UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Rebuilding the city from an ecological perspective Testemale, Philip M. 1993

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1993_fall_testemale_philip.pdf [ 11.92MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0086313.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0086313-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0086313-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0086313-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0086313-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0086313-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0086313-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0086313-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0086313.ris

Full Text

REBUILDING THE CITY FROM AN ECOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVEbyPhilip M. TestemaleB.A., The University of British Columbia, 1990A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMaster's of ArtsinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIESSchool of Community and Regional PlanningWe Accept this thesis as conformingto the required standardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIASeptember 1993© Philip M. Testemale, 1993In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.(Signature)Department of ^OF C'CIAAV\AM 1Ty^hl 9) -PEZ, CNA^Itt\NI Mil VC/The University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate  S-137PWAT7b< Z3 1 (99  3DE-6 (2/88)ABSTRACTThe depth and severity of the planet's ecological and social crisis demands solutionsand actions which exceed the capacity and ability of our dominant paradigm. Westernculture -- its set of values, attitudes, ethics, institutions and traditions -- is inherently non-sustainable. This is especially true with regards to perceptions and interrelationships withnature. The city is a projection of both the positives of this culture as well as being itsworst "ecological and social nightmare." This thesis addresses the city as the logicalstarting point for the project of sustainability; one which must ultimately entail nothing lessthan a complete paradigm shift.Planning, and more specifically urban design, have significant "leadership" roles toplay in this movement. This thesis explores an ecological approach to design as analternative to current theory and practice.By initially exploring ecological theories, a broad base is established which contrastsdeep ecological thinking with the shallow environmentalism that preoccupies mainstreamsociety. It is asserted that the radical theory and principles of Deep Ecology, SocialEcology and Bioregionalism demonstrate an ecological wisdom and perspective found to beabsent in Eco-development and environmentalism.This difference is directly translatable to design theory. Neotraditionalism is argued asembodying a mainstream "reformist" approach to urban form. In contrast the processtheory of Alexander et al and the theories and principles of the Ecocity movement provideradical prescriptions to urban form and societal issues.Variations on the concept of the urban village are found in each of the three designtheories. These are examined as potential alternatives to existing single-family landscapes.A synthesis of this concept drawing upon the principles of Alexander et al. and Ecocitytheory is called the urban eco-village. This is posited as a process and form prescriptioniifor community which can begin to reharmonize the relations between humans and otherhumans, and between humans and non-humansAction must be the touchstone of any paradigm shift. Hence, a series of strategies forimplementation are explored. These present potential process and built form actions whichemerge in the context of an ecological ethic. Accordingly, these coalesce around holisticdesign principles, the necessity to rebuild existing form (the concept of bricolage) and theconcentration of these efforts at the local/community scale in a bottom-up fashion.The strategies point to the requisite need to break with the current fixation on formwhich characterizes mainstream design. An alternative design philosophy and ideologybased on ecological understanding, information, and a more holistic definition ofcommunity within nature must be widely accepted and practiced if the goals ofsustainability are to be brought closer to realization.illTABLE OF CONTENTSABSTRACT^ iiTABLE OF CONTENTS^ ivLIST OF FIGURES viACKNOWLEDGEMENT^ viiiCHAPTER ONE : INTRODUCTION^ 11.1 PURPOSE^ 11.2 SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS 21.3 RATIONALE 41.3.1 The Problem of Sustainability in Context^ 41.3.2 Planning Theory and Practice^ 101.3.3 Thesis Contribution^ 121.4 METHODOLOGY^ 131.5 THESIS ORGANIZATION 14CHAPTER TWO : THEORY^ 182.1 INTRODUCTION 182.2 DEEP ECOLOGY VERSUS SHALLOW ENVIRONMENTALISM^202.3 PLANNING THEORY^ 242.4 LITERATURE REVIEW OF ECOLOGICAL / ENVIRON. THEORY^272.4.1 Eco-development/Environmentalism^ 282.4.2 Social Ecology^ 332.4.3 Bioregionalism 372.5 CONCLUSION^ 54CHAPTER THREE : DESIGN THEORY^ 553.1 INTRODUCTION^ 553.2 LYNCH'S NORMATIVE THEORIES OF CITY FORM^ 573.3 LITERATURE REVIEW OF DESIGN THEORIES 613.3.1 Neotraditionalism^ 623.3.2 Alexander et al.: A New Theory^ 733.3.3 The Ecocity Movement 793.4 TO BUILD OR TO REBUILD?^ 933.5 CONCLUSION^ 96CHAPTER FOUR : THE URBAN VILLAGE IN DESIGN THEORY^984.1 INTRODUCTION^ 984.2 URBAN VILLAGE DEFINED^ 1014.3 URBAN VILLAGE IN HISTORICAL CONTEXT^ 1084.4 THE URBAN VILLAGE IN THE THREE DESIGN THEORIES^ 1134.4.1 The Traditional Town Center in Neotraditionalism 1134.4.2 Case Project:Kentlands, Maryland, U.S.A^ 1164.4.3 The Identifiable Neighborhood in Alexander et al.^ 120iv4.4.4 Case Project:Second and Columbia Project, Vancouver, B.0^ 1234.4.5 The Integral Neighborhood in Ecocity Theory 1374.4.6 Case Project:The "Halifax Project," Adelaide, S.A., Australia^ 1404.5 CONCLUSION^ 142CHAPTER FIVE : STRATEGIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION^ 1475.1 INTRODUCTION^ 1475.2 ECOLOGICAL INTEGRATION^ 1515.3 BIOREGIONAL INTEGRATION 1635.4 SOCIAL/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT^ 1745.5 EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AND INSTITUTIONS^ 1825.6 BUILT FORM^ 1895.7 THE URBAN LANDSCAPE^ 1995.8 CONCLUSION 215CHAPTER SIX : CONCLUSION^ 219BIBLIOGRAPHY^ 225APPENDIX ONE : TOWN-MAKING DESIGN PRINCIPLES^ 233APPENDIX TWO : EIGHT POINTS FOR URBAN RESTRUCTURING^235APPENDIX THREE : ECOLOGICAL DESIGN GUIDELINES^ 239LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1.1 Map of the Thesis^ 15Figure 2.1 Map of the Thesis^ 19Figure 2.2 Bioregional versus Industrial-Scientific Paradigm^ 39Figure 3.1 Map of the Thesis^ 56Figure 4.1 Map of the Thesis^ 99Figure 4.2 Continuum for Analysis of Urban Villages^ 103Figure 4.3 Concentric Rings of Density^ 104Figure 4.4 "Punjab Market," Vancouver 111Figure 4.5 "Little Italy," Vancouver 111Figure 4.6 "Chinatown," Vancouver^ 112Figure 4.7 Plan of Kentlands^ 117Figure 4.8 Design for the Town Center, Kentlands^ 118Figure 4.9 Design for the Town Center, Kentlands 119Figure 4.10 "Master List" of A Pattern Language (partial) 124Figure 4.11a The "Identifiable Neighborhood"^ 125Figure 4.11b The "Identifiable Neighborhood" (cont'd)^ 126Figure 4.12 "Language" Built from Pattern No. 14: "Identifiable Neighborhood"^ 127Figure 4.13 Second and Columbia Site Context 129Figure 4.14 Overriding Attitudes^ 130Figure 4.15 Program and Context Issues^ 131Figure 4.16 Figure Ground of Design 133Figure 4.17 Figure Ground of Design 134Figure 4.18 Model of Workshop Design^ 135Figure 4.19 Model of Workshop Design 136Figure 4.20 The "Integral Neighborhood" 138Figure 4.21 The "Halifax Project"^ 141Figure 4.22 Program for "Halifax Project"^ 143Figure 4.23 Development Process 144Figure 4.24 An Urban Eco-Village^ 146Figure 5.1 Map of the Thesis^ 149Figure 5.2 Master List of Categories, Catalysts and Strategies^ 150Figure 5.3 Private Property versus Community Land Trust 155Figure 5.4 Process Framework for the "Halifax Project" 156Figure 5.5 Co-design^ 157Figure 5.6 Urban Village Mapping^ 158Figure 5.7 Ecological Yardstick 160Figure 5.8 The "Urban Footprint" 161Figure 5.9 The ACC of the Vancouver in Real Area^ 161Figure 5.10 Transportation Alternatives^ 162Figure 5.11 Urban Ecology Mission Statement 166Figure 5.12 Urban Ecology Defined 167Figure 5.13 Urban-Rural Rebalance (I) ^ 169Figure 5.14 Urban-Rural Rebalance (II) 170Figure 5.15 Bioregional Reinhabitation 171Figure 5.16 Bioregional Mapping^ 173viviiFigure 5.17 Artisan/Small Business Incubator^ 180Figure 5.18 Decentralizing City Hall^ 181Figure 5.19 Bricolage Educational Program 186Figure 5.20 William Curtis Park 189Figure 5.21 "Reinhabitation House" 192Figure 5.22 Densifying a Single-Family Neighbourhood^ 1%Figure 5.23 Green Roofs^ 197Figure 5.24 Start at Home 198Figure 5.25 "Ecology Square" 203Figure 5.26 Typical Grid in a Vancouver S-F Neighbourhood^ 205Figure 5.27 "Responsive" Pattern of the Italian Town of Sienna 206Figure 5.28 Every Second...Street^ 207Figure 5.29 Traffic Calming ("Woonerf") Methods^ 208Figure 5.30 "Asphalt Eater" 209Figure 5.31a "Lanes to Kids"—Before 211Figure 5.3 lb "Lanes to Kids"— After^ 212Figure 5.32 Activity On Corners 213Figure 5.33 Daylight Streams 216Figure 5.34 "Opportunistic Agriculture" 217ACKNOWLEDGEMENTI would like to express my appreciation to: Penny Gurstein and Moura Quayle for theirencouragement, guidance and patience; friends, classmates and professors at the School ofCommunity and Regional Planning who have provided challenges and support in a truecommunity of learning; and Ginnie and Mike for their generous assistance and advice inediting.I would like to express special thanks to friends and family for encouragement andsupport over the years: Paul for his doses of "reality" and tolerance; to Barry for hisgenerosity and camaraderie; to Craig and Scott for their unconditional friendship and"intellectual excursions;" to my family for the depth of all of their love and support; andespecially to Cheryl for her encouragement, counsel and cherished friendship.The largest thanks goes to Alison who as a partner has given love and encouragementthroughout this process displaying amazing tolerance and compassion to make an otherwiselaborious task a bright and worthwhile one.—PeaceviiiCHAPTER ONE : INTRODUCTION1.1 PURPOSEThe purpose of this thesis is to analyze how we design the structures and institutions ofan ecological culture and the ecological city. This purpose develops from two integratedgoals. The first is the large scale project of sustainability, explicitly, the movement, whichmay be characterized as a paradigm shift, towards an ecological culture --towards asituation of sustainability. This is considered in the light of a worsening ecological andsocial condition of the planet resulting from a paradigm which is inherently non-sustainable, namely Western capitalist and growth-oriented culture.Urban planning, and more specifically physical design, have an important role to playin a shift away from the entrenched unsustainable paradigm. Fundamentally, the form ofthe city in Western culture and the processes which have shaped, and continue to shape it,must be addressed. Their tremendous consumption of resources and energy, generation ofwaste and pollution and societal decay necessitate that cities be the starting point. Theappropriate means for instigating change must be defined and expressed. The goal ofsustainability, then, involves how to move toward both what is termed an ecological cultureas well as how to generate the ecological city. Importantly, these two elements areinextricably linked and coterminousMoving from the level of the city to that of the single-family landscape in the context ofurban Vancouver, the larger goal can be explored within the confines of a smaller, more"contained" goal. Explicitly, this second goal is to analyze the alternative concept of theurban village and, building on a sound basis in theory, to delineate a synthesis which couldbe called the urban eco-village, viewed as small scale expression of the larger sustainableculture and city sought.The urban eco-village could provide an integral component in the rebuilding of the non-sustainable city, however, in a manner that is in keeping with ecologically deep theory,principles and practice, and with an ecological ethic. The exploration of the followingquestions extrapolates the relationship between the urban eco-village and deep ecology.What constitutes the form of the urban eco-village and what is the process of achieving it ?What are the appropriate ecological theories and principles which form the basis for thedefinition of the urban eco-village? How do these permeate and inform design theories?How do these perform in terms of an ecological ethic? What are the different versions ofthe urban village concept which emerge from design theory? What is an appropriatesynthesis of these versions into the urban eco-village? What are some practical andimplementable strategies for achieving this goal?Fundamentally, all of these questions relate to how we design; the philosophical andideological underpinnings or perspectives we bring to the task as planners. Differenceshere are a projection of divergent paradigms or sets of values. Ultimately, to attain either ofthe expressed goals the how should arise from a holistic Gestalt approach in an ecologicalframework, not from an extrapolation of the status quo hidden behind shallow reforms.1.2 SCOPE AND DEFINITIONSFrom the outset it is necessary to define some key terms and concepts which are usedthroughout this thesis, in order to provide a clear definitional framework and to establishthe scope of the thesis.The first of these, Ecological Culture, is a World View or paradigm which isecologically based in outlook and action. Generally, it is a society which strives to balanceinteractions between humans and the natural (biotic and abiotic) realm. Such a culturerespects the diversity and richness of all life-forms, and strives for meaningful human andtrans-human interactions through an expanded definition of community. The latterembraces the goals of social equity and freedom, meaningful and sustainable work,economic justice (internally and externally), peacefulness, caring and sharing, culturaldiversity and integrity, non-hierarchical relations, institutions and organizations, spiritualfulfillment, self-determination, among others. It is a society which is based on solar notfossil fuel energy, and which creates living and working environments which "fit" intonature. This is juxtaposed to Western Culture which is the dominant Paradigm (below),the culture of industrialized, or "developed" North America and Western European. Theseare societies characterized by Capitalist ideology, Welfare State economics, individualismand materialism, large-scale production and consumption of resources, energy and food,and a Cartesian reductionistic view of nature based on the scientific methodA second term, the Ecological City, is coterminous with the Ecological Culture. TheEcological City is an urban form which is in balance with natural realm. It is built form andlandscape which is ecologically sound to the greatest extent possible, if in fact it does notenhance natural systems. The various urban design and architectural prescriptions for sucha form are explored throughout this thesis. However, in general, the ecological cityconsumes resources, energy and food, and produces waste and pollution within thecarrying capacity of its region. This is juxtaposed to the Non-Sustainable City whichconsumes and pollutes well in excess of the capacity of its supporting region.The term Sustainability is interchangeable with Ecological and Social Sustainabilityand is a physical and social state wherein human activity is within the limits of naturalcapacity. This is an inclusive definition which addresses issues of human needs,ecological integrity, social self determination and equity. An ecological culture is onewhich is in a state of Sustainability. These definitions differ strongly from the UnitedNations' concept of Sustainable Development which calls for the resolution of ecologicaldegradation through increased industrial activity on behalf of "developing" countries.A Paradigm is the set of values, attitudes and perceptions of a society or culture. It isthe shared metaphysical conception which dictates interactions between humans and otherhumans, between humans and non-humans and between humans and the spiritual realm. AParadigm Shift is "A profound shift change in the thoughts, perceptions, and values thatform a particular vision of reality" (Capra 1982, p. 30).Ecological Theories are those which explore radical societal change from an ecologicalperspective. Three are dealt with explicitly in this thesis: Social Ecology, Deep Ecologyand Bioregionalism. Others are Ecofeminism, CED, Conserver Society, etc.t DesignTheories are herein limited to Neotraditionalism, those of Christopher Alexander et al. andEcocity Theory, as these are representative of contrasting perspectives and responses to thenon-sustainable city.An Ecological Ethic is an ethic which governs the relations between humans and nature(or the "land"). As yet it has not been adopted at the scale of society which still largelyconfines ethics to relations between humans and humans, and between individual humansand society.The Urban Village was initially a sociological term for North American inner-cityethnic neighbourhoods coined by Herbert Gans (1962). More recently, it applies to adesign concept for creating compact, mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented form in replacement ofconventional single-family neighbourhoods. The Urban Eco-Village is an expandedversion of this which, it is argued, can provide the embodiment of the ecological cultureand city at this particular scale.1.3 RATIONALEThis section establishes the rationale behind this thesis, as divided into assumptions orexplanations about the context of the problem, the relevance of this thesis to currentplanning knowledge and practice, and the contribution that the thesis makes.1.3.1 The Problem of Sustainability in ContextThis discussion addresses assumptions about the current ecological and social conditionor context, the nature or scale of alteration required, human nature and finally those havingto do with appropriate means for change.t See Roseland 1990.The current condition of ecological degradation is visible at all scales from the planet asa whole down through every ecospheric division to the tiniest and most delicate ecosystem.For the purposes of this discussion, the problem will be divided into the planetary, that ofthe region and city, and that of the local neighbourhood. In addition to clarifying theperceived nature and extent of this degradation, the integrated social aspects of the problemwill be identified. This, in the end, will make clear the view that the overall condition ofnon-sustainability is a socio-cultural construct, and that problems must be identified andremedies sought in an ecologically and socially integrated approach.Planetary LevelThe first level is that of the planetary state of ecological degradation. This has beenexhaustively examined in popular and academic literature and through the media. Yetconsensus is lacking on the depth, severity and extent of the problem. It is assumed hereinthat wet are at a point which could best be described as critical, or to use a metaphor, weare perched on a precipice in danger of plummeting. Global warming, ozone depletion,acid rain, desertification, rainforest and old-growth loss, species and ecosystemdestruction, resource and fossil fuel energy exploitation, pollution and waste, consumptionpatterns of (mainly) the "First" World, population proliferation, accompanying diseaseand famine, are just the beginnings of the list which describe the ecological reality of today.Previously we could hide behind a veil of ignorance; however the reality that our wealthand standard of living has been built on the back of false promises, destruction ofecological integrity and exploitation of the majority of the earth's population is now comingback to haunt us. This condition is regarded as an attack on life, on all life from the levelof Gaiat t down to the smallest microorganism.t "We" here refers to previous and present generations of what is termed the "Developed World" or WesternSociety. Globally, this privileged minority is comprised of mainly European and North American industrialcountries in addition to some Asian countries and former colonies of previous empires of European countries.t t The Gaia Hypothesis is defined and explained in Lovelock (1978; revised)5To take an ecological perspective is to understand that a threat to integrity at any scale isultimately a threat to the whole. This is the principle of interconnectivity. Press upon anyone or individual ecosystem and the biosphere writ large is jeopardized. The situation isone of ecological limits to growth, to degradation, to population. It is the opinion of thisauthor that we are pressing at the doorsteps of absolute limits; in fact we have likely passedthrough. The implications of this depend on valuative and ethical perspectives. We canaccept responsibility and act accordingly, as painful as that might be. We can act selflessly,trans-personally and with compassion and concern. Or, we can continue to turn our backsand exercise selfish denial and wither the planet and its species. It is assumed herein thatthe choices are that fundamental and large.The Level of the City and RegionThe second level on which assumptions about the current ecological condition must bemade has to do with the modern city. The majority of the above conditions are directly orindirectly a manifestation of the demands of the large city or metropolis. The city is a directprojection of our society, and the ecological and social reach of the non-sustainable citynow extends well beyond the confines of urban, regional and national boundaries.Although the city of today is an expression of diversity in culture, variety of entertainment,high standards of living, technological progress and other advances of Western industrialsociety, it is simultaneously an ecological nightmare. The consumption and waste whichmost cities inflict on the biosphere is at a scale which is well beyond the carrying capacityof its direct regiont and is representative of large imbalances. Accordingly, the city and theregion are assumed to be the logical starting places for ecological restructuring. These arethe ecological cancers of our earth. You do not fight a disease by treating symptoms.Level of Local NeighbourhoodThis assumption is brought down one more level to that which can be managed withinthe scope of this thesis --the scale of the local neighbourhood and in particular the single-t See Wackemagel et al. (1993) for an explanation of the concept of Appropriated Carrying Capacity6family landscape. This is chosen as the worst manifestation of the above conditions andthe one in most urgent need of addressing. This realm also serves to contextualize thethesis further as it is a landscape which proliferates over much of North America, Canadaand the region surrounding and containing Vancouver itself. It is less an assumption andmore accurately a fact now that these landscapes are the least sustainable expressions (withsome industrial exceptions) of the North American city. They are a wholesale projection ofconsumption, inefficiency, waste, individual self-interest and social breakdown. Theecological implications of land consumption, infrastructure costs in terms of dispersed landuse patterns, consumption and pollution due to the private automobile, and the treatment oflandscapes and natural environments are only a few of the non-sustainable aspects of thesingle-family neighbourhood. The assumption made herein is that this is the urban realm inmost urgent need of alternative practices and ecological medicine.As is evident in the above assumptions about the ecological condition of the biosphere,the social aspects of non-sustainability are inextricably linked to the ecological ones. It isassumed that it constitutes negligence to separate them. Our ecological condition is amanifestation of our society's and culture's values, specifically the dominant Westernparadigm of the so-called First World. An ethos of technology, growth, resourceexploitation, capitalistic self-interest, consumption and unconscionable waste has broughtus great wealth and prosperity and comfort in living. It can no longer be denied, though,that this has been to the benefit of a few at the expense of the masses. The polarization ofhaves and have-nots serves to escalate ecological destruction through a perceived need to"catch-up" on the part of "developed" nations via rapid industrialization. Such disequity isa question of power in the hands of those few who currently hold it, be they ingovernments or multi-national corporations, who have a vested interest in preserving thestatus quo and the power and will to do so, apparently at any cost.This social disequity should be seen not simply as a dichotomy at the global scalebetween North and South, but a polarity within our own countries and cities. We are in the7throes of societal breakdown as expressed in all manners of poverty, crime, racialintolerance, segregation and scapegoating, war, rioting, unemployment, and on and on. Itis not an assumption of this thesis that more and stricter conservative economics andpreservation of the status quo are the solution. Rather the inverse. We require new ways ofthinking and doing. This change must be in concert with an ecological perspective, asneither social nor ecological solutions will be realized in separation. It must be a concertedeffort at all levels, and it must evolve in a context of wisdomThe Nature of ChangeWhat all that is articulated above adds up to is that the severity of our ecological andsocial problems cannot tolerate mere reformist answers. The goal of moving from a stateof non-sustainability to sustainability will not be realized by simply tinkering with what wehave. A fundamental assumption or perspective of this thesis is that the mere existence of asystem does not validate it. What we require is a drastic, creative and radical alteration ofthe way that we think, act, exist, relate--to nature and with each other--at all scales; to stateit simply, we need a paradigm shift from our current World View to a new ecological one.tTo make such an assumption places one at direct odds with mainstream society.Arguably, those who express the strongest opposition to such change are those with themost to lose. Additionally, it is a sad fact that these people are generally the masters ofwealth and accordingly of power and control in our society. This from the onset precludeschange being delivered from the "top." In terms of equity, then, any paradigm shift of anysort of legitimacy must be grasped, nurtured and emerge from the bottom-up. Fear ofchange is one of the largest dissuaders to action in this case. Ecological knowledge,though, brings understanding that change is necessary for the health of any system and istherefore invited.t An excellent discussion of paradigms and paradigm shifts appears inn Berman (1981) and Capra (1982) amongothers.8Human NatureThe scope of required change raises important questions about human nature. In theface of the above context, will our culture and society heed warnings and act in wisdom torebalance, or will it blindly carry on in the misguided faith that an ecological collapse willnot occur or that technology will save us? The construct of Western society is erected oncertain assumptions about human nature which ultimately shape judgement on thisquestion. The status quo would have us believe that we are instinctively greedy, self-interested, individualistic, competitive, non-cooperative monads in a fiercely cut-throat,asocial milieu. Although there is some evidence on the surface for this view, it a premiseof this thesis that this is not a natural fact but rather a result of conditioning over centuriesby a dominant World View. One only has to look to other cultures and animals to see thatpeace and cooperation can be a condition in any society or community if there is the will.Therefore, the answer to the question is slightly less pessimistic than the contextpresented. It is assumed that we can turn around and bring our biosphere and society back.But not without significant effort, sacrifice, pain, and drastically different ways of thinkingand doing. Human beings are naturally good, caring, cooperative, nurturing, life-respecting creatures. It is felt that if people become more knowledgeable and aware of themanner in which their current actions are destroying biospheric life, as well as the futurelives of their children and their own lives, if this conceptual "leap" can be grasped byenough people, their true natures will emerge.Means for ChangeThis final set of assumptions follows logically from the previous ones. We have asituation, it requires change of a certain magnitude, and such a change will depend oncertain human values. The only remaining question then is how? The answers to this inessence form this body of this thesis. These too rely upon or express certain assumptionsor premises.9The first of these is that the largest and most fundamental requirement is for humansocieties to act from the basis of an ecological ethic. This ethics of choosing meansappropriate to ends must permeate the shift to an ecological perspective. The secondassumption is that it is necessary to act from ecological knowledge or wisdom. Thistranslates into actions which are holistic in conception and incremental in application. Fromthis perspective, the goal of sustainability is not viewed as an absolute or rigid end; rather itis assumed to be a changing and responsive goal which represents a state which we willnever achieve. What is critical is decreasing drastically the distance between our presentstate and that of sustainability which always will and always should remain a goal.A third assumption is that we should look at the means we currently have in terms ofhuman resources and of the form and infrastructure of our built form and landscapes.Action hence should be infused with the "Spirit of Re" -- rebalance, reinhabit, rebuild. Themeans for a shift should rise from the bottom-up, from the level of the local community.This is a reflection of both current reality and a prescription for future legitimacy.Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world,indeed it's the only thing that ever has. --Margaret MeadIn summary this thesis rests upon assumptions that situations of ecological and socialdegradation are inseparable in terms of both roots causes and solutions towards betterment.What is required is radical change -- a paradigm shift -- based on peace and cooperationthrough efforts grounded in an ethical perspective and a wisdom which is ecological.1.3.2 Planning Theory and PracticeThis thesis has relevance to three areas of planning knowledge and practical application:ecological theories as applied to planning, professional planning and design practice, andpublic policy. As a general rule, the approach and arguments of this thesis attempt to"bridge" these elements rather than consider them in isolation.10Ecological Theory and PlanningThis thesis does not aspire to generating new theory but attempts to synthesize existingtheories in terms of the stated goals. This process includes contrasting and analyzingtheories within a broader ecological and socio-cultural agenda and translating them intocorresponding design theories. The objective is to demonstrate the potential for ecologicaltheory to inform design theory and practice.Professional Design and Planning PracticeMany of the design theories discussed herein are denigrated by the mainstreamprofession as "ivory tower," idealistic and unrealistic. This thesis argues that such aresponse is dangerous and ecologically negligent. It asserts that ecologically deep theoryshould be the basis for alternative approaches and applications given the breadth and depthof our current crisis. No longer an academic luxury, planning must begin to face complexsituations with complex and well-thought-out solutions.Public PolicyThis thesis implicitly identifies and responds from an ecological perspective to deficienciesin public policy formulation and implementation. Chapter Five makes some explicitstrategy recommendations in this area. Directed largely at the municipal level of politicsand planning, the intention is to generate ideas and provoke thought in radically alternativedirections. A large degree of responsibility for the current context and solutions lies withpolicy formulators and regulators. However, it is important that no single group befingered. Rather, our situation must be considered a shared responsibility for past mistakesand future solutions.The logical extension of this ethos is to address the question of responsibility in thecontext of society at large. An underlying assumption of this thesis is that any sort ofprogress towards the goal of sustainability must come from the majority of the members ofsociety, that is from the bottom-up. It must be the broadly based effort of a whole culturenot just of a few "leaders" or lobbies.111.3.3 Thesis ContributionThe contribution that this thesis makes lies in its application of ecological principles todesign questions, in its inclusion of an ethical dimension,in its thorough exploration of adesign concept or model as a catalyst for change, and in its capacity to become a resource.Application of Ecological PrinciplesThe application of ecological theory to the objectives and goals presented at the outset isa departure from conventional approaches. The thesis attempts to treat holistically what areoften dichotomous and/or distant elements or entities in the pursuit of sustainability:ecology and society, theory and practice, process and form in design, and design practiceand people.To expand on the first of these, the task of achieving sustainability is perceptibly anoverwhelming challenge in the face of which planners fall back on surficial "band-aid"solutions. Often planners view societal and ecological problems as mutually exclusive ,ignoring the interconnectedness and common "rootedness" of the two.Planning theory and practice often display such a disconnection. Too often it is thecase that theses fail in translating theoretical concepts into plans relevant to the real world.The question might be asked whether ecological culture must precede an ecological city(Downton 1990). Actually they must evolve together. In the narrower focus of designtheory and practice, this translates into a need to balance process and form. This thesisstresses the fact that a "green city" counts for nothing if methods and values -- the process-- are not reflective of an ecological ethic.Accordingly, there is a necessity to make the final "leap" across the current distancebetween design and society at large. Paradigm shifts are not the domain of a specializedfew. This thesis supports arguments for bringing planning and design into the realm of thelocal community in a holistic, decentralized and participatory manner.12Inclusion of an Ethical DimensionIn presenting an ecological perspective, it is argued explicitly that we must begin byinverting the current scenario. Any project for sustainability must align itself with anecological ethic of appropriate means to ends versus the ends-by-any-means approachwhich predominates today. This thesis identifies the general character of this ethic inChapter Three. However the essence of it permeates the entire approach and discussion.Exploration of a Design ConceptA third contribution is in the thorough analysis of a design concept with the objective ofdemonstrating one plausible avenue among a multiplicity. The urban village is presentedand analyzed as a solution which, in its full expression as an urban eco-village, is able tomodel potential actions at both its own and larger scales.Capacity as a ResourceThis thesis provides an end-product which can act as a resource for academics,planning and design professionals, policy makers and, importantly, the general populace.This resource is mainly contained in the strategies for implementation found in ChapterFive. However, the presentation and analysis of theory and principles in support of thesealso could have utility to some of these people.1.4 METHODOLOGYThe methodology of this thesis includes, but is not restricted to, the followingelements:Literature ReviewA review of relevant literature on ecological and environmental theory and principles,planning and design theory applied to sustainability, and community development. Thesesources include academic resources on relevant specific and broad subjects, journal articles,conference proceedings, published and unpublished reports and other information fromvarious groups and individuals.13Case Study ExamplesA brief review of case studies in the form of built and unbuilt designs and projectsillustrates applications of design theories. Sources include the above literature sources aswell as printed and graphic presentation material provided by individuals and groups andthrough personal communications.AnalysisAnalysis of the above material is undertaken through critical assessment andcomparison. In presenting and contrasting theories, principles and projects, the authorbuilds an argument in support of an appropriate course of action.Generation of Strategies/IdeasA series of strategies which address the institutions and structures of an ecologicalculture and city vis a vis the urban eco-village are catalogued and discussed. The methodfor presenting these is to describe and analyze both the broad category (six in number) anda single "catalyst" strategy for each in turn. The remaining strategies for each category arepresented in a written and visual format.1.5 THESIS ORGANIZATIONThe organization of the thesis is diagrammatically "mapped" in Figure 1.1. It has anoverall structure which moves from ecological theory to urban design theories and then tothe concept of the urban village and finally to implementation strategies for the urban eco-village.Chapter TwoChapter Two is a literature review of ecological and planning theories applicable tourban design. This includes an introductory comparison of deep and shallow ecologywhich in turn serves to introduce the theory of Deep Ecology. This is then applied to adiscussion of radicalism and reformism in the context of planning theory and the"ecological perostroika" proposed as forming a new "tradition." A more detailed14Figure 1.1 : Map of the Thesis121a-Amlimmri1111111111111111 11111111111111101111111111d15Source: Authorexamination of what are labelled more mainstream, "shallow" theories of Eco-developmentand environmentalism leads to a discussion of the deeper theory of Social Ecology. Thefinal portion of the chapter is dedicated to a detailed analysis of the theory and principles ofBioregionalism. This theory forms the core or nucleus in support of the goals of thisthesis.Chapter ThreeThe purpose of the third chapter is to translate the general theories into design theories.To provide a contextual framework, the normative theories of Kevin Lynch are introduced.It is argued that the design theory of Neotraditionalism informed by a shallow perspectiveon ecology accords with Lynch's city as a machine perspective. By contrast, the ecologicaltheory of Alexander et al. sees the city as an organism. Ecocity theory is closely related tothe deep theory of Bioregionalism. The theory and principles of the Ecocity movement arecompatible with the "single" normative theory of Lynch which regards the city as acomplex ecosystem. Together, the process answers found in Alexander and the processand form found in Ecocity provide the most appropriate model for sustainability and theurban eco-village. This chapter concludes by introducing an ethical framework fordiscussion which coalesces around whether to build or rebuild the sustainable city.Chapter FourChapter Four looks at the one design concept of the urban village as it is delineated inthe above three design theories. The purpose of the chapter is to arrive at a synthesisherein called the urban eco-village. Initially, the concept is defined and qualified as a visionor potential and not an absolute. It is explicitly viewed as compatible with certaindefinitions of community. Following this, the urban village is placed in a historicalcontext. The urban village is then explored as the Traditional Town Center inNeotraditionalism, as the Identifiable Neighborhood in Alexander et al., and finally as theIntegral Neighborhood and the Eco-village in Ecocity theory. To illustrate each theory acase project is presented.16Chapter FiveThe purpose of Chapter Five is to move from theory and conceptualization to practice.For this a series of implementation strategies are presented. These are organized into sixcategories. The first four concentrate on process issues: ecological integration, bioregionalintegration, social/community development, and educational programs and institutions.The final two, built form and the urban landscape, address physical form. As a whole,these strategies are meant to be taken as a "bundle," a resource of ideas and information tobe added to and subtracted from organically over time as situations and ideas alter.Chapter SixChapter Six is the concluding chapter of this thesis. It synthesizes the broader andmore specific conclusions of the thesis. These are discussed in terms which are proactiveand forward looking and introduce questions of further research, implementation andaction.17CHAPTER TWO : THEORY2.1 INTRODUCTIONThe purpose of this chapter is to explore theories, or paradigms, in order to understandthe perspectives which inform planning and design decisions with regards to sustainability.This thesis is specifically concerned with the concept of the "urban village" as part of thesolution to non-sustainable cities and more concisely with implications for policy andpractical application of a such a concept. This chapter is an exploration of theories whichdemonstrate a range of thoughts with regards to ecological and social sustainability. Moreweight is given to those ecological perspectives which address more rooted and deeperecological and societal problems and seek radical alternatives of a fundamental nature.These stand in contrast to the more reformist approach of "environmentalism" which,despite having a morally sound basis and potential to contribute, lacks ecological wisdomand a program for change. This dichotomy will be argued explicitly and implicitlythroughout. If we as planners and designers are going to embark on a program oflegitimate and true sustainability, then we must ground our actions in those theories andprescriptions which are entrenched in ecological knowledge, wisdom and spirit.Figure 2.1 illustrates the content of this chapter in the context of the thesis'development. The method for exploring these theories will consist mainly of a literaturereview which will have the following format. First, there will be a discussion of deeperecological thinking as opposed to mainstream reform or shallow environmentalism. Thiswill set the tone and identify the author's perspective for the discussion to follow. This isnot intended to encourage divisiveness, but rather to expound and articulate the point that ifour actions are not based in ecological holism, then any efforts we make will representecological shortfalls in the long run. Second, this discussion will be placed in the morespecific context of planning theory based on an analysis of radical theory and on JohnFriedmann's thesis of the existence of "Four Traditions" in planning. The thesis which18Figure 2.1 : Map of the ThesismolitimutemittEmituoi t imiutv" I19Source: Authorcalls for a fifth tradition, or "ecological perestroika" in Mark Roseland's terms, will also beconsidered. Third, a more detailed description and analysis will expand briefly upon theindividual paradigms of Eco-development as an extension of environmentalism, and on thedeeper theory of Social Ecology. Bioregionalism, viewed as the most appropriate of thesethree ecological perspectives in the context of design form and process for urban villages,will be discussed and analyzed at greater length.Although it precludes a large number of theories and perspectives and belies the widespectrum of ecological / environmental thought, the scope of the thesis dictates suchchoices. Strong criticism leveled against shallow environmentalism is not intended toextinguish the potential within it, but rather to inform of its shortfalls and the ecologicaldangers inherent with it. It is neither possible nor advisable to remain totally objectivewhen reviewing theory; indeed the selection of a mere three or four positions extinguishessuch possibilities from the onset.2.2 DEEP ECOLOGY VERSUS SHALLOW ENVIRONMENTALISMThe purpose of this section is to outline a fundamental dichotomy which exists inecological perspectives. This can be characterized in many different manners includingdeep versus shallow ecology, radicalism versus reformism, and paradigm change versusstatus quo maintenance, to name a few. Our current World View, or paradigm, introducedin Chapter One is one which is largely concerned with inadequate perspectives on andsolutions to ecological issues. The case defended herein is that shallow reformist or statusquo maintenance programmes will fail in the long term, unless they move toward acomplete understanding of ecology in both the social and natural uses of the term.Ultimately this argument boils down to the fact that in light of the current situation wecannot afford anything less than drastic and fundamental alteration of our social, political,economic, and cultural institutions and practices, and of our attitudes and actions towardsthe natural realm of which we are an integral part.20Some qualifications must be made in the "sticky" area of terminology and vocabulary.Deep Ecology should be differentiated from deep ecology (small 'd', small 'e'), deeperecology or deeper thinking. Deep Ecologyt, now commonly known as Ecosophy, itself isa philosophy, or paradigm, founded by Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess in the 1970s.The eight platform principles of the Deep Ecology Movement are:1. The well-being and flourishing of human and non-human Life on Earth have value inthemselves (synonyms: intrinsic value, inherent value). These values are independent ofthe usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.2. Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values andare also values in themselves.3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vitalhuman needs.4. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease ofthe human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease.5. Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation israpidly worsening.6. Policies must therefore be changed. These policies affect basic economic,technological, and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeplydifferent from the present.7. The ideological change is mainly that of appreciating life quality (dwelling insituations of inherent value) rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard ofliving. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great.8. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectlyto try to implement the necessary changes.(Drengson 1992, pp. 44-45)The introduction of Deep Ecology by Naess served to illustrate the rift between two verydistinct and separate types of ecology. One type is "...interested in administrative solutionsto environmental problems" and the other in "uncovering the political, economic, andcultural roots of these problems" (Cayley 1991, pp. 3-4).t Deep Ecology, or Ecosophy, is distinct from the more inclusive deeper ecologies discussed herein. Some DeepEcologists call for a drastic reduction in human population, in human material standards of living, and of intrusioninto non-human diversity and richness by human activities (Drengson 1992, p. -44). Yet it is unclear whetherDeep Ecologists are suggesting a balance between non-human and human life forms, or, as many critics assert, asubservience of the latter to the former (Gardner and Roseland 1989; Roseland 1990).21Deeper ecologies offer a criticism of our fundamental societal values and attitudestowards Nature, and suggest the drastic alteration of these. In short, they are newparadigms posited as alternatives to the existing non-sustainable one:Whereas shallow environmentalism is concerned with more efficient control andmanagement of the natural environment for the benefit of "man," the deep ecologymovement recognizes that ecological balance will require profound changes in ourperception of the role of human beings in the planetary ecosystem. (Capra 1982, p. 412)The new paradigms refuse to work from within the system to "fix" it, but instead seek toidentify root causes and mainly "grass-roots" solutions which lie outside the dominantstructures. Their basis is a reconnecting and healing relationship with the natural world,which has figuratively and literally become "separate" from us through three centuries ofCartesian industrial-scientific thinking (see Berman 1981 ; Capra 1982). By rootingourselves in an ecological World View we might begin to re-balance our relation withnature and unlearn our non-sustainable ways and in doing so reverse the condition of thefollowing polarities:...Man the conqueror versus man the biotic citizen; science the sharpener of his swordversus science the searchlight on his universe; land the slave and serpent versus land thecollective organism. (Leopold 1949, p. 260-61)Such a change in ethics and values is not part of the thinking which forms the ideologyof shallow environmentalism which addresses usually narrow, single issues. The dominantview is that the solution is merely a matter of cleaning up our act and applying scientific andtechnological fixes, while maintaining the status quo. This, however, ultimately fails toreach the actual roots of the problem which lie in larger societal values and institutions; nordoes it address the question of society's impact on the interrelatedness of natural systems.Shallow environmentalism is often characterized as applying "band-aid' solutions whichcan exacerbate the situation on hand:Finding technocratic fixes for environmental problems...was like cutting off the heads ofmythical Hydra: where one was severed two would grow back. (Cayley 1991, p. 4)Koula Mellos (1988) characterizes these opposing perspectives as being inclusive in theecological movement to the extent that they have a common conception of the22interconnectedness of society and what he calls organic nature. It is as to the nature of thisrelationship that there is difference. Mellos describes radical perspectives in much the sameway that deep ecology has been characterized in the preceding pages. Their conception ofthe relationship between society and nature is holistic, and proponents seek alternativeswhich reharmonize the two. Those adhering to the reform view adopt an anthropocentricperspective and see the interrelationship of society and nature as being one of subservienceof the former to the latter. Under the banner of reform, Mellos places, in addition toothers, the schools of "Eco-development" and, with some trepidation, that of"expansionism." Eco-development informed much of the thinking behind the UnitedNations commissioned Brundtland Report Our Common Future (WCED 1985), and isdescribed in the following manner:This socio-ecological theory adopts a human needs approach which posits the nature ofman as constituting basic needs best by a pattern of production and distribution based onmoderation.... (Mellos 1988, p. 6)Eco-development is largely concerned with the macro-global scale of situations ofdisequity. While addressing many of the pressing ecological problems which face theplanet, the remedies which the report proposed do not call for any drastic alterations, onlyfor what could be described as watered down reform. Our Common Future calls foreconomic growth in developing countries as a remedy, and was the originator of the term"sustainable development" described in the preceding chapter. In their most recentconferences, such as Rio de Janeiro in 1992 which appeared on the surface to demonstratea large consensus among world governments, UN solutions have consistently been weak.Indeed the most pressing issues facing the planet, population and consumption, were noteven on the agenda.Mellos has included the theory of expansionism in his shallow or reform ecologycategory on the premise that such a theory is explicitly critical of ecology and thereby is aparty to shallow platforms. Expansionism argues that any ecological problems can beconquered by technology and continued economic growth:23...in this view, it is the unlimited technical mastery over nature provided by expandingtechnology which is the key to the solution of ecological problems as they emerge,however wide their magnitude may be. (Mellos 1988, p. 6)The combination of these two theories of Eco-development and expansionism begin toidentify shallow ecological thinking or environmentalism. One would be hard pressed tocall expansionism even environmental, yet the extent to which its proponents claim to bebehind the concept of sustainable development which warrants its inclusion in thediscussion.The labels of Eco-development and environmentalism present a problem as they arebroad and general. The effort here is to try to describe and analyze the perspective andprinciples of the dominant World View, understanding that there is a whole variety ofviews and values ranging from complete ecological ignorance and antagonism to the other"edge" which, in some cases, overlaps with the deep ecological theories discussed later.This paradigm will be expanded on in the section on Eco-development andenvironmentalism.2.3 PLANNING THEORYIn Grabow and Heskin's notion of radical planning theory (1973) and in JohnFriedmann's "Four Traditions," we can see a similar dichotomy in values and perspectivesin planning theory. Mark Roseland's call for a "Fifth Tradition" attempts to unite thetheories of Deep Ecology, Social Ecology and Bioregionalism in a common definition ofequitable sustainable development or an "ecological perestroika." These theorists allcriticize the current world paradigm with its inequities of power and in distribution ofwealth.The arrogant assumption of power by the state that has gained control over the principalmedia of manipulation, and that can harass citizens, divorce them from their livelihood,and threaten them with terror, and an economy that is increasingly controlled by a handfulof global corporations whose interest in public benefits is zero, and whose very leadershipremains, for the most part, anonymous and unaccountable to the political order, have ledus to ...growing disorder and unpredictability....