UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Citizen representation in neighbourhood improvement programs Guerrette, Daniel 1979

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1980_A8 G94.pdf [ 8.85MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094873.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094873-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094873-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094873-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094873-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094873-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094873-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094873-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094873.ris

Full Text

CITIZEN REPRESENTATION IN NEIGHBOURHOOD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS by DANIEL GUERRETTE B.A., The University of New Brunswick, 1975 A THESIS.' SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER'S OF ARTS I n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES School of Community and Regional Planning We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1980 (§) Daniel Patrick Guerrette, 1979 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Brit ish Columbia, I agree t h a t the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. School of Community and Regional Planninq Department or J 3 The University of Brit ish Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date A P r i l 15> 1980 i i ABSTRACT This thesis addresses the issue of representation in planning for neighbourhood improvement. A l i t e r a t u r e review indicates that c r i t i c s have argued that c i t i z e n involvement establishes a forum for a vocal minority rather than a representative cross section of the community. This research demonstrates the poten t i a l for c i t i z e n involvement to foster a representative community consensus and i t uncovers methods by which t h i s can be assured by a neighbourhood planner. Representation i n c i t i z e n involvement i s explored so that the planning profession can defend t h i s important, yet costly, process. The issue i s c l a r i f i e d for the planners who view the idea of par t i c i p a t o r y democracy as Utopian, yet, s t i l l advocate i t . Two case studies of the c i t i z e n committee approach are undertaken. The elements of the approved neighbourhood improvement programs are examined in r e l a t i o n to the ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the committee, the process undertaken in carrying out the planning task, and the role of the planner. While the location of committee member homes within the neighbourhood influenced the content of the plan, a p o s i t i v e basis for representation was found in various i i i aspects of the planning process and not i n the make-up of the committee i t s e l f . The role of the planner was instrumental Xn broadening the perspective of committee members by ensuring that many d i f f e r e n t approaches to c i t i z e n involvement were used to d i l u t e committee member biases. In one of the case studies, the planner broadened the make-up of the committee by holding public meetings at various places throughout the neighbourhood so that the planning process could be brought as close as possible to a l l the people. In that case, the committee evolved a u n i v e r s a l i s t i c point of view from an i n i t i a l strongly p a r t i c u l a r i s t i c one. These factors a l l had a demonstrable effect on the plan. Meanwhile, the planner evolved an understanding of the values of committee members which was necessary to f a c i l i t a t e the preparation of meeting agendas sati s f a c t o r y to a l l . A p a r t i a l model for the role of the planner i s developed to f a c i l i t a t e a representative process involving mutual learning. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e to thank Professor Michael Poulton from the University of B r i t i s h Columbia for giving me the confidence and primary ideas to s t a r t t h i s thesis, Professor Brahm Wiesman, Director of the School of Planning, who gave me the motivation to sharpen my concepts and com-plete t h i s t h e s i s , and Professor Henry Hightower who assisted i n applying s t a t i s t i c a l methods to the substantive and descriptive representation methodology. Special achnowledgements should go to B i l l Buholzer, Larry Beasley, Tom Phipps and Kari Hubtala who guided me when I studied the planning processes i n Grandview Woodlands and Riley Park, and to the c i t i z e n s of Riley Park and Grandview Woodlands who kindly gave me t h e i r time when I requested i t . F i n a l l y , a special thank-you to my wife, E l l e n , for reading and typing d r a f t s , c r i t i c i z i n g my work when i t needed to be c r i t i c i z e d , and being very patient during the preparation of t h i s thesis. V CONTENTS PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Problem. 1 1.2. Objective. 1 1.3. Approach. 2 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Goals for Local Area Planning. 3 2.2. Role of Citizen Participation. 8 2.3. Historical Perspective on Local Area Planning. 13 2.3.1. Community Efforts. 13 2.3.2. American Decentralized Local Area Planning. 19 2.3.3. Local Area Planning in Canada. 21 2.4. Decentralization and Citizen Involvement. 23 2.5 Previous Evaluations of Local Area Planning. 25 2.5.1. Case Studies. 25 2.5.2. Comparative Research in Local Area Planning. 28 2.6. Conclusions. 33 3. METHODOLOGY 3.1. Purpose. 36 3.2. Value Position. 36 3'.3..-.; .. Definitions. 37 3.4. Process Oriented Methodology. 41 3.5. Case Study Approach. 44 3.6. Scope. 45 3.7. Data Sources. 48 4. CONTEMPORARY INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR LOCAL AREA PLANNING 4.1. The Evolution of Local Area Planning in Vancouver. 52 4.2. Federal Involvement. 54 5. CASE STUDY FINDINGS 5.1. Setting. 58 . . 5.1.1. Riley Park. 58 5.1.1.1. Neighbourhood Characteristics. 58 5.1.1.2. Participation in the Local Area. 60 5.1.2. Grandview Woodlands. 63 5.1.2.1. Neighbourhood Characteristics. 63 5.1.2.2. Participation in the Local Area. 67 5.2. Planning Products. 68 5.2.1. Riley Park Plan. 68 5.2.2. Grandview Woodlands Plan. 73 5.3. Process Events—Development of Committees. 74 5.3.1. Riley Park Planning Process. 74 5.3.2. Grandview Woodlands Planning Process. 81 v i 5.4. Different Forms of Public Involvement. 84 5.4.1. Riley Park. 84 5.4.2. Grandview Woodlands. 89 5.5. Analysis, Descriptive and Substantive Methodology. 97 5.5.1. Riley Park. 97 5.5.1.1. Descriptive Representation. 97 5.5.1.2. Substantive Representation. 104 5.5.2. Grandview Woodlands. 110 5.5.2.1. Descriptive Representation. 110 5.5.2.2. Substantive Representation. I l l 5.6. Analysis of Assumptions Underlying Process Oriented Methodology. 118 5.7. Analysis, Process Methodology 123 5.7.1. Conmunity Organization Efforts by Staff Professionals to Influence Representation. 123 5.7.2. Evidence of Research Used to Formulate an Understanding of the Different Segments of the Gamimanity. 124 5.7.3. The Use of Supplemental Citizen Involvement Techniques and the Planner's Understanding of the Cornmunity's Social Fabric in their Development. 126 5.7.4. Evidence of the Impact of Different Forms of Citizen Involvement on the Final Plan. 127 5.7.5. The Planner's Influence on the Process. 129 CONCLUSIONS 6.1. Representation. 131 6.2. Assessment of Methodologies. 135 6.3. Comparison between Case Studies. 137 6.4. The Role of Citizens as a Learning Process. 141 6.5. The Role of the Planner. 142 POSTSCRIPT 147 BIBLIOGRAPHY 149 APPENDICES , 1. Format for Informal Interviews. 154 2. Relevant Portions of Riley Park Neighbourhood Plan. 157 3. Relevant Portions of Grandview Woodlands Plan. 166 v i i TABLES PAGE 5.1 N.I.P. Expenditures - Capital A l l o c a t i o n s . 71 5.2 Riley Park: Capital Expenditures. 72 5.3 Riley Park: Results from the Second Community 86 Questionnaire. 5.4 Grandview Woodlands: Results from the Community Questionnaire. 95 5.5 Riley Park: Results from the Committee Opinionnaire. 105 5.6 Riley Park: Locationally S p e c i f i c N.I.P. Expenditures i n Concept Plan by Sub-areas. 107 5.7 Riley Park: Relationship between Spending per Household and Representativeness Ratio'by Sub-areas. 108 5.8 Grandview Woodlands: The .Total Level of Schools Spending by? Sub-areas . 119 5.9 Grandview Woodlands: Spending per Household and Representativeness Ration by Sub-areas. 120 6.1 The Participatory Process, I t s Stages with the Role of the Planner i n Each Stage. 144 v i i i CHARTS PAGE 5.1. Age Composition of Riley Park/Vancouver. 61 5.2. E t h n i c i t y : Riley Park and Vancouver. 62 5.3. Age Composition of Grandview Woodlands (N.I.P. area)/Vancouver. 65 5.4. E t h n i c i t y : Grandview Woodlands and Vancouver. 66 5.5. Labour Force Composition: C i t i z e n Committee and Riley Park. 98 5.6. Educational Attainment: Riley Park Local Area and N.I.P. Committee. 100 5.7. Voting Age Population Age D i s t r i b u t i o n : Riley Park Local Area and N.I.P. Committee Compared. 101 5.8. Labour Force Composition: C i t i z e n Committee . . and Grandview Woodlands. 112 5.9. Age Di s t r i b u t i o n of Voting Age Population: Grandview Woodlands Local Area and N.I.P. Committee Compared. 113 ix FIGURES PAGE 5.1. Vancouver Local Areas. 59 5.2. Riley Park: Patterns for Strategic Improvement of the Community. 70 5.3. Riley Park: Homes of Committee Members. 102 5.4. Riley Park: Sub-area D i s t r i b u t i o n of Population and Homes of Committee Members. 103 5.5. Grandview Woodlands: Homes of Committee Members. 114 5.6. Grandview Woodlands: Sub-area D i s t r i b u t i o n of Population and Homes of Committee Members. 115 1 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Problem: The legitimacy of c i t i z e n involvement i n planning has often been questioned. For example, the Vancouver Director of Finance argues that c i t i z e n involvement "can create an i n t e r n a l battleground between . . . groups . . . (who are t r y i n g to) . . . avoid t h e i r f a i r share of something" (see section 4 . 3 ) . While c i t i z e n involvement can off e r a sense of popular support to the planner's recommendations to elected o f f i c i a l s , the c i t i z e n groups that become involved in-a planning process are often questioned on the basis of representativeness since the prospect of p a r t i c i p a t i o n appears to a t t r a c t involvement from a l i m i t e d portion of the community. Another part of t h i s problem i s the f a i l u r e of the planning profession to develop a sa t i s f a c t o r y methodology to examine the representativeness of those c i t i z e n s involved i n a planning process. To enable the planner to improve the representativeness of a planning process two steps must be taken. F i r s t a methodology must be developed which can measure the extent to which people throughout a community influence the plans produced. Second, a set of guidelines must be developed to promote representativeness i n the 1.2 Objective: 2 planning process. This thesis addresses both of these issues in the context of planning for neighbourhood improvement. 1.3 Approach: Understanding the goals and history of c i t i z e n involvement i s a prerequisite to developing a methodology for evaluating the representativeness of a p a r t i c u l a r p a r t i c i p a t i n g group such as a c i t i z e n planning committee. . An intensive l i t e r a t u r e search on the rol e of c i t i z e n involvement i n decentralized urban planning i s presented in Chapter Two covering both the phenomena of c i t i z e n involvement and the c i t i z e n committee approach to policy development. Chapter Three develops a process oriqnted methodology for use i n two case studies. Their general setting i n Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia i s described in Chapter Four. The case study i s described i n d e t a i l i n Chapter Five. Analysis of representativeness i s undertaken using the process oriented methodology. The application of e x i s t i n g methodologies found i n the l i t e r a t u r e i s also attempted. F i n a l l y , Chapter Six compares the findings generated by the new methodology with the findings generated by an exi s t i n g methodology. An o v e r a l l assessment i s made and a set of guidelines i s proposed for ensuring representativeness. The performances of the planning process i n the two case studies i s then evaluated. LITERATURE REVIEW Goals for Local Area Planning: This section focusses on the promises of Local Area Planning as seen i n the planning l i t e r a t u r e and examines previous attempts at evaluating l o c a l planning processes. The l i t e r a t u r e has been devoted mostly to what this paper refers to as decentralized l o c a l area planning. The terms used to refe r to thi s type of i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangement have been l o c a l area planning, neighbourhood planning and community planning (Needleman, 1974). Rationales for Decentralized Local Area Planning: Decen-t r a l i z e d Local Area Planning i s distinguished by the use of a s i t e o f f i c e , along with a s t a f f addressing problems i n the area i n a process that incorporates c i t i z e n input. This approach to planning follows a general r e j e c t i o n of city-wide i n i t i a t i v e s or i n i t i a t i v e s made without the assumption of the neighbourhood as an integrated system (Needleman, 19 74). I t i s undertaken on the basis that issues i n the l o c a l area can be viewed independently. The l i t e r a t u r e proposes several p o l i t i c a l goals achieved through Local Area Planning. The following i s a p a r t i a l l i s t : I t establishes 1. a clearer d e f i n i t i o n of land use or s o c i a l service p o l i c i e s and"their r e l a t i o n s to minority groups (Davidoff, 1965; Friedmann, 1973); 2. a greater s e n s i t i v i t y to the p a r t i c u l a r needs of d i f f e r e n t c i t y areas (Kasperson, 1974; Anderson, 19 76; Anderson, 1977; Schmandt, 1973) 4 3. a more equitable delivery of public services i n which a l l o c a t i v e decisions between the d i f f e r e n t parts of the c i t y are made more e x p l i c i t (Kasperson, 1974b; Anderson, 1976, 20); 4. better, more accessible c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n due to the more understandable and comprehensive nature of l o c a l issues (Kasperson, 1974b) re s u l t i n g i n . . . 