Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Conflicting expectations : the situation of the local area planner in Vancouver Daneluzzi, Lidio 1978

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1978_A8 D35.pdf [ 7.18MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094402.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094402-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094402-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094402-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094402-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094402-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094402-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094402-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094402.ris

Full Text

CONFLICTING EXPECTATIONS: THE SITUATION OF THE LOCAL AREA PLANNER IN VANCOUVER by LIDIO DANELUZZI Laurea i n S o c i o l o g i a , L i b e r a U n i v e r s i t a D e g l i S t u d i d i T r e n t o , 1973 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS • i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES School of Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d s tandard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August , 1978 c) L i d i o D a n e l u z z i j 1978 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumb ia , I a g ree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s tudy . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d tha t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i thout my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . L i d i o D a n e l u z z i School Community and Reg iona l P l a n n i n g fisgaxxBMR* o f The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumbia 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5 D a t e 17 August 1978 i i ABSTRACT L o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g i s an approach to c i t y p l a n n i n g which has developed i n Vancouver over the past f i v e y e a r s , and a major u n i t i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e of the Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. Th is t h e s i s i s concerned w i t h the purposes of t h i s approach as they have e v o l v e d , p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h the i n t e r p l a y between the purposes a c t u a l l y served and the s t r u c t u r e of the c i v i c bu reaucracy , and w i t h the cho ices made by p lanners among c o n f l i c t i n g demands. The methodology used has two e lements , an h i s t o r i c a l a n a l y s i s based c h i e f l y on contemporary documents, and a s o c i o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s of the r o l e r e l a t i o n s h i p s of p l a n n e r s work ing i n Area P l a n n i n g based on i n t e r v i e w d a t a . The c o n c l u s i o n s suggest t h a t the o r i g i n a l purposes f o r do ing Area P l a n n i n g are no l o n g e r b e i n g served by the e x i s t i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e , and that there i s an o p p o r t u n i t y and a need f o r r e s t r u c t u r i n g of the o r g a n i z a t i o n and restatement of the purposes i f the o b j e c t i v e s of Area P l a n n i n g are to be a t t a i n e d . The Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n of the C i t y P l a n n i n g Department was e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1974, i n response to the p u b l i c demand f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the p l a n n i n g process among o ther reasons . I t has grown r a p i d l y , to become the l a r g e s t d i v i s i o n i n the P l a n n i n g Department. A 1973 repor t suggested three b a s i c reasons f o r i n t r o d u c i n g t h i s new approach to p l a n n i n g i n Vancouver: P l a n n i n g i s more e f f e c t i v e i f a s t r o n g c e n t r a l i z e d p l a n n i n g e f f o r t i s c o o r d i n a t e d w i t h neighbourhood o r i e n t e d p l a n n i n g at the l o c a l l e v e l . L o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g b r i n g s the p l a n n i n g process c l o s e r t o the p e o p l e . L o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g promotes p l a n n i n g w i t h c i t i z e n s on a coopera t i ve b a s i s , r a t h e r than c o n f r o n t a t i o n responses to p lans and p r o p o s a l s . i i i The p lanner i s seen as the c e n t r a l f i g u r e i n the p r o c e s s . In a d d i t i o n to responding to p o l i c y d i r e c t i v e s and the i n f o r m a l support and guidance of o thers i n the same s i t u a t i o n , the p o s i t i o n taken by a p l a n n e r i s shaped by compromises among the c o n f l i c t i n g e x p e c t a t i o n s and demands p l a c e d on the person i n t h i s p o s i t i o n by those i n a v a r i e t y of r e l a t e d r o l e s . Guidance, or the l a c k of i t , through p o l i c y d i r e c t i v e s i s researched through study of documents. The l i t e r a t u r e i s a l s o the b a s i s f o r s p e c i f y i n g three d i f f e r e n t models of the s t r u c t u r e of the work s i t u a t i o n i n which the l o c a l a rea p lanner i s the c e n t r a l e lement . These models i d e n t i f y by o r g a n i z a -t i o n a l p o s i t i o n and i n t e r e s t the s i g n i f i c a n t o thers i n the p l a n n e r ' s env i ronment , but they do not i n d i c a t e how the p l a n n e r chooses among the i n c o n s i s t e n t e x p e c t a t i o n s and demands made by those i n v o l v e d i n these r o l e r e l a t i o n s h i p s . To develop the models f u r t h e r i n t e r v i e w s were conducted w i t h a l l of the p l a n n e r s i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n , t h e i r s u p e r i o r s to whom they are a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y r e s p o n s i b l e , r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of o ther c i v i c departments who are i n f requent contact w i t h Area P l a n n i n g , some a ldermen, and some c i t i z e n s a c t i v e i n l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g programmes i n t h e i r own neighbourhoods. I t i s c l e a r from the data tha t the r a p i d expans ion of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n has not corresponded to a p a r a l l e l expansion o f a r e a p l a n n i n g s e r v i c e s . The major f a c t o r c o n t r i b u t i n g to an i n c r e a s e i n s t a f f s i z e i s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of two f e d e r a l programs, NIP (Neighbourhood Improvement Program) and RRAP ( R e s i d e n t i a l R e h a b i l i t a t i o n A s s i s t a n c e Program). RRAP i s c l e a r l y an implementat ion program r a t h e r than p l a n n i n g , and NIP d i f f e r s i n s i g n i f i c a n t ways from the l o c a l area p l a n n i n g i d e a l . The second major f a c t o r i n the growth of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n i s the development of an " i n - h o u s e " group of p lanners work ing w i t h i n C i t y H a l l u s i n g a p l a n n i n g i v approach which has l i t t l e i n common w i t h the Area P l a n n i n g concept . The growth of the d i v i s i o n and d i f f u s i o n of i t s a c t i v i t i e s seem to have negated the s p i r i t which c h a r a c t e r i z e d the i n t e n t and e a r l y implemen-t a t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g . In a d d i t i o n to the l o s s of i t s i n i t i a l m o t i v a t i o n , Area P l a n n i n g i s now at a c r i t i c a l p o i n t i n time because of the c a n c e l l a t i o n of f u t u r e NIP programs and changes i n the RRAP approach by the f e d e r a l government. A r e s t r u c t u r i n g or replacement of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n w i l l be r e q u i r e d to e s t a b l i s h again a l o c a l p l a n n i n g approach as a p a r t of more e f f e c t i v e and democrat ic governance of the c i t y . V TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of Methodology . 4 . .Organizat ion of the Thes is 6 CHAPTER 2: AREA PLANNING IN ITS HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT 16 Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver 18 CHAPTER 3 : AREA PLANNING IN ITS THEORETICAL CONTEXT 30 CHAPTER 4 : THREE OPERATIONAL MODELS 53 The NIP Program 54 The LAP Program 58 In -house A c t i v i t i e s 61 CHAPTER 5 : DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH 64 Data Sources D e s c r i p t i o n 64 C o l l e c t i o n of Data 68 Use of Data and Pro Forma Ana lyses 75 CHAPTER 6 : THE FINDINGS 77 I n t r o d u c t i o n 77 The S i t e O f f i c e L o c a t i o n 80 P l a n n e r s ' P e r c e p t i o n of T h e i r Own Role 86 O b j e c t i v e s 96 Dura t ion of an Area P l a n n i n g Program 102 Community P a r t i c i p a t i o n 106 Other C i t y Departments and the B u r e a u c r a t i c Role . . . . 114 P o l i t i c i a n s 122 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS 128 BIBLIOGRAPHY 136 APPENDIX I: PLANNER'S INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 142 APPENDIX I I : DIRECTOR'S INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 144 APPENDIX I I I : CIVIC DEPARTMENTS INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 145 v i Page APPENDIX IV: ALDERMEN'S INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 146 APPENDIX V: COMMITTEE MEMBER'S INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 147 APPENDIX V I : LIST OF BRIEFS AND SUBMISSIONS BY CITIZENS, CITIZEN GROUPS, AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES IN RESPONSE TO THE "LOCAL AREA PLANNING REVIEW" 148 v i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My thanks go to Henry Hightower f o r h i s p a t i e n c e , constant support and encouragement; to George Gray f o r h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n i n the moments of major need. Lyn .Howes a l s o deserves the c h i e f c r e d i t f o r going beyond the c a l l o f her d u t i e s i n h e l p i n g me w i t h t h i s work. Th is t h e s i s i s t h e i r s as much as mine i n the measure i n which they c o n t r i b u t e d w i t h t h e i r comments and gu idance . I must a l s o r e c o r d my g r a t i t u d e f o r a l l the people i n t e r v i e w e d , i n p a r t i c u l a r the s t a f f i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n f o r t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n to making t h i s an e n r i c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e . F i n a l l y to Bev f o r b e a r i n g w i t h me. 1 . CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION Area P l a n n i n g i s one of the major i n n o v a t i o n s i n urban p l a n n i n g i n Canada i n recent y e a r s . Many observers see t h i s new approach to p l a n n i n g s e t t i n g a t r e n d f o r the f u t u r e of urban p l a n n i n g . Where i s t h i s t rend lead ing? What are i t s consequences f o r the p l a n n e r and the p l a n n i n g p r o f e s s i o n ? These are the two major u n d e r l y i n g ques t ions t h i s t h e s i s w i l l e x p l o r e . A s t rong i n d i c a t i o n that something i s changing i n the p l a n n i n g p r o f e s -s i o n comes from the recent f i n d i n g s of Reg Lang and John Page about the e d u c a t i o n a l background of Canadian p lanners (Page and Lang , 1977) . Acco rd ing to the r e s u l t s of t h i s r e s e a r c h , among those p lanners w i t h an undergraduate degree, 64% of the ones w i t h degrees i n a r c h i t e c t u r e and e n g i n e e r i n g r e c e i v e d t h e i r degrees be fo re 1966 and on ly 36% a f t e r 1966. By c o n t r a s t , 74% of t h i s group hav ing geography degrees r e c e i v e d them a f t e r 1966 and o n l y 26% befo re 1966. I t becomes easy to f i n d a r e l a t i o n between the changing background of the p lanners and the more s o c i a l l y o r i e n t e d approach to p l a n n i n g found i n Area P l a n n i n g . I t was n e c e s s a r y , f o r the purpose of t h i s m a s t e r ' s t h e s i s , to l i m i t the scope of the research to a p a r t i c u l a r aspect of the problem and a s p e c i f i c g e o g r a p h i c a l a r e a . I t was f e l t that the most important aspect of the Area P l a n n i n g process to be researched, g iven h i s / h e r c e n t r a l p o s i t i o n i n the p r o c e s s , i s the p lanner and the v a r i o u s c o n f l i c t i n g r o l e s he/she i s asked to p l a y . Vancouver was s e l e c t e d as the n a t u r a l s e t t i n g f o r the r e s e a r c h f o r s e v e r a l reasons : - I t was one of the f i r s t Canadian c i t i e s i n which Area P l a n n i n g was i n t r o d u c e d . - I t was a c c e s s i b l e and because of i t s s i z e cou ld set a t rend f o r o ther 2. c i t i e s . - The D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g i s p u b l i c l y known as a suppor ter of Area P l a n n i n g . - The researcher had spent the p r e v i o u s summer (1977) working f o r the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n i n Vancouver. Together w i t h a f i r s t hand l o o k at the s i t u a t i o n , t h i s f a c t would f a c i l i t a t e the access to i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g Area P l a n n i n g and the people i n v o l v e d i n i t . The l i m i t e d amount of research and l i t e r a t u r e on the f i e l d of Area P l a n n i n g was a s t rong i n c e n t i v e f o r conduct ing t h i s s tudy . I t a l s o encouraged an open-ended approach to the r e s e a r c h w i t h g e n e r a l l y e x p l o r a t o r y i n t e n t i o n s . The expected r e s u l t of t h i s approach was a set o f c o n c l u s i o n s d e f i n i n g p o t e n t i a l areas of study r a t h e r than g i v i n g j u s t dogmatic d e f i n i t i o n s of the present s i t u a t i o n . The research was conducted with.' -the area p lanner i n mind and the c o n c l u s i o n s are in tended to s t i m u l a t e a d i s c u s s i o n on the present s t a t e of the a r t , o f f e r i n g to the p lanners an a l t e r n a t i v e p o i n t of v iew on which to b u i l d a process of c o n s t r u c t i v e s e l f - c r i t i c i s m . I t i s important to d e f i n e at the outset of t h i s p r e s e n t a t i o n the meaning of some of the d e f i n i t i o n s f r e q u e n t l y used throughout the t h e s i s i n order to avo id p o s s i b l e con fus ion f o r the r e a d e r . Some terms such as "Area P l a n n i n g " have been g iven a s p e c i f i c meaning i n the context of t h i s t h e s i s to make i t p o s s i b l e to use them as t e c h n i c a l terms w i t h the same meaning throughout the t h e s i s . P l a n n i n g Department - One of the departments i n the e x e c u t i v e branch of the Vancouver c i t y government, which i s o rgan ized i n t o f i v e major d i v i s i o n s of which Area P l a n n i n g i s one. Area P l a n n i n g - W i l l be used to r e f e r to a c t i v i t i e s of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n i n c l u d i n g the West End L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g program and to 3 . a v o i d con fus ion statements that do not r e f e r e x c l u s i v e l y to tha t u n i t of the Vancouver government w i l l use the terms "community p l a n n i n g " or "neighbourhood p l a n n i n g " . L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g - Used o n l y i n some quotes or r e f e r e n c e s i s a term almost in te rchangeab le w i t h Area P l a n n i n g . NIP - Neighbourhood Improvement Program, i n t r o d u c e d by the f e d e r a l govern -ment through the N a t i o n a l Housing Act (Sec t ion 2 7 . 1 to 2 7 . 7 ) , funded by three l e v e l s of government and implemented i n the C i t y of Vancouver by the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n of the C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. LAP - L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g program, i n the context of the t h e s i s the acronym i s on ly used to i n d i c a t e those Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n programs which C i t y P l a n n i n g d e f i n e s as LAP. S i t e O f f i c e - O f f i c e l o c a t e d i n the community; p lanner and s t a f f implement-i n g NIP and LAP operate from s i t e o f f i c e s . In -house P l a n n e r - P lanner work ing f o r the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n from C i t y H a l l . Area P lanners - Inc lude a l l p l a n n e r s work ing f o r the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n independent ly from t h e i r l o c a t i o n . C a p i t a l i z e d terms w i l l be used f o r o f f i c i a l l y recogn i zed u n i t s , t h e i r f u n c t i o n s and p e r s o n n e l , and lower case terms l i k e "neighbourhood p l a n n i n g " are used i n t h e i r g e n e r i c meaning. For the purpose of t h i s t h e s i s Area P l a n n i n g i s d e f i n e d as "a^process to f a c i l i t a t e p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n p l a n n i n g " . The development of Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver can be b e t t e r understood by r e f e r r i n g to the 1973 r e p o r t t i t l e d " L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g " . T h i s i s the o n l y document c l e a r l y s t a t i n g the purposes of Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver. A l though the repor t was never endorsed by C o u n c i l , the author of the repor t was chosen to 4. implement the f i r s t Area P l a n n i n g program i n K i t s i l a n o . From there on , Area P l a n n i n g programs were based on what can be d e f i n e d as " o r a l t r a d i t i o n " w i t h new programs f o l l o w i n g the s teps of the ones that preceded them. In t h i s context i t becomes d i f f i c u l t to c l e a r l y d e f i n e Area P l a n n i n g , i t s purpose and o b j e c t i v e s . To understand what Area P l a n n i n g i s i n Vancouver, one must r e f e r to i t s h i s t o r i c a l development as d e s c r i b e d i n the next c h a p t e r , the th ree o p e r a t i o n a l models d e s c r i b i n g the Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s i n Vancouver and the i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s ob ta ined i n the i n t e r v i e w s w i l l c o n t r i b u t e to present a c l e a r p i c t u r e of Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver. STATEMENT OF METHODOLOGY The m e t h o d o l o g i c a l approach used i n t h i s research i s based on the s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w techn ique . Th is approach has been s u c c e s s f u l l y adopted i n the two major works p i o n e e r i n g research i n the f i e l d of n e i g h -bourhood p l a n n i n g and i t was f e l t that t h i s was the most a p p r o p r i a t e technique to use i n e x p l o r i n g t h i s r e l a t i v e l y new p l a n n i n g f i e l d . Among o ther reasons , the p r e v i o u s exper ience of the r e s e a r c h e r work ing i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n made the p lanners more a c c e s s i b l e f o r i n t e r v i e w and thus encouraged the i n t e r v i e w approach. The i n f o r m a t i o n c o l l e c t e d i n the i n t e r v i e w was to be compared w i t h the m a t e r i a l p r e v i o u s l y c o l l e c t e d by a n a l y z i n g a l l documents tha t were made a v a i l a b l e . The study of documents and e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e on Area P l a n n i n g and the r o l e of the p lanner was.; a l s o to form the b a s i s f o r the theory suppor t ing the r e s e a r c h . The i n f o r m a l approach adopted i n t h i s research has made p o s s i b l e the e x p l o r a -t i o n , us ing a v a r i e t y of t e c h n i q u e s , of a l l avenues that cou ld l e a d to a b e t t e r unders tanding of the r o l e of the p l a n n e r i n Area P l a n n i n g . 5. The f i r s t stage of the r e s e a r c h i n c l u d e d the study of a l l documents a v a i l a b l e i n c l u d i n g newspaper c l i p p i n g s , minutes from Area P l a n n i n g committee meet ings , P l a n n i n g Department p u b l i c a t i o n s and the Area P l a n n i n g f i l e s to which the researcher had a c c e s s . Th is i n f o r m a t i o n i n t e g r a t e d w i t h the e x i s t i n g Area P l a n n i n g l i t e r a t u r e and the r o l e theory was used to d e f i n e the t h e o r e t i c a l model on which the i n t e r v i e w s were based . At the second stage of the r e s e a r c h area p lanners and o ther p a r t i c i -pants i n the Area P l a n n i n g process were i n t e r v i e w e d . The i n t e r v i e w format was s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t f o r d i f f e r e n t groups of a c t o r s but was designed to cover common areas on which the research was based . As to the community members p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the p rocess i t was f e l t that the s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w was inadequate to cover the great v a r i e t y of t h e i r p o s i t i o n s and o p i n i o n s , t h e r e f o r e p u b l i c statements from community p a r t i c i p a n t s were a l s o c o l l e c t e d at a recent conference of NIP and LAP committees. Furthermore, the L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g rev iew p r e s e n t l y conducted by the P l a n n i n g Department has encouraged more r e a c t i o n s and comments from people i n v o l v e d i n Area P l a n n i n g , these comment-responses were made a v a i l a b l e to the r e s e a r c h e r . By u s i n g t h i s approach the number and v a r i e t y of p o s i t i o n s presented were much l a r g e r than would ever have been p o s s i b l e by l i m i t i n g the research to the s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w . One s e r i o u s drawback to the s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w technique i s that i t i s wide open to m a n i p u l a t i o n by the researcher i n both the range o f ques t ions asked and i n the s e l e c t i o n of answers presented i n the a n a l y s i s . To compensate f o r t h i s weakness i n the r e s e a r c h , whenever p o s s i b l e feedback was s o l i c i t e d from people c l o s e to Area P l a n n i n g about the process f o l l o w e d and the assumptions made. These contac ts i n c l u d e d a cont inuous d i a l o g u e . w i t h the t h e s i s a d v i s o r , and i n f o r m a l conversa t ions 6. w i t h area p lanners and other people a c t i v e l y i n v o l v e d i n the Area P l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The advantage w i t h the technique used i s that i t a l lowed the e x p l o r a -t i o n of t h i s f i e l d of research from a more r e a l i s t i c p e r s p e c t i v e l e a v i n g the research c o n s t a n t l y open to new suggest ions and p o s s i b i l i t i e s . A l l i n t e r v i e w s were t a p e - r e c o r d e d and subsequent ly typed to form the re ference m a t e r i a l f o r the t h e s i s . The f i n a l r e s u l t i s the comparison of the f i n d i n g s w i t h the t h e o r e t i c a l model used to t e s t the accuracy of the hypotheses conta ined i n the model and then to move to a h igher l e v e l of a n a l y s i s of the Area P l a n n i n g s i t u a t i o n i n Vancouver and the p o s i t i o n of the area p lanner i n p a r t i c u l a r . ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS The body of the t h e s i s can be d i v i d e d i n t o two p a r t s , the f i r s t d e s c r i b i n g the context i n which the research i s conducted and the second c o n t a i n i n g the p r e s e n t a t i o n and d i s c u s s i o n of the f i n d i n g s . T h i s i n t r o -duc t ion i s in tended to o f f e r a summary of the contents of the d i f f e r e n t chapters i n the t h e s i s as a guide f o r the reader approaching t h i s s tudy . The f i r s t of the two p a r t s of the t h e s i s c o n t a i n s an i n t r o d u c t o r y c h a p t e r , a b r i e f h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e on Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver, a chapter d i s c u s s i n g the theory on which t h i s study i s b a s e d , the p r e s e n t a -t i o n of the three o p e r a t i o n a l models adopted i n the research to i n t e r p r e t the r e a l i t y of Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver, and the chapter c o n c l u d i n g t h i s f i r s t h a l f of the t h e s i s e x p l a i n s the methodology adopted i n the r e s e a r c h . The i n t r o d u c t o r y chapter of which t h i s s e c t i o n i s a p a r t , has a l r e a d y e x p l a i n e d the purpose of the r e s e a r c h , the expected f i n d i n g s and p o s s i b l e c o n c l u s i o n s together w i t h a statement of the methodology used and 7. a d e s c r i p t i o n of how the t h e s i s has been deve loped. The f o l l o w i n g chapter b r i e f l y p resents Area P l a n n i n g i n i t s h i s t o r i c a l context and development, e x p l a i n i n g how Area P l a n n i n g o r i g i n a t e d from the demand f o r c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n that was c rea ted by the p u b l i c movement i n o p p o s i t i o n to urban renewa l . The e a r l y s e v e n t i e s saw a change i n the m u n i c i p a l p o l i t i c a l scene i n Toronto , Vancouver and other Canadian c i t i e s and w i t h i t saw the i n t r o d u c t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g as an i n n o v a t i v e and more humane approach to p l a n n i n g . In Vancouver the new p o l i t i c a l atmosphere was c rea ted by The E l e c t o r s A c t i o n Movement (TEAM) when that p a r t y swept to power i n 1972, w i t h Area P l a n n i n g as p a r t o f t h e i r p o l i t i c a l p l a t f o r m . The h i s t o r i c a l development of Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver f o l l o w s the f i r s t s teps i n the West End e x p e r i e n c e , the a r r i v a l of Ray Spaxman, a suppor ter of Area P l a n n i n g as new P l a n n i n g D i r e c t o r , h i s r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the P l a n n i n g Department w i t h the i n t r o d u c t i o n of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n and f i n a l l y the advent of the f e d e r a l NIP program. In a d d i t i o n there i s a d e s c r i p t i o n of NIP and LAP programs as w e l l as i n - h o u s e a c t i v i t i e s from 1974 to the p resent t i m e . The t h i r d chapter p resents the t h e o r e t i c a l context of the r e s e a r c h . A f t e r a summary and d i s c u s s i o n o f the l i t e r a t u r e r e l a t e d to r o l e theory and the v a r i o u s r o l e s the p lanner p l a y s , three d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s i n which area p lanners operate are d e s c r i b e d . These are three v a r i a t i o n s on the t h e o r e t i c a l model . Role theory d e f i n e s the p o s i t i o n of the p lanner as the r e s u l t of c o n f l i c t s among d i f f e r e n t r o l e s . The d i f f e r e n t r o l e s the p lanner i s asked to p l a y are cons idered i n the contex t i n which the p l a n n e r c o p e r a t e s . The f i r s t v a r i a b l e i n the model i s the l o c a t i o n of the p l a n n e r ; Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver i s done i n s i t e o f f i c e s as w e l l as 8. from c i t y h a l l . L o c a t i o n has an e f f e c t on how the p lanner o p e r a t e s , and a l s o has some consequences f o r the d i r e c t i o n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n i s t a k i n g . The second impor tant element of the model has been d e f i n e d as the s t r u c t u r e of the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . S t r u c t u r e r e s u l t s from a combina-t i o n of d i f f e r e n t f a c t o r s and best de f ines the s i t u a t i o n i n which the p lanner o p e r a t e s . The elements of t h i s s t r u c t u r e a r e : the scope of the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , r e s i d e n t s ' i n p u t , f i n a n c i n g of the program, g u i d e l i n e s f o r the program and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y of the p l a n n e r . L o c a t i o n and s t r u c t u r e help to d e f i n e the context i n which the p lanner o p e r a t e s ; i n t h i s context there are s e v e r a l p a r t i c i p a n t s to the p l a n n i n g process that c o n t r i b u t e w i t h t h e i r d i f f e r e n t e x p e c t a t i o n s to c o n f l i c t i n g d e f i n i t i o n s of the p l a n n e r ' s p o s i t i o n i n the p r o c e s s . Because of the p a r t they p l a y i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , these p a r t i c i p a n t s are c a l l e d r o l e d e f i n e r s . T h e i r d i f f e r e n t e x p e c t a t i o n s are presented and the r e s u l t of the c o n f l i c t c reated by t h e i r e x p e c t a t i o n s a n a l y z e d . The f i r s t of the r o l e d e f i n e r s presented i s the p lanner w i t h h i s / h e r needs as an i n d i v i d u a l and a p r o f e s s i o n a l . The second r o l e d e f i n e r s , the P l a n n i n g Department, are shown to have p o s s i b l e areas of c o n f l i c t w i t h Area P l a n n i n g . P o l i t i c i a n s and t h e i r r e l a t i o n w i t h the area p lanner are d i s c u s s e d n e x t . Another r o l e d e f i n e r i s the l o c a l community. I t s e x p e c t a t i o n s are d i s c u s s e d together w i t h the p l a n n e r s ' r o l e as advocate f o r the communities i n which they work. The oppos i te of the advocate r o l e i s the b u r e a u c r a t i c r o l e encouraged by other c i v i c departments a c t i n g as d e f i n e r s of the p l a n n e r ' s r o l e . Th is chapter concludes w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n of the c o n f l i c t s c r e a t e d by a l l these d i f f e r e n t d e f i n i t i o n s of the area p l a n n e r ' s r o l e , and the p o s i t i o n the p lanner can chose when f a c i n g the c o n f l i c t . 9. The three o p e r a t i o n a l models i l l u s t r a t i n g d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s i n which the p lanner operates are i n d i v i d u a l l y d e s c r i b e d i n the nex t chapte r ; they are d e f i n e d as NIP and LAP programs and i n - h o u s e a c t i v i t i e s . The three models are a l s o presented g r a p h i c a l l y i n Appendix . T h i s s e p a r a t i o n of the p l a n n e r ' s a c t i v i t i e s i n three c a t e g o r i e s h e l p s to understand b e t t e r the p o s i t i o n of the p lanner i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The same p lanner may be i n v o l v e d i n a c t i v i t i e s that f a l l i n more than one ca tegory , and i n that case the s e p a r a t i o n i n d i f f e r e n t c a t e g o r i e s h e l p s to understand the p l a n n e r ' s r e a c t i o n to d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s . The p r e s e n t -a t i o n of the methodology c h a p t e r , which concludes the f i r s t p a r t of the t h e s i s , beg ins w i t h a d e s c r i p t i o n of the v a r i a b l e s o p e r a t i n g i n the t h e o r e t i c a l model , f o l l o w s a d e s c r i p t i o n of data s o u r c e s , o r i g i n of the i n f o r m a t i o n , how the i n f o r m a t i o n i s o b t a i n e d , d e s c r i b i n g i n d e t a i l the technique used i n the s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w used i n the r e s e a r c h . F i n a l l y there i s an e x p l a n a t i o n of how the data ob ta ined are used and a n a l y z e d . The second h a l f of the t h e s i s con ta ins the p r e s e n t a t i o n and d i s c u s s i o n of the f i n d i n g s . The m a t e r i a l c o l l e c t e d i n the i n t e r v i e w s i s presented here and compared w i t h other r e l e v a n t i n f o r m a t i o n ob ta ined from v a r i o u s documents, newspaper a r t i c l e s and o ther sources of i n f o r m a t i o n . For c l a r i t y of p r e s e n t a t i o n and to h e l p the researcher to s y s t e m a t i c a l l y o rgan i ze the m a t e r i a l , the i n f o r m a t i o n i s ^ p r e s e n t e d under d i f f e r e n t headings r e p r e s e n t i n g areas of i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The p r e s e n t a t i o n h i g h l i g h t s those p o i n t s tha t are supported by the f i n d i n g s from other areas of i n v e s t i g a t i o n . By i n d i c a t i n g the l i n k s between these f i n d i n g s i t i s p o s s i b l e to i l l u s t r a t e how and why c e r t a i n c o n c l u s i o n s are reached . The c o n c l u s i o n s presented at the end are o n l y some p o s s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s 10. of what i s happening i n Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver. The ex tent to which the m a t e r i a l p resented covers the area researched and the way i n which i t i s presented should a l l o w the reader to reach d i f f e r e n t c o n c l u s i o n s based on the same i n f o r m a t i o n p r e s e n t e d . Th is i s because of the e x p l o r a t o r y c h a r a c t e r of t h i s research in tended to open new avenues and to s t i m u l a t e d i s c u s s i o n r a t h e r than j u s t to o f f e r one of the p o s s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the p o s i t i o n of the area p lanner today i n Vancouver. The p r e s e n t a t i o n of f i n d i n g s begins w i th a d i s c u s s i o n of the f u n c t i o n and importance of the s i t e o f f i c e u n d e r l i n i n g i t s importance as the most v i s i b l e of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Area P l a n n i n g . P lanners l o c a t e d i n s i t e o f f i c e s can i d e n t i f y b e t t e r w i t h the l o c a l a rea i n which they are w o r k i n g , and be i d e n t i f i e d by o thers w i t h t h e i r a r e a s . The l o c a t i o n i n the community has s e v e r a l p o s i t i v e aspects as u n d e r l i n e d by p lanners d u r i n g the i n t e r v i e w . I t a l s o puts p lanners i n a p o s i t i o n d i f f e r e n t from c i t y h a l l as they are on t h e i r own, h e l d r e s p o n s i b l e by c i t y bureaucracy f o r what i s happening i n the community. The American l i t e r a t u r e (Needleman i n p a r t i c u l a r ) sees the community p lanner as an advocate f o r the l o c a l community. The area p lanner i n Vancouver has never r e a l l y operated as an advocate f o r the community and i s p r e s e n t l y moving f u r t h e r away from that r o l e to take a p o s i t i o n that can bes t be des ignated as d e c e n t r a l i z e d b u r e a u c r a t . The reasons f o r t h i s can be found i n the b a s i c d i f f e r e n c e s i n soc io -economic and r a c i a l c o n d i t i o n s between Canada and the U . S . , the recent Canadian r e c e s s i o n r e s u l t i n g i n a more r e a c t i o n a r y a t t i t u d e i n the p u b l i c , the type of programs implemented by the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n (NIP i n p a r t i c u l a r ) , and the d i v i s i o n of Area P l a n n i n g i n t o the in -house group and the group of p lanners work ing i n the s i t e 11. o f f i c e . The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the i n - h o u s e a c t i v i t i e s are d i f f e r e n t from what i s done i n the s i t e o f f i c e and the i n - h o u s e p lanner g e n e r a l l y l a c k s the contact w i t h the p u b l i c t h a t rep resents the key element of Area P l a n n i n g . The development of the i n - h o u s e group to i t s p resent s t r e n g t h has l a r g e l y c o n t r i b u t e d to change the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n from a s m a l l group of young p lanners aimed by common i d e a l s about t h e f f u t u r e of the c i t y to a l a r g e group where the l a c k of unders tanding about i n d i v i d u a l p o s i t i o n s has r e s u l t e d i n l i t t l e support f o r the a rea p lanner from the d i v i s i o n . The p l a n n e r s ' p e r c e p t i o n s of t h e i r own r o l e i s d i s c u s s e d next together w i t h t h e i r s u p e r v i s o r s ' d e f i n i t i o n s of a good area p l a n n e r . Area p lanners see themselves and are seen at the cent re of c o n f l i c t i n g e x p e c t a t i o n s coming from d i f f e r e n t s o u r c e s . In such a p o s i t i o n the p lanners are r e q u i r e d to use s k i l l s that are not par t of the p l a n n e r s ' t r a i n i n g , they must be the c e n t r a l a c t o r and at the same time d i r e c t a l l the o ther p a r t i -c i p a n t s i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The p lanner i s expected to be p o l i t i c a l l y a s t u t e , so as to a v o i d open c o n f l i c t between d i f f e r e n t e x p e c t a t i o n s . Being p o l i t i c a l l y a s t u t e a l s o means aware of the h idden agendas that v a r i o u s p a r t i c i p a n t s b r i n g to the meet ings , and b e i n g ab le to develop the p l a n n i n g process i n the middle o f these c o n f l i c t i n g e x p e c t a t i o n s . In p a r t i c u l a r , the p lanner must be aware of the p o l i t i c a l p r e f e r e n c e s of i n d i v i d u a l aldermen i n order to be ab le to p r e d i c t whether they w i l l support the p lanner on the i n d i v i d u a l i s s u e . In t h i s s i t u a t i o n , r a t h e r than t a k i n g a s t r o n g p o l i t i c a l s t a n d , the a rea p l a n n e r s i n Vancouver re t reat , ; toward a.-. more b u r e a u c r a t i c r o l e c o n s i d e r i n g t h e i r a c t i v i t y j u s t a j o b . In t h i s way the p l a n n e r can deny the f r u s t r a t i o n s caused by the i m p o s s i b i l i t y of p l e a s i n g everyone. From a s i t u a t i o n i n which area p lanners were f i g h t i n g 12. f o r t h e i r i d e a l s , they are now j u s t work ing f o r a s a l a r y c o n s i d e r i n g t h e i r f r u s t r a t i n g p o s i t i o n j u s t p a r t of the job and as such to be l e f t i n the o f f i c e w i t h a l l the c o l o u r e d maps when they go home. The importance assumed by the NIP program among the Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s has c o n t r i b u t e d t o . put emphasis on the r o l e of the p lanner as a d m i n i s t r a t o r of funds a l l o c a t e d by three d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of government. A l s o , the p a r t i c u l a r c o n d i t i o n s i n which NIP i s a d m i n i s t e r e d ( s t a b l e r e s i d e n t i a l areas) has f o r c e d the p lanner i n t o a r o l e of community worker educat ing the community about the c i v i c p r o c e s s . Community development i s one of the most important o b j e c t i v e s pursued by the p lanner implementing NIP from a s i t e o f f i c e . Other o b j e c t i v e s the area p lanners are p u r s u i n g are not as c l e a r to them or o t h e r s . Th is l a c k of c l a r i t y about the purpose of Area P l a n n i n g has h i s t o r i c a l o r i g i n s . The i n i t i a l repor t i n t r o d u c i n g Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver was not f o r m a l l y endorsed by c o u n c i l . The newly c rea ted Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n had no c l e a r d i r e c t i o n from the b e g i n n i n g ; under these c i rcumstances i t has been easy f o r NIP and i t s g u i d e l i n e s to become a model f o r Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s i n s i t e o f f i c e s . At the same t ime the i n - h o u s e Area P l a n n i n g group l o o k i n g f o r o b j e c t i v e s found the b u r e a u c r a t i c model immediate ly a v a i l a b l e . In t h i s context LAP has become " a program whose i d e a l s are o b j e c t i v e s a f t e r which you r u n " . One of these i d e a l s i s s o c i a l e q u i t y . Many of the area p lanners f e e l tha t t h e i r communities have been t r e a t e d u n f a i r l y i n the pas t and tha t the main reason f o r t h e i r presence i n the a rea i s to c o r r e c t t h i s imbalance by g i v i n g those communities the " h i s t o r i c a l p a y - o f f " . T h i s concept of e q u i t y c o n f l i c t s w i t h the approach used by o ther departments which cons ider e q u i t a b l e , the even d i s t r i b u t i o n of resources independent ly of what has happened i n the pas t and thus p e r p e t u a t i n g the p resent £ 13. d i s p a r i t i e s . There i s a g e n e r a l consensus among a l l people i n v o l v e d i n Area P l a n n i n g that a t ime l i m i t has a b e n e f i c i a l e f f e c t on the p l a n n i n g program. P o l i t i c i a n s l i k e to move on to another area to get more exposure , o ther c i v i c departments b e l i e v e t h a t a t ime l i m i t e l i m i n a t e s end less d i s c u s s i o n s and the community i t s e l f l i k e s to have some dead l ines so that t h i n g s can be done. The major n e g a t i v e e f f e c t a s s o c i a t e d w i t h d e a d l i n e s i s that they g ive to the p u b l i c the f a l s e impress ion that p l a n n i n g has a p o i n t at which i t beg ins and a p o i n t at which i t ends. NIP w i t h i t s c l e a r cut d e a d l i n e s has l a r g e l y c o n t r i b u t e d to c r e a t i n g t h i s i m p r e s s i o n . The t ime c o n s t r a i n t s a l s o c o n t r i b u t e to f o r c i n g the area p lanner i n t o the p o s i t i o n of community worker . The main concern of the area p lanners i s to prepare the community f o r when the program w i l l be over and the process must be cont inued by l o c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s . Community p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s what brought Area P l a n n i n g i n t o b e i n g and makes i t d i f f e r e n t from o ther Area P l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s . Many of the problems the p lanner encounters are a l s o a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p u b l i c involvement i n p l a n n i n g . The r a t i o n a l e f o r hav ing the p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n p l a n n i n g i s to make the process more humane; the p lanner becomes a person d e a l i n g w i t h o ther people concerned about i s s u e s a f f e c t i n g t h e i r l i v e s . T h i s concern i s t r a n s f e r r e d from the p lanner to the c i t y bureaucracy and p o l i t i c i a n s . At the same time the members of the community i n v o l v e d i n the process become f a m i l i a r w i t h the i n t r i c a c i e s of c i t y h a l l . For the in -house group, the contac ts w i t h the p u b l i c are n o t i c e a b l y reduced. Th is a f f e c t s t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s and i n d i r e c t l y the d i r e c t i o n of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . The p a r t i c i p a t i o n of the p u b l i c i s not seen p o s i t i v e l y by the m a j o r i t y o f the c i v i c departments. I t i s t ime-consuming and the o ther departments 14. do not have t ime and resources to go a long w i t h i t . Fur thermore , they are not i n t e r e s t e d i n r e s i d e n t s ' o p i n i o n s because they c o n s i d e r themselves the exper ts s u p p o r t i n g c o u n c i l i n making d e c i s i o n s . T h e i r b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e s are not prepared to d e a l w i t h the involvement of c i t i z e n s i n the d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s . Some aldermen see Area P l a n n i n g as t h r e a t e n i n g t h e i r p o l i t i c a l a u t h o r i t y and want the p l a n n i n g committee to remain i n an a d v i s o r y c a p a c i t y . Area P l a n n i n g i s a l s o a s s o c i a t e d by some w i t h the r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e of the c i t y i n t o a ward system. Th is causes a negat i ve r e a c t i o n toward Area P l a n n i n g from some members of c o u n c i l . T h i s n e g a t i v e a t t i t u d e , based on f e a r s more than on a p o l i t i c a l e v a l u a t i o n of the r e a l i t y , has improved s i n c e s e v e r a l aldermen have been ass igned a l o c a l a rea w i t h which to act as l i a i s o n . Th is has c o n t r i b u t e d to making i n d i v i d u a l aldermen more f a m i l i a r w i t h Area P l a n n i n g and as a r e s u l t t h e i r a t t i t u d e has n o t i c e -a b l y changed; they a p p r e c i a t e t h e f f u n c t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g and use the feedback they o b t a i n from the l o c a l community through the p r o c e s s . To take advantage of the s i t u a t i o n , aldermen expect the p lanner to be " p o l i t i c a l l y a s t u t e " by a c t i n g as a b u f f e r p r e v e n t i n g p o l i t i c a l l y unpopular i s s u e s from r e a c h i n g c o u n c i l . The p lanners i n s i t e o f f i c e s are not cons idered s imp ly exper ts c o n t r i b u t i n g to the work ing of the c i t y bureaucracy , they are seen i n a p o l i t i c a l p o s i t i o n because the r e s u l t s of t h e i r a c t i o n s are immediate ly p o l i t i c a l . The area p l a n n e r s are d i r e c t l y accountab le to t h e i r s u p e r i o r s and to c o u n c i l but there are a l s o d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of a c c o u n t a b i l i t y to a l l the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the Area P l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , i n p a r t i c u l a r the l o c a l community and the,>planriing committee r e p r e s e n t i n g i t . In a d d i t i o n , the p lanner implementing NIP i s a l s o accountable to s e n i o r l e v e l s of government, i n p a r t i c u l a r the f e d e r a l , and i s faced at t imes w i t h the more or l e s s 15. e x p l i c i t requests by a l o c a l M.P. o r M .L .A . to support a pet p r o j e c t . The f i n d i n g s presented i n the second p a r t of the t h e s i s i l l u s t r a t e d i f f e r e n t aspects of the s i t u a t i o n i n which the p lanner o p e r a t e s . i;The f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s d i s c u s s the c o n f l i c t among r o l e s the area p lanners face i n t h e i r working exper ience and i n d i c a t e how they so lve t h e i r c o n f l i c t and d e f i n e t h e i r p o s i t i o n i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The a rea p lanner i s l e f t a lone i n the s i t e o f f i c e to d e a l w i t h the l o c a l community from an " independent" p o s i t i o n , w h i l e r e c e i v i n g l i t t l e support from the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . I t s h i s t o r i c a l development has brought Area P l a n n i n g to a p o i n t where i t s o b j e c t i v e s are not c l e a r l y s t a t e d . In t h i s s i t u a t i o n the t r a d i t i o n a l a rea p l a n n e r , young and i d e a l i s t i c , cannot bear a l l the p ressure a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a l l the d i f f e r e n t r o l e s he/she i s expected to p l a y . As t h i s type of area p lanner fades out a new type of p lanner i s a t t r a c t e d to Area P l a n n i n g , one that can bear the c o n f l i c t among r o l e s because he/she choses the b u r e a u c r a t i c r o l e and denies the ones c o n f l i c t i n g w i t h i t . In do ing t h i s the p lanners change the o r i g i n a l nature of Area P l a n n i n g , from an i n n o v a t i v e p l a n n i n g approach to a d e c e n t r a l i z e d b u r e a u c r a t i c approach to p l a n n i n g . 