(Friedmann 1987, p. 347)24Despite differences in philosophical and ideological outlooks, there is a fundamentalopposition to such inequities and the social and ecological manifestations of them shared byall the theorists discussed. The prescriptions that these theorists recommend in terms ofaction vary widely, yet they all generally include Friedmann's "social transformation" and,more specifically, "social mobilization" whereinPlanning is a political activity which attempts to change the status quo of oppression andalienation under capitalism... [and].. emphasizes the politics of disengagement andconfrontation. (Friedmann as adapted by Roseland 1990, p. 9)Radical theory focuses on questions and assumptions about power, and moreimportantly disempowerment, and its relation to planning action. Grabow and Heskin intheir 1973 paper, Foundations for a Radical Concept of Planning, are recognized asushering in the concept of radical planning theory (Friedmann 1987). Their thesis wasborn out of a critique of the, then contemporary, planning paradigm and its inability toaddress fundamental structural problems with rationality. In their view, "Modern planning,objective planning, has elitist, centralizing, and change resistant tendencies" (Ibid., p.108).Elitism is seen as the separation of the ostensible planner from the public which in turnresults in invidious hierarchy. The required control necessitates centralization which isself-reproducing and resistant to all but programmed social change (Ibid.). Freidmannidentifies Grabow and Heskin's article as an attempt to deconstruct "...establishmentplanning...and [propose] a new order of society evidently inspired by utopian and anarchistthought..." (Ibid., p. 300). This was in partial response to the failure of advocacyplanning which was seen as regressing from its obligation to interest groups and the"underdog" into the assumptions of pluralist politics and the net of state funding.Grabow and Heskin saw a duality existing between "planned action" and "spontaneity"and prescribed a dialectical approach to mediating these, to achieving a new paradigm orsynthesis based on...systems change and the realization of a decentralized communal society which facilitateshuman development by fostering an appreciation of an ecological ethic based onevolutionary process: spontaneity and experimentation. (Grabow and Heskin 1973, p.109)25Radical planning and the role of its practitioners is summarized by these two authors asembodying the following:• a synthesis of rational action and spontaneity.• an active planner's role wherein he [she] is an agent for radical change, and is not acreature of divided loyalty but rather facilitates social experimentation by the people.• the radical planner is what they call a 'nonprofessional professional'; an educator,student of the ecological ethic and one who strives for self-actualization and that of others.• the radical planner is "one of us, or all of us" not apart from the people. (Ibid., p. 112)Friedmann (1987, pp. 70-85) offers an analysis of radical theory within the context of hisfour major "traditions": social reform, policy analysis, social learning and socialmobilization. From these stem three definitions of planning wherein "Planning attempts tolink scientific and technical knowledge either (1) to actions in the public domain; (2) toprocesses of societal guidance; or (3) to a process of social transformation" (Freidmann asadapted by Roseland 1990, p. 8).Of importance to this discussion are "social mobilization" and "transformation." The"social mobilization" tradition is defined as a "...direct departure from all others byasserting the primacy of direct collective action 'from below" (Ibid.). Radical planning isanalyzed by Friedmann through a series of questions which are strikingly similar to thesynthesis provided by Grabow and Heskin. The conclusions that he reaches aresummarized in the following statement:...radical intellectuals have had to rethink society from the ground up... [vvhich]...hasmeant that no one could remain content with a metaphysics that merely underwroteexisting relations of power. Radical knowledge might not reveal the ultimate truth ofthings: it would reach out instead to a historically contingent truth. And underlying thistruth would be an image of 'being human' based on social bonds rather than on the flawedassumption of the autonomous self-development of unattached, free-floatingindividuals...[and it would]...have to stay close to the experiences of everyday life.(Friedmann 1987, p. 307)Crucial to this definition are "...critical thinking and ... a moral commitment to an ethics ofemancipation" (Ibid., p. 306). Friedmann's view is more conservative when compared toGrabow and Heskin's assertion that "..radical planning is every individual's organic desireto merge with the unity of the world" (1973, p. 111).26Roseland (1990) provides a critique of the four "traditions" and argues for the inclusionof a "fifth tradition" or "ecological perestroika" which centres around a equitable definitionof sustainable development and a set of relevant paradigms. The author asserts that...despite dimly acknowledged contributions of the social learning and social mobilizationtraditions, there are still significant gaps in planning theory as it pertains to sustainabledevelopment, especially in the areas of ecological integrity and future equity andcommunity self-reliance. (Roseland 1990, p. 12)Roseland views social learning and social mobilization as being unable to address currentconcerns of sustainability in terms of material human needs, non-material human needs,ecological integrity (conservation/reducing consumption), future and current equity,community self reliance and participatory democracy (Ibid., p. 13). A list of paradigms isthen presented as a method of filling these gaps wherein "...each reflects a wisdom thataddresses, at least in part, principles neglected in the four traditions" (Ibid, p. 12). Theparadigms are steady state, appropriate technology, the conserver society, communityeconomic development, ecofeminism, social ecology, the green movement, bioregionalism,deep ecology, new physics, native world view, and the Gaia hypothesis (Ibid., p. 14). Inreviewing each of these a sound argument is made for the existence and "depth" of an"ism" and the usefulness of viewing them as a somewhat cohesive set, or an ideology,which in order to be successful must...catch our imaginations--it must propose a new agenda that goes beyond environmentalprotection, an agenda that focuses our attention on restructuring our economy and societyfor sustainability. (Ibid., p. 34)It is with the goal of such a notion or "perestroika," of a unified ideology of ecologicalwisdom, that the following review of paradigms is undertaken.2.4 LITERATURE REVIEW OF ECOLOGICAL / ENVIRONMENTALTHEORYThe remainder of this chapter will look at a set of theoretical paradigms in depth, basedupon a review of literature having to do with the respective theories. As was statedpreviously, the theories discussed are by no means exhaustive in terms of providing the fullrange of perspectives on ecology or environmentalism. The purpose here is to survey27theories which inform design theories. These, in turn, present versions of the urbanvillage, some of which can contribute to the synthesis of an urban eco-village.Eco-development/environmentalism embodies the ideology of technological fixeswithin the current paradigmatic structure of growth and disequity. Social Ecologyprovides political and utopianistic prescriptions. Bioregionalism's theories and principlesfor practice provide a more grounded and practical approach. The latter possesses themost potential for meeting the goals of a sustainable society, especially as realized throughdesign theory and practice.2.4.1 Eco-development/EnvironmentalismWestern society is admittedly beginning to muster some awareness of the condition ofthe "environment." For over three centuries, the social, political and economic program ofthe industrial-scientific world has focused on growth, consumption, expansion,centralization and, most importantly, on the separation of humans from their environment --from nature. The purpose of this section is to describe and analyze the mainstream orconventional reaction to ecological and social degradation. This perspective, in the main,informs the design theories of Neotraditionalism and the likes.For Eco-development and environmentalism the notion of sustainable development isinformed largely by the United Nations' definition, one which falls short in its program forchange. Eco-development, despite concentrating on the more macro-global issuesincluded in Our Common Future (WCED 1987), still has bearing on a more local or micro-level and on design theory. Although Environmentalism may embrace many of theprinciples and understanding found in deep ecologies, its single issue, narrow focus oftenworks to effect change only at the level of symptoms. It lacks the holism and breadthrequired to truly "heal " such situations, and yet it appears to be the perspective or reactionwhich most design embodies. Additionally, the methodology for carrying outNeotraditional design per se represents a reductionism which is a mirror of the largerparadigm of which it is a part.28Return to Sustainable DevelopmentSustainable Development is development that meets the needs of the present withoutcompromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. (WCED 1987, p.43)With this statement what was effectively launched was a process of awareness andacting (to some extent) which could be characterized as contradictory. On the one hand, theUnited Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (UNWCED)produced a comprehensive assessment of global ecological destruction and developmentalproblems, and with this achieved an unprecedented level of exposure to the problem on thepart of the general public. This may be described as the "second coming" ofenvironmentalism or as the emergence of a green consciousness. But much of what wasdiscussed in Our Common Future merely echoed what had been stated by ecologists andenvironmentalists for two decades already. However, international legitimacy andexposure effectively brought the message home to the general populace. Suddenly it was"in" to be green, to speak of the environment with concern, to recycle, to buy "green"products, etc. The moral basis of such a movement is for the most part sound; it is theother side of the coin which tends to contradict its programme.The "down side" is the inability of such a perspective to address the root causes of theworsening social and ecological crisis. This is largely referred to as a"band-aid" solutionapproach; one which fails to view the situation as a function of a World View which isinherently non-sustainable. The best that can be hoped for by following a path inaccordance with the UN's definition of sustainable development is for a partial slowing ofthe destruction. This is far from, in both human and non-human life terms, an adequateresponse.Among others, Rees (1989) and Gardner and Roseland (1989) view this"conventional" interpretation of sustainable development as falling short on many counts.The WCED calls for "...a five to tenfold increase in world industrial output...by the timeworld population stabilizes some time in the next century" (WCED 1987, p. 213 as quoted29in Rees 1989). Sustainable development is, therefore, a remedy which would bringdeveloping countries up to our levels of industrial production and consumption as ananswer to global disequity and ecological rape. Even the Government-sponsored RoyalCommission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront was sharply critical of the Brundtlandreport stating that it was...deliberately vague [about means of reaching the goals of sustainable development]...judging that the best way to put these new imperatives on the international agenda wasto sell the idea that we can eat our cake (economic development) and have it too (a healthyenvironment). (Crombie 1992, p. 39)Clearly, while the UN definition may be viewed as "progress," it is obviously entrenchedin a paradigm of growth, development, consumption and exploitation, the recipe whichproduced this mess in the first place.Gardner and Roseland are also critical of mainstream interpretations and definitions fortheir failure to pay attention to...non-material human needs [quality of life issues], the need for the industrializedminority to reduce its overconsumption in the name of social equity and ecologicalintegrity, willingness to seriously address existing inequities, and genuine attention toissues of social self-determination. (1989, p. 39)Their alternative to this conventional definition is equitable sustainable development which...requires close attention to issues of current inequities which, in turn, requires not onlymaintaining ecological integrity but also meeting the full range of human needs andachieving social self-determination. (Ibid., p. 37)Rees echoes this definition of sustainable development with his own goal:To provide a secure and satisfying material future for everyone, in a society that isequitable, caring, and attentive to basic human needs. (1989, p. 2)The basic message is that the heart of the problem is in the system -- in its social,economic and political relations and constructs -- and accordingly this is where we shouldbe formulating answers. The notion of sustainable development or sustainability shouldalso be recognized as a goal not as an absolute. It is one which necessarily requires action,as we can ill afford to have it remain in the nether lands of theoretical abstraction.30Eco-developmentThe theory, or perspective, of Eco-development is basically one which also stemsfrom the above UN definition of sustainable development. It concentrates on the macro-global scale as did UNWCED, Federal and Provincial Ministries of Environments (andtheir respective "Green Plans"), the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA),etc. The term was first coined in 1972 by Maurice Strong at the Stockholm Conference onHuman Development.Eco-development is a critique of economic concentration and political centralization onthe global level and above all a programme of economic decentralization. (Mellos 1988,P. 60)Unlike radical or deep ecological theories, Eco-development is not a comprehensiveprogramme of economic, political and social theory depicting a global political, social andecological malaise and a proposed reconstruction. Rather it is strongly pragmatic andweak in theory and tends to concentrate on economic and political decentralization without...reference to the logic of the particular organization of economic and political practice ofwhich economic concentration and political domination are themselves the effects. (Ibid.,P- 61)Eco-development focuses narrowly on the social and ecological while treating thepolitical and economic in a superficial or reformist manner. Although sharing with deepertheory some prescriptions for ecological healing, it still remains largely anthropocentric inits view. Nature can be sacrificed for the attainment of basic human needs (material andnon-material). Self-reliance is posited as achievable via a path of Eco-technology. Thisconsists of...a synthesis of various technologies including a local adaptation of imported, foreigntechnology compatible with local requirements of a local community occupying a specificregion. (Sachs as quoted in Mellos 1988, p. 70)Mellos points out that such a notion of self reliance or sufficiency is generally applied to theindividual and to relationships between the person and nature, but does not extend to acollective notion of community . Simply stated, the ideologies of Capitalism with their31inherent self-interest and market principles are preserved under the guise of ecologicallanguage.Although the concept of Eco-development focuses on the dilemma of global disequitiesand ecological malaise in the context of international development, it has relevance to urbandesign theory and practice. It is a sensibility and perspective which informs the dominantparadigm and accordingly the bulk of mainstream design. Although it may be seen asmuch deeper than many others, it can be regarded as reformism and therefore remainsinsufficient as a paradigm in and of itself.EnvironmentalismWhile Eco-development fails to address root causes, environmentalism presentsinadequate answers for different reasons. As a rule, environmentalism can be seen aslimiting in its narrowness of scope. The very term "environmentalism" is problematic dueto the implied separation or "otherness" of nature. Many "environmentalists" tend toconcentrate on single issues and in doing so miss the "big picture." Groups such as theSierra Club, Greenpeace, Conservation, and local "Save ..." groups have the best ofintentions, and often even a depth of ecological knowledge, but their mandate tends tofocus on damage control and running from one disaster to the next.Environmentalism is a direct response to the scale of ecological destruction taking placeon the planet. The specialization, enormity and power of large multi-nationals andgovernments begets a similar structure and approach in environmental groups, ultimately atthe expense of attention to root causes. Arguably, environmentalists underestimate thepower of "grass-roots" action.Admittedly, environmentalists have forced ecological destruction onto the agenda ofthe mainstream in recent decades. Unfortunately, their victories are not going to constitutethe "turn-around" required. They will likely be barely able to keep up with the pace ofdestruction, and therefore they offer a minimal answer.32Both Eco-development and environmentalism are, morally and ethically,"improvements" on ecological ignorance, which is to say they are at least action in the rightgeneral direction. However, one would be hard pressed to find a theoretical or ideologicalbasis in them other than preservation of the major tenets of the dominant paradigm. Theyare, for the most, part European/North American middle-class phenomena, which, asbenefactors, have a vested interest in preserving that paradigm intact. Therefore, reform isacceptable, but radical change irks their sensibilities. Such a refusal is reflective of shortterm thinking and a "draw-bridge" mentality which will only serve to heighten the crisisand worsen its manifestations.The conventional interpretation of sustainability, the reliance on technological fixes,narrow concentration and specialization, and the lack of deep insight into causation shapesthe majority of environmental thinking in our society and culture. Hence, when this istranslated to design theory and application such weaknesses are replicated. Although itwould be a mistake to state that Eco-development and environmentalism have their fullembodiment in Neotraditionalism, it is hypothesized that the latter is a reflection of, at thevery least, a type of thinking or perspective displayed in them.2.4.2 Social EcologyThe means for tearing down the old are available, both as hope and peril. So, too, are themeans for rebuilding. The ruins themselves are mines for recycling the wastes of animmensely perishable world into the structural materials of one that is free as well asnew. - Murray Bookchin, 1991.Social Ecology is a comprehensive and holistic paradigm which addresses therelationships between self, society and Nature. It is a radical perspective and a formula fortransforming societal attitudes, values, norms and institutions. Its holism is born out of acritique of the dualism which has plagued Western Civilization for upwards of threecenturies (Clark 1988), and which is almost universally manifested in the existinghierarchy of our social, cultural, economic and political institutions, as well as in ourrelations between human and human and between human and non-human life. This33hierarchical dominance of man has wrought destruction on the ecological integrity of theplanet and disrupted evolution.The philosophy or ideology of Social Ecology comprises a critique of hierarchy andproposes goals of self determination, freedom and eco-communities, or more eloquently,...a new ecological sensibility and a new ecological society --a reharmonization of natureand humanity through a reharmonization of human with human. (Bookchin 1991, p. 11)It advocates "municipal libertarianism" as a means of achieving its goal.BasisMany of the theories and recommendations for an ecological society are embodied inMurray Bookchin's The Ecology of Freedom (1991). The theory has been labelled as eco-anarchism with its major ideological and philosophical origins in nineteenth centuryclassical anarchism (i.e. Kropotkin and Bakunin), and to a lessor extent in Marxism. Thistheory points the finger of blame at Capitalism and other oppressive political and economicforms which breed power and dominance and perpetuateA dualism that sets spirit against matter, soul against body, humanity against Nature,subjectivity against objectivity, and reason against feelings. (Clark 1988, p. 72)Bookchin demonstrates the pervasiveness of such political, economic and socialdominance throughout literate history. In ancient pre-literate, or what Bookchin calls"organic," societies, the absence of hierarchy is unearthed. The lack of either matriarchicalor patriarchical dominance and the apparent substantive freedom of these early societiescause him to present this as the most appropriate model for present and future society.There is no suggestion in Social Ecology that we should revert to ancient hunting andgathering ways. Rather...we must absorb what is ethically and intellectually valuable and discard what isethically harmful. We should avoid superstition, incipient hierarchy, and hierarchicalsensibility of any kind. (Bookchin 1991, p. ivii)Philosophical and ideological difference between the Social Ecology and otherecological theories revolve around the perceived role of humanity. Social Ecology is34sharply critical of Deep Ecology as strongly biocentric. Less antagonism exists betweenSocial Ecology and Bioregionalism. In fact Murray Bookchin is often grouped withbioregionalists and appears in much bioregional literature (see Andruss et al. 1990; Plant &Plant 1990; Sale 1985). He advocates an ecocentrism which recognizes humanity's rolein natural evolution, its ability to impede and destroy that or to progress in harmony with it.This is not the management or "stewardship" of nature proposed by environmentalism buta recognition of the social ecological whole within the larger natural ecological whole.Which is not to say that in an ecological society the lion will lie down with the lamb orthat the biosphere will be sedated into loving quietude with the balm of human kindness.But first nature [non-humans] can indeed be rendered biotically more fecund for nonhumanas well as human life, and the intervention of an ecologically oriented human rationalityand technics could foster many evolutionary advances--advances that would diminish thedamaging effects of harmful accidents and change events that can occur when evolution isleft to "Mother Earth" alone. (Bookchin 1991, p. )GoalsThe goal of Social Ecology is the transformation of society into an ecological systembased on diversity, non-hierarchical relations and spontaneity. It is a broad and holisticgoal and "...not the mere adding together of innumerable details collected at random andinterpreted subjectively and sufficiently" (E.A. Gutkind as quoted in Bookchin 1991).What is sought is in essence freedom which is seen as attainable only through self-determination. This form of freedom, called substantive freedom, is co-equal withequality, or justice, and views everyone as indivisibly equal. Formal equality, arguesBookchin, belies the realities of disequity which are a function of individual difference anduniqueness and which cannot be accounted for in a "universal" notion. Social Ecologyespouses classical anarchy which views humans as being inherently good. If society isrooted in an ecological wisdom which harmonizes relations between humans and humansand between humans and non-humans, then substantive freedom will emerge.One ultimate goal of the social ecologists is the eco-community. In short the eco-community35will not attempt to dominate the surrounding environment, but rather will be acarefully integrated part of its ecosystem. Rather than continuing the system ofobsessive, uncontrolled production and consumption, the community will practice trueeco-economy, the careful attending to an application of "the rules of the household."(Clark 1988, p. 73)Such a community stands as a loose abstraction and is in essence left to emerge in specificcircumstances as part of the evolution out of dominance into freedom.ProgramThere is one main prescription which Social Ecology focuses upon. This is the conceptof "municipal libertarianism" which is extensively examined in Murray Bookchin's CitiesWithout Urbanization (1992) and which advocates the full participation of local people inthe governance of their daily lives (Plant & Plant 1990). It is a truly grass-roots agendawhich sees people reclaiming power and control in their lives from distant levels ofgovernment and economics. The precedents of this form of popular democracy lie inHellenic Greek society and ancient organic societies. The basic unit of governance isdescribed as follows:Assemblies can be formed from populations that may consist of anywhere from a typicalresidential block to a dozen or more. They can be coordinated by strictly mandateddelegates who are rotatable, recallable, and, above all, rigorously instructed in written formto support or oppose any issue that appears on the agenda of local confederal councilscomposed of delegates from several neighborhood assemblies. (Bookchin 1992, p. 246)The political prescriptions of Bookchin and Social Ecology find their way into muchecological thinking and into the recommendations of Bioregionalism.Social Ecology presents a promising paradigm for social and ecological sustainability.Its strength lies largely in its political alternatives and radicalism, and in its provision of anintellectual and philosophical perspective which can, and herein does, inform both planningand design.362.4.3 BioregionalismAnother DescentThrough the weeks of deep snowwe walked above the groundon fallen sky, as though we didnot come of root and leaf, as thoughwe had only air and weatherfor our difficult homeBut nowas March warms, and the rivuletsrun like birds songs on the slopes,and the branches of light sing in thehills,slowly we return to earth.-Wendell BerryBioregionalism is simultaneously poetically simple and deeply wise. It is a newparadigm or theory, yet it draws on wisdom and a manner of existing which is age-old. Itcould be characterized as a gentle, small and quiet force, a direction for societal andecological betterment which has barely begun to show its potential. It is not revolutionaryor dogmatic. It does not demand adherence to strict ideology, religion or class. Ittranscends all of these. It is an expression of what is within all of us. It is about stopping,or at least slowing down, and absorbing. We, for whatever reasons, are all in-place. Weinhabit and interact with the living and non-living environment within the ecosystems ofwhich we are citizens. Whether we know it or not, whether we care or not, whether we arethe first generation or the one hundredth, whether city-dweller or rural inhabitant, whetherwe look to nature with respect or damn it, we are all citizens of place. Each place isunique, having its own set of interrelationships informed by geography, geology, biota,lore, wisdom, spirit and myth and an immeasururable bundle of pieces which make thewhole and give it identity.The land speaks its own truths, and those who care to stay in place long enough beginto hear and understand and absorb this wisdom. For those who care and look at their home-- for this is your home -- there are not many places left where the scars of our ignorance37do not mar the beauty of the landscape and the faces of its inhabitants. We have literallyturned our backs on the land and air and sea which support us. We are largely ignorant asto their workings, and we live out of synchrony with them. Ironically, by looking closelyat one's own home -- one's bioregion -- one begins to see the enormity of the destruction,and at the same time begins the process of healing which arises out of a dialectic betweenthe self, fellow human beings and nature.So much of our attention is drawn to issues of global ecological destruction anddisequity, the enormity of which can only cause the most optimistic among us to raise ourarms in defeat. Bioregionalism is a response to those situations and is a program forecological and social sustainability which begins and stays at home, not the parochial andnarrow realm of house but in the living home, one's ecosystem. It is about transcending theinter-personal and intra-personal and moving to the trans-personal to harmonize with allthat is living around you.Bioregionalism is the embodiment of the adage "Think Globally, Act Locally." Itprescribes a powerful yet simple remedy. Act in your realm of knowing; embark on aprogram of learning, the land the lore, the spirit of place; take things into your own handsin a spirit of cooperation with your neighbours and other living beings; act in balance andseek to reharmonize oneself with place. Do all these things in your geographical andmetaphysical terrain. Heal your own portion of the biosphere, and in turn you add to theprocess of healing the living planetary biosphere.Bioregionalism presents as an alternative to the current World View, shown as Figure2.2 below. This is admittedly a very broad and general formula and should not be viewedin absolute terms but rather as an inclination, intuition or potential direction.38Figure 2.2 Bioregional versus Industrial-Scientific ParadigmBioregional Paradigm^Industrial-ScientificParadigmScale^Region^StateCommunity^Nation/WorldEconomy^Conservation ExploitationStability Change/ ProgressSelf-Sufficiency^World EconomyCooperation CompensationPolity^Decentralization^CentralizationComplementarity HierarchyDiversity^UniformitySociety^Symbiosis PolarizationEvolution Growth/ViolenceDivision^MonocultureSource: Sale 1985, p.50.What follows is an exploration of the terms, concepts, philosophical "positions" andmusings of bioregional thought. A Deep Ecologist is a Bioregionalist is a Social Ecologistif she or he so pleases, and Bioregionalism is likely the most inclusive of all three. It hasthe quality of a tool which has been handed to the disempowered person looking at thedestruction of the planet; its message is "start rebuilding." Metaphorically, the person hasbeen handed a hammer, some nails and some boards, not a plan or drawing on a piece ofpaper. Such a task in essence is the long and arduous journey from theory to practice.Lewis Mumford, in his Culture of Cities (1938), offers an appropriate base forBioregionalism:We must create in every region people who will become accustomed, from schoolonward, to humanist attitudes, cooperative methods, rational controls. These people willknow in detail where they live and how they live: they will be united by a commonfeeling for their landscape, their literature and language, their local ways, and out of theirown self-respect they will have a sympathetic understanding with other regions anddifferent local peculiarities. They will be actively interested in the form and culture oftheir locality, which means their community and their own personalities. Such peoplewill contribute to our land-planning, our industry planning, our community planning theauthority of their own understanding and the pressure of their own ideas.Bioregion, Bioregional, BioregionalismAs a starting point for gaining a better understanding of the concept of Bioregionalism,it is helpful to view the etymology of the term and in doing so literally and figuratively39"build" the concept. Taking the terms bioregion, bioregional and bioregionalism as"...precisely separate and complementary" (Aberley 1985, p.143) serves to delineate notonly each individual term but as well the theory as a whole, as a process.t Asbioregionalism is a place-based theory, it is logical that the bioregion be the root word aswell the place of beginning for this discussion. Bioregion is derived from the Greek bios(life) and the French region (region), itself from the Latin regia (territory) and the verbregare(to rule or govern). The bioregion is conceived of as a life territory or place-of-life(Dodge 1990, p. 5). Bioregion receives its full definition from Peter Berg, one of the co-originators of the concept in the 1970s with Raymond Dasmannp3 ioreg ion s arel...unique life-places with their own soils and landforms, watersheds andclimates, native plants and animals and many other distinct natural characteristics...thatexist within the whole planetary biosphere and are unique intrinsic contributive parts.(1991b, p. 6)The bioregion is at once part of the global web of life and a unique expression of theindividual, naturally-delineated place: "...there is distinct resonance among living thingsand the factors that influence them which occurs specifically within each separate place onthe planet" (Ibid.).The geography of bioregions and their borders is determined by natural laws ordictates, not by anthropocentric abstractions. The best example of the latter is the 49thParallel which, in complete disregard for geography, literally cuts East to West throughgreat undifferentiated plains, up mountains thousands of metres high and down into theirvalleys, across water bodies, all in an effort to contain nations. A bioregion, on the otherhand, is a "Life territory, a place defined by its biota, rather than human dictates: a regiongoverned by nature not by legislation" (Roseland 1990, p. 18). Most frequently,bioregional boundaries are based on watersheds or a river basin (Aberley 1985). JimDodge lists six criteria:t Credit goes to David Aberley's 1985 thesis for viewing Bioregionalism etymologically.40(i) Biotic Shift: Boundaries here are based upon a species differentiation ofapproximately 15-25%, as dictated by climate and soil. This permits vague andpermeable boundaries between bioregions and recognizes the inherent biologicalintegrities of place.(ii) Watershed: These are river drainage systems with borders established along mountainor hill ridges between systems. These usually result in overly large bioregions; thereforedivision into smaller watershed tiers based on interdrainage distinctions is plausible.(iii) Landform: Such boundaries are based on mountain ranges and correlate strongly towatersheds.(iv) CulturallPhenomenological: "...you are where you perceive you are; your turf iswhat you think it is, individually and collectively." This is sometimes thought to be a bitanthropocentric and one which can result in distorted and perverse borders such as thoseexampled in our present system.(v) Spirit Places: Or "...psyche-tuning power presences...", the best example beingMount Shasta in California. The criteria is mainly the predominant psycho-physicalinfluence where you live.(vi) Bioregion as a Vertical Phenomenon: Bioregional borders here have to do withvertical differentiation rather than on the horizontal plane. Hence lowland places versushill places. (1990, p. 7-8)Together these give us a strong sense of where we are and of the life that envelops ourown. This list concurs with Berg's own list (1991b), with the possible exception of hisNatural History, which may or may not fit into Cultural /Phenomological criteria. Morethan a strictly geographical criteria, these add another dimension, the metaphysical, whichis Berg's "Terrain of Consciousness," which includes both place and the ideas that havedeveloped about how to live in that place (Ibid., p.6).David McCloskey (1989) also sees metaphysical criteria as necessary but adds someimportant qualifiers and a degree of intellectual and poetic depth to the discourse onbioregional boundaries, or what he calls ecoregional boundaries.t McCloskey views that,as truly natural, holistic "emergents," bioregional boundaries should be based not onstrictly natural determinants but should also "speak" a truth and "rightness." It is not asimple case of the difference between "hard" and "soft," as natural borders often dictatehard lines as "...powerful articulations of diversity" (p. 131). Rather, legitimate bordersshould speak a truth or wisdom about the place and the human and non-human life forms itt Sale explores extensively the sizes and alternative terminology for bioregions in Dwellers in the Land (1985).41contains. Two other criteria which McCloskey includes are that boundaries be multiple,not singular, that they exist spatially and temporally on multiple planes, or layers, andsecond, that...place, species, and peoples have evolved together ("co-evolution"). A shared dynamicunity of formation is the divisible factor in discovering the distinct-ive character andboundaries of an ecoregion. (Ibid.)The latter criteria appears to echo Social Ecology, and such a criteria introduces us tothe powerful and central tenet of bioregionalism, that of living-in-place. This was aphrase and concept articulated by Berg and Dasmann in the seventies. Grammatically, theaddition of the suffix -al attributes "having to do with," which potentially takes us in thedirection of connectedness. The act of living-in-place is the active bioregional process(Aberley 1985, p.144).Living-in-place means following the necessities and pleasures of life as they areuniquely presented by a particular site, and evolving ways to ensure long-term occupancyof that site. A society which practices living-in-place keeps a balance with its region ofsupport through links between human lives, other living things, and the processes of theplanet -- seasons, weather, water cycles -- as revealed by the place itself. It is theopposite of a society which makes a living through short-term destructive exploitationof land and life. (Berg 1990a, p. 32)The addition of -ism to bioregional allows us to arrive at the theory, the body ofconcepts, thoughts and laws, which is Bioregionalism. In David Aberley's words it is "...ateaching which helps people to both describe the bioregion where they live, and then to livewithin its natural capability to support life on a sustainable basis by ecological laws"(1985, p.145). Bioregionalism is thus a theory which is based on the necessity for action,for doing, and is therefore more than an intellectual abstraction. It is, at the same time,powerful and accessible. The process of Bioregionalism is one which involves learningand exploring, activities open to all those who chose to stay put and open their senses towhat the land and its wise dwellers speak to them.[Bioregionalism]...involves becoming native to a place through becoming aware of theparticular ecological relationships that operate within and around it. It meansunderstanding activities and evolving social behavior that will enrich the life of that place,restore its life-supporting systems, and establish an ecologically and socially sustainablepattern of existence within it. Simply stated it involves becoming fully alive in and witha place. It involves applying for membership in a biotic community and ceasing to be anexploiter. ( Berg 1991b, p. 6)42Principles and Practice of BioregionalismThe basic principles of Bioregionalism are given in the outline by Kirkpatrick Sale inhis seminal work Dwellers in the Land (1985). This framework provides a comprehensiveexpression of the process of living-in-place as it applies to society, culture, economics andpolitics. Given that Bioregionalism is essentially grounded in action, the line betweentheory and practice becomes somewhat "fuzzy."The four "natural implications," as the author calls them, give one a feel for theconcept of Bioregionalism. These are Knowing the Land, Learning the Lore, Developingthe Potential, and Liberating the Self. Although to some extent implicit in these principles,the concept of Reinhabitation articulated by Peter Berg is herein dealt with as a separate,"fifth" concept. What follows is a description and analysis of each of these principles asdefined by both Sale and Berg, and buttressed by other authors.Knowing the LandObligations have no meaning without conscience, and the problem we face is theextension of the social conscience from the people to the land. -Aldo Leopold 1949This concept is really quite simple, although most people, especially urban dwellers,might have no connection with it. We have become distant cousins of the land -- separatedfrom nature -- which feeds both our bodies and souls. Knowing the land requires that eachof us becomes an ecologist, even if in small and simple ways. If bioregionalism is in factan evolutionary process, then obviously its goals will not be reached overnight. Indeed, itis a lifelong and multi-generational process. Additionally, it cannot be expected that allwill participate or that all will gain the same level of ecological knowledge or wisdom,given the sacrosanct ecological tenet of diversity. The requirement, though, is for acertain benchmark level of ecological knowledge, just as we require this in language inorder to communicate properly. As languages and dialects change (or at least used to) fromregion to region, so too does the ecology and biology of the land. To begin to live inharmony with our land, we need at least a basic understanding of its workings.43Garrett Hardin has labelled such ecological literacy, upon which the success of anyform of real sustainability depends, as ecolacy (as quoted in Milbrath 1989). It was oncethe case that a person was considered educated if she or he was literate. In our industrial-scientific paradigm, literacy is no longer sufficient, and numeracy has become a necessity(Ibid., p. 20). Hardin argues we are now at a point which requires a third level ofeducation in which...a person develops a working understanding of the complexity of the world and isprepared to ask, and then what?. Almost everything we do when we intrude in nature hasunintended consequences. We had better develop a habit of mind (ecolacy) that featuresmore respect for nature's intricacies and a humble awareness of our own limitations inanticipating all the consequences of our actions. (Milbrath 1989, p. 20)Milbrath, for his part, calls for a plan of action which involves using our cleverness,which begins to sound a bit too much like the Eco-development/environmentalist's line ofreasoning, relying on human ingenuity and technology to "fix" the earth. What is actuallyrequired is knowledge and eduction which are based on a wisdom that stems from anintimacy with the land, not from textbook solutions. Skolimowski eludes to this type ofeducation:Genuine education must be the process of opening up the doors and windows of thestudent's mind to the richness and multifariousness of the universe, not the process ofreducing the universe to economic categories, or at best to physical and chemical ones.(1991, p. 124)Such an eduction is a habit of mind which quite naturally can become a habit of doing.Knowing the land then requires at the very least a basic understanding of the conceptsand principles of ecology, a basic understanding of how one 's ecosystem or bioregion(here a question of scale) operates. Briefly, ecology is the study of the interrelationshipsbetween living things and their environments. Eugene Odum's Fundamentals of Ecology(1971) offers an exhaustive review of ecological concepts and principles which could forma solid basis for ecological education. The ecosystem is the basic unit of ecology and canbe defined asAny unit that includes all of the organisms (i.e., the "community) in a given areainteracting with the physical environment so that a flow of energy leads to a clearlydefined trophic structure, biotic diversity, and material cycles (i.e. exchange of materials44between living and nonliving parts) within the system is an ecological system orecosystem. (Odum 1971, p. 8)In bioregional terms, the natural system is synonymous with the ecosystem (Dodge1991).Implicit in the concept of the ecosystem is the notion of the interrelatedness of all livingand non-living things. This may be referred to as the "web of life," and it generates anunderstanding that all that we do to harm or enhance the life (Nature) of which we are anintimate part ultimately harms or enhances ourselves. Such a web exists from the smallestecosystem right up to the level of the planet. The hypothesis that the earth is a lifeforceunto itself is fully developed by James Lovelock in GALA: A New Look at Life on Earth(1987 edition). Interrelationship, or interdependence, is necessary to the health of thewhole as is the concept of diversity. Diversity, the central tenet of ecology, can be definedin terms of natural systems (biodiversity) as well as for human systems. It is a measure ofthe qualitative and quantitative condition of species in the ecosystem. The more numerousand differentiated the species, the healthier the system. Homogeneity and simplicity are nothealthy indicators for nature or society. Simplicity creates a situation of susceptibility; itweakens the system and invites collapse.Knowing the land involves other ecological concepts as applied to the bioregion.Importantly, the carrying capacity of the land, initially described in ecological science asthe ecosystem's ability to support plant and animal life, in bioregional terms is a measurewhich includes the ability to support a human population in an ecosystem on a continuouslyregenerating basis. When the carrying capacity is balanced in terms of the demands on anecosystem and its capacity to regenerate itself, a situation of sustainability arises (Aberley1985).tt Other ecological concepts are explored in Odum (1971) , Aberley (1985) and Sale (1985).45The starting point for educating oneself, for becoming a bioregionalist, is the simple actof inventorying one's bioregion's natural features and life. Sale suggests that one beginwith the simple act of becoming conscious of...the bird songs and waterfalls and animal droppings, follow a brooklet to a stream anddown to a river, and learn when to set out tomatoes, what kind of soil is best for celery,and where blueberries thrive. On a more sophisticated level, we can develop a resourceinventory for the region.... (Sale 1985, p. 44)Such a resource inventory would include forests, hydrology, geography, geology,climatology and so on. For the urban dweller, cities are as much a part of the bioregion asis the rural realm. However, they appropriate energy and food on an average of ten timesthe region's carrying capacity (Wackernagel et al. 1993).Learning the LoreThe thoughts of the earth are my thoughts.The voice of the earth is my voice.All that belongs to the earth belongs to me.All that surrounds the earth surrounds me.It is lovely indeed, it is lovely indeed.- Navajo SongThe second of Sale's principles is about the history of place, the record of how both thehuman and natural possibilities have been explored (1985, p.45). Sale states that much ofthis wisdom lies with the region's ancient dwellers and, especially in North and SouthAmerica, with Native cultures. Although it would not be feasible, nor entirely desirable,to return to the life of ancient cultures,...serious historical and anthropological exploration of their ways and wisdom shows thatearlier cultures, particularly those well-rooted in the earth, knew a number of importantthings we are now learning about.... (Ibid.)Such wisdom and local information includes the methods for working the land, buildingand vernacular architecture, climatic subtleties, myth and other arts, all born out ofconnection to and harmony with the land. Not only does this knowledge inform us of thenatural systems in the bioregion but as well of the spirit of place.Jim Dodge (1990) speaks of learning the lore as one of the elements which shape anddefine bioregionalism. What he calls the spirit of place is a spiritual commonality derivingfrom a profound and shared regard for all life forms. Here is a connection to DeepEcology, or, at the very least, to a deeper understanding of ecology. Dodge continues bystating that such wisdom has to be earned, and to be earned it has to be lived (1990, p.10).Such a process of learning transcends generations and cannot be "encapsulated" in booksor delivered in classrooms.Gary Snyder (1990) echoes this metaphysical and mythic spirit-of-place notion in thefollowing description:to know itl...is to realize that you are part of a part and that the whole is made of parts,each of which is whole. You start with the part you are whole in. (p. 17)Snyder views permanence, or staying in place, as a way to learn the lore. People must putdown roots, not simply in terms of a few decades or even lifetimes, but in terms of multiplegenerations and centuries. Truly, this begins to take on the quality of the long view of theNative World View. If people stay long enough, even white people, the spirits will againbegin to speak to them.It's the power of the spirits coming up from the land. The spirits and the old powersaren't lost, they just need people to be around long enough and the spirits will begin toinfluence them. (Crow Elder as quoted in Snyder 1990)In this manner, learning the lore transcends the mere physicality of place and transports it tothe realms of the phenomenological, the "terrain of consciousness," the intellectual,metaphysical, mystical, mythical and esoteric.This we know: the earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the earth. All thingsare connected like the blood that unites us all. Man did not weave the web of life, he ismerely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself. (Chief Seattle1852)Developing the PotentialThe third element in Sale's typology is Developing the potential. This is therequirement to utilize what may be termed the biotic and geological resource, as well as theresources of human inhabitants to their fullest extent "...constrained only by the logic of47necessity and the principles of ecology" (1985, p. 46). He uses the terms "carryingcapacity," "self sufficiency" and "sustainability" as distinct from "development" with itsgrowth-orientated model of speculation, extraction, exploitation and consumption of theecosphere and of its people.His notion of development is an alternate outlook on economics, one which transcendspure monetary concerns and measures. It is about self-reliance and sufficiency, it is aboutgrass roots, it is about knowing carrying capacity and living within these parameters, it isabout making community and society priorities in economics. Much of the bioregionalwriting looks, as does that of other ecological schools, to E.F. Schumacher's Small isBeautiful (1973) as a source for this type of thinking.The ecological "school" of Community Economic Development (CED) reflects muchof this kind of thinking on development. CED is at its social height when community isemphasized over development and economics. In such a communalization approach, theeconomy is based on non-market principles, community is conceived as mutualcommitment with the primary goal of sharing and caring, and the primary strategy is todevelop mutual aid institutions (Boothroyd & Davis 1991, p. 17).There does exist some discrepancy between the concept of self-reliance and that of self-sufficiency, and therefore caution must be exercised. Self-reliance is interpreted here as thethe goal of meeting material needs as best as possible within the capacity of the specificbioregion or smaller division thereof. This does not demand a strict insular and introverteddogma which calls for closing one's region off from the rest of the world. Such a lack oftrade and exchange and total independence defines self-sufficiency. Self-reliance refers tothe removal of that which makes us unnecessarily dependant and susceptible, and whichdeludes us about the true cost and levels of our consumption (see Wackernagel et al. 1993).It is necessary, indeed vital, that we look also at such capacities and costs in social terms asthere is much to be gained from political, cultural and social independence as well asthrough sharing with other regions. Self-reliance, then, as is the larger goal of48sustainability, is a goal not an absolute. It recognizes the unique undeveloped or forgottenpotentials of place and accepts the need for and benefits of exchange and trade withimmediate neighbours.This situation could be likened to a continuum, where on the one hand we have a strict,dogmatic, no-trade scenario and, on the other, the opposite which has been cast upon us-- that of global monoculture, free trade and the ecological and social inequities and"shallowness" that are its partners (see Figure 2.3). Self-reliance in essence takes thepositive elements of the latter and brings them down to an ecological and human scale, to alevel where these elements can be enriched and made meaningful. It does not have to meanthe extinguishment or reversal of the scientific and technological gains which can benefitthe biosphere and humans but points to a reorientation at a scale and level which isecologically accountable and humane. In essence, it is an exercise in ecological wisdom.To adapt a much-used phrase, it is economics as if the biosphere mattered.Liberating the SelfThe fourth precept which Sale provides is the anarchist notion of Liberating the Self,and this too has a relationship to other ecological theories. Anarchism, is the politics whichinforms most ecological politics, but, unfortunately, it is a politics grossly misunderstoodby the "mainstream." It underlies Social Ecology and Deep Ecology as well asBioregionalism.Kirkpatrick Sale identifies what he describes as two broad perspectives for thedevelopment of the individual within the development of the region. The first is the act andultimate outcome of the bioregional practice of living-in-place, which necessarily releasethe individual from the oppressive constraints of the current "system." This is a politicaland economic imperative which resists oversized and unaccountable governments andbureaucracies, distant markets, large multi-national corporations and the likes. Theargument follows that by learning to live in accordance with ecological principles, and thusbecoming more self-reliant politically and economically, the potential of the bioregion can49be realized. By doing this, the integrity of natural systems will be healed and maintained,balance will be achieved, a connection to the land and other beings heightened. From thisset of communitarian values, cooperation, participation, solidarity and reciprocity willemerge (Sale 1985).Essentially, the anarchist believes that, given the broadest possible freedom to develop,people's natural tendency to cooperate will produce viable institutions, and that centralizedauthority, by discouraging voluntary urges, tends to eliminate natural social instincts.