5. a faster feedback process through the involvement of the consumers of a public service i n p o l i c y making and reviewing (Kasperson, 1974b); 6. t e r r i t o r i a l power bases which challenge e x i s t i n g e l i t e s (Kasperson, 1974b; Kotler, 1969; Schmandt, 1973; Fraser, 1972); 7. popular support for established p o l i t i c a l representatives through the s e n s i t i z a t i o n of p o l i t i c i a n s to vocal public opinion (sic) (Anderson, 1976); and 8. the alignment of planners with public opinion, creating a convincing package for the p o l i t i c i a n , and enhancing the influence of the planner as well as that of the c i t i z e n (Needleman, 1974). These rationales are sometimes interdependent, and sometimes they are apparently contradictory. For example, goals number s i x and seven are contradictory. While Anderson and Needleman saw benefits for p o l i t i c i a n s i n Local Area Planning, arguing that i t i s to the p o l i t i c i a n ' s advantage to s e n s i t i z e himself to popular public opinion, Fraser and Kotler saw i n decentralization and c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n a reduction i n the l e v e l of p o l i t i c a l d i s c r e t i o n available to the p o l i t i c i a n . While the p o l i t i c i a n ' s l e v e l of d i s c r e t i o n may be reduced by l o c a l area planning, according to Anderson and Needleman, this would only pertain to a few popularized issues. With an increased public rapport, the p o l i t i c i a n ' s decision making d i s c r e t i o n may even be enhanced. In a s i m i l a r l i g h t , Kasperson feels that c e r t a i n 5 forms of decentralized municipal services which do not involve a substantial delegation of discretionary powers (which are la b e l l e d deconcentration rather than decentralization) strengthen the central authority by bringing i t closer to the periphery (Kasperson, 1974c). While Kotler and Fraser both assumed p o l i t i c a l power to be a 'zero sum' commodity i n which one party's loss i s another party's gain, Anderson and Needleman f i n d three parties which should p o t e n t i a l l y benefit simultaneously from decentralized planning decision making, i e . c i t i z e n s (goal 5), p o l i t i c a l representatives (goal 7) and planners (goal 8). The interdependence of goals for Local Area Planning i s i l l u s t r a t e d by the c e n t r a l i t y of goal 4. Goal 4, "more accessible c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n " , makes goals 5 - 8 possible. The importance of th i s l i n k between Local Area Planning and c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s underscored by two important planning th e o r i s t s : Paul Davidoff and John Friedmann. While both of these authors seek to promote c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n by decentralizing planning, they also anticipate a means to a whole new planning process, or i n Friedmann's case, a new p o l i t i c a l process oriented to f a c i l i t a t i n g user needs and the needs of those otherwise affected by planning decisions. Davidoff sees Local Area Planning as essential for generating an ideal c a l l e d " p l u r a l planning". P l u r a l planning would award d i r e c t participatory powers through 6 i n t e r e s t groups. The assumption i s that d i f f e r e n t value positions must be incorporated into the planning process because the t o t a l s o c i e t a l welfare must be viewed i n terms of an e s s e n t i a l l y bifurcated s o c i a l system. Davidoff proposes that d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t groups expressing d i f f e r e n t value positions should prepare alternate plans that serve t h e i r own i n t e r e s t s , and the role of the planner should be changed to one of advocate for c l i e n t i n t e r e s t groups si m i l a r to the role of lawyer representing c l i e n t s . Local., area planning i s mentioned i n the following passage by Davidoff: From the point of view of e f f e c t i v e and r a t i o n a l planning i t might be desirable to commence p l u r a l planning at the l e v e l of c i t y wide organizations, but a more r e a l i s t i c view i s that i t w i l l s t a r t at the neighbourhood l e v e l . Certain advantages of t h i s outcome should be noted. Mention was made of tension i n government between c e n t r a l i z i n g and decentralizing forces. The contention aroused by c o n f l i c t between the central planning agency and the neighbourhood organization may indeed be, healthy, leading to a clearer d e f i n i t i o n of welfare p o l i c i e s and t h e i r r e l a t i o n to the rights of individuals or minority groups (19 65, 334). Friedmann sees a r o l e for l o c a l area planning i n attaining a system of " s o c i e t a l guidance" c a l l e d "transactive planning". This view i s d i f f e r e n t from Davidoff's since i t assumes that the planner must also contribute to his c l i e n t s 1 l e v e l of technical understanding of t h e i r problems when he serves them. He proposes that planning take place within a process of mutual learning between planners and c i t i z e n s . Friedmann feels that t h i s necessitates an end to the d i v i s i o n between planning and action, i e . plan 7 making and plan implementing, so that c i t i z e n s and planners can better evaluate t h e i r assumptions and technical expertise (Friedmann, 1973). The necessary organization for such a l e a r n i n g - p a r t i c i -patory society would be h i e r a r c h i c a l . Thus the basic planning unit must be l o c a l i n order to give each c i t i z e n the oppor-tunity to make di r e c t inputs into the decision making process. Friedmann feels that "participant planning" i s the most important form of planning (Friedmann, 1973, 203). To expedite p a r t i c i p a t i o n , "task oriented working groups" are proposed. Group dynamics factors require that these have no more than twelve members and that they be temporary and issue oriented i n nature. However, t h i s decentralization must be balanced by integration into the larger society, and Friedmann adds that working groups should be connected to each other i n what he c a l l s a " c e l l u l a r structure" where representatives from d i f f e r e n t groups meet to c o l l a t e decisions and make decisions a f f e c t i n g the areas of j u r i s d i c t i o n which are too large for d i r e c t representation. Friedmann believes that i f people were to be given an ongoing opportunity to p a r t i c i p a t e i n public policy making, such as they would have under the "so c i e t a l guidance system", a p a r t i c i p a t i o n rate as high as 30% should be expected (Friedmann, 1973). Although these normative theories of planning have fundamental differences, both Friedmann and Davidoff believe that decentralization w i l l encourage p a r t i c i p a t i o n by c i t i z e n s i n planning, whether they act through i n t e r e s t groups or through tiny task oriented groups of c i t i z e n s banded together 8 to deal with a problem which affects them. Both authors f e e l that goal number four for Local Area Planning i s important. Role of C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n Much of the attention given to c i t i z e n p a r t i c i -pation i n the l i t e r a t u r e concentrates on l o c a l area planning of the decentralized type (Breitbart, 1974; Carney, 1977; Cole 1974; Fraser, 1972; Hyman, 1969; Jensen, 1974; Mogulof, 1970; Frisken and Homenuck, 1972; Davidoff, 1965; Friedmann, 1973a, 6; Friedmann, 19 7 3b, 20 3; Granatstien, 19 71). Another d i r e c t i o n i n the l i t e r a t u r e i s to examine c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n toward the planning and administration of s o c i a l services (Alinsky, 1943; Ontario, 1971; Head, 1971) . Both of these directions contend that decentralization i s a fundamental element i n enabling and promoting p a r t i c i p a t i o n by c i t i z e n s i n public a f f a i r s (see goal 4, section 3.1). Some more recent contributions to the l i t e r a t u r e do not assume c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s r e l i a n t on decentralization. They have examined e f f o r t s at c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n at a regional l e v e l (Cornejo, 1975; Perryman, 1975; St. Pierre 1977). Some of the l i t e r a t u r e goes so far as to deny the r e l a t i o n -ship between p a r t i c i p a t i o n and decentralization (Perryman, 1975; Gusking, 1971, 54). F i n a l l y , the more academic s o c i a l s c i e n t i f i c l i t e r a t u r e deals with p a r t i c i p a t i o n as i t affects democratic theory (Cole, 1974, 10 - 20). 9 Some concepts for analysing c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n include the process and product d i s t i n c t i o n . In an a r t i c l e written i n 1969, Hightower categorizes planning theory into theories of process and theories of phenomena. Process theories are non^substantive theories which contribute to decision making, eg. evaluation methods (optimizing techniques, cost benefit analysis and public program budgetting) and methods for operationalizing and integrating values as v a l i d c r i t e r i a (including both Utopian ideals and approaches for c l i e n t involvement such as the "collaborative approach" by Godschalk and M i l l s (Hightower, 1969, 327). Since that time, the concept of decision making process has been used with more connotations of c l i e n t value i d e n t i f i c a t i o n methods. Friedmann defines process to mean: . . . the manner i n which a moral community agrees to conduct i t s public business, which includes not only the process of a r r i v i n g at decisions on laws, p o l i c i e s and programs but also the processes of carrying them out. In the broadest sense, therefore, process refers to the a l l o c a t i o n and uses of power (Friedmann, 1973a, 6). The concept of product, on the other hand, i s used primarily to describe the outcome of the decision process. Section 2.1 introduced goals for Local Area Planning. However, i t was found that Local Area Planning i s often seen as a means to the end of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . What, then, i s the purpose of c i t i z e n p a r ticipation? The following four goals have been i d e n t i f i e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e : 1. more e g a l i t a r i a n plans (Friedmann, 1973a, 6), 10 2. improved s o c i a l / p o l i t i c a l awareness for a l l members of society (Friedmann, 1973b; Burke, 1968; Martin, 19 7 3) . 3. more s o c i a l integration as people are forced more into considering the implications of public policy on other interests (Ontario, 1972; Martin, 1973) . 