16. CHAPTER 2 AREA PLANNING IN ITS HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT The concept of Area P l a n n i n g can be b e t t e r understood i f seen i n i t s h i s t o r i c a l c o n t e x t . T h i s survey of the events that preceded and i n t r o d u c e d Area P l a n n i n g i n Canada and i n Vancouver i n c l u d e s a b r i e f a n a l y s i s of urban renewal i n Canada i n the l a t e s i x t i e s , i t s f a i l u r e , and a subsequent change of a t t i t u d e on the p a r t of the governments. In the s i x t i e s the Nor th American answer to urban b l i g h t was Urban Renewal. Through t h i s program e n t i r e neighbourhoods were wiped out to c r e a t e the space f o r modern b u i l d i n g s and f a s t highways. G r a d u a l l y r e s i d e n t s of areas proposed f o r renewal began to r e a l i z e t h a t t h e i r l i f e s t y l e and the s o c i a l network on which i t was based were b e i n g dest royed a long w i t h t h e i r p l a c e of r e s i d e n c e . At t h i s p o i n t they began to o rgan i ze themselves to f i g h t urban renewa l . One can see a p a r a l l e l between the student movements of the l a t e s i x t i e s i n s i d e Nor th American u n i v e r s i t i e s and the^pppular movement.?against ur.bansrenewal:..with the consequent demand f o r c i t i z e n involvement i n p l a n n i n g . The same d i s t r u s t f o r a u t h o r i t y and e x p e r t i s e can be seen to l e a d people i n s e v e r a l Canadian c i t i e s to express t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n a g a i n s t d e c i s i o n s taken by p lanners w i t h d i s r e g a r d f o r the consequences of t h e i r a c t i o n s on the l i v e s of people a f f e c t e d by urban renewa l . The p o l i t i c a l es tab l i shment soon r e a l i z e d the need to modify i t s p u b l i c image i n order to r e g a i n the f a i l i n g c r e d i b i l i t y . A t the m u n i c i p a l l e v e l , p l a n n i n g departments w i t h t h e i r urban renewal programs were g e t t i n g the s p o t l i g h t and i t was f e l t tha t t h i s was the p lace to s t a r t making changes. The P l a n n i n g Department up to that p o i n t had been i n v o l v e d i n many of the most important i s s u e s as they were r e l a t e d to land use . I t t h e r e f o r e appeared that p l a n n i n g needed to be r e s t r u c t u r e d , i n order to respond to the demand f o r c i t i z e n involvement i n d e c i s i o n s r e l a t e d to urban l a n d u s e . L o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g was i n t r o d u c e d as a new approach to p l a n n i n g based on c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h the p u b l i c . Toronto was the f i r s t Canadian c i t y to i n t r o d u c e the l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g concept w i t h the T refan Court exper iment . Winnipeg in t roduced area or " d i s t r i c t " p l a n n i n g as par t of i t s U n i c i t y r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of 1971. In Vancouver the a rea p l a n n i n g concept became a r e a l i t y when The E l e c t o r s A c t i o n Movement (TEAM), the new " r e f o r m " p a r t y , swept to p o w e r . i n 1972. The reasons f o r i n t r o d u c i n g l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g i n v a r i o u s c i t i e s throughout Canada were s i m i l a r , as Anderson i l l u s t r a t e s w i t h the p o l i c y statements r e p o r t e d i n h i s a r t i c l e : Vancouver: L o c a l A rea P l a n n i n g can make p l a n n i n g more e f f e c t i v e by a l l o w i n g c i t i z e n s to i n f l u e n c e the deve lop -ment of t h e i r community. At the same time a two- way f l o w of communication i s e s t a b l i s h e d between c i t i z e n s and c i t y h a l l humanizing bureaucracy and making people aware of and i n v o l v e d i n c i v i c a f f a i r s . C i t y resources and problems shou ld be r e d i s t r i b u t e d among the neighbourhoods cor rect ing i ' . imbalances w i t h i n the c i t y . The L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g Program w i l l i n v o l v e i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h i n the community from the f i r s t s tages of p l a n p r e p a r a t i o n i n an e f f o r t to work on a p a r t i c i p a t o r y , c o - o p e r a t i v e b a s i s . A s t r o n g i n i t i a t i n g r o l e on the par t of the c i t y s t a f f w i l l guarantee the l e a d e r s h i p e s s e n t i a l to the p l a n n i n g i n L o c a l A r e a s . To ron to : The community i s encouraged to become i n v o l v e d i n the p l a n n i n g process from the beg inn ing through the Community P l a n n i n g Committees or Task Forces set up i n most areas w i t h the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of l o c a l r e s i d e n t s , b u s i n e s s and i n s t i t u t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s . Winn ipeg : What we are work ing t o w a r d s i i s .a system whereby a r e s i d e n t s ' group i s the c r e a t o r of a d i s t r i c t p l a n by de te rmin ing t h e i r own concerns , i s s u e s , p o l i c i e s . a n d programs f o r the implementat ion of the p o l i c i e s . (Anderson, 1977, 3 5 ) . 18. A genera l d e f i n i t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g i s : a p l a n n i n g process t h a t i n c l u d e s c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n de te rmin ing the f u t u r e o f t h e i r n e i g h -bourhood. To make t h i s process p o s s i b l e , a p lanner and suppor t ing c i t y s t a f f are ass igned to a des ignated a r e a . An o f f i c e i s opened i n the area and w h i l e the p l a n n i n g s t a f f are c o l l e c t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n about the c h a r a c t e r -i s t i c s of the a r e a , l o c a l r e s i d e n t s are encouraged to get i n v o l v e d . A committee of r e s i d e n t s i s e s t a b l i s h e d to d i s c u s s i s s u e s i n the a r e a , ana lyze the i n f o r m a t i o n , develop goals and propose a p l a n to c i t y c o u n c i l . A f t e r ref inement and approva l the p l a n i s ready to be implemented. The l e n g t h of the p l a n n i n g involvement i n the l o c a l a rea remains a p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n . On one s i d e the suppor ters of l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g would l i k e to see a permanent involvement at the l o c a l l e v e l , on the o ther s i d e the suppor ters of the s h o r t - t i m e involvement p o i n t to the f i n a n c i a l c o n s t r a i n t s and the advantages of r o t a t i n g the s t a f f around the c i t y to cover a l a r g e r number of neighbourhoods. The d e s i r e of c i t y c o u n c i l and other l e v e l s of government to make t h e i r presence more widespread by moving on to another l o c a l a rea a f t e r a shor t p e r i o d of t ime has tended to dominate. AREA PLANNING IN VANCOUVER Vancouver was one of the very f i r s t Canadian c i t i e s to r a i s e e f f e c t i v e o p p o s i t i o n to urban renewa l . The movement began i n S t ra thcona a f t e r the c i t y had a l r e a d y implemented Stage 1 and 2 , c l e a r i n g e leven b l o c k s and d i s p l a c i n g 2,000 St ra thcona r e s i d e n t s . Stage 3 , approved by c i t y c o u n c i l i n October I1968, was about to b u l l d o z e the r e s t of the d i s t r i c t . At t h i s po in t the main l y Chinese r e s i d e n t s were - m o b i l i z e d . T h e i r r e a c t i o n was made much more e f f e c t i v e by the s u r p r i s e i t c r e a t e d . The S t ra thcona 19. P r o p e r t y Owners and Tenants A s s o c i a t i o n (SPOTA) was formed i n December 1968 and soon became the v o i c e of more than 400 members anx ious to s tay i n the d i s t r i c t . A f r e e z i n g of f e d e r a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s to Urban Renewal saved S t ra thcona from immediate d e m o l i t i o n , a l l o w i n g the o p p o s i t i o n by SPOTA to ga in momentum. The newly appointed m i n i s t e r of h o u s i n g , i n a po l i cy^speech g iven a t a banquet o rgan ized by SPOTA i n h i s honour, a t t a c k e d the conven-t i o n a l wisdom of urban r e n e w a l , and then b l u n t l y informed c i t y c o u n c i l that S t ra thcona r e s i d e n t s must be i n v o l v e d i n any p l a n n i n g f o r the a r e a . What he proposed was a k i n d of p a r t i c i p a t i o n d i f f e r e n t from the " b l u e r i b b o n " type where bus iness l e a d e r s and o ther important p e r s o n a l i t i e s were i n v i t e d to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the p l a n n i n g process g i v i n g w i t h t h e i r presence the approva l of the community to -p lanning schemes. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that the S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department was e s t a b l i s h e d i n Vancouver the same year SPOTA was formed. The terms of r e f e r e n c e of the department were b r o a d , i n c l u d i n g hous ing and urban renewal together w i t h h e a l t h , e d u c a t i o n , employment, r e c r e a t i o n and w e l f a r e . The f u n c t i o n of the new department was to c o - o r d i n a t e the e f f o r t s of o ther c i v i c departments and v o l u n t a r y a g e n c i e s . S o c i a l P l a n n i n g e f f o r t s i n the f i r s t few years of o p e r a t i o n were concent ra ted on a t tempt ing to c o - o r d i n a t e s o c i a l s e r v i c e s on ar l o c a l a rea b a s i s . A f t e r b e i n g i n s t r u m e n t a l i n o r g a n i z i n g s o c i a l s e r v i c e teams on a l o c a l a rea b a s i s , the department moved away from the "community development" r o l e by s u b c o n t r a c t i n g that f u n c t i o n to a p r i v a t e s o c i a l agency, the Neighbourhood S e r v i c e s A s s o c i a t i o n . T h i s agency e s t a b l i s h e d a Community Development Department and made a v a i l a b l e to l o c a l areas of the c i t y a complement of community development workers . 2 0 . By l a t e 1970, the l o c a l a rea c o - o r d i n a t i o n approach to m u n i c i p a l s o c i a l p l a n n i n g i n Vancouver had v i r t u a l l y d i s a p p e a r e d . P a r t of t h i s change can be e x p l a i n e d w i t h the words of the D i r e c t o r of S o c i a l P l a n n i n g s t a t i n g that the department 's success a r o s e , not from s t a f f r o l e s as l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g c o - o r d i n a t o r s , but r a t h e r by s e l e c t i v e i n t e r v e n t i o n i n c i t y - w i d e i s s u e s . As a r e s u l t , the narrow approach, based on l o c a l a rea c o - o r d i n a t i o n of s o c i a l s e r v i c e s was abandoned i n favour of a s t r a t e g y of s e l e c t i v e i n t e r -v e n t i o n over a broader and much wider range of urban i s s u e s and concerns . In s p i t e of t h i s change i n d i r e c t i o n , the S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department e s t a b l i s h e d and c o - o r d i n a t e d the f i r s t L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g program i n Vancouver. The West End was i n f a c t a l a r g e enough arena to a t t r a c t the department 's a t t e n t i o n and a f t e r the i n i t i a l involvement of s o c i a l p l a n n e r s w i t h r e s i d e n t s , the program was i n i t i a t e d . The i n t r o d u c t i o n of the S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department was one i n d i c a t i o n of the t rend toward p l a n n i n g w i t h people r a t h e r than f o r peop le . Whi le the c i t y f a t h e r s were s t i l l m a i n t a i n i n g a r i g i d a t t i t u d e toward c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n , i t was ev ident tha t the ground was ready f o r some major i n n o v a t i o n s i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . A t l e a s t t h i s was ev ident to TEAM, the emerging " r e f o r m " p a r t y . TEAM made the l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g concept par t of the 1972 e l e c t i o n p l a t f o r m , won the e l e c t i o n and subsequent ly changed the head of the P l a n n i n g Department i m p o r t i n g Ray Spaxman, a s t r o n g suppor ter of l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g , from Toronto . Before Spaxman's a r r i v a l , the c i t y pressed ahead w i t h an exper imenta l Area P l a n n i n g program i n the West End opening a s i t e o f f i c e and a s s i g n i n g a team made up of s t a f f from the S o c i a l P l a n n i n g , P l a n n i n g and E n g i n e e r i n g Departments. Th is experiment d i d not ach ieve the expected success i n terms of m o t i v a t i n g r e s i d e n t s and g a i n i n g i n f l u e n c e w i t h c o u n c i l . The TEAM p a r t y 2 1 . h o l d i n g the m a j o r i t y i n c o u n c i l became d i s i l l u s i o n e d about the whole process of Area P l a n n i n g and s h i e d away from the o r i g i n a l i d e a of cont inuous involvement i n the community i n favour of more reward ing , from the p o l i t i c i a n ' s po in t of v iew, shor t range programs. C o u n c i l f e l t tha t by r e d u c i n g the involvement i n an a rea to s i x to e i g h t months would i n c r e a s e the p r o d u c t i v i t y of the process a l l o w i n g a t the same time the involvement i n a l a r g e r number of areas i n the c i t y . A r r i v i n g i n Vancouver, Spaxman found Area P l a n n i n g i n s e r i o u s t r o u b l e , the West End hav ing f a i l e d to o b t a i n the needed support from the p u b l i c and c i t y c o u n c i l . The "TEAM" approach which was d e l i b e r a t e l y set up separate from C i t y H a l l was c r i t i c i z e d because of i t s apparent d i s a s s o c i a t i o n from i t s r e s p e c t i v e departments. To c o r r e c t the s i t u a t i o n , i t was f e l t tha t the Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s had to be o rgan i zed under the d i r e c t i o n of one department w i t h s t a f f input from o t h e r s . F o l l o w i n g the a r r i v a l of the new d i r e c t o r , the P l a n n i n g Department was r e o r g a n i z e d and the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n was c r e a t e d . See the diagram of the .p resent , . o r g a n i z a t i o n of the P l a n n i n g Department (page 2 2 ) . The f i r s t L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g (LAP) program w a s . - . i n i t i a t e d i n K i t s i l a n o i n the s p r i n g , 1974, p l a n n i n g s t a f f was ass igned and a s t o r e f r o n t o f f i c e was opened i n the a r e a . Other LAP programs f o l l o w e d K i t s i l a n o ; F a i r v i e w S l o p e s , Char les/Adanac, Champlain He ights ( a l l th ree wi thout e s t a b l i s h i n g a s i t e o f f i c e i n the a r e a ) . Grandview Woodland was i n i t i a t e d i n 1975 and more r e c e n t l y Marpole i n January 1978. From the beg inn ing LAP was a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a new f e d e r a l program. The Neighbourhood Improvement Program (NIP) was i n i t i a t e d i n K i t s i l a n o a few months a f t e r LAP was in t roduced and the p l a n n i n g s t a f f together w i t h the P l a n n i n g Committee began to manage the two programs at the same t i m e . 22. Genera! Organization of the Planning' Department - 1978 In a study p reced ing the i n t r o d u c t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g the P l a n n i n g Department had c o l l e c t e d i n f o r m a t i o n about the c o n d i t i o n of the hous ing s t o c k , s t r e e t s and other p h y s i c a l aspects throughout the c i t y , i n c l u d i n g an i n v e n t o r y of r e c r e a t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s and park space a v a i l a b l e to c i t i z e n s l i v i n g i n d i f f e r e n t neighbourhoods. A l i s t of l o c a l areas needing a t t e n t i o n was drawn based on t h i s study and the v a r i o u s Area P l a n n i n g programs were i n i t i a t e d i n the areas i n d i c a t e d by the s tudy . Thanks to the f i n a n c i a l support from the twbaother l e v e l s of government, s e v e r a l NIP programs have been implemented i n Vancouver i n the pas t few y e a r s . The l a s t NIP programs were s t a r t e d i n the Kens ington and K iwassa neighbourhoods i n October 1977. In 1978, the f e d e r a l government has dec ided to c o n s o l i d a t e the Neighbourhood Improvement Program, the M u n i c i p a l I n f r a s t r u c t u r e Program and the M u n i c i p a l I n c e n t i v e Grant Program i n t o one Community S e r v i c e s Grant Program. I t i s s t i l l e a r l y to see how t h i s new p o l i c y w i l l e f f e c t the f u t u r e of Area P l a n n i n g but i t w i l l c e r t a i n l y mean a r e o r i e n t a t i o n of the D i v i s i o n ' s a c t i v i t i e s . The Neighbourhood Improvement Program has been the backbone o f A rea P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver s i n c e the a v a i l a b i l i t y of funds from other l e v e l s of government has encouraged the p r o l i f e r a t i o n of NIP g i v i n g to the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n a steady f l ow of cash p a r t i a l l y independent of c i t y funds . NIP has a l s o c o n t r i b u t e d to make the p a r t i c i p a t o r y p rocess i n p l a n n i n g p o s s i b l e by opening s i t e o f f i c e s i n areas where i t was implemented. Some of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n s t a f f i s not i n v o l v e d i n NIP or LAP and operates from c i t y h a l l . These p lanners are g e n e r a l l y ass igned d i f f e r e n t p a r t s of the c i t y to moni tor and where p o s s i b l e to get i n v o l v e d w i t h l o c a l c i t i z e n s . The D i v i s i o n a l s o i n c l u d e s the s t a f f a d m i n i s t r a t i n g 24. RRAP. The Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n , w i t h a s t a f f of 43 i s by f a r the l a r g e s t i n the P l a n n i n g Department; i t i n c l u d e s 10 p l a n n e r s , 9 p l a n n i n g a s s i s t a n t s , RRAP a d v i s o r s and promoters , and c l e r i c a l s t a f f . As shown i n the d iagram, 5 p lanners and 7 p l a n n i n g a s s i s t a n t s are work ing i n s i t e o f f i c e s w h i l e the i n - h o u s e group comprises 5 p lanners and 3 p l a n n i n g a s s i s t a n t s (see page 2 5 ) . A b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n of NIP and LAP a c t i v i t i e s i n Vancouver i s o b t a i n e d from the L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g rev iew produced by the P l a n n i n g Department. The rev iew presents the f o l l o w i n g LAP a c t i v i t i e s as c o u n c i l - e n d o r s e d L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g programs. The Charles/Adanac exper ience has not been i n c l u d e d i n t h i s group by the author of the r e p o r t a l though i t i s cons idered by some p lanners as a r e a l LAP program. (1) West End: I n i t i a t e d i n February 1973; S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department c o - o r d i n a t e d team of c i v i c s t a f f ( S o c i a l P l a n n i n g , C i t y P l a n n i n g , and E n g i n e e r i n g ) , work ing on c o n s u l t -a t i o n w i t h c i t i z e n s (upon a d v i c e of c i t i z e n s , no c i t i z e n s ' c o r . , committee was organized), ; l o c a l s i t e o f f i c e i n o p e r a t i o n f o r two y e a r s . Program was undertaken w i t h i n context of s i x t e e n p o l i c y g u i d e l i n e s adopted by C o u n c i l . R e s u l t s to date i n c l u d e  two rezon ings to reduce f u t u r e p o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t i e s , t r a f f i c - open space improvements west of Penman, and the j o i n t  p l a n n i n g of the West End Community Centre (now i s opera t ion )  and the Haro Park Sen ior C i t i z e n s Complex. (2) K i t s i l a n o : I n i t i a t e d i n February 1974; Terms of Reference f o r C i t i z e n Committee ( w r i t t e n by the Chairman of the then Community Development Committee, A i d . V o l r i c h ) were adopted, and are now used as a 'mode l ' f o r f u t u r e programs; P l a n n i n g Department team approved and l o c a l s i t e o f f i c e operated f o r 2 1/2 y e a r s . R e s u l t s to date i n c l u d e Area P l a n s  f o r Apartment A r e a , K i t s P o i n t , P t . Grey Road, West Broadway, and Convers ion A reas . New zon ing schedules were adopted to  encourage the r e t e n t i o n of e x i s t i n g good h o u s i n g , r e i n f o r c e  the v i a b i l i t y of l o c a l and d i s t r i c t commercial a r e a s , and  f a c i l i t a t e the development of compat ib le new r e s i d e n t i a l and  commercial uses and b u i l d i n g s . An N . I . P . program was i n i t i a t e d  i n the s p r i n g of 1974 i n conjunction w i t h the R . R . A . P . program to upgrade e x i s t i n g hous ing s t o c k . The C i t i z e n s Committee  cont inues to a d v i s e on p l a n n i n g and N . I . P . m a t t e r s . AREA PLANNING DIVISION :ASSCCIATE= ;OIRECTOn ; _fc ilSEfllOR ; M4R.POLS 1 PLANNER. U I i i R.R.A.P IJSEMIOR' i iiPLANNER; JLAiiiJES'lf PLANNER II P.A. 1U P.A.III •P.A.III TYPIJT TYPIST P.A.III TYPIST SITE OFFICE GROUP PLANNER II PLANNER II OFFICE PO-OSDIKATOB P.A.III P.A.III ADMINISTRATION .' ri — r i — 1 I I — 1 1 1 — 1 ,, ' — CHAHPLAIN CITY/WEST SIDE CITY/ IMPLEMENTATION PROJECTS/ TECHNIfAl HEIGHTS EAST SIOE fAIRVIEW . SPECIAL SUPPORT CITY LANDS KITSILANO S ™ 1 " CEDAR COTTAGE' | ADMINISTRATOR iPLAJlNERIf FLAEHS'I- J_ j j K A V i l l ; PLA>V;VER "i I i?LAii;i£R"i'ii iiipVOT; TYPIST TYPIST TYPIST W I^U6,T&ijl I GRANOVIEW 1 ' RILEY PARK 1 1 EJiJi . WOODLAND c " ' P.A.III TYPIST _L t A 5 T 5 i D E CEDAR COTTAGE PROMOTER PROMOTER PROMOTER 'PROMOTER. _L PROMOTER PROMOTER PROMOTE ADVISOR ADVISOR ADVISOR, AtX/liOR iPERMANENT POSITION ADVISOR. AOVISOR. IN. HOUSE GROUP RRAP ADMINISTRATION Source: Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department, A Review of L o c a l Area PI ann-i n , September 1977 (updated to 1978) . K5 (3) Champlain H e i g h t s : I n i t i a t e d i n S p r i n g 1974; C i t i z e n s Committee o rgan i zed to a d v i s e on development and compat-i b i l i t y of Areas E and F, Champlain He ights and overcoming the d e f i c i e n c i e s of e x i s t i n g b u i l t - u p a r e a s . R e s u l t s to date  i n c l u d e the adopt ion of Area P l a n to guide the comprehensive  development of Areas E & F. Res idents cont inue to adv i se on  implementat ion through new C i t i z e n s Committee. (4) .rFairview^Slopes:•• I n i t i a t e d i n F a l l of 1974; P lanner a s s i g n e d , and C i t i z e n s Committee a p p o i n t e d ; Terms of Reference adopted. R e s u l t s to date i n c l u d e adopt ion of  Area P l a n on June 1 , 1976, new zoning schedule adopted to  encourage r e t e n t i o n of e x i s t i n g houses and permi t new low- p r o f i l e r e s i d e n t i a l development and some compat ib le commer- c i a l . Implementat ion of r e q u i r e d p h y s i c a l improvements,  i n c l u d i n g p a r k l a n d a c q u i s i t i o n , and development of s o c i a l  hous ing de layed f o r l a c k of funds . C i t i z e n s Committee  d i s s o l v e d by C o u n c i l but r e s i d e n t s s t i l l a b l e to p a r t i c i p a t e  i n development process through Development Permi t Board . (5) Grandview-Woodland: I n i t i a t e d i n Summer of 1975; P lanner a s s i g n e d ; l o c a l s i t e o f f i c e opened i n December 1975; support s t a f f added i n F a l l of 1976. C i t i z e n s Committee appointed ( a f t e r community e l e c t i o n s and Terms of Reference adopted) . R e s u l t s to date i n c l u d e i n i t i a t i o n of NIP/RRAP i n p o r t i o n of a r e a . Area P l a n to be cons idered by C o u n c i l  i n l a t e 1977 or e a r l y 1978. NEIGHBOURHOOD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS - N . I . P . (w i th complementary R e s i d e n t i a l R e h a b i l i t a t i o n A s s i s t a n c e Program - R . R . A . P . ) were e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1973 under the N a t i o n a l Housing A c t . Th is i s a c o s t - s h a r e d e f f o r t (Federa l - 50%, P r o v i n c i a l - 25%, and C i t y - 25%) to improve m u n i c i p a l s e r v i c e s and u t i l i t i e s as w e l l as s o c i a l and r e c r e a t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s . The R . R . A . P . program i s a F e d e r a l program to improve hous ing c o n d i t i o n s . (1) K i t s i l a n o (1974-1977) - t o t a U $ 1 . 2 m i l l i o n Housing - $584,000 - to buy e x i s t i n g hous ing f o r r e n o v a t i o n and to buy s i t e s f o r redevelopment f o r low/moderate income persons . C h i l d Care Centres - $250,000 Community Centre F a c i l i t i e s - $150,000 Playground and A d u l t Rest Areas - $123,000 (2) Cedar Cottage (1974-1977) - t o t a l $1 .8 m i l l i o n Parks and R e c r e a t i o n - $281,340 - p r i m a r i l y f o r development of C l a r k P a r k , China Creek P a r k , Brewers P a r k , and John Hendry P a r k . T r a f f i c and T r a n s p o r t a t i o n - $50,000 - s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r bus s h e l t e r s and r e d e s i g n of F i n d l a y / V i c t o r i a D i v e r s i o n . B e a u t i f i c a t i o n a n d - P u b l i c Use Areas - $315,000 Grandview Community Centre - $500,000 Housing - $500,000 (3) Downtown-Eastside (Oppenheimer Area) (1975-1979) - t o t a l  $685,000 Community H e a l t h F a c i l i t i e s - $200,000 S o c i a l , R e c r e a t i o n & Community F a c i l i t i e s - $130,000 Japanese Community F a c i l i t i e s - $150,000 P u b l i c Open Space - $95,000 - p r i m a r i l y Oppenheimer Park . P r o j e c t s Encouraging Employment of Res idents - $5,000 (4) Mt . P l e a s a n t " T r i a n g l e " (1975-1979) - t o t a l $1 .8 m i l l i o n  Community F a c i l i t i e s - $440,000 - f o r K i v a n Boys and G i r l s Club and a new Neighbourhood House Parks Improvement - $369,000 - South China Creek P a r k , Sunnyside Park and Robson Park Schools - $50,000 Bus S h e l t e r s - $45,000 S t r e e t s and Curbing - $475,000 Boulevard Trees - $100,000 T r a f f i c and S a f e t y - $90,000 (5) R i l e y Park (1976 -1980) - t o t a l $2 .0 m i l l i o n  Community F a c i l i t i e s - $710,000 Parks Improvements - $267,000 S t r e e t s Upgrading - $210,000 Commercial Area Improvements - $170,000 Schools Improvements - $75,000 (6) Grandview-Woodland (1976-1980) - t o t a l $2 .5 m i l l i o n  School Improvements — $1,035,000 P a r k s Improvements - $460,000 S t r e e t B e a u t i f i c a t i o n - $201,000 S t r e e t Curbing/Bus S h e l t e r s - $181,000 S o c i a l S e r v i c e s - $90,500 Housing - $250,000 (7) Kens ington (1977-1981) - t o t a l $2 .6 m i l l i o n and Kiwassa  (1977-1981) - t o t a l $400,000 The concept p'lans f o r these two neighbourhoods have j u s t been approved by CMHC and the P r o v i n c e and are now on t h e i r f i r s t stage of implementat ion of the program. The L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g Review d e s c r i b e s two o ther c a t e g o r i e s of a c t i v i t i e s ; neighbourhood i n i t i a t i v e s , and other l o c a l area p l a n n i n g e f f o r t s i n the form of p r o j e c t s tha t c o u n c i l i n s t r u c t s the P l a n n i n g Department to under take . These a c t i v i t i e s are managed by the i n - h o u s e group of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . The i n - h o u s e group i s , i n the words of the D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g a pre out -house group. T h e i r a c t i v i t i e s cover a wide range of p l a n n i n g i s s u e s t r y i n g to s e r v i c e the remain ing areas of the c i t y not r e c e i v i n g NIP or LAP a t t e n t i o n . 30. CHAPTER 3 AREA PLANNING IN ITS THEORETICAL CONTEXT The h i s t o r i c a l background of Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver and the d i s t o r t i o n caused by the dominat ion of Area P l a n n i n g by the two f e d e r a l programs, NIP and RRAP, have c rea ted a c o n f u s i n g s i t u a t i o n , not on ly f o r the p u b l i c but a l s o f o r the p lanners o p e r a t i n g i n the d i v i s i o n . The l a c k of c l e a r l y d e f i n e d o b j e c t i v e s d e f i n i n g the purpose of Area P l a n n i n g programs becomes p a r t i c u l a r l y c r i t i c a l now that the f e d e r a l government has dec ided to d i s c o n t i n u e NIP programs i n Canada. Th is chapter proposes a t h e o r e t i c a l model f o r the a n a l y s i s of Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver, a model based on the p o s i t i o n s a rea p l a n n e r s assume i n the p r o c e s s . The p o s i t i o n of the area p lanner i s d e f i n e d by r o l e s that are at t imes i n c o m p a t i b l e . S e v e r a l groups are a c t i n g as r o l e d e f i n e r s ; c i t i z e n s on one s i d e and p o l i t i c i a n s and bureaucracy on the o ther together w i t h many o ther p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the Area P l a n n i n g process are p r e s s u r i n g the p lanner to p l a y c o n f l i c t i n g r o l e s . Area p lanners are r e q u i r e d to f i l l s i m u l t a n e o u s l y s e v e r a l r o l e s that p resent i n c o n s i s t e n t , c o n t r a d i c t o r y , or even m u t u a l l y e x c l u s i v e e x p e c t a t i o n s . Over a p e r i o d of time they cannot f u l l y meet t h e i r own and o t h e r s ' e x p e c t a t i o n s , and to the ex ten t that they f a i l to meet e x p e c t a t i o n s f o r the management of one o r another of the r o l e s they may be judged i n e f f e c t i v e by the d e f i n i n g group. Some of the v a r i o u s d e f i n i n g groups may be aware of the complex i t y of the p o s i t i o n of the p lanner and t h i n k that the p lanner i s choosing the wrong one among the v a r i o u s r o l e s , from t h e i r p o i n t of v iew, and t h e r e f o r e see the p lanner not as a f a i l u r e but as an enemy a c t i n g a g a i n s t t h e i r i n t e r e s t s . Dav id E v e r s l e y ' s d e f i n i t i o n of the p lanner as " a l l o c a t o r of scarce r e s o u r c e s " 31. a l s o c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e s why the p lanner w i l l never be ab le to f u l l y s a t i s f y any of the groups that he i s work ing f o r ( E v e r s l e y , 1973) . Th is can a l s o c o n t r i b u t e to e x p l a i n i n g the c o n f l i c t s w i t h i n the b u r e a u c r a t i c r o l e of the p l a n n e r . For Bates (1956) , w i t h i n any g i ven p o s i t i o n there tends to be a s t r a i n toward c o n s i s t e n c y or adjustment among the v a r i o u s r o l e s that de f ine the p o s i t i o n . T h i s i s based on the assumption that p s y c h o l o g i c a l t e n s i o n i s aroused i n i n d i v i d u a l s that occupy a p o s i t i o n c o n t a i n i n g i n c o n s i s t e n t or malad jus ted r o l e s . As a r e s u l t o f t h i s process c e r t a i n r o l e s become dominant ( G e t z e l s , 1954) and determine the s t r u c t u r e of the p o s i t i o n i n which i t i s found . The other r o l e s become r e c e s s i v e and are changed or a d j u s t e d i n r e l a t i o n to the dominant r o l e s . For the a rea p lanner there are a number of r o l e s any of which can be dominant. They vary from a c l u s t e r of r o l e s centered on the r o l e of advocate f o r the l o c a l community to another set centered on the r o l e of bureaucrat a c t i n g as a " b u f f e r f o r the p o l i t i c i a n s " . There i s a b a s i c i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y between those r o l e s , r o l e s that have i n common' a b u r e a u c r a t i c o r i e n t a t i o n and those tha t have i n common an advocate o r i e n t a t i o n . G e t z e l s (1954) equates i n t e n s i t y of the c o n f l i c t w i t h i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n at l e a s t one of the r o l e s . The extent of r o l e c o n f l i c t i s a f u n c t i o n of the number and magnitude of i n c o m p a t i b l e e x p e c t a t i o n s . The t h e o r e t i c a l model proposed i n t h i s study has a s t a t i c component represented by the l o c a t i o n of the p lanner and the s t r u c t u r e of the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . P l a n n i n g s t r u c t u r e i s d e f i n e d i n the model as the combinat ion of scope of the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , program g u i d e l i n e s , d u r a t i o n and f i n a n c i n g of the program and type o f c i t i z e n invo lvement . P l a n n e r s ' 32. a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i s seen as the l i n k a g e between the two components. The dynamic component of the model i s represented by the v a r i o u s p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the Area P l a n n i n g process w i t h t h e i r c o n f l i c t i n g d e f i n i t i o n s of the p l a n n e r ' s r o l e . The area p l a n n e r , cons idered as an i n d i v i d u a l and a p r o f e s s i o n a l , i s the f i r s t d e f i n e r of h i s / h e r own r o l e ; the o thers cons idered i n t h i s model are the p l a n n i n g p r o f e s s i o n , p l a n n i n g department, o ther c i v i c departments, development i n t e r e s t s , l o c a l community and p o l i t i c i a n s . The p r e s e n t a t i o n of the t h e o r e t i c a l model i n i t s v a r i o u s components i s i n t e g r a t e d w i t h the d i s c u s s i o n of r o l e t h e o r y , the d i f f e r e n t r o l e s the p lanner i s f a c i n g and the c o n f l i c t among them. The t h e o r e t i c a l model i s subsequent ly a p p l i e d to three major c a t e g o r i e s of the p l a n n e r ' s a c t i v i t i e s , NIP programs, LAP programs, and i n - h o u s e a c t i v i t i e s . P robab ly the most important element i n the t h e o r e t i c a l model i s the l o c a t i o n from which the p lanner o p e r a t e s . The d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of the p l a n n i n g o p e r a t i o n i s very much.ja par t of the Area P l a n n i n g concept . The " L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g " r e p o r t p r e c e d i n g the i n t r o d u c t i o n of A rea P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver cons idered the s i t e o f f i c e " p r i m a r i l y necessary to f a c i l i t a t e c i t i z e n / p l a n n e r d i a l o g u e " . The s i t e o f f i c e a l s o h e l p s the p l a n n e r to get a b e t t e r understanding of what the community f e e l i n g s and needs a r e . The p lanner tends to i d e n t i f y w i t h the l o c a l a rea i n which he/she operates and becomes a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t i n the eyes of c o l l e a g u e s and c i t y bureaucracy i n g e n e r a l . Anderson c o n s i d e r s the p lanner i n the s i t e o f f i c e as t h e : ' " d i r e c t o r of p l a n n i n g " f o r the neighbourhood. In t h i s s i t u a t i o n the p lanner has more freedom of a c t i o n but becomes accountable to the c i v i c bureaucracy and p o l i t i c i a n s f o r tha t community. 33. H a l f of the p lanners i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n of Vancouver are o p e r a t i n g from c i t y h a l l . They are g e n e r a l l y d e a l i n g w i t h s p e c i f i c p l a n n i n g i s s u e s as they a r i s e but t h e i r f u n c t i o n a l s o i n c l u d e s m o n i t o r i n g areas of the c i t y not covered by o ther programs and some NIP and LAP programs. In the words of the d i r e c t o r of p l a n n i n g , the p lanners i n the i n - h o u s e group are " s o r t of p r e l i m i n a r y out -house group i n the sense that they are cover ing t h i n g s that haven ' t reached the s i z e of i s s u e that would r e q u i r e a f u l l - t i m e person" (from i n t e r v i e w w i t h Ray Spaxman). T h i s d e f i n i t i o n over looks the consequences tha t the d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n has on the two groups of p l a n n e r s . The d e c i s i o n to open a s i t e o f f i c e i m p l i e s the commitment to the development of r e a l c i t i z e n / p l a n n e r d i a l o g u e , and there are s u b s t a n t i a l cos ts to tha t commitment i f on ly i n the time i t takes to develop community/site o f f i c e or c i t i z e n / p l a n n e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The i n - h o u s e s t a f f are work ing i n areas where there i s no commitment of t h i s k i n d , e i t h e r because the l e v e l of communication i s not d e s i r e d or because the cos ts cannot be covered w i t h i n the budget . As a r e s u l t , the p l a n n e r s ' cho ice of r o l e s i s a f f e c t e d by t h e i r l o c a t i o n and the presence of a l a r g e i n - h o u s e group may have a s t r o n g impact on the o r i e n t a t i o n of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . Together w i t h the l o c a t i o n of the p lanner there are o ther f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t i n g to the d e f i n i t i o n of the c h a r a c t e r of d i f f e r e n t programs. In t h i s t h e s i s s e v e r a l of these f a c t o r s have been grouped under the d e f i n i t i o n " s t r u c t u r e of the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s " . The scope of p l a n n i n g i s the f i r s t of the f a c t o r s to be c o n s i d e r e d . I t may va ry from the p r e p a r a t i o n of a comprehensive p l a n f o r the a rea or a p l a n f o r the use of NIP funds to the m o n i t o r i n g of a d e f i n e d area or the p r o d u c t i o n of a repor t on a s p e c i f i c i s s u e . 