(Woodcock 1990, p. 41)The main thrust is a program of resistance to the continual destruction of naturalsystems by the current system and of bioregional renewal (Dodge 1990; Gardner andRoseland 1989; Roseland 1990). Such "ecology with a vengeance" (Dodge 1990) is inessence an anarchist stance. Eco-anarchy is comprehensively explored in Bookchin'sThe Ecology of Freedom (1991) and Urbanization Without Cities (1992). It is not aprogram of militaristic, anti-social dogma. Dodge describes it best as follows:Anarchy doesn't mean out of control -- it means out of their control... it is based upon asense of independent self-reliance, the conviction that we as a community, or a tightsmall-scale federation of communities, can mind our own business, and can makedecisions regarding our individual and communal lives and gladly accept theresponsibilities and consequences of those decisions. (Dodge 1990, p. 8-9)This politics is not the mere displacement of one form of oppression with another. Ratherit is about controlling destiny, about political empowerment (to use an overworked term),and it is about a form of direct democracy. It embraces the goals of decentralization andself-determination.The second perspective on liberating the self which Sale advances has to do with thesense of freedom or liberation gained from being rooted or connected to the land, a freedomat the individual scale (the liberation of the sell). Peter Berg discusses theinstitutionalization of the process of bioregionalism as being the Figures of Regulation:[These]...symbolize energetic and ecosystem processes [and events that epitomize theirinter-connectedness] in practices, ceremonies, observances, ritual cycles and holidaycelebrations which ground human behavior and cultural adaptations...They complementprocesses that govern the ultimate flow and cycle of energy through watersheds. (Berg asquoted in Aberley 1985)50Therefore, in this sense, the process of politics in a bioregional framework is not separatedfrom the place, and the actions of the people are not dictated from above but arise from thenatural patterns and processes which the land speaks. They are discovered and learnt as afunction of staying and learning. Unlike the programs of shallow reformism,Bioregionalism and the politics of anarchy chart a new path: "It's time to shift from savingwhat's left and begin to assert bioregional programs for reinhabitation" (Berg 1990b, p. 7).ReinhabitationTraveling at HomeEven in a country you know by heartit's hard to go the same way twice.The life of the going changes.The changes change and make a newway.Any tree or stone or birdcan be the bud of a new direction. Thenatural connection is to make intentof accident. To get back before darkis the art of going.Wendell BerryThe fifth principle which is essentially implicit in the above four, but absent explicitly,is that of reinhabitation. Berg (1991b) defines the process of reinhabitation as follows:_lit] means learning to live-in-place in an area that has been disrupted and injuredthrough past exploitation. It involves becoming native to place through becoming awareof the particular ecological relationships that operate within and around it. It meansunderstanding activities and evolving social behavior that will enrich the life of thatplace, restore its life-supporting systems, and establish an ecologically and sociallysustainable pattern of existence within it. (p. 6)Reinhabitation is a recognition of the ecological (and social) damage which has beendone in order to begin to heal the wounds. The healing process includes striking a balance(or achieving a re-balance) between urban and rural realms. Urban excess is not only theheart of the problem, it is also where solutions must begin. The bioregional notion ofreinhabitation has strong practical and metaphorical powers to heal, especially for urbandwellers, and hence forms a strong tie to design theory and the urban village concept.This controversial yet important tenet of the bioregional project calls for the reduction insize of large urban centres and redistribution of their inhabitants to smaller, more51ecologically and socially sustainable areas. Kirkpatrick Sale in Human Scale (1980)outlines very specific dimensions for such rebalanced communities.t Through acomprehensive survey of the history of town and city dimensions, Sale arrives at figuresfor the average optimum population of 500 people for smaller societies and 5000 for largerones. These are also translated into an optimum geographical extent appropriate for thehuman not the machine:The size of townships should be limited by the pedestrian range to keep them within ahuman scale ... The human being himself, so much neglected during the machine age,must become the focus of all reconstruction to come. Our stride determines and measuresour space -- and time -- conception and pegs out our living space. (1980, p. 187)The figures are not intended to provide an absolute but rather to act as a framework or goalin relation to design questions. These are explored in the next chapter through Ecocitywhose practitioners are in fact bioregionalists undertaking to give the theory a form.Reinhabitation should not be regarded strictly in physical or literal terms. Equallyimportant is its spiritual and metaphysical quest. Moreover, it is still left mainly to theindividual and community to interpret and translate. This is perhaps best articulated byDodge who states that bioregionalism...is properly a notion, which is variously defined as a general idea, a belief, an intuition,an inclination, an urge... [we are] dealing with the grand concorde of what does not stoopto definition. (1990, pp. 5-6)This opens the door to the fluidity of ideas and applications which is a condition of not onlybioregionalism but of all ecological perspectives. Accepting theory as such, we mustnonetheless begin to give form and process to ideas:...theories, ideas, notions -- they have their generative and reclaimative values, andcertainly a loveliness, but without palpable intelligence of practice they remain hoveringin the nether regions of nifty entertainments or degrade into more flamboyant fads anddiversions like literary movements and hula-hoops. Practice is what puts heart to work.(Dodge 1990, p. 10)t Sale's quantitative assessment is reminiscent of that of Christopher Alexander whose theories arc explored inthe following chapter.52The Urban ContextBy moving from ecological theory to design theory and to design precedents, theorybecomes to practice. What is important to address here is the relevance to the urban realmof the theory of Bioregionalism. The question of whether the paradigm has anything to dowith the urban realm at all is indicative of a lack of understanding by a majority of urbandwellers with regards to natural systems. The city is responsible for the bioregion'secological destruction and, by necessity, for its re-balance. Vancouver alone (a 4000 sqkm region) consumes 21 times more land than there is in the region in terms of foodproduction (22,000 sq km), forestry (8,000 sq km)and energy (54,000 sq km)(Wackemagel et al. 1993). This huge imbalance violates all the principles of bioregionalpractice outlined above. Add to this the waste that cities currently produce and the enormityof the task begins to balloon.Cities are the most significant sites of human inhabitation in bioregions because they areplaces where greatest consumption of resources and generation of wastes take place.Governed with sustainable policies and peopled by active reinhabitants, they can reversetheir present decline and become beneficial partners in restoring their life places. (Berg1990b, p. 22)Cities are the physical manifestations of societal values, and can be viewed in a positivelight given the cultural, spiritual and social potentials that they have come to signify. Butwhen considering the severity of our ecological crisis,Cities have thus become a symbol for the neglect of organic, cultural traditions and thedestruction of the identity of places. (Hahn 1991, p. 4)To couch this in more bioregional terms, we face the necessity for a change ofparadigmatic proportions. The ecological theories, and some elements of environmentalismas well, are harbingers of such a "shift" in thinking, feeling and acting. In accepting thechallenge, we must also accept the current realities and circumstances. We are not talkingabout utopianism or revolution, but about concerted, meaningful and fundamentally alteredways of educating, transforming and healing which reflect ecological wisdom and a deepconcern for all life.532.5 CONCLUSIONThe purpose of this chapter has been to to give a theoretical basis or underpinning tothis thesis. This is aimed specifically at those theories which inform design and planningdecisions with regards to sustainability, more precisely those which inform design theoriesand concepts such as the urban village and urban eco-village. The goal has been toestablish support for the argument that design and planning must be informed by deepecological theory. The specific theory of Bioregionalism provides the most promise in thepursuit of the larger and smaller goals of sustainable urban lifeThe ultimate aim of this analysis is to translate these theories which are cultural andbroad in context to the more concise arena of design theory. It is important to stress thatthe aim of doing this is not to "dilute" or abridge the theories presented above, but to bringthem to bear on ecological and social sustainability in design theory, and on implementationstrategies.54CHAPTER THREE : DESIGN THEORY3.1 INTRODUCTIONOur eyes do not divide us from the world, but unite us with it. Let this be known to betrue. Let us abandon the simplicity of separation and give unity its due. Let us abandonthe self-mutilation which has been our way and give expression to the potential harmonyof man-nature. - Ian McHarg, 1969The purpose of this chapter is to examine the theoretical concepts and principles ofthree design theories which inform the design concept of the urban village, particularly asdirectly or indirectly related to the broader environmental and ecological theories presentedabove. The three design theories presented herein, Neotraditionalism, the theory ofChristopher Alexander et al. and Ecocity theory, provide contrasts in the perception of thepresent condition of the city and prescriptions for its alteration. When considering theconcept of the urban village, it will be argued that although these theories may seem similaron the surface, they actually reflect deep divergences in thinking. The theory of Ecocity asit is informed by Bioregionalism offers the most promise and capability for actualizing thegoal of sustainability.This chapter is intended to take us one step closer to a practical program for thesustainable city. The context herein becomes more focused on the urban (and suburban)realm and gives the reader some "tools" with which to begin. It can be regarded as ahalfway point between theory and practical application. Chapter Four will be concernedmore closely with the design concept of the urban village. Figure 3.1 maps the content ofthis chapter relative to the development of the thesis.Initially, the normative theories of Kevin Lynch will be explored in relation toNeotradionalism, Alexander et al. and Ecocity. The notions of the city as machine, as anorganism, and as a complex ecology, respectively, demonstrate the perspective from whicheach design theory emerges.55Figure 3.1 : Map of the Thesisder56Source: AuthorThe examination of Neotraditionalism will focus largely on the theoretical concepts andprinciples as presented in the writings and projects of Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk. An explicit critique of Neotraditionalism will serve to highlight the shortfalls inecological and social thinking that this theory tends to display.A brief review of the urban design theories of Christopher Alexander will draw on theThe Oregon Experiment (1975), A Pattern Language (1977), A New Theory of UrbanDesign (1987) and other works. The work of Alexander is explicit in its ecological basisand has informed many other ecological design theories. However, it remains largelytheoretical and abstract and therefore will not be dealt with at length.A more detailed analysis of the theoretical concepts and principles of the Ecocitymovement will deal largely with the work of Richard Register and Urban Ecology inBerkeley. This theory is a direct extension of bioregionalism, and it informs a particularview of the urban village -- that of the urban eco-village.The final section of this chapter will discuss the ethical and value-laden issue ofwhether to build or to rebuild in striving for the goal of making cities sustainable.3.2 LYNCH'S NORMATIVE THEORIES OF CITY FORMThe good city is one in which the continuity of this complex ecology is maintained whileprogressive change is permitted. The fundamental good is the continuous development ofthe individual or small group and their culture: a process of becoming more complex,more richly connected, more competent, acquiring and realizing new powers intellectual,emotional, social, and physical. (Lynch 1981, p. 116)For the purposes of creating a contextual framework for this discussion of designtheories, the normative theories of Kevin Lynch provide an appropriate starting point. In ascenario similar to that of the previous chapter where differences in attitudes towardsecology were shown to influence theory and practice, it will be demonstrated here that adifference in perspective on what the city is composed of, what it represents, what ishealthy, produces divergences in design practice.57The first normative theory Lynch introduces is that of the Cosmic view of the city.This view is based on the notion of ceremonial cities which were "...places of holy ritualwhich explained the risky forces of nature and controlled them for human benefit" (1981,p. 73). It speaks of power and dominance and utilizes elements such as the axial line, radialplans, elements of enclosure, terminating views, and sacred centres. It might, at a stretch,correspond to Neotraditionalism, but in reality it does not apply appropriately to any of thetheories discussed here. The normative view of the city as a Machine is perhaps the best"fit" for Neotraditionalism. The city as an Organic form parallels the ideas presented byChristopher Alexander et al. And, finally, the notion of the single normative theory of aComplex Ecosystem presented by Lynch corresponds to the design theories of the Ecocitymovement. The implicit perspectives of these views are often deeply rooted, and theirmanifestations result in dramatically different city forms. In a program for a sustainablecity such differences will also arise through design. If we are suggesting new paradigms inan effort to create sustainable cities, we must know from whence we came.The City as Machine: NeotraditionalismThe perspective of the city as a machine speaks of cool, calculated efficiency. The cityis regarded as an amalgam of autonomous parts where...stability is inherent in the parts, and not in the whole. The parts are small, definite,often similar to each other, and they are mechanically linked. The whole grows byaddition. It has no wider meaning; it is simply the sum of its parts. (Ibid., p. 81)This clearly practical perspective is not necessarily inhumane nor modern; rather it isfundamentally about efficiency. It is the product of a reductionist mode of thinking whichanalyzes a city's parts into autonomous functional units connected by transportation links.The motives are equity of allocation, access, broad choice, smooth technical functioning,productive efficiency, material well-being, physical health and autonomy of parts. The bestexamples of the city as the machine are the grid towns of the United States, "...Motivatedby land speculation and land allocation too familiar to us..." (Ibid., p. 83). The city as a58machine is more a view of how the world works, one which is strongly anthropocentricand disconnected from nature.The view corresponds to Neotraditional thought and practice as it is presented below.The focus on transportation, on the grid layout, on efficiency, and on the separation ofactivities are common to all its manifestations. In fact, the whole manner of "tacking on"traditional towns to the current suburban realm speaks of such autonomy of parts andinherent separation from the whole.Explicit rationality, with all its glories and its dangers, is here at its best. One wonders,of course, whether there might be more to cities than this.... (Ibid., p. 88)The City as Organic: Alexander et al.The Organic city perspective is a critique of industrial-scientific rationality andtechnological "coolness." The notion of the city as an organism accompanied the rise ofbiology in the 18th and 19th centuries (Ibid.). The science of ecology and, more recently,of human ecology has become the most prevalent perspective on city form in the planningprofession today. It is based on the notion that the city...is an autonomous individual with a definite size. It does not change its size by simpleextension or swelling or limitless adding of parts, but reorganizing its form as it changessize, and reaches limits, or thresholds, where change in form is a radical one. While it hasa sharp external boundary, it is not so easy to divide it internally. (Ibid., p.89)The historical antecedents of this perspective are the Garden City and New TownMovements, and theories such as those of Patrick Geddes and Lewis Mumford. Theobjectives are community, continuity, health, well-functioning, security, "warmth,""balance," the interaction of diverse parts, orderly cycling and recurrent development, and acloseness to the "natural" universe (Ibid., p.94). This view is epitomized by the work ofChristopher Alexander, with his strong and explicit use of the metaphor of the city as anorganism, and the translations of this into urban process and form.The City as Complex Ecosystem: Ecocity MovementIn an attempt to break "...dogmatic norms that customarily guide discussions about thegoodness of cities" (Ibid., p.108), Lynch proposes a single theory of good city form,59general in nature, flexible and open, not steeped in absolutes, which relies on theframework of ecology. Although Bioregionalism and Ecocity design theory bear somerelation to the notion of the Organic city, it is argued herein that they far exceed theconfines of that perspective. In the same way that Lynch theorizes that the city isphysically and metaphorically akin to an ecosystem, so too do bioregional and ecocitytheorists. They argue for ecology, a Complex Ecology, as the basis of good design whichin turn begets good city form -- one which is ecologically and socially sustainable, vibrantand alive.This notion of a general normative theory stems from the analogy of the city as anecosystem, an ecology defined largely in scientific terms as...a set of organisms in a habitat; where each organism is in some kind of relation toothers of its own kind, as well as to other species and the inorganic setting. Thissystem can be considered as a whole....(Ibid., p. 114)There are vague infusions of anthropocentricities in this analogy as Lynch tends to deny theexistence of any "life-force" in ecosystems, considering them to be made up of"unthinking" organisms (Ibid., p. 115). This stands in opposition to the GAM Hypothesiswhich underlies both Bioregionalism and Ecocity theory. To some extent this discrepancyis bridged with the presentation of a more agreeable framework which Lynch calls"learning ecology." In essence this posits the ecosystem as a thinking, creative andlearning entity progressing through the agency of the human species as the "dominantanimal." The presence of the human adds to the familiar characteristics of the ecosystem(diversity, interdependence, context, history, feedback, dynamic stability, and cyclingprocessing) the features of "...values, culture, consciousness, progressive for regressive]change, invention, the ability to learn, and the connection of the inner experience and outeraction" (Ibid., p. 116).Although there may be a problematic with the critical importance of the human speciesto an expanded interpretation of the creative life-force, Lynch's perspective nonethelessbegins to merge with the deeper views on ecology, as theory is translated to the city and60design. Of the four normative theories he presents, that of a complex ecosystem comesclosest to describing the theoretical framework from which the Ecocity movement emerges.For his part, Lynch argues that the good city embodies continuity, connection, andopenness, and follows the principles of vitality, sense, fit, access, control and the "meta-criteria" of efficiency and justice (expanded in Lynch 1981, pp. 121-235). Although theseconcepts and principles do not "fit" exactly with those that will be presented in the sectionon Ecocity theory, they do represent a movement towards consensus on a new andemergent perspective on the city and design which holds promise for a sustainable future.It is necessary to stress that the above analogies and typologies are intended only toprovide a conceptual basis for the comparison of design theories to follow. They reflectdifferences in perspectives on the city and in turn influence our thoughts and actions in thelarger process of making cities sustainable. They provide a starting point and help us tounderstand theory and interpret the prescriptions and modes for urban villages which eachof the design theories provides.3.3 LITERATURE REVIEW OF DESIGN THEORIESThe purpose of this section is to review three design theories which inform the conceptof the urban village as a remedy to the non-sustainable city. These are, respectively,Neotraditionalism as informed by a Eco-development/environmentalist perspective onsustainability, the theories of Christopher Alexander et al. as informed by deeper ecologies,and the Ecocity movement as informed by deeper ecologies and more specifically byBioregionalism. The framework for analysis in each case is provided by the concepts andprinciples of the forms in the dominant theorists and practitioners. These are AndresDuany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, Christopher Alexander and Richard Register,respectively.613.3.1 NeotraditionalismThe theory of Neotraditional urban design was born out of a critique of the physical andsocial malaise of the modern suburban landscape. In its essence, it prescribes a return tothe pre-War (WWII) planning principles of traditional (Eastern Seaboard) townsemploying the grid, mixed-use town centres or urban villages, a mix of housing types,pedestrian orientation (in scale), and architectural continuity. These are to be accomplishedthrough revised zoning ordinances and architectural guidelines.The works of Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and their TraditionalNeighborhood Developments (TNDs) and the comparatively "enlightened" work of PeterCalthorpe's "Pedestrian Pockets" and Transit Oriented Developments (TODs) are examplesof this school. Additionally, the design principles of the TNDs and the TraditionalNeighborhood Ordinance as outlined by William Lennertz (1991) are included in theanalysis of what has become a "wave of Neotraditionalism" in planning and design circles.In this author's opinion the extent to which a dangerously superficial and naive perspectivehas been taken to heart by the profession and the public in the face of such overwhelmingcomplex social and ecological problems warrants a strongly critical analysis.Theoretical Concepts of NeotraditionalismThe theory of Neotraditionalism views the city as a machine -- as a series of "...parts,small, definite, often similar to each other, and mechanically linked. The whole grows byaddition" (Lynch 1981, p.86). This mechanistic view is visible in the theoreticaloutlooks of its major proponents and in the actual physical results of this design theory.This reductionist and ecologically shallow position contrasts strongly with the designtheories of Alexander et al and Ecocity. Ironically, there is a major similarity in thehistorical precedents which inform them with regard to form, and in their criticisms of theexisting state of design and resulting process and form.62Alex Krieger, in the opening of Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater -Zyberk: Towns andTown-Making Principles (1991), identifies a "diverse legion" of town planners of the pastcentury who have influenced the work of Duany and Plater-Zyberk:...Clarence Stein, Henry Wright, Lewis Mumford, Clarence Perry, and John Nolan in theUnited States; Joesph van Stuben, Theodore Fritsch, George Metzendorf, Ernst May andLiberecht Migge in Germany: Georges Benoit-Levy, Henry Seller and Tony Gardner inFrance; Stanley Abercrombie, Patrick Geddes, Frederic Osborn, Barry Parker, RaymandUwin, and finally, unavoidably Ebenezer Howard in England. (p. 12)Krieger adds the more recent theoretician Leon Krier to round out his list. Many of thenames, in particular Geddes, Howard and Mumford, are identified by Sale (1985) andRegister (1991) as influences on Bioregionalism and Ecocity theories, respectively.Alex Krieger finds three motivations in the work of Duany and Plater-Zyberk: 1)designing suburban subdivisions in the manner of towns; 2) challenging zoningconventions and writing codes that favor traditional patterns of placemaking; and 3)working directly with those who produce the modern suburban landscape, the real-estatedevelopers, with the aim of persuading them with regards to alternatives (1991, pp. 9-10).This forms an expanded goal for Neotraditionalism per se as an effort to...channel new suburban growth into compact, tightly woven communities with housing,offices, and stores within walking distance of each other. Their goal is to wean peoplefrom cars by creating neighborhoods -- in existing urban and suburban areas as well as innew development -- where walking is encouraged, public transportation is accessible, andstreets, parks, and other public places are sources of civic pride and identity. (Bressi1992, p. 101)This boils down to a pragmatic idealism (Kreiger 1991) which in turn can beinterpreted as empiricism with a touch of pragmatism (Broadbent 1990).The theory of Neotraditionalism focuses almost exclusively on the condition ofsuburbia:The problems of car-oriented sprawl -- relentless traffic jams, the erosion of rurallandscapes, social segregation, pollution of all kinds, and rising housing costs. (Ibid.)Duany and Plater-Zyberk blame this condition almost exclusively on planners and zoningfrom the post-War period on: "Misguided planning, not rapacious real-estate developers, ischiefly to blame for this miscarriage of growth. Left to their own devices, developerswould have every incentive to build towns" (Duany & Plater-Zyberk 1992, p. 7). The63couple go on to posit all planners as guardians of the concept of Euclidian zoning wherein"...every generation of planners attempts to relive that last great victory of the planningprofession..." (Ibid.). No one is going to be the first to run to the defence of out-datedplanning techniques and planners; however, this accusation belies the larger highlycomplex political, social, economic and cultural constructs and institutions which planningand design emerge from. The conclusion can only be that Duany and Plater-Zyberk areeither guilty of gross naivety and ignorance or are consciously suppressing andsimplifying the situation to work to their advantage. Nonetheless, the concept ofNeotraditionalism can be divided into critiques of physical and social elements, a typologywhich is replicated in the Traditional Town-Making Principles. Both physical and socialfailures are seen to stem directly from the planning and zoning scenario described above.Physical FormIn the current suburban context, the required and rigid separation of housing,commerce and industry is seen by the Neotraditionalists as having negative manifestationsin terms of the physical form of both streets and buildings. In terms of the latter, thetypical planned neighbourhood (suburbia) segregates and separates functions to the point ofisolation. Work is consequently distant from home, which in turn is distant from shops,which in turn is distant from entertainment, and so on. The resulting landscape is one ofisolated groups of buildings of homogeneous use with vast expenditures on land andenergy to provide connection between then chiefly in the form of the freeway. There is noconcern for building size or disposition to the street. The result is that spatial definition islost and the "sense of place" destroyed (Duany 1991; Duany & Plater-Zyberk 1992).Civic buildings often do not receive prominent sites. Such separation and segregation bymeans of zoning had its utility in its original context, but is dysfunctional in the modernsuburban/urban context.Their critique is also extends to the streets and the resulting spaces and places theyform. Planned communities have "...'collector streets,' which are only for cars, and cul-64de-sacs, which are hard to describe because while they are supposedly designed for peoplethough they are rarely used" (Duany & Plater-Zyberk 1992, p. 7). In addition, vehiculartraffic controls the scale of the street and form of its space, with wide streets dedicatedprimarily to the automobile, and parking lots dominating the public space (Duany 1991;Gehl 1987). The solution, in their opinion, is a return to the grid system of streets, anotion expanded as a principle below.Social FactorsMost critics of suburbia dwell on its ugliness, yet the chief defect of the suburbs is not somuch aesthetic as the fact that as civic environments they simply do not work. (Duany& Plater-Zyberk 1992, p. 8)Duany and Plater-Zyberk point out that even in the rare cases that suburbs have apleasant appearance, they still have " insidious social effects." This is not a newobservation by any stretch of the imagination. It is, in fact, one which has been voiced bysocial, ecological, planning, geographical and anthropological theorists for decades. Theelement which the Neotraditionalists concentrate on is the economic segregation of, in theirwords, "classes," as it is manifested by homogeneous housing types and costs in suburbansubdivisions. The inability to create mixed-use housing types and higher densities is seento perpetuate the polarized situation of wealthy subdivisions and "ghettos" of affordablehousing. Other social consequences that are highlighted are the dependency by the youngon parents and their autos to ferry them from activity to activity, and the loss of legitimacyas citizens that the elderly experience upon the loss of their driver's license.[Neotradi tional i sm has a] ...fundamental commitment to social objectives: privacy,security, convenience, visual pleasure, social enjoyment for all ages and a strong sense ofidentity. (Brown 1991, p. 14)To them, the answers are "simple.". By diversifying housing types and interspersingnon-market housing (10 % is the stock recommendation) among market housing,segregation will end. Another solution is to "soften" socio-economic differences throughclose attention to architectural detail. In addition, Neotraditionalists suggest urban designand architectural principles be used to encourage pedestrian traffic and a "sense of place."65Within the Neotraditional movement, there is a difference in perspective andprescriptions in between the concept of Traditional Neighborhood Developments (TNDs)and Transit Oriented Developments (TODs). Although both fall under the label ofNeotraditionalism, the TODs, as theorized about and promoted by San Francisco architectPeter Calthorpe, could be considered to be more environmentally, and dare one sayecologically, enlightened. A TOD is described as...a mixed use community within an average one-fourth mile walking distance of a transitstop and core commercial area. The design, configuration, and mix of uses emphasize apedestrian oriented environment and reinforce the use of office, open space, and publicuses within comfortable walking distance, making it convenient for residents andemployees to travel by transit, bicycle or foot, as well as by car. (Bookout 1992a, p.13)He calls Urban villages, or town centers, "pedestrian pockets," and defines them as simpleclusters of housing, retail space and offices within walking distance of a transit "focus,"usually a light rail station. This idea of the quarter-mile radius is not an invention of theNeotraditionalists. Leon Krier has put this optimum human distance to theoretical use(Bressi 1992, p.102), but the formula is actually as old as cities, and was largely"discovered" and examined in terms of population, scale and size by ConstantineDioxiades, founder of the science of human settlements known as Elastics (Sale 1980).The Transit Oriented Development remains, however, under the leash of practicalreformism and pragmatism in ecological terms.Less fixation on nostalgia, less orientation towards the automobile, and a moreregionally-based planning set TODs apart from TNDs. The first of these represents anattempt by Calthorpe to distance himself from the rhetoric and architectural nostalgia forthe small town which is the focus of the work of Duany and Plater-Zyberk.The problem is to introduce the needs of the pedestrian and transit into the auto-dominatedregions of our metropolitan areas, not to return to the fiction of small-town America.(Bookout 1992a, p. 13)Despite the fact that Calthorpe, like Duany and Plater-Zyberk, is largely involved with newtown developments, such as Laguana West in California, he recognizes the necessity of66dealing with current urban form. His solution is to look at systems, rather than merelyadding to the whole in the framework of the city as a machine.The second point of departure is embedded in the name -- Transit OrientedDevelopments. Where TNDs merely prescribe the "diffusion" of the love affair withautomobiles and attendant pollution into the grid, TODs at least begin to think about gettingpeople to"kick the habit." TODs have as their focus the transit station which links the partsof a metropolitan system. Therefore TODs, more than TNDs, have a potential to betteraddress sprawl. Although this is a key part of the remedy to non-sustainable cities, itshould not be thought of as the solution in and of itself.The final point of difference between these two "schools" is the regional basis forplanning which is integral to Calthorpe and appears to be an afterthought in the work ofTraditional Neighborhood Development. TODs are to become part of a system of bothurban TODs and neighborhood (suburban) TODs which form a hierarchy of nodes andcentres of population and density in the manner set out by Lynch (1987) in his theories forplanning. The nodes are connected by transit lines rather than by the current system offreeways and highways. Where TNDs tend to be created in isolated splendor, TODs areconceived of as fitting into a more integrated whole.The Urban Context for NeotraditionalismAlthough both TNDs and TODs were born out of a criticism of the modern condition ofsuburbia, they also implicitly and explicitly are oriented to the urban context. Duany andPlater-Zyberk have begun to formulate TUDs (Traditional Urban District) ordinances forthe retrofitting of existing neighborhoods (Lennertz 1991b, p. 24). Calthorpe, viewingthe city in a more holistic fashion, explicitly turns attention to the urban network of suchsystems.Town-Making Design PrinciplesAppendix One is a summary of the town-making principles of Neotraditionalism asformulated by Duany and Plater-Zyberk and presented in Andres Duany and Elizabeth67Plater-Zyberk: Towns and Town-Making Principles (1991) by William Lennertz. As thecentral mechanism for implementing these principles, the Traditional NeighborhoodDevelopment Ordinance (TND) is broadly applied as an alternative to conventional zoningand ordinances. Additionally, Duany (1991) regards such principles and ordinances ashaving the ability to restore the urban village concept (the option of creating newdevelopment in traditional patterns) in accordance with the following physical conventions:Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance (TND)1. The neighbourhood area is limited in size, and physically articulated with clear edgesand a focused centre.2. Shops, workplaces and residences for all income groups are provided and located inclose proximity.3. Streets are sized and detailed to serve equitably the needs of the automobile and thepedestrian.4. Buildings are controlled in size and disciplined to spatially defined streets and squares.5. Squares and parks are distributed throughout and designed as specialized places forsocial activity and recreation.6. Well-placed civic buildings act as symbols of identity and provide places of purposefulassembly.These physical conventions pursue certain social objectives:1. By compact organization, infrastructure is minimized, automobile use and pollutionare decreased and public transit is made viable.2. By providing a full range of housing types and workplaces, all age groups andeconomic classes are integrated, and the bonds of authentic community are formed.3. By providing habitable public places, citizens come to know each other and watchover their collective security.4. By providing most of the activities of daily life within walking distance, the elderlyand the young gain independence of movement.5. By providing suitable civic building, democratic initiatives and the balanced evolutionof society are encouraged. (Duany 1991, pp. 21-22; Lennertz 1991a, p. 102)Critique of NeotraditionalismTo begin, a point by point critique of Neotraditionalism, especially as it is promoted inthe writings and design work of Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, must startwhere these two begin, with their attack on zoning, ordinances and the planningprofession.68Misguided planning, not rapacious real-estate developers, is chiefly to blame for thisgross miscarriage of growth. (1992, p. 7)They imply that developers would magically have acted ethically and without self-interestand greed if they had been given free reign on the landscape. Unfortunately, twentieth-century developers, for the most part, are of the same mold as nineteenth-centuryindustrialists whose engines of efficiency were the chief reason for the Euclidian zoning inthe first place. The market does not distribute equally. On their part planners, zoning andordinances are products of a larger system. Neotraditionalism_fails to grasp the powerful influence of historical, cultural, social, and technologicalforces that shape development. It overstates the role of planners and casually absolvesarchitects of their leading position in convincingly undermining the city in the post-industrial era. (Palermo 1992, pp. 47-48)This is not a defence of zoning and the planning profession as they exist today. In factthere is a degree of validity in some of the accusations which Duany and Plater-Zyberkmake. But to boldly suggest that planners are solely responsible for the physical andsocial form of modern suburbia is indefensible.We live in a society, a culture, which is a complex construct of values, institutions,preferences and aspirations out of which suburbia and modern planning have emerged.One does not acquire the requisite perspective for ecological and social sustainability byblindly pointing the finger at what is in effect the symptom of a much larger and deeperdilemma. Architectural tinkering and revised zoning ordinances do little towardsaddressing that fact.Both rhetorically and physically the replication of the grid is the basis of the designprinciples of Neotraditionalism. This manifestation of the Mechanical view of the city maybe appropriate in some circumstances, but in the main it runs against sensibilities andintuitive reality, especially in an ecological context. To begin with, it is an expression ofecological naivety towards problems. To solve the problem of the automobile (congestion,loss of land to asphalt, pollution, etc.) they would "diffuse" it through the capillaries of agrid. But the problem of the scale of automobile use in North America will not to be69solved by making it more convenient to commute. Our task is to get people out of the car,not to figure out new and efficient ways to keep them in it."Efficient" is a key word here for the grid. Not only is it efficient for the automobile,but it is efficient for society. It is the physical manifestation of the necessity to control thepopulation -- and a metaphor for hierarchy and power. The grid has throughout historybeen linked to such notions of dominance, and its damaging effects on society should notbe underestimated.In addition to this, the grid is a complete affront to the principles of ecology. The gridhas little relevance in most landscapes. It may be "efficient" for a "level playing field," touse political rhetoric, but rarely is it a condition of reality. The landscape, even when it isflat, makes demands and deserves respect when building community. This is not tosuggest that the curvilinear and sinuous suburban streets that Duany so dislikes are thecorrect route either. The land speaks a certain truth and a wisdom which can only be learntby intimate acquaintance with it.The next point of contention revolves around the gimmickry and faddishness ofNeotraditionalism a la Duany and Plater-Zyberk, their placeless reharvesting of a nostalgiafor small American towns.Americans have shown over and over again that they will pay premium prices to live inthe relatively few traditional towns that remain. (Duany and Plater-Zyberk 1992, p. 7)"Warm" and "fuzzy" sells, and, in the same manner that Americans flock to Disneyland,the floundering middle class rushes for the protection of the white-picket fence in placeslike Seaside, taking refuge from societal and "environmental" decay. Such wholesalereplication of the "Newhartesque" small towns of New England and the Southern Statesnot only runs against social and ecological sensibilities, it also heightens a damagingplacelessness which is rampant across North America (see Relph 1976) with itsburgeoning global monoculture.It would be foolhardy to suggest that Bioregionalism or Ecocity offer completesolutions on their part, however, at least they begin with a reidentification of and70reconnection with place and home. In order to heal, society must know and understand theland, the wisdom and the lore of the place, the bioregion in which it lives. The Duany andPlater-Zyberk team would have us believe differently. They feel that a sense of place isclose at hand; it simply needs to be designed for.The designers chief task is the making of space that draws people out from their privaterealms to stroll and loiter with their neighbors: public space. (Ibid., p. 11)Admittedly, there are design elements and tools at the disposal of the designer which canserve to improve and enhance space and sense of place. These are tried and true andinclude, for example, appropriate set-backs, height-width ratios, street trees, facilitating thepedestrian, narrow street widths, and turn radiuses, etc. These are elements which predatethe automobile and do create a feel which is drastically different from that of the typicalsuburb. However, the suggestion that people will suddenly emerge from their homes in aspirit of neighbourliness, congeniality and community at the stroke of a designer's pen issimply wishful thinking. It belies the complexity of a sense of place as an experiential,mythical, phenomelogical, societal, cultural as well as physical experience.Regardless of any influence it may or may not have, physical form is not the key variablewhose manipulation will induce [societal] change (Lynch 1981, p. 101)As if these affronts in the physical realm were not enough, Neotraditionalism seemscompelled to offers its simplicity as a solution to broad social problems. The issue ofaffordable housing is, once again in the words of Duany and Plater-Zyberk, a simpleproblem which requires simple answers. In Neotraditionalism, the suburban landscape isviewed as the bastion of the middle class, an area segregated from the "lower classes."The solution then is open up the gates so to speak and let in the poor people (but only up to10% of the population), and everyone will live in peaceful harmony happily ever after.This formulaic approach is an insult to those who are less "privileged" in our societies.The provision of higher density housing, of multiple housing types, of elements such asapartments above streets are all noble gestures and sound ideas for revitalizing suburbanneighbourhoods. However, to intimate that this will be the solution to highly complex and71systemic problems such as the lack of affordable housing or the polarization of wealth insociety verges on travesty.Who is going to feel comfortable being on social assistance or welfare and living nextdoor to a person who is drives a BMW and golfs three times a week? It is wealth, in fact,which is lapping up these Neotraditional towns. Seaside, where construction costs aretwice those on a per square foot basis of the surrounding area (Patton 1991), is not themodel of social harmony and "mix" it was promoted to be. It is a haven for the wealthyand architects. To make matters worse, the suggestion that we can "cover up" socialdiscrepancies with "close attention to architectural details" and thus make things better is anaffront to any half-intelligent being.Make all the buildings roughly similar in size...and the size of the resident's paycheckmatters much less. (Duany and Plater-Zyberk 1992, p. 9)Under fire too must be the process which is prescribed for building Traditional Towns.This is the trademark of Duany, the one week charrette, promoted as an appropriate anddemocratic way to design. It represents nothing less than the hijacking and railroading ofthe principles of consensus and participation in planning, all in the name of economicefficiency and expediency. This is likely a product of pressure to get as many of these"towns" built as possible before the planning profession and the public "wise up" to theirgame. To use a cliché, "Rome wasn't built in a day." The process of building acommunity (in the larger sense of the word) is, in fact, an evolution over time not aformula. It is a creative, perpetual and democratic process of social exchange and contract,which must be in balance with the natural realm if in fact it is to be legitimate.Perhaps the best way to demonstrate the lack of consideration that Neotraditionalismdisplays in regard to ecological sustainability is to refer the reader to the more "enlightened"theories of Alexander et al. and especially of Ecocity theory. However, a few points will bemade explicit here. Certain exceptions can be made for Peter Calthorpe's TODs in light ofhis relative understanding and response to ecological issues. However, when Duany andPlater-Zyberk purport to be building "sustainable communities" (Bamberton on Vancouver72Island being a case in point), their bluff must be called. On a very basic level, theconsumption of land which they criticize in suburban sprawl is merely slowed down (albeitminutely) by Traditional Towns. They are still consuming vast acreage to build theseplaces, and although they may be looking to retrofit existing form, this is hardly theirmainstay.All of the principles and concepts presented above place Neotraditionalism under thetheoretical influence of the Eco-development /environmentalism paradigm. Both TNDs andTODs can be viewed as technological "fixes," the cure-alls for suburban blight and itsattendant social and ecological problems. What may seem like an overly antagonistic attackon Neotraditionalism, it is hoped will be recognized as stemming from a belief that suchshort-falls in ecological and social thinking are damaging options in the face of the crisiswe are currently experiencing. For constructive, peaceful and promising solutions (notpanaceas) of a very different nature, we turn to more ecologically-based design theories .3.3.2 Alexander et al. : A New TheoryIt is quite simply, the desire to make a part of nature, to complete a world which isalready made of mountains, streams, snowdrops, and stones, with something made by us,as much a part of nature, and a part of our immediate surroundings. (Alexander 1979, p.9)It is what is described by Alexander as the timeless way, the manner of creating --cities, towns, villages, homes, chairs -- which is inherent, tacit and alive in all of us. It iswhat could be labelled as the type of wisdom found within and sought by bioregionalthought and practice. It is generated through a process of learning and practicing thelanguage (the lore, the spirit of place) to arrive at a quality without a name:...a central quality which is the root criterion of life and spirit in man, a town, a building,or a wilderness. This quality is objective and precise, but it cannot be named. (Ibid., p.19)This is the core of the theory of design presented by Christopher Alexander and hisassociate authors in several volumes of work. It is a theory of design which is deeplyorganic, which some might go so far as to describe as biocentric to an extreme. It is73strongly critical of the current state of urban form and of design and planning practice. Thisis perhaps not so much for ecological reasons as for humanistic ones. Alexander et al.' stheory targets the lack of life and beauty in the modern urban context, mainly in NorthAmerica. Although firmly rooted in ecological and biological understanding, theirprescriptions for change do not explicitly, at least not in the main, address ecologicalproblems as root causes. This theory is strongly critical of the mechanical view of the city,and of the reductionism exemplified by Neotraditionalism and conventional professionalpractice. It is most importantly about the process of design and building wherein formbecomes secondary and responsive to the process. Herein is Alexander et al.'s mostenlightened and informative contribution to this discussion. The process is seen to becreative, highly participatory, democratic and evolutionary in nature. It is a radicaldeparture from convention, and exudes a poetic and promising notion of how sustainableform can emerge from the bottom up.The purpose of this section is to introduce the theory and evolving principles ofAlexander et al. The method for doing this is not straightforward, partly because theprogress of their work over several decades has involved much refinement and adjustment.Similar or identical concepts and principles appear under one heading in one publishedvolume, and under another in a different one. Nonetheless, a commonality runs throughthe theory. When something such as this is written more as poetry than prose, it becomesvery difficult to translate the emotional and artistic sense of such theory.Theoretical ConceptsIn order to explore the theoretical concepts and principles of the work of Alexander etal., three works are used: The Oregon Experiment (1975), The Timeless Way of Building(1979), and A New Theory of Urban Design (1987). The Timeless Way of Building ispart of a two-volume set, the second half of which is A Pattern Language (1977). Theformer presents the theory, whereas the latter gives us "tools" for practice. In all of these74works there is an explicit and recurring theme of organic wholeness in the design andbuilding of places and spaces.As stated, the theory was born out of a criticism of the modern urban landscape andarchitecture, and the processes which have created it. In The Oregon Experiment criticismis launched against the archaic notion of the master plan with its enforced rigidity inprocess and form. In their words, it is simply "...not possible to fix today what theenvironment should be like twenty years from today" (1975, p. 18). A New Theory ofUrban Design attacks the planning anthem: the current state of design. This is labelled bythe authors as the "Dilettantism" of modern design which acts "...as if the problem could besolved on a visual level, as an aesthetic matter" (1987, p. 3). Overall, Alexander et al. seea lack of depth in design and form in the modern city. The quality, poetry, the life-force,the wholeness are all missing.Their solution looks to the way we design in A Timeless Way of Building, whereindesign is described as a journey, one which is recursive and has as its end goal to "planitself out of a job." The timeless way is a process of gaining knowledge and understandingthe quality. To actualize that quality we generate a living patternlanguage ("knowing theland," "learning the lore") as a gate. Then, having done this, we can pass through it to thepractice of the timeless way ("reinhabitation," "living in place"). The ultimate goal is theshedding of the gate, as the language serves to return us to what we once knewimmediately and did intimately: "...when we give up our ideas and opinions, and doexactly what emerges from ourselves" (Alexander 1979, p. xv), beauty and life willemerge.When we say that something grows as a whole, we mean that its own wholeness is thebirthplace, the origin, and the continuous creator of its ongoing growth. That its newgrowth emerges from the specific, peculiar structural nature of its past. That it is anautonomous whole, whose internal laws, and whose emergence, govern what emergesnext. (1987, p. 10)This notion of organic wholeness is the over-riding or underlying theme Alexander etal.'s theory. In A New Theory of Urban Design (1987), this is the one basic and75obligatory rule which all acts of building must follow: "...it [the building] must create acontinuous structure of wholes around itself" (Ibid., p. 22). In The Oregon Experiment(1975), it is expressed as the first principle of Organic Order where planning and buildingare to be "...guided by a process which allows the whole to emerge gradually from localacts" (1975, p. 5). All their other principles are essentially variations and applications ofthis one rule. In The Timeless Way of Building (1979), the concept becomes the core ideaof the process which leads to the quality without a name, a process which...allows the life inside a person or a family, or in a town, to flourish, openly, infreedom, so vividly that it gives birth, of its own accord, to the natural order which isneeded to sustain this life." (Alexander 1979, p. 7)This organic wholeness coincides with the Organic perspective outlined by Lynch asone of the three dominant normative theories. The prose of these theoretical works, themetaphors, analogies and vocabulary, all centre on the idea of the city as a biological,living whole. Alexander et al. might be criticized for not taking biocentrism to a logicalecological extreme, wherein sustainability of the city might be found only in the extent towhich it positively impacts on other life forms seemingly subjugated. Another criticism isthat the work remains largely theoretical and lacks practical tests. Although specificprojects (the University of Oregon, the Mexicalli Project) have applied the theory, it is toosoon to judge their success. Nonetheless, when the process theory in Alexander et al. isplaced together with the theories and prescriptions of Ecocity theory, the result is powerfuland promising.Process Over FormThis quality in buildings and in towns cannot be made, but only generated, indirectly, bythe ordinary actions of the people, just as a flower cannot be made, but only generatedfrom the seed. (Alexander 1979, p. xi)Found within the theory of Alexander et al. is the premise which states that processsupersedes form, that "..it is the process above all which is responsible forwholeness...not merely form" (Alexander et al. 1987, p. 3). Such a process is innately ademocratic one. It is collaborative and evolutionary. What is up for criticism is what76conventional design has become. Perhaps the grossest manifestation of this is the "cramsession" techniques of the Charrette of Duany and Plater-Zyberk. Mainstream planningand design do not rate much better. Most mainstream design is separate from planning,and in turn from the people and the place. Mainstream urban design is fixated on aestheticsand appearances, on the latest trends and fashion. Often what is important is how the placelooks from an airplane or through the eyes of a bird.The Oregon Experiment initially pointed in the direction of an alternative:...a complete and implementation planning process, based on these patterns [ in A PatternLanguage], could allow the users of a community to take charge of their ownenvironment, and that people could channel the process of development into a healthiercourse. (1987, p. 4)Herein, the designer becomes the builder, the citizen the designer and builder, and theprocess of designing and building becomes truly democratic. Alexander et al. seek toprovide metaphorical tools which are understandable and to remove the current "smoke andmirrors" act of what was once, and should again be, a truly human and natural act.tThey would argue that if the rigid straight-jacket of modern planning is shed,beautifully "alive" places can emerge out of a democratic process of negotiation and "giveand take." Today people have lost not only the ability to create and build but the ability tointer-relate and negotiate, to act as citizens. Both loses are the result of the "handing off" ofsuch tasks to increasingly specialized and distant "professionals." Perhaps this process isthe main threat to future sustainability and the worst crime the modern scientific era hasgenerated.Design Principles of Alexander et al.A contribution to the process of building the ecological city is both implicit and explicitin the principles provided by Alexander et al.. Those principles are contained in TheOregon Experiment (1975) and A New Theory of Urban Design (1987). These are listedbelow with abbreviated descriptions. They can be regarded as guideposts. From such at The Production of Houses (1985) provides a powerful vignette of how such a process can be facilitated.77theoretical basis, the art of building a language can be explored in the context of the urbanvillage.The Principles in The Oregon Experiment1. The Principle of OrganicOrder: Planning and construction will be guided by a processwhich allows the whole to emerge gradually from local acts.2. The Principle of Participation: All decisions about what to build, and how to build it,will be in the hands of the users.3. The Principle of Piecemeal Growth: the construction undertaken in each budgetaryperiod will be weighed overwhelmingly towards small projects.4. The Principle of Patterns: All design and construction will be guided by a collectionof communally adopted planning principles called patterns.5. The Principle of Diagnosis: The well being of the whole will be protected by anannual diagnosis which explains, in detail, which spaces are alive and which ones aredead, at any given moment in the history of the community.6. The Principle of Coordination: Finally, the slow emergence of organic order in thewhole will be assumed by a funding process which regulates the stream of individualprojects put forward by users. (Alexander et al. 1975, pp.5-6)The Principles in A New Theory of Urban Design1. piecemeal growth: to guarantee a mixed flow of small, medium and large projects --preferably in equal quantities by cost2. the growth of larger wholes: "Every building increment must help to form at least onelarger whole..."3. visions: "Every project must first be experienced, and then expressed as a vision whichcan be seen in the inner eye (literally)"4. positive urban space: "Every building must create coherent and well-shaped publicspace next to it"5. layout of large buildings: "The entrances...main circulation, main division...intoparts...interior spaces...daylight, and ...movement within the building, are all coherentand consistent with the position of the building in the street and in the neighbourhood"6. construction: "The structure of every building must generate smaller wholes in thephysical fabric...in its structural bays, columns, walls, windows, building base etc....inits entire physical construction and appearance"7 formation of centers: "Every whole must be a center in itself, and must also produce asystem of centers around it." (Alexander et al. 1987)What is most evident in these two sets of principles is the notion that the form isimplicit in the process. Mainstream urban design and architecture pragmatically apply form78and regulation and subjugate the place (site) and the process. Alexander et al. presentmarkedly more responsive and incremental approach.3.3.3 The Ecocity MovementCultures, ecological systems, individual living creatures, and even machines have awholeness without which they collapse and die or cease functioning. It is likely thatwithout a deep philosophy, a set of lifestyles, and a methodology of cultural andecological survival and thriving including ecocity building as an indispensable element,our species and those we impact will collapse and die. It is likely that with a deepphilosophy, set of lifestyles, and a methodology of cultural and ecological survival andthriving with ecocity building we will evolve on into a creative, healthy future. What wedefine largely determines the results; what we design, even more so.