4. increased attachment to the whole p o l i t i c a l system, so that people w i l l become more involved and responsible (Martin, 1973). Of the anticipated benefits, only a few relate to the improvement of product, i e . the policy which i s the outcome of the planning process. Goals 2, 3 and 4 for c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n and goals 6, 7 and 8 for Local Area Planning (those goals that relate more to p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the l a t t e r set, from section 2.1) are benefits independent of product. There appear, then, to be two d i f f e r e n t categories of goals for c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n , eg., task oriented goals and process oriented goals (Perryman, 1975, 73). Evaluating whether c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n can more e f f e c t i v e l y achieve certain task oriented goals becomes less important i n cases where p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s viewed as a r i g h t or necessary condition for human development (Perryman, 1975, 73). In such cases, i t becomes a question of how well the process achieves i t s substantive goals r e l a t i v e to other approaches using c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Whether or not the product can be better without c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n can never be determined because of the absence of any c r i t e r i a for answering such a question.. Goal number 1 appears to be the most important overt purpose of most proponents of Local Area Planning. However, 11 the goal, and whether i t can be attained appears to be a matter of f a i t h i n some of the t h e o r e t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e . Exploring the variable appears to produce certain method-o l o g i c a l problems. For example, how i s i t possible to explore equity when i t e n t a i l s a d i f f i c u l t to quantify variable such as opportunity for p o l i t i c a l expression rather than an economic resource? Goal number 3 for c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s s i m i l a r to what Cole c a l l s the " s o c i o l o g i c a l view" of p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Cole, 1974). This refers to a large amount of academic thought which concludes that structures for the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of c i t i z e n s i n policy making are needed to counteract the r i s e of bureaucracy and impersonal r e l a t i o n s , and effects from the erosion of certain i n s t i t u t i o n s l i k e the family, job, church and community through which individuals can relate to one another, form alliances and take p o l i t i c a l i n i t i a t i v e s (Cole, 1974, 2). The second and fourth goals are related to what Cole c a l l s the p o l i t i c a l view of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . This generalizes on a group of modern thinkers who are concerned about the psychological effects of p a r t i c i p a t i o n and the development of a deeper sense of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i n individual c i t i z e n s who must have t h e i r perspectives broadened beyond "the narrow confines" of private l i f e (Cole, 1974, 3). The trend i n the s o c i a l s c i e n t i f i c l i t e r a t u r e i s to view p a r t i c i p a t i o n within the s t r i c t confines of democratic theory rather than to entertain product or policy concerns such as Local Area Planning problems. Since modern 12 democratic theory has been opposed to p a r t i c i p a t i o n for fear i t would r e s u l t i n arb i t r a r y mob r u l e , i t has favoured representative democracy (Cole, 1974; Jensen, 1974, 16ff). The arguments proposed by modern post war l i b e r a l theorists such as the s o c i o l o g i c a l and p o l i t i c a l views introduced above are a complete reversal of the democratic theories. They have been attributed to the current period of mass l i t e r a c y and multimedia communications (Cole, 1974; Carney, 1977) . Unlike the modern democratic t h e o r i s t s , not a l l the advocates of p a r t i c i p a t i o n see a c o n f l i c t between p a r t i c i -patory democracy and representative democracy. Writers who see l o c a l p o l i t i c s i n a p l u r a l i s t i c l i g h t are more l i k e l y to see these two as mutually supportive. While e l i t i s t s see l o c a l p o l i t i c s as a struggle between the "ins" and the "outs", p l u r a l i s t s see p a r t i c i p a t i o n as a means of f a c i l i t a t i n g the use of "rules of operation" i n which individuals or groups can make demands on the e x i s t i n g p o l i t i c a l system. Hence, those who see i n p a r t i c i p a t i o n a transfer of power from elected representatives to the powerless see l o c a l p o l i t i c s as e l i t e dominated and forsee a d i f f i c u l t s t r u c t u r a l change as p a r t i c i p a t i o n a l t e r s the l e v e l of power of e l i t e s (Frisken, 1972, 65 - 66). P l u r a l i s t s , on the other hand, are more l i k e l y to perceive benefits from p a r t i c i p a t i o n as a Toronto alderman exemplified when he suggested that p a r t i c i p a t i o n increases the power that the representative derives from his o f f i c e by reducing the l i k e l i h o o d of his/her being defeated over 13 an issue (Jaffery, 1972, 59). 2.3 H i s t o r i c a l Perspective on Local Area Planning: In North America, modern decentralized Local Area Planning originated i n the United States where i t was introduced as a re s u l t of federal involvement i n Urban a f f a i r s during the 1960's (Hallman, 1973; Farkas, 1971). Clear evidence of t h i s type of planning did not come about i n Canada u n t i l projects l i k e the Trefann Court -project i n Toronto (Anderson, 19 77), or perhaps the Strathcona e f f o r t i n Vancouver, both taking place i n the late 1960's and early 70's. Both of these began as l o c a l l y i n i t i a t e d s e l f help community development e f f o r t s for change i n the neighbourhood which were organized with the assistance of an external organizer. H i s t o r i c a l l y the development of decentralized Local Area Planning can be traced back to community development and community organization e f f o r t s i n both Canada and the United States. 2.3.1 Community E f f o r t s : The "representativeness" of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n e f f o r t s i n the distant past has often been questioned. For example, the New England town meeting i s now seen as e l i t i s t and dominated by exclusive cliques (Jensen, 1974,1). The function of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n urban renewal programs throughout North American has been c a l l e d one of public relations since involvement was r e s t r i c t e d to businessmen, planners and leaders of c i v i c groups (Jensen, 1974, 2). 14 The l i t e r a t u r e appears to trace modern c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n , as practised i n Local Area Planning programs, back to various community e f f o r t s ranging from non professional, i n t e r n a l l y induced community s e l f help programs to profes-sionalized, i n s t i t u t i o n a l l y assisted community organization. Community s e l f help includes the organization and operation of community in t e r e s t groups from within, including ratepayer associations and tenant associations. They have existed since 1904 i n Toronto (Ebers, 1972, 66) and for a s i m i l a r l y long period i n Vancouver (Vancouver Urban Research Group, 1972, 61). T r a d i t i o n a l l y , they served to "formulate small and s p e c i f i c requests" to c i t y h a l l such as they i n s t a l l a t i o n of a new road sign. Such groups were orga-nized without the s k i l l s of a professional community organizer who has been trained for that function. The apparent success of t h i s category of organization has been explained by the t y p i c a l l y high l e v e l of p o l i t i c a l influence among certain group members (Lorimer, 1972, 197). In his book, James Lorimer i d e n t i f i e s new, "noisy" organizations that are t y p i f i e d by confrontation t a c t i c s and which arise i n response to c i v i c proposals such as an urban renewal project or freeway which threaten the future of the communities they represent. Lorimer i d e n t i f i e s the following stages i n the r a d i c a l i z a t i o n of community groups: 1. the group makes demands from council and when these are unheeded, they voice these to the media making them into public issues, 15 2. the group i s lab e l l e d as unrepresentative and/or the government reacts by either co-opting factions or establishing r i v a l groups using s o c i a l service agency community organ-i z e r s , 3. various neighbourhood groups form c o a l i t i o n s and create an organized p o l i t i c a l machine to oppose council, often f i e l d i n g t h e i r own candidates (Lorimer, 1972, 197 - 200). Community development and community organization e f f o r t s involve the organization of community action with the help of community organizers that animate and coordinate a group of people to representtheir own i n t e r e s t s . The community groups that Lorimer examines include those assisted by community organizers as the following section indicates: Sometimes a f l e d g l i n g group gets a community organizer who works with them to get the group going. On occasion organizers arrive on the scene and s t a r t organizing a l o c a l group where no one i n the area had taken that step i t s e l f (Lorimer, 1972, 192). Community development i s defined as "a s o c i a l process i n which human beings can become more competent to l i v e and gain some control over l o c a l aspects of a f r u s t r a t i n g and changing world". Unlike community organization, community development does not involve the formulation of p o l i t i c a l demands for a more favourable share of s o c i a l and economic resources, but the organization of changes i n the community through independent c o l l e c t i v e action, such as clean up campaigns and learning situations for acquiring better ways of working and developing a s o c i a l order to arrest the deterioration of neighbourhoods (Biddle, 1965, 3 4 - 3 5 , 81 - 82). 16 The story of the development of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the United States must consider important contributions i n the administration of the American Point Four program 'of the post World War I I period i n which this technique was used (Kasperson, 1974b, 17). Rural community development programs such as the Point Four Program and certain Tennessee Valley Authority Programs (19 30's) made more contributions to our knowledge of c i t i z e n participation i n North America than early urban programs (Kasperson, 1974b, 16 - 17). Both community organization and community development are oriented toward community s e l f help. Hence, the importance of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n both f i e l d s . A fine l i n e appears to e x i s t between the two types of a c t i v i t y . Consequently, an active agent l i k e Saul Alinsky has been c a l l e d both a community organizer and a community developer (Biddle, 1965; Freedman, 1977). Biddle refers to community organization as more oriented to s o c i a l service programs c a l l i n g i t a branch of the s o c i a l work profession along with group work and casework (19 66, 223) . An American example of t h i s type of program i s the Grey Areas Program of the 19 50's which dealt with the urban problem of slum dwelling i n slum areas. This was a $20 m i l l i o n program funded by the Ford foundation which sought to reduce substandard housing and reintegrate members of "slum cultures" into the "Mainstream of Americal l i f e and culture" i n selected areas of s i x large American c i t i e s . P a r t i c i p a t i o n was used i n developing programs to better 17 address s o c i a l needs as residents saw them. This program made a s i g n i f i c a n t contribution to subsequent government programs during the "war on poverty" period of the 19 60's including the President's Committee on Juvenile Delinquincy and programs by the o f f i c e of Economic Opportunity such as the Community Action Program (Kasperson, 1974b). An example of a Canadian community organization e f f o r t funded by the federal government i s the Company of Young Canadians. Community organization has often conjured an image of inducing c o n f l i c t i n the p o l i t i c a l process, of outside agents moving into the community,heightening the expecta-tions of l o c a l residents and organizing the opposition to the status quo. Many of these connotations originated from Saul Alinsky, a professional community organizer who established the Back of the Yards project i n Chicago i n which he mobilized c i t i z e n s to pressure p o l i t i c i a n s into improving th e i r working class neighbourhoods (Kasperson, 1974b, 17). The basic organizing unit i n Alinsky's community organization i s the "People's Organization", which i s a c o n f l i c t oriented association of community residents working i n th e i r interests together, or i n Alinsky's terms, to " f i g h t for those rights which ensure a decent way of l i f e " . Alinsky emphasizes that i n the war against " s o c i a l e v i l s , there are no rules of f a i r play" (Alinsky, 1946, 153 - 156). The basis for p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Alinsky's community organization i s the role of what Alinsky c a l l s 18 indigeneous leadership which i s necessary to i d e n t i f y the values and interests of the people i n the cornmunity (Alinsky, 1946, 87) . While not a l l community organization follows t h i s c o n f l i c t based model, some references to community organization i n the l i t e r a t u r e assume as much (Freeman, 1977). An example of community organization e f f o r t s which did not completely conform to t h i s model i s the American government funded Community Action Program. The enabling l e g i s l a t i o n for the Community Action Program required "maximum feasible p a r t i c i p a t i o n of residents of the area and of the groups served" (Kasperson, 1974b) . This decentralized s o c i a l services program provided employment programs, human resource development programs and motivation programs. The heavy emphasis placed on p a r t i c i p a t i o n and s e l f help has been interpreted as an oversight and p o l i t i c a l blunder i n that President Johnson, who was responsible for introducing the legislation,, only became aware of the "maximum feasible p a r t i c i p a t i o n " clause afterwards, and did not favour i t (Kasperson, 1974b; Moynihan, 19 69). Subsequent to the passing of l e g i s l a t i o n , the Office of Economic Opportunity interpreted "maximum p a r t i c i p a t i o n " as involvement of the poor i n areas served i n planning, policy making and program operation. Their role was balanced i n equal proportion with established agencies and c i t y leader-ship groups, thus leaving out e n t i r e l y representation by established municipal governments (Kasperson, 1974b) . 