34. Guidelines the planners must follow may vary from program to program making the a c t i v i t i e s ; 6 f ; t h e Area Planning D i v i s i o n d i v e r s i f i e d . Deadlines assume d i f f e r e n t importance i n d i f f e r e n t programs, becoming c r u c i a l i n NIP for the release of funds. D i f f e r e n t funding arrangements also c o n t r i -bute to d i v e r s i f y Area Planning a c t i v i t i e s i n Vancouver. The input from l o c a l residents i n the planning process i s emphasized by planners i n s i t e o f f i c e s more than by t h e i r in-house colleagues. Planners i n the s i t e o f f i c e produce a plan with the co-operation of a committee of l o c a l r e s i -dents. They obtain feedback from the community through p u b l i c meetings and questionnaires, and the constant i n t e r a c t i o n with people a t t r a c t e d by the sto r e f r o n t l o c a t i o n of the s i t e o f f i c e . The in-house planners work closer to t h e i r mother bureaucracy and t h e i r contact with the p u b l i c i s l i m i t e d by t h e i r l o c a t i o n . They don't generally work with a committee and may be involved only i n some p u b l i c meeting. The a c c o u n t a b i l i t y of the planner cannot be considered e n t i r e l y part of e i t h e r the s t a t i c or dynamic component of the model; i t i s rather a linkage between the two components and contributes to making the planner's choice among the d i f f e r e n t roles more d i f f i c u l t . The area planner has a p l u r a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y with the community on one side and the c i v i c bureau-cracy and c i t y c o u n c i l on the other. In NIP the planner also becomes accountable to the fe d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l governments. Among the d i f f e r e n t role definers to which area planners become accountable, the f i r s t one to be presented is. the planners themselves. The importance of the personal attitu d e of the planners towards the roles they are expected to play i s supported by Akerman. He thinks that the extent toowhich the role i s s u c c e s s f u l l y handled i s a function of the degree of overlap between the r o l e expectations and the planners' own needs. In 3 5 . the context o f t h i s research i t becomes necessary to ana lyze the p l a n n e r s ' p e r s o n a l needs to understand b e t t e r t h e i r r e a c t i o n to the g iven r o l e s and the e t h i c p o s i t i o n of the p lanner as a p r o f e s s i o n a l asked to make non -t e c h n i c a l c h o i c e s . P e r s o n a l h i s t o r y and background w i l l he lp to understand a p l a n n e r ' s a t t i t u d e toward the d i f f e r e n t e x p e c t a t i o n s and the v a r i e t y of r o l e s he/she i s p ressured i n t o p l a y i n g . E d u c a t i o n a l background and p rev ious work ing exper ience are a l s o important elements determin ing the p l a n n e r ' s d e c i s i o n s . Some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of community p lanners make them d i f f e r e n t from other p lanners i n the department. Needleman found t h a t community p lanners as a group are much younger than t h e i r c o l l e a g u e s . In the departments he v i s i t e d the average age of the community p lanner was 27 , tha t of the r e s t of the s t a f f , 34 (The Needlemans, 1974; 187) . Needlemans' community p lanners were a l s o more s o c i a l l y o r i e n t e d and from a g e n e r a l l y h u m a n i s t i c b a c k -ground. Community p lanners e n t e r the c i v i c arena w i t h s t r o n g ideas about the r o l e they are going to p l a y . The i n a b i l i t y to perform i n the chosen r o l e may l e a d to f r u s t r a t i o n , and e v e n t u a l l y to r e s i g n a t i o n from the p l a n n i n g department or the r e t r e a t to a more comfortable b u r e a u c r a t i c r o l e . In t h e i r book, the Needlemans o u t l i n e the " g u e r r i l l a " t a c t i c s community p lanners use to f i g h t s u c c e s s f u l l y the b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e from the i n s i d e . I n t e r e s t i n g l y enough, the Needlemans n o t i c e that the p lanners who are more s u c c e s s f u l i n the r o l e of g u e r r i l l a are the ones that leave the department. Th is may i n d i c a t e tha t those p lanners had d e f i n i t e o b j e c t i v e s and once they managed to achieve them they cons ide r t h e i r m i s s i o n accom-p l i s h e d (the Needlemans, 1974; 2 9 4 ) . Not a l l the p lanners i n t e r v i e w e d by Needleman are " g u e r r i l l a s " . Some of them are not w i l l i n g or ab le to oppose the p l a n n i n g department that 36. employs them, or to r e j e c t the comprehensive p l a n n i n g approach they were t r a i n e d to v a l u e . Desp i te the most i n t e n s i v e community p r e s s u r e , some s t r i v e to work i n terms of the t r a d i t i o n a l p r i o r i t i e s and methods of e l i t e encapsu la ted c i t y p l a n n i n g . Others w ish to ac t as a d m i n i s t r a t i v e g u e r r i l l a s on b e h a l f of t h e i r community but l a c k the p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and s k i l l s necessary f o r the r o l e . These " m i s f i t " community p lanners - a m i n o r i t y among those i n t e r v i e w e d - develop p a t t e r n s o f behaviour the Needlemans c a l l r o l e r e s i s t a n c e and r o l e i n c a p a c i t y . Gower (1972) has an i n t e r e s t i n g theory on how p lanners so l ve t h e i r moral and l e g i t i m a c y problems, as w e l l as the i n s e c u r i t y w i t h i n the p r o f e s -s i o n on the t o p i c o f s o c i a l change. Gower contends that p lanners when threatened w i l l ( i ) c l i n g to the l o c a l f i c t i o n that they themselves do not make d e c i s i o n s , and ( i i ) accord technology an independent a u t h o r i t y of i t s own. Donald A . Bar r suggests tha t to be p r o f e s s i o n a l i t i s not necessary to subord inate p e r s o n a l or group concerns to the aim of the govern ing appar -a t u s . With an understanding of h i s p o s i t i o n and h i s l i m i t a t i o n s , the urban p lanner can d e s c r i b e those t h i n g s capable of r e g u l a t i o n and, as w e l l , those t h i n g s which cannot be r e g u l a t e d . H i s p lans are not the on ly p l a n s . In o ther words, the p lanner can admit t h a t the p lans he/she prepares are incomplete and he/she can i n d i c a t e that they can be completed on ly i f complemented, and c o n t e s t e d , by the i d e a s of o ther l e s s l e g i t i m a t e sources ( B a r r , 1973; 159) . In t h e i r survey of Canadian p l a n n e r s , L a n g and Page d e f i n e a p r o f e s s i o n as c h a r a c t e r i z e d i n par t by a d e f i n a b l e body of theory . Th is theory p rov ides the framework g u i d i n g the p r a c t i c e of the p r o f e s s i o n a l w h i l e p r a c t i c e tu rns theory i n t o " r e a l knowledge" (Lang and Page, 1977) . A 37. p r o f e s s i o n a l must not on ly know the theory but be ab le to dev ise new ones i n l i g h t of change ( C r a i g , 1977; 1 3 ) . From t h i s d e f i n i t i o n of p lanner as p r o f e s s i o n a l i t appears that community p lanners are i n a s i t u a t i o n i n which they are expected to be more than j u s t a p lanner and t h i s makes the search f o r a p r o f e s s i o n a l i d e n t i t y c o n f u s i n g . Some p lanners react to t h i s d i f f i c u l t y i n r e c o n c i l i n g t h e i r p o s i t i o n w i t h t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l i d e n t i t y by assuming a c r i t i c a l p o s i t i o n toward t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n . Urban p l a n n i n g today i s not a p r o f e s s i o n because what we do i s adopt the p r i n c i p l e s or n o n - p r i n c i p l e s of the people that pay our s a l a r i e s . That goes f o r the ones who work f o r c i t i e s as w e l l as development companies. P l a n n i n g i s not a p r o f e s s i o n . I t has no code of e t h i c s . I t does no t know what i t i s d o i n g , we have no u n i f i e d d i r e c t i o n . . . . I f e e l about the p lanners the same way A l i n s k y f e l t about s o c i a l workers . He wou ldn ' t have them around because no matter what they p r o f e s s , they ' ve i n v e s t e d so much time and money i n deve lop ing t h e i r own t i n y p e r f e c t e x p e r t i s e tha t they cannot abandon i t . (Anderson, 1976; 217) . The same d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n was expressed by p lanners i n Lang and Page ' s r e s e a r c h . In p a r t i c u l a r they were d i s s a t -i s f i e d w i t h the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of p l a n n e r s , the i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s of p l a n -n i n g i n s o c i e t y and w i t h C . I . P . (Canadian I n s t i t u t e of P l a n n e r s ) . As f a r as CIP was concerned, v a r i o u s suggest ions were made to improve i t , the main one b e i n g the need f o r the c o n t i n u i n g educat ion of p l a n n e r s . P lanners a l s o expressed the o p i n i o n that the CIP Code of E t h i c s shou ld be improved. For example, they should have the r i g h t and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to judge t h e i r c o l l e a g u e s at work ( C r a i g , 1977; 1 3 ) . In the American scene the p l a n n i n g p r o f e s s i o n seems to be more concerned w i t h d i s s e n t and how to dea l w i t h those p lanners a c t i n g on t h e i r 38. own f o r what they deem p r o p e r . Nader i n h i s speech at the AIP conference i n 1970 de f ines a p r o f e s s i o n i n c o n t r a d i s t i n c t i o n to a t rade as . . . a body of l ea rned knowledge w i t h an a b i l i t y to examine i t s e l f and i t s purposes ; an a b i l i t y to l i n k i t s body of knowledge w i t h o ther bod ies of knowledge to achieve common purposes ; the a b i l i t y to defend d i s s e n t , not j u s t w i t h i n the s o c i e t y but d i s s e n t by i t s members i n c o n f l i c t s w i t h t h e i r employer o r g a n i z a t i o n s or t h e i r government agencies or c o r p o r a t i o n s ; and above a l l , the a b i l i t y to p ioneer new p o l i c i e s tha t are not brought i n t o e f f e c t by market i n c e n t i v e s " . (Nader, 1970) In the U .S . apparent l y n e i t h e r ASPO nor AIP have p u b l i c l y s t a t e d that they share N a d e r ' s views on the defense of t h e i r d i s s e n t i n g members. The 1971 AIP Code of P r o f e s s i o n a l R e s p o n s i b i l i t y mentions such p r o f e s s i o n a l s tandards as " s o c i a l c o n s c i o u s n e s s , " s e r v i c e " i n the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , " and " i n d e p e n -dent p r o f e s s i o n a l judgement," but i s open to q u e s t i o n whether AIP w i l l do any th ing to p r o t e c t a p lanner who takes these standards s e r i o u s l y and gets i n t o t r o u b l e w i t h h i s employer . The AIP code says that a p lanner serves p r i m a r i l y the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , but i t t e l l s a; p lanner who f e e l s that h i s / h e r work c o n f l i c t s w i t h the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t to q u i t i n s t e a d of b low ing the w h i s t l e or f i g h t i n g from w i t h i n . The p l a n n e r , a c c o r d i n g to the AIP code, " s h a l l accept or cont inue employment on ly when he can i n s u r e accommodation of the c l i e n t ' s or employer ' s i n t e r e s t w i t h the pub l i c? , i n t e r e s t " . The ASPO Code of E t h i c s says that the o r g a n i z a t i o n does not attempt to p o l i c e e t h i c s i n p l a n n i n g but r a t h e r to promote such e t h i c s w i t h i n these s e l f - p r o f e s s e d c o n s t r a i n t s . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note tha t ASPO's code resembles A I P ' s i n that i t does not concern i t s e l f w i t h cases of employer v i n d i c t i v e n e s s a g a i n s t a p lanner employee. The reason f o r t h i s i s that ASPO i s an o r g a n i z a t i o n whose members are both p r o f e s s i o n a l s and laymen, open to anyone w i t h i n t e r e s t i n p l a n n i n g , w h i l e AIP (and CIP) 39. r e s t r i c t t h e i r membership to persons who demonstrate some l e v e l of p r o f e s s i o n a l competence i n p l a n n i n g . Ralph Nader b e l i e v e s that there must be some s o r t of i n n e r i n i t i a l de te rminat ion t h a t the i n d i v i d u a l employee would go on ly so f a r i n obeying the d i c t a t e s of the o r g a n i z a t i o n and beyond tha t w i l l have t o , i n e f f e c t , "blow the w h i s t l e " and achieve the r e s o l u t i o n of h i s own consc ience by a t t a c h i n g h i s concerns and h i s i n f o r m a t i o n to o u t s i d e a u t h o r i t i e s (Nader, 1970) . F i n k l e r suggests that i t i s necessary to i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d i s s e n t and independent i n i t i a t i v e w i t h i n the p l a n n i n g p r o f e s s i o n , i f the maximum p o s i t i v e b e n e f i t s are to be r e a l i z e d . Under the p resent system even w i t h minor changes and i n c r e a s e d p r o t e c t i o n f o r d i s s e n t e r s the c o n f l i c t tends to overshadow the p o t e n t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n f o r new and i n n o v a t i v e i d e a s ( F i n k l e r , 1971; 5 7 ) . The b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e i n which the p lanner operates tends to s u f f o c a t e the independent i n i t i a t i v e . I f we look at the p l a n n i n g department as a f u n c t i o n of government, any p l a n n i n g becomes subord inate and p a r t of the governing r o l e . Bar r suggests that the emphasis i n urban p l a n n i n g i s p l a c e d on o r d e r i n g s o c i a l and p h y s i c a l t h i n g s and making such o r d e r i n g more r a t i o n a l and p r e d i c t a b l e ( B a r r , 1973; 157) . Us ing t h i s d e f i n i t i o n of p l a n n i n g i t becomes p o s s i b l e to e x p l a i n how c o n f l i c t a r i s e s between community p lanners and t h e i r department. The b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e of the p l a n n i n g department i s not equipped to d e a l w i t h the u n p r e d i c t a b i l i t y of the d e c i s i o n s made by c i t i z e n s i n v o l v e d i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The p lanners tha t are a t t r a c t e d to neighbourhood p l a n n i n g are not o n l y younger than the r e s t i n the p l a n n i n g department, they a l s o base t h e i r a c t i o n on d i f f e r e n t p h i l o s o p h i c a l b e l i e f s . The Needlemans i d e n t i f i e d i n 40. t h e i r research three sources of i r r i t a t i o n c r e a t i n g a sense of mutual d i s l i k e and d i s t r u s t between neighbourhood p lanners and many of t h e i r c o l l e a g u e s . P lanners i n o ther s e c t i o n s of the P l a n n i n g Department p e r c e i v e d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e i r own p e r s o n a l s t y l e , background and work a t t i t u d e s and those commonly found among neighbourhood p l a n n e r s . These d i f f e r e n c e s extend to the d e f i n i t i o n of p l a n n i n g w i t h neighbourhood p lanners tend ing to d i f f e r w i t h most o ther s t a f f members over the proper degree of p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y p lanners should engage i n , the l e g i t i m a t e scope of p l a n n i n g , t t h e proper degree of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and the most u s e f u l time frame f o r p l a n s . F i n a l l y , there are problems of c o - o r d i n a t i n g neighbourhood p l a n n i n g w i t h the o ther a c t i v i t i e s of the p l a n n i n g department. These f r i c t i o n p o i n t s are of course i n t e r r e l a t e d (the Needlemans, 1974; 186) . Given i t s s t a t u s i n the P l a n n i n g Department of the G i t y of Vancouver, i t i s by f a r the l a r g e s t d i v i s i o n and has s t r o n g support from the D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g , the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n r e c e i v e s l i t t l e o p p o s i t i o n w i t h i n the P l a n n i n g Department. The c o n f l i c t w i t h the c i v i c bureaucracy seems to occur at a d i f f e r e n t l e v e l i n v o l v i n g the other c i v i c departments. Because of i t s n a t u r e , Area P l a n n i n g covers a wide range of a c t i v i t i e s and i n doing so has over laps of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s w i t h o ther s e c t o r s of c i t y bureaucracy . The b a s i c p h i l o s o p h i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s between Area P l a n n i n g and other departments can be seen as the major source of c o n f l i c t w i t h i n the bureau -c r a t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n of the c i t y . The a c t i v i t i e s of the o ther c i v i c departments are based on t h e i r own e x p e r t i s e . w h i l e f o r Area P l a n n i n g c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h the p u b l i c becomes the most important e lement . In p l a n n i n g t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s o ther departments cons ide r the needs of the c i t y as a whole and e s t a b l i s h a l i s t of p r i o r i t i e s . Area p lanners f e e l that the 41. communities i n which they are work ing have been n e g l e c t e d i n the p a s t and must now get t h e i r f a i r share of a t t e n t i o n . They p o i n t out t h a t the b u r e a u c r a t i c conceptLof Jiequity used by o ther departments makes the i m p l i c i t assumption that a l l the areas of the c i t y are e q u a l and as a r e s u l t d i s -p a r i t i e s among neighbourhoods are i gnored and the e x i s t i n g i n e q u a l i t i e s pe rpe tuated . Because of t h i s d i f f e r e n t approach to c i t y p l a n n i n g , a rea p lanners are always a s k i n g more f o r t h e i r communities than o ther departments are ready to g i v e . The i n a b i l i t y of the b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e to d e a l w i t h the c o n f l i c t s the p lanner r a i s e s i n the community can a l s o be cons idered a major source of c o n f l i c t . Rather than modify t h e i r e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e to a s s i m i l a t e Area P l a n n i n g , o ther c i v i c departments cons ide r t h i s approach to p l a n n i n g a t h r e a t to t h e i r own e x i s t e n c e and t h e i r a c t i o n s r e f l e c t t h i s a t t i t u d e ; by doing t h i s , c i t y bureaucracy f a i l s to recognize the i m p o r t -ance of area p lanners as a s t i m u l a n t f o r the ongoing c o n f l i c t necessary to the h e a l t h y f u n c t i o n i n g of the human s o c i e t y . Bar r recogn i zes t h a t the order necessary to m a i n t a i n a h e a l t h y c o n f l i c t between the p a r t s of man, h i s s o c i e t y and h i s environment may be seen as d i s o r d e r by a bureaucracy preoccup ied w i t h m a i n t a i n i n g on ly c e r t a i n of these p a r t s . In f a c t , a c c o r d i n g to B a r r , " the amount of o rder tha t we see as necessary to man's environment v a r i e s w i t h the unders tanding we have concern ing the p a r t s of tha t environment" ( B a r r , 1973; 158) . Having s a i d t h a t , Bar r p o i n t s out tha t the government i s so p r o m i n -ent i n the p resent system that any p l a n n i n g becomes subord inate to and p a r t of the governing r o l e . He f u r t h e r suggests that p lanners shou ld be cons idered as government f u n c t i o n a r i e s i n order to understand b e t t e r what the p lanners do and why they do i t . Urban p l a n n i n g i s a b u r e a u c r a t i c 42. f u n c t i o n . Seeing i t i n t h i s l i g h t and unders tanding i t s l i m i t a t i o n s we can a p p r e c i a t e or respect what i t does w e l l and cease to expect from i t what i t cannot d e l i v e r because of i t s nature (Bar r , 1973; 157) . The b u r e a u c r a t i c r o l e has been d e s c r i b e d by Normal Beckman u s i n g a summary of the l i t e r a t u r e g i ven to new Bureau of the Budget employees w h i c h , he s a i d , was a p p l i c a b l e e lsewhere : The employee has a d i f f i c u l t r o l e to p l a y . He must be humble, s e l f - e f f a c i n g , and q u i e t l y l o y a l . He w i l l have l i t t l e or no - ,opportuni ty to use pronouns i n the f i r s t person s i n g u l a r . . . he i s a team p l a y e r . (Beckman, 1964; 326) Many community p lanners w i l l r e f u s e to i d e n t i f y themselves w i t h t h i s d e f i n i t i o n . Never the less t h i s i s a d e s c r i p t i o n of the b u r e a u c r a t i c r e a l i t y . I t c l e a r l y shows how i r r e c o n c i l a b l e t h i s r o l e i s w i t h that of the advocate p lanner suggested by D a v i d o f f . In t h i s s i t u a t i o n the Needlemans see the g u e r r i l l a t a c t i c s as the on ly p o s s i b l e way o u t . On t h i s s i d e of the border community p lanners f i n d themselves f i g h t -i n g a g a i n s t the same type of o p p o s i t i o n . Gerecke (1971) found the p r a c t i c e of p l a n n i n g i n Canada h i g h l y b u r e a u c r a t i z e d w i t h the r e s u l t that change has not been i n t e r n a l i z e d i n t o i t s own p r a c t i c e s . T h i s s i t u a t i o n o r i g i n a t e s the paradox where i n one d i r e c t i o n d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n demands that c i v i l se rvants be armed w i t h new s k i l l s , a t t i t u d e s , r o l e s and v a l u e s , and s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n the oppos i te d i r e c t i o n the p u b l i c b u r e a u c r a c i e s r e p o r t e d l y r e s i s t change, p a r t i c u l a r l y the profound changes seemingly represented i n d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n . The c l a s s i c c r i s i s between the i r r e s i s t i b l e fo rce (the demands f o r a new cadre of p u b l i c se rvants ) and the immovable ob jec t (the b u r e a u c r a t i c r i g i d i t y of the p u b l i c s e r v i c e ) a r i s e s . The Needlemans (1974) s t r e s s the same p o i n t : 43. The community i s unprepared f o r t h i s new k i n d of p l a n n i n g , much of the s t r u c t u r e of c i t y government and f i n a n c e i s a n t a g o n i s t i c to i t , and the community p lanners themselves are confused as to t h e i r mandate. Community p l a n n i n g f i t s i n t o the community's e x p e c t a t i o n s and the c i t y ' s i n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e l i k e a h e r e t i c i n church . C i t y h a l l and i t s d i f f e r e n t departments are g iven an important p l a c e i n t h i s t h e s i s as d e f i n e r s of the area p l a n n e r ' s r o l e . P o l i t i c i a n s , aldermen i n p a r t i c u l a r , are a l s o cons idered f o r the important r o l e they p l a y i n c i t y government. The a n a l y s i s of the area p l a n n e r ' s r e l a t i o n w i t h o ther c i v i c d e p a r t -ments has been l i m i t e d i n t h i s t h e s i s to the departments w i t h which the i n t e r a c t i o n i s more f r e q u e n t ; the E n g i n e e r i n g Department, the Parks Board , the S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department and the Schoo l Board . The E n g i n e e r i n g Department manages most of the c i t y ' s p h y s i c a l o p e r a t i o n s , from t r a f f i c to garbage d i s p o s a l . Area P l a n n i n g becomes very much dependent on t h i s department dur ing the implementat ion stage of v a r i o u s p r o j e c t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h NIP which i s l i m i t e d to fund ing f o r p h y s i c a l ( i . e . c a p i t a l ) improvements. The c o n f l i c t between the two a r i s e s when Area P l a n n i n g p r o j e c t s do not conform to the l i s t of p r i o r i t i e s e s t a b l i s h e d by the E n g i n e e r i n g Department and they cannot accept the suggest ions of the area p lanner to reorder t h e i r p r i o r i t i e s i n favour of h i s / h e r community. A great d e a l of energy i s wasted i n t h i s arm w r e s t l i n g compet i t i on where the E n g i n e e r i n g Department m a i n t a i n s a s t r o n g p o s i t i o n . In t h i s c i rcumstance C i t y C o u n c i l i s f r e q u e n t l y c a l l e d upon to a r b i t r a t e , making d e c i s i o n s that may cause the E n g i n e e r i n g Department to give i n on the p a r t i c u l a r case wi thout changing e i t h e r p o l i c y or a t t i t u d e toward Area P l a n n i n g . L i k e everyone e l s e , the Park Board has i t s own l i s t of p r i o r i t i e s and 44. i s not prepared to d e a l w i t h suggest ions to a l t e r that l i s t . Fur thermore, Park Board s t a f f cons idered themselves " e x p e r t s " and were not w i l l i n g to "waste" time and money to hear c i t i z e n s ' o p i n i o n s . Th is genera l a t t i t u d e has been p a r t i a l l y mellowed by the f a c t that i n these days of budget r e s t r a i n t s , the funds p rov ided by v a r i o u s NIP programs represent a major c o n t r i b u t i o n to Park Board p r o j e c t s . A c c o r d i n g to t h e i r spokesman: The NIP programs have been r e c e n t l y the major source of fj.-i; ' : lu.-f u n d i n g . Through NIP the Parks Board has r e c e i v e d i n the past few years $1 m i l l i o n used to p rov ide new and r e p a i r e x i s t i n g equipment. We can get a b e t t e r i d e a of the impact of NIP by comparing t h a t $1 m i l l i o n to the $1.5 m i l l i o n that the Parks Board has i n i t s budget t h i s year to spend over the whole c i t y . Th is amount does not i n c l u d e the o p e r a t i o n budget which i s s e p a r a t e . The S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department f e e l s p a r t i c u l a r l y th reatened by Area P l a n n i n g . The r o l e of community educators assumed by the area p lanners and t h e i r i n t e r f e r e n c e i n the des ign of s o c i a l s e r v i c e s f o r t h e i r communities cause a dangerous f r i c t i o n between the two. The S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department en te rs i n t o d i r e c t compet i t i on f o r the a l l o c a t i o n of resources w i t h Area P l a n n i n g w h i l e i t w i t n e s s e s the d i v i s i o n s t e a d i l y i n c r e a s i n g i t s s i z e . The School Board i s i n a s i t u a t i o n s i m i l a r to o ther departments. The f a c t that the b o a r d ' s concern i s l i m i t e d to educat ion o f t e n c o n t r i b u t e s to f r u s t r a t e the a rea p l a n n e r ' s attempts to suggest a l t e r n a t i v e use f o r u n d e r u t i l i z e d s c h o o l f a c i l i t i e s . Development i n t e r e s t s p lay an important p a r t i n the Area P l a n n i n g process as i n any other type of p l a n n i n g . Developers are concerned w i t h the consequences Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s may have on t h e i r i n t e r e s t s and ^ Stephen C r i p p s , Parks Development Manager, Vancouver Parks Board . Statement made at a meet ing of the Marpole C i t i z e n s P l a n n i n g Committee, A p r i l 2 0 , 1978. 4 5 . f o l l o w the p l a n n i n g process very c l o s e l y . Community involvement i n p l a n n i n g i s something developers do not a p p r e c i a t e ; n e v e r t h e l e s s i t i s b e i n g accepted as the community v o i c e i s becoming s t r o n g e r . Among the r o l e d e f i n e r s p resented i n t h i s chapter the l o c a l community has one of the s t ronges t impacts on d e f i n i n g the p l a n n e r ' s p o s i t i o n i n the Area P l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . In the s i t e o f f i c e i n p a r t i c u l a r the p l a n n e r ' s d i r e c t contact w i t h the l o c a l community c o n t r i b u t e s to a great ex tent to emphasize the r o l e of the p lanner as advocate f o r that community. The concept of advocacy i n p l a n n i n g was i n t r o d u c e d by P a u l D a v i d o f f i n 1965 w i t h h i s famous a r t i c l e "Advocacy and P l u r a l i s m i n P l a n n i n g " . In h i s a r t i c l e Dav ido f f supported the i d e a that the p lanner should do more than e x p l i c a t e the v a l u e s u n d e r l y i n g h i s p r e s c r i p t i o n s f o r courses of a c t i o n , he should a f f i r m them, he shou ld be an advocate f o r what he deems proper ( D a v i d o f f , 1965; 331) . The advocate r o l e i s to be p layed by the p lanner i n a context of p l u r a l p l a n n i n g . Advocacy becomes the means of p r o f e s s i o n a l support f o r competing c l a i m s about how the community should deve lop . P l u r a l i s m i n support of p o l i t i c a l c o n t e n t i o n d e s c r i b e s the p r o c e s s . Advocacy d e s c r i b e s the r o l e performed by the p r o f e s s i o n a l i n the p r o c e s s . Advocate p l a n n i n g , by making more apparent the va lues u n d e r l y i n g p l a n s , and by making d e f i n i t i o n s of s o c i a l costs and b e n e f i t s more e x p l i c i t , should g r e a t l y a s s i s t the p rocess of p l a n e v a l u a t i o n . Dav ido f f adds l a t e r that much of the work of an advocate p lanner would be e d u c a t i o n a l (Dav ido f f , 1965; 333) . The success of D a v i d o f f ' s d e f i n i t i o n of the p lanner as an advocate i s l a r g e l y due to the upsurge i n the l a t e 6 0 ' s of the p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n movement. A genera t ion of young p lanners decided t h a t t h e i r p l a c e was w i t h the p e o p l e , the poor and the m i n o r i t i e s , that had been n e g l e c t e d by 46. the t r a d i t i o n a l approach to p l a n n i n g . These p lanners c a l l e d themselves advocates f o r these members of s o c i e t y and devoted t h e i r energ ies to making the c la ims of t h e s e . m i n o r i t i e s h e a r d . Whi le advocacy became a popu lar word i n the ja rgon and p r a c t i c e of the p l a n n i n g p r o f e s s i o n , the context i n which the advocate r o l e was to be performed was f o r g o t t e n . P l u r a l i s m as a p l a n n i n g process s imply remained an i d e a l a f t e r which to r u n . As a r e s u l t the p l a n n e r - a d v o c a t e s were not i n a p o s i t i o n to c o n t r i b u t e to the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , they were s imply f i g h t i n g the e s t a b l i s h e d power i n order to get as much as they cou ld f o r the groups they were s e r v i n g . The Needlemans w i t h t h e i r " G u e r r i l l a s i n the Bureaucracy , " l a r g e l y c o n t r i b u t e d to a r e d e f i n i t i o n of the advocate r o l e , de -emphas iz ing p l u r a l i s m , the most i n t e r e s t i n g aspect of D a v i d o f f ' s d e f i n i t i o n . In Canada and Vancouver i n p a r t i c u l a r , the r a c i a l , economic, s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l c o n d i t i o n s are d i f f e r e n t from those i n the e a s t e r n U n i t e d S t a t e s where Dav ido f f and the Needlemans conducted t h e i r r e s e a r c h . These d i f f e r e n t c o n d i t i o n s a l l o w the area p lanner i n Vancouver to emphasize the p l u r a l i s t i c aspect of p l a n n i n g r a t h e r than s imply to f i g h t the bureaucracy as Needlemans' g u e r r i l l a s d i d . ' P l u r a l i s m i n p l a n n i n g i s ob ta ined by p r e s e n t i n g the input from v a r i o u s p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the process and i n p a r t i c u l a r , per fo rming the educat i ve r o l e d e s c r i b e d by D a v i d o f f . The educat i ve f u n c t i o n of the area p lanner c o n s i s t s main l y i n making the p a r t i c i p a n t s aware of how the c i v i c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o p e r a t e s , what the d i f f e r e n t f u n c t i o n s of c i t y government are. and how c i t i z e n s can e f f e c t -i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n the p r o c e s s . Neighbourhood p lanners f i n d themselves i n an ambiguous p o s i t i o n . On one s ide they are c i t y bureaucra ts d i r e c t l y accountable to c i t y h a l l , w h i l e on the o t h e r , the community w i t h which they are i n c l o s e contact 47. expects the p lanner to be i t s advocate and support i t s demands. I f the neighbourhood p lanners c o n s c i o u s l y chose to p l a y the r o l e of advocate f o r t h e i r community they must f i r s t counter the doubts that remain i n the community about t h e i r p o s i t i o n w i t h a token of t h e i r commitment to the community. The Needlemans d e s c r i b e d two d i f f e r e n t s t r a t e g i e s used by p lanners to d e a l w i t h t h i s problem. The f i r s t , "agency b e t r a y a l " c o n s i s t s of i n d i r e c t l y demonstrat ing l o y a l t y to the community by committ ing a c t s of d i s l o y a l t y a g a i n s t the p l a n n i n g department. One dev ice commonly used f o r t h i s purpose i s v e r b a l r e j e c t i o n . By openly c r i t i c i z i n g the govern -ment and the p l a n n i n g department p o s i t i o n the neighbourhood p lanner ga ins the community's c o n f i d e n c e . The most e f f e c t i v e form of agency b e t r a y a l however i s l e a k i n g i n f o r m a t i o n about the c i t y p lans and o p e r a t i o n to community groups (The Needlemans, 1974; 125) . The o ther techniques used by the p lanners d e s c r i b e d by the Needlemans i s " s y m b o l i c d e l i v e r y , " r a t h e r than something t a n g i b l e , they d e l i v e r a token of the c i t y i n t e r e s t and good i n t e n t i o n s f o r the community. When the d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t of the community i s such that i t makes a symbol ic d e l i v e r y u s e l e s s , the p lanner i f a l l s back on the s t r a t e g y of d e l i v e r y convers ion to prove t h e i r s e r v i c e a b i l i t y . Unable to d e l i v e r what the community wants , they encourage the community to want what they can d e l i v e r . They t r y to i n t e r e s t the community i n the va lue of the one resource they do c o n t r o l : i n f o r m a t i o n (the Needlemans, 1974; 130) . These techniques can be s u c c e s s f u l l y used by the p lanner who b e l i e v e s i n a s t r o n g advocate r o l e as w e l l as by the p lanner a c c e p t i n g the b u r e a u c r a t i c r o l e . Community p lanners do not cons ide r themselves as j u s t another c i v i l s e r v a n t . They view p l a n n i n g as a p r o f e s s i o n w i t h e t h i c s and concern . The Needlemans p o i n t out that to be denied the a u t h o r i t y they f e e l i s 48. necessary and then to be blamed f o r a c t s they have no c o n t r o l over i s a "Catch 22" f r u s t r a t i o n they w i s h to a v o i d at a l l c o s t s . I t i s not easy f o r the p lanners to communicate to the community that t h e i r r o l e i s h i g h l y s p e c i f i c and independent of o ther agenc ies . In order to s a t i s f y r e s i d e n t s that changes are p o s s i b l e area p l a n n e r s , w i t h few e x c e p t i o n s , choose, a c c o r d i n g to the Needlemans, community o r g a n i z a t i o n and p o l i t i c a l educat ion over l a n d - u s e p l a n n i n g (the Needlemans, 1974; 90) . Th is may e x p l a i n the genera l compla int repor ted by M i c h a e l B rooks , that the advo-cate p lanner i n v a r i a b l y ends up doing more advocat ing ( e . g . o r g a n i z i n g and p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n p r o t e s t a c t i o n s ) than p l a n n i n g . From the academic community, however, came the r e l a t e d compla int tha t those s tudents who are most i n t e r e s t e d i n advocacy o f t e n tend to be q u i t e d i s i n t e r e s t e d i n maste r ing the t e c h n i c a l s k i l l s of the p r o f e s s i o n (Brooks , 1970; 4 2 ) . . A c c o r d i n g to Beckman t h i s s i t u a t i o n i s c e r t a i n l y to be a v o i d e d . He t h i n k s i n f a c t tha t the p r o f e s s i o n a l should r e s i s t r e v e a l i n g s t rong a t t i t u d e s which might r a i s e doubts about h i s o b j e c t i v i t y (Beckman, 1964; 326) . For o thers l i k e P a u l Y l v i s a k e r , the advocate r o l e i s e s s e n t i a l . He p r e d i c t e d a rush of Naderism d u r i n g the 1 9 7 0 ' s , an o u t c r o p p i n g of advocate p lanners keeping the system honest by e x e r t i n g constant p ressure upon i t ( Y l v i s a k e r , 1970; 1 5 ) . By assuming the r o l e of advocate f o r the l o c a l community the p lanner r e j e c t s the r o l e of c i v i l servant and becomes an impor tant a c t o r i n the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . By doing so the p lanner e n t e r s i n t o c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h the p o l i t i c i a n s who have been e l e c t e d to govern the c i t y . David E v e r s l e y supports the t h e s i s that the p lanner cannot leave the d e c i s i o n s s o l e l y to p o l i t i c i a n s , a t tempt ing to p l a y a " n e u t r a l " r o l e . To r e s i g n o n e s e l f to m a n i f e s t i n j u s t i c e s i n the s o c i e t y i n which one h a s , 49. de f a c t o , such l a r g e powers, i s to a b d i c a t e the t a s k i n ignominy, as w e l l as v i o l a t i n g one 's own consc ience i f one knows the f a c t s . He must p o i n t out the consequences of each o p i n i o n to t h e i r masters and i t would be s u r p r i s i n g i f they managed t o t a l l y to conceal an i d e o l o g i c a l b i a s i n favour of one or another ( E v e r s l e y , 1973; 202) . In neighbourhood p l a n n i n g the p lanner has to respond to many masters and cannot assume a va lue n e u t r a l p o s i t i o n because when the p lanner "passes the buck" to the p o l i t i c i a n , he does more than merely keep h i m s e l f pure and va lue n e u t r a l , he e f f e c t i v e l y denies h i s r o l e of p lanner and the p l a n n i n g f u n c t i o n i n government, r e p l a c i n g i t w i t h the r o l e of a d m i n i s t r a t o r of cur rent programs (something a k i n , i f not i d e n t i c a l to the c i t y manager). Thus i f p l a n n i n g i s cons idered to be of some va lue by the p lanner and the community, the adopt ion of an e n t i r e l y va lue n e u t r a l stance by the p lanner works at c ross purposes to the o b j e c t i v e s of the p lanner i n the community ( S i n g e r , 1971; 111) . Wronski sees the p lanner as s u b s e r v i e n t to the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t and , i n f a c t , w e l l removed from p u b l i c p o l i c y making. His (the planner.}s) r o l e i s not tha t of a d j u d i c a t o r or r e f e r e e . . . he must i n f o r m and adv ise h i s boss and h i s p o l i t i c a l masters . He must be prepared to advocate the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t as he sees i t but i n the f i n a l a n a l y s i s he must accept the d e c i s i o n of the p o l i t i c i a n s and work w i t h i n the l i m i t a t i o n s of p o l i t i c a l va lues which they s e t . (Wronski , 1971; ,66) The complex i ty of the p o s i t i o n of the p lanner o p e r a t i n g from a d e c e n t r a l i z e d l o c a t i o n i s u n d e r l i n e d by s e v e r a l a u t h o r s ; Bolan (1969) sees the c i t y p lanner not as a technocra t but as a p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s manager where the "engagement and commitment of the c l i e n t are of g rea te r importance as a means of p r o f e s s i o n a l s k i l l and s e r v i c e than are the 50. m e t h o d o l o g i c a l s k i l l s w i t h which the problem has been analyzed and a s o l u t i o n d e v e l o p e d . " S o c i a l a b i l i t i e s i n the form of o g a n i z i n g and communication s k i l l s , p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s , and knowledge of group dynamics, p o l i t i c s , r o l e t h e o r y , and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t u d i e s were cons idered v i t a l . John Friedmann seems to have been f o l l o w i n g a s i m i l a r road to Bo lan w i t h regard to the d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of p l a n n i n g s e r v i c e s and the p r o j e c t i o n of new a b i l i t i e s r e q u i r e d i n t h i s new environment. In 1969, he remarked tha t the success of p l a n n i n g was l a r g e l y a f u n c t i o n of managing i n t e r -p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s (Fr iedmann, 1969; 311) . By 1971, Friedmann e x p l i c i t l y en jo ined h i s p r o f e s s i o n to change from " i n f l e x i b l e automatons programmed to on ly a t h i n r e p e r t o i r e of a c t i o n r e s p o n s e s , " to something s i m i l a r to Dyckman's urban p o l i c y a n a l y s t (Fr iedmann, 1971) . Th is new form of p lanner has much g r e a t e r contact and a much c l o s e r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the c l i e n t than the t r a d i t i o n a l p r o f e s s i o n a l , whom Friedmann r e j e c t s . In f a c t , the p l a n n e r - c l i e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p he e n v i s i o n s i s s y m b i o t i c , r e q u i r i n g of the p lanner p r o f e s s i o n a l competence i n deve lop ing i n t e r p e r s o n a l and on -go ing exchanges. W i t h i n t h i s same p e r i o d , 1969-1970, Bolan i n t r o d u c e d h i s t h e o r e t i c a l i n q u i r y i n t o the l o c a l approach to urban p l a n n i n g . In h i s breakdown of community d e c i s i o n behaviour (1969) , Bolan contended that the s k i l l and a b i l i t y w i t h which the p lanner performs h i s r o l e i n the l a r g e r d e c i s i o n -making system w i l l have a s i g n i f i c a n t impact on the sys tem's outcome. The r o l e s of the p lanner are w i d e - r a n g i n g and suggest a s i m i l a r span of competence. They i n c l u d e : c r i t i c , i n i t i a t o r , p l a n n e r , t e c h n i c a l e x p e r t , i n v e s t i g a t o r , a n a l y s t , s o c i o - e m o t i o n a l e x p e r t , s t r a t e g i s t , o r g a n i z e r , spokesman-advocate, m e d i a t o r - a r b i t e r , n e g o t i a t o r , p r o p a g a n d i s t , symbol ic l e a d e r , e n f o r c e r , and e v a l u a t o r . But beyond t h i s cata logue of r o l e s , i t 51. i s the subsequent hypothes is of the a r t i c l e which i s of prime importance to t h i s s tudy . Bo lan suggested t h a t the determinants of the p l a n n e r ' s r o l e performance were m o t i v a t i o n (the i n c l i n a t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e ) , o p p o r t u n i t y (a matter of resources ) and s k i l l s . By " s k i l l s " Ke denoted the f o l l o w i n g q u a l i t i e s and a b i l i t i e s : p e r s o n a l i n t e l l i g e n c e ; p e r s o n a l exper ience i n l o c a l d e c i s i o n m a k i n g ; competence i n i n t e r - p e r s o n a l a f f a i r s ; , good a b i l i t y w i t h communications (speaking and w r i t i n g w e l l , w i t h e f f e c t i v e use of the med ia ) ; e x t e n s i v e and s p e c i f i c knowledge of the l o c a l i s s u e s ; and a wide network of s o c i o - p r o f e s s i o n a l c o n t a c t s . From h i s own knowledge Bolan concluded that the p lanner does not have a l l the s k i l l s r e q u i r e d and that a p p r o p r i a t e educat ion i n i n t e r - p e r s o n a l s k i l l s , s o c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n , group dynamics, p o l i t i c s , communication, and community o r g a n i z a t i o n were e s s e n t i a l . Lack of t r a i n i n g i n these a r e a s , i n B o l a n ' s o p i n i o n , "has c o n t r i b u t e d to f a i l u r e s i n urban p o l i c y m a k i n g . " Th is t h e s i s w i l l not be focussed on the advocate -bureaucra t dichotomy as much as on the v a r i o u s aspects of the b u r e a u c r a t i c r o l e area p lanners are p l a y i n g i n Vancouver. One of the reasons f o r not a n a l y z i n g i n depth the advocate r o l e i s t h a t there i s a l r e a d y a l a r g e body of l i t e r a t u r e d e a l i n g w i t h the s u b j e c t . The second reason i s that the economic, s o c i a l and r a c i a l s t r u c t u r e of Canadian s o c i e t y i s d i f f e r e n t from the U.S. where most of that l i t e r a t u r e o r i g i n a t e s and as- .a ' . r e s u l t - - - t h e advocate r o l e a t t r i b u t e d to community p lanners assumes a complete ly d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i n the Canadian c o n t e x t . In Vancouver i n p a r t i c u l a r the d i s t o r t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g i n t o NIP has f o r c e d the p lanner i n t o the r o l e of a d m i n i s t r a t o r of f e d e r a l programs. P l a n n i n g becomes a secondary f u n c t i o n , and the advocate r o l e i s comple te l y ignored i n t h i s c o n t e x t . The concept of Area P l a n n i n g i s confused w i t h 52. i t s d i s t o r t i o n s and the area planners are faced with a v a r i e t y of r o l e s they are expected to play. The i n d i v i d u a l a b i l i t y of the planner to r e c o n c i l e apparently contra-d i c t o r y r o l e s plays a very important part in the performance of the Area Planning program. There i s an element of i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y between the rol e s of career c i v i l servant and community worker, and the planner i s l e f t alone to solve t h i s c o n f l i c t . The following d e s c r i p t i o n of three d i f f e r -ent si t u a t i o n s i n which area planners operate i n Vancouver w i l l help to understand the area planners' struggle in defining t h e i r own p o s i t i o n . CHAPTER 4 THREE OPERATIONAL MODELS Th is s e c t i o n d e s c r i b e s three d i f f e r e n t a p p l i c a t i o n s of the t h e o r e -t i c a l model presented i n the p rev ious chapte r . They show how the p o s i t i o n of the p lanner i s a f f e c t e d d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g process by d i f f e r e n t r o l e d e f i n e r s together w i t h o ther v a r i a b l e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y the d i f f e r e n t s t r u c t u r e s i n which the p lanner o p e r a t e s . The same v a r i a b l e s are present i n a l l the th ree models but the r o l e d e f i n e r s are not the same f o r a l l s t r u c t u r e s . The i n t e n s i t y w i t h which the r o l e d e f i n e r s p ressure the p lanner to p l a y d i f f e r e n t r o l e s a l s o v a r i e s at d i f f e r e n t stages of the p r o c e s s . The f o l l o w i n g a p p l i c a t i o n s of the t h e o r e t i c a l model rep resent th ree d i f f e r e n t ways i n which Area P l a n n i n g i s implemented i n Vancouver. Th is t h e o r e t i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n h e l p s to understand and separate the v a r i o u s a c t i v i t i e s of the area p l a n n e r . In p r a c t i c e , the same p lanner can be oper -a t i n g w i t h i n more than one s t r u c t u r e at the same t i m e ; t h i s w i l l make a comparison between d i f f e r e n t models very d i f f i c u l t . The s e p a r a t i o n and c a t e g o r i z a t i o n of the d i f f e r e n t a c t i v i t i e s of the p lanner w i l l n e v e r t h e l e s s c o n t r i b u t e to understand the complex i t y of the s i t u a t i o n s i n which the p lanner o p e r a t e s . Another important f u n c t i o n of the models i s to o f f e r a context i n which the i n t e r v i e w responses can be i n t e r p r e t e d . The th ree c a t e g o r i e s of a c t i v i t i e s to which the t h e o r e t i c a l model i s a p p l i e d are here presented under the t i t l e s of NIP program, LAP program, and In-house a c t i v i t i e s . 54. THE NIP PROGRAM NIP (Neighbourhood Improvement Program) i s the most popu la r Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t y i n Vancouver. Confused and i d e n t i f i e d w i t h LAP, i t has become the backbone of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n , at l e a s t i n an a d m i n i -s t r a t i v e sense and i n terms of s t a f f s i z e . In a s i t u a t i o n where Area P l a n n i n g i s g e t t i n g consent from d i f f e r e n t s i d e s but l i t t l e f i n a n c i a l support from C i t y C o u n c i l i t i s easy to under -s tand why NIP has become the most important f u n c t i o n i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . The c i t y i s c o n t r i b u t i n g on ly one q u a r t e r of the c a p i t a l a l l o -ca ted to each NIP program. In o ther words, the c i t y i s g e t t i n g back f o u r t imes as much as i t i s pay ing f o r . The program i s funded by d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of government: 50% f e d e r a l , 2 5 % e p r o v i n c i a l , 25% m u n i c i p a l . I t s purpose i s to improve the more rundown areas of the c i t y by a s s i g n i n g a f i x e d amount o f money (approx imate ly $2 m i l l i o n f o r a neighbourhood of 10,000 people) to be spent i n the area f o r p h y s i c a l improvements. A t the same time the f e d e r a l RRAP ( R e s i d e n t i a l R e h a b i l i t a t i o n A s s i s t a n c e Program) h e l p s w i t h loans and/or g r a n t s , homeowners and l a n d l o r d s i n the des ignated a rea to improve t h e i r b u i l d i n g s . When NIP/RRAP areas are s e l e c t e d by the c i t y and approved by the s e n i o r governments, fund ing commitments are e s t a b l i s h e d , a p lanner and s t a f f are ass igned by the c i t y , a c i t i z e n s ' a d v i s o r y committee i s e s t a b l i s h e d , a s i t e o f f i c e i s opened and a "concept p l a n " to a l l o c a t e funds to s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t s i s worked out i n c o - o p e r a t i o n w i t h the c i t i z e n s , p lanners and o ther c i v i c s t a f f . F i n a l d e c i s i o n s on expend i tu res are made by C i t y C o u n c i l . An i n t e r d e p a r t m e n t a l NIP A s s i s t a n c e Committee had been e s t a b l i s h e d i n September 1975 to f a c i l i t a t e the implementat ion of the program. 