- Richard Register1991The Ecocity movement is largely an effort to rebuild the non-sustainable city of today.It is radical in its approach, recognizing that "practical" reforms of Neotraditionalismcompromise the social and ecological health of existing and future cities. Ecocity theorypresents a visionary and creative force, which is informed by ecological wisdom andgrounded in action. Simply put, the holistic approach of Ecocity is a vital extension of thedeep theories of ecology presented in the previous chapterFirst, the historical and more recent influences on the theoretical basis of the Ecocitymovement will be detailed. This is followed by a comprehensive review of the principlesof Ecocity building as presented by Richard Register and other Ecocity theorists andpractitioners. A final section will present other similar theories and principles for ecologicalurban restructuring and rebuilding.Concepts and TheoriesThe Hopi architecture was built by the people, for the people. This is an important pointto make because I've been through several cities and the new architecture seems to me tobe all science. Its all brains and no heart. They aren't cities where we can grow and besensitive to our environment. Where we nurture our values. Where we can teach our kidsthe important values we never want to forget. (Masayesva 1990, p. 28-29)Vernon Masayesva, a Hopi himself, goes on to explain what could be described as theessence of Ecocity theory. What Lynch describes as the city as an ecosystem or complexecology is in Masayesva's words "..not just the city of the future, but it is the city of thepast." Ecocity theory, in a manner much akin to Bioregional theory, is both a recent79phenomenon and yet ancient in its roots. In fact, these two theories literally share theirhistories. It is not the case that Bioregionalism singularly informs Ecocity; the relationshipbetween them is a two-way street. And, just as Bioregionalism is "fed" by diverse viewsand interests, so too is Ecocity theory.The origins of Ecocity look back to ancient town and village building where, forgeographical and technological reasons, the ecological notions of carrying capacity andself-sufficiency were implicit and tacit in building. The limits of local materials andknowledge (wisdom), minimal energy sources, and physical reach (i.e., the distance onecan walk or haul by animal) determined the size and shape of human settlements. Hereinwas a notion of sustainability which was completely tied to survival. It was not part of thevocabulary; it was intuitive and instinctual. Because of the separation and disconnectionfrom nature, however, we need to formulate an explicit concept. Previously, to wrongnature was to invite deadly and swift repercussions. Arguably, the circumstances of such ascenario have altered little except in scale and "lag-time." In order to avoid such a responseby nature, we need to inform our current actions, including design, with the sensibilities ofthe past.Like Neotraditionalism and to some extent the work of Christopher Alexander et al.,Ecocity has its roots in the theories and works of many turn-of-the-century planners andsocial theorists of the New Town/Garden City Movement. However, unlikeNeotraditionalists, Ecocity designers do not simply extract the earlier plans and transplantthem to the current context.Register (1991) points to the "...direct approach to planning for social andenvironmental purposes simultaneously" (p.3) which these theorists took as a model forthe Ecocity movement, as exampled by the work of Lewis Mumford who brought anenlightened ecological wisdom to the discipline of regional planning. Both Sale (1985)and Register (1987 ; 1991) cite his critical works such as The Culture of Cities (1938) and80Pentagon of Power (1970) as embodying the essence of Bioregional and Ecocity thoughtprior to the late 60s and early 70s.The ecological crisis and attendant environmental awareness of those decades disturbedand motivated people and, in terms of design, had the effect of instigating the birth of theecocity movement (Register 1991, p. 4). The more recent emergence of ideas such asappropriate technology, steady-state, and the notion of sustainable development have againpushed ecological issues to the fore.The whole systems approach and the works of philosopher/designer Paolo Soleri arefoundations of the Ecocity movement. In this theorist's view, the cities and towns are thefoundation, or litmus test, of the ecological and social health of the species: "....healthyecological evolution is absolutely necessary if we want healthy, creative functioning ofsociety in the future" (Ibid.). Soleri, the designer of the three-dimensional, high densitytown of Arcosanti, approaches design from a highly cerebral and, some might say, poeticperspective. He is sharply critical of the suburban context:The lesson is clear: life is where crowding is immense. Death comes when the systemuncrowds. When death supersedes life, the tree returns its complex-miniaturized self tothe vast surroundings. When the hyper-organism, the city, surrenders its makers anddwellings to the dimly alive pseudo-organism called suburbia, death is dancing. (Soleri1990, p. 21)Other design and social theorists of recent decades, including Ian McHarg (1969), JaneJacobs (1961), Anne Whiston-Spirn (1984) and Michael Hough (1984), have allcontributed to the ecologically-based discipline in design.Register cites Bioregionalism as a recent "strain" in Ecocity theory (1991). The theoryof Ecocity building is the "design version," or extension of, Bioregionalism. There isoverlap, exchange and sharing, a strong communication between the two theories.The final historical/theoretical conceptual framework for the Ecocity movement stemsfrom that of architectural and town-planning influences. These "case studies" are the testsof the application of ecological design theory. Among others, Register (1991) cites SimVan Der Ryn and Peter Calthorpe (1986), Christopher Alexander (1977; 1979) and81Christopher Canfield (1990 a; 1990b) as examples. Although the notions of "pedestrianpockets" and TODs proposed by Calthorpe advocate the central Ecocity tenet of "Access byProximity," there is a danger in the compromises that he and others like Van der Ryn make.Ecocity theory is in effect a "true" ecosystems approach to the rebuilding of non-sustainable cities. It has a theoretical and practical purity and simplicity (without beingsimplistic) which warrants serious attention. Perhaps it is the brightest light amongstmany theories; at least it seems to take the biggest steps towards the reformation of the citywithin a new paradigm of ecological and social holism. It is based on rebuilding, which inan ecological framework is the only logical and ethically appropriate point of departure.Ecocity PrinciplesWhat follows is a description and analysis of "Principles of Ecocity Building" asoutlined and described by Richard Register in Ecocity Berkeley: Building Cities for aHealthy Future (1987). The eight principles are:• Criteria: Life, Beauty, Equity (which forms the underlying basis for all theprinciples)• Bioregion, Biology and the City• The Shape of Things to Come -- Three Dimensional, Not Flat• Neighborhoods• Tall Buildings, High Density• Access by Proximity, Not Transportation• New Towns• The LawThe latter principles of New Towns and The Law are herein dealt with only in brief.Principle One: Criteria: Life, Beauty, Equity[Life :lit is in the service of defending, exploring, and cherishing life on Earth thatccocities will be built....So both kinds of reasons -- those that provide a healthy,adventuresome, beautiful environment, and those that support the needs and desires of theindividual, singly and collectively -- must be accommodated.... lBeautylThe aesthetic of acity -- its sensitivity and style, the way its buildings, streets, and transportation systemsare constructed, its relation to its natural and designed biological environment, its many82ways of functioning... [Equity:] ...fairness among people, the full opportunity for citizensto choose, create, and live out their own special expressions of potential. The city is aninstrument for human purpose -- without this equity it fails in its human purpose whetherit impacts negatively or positively upon nature. There should be nothing strange,embarrassing, or egotistical about attempting to enhance life, beauty, and equity. (p. 13)The criteria for the building , or more accurately the rebuilding, of cities, have explicitlyecological roots from the outset. The protection of all life forms, not of humans solely, iscentral to bioregional and other ecological theories. Whereas the pleasures and necessitiesof man (gender intentional) have at a very large cost built the cities which we know today,ecocities are to be ones which begin to heal the damage that has been done and instigate aprocess of re-balancing The urban ecologist (Ecocity practitioner, bricoleur) recognizes theimportance of economic, political, social and cultural forces in the city, and understandsthat they have shaped it. However, so great has been the cost to the biosphere that a largeshift in values and actions must take place: "[nothing less than the need to] rebuildcivilization on ecological principles" (Register 1991, p. 8). Hahn (1991) echoes thesewords on the dual role for the city of the future:Thus the city is the central point of departure as well as the central place of furtherdevelopment of society's appropriation of natural resources, of the transformation oftechnology, of societal innovations and cultural change. (p. 7)The beauty, or aesthetic, of the city is a judgement made on inherently subjectivegrounds, and yet at the same time, when nature's beauty prevails, a city's attractivenessbecomes a source of consensus. For the built urban landscape and architecture, what is isugly to one person may be viewed as sublime by the next. In the cities of today, wherethere is still much beauty to be found, nature has come to play second fiddle to man'screations. Most urban dwellers are distant from that which feeds body and soul. Hough(1984), Spirn (1984) and others are quick to point to what could be termed as holdouts, orpockets of resistance, as proof of "nature-creative" in the city, a different aesthetic which isalive. However, there must unquestionably be a broader re-balance of the city human andthe city ecological. A large portion of this programme, develops a respect and appreciationfor the beauty in nature through contact and exposure, not through separation and creation83of "reserves." The city has the ability to cater to the tastes and desires of all; indeed suchdiversity is the ultimate expression of the potential of the city. Currently though, those ofonly a select few are being satisfied.The ability to choose and live out one's individual creative potential in the spirit ofcooperation, or Equity, is the condition of the ecological city, not of the corporate city norof the socialist city. The roots of the Ecocity movement in Bioregionalism and SocialEcology are evident here. The equity described is not just a human function; it also extendsto non-human life and is intergenerational. It is not the formal equity of justice butBookchin's substantive equity whereinHumanity begins to gain its most sparkling glimpse of emancipation. With this questcarried to the social realm, rather than confined to a privatized hedonism, humanity beginsto transcend the realm of justice, even of classless society, and enters into the realm offreedom -- a realm conceived as the full realization of humanity's potentialities in theirmost creative form. (1991, pp. 9-10)Such a form of equity is not, by any stretch of the imagination purely a physical designquestion. In Ecocity design theory there is the implicit and explicit realization that theecological crisis must be responded to by providing alternatives in social, political,economic, cultural spheres and physical design. These are interdependent, andsustainability emerges from appropriate actions with regards to all of them not just to asingle one. Such ecological enlightenment is the essence of the principles of Ecocitybuilding.Principle Two: Bioregion, Biology and the CityWe can draw the borders of a bioregion according to types of living species, watersheds,winds, air drainages, geographic and geologic features, and climates. Nothing crisp ordogmatic exists to help us map bioregions, yet in the very differences of life from oneplace to another we find the richness and value of unique local offerings. This biologicalaspect of the ecocity is what some have called the "Green City." (Register 1990, p. 4)This principle speaks directly to the paradigm of place -- of bioregionalism -- and to thenecessity to understand the natural systems and to live-in-place. Ecocity building is thepractice, visa vis design, of Bioregionalism: it is about reinhabitation, the activeexpression of bioregional principles.84The biological aspects of the Ecocity program are those which apply to the greening ofcities. Many of these principles have a commonality with not only Bioregional but otherecological design theories.• Diversity is healthy. The number of species and variety of habitats and resources in anarea, and the complexity of their interconnections are generally measures of ecologicalstability and, if disturbed, resilience.• Fairly large areas are required for natural species to develop diversity of population.Generally, people should create settlements that, on a map, look something like "spots"against a background of natural and agricultural land, rather than sprawl that becomes abackground against which parks and natural areas look like spots.• Land has a limit to the biomass it can naturally support in a particular climate called its"carrying capacity. " Given the climate and soils of an environment, plants and animalscan extract only so much water, minerals, and energy in creating their bodies. Anotherlimit to carrying capacity is the rate at which the total population can reprocess thatbiomass into usable resources through decomposition and soil building.It is easy for people thoughtlessly to reduce an environment's carrying capacity [seeWackernagel et al 1993] -- to strip its forests or pollute its air and water. The complexliving system of a bioregion degrades and may collapse, regenerating only over hundreds,even thousands of years (if ever). It is far more difficult to increase long-term carryingcapacity. Sustained composting, rebuilding of soil, strategies to augment the supply ofwater, and reforestation can provide the resources that invite and sustain populations ofdifferent species.• There is a green hierarchy in ecocity planning. Natural (native) and useful (food,medicinal, wood-providing) plants are much more important for ecological and socialhealth than ornamentals, though this rule is softened by the diversity principle. Lawnspresently consume vast areas, waste water, energy, and time, and tempt people to applyexpensive fertilizers and dangerous pesticides. Why not plant food gardens, ground coversof herbs and strawberries, fruit and nut trees?• Make waste into new resources: compost and recycle.• Biological pest control and nutrients are generally preferable to chemicals. Use parasiticwasps to control aphids and natural manure and compost in gardening, for example.• When it comes to extinction and diminution of species, urbanites, suburbanites , andrural people all conspire, if only half-consciously. Cities, per se, are not the cause ofthis problem. Fences, country roads, range and forest management, replacement ofnatural species with useful ones (cattle, for example), deforestation for agriculture,flooding valleys to benefit city and farm alike for electricity and water, living far fromwork and commuting..., all these can intrude on natural species. (Register 1987, pp. 16-18)Expanding on these biological elements for design and coming from a somewhatdifferent perspective is the work of Nancy Jack and John Todd in Bioshelters, Ocean Arks,City Farming: Ecology as the Basis of Design (1984). Although they are more concernedwith the creation of extremely organic self-sufficient future habitats, their principles, or85"Precepts of Biological Design," inform the Ecocity movement and vice versa. Briefly,these principles are as follows:Precept One: The Living World is the Matrix for All DesignThe Gaia hypothesis [see Lovelock 1979] forms this notion , one which permeates all ofthe design principles. It is used as a premise that design is based on a matrix of a livingentity which profound and complex beyond present comprehension. It is a metaphor inthat it attempts to understand and maintain a connection with larger life which, ironically,we can only understand partially.Precept Two: Design Should Follow, Not Oppose, the Laws of LifeTherefore the necessity is to recognize and heed the following laws:(i) The cell is the basic unit and building block of life(ii) The cell participates directly in the fundamental functioning of the wholeorganism(iii) The fact that organisms are at once complete, independent and autonomous,yet interdependent with other life forms, is a paradox of basic life(iv) The ecosystem is the next level of organization and is analogous to anorganism, the differences being that the boundaries are less distinct, the lengthbetween the components longer and the couplings looser(v) Nature is not static(vii) All life shares the same basic information(viii) Time, in nature, is more complex than time as we experience it.Precept Three: Biological Equity Must Determine DesignBiological design and biotechnology can not be divorced from issues of social justice.Biological equity, the just access to and distribution of basic resources is, unavoidably, aprecept of biological design.Precept Four: Design Must Reflect BioregionalityPrecept Five: Projects Should be Based on Renewable Energy SourcesPrecept Six: Design Should be Sustainable through the Integration of Living Systems.Using the biological world as a model, wherever possible integrate design and function.This rejects the conventional notion of separation of functions and of design fromfunction.Precept Seven: Design Should be Coevolutionary with the Natural WorldMaking sophisticated attempts at creating a working alliance between the human andnatural worlds. Working with, or better within, nature rather than in opposition to.Precept Eight: Building and Design Should Help to Heal the PlanetA guideline more than a rule. The difficulty of working with the living world and takingone's cue from the patterns discernible there is the circuitous and overlapping yetincomplete nature of what one is able to perceive of its being. Processes, structure, andfunctions are interwoven; everything is recycled to be born again. All is motion. All isflux.Precept Nine: Design Should Follow a Sacred EcologyThis corresponds to the Bioregional principle of Learning the Lore. It is the recognitionof the wisdom which arises from a intimate and spiritual association with nature.(adapted from Todd & Todd 1984, pp. 19-90)86Taking the biological principals of Register and the Todds together, a comprehensivepicture of an alternative design paradigm begins to emerge. It is one which can be manifestin design and action at all levels, from the larger bioregional program of reinhabitation tothe smaller scale of landscape treatment of one's yard. Register makes some suggestionson the direction which restoring the biology of a city can take place. Possible means are therestoration of urban creeks, rivers, shore fronts, marshes and springs, and buildingstructures which are respectful of and enhance water systems (1987; 1990). This mightinclude, in the Vancouver context, the daylighting of significant streams now culvertedbelow ground, and exploring methods for increasing permeability in the landscape anddecreasing runoff. Register adds to this the necessity of reducing levels of pollution fromautomobiles and animals in remaining runoff .Other ways of introducing biological principles include increased urban gardening andorchards, creation of solar greenhouses, and rooftop gardens, the re-establishment ofnative wildlife and plants inside the city and around it, in parks and along restored creeksand streams in the form of greenbelts. The latter can be accomplished by public and privateacquisition of sensitive lands, and through zoning and tax incentives to create more focused"pockets" of urban activity in the midst of nature (Ibid., p.18). The concept of theCommunity Land Trust (CLT) presents a viable and increasingly popular alternative toachieve such goals. By acquiring lands in public trust and placing them under covenants topreserve ecological integrity in perpetuity, the Land Trust model holds hope for asustainable future (see Bartman et al. 1992).Principle Three: The Shape of Things to Come - Three Dimensional, NotFlatWe need to build our cities far more compactly than we do today. Instead of flat like atortilla, cities should be three-dimensional --much more like the old cities of Europe,though not necessarily as vertical as Manhattan. And they can't, without greatenvironmental damage, be narrow-mindedly dense like downtown San Francisco, which isalmost exclusively work space, and one specific kind at that: office space. (Register1987, p. 19)87With this, the third principle of Ecocity building and its criticism of sprawl, whichcould almost be regarded as universal, is voiced. Whereas the second principle can belabelled the regional program for the Ecocity, this call for three dimensionality takes in thescale of the city itself. Register posits two elements for the employment of this principle:density and mixed use, and diversity (1987; 1990). The former has much in common withthe program, at least on the surface, of Neotraditionalism. However, the entire ecologicalcontext of Ecocity building as expressed in the latter element show it to be a solution of avery different stripe.The policy of creating higher densities and more "compact" cities is to be combinedwith mixed use. Therefore, the existing condition of extremely tall, single-use officebuildings with sprawl surrounding the city is offset by mixed-use zoning whichconcentrates development as opposed to scattering it. Other notions include the creative useand alteration of existing tall buildings in order to articulate and give them a grain or texturecurrently missing, and the construction of apartment buildings adjacent to office buildings(Register 198'7, pp. 19-20). The case of downtown Vancouver, with the adjacent WestEnd, presents a slightly improved situation over that of most American cities; howeverdiversity in terms of use is still somewhat lacking.Diversity embraces the notion that what is "...healthy in ecological systems, is alsohealthy for the economy of the city" (Ibid.). In the same manner that uniformity at one endof the scale in the form of suburban sprawl is non-sustainable, so too is it in the densesingle-use of the offices' sector. The creation of compact cities, within a program ofreinhabitation, would not only be an ecological improvement in terms of reducing thepollution associated with commuting, but, by diversifying, would contribute to the goals ofsocial sustainability through creating a vibrancy, richness and depth normally lacking individed sectors.Principle Four: NeighborhoodsEven if downtowns and adjacent neighborhoods are far more attractive, pleasant, healthy,many people will want to live in lower density areas; how low, how scattered, and how88uniform is the critical issue. It's a matter of degree, of not "going too far"....(Register1987, p. 21)The fourth principle takes the bioregional principle or imperative of reinhabitation downto the scale of the neighbourhood. This principle introduces to the Ecocity its version ofthe urban village, that of the integral urban neighborhood or urban eco-village. In essence,it is an integrative program for design which echoes the comprehensive breadth of thedeeper ecologies. It is not integration in the narrow convenience/efficiency orientation ofthe Neotraditional neighbourhood. The neighbourhood in Ecocity theory is conceptualizedas a socially, politically, economically and ecologically integrated whole, complete untoitself as well as part of the larger system of the city. The following steps are forwarded asbeing helpful in achieving the ecological health of the city:• Preserve Medium Density Neighbourhoods While Vitalizing Their Centres. This isin essence the urban village concept of densifying around cores or centers established bycommercial activity. Increase population by adding apartments above stores, carriagehomes, garages, basement and attic conversions,raising and adding stories to houses nearsuch centres.• Withdraw from low density neighborhoods and areas of medium density in sensitive orrich ecological areas. This includes creeks and shorelines, steep slopes, and special viewsthat should be available to any citizen.• In very large suburban sprawls, locate good potential centers and begin focusingdevelopment there while withdrawing from areas at greater distance from the centers.Again this is the urban village concept. The qualifier is given that, if the whole area ispurely a "bedroom" to the city then a general withdrawal should occur.• Make most streets narrower while adding garden space. on residential streets the reversalof the normal policy of widening streets and reclaiming land for vegetable gardens, fruittrees and green space. The decrease in traffic from narrowing and other methods such astraffic calming allows for such activity to happen in front yards and close to the road dueto decreased pollution.• Use positive incentives. When withdrawing development from one place and increasingit in another use positive incentives. This reprioritized tax money, bond money,endowments, land banking, non-profit donations [CLTs], transfer of development rights,etc. ( adapted from Register 1987, pp. 21-24)In all, these add up to a focus on building, designing and activity at the localcommunity scale. They represent creative and implementable solutions for turning"bedroom" communities into unique and vibrant places.89Principle Five: Tall Buildings, High DensityHeight limits are often imposed as an anti-development strategy, and usually because tallbuildings arc seen as causing traffic congestion. Insofar as height limits show anappreciation of limits in general and take into account the qualitative changes thataccompany quantitative change, they are well motivated meaningful, and sometimesbeneficial; they put the brakes on run-away single-use construction...But since the ideabehind ecocities is not to stop development nor reverse the clock but to move into thefuture by encouraging particular kinds of development, height limits have to be consideredin another light. (Register 1987, p. 24)This ecocity principle is an expression of the creative force behind and the strength ofdiversity fundamental to the movement. This principle looks at the scale of theneighborhood in a different context, that of the downtown, and therefore at the potential forecological and social communities within areas of existing tall structures as one form ofdensification. Ecocity looks to the possibilities and benefits inherent in diversity, and to thepositive legacies or elements in the contemporary city, finding the potentials within them.One of the "facts of life" in the city is the high-rise, the sky-scraper or tall (usuallysingle-use) building. Negatively, these are viewed as casting shadows, making streetscooler, increasing winds, adding population, and as architecturally alienating and ugly,appearing often as glass boxes. But as Register (1987) is quick to point out, suchnegatives are conditional (p. 26). It is not necessary to tear down tall buildings in order torebuild the city. One of the implicit precepts in ecocity (re)building is to utilize the formand materials already in place. This reduces energy and resource consumption. Equallyimportant is the social aspect: "...some people like to live among or near tall buildings andthe cultural variety that larger numbers of people make possible..." (Ibid.). "Twentystories up," design can discover...a new kind of border zone scarcely experimented with as yet, the border between thesubtle and the spectacular, the small and the large, the secure and the exciting, theimmediate, personal scale, and the scale revealed by a high-flying view of much of thebioregion. (Ibid., p. 27)Positively, a neighbourhood of tall structures and dense downtowns has the followingadvantages:• saves vast acreage of land for agriculture and nature,• promotes energy saving, non- or low-polluting pedestrian, bicycle, and transit access,• makes commerce and culture and social diversity of all kinds easily available, and,90• can be built with multi-leveled solar greenhouses, rooftop gardens, fruit trees in thestreets, restored creeks, and with other elements of biology extending into and through thecity. (Register 1990, p. 6)Although this notion may appear to reflect the concepts of le Corbousier's "Ville Radieuse"and his futuristic cities, such an interpretation belies the underlying philosophies and intent.The intention of this principle is to make such environments home again for human andnon-human life, to make them individual, unique and alive, in the bioregion. Otherpotential Ecocity principles for the downtown exemplify the "small steps" that can be takenin the evolutionary transformation to the ecocity. These include the creation of pedestrianmalls, transit malls and car-free zones which create quiet zones for convivial connections;encouraging city-art in public places especially to celebrate living-in place, in the bioregion;creating public amenities all-weather places for gathering and moving (see Gehl 1987); andproviding both no-car condos where lower rents/mortgages can be given in exchange fornot harbouring a car and single-room housing to address ecological and social goals.Principle Six: Access by Proximity: Not TransportationThink of establishing desirable places close to one another. Transportation is what youhave to do to get places inconveniently located. If diversity is designed into the city,commuting can be minimized and other travel can be reserved for special occasions.Cities that are easily navigated without the car--even difficult to manage in a car--encourage train and bus use between cities too. (Register 1990, p. 7)This Ecocity principle highlights the dichotomy between design which is radical andthat which is reformist. The solutions posited by Neotraditionalism belong to the lattergroup. Arguably, their notions might be about reducing from two cars to one or makingshops closer and hence reducing reliance on the car. However, their goal is not to actuallychange modes of transportation or to eliminate cars for the most part. This ecocityprinciple on the other hand, recognizes the following:• There is a hierarchy of ecologically healthier surface transportation modes. Cars areworst, trains, buses and ferries better, bicycles better yet, and foot travel best. The mostserious efforts, then, should be made to help pedestrians, considerable effort made forbicyclists, significant support should be given to public transportation, and strongdisincentives should be applied to automobiles.• The principle of diversity should moderate the transportation hierarchy. In other words,many modes should be available, with the greatest emphasis on the pedestrian and the91least on the automobile. Car-free zones, pedestrian malls, and transit malls are crucial,with as little adjacent parking as possible. But some cars-for instance, taxis, certaindelivery vehicles, and rental cars for getting into rural areas not served by publictransportation -- could fit into an ecocity context.This includes the idea of slow streets [Also called traffic calming, or in Dutch"Woonerfs"] wherein the street becomes a place not a route. When the car is sloweddown drastically ( 25 kmh or less) through designing more trees, narrowed curbs atintersections called "chokers," speed humps and other features. [the placement ofvegetation islands and parking spots which interrupt the flow of traffic, sculpture,gardens, etc. are others].Connecting rooftops downtown with foot bridges, covering arcades and pedestrianroutes for inclement weather. The relegation of the automobile from the fore to the leastin public and private terms can be accomplished by personal efforts and through "sinking"freeways out of site and reclaiming streets on amenable ecologically sensitive lands, or"taking back" every fourth street in residential neighbourhoods. (Register 1987, pp. 33-37)Principles Seven and Eight: New Towns and The LawRegister stated in 1987 that ecocities can be created either through building or throughrebuilding existing cities. Looking at his more recent writing (1990; 1991), it wouldappear that he has backed away from the notion of building new towns. This is a functionof ecological necessity and ethics. Rapidly escalating ecological realities demand a newand more fundamental perspective.The principle, The Law, centres on zoning, ordinances and codes in place nationally,provincially (state) and municipally. This principle considers the methods and processesfor altering, replacing, challenging and circumventing these laws. A discussion of these isdeferred to the fifth chapter where they will be referred to the context of Vancouver.An Expanded Set of Ecological Principles and GuidelinesA more recent set of ecological design principles and guidelines presented by Registergives a slightly expanded framework in order to do no less than "...rebuild civilization onecological principles." These were introduced in Register's State of the Theory, State ofthe Movement and Ecocity Principles and Guidelines, and are as follows:1. Access by proximity, that is, built in diversity, via mixed use and balanceddevelopment zoning and other "proximity policies" and life style choices.2. Low energy transportation hierarchy (transportation is inextricably tied in with landuse): pedestrian first, bicycle second, rail transit third, buses fourth, cars in last priority.3. Maximum recycling.4. Minimum pollution.925. Energy conservation and renewable (solar, wind, biomass, hydropower, etc.) energysystems.6. PREcycling: produce essentials and important items, go easy on unimportant ones.7. Spend on and invest in resources, goods and services in inverse proportion to distancefrom home, that is, supporting local and regional over national and internationaleconomy, with large and frequently used items from nearby, and some infrequently usedand small items from far away.8. Favor buildings and building features and agricultural practices that serve many purposeover ones that serve one or few purposes, a major permaculture design principle.9. Design for and in awareness of local and bioregional uniqueness: geology,typography, soils, climate, sun angles, winds, flora, fauna, history and culture.10. Finance for long term pay-back, not short term.11. Encourage biological richness, species diversity, especially native.12. Use healthy agricultural practices emphasizing indigenous and locally adaptive crops,in season eating, minimizing fossil fuels, insecticides, herbicides, and artificial fertilizers;utilize whole systems design approaches.13. Use whole systems approach to design incorporating all of the above.14. Apply the ethics, morals and values of survival and thriving as guiding principles: avoice for all, compassion, justice and responsibility. (1991, pp. 8-9)These in their comprehensiveness propose a program not just for design but as well forbroader social action. Two other sets of ecological principles for design form AppendixTwo and Appendix Three. These are principles which are resources similar to Ecocitytheory but unique to the locale and projects. The first is a set of principles for urbanrestructuring in Germany, the second for an Australian rebuilding program.3.4 TO BUILD OR TO REBUILD?The means for tearing down the old are available, both as hope and peril. So, too, are themeans for rebuilding. The ruins themselves are mines for recycling the wastes of animmensely perishable world into the structural materials of one that is free as well asnew. -Murray Bookchin, 1991We stand at a critical juncture, one which is simultaneously two. On the one hand isthe precipice of ecological and social destruction that we as a society face. We still havechoices of paths which might save not only humanity but Gaia herself. It is not a matter ofslightly altering our direction, for that will still cause us to plummet. We have to do acomplete about face, and move in the opposite direction away from the cliff. The analogybelies the complexity of such a shift, but it serves as a starting point for understanding andacting in a deeper ecological and transpersonal manner.93The second juncture is the one we find ourselves at in this thesis. The next twochapters are attempts to operationalize what has been explored in theoretical terms to thispoint. This "bridge" from the theoretical to the practical begs the vital question of How?The What? has already been made explicit; the how though poses a whole set of challengesand questions. At the very core of this is a question of a fundamentally ecological nature:In looking to create sustainable cities, do we concentrate on rebuilding existing ones or wewe continue to build anew? There is likely no one answer to this question; however, in thecontext of Vancouver, the only ecologically and socially responsible answer is to begin torebuild what we have already created. In Patrick Geddes words,...civics as an art has to do not with imagining an impossible no-place where all is well,but making the most and the best of each and every place, especially of the city in whichwe live. (Geddes as quoted in Hough 1984, p. 3)Every designer craves and longs for the the crisp white sheet -- the fresh start, the new.However, we have in recent history, worn out that privilege to the point of its abuse. Wehave far exceeded the carrying capacity of this bioregion; we must begin by stopping, bylook creatively at the potential within ourselves and our cities as they exist. This processof rebuilding involves not simply converting existing buildings, densifying or up-zoning.It involves reinhabitation, which includes a cultural and societal perspective. It alsoinvolves returning lands back to their natural states or to other more appropriate uses. Itinvolves making spots in a sea of natural terrain, not specks of natural in a sea ofurbanization. Such an exercise might not be profitable and to a large extent runs againstthe orientation of much conventional architecture, design and planning. To quote LeonKrier,The challenge to our generation is to refuse to build now. To protest against thetransformation and destruction of the cities serves no purpose if we do not have a globalalternative plan of reconstruction in our hands. (1984, p. 38)Although many would disagree, this does not have be viewed as a painful process forprofessionals and the populace. Rather, it provides hope for the future, a challenge and anew(old) and meaningful way of experiencing which eclipses the superficiality, alienation94and destructive activities of today's World View. The new role for the designer andplanner in this effort is part of the French vocabulary but absent in English. It is the"science of working with what exists is a strange mixture of theory, research andpracticality"(Todd & Tukel 1981, p. 38). This is the practice of Bricolage, and thepractitioner is known as the Bricoleur which translates into "...enlightened tinkers withwhat is at hand" (Ibid.). The bricoleur is characterized as one who...would see what was, is, and can be, as a splendid continuum which must come fullcircle... who assumesl...that the true potential of a house, a block, or a whole ton hasscarcely been tapped. The bricoleur tries to listen to the voice of a place as expressedthrough the history and inhabitants. There is a responsibility to maintain continuity. Totransform is not to inoculate with misplaced status. If restoration leads to displacement,it is failure. (Ibid.)The Bricoleur is a Bioregionalist is a Reinhabitant is a Ecocity Rebuilder is a Bricoleur.They are one; the circle is closed.Simply stated Ecocity and Alexander et al. embody an ends/means form of ethics,where one's actions are not compromised for the sake of the larger goal. Formally this iscalled a deontological ethical perspective. It prescribes that: "...good ends cannot bejustified by wrong actions" (Bolan 1985, p. 75). This contrasts with a teleologicalperspective which adheres to an ethics of achieving ultimate ends by whatever means.Register (1991) appropriately applies the axiom of deontological ethics: "Live therevolution in order to bring it about" (p. 9). Perhaps in the the spirit of Bioregionalismand eco-anarchy (Social Ecology), we should rephrase this to "Live the evolution in orderto bring it about."To place this in the context of the larger goal of making non-sustainable citiesecologically and socially sustainable, it is imperative that we apply such an ethic. We mustcarefully assess the way we proceed. The project is long term. It will take centuries andmultiple generations. The ethics, if indeed they can be labelled as such, of our currentparadigm are teleological and short term, where the end (usually profit) must be reached atall costs and fast. Such an ethics is inherently anti-ecological and anti-social. Therefore, topractice ecological city-building, we must embrace the deontological; otherwise, from the95outset we are destroying our ultimate end or goal. If we embrace the goal of creating urbaneco-villages on agricultural land in Langley, we are shooting ourselves in the proverbialfoot. We negate, from the start, all of the theory and principles discussed. We cease to beecological.The only logical path in such a context as Vancouver and the Greater VancouverRegional District (GVRD) is to ensure that our first action is to concentrate on existingbuilt areas and "to refuse to build." Rather, we must reinhabit, reconstruct, rebuild. Bydoing this we are embracing ecology, Bioregionalism and Ecocity theory and principlessimultaneously.Register (1991) suggests the following tenets for action (means) and futureaccomplishment of ecological cities (goals / ends):•Efficiency -- in action and as a goal• Harmony -- in action and as a goal•Vitality -- in action and as a goal• Creativity and Stewardship in Balance -- in action and as a goal.