19 2.3.2 American Decentralized Local Area Planning: The Model C i t i e s Program was another American federal program for inner c i t y r e s i d e n t i a l areas which featured c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . This one, however, also had provisions for improving the neighbourhoods phys i c a l l y as well as s o c i a l l y i n a comprehensive package of l o c a l improvements. Bending to pressure from conservative municipal governments, control of t h i s program was delivered to c i t y governments, and c i t i z e n s were given an advisory function (Kasperson, 1974b, 22). Instead of "maximum" p a r t i c i p a t i o n i t substituted "widespread" p a r t i c i p a t i o n which required: 1. .an organizational structure to involve residents i n program planning and administration, 2. leadership acceptable to residents, 3. s u f f i c i e n t and adequate lead time, 4. technical assistance, 5. f i n a n c i a l assistance, 6. employment of l o c a l s throughout the process (Kasperson, 1974b, 22). Although the organization structure for c i t i z e n involvement i n the Model C i t i e s Program was an advisory body i n a de jure sense, an analysis of projects i n the western United States revealed that a l l the projects i n that area had achieved de facto veto power i n less than one year (Kasperson,.1974b, 2 3). Most of t h i s power was attained through con-frontations over prerogatives and procedures re s u l t i n g from high expectations for the Community Action Program and the c i v i l r i ghts movement. The 20 subsequent disappointments over the results of both of these led the urban poor to make even greater demands on t h i s new program (Kasperson, 1974b, 23; Hamilton, 1973, 251). This was the f i r s t program to introduce a substantive l e v e l of pa r t i c i p a t i o n into comprehensive l o c a l planning and develop-ment, according to some American authors, whereas previous programs had only extended t h i s feature to the planning of s p e c i f i c s o c i a l services (Kasperson, 1974b, 23; King 1971, 36). In addition to the p a r t i c i p a t i o n aspect, new programs appeared to concentrate on the r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and retention of e x i s t i n g inner c i t y r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhoods rather than redevelopment of inner c i t y t r a n s i t i o n a l neighbourhoods. The fact that c i t i z e n involvement became popular at the same time as neighbourhood r e h a b i l i t a t i o n i s understandable. The strengthening of the community through c o l l e c t i v e decision making works together with the strategy of neighbourhood physical r e h a b i l i t a t i o n toward a common goal to lengthen the l i f e span of neighbourhoods and t h e i r constituent housing. F i r s t l y , the public outcry for a greater say by ci t i z e n s affected by redevelopment produced opposition groups that often evolved, as governments began to make concessions, into participatory planning committees during the 1960's and early 1970's. I t also c a l l e d into question the legitimacy of the planning profession (Needleman, 1974, 29) that forced a r e d e f i n i t i o n of the concept of "public i n t e r e s t " by such planning theorists as Davidoff (1964) and Friedmann (1973) (see section 2.2). Moreover, with a r e d e f i n i t i o n of the "public i n t e r e s t " 21 concept i n the d i r e c t i o n of a c i t i z e n involvement base, the planning profession contributed to a high l e v e l of community control by c i t i z e n committees (Needleman, 1974). In the Model C i t i e s Program, Kasperson argues that instead of c i t i z e n committees being coopted by c i t y o f f i c i a l s , as had been expected, the reverse happened when c i t y planners were coopted and sided with the committees, becoming "bureaucratic g u e r r i l l a s " or "neighbourhood advocates" i n adversary situations (Kasperson, 1974b, 29) . 2.3.3 Local Area Planning in-Canada: Many of the forces leading to c i t i z e n p a r t i c i -pation and decentralized planning i n Canada were the same as those that operated i n the United States. However, Canada's more authoritarian p o l i t i c a l culture (Anderson, 1977) and i t s less v o l a t i l e r a c i a l s i t u a t i o n (Anderson, 1977) resulted i n less urban violence here during the late 1960's. Only urban renewal and freeway construction appear to have been s i g n i f i c a n t i n creating the l e v e l of public d i s -s a t i s f a c t i o n necessary to encourage public inputs into planning (Anderson, 1977; Fraser, 1973). As a consequence of t h i s and various j u r i s d i c t i o n a l differences between Canada and the United States a f f e c t i n g the powers of d i f f e r e n t levels of government, i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements for l o c a l area planning i n Canada are less comprehensive than American ones. To i l l u s t r a t e , the Model C i t i e s 22 Program i n the United States integrated under a single administrative structure various sub programs dealing with crime and delinquency, day care, economic development, housing, transportation and urban renewal (Model C i t i e s Service Centre, 1971). Moreover, the American programs paid for the operating costs of these projects over a f i v e year period as well as for t h e i r c a p i t a l costs. By contrast, Canadian programs are exclusively concerned with housing and r e s i d e n t i a l development. The Canadian federal program c a l l e d the Neighbourhood Improvement Program (NIP) i s intended to compliment another program for housing r e h a b i l i t a t i o n (RRAP; see Barnard, 1973). As a r e s u l t , the Local Area Planning Division i n Vancouver seems concerned about the i n a b i l i t y of Local Area Planning to resolve s o c i a l issues i n Vancouver (Beasley, 1977). In fact, t h i s i s because l o c a l area planning does not have the j u r i s -d i c t i o n nor the funding to meet these needs i n Canada. This section has served to i l l u s t r a t e the unique circumstances of l o c a l area planning i n Canada and a more detailed review of Canadian programs i s found i n chapter 4. 2.4 Decentralization and C i t i z e n Involvement: The American l i t e r a t u r e i m p l i c i t e l y assumes and sometimes i t e x p l i c i t e l y states a relationship between decentralization and c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Kotler, 1969; Perryman, 1975, 71). The assumption underlies a bias for di r e c t p a r t i c i p a t i o n which i s only possible when the planning j u r i s d i c t i o n i s small enough to enable every interested and motivated c i t i z e n an opportunity to play a part. Another assumption i n the l i t e r a t u r e i s that p a r t i c i p a t i o n and decentralization are necessary conditions for each other and that they both achieve the goal of enhancing a community i d e n t i t y and developing a feasible scale for d i r e c t p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Perryman, 1975, 71). . These assumptions have not gone unchallenged, however. Some of the l i t e r a t u r e has concluded that l o c a l government i s not r e a l l y democratic at a l l (Leemans, 1970, 19), p a r t i c u l a r l y when compared to national levels of government. Madison argued that l o c a l and state governments are more prone to rule by faction when compared to national l e v e l s of government (Kasperson, 1974c, 33). Why i s an e l i t e more l i k l y to pa r t i c i p a t e i n l o c a l public a f f a i r s ? F i r s t l y , p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n planning should be seen as a component of p o l i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and empirical studies have established a high l e v e l of correlat i o n between p o l i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n and awareness and socioeconomic status (Kasperson, 1974a, 8). Since p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n public decisions probably requires more 24 p o l i t i c a l awareness than mere voting, perhaps there i s a danger that decision makers w i l l be less representative i n democracy-by-participation than i n democracy-by-voting. Secondly, voter turnouts i n t h i s country show that people tend to pa r t i c i p a t e more i n elections for higher levels of government (provincial and federal) than they participate i n l o c a l elections. Perryman claims that t h i s r e f l e c t s the controversial nature of issues dealt with by higher government (eg., health care, urban growth, poverty and housing; Perryman, 1975, 72) . Hence the generalization that the more l o c a l the issue, the less i n t e r e s t i t sparks. In the absence of compelling issues that appeal to r i c h and poor a l i k e , Local Area Planning i s l i k e l y to appeal to the p o l i t i c a l l y ambitious and the more p o l i t i c a l l y aware who may see p a r t i c i p a t i o n as a stepping stone to public o f f i c e , and who simply know more about less publicized l o c a l public issues. These people are l i k e l y to originate from higher socioeconomic groups. Moreover, the geographical basis for the decentralization proposed i n most of the l i t e r a t u r e (with the possible exceptions of Ackoff and Friedmann) on l o c a l area planning would create the problem of having to define community boundaries on the basis of inconclusive and arbit r a r y c r i t e r i a . The assumption of geographical c r i t e r i a i s often a questionable one since i t excludes other forms of in t e r e s t groups (eg. women, Indians and the poor l i v i n g outside neighbourhoods i d e n t i f i e d as t y p i c a l l y underprivileged) (Perryman, 1975, 73; Kasperson, 1974). 25 This point of view would lead to the advocacy of a sectoral basis for defining l o c a l planning rather than a geographical basis. In addition to these problems with the goals for l o c a l planning are the e x t e r n a l i t i e s i n decentralization and p a r t i c i p a t i o n such as parochialism of the community in response to wider issues. I f wider issues are those issues that most interest and concern c i t i z e n s , these could remain unresolved i f each neighbourhood refuses to undertake i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and pay the costs toward resolving these issues (Perryman, 1975, 71). Also, decentralization b u i l t around homogeneous neighbourhoods could create "ghettos" which would prevent s o c i a l integration. For example, selecting neighbourhoods along ethnic l i n e s may, i n some instances, exacerbate ethnic c o n f l i c t (Kasperson, 1974c, 34). 2.5 Previous Evaluations of Local Area Planning: Empirical Studies of Local Area Planning i n the past have taken the form of case studies, policy reviews by government bodies, and comparative studies. 