55. The major d i f f e r e n c e between the NIP model and the o thers i s the presence as r o l e d e f i n e r s of the f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l governments. The NIP program was i n t r o d u c e d by the f e d e r a l government i n S e c t i o n 2 7 . 1 to 2 7.7 of the N a t i o n a l Housing A c t ; the way i n which the program i s funded i s s p e c i f i e d as w e l l as the s teps that must be f o l l o w e d to o b t a i n the funds . In implementing the program, the p lanner must f o l l o w the g u i d e -l i n e s e s t a b l i s h e d by the f e d e r a l government governing ways i n which the funds can be used and d e a d l i n e s to be met by the program. In t h i s program, the funds are used as a c a r r o t to s t i m u l a t e c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n w h i l e the g u i d e l i n e s and dead l ines are used as a s t i c k to c o n t r o l the program. The s t rong f i n a n c i a l involvement of the f e d e r a l government may generate p o l i t i c a l p ressure from i n d i v i d u a l Members of P a r l i a m e n t who f e e l they should be ab le to get the pet p r o j e c t s i n the l o c a l a rea under -taken w i t h NIP funds . C i t y p o l i t i c i a n s jump on the NIP bandwagon to take advantage of the exposure the program o f f e r s . Aldermen can have a say i n the s e l e c t i o n of needy neighbourhoods. At t h i s l e v e l they can favour one area r a t h e r than another and t h e r e f o r e become accountable to t h e i r e l e c t o r a t e f o r t h i s c h o i c e . Dur ing the p r e p a r a t i o n of the p l a n , C o u n c i l has l i t t l e input except f o r the p o l i t i c a l i n f l u e n c e tha t i n d i v i d u a l a ldermen, i n p a r t i c u l a r the one appointed as l i a i s o n w i t h the a r e a , can e x e r c i s e on the committee or the p lanner to i n f l u e n c e the o r i e n t a t i o n of the p l a n . C o u n c i l i s i n a way de legated by the f e d e r a l government to d e a l w i t h NIP and t h e i r approva l of the p l a n i s a major step necessary to ga in access to the funds . C o u n c i l a p p r o v a l becomes more a f o r m a l i t y s i n c e the g u i d e l i n e s imposed on the committee guarantee a h i g h l e v e l of a c c e p t a b i l i t y of the p l a n by a l l governments. Because of t h e i r l o c a t i o n , p lanners tend 56. to i s o l a t e themselves from the P l a n n i n g Department. The P l a n n i n g Department p e r c e i v e s NIP p o s i t i v e l y s i n c e i t r e p r e s e n t s an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r e x t r a fund ing and consequent expans ion . The Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n i n Vancouver has been ab le to expand to i t s p resent s i z e m a i n l y because of N IP . Th is p a r t i c u l a r f a c t may account f o r the d i r e c t i o n the d i v i s i o n i s t a k i n g towards a f u n c t i o n of a d m i n i s t r a t o r of f e d e r a l programs r a t h e r than an Area P l a n n i n g f u n c t i o n . The RRAP i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h NIP and a l though the p lanner has no r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r RRAP, the two programs are o p e r a t i n g out of the same o f f i c e and are p e r c e i v e d by the g e n e r a l p u b l i c as one. Other c i v i c departments cannot openly oppose NIP s i n c e they have no c o n t r o l on i t s fund ing and the p r o j e c t s proposed by the NIP committee can be cons idered a g i f t to them. In genera l the o ther departments a p p r e c i a t e the e x t r a fund ing they are g e t t i n g but would p r e f e r to dec ide on t h e i r own how to spend i t r a t h e r than take d i r e c t i o n s from the c i t i z e n s . The bu reau -c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e of c i v i c departments i s not f l e x i b l e enough to accept and to u t i l i z e to t h e i r own advantage the input from the r e s i d e n t s i n the community. They see any th ing d i f f e r e n t from t h e i r t r a d i t i o n a l p l a n n i n g approach as a th rea t to t h e i r e x i s t e n c e and power. Other departments see the NIP p lanner as i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s and oppose t h i s i n t r u -s i o n w i t h a l l means a v a i l a b l e to them; they may oppose NIP s imply by not a s s i g n i n g enough support s t a f f , du r ing the p r e p a r a t i o n stage of the p l a n they may r e t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n or g ive u n r e a l e s t i m a t e s on p r o j e c t s , they may a l s o become u n c o - o p e r a t i v e when asked to concur on v a r i o u s i tems i n the p l a n b e f o r e approva l by C o u n c i l . Other c i v i c departments may use t h e i r i n f l u e n c e to p ressure the P l a n n i n g Department and c i t y p o l i t i c i a n s to take a c t i o n a g a i n s t NIP programs. Although NIP can expect from development i n t e r e s t s the type of o p p o s i t i o n t h a t a l l programs i n v o l v i n g p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n r e c e i v e , the d i r e c t contact of the p lanner implementing t h i s program w i t h deve lopers i s l i m i t e d . Oneoof the reasons f o r t h i s i s the f a c t tha t NIP programs are i n i t i a t e d i n s t a b l e r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s , i n neighbourhoods whose p h y s i c a l c o n d i t i o n can be improved wi thout r e q u i r i n g a major redevelopment. In t h i s s i t u a t i o n , deve lopers w i l l d i r e c t t h e i r a c t i o n at the p o l i t i c a l l e v e l , i n p a r t i c u l a r the f e d e r a l where the program o r i g i n a t e s . Res idents are the major p a r t n e r of the p lanner i n t h i s program. They are l u r e d i n t o i t by the presence of the funds they can use to improve t h e i r neighbourhood. A v a r i e t y of people are a t t r a c t e d by the program, t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a l s o vary a c c o r d i n g to the phase of the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s ; some people are concerned w i t h g e n e r a l i s s u e s and the des ign of p o l i c i e s f o r t h e i r l o c a l a r e a , o thers p r e f e r to focus on the improvement o f a s t r e e t o r park . To d e s c r i b e the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the p l a n n i n g program, we can a l s o r e f e r to the comment made by Anderson and Needleman that i n most of the cases they are r e s i d e n t s that know l i t t l e about p l a n n i n g and cannot see f u r t h e r than t h e i r own f r o n t y a r d . The p lanner has to ga in t h e i r conf idence i n order to o b t a i n t h e i r c o - o p e r a t i o n , but he r e p r e s e n t s the bureaucracy of c i t y h a l l and he i s c a l l e d upon to e x p l a i n c i t y p o l i c i e s . To get out of t h i s c o n t r a d i c t i o n the p lanner has to s i d e w i t h the community, ve rsus C i t y H a l l and i t s bureaucracy . By doing t h i s the p lanner can s t i l l p l a y a sa fe game by p o i n t i n g out to the c i t i z e n s the c o n s t r a i n t e x i s t i n g i n the s t r u c t u r e of NIP when they are s tepp ing out of l i n e . By showing to the committee the c o n s t r a i n t s i n the process the p lanner may present as a v i c t o r y what o therwise would seem a normal achievement. Th is technique has been r e c o g n i z e d and d e f i n e d by the Needlemans as " s y m b o l i c d e l i v e r y " . 5 8 . In t h i s s i t u a t i o n the most s u c c e s s f u l NIP p lanner i s not the one that t r i e s to p l a y the advocate r o l e or the r o l e of g u e r r i l l a , but the one that p l a y s w i t h i n the r u l e s of the system. The major achievements that the p lanner can o b t a i n are a genera l improvement not o n l y i n the p h y s i c a l aspect of the community but a l s o i n the s o c i a l network of community a c t i v i t i e s , the p lanner can through the program educate the p a r t i c i p a n t s to the p l a n n i n g process and the i n t r i c a c i e s of the c i t y bureaucracy c o n t r i b u t i n g i n t h i s way to the democrat ic p r o c e s s . THE LAP PROGRAM LAP programs are e s t a b l i s h e d when the p l a n n i n g needs of a l o c a l a r e a warrant e x t r a a t t e n t i o n . The program i s expected to produce a compre-h e n s i v e p l a n f o r the a r e a . The LAP model i s the one that r e f l e c t s more c l o s e l y the t h e o r e t i c a l model f o r L o c a l A rea P l a n n i n g as presented i n the 1973 r e p o r t p r e c e d i n g the i n t r o d u c t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver. The Area P l a n n i n g exper -ience i n Vancouver has been r a r e l y based on the p o l i c i e s i n d i c a t e d i n the r e p o r t . In most of the cases the Area P l a n n i n g programs were d i c t a t e d by e x t e r n a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s . In K i t s i l a n o , the f i r s t L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g (LAP) e x p e r i e n c e , the LAP program was p a r t i a l l y i n c o r p o r a t e d i n NIP when t h i s program was i n i t i a t e d i n the a r e a . The second major LAP program began i n Grandview Woodland i n 1975. The same p l a n n i n g s t a f f i s managing the NIP program at the same time w i t h a d i f f e r e n t P l a n n i n g Committee. A t the present t ime the Grandview Woodland LAP program, a f t e r some f r u s t r a t i n g e x p e r i e n c e s , i s merely s u r v i v i n g and w i l l soon be unable to j u s t i f y i t s e x i s t e n c e . Other programs were l a b e l l e d as LAP, and produced a p l a n f o r the a r e a , 59. but were managed by a planner working at c i t y h a l l . Recently, an LAP program has been introduced i n the Marpole Local Area. Since Marpole w i l l not q u a l i f y for NIP this can be considered the very f i r s t LAP experience i n i t s pure form. The time a l l o c a t e d to produce a plan i s 18 months. No other guidelines have beencspecified i n the assumption that a f t e r four years of Area Planning i n Vancouver, the s t a f f i n the s i t e o f f i c e w i l l be able to manage the program. The personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the area planner implementing LAP can be assumed to be the same of the NIP planner; they both operate from a s i t e o f f i c e with very s i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . * The structure of LAP, contrary to NIP,is not defined. The program i s expected to deal with the major planning issues i n the area, rezoning i n p a r t i c u l a r . The f e d e r a l government i s not d i r e c t l y involved with LAP, t h i s planning process remains i n the hands of Council. Individual aldermen maintain personal p o s i t i o n s toward the program, they look at the process from d i f f e r e n t p o l i t i c a l standpoints and maintain d i f f e r e n t i n d i v i d u a l expectations. Some of them consider the program an expensive luxury, others a necessary step to get the community involved. In spite of t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s , Council f e e l s the same way about one thing, they are the only elected body and as such can make p o l i t i c a l decisions. The l o c a l area planning committee must remain i n a consultative function. Since there are no funds a l l o c a t e d for LAP other than for the admini-s t r a t i o n of the program, other c i v i c departments may f e e l that they can maintain a better control on the planning program and therefore be more co-operative with the planner and the committee. On the other hand, because there are no funds a l l o c a t e d , LAP must compete with the other 60. departments f o r the a l l o c a t i o n of a share of the c i t y budget and t h i s may cause c o n f l i c t . In the case of c o l l i s i o n between the committee and the c i t y bureaucracy the p lanner w i l l not be p r o t e c t e d by w e l l d e f i n e d g u i d e l i n e s as f o r NIP. In t h i s s i t u a t i o n the p lanner can remind the committee of the terms of r e f e r e n c e i n d i c a t i n g that the p lanner can express h i s / h e r o p i n i o n i f d i f f e r e n t from the p o s i t i o n of the committee. Developers whose i n t e r e s t s are going to be a f f e c t e d by the LAP program use t h e i r i n f l u e n c e p a r t i c u l a r l y at the p o l i t i c a l l e v e l to get the p l a n moving i n the d i r e c t i o n more favourab le to them. The u n p r e d i c t a b i l i t y of the p l a n n i n g process and the l o s s of t ime a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t are cons idered as n e g a t i v e f a c t o r s by the deve lopers . The i n t e r e s t s o f the l o c a l community and those of developers do not g e n e r a l l y c o i n c i d e and the p lanner may remain caught between the two. Cont rary to NIP the focus i n LAP i s not on how to spend the money but how to get funds or on p r o j e c t s that do not r e q u i r e f u n d i n g . I f the immediate i n t e r e s t of the community i s not on spending the funds a l l o c a t e d , the r e s i d e n t s can concent ra te on t h e i r i n t e r e s t s as i n d i v i d u a l s or members of community groups. The LAP program b r i n g s to the s u r f a c e the d i f f e r e n t and c o n f l i c t i n g i n t e r e s t s i n the community c r e a t i n g the c o n d i t i o n s f o r a s p l i t i n the community over i s s u e s . The p lanner may not be prepared to d e a l w i t h t h i s c o n f l i c t and o ther c i v i c departments w i l l not be prepared to r e a c t p o s i t i v e l y to i t . C o u n c i l w i l l not a p p r e c i a t e the f a c t tha t i t i s c a l l e d upon to make a d e c i s i o n tha t w i l l make aldermen unpopular w i t h one of the s i d e s and the LAP program w i l l be cons idered a f a i l u r e . The r e s i d e n t s c o n t r i b u t i n g to the p l a n n i n g process f o r i d e a l i s t i c reasons w i l l be f r u s t r a t e d when caught i n between c o n f l i c t i n g f o r c e s and e v e n t u a l l y w i l l drop out of the program. Those r e s i d e n t s that see the 61. present s i t u a t i o n i n the area as f a v o u r a b l e to them, oppose LAP a c t i v i t i e s or chose not to p a r t i c i p a t e l e a v i n g the program open to the a c c u s a t i o n of not r e p r e s e n t i n g the l o c a l community. The e x p e c t a t i o n s imposed on the p lanner by h i s / h e r t r a i n i n g and p r o f e s s i o n w i l l have an e f f e c t on the way the i n d i v i d u a l p lanner choses to s o l v e the c o n f l i c t among r o l e s . What emerges from the a n a l y s i s of the l i t e r a t u r e i s that the p r o f e s s i o n has not r e a l l y c l a r i f i e d to the p l a n n e r s what p o s i t i o n they are supposed to take i n the s t r u g g l e to produce the p l a n . The p l a n n e r s are l e f t a lone i n a s i t u a t i o n i n which they cannot p o s s i b l y p l e a s e a l l s i d e s . IN-HOUSE ACTIVITIES The a c t i v i t i e s of the in -house group are aimed at o f f e r i n g some s e r v i c e to the areas i n the c i t y not covered by NIP o r LAP programs. These a c t i v i t i e s can be c l a s s i f i e d as m o n i t o r i n g and s p e c i a l p r o j e c t s or i s s u e s . These a c t i v i t i e s are a l s o performed by the p lanners i n s i t e o f f i c e s who do i n f a c t monitor areas adj.acent to the one i n which they are p roduc ing a p l a n and a l s o d e a l w i t h s p e c i f i c i s s u e s as they a r i s e i n t h e i r a r e a . The d i f f e r e n c e between the two groups of p lanners i s that w h i l e f o r the s i t e o f f i c e p lanner the main o b j e c t i v e s i s to produce a p l a n f o r the a r e a , the i n - h o u s e group responds to the demands of C o u n c i l and gets i n v o l v e d i n i s s u e s i d e n t i f i e d i n the department 's work program. The number of p r e s s i n g i s s u e s i s such that the m o n i t o r i n g f u n c t i o n i s g e n e r a l l y very l i m i t e d . The i n - h o u s e p lanners work i n o f f i c e s c l o s e to the o ther members of the d i v i s i o n and of the P l a n n i n g Department zon ing s t a f f i n p a r t i c u l a r . T h e i r a c t i v i t y i s c l o s e l y moni tored by t h e i r s u p e r i o r s and t h e i r f r e e 62. i n i t i a t i v e l i m i t e d . They are area p lanners o n l y by d e f i n i t i o n , i n p r a c t i c e t h e i r approach to p l a n n i n g d i f f e r s l i t t l e from that of c o l l e a g u e s i n o ther d i v i s i o n s . In f a c t they may work together i n t a s k f o r c e teams a l s o i n v o l -v i n g other departments. Because of t h i s c l o s e working r e l a t i o n s h i p and because they are not u s u a l l y i d e n t i f i e d w i t h a s p e c i f i c l o c a l a r e a , some i n - h o u s e p lanners c o n s i d e r themselves g e n e r a l i s t p lanners and are p e r c e i v e d as such i n s i d e c i t y h a l l . I t i s d i f f i c u l t to e x p l a i n how the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the i n - h o u s e p lanners d i f f e r from those of the ones i n s i t e o f f i c e s s i n c e many of the p lanners now work ing i n - h o u s e have r e c e n t l y worked i n s i t e o f f i c e s and/or a re about to move t o one. What can be s a i d i s that the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of i n - h o u s e a c t i v i t i e s are such that may a t t r a c t p l a n n e r s who have no i n t e r e s t i n moving to a s i t e o f f i c e and are not i n t e r e s t e d i n work ing w i t h r e s i d e n t s p r e p a r i n g a p l a n . The in -house p lanner i s supposed to d e a l w i t h the p u b l i c d i r e c t l y but the c o n t a c t s w i t h the community are g e n e r a l l y l i m i t e d and are more c o n f r o n t -a t i o n than c o - o p e r a t i o n as w i t h the committee. The i n - h o u s e p l a n n e r s are too c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h c i t y h a l l to be ab le to s e l l an image of themselves independent of c i t y bureaucracy . The b e s t they can do i s to e x p l a i n the p o l i t i c a l p rocess to the p e o p l e , hop ing they w i l l understand t h e i r p o s i t i o n . The i n - h o u s e p lanner gets i n v o l v e d g e n e r a l l y when the i s s u e has developed i n t o a problem and l i t t l e can be done to avo id c o n f r o n t -a t i o n . The p lanner i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n i s not i n a f o c a l p o s i t i o n as the s i t e o f f i c e p lanner i s . The a c t i v i t i e s of the i n - h o u s e p lanners are " r e p o r t " o r i e n t e d , which means they have been i n s t r u c t e d to work on a s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t and are expected to r e p o r t to C o u n c i l about i t . T h i s has s e v e r a l i m p l i c a t i o n s : the p lanners r a t h e r than community workers see themselves as exper ts o f f e r i n g t e c h n i c a l support to C o u n c i l ; they are aware of the p o l i t i c a l c l i m a t e i n C o u n c i l chamber and are d i r e c t l y r e a c t i n g to i t , and o b v i o u s l y are d i r e c t i n g themselves to C i t y C o u n c i l . From the p i c t u r e g iven so f a r i t i s ev ident t h a t the i n - h o u s e p lanner c o n t r i b u t e s ve ry l i t t l e to making the p l a n n i n g process more humane. The p lanner i s j u s t a bureaucrat f a c i n g d e v e l o p e r s , the community, C o u n c i l , and anyone e l s e i n v o l v e d w i t h l i t t l e c o n t r o l on the outcome of the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The s e p a r a t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s i n the th ree c a t e g o r i e s presented i s o n l y an attempt to c l a s s i f y the d i f f e r e n t Area P l a n n i n g programs i n v iew of the p o s i t i o n the p lanner occup ies i n i t . The th ree c a t e g o r i e s presented are not m u t u a l l y e x c l u s i v e i n the sense tha t a p lanner may be i n v o l v e d i n more than one of them; the r e a l i t y of Area P l a n n i n g i s that the d i f f e r e n t a c t i v i t i e s are so i n t e r t w i n e d tha t a s e p a r a t i o n would be ve ry d i f f i c u l t and c e r t a i n l y c o n f u s i n g . Furthermore there i s a n o t i c e a b l e d i sc repancy between the v a r i o u s ways p lanners and the way each p e r c e i v e and d e f i n e t h e i r own a c t i v i t i e s . Ih these c i r c u m -s t a n c e s , on l y very broad c a t e g o r i e s would a l l o w the r e a c h i n g of a s a t i s f a c -t o r y degree of consensus on the d e f i n i t i o n s used. CHAPTER 5 DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH DATA SOURCES DESCRIPTION The data used i n t h i s research can be grouped i n two major c a t e g o r i e s : the f i r s t i n c l u d e s the e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e , r e l e v a n t documents and m a t e r i a l p u b l i s h e d by the P l a n n i n g Department, and the second r e s u l t s from s e v e r a l s e t s of s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w s . At the f i r s t stage of the r e s e a r c h , the a n a l y s i s of the e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e i s accompanied by research o f v a r i o u s Area P l a n n i n g documents - they i n c l u d e minutes from d i f f e r e n t Area P l a n n i n g Committee meet ings , i n t e r d e p a r t m e n t a l memoranda, and other m a t e r i a l conta ined i n the Area P l a n n i n g f i l e s at C i t y H a l l . N e w s p a p e r c l i p p i n g s and o ther a r t i c l e s r e g a r d i n g the sub jec t of the t h e s i s were a l s o an e x c e l l e n t source of i n f o r m a t i o n . The o b j e c t i v e at t h i s stage was to ga in a c l e a r unders tand ing of Area P l a n n i n g h i s t o r y , i t s o r i g i n s , the p o l i t i c a l c l i m a t e i n which i t developed, and i t s e v o l u t i o n to d a t e . Th is i n f o r m a t i o n was needed to des ign a model of the s t r u c t u r e w i t h i n which the p lanner o p e r a t e s . The v a l i d i t y and .accuracy of the t h e o r e t i c a l model was t e s t e d at a l a t e r stage by comparing i t to the data c o l l e c t e d i n the i n t e r v i e w s about the v a r i o u s components of the t h e o r e t i c a l model . The major d i f f i c u l t y i n d e f i n i n g the models was that i n d i v i d u a l p lanners i n many cases operate w i t h i n more than one s t r u c t u r e . Th is i n c r e a s e s the d i f f i c u l t y of c o l l e c t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n f o r each separate s t r u c t u r e and may a l s o a l t e r the p l a n n e r s ' p e r c e p t i o n of t h e i r s i t u a t i o n . At the second l e v e l , the accuracy of the model was v e r i f i e d through s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w s . Area p lanners were the l a r g e s t group of people to be i n t e r v i e w e d , i n f a c t a l l the p lanners i n the Area P l a n n i n g 65. D i v i s i o n were i n t e r v i e w e d . P l a n n e r a s s i s t a n t s were i n t e r v i e w e d i n cases where they a c t u a l l y perform a p l a n n e r ' s j o b . Sen io r p lanners s u p e r v i s i n g the i n - h o u s e and the s i t e o f f i c e groups were i n t e r v i e w e d as w e l l as the a s s o c i a t e d i r e c t o r i n charge of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n and the d i r e c t o r of the P l a n n i n g Department. Other p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the p l a n n i n g process were i n t e r v i e w e d to o b t a i n t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s of the r o l e of the p l a n n e r and to de f ine the r e l a t i o n they develop w i t h the p l a n n e r . For some of the agencies or groups i n t e r -a c t i n g w i t h the p lanner i t has been easy to l i m i t the number of i n t e r v i e w s to one or two persons s i n c e the agency has a person ass igned to d e a l s p e c i f i c a l l y w i t h Area P l a n n i n g i s s u e s . Th is i s the case w i t h the S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department, E n g i n e e r i n g , Park Board and School Board . The person or persons b e i n g d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d i n Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s have a d i r e c t and unique knowledge of the problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e i r r e l a -t i o n to Area P l a n n i n g . They see Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s from t h e i r department 's p o i n t of view and can c l e a r l y p o i n t out where the c o n f l i c t a r i s e s between t h e i r approach to p l a n n i n g and the Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s . C i t i z e n s and members of C o u n c i l are two groups that cou ld not be approached i n the same way. Every c i t i z e n and member of C o u n c i l w i l l have a p e r s o n a l p o i n t of view and i t would have been i m p o s s i b l e to i n t e r v i e w each i n d i v i d u a l and a q u e s t i o n n a i r e r w o u l d have been inadequate f o r the t a s k . The problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and the p r e d i c t e d low r e t u r n r a t e encouraged the researcher to pursue the route of the s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w . Once t h i s d e c i s i o n was made, the next step was to s e l e c t a s m a l l number of people among the hundreds of c i t i z e n s tha t have been i n v o l v e d to date i n Area P l a n n i n g . 66. The two a l t e r n a t i v e s cons idered were random s e l e c t i o n and the s e l e c -t i o n of those p a r t i c i p a n t s more deeply i n v o l v e d i n Area P l a n n i n g and b e t t e r capable of a r t i c u l a t i n g t h e i r thoughts about i t . I t was f e l t that a l though the random s e l e c t i o n would tend to ba lance b i a s e s , i t would not guarantee the proper coverage of the t o p i c s i n v e s t i -ga ted . The sample frame would prove^inadequate because the exper iences of the c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a n t s i n Area P l a n n i n g are r e l a t e d to d i f f e r e n t time frames and are a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a v a r i e t y of Area P l a n n i n g s i t u a t i o n s . The second a l t e r n a t i v e a l lowed s e l e c t i o n of those p a r t i c i p a n t s that have been i n v o l v e d i n Area P l a n n i n g f o r a long p e r i o d of t i m e , have a broader p e r s p e c t i v e on the t o p i c s researched and are more a r t i c u l a t e d i n p r e s e n t i n g i t . There are a l l k i n d s of b i a s e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h i s approach and the best tha t cou ld be done to e l i m i n a t e the e f f e c t of those b i a s e s would be to be aware of t h e i r e x i s t e n c e and to p resent the m a t e r i a l produced by the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the a p p r o p r i a t e c o n t e x t . B i a s e s cannot be e l i m i n a t e d but can be ba lanced by p r e s e n t i n g a spectrum of o p i n i o n s that attempts to encompass the d i f f e r e n t p o s i t i o n s of c i t i z e n s i n v o l v e d i n the Area P l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . I t i s very d i f f i c u l t to chose the people that are to speak f o r the p u b l i c . I f there were such persons there would be no need f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n and consequent ly f o r L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g . The choice of the spokesman f o r the r e s i d e n t p a r t i c i p a n t s i s open to b i a s . The researcher a l s o be ing b i a s e d by d e c i d i n g who to i n t e r v i e w and the person i n t e r v i e w e d can be o n l y sure of r e p r e s e n t i n g h i s / h e r p o i n t of v iew. I t was dec ided that a l though the i n t e r v i e w approach would o f f e r i n t e r e s t i n g i n s i g h t s i n t o the p r o c e s s , i t was not s u f f i c i e n t to represent the wide range of p u b l i c o p i n i o n s . Therefore i t needed to be supplemented w i t h other i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g the p u b l i c r e a c t i o n to L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g . At a conference of LAP and NIP committees i n Vancouver on the 23rd of October 1977 v a r i o u s problems a r i s i n g from the program were d i s c u s s e d by the p u b l i c , c i v i c s t a f f and p o l i t i c i a n s . The work ing paper f o r t h i s conference was the repor t on L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g produced by the P l a n n i n g Department. The r e p o r t i s c o n t i n u a l l y b e i n g r e v i s e d and the workshop was a good o p p o r t u n i t y to o b t a i n feedback to the r e p o r t . Furthermore a l l p l a n n i n g committees and i n t e r e s t e d c i t i z e n s were i n v i t e d to respond to the r e p o r t . As a r e s u l t , 12 b r i e f s were submit ted by c i t i z e n s and c i t i z e n groups and f i v e from other p u b l i c agencies (see Appendix V l f o r l i s t of s u b m i s s i o n s ) . A l l these comments were used i n the research to present the view of the p u b l i c ori L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g . The major research problem a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the u t i l i z a t i o n of t h i s m a t e r i a l i s rep resented by the f a c t tha t the comments were not addressed to the ques t ions posed by the r e s e a r c h . In s p i t e of t h i s i t was p o s s i b l e to e x t r a c t from the m a t e r i a l p r e s e n t e d , comments r e l e v a n t to the research purpose. Th is i n f o r m a t i o n was s u p p l e -mented by a few i n t e r v i e w s conducted w i t h people chosen f o r the l e n g t h and c o n t i n u i t y of t h e i r involvement and f o r t h e i r a b i l i t y to p resent an a r t i c u l a t e d a n a l y s i s of the L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . In a d d i t i o n to t h i s , the w r i t e r has been an o b s e r v e r / p a r t i c i p a n t i n v a r i o u s L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g programs, s i t t i n g i n on many p l a n n i n g committee meetings i n d i f f e r e n t l o c a l areas s i n c e December 1976 and p r e s e n t l y s i t s i n the Marpole LAP committee as a r e s i d e n t member. Some steps were taken i n order to reduce the e f f e c t s of b i a s e s ; the f i r s t was the use of extreme c a u t i o n i n s e l e c t i n g the statements so that they would be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the wide range of o p i n i o n s expressed . 68. Another important step was the comparison of these statements w i t h the conc lus ions presented i n the Report Back on C o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h P u b l i c on  the Review of L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g produced by the P l a n n i n g Department. The process by which these c o n c l u s i o n s were reached was a l s o a n a l y z e d . The i n t e r v i e w s w i t h aldermen were l i m i t e d to those members of C o u n c i l who have been more i n v o l v e d w i t h Area P l a n n i n g and whose o p i n i o n s represent oppos i te extremes. The aldermen i n t e r v i e w e d are a l s o the ones a c t i n g as a l i a i s o n w i t h those neighbourhoods where Area P l a n n i n g programs are more a c t i v e at the p resent t i m e . COLLECTION OF DATA Th is approach to the problem of d e f i n i n g the p l a n n e r ' s p o s i t i o n i n Area P l a n n i n g may not have the r i g o r r e q u i r e d of a more s c i e n t i f i c approach. I f s o , i t i s because the purpose of t h i s r e s e a r c h i s e x p l o r a t o r y , shedding some l i g h t i n an area that has not been the sub jec t of much i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The p o s i t i o n of the p lanner i n Area P l a n n i n g i s n e v e r t h e -l e s s a c r i t i c a l s u b j e c t . The p l a n n e r ' s response to the v a r i o u s e x p e c t a -t i o n s determines to a great ex ten t the f i n a l output of the program. I t was f e l t that i n t h i s case the end j u s t i f i e d the means and i t was more important to break as much ground as p o s s i b l e than to t r y to f i n d the f i n a l answer i n a s i t u a t i o n where there cannot p o s s i b l y be a f i n a l n a n s w e r . The s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w was judged to be the b e s t data c o l l e c t i o n t o o l . Th is technique i s broad enough to s i m u l t a n e o u s l y generate and t e s t new hypotheses , going beyond the boundar ies of the research des ign i f necessary . The concern f o r the vas t amount of i n f o r m a t i o n which has yet to be a r t i c u l a t e d was i n t h i s way s a t i s f i e d . The p o t e n t i a l of the l o o s e l y s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the area of neighbourhood p l a n n i n g , 69. has been demonstrated i n two of the most complete s t u d i e s of the s i t u a t i o n ; i n the U . S . , " G u e r i l l a s i n the Bureaucracy" and i n Canada, "The L o c a l Area P lanner i n Canada". As noted by Anderson, the author of "The L o c a l Area P l a n n e r i n Canada," the one s e r i o u s drawback i n t h i s technique i s that i t i s more open than u s u a l to m a n i p u l a t i o n by the researcher i n bo th the range of ques t ions asked and i n the s e l e c t i o n of answers p r e s e n t e d . I t becomes important to compare c a r e f u l l y the h y p o t h e s i s , i n t e r v i e w schedule and data presented i n t h i s way to i n s u r e that the h y p o t h e s i s i s thoroughly exp lo red by the s c h e d u l e . The responses presented r e f l e c t the r e s u l t s of the research a c c u r a t e l y , and f i n a l l y any c o n c l u s i o n s drawn are supported by s p e c i f i c responses . Some other s teps have been taken i n s e t t i n g up the research des ign i n order to c o n t r o l b i a s . Some of the quest ions d i r e c t e d to the p lanners were screened out a f t e r a p r e - t e s t of the i n t e r v i e w s c h e d u l e . For the o t h e r groups of people i n t e r v i e w e d i t was i m p o s s i b l e to p r e - t e s t the i n t e r v i e w schedule because they were d i f f e r e n t f o r each group, there, were s e v e r a l groups and the number of people f o r each group was r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l . E r r o r s were c o n t r o l l e d by u s i n g m u l t i p l e data sources and t e c h n i q u e s . They i n c l u d e the a v a i l a b l e documents, Area P l a n n i n g f i l e s , newspaper c l i p p i n g s and o ther a r t i c l e s r e g a r d i n g the t o p i c of the t h e s i s and the p a r t i c u l a r i n s i d e knowledge of the r e s e a r c h e r a c q u i r e d i n the p rev ious summer w h i l e work ing f o r the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n i n Vancouver. Th is l a s t element has h o p e f u l l y c o n t r i b u t e d to generate a set of answers that were more honest and to the p o i n t as opposed to a set of answers merely d i r e c t e d to c r e a t i n g or m a i n t a i n i n g a c e r t a i n type of p u b l i c image. Va luab le comments were ob ta ined i n s i t u a t i o n s d i f f e r e n t from the i n t e r v i e w s e t t i n g . "O f f the r e c o r d " comments made by people i n t e r v i e w e d 70. a f t e r the tape recorder was turned o f f were a l s o a very important source of i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the r e s e a r c h . The accuracy of the i n f o r m a t i o n presented i n the t h e s i s was checked by a p lanner work ing f o r the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . The f i n a l step i n the e f f o r t to c o n t r o l b i a s was to understand the o r i g i n and the impact of m e t h o d o l o g i c a l problems that cou ld not be e l i m i n a t e d . The f i r s t set of i n t e r v i e w s was a d m i n i s t e r e d to some of the p lanners i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . The i n t e r v i e w of the D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g and the A s s o c i a t e D i r e c t o r f o r Area P l a n n i n g f o l l o w e d t h i s f i r s t group and preceded the i n t e r v i e w s w i t h the remain ing area p l a n n e r s . Th is approach a l lowed a c q u i s i t i o n of more s p e c i f i c knowledge of c u r r e n t events from the p lanners before approaching the d i r e c t o r s , and i t a l s o a l lowed the use of the d i r e c t o r s ' comments i n c o n t r o l l i n g the responses of the p lanners whose i n t e r v i e w s f o l l o w e d . Both p lanners and d i r e c t o r s were presented w i t h an o u t l i n e of the sub jec t areas of the i n t e r v i e w w h i l e the f u l l set of ques t ions was a d m i n i -s t e r e d by the i n t e r v i e w e r . The reason f o r g i v i n g the o u t l i n e to those i n t e r v i e w e d was to reduce a n x i e t y and reassure them. The i n t e n t i o n was to f a c i l i t a t e communication and e s t a b l i s h a d ia logue by p u t t i n g i n t e r v i e w e d and i n t e r v i e w e r a t the same l e v e l . For the other group of people i n t e r v i e w e d there were fewer , more g e n e r a l q u e s t i o n s , more open-ended and in tended to s t i m u l a t e d i s c u s s i o n . The quest ions conta ined i n the i n t e r v i e w were o u t l i n e d a t the b e g i n n i n g of the i n t e r v i e w to g ive respondents a b e t t e r f e e l i n g f o r the areas b e i n g covered . The i n t e n t of these i n t e r v i e w s was to i n v e s t i g a t e the v a r i o u s elements of the t h e o r e t i c a l model , more s p e c i f i c a l l y the ques t ions were aimed at 71. i n v e s t i g a t i n g the r e l a t i o n s e s t a b l i s h e d by the area p lanner w i t h the other p a r t i c i p a n t s , what the e x p e c t a t i o n s of the other p a r t i c i p a n t s a r e , t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n of the r o l e of the area p lanner and t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g o b j e c t i v e s together w i t h the awareness of the c o n f l i c t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the p l a n n e r ' s p o s i t i o n . In a l l i n t e r v i e w s c h e d u l e s , g e n e r a l quest ions more open to p e r s o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n were f o l l o w e d by more s p e c i f i c ones ; i n t h i s way i f the answers to the f i r s t set of ques t ions d i d not o f f e r enough i n f o r m a t i o n about the areas i n v e s t i g a t e d , the subsequent quest ions p o i n t e d d i r e c t l y to those areas i n v e s t i g a t e d i n the r e s e a r c h . The purpose of t h i s approach was to g i ve the respondent the o p p o r t u n i t y to f r e e l y i n t e r p r e t the s i t u a t i o n before b e i n g asked more s p e c i f i c ques t ions about the t h e o r e t i c a l model used i n the r e s e a r c h . The i n t e r v i e w schedule used w i t h the area p lanners was much longer than the others and conta ined more than s i x t y quest ions (see Appendix I) grouped under n ine d i f f e r e n t head ings . The f i r s t group of ques t ions presented under the heading "Job D e s c r i p -t i o n " were designed to exp lo re the p l a n n e r s ' p e r c e p t i o n of t h e i r own j o b , to see whether they recogn ized t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s i n the models proposed, to understand t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n of a c c o u n t a b i l i t y f o r d i f f e r e n t a c t i v i t i e s and the g e n e r a l r u l e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e i r j o b . The second set of quest ions was aimed at the p l a n n e r ' s p e r c e p t i o n of the scope and o b j e c t i v e s of t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s w i t h i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n , and t h e i r degree of success i n a c h i e v i n g those o b j e c t i v e s . The ques t ions under " G u i d e l i n e s " were designed to f i n d out what k i n d of g u i d e l i n e s the p lanner was f o l l o w i n g , who e s t a b l i s h e d them and how they were a f f e c t i n g the Area P l a n n i n g process cons idered i n the more g e n e r a l 72. context of c i t y p l a n n i n g . The e f f e c t s of dead l ines and d u r a t i o n of the program were ana lyzed i n the f o u r t h group o f q u e s t i o n s . The p lanner was a l s o asked about the i d e a l t ime frame f o r v a r i o u s p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s . D i f f e r e n t f i n a n c i a l arrangements f o r the v a r i o u s programs were ana lyzed i n the f o l l o w i n g set of q u e s t i o n s , t h e i r i m p l i c a t i o n s and e f f e c t s on the program. The next group of quest ions was the most important i n the r e s e a r c h . The ques t ions d e a l t w i t h r o l e d e f i n e r s and were aimed at f i n d i n g out which groups were i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h the p l a n n e r , the k i n d of e x p e c t a t i o n s they imposed on the p l a n n e r , how the p lanner r e a c t e d t o these e x p e c t a t i o n s , i n p a r t i c u l a r when they were i n c o n f l i c t w i t h each o ther and f i n a l l y , the p e r c e i v e d e f f e c t of a l l these p r e s s u r e s on the p lanner h i m / h e r s e l f . The r o l e of l o c a l r e s i d e n t s i n the p l a n n i n g p rocess was s p e c i f i c a l l y i n v e s t i g a t e d i n the next set of q u e s t i o n s . The p lanner was asked about d i f f e r e n t techniques used i n g e t t i n g c i t i z e n s i n v o l v e d , the d i f f e r e n t e x p e c t a t i o n s c i t i z e n s pose on the p lanner and the degree to which r e s i d e n t s i n v o l v e d were r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the l o c a l community and t h e i r input i n t o : the d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s . Quest ions r e g a r d i n g the l o c a t i o n of the p l a n n e r were aimed at i n v e s t i -g a t i n g h i s / h e r f e e l i n g s about s i t e o f f i c e s as opposed to p l a n n i n g from c i t y h a l l . The f i n a l set o f ques t ions d e a l t d i r e c t l y w i t h the p l a n n e r . I t i n c l u d e d p e r s o n a l data r e g a r d i n g the p l a n n e r , h i s / h e r background, work e x p e r i e n c e , hours of overt ime work, s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the p resent j o b , problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t and q u a l i t i e s that were f e l t necessary to make a good area p lanner together w i t h t h e i r own d e f i n i t i o n of the p l a n n e r ' s 73. proper r o l e i n the c i t y ' s d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s . The same i n t e r v i e w schedule used w i t h the area p lanners was presented to t h e i r s u p e r v i s o r s , the i n - h o u s e and the s i t e o f f i c e s e n i o r p l a n n e r s . In both c a s e s , the i n t e r v i e w e r e x p l a i n e d to the s e n i o r p lanners that the i n t e r v i e w schedule was the same a d m i n i s t e r e d to the p lanners under t h e i r s u p e r v i s i o n and asked them to respond c o n s t a n t l y keep ing i n mind the p o s i t i o n of the p lanners they s u p e r v i s e d . The l a s t set of ques t ions i n p a r t i c u l a r was used to o b t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n about the p lanners s u p e r v i s e d and was focussed i n p a r t i c u l a r on the r o l e s e n i o r p lanners expect the a rea p lanner to p l a y . ' The quest ions asked of the D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g and the A s s o c i a t e D i r e c t o r f o r Area P l a n n i n g were in tended to cover the same n ine areas i n v e s t i g a t e d i n the p l a n n e r s ' i n t e r v i e w but were focussed on the d i r e c t o r ' s d e f i n i t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g and the r o l e of the p lanner i n c l u d i n g the e x p l o r -a t i o n of the q u a l i t i e s they expected i n an area p l a n n e r . The ques t ions d i r e c t e d to the d i r e c t o r s were fewer than f o r the p lanner and of a more g e n e r a l content . A s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n