(p.9)Accomplishing these goals depends on one's actions, states the author. Hence self-education (we co-create ourselves and our built environments) and life-style changes(organizations and politics) are the logical starting points.It is vital that we begin by rebuilding our previous mistakes. Often regarded as aninhibitor to conventional design and planning process, the presence of the community as apopulation presents opportunity to the bricoleur. In fact, the whole series of "inhibitors"for the mainstream are viewed as opportunities and potentials by practitioners of bricolage.3.5 CONCLUSIONThis chapter has served to outline the three design theories which are in effect the"logical extensions" of the theory of Chapter Two into the realm of design.Neotraditionalism is the embodiment of Lynch's Mechanical view of the city. It offers a96weak and shallow response to the condition of the non-sustainable city. With a narrowfixation on design it proposes that the solution required is "simple": design away theproblems and cover them up with nostalgic small town architecture and urban form.The work of Alexander et al. is the realization of Lynch's Organic view of the city. Itprovides insight into design from an ecological and biological perspective or orientation.Its largest contribution is the recognition that process must take precedence over form indesigning and generating community, that design must be embraced by the "grass-roots."Ecocity represents the view of the city as a Complex Ecology/Ecosystem according toLynch's prescription for a "single" normative theory. As an extension of Bioregionalism,Ecocity provides the most potential in terms of ecological and social depth for the task ofrebuilding the non-sustainable city.Importantly, Ecocity design theory provides a prescription for process and form whichis firmly rooted in an ecological ethic. Such a perspective is strongly dedicated torebuilding the potential that exists, not continuing the consumptive path by constantlystarting anew. It recognizes the mistake in subjugating means and actions to goals andends. The logical extensions of this ethic are the notion that design cannot be isolated andseparated from larger social processes, that process is more important than form in design,and that ultimately questions of ecological sustainability cannot be disconnected from socialones.97CHAPTER FOUR : THE URBAN VILLAGE IN DESIGN THEORY4.1 INTRODUCTIONThe purpose of this chapter is to explore the concept of the urban village as it isinterpreted in the three different design theories evaluated in the preceding chapter. Morethan being a singular design concept which stands alone, the urban village has the potentialto be both a "seed" for regeneration and an integral part of the larger process of making thenon-sustainable city sustainable again. Although the physical form and manifestation of theurban village in each theory may appear similar, a detailed reading of each providesevidence of significant differences. It will be argued that only in pursuing the form andprocesses of generating urban eco-villages as prescribed by Alexander et al. and especiallyEcocity will the urban village have a legitimate role in the creation of sustainable cities.The urban village as it has been "consumed" and marketed by mainstream design andplanning and the media speaks of a very narrow and superficial concept which focusesalmost exclusively on form and aesthetics. This is represented in the theory ofNeotraditionalism, where the concept is translated as the Traditional Town Center (Krieger1991). The urban village is implicit throughout the theory of Alexander et al. but isexpressed explicitly as the Identifiable Neighborhood (Alexander et al. 1977) . In similaryet more holistic fashion, the urban village in Ecocity theory, identified as the IntegralNeighborhood (Register 1987) and the Eco-village (Ecopolis 1992), provide us with anappropriate goal within the goal, the urban eco-village and the appropriate process forachieving it. The larger goal is the ecological city, and herein it will be demonstrated thatthe main utility of the urban eco-village is the way in which it models the larger, and insuch a manner provides a vision for it. Figure 4.1 illustrates the content of this chapterrelative to the progress of the thesis.98Figure 4.1 : Map of the Thesisinumentoitmato ttatiumititutos'99Source: AuthorThe full ecological and social expression of the urban village should be defined,known, and translated as a potential, not as an absolute. It should be regarded as a vision,a tool for the reinhabitation of urban neighborhoods. The undemocratic, non-participatoryand egocentric manner of "top-down" design and planning has no place in an ecologicalculture or city. Accordingly it should be abandoned with regards to the urban village. Thedescriptions and case examples provided below are meant to be seeds and potentials ofwhat could be, not what necessarily has to be. In the end, it is the people who mustreinhabit the city and create an ecological culture and sustainable forms of community.Ecology necessitates that the planner's and designer's role is to educate, facilitate, andprovide the tools and, if appropriate, some vision. It is not for them to do it on thepeople's behalf.Quite simply, the notion of the urban village has the ability to evoke an emotional andtangible response in people. More than this, the full expression of the urban village -- theurban eco-village -- has the ability to act as a catalyst, an integral part of the shift to a newculture.The reasons for this are numerous. One aspect is the scale at which community istheorized as "gelling" or coming together. The task of healing the non-sustainable city,never mind the planet, is a daunting one to say the least. To begin this, the urban villageprovides a size of project which is tangible and comprehensible. It is a scale which peoplecan wrap themselves around, one at which they can own the problem.When we bring the project of reinhabitation and living-in-place to the level of theneighbourhood, we can begin, borrowing a metaphor from above, to put tools intopeople's hands. The urban eco-village can be a bright spark, a vision of what could be. Itis a flexible idea which prescribes a certain form but allows this to be generated in thecontext of a radically altered process, one which is part of a larger paradigmatic shift.This notion is called "planting a seed," and it is a response which looks atoperationalizing the ecological version of the urban village, as a portion of a larger whole.100This is true both literally in the physical city of sustainability, and metaphorically in thelarger cultural shift to a new way of thinking and doing.The heart of this task is the generation of community as a reflection of ecological andsocial health. To place this in context, the theory of Ferdinand Tonnies (1955 ed.) will beexplored as it provides an appropriate typology for this discussion, that being thedichotomous community types of Gemeinschaft (the rural, parochial village of pre-industrial era) and of Gesellschaft (the community of contract and association). Thistypology has been modified recently by Boothroyd (1991) to include Post-Gesellschaft (orGruenschaft), a sustainable mix of the two. These definitions of community will beexpanded in Section 4.3, as well as in the course of discussing the different versions of theurban village. The conclusion will reinforce the argument for an appropriate model whichcan potentially be planted as a "seed" in local neighborhoods.4.2 URBAN VILLAGE DEFINEDThe purpose of this section is to give a clear definition of the term "urban village."Moving from the flat, basic and two-dimensional to the complex and multi-dimensional,we can metaphorically and literally "build" our concept by adding layers and lateralexcursions as we progress from the shallow to the deep perspective (see Figure 4.2).Prior to delving into definitions it should be made clear that the urban eco-village is notan autonomous entity. Form does not stand separate from process, and the concept as aremedy does not stand separate from the larger processes of creating the sustainable city, ofreinhabiting, and indeed of the planetary paradigm shift to an ecological culture. It is a partof the whole. As examples Identifiable Neighborhood and the Integral Neighborhood arevery different in intent and substance from the Traditional Town Center. The latterrepresents a perspective where the village stands alone, as an appendage to the machine-likecity. The former two present an ecological view of integration into the complex web whichis the city as a Complex Ecosystem.101Additionally, while the concept of the urban village addresses the scale of the city, innone of the three theories is it prescribed as the only scale or form that the city could take.Jan Gehl (1987) considers this question of whether to assemble or disperse as conditional:...assembling ought not to be attempted in all circumstances. On the contrary, in manycases good arguments exist for not doing so; for example, to ensure a more evendistribution of city activities over larger sections of the city, or to establish peaceful,quiet spaces as supplements to the more lively ones. (p. 83)To reiterate Register's fourth Ecocity principle, it is a question of "...how low, howscattered, and how uniform..." (1987, p. 21). In keeping with ecological tenets ofdiversity found in Bioregional, Ecocity theory, and the theory of Alexander et al., it wouldbe foolish to assume that all urban form would be at the same density as is found in theurban village.The Concise Oxford English Dictionary defines urban as "Of, living or situated in, acity or town, as — districts, population" and village as "Assemblage of houses etc.; largerthan hamlet and smaller than town" (1952). The urban village then is an "assemblage ofhouses etc., situated in a city or town."The idea of the urban village is born of a criticism of the unsustainable form and socialpathologies of the large North American city. In defining the urban village, variousperspectives can be seen to lie on a continuum (see Figure 4.2), moving from a focus onthe physical (two-dimensional and design oriented) to more holistic three- and even multi-dimensional ones. The latter includes not simply physical elements but as well thedimensions of social, political, economic, ecological, and the spiritual.To begin with the left of the continuum, we look at the physical aspects of the urbanvillage. In size it lies between the low densities of single-family suburban sprawl and thehigh densities of downtown cores. There is no absolute size, but in all three designtheories, the concept of walkability, expressed as the 1/4 mile (approximately 300 yards)radius is common (Krieger 1991; Sale 1980; Alexander et al. 1977).The size of an ideal urban block cannot be established more precisely than the ideal heightof the human body. One can, however, deduce through comparison and experience sizes102of urban blocks which are more apt to form a complex urban pattern than others. (Krier1984, p. 43)The same is true for the neighbourhood or urban village. In Neotraditionalism andAlexander, such notions of absolute size are more quantitatively "strict" than in Ecocity,which sees fewer formulaic answers arising naturally from process. This physical size isalso mirrored in ideal population sizes where estimates of around 500 are seen as logical,given such physical boundaries (Krieger 1991; Sale 1980; Alexander et al. 1977).Figure 4.2 : Continuum for Analysis of Urban Villages103Source: AuthorThis form usually focuses on an identifiable centre or core. This is an agglomeration ofcommercial, residential and, in some cases, sacred or collective sites. The core will oftenbe a higher density collection of alternative housing types and stores, community,religious, entertainment and political institutions and facilities. Usually, it will include a"commons" or "village green." Densities in land use tend to fall off as one moves from thecentre to the "edges" of the village (see Figure 4.3)Figure 4.3 : Concentric Rings of Density104Source: AuthorIn Neotraditionalism, the physical organization of space and its uses tend to be rigidlyformulaic and "tight." The grid tends to predominate, and the notion of hierarchy isentrenched. In Alexander et al. and especially in Ecocity, the approach tends to be moredemocratic and fluid. Here the unplanned is allowed to happen in concert with the planned,and the physical village is seen as a logical result of living close to the land and usingwisdom and intuition rather than cleverness and fashion.In moving to the right on our continuum, we begin to leave behind the Neotraditionalurban village, where the social aspect is seen as part and parcel of the imposed plan. Incontrast to such a misunderstanding of the complexity of community, Ecocity andAlexander et al. apply the maxim that ecological culture must precede the ecological city,and that community writ large must precede physical community. Without doubt, there arecertain universal forms and design applications which will augment certain social benefits,such as the idea of agglomeration, of allowing for interaction on streets and placement ofbuildings, street widths, height to width ratios, of creating identifiable neighborhoods,defensible space, and common ground, to name a few. However, to a large extent thesocial processes will ultimately build the sustainable city. The focus on social aspects inthe Ecocity version of the urban village is on the collective spirit of a counterculturededication to change how we live on the land and interact with it and among ourselves. Itis about rootedness and reinhabiting. This idea of common ground does not arise explicitlyin Alexander et al.These are largely political questions, ones which vary greatly across the spectrum wehave created. In Neotraditionalism, the placement of the town hall is thought to be theimpetus for a "grass-roots" politics to rise under the premise that if we replicate the pre-War New England village which had a certain civic democracy, those democraticprocesses will automatically be embraced by the people. Theories such as those ofAlexander et al. and Ecocity view the converse scenario as true and sustainable: theprocess of community and democratic structures precede the physical form (i.e., town105halls, community facilities) of villages themselves. Less dogmatically, they should beviewed as emerging and reinforcing each other simultaneously. Politics on this "deeper"side of the spectrum is of the type explored in Chapter Two in connection withBioregionalism and Social Ecology. It is inclusive, ethical and open; important are theconcepts of bioregional government and "municipal libertarianism." The urban eco-villageand the larger ecological city are the extension of "...the self-governing city state into theecological realm..." (Downton 1991, p. 28).The economic definition of the urban village swings between the poles of short-termprofit, consumption and pollution, and the long view of an economy of means, sufficiencyand conservation. Neotraditionalism again comes up shallow in its assessment of, andprescription for, a sustainable economy vis a vis the urban village. It can be described as amethod of making society more efficient and convenient. It is nothing other than amodified, or reformed, extrapolation of our current formal economy. Although Ecocityand Alexander et al. in formulating urban village concepts, may also prescribe bringingshops and services within walking distance, they go much further. The economy is seenas a part of the whole, and the urban village is viewed as one method out of many whichcan help to create long term and meaningful economy, based on collective spirit, on selfreliance, on Small is Beautiful, on the informal, on appropriate technology, on carryingcapacity, recycling, etc. What the urban village provides is a type of form, of interaction,of scale which could potentially lead to such alternatives.The definition of the urban village which incorporates ecology is completely absent inNeotraditionalism, yet it is the core of both Alexander et al. and Ecocity. For this reason itis left to the individual sections (below) to expand and illustrate how ecology acts as thekey in the urban eco-village.We have then what are, necessarily, three very different versions of a single idea. Oneis very "flat"(two-dimensional) and is the mere transposing of the nostalgic vision ofvillage onto the physical, social, political, and economic landscape of the city today. It106contributes little towards the goal of generating the sustainable city. On the other extreme isthe ecological village found in Ecocity theory and practice. As a totality it does not existtoday, but is found as fragments and "seeds" in every city. As an entity it cannot possiblyexist if we do not as a society have an ecological value basis and way of acting. Hence thedefinition of urban village in Neotraditionalism represents a physical reality contrastingwith a truly holistic version, the urban eco-village, which remains as a distant goal to bebuilt and generated through appropriate means. For any "village" to embody such"community" it will have to be built and generated over many generations and decadesbefore it could even begin to think off itself as sustainable. It is a long and difficult path totraverse, but rebalancing cannot be achieved overnight.In addition, it should be noted that the urban village is not several things. Mostimportantly, the urban village is not the idea of regional town centres which are also knownas "edge cities." These are now becoming a reality in the Greater Vancouver RegionalDistrict (GVRD) as exampled by Metrotown, Richmond Town Centre, Whalley in Surrey,etc. These are best described as surrogate downtown cores which, in scale and use, seekto replicate high density cores across the region. Their focus is generally on economic andcommercial functions and high-rise housing. Although such forms and densities have arole in the ecological city, and could be a focus of rebuilding (see "Tall Buildings" inSection 3.3.2), they are not the focus of this discussion.Additionally, the urban village is not the simple act of allowing apartments above storesalong established commercial "corridors," the apparent village centres "policy" of the Cityof Vancouver. Although such a minute step is one in the right direction, it could hardly berecognized as a bold and courageous step towards realizing sustainability. Such "inaction"only reinforces the argument for more decentralized government and planning1074.3 URBAN VILLAGE IN HISTORICAL CONTEXTIn order to place the above definitions and the discussion to follow into some context, itis beneficial to briefly look from the historical perspective at the term "urban village." Thishistory is very recent and can be broken into two distinct and separate usages. The first isthe original coining of the phrase by Herbert Gans in the early 1960s, and the second is thevery recent usage which applies to the design concept found primarily inNeotraditionalism. In addition to discussing both of these, this section will look at somecriticism of the notion, mainly by Jane Jacobs, some existing examples of fragments, orseeds, of urban villages in Vancouver, and will review the historical progress ofcommunity as identified by Tonnies and more recently Boothroyd to further delineate thenature of the various interpretations of the urban village concept.Herbert Gans and the Urban VillageIn 1962 sociologist Herbert Gans in his book The Urban Villagers identified twomajor types of low-rent neighborhoods in inner-city American cities: the areas of first andsecond migrants and those which attract the criminal, the mentally ill and the destitute (p.4).The former type Gans calls urban villagers, and their neighbourhood...typically, is one in which European immigrants -- and more recently Negro and PuertoRican ones -- try to adapt their non-urban institutions and cultures to the urban milieu.(Ibid.)Gans specifically states that such a label is not an ecological concept which would includethe economics, physical and demographic aspects of village life. It was intended mainly asa sociological description and to a small extent a geographic one.Ley (1983) expands upon this original concept by stating that such urban villages arebased on 1) class (generally the working class), 2) lifestyle, for example thecountercultural centres of Greenwich Village in New York or the Haight Ashbury district ofSan Francisco and/or 3) ethnicity, as exemplified in Vancouver by areas such as Little Italy(Commercial Drive), Chinatown and Punjab Market (49th and Main) (p. 147). To thetypical urban villager, his/ her neighborhood represents108...security, warmth and a sense of belonging...These are the things he prizes most aboutthe space around him: his possession of all of it, his being enclosed by it, its familiarity,its manageability, and its intimacy. (Alvin Schorr as quoted in Ley 1983, p. 147)Jane Jacobs defines the urban village as being located in moderate to high densityinner-city areas and characterized by intense local social networks, a high degree ofneighboring, the use of local facilities and the presence of nearby extended familymembers (1961). Jacobs also refers to another type of urban villages, that being associatedwith the design notion. The latter is the, then (1960s) orthodox, planning notion of the"ideal" neighborhood size. To Jacobs, speaking over thirty years ago, these notions are"...the ideal of the supposedly cozy, inward-turned city neighborhoods (of — 700people)...[and are a] ...silly, and even harmful 'ideal' ...grafted onto cities"(1961, p. 115).Certain qualifications must be made about this criticism of what is essentially a shallowversion of the urban village. The first is that the comment predates what could be describedas the age of ecological consciousness or enlightenment. The critique of the notion of the"ideal" neighbourhood size is couched in social and physical terms and does not addressthe ecological non-sustainability of the city. The criticism is appropriate when looking atthe Neotraditional version of the urban village, but largely irrelevant to the more expandedand holistic versions found in Alexander et al. and Ecocity. A second point is that it islocked into a gesellschaft (see below) notion of community, one which has recently beenassessed to be not only unecological but quite socially unhealthy and non-sustainable aswell. Ecocity theory and Alexander et al.'s theory understand that the city will becomposed of a plethora of densities and forms, with the urban village being one element inthe "web" which seeks to rebalance a presently skewed situation.The use of the term "urban villages" has been applied to the above "ideal"neighborhood as identified by Jacobs and has essentially "re-surfaced" under the guise ofNeotraditionalism. Unrelated in nearly every aspect to Gans' original definition, it refers tothe physical design response which lacks social and ecological understanding in terms ofform and process. This version has become a "catch-phrase" applied to the born-again109New England traditional town centers which Duany and Plater-Zyberk are transposingacross North America (see Section 4.4.1). This latest version applies neo-conservative,simple and "clean" ideas. It is the antithesis of the urban eco-village found through anexploration of a more ecological design theory.It is helpful to briefly look at some examples of urban villages as they occur inVancouver which might be the seeds of the more holistic ones we seek to rebuild. Figures4.4 to 4.6 are sketches of urban villages ala Gans such as Chinatown, Strathcona, LittleItaly (Commercial Drive) and Punjab market (49th and Main). In addition to these, typicalneighborhood commercial areas (i.e., Dunbar, Kerrisdale, MacDonald) have the potentialto be future village cores. Perhaps, as a truly diverse ecological and social model for theintegrated neighborhood, the area of Strathcona stands as being the closest, in relativeterms, to the ideal that this city has to offer.Community DefinedBefore assessing each of the versions of the urban village in isolation, it is important togive "community" some definition in terms of a historical progression and as a goal. Thenotion of community analyzed by Ferdinand Tonnies (1955 ed.) in the latter part of thenineteenth century recognized two distinct types of community. The traditional, ruralcommunity, centred on the small village or town, was characterized by Gemeinschaft,bonds based on close blood relations, on bound geography. It was largely parochial andintroverted in nature. It was, despite current criticisms, strongly identifiable in bothphysical and phenomenological terms.Gesellschaft is the other type of community which is more or less the condition ofpresent societies in the Western world, especially urban ones. It is what is called thecommunity of interests and is built on contract and exchange. It is not bound by physicalgeography due to technologies such as the car, train and the plane. While most of usbelong to numerous gesellschaft communities, the gemeinschaft type tended to be the solecommunity of its members. These gesellschaft communities tend to have transient110• -^- 71^10.111!*^ f_Figure 4.4 : "Punjab Market." VancouverSource: AuthorFigure 4.5 : "Little Italy," Vancouver111Source: AuthorFigure 4.6 : "Chinatown," VancouverSource: Authorpopulations and are specific, or specialized, in their orientation. Clubs, friends, familymembers, interest groups, sports and entertainment are experienced in separation andgeographically "spread-out." There is little association or overlap among the groupings,and community is generally conducted on a superficial level.Without community, societies based entirely on association and contract soon denigrateinto meaningless forms of regulation and exchange that tend to consume rather thannourish themselves while failing increasingly to meet the basic needs of its members.(Drcngson 1988, p. 47)The gesellschaft form is not compatible with the ecologically and socially sustainablecity. But a return to gemeinschaft is also not practical nor even desirable for many.Boothroyd (1991) formulates the answer as a Post-Gesellschaft community which inessence takes the best of both worlds. Post-gesellschaft seeks to "...replace independencewith awareness and responsibility as the primary virtues" (Boothroyd 1991, p. 123). Thecharacteristics of such a community are ecological in their breadth and depth. These112include environmental protection, economic stability, cultural integrity, global equality,internal and external economic justice, and spiritual enlightenment (Ibid.).Such a community type is best personified in the Integral Neighborhood/Eco-village ofEcocity theory (see Section 4.4.5). The theories of Alexander et al. also show potential togenerate such post-gesellschaftism, but seem to fall short in providing a reason for unityamong neighbours other than the activity of designing. Neotraditionalism does little morethan "dress-up" gesellschaft in gemeinschaft clothing in the Traditional Town Center.4.4 THE URBAN VILLAGE IN THE THREE DESIGN THEORIESIn looking at the urban village in Neotraditionalism, Alexander et al. and in Ecocitytheory, we run a course from the two-dimensional to the multi-dimensional (see Figure4.2). We move from "sustainable development" to changes prescribed by deep ecology,from the corporate city to the Green City, from individualism to collective community,from preservation of the status quo to a new paradigm for the city and the planetary whole.The versions are known as the Traditional Town Center, the Identifiable Neighborhoodand The Integrated Neighborhood/Eco-village respectively. The method for exploring eachwill include a brief definition of the version followed by a case example which will bepresented visually with some written description.4.4.1 The Traditional Town Center in NeotraditionalismLiterally, the urban village in Neotraditionalism is Neotraditionalism itself. If we arelooking strictly at the urban village in its shallow, physical and commercial form, thenNeotraditionalism could be said to be the urban village. In the physical form proposed inthe Town-Making Principles, the Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance, or theTraditional Urban District, and in their attendant codes and zoning, the single purpose ofNeotraditionalism is to create the small town or village. The Traditional Town Center(TTC) in Neotraditionalism, for the purposes of this discussion, is best exemplified by thework of Duany & Plater-Zyberk, and is demonstrated below in the case of Kentlands,113Maryland. The notion of Urban Quarters or Components as presented by Leon Krierbrings this largely suburban notion into the city.The theme of the TTC is oriented towards replicating the small New England town.Regionally, TTCs are to be placed at regular geographic intervals like "nodes." Becausethe strict principles of Neotraditionalism do not address other forms of building (i.e., interms of density and type), the prescribed "ideal" seems to replicate the uniformity ofsuburbs we have today under a different guise. Instead of flat single-family landscapes wewould have village "blips" every mile or so, all arranged in efficient grid patternformations.The design of the individual town or village tries to embody a small village atmosphere,in terms of its classical formal plan (the grid), compactness, a strong sense community, amix of uses, elements such a "Main Streets," multi-purpose land use, orientation to majorcivic space (i.e., every village should have a square or a "village green"), traditions andhistorical references, the principle of walkability and distinct boundaries (or visible edges)(Brown 1991, pp. 12-15).In actuality the TTC conveys a sense of placelessness, and temporal distortion (seeRelph 1976). Moreover, it is based on the beliefs and hopes behind the neo-conservatismmovement in middle-class America, namely, that we can return to a better time and build"gated" and neatly manicured little villages in a sea of pathologies and problems. Thisconjures up images of residential mini "theme parks" sprouting up across America,exclusively for the well to do.The two-dimensionality of the TTC is a reflection of its overarching orientation tophysical design and an unwillingness or inability to deal with the social and ecologicalcomplexities which need addressing. The physical facade does not alter the reality behindit. In essence, it perpetuates a gesellschaft community under the guise of gemeinschaftform.114This obsession with a formula, with an "ideal" physical village as being the harbingerof a new sustainable era is made of the same "stuff" that Jacobs was so critical of over threedecades ago. It is a parallel to the neighborhood planning which was seen to embody thefollowing:It is fashionable to suppose that certain touchstones of the good life will create goodneighborhoods -- schools, parks, clean housing and the like. How easy life would be if itwere so! How charming to control a complicated and ornery society by bestowing uponit rather simple physical goodies. In real life, cause and effect are not so simple. (Jacobs1961 pp. 112-13)Leon Krier's Urban Quarters or Components.The notion of the Urban Quarter or Component is a theory which is somewhat morereminiscent of Alexander et al. than of Neotraditionalism. There is, however, a potentialfor Krier's work to provide a unifying thread. His theory is based on a strong affirmationof the urban form which characterized pre-industrial European cities. The actualcomponent is the small urban block:...urban blocks should be as small in length and width as is typologically viable; theyshould form as many well defined streets and squares as possible in the form of a multi-directional horizontal pattern of urban spaces. (Krier 1984, p. 43)The Urban Quarter is Krier's expression of the urban village, a component of his Citieswithin the City:...with a maximum size of 20-30 hectares -- approximately 10,000 inhabitants -- and witha balanced distribution of mixed functions. This equilibrium of workplaces and livingquarters would allow the majority of people to reach their workplace on foot. (Ibid., p.48)Although bearing some relationship to Lynch's city as organic and complex ecosystem, thetheory of the urban component/quarter remains what may be called "design determinism,"and therein it shares a lineage with Neotraditionalism.The best way to illustrate the urban village in Neotraditionalism is to look, graphically,at an example. The case example used here is the Kentlands, Maryland which (togetherwith Seaside, Florida) is one of the flagships of Duany/Plater-Zyberk's Neotraditionaliststyle. The facade may present a "pretty picture," but this belies a lack of depth and the115contrived nature of this type of design. The TTC is representative of not onlyNeotraditionalism but of the larger realm of mainstream design.4.4.2 Case Project: Kentlands, Maryland, U.S.A.DesignerAndres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-ZyberkOwnerJoesph Alfandre and Co. Inc.Context/DescriptionThe Kentlands is an attempt to incorporate the Traditional Town Center concept intosuburban context. Figure 4.7 is a plan of the Kentlands which is described as follows:The Kent Farm site is surrounded by conventional suburban office parks, townhousesubdivisions, and strip shopping centers. The property was zoned for mixed uses withthe intention that it provide a commercial center for the region....In response to therequirement to make the Kentlands commercial component a regional shopping center, aseries of designs was developed over a two-and-a-half year period attempting to hybridizethis distinct and inflexible type with a traditional downtown. One constant has beenmaintained: the evolving scheme is seamlessly attached to the street grid of the Kentlandsneighborhoods in such a way that residents will conveniently walk into the center of townfrom the four neighborhoods. (Kreiger 1991, p. 53)Program:The following elements form the program of the Kentlands project:• 356 acres• 1600 dwelling units• 1 million sf office• 1.2 million sf commercial• Meeting house• 2 places of worship• Library• Elementary School• Child care facility• Recreational club house( Ibid., p. 54)Design ProcessThe process of design was conducted over a two-and-a-half-year period, and involvedan intensive Charrette (see Chapter Three : Section 3.3.1) as part of the design process.116Figure 4.7 : Plan of KentlandsSource: Kreiger (1991)The Urban (Eco) VillageThe town square [Figure 4.8 and 4.9), at the heart of :he Midtown neighborhood, isbordered by a church, the shopping center entrance, and four-stor) buildings which containshops, offices, and apartments.^p. 52)117Figures 4.8 and 4.9 graphically demonstrate the morphology of the Town Center andvillage concept as it emerged through the charrette processThe resulting form maintains a theme or image of the traditional village which is notaltogether out of place in a regional vernacular context. The central element of theconventional shopping center is, however, somewhat incongruous with the urban villageconcept. Not unexpectedly the main organizing element is the automobile, accommodatedby the grid street-pattern and acres of parking (see Figure 4.7). There is also extensiveFigure 4.8 : Design for the Town Center, Kentlands118rif\\ • 1 " , "ti ..".••••■t ez-R, e•err.,The following series of drawings and sketches rep-resents the design development of the town centerand its adjacent regional shopping center.9, 10Prior to the charrette, the independent retail deed-tips!' agreed to a hybrid shopping center plan, toserve both a regional clientele arriving by earand neighborhood residents arriving on foot Theshopping center is integrated into the town livattaching its anchor stores to the main street. thusallowirrg pedestrian access which avoids traversingparking lots11, 12During the charrette, the retail developer de-manded a more conventional shopping renter plan.The charrette yielded a nest plan which ioins theshopping center to Midtown at the square only Theplan shows this scheme in progress. The renderingshoos the charrrttek final presentation scheme•^ 42%Ts-r-P 1101 Mr-1001 Lt:; ,::.'k-k .^f..r rz-jrSource: Kreiger (1991)1 2.....,..„......^ .L1tr7U--1411+A more recent proposal for the shopping center byAldo Rossi and Morris Adjrni.".17; T'Temphasis on green space and belts, pedestrian facilitation and compact from. These pointin the direction of sustainability but in a very weak and shallow manner. This model of theurban village has, in fact, very to offer the urban eco-village concept.Figure 4.9 : Design for the Town Center, Kentlands11913A post-charrette plan by Duari, and Plater-Zvlierkat irk Lskeu-Filson Architects. The tow n squat:extends into the shopping center-laA post-charrette plan by Duane and Plater-Zyherkwith Design International. Porn streets lined withstores extend through the parking lots toward theanchor stores positioned near the highwaySource: Kreiger (1991)4.4.3 The Identifiable Neighborhood in Alexander et al.The method for elaborating on the urban village in the theory of Alexander et al.comprises an explicit planning process for creating towns, as it is outlined in A PatternLanguage, nested within the larger goal, or project, of creating Independent Regions. Thepatterns of the Pattern Language can be described as the tools, or language, for thesequencing of the elements in the project of making towns and buildings: "All 253 patternstogether form a language. They create a coherent picture of an entire region..." (Ibid., p.xxxv). Each element or pattern is presented as a problem with solutions for it, whichtogether constitute a language. Like any language, a pattern language is a network: "..thereis no one sequence which perfectly captures it" (Alexander et al. 1977, p. xviii). In APattern Language (1977) the sequences range from largest or lowest (No.1 . IndependentRegions) to smallest or highest (No.253. Things from Your Life). The 253 patterns aremeant to be added to, subtracted from at discretion, and implemented or "spoken" withinthe process of piecemeal growth.The Planning ProcessWe begin with that part of the language which defines a town or community. Thesepatterns can never be "designed" or "built" in one fell swoop -- but patient and piecemealgrowth, designed in such a way that every individual act is always helping to create orgenerate these larger global patterns, will, slowly and surely, over the years make acommunity that has global patterns in it. (Alexander et al. 1977, p. xix)The planning process for the creation of community is fundamentally a participatoryand democratic one. Central authority, laws and the conventional planning tool of themaster plan play a subservient role. The process consists of organic and "grass-roots"action, and is evolutionary in nature. Larger patterns will "...emerge gradually andorganically, almost of their own accord, if every act of building, large or small, takes onthe responsibility for gradually shaping its small corner of the world to make these largerpatterns appear" (Ibid., p. 3). Seven steps form this piecemeal planning process:1. The Core of the process is that the region is composed of a hierarchy of social andpolitical groups, from the smallest and most local groups ...to the largest groups -- citycouncils, regional assemblies. Each forms a coherent political entity.1202. Each group makes its own decisions about the environment it uses in common.Ideally, each group actually owns the common land at its "level." [The concept of privateproperty is maintained at the level of the house].3. Each of these groups takes responsibility for those patterns relevant to its owninternal structures. Therefore, in the case of the example of the IdentifiableNeighborhoods given below, the level of the neighborhood is responsible for the patternsat that level of the community.4. Faith neighborhood, community, or city is free to find various ways of persuading itsconstituent groups and individuals to implement these patterns gradually.5. As far as possible, implementation should be loose and voluntary, based on socialresponsibility, and not on legislation or coercion.6. Once this process is in progress, groups can begin to include higher patterns [patternsat a smaller scale -- see examples below].7. It is of course possible for individual acts of building to begin working their waytoward these larger communal patterns even before the neighborhood, community, andregional groups are formed. (adapted from Alexander et al. 1977, pp. 4-7)This process demonstrates the extra-dimensionality in Alexander. The process of startingin one's area of immediate concern, of growing up and down through the levels as well asmoving laterally, differs from the strict and "top-down" premises found inNeotraditionalism and other mainstream design theories and practices. The final step orguideline for the process is of immediate significance to the operationalization of theconcept of the urban village. It recognizes that the process must be able to, and likely will,start at the smallest level and work from the "bottom up." Indeed, as we look towardsimplementing all of these theories and principles, as we look at the hurdles which must besurmounted, the notion of the small act of "planting the seed" is increasingly viewed as themost legitimate and promising action one can take.This process serves as a link to other theories and versions of the urban village.Although it contains anthropocentric priorities, it does nest well into the theories ofBioregionalism and Ecocity Rebuilding. This is evident in A Pattern Language 's regionaltheories and notions of a regional council which could easily be taken for bioregionallanguage. As we look at individual patterns, and especially the Integral Neighborhood,these connections will appear stronger and stronger.121Using A Pattern Language to create "Identifiable Neighborhoods"In order to demonstrate how the Pattern Language is used, and how IdentifiableNeighborhoods might emerge from the above process, we isolate No.14 IdentifiableNeighborhood as the pattern which best correlates to the idea of the urban village in thistheory. The larger patterns of No. 1. Independent Regions and No.8. Mosaic ofSubcultures relate to the broader efforts of Bioregionalism and Ecocity building.Identifiable neighborhoods are not isolated from these larger ones, but rather areinextricably tied to them. It is not necessarily the only or best pattern which correlates tothe urban village concept. Rather it is a starting point; in using the language other relevantpatterns will be included. In addition, specific, "real life" situations may demand thealternative starting points of larger or smaller patterns. The beauty of such a process, if infact it is successful, is that the identifiable neighborhood will emerge sooner or latter in theprocess of generating community.The eight-step process prescribed in A Pattern Language (1977, pp. xxxviii-xxxx)provides an example of how the process could potentially unfold in a practical situation.(1) The copy of the first portion of the Pattern Language "master list"(those relevant to the larger scale of town / neighborhood building) is Figure4.10. On it all of the patterns which might be of relevance have a checkmark beside them.(2) By scanning the list, the pattern which best describes the overall scopeof the project is No. 14 Identifiable Neighborhoods. This is enclosed in abox.(3) Figure 4.11a and b describe the pattern No. 14 in terms of problems,solutions and other potential and related patterns (Nos. 8, 12, / 15, 23, 37,41, 53, 60, and 61). Patterns 8 and 12 are "larger" patterns and on thescale of Bioregionalism and Ecocity rebuilding would necessarily included.However, given the scope of this exercise, and the attempt to narrow forpracticality's sake, we will concentrate on pattern 14 and on higher or"smaller" patterns. The latter are marked with "x's" on the master list.(4) The process of building the language proceeds by looking to the nexthighest pattern, and assessing its relevance to the project. In turn, theoptional and relevant patterns are then explored in a similar fashion.Generally, one continues to work "down," by excluding patterns larger thanthe original. Figure 4.12 is a "tree" diagram which illustrates how thegeneration of a language expands, or grows exponentially and recursively.The figure shows only three levels, and does not include discretionary add-122ons (i.e., No. 51 Green Streets or No.106 Positive Outdoor Space), or newpatterns. The patterns are given by number and title with full descriptionsbeing found in A Pattern Language (19'77).(5) All inappropriate or unsuitable patterns are deleted. The basic criteria forsuch deletions in this case are provided by ecological theory and principlesdescribed in previous chapters. Therefore, for example, pattern No.23Parallel Roads is excluded from the second line of Figure 4.12.(6) to ( 8) Other patterns can be added and subtracted at the discretion of thegroup or individual. These steps are such additions, in sequence, to thelanguage, or alterations of existing patterns to fit the unique context of theproject.The above demonstration gives an idea of how the process of building the identifiableneighborhood might be accomplished by a community. A Pattern Language (1977) andother sources listed in the reference list are literally and metaphorically tool kits whicheveryone from the most experienced designer to (more importantly) the average citizen canuse. Integral to the process of creating an ecological culture and ecological cities is the needfor it to arise from the "grass-roots."A case study below provides an example of the process as undertaken by a group ofarchitecture students in a workshop studio. It serves to highlight the essence of the processand the form which results from using A Pattern Language (1977) and A New Theory ofUrban Design (1987).4.4.4 Case Project: Second & Columbia Project, Vancouver, B.C.DesignerU.B.C. School of Architecture, Urban Projects WorkshopOwnerCity of Vancouver123Figure 4.10: "Master List" of A Pattern Language (partial)124SUMMARY OF THE LANGUAGEthrough cite policies, encourage the piecemeal forma-tion of those major structures which define the city;E. MOSAIC OF SUBCULTURES9. SCATTERED WORKJO. MAGIC OF THE CITYV/ I 1. LOCAL TRANSPORT AREASbuild up these larger city patterns from the grass roots,through action essentially controlled by two levels ofself-governing communities, which exist as physicallyidentifiable places ;12. COMMUNITY OF 700013. SUBCULTURE BOUNDARY14. IDENTIFIABLE NEIGHBORHOOD X s./. I5• NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARYconnect communities to one another by encouraging thegrowth of the following networks;/16. WEB OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION17. RING ROADS18. NETWORK OF LEARNINGVt 19. WEB OF SHOPPING20. MINI-BUSESestablish community and neighborhood policy to con-trol the character of the local environment according tothe following fundamental principles;21. FOUR-STORY LIMITSUMMARY OF THE LANGUAGE22. NINE PER CENT PARKINGX 23. PARALLEL ROADS^ 24. SACRED SITES^ 25. ACCESS TO WATER26. LIFE CYCLE27. MEN AND WOMENboth in the neighborhoods and the communities, and inbetween them, in the boundaries, encourage the forma-tion of local centers;/ 2E. ECCENTRIC NUCLEUS29. DENSITY RINGSV. 30. ACTIVITY NODESV/ 31. PROMENADE32. SHOPPING STREET33. NIGHT LIFE34. INTERCHANGEaround these centers, provide for the growth of housingin the form of dusters, based on face-to-face humangroups;35. HOUSEHOLD MIX36. DECREES OF PUBLICNESS37. HOUSE CLUSTER38. ROW HOUSES39. !MUSING HILL40. OLD PEOPLE EVERYWHEREx ^RaiSUMMARY OF THE LANGUAGEbetween the house clusters, around the centers, andespecially in the boundaries between neighborhoods, en-courage the formation of work communities;/ 41. WORK COMMUNITY42. INDUSTRIAL RIBBON43. UNIVERSITY AS A MARKETPLACE^ 44. LOCAL TOWN HALL^ 45. NECKLACE Or COMMUNITY PROJECTSV/ 46. MARKET OF MANY SHOPS47. HEALTH CENTERVP 4 8 . HOUSING IN BETWEENbetween the house clusters and work communities, allowthe local road arid path network to grow informally,piecemeal ;49. LOOPED LOCAL ROADS50. T JUNCTIONS51. GREEN STREETS52. NETWORK OF PATHS AND CARSX ^ 53. MAIN GATEWAYS54. ROAD CROSSING55. RAISED WALK56. BIKE PATHS AND RACKS57. EH ILDREN IN Tilt CITYSUMMARY OF THE LANGUAGEin the communities and neighborhoods, provide publicopen land where people can relax, rub shoulders andrenew themselves;58. CARNIVAL/ 59. QUIET BACKS/ 6o. ACCESSIBLE GREENX t/ 61. SMALL PUBLIC SQUARES62. HIGH PLACES63. DANCING IN THE STREET/ 64. POOLS AND STREAMS65. BIRTH I -ACESv't 66. HOLY GROUNDin each house duster and work community, provide thesmaller bits of common land, to provide for local ver-sions of the same needs;L7 67. COMMON LAND6E. CONNECTED PLAY69. PUBLIC OUTDOOR ROOM70. CRAVE SITES71. STILL WATER72. LOCAL SPORTS73. ADVENTURE PLAYGROUND74. ANIMALSwithin the frarr.cwork of the common land, the clusters,and the work communities encourage transformation ofSource: Alexander et al. (1977)Figure 4.11a : The "Identifiable Neighborhood"14 IDENTIFIABLENEIGHBORHOOD **. • tire orison. or setnculi-1^(8) and the cON,11,41 -1, or7000 (12', arc made up of neighborhoods. This pattern definesthe nergi,orhoods. It defines those small human groups whichcreate the energy and character which can bring the larger com-MUNI", 1, 7000 (12) and the Hutto my stificio1, -Iitiel, (8) tolife.People need an identifiable spatial unit to belong to.To.iol'a pattern of development deltrop neighborhoodr.They want to be able to identify the part of the city where theylive as distinct from all others. Available evidence suggests, first,that the neighborhoods which people identify with have extremelysmall populations; second, that they are small in area and third,that a major road through a neighborhood destroys it.What is the right population for a neighborhaid?The neighborhood inhabitants should he able to look aftertheir own interests by organizing themselves to bring pressure oncity hall or local governments. This means the families in a neigh-borhood must he able to reach agreement on bask decisions aboutpublic se, ices, community land, and so forth. Anthropologicalevidence suggests that a human pour cannot coordinate itself toreach such decisions if its population is above 1500, and manypeople set the figure as low as 500. (Sec, for example, AnthonyWallace, .110.rifq and Social Structure, Philadelphia Housing Au-125TOWNSA lomat" neighborhood: the Fusgereo in Augsburg,thnHty, 1951, a r ailablc from University Microfilms, Inc., AnnArbor, Michigan, pr. 21-24.) The experience of organizing com-munity meetings at the local level suggests that sofa is the morerealistic figure.C. As far as the physical diameter is concerned. in Philadelphia,people who were asked which if, they rcally knew usually lim-ited thCmselves to a small ate, scidoin exceeding the two to (liceblocks around 1hoit own house. (Mary kV. Herman, "ComparativeStudies of identification Areas in Philadelphia," City of Phila-delphia CorninuMe, Renewal Program, Technical Report No 9,April 1964.) One-uttartcr of the inhabitants of an area in Mil-waukee considered a neighborhood to he an area no larger thana block (300 feet). One-half considered it to be no more thanseven blocks. (Svend Rim-trier, "Villagers in Metropolis," Beitilltinurnel of S6riology, a, No. t, March 1951, pp. 11 - 43.)3. The first two features, by themselves, arc not enough. Aneighborhood can only have a strong identity if it is protectedfrom bravo- traffic. Donald Applevrard and Mark Lintel; havefound that the heavier the traffic in an area, the less people thinkof it as home territory. Not only do residents view the streetswith heavy traffic at less personal, but they feel the same about14^IlitiNT11 - 1.11(1.1i Nriiii11110P,11000the house along the^ Quality of CityStreets," Zrs Donald Artilcyaril and Mark Link'', Center lotPlanning and lievelognortit Research, University of California,Ilcrkeicy, t 971.)ncighliorhoviii1 with light traffic^Imo velticics/dayzoo az-hod, peak hour Is—xi , mph Two - ivayand v isiting"^feel II, ^''hero n,c tcarno people on tlas strert. 1 don't feelalone_41/01t, ro,11^Drfozael,^11,1,1,nnTM- rover life doein't ',hind, into Mr ho<OM, tr: lrom the ',ref.feel nr, 4nnte erten,ile, tienrighli-ororiii with tinxicrate traffic 6000 vehicks/d ays so^h^hot,^s mph^s.o - w- ayiiig r tt'in , ,in,inior and1,, ler^n,qhborr hi, t a^reWt , -lore f ien,/rDon', fee, 'h., It nn)^ Stir g ,1114,-hhr.neighbor ire o.i w rill^) traffic^t fidem schieles/claycub hour^intik (1 nr-wayRii sident , rag aria lisiting"nor a r. e,rdry Irreer--n, one 07— /yelp_Pen t/n iisrafraid to gc ,to the we, befnu, of the Dalh.Rraid, 10 , ri- -,I■rig^trrrilors"it /I^ rut!,o^honk.Source: Alexander et al. (1977)Figure 4.1 lb : The "Identifiable Neighborhood" (cont'd)TOWNS^ 14 IDENTIFIABLE NEIGHBORHOOD126How shall we define a major road? The Appleyard-Lintellstudy found that with more than zoo cars per hour, the qualityof the neighborhood begins to deteriorate. On the streets with55o cars per hour people visit their neighbors less and nevergather in the street to meet and talk. Research by Colin Buchananindicates that major roads become a barrier to free pedestrianmovement when "most people (more than 5o%) . . . have toadapt their movement to give way to vehicles." This is based on"an average delay to all crossing pedestrians of 2 seconds . . . asa very rough guide to the borderline between acceptable and un-acceptable conditions," which happens when the traffic reachessome t50 to 250 cars per hour. (Colin D. Buchanan, Traffic inToren:, London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1963, p. 204.)Thus any street with greater than zoo cars per hour, at any time,will probably seem "major," and start to destroy the neighbor-hood identity.A final note on implementation. Several months ago the Cityof Berkeley began a transportation survey with the idea of decid-ing she location of all future major arteries within the city. Citi-zens were asked to make statements about areas which they wantedto protect from heavy traffic. This simple request has caused wide-spread grass roots political organizing to take place: at the time ofthis writing more than 3o small neighborhoods have identifiedthemselves, simply in order to make sure that they succeed in keep-ing heavy traffic out. In short, the issue of traffic is so fundamentalto the fact of neighborhoods, that neighborhoods emerge, andcrystallize, as soon as people are asked to decide where they wantnearby traffic to be. Perhaps this is a universal way of implement-ing this pattern in existing cities.Therefore:Help people to define the neighborhoods they live in,not more than 30o yards across, with no more than gooor 500 inhabitants. In existing cities, encourage local groupsto organize themselves to form such neighborhoods. Givethe neighborhoods some degree of autonomy as far as taxesand land controls are concerned. Keep major roads outsidethese neighborhoods.max. population of 5o0Mark the neighborhood, above all, by gateways wherever mainpaths enter it—MAIN GATEWAYS (53)—and by modest boundariesof non-residential land between the neighborhoods—NEIGIIDOR•IlOOD BOUNDARY ( I 5). Keep major roads within these boundaries—PARALLEL ROADS (23) ; give the neighborhood a visible center,perhaps a common or a green—ACCESSIBI.F. GREEN (6o) —or aSMALL ',tinkle SQUARE (6 I ) ; and arrange houses and workshopswithin the neighborhood in clusters of about a dozen at a time-NOUSE CLUSTER (37), WORK COMMUNITY (41). .Source: Alexander et al. (1977)SC..L\TrEse.E17 WORK.KI017E5 1^sE-1._+- EldJC2NIItI6-1Wor2Ksi-t OFS -L N2 c7F<STEET- C.AI-7;1F-axp S174 \ItiS C-Ci-RrYAIRPS v1/4A-RCH Lt VC ,13.k.JILD1NG-1 cc.)v.4-4c,t_t_mct 14^EWI-"eANCE ..\41- ANCE^"MAY \)S I 11 cA)(.±._PitTsi INT -Pueu.c) -41 1.0_1(p 1 -Po3ci-koe aA7)00,2.-11-2 . "PLACES 161ARDEN PEI7E-53)2 (A (N DCANZ1 ..AcnQgy FW,<EI(c) sTzi atm 0-1-i (\rci^pcpc/R-11,,-7^I r01-4E^(^4 g 61Figure 4.12: "Language" Built from Pattern No.14: "Identifiable Neighborhood"si4o.1=1, 11 6i s-riz--E15 I\^-Bacv sNEV/0413G0H •► STIZ. GAMS'I T'U13UG cur-Doog 12oovkitS'70?--136V•tavin.,2E- TIA\f61(2(1)N17i7BrQSrTy •Rtt■IS :35^vA t)< L7-S31 I zow -t-Aws-Ez, Jugs 1 T. 1 -H 00C IIN.61cLOSI•<^ G-q- l Icommoil44.1* +-10^'DI-CaCEIQ1—T--;amtLy c-tc.LKA-ncWlaiLz\uAk5 127:411'LaeAli1/717-1-0JSE1t -p6'mTuv3L.E"KIE:16k+-tsc.Z-taS,Source: Author as adapted from Alexander et al. (1977)Context/DescriptionThe Second and Columbia Project was a design workshop at the School of Architectureat The University of British Columbia. The program was to design the City owned sitewhich is currently zoned as industrial, through an alternative process as theorized byAlexander et al. Figure 4.13 shows the site in its geographical context. The workshop wasan attempt to respond to current planning and design processes regarded as "...toosingularly driven and too narrowly conceived" (Quayle et al. 1992, p. 1). The alternativeprocess, termed Responsive Incremental Design, addresses the type of "megaproject"development in Vancouver which is viewed as unlivable because of its overarchingfunctionality, and orientation to gigantism in economics and in terms of power, profit andbureaucracy (Ibid.).Responsive Incremental Design seeks to embody the notion that "Human purpose issupported by human scale" (Ibid., p. 2). It rejects the process and form found inNeotraditionalism, specifically in the design of Duany and Plater-Zyberk, as stifling,repetitious and a functional response which belies the plurality of the culture of the city(Ibid., p. 3). The alternative is an experiment which seeks simultaneously to draw uponthe vernacular and the uniqueness of place. Figure 4.14 identifies the "overriding attitudes"which guided the process of design.ProgramFigure 4.15 identifies the program and context issues of the project.ProcessResponsive Incremental Design is an application of the process theories of Alexander etal. as outlined in A New Theory of Urban Design (1987). The Central premise is that"design of specific actual place comes first-planning and guidelines come later" (Quayle etal. 1992). The process...fits the locally based nature and context. It accepts accidents, works to consensus,brings space and buildings to life, and guides free design responsibly. (Ibid., p. 4)128DEVELOPMENTOPTION 3/MI 17omj *****.1 -C^Ei]12,© U ©©HUEKVCommercial el vs.   Goads 4 SenaResiMenel ^CommerMalMelee Pdnfln 000000))OrCulatlen^ U Pereaselen -200 meleesIL'^I0 20 SO^100i'41111111hiln0•*04Figure 4.13 : Second and Columbia Site ContextSecond and Columbia site chosen for this experiment isshown inset over a preliminary development proposaland zoning plan prepared for the city by a consultant.Traditional block-long development packages are beingdefined from the beginning.129Source: Quayle el a!. (1992)Figure 4.14: Overriding AttitudesURBAN PROJECTS WORKSHOPUBC SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURERESPONSIVENESS INCREMENTAL DEVELOPMENTOVERRIDING ATTITUDES:— Best Public GoodStriving to design the 'highest and best use in the public weal'— Wholeness:An actual condition not an abstraction. Approach through attitude of repair andnested centers.— Mix of Uses:Providing a finegrain mix of use -- the opportunity to live, work and witness within adiverse interesting community -- social and physical reality.— Movement Systems:The mix of uses reduces reliance on commuting and therefore the car: other pathsand movement systems should be emphasized allowing the withdrawal of privateautomobile omnipresence- Self-Containment:The site should be in continual balance; soil excavated on site to be rehabilitatedand reused on site: all surface and storm drainage to be managed on site; promotean edible ecological landscape cohere materials can be composted and recycled onsite.