2.5.1 Case Studies: Two case studies are considered i n t h i s section, including Kaplan et a l (1973) and Fraser (1972). Kaplan, Gans and Kahn (1973) examine the model c i t i e s program i n three American c i t i e s . Nevertheless, the study i s not e n t i r e l y a comparative one, and the authors describe each project as a separate case study. The methodology 26 for the study of the Seattle project includes an examination of two categories of phenomena i n the planning process: content and process. The evaluation i s presented under the following headings: 1. relationship between content and process, 2. achievement of coordination, 3. achievement of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n , 4. achievement of innovation, and 5. l e v e l of technical assistance (Kaplan, Gans and Kahn, 1973) . They conclude that the planning process did not follow a model dictated by the federal agency because professionals and c i t i z e n s did not work well together. While s t a f f kept speeding the process so as to meet deadlines, c i t i z e n s f e l t that the pace was too rapid. Citizens also complained that professionals took l i b e r t i e s i n w r i t i n g up proposals agreed to i n committee; t h i s may also have been related to the former problem i n that the speed of the process may have resulted i n misunderstandings between the two groups i n the community. As a f i n a l r e s u l t , the l e v e l of c i t i z e n involvement declined u n t i l i t was v i r t u a l l y non-existent towards the end of process. According to the authors, t h i s reduced the l e v e l of innovation (section 4 of evaluation) i n the f i n a l product. On the positive side, Seattle became the f i r s t community to receive implementation grants because: 1. agreement on p r i n c i p l e s was sought before d e t a i l , 27 2. high p r i o r i t y was given to speed i n l i e u of q u a l i t y i n decisions i n l i g h t of the close deadlines that had to be met, and 3. the mayor was w i l l i n g to delegate as much power as l e g a l l y possible without reducing his l e v e l of support for the project (Kaplan et a l , 1973) Writing -. ear l y i n the development of Local Area Planning methods i n Canada, Graham Fraser contends i n his book that Trefann Court was a successful Local Area Planning project because i t demonstrated that c i t i z e n s groups were capable of more than c r i t i c i s m and r e j e c t i o n of plans, and that they could work together i n preparing t h e i r own plans. A community group was welded together and a planner was hired to provide technical assistance i n t h i s project. Due to pressure from higher levels of government, the c i t y was forced into not contradicting or overriding proposals made i n committee, and although the plan was prepared under d i f f e r e n t conditions than the;,, Seattle Model C i t i e s Plan, t h i s committee achieved a great deal of autonomy as w e l l . The author f e l t that the-problem of legitimacy was resolved by: 1. the involvement of a planner "consulting informally with the people on a day to day basis", and 2. by a detailed s o c i a l survey worked out by the people on the working committee (Fraser, 1972, 261) . Nevertheless, there was clear danger of well organized groups dominating the process i n t h i s project. Tenants and property owners had previously been at odds over the need for urban renewal while expropriation had been an 28 active threat. After the committee was established and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n had been made into a major p r i n c i p l e of t h i s e f f o r t , tenants chose to leave planning to the other actors i n an e f f o r t to speed the process and also because they were unable to "come to grips with the detailed problems which had to be solved" due, according to the author, to t h e i r longlasting reliance on bureaucrats to make decisions for them (Fraser, 1972, 261 - 261). 2.5.2 Comparative Research i n Local Area Planning: Cole points out the shortcomings of case studies and policy evaluations for improving c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . He suggests that a comparative framework for analysis be developed so that the success or f a i l u r e of each e f f o r t at incorporating p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the process can be measured by the norm (Cole, 19 74, 16). He claims that most of the case study research has been normative i n nature and that a uniform scheme of categorization i s necessary (Cole, 1974, 16 - 20). Cole's scheme of q u a n t i f i c a t i o n i s the index c a l l e d . " l e v e l of p a r t i c i p a t i o n " which i s a measure of c i t i z e n control on the dimensions of i n t e n s i t y and variety of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Each c i t y has one score on the index which i s based on the performance and services offered by a l l the programs available i n i t . The study inventories most American c i t i e s with populations greater than 50,000. Variety i s measured by the presence of 1) neighbourhood councils, 2) l i t t l e c i t y h a l l s and 3) multiservice centres; 29 program i n t e n s i t y was measured by whether or not c i t i z e n s had control over 1) plan approval, 2) budget revue, and 3) s t a f f i n g (Cole, 1974, 24). The index i s used both as a dependent and an independent variable i n th i s study (Cole, 1974, 80). Cole examines p a r t i c i p a t i o n both i n terms of quantity and q u a l i t y . The " l e v e l of p a r t i c i p a t i o n " did not correlate with ethnic variables i n t h i s study, nor with most socioeconomic variables, although income of c i t i e s studied did seem to be p o s i t i v e l y correlated with l e v e l of p a r t i c i p a t i o n s l i g h t l y (Cole, 1974, 45). City s i z e , however, appeared to be p o s i t i v e l y correlated with the l e v e l of p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Cole, 1974, 73). Regarding the quality of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , Cole found that the c i t i e s with the highest levels of p a r t i c i p a t i o n tended to have the least representative participants demographically. Moreover, those same c i t i e s had the highest incidence of p o l i t i c a l l y motivated part i c i p a n t s , i e . participants motivated for personal p o l i t i c a l appoint-ment or the p o l i t i c a l advancement of t h e i r ethnic group rather than the immediate s o c i a l and economic goals of t h e i r neighbourhood community. Also, unrepresentative p a r t i c i p a t i o n was p o s i t i v e l y correlated with a f a i l u r e to achieve goals, i e . an i n a b i l i t y to reach consensus, increased public t r u s t i n c i t y o f f i c i a l s , or improve public awareness of the program with time (Cole, 1974, 96 - 97). Focussing on p a r t i c u l a r planning e f f o r t s , there was no congruency i n any of the cases between the planning 30 participants and the community at large i n socioeconomic ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as high school graduation, completed number of school years and median income (Cole, 1974, 91). Cultural and socioeconomic variables such as the above are only one measure of the l e v e l and qu a l i t y of p a r t i c i p a -t i o n . Socioeconomic and c u l t u r a l congruency between participants and the community, c a l l e d descriptive, representation, simply describes the s i m i l a r i t y between participants and c i t i z e n s i n t h e i r external c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and only suggests differences i n the i r planning values. I t does not measure the actions or values of the participants for comparison with community values to determine how accurately the participants represent the community. The l a t t e r approach constitutes what Cole describes as sub-stantive representation (Cole, 1974, 20). Cole's findings appear unfocussed and his highly quantified approach result s i n a poor in-depth understanding df the deterministic factors underlying representation. A f a i l u r e to adequately explore substantive representation i s evident, and i t results from the i n a b i l i t y of his methodology to examine the motives of the participants i n reaching policy conclusions. Using a s o c i o l o g i c a l approach, Martin Needleman ex-plores the role of the l o c a l area planner and his r e l a t i o n -ship with other actors that he becomes professionally involved with, including members of the l o c a l community, the remainder of the planning department, the remainder of the c i v i c bureaucracy and the c i t y council. His i n f o r -31 mation comes from extensive interviews with l o c a l area planners i n several unidentified American c i t i e s . Needleman describes the l o c a l area planner as a l o c a l advocate who must f i g h t municipal government from within i n order to represent the interests of the c i t i z e n s i n his area; hence the t i t l e of " g u e r i l l a " i n the bureaucracy (Needleman, 19 74). The following are examples of t y p i c a l problems i n l o c a l area planning i d e n t i f i e d by Needleman. F i r s t l y , he concludes that the planner must deal with the fact he i s i d e n t i f i e d with c i t y h a l l and the stigma which arises from that. This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y important i n l i g h t of the ombudsman role which Needleman i d e n t i f i e s i n l o c a l area planners. Another problem that i s related to c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s the fact that the l o c a l planner must straddle the l i n e between giving the impression that he i s e f f e c t i v e i n bringing about positive change, and consequently made responsible for any decisions by the c i t y which have been harmful to members of the community, or, a l t e r n a t i v e l y , denying r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for those decisions and being treated by the public as i r r e l e v a n t i n bringing about changes i n other subjects. A third important problem common to the planning process i s deciding how to deal with the s i t u a -tion whenever a consenses cannot be reached. Much l i k e Needleman, Grant Anderson (19 76) explores the role of the l o c a l planner i n the context of other roles i n the l o c a l planning process. He examines the 32 relationship of planners to 1) professional p o l i t i c i a n s , 2) academics and i n t e l l e c t u a l s , 3) resident amateurs, 4) development i n t e r e s t s , 5) other c i v i c planners and 6) other c i v i c departments. Anderson found by interviewing planners involved i n l o c a l planning i n Toronto, Vancouver, Hamilton and Winnipeg that l o c a l planners do not completely represent the people i n t h e i r communities. Although he does not f i n d that l o c a l planners are not equipped by t h e i r t r a i n i n g to represent l o c a l i n t e r e s t s , he does establish that they are intimidated by the greed and short-sightedness of c i t i z e n s , and that a lack of consensus commonly forces the planner to act for the general i n t e r e s t , either by seeking solutions that serve the greatest good or by acting for city-wide interests instead. However, ce r t a i n variables l i k e the l e v e l of apathy a f f e c t the l e v e l of s a t i s f a c t i o n of the planner i n his r o l e , and apathy i s less prevalent i n l o c a l areas that are threatened by large projects (Anderson, 1976, 170ff). Anderson feels that l o c a l area planning does not meet a l l the goals of decentralized planning and participatory democracy. However, l o c a l area planning does educate people regarding the functions of government, and i t pro-vides them with a forum for expressing t h e i r concerns. I t also makes government more sensitive to t h e i r concerns (Anderson, 1976, 215 - 216). These more modest expectations have also been the 33 conclusion of other evaluations of Local Area Planning e f f o r t s (Hruza, 1972, 209). Hruza argues that t h i s type of feedback mechanism i s needed i n planning for s o c i a l change i n public service agencies due to the rapidly changing circumstances of today's society (Hruza, 1972, 159). Hence, while Local Area Planning does not meet the expectations of p a r t i c i p a t o r y democracy theory or the theory of advocacy planning, i t does meet important needs. 2 .6 Conclusions Since representation i s seen as a d i f f i c u l t variable, c o n f l i c t resolution has ... been seen as an alternate indicator of project success. Consequently, what to do with c o n f l i c t and the lack of consensus has become a c r u c i a l issue i n studies of the planner's role i n Local Area Planning. One assumption that could be used to j u s t i f y the use of t h i s factor as an indicator of project success i s that i t plays an important role i n the functioning of the feedback process of Local Area Planning. The l i t e r a t u r e offers some techniques for preventing c o n f l i c t used i n d i f f e r e n t projects. In Seattle, the planners sought agreement i n p r i n c i p l e before agreement i n d e t a i l i n a l l matters. In Trefann Court, the organizers were aware that one group was underrepresented while another group dominated the process, but did not upset the status quo for fear of arresting progress. There i s a f e e l i n g , then, that the planner can manipulate consensus or compromise using strategy. 