601 .d2cao’M 351111460 - — ad 2 a • 0 - 4 — - — 4 4 — 32 14.70032 0.2 Ca,t.l pd la-961 9669441 - — 2 - 4 - - - — • $74032 S..3t.oI 0.49.60 4 3 - I I I • — - — — 4 4 - I, _1M 0.94 fl-Os

TMbi 150.1600.94 II 112 24 164 loS 500 32 23 42 25 17 41 14 970

TOTAL 0I40.0I5 To694 F6194.%S,fl96t965.d 040% 17.14470