— Devolution of Scale:The development should aim for a maximum height of 5-7 stories with a maximumdevelopment proposal of 100,000 square feet; each development must have a streetaddress and 'address' the street; we maintain an equivalent density can be achievedwithout excessive height.— Positive Open SpaceThe importance of public control of open space is emphasized in this process whereevery building is shaped and located to create 'positive,' usable, enjoyable openspace.— Incremental Design DevelopmentThe design of the whole arrives from a series of discreet and accumulative localdesigns of building and open space that respond to actual situations.130Source: Quayle et al. (1992)Figure 4.15: Program and Context IssuesURBAN PROJECTS WORKSHOPUBC SCHOOL OF ARCHrlECTURERESPONSIVE INCREMENTAL DEVELOPMENTSummary of Agreements About Overall Program Context and Second ANC Columbia St.Project 1991.- PROGRAM• Each project not more than 100,000■ Balance of small, medium and large• Mix of use within projects (when appropriate)• Distribution of use in continual balance• Maximum height 5-7 storiesMix of use:housing^50% (50% family)community^13%commercial^10%hotel^5%service industry 10%parking 12%Major public sace: 30%Built ground /p Open space: courtyards, pathways, roadways, etc. (50/50 overall)— CONTEXT■ 2nd Avenue full east-west traffic artery could be greened■ Between 2nd Avenue and 1st Avenue: zone of transition• 1st Avenue should be downplayed and local neighbourhood begins■ A significant sense around Columbia - Manitoba as a center (geometry ofstreets crank)• North-South lineage strong toward the water■ East-West not through as streets but East and West flanks are important■ Build strong to Cambie edge■ Continue False Creek Park to 1st Avenue and Main Street (at least)• Water edge can be more urban and manipulated• Neighbourhood paths: beads on paths■ Salt building saved; Canron perhaps, lumber shed perhaps• Rail line kept■ Greening of open spaces including roads and paths131Source: Quayle et al. (1992)The Second and Columbia Project was undertaken by a team of designers/ planners (in thiscase, architecture students) who worked interactively to build the site incrementally.Through a series of first, second and subsequent building "moves" agreed upon byconsensus, a framework emerges which provides• a collaborative rather than a competitive process• an emerging clarity through adjustment and adaptation• a consensual place• appropriate form that is often totally unexpected, form that could not have beenconceived in a conceptual plan• the larger ideas that emerge from an expanding local awareness• responsive community planning without the crutch of forms or rules.(Ibid., pp. 6-7)The Urban (Eco) VillageFigures 4.16 and 4.17 diagram the resulting figure grounds of the design workshop,and Figures 4.18 and 4.19 are photographs of the model based upon the design.Obviously, the process does not start with the concept of the urban village, but such apattern can emerge from it. What is evident in the resulting patterns and models is thequality of "eccentric nuclei" and a mix of uses and spaces which results in a unified butorganic and loose form.A few points of criticism relate mainly to issues of sustainability. The first is anobvious lack of participation in the process. Although this was likely a factor of the settingand constraints of a studio workshop, it is unclear how a "real-life" scenario wouldrespond. In addition, there is over-emphasis on architecture and on human processes to theexclusion of natural processes resulting in a design which may be "organic," but lacking inecological attention. These comments aside though, this case provides a highly suitableexample of the process which could contribute to the goal of the urban eco-village.132et.Figure 4.17: Figure Ground of Design3 114.44:1..; I *—et134Source: Quayle et al. (1992)Figure 4.18: Model of Workshop Design135Source: Quayle et al. (1992)Figure 4.19: Model of Workshop Design136Source: Quayle et al. (1992)4.4.5 The Integral Neighborhood in Ecocity TheoryThe holistic goal of the urban eco-village in an ecologically and socially sustainable citylies in the future. It is as yet unbuilt, because we are not an ecological society or culture asyet. If we were, the collective community could design and build the appropriate urban eco-village. The best that we can achieve presently is to begin the process with appropriatemeans. What is presented here is a vision of this potential, not strict guidelines. We areinvolved in the larger process of building a new culture from the old. It is a not a matter ofwaking up tomorrow and having an ecological mindset. Ecocity design, reinhabitation,rebuilding as the work of the bricoleur are all part of the process. No one theory,philosophy, religion or action is going to make the sustainable city. It will only happen ifwe act collectively and interconnectively, in all aspects of our personal, professional andspiritual lives.The urban village version explored here shares much with Alexander et al.'s; however,it takes it that one final step -- or leap. The Integral Neighborhood/Eco-village is the urbaneco-village. It is best described as a symbol, a metaphor, a model of what can be --and as acatalyst. It is quite literally the embodiment of the axiom, "Think Globally, Act Locally."What is suggested in this process of design and building, of generating, is something thatplanning and design professions, indeed Western society has lost touch with. The idea thatour living environments, our cities, be (re)built, from the bottom-up, in accordance withecological principles, is an alien and antagonistic notion for most. This fact should notdissuade those who strive to be ecologically literate, to reinhabit and to live "in place" fromexploring, suggesting, educating and looking for creative potential in themselves, in theircommunities and in their bioregions. The Integral Neighborhood and the more rural and"New Town" variant, the Eco-village, are the types of alternative design form and processwhich emerge from such "deep" efforts. They should be seen as serious to the point ofdeparture, a creative exercise, and part of the meaningful and rich process of reinhabiting,of coming Home!137Richard Register provides the following vignette to accompany Bill Mastin's (Figure4.20) portrayal of the Integral Neighborhood in Berkeley.[The Integral N:eighborhood^yens diverse "mixed use" area Its integral in the sensethat its functions are closely linked and usefully related one to another. Homes, jobs,schools, recreation, natural features (like the open creek) and agricultural features (like themany gardens and fruit trees) make the neighborhood a kind village in the city. Thebasics of a lively community are all here --and so is the culture of the city and all itsspecial contributions that require a larger population base: nearby downtown, schools ofhigher learning, theaters, research centers, hospitals....In the integral neighborhood thereis some animal raising, almost complete recycling, solar and wind energy harnessed, fuelenergy conserved with insulation and non-auto transportation. Some professional officesand arts, crafts and trades work spaces fit well here. There's opportunity in nooks andcrannies and on specially designed rooftops for childcare, play areas, cafes , places tosimply sit and watch the views, people, birds, creek....(Register 1987, p. 23)Figure 4.20 : The "Integral Neighborhood"Source: Bill Mastin138This portrait speaks volumes about the potential to rebuild and regenerate communityonce again in our cities. It does not require isolated utopias, neither should it mean shinynew towns which serve to consume more precious land and energy. Rather the rebuildingcan begin right in our own neighborhoods, in our own ecosystems and bioregions. Theconcept of the Integral Neighborhood embraces the Bioregional precepts of knowing theland, learning the lore, developing the potential, liberating the self, in short the processes ofreinhabitation. In terms of Ecocity theory it expresses at once one principle and all of themtogether. It may be about one scale, but its basic principles can and will emerge over andover again at any scale in the process of rebuilding cities. It is about creating villages in thecity, or to cite Krier cities in the city. It is not about creating isolated entities with no orpurely utilitarian connections to the whole. Instead, it is the notion of creating nodes whichare at once singular and at the same time interconnected and integral portions of the largercity, the bioregion and the planet as a whole. The view of the city is that which Mumfordvoiced nearly sixty years ago:The city in its complete sense, then, is a geographic plexus, an economic organization,and institutional process, a theater of social action, an esthetic symbol of collective unity.On the one hand it is a physical frame for the commonplace domestic and economicactivities; on the other, it is a consciously dramatic setting for the more significantactions and the more sublimated urges of a human culture. (1938, p. 480)The Integral Neighborhood integrates the notion of the post-gesellschaft community and thecity as a complex ecosystem. Arguably, it is the current distance between the two whichcreates a situation of non-sustainability.Another similar expression which has much to contribute to the discourse on andprocess of reconstructing non-sustainable cities is the notion of the Eco-village. Mainly aconcept explored in Scandinavian countries, it is in essence about creating new ruralvillages (or retrofitting old ones) in accordance with ecologically and socially sustainablepractices. They are not in most cases what would be called utopias, as they do not formisolated islands cut off from their context. They are based on the principles of the village,or gemeinschaft community, but differ in that a greater solidarity is required and maintained139in an eco-village (Stein 1990, p. 102). The Eco-village is an intentional form ofcommunity built on the unifying values and ethics of ecological and social sustainability.They begin to express the notion of Post-Gemeinschaft community. They embrace theancient notion of the village which has always been characterized "...relative to production,to nature, to surrounding communities, to the bioregion, and to the interrelated contact ofits human inhabitants with each other"(Ibid.) within a new cultural context.The Eco-village , the tall towers and high densities, and the isolated rural farm representdifferent aspects of the bioregional movement, as does the urban eco-village. They are allexpressions of the process of reinhabitation, of learning to live within the carrying capacityof the bioregion or of the smaller bioregional unit. The Eco-village is a lot closer than anyexisting city to the balance and interconnectedness with the land that are the goals of theEcocity movement. From the Eco-village example, we can learn some of the tools forimplementing the ecological ethic. The Eco-village can also serve as an appropriate andmotivating model for urban inhabitants.The project explored below represents a mix of both the Integral Neighbourhood andthe Eco-village. Called an Ecopolis by its designers, The "Halifax Project" articulates thegoal of the urban eco-village through its radical process and form, and as represented inpolitics, economics, and culture.4.4.6 Case Project: The "Halifax Project," Adelaide, S.A., AustraliaDesignerEcopolis Pty. Ltd. (Paul Downton)Owner(Current) The City of Adelaide(Proposed) A Community Land Trust140i t.,M1 • P ■r 4' ...*".,^"r INC ' ' '^i.,4 , -,4, 7 'WA ,.14:4tio e'.1)=-.:", • 4Vt■% :t ir ^i7IP% 10t.,,^•\^...?^‘.. -01'S_,•,SIRIEET TREELS IlItENIOE^Flotat-nw Aux. 1.- AP* Li eis' t^. lb OltWATER. MARVL F Ma%'''-. Z.-11,7,4•- .^;.:^ETRAFFICNCEE TRAFFIC ^4 41 iNlitEPESOLIS IN SAVES. kNEVE,IEsE E. ^1:,Sr PebESMAN- POttelty SIASEIIVEAANCLIKS MENU. YllAL-PRATECTISVIFItc, iNCREESINS LEVELS Of V,'N-04‘. .°Figure 4.21 : The "Halifax Project"141Source: Urban Ecology (1992)Context/DescriptionThe site of the "Halifax Project" is a city block which is currently owned by the localcouncil and partially used as a depot and incinerator. A "normal" process would see thesite developed into standard apartments/townhomes. Ecopolis Pty. with the aid of UrbanEcology Australia generated a radical proposal for a design process. Figure 4.21 is adesign by Paul Downton intended as a vision and based on ecological principles.ProgramThe program for the 2.4 hectare site is outlined as Figure 4.22. The developmentprocess and is shown as Figure 4.23.ProcessThe guiding principles of this process termed as "Community Driven Design" formAppendix ThreeThe Urban (Eco) VillageIn terms of design process and form, the "Halifax Project" represents an estimated"best" case to the urban eco-village of the three cases explored herein. Drawbacks mightinclude its almost introverted and inward turned character as a result of intensity due to thephysical confines of a city block.4.5 CONCLUSIONThe purpose of this chapter has been to give a strong definition to the concept of theurban village. Moving from the narrow and shallowly conceived notion inNeotraditionalism to deeper ecological interpretations found in Alexander et al. and Ecocitytheory, the goal has been to give form and expression to what is defined as the urban eco-village (see Figure 4.24).In the analysis of the Traditional Town Center in Neotraditionalism and the specificcase of the Kentlands, the weakness of this interpretation was demonstrated. Here the142Figure 4.22: Program for "Halifax Project"Ecopolis Adelaide • Stage OneThe Halifax ProjectA Community Driven DevelopmentKey points & features of the projectThe following key points and features are identified on the drawing:143• Native vegetation planted on contaminatedsite to `de-toxify' soil and create wildlife'habitat• Canopy, understorey, and ground coverplantings create the beginnings of anecological corridor• Energy efficient townhouses• Existing cottages refurbished• Apartments and townhouses• Heritage chimney retro-fitted for use as a`cool' tower• Apartments over craft workshops• Mixed use - cultural and commercial focusenhances community identity• Meeting hall• Community shade tents - u.v. protection• Village Square open space integral tostormwater control ; no stormwater runoffto surrounding streets• Low/middle income co-housing• Apartments and offices• Rain water tanks• 100% solar town houses• Middle income co-op town houses• Stormwater and grey water used to irrigateon-site vegetation and roof gardens• Cafes and coffee shops• Rooftop and balcony gardens contribute tofood supply and solar thermal control ofbuildings• Shops,clinics, etc.• Apartments over shops• Verandahed pedestrian street• Excess power from solar-electric devicesis exported to main grid• Building forms designed for naturalheating and cooling• Ecology Centre - education and agitation• Old Cottage Theatre retained• Relatively formal street frontages respectthe City's planning heritage• Verandahs and balconies reflect bothcolonial traditions and an appropriateresponse to climate• Entryways, public and private spaces areclearly definedClean, quiet, comfortable public transportreduces private car dependency - especiallyfor homeworkers, children, and the elderlyStreet trees provide shade, filter the air andare irrigated by water harvested from thestreetAdvanced traffic management results insafer, narrower roads and pedestrianfriendly streetsVerandahs provide vital protection fromincreasing levels of u.v.Source: Ecopolis Pty. Ltd.evolvesinto• 677)Users° 0ownsentbuildingsowns land,controlsfinancessets up formal structuresof LT, EDB and CBrepresents tenants, ownersand users of site; dealswith conflict resolutionand community demands144Figure 4.23 : Development ProcessLT funds EDB,EDB advises LTrepresentatives ofinterests, plusdistinguished names tocontrol trustprincipaladvisercreates design parameters& overseesbuildings/spacesCB requests site additions/modifications from EDBEDB approves specific proposals and provides advice to CBinitiator of project andintegral adviser to EDB;has veto during initial5-year planThe Develo ment ProcessConventional(Greed Driven)Ecological(Community Driven)Goal Merely to make a large profit To meet community needs& aspirationsMeans Land speculation &community exploitationLand nurturing &community empowermentFinancialresourcesBorrowing from anywhere -mostly banks leg: State Bank)Ethical investment - returningresources to the communityMaterialresourcesAnything `convenient'-Market driven, expedient,capital intensiveCarefully selected - Healthy,environmentally responsible,region specific, labour intensivePolitics Exclusive, sometimes corrupt,expedient, ego-centricInclusive, ethical, open-process,eco-centricNature and people treated asthe fuel of economic activityThe economy in the service ofthe community & the ecologySource: Ecopolis Pt■ . Ltd.strong emphasis on form, and orientation to functional and repetitious formulaic designfalls short in ecological or social terms. An exploration of the Identifiable Neighborhood inAlexander et al. and the Second and Columbia Workshop provided examples of theholistic approach to design process, which was found somewhat lacking in ecologicalattention.Finally, by looking at Ecocity 's Integral Neighborhood and Eco-village and especiallythe case of the "Halifax Project," a balance of appropriate process and form elements wasfound. The latter project is regarded as the best proximation of the ideal urban eco-village.This "hybrid" of sorts is a fine mix of ecological; theory and principles and innovative,site-specific design processes. It provides a vision which can contribute to the central goalof sustainability. It is crucial that the ecological culture and city evolve simultaneously, notone preceding the other.145Figure 4.24 : An Urban Eco-Villaget: •,-,^.--2-2-ecse61'- T2 2 ' ,p1^0 /,.,,..• ,kre:•' ,^'.17.'--Z,I; Al_TEZJAINE-^." ,-• , Sd'Z'a?'^'..,'^":,-isl: ,•%-^Pjytta.i^/ f ,- -^.7. •^j ■ .^r^_' N 1(,. ' ,^f::—•••,,,, ,..4 .,,,, oL___4'-71-^, ^'.....-\ 1 iairl■-• jit.. 7..._. /^' & '^el^P—^I ii '''-' "77'^. •/--^ r r ,, -L.., lAnitiNI •"). ve. _-_-^' i 4:4 4 . ,^' ,•-•—eneyte--146— • i•PL^.05'r. I I, Irl ir/ iTrIP,^. 't1.'14^-4-'1 I .1- \1_44.11 71,-LemSource: AuthorCHAPTER FIVE : STRATEGIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION5.1 INTRODUCTIONThe purpose of this chapter is to clearly identify and analyze a set of strategies for thegeneration of urban eco-villages in the context of the city of Vancouver. These"operationalization" strategies are in essence conclusions which emerge from the aboveexploration of concepts, theories and principles (See Figure 5.1), and of the barriers whichlie ahead. The Urban Eco-Village concept has potential for being an integral component inthe process of rebuilding the non-sustainable city. However, in order for it to be trulyecologically and socially sustainable, it must be informed by ecologically deep theory,principles and practice, and an ecological ethic.To this point the direction has largely focused on the question of what? The previouschapter began to deal with the question of how? However, the concept still remains anabstraction of sorts in terms of the actual details for its implementation. The goal of thischapter is to identify a series of strategies, or means, and to ground these in the context ofthis city and the bioregion. The strategies can be grouped into six categories of focus,relating to questions of process and of form for generating the urban eco-village. For eachof the categories one key strategy will be expanded upon in the same framework. Theseare called catalysts, as they embody the spirit and direction of the rest of the strategies intheir particular category as well as those of the other categories and the larger whole. Thesix categories and their respective catalysts are as follows:Process Strategies• Ecological Integration - Catalyst: Community Land Trust• Bioregional Integration Catalyst: Local Direct Democracy• Social/Community Development - Catalyst: "Urban Ecology North"• Educational Catalyst: BricolageEducationalProgram147Physical Form• Built Form — Catalyst: "Reinhabitation House"• Urban Landscape — Catalyst: "Ecology Square"The strategies are presented in the spirit of a " bricolage bundle":The bundle -- a concept borrowed from American Indian tribes -- has been used for severalyears now in the Bioregional movement as a way of learning about the nature of theplaces they inhabit, and then of teaching other groups and organizing projects for theregion. Typically a bundle will have a map of the bioregion, a description of the types oftrees and flowers, mammals and birds, and insects and fishes that arc common to it, a fewitems on its history and earliest occupants, a drawing and a poem or two, and perhaps alist of current groups working on ecological, communitarian or bioregional projects. Butit can be anything, depending on the nature of the bioregion and the depth ofcommitment, and it can be organic, growing year by year as the analysis continues andconcerns multiply. (Sale 1985)Each of the categories and catalysts will be described and analyzed within the followingframework:Scale - the range of scales which the strategies address from the very localto the planetary.View - the range from short term, "kick-start" strategies to ones which aremeant to be perpetual .People - the various individuals, communities, and professional andpolitical entities whom the strategies apply to or involve.Methods - identification of some of the potential avenues of action whichare at hand for the implementation of the strategies.Goals - the extent to which the strategies move society and the form of thecity closer to the goals of ecological and social sustainability and the urbaneco-village.Together these ideas form a "language" and could be expanded as part of furtherresearch. Figure 5.2 provides a graphic overview, or "master list," of the categories,catalysts and strategies explored herein.The strategies are not isolated and separate entities but interdependent and mutuallyreinforcing parts of a larger whole. In the spirit of Alexander et al., they can be undertakenin a piecemeal fashion, with each action servicing and respecting the larger whole. Throughcomposition (selection among, addition to and subtraction from the list of strategies), a148Figure 5.1 : Map of the Thesis111111U1111t111111111111111111111111111111110149Source: Authorlanguage emerges which is responsive to the unique dictates for a particular project on anyscale.All of these strategies have some common elements or characteristics: holism and thebottom-up approach, for example. Although many of the strategies apply at the level of thebioregion, the majority of our efforts must balance such actions with those at the very localcommunity level and on smaller scales. Additionally, these strategies universally embracewhat might be defined as the "Spirit of Re": rebuild, rebalance, reinhabit, regenerate,recycle, reduce, etc. Lastly, all the strategies embrace the ethical perspective whichchooses means appropriate to ends, or a deontological ethics.Figure 5.2 : Master List of Categories, Catalysts and Strategies150Ipvcc.ESS •17.ATE<I ,E.5Sz 'recc,ex.m5/1 ,,s-rfrvno451R345.zEc_d_CenCAL ■NWEEIZATICN52. 35. 2.45.1.552..452 7-52.e,5.2.5SL. Io53 maiems /iNsartfrws RC *5. 3.SOZEirk101/ Il-alietZCN^5 3./-5.3.355.45.5.55.3.45.rea,e.om5/ inErnuro5 irc<* 5445cut..../c64.4.14rry .-vase. 541.5.435.4.+5.4.55.4.65.4. q-5.4.55.5 auznwee, rox0645 5.5-1Asp lizrovrick5 5525.5.355455.5conowNity^TRsisreE1,4u7iNc5 Palor.L5go- DEK..initlans:NriNzwa4 RE-Jacin1oxi3w viucciC mt.P1INe1Frn rr-TOAL--_LCCtL 6PC-C14 Nvaqizey'caegviniel CA 1tCrlyKID THE oalpi^1)ALTEZ.Z11,E TIZAW,C,4T"oev,eni qty.vtato-guenv aB3csart•rE3icEaliwtv, Zc50-nrirarta4isciaraksv13104241044-.ACROcueu ke7F1,47fter.1404.4- Tztor,FACAW.vs.a. war PawoaxiealSol'AlErkfAeK,LER. INT 12NILAJ.CKTISa /6emic1. yrso40,5RZENT04.1&17 FLAkINII49cbmvagry ON. kr.4461-05(ce+MS rn Caa,arnaV5CCAVAUNiff KrakEN5EZICLUCCIG EDIATICAL4a.t4- eak _1125SILLY6114,47 C,NATWE rnau. R1 wp)trsteaca. -Fon‘f sntualte5156 300- V.&15fi vm5u4 lzupeusis"srecca,e5*5.c..5.5./-54.554.454.5*5.7.15.72.5:7.557.55. (.5+.e)57.10ZEINW,WRG.1RattIONCi I.4IN6W4M714:VIGLit41^1NLIAN6cielaa.1 TaF5STAET rr -Home'"Frcdpny W.d.uniZE"c sr. ZEvtry .gacm7.?A.F.1.) •=7 CnetiaJft-T,Ey-e_4615(8■Ke5LANES 0 6(osAcrion^GN CCAea51611.516525 5uVSII^.L' 64.45Aul3e40 ,4; +1,C neLA1411.4C-9-tr SileldW5'^c, 2 5L:Lvt.',A1'Source: Author1515.2^PROGRAMS AND INSTITUTIONS FOR ECOLOGICALINTEGRATIONThe first set of strategies includes those which are ecologically oriented. These includeprograms, institutions, activities, models/demonstrations, and investigative research whichfacilitate the movement or shift from our present paradigm towards a radical alternative, atruly ecological culture. "Getting there" is a long and evolving process. Some of thestrategies presented herein address this long view, while others are meant to be short-terminstigators of the larger process.With very few exceptions, the main goal which these ecological strategies embody isthe acquisition of good information, knowledge and/or wisdom as the basis of andprecursor to action. This is in keeping with the bioregional principle of knowing the land(see Chapter Two). In strictly planning and design terms, this translates into the need forthe gathering of appropriate biophysical, geological, social, historical and culturalinformation prior to planning, redesigning, or rebuilding. Many of these strategiessimultaneously provide such resources and serve to reacquaint people with their naturalhomes and developing community. Here we can begin to see how the "web" ofinterconnectiveness among the various strategies can develop.ScaleThe scale, or level, that most of these ecological actions addresses is the localcommunity or the city. In some instances this scale will range up to the bioregional level.Although many strategies are "transportable" to bioregional considerations, local scale isemphasized as key, with notions of Small is Beautiful and empowerment throughparticipation being central.ViewSome of these strategies are short-term in nature while others are to evolve and in effectbe "institutionalized" only in the long term. The former are "kick-starters," or instigators,of the process of sustainability. Importantly, these must remain resilient to change and beflexible over time. Our ability to plan does not include an omnipotent ability to accuratelypredict the ultimate shape of future society, only envision potentials and possibilities.PeopleThe ecological strategies address a wide range of people, including planning and designprofessionals, academics, students, politicians, and the general populace. Although someof the programs and institutions will require specific skills and knowledge (i.e.,Demonstration Design Project -- see Section 5.2.6), all strive for a greater degree of localparticipation and responsibility to break down the barriers of specialization and in the longterm establish a degree of self-reliance in the community and its individuals.MethodThe methods utilized by the ecological strategiest vary to a large degree: some will requirebiophysical, geological, socio-cultural and historical research; some will entail field work;some (i.e., Ecological Yardstick -- see Section 5.2.6) can adopt and adapt existing models;others will require activities and organization for policy formulation, lobbying and politicalpressure.GoalsThe provision of actual resources for ecological understanding of the local area as wellas methods for monitoring and directing ongoing progress and action is a vital step.Additionally, local involvement begins the process of rebalancing human intervention in thenatural landscape. More than physical changes, these strategies tend to "gel" community inprocess, as well as ownership, trusteeship, stewardship and a sense of owning theproblems and the solutions. The catalyst strategy of the Community Land Trust brings tothis process an ethical commitment and responsibility which is crucial to sustainability.t These strategies are actually for the most part methods in and of themselves.1525.2.1 The Community Land TrustOne of the major barriers to the realization of an ecological culture or society is thenotion of private ownership of property, and the whole set of attitudes and values which itrepresents. The concept of the Land Trust provides a community property ownershipmodel which offers an avenue for an ethical relation to the land and the biosphere.The Community Land Trust (CLT) is chosen as the core strategy or catalyst for thiscategory as it embodies ecological and socially appropriate values, and because it has thepotential to act as a unifying and cohesive force within the local community and on a morebioregional scale.A definition of the CLT concept is provided by the Institute for CommunityEconomics:(A CLT is]...an organization created to hold land for the benefit of a community and ofindividuals in the community. It is a democratically structured non-profit corporation,with an open membership and board of trustees elected by the membership. The boardtypically includes residents of trust-owned land, other community residents, and publicinterest representative. Board members are elected for limited terms, so that thecommunity retains ultimate control of the organization and of the land it owns. ( 1982,p. 197)ScaleThe CLT is envisioned as being undertaken at the scale of the local community in theeffort to regenerate the local urban eco-village. Initially, this will entail the acquisition ofsmall but significant lands in trust and building this area over time as larger cultural valuesand attitudes towards property shift. Ultimately, as part of the reinhabitation process on abioregional scale, the local CLT could acquire lands of ecological and agriculturalimportance in the region (see Section 53.2, Urban-Rural Rebalance).ViewThe CLT could be implemented locally in the present, but the long term goal is theincremental replacement of the current unsustainable model of private property by thecommunity property model. From an ecological perspective, this is a necessary step increating a long term ethical relationship with the land.153PeopleThis catalyst strategy can be applied to all communities, groups and citizens in oursociety. The CLT seeks to rebalance the individual with community and with the land.Equity through security of tenure, not ownership, is a central premise of the CLT. CLTscould be implemented through external groups (i.e., Federal, Provincial or Municipalgovernments, special interest groups, conservancies, etc.), but preferably would comefrom the "grass-roots." Ultimately, the success of such a strategy depends on all parties insociety taking responsibility and putting the community and future generations ahead ofindividual short-term gain.MethodsThe CLT begins as a seed and grows with time and energy. Individual citizens, theCity, utility companies or commercial land owners could make initial donations of land orfunds for land. The size of acquisition is not of consequence. Lands could potentiallyinclude parks, stream/creek courses, excess road right of ways (ROWs), common areas ofland, reclaimed streets, private lots, significant ecological areas, Greenwayst and otherproperties. People will accept such trusts if they know the ultimate benefits and potentials.GoalsThe strategy of the CLT serves to further the goals of both sustainability and the urbaneco-village in a significant manner. The local establishment of stewardship and trusteeshipinstitutes a different ethical relation with the land. The goals of community are reinforcedby collective security of tenure and responsibility for the land. Gain becomes biosphericand social wealth. Figure 5.3 provides a matrix which contrasts the goals and objectives ofthe CLT with those of Private Property.t See City of Vancouver, Urban Landscape Task Force (1992), Greenways-Public Ways for an explanation of theconcept of Greenways.154Figure 5.3 : Private Property versus Community Land Trust155Private Property• ownership•privilege• short term• self•gesellschaft•monetary wealth•abstract• self-interest•anthropocentric•justice• own good•market• individual rights• personal• consumer society•ecologyeconomy imbalancedsocietySource: AuthorCommunity Land Trust• stewardship/trusteeship•obligation• long term•community•post-gesellschaft• social/biospheric wealth•real•equitable•ecocentric•freedom• common good•non-market•community/biospheric rights• trans-personal• conserver society•ecology• economy balanced• society5.2.2 Neighbourhood Rebuilding ProcessA framework for the design and development process of rebuilding to generate urbaneco-villages could be instigated in local communities. Figure 5.4 is an example of such aprocess which attempts to be inclusive, democratic and self-regulating. It is also anexample of means for balancing long-term goals and immediate realities including diverseinterests/priorities and ownership.5.2.3 Co-Design Project for Generating Urban Eco-VillagesAs part of the above process, co-design workshops can play a role in theredesign/rebuilding project. This participatory design concept was developed by StanleyKing (1989) and involves the public, tenants and/or owners at all levels of design fromconceptualization and generation of options, to final choices. This would be adapted forrebuilding in the spirit of bricolage.Figure 5.4: Process Framework for the "Halifax Project"LT funds EDB,EDB advises LTrepresentatives ofinterests, plusdistinguished names tocontrol trustprincipaladviserrepresents tenants, ownersand users of site; dealswith conflict resolutionand community demands creates design parameters& overseesbuildings/spacesinitiator of project andintegral adviser to EDB;has veto during initial5-year planCB requests site additions/modifications from EDBEDB approves specific proposals and provides advice to CBMdracjetne.sk Turfsets up formal structuresof LT, EDB and CBowns land,controlsfinancesusersO (""own.rentbuildings^0156Source: Ecopolis Pty. Ltd. (1992)sec ono Orowng tor the intent group (photo Don Wise)evs3!.Jate ono Score the ,r-,acet, Ihey^:rear,.,nick NClosing the Workshop-the COO^leaaers close tne workshoo ov oesc*;::noPhases C" 'ne Dr0Ora ,n. which ssc: l .u0e a cc7-,oeolh:o■tea to" al! to see coo review plus a wrlter-. rePio7" Tru rDe^• -tea to Pchne's, aes , aners coo Qaverrs.sner-1 e^reecy3uE,oolieors o of the images and wr'rrer - r , C.res !O«5•-sc; coo 1,e , es the hoNhonc from C portKupant (photo Don Wise)5.2.4 Demonstration Re-Design ProjectThe City of Vancouver could instigate and fund a demonstration redesign project in anexisting single-family neighbourhood.} This project v■ ould highlight the principles ofecologically-based design, the urban eco-village and strategies such as the ones includedherein. As a first step it would demonstrate what is possible, identify "roadblocks" andplay a leadership role in promoting an ecological city.Figure 5.5 : Co-designSource: Stanley King (1989)r This idea was originally proposed in a slightly different manner in the (^:171117,1;C report^CVT1TI 990).157-1--^Source: Author5.2.5 Urban Village MappingThe City of Vancouver through an appropriate committee or body, such as the UrbanLandscape Task Force, could implement and finance a project to map existing (as per Gans[see Section 4.3]) and potential urban eco-villages in the city. This would include adetailed and sensitive exercise at the level of the local neighbourhood identifyingcultural/ethnic urban villages and potential cores or nuclei.Figure 5.6 : Urban Village Mapping1585.2.6 Ecological Yardstick ProjectAt the local level, as a part of creating ecologically sustainable form and landscapes, anecological monitoring program can be instituted. Call the actual monitoring checklist an"ecological yardstick," "frog stick" or any other suitable name in the context of place. Thisecological checklist such as the one displayed in Figure 5.7 is a method for identifyingareas of ecological importance/priority and monitoring the community's progress towardsrebalancing with nature.5.2.7 Local Species InventoryIn local communities, and as part of the above ecological monitoring program, a localspecies inventory can be undertaken. This would identify and document the species (pastand present) indigenous to the local area and bioregion, describe their habitats and establishpriorities for rebalancing. This would serve as an educational resource which could bedeveloped over time and which would establish criteria for restoring biodiversity and theecological integrity for the area.5.2.8 Carrying Capacity RebalanceThe local Appropriated Carrying Capacity (ACCT) of the neighbourhood can becalculated using a forthcoming handbook by Wackernagel et al. (1993). Based on thisknowledge a long-term strategy could be established to reduce consumption and waste offood, material goods, energy and resources, and halt pollution, in order to bring the urbaneco-village into balance with its bioregion.t Appropriated (Tarrying Capacity (ACC) is the area of land which people in the region must appropriate (a) tocontinuously provide all the resources they currently consume, and to (b) continuously absorb all the waste theycurrently discharge. ACC is the land needed to provide these resources and to absorb this waste indefinitely. Thisland might exist right now, might be borrowed from the past or even from the future (Wackernagel et el. 1993)159Figure 5.7: Ecological Yardstick7^The Halifax Project • A Community Driven DevelopmentUrban Ecology Checklist^The 'Frog-stick'^14"-• 114-*-• %>€:1. WILDERNESS - NirtuallyactinctAway tiomSustanabililty-100 -75 -50 -25 +25 +75 +100 Towrick&stainability1.Air Fbllues V Puifies2.Water FbIlues/wastes V Ptrifieshecvdes3.Eath (soil) Destroys V Renews4.Fue(enagy) Nan-renewable V Renewable5.Biomass Deaeases V Increaselstarilize6.Food Consul V CreamThiocivesity Dmeases V Increases8.Habitat Destroys V Creaes9.Earlinics Redres V Increases10.Waste Ceneraes V RecyclesTOTAL FIERFORMANZE 1000 =ohs 10 0 %2. ECOPOLLS Halifax Project Total effect on-25 +25 +50theartiEciallxdegraclechuralandurbanprojzasites+75 +100 Towach&stainabilityArmy nom&stinabibIty-100 -75 -50Air %Hues v BalesWater FbIltres/wastes v RrifieshecydesEath (soil) Destroys ./ ResFae(energy) Nan-renewriale V RenewableBiomass larcreases V Inaease/stabilizeFord Consumes V CrewsBiodversity Demises V InaeasesHabitat Destroys v Cream&plinks Redres ./ IncreasesWaste Generates 4/ RecyclesTOTAL PERFCRMAKE +25 +100 +300 +300 =phs 7 2 .5 %3. ADELAIDE, SOUTH AUSTRALIAAway fiomStstandaililty-100 -75 -50 -25 -1-25 +50 +75 +100 TowachStstainkilityAir Fbllues V PuifiesWater FbIlues/wrstes V PtrifieshecvdesEath (soil) Dstroys v RenewsFre(enemv) l'sbnaenewable v RenewableBiomass Decreases V Increase/stabilizeFord Consumes I/ CreaesBiodvasity Dowses v InaeasesHabitat Destroys I/ CleatsEoalinics R,edres ./ IncreasesWaste Generaes V RecyclesTOTAL -225 -100 =mints 8 2.5 %160Source: Ecopolis Pty. Ltd. (1992)Figure 5.8 : The "Urban Footprint"ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT• •Source: AuthorFigure 5.9 : The ACC of the Vancouver in Real Area161Source: Authorsmallsterna rd s2cCar Ccveathcfcli spetecSource: Richard Register (1987)5.2.9 Rid the Grid! (Part I)"Rid the Grid" (Part I) could be a local strategy to reduce energy consumption anddependency on what is called the power grid.t By reducing consumption, and bypromoting and incorporating alternative energy sources such as solar (passive and active),wind, geothermal, etc., the community can become aware of the costs and capacity ofenergy and appropriate actions to become more self-reliant.5.2.10 Alternative "Self-Propelled" Transportation ProjectA local program could be institutionalized which emphasizes transportation andinfrastructure alternatives to those of and for the private automobile, with the ultimate goalof eliminating the car. The program could tie into ideas such as "Greenways" and "rails totrails" and emphasize "self-propelled" transportation and high occupancy, "clean-powered"vehicles on a city and bioregional scale .Figure 5.10: Transportation Alternativest The "power grid" refers to large utility corporations such as WC. Hydro which as monopolies generate andsupply power on a macro scale at prices which often do not reflect the "true" price of such energy, especially interms of ecological degradation.1625.3 PROGRAMS AND INSTITUTIONS ORIENTED TOWARDSBIOREGIONAL INTEGRATIONThis set of strategies emerges from the conclusion that bioregional integration is criticalto the sustainable city. In effect, this set is the "larger scale" version of the first set onecological integration as part of the local rebuilding process. Cities and towns presentlysustain themselves not only on their own natural capital (food, resources, energy, etc.) butby "appropriating" their own region's carrying capacity and frequently those of distantregions. Any rebalance must seek to know the bioregion, its nature, its carrying capacity,its history and lore, its cultural roots, and begin to reorient our activities and physicalstructures in concert with that knowledge. This concept of bioregional integration embracesthe principles of Bioregionalism which are holistically embodied in the principle ofReinhabitation. All of the strategies presented herein seek to contribute to this process.ScaleBioregional integration seeks to reorientate away from the scale and centralization of thelarge nation-state and global cultural assimilation. With efforts and actions concentrated onthe identifiable and tangible geographical terrain and terrain of consciousness, sustainabilityat all levels can be brought closer to reality. The enormity of planetary degradationdemands such a reorientation. The intent of these strategies is not to place the bioregion atthe hierarchical "top" in a politically and structurally oppressive sense, but at the top of ourconsciences, imaginations, realm of knowing to realm of action. The bioregion presents anidentifiable whole which people can grasp and regain a degree of efficacy. The planet in itsphysical size and the scale of its ecological and social problems is beyond thecomprehension of most individuals and communities except as a metaphor.ViewThe project of shifting our current political, economic, social, cultural and ecologicalinstitutions and values to bioregionally and locally integrated ones will necessarily be anevolutionary and slow process. The strategies of this category keep this prospect in mind.163Some are short-term instigators, while others seek growth and actualization in the longterm.PeopleParallel to the notion of individuals acting in ecological balance with the community,bioregional integration entails individuals and communities acting in balance with thebioregional whole. In the present and short term, those individuals and communitieswould be largely gesellschaft communities of interest. The longer term would see a moregrass-roots scenario where the post-gesellschaft urban eco-village and other communityforms would act in a politically, economically, and socio-culturally balanced and integratedfashion to support bioregional union.MethodsThe range of methods at hand include creating professional institutions/bodies,information gathering and analyzing, political organization and lobbying, and planningalternative strategies. Longer term methods include integrating the urban eco-village intothe region through expansion of the CLT (see Section 5.3.2, Urban-Rural Rebalance).GoalsBioregional integration serves the larger goal of ecological and social sustainability.By effectively reinhabiting and rebalancing our cities, towns and villages in theirbioregions, we contribute in a holistic fashion to the larger biospheric whole. Importantly,no urban eco-village should be viewed as an isolated or "balkanized" island of self-sufficiency. The dual goals of regional sustainability and the urban eco-village are in factinseparable. Any advancement on one "front" is mutually beneficial to the other.5.3.1 "Urban Ecology North"The creation of a professional planning and design group such as Urban Ecology North(UEN) is the act of institutionalizing the process of bioregional integration and the theoriesand principles of Ecocity. This catalyst strategy would be an appropriate means for164organizing and concentrating the efforts of planning and design professionals towards thegoal of re-building the non-sustainable city and achieving larger bioregional sustainability.Initially, such a body would represent in organization and direction an "alternative" to themainstream. Such an organization could potentially solidify bioregional and rebuildingefforts and "spearhead" the cause through projects, lobbying, advocacy planning,education and other methods.In the long term, such an institute would cease to be the alternative and would becomethe norm. The adherence to ecologically deep theory and strategies for attaining its goalsdistinguishes it from the "single issue" environmental movement. Figures 5.11 and 5.12outline the philosophical statements of the original institute of Urban Ecology in Berkeley,California, and of an "off-shoot," Urban Ecology Australia in Adelaide, South Australia. Itis envisioned that a UEN would embrace these philosophies.ScaleThe scale of such an institution would initially be small, physically andorganizationally, but it would aim to grow through increased awareness and openmembership. The likely scenario would be for there to be a core group of administratorsand professional staff supported by the larger membership. The scale of issues andprojects undertaken by UEN would range from the very small and local up to that of thebioregion.ViewSuch a catalyst strategy has the long term goal of achieving ecological culture and citiesthrough appropriate means in the present. As opposed to promoting or representingutopian thinking, or the other extreme of complacency, UEN would work from the "Spiritof Re" and bricolage in small and meaningful efforts with the knowledge that these arewhat will ultimately lead to change for the bioregion and the planet. The long-term goal ofUEN would be coterminous with sustainability.165Figure 5.11 : Urban Ecology Mission StatementOur. Mission StatementUrban Ecology is a membership organization made up ofa broad spectrum of people dedicated to building ecologi-cally and socially healthy cities. Our mission is to developand communicate innovative alternatives to the ways webuild, making it possible for humanity to live in an eco-logically sustainable manner that permits all people — andall species — the opportunity and fullness of life.To fulfill this mission, we work to:• Revise land use priorities to create compact, diverse,green, safe, pleasant, and vital mixed-use communitiesnear transit nodes and other transportation facilities.Revise transportation priorities, favoring foot, bicycle,cart and transit over autos, and emphasize "access byproximity."• Restore damaged urban environments, especiallycreeks, shorelines, ridgelines and wetlands.• Create decent, affordable, safe, convenient and raciallyand economically mixed housing.• Nurture social justice and create improved opportuni-ties for minority communities.• Support local agriculture and preservation of farm-land and open space near urban areas.• Use innovative appropriate technology and promoteenergy and resource conservation in cities.• Increase awareness of the local environment and bio-region through local activist and educational projectsthat increase public awareness of ecological sustaina-bility issues.166Source: Urban Ecology (1992)Figure 5.12: Urban Ecology Defined167IrEcology, like charity, begins athome.^Over-population, speciextinction. global warming and all ofthe other environmental crises weface are human-created and they v1'begin where most humans live - in^•cities.^ •'=;;(''While we attempt to conserve nature innational parks and wildlife sanctuaries, it iseasy to forget that it is actually nature whichconserves us. Whether or not our speciessurvives depends on our ability torecognise this relationship and to build ourcities accordingly.An ecological city, or 'eco-city' is a L4city in balance with nature. No suchcity exists - yet.In the 10,000 years since civilisation beganand cares and agriculture were invented,the human population has grown fromabout I 0 million to 5.5 billion • in all that^1,)trrne there has never been an eco-city. Andyet ecb-cues can be built in the here and "now • in existing cities and new ones.Eco-cities are decentralised. Etc-cities fit their place and respond tothe demands of the eco-system oftheir bio-regionPeople in eco-cities live near where theywork, play and shop, thereby decreasingInc need for energy-depleting, pollutinglorms or transport. Each dwelling or groupof dweliings produces its own energy usingrenewable energy from the sun, wind orwater•City farms decrease the need for intensive "4 ;-`, and extensive agriculture with itsdependence on fossil fuels andcarcinogenic pesticides and Its disastrouseffect on the land.Urban Ecology offers a way forwardfrom the impasse of 'economy vs4•&17 environment' by bringing togetherc: economics and ecology In apositive, practical and exciting way.The ecological rebuilding of our tines canprovide more jobs than will be los' with theending of destructive development.And because ecological development use:•I'd, a knowledge of, and sensitivity tc theecosystem as a basis for design there is noneed to wall for Environmental ImpactStatements to empty the coffers before^ building can go ahead.Social justice Is a major concern forUrban Ecology. An coo-city is ahealthy, living organism which canonly thrive when the needs of all Itsconstituents are metUrban Ecology also makes possible a• reconciliation with indigenous peoples byecologic reversing our historical insensitivity to theland which Is their home.Urban Ecology Australia, an affiliate of the- pioneering Urban Ecology group foundedin 1975 In the USA, is building up a broadmembership base - it is not a, 'professionals only' organisation because acity Is made up of a whole range of people,all of whom contribute in some way or otherto the life and health of our cities, all ofwhom have a right to take part in the-Urban Ecology Australia Inc is a community.based, non-profit, accredited NGO. We arededicated to educating and agitating foreco-city implementation. We are activelypursuing project proposals and plan toannounce some important 'on-the-ground'developments before the end of this year(1992).We are committed to seeing eco-cities become a reality NOW!!Our survival depends upon ourability to bring about a profoundchange in the way we live. UrbanEcology is that change. JOIN US!For more information contact.Urban Ecology Australia InPO Box 3040 • Grenlell StreetSA 5000 • AustraliaPhone/Fax(08) 379 1984What Is UrbanEcology?^Je plaCommunity gardens produce food whilealso filtering pollution and providing windn fo breaks and shelter from UV radiation. WaterIs collected In rainwater tanks and waste-...water Is used for Irrigation. Organic waste isr^sir disposed of locally, replenishing thenutrients in the soil. With each area^■"(producing most of its own needs, an eco-city is less prone to disruption due to naturaldisasters or human conflict.The consolidation of spreading suburbs•,` and restructuring of urban sprawl intohigher density eco-villages and towns goes r:...•.. hand in hand with the creation of wildlifeN., corridors in which natural ecosystems canbe restored.^7-low to create jobs and protect the environment. shaping of the human habitat.•• "r-{a Urban Ecology provides a holistic focus for--••-•••• down to-earth solutions from solarVI':^architecture to permacuiture, to providesane solutions instead of the techno-fixesthat all too often 'solve' one problem bycreating another.Source: Ecopolis Pty. Ltd. (1992)PeopleAlthough it would mainly be a professional planning and design body in its earlystages, UEN would seek to be open and democratic. Within the tenets and spirit ofecology, it would seek to diversify the views, values, opinions and goals of itsmembership. The "common thread" would, of course, be ecological rebalancing; however,it must be acknowledged that the ways of achieving this are not cast in stone, and thereforea range of views and opinions must be encouraged.MethodsThe methods or means available for such a strategy and institution are exceptionallybroad. These include the theory and principles outlined in previous chapters, which are inessence only the "tip of the iceberg." Importantly, UEN would be one of the most effectiveways of finding a voice and avenue for implementation of strategies such as thosecontained herein. In addition, partnership with a bricolage educational program wouldbeneficial.GoalsThe UEN will bring the goals of ecological culture and the ecological city to the publiceye in the context of the city and the bioregion. The Urban eco-village would be onemethod among many that such an institution would have at hand.5.3.2 Urban-Rural RebalanceAs a long-term strategy and extension of the Community Land Trust, the urban eco-village trust could be extended to the bioregional level.t This could potentially includeacquiring in trust agricultural and ecologically significant lands or capital such as a fishboat.This would serve to give urban citizens an opportunity to reacquaint/rebalance with nature,steward these lands in an ecologically sound manner, rebalance carrying capacity (vis a visagriculture), and provide places for reflection, education and recreation.t This is a variation on a similar idea which is part of the "Halifax Project," outlined in the previous chapter.16841'), ±07,-,■idaliC_....■411^'"..)c)o-uKrAtua.lx-ISf,,C6-1 =C01-06i taV6132VEof:jogiojA7 7--r----77.11,,,//t^4.6 6frifU5.4–^• —...N\ 7s, do:404111010",'-^ ■IN■r..4_ir?•!'•(111,1Figure 5.13: Urban-Rural Rebalance (I)169Source: AuthorFigure 5.14 : Urban-Rural Rebalance (II)C01-4kLiN r\-•y ±-- ‘,KN /ask (i-rii,1 -rzu6-r"c61 4.