34 -However, as Needleman and Anderson show, not a l l the planners dealt with groups that could make compromises, and they often had to make decisions for themselves using t h e i r own c r i t e r i a . Hence, the problem of c o n f l i c t resolution i s divided into c o n f l i c t prevention and dealing with unresolvable c o n f l i c t . Some l i t e r a t u r e sources have dealt with the issue of representation as i t affects i n t e r n a l c o n f l i c t , i e . within the p a r t i c i p a t i n g body, and they deal with representation as i t effects trust i n municipal o f f i c i a l s . Cole (1974) concludes that descriptive representation, or the median s i m i l a r i t y between p a r t i c i p a n t s 1 socioeconomic character-i s t i c s and those of the community they represent 1 i s correlated with the above c o n f l i c t problems. That the legitimacy of the role of l o c a l area planning and c i t i z e n involvement i s questioned by other c i t y de-partments i s an important issue i n the l i t e r a t u r e (Needleman, 1974; Anderson, 1976) p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the more recent l i t e r a t u r e . That issue i s external c o n f l i c t , or a c o n f l i c t between the l o c a l c i t i z e n body and other c i t y departments. The e a r l i e r l i t e r a t u r e (late 1960's and early 1970's) saw l o c a l area planning as a response to the. 'extraordinary p o l i t i c a l controversies of the times. This means that the e a r l i e r l i t e r a t u r e concentrated on i n t e r n a l c o n f l i c t s between interests within the p a r t i c i p a t i n g arena. An example i s the c o n f l i c t between homeowners anxious to measured by the median number of school years attended, the proportions having completed high school and/or median incomes. 35 preserve t h e i r homes and neighbourhoods on one side, and public assistance r e c i p i e n t s and merchants anxious to see redevelopment and public housing on the other side as in Fraser's (1971) book, Trefann Court. One common conclusion in the l i t e r a t u r e i s that participants i n Local Area Planning may often be unrep-resentative of the people in t h e i r communities. This serves to contradict the b e l i e f s and assumptions of many strong advocates of Local Area Planning (Davidoff, 1969; Fraser, 1972; Friedmann, 1973b). However, that t h i s issue remains somewhat unresolved t e s t i f i e s to the value laden nature of t h i s subject. Much of the problem l i e s in shortcomings in the concepts used. Descriptive represent-ation i s an i n s u f f i c i e n t indicator by i t s e l f and substan-t i v e representation can never be represented s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . This i s because a p a r a l l e l can never be made between the types of decisions made by participants a f t e r making the necessary compromises in t h i s type of planning process and the types of decisions which the rest of the community would have preferred with an incomplete knowledge of the necessary compromises. A major reason for the l i t e r a t u r e ' s i n a b i l i t y to deal with t h i s topic l i e s in a f a i l u r e to generate an adequate methodology for examining representation. C i t i z e n involvement and planning are both processes and both descriptive and substantive representation are s t a t i c indicators of that variable. The generation of a process-oriented methodology for analyzing, representation i s required. 36 3. METHODOLOGY 3.1 Purpose: To better evaluate l o c a l area planning projects with regard to the issue of representation i n e x i s t i n g forums for c i t i z e n involvement, a new process oriented methodology i s required. I t has become necessary to generate informa-t i o n using t h i s methodology to: 1. f a c i l i t a t e analysis for the current debate within i n s t i t u t i o n a l c i r c l e s over the potential of l o c a l area planning to adequately represent a wide portion of neighbourhood communities. 2. f a c i l i t a t e a feedback process i n which l o c a l area planners can evaluate t h e i r own performance i n areas where they can affe c t the l e v e l of representation. In order to further f a c i l i t a t e the development of a feedback process, the areas i n which the planner manipulates representation must be discerned, and a general framework for maintaining representation must be developed. The research reported i n the remainder of th i s thesis i s oriented to the development of both the representation evaluation methology and the planner's role i n maintaining representation. Representation s h a l l refer to the phenomena wherein cer t a i n members of the community (participants) act on behalf of the community or a portion thereof i n bringing together information or reaching policy agreement toward planning. a 3.2 Value Po s i t i o n : One premise must be openly revealed for t h i s research to be understood. I t i s assumed that c i t y government i s 37 concerned about the popularity of planning policy from the point of view of the taxpayer. While developers and other outside interests play a dominant role i n the economics of urban development, the premise underlying planning has been the need to provide community control over urban development so that the people are not alienated from i t . Therefore, i t i s assumed that when c i t y government and implementing departments are c r i t i c a l of c i t i z e n involve-ment, i t i s because those i n charge f e e l i t inadequately represents the values and preferences of a l l the community, and not because they are against p o l i c i e s that are i n l i n e with community preferences. However, i t i s under-stood that certain c i t y departments which implement c i t y p o l i c y are subject to operational constraints not under-stood by the general public. I t i s the hope of t h i s researcher that c i t y government w i l l continue to evolve so that the general public w i l l have more d i r e c t input to c i t y p o l i c y , and at the same time, f i n d better oppor-t u n i t i e s for understanding the operational contraints of implementing departments. 3.3 Definitions : The following terms are used extensively i n t h i s report and/or they are commonly found i n the l i t e r a t u r e reviewed i n the previous chapter. Other terms are defined as they are introduced. C i t i z e n involvement or p a r t i c i p a t i o n s h a l l refer to a process i n which c i t i z e n s , who are not elected representatives 3d form an o f f i c i a l l y sanctioned body which meets regularly to play an active role i n government policy making. For t h i s research, the o f f i c i a l l y sanctioned body w i l l be c i t i z e n ' s advisory committees which w i l l be described i n the next chapter. In certain instances reference w i l l be made to other forms of c i t i z e n involvement which w i l l refer to informal contacts between private c i t i z e n s and planning professionals, involvement i n design-ins and neighbourhood walks, non-members attending committee meetings, correspondence from private c i t i z e n s or organ-i z a t i o n and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n community questionnaires. Participants refers to committee members i n most instances, but depending on the context, i t may refer to those taking an active part i n other forms of c i t i z e n involvement. Representativeness, using the approach introduced by Cole, s h a l l be divided into two concepts for purposes of analysis. Descriptive representation i s the degree of divergence between s o c i a l and economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the p a r t i -cipants and the socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the rest of the community. The three indicators of descriptive representation used i n t h i s research are l e v e l of education attainment, occupational category, and ethnic background. Substantive representation i s the degree of divergence between the planning p r i o r i t i e s of the committee, or i t s planning decisions and those p r i o r i t i e s evident i n the com munity. 39 While universalism and particularism are used ex-tensively i n the planning l i t e r a t u r e to r e f l e c t on the nature of participants, the l i t e r a t u r e rarely defines them. They are opposite poles i n a dichotomy introduced by Talcott Parsons (Parsons and S h i l s , 1967, 7 7 ) . In this case, Parsons' c u l t u r a l dichotomy i s used. Universalism refers to the tendency to view an object i n the l i g h t of general standards rather than i n the l i g h t of properties that r e l a t e to an actor's own status. Particularism refers to the tendency to view an object in the l i g h t of properties that r e l a t e to the actors own status rather than according to general standards (Parsons and S h i l s , 1967, 82). For example, a member of a c i t i z e n s ' planning committee i s p a r t i c u l a r i s t i c when he views a planning decision i n terms of how he feels about his own property investment, and he i s universal-i s t i c when he views a decision d i r e c t l y i n terms of exist i n g community values regarding such things as the needs of single parents, the problem of juvenile d e l -inquincy or urban design constraints. The neighbourhood plan i s viewed as the f i n a l product of t h i s planning e f f o r t ; a document which proposes a set of goals and a policy framework for development and land use i n the neighbourhood. In thi s case, a neighbourhood plan can be a part of an integrated plan for government expenditures for physical and s o c i a l improvements i n the neighbourhood such as i n the Neighbourhood Improvement 40 Plan. Although the neighbourhood plan i s not a legal document u n t i l r a t i f i e d by coun c i l , the draft plan submitted to council and the f i n a l plan adopted by council are viewed as d i f f e r e n t stages of the evolving neighbourhood plan. .The d e f i n i t i o n of planning that i s used i n t h i s research has been a r b i t r a r i l y narrowed to include only the development of the neighbourhood plan. Process i s defined as the e f f o r t undertaken by relevant actors (ie. planners, c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a n t s , government p a r t i c i -pants) to complete the plan. I t i s acknowledged that the s p l i t between planning and implementation i s an arb i t r a r y one since after policy decisions are made on the plan and the plan i s completed, many more decisions require "planning" or consideration i n terms of the facts both as they arise or are researched. However, the production of the neighbourhood plan and the consideration of neighbourhood interests i n policy development and the development of tentative recommendations i s an : important step i n f a c i l i t a t i n g the quick unimpeded implementation of the neighbourhood plan. 1 The process oriented methodology w i l l be exclusively concerned with t h i s important stage of the whole planning phenomenon. "'"This is both an expressed principle found in the N.I.P. guidelines (C.M.H.C., 1973b) and a conclusion reached in Kaplan et al (1973). 41 3 . 4 Process Oriented Methodology: A process oriented methodology i s founded on the dynamics of the events that take place during planning. In examining the subject of representation the following question i s asked: what measures are taken by which actors i n the process to ensure that representation i s extended to the maximum? This i s d i f f e r e n t than other methodologies that have been used to examine representation i n the l i t e r a t u r e . In some cases, researchers have focussed on the underlying c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of those actors i n the process to determine i f there i s any symmetry between participants and the community (geographical, socio-economic, ethnic). In other cases researchers sought to ascertain i f the plan made allo c a t i o n s to deserving s o c i a l groups. The former method ignores developments i n the planning process which might cause a heightened awareness on the part of the participants r e s u l t i n g i n a better product or plan for meeting the diverse needs of the community. The l a t t e r method i s too subjective and i s not sensitive to the constraints i n planning, i e . the l i m i t e d resources and the re s u l t i n g d i f f i c u l t y of meeting everybody's needs. 