was asked of the d i r e c t o r s about the q u a l i t i e s they r e q u i r e d of the p lanner tha t was going to f i l l the p o s i t i o n l e f t vacant by the r e s i g n a t i o n of the p lanner i n Grandview Woodland. The i n t e n t of t h i s q u e s t i o n was to compare t h e i r p r e v i o u s statements about the q u a l i t i e s r e q u i r e d i n an a rea p lanner w i t h a r e a l l i f e s i t u a t i o n and to determine the reasons f o r s e l e c t i n g c e r t a i n q u a l i t i e s i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r i n s t a n c e . The i n t e r v i e w schedule adopted w i t h o ther departments, c i t i z e n s and p o l i t i c i a n s were s i m i l a r to those a l r e a d y presented but' ; were r e l a t i v e l y s h o r t . Rather than i n v e s t i g a t e the v a r i o u s elements of the t h e o r e t i c a l model i n d i v i d u a l l y , the i n t e r v i e w focussed on the r o l e d e f i n e r s ' p e r c e p t i o n 74. of Area P l a n n i n g , the r o l e of the p lanner and the e x p e c t a t i o n s they have of the p lanner and the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . Role d e f i n e r s were asked about the r e l a t i o n they e s t a b l i s h w i t h the p lanner and the e f f e c t s of l o c a t i o n on the r e l a t i o n and the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The i n t e r v i e w s were conducted i n March 1978 beg inn ing w i t h the P l a n n i n g Department s t a f f . The i n t e r v i e w s were tape recorded and l a s t e d a l i t t l e more than an hour on the average w i t h the e x c e p t i o n of the two d i r e c t o r s whose i n t e r v i e w schedules were s h o r t e r . Before i n i t i a t i n g the i n t e r v i e w , the p lanners were g iven an i n t e r v i e w o u t l i n e and were a l s o t o l d about the expected l e n g t h of the i n t e r v i e w . T h i s c o n t r i b u t e d to making the p l a n n e r s f e e l at ease as was p o i n t e d out by some of them. In s e v e r a l c a s e s , a f t e r the i n t e r v i e w was completed the p lanners cont inued the d i s c u s s i o n o f f e r i n g " o f f the r e c o r d " i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s on Area P l a n n i n g . The p lanners were reassured tha t t h e i r comments would be used i n the t h e s i s w i thout making d i r e c t re fe rence to the author of the comment defending i n t h i s way t h e i r anonimity as f a r as p o s s i b l e . The i n t e r v i e w s w i t h people o u t s i d e the P l a n n i n g Department were designed to l a s t about h a l f an hour and were conducted very much i n the same manner adopted w i t h the other p l a n n e r s . A l l the i n t e r v i e w s were taped and subsequent ly t r a n s c r i b e d i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l form. The t r a n s c r i p t s were used as a data base f o r the r e s e a r c h . I t was f e l t that on ly i n t h i s way would i t have been p o s s i b l e to m a i n t a i n the o r i g i n a l c h a r a c t e r of the statements made and at any p o i n t i n the research i t would have been p o s s i b l e to go back to the o r i g i n a l statement recorded i n i t s c o n t e x t . By f o l l o w i n g t h i s procedure the d i s t o r t i o n s a s s o c -i a t e d w i t h the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the comments are min imized and the reader 75. i s p resented w i t h quota t ions of the o r i g i n a l comments. USE OF DATA AND PRO FORMA ANALYSES The i n f o r m a t i o n ob ta ined i n the i n t e r v i e w s w i l l be presented w i t h the other data c o l l e c t e d d u r i n g the r e s e a r c h . Rather than l i m i t the p r e s e n t -a t i o n of the f i n d i n g s to the t e s t i n g of the three o p e r a t i o n a l models , the data have been o rgan i zed and are presented under d i f f e r e n t s e c t i o n s r e p r e s e n t -i n g the d i f f e r e n t components of the t h e o r e t i c a l model . I t was f e l t that t h i s approach, w h i l e s t i l l a l l o w i n g the comparison of the f i n d i n g w i t h the t h e o r e t i c a l model , would encourage a l t e r n a t i v e use of the f i n d i n g s thereby emphasiz ing the e x p l o r a t o r y c h a r a c t e r of t h i s t h e s i s . The use of t h i s approach i n p r e s e n t i n g the research data a l l o w s one to go beyond the t e s t i n g of the o p e r a t i o n a l models , encouraging f u r t h e r e x p l o r a -t i o n of new hypotheses. In t h i s c o n t e x t , the o p e r a t i o n a l models become a base from which to expand i n t o other areas of i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The conceptua l and the o p e r a t i o n a l models presented are the t o o l s used to ga in a b e t t e r understanding of the t h e o r e t i c a l background and the p r a c t i c a l problems of Area P l a n n i n g . They were a l s o a necessary step i n order to be ab le to des ign the research q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and e f f e c t i v e l y p resent them to the people i n t e r v i e w e d . The l i m i t a t i o n s of the o p e r a t i o n a l models can be seen by comparing them to the research f i n d i n g s . In cases where the models are s l i g h t l y i n c o n t r a s t w i t h the comments obta ined i n the i n t e r v i e w s , they can be ad jus ted to cover the gap between theory and r e a l i t y . In many c a s e s , the statements c o n t r a d i c t i n g the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the model can be e x p l a i n e d by uncover ing the b i a s tha t has l e d to that statement or the d isc repancy between the i n v e s t i g a t i v e i n t e r e s t of the researcher and t h a t of the 76. i n t e r v i e w e d . One l i m i t a t i o n not ev ident from the p r e s e n t a t i o n i s r e l a t e d to the number of o p e r a t i o n a l models used i n the r e s e a r c h . To s i m p l i f y the p r e s e n t -a t i o n , the number of models was reduced to th ree from the o r i g i n a l f o u r . The des ign of the r e s e a r c h i n c l u d e d i n f a c t two d i f f e r e n t groups of i n -house a c t i v i t i e s : " m o n i t o r i n g " and " s p e c i f i c i s s u e s " . For reasons that are e x p l a i n e d i n the f i n d i n g s , m o n i t o r i n g becomes on ly a secondary f u n c t i o n and the model f o r t h i s a c t i v i t y i r r e l e v a n t . I t was f e l t that by i n c l u d i n g the two i n - h o u s e a c t i v i t i e s i n the same o p e r a t i o n a l model the p r e s e n t a t i o n would beLjmorei e f f e c t i v e w i thout a l t e r i n g the charac te r of the f i n d i n g s . S e v e r a l o ther problems were encountered d u r i n g the p r e s e n t a t i o n of the i n t e r v i e w schedule because of the many d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the Area P l a n n i n g s i t u a t i o n by the people i n t e r v i e w e d . Even among the a rea p l a n n e r s there are very d i f f e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of Area P l a n n i n g . Whi le these problems have r a i s e d some doubts and many q u e s t i o n s , the v a l u e of the o p e r a t i o n a l models as a . . . t h e o r e t i c a l t o o l was con f i rmed . 77. CHAPTER 6: THE FINDINGS INTRODUCTION Th is i n t r o d u c t o r y s e c t i o n s t a t e s the s t r a t e g y used i n p r e s e n t i n g the research f i n d i n g s . The l o g i c a l sequence i n which the research data are presented takes the reader from the s i m p l e s t elements to the more complex ones. The t r a n s i t i o n from a group of data to the next and the l i n k between the d i f f e r e n t s e c t i o n s become c r u c i a l p o i n t s i n understanding the l o g i c of the p r e s e n t a t i o n . The data c o l l e c t e d d u r i n g the research have been o rgan ized under d i f f e r e n t s e c t i o n s r e p r e s e n t i n g the v a r i o u s components of the o p e r a t i o n a l models d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s t h e s i s . I t was f e l t tha t the use of t h i s approach would a l l o w the d e s c r i p t i o n of the v a r i o u s s i t u a t i o n s i n which the a rea p lanners are o p e r a t i n g more f u l l y than i t would have been p o s s i b l e by s imply t e s t i n g the three o p e r a t i o n a l models . P r e s e n t i n g the f i n d i n g s i n t h i s way would reduce the need to s e l e c t and manipu late the data and min imizes researcher b i a s . The p r e s e n t a t i o n of a l a r g e amount of i n f o r m a -t i o n should a l s o encourage a l t e r n a t i v e uses of the research data emphasiz -i n g i n t h i s way the e x p l o r a t o r y nature of t h i s work. There are s e v e r a l reasons f o r b e g i n n i n g the d i s c u s s i o n of the f i n d i n g s from the s i t e o f f i c e l o c a t i o n . The s i t e o f f i c e i s the most t a n g i b l e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f Area P l a n n i n g . By l o c a t i n g the p lanner i n the n e i g h -bourhood the c i t y e s t a b l i s h e s i t s commitment to the a r e a . At the same time the p l a n n e r ' s work ing c o n d i t i o n s are q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from c i t y h a l l . The contact w i t h the p u b l i c i s more d i r e c t , and the p l a n n i n g approach assumes some unique c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Thus the l o c a t i o n of the p lanner i s the most important element d i s t i n g u i s h i n g and c h a r a c t e r i z i n g the two groups of p lanners o p e r a t i n g i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n , the i n - h o u s e 78. group and the p lanners work ing i n s i t e o f f i c e s . The importance of the d i s t i n c t i o n between the two groups of a rea p lanners w i l l become c l e a r e r i n l a t e r s e c t i o n s of t h i s c h a p t e r . At the present t ime i t i s important to note that the most importance consequence of the l o c a t i o n i s i t s e f f e c t on the p l a n n e r s ' p e r c e p t i o n s of t h e i r own r o l e s . There i s i n f a c t a marked d i f f e r e n c e between the way i n - h o u s e p lanners and other p lanners working i n a s i t e o f f i c e p e r c e i v e t h e i r r e l a -t i v e p o s i t i o n s . T h i s d i f f e r e n c e has important consequences f o r the d e f i n i -t i o n of the goa ls and o b j e c t i v e s of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . The impact p lanners have i n de te rmin ing the d i r e c t i o n f o r the d i v i s i o n i s a m p l i f i e d by the f a c t that Area P l a n n i n g a t the present t ime has no c l e a r l y de f ined o b j e c t i v e s . The i n c r e a s e d s i z e of the i n - h o u s e group and the c h a r a c t e r of the programs the d i v i s i o n i s a d m i n i s t r a t i n g have a l s o had a s t rong impact on Area P l a n n i n g and have changed the o r i g i n a l c h a r a c t e r of the d i v i s i o n . The p lanners l o c a t e d i n s i t e o f f i c e s are p ressured by these f o r c e s to r e d e f i n e t h e i r p o s i t i o n . The sub jec t of i t s o b j e c t i v e s i s f o l l o w e d by the d i s c u s s i o n of the t ime frame of the Area P l a n n i n g programs. The d u r a t i o n of the program i n any one a rea i s d i r e c t l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the o b j e c t i v e s of the program and i s an important i n d i c a t o r of the p l a n n i n g approach used. D u r a t i o n of the program becomes a more important element i n the NIP f e d e r a l programs where the r e l e a s e of funds depends on observ ing f e d e r a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d d e a d l i n e s . A t t h i s p o i n t i n the p r e s e n t a t i o n of the research f i n d i n g s , the image of the p lanner implementing Area P l a n n i n g shou ld emerge c l e a r l y i n a context d e f i n e d by t h e i r l o c a t i o n , p e r c e p t i o n of t h e i r p o s i t i o n , Area P l a n n i n g o b j e c t i v e s and d u r a t i o n of the programs. To complete the p i c t u r e , o ther p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the Area P l a n n i n g process are p resented i n the 79. f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n s . They c o n t r i b u t e through t h e i r d i f f e r i n g r o l e e x p e c t a -t i o n s to d e f i n i n g the p o s i t i o n of the p l a n n e r . From the data c o l l e c t e d three groups emerge more c l e a r l y as r o l e d e f i n e r s : the community, c i t y bureaucracy , and p o l i t i c i a n s . Community p a r t i c i p a t i o n makes the Area P l a n n i n g process un ique ly d i f f e r e n t from o ther p l a n n i n g approaches. The c l o s e work ing r e l a t i o n s h i p the p lanner i n the s i t e o f f i c e develops w i t h the l o c a l community has a d e f i n i t e impact on the p l a n n e r ' s r o l e d e f i n i t i o n and puts an emphasis on the p l a n n e r ' s r o l e as advocate f o r the l o c a l r e s i d e n t s . In c o n t r a s t to t h i s , c i v i c departments expect the a rea p lanners to adapt to a r o l e t h a t i s compat ib le w i t h the b u r e a u c r a t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n of the c i t y . Whi le the l i m i t e d contact w i t h the p u b l i c makes the i n t e g r a t i o n i n the c i v i c bureaucracy e a s i e r f o r the i n -house p l a n n e r s , the s i t e o f f i c e p l a n n e r s ' task becomes more d i f f i c u l t . S i t e o f f i c e p lanners f i n d i tvadvantageous to abandon the r o l e of advocate f o r the l o c a l community and to move away from the o r i g i n a l i d e a l of p u b l i c involvement i n p l a n n i n g tha t was the o r i g i n a l m o t i v a t o r of Area P l a n n i n g . The f i n a l s e c t i o n dea ls w i t h the r o l e of the p o l i t i c i a n as a r o l e d e f i n e r . They are the masters and have the f i n a l say i n what the p lanner can do. Whi le c i t y aldermen are g a i n i n g a h igher l e v e l of awareness about Area P l a n n i n g , t h e i r present involvement and c o n t r i b u t i o n i s not h e l p i n g area p lanners to make t h e i r p o s i t i o n c l e a r . The p r e s e n t a t i o n of the f i n d i n g s i s f o l l o w e d by a c o n c l u d i n g c h a p t e r . The c o n c l u s i o n s r e f l e c t a l l of the data developed i n t h i s r e s e a r c h . What i s more d i f f i c u l t to show and cannot be separated from the f i n a l c o n c l u s i o n s are the p e r s o n a l impress ions of the r e s e a r c h e r . They are based.km four months of work i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n , a lmost two years of i n v o l v e -ment at d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s of Area P l a n n i n g and a l l the p e r s o n a l c o n t a c t s w i t h 80. people who are making Area P l a n n i n g what i t i s today. THE SITE OFFICE LOCATION The p r e s e n t a t i o n of the research f i n d i n g s begins w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n of the l o c a t i o n i n which the p lanner o p e r a t e s . The s i t e o f f i c e i s a v i s i b l e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the b a s i c ph i losophy of Area P l a n n i n g . The s i t e o f f i c e l o c a t i o n of the p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t y has been accepted as an i n t e g r a l pa r t of Area P l a n n i n g and very l i t t l e d i s c u s s i o n on the appropr ia teness o f the s i t e o f f i c e concept has f o l l o w e d . L i t t l e , i f any, comment about the l o c a t i o n e f f e c t on the p lanner can be found i n the l i t e r a t u r e . The f i r s t c o n s i d e r a t i o n that comes to mind i s the p o s s i b i l i t y that the p lanner by b e i n g i n the neighbourhood tends to assume the advocate r o l e f o r that neighbourhood. The L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g repor t (1973) recogn i zes the importance of the s i t e o f f i c e and cons ide rs the es tab l i shment of i t s presence i n the area as the f i r s t of the a c t i v i t i e s p reced ing an^Area P l a n n i n g program. In the repor t the s i t e o f f i c e i s c o n s i d e r e d : . . . p r i m a r i l y necessary to f a c i l i t a t e c i t i z e n -p lanner d ia logue and to improve the i n f o r m a t i o n base f o r p l a n n i n g by o b t a i n i n g an i n t i m a t e awareness of the i s s u e w i t h i n the community. The p lanner i s r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e to members of the community and makes the p l a n n i n g f u n c t i o n more v i s i b l e , thereby reduc ing the m i s t r u s t between o f f i c i a l s and r e s i d e n t s . The s i t e o f f i c e should not be i d e n t i f i e d w i t h any one group w i t h i n the community. Each of the s i t e o f f i c e s e s t a b l i s h e d so f a r had a s t o r e f r o n t l o c a t i o n to make t h e i r presence more v i s i b l e and to be more a c c e s s i b l e to the community. As the t i t l e of an a r t i c l e i n the Vancouver Sun, May 24, 1973, puts i t , the " S t o r e F ront Scheme Puts the P lanners on the S t r e e t " . The a r t i c l e was based on an i n t e r v i e w w i t h the man i n charge of the f i r s t l o c a l 8 1 . Area P l a n n i n g o p e r a t i o n i n the West End. Lynn U i b e l c la ims i n t h i s a r t i c l e tha t i t i s bes t f o r p lanners to be on l o c a t i o n to f a c i l i t a t e the r o l e of r e s i d e n t s i n l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g and to l e t people know what t h e i r c i t y i s do ing f o r them. A f i n a l a u t h o r i t a t i v e comment on the f u n c t i o n of the s i t e o f f i c e i n the e a r l y days of Area P l a n n i n g was made by the then r e c e n t l y appointed D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g , Ray Spaxman: . . . the l o c a t i o n of a s i t e o f f i c e i n the community p r o v i d e s , i n some c a s e s , a very e s s e n t i a l presence i n the community, and a very impor tant communication l i n k i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . 1 At the present t ime there are a t o t a l of f i v e Area P l a n n i n g s i t e o f f i c e s i n Vancouver; four at d i f f e r e n t stages of implementat ion of N IP . Of these f o u r , the Grandview Woodland o f f i c e a l s o manages an LAP program. The o ther s i t e o f f i c e i s i n the Marpole a rea where the P l a n n i n g Department has j u s t s t a r t e d an LAP program. Some of the area p lanners work ing at c i t y h a l l have r e c e n t l y been work ing i n a s i t e o f f i c e and t h e i r comments, based on d i r e c t e x p e r i e n c e , are most e n l i g h t e n i n g . Most of the comments o b t a i n e d i n the i n t e r v i e w s g e n e r a l l y express support f o r the s i t e o f f i c e as a work ing environment. The s i t e o f f i c e has d e f i n i t e advantages over c i t y h a l l i n that i t g i ves the p lanner a more immediate and d i r e c t f e e l i n g about the community, human-i z i n g the p l a n n i n g p rocess . The presence of the s i t e o f f i c e i s a t a n g i b l e e x p r e s s i o n of the commitment to the a r e a , a commitment which cou ld be g e n e r a l i z e d by c r e a t i n g a number of l o c a l c i t y h a l l s throughout the c i t y . Th is i d e a has an obvious r e l a t i o n s h i p to the debate p r e s e n t l y going on about the ward system. Memo to Mayor A. P h i l l i p s from R . J . Spaxman, D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g , C i t y H a l l , J u l y 25 , 1974, Vancouver. 82. A l l the area p lanners i n t e r v i e w e d expressed support f o r the s i t e o f f i c e concept u s i n g a v a r i e t y of arguments: The s i t e o f f i c e improves the v i s i b i l i t y of the program i n the neighbourhood. The s i t e o f f i c e i s a l s o good as a source of i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the neighbourhood. I t i s r e a l l y good as a s o c i a l and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f o r c e i n the neighbourhood. Be ing out there means there i s space a v a i l a b l e f o r meet ings , there i s o r g a n i z a t i o n b e h i n d . I t h i n k that i t p r o v i d e s a good s e r v i c e f o r the community. I t g i ves us a p l a c e to meet. I t g i ves me a much b e t t e r f e e l i n g f o r the community j u s t b e i n g h e r e . The p l a n n i n g o f f i c e i s a s t o r e f r o n t o p e r a t i o n whose s i z e and atmosphere are hard to d u p l i c a t e at c i t y h a l l . The i n f o r m a l i t y of a s i t e o f f i c e breaks down b a r r i e r s , e f f e c t i v e l y h e l p i n g people to overcome . t h e i r r e l u c t a n c e to approach the c i t y h a l l b u r e a u c r a t s . People tha t o therwise would never w r i t e a l e t t e r or c a l l c i t y h a l l come to the o f f i c e , express t h e i r f e e l i n g s and become i n v o l v e d when a communication l i n k i s made v i s i b l e at the l o c a l l e v e l . One of the advantages i n d i c a t e d by s e v e r a l p lanners work ing i n s i t e o f f i c e s i s that i t g i ves them an immediate and d i r e c t f e e l i n g f o r what i s happening i n the community which they -becomes p a r t o f . The presence of the p lanner i n the area c rea tes the impetus that the p l a n n e r s cannot m a i n t a i n when they r e t u r n to c i t y h a l l : I f e e l s o r t of at a l o s s f o r not b e i n g i n the n e i g h -bourhood because I cou ld s o r t of i d e n t i f y w i t h the neighbourhood. On the^other s i d e , the same p lanner l a t e r commented: At c i t y h a l l I ' ve very good a c c e s s i b i l i t y to people tha t work i n d i f f e r e n t departments. I can contact them face to f a c e . I t i s an advantage to bounce ideas o f f the o ther p l a n n i n g s t a f f . I f e l t a l i t t l e i s o l a t e d i n the s i t e o f f i c e . 83. Other p lanners seem to be l e s s ambivalent about t h e i r f e e l i n g s and show u n q u a l i f i e d support f o r the s i t e o f f i c e l o c a t i o n . Those more committed to the l o c a l area d i s m i s s the problems of communication w i t h c i t y h a l l w i t h statements such a s : . . . l o c a t i o n has no e f f e c t s , we use the phone to contact o ther departments. The genera l consensus on the s i t e o f f i c e i s that i t makes the p l a n n i n g process more humane; the c i t y bureaucrat i s seen as a human b e i n g , aware of p l a n n i n g w i t h and f o r p e o p l e , not numbers, and can t r a n s f e r that f e e l i n g to the c i t y h a l l bureaucracy . You are more i n v o l v e d w i t h people i n the s i t e o f f i c e , but i n f a c t that i s what you need to have , tha t i s where a l l your knowledge comes f rom, from people t e l l i n g you about t h i n g s you can never l e a r n from books or e x p e r t s , so you need t h a t k i n d of i n t e r a c t i o n . Not a l l departments a p p r e c i a t e the advantages p lanners d e r i v e from t h e i r l o c a t i o n , and f o r d i f f e r e n t reasons have a negat i ve r e a c t i o n to the s i t e o f f i c e . In one department the f r u s t r a t i o n of not b e i n g ab le to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the v a r i o u s Area P l a n n i n g programs f o r l a c k of resources and mandate has provoked s t r o n g comments from the department spokesman a g a i n s t the s i t e o f f i c e : You don ' t need the s i t e o f f i c e f o r the p lanner to become f a m i l i a r w i t h the a r e a . You can go out there f o r a few days a week and walk around d u r i n g lunch - hour to know the p h y s i c a l l a y o u t . I t i s needed o n l y to t r y to get the people i n v o l v e d and t h a t ' s a l l . They do not r e a l l y need a s p e c i a l p lace to h o l d the meet ings , they can use any p u b l i c space , as s c h o o l s , churches . . . The s i t e o f f i c e has become the k i n d of p o l i t i c a l ward o f f i c e , they get compla ints about every aspect of the c i t y . . . I'm not s a y i n g you d o n ' t need an Area P l a n n i n g o f f i c e , maybe i t i s expens i ve , i t i s a l u x u r y , i t g i v e s easy access to the community, but I t h i n k t h a t a te lephone number at c i t y h a l l cou ld be j u s t as good. I don ' t t h i n k the s i t e o f f i c e i s necessary f o r the success of the program. 84. The p lanners work ing i n s i t e o f f i c e s see t h e i r p o s i t i o n as a commit-ment to the a r e a , a way to b r i n g government out to p e o p l e , a way of s a y i n g , "We have come to you , p l e a s e come to u s " . T h i s is . , ai'.commitment that takes much of the p l a n n e r ' s energy. He cannot t u r n away anyone that comes i n t o the o f f i c e even i f they have the s i l l i e s t reason and a r r i v e at the most c r u c i a l t i m e . Yesterday I was t r y i n g to complete the minutes of the committee meet ing , I had a h a l f hour before the m a i l i n g dead l ine and a l o t of people are g e t t i n g these minutes , when a guy comes i n and wants t to t e l l me there i s a need f o r a s i g n a l l i g h t at the i n t e r -s e c t i o n by h i s house f o r him to ga in access more e a s i l y to the main a r t e r i a l . U n f o r t u n a t e l y the p l a n n i n g a s s i s t a n t was away and the s e c r e t a r y c o u l d not h e l p . I had to l i s t e n because that i s what we are here f o r . People dropping i n are a prob lem, e s p e c i a l l y on Mondays or F r i d a y s when not a l l the s t a f f are i n the o f f i c e because of the four day work week. P lanners must p r o t e c t themselves from constant i n t e r a c t i o n by : . . . c r e a t i n g a d i v i s i o n of labour w i t h i n the o f f i c e , a s c r e e n i n g p rocess that a l l o w s someone e l s e to take that i n t e r a c t i o n whenever p o s s i b l e . There i s a p o s s i b i l i t y that some p lanners use t h i s s c r e e n i n g procedure to i s o l a t e themselves r e c r e a t i n g a working environment s i m i l a r to c i t y h a l l . S e v e r a l of the p lanners i n t e r v i e w e d would l i k e to see the commitment to the l o c a l a rea expanded to the scope of a m i n i c i t y h a l l . They are f a c i n g a l l k i n d s of ques t ions from the p u b l i c and would l i k e to be ab le to get the support needed to s a t i s f y the demands of the p u b l i c . The same f e e l i n g i s expressed by the D i r e c t o r of the P l a n n i n g Department: We look forward i n the department to the t ime when c i t y h a l l has and the community h a s , a wish to have the s e r v i c e s of c i t y h a l l d e c e n t r a l i z e d more than they a r e . . . . One imagines a p l a c e w i t h i n w a l k i n g d i s t a n c e o r a shor t r i d e , a p l a c e where you can f i n d out about l i b r a r i e s , m e d i c a l h e a l t h , dog l i c e n c e s , and p l a n n i n g a d v i c e . The person i n there i s not a p lanner t h a t says I am s o r r y I d o n ' t know any th ing 85. about h e a l t h but I can put you i n touch w i t h somebody. Th is person i s one that knows a b i t about i t , but i s not the p r o f e s s i o n a l p lanner that has to spend most of h i s t ime answering ques t ions he doesn ' t know the answer t o . Comments l i k e these r a i s e the f e a r s of those opposed to the ward system. They see Area P l a n n i n g as preced ing and advocat ing the r e s t r u c -t u r i n g of that type of p o l i t i c a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n w i t h i n the c i t y . In r e a l i t y A rea P l a n n i n g as i t i s done today i n Vancouver c o n t r i b u t e s very l i t t l e to the c r e a t i o n of the ward system i n the c i t y . Dur ing the i n t e r v i e w s p lanners d i d not express any p o l i t i c a l commitment to change the p resent system. I f Area P l a n n i n g i s the road tha t l e a d s to the ward system we are s t i l l f a r from the end of the road and a more g e n e r a l i n t e r e s t and commitment must be c reated f o r the ward system to become a r e a l i t y . . 1 , . . \ One.reason the s i t e o f f i c e has a s t rong impact on the p lanner i s because the p lanner i n the s i t e o f f i c e i s implementing a program w h i l e the i n - h o u s e p lanner i s g e n e r a l l y d e a l i n g w i t h s i n g l e i s s u e s . The few area p lanners that have l e f t the s i t e o f f i c e to manage NIP or LAP programs.^rom c i t y h a l l have a lower degree of involvement i n the community than the p lanner i n the s i t e o f f i c e . The d i r e c t contact w i t h the p u b l i c i s a lmost complete ly e l i m i n a t e d and the p lanner f e e l s very much a p a r t of the c i t y bureaucracy . The p lanners work ing i n the s i t e o f f i c e f e e l p h y s i c a l l y removed from the r e s t of the c i v i c bureaucracy , more d i r e c t l y r e s p o n s i b l e to the l o c a l community, and to the c i t y bureaucracy f o r what i s happening i n the community, They cannot h i d e beh ind a b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e but must ac t on t h e i r own i n a s i t u a t i o n loaded w i t h p o t e n t i a l f o r c o n f l i c t . 86. More and more, the p lanners tend to r e a c t to t h i s s i t u a t i o n by deve lop ing a d e c e n t r a l i z e d b u r e a u c r a t i c model r a t h e r than a c t i n g as advocates f o r the community wants . By denying the c o n f l i c t i n t h i s way they deny the fundamental ph i losophy that o r i g i n a t e d Area P l a n n i n g and c o n f i n e themselves to the r o l e of a d m i n i s t r a t o r . Th is f i n d i n g i s developed i n the next s e c t i o n . PLANNERS' PERCEPTION OF THEIR OWN ROLE S e v e r a l answers to the ques t ions conta ined i n the i n t e r v i e w can be used to understand how the p lanners see themselves and are seen by o t h e r s . The answers that can he lp to d e s c r i b e how the p lanners see themselves are those ob ta ined when i n q u i r i n g about p l a n n e r s ' a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , o v e r t i m e , the q u a l i t i e s of good area p l a n n e r s , s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the j o b , what o ther p r o f e s s i o n they would chose and the q u e s t i o n : "How do you see y o u r s e l f as a p l a n n e r ? " The f i n d i n g s emphasize the importance of the p lanner as the key f i g u r e i n the Area P l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The p a r a l l e l i s e a s i l y drawn between t h i s p l a n n i n g process and a stage performance where the p lanner becomes the c e n t r a l a c t o r . Dur ing the implementat ion phase of the NIP the p lanner i s cons ide red as main l y an a d m i n i s t r a t o r . Th is i s a r e s t r i c t e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the p l a n n e r ' s r o l e s i n c e at t h i s stage i n the process p lanners are a l s o promoting community development. Th is b a s i c a l l y educat i ve f u n c t i o n b r i n g s back the d e f i n i t i o n of advocate p lanner a l s o d e s c r i b e d by D a v i d o f f as the one that c o n t r i b u t e s to p l u r a l i s m i n p l a n n i n g through the process of making the community aware of i t s r i g h t s and how to have them r e c o g n i z e d . 87. Not a l l the p lanners seem to be aware of t h i s aspect of the advocate r o l e they are p l a y i n g and seem to p r e f e r a more b u r e a u c r a t i c d e f i n i t i o n of t h e i r own r o l e . The f i n d i n g s a l s o show that the area p lanners i n t e r -v iewed expressed genera l s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h t h e i r j o b . The a c c o u n t a b i l i t y q u e s t i o n u n d e r l i n e s a major d i f f e r e n c e i n the way p lanners p e r c e i v e t h e i r r o l e , as a f u n c t i o n of t h e i r l o c a t i o n . The image the p lanners have of themselves i s f i n a l l y compared w i t h the d e f i n i t i o n of a good area p lanner ob ta ined from t h e i r s u p e r v i s o r s , the A s s o c i a t e D i r e c t o r f o r Area P l a n n i n g and the D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g . In a l a t e r s t a g e , these d e f i n i t i o n s w i l l be compared w i t h those of the v a r i o u s other r o l e d e f i n e r s . Most of the p lanners i n the s i t e o f f i c e share the consciousness about the importance of t h e i r r o l e ; they f e e l t h a t the success of the program l a r g e l y depends on t h e i r performance. I cannot say i f the program i s s u c c e s s f u l . I t h i n k a l o t depends on the p l a n n e r . The success of the program w i l l r e f l e c t on my own c a p a b i l i t i e s . Area p lanners i n s i t e o f f i c e s are aware of the importance of t h e i r p o s i t i o n and would l i k e to r e c e i v e more r e c o g n i t i o n , e s p e c i a l l y from c i t y h a l l . Some p lanners expressed some disappointment f o r not r e c e i v i n g enough feedback from t h e i r s u p e r i o r s and c o l l e a g u e s . Area p lanners r e c e i v e l i t t l e p u b l i c r e c o g n i t i o n f o r the work they are doing and one of the reasons f o r t h i s was po in ted out by one of them: One of the t h i n g s I have found out about working i n Area P l a n n i n g i s that you cannot ach ieve a s t a t u s of a good a rea p l a n n e r . You can e s t a b l i s h a s i t u a t i o n i n which you can l i v e w i t h y o u r s e l f or the D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g supports you, but everybody e l s e . . . 88. The c e n t r a l i t y of the p l a n n e r ' s p o s i t i o n i s recogn i zed by the p lanners as w e l l as by o ther p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the Area P l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . There i s an i n t e r e s t i n g d i f f e r e n c e between the i n - h o u s e p lanners and the s i t e o f f i c e group. The r o l e s e l f - d e f i n i t i o n of the i n - h o u s e p lanners i s b e s t represented by the e x p r e s s i o n , "I f e e l l i k e I'm s i t t i n g on the f e n c e , w i t h C o u n c i l and c i t y bureaucracy on one s i d e and c i t i z e n s on the o t h e r . For the s i t e o f f i c e p lanners the scene becomes more crowded. The p lanners are s t i l l a t the cent re but the number and v a r i e t y of people w i t h which th are i n t e r a c t i n g i s i n c r e a s e d . In t h e i r own d e f i n i t i o n the p lanner i s " a l i n k and a balance between a l l the a c t o r s , " and " the focus of the committee a c t i v i t i e s , " a " c o - o r d i n a t o r , " a " m e d i a t o r , " a " r e c o n c i l i a t o r , " "someone that t r i e s to f i n d a s o l u t i o n that most people can l i v e w i t h " . The s i t e o f f i c e p lanner i s a l s o a manager r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the success of the o p e r a t i o n . As Anderson (1976) p o i n t e d o u t , the p lanner i n the s i t e o f f i c e i s l i k e the D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g f o r the neighbourhood. Many area p lanners p e r c e i v e the importance of t h e i r r o l e as a s i t e o f f i c e c o - o r d i n a t o r . They see themselves as the pr imary a c t o r . Some of them f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to a d j u s t to t h i s new r o l e and f e e l "on s tage" at the committee meetings o r " l i k e a f i s h i n a tank" watched c a r e f u l l y by a l o t of c i t i z e n groups i n the neighbourhood. Needleman recogn i zed t h i s aspect of the neighbourhood p l a n n e r ' s p o s i t i o n i n h i s r e s e a r c h : The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e g u e r i l l a r e q u i r e s s k i l l s that most p lanners r e c e i v e d no t r a i n i n g i n and never imagined they wou ld . The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e g u e r i l l a has to be ab le to t h i n k on h i s f e e t . He has to p resent h i s argument to s k e p t i c a l , o f t e n h o s t i l e , community l e a d e r s w i t h enough eloquence to persuade them and enough f o r c e f u l n e s s to i n s p i r e t h e i r c o n f i d e n c e . In w inn ing community a c c e p t -ance , he i s f o r c e d to f u n c t i o n not on ly as a p lanner but a l s o as an a c t o r , a p o l i t i c i a n , a salesman, a con man, perhaps even a c h a r i s m a t i c l e a d e r . (Needleman, 1972) . 89. There i s another aspect to the t h e a t r i c a l stage s i t u a t i o n that Vancouver p lanners d i d not make e x p l i c i t i n the i n t e r v i e w . Whether they recogn i ze i t or n o t , t h i s aspect of t h e i r performance has a very important par t i n the process as L i s a P e a t t i e (1970) p o i n t s out . She imagines the area p lanner as a t h e a t r i c a l agent , cogn izant of dramat ic moments, performance, emot iona l engagement, and staged demonstrat ions and a c t i o n s . P e a t t i e ' s p lanner i s an a c t o r i n a p o l i t i c a l t h e a t r e , m a n i p u l a t i n g an audience of p o l i t i c a l c l i e n t s . The same imagery i s pursued by Keyes and T e i t c h e r (1970) , who argue that d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n has shown a p r o p e n s i t y f o r " e x p o r t a t i o n " r a t h e r than more t r a d i t i o n a l "nuts and b o l t s " p l a n n i n g s k i l l s . The a rea p lanners i n t e r v i e w e d d i d not openly d i s c u s s t h e i r r o l e as stage d i r e c t o r but t h e i r consciousness about t h i s aspect of t h e i r p o s i t i o n was expressed i n s e v e r a l of the statements presented and becomes more e v i d e n t i n the f o l l o w i n g : I a l s o see mysel f as a manipu la to r of the committee. I f e e l tha t the committee cannot j u s t go on by i t s e l f , I f e e l they need some d i r e c t i o n . I t i s almost an i m p o s s i b l e t a s k , you are r e a l l y o r c h e s t r a t i n g so much. The p lanner has to be ab le to m o b i l i z e people whether i t i s t h e i r own s t a f f , c i t i z e n s , o ther departments , the c i t y manager or h i s s u p e r i o r s , he must convince o ther people to c a r r y on w i t h peop le . There i s a l s o a t ime dimension that must be o r c h e s t r a t e d , s i n c e the program must operate at a pace acceptab le to the p o l i t i c i a n s , the D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g and the community, a l l of whose e x p e c t a t i o n s and comprehensions d i f f e r . Area p lanners respond to these c o n f l i c t i n g p ressures by wear ing a l o t of d i f f e r e n t h a t s and doing a l o t of s h u f f l i n g , and end up b e i n g s l i g h t l y suspect from a l l p o i n t s of v iew; t h e i r success cou ld be measured by the unanimity of s u s p i c i o n towards t h e i r work tha t p r e v a i l s . 