\q(<, / (s<),sT,,NAo5__L --CommoH_1Ty )AAN.L\(-:10/Quisi--co ,oEci (-^/)i=2=w1)0\1 /Ecwff-\- - cli.170Source: Author?.A.WS 14 "..5 12AWLES? VA4COUVW.. C OVVRV: ".ECC)^NLATtfiee"gENI-14Z I TL2P)5.3.3 Bioregional Reinhabitation StrategyIn conjunction with the bioregional planning body (see next section) a reinhabitationscheme could be implemented at the bioregional level. This could include steps to decreasesprawl and centralization through densification and rebuilding and to increase natural areas,reversing the land use patterns of today. Figure 5.15 shows how this could beaccomplished in Vancouver, where areas of human inhabitation which currently overwhelmthe natural could become small pockets.Figure 5.15: Bioregional ReinhabitationSource: Author5.3.4 Bioregional (Watershed) CouncilIn the immediate term. a political council or body based on the bioregional unit and onthe principles of bioregionalism could be institutionalized. This "watershed council" couldbe responsible for the policies. programs and administration of the project of rebalancingthe bioregion. In the short-term. this ad hoc body could be an alternative to currentregional politics. In the long-term. membership and representation would be diverse withurban eco-villages, towns, and rural villages represented.1715.3.5 Bioregional Planning BodyIn conjunction with the above bioregional council, a commission and institute forbioregional planning could be potentially instituted. This could have a political affiliation,responsibilities, and jurisdiction similar to those that currently exist in the GreaterVancouver Regional District (GVRD) and separate municipalities; however, its mandatewould be drastically different. Such a body could be based on bioregional theory andpractice and an overarching dedication to ecological and social restructuring throughexisting alternative means as well as new and creative approaches as they emerge.5.3.6 Bioregional MappingA group of bioregionalists in an ad hoc fashion or through the above institutions, couldpotentially undertake a bioregional mapping project. This would include mapping of thebiophysical, geologic, social, historical and metaphysical realms, and of other elementswhich make up the bioregion. This resource and the process of creating could bepromoted as a means of establishing a reorientation to place and home.5.3.7 Bioregional Alternative Transportation StrategyA strategy to promote and initiate alternatives to the private automobile at the regionalscale could be adopted. This should be radical in nature and include incentives foralternatives and strong disincentives to the automobile uset These might include the ideasof creating more permanent and self-reliant communities based on access by proximity notby transportation. This could be extended to the bioregion by encouraging living andtraveling within the region.t Many examples of these arc given in the Clouds of Change report (CVTFAC 1990).172Figure _5.16: Bioregional Mapping173Source: Tukel (1982)5.4 SOCIAL/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ORIENTED PROGRAMSAND INSTITUTIONSThe strategies oriented towards social and community development approach thecondition of social non-sustainability from a community development and communityeconomic development perspective. They seek to instigate the process towards, andreinforce the strengthening of, the post-gesellshaft community.Today in most of Western society, social programs are administered in a top-down andcentralist manner. Although this pillar of the Welfare State made sense in a burgeoning andwealthy society based on an unlimited resource base, large debts, currently ecologicalpressure and neo-conservative balkanism in the face of festering economic, ecological andsocial realities have forced the Welfare State to reassess its social mandate. The strategiesin this category do not suggest that these programs should be abandoned in a wholesalemanner; however, in Canada "the powers that be" are beginning to force certain realities onthe populace. In reaction to this and with the recognition that alternative actions can beinfinitely more sustainable, effective and even efficient, communities themselves must lookto their own potential resources. They must develop the potential.ScaleGiven this scenario, all of these strategies look to the local community for long-termcontrol, administration and direction of sustainability programs. They are not oriented tothe growth model of current economics; rather they seek to begin small and stay small,creating democratic and meaningful work which can sustain individuals and communities.If we look at the sustainable alternatives of steady-state and Small is Beautiful economics,we can see the potential in the small:The greatest wealth is to live content with little - PlatoViewAll of these programs and institutions can be adopted and implemented immediately.For the most part, the strategies are already in operation in existing programs or variations174upon them. In the long-term, these would not grow in size but would develop in numberand diversity in concert with community development.PeopleUnquestionably, the key focus of these programs will be on the local citizenry. It isimperative that external roles ( for planners, politicians, etc.) be limited to those ofinstigation and facilitation. To even suggest this amounts to planning what should in realityshould be unplanned; legitimacy in grass-roots organization and action is generallystrongest when it is spontaneous. Therefore, the involvement of those from outside thecommunity should be regarded as a catalyst, giving example and impetus to those withincommunities.The notion of social equity is central to these strategies. "Equity means both future(intergenerational) equity and current equity....fand1 requires not only maintainingecological integrity but also meeting the full range of human needs and achieving socialself-determination" (Gardner & Roseland 1989, p. 38). The true "development" of acommunity sees such equity applied to a global scale.MethodsThe methods utilized by these strategies vary widely but in the main focus on localcontrol. This becomes largely a political question and is explored as the catalyst in Section5.4.1. Other ways of regaining local economic, social and ecological control might includevolunteerism, "sweat-equity," "barn-raising," non-profit, collective and cooperativeorganization and so on.GoalsThese strategies concentrate on the social element of sustainability but not to theexclusion of ecological issues. An ecological culture is about sustainability in all realms notmerely the physical. Therefore, ecological interrelatedness necessitates overlapping of andbridging between all of these categories. These strategies advance the concept of the urban175eco-village by placing control in or "re-empowering" the local community. The physical,the social and the natural realms must be re-balanced.5.4.1 Local Direct DemocracyThis strategy is selected as the catalyst for others in this category on the assumption orunderstanding that politics is a projection of a society and culture. The reverse, thatpolitical process ultimately shapes society and culture, is also true. The current institutionof representative government at the Federal, Provincial and Municipal levelst has left theaverage citizen complacent, inactive, out of touch and generally suffering from a low levelof efficacy. Democracy is the central pillar of our society and accordingly must be acentral focus in efforts of sustainability.A return to more local and direct forms of government is consistent with the goals ofsustainability and the urban eco-village. This will not be achieved, however, throughrevolution, as this has proven to merely replace one form of oppression and dominancewith another. Rather power and determination can only be returned gradually to the localcommunity.The form of this direct democracy is envisioned as being consistent with MurrayBookchin's "Municipal Libertarianism"t t or the original democracy of Hellenic Greece, inwhich every citizen of the community participates through discussion, debate, voting,committees, etc. in determining the direction which the community follows.ScaleThe scale at which this form of governance can function is at the level of localneighbourhood/village councils. Numerically, this is viewed as being optimal at the scaleof 500 to 5000 people. The amount of power and decision-making would be small andrestricted at first but would grow as power is devolved downwards. Obviously this wouldt This tripartite hierarchical structure is the context for Canada. Most Western democracies have similardivisions of power .t t See Bookchin (1991; 1992) and Section 2.2 for an explanation of "Municipal Libertarianism."176be in the context of balancing "higher" levels of power and responsibility with localcommunity.ViewThe short range prospectus of this strategy is for such a form of governance to begin ona small scale in an informal, ad hoc "grass-roots" manner. The long range would see moreresponsibility and power assumed as the level of participation, sophistication and strengthof the community politic increases.PeopleIn contrast to the current representative system where politics is a concern of theaverage citizen for a short period of time every three to five years, politics would becomean increasingly important and central aspect of daily life. Such democracy involvesresponsibility and empowerment -- the ability to effect real change at a visible level.Politics could potentially regain legitimacy and accountability as a projection of thecommunity not of some distant representative or bureaucrat.MethodsSuch a political forum could potentially be arrived at through various means. In theabsence of a "grass-roots" action,t this will likely entail impetus from outside thecommunity, which could occur with legislative and structural changes instigated from anylevel of current government, facilitation and organization by individuals or groups ofcitizens, or the adoption and promotion of such by alternative political parties. The mosteffective method might be a test case or demonstration enacted by the City of Vancouverwhich, if successful, could ultimately "spawn off" similar local governments.GoalsThis strategy addresses the political element of the concept of ecological and socialsustainability. It aligns or "bridges" that goal with that of the urban eco-village.Democracy is crucial to the both. Local control in decision-making entails responsibility,t This is viewed as the most desirable and legitimate scenario.177commitment and an increased sense of efficacy. Such self-determination by communitycan ultimately translate into a heightened ethic in the treatment of the natural realm. Whenresponsibility lies in one's proverbial "court," actions now "exported' to the powers that becould evolve to become the community's problem and solutions.5.4.2 "Barn Raising" NetworkIn cooperation with a larger network such as Habitat for Humanity,t the localcommunity could organize a local "barn raising" network. The goal of this would be toprovide a core of volunteer human and donated/recycled material resources in order toundertake rebuilding projects in the local community. "Sweat equity" is the process of acommunity joining together and "raising" an extension to a single-family dwelling fordensification (as an example). That owner would then be obligated to contribute apredetermined amount of labor or other resources to other projects. Over time, thisaffordable and rapid rebuilding technique would expand in numbers and resources as it(re)builds community through shared effort.5.4.3 C.E.D. InstitutionalizationAt the local scale possibly create a program for Community Economic Development(CED) on a long-term basis. A community-based economy would emphasize productionand distribution organized on non-market principles, dedicated to mutual commitment andthe goals of sharing and caring, and employing strategies of developing mutual aidinstitutions (Boothroyd & Davis 1991). This form of "development" views thestrengthening of the social community and self-reliance as being more sustainable than thecurrent approaches oriented to expansion and growth-oriented economics focusing onmonetary gain and the exploitation of resources.t Habitat for Humanity is a continent wide, non-profit organization which builds affordable housing through theprinciples of volunteerism, "sweat equity," donations and other informal methods.1785.4.4 Artisan/Small Business IncubatorAs a part of the above CED strategy, a local Artisan/Small Business Incubator could beinstituted and built. An incubator is a facility and support network which providesinexpensive space, and informational and marketing resources to artists, craftspeople andsmall business operators who are starting out. It attempts to support diverse andecologically appropriate business and art within the notion of Small is Beautiful to create amore sustainable economy.5.4.5 Decentralized PlanningThe City of Vancouver could be encouraged and lobbied to adopt a policy to devolvethe current Planning Department to the local community level. This would involve both theadministrative and physical decentralization of planners and support staff. It is envisionedthat planners would form local teams assigned to all aspects of planning for a particularcommunity and be situated physically in that community. As part of a general strategy todevelop more local autonomy, citizen participation and responsibility, this program wouldbe in concert with other strategies such as "reinhabitation house" (see Section 5.6.1) andbricolage roles for planners (see Section 5.5.1).5.4.6 Community Definition WorkshopsOn a formal or informal basis, community definition workshops could be held in localneighbourhoods. These would explore the meaning and definition of community,introduce new ways of conceptualizing/thinking about community (i.e.,Bioregionalism/urban eco-villages) and promote community strategies, solidarity anddevelopment. Additionally, these can be potential instigators of the process of formingmore "grass-roots" institutions for democracy and planning.179Figure 5.17 : Artisan/Small Business IncubatorfSource: Author180Figure 5.18: Decentralizing City HallSource: Author5.4.7 Community Celebrations'The project of rebuilding community and the urban eco-village for sustainability couldinclude festivals or local community celebrations. The efforts of these strategies and largerones cannot be confined to serious work. Rather they can and should become a balance ofhard work, tough choices, compromise, sorrow. joy and fun. Too often the importance ofcoming together for reasons other than "strictly business" are overlooked. At any scale andin any project, the celebration (of accomplishment, of significant dates, or for anycommunity reason) could be a important planned or spontaneous component.t An idea found in areen•ays-Public Ways CA - 11,1T (1992) Alexander at al. (1977) and other sources1815.4.8 Community KitchensPotentially set up a network of community kitchens in the local neighborhood as amunicipal policy or through "grass-roots" organization. These could, in the short term,focus on those who are in need of affordable and nutritious food and those committed tothe social aspects of such networks. In the longer term and in conjunction with alternatebuilt forms (such as Co-Housing),t these could become more institutionalized and"mainstream" as the financial and social benefits of collective actions "take hold" in thecommunity.5.5 EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AND INSTITUTIONSEducation, be it formal or informal, must be a central pillar in rebuilding society andcities. If we are to have an ecological culture, then what we teach, how we teach and evenwhere we teach must be consistent with it. These strategies seek to bring education "inline" with such a paradigm change.Education is a projection of the broader society and culture. Our current educationsystems, for the most part, perpetuate the status quo and yet, ironically, are usually theharbingers and focus of change. An appropriate axiom might be that if you change theform, content and process of education, then you change the society. The aim of thesestrategies is to begin to reorient education in an ecological direction. This goal requires notonly a change of curriculum but a fundamental reassessment of how we learn. Simplystated this is a shift from an information society to one of ecological wisdom.ScaleThis process and its programs need to occur at all levels, in institutions from the pre-school to graduate school and for the lay person as well as the wise old sage.Reorientation can occur at the personal and intimate level of a grandfather talking to at Co-housing is a form of housing which attempts to balance individual privacy and the benefits of sharedfacilities and activities. A concept developed mainly in Scandinavian countries, it prescribes more sustainablecommunity form. (see McCamant & Durrett 1988)182young child or in the formal university lecture. In the spirit of the evolutionary andincremental path sought, the most appropriate focus of energy will be on the very young.At all levels, though, education must be open and inclusive, not hierarchical and elitist.ViewAlthough a long term, incremental and evolving process of educational change isdesirable, there is the burning question of time. The scale and rapidity of ecological andsocial degradation demands more rapid ecological education than is afforded by the nextgeneration growing into positions of influence. Hence in the short term, programs andinstitutions of an ecological orientation must be enacted immediately in a holistic and broadmanner. This immediate necessity and the notion that ecological rebalance can be relearnt ifwe listen to wisdom are embraced by the strategies of this category.PeopleAll peoples, groups and communities are important to these educational strategies bothas teachers and as students. Educational opportunities in the current context largelyperpetuate and reinforce the situation of haves and have-nots on the global scale right downto neighbourhoods. A formal education at the university is almost a necessity in order to"get ahead" these days. Access to such education should not be based on financial wealthor "marks." Rather it should be based on a willingness to learn. Additionally, alternative"informal" education should be embraced. Much can be learnt, especially in ecologicalterms, from native peoples in terms of both how they learn and what they learn. Thestrategies here address a wide range from professionals and politicians to laborers andchildren. Education must be regarded as a lifelong pursuit, not something which ends atconvocation ceremonies.MethodsThese strategies present a wide range of educational methods and forms. Balance is acentral goal, and "getting dirty" is just as important as "turning a page." Learning shouldbe found in classrooms, in the field, in the community, in discussion, in contemplation, in183art, in music, in the natural universe. It should be broad and "multi-disciplinary," notspecialized and focused. Education today may advance us financially, but the extent towhich it circumvents our understanding of the multifariousness and richness of life and theuniverse condemns it as a travesty.GoalsThese strategies embrace the concept of "ecolacy" (see Section 2.4.3) and the necessityfor widespread ecological literacy if we are going to have any semblance of sustainability.Most of programs and institutions are intended to "ground" new educational processes inecological understanding and perspectives and to alter the "shape" of current ones. Perhapsthe first step in any such process is to embrace in principle a balance of wisdom withknowledge, the technical with the arts, the serious with the fun, and the theoretical with thepractical.If society is going to grow in the direction of sustainability, it must learn an appropriatemeans of getting there. Equally important, though, is the need to educate as to thenecessity for such a shift. People must know the depth of the problem and its causes, priorto embracing any commitment to solution. Holism is the key in all of this, and complexityis imperative. Simplistic thinking breeds simplistic answers which, in their short-sightedness, have led us along ecologically and socially destructive paths.5.5.1 Bricolage Educational ProgramThe bricolage educational program is intended to focus on the necessity to incorporateecology in current planning and design schools. The goal of this strategy is to educate, in aradically altered manner, a new generation of professionals who have the capacity to act ascatalysts themselves. The "product" will be the "bricoleur." (S)he will act not only as abridge between one context of planning and a new ecological one but between communityand professional, and between old-guard and new professionals.184ScaleThe bricolage educational program would exist at the level of the professional degree inplanning, landscape architecture and architecture in local universities. In structure, it wouldattempt to eliminate the academic and theoretical distance between such professionalschools and the community. Through citizen participation in projects in the community thereach of such an ecological education would be extended in an informal manner.Additionally, through a multi-disciplinary approach it would attempt to bridge current gapsbetween departments. In the longer term, the bricolage ethic and discipline would be partof education at all levels and in all forms of education.ViewThe short term scenario is for this program to be integrated into the existing frameworkof the university system as a stream or option. In a growing ecological culture, it mightbecome a school in and of itself with a different nature and approach.PeopleThe program addresses, in the short-term, students of professional planning and designprograms. Although seemingly exclusive, this stems from the necessity of focusingimmediately on levels where people will be able to facilitate and disseminate knowledge.Additionally, the current influence of such professionals necessitates that they be a keyfactor in turning the tide.In time, as an open and inclusive school, it would encourage participation by all citizensat all levels and in all aspects of bricolage. This might include participation in rebuildingprojects, co-design, lectures, or contributing as teachers and students in projects on localand bioregional lore and history. In this manner, education would be a sort of "livingschool" for all people.185Figure 5.19: Bricolage Educational Programr(4'6.)/12. \rBRI 014EUIVIIv?•,^c"—186Source: AuthorMethodsThe most appropriate method of implementing this strategy would be to incorporate theprogram as part of the "Green College" at the University of British Columbia. The"stream" or program would incorporate the following elements:• an interdisciplinary/holistic approach• an apprenticeship style of education• theory and concept work in classroom/studio setting• ecological basis and basis in the bioregional context• "hands-on" community and field work• other practical applications• philosophy and the arts• local history and lore• creativity.GoalsThis strategy would move us closer to the goals of sustainability and the urban eco-village by providing a group of professionals who are capable of facilitating such amovement in the context of planning and design.Professionals have an ability and obligation to play a leading role in the shift from thecurrent paradigm to an ecological one; however, they presently do not have the knowledgeor capabilities for such a task. This is not to say that these people should or will beharbingers of a new ecological era. Rather, they have a certain position of influence in theshaping of our societies and therefore should act in an ethical manner.Centering on the art form of bricolage, the role of the new professional in rebuilding thecity or urban eco-villages is obvious. They become a resource for communities to drawupon, and, in conjunction with a decentralized planning program by the City (Section5.4.5), could be placed in neighborhoods as part of a planning team.5.5.2 Local Book of LoreA local "book of lore" could be created in each community. Akin to a "bundle," thisbook would be a celebration of and educational resource for the urban eco-village, andcould include local history, stories, myth, spirituals, songs, art, natural history and any187other element deemed appropriate or necessary. It would be expandable and accessibleand could be generated and kept in the local "reinhabitation house" (see Section 5.6.1).5.5.3 Storytelling CirclesUsing resources such as the Local Book of Lore as well as the wisdom of locals, lookat the possibility of informal storytelling circles. Invite all citizens to participate aslisteners/students or as storytellers and teachers. This will serve to strengthen communityspirit and identity, and importantly it will recognize the alternate knowledge and wisdomwhich can be found in a local community.5.5.4 Public Ecological Seminars and ProgramsIn conjunction with the bricolage school, look at instituting ecological seminars andprograms for the education of the local public. These would be open and accessible andwould stress alternative educational methods such as those expressed in Section 5.5.1.They could emphasize human impacts on the local natural realm, develop greater ecologicalunderstanding and look at strategies or means at the disposal of the community forrestructuring for sustainability5.5.4 Nature Park for ChildrenAs a project of the bricolage educational program, and possibly "ecology square" (seeSection 5.7.1), the community could create a local nature park for children. Figure 5.20 isan example of such a park in Great Britain. The local program will obviously vary andcould include models of ecosystems and species representation for the bioregion, urbangardens, discovery places and places for exploration and play. The park would not be azoo but a "living" and indigenous representation of the biodiversity of the region and place.188'Siker juoilee \Valk. asNtrISDeciduous treesCorulerous treesk”ugh grasslandMr.idouCut grassGravelRuderalcommunityIV ifecIduousoo land^1:■IiiMeadow 114 1111q 11 1 1,.....„::, ,,...,..:,... :„...r.:::::,...,47-,,, v-- T t,.....,-;;,...;,....., v.4,... „„, „,, ,fri..., ...i. ,, 4,-,,..Rou gh G rassland,..':,,r,,.. 7 ,, :,,zS. -v-,_.1V‘:‘,.,-.Y,",e:.■. ' -,,. 1.gz ir- 4e. ,.satc- ""....y.„0."is.t: \\I , R.bbil : '^sr•rv.41.. .,,^11^.".C e...-"*--": ,iii.or^il^!1V-1!'11e. °°' /1/rP - oeit t i.f -T.4: a! lilt :,,, IL pl);, Ili'..,-.7 ^7i.'ear4 :A: . a,' . 10,4 ILI(Orlir1 l i(10i til,;'i li i i ip11: IT i11;0 11 \0je P.:41., 4 64:: r...:1:4111:b::411:111.1(:1 11:11:Itii l)I' f■ 1,q 1Y b'tejl: II 11#GorseScrubE ntryfromVineLaneSand Dune:'Scale (metres)Figure 5.20: William Curtis ParkSource: Nicholson-Lord (1987)5.6 BUILT FORMThe last two sets of strategies are those which address the physical form of thesustainable city in terms of built form and the urban landscape. They focus on newarchitecture and the rebuilding of existing form as the physical component of the urban eco-village within the larger ecological city.Metaphorically these form a "tool kit" which is at the disposal of the bricoleur, theplanner. the community or the individual citizen. In the spirit of Alexander et ar.s - APc:11[CM Language ( 1977), they are to be selected from and amalgamated as the unique189project context dictates. In keeping with the idea of a "bricolage bundle," they are to beadded to over time in an organic manner. Ultimately, each urban eco-village would have itsown "bricolage bundle" of such strategies and prescriptions. Each would build its ownlanguage over time as the community develops, as new ideas on rebuilding and ecologicalsustainability arise and the place is reinhabited.All of the strategies included herein are informed by the ecological theories andprinciples presented in previous chapters. Some are strictly sensible or logical actions;others have the potential to become metaphors for the community and society. The singlecatalyst of "reinhabitation house" is chosen for its power to symbolically and physicallyhouse the ideas and efforts of a community.ScaleThe scale to which these strategies are oriented is that of the individual building,groups of buildings or, at the largest scale, whole residential blocks. This "architectural"scale is by no means intended to create projects standing in splendid isolation, nor should itdetract from actions at smaller and larger scales. Rather, it is intended to occur in theholistic context of the larger projects of rebuilding for eco-villages, the sustainable city andecological culture.ViewThese built form strategies can all be undertaken or initiated in the short term and thengrow over the long term, both with respect to individual buildings and for applicationsacross the urban eco-village. Architecture is seen as a long-term and incremental process,not a "one-shot deal." All might be likened to seeds which are planted in the community.Some will grow to be large and as predominant as evergreen trees; some will remain smalland "ugly" like weeds. All types, though, will be recognized as important contributors.PeopleThe strategies represent alternatives for the individual family, for the community as acollective, and for current government or owners of buildings. It would be inappropriate190for such building designs to be within the reach of only a few as a result of their beingdifferent or architecturally designed and hence unaffordable. Therefore, the techniques andmethods listed below attempt to circumvent the current process and expense in architecturaldesign in favour of placing architecture where it belongs -- in the hands of the people.MethodsThe rebuilding efforts central to these strategies are the most ecologically benign andeconomically rational methods of creating sustainable architecture. The current system ofarchitectural design and construction is to design, build, complete, possibly renovate, andtear-down, then start the whole process over. The strategies included here attempt toreverse this wasteful, consumptive and largely unnecessary process. Bricolage underliesall the strategies -- and the "Spirit of Re"-- where potential is seen in fixing what exists notcreating new places and buildings and "disposing" of the old.Through processes such as "sweat-equity," "barn-raising," building and material reuse,alternative (collective) ownership patterns and other "informal" structures, the strategiesdraw on the energy and talent latent in the community, uniting them rather than dispersingand appropriating them. Not only does such participation lead to more sustainablecommunities, but by encouraging permanence and other techniques, the goals of affordableand adequate housing come closer to achievement.GoalsBuilt form and the urban landscape are parts of the equation for the sustainable city. Inthis whole, the equation for the urban eco-village is a composition of interdependent builtforms. In the end, they cannot stand alone, nor can the community.5.6.1 "Reinhabitation House ""Reinhabitation House" as a catalyst for the strategies of built form is actualized inconjunction with the next catalyst of "ecology square" (see Section 5.7.1). Physically andmetaphorically, it houses the ideas and efforts of the local community. As conceptualized,it is to form the focus or nuclei of the community (see Figure 5.21).191,sQ-Lt\v-EFigure 5.21 : "Reinhabitation House"• t-AccFeEuLl_ I) N61^:^/9<11--t-S6 13g 1 C-C,3—?■5^14--atist.C.0-0g-1^-EDOC74T1 Oi44' .1.44D -rTausrconiNkik'rk—i SAC192■•Source: Author"Reinhabitation house" will, of course, have a different form, name and spirit in eachunique neighbourhood. Programmatically, it could include some of, all of or more than thefollowing aspects:•Local government seat•Ecological education facilities and programs•Community Land Trust office•Local (decentralized) planning office•Community activity space•Artisan/ Small Business Incubator• Possibly a unique focus (i.e., an annex for bricolage school)•Ecological technologies and utilities.In a certain sense "reinhabitation house" has the potential to encompass all of the strategiesoutlined in this and other categories. It is envisioned as becoming the catalyst for the othercatalysts. Therefore, in the context of a typical, existing, single-family neighborhood,instead of such services and activities being spread out and specialized across the largerlandscape, they are agglomerated, concentrated and reduced in size at the level of the localcommunity.As a physical structure, the "house" would preferably re-use existing or abandonedstructures in the neighbourhood (i.e., community centres, churches, etc.). Ideally it wouldbe located in the geographic centre of the neighbourhood. It would draw upon the localvernacular architecture, and its size would be flexible in the long term. Figure 5.21presents one potential vision. In this case, "reinhabitation house" is constructed across aclosed-off street and is meant to tie into buildings on either side. The "house" itself forms agateway to the village square (see Section 5.7.1) which it begins to shape and define.Scale"Reinhabitation house" is a strategy which would be actualized only at the scale of thelocal urban eco-village. The size and extent of the program will vary with the size andrequirements of the particular neighbourhood community.ViewThis strategy is a catalyst for the rest of the built form in the urban eco- village. As afirst step, "the house" will be (re)built in the short term and in construction and program193will set an architectural precedent. In the long term, it will grow physically and in intensityof activity within and around it. Unlike most architecture, it would strive to be organic"living architecture," responsive to place and people.PeopleProgrammatically, "reinhabitation house" would address all citizens of the community,and in a very real manner it would belong to them as the first portion of the CLT. Likely,the first acquisitions of the CLT would be instigated externally as part of City policy, but inthe long term they would emerge in response to the desire for stronger community. Thepreferable scenario for construction would be to have such a facility "raised" by collectivevolunteerism on the part of the community in order to increase spirit and reduce costs.MethodsPerhaps the most appropriate means of instigating such houses is for the City ofVancouver to implement a demonstration project in conjunction with other strategiescontained herein. This would potentially spark the imagination of differentneighbourhoods to undertake similar efforts. The "house" would be a model for "greenarchitecture" and alternative decentralized energy sources. Designed in co-designworkshops, built by the hands of the community and run by the citizenry, it would becomethe "prize" of the local urban eco-village.GoalsThe first moves towards goals such as those set out in this thesis are the most crucialones. "Reinhabitation house" forms such a critical step. All of the built form and resultingspaces of the village will be in response to it and depend, therefore, on peoples' attitudestowards community and willingness to participate.Quite likely, the long-term goal of the urban eco-village, not to mention the goal ofsustainability, represents too much change for one neighbourhood to stomach. Oneresponse to this is to act in a deontological fashion with regards to actualizing these ends.Such a path would entail an incremental approach, to which "reinhabitation house" is194appropriate, in scale and as potentially providing the impetus for the rest to follow. Ithinges on a belief in the potential power of small actions by small groups of people to"change the world."5.6.2 Rebuilding/Intensifying for Cooperative BlocksIn conjunction with the "barn raising" network (Section 5.4.2), the active densificationof appropriate areas of single-family neighbourhoods could be organized. This rebuildingstrategy would address not only the aspect of population densities, compact form andsustainable architecture but social potentials for cooperating in how we (re)build , how weown and how we live.5.6.3 Recycling Public BuildingsA community-based program with support from City Council could reuse and recyclepublic buildings and facilities. Through donations of underutilized/abandoned buildings,funds and/or the transference of control of other City-owned buildings, the localcommunity can begin to provide and rebuild for self-reliance. The uses of these buildingsmay include everything from "reinhabitation house" to affordable housing, to space forartists and crafts people. The rebuilt structures will model the resourcefulness andcreativity of the bricolage movement within the larger community.5.6.4 Green RoofsThis program addresses the underutilization of roofs at the local level in ecological andagricultural terms. It could include demonstration projects, identification of appropriatecommercial, institutional and residential buildings, and the provision of educational andtechnical assistance. This would give an alternative "level" for ecological restructuring andthe creative provision of productive and healthy natural processes in the urbanenvironment.195Figure 5.22: Densifying a Single-Family Neighbourhoodse, ;Ei-LS^\!•16 A'i-lE16,14-(56SR4-(0CD.^- COMMULItt`\/ " .4J''L1 -Z_-,.& is VN GA-' ----'196Source: AuthorFigure 5.23 : Green RoofsSource: Richard Register (1987)5.6.5 Start at HomeEncourage, through education and incentive programs, the individual home owner tostart the process of sustainability at home. This could include putting land in trust. usingalternative energy sources and conservation, engaging in agriculture, densification, watertreatment and other strategies. Possibly each community could rebuild a single-familyhome as a demonstration model to provide ideas and impetus to the community. In thespirit of "acting locally," the level of the household is appropriate as a starting place forpeople to grasp potential solutions. Creating sustainable form and landscapes at this levelprovides example and inspiration.197Figure 5.24: Start at Home198Source: Author5.7 THE URBAN LANDSCAPEThe urban landscape is a mirror of our values -- our basic principles and how we act uponthem. It is formed by the interaction of built and natural environments, and by the wayswe move about within this setting. (CVULTF 1992, p. 1)The urban landscape is the outside inside the city, but, as the above quotation asserts,this realm is not isolated. In remedying the non-sustainable city, it is logical that manyefforts in rebuilding will look to the restoration of the natural systems of air, water, earthand fire (energy). The urban landscape presents both problems and potentials. The fact thatmost of the urban landscape is in public hands presents a potential, even if the major part ofit is under asphalt. It is much more difficult to encourage and implement change forecological betterment with private land-owners than it is with publicly owned lands.Hence, unnecessary street ROWs and streets themselves, utility corridors, parks, industriallands, etc. are all ripe for being the "leaders" in transforming the city.As the most visible or tangible locale for natural processes, the urban landscape is thelogical focus of a program for sustainability. Few people know or think about howbuilding a three-car garage or paving their backyards contributes to decreased permeability,increased storm-water runoff, and soil degradation. Few know of the location of nowculverted streams in the city or the role which trees have as the city's "lungs." Therefore,it is important not only that these begin to be revived but also that they are included ineducation to create visual and physical connections between people and their local naturalsystems.The whole city will not be "greened-over" and all human interference eliminated. Thisis not only a physical impossibility but an ecological one as well. Human inhabitation andinterference in the landscape are necessary conditions of the survival of our species. Thesustainability of the city is just as much a question of social and cultural diversity, healthand vitality, as it is one of the landscape. What is in need of addressing is where humansfit in nature, how they fit, at what scale, and how many are optimal.199ScaleThe scale which the majority of these strategies focus on is that of the very localcommunity within the city. They are small projects and actions which can be undertakenincrementally to add to the rebuilding of the whole-the whole ecosystem, the wholewatershed, the whole bioregion, the whole biosphere. In recognition that these addressnatural systems, the smallest act is assumed to effect the largest scale, and vice versa.ViewThese strategies begin as small efforts and, in the long term, restore and rebalance atthe larger scale. Humans lack the patience and foresight of nature. Therefore, inrebalancing, we must learn how to "think like mountains" and recognize that, while someefforts will be realized in our life-times, most will be only for the eyes of our children'schildren.PeopleSome strategies, such as the catalyst "ecology square" undertaken in concert with"reinhabitation house," are reliant upon external impetus and funding. However, most ofthe strategies are collective, "grass-roots" initiatives aimed at "taking back" what is in manyways the community's heritage. This quasi-anarchist stance stems from a belief that thecurrent centralized and bureaucratic institutions we have are incapable of an intimate localknowledge and the ability to exercise discretion. Regulation might be the only answer tooverwhelming size and competing interests. However, ecology does not favour such aresponse as it is contrary to the diversity of the biosphere. Hence, the concerns of thepeople who have an intimate knowledge of their ecosystem are more valid than someone'sa thousand miles away.MethodsThe range of methods encompassed by this set of strategies represents democratic,collective actions in rebalancing the landscape. For the most part, the tactics are anarchisticin process and labour intensive in implementation. What is required is a lot of creativity. If200we look at our local landscapes we can see the untapped potential and move to unearth it.We can reclaim streets to make them places, urban gardens and greenways. We can turnenergy intensive, "culled" parks into working and species rich gardens, orchards andforests. One of the threads which underlies these strategies is the need to prioritize naturalsystems and humans above the car. Half of the battle on the road to sustainability is inrecognizing the destructive and consumptive nature of the private auto. The one fact thatover 30% of our urban landscapes are dedicated to the car indicates the importance of sucha shift.GoalsThe treatment of our urban landscape is pivotal in the advancement of the goals ofsustainability. One of the main characteristics of the city today is the mental and physicalseparation of people from smaller and larger natural processes. Part of the scenario of non-sustainability is based on the fact that if you cannot see and experience the impact of youractions, be they negative or positive, it is unlikely that you will care for, respect andsteward the impacted systems. Herein lies the importance of bringing natural systems backinto view and making them part of people's everyday urban experience. The urban eco-village exists on a scale which encourages such respect and caring.5.7.1 "Ecology Square"The strategy of "ecology square" is a catalyst which addresses the manner in which wetreat our urban landscapes. It is to be a model of the larger landscape at the scale of thevillage square. As previously stated, it is to occur in conjunction with "reinhabitationhouse." The latter is a metaphorical containment of the community's efforts and values;"ecology square" is to play a similar role in the context of the landscape."Ecology square" embraces the age-old concept of the village green and the commonssimultaneously. However, more than being a mere aesthetic feature, it is to take on thefunctional and spiritual significance that it had in its original form. Hence, the villagesquare is a place for gathering, a place for celebration, a place for commerce, a place of201politics, a place for growing food, a place for play and so on. It is the heart of thecommunity rather than an artificially imposed space.In order for it to become all those things, it must be owned by the collectivecommunity -- it must be accessible. It must be the community's responsibility and thereforeshould be one of the first acquisitions of the local CLT. Held in perpetuity under strictecological tenets, "ecology square" would represent the community's attempt to strike abalance with the natural systems which support it.The "square" would be a "living square" -- a demonstration of ecological practices,treatments and design for the larger realm. It could focus on reclaimed hydrologicalfeatures such as daylighted streams or ponds, on urban agriculture, greenhouses, onecological education (i.e., a nature park for children), or on alternative energy sources, inaddition to a myriad of other options. The "square" would, therefore, represent integrationand diversity. To take this to the next scale it would be connected to the city throughGreenways and ecological corridors.It is important that each "ecology square" take on its own unique scale, program andconstruction based on the uniqueness of place. The name is intended only to act as acatalyst within a catalyst, in the hope that the concept would be interpreted diversely acrossthe city.ScaleThere should be no absolute size or number of such squares in any given urban eco-village. There should, instead, be a hierarchy of nuclei ranging from multiple activity anduse (ie."ecology square[s]") down to the scale of activity nodes at the very local level ofthe neighbourhood or city block.View"Ecology square" is to be a project initiated in the short term in concert with "reinhabitationhouse." The long term would see the square grow, contract and alter as values and202Figure 5.25: "Ecology Square"203ECOLNy 40w4IREW 'RNLI< /04paw_ute -12WATER: W-Licti-rrEp ,s-Tz;&A-T00 /-muwA--E-wEvyiA1 - o /112EST-/4'Pe.PASSIVE-+-NESource: Authornecessity dictate. The expectation is for it to gain "layers" of richness in uses, activitiesand shared memories which can only come in the long term. This "heart" of thecommunity would spawn other smaller squares forming nuclei of activity at the scale of theurban eco-village.PeopleThe first or the first few such community squares could and likely will be instigated byexternal sources such as the City Planning Department or the Council. As a commonlyowned portion of the CLT, each would be maintained by and in trusteeship with thecommunity itself. Its actual construction, maintenance and the creation of other communitysquares would also be the responsibility of the community.MethodThe actual land for the square might be a portion of an existing street in an existingcommercial area, a commercial lot, or portions of private lots. As part of the CLT the landwould be either transferred from the City or Crown, donated by individuals or commercialland owners, or purchased through funds acquired by donation, grants and loans. Theactual construction and maintenance of the square would rely on volunteerism and sweat-equity as outlined in previous strategies.Goals"Ecology square" in conjunction with "reinhabitation house" will physically andmetaphorically contain the efforts towards and values for ecological and socialsustainability of the local community. If indeed sustainability is be achieved, then it mustbe accomplished through appropriate means and actions. To reiterate the central tenets ofEcocity theory, "ecology square" can come to symbolize efficiency, harmony, vitality, andcreativity and stewardship in balance.2044-^,^CCccNtielue,61-i-vt.^iv^Diggfaj !I35+1-- _AvE).1(.*^I f^5.7.2 Rid the Grid (Part H)At the level of the identifiable urban eco-village, a long-term strategy of deconstructingthe grid pattern of streets as the main organizational basis of urban form could beimplemented. Allow instead for the incremental and negotiated to happen and for patterns inthe landscape to emerge in response to this process and to natural processes. Figures 5.26and 5.27 contrast an existing grid pattern in a single-family neighbourhood in Vancouverwith the more responsive, negotiated pattern of the Italian town of Siena. By addingecological elements, a more socially and ecologically responsive landscape may result overtime.Figure 5.26: Typical Grid Pattern of Streets in a Vancouver Single-Family Neighbourhood205Source: AuthorFigure 5.27: "Responsive" Pattern of the Italian Town of SienaPiazza del Campo, Siena. ItalySource: Jan Gehl (1987)5.7.3 Every Second...StreetAs part of the above strategy. every second street in local residential neighbourhoodscould be closed. They would be turned into green (ecological/agricultural) corridors forpedestrian and "self-propelled" traffic only. These could be tied into the network ofGreenways and bicycle routes in the city, and alleys could be blocked to all vehicles exceptemergency and local traffic and other local streets could be "woonerfed" (traffic calmed) sothey can become places.206sti4GI LE^QEsmt=wr-rEve---70.&)\,1/8\1 -61.00-fv,z4 ,str\T-4'5tcrICtot\1-'2.B)10(A,^aL 9LNOw = zoctA.-,AE 4CCSC 03,G) -13 Cl\CSKook 4-". _1\21-CET' \ST17-15(\vs.itoTtelFigure 5.28: Every Second...Street207Source: AuthorFigure 5.29: Traffic Calming ("Woonerf") MethodsEntry treatment^Traffic throttle^ Road closureSource: Urban Ecology (1992)5.7.4 Paved Streets to Green StreetsAs part of the above two strategies, the development and utilization of holistictechnologies for simultaneously removing and recycling asphalt streets could be supported.An example of a machine for accomplishing this is the "asphalt eater," diagrammed inFigure 5.30 and described in the following manner:Up front is a tool like a sod cutter that cuts up the roadbed into chunks. Behind it achisel plow prepares the subsoil for agriculture. An asphalt catcher and conveyor beltcarry the material onto a heating bed or perforated griddle that softens the asphalt,separating it from the gravel. The asphalt oil is burned in the gasifier unit that powersthe entire machine, and the waste heat is fed back into the griddle to melt the asphalt.The separated gravel is conveyed off to trucks for reuse in construction.Behind the gasifier unit is the auger unit, which drills holes for trees. Each hole isautomatically injected with sewage sludge from a tank on the machine which is filled atthe local sewage plant. Behind the auger boom is the planting platform with workerswho are busy placing tree stock in the new holes. (Van der Ryn & Calthorpe 1986, p.53)208Figure 5.30: "Asphalt Eater"209Source: Author5.7.5 Pedestrian and Bikes Over AutosThe implementation of a policy in the City of Vancouver which prioritizes pedestrianand bike traffic over the auto in the public realm could be instigated and supported. Thiswould be actualized by reclaiming and rebuilding infrastructure currently dedicated to theautomobile. The program could include dedication of lanes and paths on existing streets,giving budgetary priority to such projects, establishing right of way priority at crossingsand intersections, for example. A system of disincentives for automobiles and incentivesfor other ecologically sound modes of transportation through taxes, tolls and conveniencefactors could be instituted simultaneously. As a "grass-roots" initiative, citizens couldorganize bike and pedestrian demonstration rallies at peak traffic times on major commutingroutes to raise awareness.5.7.6 Lanes To KidsIn conjunction with the above strategies, at least half of alleys in residentialneighbourhoods could be the domain and responsibility of kids. "Lanes to kids" wouldundertake to close alleys off to all but self-propelled vehicles and pedestrians, and providelandscapes for exploration, fun, discovery, learning and living (for example, agriculture).Garages and roofs can also be used as places for teens, and for other more intensive uses.5.7.7 Activities On CornersAs a street strategy, potentially implemented in the immediate to short term, thisstrategy is intended to facilitate activities on corners. Identify potential cores and focuspoints in the local area, and begin the process by narrowing and "calming" streets, usingreclaimed space for activity-generating ideas such as kiosks for posting newspapers in fulleach morning, sidewalk cafes, places to sit, places to play, places for games for young andold, and other activities.210Figure 5.31a : "Lanes to Kids Before211Source: Authorfq•4.)V(■,11 11 1 I,sl 'ii•C_)r(•)7rT-31:Itt/.Wa13,1.