Paper details  

– This is a two-part assignment. Please follow these instructions carefully. The aim of this group report is to give a comparative analysis of the sustainability of one good project and one bad project. We have chosen Royal Seaport Stockholm and Liverpool Waters respectively. Please Address the following points in relation to the two urban regeneration programs in dedicated paragraphs. The First Part of the Assignment –> I would like you to address the liveability (which is 1 of 4 criteria that of sustainability that our group has chosen to evaluate sustainability) of both of these projects and analyse them individually. So, you’re the format and write up would look like (i.e. Each paragraph will look like  Good Project: People, Place, and Social Equity. Bad Project: People Place, and Social Equity. Good Project: Affordability. Bad Project Affordability. These two criteria (people place and social equity & affordability were both taken from the LEED criteria of what makes a development sustainable. ALSO, you must NOT address the other group members parts (don’t step on anybodies toes). Below are the other sections that you must make sure that you DO NOT repeat or include in your section.
.
Planning Intentions
– Forward looking
– High quality public space
Energy Efficiency and climate responsibility
– Green Quality environment
– Highly efficiency energy for heating
Liveability (two person section)
– Compactness
– Mixed-use nature of project
– People, Place and Social Equity.
– Affordability
(Transport) Forward looking mobility
– Interplay and synergy of transport for both project
.
.
Second Part of the Assignment–>Please make yourself familiar with these projects and write 1 paragraph explaining the projects. Each paragraph for this section should be 250 words long. Thanks

Preferred language style   US English
Urban Sustainable Planning of Two Urban Regeneration Projects