9 0 . Most of the planners seem to react to the uneasiness of th i s s i t u a t i o n by assuming a bureaucrat ic r o l e , s h e l t e r i n g themselves behind the i n s t i t u -t i o n a l s t ruc ture . They t ry to protect themselves on one s ide from the more conservat ive , property owning i n t e r e s t s that see the planner as a sub-ver s ive element, us ing t h e i r inf luence i n the bureaucracy to h i g h l i g h t or even forment community ac t iv i sm. On the other s i d e , c i t i z e n a c t i v i s t s accuse the planner of p l ay ing at c i t i z e n power, or at worst manipulat ing or defusing d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n i n the community. In t h i s environment: It i s sometimes d i f f i c u l t for area planners to judge whether they are mainta ining an ob jec t ive stance or indeed whether they should even attempt to do so. I t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y f r u s t r a t i n g for planners who have a strong personal p o s i t i o n on some of the issues that our c i t y i s fac ing not to be able to honest ly express t h e i r own opin ion on these i s sues for fear of being l a b e l l e d p o l i t i c a l l y and l o s i n g the confidence of part of t h e i r community. The NIP program has helped the planners to solve t h i s dilemma by taking the r o l e of adminis trators of f edera l programs. I'm an area planner admini s t ra t ing an NIP program i n t h i s community. With NIP I'm not performing a p lanning func t ion , i t i s p r i m a r i l y a co-ord ina t ing funct ion and the s k i l l s that are required are not planning s k i l l s . What I'm doing now i s b a s i c a l l y admini s t ra t ing the NIP program. Other departments perceive the NIP program i n a s i m i l a r way. NIP i s mainly admini s t ra t ion of spending money and the planning funct ion i s l o s t a f ter the f i r s t s i x months, that i s a very h u r r i e d s i x months, and I see that as being one of the main disadvantages; they planner becomes a f ter the f i r s t s i x months simply an admini-s t r a t o r . By de f in ing themselves as admini s t ra tor s , planners p lay down another important r o l e that many of them have mentioned i n the interview -co-ordinators of community development. Thi s was, for the planners 9 1 . i n t e r v i e w e d , p robab ly t h e i r major f u n c t i o n . The e d u c a t i o n a l aspect of community development i s pa r t of the advocate r o l e of the p lanner a c c o r d i n g to the Dav ido f f d e f i n i t i o n : Not a l l the work of an advocate p lanner would be of an adversary n a t u r e . Much of i t would be e d u c a t i o n a l . The advocate would have the job of i n f o r m i n g o ther groups , i n c l u d i n g p u b l i c a g e n c i e s , of the c o n d i t i o n s , problems, and out look of the group he r e p r e s e n t e d . ( D a v i d o f f , 1965; 333) For D a v i d o f f , the advocate r o l e can e x i s t o n l y i n a p l u r a l i s t i c p l a n n i n g context and educat ion of the p u b l i c by the p lanner c o n t r i b u t e s to make p l a n n i n g the p l u r a l i s t i c p rocess that he c a l l s f o r . The area p lanners i n t e r v i e w e d seemed to ignore the e d u c a t i o n a l aspect of the advocate r o l e and d i d not speak about themselves as advocates f o r t h e i r community. The degree of awareness about t h e i r r o l e as an advocate f o r the community v a r i e s among p lanners but there i s a t r e n d i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n c l e a r l y expressed i n the f o l l o w i n g s tatement : At one t ime I thought I would not have been s u i t e d f o r an Area P l a n n i n g job when a couple of years ago most of the people i n Area P l a n n i n g were p a r t of the counte r -c u l t u r e and t e n d i n g towards l e f t w i n g p o l i t i c s ; I'm very middle of the road p o l i t i c a l l y and o t h e r w i s e , I t h i n k the g e n e r a l p o l i t i c a l and p l a n n i n g c l i m a t e i s becoming more middle of the road and I can f i t i n q u i t e w e l l . I t h i n k I f i t w e l l i n t h i s community . . . I see mysel f as a g e n e r a l i s t p lanner that j u s t happens to be doing an Area P l a n n i n g job i n a s i t e o f f i c e s i t u a t i o n . The c h a r a c t e r of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n i s changing and the p r i c e p a i d f o r t h i s change i s the l o s s of those l o c a l a rea p lanners that have been w i t h the d i v i s i o n f o r a long p e r i o d of t i m e . There has been a change i n the Area P l a n n i n g process i n the c i t y . The Area P l a n n i n g group at c i t y h a l l has changed over t ime s t a r t i n g as a s m a l l group i n which everybody was q u i t e i d e a l i s t i c , e n t h u s i a s t i c , and shared a sense of outrage about what was going on i n the c i t y to a s i t u a t i o n now where the group i s q u i t e 92. l a r g e and there are so many people i n the d i v i s i o n that we do not know one another w e l l enough to understand where each other stands on the fundamental va lue . i s s u e s we are d e a l i n g w i t h . We d o n ' t share n e c e s s a r i l y the same k i n d s of concerns and v a l u e s , and we may have complete ly d i f f e r e n t a s p i r a t i o n s . Some are there because they are s t i l l outraged about what i s going on i n t h e c c i t y , but some are there because , I b e l i e v e , there i s a n i c e f a t s a l a r y , s e c u r i t y , and they have the mortgage to pay. T h i s d e t r a c t s from what I cons ide r one of the b a s i c elements of Area P l a n n i n g and that i s group support from people you work w i t h . The absence of that support has l i m i t e d my a b i l i t y to cope w i t h the c o n f l i c t i n g p ressures that I mentioned j u s t now. You are ab le to bear that p ressure more e a s i l y i f you have the i d e a t h a t there are people around you who support you , b e l i e v e i n what you are d o i n g , are concerned and understand what you are doing and how w e l l you are b e a r i n g up under those p r e s s u r e s . But i f everybody i s out to do t h e i r own t h i n g , i n some ways competing w i t h one another i n the i r - ip rogram r a t h e r than c o - o p e r a t i n g , that atmosphere i s l o s t . Among the i n - h o u s e p lanners i n p a r t i c u l a r the atmosphere has changed and w i t h i t the sense of purpose f o r what they are do ing . Area P l a n n i n g l o s e s i t s o r i g i n a l charac te r and becomes f o r some p lanners j u s t a j o b . I'm not m a r r i e d to the j o b ; when I go home I r e a l l y t r y to walk away from the j o b . When the i n - h o u s e p lanner moves to a s i t e o f f i c e he c a r r i e s w i t h him the same a t t i t u d e toward the j o b . I'm c o n t i n u i n g to t r y to work a four day week and cont inue to s t i c k to those hours . I f e e l by making a good use of my time and be ing very c a r e f u l about work commitments I can do i t . I'm going to t r y . In genera l the p lanners i n the s i t e o f f i c e work s e v e r a l hours a week o v e r t i m e . In the extreme p o s i t i o n , one p lanner answered the overt ime q u e s t i o n i n the f o l l o w i n g way: I g e n e r a l l y work an e x t r a day a week and u s u a l l y one or two e x t r a even ings , at l e a s t an e x t r a hour a day and about h a l f a weekend a month. I t i s an impress i ve amount of t ime d e d i c a t e d to the j o b , from 52 to 56 hours per week compared to the b a s i c 35 hour^week, but as the same 93. p lanner noted a l i t t l e l a t e r i n the i n t e r v i e w : I f e e l s a t i s f i e d i n terms of the amount of work I put i n t o i t . Remember that much of that i s s e l f - i m p o s e d . T h e o r e t i c a l l y I don ' t need to work a l l those e x t r a h o u r s , but i n order to do the job i n the way I t h i n k i t needs to be done, I do. S a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the present job seems to be g e n e r a l l y widespread among the p l a n n e r s ; when asked about what o ther job they would choose, none of them had a c l e a r a l t e r n a t i v e i n mind . In g e n e r a l they c o u l d not see themselves doing something d i f f e r e n t and when t r y i n g t t o t h i n k of some p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e s cont inued to move around the f i e l d of p l a n n i n g . A l l the p lanners i n t e r v i e w e d seem to agree tha t there i s m u l t i p l e a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , to the c i t i z e n s (the committee i n p a r t i c u l a r ) , to the c i t y bureaucracy , and to C i t y C o u n c i l . For the NIP program they a l s o f e e l accountab le to the o ther l e v e l s of government, i n p a r t i c u l a r the f e d e r a l government tha t o r i g i n a t e d the program and moni tors i t through CMHC. A few p lanners had some d i f f i c u l t y i n d e f i n i n g t h e i r a c c o u n t a b i l i t y . Some saw themselves a c c o u n t a b l e , main l y i n an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e way, to t h e i r s u p e r i o r s on C i t y C o u n c i l . Only a few p lanners f e e l a s t rong account -a b i l i t y to themselves ; "we are accountab le to o u r s e l v e s f o r the way we are a c t i n g i n the neighbourhood, f o r the p e r s o n a l p o i n t of view tha t we are b r i n g i n g to the program." For o thers p e r s o n a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i s expressed i n sentences l i k e , " I ' v e always been ab le to keep my p r i n c i p l e s " and " I ' m not going to change my mind about t h i n g s , " or "I have independent judgement about the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . " A c c o u n t a b i l i t y to themselves can be d i r e c t l y a s s o c i a t e d to the " independent" r o l e that the p lanner i s supposed to p l a y . An " independent" r o l e i s c a l l e d f o r i n the L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g r e p o r t (1973) and r e i t e r a t e d i n a 1974 memo from the P l a n n i n g D i r e c t o r Ray Spaxman to the then Mayor A r t P h i l l i p s . When asked dur ing the i n t e r v i e w to de f ine " independent" Ray Spaxman r e p l i e d : I t h i n k that any i n d i v i d u a l i n v o l v e d i n any p r o j e c t , any purpose, any work, any team o p e r a t i o n , any community, has the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to i d e n t i f y what he t h i n k s . T h i s i s important because out of the d i s c u s s i o n among people that are t h i n k i n g f o r themselves , comes the a b i l i t y to do some^ t h i n g . I f everybody i s r e p r e s e n t i n g everybody e l s e , nobody knows where they i n d i v i d u a l l y come from. I had s i t u a t i o n s i n area p l a n n i n g o f f i c e s where the p l a n n e r has s a i d : I do not want to represent m y s e l f , I work f o r t h i s community, I represent the community, my concerns d o n ' t m a t t e r , the community m a t t e r s . But when they come to argue the case f o r the Area P l a n n i n g Committee and they stand up to the b u f f e t i n g , that happens i n e v i t a b l y i n a s i t u a t i o n l i k e t h a t , from C o u n c i l , from t h e i r s u p e r i o r s , from other departments from the o p p o s i t i o n to the p l a n , they w i l l break down i f they don ' t r e a l l y f e e l the argument. They must r e t a i n the a b i l i t y to say " t h i s i s what I t h i n k " and a l s o the a b i l i t y , which i s ve ry important f o r p l a n n i n g , to say "I don ' t know, I c a n ' t rep resent your p o i n t of v iew, because I don ' t know, I don ' t f e e l i t " . So we have independence i n the terms of re fe rence because i t i s i m p o r t a n t . We d o n ' t s t r e s s that independence but make sure i t i s t h e r e . The p l a n n e r ' s job i s to f i n d out what the community needs and t r y and h e l p them and help h i m s e l f to present i t i n the program. The same concept was expressed w i t h d i f f e r e n t words by another p lanner occupying a s e n i o r Area P l a n n i n g p o s i t i o n : Area p lanners are accountable to themselves . They must take advantage of t h e i r t r a i n i n g and e x p e r i e n c e . They must be aware of t h e i r v a l u e system. They are human be ings and cannot submerge t h e i r own v a l u e s and b i a s e s . They've got to make sure to get those out and make sure they get t h e i r t r a i n i n g and exper ience out so tha t people can take advantage of t h a t . When asked to d e f i n e the q u a l i t i e s that make a good area p l a n n e r , p l a n n i n g d i r e c t o r s and s u p e r v i s o r s gave d e s c r i p t i o n s that were very c o n s i s t e n t w i t h a common i d e a l of an a rea p l a n n e r : J Communication was the most important i tem i n the l i s t of q u a l i t i e s . I t i n c l u d e d v e r b a l and w r i t t e n a b i l i t y to communicate, a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the w i l l i n g n e s s to l i s t e n to people and be e n t h u s i a s t i c about i t a l l . High l e v e l s of energy and 95. a b i l i t y to cope w i t h f r u s t r a t i o n were a l s o cons idered e s s e n t i a l . The p lanner has to be an a n a l y t i c a l person to be ab le to de f ine the v a r i o u s components i n terms of h i s / h e r p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . Th is q u a l i t y had to be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the communication s k i l l s f o r the ; . p lanner to be ab le to present h i s / h e r a n a l y s i s to the p l a n n i n g committee and to C o u n c i l i n a way that they cou ld understand and r e a c t t o . Educat ion and exper ience were cons idered impor tant but were not g e n e r a l l y used as d i s c r i m i n a t i n g f a c t o r s i n the h i r i n g p r o c e s s . A l l the p lanners i n s e n i o r p o s i t i o n s emphasized the human aspect of the Area P l a n n i n g process to e x p l a i n why the many p e r s o n a l q u a l i t i e s were r e q u i r e d and on ly those w i t h s u i t a b l e p e r s o n a l i t i e s cou ld be a good area p l a n n e r . A p lanner working i n another department expressed t h i s concept q u i t e c l e a r l y . I don ' t t h i n k t h i s job i s f o r everybody. I ' ve seen a number of p lanners i n the c i t y f u n c t i o n i n g w e l l not j u s t as academics , at some p o i n t you are r e q u i r e d to t r a n s -l a t e a l l the academic knowledge and exper ience i n t o p r a c t i c e and a process that the community can unders tand . I f you cannot do tha t you are dead, you should be do ing something removed from the p u b l i c . The q u a l i t i e s needed to make a good area p lanner are many and d i f f i c u l t to d e f i n e . There i s no g iven. : formula to h e l p the p lanner per fo rm an Area P l a n n i n g job and many of the s k i l l s r e q u i r e d are not p l a n n i n g s k i l l s and are not p a r t of the p l a n n e r ' s t r a i n i n g . Any Area P l a n n i n g s i t u a t i o n d i f f e r s from the o thers because of the type of i s s u e s and people i n v o l v e d . The area p lanners can on ly use t h e i r judgement i n d e c i d i n g about the most a p p r o p r i a t e approach. I f the p lanner f a i l s , the Area P l a n n i n g program f a i l s because i t i s cent red on the p lanner and the sur rounding bureaucracy i s not prepared to i n t e r v e n e . Superv i so rs are not c l o s e enough to the p lanners to he lp them to prevent e r r o r s or to f u l l y understand the p r o c e s s . 96. T h i s f a c t e m p h a s i z e s t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e p l a n n e r s b u t a t t h e same t i m e e m p h a s i z e s t h e w e a k n e s s e s o f A r e a P l a n n i n g f o r i t s a l m o s t c o m p l e t e d e p e n d e n c e on t h e p l a n n e r s ' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e i r own r o l e and o f t h e A r e a P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n ' s o b j e c t i v e s . OBJECTIVES The g o a l s a n d o b j e c t i v e s o f A r e a P l a n n i n g i n V a n c o u v e r a r e n o t v e r y c l e a r f o r two m a i n r e a s o n s . The A r e a P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n i n c l u d e s t h e i n - h o u s e a n d t h e s i t e o f f i c e p l a n n e r s p e r f o r m i n g a r a n g e o f a c t i v i t i e s t h a t v a r y t o a g r e a t e x t e n t . T h e s i t e o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s i n c l u d e b o t h NIP a n d L A P . O f t e n t h e two p r o g r a m s a r e i m p l e m e n t e d t o g e t h e r , m a k i n g t h e d i s t i n c t i o n d i f f i c u l t . F u r t h e r m o r e , i n most c a s e s NIP i s u s e d a s a means t o i m p l e m e n t o t h e r A r e a P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s . Why t h e D i v i s i o n i s p r e s e n t l y l a c k i n g d i r e c t i o n c a n b e p a r t i a l l y e x p l a i n e d b y i t s h i s t o r i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t . A r e a P l a n n i n g was b o r n i n a c l i m a t e o f e c o n o m i c e x p a n s i o n a n d p o l i t i c a l r e n e w a l i n t h e c i t y . A t t h e t i m e , as one p l a n n e r p o i n t e d o u t , "we a l l were o p t i m i s t i c a b o u t t h e f u t u r e a n d n o t h i n g seemed t o b e i m p o s s i b l e f o r A r e a P l a n n i n g . " T h e p l a n n e r s d i d n o t see t h e n e e d a t t h e t i m e f o r a f i r m commitment f r o m C o u n c i l t o A r e a P l a n n i n g n o r d i d t h e y w o r r y t o o much a b o u t f i n a n c i a l a r r a n g e m e n t s a n d t h e o p e r a t i n g c o s t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e community f a c i l i t i e s t h e y a r e p r o p o s -i n g . A l l t h i s h a s r e s u l t e d i n a l i m i t e d f i n a n c i a l commitment b y C i t y C o u n c i l l e a v i n g A r e a P l a n n i n g t o f u n c t i o n m a i n l y as t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r o f f e d e r a l p r o g r a m s . The i m m e d i a t e c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h i s d e v e l o p m e n t , as an a r e a p l a n n e r p o i n t e d o u t , was t h a t : T h e d i v i s i o n h a s n o t b e e n a b l e t o a r t i c u l a t e w i t h any d e g r e e o f c l a r i t y o r u n a n i m i t y s u c h b a s i c c o n c e p t s as t h e p u r p o s e o f A r e a P l a n n i n g p r o g r a m s a n d t h e r e a s o n s f o r i n v o l v i n g c i t i z e n s i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . To f i n d a c l e a r d e f i n i t i o n of goa ls f o r A rea P l a n n i n g we must go back to the " L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g " repor t produced by the Vancouver P l a n n i n g Department i n 1973. The repor t j u s t i f i e d l o c a l area p l a n n i n g on the b e l i e f tha t p l a n n i n g and c e r t a i n s e r v i c e d e l i v e r y can be accompl ished more e f f e c t -i v e l y at the l o c a l l e v e l than at the c i t y s c a l e . The purpose of l o c a l area p l a n n i n g was to examine a s p e c i f i c geographic area i n a comprehensive manner. The reasons f o r l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g were o u t l i n e d i n that r e p o r t . P l a n n i n g becomes more e f f e c t i v e by c o - o r d i n a t i n g a s t r o n g c e n t r a l i z e d p l a n n i n g e f f o r t w i t h l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g . Th is e f f o r t w i l l produce a broad conceptua l overv iew of the c i t y i n d i c a t i n g problems, a s p i r a t i o n s , p roper r e l a t i o n s h i p o f l a n d uses , zon ing r e g u l a t i o n s , e t c . B r i n g s the p l a n n i n g process c l o s e d to the people by : - i n s t i l l i n g a f e e l i n g of conf idence i n r e s i d e n t s that they w i l l be ab le to have an e f f e c t on the f u t u r e of t h e i r communit ies , - e s t a b l i s h i n g a two-way f l ow of communication between r e s i d e n t s and c i t y h a l l , - humaniz ing bureaucracy , - c o r r e c t i n g imbalances between neighbourhoods. Develop a c o - o p e r a t i v e b a s i s f o r p l a n n i n g i n s t e a d of c o n f r o n t a t i o n responses to p lans and development p r o p o s a l s . The L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g r e p o r t was never f o r m a l l y endorsed by C o u n c i l . C i t y C o u n c i l s imply i n s t r u c t e d the P l a n n i n g Department to come-back w i t h some recommendations on which areas were to be cons idered an Area P l a n n i n g p r i o r i t y . The P l a n n i n g Department presented a l i s t of l o c a l areas where i t was f e l t the need f o r Area P l a n n i n g was h i g h e s t and C o u n c i l dec ided to beg in w i t h K i t s i l a n o . A f t e r a few months when the Neighbourhood Improvement 98. Program (NIP) was launched by the f e d e r a l government, K i t s i l a n o became the easy cho ice f o r tha t program together w i t h par t of Cedar Cot tage . There i s some c r i t i c i s m of the P l a n n i n g Department f o r s e l e c t i n g K i t s i l a n o ( G u t s t e i n , 1976) . The author of the a r t i c l e suggested t h a t i f the purpose of NIP was to preserve s t a b l e areas then K i t s i l a n o shou ld have never been chosen as i t was not s t a b l e . The a rea was under s t r o n g p ressure f o r redev -elopment and by 1974 l a r g e p a r t s of i t were l o s t to b u l l d o z e r s . From the beg inn ing NIP and LAP were g e n e r a l l y combined together i n a way that made d i f f i c u l t f o r the p u b l i c to d i s t i n g u i s h between the two programs. The major reason f o r hav ing the two programs combined was, a c c o r d i n g to the A s s o c i a t e D i r e c t o r f o r A rea P l a n n i n g , that ."NIP! has; made LAP poss ib le . " " ' " Another f e d e r a l program a s s o c i a t e d w i t h N IP , the R e s i d e n -t i a l R e h a b i l i t a t i o n A s s i s t a n c e Program (RRAP), f u r t h e r c o n t r i b u t e d to making the d i s t i n c t i o n between programs u n c l e a r . The success o r non -success of the Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s was not a s s o c i a t e d by the p u b l i c w i t h one of the programs or the o t h e r . The " L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g Review" (1977) r e p o r t p r e s e n t l y under d i s c u s s i o n i n d i c a t e s what the NIP programs are wi thout s p e c i f y i n g that the a rea p lanner i s out i n the community not s imply to he lp people to decide how to spend the funds but a l s o to d e a l w i t h p l a n n i n g i s s u e s i n the a rea and p rov ide a p l a n that i s more comprehensive than i s r e q u i r e d f o r the NIP program. The rev iew a l s o d e f i n e s LAP neighbourhood programs that were managed from c i t y h a l l r a t h e r than a s i t e o f f i c e . I f we add to t h i s the a c t i v i t i e s of the i n - h o u s e group t r y i n g to serve the remainder of the c i t y and g e t t i n g i n v o l v e d i n s p e c i f i c i s s u e s , the p i c t u r e becomes even more Ron Youngberg at the NIP and LAP committees conference , October 2 3 , 1977. 99. c o n f u s i n g . A d e f i n i t i o n o f what NIP i s i n Vancouver i s presented i n t h i s excerp t from one of the s i t e o f f i c e p l a n n e r ' s i n t e r v i e w s : The scope of NIP i s very c l e a r i n the N a t i o n a l Housing A c t . There are c e r t a i n t h i n g s that NIP can d e a l w i t h and others i t cannot . In o ther neighbourhoods which on ly have NIP the p l a n n i n g s t a f f are d e a l i n g w i t h a number of o ther i s s u e s tha t do not r e a l l y r e l a t e to NIP. They are p l a n n i n g i s s u e s and the p l a n n i n g department has used NIP as an o p p o r t u n i t y to d e a l w i t h i s s u e s that may be i n the community. They f i n d out from the NIP committee how they f e e l about these other i s s u e s , and perhaps a l l o w the c i t y to d e a l w i t h i s s u e s that o t h e r -w ise they would not have d e a l t w i t h . NIP i s d e a l i n g w i t h t h i n g s that are i n the terms o f re fe rence of the N a t i o n a l Housing A c t . L i m i t a t i o n s of NIP are the r i d i g i t y of the g u i d e l i n e s e s t a b l i s h i n g the ways i n which funds must be used and d e f i n i n g e l i g i b l e a r e a s . These l i m i t s are recogn ized by the D i r e c t o r of the P l a n n i n g Department Under NIP your o b j e c t i v e s tend to be con f ined by the nature of the program so i t i s on l y i n the t h i n g s o u t s i d e of NIP tha t you get a l o t of f l e x i b i l i t y . Another p lanner added: There i s o n l y a l i m i t e d band i n the spectrum of p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s tha t can be done w i t h NIP . S ince NIP i s o r i e n t e d towards s t a b l e neighbourhoods: Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s have been i n i t i a t e d i n Vancouver, i n areas that o therwise would not have been s e l e c t e d f o r LAP. With N IP , people are i n c l i n e d to take advantage of the funds a v a i l a b l e and can do so i f they f o l l o w the g u i d e l i n e s e s t a b l i s h e d f o r the NIP program, that must be met to ensure the r e l e a s e of funds . These c o n s t r a i n t s are f r u s t r a t i n g f o r the p lanner work ing to produce a comprehensive p l a n f o r the community when the committee f e e l s the p r e s s u r e . a n d wants to decide q u i c k l y on i tems funded by N I P . LAP becomes i n these c i rcumstances the poor r e l a t i v e of NIP and 100. l o s e s c r e d i b i l i t y by b e i n g i n t r o d u c e d through the back door . There i s no f i r m commitment to i t on the p a r t of C o u n c i l , and the P l a n n i n g Department p r e f e r s to l i v e w i t h NIP sc raps r a t h e r than openly f i g h t f o r the implementat ion of more LAP programs. Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver i s funded by NIP as i f we d i d not have the conf idence to go to C o u n c i l and say. we want LAP. LAP becomes: A program whose o b j e c t i v e s are k i n d of i d e a l s a f t e r which you r u n . There i s a s t r o n g f e e l i n g shared by many p lanners work ing i n s i t e o f f i c e s that the u n d e r l y i n g reason f o r do ing Area P l a n n i n g i n the a rea i s that i n the past neighbourhoods have been n e g l e c t e d and they are now g e t t i n g t h e i r h i s t o r i c a l p a y o f f : . . . we say that the c i t y has not been t r e a t e d f a i r l y , h i s t o r i c a l l y , so we should now take b e t t e r care of neighbourhoods that have been n e g l e c t e d i n the p a s t . My f e e l i n g i s that the reason f o r Area P l a n n i n g i s that there are a l o t of l o c a l areas that have been n e g l e c t e d i n the past and f o r these areas to get a f a i r share of improvement i n the c i t y , i t i s important to have Area P l a n n i n g o p e r a t i n g . My p e r s o n a l m o t i v a t i o n i s , where p o s s i b l e i n a p l u r a l i s t i c k i n d of s o c i e t y , to ach ieve a compromise consensus so that everyone gets a b i t of payof f and , hav ing s a i d t h a t , the people t h a t have not h i s t o r i c a l l y got tha t p a y o f f , get a b i t more so t h a t there i s some k i n d of e q u i t y . The payof f may come i n the form of educat ion to the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . Res idents of many areas may have been ignored i n the pas t f o r not b e i n g v o c a l enough or not knowing the a p p r o p r i a t e channels to reach the p o l i t i c a l l e v e r s of power. The planners^.working w i t h them can t r a n s l a t e t h e i r d i s c o n t e n t i n t o manageable problems and i n the process educate the p a r t i -c i p a n t s . 101. When the p lanner i s sent out i n a community to implement LAP he/she i s expected to produce a comprehensive p l a n for ; . the l o c a l a r e a . When implementing NIP the p lanner t r i e s to produce a p l a n that i n c l u d e s more than j u s t a l i s t of t h i n g s to do w i t h NIP funds . "Community development" i s probably one of the most important aspects of Area P l a n n i n g as i t i s done i n Vancouver. One p lanner admit ted to u s i n g t h e . . a d m i n i s t r a t i v e phase of NIP to educate the p l a n n i n g committee to d e a l w i t h c i t y bureaucracy and o ther a g e n c i e s . Even the design of a park becomes an e x e r c i s e i n which the committee b u i l d s up i t s own s t r e n g t h and e x p e r t i s e so tha t when the .p lanner i s gone there w i l l be a s t r u c t u r e i n the community ab le to c a r r y on the a c t i v i t i e s i n i t i a t e d . Many of the area p lanners expressed t h e i r concern f o r what i s going to happen when the p l a n n i n g s t a f f leave the area and i n d i c a t e d the d i f f e r e n t s teps they were t a k i n g to make that t r a n s i t i o n smooth and a l l o w the program to c o n t i n u e . My r o l e i n t h i s type of community i s to get people to f e e l that they can a c t u a l l y p a r t i c i p a t e , encouraging people to get together and e d u c a t i n g them, f o s t e r i n g groups to work on p r o j e c t s , a l s o making the o ther bureaucra ts and C i t y C o u n c i l aware of t h e i r r e s p o n -s i b i l i t i e s to t h e i r neighbourhoods. We have t h i s communication going on between the Committee and C o u n c i l through the l i a i s o n alderman. H o p e f u l l y , What you are t r y i n g to do i s to p u l l y o u r s e l f out so tha t they can work w i t h one another . One of the t h i n g s I have t r i e d to do i s to b r i n g out some of the concerns that are f u r t h e r o f f i n t o the f u t u r e to the Committee's a t t e n t i o n . I f e l t the urgency to do tha t because a f t e r the program i s ove r , c i t i z e n s w i l l be l e f t a lone f o r a w h i l e i n the f u t u r e . The o b j e c t i v e s f o r the i n - h o u s e p lanner are d e f i n e d i n the Department 's work program and l i t t l e room i s l e f t to the i n i t i a t i v e of the p lanner that must a l s o d e a l w i t h the urgency of o ther i s s u e s as they come up. 102. B a s i c a l l y we t r y to f i n i s h what we are do ing but we cannot always do t h a t . I f we don ' t have t h a t p ressure we go i n t o those areas tha t we have p r e v i o u s l y d e f i n e d as needing some p l a n n i n g or p o l i c i e s developed. The p lanners tha t have operated i n the s i t e o f f i c e s u f f e r the most f o r t h i s l a c k of freedom to develop t h e i r own program. The g e n e r a l o b j e c t i v e of the in -house p lanner i s to o f f e r some form of s e r v i c e to the other communities i n the c i t y not covered by s p e c i f i c NIP and/or LAP programs. An important aspect of t h i s s e r v i c e i s the m o n i t o r i n g of those areas to be ab le to understand p l a n n i n g i s s u e s as they a r i s e or to a n t i c i p a t e them. A l l the p lanners i n t e r v i e w e d recogn ized tha t the m o n i t o r i n g aspect of the d i v i s i o n ' s a c t i v i t y was l a r g e l y n e g l e c t e d f o r l a c k of t ime and r e s o u r c e s . M o n i t o r i n g has been reduced to be ing aware of major rezon ing and development pe rmi ts i n the a r e a , answering to the o c c a s i o n a l i n q u i r y and going to the o c c a s i o n a l meet ing . We don ' t do enough m o n i t o r i n g to know what i s happening and to a n t i c i p a t e t h i n g s as a r e s u l t of t h a t . We don ' t do enough m o n i t o r i n g of programs that we have completed; take K i t s i l a n o f o r i n s t a n c e , the m o n i t o r i n g of that i s very c a s u a l i n d e e d . At t h i s p o i n t the p r e s e n t a t i o n of the o b j e c t i v e s of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n may seem a l i t t l e confused but the s i t u a t i o n i s such that i t becomes very d i f f i c u l t to p resent c l e a r cut d i v i s i o n s between d i f f e r e n t a c t i v i t i e s w i thout l o s i n g the c h a r a c t e r and substance of the r e a l i t y . Another p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s l a c k of c l a r i t y i s the one o f f e r e d w i t h d e c l a r e d c y n i c i s m by a p lanner from o u t s i d e the department: To me, LAP seems to be a program s e a r c h i n g f o r a purpose. DURATION OF AN AREA PLANNING PROGRAM The l e n g t h of the Area P l a n n i n g involvement i n the neighbourhood has important consequences f o r the p e r c e p t i o n of the program by p lanners and 103. p u b l i c a l i k e . As one a rea p lanner p o i n t e d out : The i m p l i c a t i o n that the p l a n n i n g process has a p o i n t at which i t s t a r t s and a p o i n t at which i t ' s over i s something that I do not t h i n k i s a p p r o p r i a t e . The c i t y should not g ive the people the i d e a tha t when the p l a n n i n g program i n the a rea i s over there w i l l be no more problems and t h i n g s w i l l f low smoothly . I p e r c e i v e p l a n n i n g as a c y c l i c a l p rocess and I t h i n k tha t the c i t y shou ld s t r e s s that f a c t . The P l a n n i n g Department may have to come back to a neighbourhood a f t e r a few years to do more p l a n n i n g work because more problems may have a r i s e n . There are s e v e r a l f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t i n g to making Area P l a n n i n g a s h o r t - t e r m commitment to the a r e a . C i t y C o u n c i l wants to i n c r e a s e i t s v i s i b i l i t y by r o t a t i n g the l i t t l e resources a v a i l a b l e , moving from one area to another as q u i c k l y as p o s s i b l e . Th is a t t i t u d e was shown by C o u n c i l r i g h t from the beg inn ing of Area P l a n n i n g . In 1974 d u r i n g t h e i i m p l e m e n t a t i o n of the West End program, Mayor A r t P h i l l i p s recommended that " C o u n c i l impose a s i x month to one year l i m i t on such programs i n the future."" '" Th is was the same c o u n c i l whose TEAM m a j o r i t y was e l e c t e d on a p o l i t i c a l p l a t f o r m i n c l u d i n g Area P l a n n i n g . By l i m i t i n g the d u r a t i o n of the p l a n n i n g program to a d e f i n e d p e r i o d of time the c i t y c rea tes the f a l s e impress ion i n the community that p l a n n i n g can be done once and f o r a l l and the concept p l a n becomes a r i g i d work program r a t h e r than a f l e x i b l e t o o l to he lp the community to develop i n the r i g h t d i r e c t i o n . A p lanner c l e a r l y expressed h i s f e e l i n g s about how the c i t i z e n s shou ld r e l a t e to t h e i r p l a n . The c i t i z e n s shou ld have conf idence i n themselves and almost l a c k of respect f o r the p l a n and say : we can change i t . I t h i n k that i s h e a l t h y . The p lanners themselves can get a t tached to the p l a n . P a r t of my job as s u p e r v i s o r i s to remind the p l a n n e r and the c i t i z e n s tha t they have c rea ted the p l a n ; i t i s a Harvey O b e r f i e l d , " C o u n c i l ' b a c k i n g down' on area p l a n n i n g p r o m i s e s , " Vancouver Sun, J u l y 1 9 , 1974. 104. p i e c e o f paper . I f you don ' t l i k e i t " , know that i t i s not go ing to work and you have a l l t h i s new i n f o r m a t i o n , then change i t . The p lanners i n t e r v i e w e d t r i e d to r a t i o n a l i z e remain ing i n the community on ly f o r a l i m i t e d p e r i o d of time by p o i n t i n g out that the cc-... committee members would not welcome the prospect of meeting once a week f o r the r e s t of t h e i r l i v e s . The p lanners a l s o recogn ize tha t there i s a need f o r keep ing the program a l i v e a f t e r they l e a v e ; some of them suggested that the p lanner should come back i n a very c y c l i c a l way and see what happened, do an e v a l u a t i o n , and d e a l w i t h new problems that have emerged. Th is would he lp the c o n t i n u i t y of the program and i t would become l o g i c a l f o r the c i t i z e n s to " h o l d the f o r t " u n t i l the p lanner comes back . At the p resent t ime there i s no p o l i c y on what to do a f t e r the program ends. T h i s i s a problem recogn i zed by the P l a n n i n g Department and the L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g Review t r i e s to d e a l w i t h i i t . Other departments a l s o see the present phas ing out of the program as a problem s i n c e they are l e f t to d e a l w i t h any l i n g e r i n g consequences of the program. For the NIP programs i n p a r t i c u l a r , u n t i l r e c e n t l y there was l i t t l e c o n s i d e r a t i o n g iven to the o p e r a t i n g and maintenance cos ts of the f a c i l i t i e s b u i l t . Once NIP i s completed, the Park Board must absorb o p e r a t i n g c o s t s of community cent re a d d i t i o n s and i n c r e a s e d maintenance of park improvements, the School Board becomes r e s p o n s i b l e f o r new f a c i l i t i e s such as gymnasia b u i l t on t h e i r grounds, e t c . Thus o ther c i v i c departments are becoming more concerned about the i m p l i c a t i o n s of NIP p r o j e c t s and t h e i r concern i s t r a n s f e r r e d to C o u n c i l . The f i n a l r e s u l t of t h i s process i s that C o u n c i l becomes s u s p i c i o u s of NIP p roposa ls and r e f u s e s i t s approva l i f o p e r a t i n g cos ts appear too h i g h . The a rea p lanners f i n d themselves w i t h a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount of money 105. i n t h e i r hands and the f r u s t r a t i o n of not b e i n g ab le to do what i s f e l t a p p r o p r i a t e . There i s a p o s i t i v e aspect to t h i s s i t u a t i o n . NIP i s f o r c e d to become more than j u s t a l i s t of t h i n g s the community would l i k e to see , p lanner and committee must g i ve more thought to the p r o j e c t s they want to implement and i n v o l v e more people i n the p r o c e s s . For NIP there are s p e c i f i c d e a d l i n e s , one year to prepare the p l a n and three more to implement i t . This sounds l i k e a reasonable amount of t i m e , but f o r d i f f e r e n t reasons the year of p l a n n i n g i s i n many cases reduced , i n a recent i n s t a n c e to 4 - 5 months. Under these c o n d i t i o n s the concept p lan produced w i l l have obvious l i m i t a t i o n s . Dur ing the implement-a t i o n p e r i o d " t h e r e i s a constant p ressure f o r bureaucracy to get t h i n g s done e a r l y and the p lanner and team a l s o want to complete p r o j e c t s e a r l y so tha t there i s l e s s money spent i n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and more money spent on p r o j e c t s . We are a l s o runn ing to beat i n f l a t i o n . " NIP d e a d l i n e s a l s o can be used by the p lanner to be waived w i t h the c a r r o t rep resented by the NIP funds as a p lanner commented: I t h i n k i t encourages us to get on w i t h the j o b . I t makes the committee to have a p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e i f they don ' t want to see the money s l i p through t h e i r f i n g e r s . I o c c a s i o n a l l y remind them, a f t e r hav ing spent a l l meet ing a r g u i n g , ' f o l k s , i f we don ' t make a d e c i s i o n now . . . ' " The s t i c k represented by the g u i d e l i n e s i s on ly used as a t h r e a t because as^a, p lanner p o i n t e d o u t : I f there i s something important i n your program that you cannot get done w i t h i n the d e a d l i n e , you s t i l l can do something about i t . So f a r , we have never l o s t NIP funds because of the d e a d l i n e s . O b j e c t i v e s and g u i d e l i n e s p l a y a r e l e v a n t p a r t i n determin ing the conduct of the p l a n n e r . In Area P l a n n i n g there are no c l e a r g u i d e l i n e s , the p lanner must be ab le to i n t e r p r e t d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s and app ly i t 106. to an Area P l a n n i n g approach. In the Vancouver s i t u a t i o n where there i s l i t t l e or no d i s c u s s i o n on the b a s i c reasons f o r doing Area P l a n n i n g , p lanners are l e f t to t h e i r own to make a judgement. I t becomes easy i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n f o r the p lanner implementing NIP to f a l l back on the g u i d e l i n e s e s t a b l i s h e d by the f e d e r a l government and i n t h i s way become merely an a d m i n i s t r a t o r of f e d e r a l programs. For the few p lanners implementing LAP programs or f o r the o ther area p lanners going beyond the NIP l i m i t a t i o n s , there i s c o n s t a n t l y a q u e s t i o n of what to do and why. The Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n seems to l a c k a c l e a r direction'?:. ' . . The v a r i e t y of s i t u a t i o n s i n which the p lanners are o p e r a t i n g , i n p a r t i c u l a r the dichotomy between in-=house and s i t e o f f i c e , c o n t r i b u t e s to f r u s t r a t e i n d i v i d u a l e f f o r t s to e s t a b l i s h a communication w i t h i n the d i v i s i o n . The l a c k of communication w i t h i n the d i v i s i o n and the l a c k of d i s c u s s i o n about Area P l a n n i n g and what i t should be c rea tes a vacuum which the p lanners f i l l w i t h a t r a d i t i o n a l and b u r e a u c r a t i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e i r own r o l e . By assuming an i n s t i t u t i o n a l r o l e the p lanner can more e a s i l y c o n t r o l the impact p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n has on the program, but by l i m i t i n g the community input i n t h i s way the p lanner r e f u s e s to recogn i ze one of the b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s of Area P l a n n i n g . COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Area P l a n n i n g i s almost a synonym f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n p l a n n i n g . By f o c u s s i n g the p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t y i n a l o c a l a r e a , p l a n n i n g i s s u e s assume a more human dimension and l o c a l r e s i d e n t s g e t t i n g i n v o l v e d i n the process are a b l e to f e e l and understand the p l a n n i n g i s s u e s . I t i s p a r t of the l o c a l p l a n n e r ' s job to b r i d g e the gap between the r e s i d e n t s ' immediate 107. needs and the t r a n s l a t i o n of those needs i n t o a p l a n or p r o p o s a l . The people p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t h i s process are g iven the o p p o r t u n i t y to i n t e r v e n e and to express t h e i r f e e l i n g s and o p i n i o n s : Th is process a l l o w s anyone, even the i n a r t i c u l a t e , to make themselves h e a r d . P lanners must e s t a b l i s h a d i a l o g u e w i t h the r e s i d e n t s of the area to o b t a i n from them much of the i n f o r m a t i o n that enables them to develop a p l a n tha t r e f l e c t s the needs and a s p i r a t i o n s of the community. At the same time the p lanners a c t as resources f o r t h e i r communities and promote an educat i ve p r o c e s s . C i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Area P l a n n i n g i s ob ta ined i n s e v e r a l ways -p u b l i c meet ings , q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , committee meetings and a d v e r t i s i n g through the media and o ther channe ls . The genera l p a t t e r n f o r s i t e o f f i c e a c t i v i t i e s i s to have p u b l i c meetings from time to t ime to present the r e s u l t s , idf ' . the committee 's work to the p u b l i c f o r feedback. The p l a n n i n g committee meets r e g u l a r l y and c o n t r i b u t e s to the p r e p a r a t i o n of the p l a n . The terms of r e f e r e n c e f o r the committee are unique f o r each l o c a l a rea but based on the prev ious exper ience of o ther committees. The t r e n d now i s to abandon the p r a c t i c e of e l e c t i n g committee members from community groups. The danger i n t h i s p r a c t i c e i s tha t i t makes committee members b e l i e v e that s i n c e they have been e l e c t e d they have the power to represent the community. T h i s b e l i e f l eads them d i r e c t l y i n t o c o n f l i c t w i t h C i t y C o u n c i l , which has been e l e c t e d to represent the c i t y and expects the committee to act i n an a d v i s o r y c a p a c i t y . Comment to the LAP rev iew repor t 1977 from E g i l Lyngen, chairman of Champlain He ights P l a n n i n g A d v i s o r y Committee. 108. People i n the program have to be c o n t i n u a l l y reminded that they are set up i n an a d v i s o r y c a p a c i t y , they do not have any d i r e c t a u t h o r i t y i n the neighbourhood and I t h i n k i t i s important tha t tha t p o i n t be kept i n mind so that they don ' t get t h e i r e x p e c t a t i o n s b u i l t up about changing t h i n g s . But u l t i m a t e l y i t i s C o u n c i l tha t dec ides those o b j e c t i v e s , the c i t i z e n s and the p l a n n i n g s t a f f work as an a d v i s o r y group to C o u n c i l . The e l i g i b i l i t y c r i t e r i a f o r membership i n the committee f o r the most recent programs are e s t a b l i s h e d a t the beg inn ing of the program and p a r t i -c i p a n t s can become p a r t of the committee at any p o i n t i n time i f they meet those requ i rements . In b r i e f , anyone who a t tends meetings r e g u l a r l y i s a member. The main concern o f the p l a n n e r i s to ensure tha t the committee i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the community. I f the p lanner f e e l s that c e r t a i n geograph-i c a l areas or groups i n the community are not represented i n the committee he/she t r i e s to i n c l u d e them i n the p r o c e s s . Sometimes the c i rcumstances are such that the p lanner must s a c r i f i c e the i d e a l of maximum c i t i z e n involvement f o r the e f f i c i e n c y of the p r o c e s s . The f o l l o w i n g comments obta ined by the p lanners i n t e r v i e w e d i l l u s t r a t e how they are f r e q u e n t l y f a c i n g t h i s di lemma. There i s go ing to be a prob lem. We d i d not get many people from the apartment a r e a , .and now the q u e s t i o n i s : do we want an even l a r g e r committee ..than we a l r e a d y have or do we need more r e p r e s e n t a t i o n from the apartment area? I don ' t know yet how we are go ing to do i t . We may be a d v e r t i s i n g aga in to t r y to get these p e o p l e . ' Because we f e e l c o n s t r a i n e d by time we do not go out to look f o r o ther p a r t i c i p a n t s . We work w i t h our committee, we are not p u t t i n g any e f f o r t i n t o expanding the committee or doing a q u e s t i o n n a i r e to get p e o p l e ' s responses or hav ing a l o t of p u b l i c meet ings . I t h i n k i f we had another couple of years and assurance of f u n d i n g , we would do more t h i n g s , get more p e o p l e . 109. One of the major problems f o r the a r e a r p l a n n e r i s represented by the e x i s t i n g community groups and a s s o c i a t i o n s . The p lanner must be ab le to o b t a i n t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i thout b e i n g manipu lated by them. I t i s important f o r the committee to be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e but i t a l s o has to be independent from other community groups. The p lanner i s p resent i n the area to g i ve everyone a chance to p a r t i c i p a t e and i f the committee appears to be an e x t e n t i o n of some e x i s t i n g group t h i s would d iscourage other people from p a r t i c i p a t i n g . To be ab le to walk t h i s t i g h t r o p e , the p lanner must be a s k i l l f u l d ip lomat i n m a i n t a i n i n g good contac ts w i t h e x i s t i n g community groups from an independent p o s i t i o n . Th is becomes d i f f i c u l t e s p e c i a l l y i n LAP where there i s not a common g o a l (spending the funds) to be pursued as i n NIP. I thought that we would have had problems w i t h the area c o u n c i l because they are the e s t a b l i s h e d group h e r e . We d i s c u s s e d e a r l y the r e s p e c t i v e r o l e s ; i n i t i a l l y they expected the p l a n n i n g program to work under t h e i r w i n g . We both came to the c o n c l u s i o n that would not have been a good i d e a . The f a i l u r e to m a i n t a i n the necessary ba lance w i t h l o c a l a s s o c i a t i o n s exposes the p l a n n i n g department to a c c u s a t i o n s such as the f o l l o w i n g : The d e c i s i o n by the p l a n n i n g department not t o . d i r e c t l y u t i l i z e the a rea c o u n c i l i n the p l a n n i n g process a f t e r hav ing supported almost a l l of the i n i t i a l : ; w o r k l e d to t h e d d i s s o l u t i o n and w i t h d r a w l of i t s more a c t i v e members. A p o l i c y of s t r i c t n o n - i n t e r v e n t i o n by the area c o u n c i l r e s u l t e d from the apparent s n u b . l Even though some of the i n - h o u s e p lanners are working w i t h a p l a n n i n g committee the i n - h o u s e group has l i t t l e contact w i t h the p u b l i c . The meetings of those committees are not as f requent as they are i n the s i t e o f f i c e s , and the remaining a c t i v i t i e s do not i n c l u d e e x t e n s i v e c i t i z e n Comment to the LAP rev iew r e p o r t , 1977, from Roy H. B lunden, member of Grandview Woodland P l a n n i n g Committee. 