%_LC-.9_41^• —1TE-if■•a011011r.f-If'0.p212Figure 5.31b : "Lanes to Kids"— AfterSource: AuthorFigure 5.32 : Activity On Corners213•Source: Author5.7.8 Rails to Trails/Ecological CorridorsA policy initiative on the part of the City of Vancouver in cooperation with currentutility and railway corridor owners could convert "rails to trails." Through donated land,land swapping or tax and other incentives, place these lands in local CLTs,t and establishalong these a system of bike and pedestrian trails, places for agriculture and places forecological regeneration. Potential corridors in Vancouver are the Arbutus rail line, theFalse Creek flatlands, the Grandview "Cut," and the rail lands along Burrard Inlet.5.7.9 Restore Ecologically Sensitive LandsA locally based program which identifies and restores ecologically sensitive lands andecosystems could, through the CLT, bring previously existing ecologically damaged orthreatened lands (creek and stream courses, forest stands, grasslands, species habitats,marshes, lakes and foreshores) under community control. The community would workcollectively to rebalance and restore these.5.7.10 Alternative Water TreatmentA local program to encourage and facilitate conversion of water treatment to moreecologically appropriate methods in the urban landscape could be undertaken. This couldpotentially involve techniques such as addressing permeability, storm-water retention andre-use, grey water recycling, use of sewage waste as fertilizer, ground watercontamination, daylighting culverted streams and creeks (see below), and other methods.Overall the goal will be to restore the natural hydrological cycles and to drastically limitwater use.5.7.11 Daylight StreamsAs part of the above strategy, a program at the level of the city or the individualcommunity to "daylight" streams could be instigated. This can be undertaken in ant Or in a larger trust such as the "Grecnway Trust" suggested by the City of Vancouver Urban Landscape TaskForce as part of their 1992 report, Greenways-Public Ways214incremental fashion, targeting priority or key streams, "resurfacing" them piece by pieceand restoring natural systems along their courses. These areas would be places forrecreation, education, contemplation, production of food (fish) , exploration, etc. Theselands would be part of CLTs, and displaced homes (see Figure 5.33) could beincorporated into blocks through corresponding projects for densifying and creatingcooperative blocks.5.7.12 "Opportunistic Agriculture" and Native Species PlantingA local program to identify "left-over" and underutilized land in the public realm and toreclaim spaces for urban agriculture and native species planting could include excess instreet ROWs, reclaimed street widths after narrowing/"calming," rail and utility corridors,underutilized park and open space, back-lanes, roof-tops, sideyards, closed-off streets,new village squares or "commons," for example. Agricultural plots will be small,community owned (CLT) or "borrowed," and would be strictly organic. They wouldemphasize native species. They might include the planting of forests and other ecosystemsto aid in the process of succession.5.8 CONCLUSIONThis chapter has been an attempt to introduce and analyze a set of strategies for theimplementation of the concept of the urban eco-village. Although these strategies are byno means comprehensive in scope, as a whole they represent an initial step. The directionof this movement is towards the operationalization and implementation of a concept whichcould potentially play an important role in rebuilding the non-sustainable city.These strategies are consistent with the purpose or goals of ecologically responsiblesustainability They are likened to a set of means within an overall one, and are "nested" onthree levels. First there is the larger goal of ecological and social sustainability -- theecological culture -- and the corresponding ecological city. The second level is that of the215Figure 5.33 : Daylight Streams^Al ^• e^• - •^•• c. •ssTr,Ait\Ervvisoz .teltu,C0.1E16}146ii-°Pf:Vt-STV.1,44 /83 tSource: Author216comom r\-/e-i4 cufES27/7Z 7,17WCO9 -kUkl 11-Y --1=-01--AalUATICA•1AYa^1E -PNWSiry--=-CVQ1K-kji4 (7' ■K:4-‘40,LQFigure 5.34: "Opportunistic Agriculture"217Source: Authorurban eco-village which responds directly to the ecological culture. Finally, there is a set ofstrategies aimed at generating the urban eco-village. The urban eco-village is a fluid andintegrated part of the whole. The concept is not a simple case of hierarchical and lateraldifferentiation. Instead, it is recursive and responsive.The two main goals of sustainability and the appropriate process and form of the urbaneco-village require ecological and bioregional integration, concentration on social andcommunity development, and educational programs and institutions. Additionally, the builtform and urban landscape can provide the appropriate and potential future "shape" of thesingle family neighbourhood.Taken together, these strategies have "common threads": the requirement of a basis inan ecological ethic which deontologically stresses appropriate means in striving for the goalof sustainability; the necessity to approach such planning and design in an holistic andincremental fashion always integrating the pieces into the framework of the whole; anembracing of the "Spirit of Re-" -- the discipline of bricolage; and the need to act at the locallevel -- the level of community.The program proposed is not meant to be a panacea but an initial and small contributionto an appropriate movement. Hope is a large part of this process as is the belief that it isthe right direction and indeed the necessary direction that our culture must go in, if survivalis going to be part of the future.In recognition of this, these strategies should be viewed as open-ended and"expandable." They are non-exhaustive and a "bricolage bundle," to be added to,subtracted from and altered as ideas and circumstances change.218CHAPTER SIX : CONCLUSIONThis thesis has been an attempt to close the distance between our current non-sustainable paradigm and an ecological one by focusing on urban design theory principlesand practice. The issue of sustainability, or the lack of an ecological culture and city, is onewhich academic and professional planning must address. Tremendous demands in termsof appropriated carrying capacity and societal decay require that the city and urban designbe starting points in moving toward a paradigm shift. The central objective of this thesis,then, has been to explore how we can design the structures and institutions of an ecologicalculture and city. The urban eco-village, it was argued, could potentially provide an integralcomponent in the rebuilding of the non-sustainable city, if informed by ecologically deeptheory, principles and practice, and an ecological ethic.The development of the thesis has been an attempt to make connections betweenecological theories and design theories, between theory and practice and between planningand people. The analysis of ecological theories which inform planning established aframework for the discussion. It served to identify the dichotomy between the dominantparadigm and alternative ecological perspectives, the former as represented by Eco-development and environmentalism and the latter by Deep Ecology, Social Ecology andBioregionalism. The theory of Bioregionalism in its concise, accessible, poetic and wisemessage was deemed most promising and able to inform ecological design.The translation of ecological theory to design theory establishes a link between thebroader socio-cultural scale and that of design. Neotraditionalism is essentially anextension of the current non-sustainable paradigm. Alexander et al. and Ecocity theory, ontheir part, offer some radical and appropriate design process and form answers. The notionof making form responsive to process and the establishment of an ecological stance whichsupports rebuilding versus new built form are considered of vital importance to thegeneration of a sustainable approach to urban design.219The review of the urban village as the Traditional Town Center, the IdentifiableNeighborhood and the Identifiable Neighborhood in the three respective design theorieshighlighted the application of theory to a practical concept. The urban eco-village providesan appropriate model for the rebuilding of the single-family landscape and the simultaneousregeneration of community in its most inclusive definition.The strategies for designing the institutions and structures of the urban eco-village asrepresentative of an ecological culture were presented as a "bricolage bundle" -- a designand community resource. Six categories of strategies for implementation were derived:institutions and programs for ecological and bioregional integration, social and communitydevelopment and education, and physical prescriptions for built form and the urbanlandscape represent possibilities for appropriate process and form and practical applicationof the urban eco-village in the context of Vancouver.A larger conclusion derived from these interdependent ones was that the strategies arenot confined to the realm of the urban eco-village. In fact, they are applicable or"transportable" to any level of rebuilding in the urban or rural realm. Importantly, though,by placing form as directly responsive to process such preconceived concepts as urbanvillages begin to lose their importance in and of themselves. "True" community can only begenerated through a responsive, accessible and inclusive process. This does not diminishthe ability of the urban eco-village to act as both a resource of form and process alternativesand as a visionary catalyst. How we design is much more significant than methods andmodels. In the development of this thesis several "universal" precepts for an alternativedesign philosophy have emerged.The first of these is the necessity to immerse our approaches to design in an ethicalcontext. A deontological ethics was identified as the only approach which could beecologically consistent in pursuing the goal of sustainability. More than just a case ofappropriate actions, this ethic is seen as incorporating a conscience. This is labeled asTranspersonal by Deep Ecologists wherein the emphasis on220...Self-realization logically entails exploration of all levels of awareness, from theprepersonal (sentient and reactive), to the personal (cognitive and deliberative) to thetranspersonal (wise and responsive). In extending our sense of identification and care, andin expanding our capacity to love, we flourish and realize ourselves in harmony withothers. (Drengson 1992, p. 45)Aldo Leopold regarded this as the extension of the social conscience from people to theland (1949, p. 246). He alluded to the requisite scale of such a change.No important change in ethics was ever accomplished without an internal change in ourintellectual emphasis, loyalties, affections, and convictions. (Ibid.)A holistic and responsive approach so eloquently embodied in Bioregionalism,Alexander et al. and Ecocity theories is the second precept. It begins by observing andunderstanding the structures, systems and processes in nature and designing in concertwith them. The mainstream approach distanced human design from nature's design at ahuge cost mostly for the latter.The third necessity is to approach design as a bricoleur, or in the "Spirit of Re." This isonly an ecological imperative to the extent that our past and present approaches havenecessitated it be so. While human interference in the natural realm is, in fact, part ofnatural processes, the scale and nature of interference to date demands that we begin bystopping. We need to look at the human and material potential in existing built form andlandscapes, and concentrate our potentials and efforts there. To consume and damage moreland currently in natural states or agricultural use is not only unnecessary but, in mostcircumstances, unethical.The last element addresses the scale at which we approach design. An ethos ofgigantism and "bigger is better" is the hallmark of our culture. Ecological tenets force us toexplore the potential and beauty in the small. This includes looking not just at the physicalbut as well at the potential of the people. The "grass-roots" level of the local andidentifiable community can formulate ethical, equitable, and ecologically sound answers.Together these represent the framework of a philosophy and ideology, an ethic forapproaching design. They form a whole which is interconnected and larger than the sum ofits parts. Such a Gestalt perspective runs counter to the philosophy of most design in our221society which is pragmatic and opportunistic, imbued with a reductionist, mechanistic anddistanced view of nature, the enemy to be conquered.The approach of mainstream design has been widely embraced by society; it is theaccepted mode of designing in both process and form. Its view of the world and behaviorin creating or altering environments, replicates and reinforces the mainstream paradigm.An ecological design philosophy, on the other hand, does not have wide support in society,let alone in the planning field. It is the approach of relatively few and in real terms itrequires the acceptance of ecology at a personal level. Its challenge is to translate thispersonal view into a societal one.The extension of ethics to this third element [human relation's with the land] in humanenvironment is, if I read the evidence correctly, an evolutionary possibility and anecological necessity. It is the third step in a sequence. The first two have already beentaken [the first ethics dealt with relation as between individuals, the second betweenindividual and society]. Individual thinkers since the days of Ezekiel and Isaiah haveasserted that the despoliation of land is not only inexpedient but wrong. Society,however, has not yet affirmed their belief. (Leopold 1949, p. 239)In essence, society needs to alter the way it views the land -- nature. The way in which weunderstand and interpret its processes and systems and the way we relate to nature willultimately shape how we treat it. Centuries of historical conditioning have separated naturefrom the human realm. The manifestation of this conditioning is the biospheric destructionwe see today.We have choices as a society, we can act upon the current social and ecologicalcondition in a transpersonal, ethical manner, informed by wisdom. Or, we can continue onthe present path and pragmatically make small adjustments in the naive hope that suchactivities and attitudes can be extrapolated to the future. It is in essence a motherhoodissue. This thesis attempts to deal with these larger and more fundamental issues within theconfines of a design concept.Fundamentally, these questions are about community. More concisely, they are aboutthe escalating loss of community which we as a society have been experiencing overcenturies, and the desire and necessity to regenerate a form within which we can be at222home. Community here is not the mere physical community or the collection ofindividuals, rather the larger potential --community which has a greater and deeper meaningfor all its members and one which extends to and embraces the land which supports it.Wilfred Pelletier articulated this in discussing the experience of North American nativepeoples.A community is invisible from the outside--just a collection of people. But from theinside it is a living organism that manages itself. Not engineered, not planned; justgrowing there --a sort of happening flourishes or shrivels depending on the climate aroundit....There's only a way of life, and all the activities are just naturally in that flow, all thethings that people find it necessary to do in order to survive....people don't even knowthey are a community. The word itself has no meaning for them. [They have] a kind ofcorporate consciousness that is shared by everybody in that community and used byeveryone. Maybe the best word for it is "trust"--a kind of trust that people outside thatcommunity can hardly imagine and which people inside that community cannot name(Pelletier & Poole 1973, p. 198)The above statement defines the native experience which many "whites" hold up as anideal. However, the reality of our urban areas would not appear to be capable of aspontaneous emergence of such a community. Nevertheless, there is potential for vitalcommunity to arise over time. It cannot be "designed" in the sense that we know designtoday; rather it must be facilitated and generated. Our roles as planners should be to help inthis process in order to provide a framework of process and form ideas which people canuse to the extent they view is necessary.Finally, this leads to a reconsideration of the thesis statement that the urban eco-villagecould provide an integral component of the rebuilding of the non-sustainable city ifinformed by ecologically deep theory, principles and practice, and by an ecological ethic.In light of the conclusions arrived at through the development of this thesis, this statementremains true. However, it should be recognized as but one amongst a multitude of processand form idea sets which communities and professionals could potentially employ. Anysuch one must remain flexible and responsive, not absolute and static, if the rebuilding andregeneration of community towards the goals of creating an ecological culture and city areto realized.223The only response in light of these conclusions is to encourage more learning in thisarea -- learning through doing, not in books and research. The planet is bleeding, and thatdoes not require more theory and pondering; it requires wisdom, and that wisdom can befound in the land and those who know the land intimately. Likely the worst crime inplanning is the replacement of action with knowledge. We must act, because "Practice iswhat puts the heart to work" (Dodge 1990, p. 10). This thesis has been an attempt to givesome channels for such action to flow through, personally and trans-personally.224BIBLIOGRAPHYAberley, D. C. 1985. Bioregionalism: A Territorial Approach to Governance andDevelopment of Northwest British Columbia. M.A.Thesis, The University of BritishColumbia.Alexander, C. 1979. The Timeless Way of Building. New York: Oxford UniversityPress.Alexander, C., H. Neis, A. Anninou, and I. King. 1987. A New Theory of Urban Design. New York: Oxford University Press.Alexander, C., H.Davis, J. Martinez, and D. Corner. 1985. The Production of Houses.New York: Oxford University Press.Alexander, C., M. Silverstein, S. Angel, S.Ishikawa and D. Abrams. 1975. The OregonExperiment. New York: Oxford University Press.Alexander, C., S. Ishikawa, M. Silverstein, M. Jacobson, I. Fiksdahl-King and S. Angel.1977.  A Pattern Language. New York: Oxford University Press.Andruss, V., C. Plant, J. Plant and E.Wright, ed. 1990. Home! A Bioregional Reader.Philadelphia: New Society Publishers.Bartman, C., F. Hietkamp, M.L. Jorgenson, M. McMullen, Z. Mulla, J. Pernu, and Y.Wada. 1992. A 20/20 Vision: Strategic Planning in the Greenbelt and Canada'sCapital. Vancouver: The University of British Columbia, School of Community andRegional Planning.Berg, P. (1991b). What is Bioregionalism? The Trumpeter 8 (1): 6-8.Berg, P. 1982. Figures of Regulation: Guidelines for Re-Balancing Society with The Biosphere. San Francisco: Planet Drum Foundation.Berg, P. 1990a. A Green City Program with a Bioregional Perspective: Developing theSan Francisco Green City Plan. In Green Cities, ed. D.Gordon , 281-288. Montreal:Black Rose Books.Berg, P. 1990b. Ecocity Theory. In Ecocity Conference 1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29 March-1 April 1990, ed. C.Canfield, 22 . Berkeley: Urban Ecology and Cerro Gordo Town Forum.Berg, P. 1991a. A Metamorphosis for Cities: From Gray to Green. The Trumpeter 8 (1):9-12.Berg, P. and R. Dasmann, ed. 1978. Reinhabiting a Seperate Country: A Bioregional Anthology of Northern California. San Francisco: Planet Drum.Berman, M. 1981. The Re-enchantment of the World. New York: Bantam Books.Berry, W. 1989. Traveling at Home. San Francisco: North Point Press.225Bolan, R. S. 1985. The Structure of Ethical Choice in Planning Practice. In Ethics in Planning, ed. M. Wachs, 70-89. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Center for UrbanPolicy Research.Bookchin, M. 1990. Cities, Councils and Confederations. In Turtle Talk: Voices for a Sustainable Future, ed. C. Plant and J. Plant, 124-132. Philadelphia: New SocietyPublishers.Bookchin, M. 1991. The Ecology of Freedom , rev. ed. Montreal: Black Rose Books.Bookchin, M. 1992. Urbanization Without Cities. Montreal: Black Rose Books.Bookout, L. W. 1992a. Neotraditional Town Planning: Cars Pedestrians and Transit.Urban Land  (February 1992): 10-15.Bookout, L. W. 1992b. Neotraditional Town Planning: Toward a Blending ofApproaches. Urban Land (August 1992): 14-19.Boothroyd, P. 1991. Community Development: the Missing Link in Welfare Policy. InIdeology, Development and Social Welfare: Canadian Perspectives , ed. B. Kirwin,103-36. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press Inc.Boothroyd, P., and C. Davis 1991. The Meaning of Community Economic Development.Vancouver: School of Community and Regional Planning, The University of BritishColumbia. DP #25.Bressi, T. W. 1992. The Neo-Traditional Revolution: A New Generation of TownPlanners Attack the Suburban Status Quo. Utne Reader  (May/June 1992): 101-104.Broadbent, G. 1990 Emerging Concepts in Urban Space Design. London: Van NostrandReinhold.Brown, P. 1991.  The Neo-Traditional Village Concept. In New Town Development,10-19. Carmel: International Making Cities Livable Council.Canfield, C. (1990a). "Cerro Gordo, Oregon: Seeking Symbiosis".In Ecocity Conference1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29March-1 April 1990, ed. C. Canfield, 101. Berkeley: Urban Ecology and CerroGordo Town Forum.Canfield, C., ed. 1990b. Ecocity Conference 1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29 March-1 April 1990. Berkeley: UrbanEcology and Cerro Gordo Town Forum.Capra, F. 1982. The Turning Point. Toronto: Bantam Books.Can, M. (1992). The Fifth Tradition. Presentation to School of Community and RegionalPlanning, The University of British Columbia.Cayley, D. 1991. The Age of Ecology: The Environment on CBC Radio's Ideas. Toronto: James Lorimer and Company, Publishers.City of Vancouver. 1990. Clouds of Change: Final Report of the Task Force on Atmospheric Change. Vancouver: The City of Vancouver.226City of Vancouver. 1992. Greenways-Publicways: Final Report City of Vancouver Urban Landscape Task Force. Vancouver: City of Vancouver.Clark, J. 1988. What is Social Ecology? The Trumpeter 5 (2): 72-75.Crombie, D. 1992. Regeneration: Toronto's Waterfront and the Sustainable City: Final Report. Toronto: Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront.Dodge, J. 1990. Living by Life: Some Bioregional Theory and Practice. In Home! A Bioregional Reader, ed. V. Andruss,C. Plant, J. plant, and E. Wright, 5-12.Philadelphia: New Society Publishers.Downton, P. 1990. Perspectives on the Future. In Ecocity Conference 1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29 March-1 April 1990,ed. C. Canfield, 19. Berkeley: Urban Ecology and Cerro Gordo Town Forum.Downton, P. 1991. Ecopolis Now!: Building Tomorrow Today. HabitatAustralia(August 1991): 23-28.Downton, P. 1993. Interview by Author, February 19, 1993, Vancouver. Phone Call.Drengson, A. 1988. Nature, Community and Self. Communities Magazine 75 (Summer1988): 42-49.Drengson, A. 1992. The Long-Range Deep Ecology and Arne Naess. The Trumpeter 9(2): 43-45.Duany, A. 1991. Andres Duany: Traditional Neighborhood Development. Vancouver:Urban Development Institute.Duany, A., and E. Plater-Zyberk. 1992. The Second Coming of the American SmallTown. Plan Canada (May 1992): 6-13.Ecopolis Pty. Ltd. 1992. The Halifax Project: A Community Driven Project. Adelaide:Ecopolis Pty. Ltd.Friedmann, J. 1987. Planning in the Public Domain: From Knowledge to Action.Princeton: Princeton University Press.Gans, H. J. 1962. The Urban Villagers: Group and Class in the Life of Italian Americans,1982 ed. New York: The Free Press.Gardner, J., and Roseland, M. 1989. Acting Locally: Community Strategies for EquitableSustainable Development. Alternatives 16 (3): 247-259.Gehl, J. 1987. Life Between Buildings. Translated by Jo Koch. New York: VanNostrand Reinhold.Gereke, K. 1989. Empowerment, Architecture, and City Planning. City Magazine: 10-19.227Gillisen, A. 1990. Scaling Down for a Sustainable Future. In Ecocity Conference 1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29 March-1 April 1990, ed. C. Canfield, 26-27 . Berkeley: Urban Ecology and Cerro Gordo TownForum.Gordon, D., ed. 1990. Green Cities: Ecologically Sound Approaches to Urban Space.Montreal: Black Rose Books.Grabow, , J., and A. Heskin. 1973. Foundations for a Radical Theory of Planning.Journal of American Institute of Planners (March): 106-113.Hahn, E. 1991. Ecological Urban Restructuring: Theoretical Foundation and Concept for Action. Berlin: Science Center Berlin. No. FS II 91-402.Hamblen, M. 1988. The Kentlands Charrette: Producing a Town Plan in a Week. UrbanLand  (September 1988): 10-15.Hough, M. 1984. City form and Natural Process. London: Croom Helm.Institute for Community Economics. 1982. The Community Land Trust Handbook.Emmaus, Pennsylvania: Rodale Press.Jacobs, J. 1961. The Life and Death of Great American Cities. New York: Vintage Books.King, S. 1989. Co-Design: A Process of Design Participation. New York: Van NostrandReinhold.Kluckner, M. 1991. Paving Paradise. Vancouver: Whitecap Books.Kostof, S. 1991. The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings Through History.Boston: Bulfinch Press.Krieger, A., and W. Lennertz., ed. 1991. Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk: Towns and Town-Making Principles. New York: Rizzoli InternationalPublications.Krier, L. 1984. Leon Krier: Houses, Palaces, Cities. London: Architectural DesignProfile.Laurie, I. C., ed. 1979. Nature In Cities. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Lehrman, F. 1988. The Sacred Landscape. Berkeley: Celestial Arts.Lennertz, W. 1991a. The Codes. In Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk: Towns and Town-Making Principles, ed. A. Krieger, 96-103. New York: RizzoliInternational Publications.Lennertz, W. 1991b. Town-Making Fundamentals. In Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk: Towns and Town-Making Principles, ed. A. Krieger, 21-24. NewYork: Rizzoli International Publications.Leopold, A. 1949. A Sand County Almanac, 1966 ed. New York: Ballantine Books.228Levine, R. S. 1990. Sustainable Development: Does It Lead to the Ecological City? InEcocity Conference 1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29 March-1 April 1990, ed. C. Canfield, 24-25. Berekley: Urban Ecologyand Cerro Gordo Town Forum.Ley, D. 1983. A Social Geography of the City. New York: Harper and Row.Livingston, J. 1990. The Rigged Shell Game of Domination and Hierarchy. TheTrumpeter 7(4): 150-151.Lovelock, J. E. 1978. GALA: A New Look at Life on Earth, 1987 ed. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.Lynch, K. 1981. Good City Form. Cambridge: MIT Press.Lynch, K., and Hack, G. 1989. Site Planning, 3rd. ed. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Masayesva, V. 1990. The Ecology of American Indian Cities. In Ecocity Conference 1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29 March-1 April 1990, ed. C. Canfield, 28-29. Berkeley: Urban Ecology and Cerro Gordo TownForum.Maser, C. 1990. Chief Seattle and the Long View. The Trumpeter 7(1): 34-36.McCamant, K., and C. Durrett. 1988. Cohousing : A Contemporary Approach to Housing Ourselves. Berkeley: Habitat/TenSpeed PressMcCloskey, D. 1989. On Ecoregional Boundaries. The Trumpeter 6(4): 127-132.McHarg, I. L. 1969. Design with Nature. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday Natural HistoryPress.McIntosh, E., ed. 1952. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English, 4th. ed.London: Oxford University Press.Mellos, K. 1988. Perspectives on Ecology. New York: St,. Martin's Press.Milbrath, L. W. 1989. Envisioning A Sustainable Society: Learning Our Way Out.Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Morgan, R. 1990. Rock Hill, S.C.: Creating an Urban Village. In Ecocity Conference 1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29 March-1 April 1990, ed. C. Canfield, 37-38. Berkeley: Urban Ecology and Cerro GordoTown Forum.Mumford, L. 1938. The Culture of Cities. New York : Harcourt, Brace and Company.Mumford, L. 1961. The City in History. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Nicholson-Lord, D. 1987. The Greening of Cities. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Odum, E. P. 1971. Fundamentals of Ecology, 3rd. ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co.229Odum, E. P. 1989. Ecology and Our Endangered Life-Support Systems.  Sunderland:Sinauer Associates, Inc.Palermo, F. 1992. Distorting Time and Place. Plan Canada (September 1992): 47-48.Patton, P. (1991). "In Florida, the future has a picket fence". Smithsonian, 21(10), 82-95.Pelletier, W. and T. Poole. 1973. No Foreign Land: The Biography of a North AmericanIndian. New York: Pantheon Books.Plant, C. and J. Plant, ed. 1990. Turtle Talk: Voices for a Sustainable Future.Philadelphia: New Society Publishers.Proctor, S. J. 1978. Vancouver's Old Streams. Waters: the Journal of Vancouver Aquarium 3 (No.1).Quayle, M., R. Walkey, and W.W. Wood. 1992. Urban Architecture of Limits. Vancouver: School of Architecture, The Universtity of British Columbia.Rees, W.E. 1989. Defining "Sustainable Development." Vancouver: University ofBritish Columbia Centre for Human Settlemants.Rees, W.E. 1992. Ecological Footprints and Appropriated Carrying Capacity: WhatUrban Economics Leaves Out. Environment and Urbanization  4 (2, October 1992):121-127.Register, R. 1987. Ecocity Berkeley. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books.Register, R. 1990. Principles of Ecocity Building. The Permaculture Activist 6 (4): 1,4-8.Register, R. 1991. State of the Theory, State of the Movement and Ecocity Principles andGuidelines. Berkeley: Urban Ecology.Relph, E. 1976. Place and Placelessness. London: Pion.Roseland, M. 1990. Is Planning Theory to Sustainable Development?: The "Fifth Tradition" and Ecological Perestroika.  Vancouver: School of Community and RegionalPlanning,The University of British Columbia.Roseland, M. 1992. Toward Sustainable Communities. Ottawa: National Round Tableon the Environment and the Economy.Sale, K. 1980. Human Scale. Pedigree Books.Sale, K. 1985. Dwellers in the Land: The Bioregional Vision.  San Francisco: Sierra ClubBooks.Sale, K. 1990. Forward. In Turtle Talk: Voices for a Sustainable Future, ed. C. Plantand J. Plant, vii-x. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers.Schumacher, E. F. 1973. Small is Beautiful. London: Sphere Books Ltd.230Skolimowski, H. 1991. Ecology, Education and the Real World. The Trumpeter 8 (3):123-126.Soleri, P. 1990. Crowding, the Life Maker . In Ecocity Conference 1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29 March-1 April 1990, ed. C.Canfield, 21. Berkeley: Urban Ecology and Cerro Gordo Town Forum.Spim, A. W. 1984. The Granite Garden: Urban Nature and Human Design. New York:Basic Books.Stein, F. 1990. Ecovillages in Denmark. In Ecocity Conference 1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29 March-1 April 1990, ed. C.Canfield, 102. Berkeley: Urban Ecology and Cerro Gordo Town Forum.Snyder, G. 1990. Bioregional Perspectives. In Home! A Bioregional Reader, ed. V.Andruss, C. Plant, J. Plant, and E. Wright, 17-20). Philadelphia: New SocietyPublishers.Taylor, M. 1990. Mashpee Commons and Seaside. In Ecocity Conference 1990: Report of the First International Ecocity Conference Held in Berkeley 29 March-1 April 1990,ed. C. Canfield, 39. Berkeley: Urban Ecology and Cerro Gordo Town Forum.Todd, J., and G. Tukel. 1981. Reinhabiting Cities and Towns: Designing for Sustainabilty. San Francisco: Planet Drum Foundation.Todd, N. J., and J. Todd 1984. Bioshelters, Ocean Arks, City Farming: Ecology as the Basis of Design. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.Tonnies, F. 1955 ed. Community Association. Translated by C.P.Loomis.London:Routledge and Paul.Tukel, G. 1982. Toward a Bioregional Model: Clearing Ground for Watershed Planning.San Francsico: Planet Drum.Urban Ecology, Planning and Development Evaluation Committee. 1992. Framework for the Creation of Ecologically Sustainable Cities. Bekeley: Urban Ecology.Van der Ryn, S., and P. Calthorpe. 1986. Sustainable Communities: A New Design Synthesis for Cities, Suburbs, and New Towns. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.Volk, L. 1991. Re-Affirmation of the European Model. In New Town Development, 32-34 . Carmel: International Making Cities Livable Council.Wachs, M. ed. 1985. Ethics in Planning. New Brunswick: Center for Urban PlanningPolicy Research.Wackernagel, M., J. McIntosh, W.E. Rees, and R. Woollard. 1993. Handbook for Estimating Appropriated Carrying Capacity (forthcoming). Vancouver. Task Force onPlanning Healthy and Sustainable Communities.Walljasper, J. 1992. At Home in an Eco-Village. Utne Reader (May/June 1992): 142-143 .231Winburn, W. A. 1992. The Development Realities of Traditional Town Design. UrbanLand (August 1992): 20-21,47.Woodcock, G. 1990. Mutual Aid: The Seed of The Alternative. In Turtle Talk: Voices fora Sustainable Future, ed. C. Plant and J. Plant, 40-47. Philadelphia: New SocietyPublishers.World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future.Oxford: Oxford University Press.232APPENDIX ONE : TOWN-MAKING DESIGN PRINCIPLESThe Master Plan. The master plan is the composite drawing which incorporates allcritical information on the town plan. Its design strategy often follows the pattern typicalof American towns: a geometrically defined center radiates on a interconnected streetnetwork which adapts to existing conditions. The plans for larger communities show theascending hierarchy of neighborhood, village, town, and regional street patterns.Commercial activity is concentrated, including shopping and working, in towncenters. It distributes civic spaces and buildings throughout the neighborhoods tocontribute to their character and focus. Neighborhoods are planned on a quarter-mileradius which results in a five-minute walk from the neighborhood edge to its center.Street Network. Streets and squares are the primary public spaces of a town orneighborhood as well as facilitators of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Blocks aregenerally no larger than 230 by 600 feet to ensure that building lots front streets and thattraveling distances are reasonable. New street networks connect whenever possible toexisting streets to become part of the regional network. The layout of streets reflectsboth the character of the land and the designers' efforts to make a memorable network thatwill accept future growth in an orderly manner.Pedestrian Network. Paths through squares and parks, plus mid-block pedestrianalleys, provide the pedestrian routes throughout town, in addition to the street andsidewalk system.Street Sections. The street sections drawn for each town or neighborhood depict thecharacter of the streets. The intention is to make a place where pedestrians feelcomfortable as well as to provide for automobile travel. The proportion of adjacentbuilding heights to the street width is specified to establish the character of the street andits spatial role in the overall town plan. The careful detailing of travel and parking lanes(with parallel parking wherever possible to protect the pedestrian), the alignment of treesand other plantings, the sidewalk width, and build-to lines, are all variables in the designof streets that characterize and distinguish neighborhoods.The Regulating Plan. The zoning of building types reflects the principle ofintegration, rather than separation of uses. Dwellings, shops, and workplaces, are locatedin close proximity to each other.Public Buildings and Squares. Squares and parks are distributed throughout theneighborhoods. They are designed as settings for informal social activity and recreation aswell as larger civic gatherings. Civic buildings, planned in coordination with public openspaces, are prominently sited, ideally terminating vistas and enclosing streets to serve aslandmarks. These buildings serve to house social, cultural, or religious activities.The Codes. The codes are a series of documents that ensures the implementation of thetown design. The Urban Regulations control those aspects of private building whichpertain to the formation of public spaces. The Architectural Regulations control thematerials, configurations, and construction techniques of the buildings. In a town builtwithout the benefit of centuries or a diversity of founders, the codes encourage varietywhile ensuring the harmony required to give character to the community.The design principles address numerous growth management issues that arecommonly considered political concerns: traffic congestion, air pollution, parking andaffordable housing, among others. Traffic congestion and pollution are diminished by theinterconnecting network of streets and by the reduction of vehicular trips that pedestrian-oriented design encourages.233On-street parking is permitted wherever possible in order to control traffic speed,protect the pedestrian, and distribute the required parking load. In the town center, smallparking lots or structures are located in the interiors of the blocks in order to maintain thestreet wall. The vast parking lots required for regional shopping centers are placed alongcollector roads as pedestrian activity is impossible there in any case. In these parking lotsthe traffic lanes are planned as an urban grid, to allow for the eventual replacement ofparking by the buildings as the town center matures.Affordable housing is addressed with the goal of integrating it in small quantitiesthroughout the neighborhood instead of creating large tracts of single-income housing.This can be achieved to a large degree by the following: 1) interspersing houses ofdifferent sizes but similar appearance; 2) providing apartments over stores; 3)encouraging garage apartments and small cottages behind single-family homes to serve asrental units.Other growth management issues such as the balance of jobs and housing, schoolsize and placement, and the equitable distribution of resources, all have a place in theabove design principles.The Charrette. The process of designing a town in a week-long charrette began withSeaside. This first attempt to create a complete town instead of a mixed-use developmentinvolved numerous participants. Subsequently, as the projects become larger and morecomplex, often requiring elaborate approval processes, the charrette has provided a settingin which all constituents --from municipal officials to interested citizens-- can participatein the planning process. The charrette helps to educate the participants, incorporate theircontributions, verify decisions and diminish the adversities of the ensuing permittingprocess.The charrette establishes a full working office of 5 to 20 people on site, staffed witha small core of experienced designers, working with local architects and, landscapearchitects, historians, engineers, ecologists, and financial and marketing consultants.The charrette begins with a day of visits to the site and to nearby towns which mightserve as models, and a presentation to the community of the principles of town planning.During the following days, the team, including the client, work day and night, meetingoften with local officials and advocacy groups, designing everything from the master planto the typical buildings, the codes and specific landscapes.Design authorship is exchanged for the authenticity of character that usually onlyhistory can give: different individuals work sequentially with entire schemes handed overto others to develop. The results, usually presented in a public slide lecture on the lastevening, may include up to 40 drawings.Implementation. This is based on a recognized limitation of current zoning codes ontown planning. It requires creative interpretation of the zoning code. Clever or lenientcode interpretation, however, cannot circumvent single-minded engineering and planningstandards, and conventional beliefs that only traffic flow, parking counts, and thesegregation of uses are important --impediments to building according to traditional townpatterns. Some communities are surprised to learn that patterns of a historic district theywish to preserve are no longer allowed.Repeated confrontations with municipal ordinances led to the development of theTraditional Neighborhood District Ordinance (TND). The ordinance can be tailored tospecific needs and has been incorporated in the laws of communities in four stages.Duany and Plater-Zyberk are currently working on the TUD (Traditional Urban District),an ordinance for retrofitting existing urban neighborhoods. (abridged from Lemiertz1991b, pp. 21-24)234APPENDIX TWO : EIGHT POINTS FOR ECOLOGICAL URBANRESTUCTURINGHuman-Ethological OrientationParticipation and DemocratisationiiOrientation to Cycles and Networks_22.2iOrientation to Nature and the SensesOrientation to Qualified Density1Orientation to the "Genius Loci"1Ecology and EconomyInternational Orientation^2235It is in no way imperative that totally new criteria for thought and actionbe used to reform the interactions between society and environment.Rather, principles of environmentally and socially compatible technologyand forms of settlement, verified by centuries of experience, should be sys-tematized. This observation is made concrete in the terminology of the»Eight Points« and further developed under the conditions of industrialsociety. Thus a basis was established for the critical discussion of the term»Ecological Urban Restructuring« and its contents.(1) Human -ethological orientation: If we do not have a better under-standing of the >mature in us«, no solutions for the >mature aroundus« can arise. It is to be noted that we carry the traces of thousands ofyears of evolution in the natural milieu and in small, social units. Spe-cific behavioural patterns emerge from this, which modern urbanplanning often disregards. Human-ethological planning criteria com-prise the human being's need for individual space and group territory;its search for identity and self-representation; its demand for orienta-tion and social structures.^•(2) Participation and democratization: Participation of the inhabitants isthe first oecological law«! The reduction of city inhabitants to mereconsumers and considering them only as incompetent recipients ofservices was a social and ecological dead-end. Personal participation,experience and responsibility in the interaction with the environmentwill instigate positive learning processes. Decentralisation in planning,in the design and implementation of the local habitat leads to spacesfor individual and collective awareness and self-realization.(3) Orientation to cycles and networks: Nature is the most economical andecological architect. Its products are harmoniously placed into ener-getic and material cycles, optimally adapted to local conditions. Buil-ders, architects and city planners should again learn from onature'sintelligence«. Pilot projects of ecological urban restructuring havedemonstrated that savings of electricity, heating energy, drinkingwater, wastes, etc. of up to 50% and more are realistic. Apart fromthis, building materials which are damaging to health and the environ-ment should be substituted; electromagnetic currents should be takeninto consideration. When choosing building materials and designingproducts it is important to consider the whole production, consump-236tion and deposition cycle and its effects on people and the environ-ment (chain or tree concept). This concerns the origin of the raw mat-erials, their production methods, their transport, the use of energy,waste treatment. Corresponding »substance-value factorso should beintegrated into all planning activities.(4) Orientation to nature and the senses: It is not enough to understandcyclical orientation and participation in purely organizational or tech-nical terms. People must be enabled to again experience them person-ally. This means, ecological urban restructuring is above all a creativetask. It is important to get beyond the reduction of functional oraesthetic aspects of the city as the expression of a linear and sectoralunderstanding of design. Since most of the natural and cyclical rela-tions of architecture, urban planning and technical systems can nolonger be experienced sensually, sensitivity and responsibility witheraway and indifference as to what is bad and good in life rises. Forexample, water in the city just occurs between the tap and the drain,and one does not bother about what happens before and after. Undersuch circumstances the esteem for this vital element must atrophy.(5) Orientation to qualified density: Ecological urban restructuring impliesintegration of urban functions, a creative mix of residential, work andleisure activities on the smallest possible scale (qualified density). Thismeans the realization of multiple alternatives for cooperation, and ofthe respective possibilities for saving time, distance and resources.The task for urban planning then is to develop new forms of media-tion between ourban experiential qualitieso and the oexperiential pos-sibilities of natural elementso. This involves creating spaces for plantson and around buildings and the fostering of small-scale building ele-ments that interact with one another and with nature. The objective isto help urban dwellers to experience the richness of natural cycles.(6) Orientation to the »Genius Loci(‹: The Chinese doctrine of oFengShui« stipulated a way of constructing buildings and cities, of utilizingland and natural resources othat the landscape was not changed insuch a way that the earth's life-supporting energetical influences andoperating laws would be disturbed.0 This was an important guidelineto people's identification, their ability to put down roots and integrate237themselves into a given natural context. In a natural-spatial sense, theorientation to the »genius loci« means defining an experiential rela-tion to the geographic, climatic and geo-morphological surroundings,to the flora and fauna specific to the area, through architecture andurban planning. Today, orientation to the »genius loci« means torelate architecture and urban planning to the history of a given place.Reference to the »genius loci« thus means to comprehend the cityand the urban neighbourhoods as living memory. Building measuresare to be consciously incorporated as links into the -»historical chain«.(7) Ecology and Economy: So far, environmental protection policies, astechnical and political reactions to remedy environmental damages,have neither proven sufficient nor financially viable. Instead of treat-ing symptoms, we must develop preventive ecological strategies whichstrike at the anthropological origins of the environmental problems. Anew, sustainable symbiosis between economy and environment in theurban context requires innovative instruments like resource taxes,emission charges, billing according to consumption, environmentalaccounting, appropriate building standards, planning laws and strate-gic subsidies. Furthermore, it is necessary to create suitable conditionsfor new forms of co-operation between the formal and the informaleconomy, between administration and local people towards co-plan-ning, co-production, co-responsibility in forming the local habitats.Initial ideas in this context are now being tested in pilot projects.(8) International orientation: Local and global environmental problems,the destruction of the resource basis in the developing countries andthe waste of resources in the industrial countries are closely linked.Ecological urban restructuring thus requires an international ex-change of knowledge and experience, and the mutual support inimplementing new urban ecological strategies. Important impulses forenvironmental policy originate from decentralized municipal net-works, a new kind of pressure »from below«. Suggestions to financesuch programmes »help for self-help« are on hand. Apart from fundsof the World Bank, the OECD and WHO, the »peace dividend«, i.e.the funds hitherto used for armaments may be channelled to this typeof activities.(Hahn 1991, pp.13-16 )238APPENDIX THREE : ECOLOGICAL DESIGN GUIDELINES2391. Restore degraded landrehabilitating and maximising the ecologicalhealth and potential of land as a :onsequence ofthe development of human settlementThe ecosystem of the bioregion has beenvirtually obliterated and must be restoredas the basic foundation of ecologicalhealth - the new urban developmentproposed for the Halifax site will drive therestoration process in two ways.RuralA significant area of degraded rural land (100 -500 hectares) will be restored toecological health as part of the project.This land will be managed withappropriate areas given over to foodproduction for the community.CityParts of the site have been used for industrialprocesses (service station, bitumen plantand works depot) leaving a legacy ofcontamination and wastes. Thisredevelopment project allows for repair ofcontaminated soils in the medium to longterm by revegetation of those site areas.Soil in areas which might be identified ascontaining consolidated waste may need tobe replaced but this contingency isexpected to account for only small partsof the total development.Decontamination of any such soil may beachieved as a component of revegetationprojects associated with the developmentbut out of the city.The =al/urban land restoration program willprovide a model for the always present butoften neglected regional relationship thatexists between the rural and urbanenvironments.2. Fit the bio- regionrespecting and conforming to the parametersprovided by the bioregion within which thedevelopment is situated, fitting into thelandscape with the patterns of developmentfollowing the inherent form and limitations ofthe landThe project respects the intrinsic features of theoriginal landscape of the TandanyaBioregion. It is integrated with both thecurrent surroundings and the anticipatedecological redevelopment of Adelaide('Ecopolis Adelaide' ) into the future.3. Balance developmentbalancing the intensity of development againstthe ecological carrying capacity of the landwhilst protecting all viable existing ecologicalfeaturesThe project has a rural as well as an urban focusso that the total ecological, energy andresource impact of the development isdealt with. The built form itself integratesthe diverse elements of a community toform a whole place, rather than the'monoculture' of single land use or singledevelopment projects such as aconventional 'housing development' and agreen thread of 'ecological corridor'reinstates indigenous vegetation whilstproviding the planning 'axis' of the urbandesign.4. Halt urban sprawldeveloping human habitation at relatively highdensity within inviolable green belts of naturalor restored ecologically viable landscape so thatthe overall development density is constrained byecological limitsThe project represents a major increase in inner-city housing and associated communityinfrastructure. This reduces the need forfurther suburban sprawl with itsexpensive and resource consumingrequirement for land, services andtransport infrastructure.5. Optimize energy performanceoperating at low levels of energy consumption,using renewable energy resources, local energyproduction and techniques of resource reuseThe project incorporates• most appropriate fuel for each use (solarelectricity and hot water, gas heating andcooking, co-generation and biogas)• minimisation of energy demand(insulated and energy efficient buildingsand emphasis on public transport, easypedestrian movement and cycling)• the ability for occupants to manipulatebuildings for comfort (user-friendly -openable windows and no reliance oncentral control systems)• on-site inter-relationship of energyproduction and use (with prospects ofexporting electricity to the grid)• renewable energy production (no gridelectricity)6. Contribute to the economysupporting and promoting appropriate economicactivityThe project adds value to the City. It encouragesthe creation of new building skills andgenerates employment both duringconstruction and in on-going operation.Ecologically orientated businesses andbusiness practice will be focussed on thesite and overall the project willdemonstrate the economic values ofecological urban development.C Ecopolis Pry Ltd • GPO Box 222 • Adelaide • Tandanya Bioregion • SA 5000 • Phone/fax 08 379 19847. Provide health and securityemploying appropriate materials .Ind spatialorganisation to create safe and healthy places forpeople to live, work and play in :he context ofan ecologically resilient environmentEcological development produces a healthier day-to-day living environment minimallydependant on mechanical support toachieve comfort_ The project creates arange of public and private spaces(designed with the participation of thecommunity) with secure separation toprivate spaces, and visible and accessiblepublic spaces enhancing security. Thesocial mix and diversity ofaccommodation provides the.basis for afull community life and a challenging butbalanced social environment. The buildingmaterials and processes involved will beecologically sound and healthy and theproject will catalyse resi'-qtrh into and useof healthy buildings.8. Encourage communityincorporating provision for a wide diversity ofsocial and community activities including secureand attractive, physical and electromagneticcommunication networks within a 3-dimensionalurban structureThe project includes community facilties and amarket place as well as craft and businessopportunities. In addition the developmentapproach is based around a managementteam, involving progressiveredevelopment of the land and a diversityof community organisations, groups andindividuals. The variety of processesinvolved will maximise a sense ofcommunity both on and around the siteby requiring people to work together inmaking the project happen.9. Promote social equityemploying economic and management structureswhich embody principles of social equityThe Management Team will be responsible forensuring that the financial andmanagement structures embody principlesof social equity in theory and in practice.The integration of these principles to thedevelopment process sets this projectapart from all conventional developmentsand is intended to guarantee ecologicalbalance in the 'invisible' structures whichultimately determine the physicalstructures of the built form.• No restriction to access to project on thebasis of sex, colour, creed.• Opportunity for a wide diversity ofsocial mix and housing developmentmethods.10. Respect nistorymaximising the retained or redeployed value ofprevious worthwhile human endeavour in termsof both heritage and manufactured artifactsThe project retains heritage elements andintegrates these in the redevelopment (theCottage Theatre and the chimney of theold incinerator in particular). Thedevelopment form respects the DesignPrinciples below, echoing traditionalforms, building and urban design elementswhile also addressing climatic andfunctional imperatives.11. Enrich the cultural landscapesupporting and promoting cultural diversity andincorporating ecological awareness into allaspects of the malting and maintenance of humansettlementAn Ecology Centre is the first building plannedfor the development. Incorporatingdwellings, a café, workshops, abookshop, and offices for Ecopolis PtyLtd as 'barefoot architects' on-site, theEcology Centre will provide an importanteducation and agitiation role to establishan ethos for the development and ensurethe integrity of the program's invisible aswell as visible structures.The project does not repeat the limiteddevelopment forms usually found in theCity, and as well as mixing housingtypes and forms, integrates these into athree dimensional urban environment.Existing street frontage cottages areretained and restored, occupant-fundedhousing, co-op and co-housing projects,street frontage, pedestrian mall fronted,apartments over shops, all inter-relate,with access from street and upper levels.12. Heal the bio-spherecontributing to the repair, replenishment andimprovement of^ off.^ water^ soil^ energy^ biomass^ food^ biodiversity^ habitat^ ecolinks^ waste recyclingto achieve the first principle set out above.The project repairs damage by closing theecological loops severed by past urbandevelopment. This can be demonstrated b^using the following Urban EcologyChecklist or Trogstick' to measurefundamental qualities of urban ecologicalperformance listed above./40Ecopolis Pry Ltd • GPO Box 2222 • Adelaide • Tandanya Bioregion • SA 5000 • Phone/foot 08 379 1984(Ecopolis 1992, pp. 3-4)

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0086313/manifest

Comment

Related Items