110. invo lvement . The contact w i t h the p u b l i c i s g e n e r a l l y l i m i t e d to a te lephone enqu i ry o r p u b l i c meetings f o r which they have l i m i t e d funds a l l o c a t e d . The f o l l o w i n g comments i l l u s t r a t e the s i t u a t i o n : • l I don ' t have much to do w i t h community groups r i g h t now. There i s a c t u a l l y no Cont inu ing process f o r keep ing t h i n g s on st ream. I meet w i t h the LAP committee once a month but there i s not much c o n t i n u i t y of i n v o l v e -ment on t h e i r p a r t . There i s a s m a l l , s t a b l e core and o ther r e s i d e n t s showing up from time to t i m e . U s u a l l y I don ' t do any th ing to encourage p a r t i c i p a t i o n , i t b r i n g s i t s e l f . C i t i z e n s are w e l l o rgan i zed and v o c a l . The i n - h o u s e group see themselves more as exper ts work ing f o r C i t y C o u n c i l to adv i se them on p l a n n i n g m a t t e r s . C o u n c i l expect to get out of you exper t a d v i c e . They want some back-up i n f o r m a t i o n to j u s t i f y t h e i r a c t i o n s . You are there to support C o u n c i l as everyone e l s e , h e l p i n g them to make d e c i s i o n s . Your r o l e i s of suppor t i ve a d v i s o r , an expert t r y i n g to a degree to d i r e c t r a t h e r than j u s t support p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n s . I t h i n k C o u n c i l depends on s t a f f to do ana lyses f o r them, to l a y out o p t i o n s . We are p r o v i d i n g a form of feedback to C o u n c i l tha t i s not t e r r i b l y expens i ve . In t h e i r d e a l i n g s w i t h the p u b l i c the i n - h o u s e p lanner a c t s as an i n t e r -mediary f o r C o u n c i l and sees the c i t i z e n s as a s e l f i s h group pushing f o r t h e i r own wants and needs : I can c e r t a i n l y sympathize w i t h people i n the, . ne igh -bourhood a l though I see hypocracy i n t h e i r p a r t ; they say : I'm i n favour of p u b l i c hous ing . . . but not i n my b a c k y a r d . The i n - h o u s e p lanners expressed t h e i r awareness about the power that c i t i z e n groups have and may e x e r c i s e i n the d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s . Th is power i s measured by 111. ...v the.:degree of a c t i v i t y of the o r g a n i z a t i o n and the e f f i c i e n c y and speed w i t h which they can respond to the i s s u e . Th is awareness of p u b l i c power can be e x p l a i n e d by the f a c t tha t i n - h o u s e p lanners have l i t t l e or .no- t ime to moni tor t h e i r a rea i n order to prevent or d e a l w i t h i s s u e s as they a r i s e . In::.many cases they get i n v o l v e d at a l a t e stage when the d ia logue becomes more d i f f i c u l t . At t h i s stage the o f f i c i a l approach to p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n has been the p u b l i c meet ing , and the p lanner can e x e r c i s e l i t t l e c o n t r o l on the p r o c e s s ; p u b l i c meetings u s u a l l y mean p u b l i c c o n f r o n t a t i o n s i n c e i f there was no c o n f l i c t , the meeting would have not been warranted i n the f i r s t p l a c e . At the meeting the people t h a t have a p o s i t i o n a n t a g o n i s t i c to C i t y C o u n c i l are u s u a l l y the more v o c a l and i n many c a s e s , C o u n c i l has to g i ve i n to the p u b l i c p r e s s u r e . The area p lanner i s out i n the community to prevent c o n f l i c t s from happening , a v o i d i n g c o n f r o n t a t i o n by u s i n g the committee i n an a d v i s o r y c a p a c i t y . S e v e r a l f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t e to the success of a p l a n n e r ' s a c t i o n : by b e i n g out i n the community the p lanner can o r c h e s t r a t e the v a r i o u s elements i n the process and thereby f a c i l i t a t e d ia logue and a v o i d misunder -s t a n d i n g s . The p lanner can o b t a i n t h i s by o f f e r i n g h i m / h e r s e l f as an exper t and mediator to the community and any o ther p a r t y i n v o l v e d . C i t y C o u n c i l can use the p l a n n e r ' s knowledge about the i s s u e to make d e c i s i o n s tha t are more a p p r o p r i a t e to the c i r cumstances . Through t h i s process the p lanner i n the s i t e o f f i c e can use c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a more c o n s t r u c -t i v e way than the i n - h o u s e p lanner can. The o ther departments g e n e r a l l y f i n d p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n uncomfor tab le . As area p lanners put i t : 112. . . . they tend to be r a t h e r confused about the c o n f l i c t tha t i s uncovered i n the community by LAP. When we ask the c o - o p e r a t i o n of o ther departments they tend to be taken o f f guard by the e x i s t e n c e of t h i s c o n f l i c t and cont roversy w i t h i n the community. Other c i v i c departments are n e i t h e r prepared nor have the resources to respond to the demands c reated by p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . They f e e l t h a t the p lanner can manipulate the community by encouraging u n r e a l i s t i c e x p e c t a -t i o n s . I t i s l i k e p l u g g i n g c i t i z e n s i n a machine, to say yes I want i t . But i t i s not the c i t i z e n s ' f a u l t , ,they don ' t know, they have not done s t u d i e s , they have not managed a l i b r a r y , a program i n the community cent re . . . they on ly say I want i t . C i t i z e n s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the Area P l a n n i n g process expressed s t rong f e e l i n g s about the committees' i s o l a t i o n from c i t y government. S e v e r a l comments suggest " b e t t e r communications between p l a n n i n g committees and c i t y government"."'" I t was suggested tha t " C i t y C o u n c i l , School Board and 2 Park Board e l e c t e d members should a t t e n d more c i t i z e n committee meet ings" to h e a r , d i r e c t l y from the r e s i d e n t s , t h e i r p o i n t of v iew . The g e n e r a l f e e l i n g i s that o ther c i t y departments, i n c l u d i n g boards do not take c i t i z e n s s e r i o u s l y : The e s t i m a t e s we were g iven on c e r t a i n i tems on our p l a n were s imp ly wrong. T h i s has caused a great d e a l of problem and makes us f e e l that we are not taken s e r i o u s l y by that p u b l i c agency. I t i s a f r u s t r a t i n g e x p e r i e n c e . In t h i s context the p lanner i s seen as b e i n g on the s i d e of the c i t i z e n s . Th is may c rea te a c e r t a i n degree o f s o l i d a r i t y between the two but has a negat i ve e f f e c t on the c r e d i b i l i t y of the p lanner and the program. "*" Report of the Chairman on the Conference of LAP and NIP Committees, November 28 , 1977. 2 I b i d . I f that department had t h e i r way, they would l i k e the people i n the area to decide how much money they want to a l l o c a t e f o r the works of that department and then g ive them the money to do what they want w i t h i t . The involvement would c o n t r i b u t e to e s t a b l i s h a m u t u a l l y educat i ve process where the c i t i z e n s can get a b e t t e r understanding of the i n t r i c a c i e s of c i t y bureaucracy w h i l e c i t y departments can o b t a i n a d i r e c t feedback from the p u b l i c . The c i v i c educat ion of the p u b l i c i s undoubtedly one of the goa ls of LAP and NIP. I t h i n k that the committees do see the p lanner as an educator of people i n the a r e a . P r i o r to the p l a n n i n g program there was r e a l l y no one to e x p l a i n to them how to go about g e t t i n g t h i n g s , what i s the r a t i o n a l e f o r t h a t , what does rezon ing mean . . . so that you have that r o l e as e d u c a t o r , to t e l l them how p l a n n i n g works and how to get i n v o l v e d i n i t . In a sense most of the p lanners have to r e i n v e n t the whee l . People l e a r n through mis takes so they have to l e a r n , through a t e d i o u s p r o c e s s , to t r u s t c i t y s t a f f , to go through p e t t y t h i n g s to dec ide tha t they are p e t t y be fo re b e i n g a b l e to focus on the t h i n g s that are important and c r e a t e t h e i r own o b j e c t i v e s . A couple of p lanners d e s c r i b e d t h i s process as community development. I t i s p robab ly as important as any th ing you do t h e r e . One of your r o l e s should be community development, to o rgan i ze that neighbourhood so that the community can c a r r y on when you and your program are not t h e r e . Other p lanners p e r c e i v e us as i n t i m a t e l y r e l a t e d to the community. Our r o l e i s i n d e f i n i n g what the community needs and f e e l i n g s a r e , to he lp people to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a c o n s t r u c t i v e way i n the d e c i s i o n -making p r o c e s s . Some of the o ther p lanners see the work t h a t we do as community development. The s imple presence o f the p lanner i n the s i t e o f f i c e and the exposure g i ven to the program c o n t r i b u t e to a more genera l awareness i n the community. The community can use the p lanner , as a resource and use the s k i l l s he/she i s making a v a i l a b l e to the community. Th is process should c o n t r i b u t e to change the community's g e n e r a l awareness of the program i n t o 114. a more a c t i v e involvement i n c i v i c m a t t e r s . Th is involvement would a l l o w the community to cont inue the p l a n n i n g program a f t e r theoplanner leaves the a r e a . With one s i g n i f i c a n t e x c e p t i o n , committee members see the p lanner p o s i t i v e l y . T h i s a t t i t u d e i s p a r t i a l l y e x p l a i n e d by the k i n d of c l o s e working r e l a t i o n s h i p the p lanner has w i t h the committee. In some i n s t a n c e s people i n t e r v i e w e d r e f e r r e d to p l a n n e r s i n other communities as not b e i n g good, but they g e n e r a l l y support the one w i t h whom they are w o r k i n g . The c l o s e working r e l a t i o n s h i p the p lanner m a i n t a i n s w i t h the community makes the c i t y commitment more ev ident and f a c i l i t a t e s communication between c i t y bureaucracy and the l o c a l community. OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS AND THE BUREAUCRATIC ROLE The p lanners i n the community are the l i a i s o n between the l o c a l r e s i d e n t s and c i t y government: they represent o ther c i t y departments and the type of r e l a t i o n s h i p they e s t a b l i s h w i t h other departments has s t r o n g e f f e c t on the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . Of a l l the d i f f e r e n t c i v i c departments there are some w i t h which the p lanner has more f requent c o n t a c t . T h i s r e s e a r c h has been l i m i t e d to four of the more important ones; the E n g i n e e r i n g Department, the S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department, the School Board and the Park Board . The r e s u l t s of the i n t e r -v iews w i l l be presented c o l l e c t i v e l y f o r the v a r i o u s departments un less the i s s u e tha t i s b e i n g presented a f f e c t s o n l y , or i n a s p e c i f i c way, a s i n g l e department. A l l the a rea p lanners i n t e r v i e w e d were asked ques t ions r e g a r d i n g the types of r e l a t i o n s h i p s they e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h o ther c i t y departments and the problems a r i s i n g from them. I t was r e l a t i v e l y easy to o b t a i n from the four 115. departments statements r e l e v a n t to the same i s s u e s covered by a rea p l a n n e r s . Each department has one person tha t operates as l i a i s o n w i t h the A r e a B l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . With the except ion of the E n g i n e e r i n g Department, t h i s person i s a l s o a p l a n n e r . T h i s g r e a t l y f a c i l i t a t e d the approach to the department and the work of the i n t e r v i e w e r by making i t easy to focus on s p e c i f i c p l a n n i n g i s s u e s . Not a l l the departments' spokesmen expressed the expected antagonism towards Area P l a n n i n g . In f a c t some expressed s t r o n g support f o r the Area P l a n n i n g concept . I get e n t h u s i a s t i c about Area P l a n n i n g , and what the p lanner can do i n that c o n t e x t . I would l i k e to see on our p a r t a deeper l e v e l of involvement w i t h programs, u s i n g each o t h e r ' s resources f o r the mutual b e n e f i t ; deve lop ing programs t o g e t h e r . Th is e x p r e s s i o n of support was immediate ly f o l l o w e d by the q u a l i f i c a t i o n tha t t h e i r department does not have the resources to supply the support needed. But I don ' t t h i n k that we w i l l be a b l e to put enough s t a f f time i n the development of those programs f o r them to become a r e a l i t y . The area p lanners were more e x p l i c i t about the problems they encounter i n t h e i r d e a l i n g s w i t h other departments. But t h e i r i n t e r v i e w statements were never as e x p l i c i t as what was s a i d by one of them dur ing a committee meet ing . He was r e f e r r i n g to another department with : :which the committee had been a rgu ing f o r more than a year to o b t a i n something t h a t was not among the p r i o r i t i e s of t h a t department. The department was c a l l e d " t h e enemy w i t h which we have j u s t won a b a t t l e " . C i t y C o u n c i l had i n f a c t j u s t dec ided the i s s u e i n favour ofethe. community. The l e v e l at which t h i s b a t t l e was fought i s c l e a r l y i l l u s t r a t e d by the o ther department 's r e a c t i o n . 116. They announced tha t i t would be s i x months b e f o r e the work c o u l d be done and that by that t ime the i tem would have come up i n t h e i r p r i o r i t y l i s t , anyway. The par t of the statement sugges t ing that t h i s work would have been done i n any case i s i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the arguments that department had put f o r t h f i r s t to the p lanner and the c i t i z e n s and then to C o u n c i l . They had argued a g a i n s t the work proposed on the grounds that i t would not be d e s i r a b l e i n that l o c a t i o n , and the argument based on c i t y - w i d e p r i o r i t i e s f o r t h a t ' . k i n d of improvement was q u i t e secondary. Thus i t appears that hav ing l o s t the b a t t l e at the C i t y C o u n c i l l e v e l they wanted to deny the p l a n n i n g committee and the p lanner the sweet s a t i s f a c t i o n of v i c t o r y . The spokesman f o r a c i v i c department c l e a r l y expressed t h i s b i l i g e r e n t a t t i t u d e i n an i n t e r v i e w . ' .1.. can ./only see problems where there i s c o n f l i c t w i thcour requ i rements . I t i s an area of c o n f l i c t . As f a r as we are concerned i t i s not p r a c t i c a l , they see i t o t h e r w i s e . So f a r i n these w i n - l o s e s i t u a t i o n s we won, we convinced C o u n c i l tha t what the community contended wasn' t p r a c t i c a l . The major problems i n d e a l i n g s between area p l a n n e r s and the o ther departments are a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e i r d i f f e r e n t approaches to p l a n n i n g . The Area P l a n n i n g ph i losophy i s at t imes r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t from that of o ther departments. E n g i n e e r i n g has a d i f f e r e n t p e r c e p t i o n of e q u i t y than we have, so we know we have a disagreement i n very g e n e r a l terms. For E n g i n e e r i n g , e q u i t y means to t r e a t every area the;.same, w h i l e f o r us (area p l a n n e r s ) , a reas that have been n e g l e c t e d i n the pas t must be g e t t i n g more now. For the NIP programs, the a v a i l a b i l i t y of funds makes the r e l a t i o n -s h i p more d i f f i c u l t because the p lanners see the o ther departments as an o b s t a c l e to t h e i r spending money and the other departments cannot accept t h i s o u t s i d e r t e l l i n g them what to do. Dur ing the i n t e r v i e w s area p lanners p o i n t e d out s e v e r a l reasons why c o n f l i c t develops w i t h other departments. 117. The most r e l e v a n t source of c o n f l i c t i s the d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e towards p l a n n i n g . Other c i v i c departments see Area P l a n n i n g programs " a s a b i t of a bother because they have t h e i r own techniques to s o l v e p rob lems" ; They see the a rea p lanner " i n p a r t i n f r i n g i n g on t h e i r t e r r i t o r y because we are s p e c i a l i z e d and you (area p lanner ) are the g e n e r a l i s t , " and " they t h i n k they are t h e J p r o f e s s i o n a l s and you should not i n t e r f e r e w i t h them". The f e e l i n g the a rea p lanner gets i s that " t h e y are a f r a i d to Ipse v i a b i l i t y i f they g i ve you too much i n f o r m a t i o n " . Spokesmen f o r the other departments j u s t i f y t h e i r l a c k of involvement w i t h Area P l a n n i n g by the l a c k of sources t h e i r department can ded ica te to Area P l a n n i n g . S e v e r a l comments emphasized how t h e i r department i s under -s t a f f e d and has l i t t l e resources to d e a l w i t h -Area P l a n n i n g . I'm the on ly p lanner i n t h i s department i n v o l v e d w i t h area p l a n n i n g , and I'm doing t h i s i n a d d i t i o n to what a l l o ther p lanners i n t h i s department do. I don ' t have an a s s i s t a n t , a s e c r e t a r y , l i k e a l l of them (area p lanners i n s i t e o f f i c e s ) have. The s c a r c i t y o f resources i n o ther departments causes f r u s t r a t i o n f o r the p lanner and the Area P l a n n i n g Committee. At the same time i t causes open c o m p e t i t i o n among the v a r i o u s area p l a n n i n g programs as Stephen C r ipps (Parks Development Manager) p o i n t s ou t : He b e l i e v e s that the Park Board and the NIP committees and p lanners are 'head ing f o r a donneybrook' because parks c o n s t r u c t i o n cannot progress q u i c k l y enough to s a t i s f y people i n NIP a r e a s . A t the moment there i s no one person who c o - o r d i n a t e s the requests f o r Park Board b u i l d i n g i n NIP a r e a s ; each p lanner comes to the Park Board w i t h separate r e q u e s t s . As more NIP programs move i n t o the implementat ion s t a g e , d e c i s i o n s w i l l have to be made about which parks and which areas to work on f i r s t . At the same t i m e , o ther c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s l i k e F a l s e Creek, J e r i c h o and perhaps Harbour Park w i l l be competing f o r work crews and machinery .^ " R i l e y P a r k : N . I . P . i n A c t i o n , " Urban Reader , 5 :2 (1977). 118. The l a c k of s t a f f and resources l i m i t s the a c t i o n of c i v i c departments and the communities that have i n the p a s t s u f f e r e d the most f o r t h i s l a c k of i n t e r v e n t i o n are the ones i n which Area P l a n n i n g programs are i n i t i a t e d . The nature of the c o n f l i c t between the p lanner now work ing i n the area and t h e c c i t y bureaucracy i s c l e a r l y expressed i n t h i s answer o f f e r e d by a p lanner work ing i n a s i t e o f f i c e : They p e r c e i v e us c o l l e c t i v e l y as a p a i n In . . . because we are t r y i n g to do th ings tha t f o r a l l s o r t s of d i f f e r e n t reasons they have not done. Presumably we are c o r r e c t i n g d e f i c i e n c i e s i n the neighbourhood which i n many cases are the r e s u l t of n e g l e c t by o ther c i t y departments . . . they become defens ive and take an i m p l i c a t i o n that they have not b e i n g doing t h e i r job p r o p e r l y d u r i n g these y e a r s . The most immediate r e s u l t s of the c o n f l i c t between the p l a n n e r and other departments, as suggested by p l a n n e r s , are t h a t : They do not look forward to get i n v o l v e d i n Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s . Most o fc the departments don ' t put a p r i o r i t y on the NIP or LAP a r e a s . One p lanner i n another department e x p l a i n e d h i s p o s i t i o n : Sometimes I f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to have some degree of open, honest d ia logue w i t h area p l a n n e r s . A l l I can do i s a s s i s t and adv ise them the best I can w i t h the l i m i t e d resources I have, but I get the i m p r e s s i o n tha t they don ' t a p p r e c i a t e my i n t e r v e n t i o n i n t h e i r program. Of ten I t h i n k t h e y ' d r a t h e r not hear my a d v i c e . We get l i t t l e acknow-s ledgement tha t the adv ice was g i v e n . I t i s a f r u s t r a t i n g s o r t of t h i n g . C i t y departments f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to d e a l w i t h community p a r t i c i p a t i o n f o r d i f f e r e n t reasons . They e x p r e s s l y s t a t e d i n the i n t e r v i e w that they p r e f e r to i n t e r a c t w i t h the p lanner r a t h e r than w i t h the committee. The main j u s t i f i c a t i o n i s e f f i c i e n c y . I f I had to go out there I would f e e l l i k e I was spending too much t i m e , w a s t i n g my t i m e . I t may be u s e f u l when you have d i f f e r e n t groups to have a l o t of meetings and t r y to s a t i s f y everybody but there i s 119. a l o t of time and work before any p r o d u c t i o n . I t i s much e a s i e r to go out and do i t . P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n extends the process i n time un less w e l l d i s c i p l i n e d and l a i d out i n terms of a t ime s c h e d u l e . An area p lanner e x p l a i n s : They are concerned w i t h e x p e r t i s e , not w i t h o p i n i o n s . The i n c i d e n t r e p o r t e d next i l l u s t r a t e s b e t t e r than any o f f i c i a l s t a t e -ment the a t t i t u d e tha t some c i v i c departments have toward c i t i z e n s involvement i n p l a n n i n g . The i n c i d e n t s t a r t e d w i t h a statement made by a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the E n g i n e e r i n g Department at an NIP p l a n n i n g committee meeting and summarized i n the minutes as f o l l o w s : The engineer concluded h i s p r e s e n t a t i o n by s a y i n g t h a t the E n g i n e e r i n g Department w i l l not as v i g o r o u s l y oppose the c l o s u r e of the s t r e e t i f l o c a l r e s i d e n t s are c l e a r l y and overwhelmingly i n favour of it.-*-The C i ty . Engineer d i d not l i k e the statement and wrote a l e t t e r to the NIP o f f i c e r e q u e s t i n g that the minutes be changed to r e a d : The engineer ended h i s case w i t h that assurance tha t even though the E n g i n e e r i n g Department was opposed to the c l o s u r e , the E n g i n e e r i n g Department would endeavour to work d i l i g e n t l y at c l o s i n g the s t r e e t i f C i t y C o u n c i l votes to have i t c l o s e d . 2 The second statement i n d i c a t e s the d i s r e g a r d the department has f o r the r e s i d e n t s i n the community, and a l s o i n d i c a t e s that they c o n s i d e r themselves as exper ts a c t i n g on ly on C o u n c i l d i r e c t i v e s . The same type of a t t i t u d e can be found i n o ther departments, even though some df t h e i r spokesmen recogn ized i n i n t e r v i e w s the va lue of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n p l a n n i n g . From R i l e y Park C i t i z e n s N . I . P . P l a n n i n g Committee Minutes of November 2 2 , 1977. 2 From R i l e y Park C i t i z e n s N . I . P . P l a n n i n g Committee Minutes of February 2 1 , 1978 120. Community by community Area P l a n n i n g has g i ven us a good understanding of these communit ies. The p lanners out there and the committees are do ing tha t f o r u s , so we are g e t t i n g a b e t t e r unders tanding than we h i s t o r i c a l l y have h a d . One o f the t h i n g s we understand i s tha t communities are d i f f e r e n t and something tha t makes sense i n one community does not n e c e s s a r i l y make sense i n another p a r t of Vancouver. Th is e x p r e s s i o n of enthusiasm i s not c l e a r l y r e f l e c t e d i n the a c t i o n s of the department t h i s p l a n n e r i s r e p r e s e n t i n g , a l though some of the area p lanners admit an improvement i n tha t department 's a t t i t u d e towards t h e i r programs. C i t y departments g e n e r a l l y get i n v o l v e d i n Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s when NIP funds are spent on a p r o j e c t that i s under the d i r e c t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of that department. Because of t h i s they p e r c e i v e the p lanner as an a d m i n i s t r a t o r and the Area P l a n n i n g aspect of the NIP program i s somehow l o s t . The Marpole a rea program i s p r e s e n t l y the on ly one where the p lanner i s i n the s i t e o f f i c e to do LAP e x c l u s i v e l y . Th is has gener -a ted some i n t e r e s t i n o ther departments anxious to see how the program i s going to f u n c t i o n . Some of the p lanners i n o ther departments p e r c e i v e NIP as an o b s t a c l e to good Area P l a n n i n g f o r v a r i o u s reasons : I t i s l i k e a program s e a r c h i n g f o r a purpose . I t i s i n e x i s t e n c e because there i s money a v a i l a b l e . . . . A good example i s the concept p l a n i n . . . There i s no document-a t i o n or even d i s c u s s i o n of problems i n the community. The " p l a n " i s j u s t a grocery l i s t of t h i n g s that people have come up w i t h i n a few weeks. Th is i s not to say there i s not any need f o r the i tems proposed i n the p l a n , but they do not p rov ide the r a t i o n a l e f o r i t and so i t i s not p o s s i b l e to comment on i t . They don ' t p rov ide any o rgan ized p l a n showing how these new f a c i l i t i e s would r e l a t e to e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s , or the l o n g term i m p l i c a -t i o n s f o r o p e r a t i n g c o s t s . NIP i s main ly a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of spending money and the p l a n n i n g f u n c t i o n i s l o s t a f t e r the f i r s t s i x months. That, i s a very h u r r i e d s i x months and I see t h a t as b e i n g one of the main d isadvantages of the program. A l a c k of c o - o r d i n a t i o n between the area p lanner and other d e p a r t -ments emerged d u r i n g the i n t e r v i e w s . I t h i n k one of the t h i n g s they shou ld do i n the f u t u r e i s to have concept p lans d i s c u s s e d by the i n t e r d e p a r t -mental NIP A s s i s t a n c e Committee, so that o ther departments w i l l be aware of what each of them i s do ing . NIP i n v o l v e s some s o r t of c o - o p e r a t i o n among those b o d i e s . I know from our p o i n t of v iew i t would be u s e f u l to know what the o ther agencies are t h i n k i n g about , and what k i n d of commitments have been made i n terms of fund ing of the program. I t seems to me tha t the NIP A s s i s t a n c e Committee i s p r e s e n t l y convened on ly at the d i s c r e t i o n of the P l a n n i n g Department. A common, o p i n i o n expressed by :Other departments i s t h a t the p lanner a l though r a i s i n g e x p e c t a t i o n s i n the community, i s more an educator of the community than an advocate . The p l a n n e r i s t e a c h i n g people how to work i n groups, to work w i t h the system, to be p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i s t s , to know how the system works . Tn genera l Area P l a n n i n g has been going on i n areas where people are l e s s aware of the process and tha t i s a good t h i n g . I t has c e r t a i n Li r e d i s t r i b u t i v e aims which are over and above spending money. . . . i t i s a good way of ex tend ing c i t y h a l l i n t o the community. I t i s an e d u c a t i o n a l k i n d of t h i n g f o r a community to r e a l i z e tha t people at c i t y h a l l are j u s t an e x t e n s i o n of i t s e l f r a t h e r than something that has l i t t l e to do w i t h the community. I t i s a good p u b l i c i t y , maybe we do not do tha t enough. The c o n c l u s i o n one reaches from the comments ob ta ined from other departments i s that Area P l a n n i n g does not seem to f i t w e l l i n the b u r e a u -c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e of c i t y h a l l , and i s p e r c e i v e d by some departments as a t h r e a t e n i n g a l t e r n a t i v e . Whether Area P l a n n i n g i n f r i n g e s on someone's t e r r i t o r y or n o t , i t i s g iven l i t t l e d i r e c t support by o ther departments. As a r e s u l t the p lanners and t h e i r s t a f f tend to operate on t h e i r own, g e t t i n g i n v o l v e d w i t h o ther departments on ly when t h e i r concurrence i s needed or t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a p r o j e c t i s r e q u i r e d . 122. A c t i n g independent l y , Area P l a n n i n g i s l i t t l e understood by other departments. The p lanners are g e n e r a l l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the community they are work ing w i t h but t h e i r p o s i t i o n i n a community i s not w e l l unders tood . With time and e x p e r i e n c e , a rea p lanners have managed to improve t h e i r r e l a t i o n s w i t h other departments. To achieve tha t they have e l i m i n a t e d p o i n t s of f r i c t i o n . The a rea p lanner i s l e a r n i n g the r u l e s and i s p l a y i n g by them i n order to progress w i t h the program. C o n t r o v e r s i a l i tems are avoided whenever p o s s i b l e , to e l i m i n a t e any b a s i s f o r c o n f l i c t that would cause- f r u s t r a t i o n i n the committee and a l i e n a t e o ther p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the program. In the case of N IP , the a rea p lanner and p l a n n i n g committee are g i ven the money but have l i t t l e power to act on t h e i r own. Other departments use t h e i r power to make the Area P l a n n i n g exper ience f r u s t r a t i n g f o r the p a r t i c i p a n t s . In the words of an area p lanner i n t e r v i e w e d : They are not s u p p o r t i n g Area P l a n n i n g programs and t h i s makes the implementat ion of the programs d i f f i c u l t , but t h a t i s what o ther c i v i c departments want . They look forward to the day when C o u n c i l w i l l g ive them NIP funds r a t h e r than l o s e them because of d e l a y s . POLITICIANS The importance C i t y C o u n c i l assumes i n the Area P l a n n i n g process l i e s i n i t s f i n a l a u t h o r i t y i n the c i v i c c o n t e x t . Th is p r e s e n t a t i o n w i l l focus on C i t y C o u n c i l and i t s r e l a t i o n w i t h area p l a n n e r s , r a t h e r than on o ther p o l i t i c a l l e v e l s . CMHC and the f e d e r a l government i n f a c t step back a f t e r i s s u i n g c e r t i f i c a t e s of implementat ion f o r the NIP programs, d e l e g a t i n g to C o u n c i l the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r approv ing p r o j e c t s . 123. Even though they know that they do not have d i r e c t c o n t r o l over the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , f e d e r a l p o l i t i c i a n s t r y to make p o l i t i c a l mi leage out of NIP programs by p r o m i s i n g r e s i d e n t s what they cannot d e l i v e r and then t r y i n g to impose t h e i r pet p r o j e c t s on the p lanner and the committee. The p lanners are aware of the p o l i t i c a l d e s i r e s at the v a r i o u s l e v e l s of govern -ment and must weigh every d e c i s i o n made by the committee a g a i n s t i t s p o l i t i c a l f e a s i b i l i t y or a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s . Many of the comments p resented here were ob ta ined i n i n t e r v i e w s w i t h the p l a n n e r s , on ly a few aldermen were i n t e r v i e w e d and a l though some of the answers ob ta ined from them o f f e r i n t e r e s t i n g i n s i g h t s to the p o s i t i o n of the area p lanner they cannot represent the wide range of o p i n i o n s t h a t i n d i v i d u a l members of C o u n c i l may have about Area P l a n n i n g . In the context of t h i s t h e s i s i t wasn ' t p o s s i b l e to t r y to i n t e r v i e w a l l members of C i t y C o u n c i l , f o r s e v e r a l reasons : - The a ldermen's answers are p r i m a r i l y " p o l i t i c a l " and a f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s of the p o l i t i c a l p o s i t i o n of the i n d i v i d u a l alderman thus would be r e q u i r e d to p l a c e t h e i r comments i n c o r r e c t p o l i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e ; - Area P l a n n i n g i s a s s o c i a t e d by many w i t h the ward system. At the p resent t ime i n Vancouver there i s an o n - g o i n g d i s c u s s i o n about the a p p r o p r i a t e -ness of the ward system f o r the c i t y . Th is f a c t would p robab ly have s h i f t e d the focus of the i n t e r v i e w s and a l t e r e d answers, e s p e c i a l l y those of aldermen tha t s t r o n g l y support or oppose the ward system. - F i n a l l y , g i ven the l i m i t s of t h i s r e s e a r c h , i t was f e l t i n a p p r o p r i a t e to expand i n t h i s a r e a . I t i s important to make c l e a r a t the outset tha t there i s a s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e i n the way C o u n c i l p e r c e i v e s s i t e o f f i c e and i n - h o u s e p l a n n e r s . S i t e o f f i c e p lanners are a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the l o c a l a rea i n which they work 124. and h e l d d i r e c t l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r any th ing happening t h e r e . The D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g i s not d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d -and can o f f e r l i t t l e d i r e c t support to the area p l a n n e r . The i n - h o u s e p lanners d e a l w i t h v a r i o u s i s s u e s , cannot be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h one s p e c i f i c a r e a , and t h e i r r e p o r t s c a r r y the s i g n a t u r e of the D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g and i n many cases the D i r e c t o r p resents them to C o u n c i l . Thus the i n - h o u s e area p lanner appears to C o u n c i l as no more than a s m a l l p a r t i n the mechanism of c i t y h a l l bureaucracy . There are i n - h o u s e p lanners d e a l i n g w i t h NIP o r LAP but f o r v a r i o u s reasons t h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h a l o c a l a rea i s l e s s e v i d e n t . U n t i l r e c e n t l y when v a r i o u s aldermen were ass igned s p e c i f i c l o c a l a rea programs to act as a l i a i s o n between a program and C o u n c i l , there was l i t t l e or no involvement of i n d i v i d u a l aldermen i n Area P l a n n i n g . As a r e s u l t of t h i s s i t u a t i o n C o u n c i l had l i t t l e unders tanding of the p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n i n which the l o c a l a rea p lanner was o p e r a t i n g . C o u n c i l p e r c e i v e d and, to the degree tha t s e v e r a l aldermen s t i l l are not d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d i n Area P l a n n i n g , s t i l l p e r c e i v e the l o c a l community as a u n i t and expects the p lanner to present them w i t h the community p o i n t of v iew. As one a l d e r -man put i t , There i s an i m p l i c i t assumption t h a t there i s a consensus p o i n t of view i n the neighbourhood. C o u n c i l expects the P l a n n i n g Department to d i s c o v e r what tha t p o i n t of v iew i s and b r i n g i t to them. I t h i n k C o u n c i l r e l i e s on the LAP p lanner to be s e n s i t i v e to what the needs of the community a r e , to be aware of what people want , to know what the p re fe rences and a t t i t u d e s of the community a r e . The d i r e c t i m p l i c a t i o n i s that the p lanner must s o l v e d i f f e r e n c e s of o p i n i o n i n the community and present C o u n c i l w i t h a set of a l t e r n a t i v e s that are not c o n t r o v e r s i a l i f p o s s i b l e . At the same t ime the p l a n n e r i s supposed to be " p o l i t i c a l l y a s t u t e " and a v o i d p r e s e n t i n g C o u n c i l w i t h a l t e r n a t i v e s 125. that are not p o l i t i c a l l y f e a s i b l e and would t h e r e f o r e make C o u n c i l unpopu-l a r . S e v e r a l p lanners p o i n t e d out t h i s f a c t dur ing the i n t e r v i e w s : There i s a demand from the p o l i t i c a l l e v e l tha t you be p o l i t i c a l l y a s t u t e , tha t you have regard f o r the p o l i t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s of the t h i n g s you are s u g g e s t i n g . I f they are going to be g iven recommendations tha t they cannot go a long w i t h p o l i t i c a l l y . They would r a t h e r you had not bothered to present them,because i t makes v i s i b l e t h e i r p o s i t i o n a g a i n s t a c e r t a i n area of i n t e r e s t i n the c i t y . They would l i k e you to r e j e c t tha t a l t e r n a t i v e at the outset because i t i s not p o l i t i c a l l y f e a s i b l e . An alderman i n t e r v i e w e d i m p l i e d the need f o r the p lanner to be p o l i t i c a l l y a s t u t e w i t h these words: When the p lanner has i d e n t i f i e d the needs i n the a r e a , he must separate the p o s s i b l e from the i m p o s s i b l e , the d e s i r a b l e from the u n d e s i r a b l e . . . as he sees i t as a p l a n n e r . The p lanner becomes i n f a c t more than an exper t r e p o r t i n g to C o u n c i l on the v a r i o u s t e c h n i c a l s o l u t i o n s to the prob lem, he/she must be a p o l i t i c a l a c t o r i n what becomes a p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . P l a n n e r and C o u n c i l are i n f l u e n -c i n g each other u s i n g e x p e r t i s e on one s i d e and p o l i t i c a l power on the o t h e r . Only a few of the p lanners s t a t e d i n i n t e r v i e w s that p o l i t i c a l p ressure and the d e s i r e s of C o u n c i l a f f e c t t h e i r v i e w s . These p lanners r e a d i l y admit ted that i n making p r o p o s a l s to C o u n c i l they are always count ing votes and t r y i n g to f i g u r e out which way i n d i v i d u a l aldermen are going to v o t e . The l a r g e m a j o r i t y of the p l a n n e r s d i d not recogn ize or admit to t h i s p r o c e s s . Dur ing the i n t e r v i e w s they made statements r e g a r d i n g t h e i r i n f l u e n c e on the p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n makers but f a i l e d to p o i n t out the oppos i te process by which they are i n f l u e n c e d by C o u n c i l : I t h i n k I can a f f e c t p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n s . P lanners can w i t h r e p o r t s , and a l s o you can he lp c i t i z e n s to a f f e c t p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n s . In a funny way I t h i n k we are i n f l u e n c i n g C o u n c i l d e c i s i o n s because we b r i n g before C i t y C o u n c i l f o r a d e c i s i o n a l o t 126. of t h i n g s that otherwise would have never been brought i n f r o n t of them. I t h i n k I can i n f l u e n c e C o u n c i l q u i t e a b i t . They look to p lanners f o r d i r e c t i o n . Th is game i s made more compl icated f o r the p l a n n e r by the f a c t tha t C o u n c i l has probably as many o p i n i o n s about Area P l a n n i n g as there are aldermen. S e v e r a l p lanners p o i n t out t h i s f a c t d u r i n g the i n t e r v i e w s : C i t y C o u n c i l i s not m o n o l i t h i c a l i n i t s view of the Area P l a n n i n g program. There are d i f f e r e n t f a c t i o n s i n C o u n c i l , or j u s t c l u s t e r s of o p i n i o n s ; some very s u p p o r t i v e , some q u i t e c r i t i c a l . . . C o u n c i l do not have a c o l l e c t i v e o p i n i o n about a n y t h i n g , much l e s s about LAP,, and to understand C o u n c i l you have to understand the o p i n i o n s of the i n d i v i d u a l members. T h i s can e x p l a i n the many d i f f e r e n t ways aldermen v iew the area p l a n n e r s : Some see the p lanner as an "unnecessary l u x u r y , " o thers as a " channe l to m a i n t a i n a d i r e c t contact w i t h the community," a l s o as a " s e r v a n t and ask you- to take care of compla ints made to them," by the p u b l i c . But more than any th ing e l s e , the p lanner i s seen as " p r e v e n t i n g those d e l e g a t i o n s to C o u n c i l , so that when people come to C i t y C o u n c i l they would have had the b e n e f i t of d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h c i t y s t a f f and the process w i l l be more o r g a n i z e d " . A s i t e o f f i c e p lanner f e e l s , as do most of the i n - h o u s e p l a n n e r s , tha t h i s r o l e i s that of an exper t s u p p o r t i n g C o u n c i l . They expect the program to g ive them a good handle on how to d e a l w i t h r e z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n s . In the mind of C o u n c i l tha t i s , I t h i n k , the h i g h e s t p r i o r i t y . Whether the p lanner i s i n a s i t e o f f i c e doing "community development ," or i n - h o u s e as an "expert a d v i s o r , " he/she must remember tha t the power to make d e c i s i o n s remains w i t h C o u n c i l . When the p lanner i s out i n the community C o u n c i l may l o s e i t s g r ip on the program and t h i s concerns some 127. aldermen. I'm a l i t t l e concerned about t h i s g roup 's f e e l i n g that they shou ld make the d e c i s i o n , and I s t r o n g l y f e e l that the d e c i s i o n should be made by the e l e c t e d people w i t h the input from the people-.':in."the Area P l a n n i n g committee. G e n e r a l l y C i t y C o u n c i l , a t l e a s t t h i s C i t y C o u n c i l , seem to go a long w i t h the committee, but C o u n c i l must reserve the r i g h t of f i n a l d e c i s i o n . T h i s statement expresses the a t t i t u d e of C o u n c i l ; whether the i n d i v i d u a l alderman i s i n favour of Area P l a n n i n g programs or n o t , t h e i r main concern i s to r e t a i n that power they were e l e c t e d to e x e r c i s e . P lanner and c i t i z e n s are s l o w l y l e a r n i n g t h i s important l e s s o n . As a r e s u l t , c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s l o s i n g i t s o r i g i n a l c h a r a c t e r of o p p o s i t i o n to the government to become, under the guide of the p l a n n e r , a c o n s u l t a t i v e body that g ives p o l i t i c i a n s the p u b l i c b l e s s i n g f o r t h e i r a c t i o n s . 128. CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS The analysis of the planner's position in Area Planning inevitably leads to some conclusions about the present situation of the Area Planning division in Vancouver. The position an area planner takes in the planning process i s largely influenced by the kind of direction and support the division offers to i t s planners, and at the same time the personal choices of the planners among the conflicting roles they are asked.'to play affect the direction of the Area Planning Division. The most striking finding of this research is the declared satisfac-tion of the area planners, with few exceptions, about the job they are doing. The importance of this finding l i e s in the fact that according to the conceptual model used i n the thesis the planner i s the centre of conflicting expectations and the struggle to find a position that allows the planner to deal with this conflict eventually brings the planner to a c r i t i c a l situation. The past history of Area Planning in Vancouver totally supports this theory. None of the planners that started a planning program i n a site office has so far remained in this position for the length of the program; with only one exception, these area planners have also l e f t the Planning Department. The interpretation of the present planners' satisfaction offers some interesting indications about the present development of Area Planning in Vancouver. The planners' satisfaction seems to be directly associated with the bureaucratic approach to Area Planning the planners seem to prefer. By using a bureaucratic approach the planners deny the conflict associated with their position in the Area Planning process. The area planners simply see themselves as city employees working from a decentralized base and their actions reflect the desires of City Council and the city bureaucracy. The 129. planner j u s t i f i e s a d i s r e g a r d f o r o ther r o l e s e x p e c t a t i o n s by u s i n g the independent p o s i t i o n the terms of r e f e r e n c e a l l o w the p lanner to t a k e . By making t h e i r p o s i t i o n c o i n c i d e w i t h that of the P l a n n i n g Department a rea p lanners p r o t e c t themselves and make t h e i r job " j u s t a j o b " . T h i s t rend i n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n has encouraged p l a n n e r s from other d i v i s i o n s , who p r e v i o u s l y cons idered Area P l a n n i n g too r a d i c a l , to move i n w i t h the i n t e n t of expanding t h e i r exper ience so as to q u a l i f y f o r f u t u r e promotions to manager ia l p o s i t i o n s . T h e i r presence a c c e l e r a t e s the change i n d i r e c t i o n of the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . As more c i t y p lanners u s i n g a b u r e a u c r a t i c approach ente red the d i v i s i o n the young, i d e a l i s t i c and r a d i c a l p lanners that c h a r a c t e r i z e d Area P l a n n i n g at i t s o r i g i n s leave because they f i n d the atmosphere i m p o s s i b l e . A c l o s e r l o o k at the h i s t o r y of A rea P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver r e v e a l s the d e t a i l s of i t s development, from a proposed i n n o v a t i v e approach to p l a n n i n g , to p l a n n i n g w i t h i n the b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e from a d e c e n t r a l i z e d b a s i s . Area P l a n n i n g was i n t r o d u c e d i n Vancouver by TEAM, a p a r t y advocat ing p o l i t i c a l renewal i n the c i t y . Only a few years l a t e r the same p a r t y seem to be much l e s s concerned about changing th ings and thus n o n - s u p p o r t i v e of the o r i g i n a l approach proposed f o r Area P l a n n i n g . The p o l i t i c a l events i n Vancouver must be .seen i n the Canadian p e r s p e c t i v e c o n s i d e r i n g the genera l change i n the country towards a more c o n s e r v a t i v e s o c i e t y . A l though TEAM swept to power w i t h Area P l a n n i n g as par t of i t s p o l i t i -c a l p l a t f o r m , the newly e l e c t e d C o u n c i l w i t h a TEAM m a j o r i t y never endorsed the L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g repor t i n t r o d u c i n g Area P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver. F o l l o w i n g the West End exper ience i t was dec ided t h a t the P l a n n i n g Department should have s o l e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r management of Area P l a n n i n g programs. T h i s a l l o w e d the program to be more e f f i c i e n t , but the 130. c o n f l i c t among c i v i c departments was merely t r a n s f e r r e d from the s i t e o f f i c e , where r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of d i f f e r e n t departments had been work ing t o g e t h e r , to the i n t e r d e p a r t m e n t a l l e v e l . The i n t r o d u c t i o n of the f e d e r a l NIP program a l lowed the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n to ga in the s t r e n g t h of numbers but has changed the d i v i s i o n i n t o a l a r g e body that needs to be run b u r e a u c r a t i c a l l y . Th is has l e d the d i v i s i o n f u r t h e r away from i t s o r i g i n a l i d e a l s . The i n - h o u s e group has grown from one p lanner and two a s s i s t a n t s i n 1975 to a s e n i o r p lanner i n a s u p e r v i s o r y c a p a c i t y , fou r p lanners and th ree a s s i s t a n t s at the p resent t i m e . In a d d i t i o n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n i n c l u d e s and i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the s t a f f a d m i n i s t e r i n g the RRAP program, p r e s e n t l y 17 persons . In t h i s s i t u a t i o n the s i t e o f f i c e p lanners have become a m i n o r i t y . They f e e l i s o l a t e d , and i t becomes more d i f f i c u l t f o r them to i d e n t i f y w i t h the d i v i s i o n from which they r e c e i v e l i t t l e suppor t . As the number of the i n - h o u s e p lanners i n c r e a s e s , the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n becomes more d i r e c t l y accountable to C o u n c i l , r e a c t i n g to C o u n c i l requests r a t h e r than imposing i t s e l f as an a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n n i n g approach. As the number of NIP programs accumulates i n f r o n t of the s e n i o r a rea p l a n n e r , he has l e s s time l e f t f o r c o n s i d e r i n g p o l i c i e s f o r Area P l a n n i n g and becomes more of an a d m i n i s t r a t o r making sure tha t no money i s l o s t . A f t e r the i n i t i a l p l a n n i n g stage i n NIP the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f u n c t i o n of the p lanner i s a l s o emphasized. There are other f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t i n g to i s o l a t e the p lanners i n s i t e o f f i c e s from one another as w e l l as from the r e s t of the D i v i s i o n ; NIP programs are d i r e c t l y competing w i t h each o ther to get whatever resources and a t t e n t i o n the other departments can g i ve them. The takeover by NIP of the Vancouver Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n has a l s o meant tha t areas more i n need of concent ra ted p l a n n i n g e f f o r t have been 131. l a r g e l y i gnored s i n c e NIP programs are d i r e c t e d almost e n t i r e l y toward s t a b l e r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhoods. Th is has a l s o meant t h a t the p l a n n e r s implementing NIP have emphasized the r o l e of community worker w i t h which they are not n e c e s s a r i l y f a m i l i a r . While per fo rming t h i s a c t i v i t y f o r which they have g e n e r a l l y r e c e i v e d no t r a i n i n g they e n t e r i n t o c o n f l i c t w i t h the S o c i a l P l a n n i n g Department and a l l o ther c i v i c departments they are t r y i n g to represent at the l o c a l l e v e l . To get the maximum c o - o p e r a t i o n from the other r e l u c t a n t departments, the area planner , l e a r n s to c a r e f u l l y a v o i d c o n t r o v e r s i a l i s s u e s , t r y i n g to adapt the Area P l a n n i n g program to the s t r u c t u r e of the b u r e a u c r a t i c system i n which he/she o p e r a t e s . The job of the p lanner at t h i s p o i n t c o n s i s t s of " e d u c a t i n g the committee" to the c i v i c p r o c e s s . Th is educat i ve process i n the p resent c i rcumstances means t e a c h i n g the community to work w i t h i n the p resent system. I f the committee choses to ask f o r something more or d i f f e r e n t , the p l a n n e r s can f a l l back on the independent r o l e e s t a b l i s h e d i n the terms of r e f e r e n c e l e a v i n g the l o c a l p l a n n i n g committee to take a d i f f e r e n t p o s i t i o n on i t s own. As a r e s u l t the p l a n n i n g committee l e a r n s to work w i t h the b u r e a u c r a t i c system by a s k i n g on ly f o r what i s acceptab le to the c i v i c o r g a n i z a t i o n . A l though s e v e r a l p lanners expressed the o p i n i o n that t h e i r f u n c t i o n i n the community i s to make the system more e q u i t a b l e by r e d i s t r i b u t i n g c i v i c r e s o u r c e s , a l l they are a c t u a l l y do ing i s c o n v i n c i n g people to work harder to get what i s a l r e a d y due to them. As the p lanners that r e a l i z e tha t Area P l a n n i n g i s not p u r s u i n g i t s o r i g i n a l o b j e c t i v e s leave the d i v i s i o n , fewer are l e f t to remind the other p lanners what Area P l a n n i n g was in tended to b e . The p lanners that remain f i n d the b u r e a u c r a t i c s t r u c t u r e more comfortable because i t denies many of the p l a n n e r ' s c o n f l i c t s among r o l e s . The p r i c e p a i d f o r s u c c e s s f u l l y 132. overcoming the p l a n n e r ' s c o n f l i c t among d i f f e r e n t r o l e e x p e c t a t i o n s i s the demise of the Area P l a n n i n g concept and s u b s t i t u t i o n of a more t r a d i t i o n a l b u r e a u c r a t i c approach to p l a n n i n g from a d e c e n t r a l i z e d b a s i s . T h i s a n a l y s i s i l l u s t r a t e d the mechanism through which the o b j e c t i v e s of Area P l a n n i n g have been d i l u t e d . The f a i l u r e by C o u n c i l to endorse the 1973 L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g repor t was a s i g n i f i c a n t step i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n . The repor t i t s e l f c l e a r l y s p e l l e d out the need f o r a s t r o n g commitment from C o u n c i l as a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r the s u c c e s s f u l implementat ion of l o c a l a rea p l a n n i n g . The l a c k of t h i s commitment must be taken as an i n d i c a t i o n of the g e n e r a l a t t i t u d e used by c i t y h a l l i n d e a l i n g w i t h Area P l a n n i n g . A l though accepted as par t of c i t y government, Area P l a n n i n g was never g iven the chance to develop on i t s own m e r i t s , and s l o w l y the complex b u r e a u c r a t i c machinery has managed to reduce t h i s new approach to p l a n n i n g to a mere ex tens ion of i t s e l f . The p resent s i t u a t i o n of A rea P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver seems to s a t i s f y a l l s i d e s ; g e n e r a l approva l f o r Area P l a n n i n g was expressed at the conference of LAP and NIP committees h e l d i n Vancouver i n November 1977. The reasons why the P l a n n i n g Department i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h the Area P l a n n i n g s i t u a t i o n have been a l r e a d y d i s c u s s e d . The c i t i z e n s are not much i n t e r e s t e d i n Area P l a n n i n g and p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n genera l at the p resent t i m e . Most of the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the conference mentioned above were members of p l a n n i n g committees and as such were not about to look i n the mouth of the g i f t h o r s e ; they i h . f a c t cons idered them-s e l v e s p r i v i l e g e d j u s t f o r g e t t i n g the Area P l a n n i n g programs. There are few compla ints from the r e s t o f the p u b l i c because l i t t l e c i v i c money i s spent i n these programs whose purpose i s to improve the p h y s i c a l c o n d i t i o n s i n the c i t y . For the same reason c i t y aldermen do not ob jec t to the programs 133. even i f they do not support the p r i n c i p l e of Area P l a n n i n g . I f a l l p a r t i e s i n v o l v e d support the way Area P l a n n i n g i s p r e s e n t l y o p e r a t i n g , there would seem to be no need f o r change in> the p resent d i r e c t i o n of Area P l a n n i n g . In s p i t e of t h i s , some f a c t o r s that w i l l a f f e c t the f u t u r e of Area P l a n n i n g must be c o n s i d e r e d . The f e d e r a l government has r e c e n t l y announced that the NIP program w i l l be r e p l a c e d w i t h d i r e c t a l l o c a t i o n , of f e d e r a l funds to the c i t y on a per c a p i t a b a s i s . Given the present t r e n d i n c i t y h a l l p o l i c i e s i t i s easy to p r e d i c t that these funds w i l l be even ly , d i s t r i b u t e d throughout the c i t y and the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n . w i l l p robab ly a d m i n i s t e r t h i s d i s t r i b u t i o n . By spread ing funds and resources even ly throughout the c i t y Area P l a n n i n g w i l l move f u r t h e r away from i t s o r i g i n a l p r i n c i p l e s to the p o i n t of e f f e c t i v e l y denying them through i t s a c t i v i t i e s . I t i s easy f o r f o r e c a s t f o r the near f u t u r e a renewed i n t e r e s t i n p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n p l a n n i n g . At some p o i n t c i t i z e n s w i l l r e a l i z e t h a t t h e i r involvement has been more tokenism than e f f e c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s . They w i l l see Area P l a n n i n g as the ins t rument w i t h which they have been dece ived and f i g h t a g a i n s t the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n and the e x i s t i n g c i v i c approach. At tha t p o i n t c i t y p o l i t i c i a n s and t h e i r c i v i l se rvants w i l l a g a i n , a decade l a t e r , be f a c i n g the problem of people want ing to p a r t i c i p a t e and a c c u s i n g them of hav ing a l r e a d y missed a good chance. The present renewed i n t e r e s t i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the c i t y of Vancouver i n t o e l e c t o r a l wards may be seen as an i n d i c a t i o n of r i s i n g support f o r d e c e n t r a l i z e d government of the c i t y . One can q u i c k l y d i s m i s s the on -go ing d i s c u s s i o n on the ward system by i d e n t i f y i n g the s t rong suppor ters of the proposed r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the c i t y w i t h those p o l i t i c i a n s or would -be p o l i t i c i a n s that see a d i f f e r e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n of the e l e c t o r a l 134. body work ing to t h e i r advantage, and by the same reason ing p o l i t i c i a n s s t r o n g l y opposed to i t would be the ones tha t see the present system work ing to t h e i r advantage. Even i f t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s c o r r e c t , the ward system debate cou ld be the i s s u e that would s t i r up the stagnant atmosphere p r e s e n t l y a f f e c t i n g c i t y p o l i t i c s . A rea P l a n n i n g has c o n t r i b u t e d to make the ward system a p o s s i b i l i t y by showing C o u n c i l some of the p o s i t i v e aspects of d e c e n t r a l i z e d government and t r a n s l a t i n g i n t o p r a c t i c e some aspects of t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the c i t y . Area P l a n n i n g shou ld cont inue to advocate a d e c e n t r a l i z e d form of govern -ment by approaching p l a n n i n g i s s u e s on both c i t y - w i d e and l o c a l l e v e l s , and shou ld encourage C i t y C o u n c i l to make d e c i s i o n s on t h i s b a s i s . The P l a n n i n g Department shou ld a l s o use a l l means a v a i l a b l e to encourage the o ther c i t y departments to use the same approach, o f f e r i n g the s e r v i c e s of the p l a n n e r i n the l o c a l a rea to b r i n g up the p o s i t i o n o f the l o c a l community on that i s s u e . T h i s form of c i t y management would r e i n f o r c e the p l u r a l i s t i c approach to p l a n n i n g suggested by D a v i d o f f by ex tend ing i t to o ther c i v i c departments , thus making the c o n t r i b u t i o n of the l o c a l community more e f f e c t i v e . In t h i s context the p lanner w i l l c o n t r i b u t e to a p l u r a l i s t i c d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g process by advocat ing the p o s i t i o n of the community on the v a r i o u s i s s u e s by which i t i s a f f e c t e d . To be ab le to take t h i s l e a d i n g r o l e , the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n and the P l a n n i n g Department must be ab le to d e f i n e t h e i r goa ls and o b j e c t i v e s more c l e a r l y than they are doing now, commit, themselves to those o b j e c t i v e s and o b t a i n the support from C o u n c i l f o r the p o l i c i e s needed t o ach ieve those o b j e c t i v e s . In order to d e f i n e i t s p o s i t i o n the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n must i n i t i a t e a d i s c u s s i o n about i t s f u n c t i o n i n s i d e the P l a n n i n g Department and o u t s i d e . Only from such s e l f - c r i t i c i s m w i l l the area p lanners 135. be ab le to advocate t h i s renovated Area P l a n n i n g approach. One p o s s i b l e way to encourage the d i s c u s s i o n on Area P l a n n i n g i s the c r e a t i o n of an i n f o r m a l s t r u c t u r e t h a t would a l l o w members of o ther c i v i c departments to p a r t i c i p a t e . T h i s p a r t i c i p a t i o n cou ld be obta ined by e i t h e r g e t t i n g other departments i n v o l v e d or by " r e a c h i n g out" to o b t a i n t h e i r support and c o - o p e r a t i o n . Area P l a n n i n g w i l l s u r v i v e i f i t w i l l be ab le to come out i n the open and ask f o r the funds needed to develop new LAP programs i n s t e a d of s imply a c c e p t i n g the r o l e of a d m i n i s t r a t o r of c i t y - w i d e programs. The present s i t u a t i o n i n Vancouver o f f e r s to the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n the i d e a l f o o t i n g f o r a f r e s h new s t a r t . As NIP programs are completed and phased out the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n must come out w i t h an a l t e r n a t i v e to p resent to C i t y C o u n c i l . Th is a l t e r n a t i v e shou ld be represented by more LAP programs, based on the o r i g i n a l A rea P l a n n i n g o b j e c t i v e s adapted to the present s i t u a t i o n i n Vancouver and the exper ience of the p a s t years of Area P l a n n i n g . H a s t i n g s - S u n r i s e i s a l o c a l a rea of Vancouver i n desperate need of c i v i c a t t e n t i o n . For years t h i s need has been recogn i zed b u t , a l though at the top of the l i s t of p r i o r i t y a r e a s , H a s t i n g s - S u n r i s e has f o r v a r i o u s reasons not been granted an Area P l a n n i n g program. In 1977, when s e l e c t i n g another l o c a l a rea f o r the l a s t NIP program, C o u n c i l promised yet another t ime t h a t H a s t i n g s - S u n r i s e w i l l be the next t a r g e t f o r Area P l a n n i n g . I t i s a promise C o u n c i l shou ld f i n d very d i f f i c u l t to ignore and the Area P l a n n i n g D i v i s i o n shou ld take advantage of the s i t u a t i o n by a s k i n g f o r funds f o r the implementat ion of an LAP program. i'The approva l of t h i s program should be used as a precedent f o r more LAP programs i n areas of the c i t y more i n need of p l a n n i n g and i t should represent the f i r s t step i n the renewed Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t y i n Vancouver. 136. BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackoff, R .L . Redes ign ing the F u t u r e : A System Approach to S o c i e t a l  Problems. W i l e y , New Y o r k , 1974. Adam, W. H e r b e r t . "Management under C o n d i t i o n s of D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n and C i t i z e n s P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Review, October 1972. A l e s h i r e , A . Rober t . " P l a n n i n g and C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " Urban A f f a i r s  Q u a r t e r l y , 5 (June 1970) : 3 6 9 - 3 9 3 . A l t e r m a n , Rache l and J . E . Page. "The O b i q u i t y of Va lues and the P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s , " P l a n Canada, 13 ( J u l y 1973) . Anderson, Grant . The L o c a l Area P lanner i n Canada: 1976. M.A. T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of Wate r loo , F a c u l t y of Env i ronmenta l S t u d i e s , School of Urban and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g , June 1976. Anderson, G rant . " L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g : The Dream and the R e a l i t y , " C i t y Magazine, 11 :7 (March 1977) : 3 5 - 4 3 . A r n s t e i n , Sher ry . "A Ladder of C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " J . A . I . P . , J u l y 1969, pp . 216-224. A r n s t e i n , Sherry . "Maximum F e a s i b l e M a n i p u l a t i o n , " P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n  Review, 32 (September) : 377-402. B a r n a r d , P e t e r A s s o c i a t e s . I n t r o d u c t i o n to the R e h a b i l i t a t i o n P r o c e s s . November 1973. A repor t prepared f o r C .M.H.C . B a r r , Donald A . "The P r o f e s s i o n a l Urban P l a n n e r , " J . A . I . P . , 3 8 : 3 (May 1973) : 155-159. B a t e s , F r e d e r i c k L. " P o s i t i o n , Role and S t a t u s : A R e f o r m u l a t i o n of Concepts , " S o c i a l F o r c e s , 34:4 (May 1956) . No r th C a r o l i n a State C o l l e g e . Beckman, Norman.. .''The P lanner as a B u r e a u c r a t , " J . A . I . P . , November 1964. Berger , E a r l , -et a l . L o c a l O r i e n t a t i o n and I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Study. Haldiman N o r f o l k Study , Volume 1 , 1971. Onta r io Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s , Toronto , Queen's P r i n t e r . B i d d l e , Bruce J . and E . J . Thomas. Role Theory: Concepts and Research . Wiley,'..New. Y o r k , 1966. B o l a n , S. R i c h a r d . "Community D e c i s i o n Behav io r : The C u l t u r e of P l a n n i n g , " J . A . I . P . , September 1969, pp . 301-310. B o l a n , S. R i c h a r d . "The S o c i a l R e l a t i o n s of the P l a n n e r , " J . A . I . P . , November 1971, pp. 386 -389 . 137. Brooks , M i c h a e l P . S o c i a l P l a n n i n g and C i t y P l a n n i n g . P l a n n i n g A d v i s o r y S e r v i c e Report No. 2 6 1 . ' American S o c i e t y of P l a n n i n g O f f i c i a l s , Ch icago , September 1970, p. 42 . Burke , Edmond M. " C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n S t r a t e g i e s , " J . A . I . P . , 34 (Sept . ; 1978) : 287 -294 . Campbel l , A i l e e n . "West End P l a n n i n g C o - o r d i n a t o r Q u i t s , " Vancouver  P r o v i n c e , J u l y 19 , 1974. C l a r k , Ron. "P lanne r s as a P r o f e s s i o n , " The C i t y Book: The P l a n n i n g and  P o l i c i e s of Canada's C i t i e s , James Lor imer and Eve l yn Ross (eds ) , 1976. C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n . I n f o r m a t i o n : Community S e r v i c e s  Grant Program, May 1978. C o l e , R i c h a r d L. C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n and the Urban P o l i c y P r o c e s s . Lex ing ton Books, L e x i n g t o n , M a s s . , 1974. C o l l i e r , Robert W. " C h a r t i n g Community G o a l s : The Role of C i t i z e n P a r t i -c i p a t i o n , " Community P l a n n i n g Review, 1 8 : 3 ( F a l l 1968) : 2 0 - 2 2 . Connor, D.M. "From P a r t i s a n s to P a r t n e r s , " Community P l a n n i n g Review, 2 2 : 1 (1972): 1 5 - 1 6 . Cooperstock, Aryeh . "The New R e l i g i o n of C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " H a b i t a t , 1 4 : 3 (1971) . Corey , Kenneth E. " S t r u c t u r e s i n the P l a n n i n g of Community Change: A P e r s o n a l C o n s t r u c t , " i n W.G. B e n n i s , et a l . , P l a n n i n g of Change, 1976, pp. 2 6 5 - 2 7 5 . C r a i g , Pamela. " P l a n n e r P r o f i l e ' 7 6 , " i n Canadian I n s t i t u t e of P la nne rs Forum, August . P resented a t the Annual Conference , To ronto , June 1977. Da land , Robert T. and John A . P a r k e r . Urban Growth Dynamics i n a R e g i o n a l C l u s t e r of C i t i e s . I n s t i t u t e f o r Research i n S o c i a l S c i e n c e , U n i v e r s i t y of Nor th C a r o l i n a , 1960. D a v i d o f f , P a u l . "Advocacy and P l u r a l i s m i n P l a n n i n g , " J . A . I . P . (1965) , pp. 331-338. D a v i d o f f , P a u l and Thomas R e i n e r . "A Choice Theory of P l a n n i n g , " J . A . I . P . 28 (1962) : 108 -115 . Desmond, M. Connor. " C o n s t r u c t i v e C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " Community P l a n n i n g  Review, 2 2 : 1 (1972): 1 9 - 2 0 . Draper , A. James (ed) . C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Canada. Toronto , 1971. Egan, M a u r i c e . " S o c i a l P l a n n i n g i n Vancouver , " P l a n Canada, Spr ing 1977. 138. E v e r s l e y , D a v i d . The P lanner i n S o c i e t y (The Changing Role of a  P r o f e s s i o n ) . Faber and Faber , London, 1973. F i n k l e r , E a r l . D i ssen t and Independent I n i t i a t i v e i n P l a n n i n g O f f i c e s . Report No. 269, ASPO P l a n n i n g A d v i s o r y S e r v i c e , May 1971. F i r m a l i n o , T i t o C a s t r o . C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n S e l e c t e d P l a n n i n g Programs: A Case Study of New Westminster . M.A. i n Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g , U n i v e r s i t y of B . C . , Vancouver, 1968. F l a k s t a d , N o r d a h l . " S t o r e f r o n t Scheme Puts P l a n n e r s on the S t r e e t , " Vancouver Sun, May 24, 1973. F r a s e r , Graham. F i g h t i n g Back: Urban Renewal i n T re fan Cour t . A . M . H a k k e r t , Toronto , 1972. F r e d e r i c k s o n , G. Neighbourhood C o n t r o l i n the S e v e n t i e s . Chand le r , 1973. Fr iedmann, J . "Notes on S o c i e t a l A c t i o n , " J . A . I . P . , 35 :5 (September 1969) : 311-319. Fr iedmann, J . "The Future of Comprehensive P l a n n i n g : A C r i t i q u e , " P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Review, May/June 1971. G a l e , Stephen and E r i c G. Moore. The M a n i p u l a t e d . Maaroufa P r e s s , Ch icago , 1975. Gardner , John W. S e l f - R e n e w a l , The I n d i v i d u a l and the Innovat i ve S o c i e t y . Harper & Row, P u b l i s h e r s , New Y o r k , Evanston and London. Gardner , L i n d s e y and E l l i o t Aronson. The Handbook of S o c i a l Psycho logy . Second E d i t i o n , 1968, v . 3 , U n i v e r s i t y of Texas. Gerecke, J . K . The P r a c t i c e o f Urban P l a n n i n g i n Canada. M.A. Thes is i n Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g , U n i v e r s i t y of B . C . , Vancouver, 1971. G e t z e l s , J .W. and E .G. Guba. " R o l e , Role C o n f l i c t , and E f f e c t i v e n e s s : An E m p i r i c a l S t u d y , " American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, 19 :2 ( A p r i l 1954) . G u t s t e i n , Donald . Vancouver L t d . James L o r i m e r , Toronto , 1975. G u t s t e i n , Donald . "Neighbourhood Improvement: What i t means to C a l g a r y , Vancouver and T o r o n t o , " The C i t y Book: The P l a n n i n g and P o l i c i e s of  Canada's C i t i e s , James Lor imer and Eve lyn Ross (eds ) , 1976. H a r t , Dav id K. "Theor ies of Government R e l a t e d to D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n and C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " - P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Review, October 1972. Hearn , C h r i s t i n e . " S t o r e Open f o r Bus iness of G e t t i n g O p i n i o n s , " Vancouver Sun, June 1974. H i c k s , Helga M a r i a . C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Neighbourhood R e h a b i l i t a t i o n . A p i l o t study of a sample a rea (Lower Mount P l e a s a n t ) . 139. H i r t e n , E. John . "The P lanner as a P r o f e s s i o n a l , " J . A . I . P . , December 1977. Johnson, Eve. " R i l e y P a r k : N . I . P . i n A c t i o n - , How does a community dec ide what to buy w i t h 1 .9 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s ? " Vancouver Urban Reader, 5 :2 (1977). K e i e s , L . C . and E. T e i t c h e r . " L i m i t a t i o n s of Advocacy P l a n n i n g , " J . A . I . P . , 36:4 ( J u l y 1970) : 225 -226 . Kasperson , E. Roger and Myrna B r e i t b a r t . P a r t i c i p a t i o n , D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n , and Advocacy P l a n n i n g . Resource Paper No. 2 5 , A s s o c i a t i o n of American Geographers. Washington, D . C , 1974. Kasperson , E. Roger. " P a r t i c i p a t i n g i n P u b l i c A f f a i r s : Theor ies and I s s u e s , " i n R .E . Kasperson and M. B r e i t b a r t , P a r t i c i p a t i o n , D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n and Advocacy P l a n n i n g , pp. 1 - 1 0 . Lang , Reg and John Page. " E d u c a t i o n a l Background of Canadian P l a n n e r s , " Canadian I n s t i t u t e of P lanners Forum, June 1977. L i n d s e y , A . D . The Modern Democrat ic S t a t e . Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , London, 1943. L o r i m e r , James A. The R e a l World of C i t y P o l i t i c s . Lewis and Samuel, Toronto , 1970. Marcuse, P e t e r . " P r o f e s s i o n a l E t h i c s and Beyond: Va lues i n P l a n n i n g , " J . A . I . P . , 4 2 : 3 ( J u l y 1976) : 264-274. M a r t i n , Bo R. C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : I t s S t r u c t u r e and D i s t r i b u t i o n Among V a r i o u s Soc io -economic Groups. M.A. T h e s i s i n Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g , U n i v e r s i t y of B . C . , Vancouver, 1973. Mer ton , Robert K. S o c i a l Theory and S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e . New York Free P r e s s , 1968. Mosher, F r e d e r i c k C. "The P u b l i c S e r v i c e i n the Temporary S o c i e t y , " P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Review, January -February 1971. Nader, R a l p h . "The P r o f e s s i o n a l R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of a P r o f e s s i o n a l S o c i e t y , " keynote speed at the Annual Conference of the A I P , M i n n e a p o l i s , M inneso ta , October 18, 1970. Nader , R a l p h . "A Code f o r P r o f e s s i o n a l I n t e g r i t y , " New York Times, January 1 5 , 1971, p. 4 3 . Needleman, M.L . P l a n n i n g A g a i n s t I t s e l f : The Community P l a n n i n g E x p e r i - ment i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s . P h . D . d i s s e r t a t i o n at the S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y of New York at B u f f a l o , 1972. Needleman, M a r t i n L. and Emerson C a r o l i n Needleman. G u e r i l l a s i n the  Bureaucracy . John W i l e y , 1974. NIP O p e r a t o r ' s Handbook. CMHC and the P r o v i n c e of B.C. June 1975. 140. O b e r f e l d , Harvey. " C o u n c i l 'backs down' on Area P l a n n i n g P r o m i s e s , " Vancouver Sun, J u l y 19 , 1974. P e a t t i e , L i s a . "Drama and Advocacy P l a n n i n g , " J . A . I . P . , 36 :6 (November 1970) : 405 -410 . P e r r y , Ross O l i v e r . The C o n d i t i o n i n g of the M u n i c i p a l P l a n n i n g Team f o r  A d m i n i s t r a t i v e D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n : In A n t i c i p a t i o n of L o c a l Area  P l a n n i n g i n the C i t y of Vancouver. M.A. T h e s i s , Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g , U n i v e r s i t y of B . C . , Vancouver, 1974. Perryman, Gavin N i c h o l a s . The Func t ions of E v a l u a t i o n Research i n C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n Programs. M.A. T h e s i s , Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g , U n i v e r s i t y of B . C . , Vancouver, 1975. P i c k e r g i l l , 1 I . W . " B u r e a u c r a t s and P o l i t i c i a n s , " Canadian P u b l i c A d m i n i - s t r a t i o n , V o l . 1 5 , 1972. Ptarmigan P l a n n i n g A s s o c i a t e s . S t ra thcona R e h a b i l i t a t i o n P r o j e c t , Stage  I I - E v a l u a t i o n . R e i n , M a r t i n . " D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n and C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n S o c i a l S e r v i c e s , " P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Review, October 1972, pp. 687-7000. Ruddy, Jon and A l a n Edmonds. "We Can Save our C i t i e s , " M a c l e a n ' s , January 1971. S i n g e r , Rona ld . "The P lanner as Va lue N e u t r a l : A U s e l e s s Myth?" P l a n  Canada, 11 :2 (September 1971) . S m i t h , D a v i d . M o n i t o r i n g Report on the P u b l i c P a r t i c i p a t i o n Program of  the GVRD. S o l n i t , A l b e r t . The Job of the P l a n n i n g Commissioner. A Guide to C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n L o c a l P l a n n i n g , U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , 1974. Spaxman, J . Ray ( D i r e c t o r of P l a n n i n g ) . Memo to Mayor A. P h i l l i p s , Vancouver C i t y H a l l , J u l y 25 , 1974. S p i e g e l , Hans B.C. C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Urban Development. Center f o r Community A f f a i r s , NTL I n s t i t u t e f o r A p p l i e d B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e s , 1968. S p i e g e l , H. and S. M i t t e n t h a l . Neighbourhood Power and C o n t r o l - I m p l i c a - t i o n s f o r Urban P l a n n i n g . Columbia School of A r c h i t e c t u r e , New Y o r k , 1968. Stone, Robert L i t t l e . L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g : A P rocess of C o n f l i c t R e s o l u t i o n i n P r o v i n c i a l / M u n i c i p a l Land Use D i s p u t e s . M.A. T h e s i s , Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g , U n i v e r s i t y of B . C . , Vancouver, 1976. 141. Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. Minutes of Vancouver C i t y L o c a l  Area P l a n n i n g and Neighbourhood Improvement P l a n n i n g Committee  Conference. October 2 3 , 1977. Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g , June 1973. Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. I n t e r n a l Memo, P i c k s t o n e , May 1973. Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. E v a l u a t i o n of the P l a n n i n g Department, October 1973. Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. Shaping the F u t u r e , Annual Review, February 1974. Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. Annual Review, 1977/78, January 1978. Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g : A Review, January 1977. Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. A Review of L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g , r e p o r t f o r d i s c u s s i o n , September 1977. Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Department. Review of L o c a l Area P l a n n i n g ( d r a f t ) , A p r i l 1978. Report Back on C o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h P u b l i c , to C i t y Manager ( f o r Standing Committee on P l a n n i n g and Development) . Vancouver Sun J u l y 22 , Vancouver Sun Vancouver Sun Vancouver Sun December 18, 1975. Van Loon , R i c h a r d J . and M i c h a e l S. W h i t t i n g t o n . The Canadian P o l i t i c a l  System: Environment, S t r u c t u r e and P r o c e s s . McGrawlHil l . ' .Book Co. , 1971. Van T i l l , J . and S . Van T i l l . " C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n S o c i a l P o l i c y : The End of the C y c l e , " C i t i e s i n Change, A l l y n and Bacon, Bos ton , 1973. Wronsk i , W. "The P u b l i c Servant and P r o t e s t Groups , " Canadian P u b l i c  A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Vol... 14, 1971. Y l v i s a k e r , P a u l . " U t t e r Chaos or Simple C o m p l e x i t y , " American S o c i e t y of  P l a n n i n g O f f i c i a l s , Ch icago , I l l i n o i s , 1970, pp. 6 - 1 6 . Y a t e s , Douglas T. Neighbourhood Democracy: The P o l i t i c s and Impact  of D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n . Lexhopks:; L e x i n g t o n , M a s s . , 1973. 1 4 2 . APPENDIX I PLANNER'S INTERVIEW SCHEDULE JOB DESCRIPTION How would you d e s c r i b e your job? Can you group your a c t i v i t i e s under one of the f o l l o w i n g headings? NIP LAP Issue Mon i to r Who are you accountable to? Does your a c c o u n t a b i l i t y change f o r each group o f a c t i v i t i e s ? What r u l e s , r e g u l a t i o n s , are you supposed to f o l l o w ? Do they d i f f e r f o r each group of a c t i v i t i e s ? SCOPE, OBJECTIVES What are the o b j e c t i v e s of your job? Do they d i f f e r f o r each group of a c t i v i t i e s ? Are they c l e a r l y def ined? How s u c c e s s f u l i s the program i n a c h i e v i n g them? Who d e f i n e s the o b j e c t i v e s and how? What are the o b j e c t i v e s of the Area P l a n n i n g d i v i s i o n ? GUIDELINES What g u i d e l i n e s do you have to f o l l o w ? Who imposes the g u i d e l i n e s ? How r i g i d are the g u i d e l i n e s ? How do they a f f e c t the p l a n n i n g process? How does your job r e l a t e to c i t y p lanning? Do you p e r c e i v e any problem between the two? DURATION OF PROGRAM What i s the d u r a t i o n of the program(s)? Do you f e e l comfor tab le w i t h the amount o f t ime ass igned to the program(s)? Do you have d e a d l i n e s to meet? What i s the impact of d e a d l i n e s on the program? What problems are a s s o c i a t e d w i t h d e a d l i n e s ? What are the advantages, d i s a d v a n t a g e s , l i m i t a t i o n s of the d e a d l i n e s ? FINANCING How i s the program(s) f inanced? Who c o n t r o l s the funds? How are the funds a l l o c a t e d ? How does the fund ing a f f e c t the p l a n n i n g process ( p a r t i c i p a t i o n , e f f e c t i v e n e s s ) ? ROLE DEFINERS Which groups, i n d i v i d u a l s , a g e n c i e s , departments do you d e a l w i th? ( ( S p e c i f y f o r each groupoof a c t i v i t i e s . ) What type of work r e l a t i o n do you develop w i t h them? ( I f chang ing , why and how.) 143. How do they see you? What do they expect from you? How do you r e a c t to them? Do they have c o n f l i c t i n g e x p e c t a t i o n s ? How do you d e a l w i t h c o n f l i c t s ? Are you s a t i s f i e d w i t h the way c o n f l i c t s are solved? How i s your a c t i v i t y a f f e c t e d by other p a r t i c i p a n t s ? Does p o l i t i c a l p ressure modify your views? What other p ressures modify your v iews? RESIDENTS INPUT How do you encourage r e s i d e n t s to p a r t i c i p a t e ? Who are the r e s i d e n t s that do p a r t i c i p a t e ? Are they r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the community? What i s the input of r e s i d e n t s i n the f i n a l p lan ( repor t )? Do r e s i d e n t s p lan ahead f o r themselves or s imply r e a c t to e x t e r n a l p roposa ls? How do you f i n d out about community p o s i t i o n on s p e c i f i c i s s u e s ? Should r e s i d e n t s have veto power? LOCATION How does the l o c a t i o n of your o f f i c e a f f e c t your performance? What i s the impact of the s i t e o f f i c e on the program? What are the advantages/disadvantages of your working l o c a t i o n ? PERSONAL Date of b i r t h . Where"ra ised? M a r i t a l s t a t u s . Educat ion ( s p e c i f y what b a c h e l o r degree) P o s i t i o n i n the P l a n n i n g Department. Work exper ience ( t o t a l , years w i t h the c i t y , P l a n n i n g Department, t h i s job ) How many hours do you work every week? How i s your t ime a l l o c a t e d ? What are your job expec ta t ions? Is t h i s job meeting your expec ta t ions? To what extent? Why not? What would you l i k e to see changed i n order to meet your e x p e c t a t i o n s ? What other p r o f e s s i o n : .would you choose? Are you s a t i s f i e d w i t h your performance? Do you f e e l tha t r e s u l t s compensate the amount of work you put i n t o i t ? What f a c t o r s are l i m i t i n g your performance? What i s the b i g g e s t problem w i t h your job? How much do you f e e l you can i n f l u e n c e c i t y o f f i c i a l s ? How do you see y o u r s e l f as a p lanner? Do you t h i n k p lanners should concern themselves o n l y w i t h p h y s i c a l aspects of c i t y development? What are the q u a l i t i e s of a good area p lanner? What do you t h i n k i s the p l a n n e r ' s proper r o l e i n the c i t y ' s d e c i s i o n making process? Is t h e r e i a n y t h i n g e l s e you would l i k e to t a l k about? 144. APPENDIX I I DIRECTOR'S INTERVIEW SCHEDULE B r i e f l y d e s c r i b e Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s . How do you d e f i n e Area P l a n n i n g problems, p r i o r i t i e s , o b j e c t i v e s ? Can you d e f i n e the boundar ies between Area P l a n n i n g and o ther p l a n n i n g i s s u e s ? Do you see the Area P l a n n i n g d i v i s i o n as a u n i t ? R e l a t i o n between v a r i o u s components. Do you t h i n k the Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s can be c l a s s i f i e d under the f o l l o w i n g c a t e g o r i e s : LAP, N IP , I s s u e , Moni tor? D i f f e r e n c e s ? What are the o b j e c t i v e s f o r each group of Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s ? What g u i d e l i n e s must the p lanner f o l l o w ? How i s the p l a n n i n g process a f f e c t e d by the g u i d e l i n e s ? What i s the t imeframe f o r the d i f f e r e n t programs? What are the e f f e c t s of d e a d l i n e s , advantages and d isadvantages? What i s the e f f e c t of d i f f e r e n t f i n a n c i a l arrangements ( formulas) on Area P l a n n i n g ( d i f f e r e n t programs)? "The p lanner has to e s t a b l i s h a f a i r l y independent r o l e . . . " How shou ld the word independent be i n t e r p r e t e d ? What are the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s tha t make a good area p lanner? What c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are you l o o k i n g f o r i n the new p lanner f o r Grandview Woodland. Who a r e the a c t o r s i n the Area P l a n n i n g process? Are they d i f f e r e n t f o r each group of a c t i v i t i e s ? What do you see as the major problem i n t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n process? Do they have c o n f l i c t i n g expec ta t ions? How are t h e i r e x p e c t a t i o n s r e c o n c i l e d ? Is the s o l u t i o n to the c o n f l i c t s a t i s f a c t o r y ? Is the p lanner a c t i n g on h i s own? What support does he get from the d i v i s i o n (department)? Are you s a t i s f i e d w i t h the q u a l i t y of c i t i z e n input i n Area P lann ing? I f n o t , what should be done to improve c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n ? To what ex tent are the community v iews represented by people invo lved? How i s the Area P l a n n i n g process a f f e c t e d by l o c a t i o n of the p lanner? Is there any th ing unique to the Area P l a n n i n g approach? 145. APPENDIX I I I CIVIC DEPARTMENTS INTERVIEW SCHEDULE How do you see Area P l a n n i n g i n the context of c i t y p lanning? Which Area P l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s are you i n v o l v e d in? How i s your department i n v o l v e d i n the Area P l a n n i n g process? What k i n d of r e l a t i o n do you develop w i t h area p lanners? What i s your r e l a t i o n ' w i t h Area P l a n n i n g committees? From your p o s i t i o n , what do you see as p o s i t i v e a s p e c t s of Area P l a n n i n g and what as negat ive? What do you see as major problems i n your i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h Area P l a n n i n g programs? What would you l i k e to see the area p lanner and program do? What do you t h i n k are the o b j e c t i v e s of Area P lann ing? What do you t h i n k they should be? What do you t h i n k i s the impact of the s i t e o f f i c e on the program? 146. APPENDIX IV ALDERMEN'S INTERVIEW SCHEDULE What i s the r a t i o n a l e f o r Area P lann ing? When and how d i d you become i n v o l v e d i n Area P lann ing? Were you f a m i l i a r w i t h the Area P l a n n i n g concept before? How do you p r e s e n t l y see Area P l a n n i n g i n the more genera l p l a n n i n g context? Have your v iews changed about Area P lann ing? Who i s p a r t of the Area P l a n n i n g process? What do you see as the p o s i t i v e / n e g a t i v e aspects of Area P lann ing? What i s the f u n c t i o n of the p lanner i n the community? What k i n d of working r e l a t i o n s h i p have you developed w i t h the p lanner? What do you see as the proper r o l e of the area p lanner? Who i s the p lanner accountab le to? How do you t h i n k the s i t e o f f i c e i s a f f e c t i n g the p lanner and the program? What should the i d e a l l e n g t h of the Area P l a n n i n g program be? 147. APPENDIX V COMMITTEE MEMBER'S INTERVIEW SCHEDULE When and how d i d you get i n v o l v e d i n Area P lann ing? Who i s p a r t of the Area P l a n n i n g process? What i s the f u n c t i o n of C i t y C o u n c i l i n Area P lann ing? What do you see as the o b j e c t i v e s f o r Area P lann ing? What do you t h i n k they should be? What k i n d of g u i d e l i n e s do you have i n Area P lann ing? How they a f f e c t the process? How do l e n g t h of the program and d e a d l i n e s , a f f e c t the p l a n n i n g process? How are the present f i n a n c i n g arrangements i n f l u e n c i n g the program? What do you t h i n k of the s i t e o f f i c e l o c a t i o n ? What i s the r e s i d e n t s ' input i n the p l a n n i n g process? How do you r e l a t e to the p lanner? What i s the p l a n n e r ' s r o l e i n Area P lann ing? How independent i s the p lanner i n deve lop ing the program? What do you see as the major problems of the p lanner? Who i s the p lanner accountab le to? How do you see Area P l a n n i n g i n the more g e n e r a l p l a n n i n g context? 148. APPENDIX VI LIST OF BRIEFS AND SUBMISSIONS BY CITIZENS, CITIZEN GROUPS, AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES IN RESPONSE TO THE "LOCAL AREA PLANNING REVIEW": 1 . Champlain He ights P l a n n i n g A d v i s o r y Committee 2 . Char les C h r i s t o p h e r s o n , R e s i d e n t , Mt . P l e a s a n t 3 . K i t s i l a n o C i t i z e n s P l a n n i n g Committee 4 . Roy B lunden, R e s i d e n t , Grandview-Woodland Area 5 . P t . Grey Road (North S ide) and Cameron Avenue Ratepayers A s s o c i a t i o n 6 . K iwassa N . I . P . Committee 7. J e r i c h o Area C i t i z e n s A s s o c i a t i o n 8 . F a i r v i e w Res ident Owners A s s o c i a t i o n 9 . Mt . P l e a s a n t N . I . P . Committee 10. R i l e y Park N . I . P . Committee 1 1 . Cedar Cottage N . I . P . Committee 12. Vancouver H e r i t a g e A d v i s o r y Committee 1 3 . Howard Cohen, Ch ie f P l a n n e r , Toronto P l a n n i n g Board 14. B .C . Department of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and Housing 1 5 . Vancouver School Board 16. Vancouver C i t y P l a n n i n g Commission 1 7 . U .B .C . School of S o c i a l Work - C l a s s 543 

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.831.1-0094402/manifest

Comment

Related Items