42 Employing insights from the l i t e r a t u r e , the following factors are seen as fundamental when examining process with a view to representation: 1. the evolution of a u n i v e r s a l i s t i c perspective i n a core group of part i c i p a n t s , • • 2. evidence that the active actors i n the process (e.g., the planners) analyzed of the community with a view to id e n t i f y i n g the s o c i a l segments that must be incorporated into process, 3. evidence of a mix of p a r t i c i p a t i o n techniques l i k e l y to appeal to the di f f e r e n t segments of the community. These elements of process are the basis with which representation can be evaluated i n any planning process, either by the active planner, program evaluator or academic. The f i r s t of these i s derived from Friedmann's concept of the learning process. Friedmann argued that parti c i p a t o r y planning can promote human understanding. The subject matter of Friedmann's learning process i s construed i n t h i s study to be universalism. Evidence of a mix of p a r t i c i p a t i o n techniques i s important because d i f f e r e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n techniques are l i k e l y to appeal to d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l and psychological segments of the community. This statement i s offered as a postulate concerning the structure of, public involvement which i s referred to as the " d i v e r s i t y of involvement" postulate. 43 The assumption could be tested as a hypothesis using empirical indicators of representation. However, representation i s a highly subjective phenomenon, and empirical indicators of representation would be very ar b i t r a r y . Instead of tes t i n g the assumption as a : hypothesis and giving i t a false degree of s c i e n t i f i c p recision, the assumption s h a l l be referred to as a postulate which must be supported by certain observations i n the case study. This research develops a process oriented methodology i n two phases. F i r s t , evidence i s sought to support the above mentioned " d i v e r s i t y of involvement" postulate through research findings. The postulate i s tested i n Chapter 5 by showing that d i f f e r e n t forms of c i t i z e n involvement generate unique and often contradictory.. conclusions. Second, a general framework for carrying out the methodolgy presented i n t h i s chapter i s applied in Chapter 5 using a case study approach. I f the postulate i s supported,the case study findings interpreted through the process methodology should indicate the degree of representation achieved in the process. Since the methodology i s not quantitative i n nature, a judgment must be made regarding the impact of each source of input on the f i n a l plan. 44 The following are therefore relevant i n the process oriented methodology: 1. community organization e f f o r t s by the s t a f f professions intended to influence representation., 2. other decisions made by the planner which influence process, 3. evidence of research used to formulate an understanding of the d i f f e r e n t segments of the community, 4. whether or not supplemental c i t i z e n involvement techniques were used and how these were co-ordinated with an understanding of the d i f f e r e n t segments of the community, 5. any evidence of the impact of d i f f e r e n t forms of c i t i z e n involvement in i t s d i f f e r e n t forms on the plan produced. 3.5 Case Study Approach: The case study approach was selected despite Cole's -45 c r i t i c i s m of that method. Cole charges that the findings from case studies have been too descriptive and that they r e s u l t i n studies that have a normative undercurrent. Nevertheless, Cole's research, which gathers data extensively from a large f i e l d rather than focussing i n -tensively on a l i m i t e d and easy to conceptualize case, tends to obscure analysis by overlooking the complex human motivations and a c t i v i t i e s that can often explain s o c i a l events. Moreover, the development of a process oriented methodology necessitates a careful consideration of the entire planning process rather than a l i m i t e d number of quantifiable variables. Hence the case study approach i s essential for t h i s research. Before the actual case study, i t s setting i s described i n chapter 4 which i s e n t i t l e d current i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements for l o c a l area planning. Chapter 4 describes the various other programs subsumed under the Local Area Planning Division i n addition to the Neighbourhood Improvement program. I t includes: A. On a municipal l e v e l : 1. the role of Local Area Planning i n Vancouver, 2. the history of Local Area Planning i n Vancouver, 3.6 Scope: and B. On a national l e v e l : 1. the role of NIP/the history of i t s inception, and 2. the models for community organization suggested i n NIP guidelines. 46 I t i s important that these descriptive matters be dealt with at the outset so that the reader w i l l develop his own understanding of the context for the case study s i t u a t i o n . The case study found i n chapter 5 i s used for three purposes: 1. to f i n d support for the postulate regarding the relationship between representation and d i v e r s i t y i n forms of c i t i z e n involvement, 2. to apply the process oriented methodology i n evaluating two l o c a l area planning projects, 3. to apply other methodologies (substantive and descriptive) for purposes of comparing t h e i r results with those of the process oriented methodology. The approach to be used i n analysing descriptive and substantive representation i s as follows: Descriptive representation focusses on a few indicators of the s o c i a l and economic ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the participants and the community to establish the l e v e l of symmetry between the two. The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s that were available i n Riley Park included e t h n i c i t y , labour force composition, educational attainment, age and geographical d i s t r i b u t i o n . The available c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n Grandview Woodlands were occupational c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , approximate age and geographical d i s t r i b u t i o n . Substantive representation was examined by: 1. comparing the expressed planning p r i o r i t i e s of the committee with those of the community, and 2. examining geographical biases which r e s u l t when 47 resource a l l o c a t i o n proposed i n the plan (government c a p i t a l expenditures) are geographically concentrated i n the very areas i n which the core group of participants reside. While the l a t t e r explores implied geographical biases, no sati s f a c t o r y method was introduced i n the l i t e r a t u r e for exploring implied socio-economic biases on the part of the committee. The a p p l i c a b i l i t y of the new methodology, i f applied successfully i n the case study, w i l l be lim i t e d to the type of project empirically examined. This case study involves Neighbourhood Improvement Projects or other projects that have c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s i m i l a r to N.I.P. projects. N.I.P. areas were selected only i f the physical state of the neighbourhood had not deteriorated to the point that improvements would be a waste of resources. This means that they must be stable neighbourhoods with l i m i t e d pressure for redevelopment, limited i n t e r n a l c o n f l i c t and, therefore, limited c o n f l i c t between the c i t i z e n s and c i t y administration. At the same time, N.I.P. neighbour-hoods must be lower income neighbourhoods. N.I.P. projects are also a form of decentralized planning because they d i r e c t l y concern a part of the whole c i t y . Also, the N.I.P. project i s affected by the presence of a f i n a n c i a l grant, the a l l o c a t i o n of which i s both one of the issues i n the preparation of the plan, and a kind of reward for successfully completing a plan acceptable to c i t y council. Therefore, once the methodology 48 has been successfully applied i t s h a l l be applicable to c i t i z e n involvement i n decentralized planning e f f o r t s i n lower income communities with l i m i t e d p o l i t i c a l c o n f l i c t . Moreover, a f i n a n c i a l grant for area improvements must be one of the planning subjects. Further study must be undertaken before applying the methodology i n d i f f e r e n t planning contexts. 3.7 Data Sources: The primary method for researching chapter 4 i s documentary analysis. Memoranda and publications of the Vancouver Planning Department and Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation* are used. Documentary evidence w i l l also serve i n the case study. The sequence of events i n the planning process w i l l be summarized from the minutes taken at planning committee meetings. Planning Department reports provide some of the data on the s o c i a l and economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the communities. Other data on the l o c a l areas and the planning committee's and neighbourhoods' s o c i a l and economic ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s are gathered from surveys commissioned or endorsed by the committees and carried out by the planning s t a f f or other organizations. One such i n i t i a t i v e was a Young Canada Works project survey of Riley Park i n 1977. In addition to the questionnaire results i t sought information *Today known as Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation 4.9 on the d i s t r i b u t i o n of households among d i f f e r e n t sub-areas. This background information i s used i n th i s study to compare the d i s t r i b u t i o n of households i n the community with the d i s t r i b u t i o n of households and businesses represented i n the N.I.P. committee. The geographical breakdown of households i n Grandview Woodlands was estimated from the enumeration area census information adjusted for overlapping areas by a "windshield survey". In Riley Park and Grandview Woodlands, information on the occupational composition, age d i s t r i b u t i o n , educational attainment and location of homes of committee members was derived through interviews with the planner and planning assistant. Information pertains to a l l people who were committee members at one time or other during the s i x month concept planning stage. Substantive representation, once again, i s explored d i r e c t l y , and through geographical biases r e f l e c t e d i n the plan. In Riley Park, committee members were asked to complete an opinionaire on community goals before a s i m i l a r questionnaire was completed i n the community. Hence, the committee was not influenced by the community questionnaire, and the results of both surveys can safely be compared. Information on substantive representation i n Grandview Woodlands was not available as the committee members there did not c o l l e c t information on t h e i r own preferences before receiving information on community preferences. Data for the process oriented methodology was derived 50 from the sequence of events that took place i n the planning process and follow up questionnaires. The sequence of events i n both projects were recorded i n the minutes of the planning committee meetings. Further information was derived from a survey especially administered for t h i s thesis i n both Riley Park and Grandview Woodlands. Interviews were held with the various actors involved i n the planning process i n the case studies. These include the two planners i n charge of planning, the two planning assistants and four c i t i z e n s from the two core groups of participants. The questionnaires were informal i n nature, meaning that much of the questioning was formulated i n a discursive context and many of the issues discussed arose as a r e s u l t of the respondents' li n e s of thinking. The various compulsory subjects i n the questionnaire are l i s t e d i n Appendix 1. 3.8 Choice of Study Areas: Two study areas were selected with core p a r t i c i p a n t groups c a l l e d planning committees. Both projects used other forms of c i t i z e n involvement as well as the committees. Riley Park completed i t s planning agenda within the time constraints imposed by c i t y council. Grandview Woodlands did not manage to do t h i s despite i t s smaller, more manageable committee. These two committees were established at the same time, 1975, and were selected i n l i g h t of t h e i r 51 s i m i l a r i t y , i n terms o f time p e r i o d and t h e i r d i s s i m i l a r i t y i n terms o f p r o c e s s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . 52 CONTEMPORARY INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR LOCAL AREA PLANNING The Evolution of Local Area Planning i n Vancouver Vancouver was f i r s t subdivided into a comprehensive set of neighbourhoods i n a 1967 report by the United Way (Vancouver, 1973). The 1973 Vancouver report on l o c a l area planning established the c i t y ' s p o l i c y during the period 1973 - 1978. That report supported r e h a b i l i t a t i o n through l o c a l oriented planning (Vancouver, 1973). I t stated the following objectives for l o c a l area planning: 1. to minimize c o n f l i c t between the c i t y and neighbourhood groups and eliminating the need for confrontation p o l i t i c s by providing opportunties for c i t i z e n involvement; 2. to maximize c i t i z e n involvement; and 3. to operate within the e x i s t i n g municipal framework, requiring that the bureaucracy become more sensitive to s o c i a l needs. During the time period of t h i s case study, the forms of l o c a l area planning i n Vancouver were l i s t e d i n a report (Vancouver, 1977a), and they included: 1. Council endorsed area programs: These are i n i t i a t e d by council upon recommendation by the Planning Department and/or a request by area c i t i z e n s . They are decentralized e f f o r t s because: 1. an area i s defined, 2. a planner and planning s t a f f are assigned, 3. a c i t i z e n ' s advisory committee i s i n i t i a t e d and endorsed, 4. an area plan i s prepared j o i n t l y by planners and c i t i z e n s (Vancouver 1977a). F i n a l decisions regarding the plan are l e f t to council. 2. Neighbourhood i n i t i a t i v e s : These are independent e f f o r t s by community groups which may not even be connected to the Planning Department. These are usually issue oriented 53 and the process i s often temporary i n nature. They are small scale groups that prepare advocacy proposals. An example of th i s type of group i s the Downtown Eastside Residents Association (Vancouver, 1977a). 3. Neighbourhood Improvement Program: In Vancouver, a planner and s t a f f i s assigned to each Neighbourhood Improvement Program project for most of i t s duration. A Citizen's Advisory Committee (Henceforth C.A.C.) i s established and a scheme i s developed j o i n t l y by ci t i z e n s and planners for submission to council. A sum of money i s allocated to the program to pay the planning s t a f f and various c a p i t a l projects for improvements i n the neighbourhood. Depending on the type of expenditure, 50 to 75% of the funds are derived from a National Housing Act fund administered by Central Mortgage and Housing, and from the p r o v i n c i a l government. The exact nature of the N.I.P. agreement i n Canadian c i t i e s determines the portion of the N.I.P. grant which i s carried by the p r o v i n c i a l and federal (N.H.A.) governments. Also, an N.H.A. loan i s available to finance the c i t y ' s portion (25 - 50%) of the N.I.P. project. In Vancouver, the N.I.P. plan i s viewed as a policy document rather than as a group of d i s j o i n t e d proposals for the a l l o c a t i o n of funds (Vancouver, 1977a). 4. Planning Department I n i t i a t i v e s Requested by Council: Frequently, the Planning Department undertakes, eit h e r through i t s own i n i t i a t i v e or under d i r e c t i o n from City Council, projects oriented to single issues or a group of related issues. The planner then finds solutions to problems i n consultation with c i t i z e n s through public meetings or by using previously established c i t i z e n groups. Examples of such projects include the Shaughnessy Hospital expansion study (Vancouver, 1977a, 5) . In Vancouver, Local Area Planning has been defined as, . . . an attempt to take a very close look at a community within the City i n view of i t s own p a r t i c u l a r needs and aspirations, and at the same time, to examine those l o c a l i z e d concerns within the context of the problems, issues and goals of the City as a whole (Vancouver, 1973, 1). Hence, the central purpose of Local Area Planning I n Vancouver, i s not so much as a forum for representation of l o c a l interests 5 4 to the Planning Department and City government, as the advocacy proponents would have i t (see Davidoff, sec. 2.1), but i t i s a forum for problem solving and c o n f l i c t resolution i n Local Areas using both l o c a l i z e d and ce n t r a l -ized inputs. This emphasis on coordination rather than confrontation i s underscored by certain p r i n c i p l e s such as the "team approach" concept, emphasizing a coordinated e f f o r t by the City bureaucracy, and the "working partner-ship" approach to c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n (Vancouver, 19 77a). The c i t i z e n ' s committee i s evident i n both N.I.P. and council endorsed l o c a l area planning projects. These constitute a core group of participants which require special attention i n any case study. The planning s t a f f i n the l o c a l area serves as a resource for information gathering and analysis for the advisory committees. The c i t i z e n s and planners act together i n preparing the neighbourhood plan which i s submitted to council for f i n a l approval. 4 . 2 Federal Involvement: While the basic features of the N.I.P. program are discussed i n section 4.1, several more points must be made. N.I.P. was introduced as a means of financing urban improvements i n r e s i d e n t i a l areas to prolong the l i f e of housing i n older, lower income areas (Central Mortgage and Housing, 1973b) . An early consultant report by Barnard and Associates presented i n 1973 l a i d the groundwork for t h i s program 55 (C.M.H.C 1973a). I t proposed a process e n t i t l e d II project management" which included: 1. planning and funding, 2: s t a r t i n g up, 3. construction (implementation), and 4. assessment. This report proposed that process consist of: 1. management and administration, 2. c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and 3. monitoring and cont r o l . While project management was not adequately defined, the concept appeared to be very s i m i l a r to the concept of community organization discussed i n chapter 2. The report argued that the c i t i z e n s must be placed i n a key role i n carrying out projects i n order to commit them to sustained improvements i n the future. The role of planning was de-emphasized and.the role of implementation was emphasized i n c i t i z e n involvement i n order to sustain public i n t e r e s t . Citizens were expected to take part i n technical tasks l i k e preparing cost estimates and conducting da i l y research as well as f i n a l i z i n g policy decisions. While the ultimate r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for technical matters remained i n the hands of the project manager, the importance of volunteers i n t h i s role appears to give him a larger role i n motivational and organizational matters. The importance of public involvement was underscored • when the following ideals were proposed: 1. Exi s t i n g community groups must be sought and 56 involved. 2. To an extent determined by the number of community groups, community organization work i s important. I f a number of community groups are present, and they appear to represent a broad cross section of the community, community organization i s unnecessary. I f few community groups are present, community organization techniques must be invoked to create one for the purpose of carrying out the project. 3. Early v i s i b l e evidence of the project must be presented to publicize the project. Examples would include a clean-up campaign or the early construction of a v i s i b l e public work, such as a community b u l l e t i n board. 4. A s i t e o f f i c e should be introduced so that the distance between the s t a f f and the residents can be reduced. 5. Delays should be avoided i n planning and i n implementing the project so that interest can be sustained. 6. The manager should d i r e c t the planning process to some extent to ensure that the process begins by formulating clear, measurable goals before tackling more problematic implementation strategies i n the construction stage (this i s i d e n t i c a l to the strategy employed i n the Seattle Model C i t i e s ' Project Oee section 2.53). While many of the suggestions made i n the Barnard report were incorporated i n the program, the rol e of c i t i z e n involvement was made less pervasive. A great deal of the cha r a c t e r i s t i c s of the c i t i z e n involvement e f f o r t were l e f t to community d i s c r e t i o n . In fa c t , no s p e c i f i c guide-l i n e s were included pertaining to c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the N.I.P. Operator's Handbook (C.M.H.C., 1975) "due to the wide variety i n regional, h i s t o r i c a l and c u l t u r a l factors" (C.M.H.C., 1975, 114). General p r i n c i p l e s , though, were offered i n an appendix, and these recommended: 1. that a high proportion of residents have an 57 opportunity to be informed of, and to comment on, the planning proposals, and 2. that residents have a s i g n i f i c a n t influence on the decision making process so that the concept plan combines the desires of area residents and the p r i o r i t i e s of the c i t y at large (C.M.H.C., 1975, 114). Generally, N.I.P. projects are f i v e years i n duration. This includes a six-month s i t e selection stage, a six-month policy planning stage, followed by a four-year implementa-tion stage (C.M.H.C., 1973). Therefore, while the N.I.P. program was terminated i n 197 8, some projects are s t i l l underway since they have a maximum of four years to implement t h e i r proposals. Riley Park and Grandview Woodlands are currently i n th e i r implementation stages. 58 5. CASE STUDY 5.1 Setting: 5.1.1 Riley Park: Riley Park was designated as a p r i o r i t y l o c a l area for NIP funding i n 1974. The planning process for a 1.9 m i l l i o n d o l l a r project began i n 1975 (Riley Park, 1977, 1) . 5.1.1.1- Neighbourhood Characteristics Figure 5.1 i l l u s t r a t e s the boundaries of the Riley Park NIP area. Much of the information used i n planning t h i s project, and i n th i s description, pertains to the entire Riley Park Local Area, and only constitutes a general p r o f i l e of the NIP area. For purposes of exposition, the larger Local Area s h a l l be referred to as the "Local Area", and the smaller NIP area s h a l l be referred to as the "NIP area". The land use of the NIP area i s predominantly residen-t i a l although i t also has a large proportion of commercial and open space land use. There are 3,800 dwelling units i n the NIP area, most of which are single family structures (Riley Park 1977, 3). According to the 1971 census 69% of the households i n the l o c a l area constitute single family detached un i t s , while the c i t y figure i s 49% (Vancouver, 1976). However, recent surveys show that 25% of the single family units also have secondary suites (Riley Park, 1977, 3) . The majority of the N.I.P. area i s zoned RS-1 (one family) and RS-2 (which allows conversions to suites and 1971 ar.c ">375 New a ?p i i « t - ' - . " S subject to 1977 CIVrtC f'jnd al locations . 1976 - tew applications to be considered after A p r i l , 1977 in Grandview and after Auaust, 1977, in Riley Park Grandview VAFJGCQIUVIE.IFS. •„,iy -jl Vam-ouvar Hlannn-.g w«p*rtme"» L i a n A R v MAY 161977 w e a r , R04HT torxim Figure 5.1 N1P/RRAP AREAS t -4 1974 - K its i lano 4 Cedar Cottage 1975 - Downtown Eastside 4 Mt. Pleasant 1976 - Grandview-Woodland & Riley Park 1977 i- Proposed Areas -Hastings-Sunrise 4 Kensington Boundaries not yet established by City Council) Ol OUNBJXFt -SOUTHLANDS 60 townhouses on a conditional approval basis). . The only multiple family housing i s the 254 unit L i t t l e Mountain Assisted Housing project dating from 1954 (Riley Park, 1977, 3) . The commercial f a c i l i t i e s are arranged l i n e a r l y along Main Street and Fraser Street. A recent Planning Department analysis found that the core of l o c a l shopping a c t i v i t y serving day to day needs i s on Main Street between 24th and 29th Avenue (Riley Park, 1977, 3). The area i s served by three elementary and one secondary school (Riley Park, 1977, 3). Local Parks include Riley Park, H i l l c r e s t Park, Cartier Park and Prince Edward Park. Mountainview Cemetery serves as an important open space (Riley Park, 19 77, 3). The population i n the l o c a l area i s 12,500. The age d i s t r i b u t i o n (see chart 5.1) shows a marginally younger population than the Vancouver norm since i t does not have apartment areas. This factor along with the larger households i n the area indicates a disproportionate number of households with children (Riley Park, 1977, 2). Unlike some East End Vancouver neighbourhoods, there are no large agglomerations of p a r t i c u l a r ethnic minorities (see chart 5.2) and the area i s marked by i t s ethnic d i v e r s i t y . 5.1.1.2 P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the Local Area: In the recent past, the School Consultative Committee, the L i t t l e Mountain Tenants Association, the Community 61 AGE COMPOSITION OF POPULATION: RILEY PARK ' AND VANCOUVER CHART 5 . 1 Riley Park Vancouver Age Q - 14 15 - 19 9.1% 20 - 34 3 5 - 54 55 - 64 25.7% 19.6% 21.9% 24 .3% 23.1% 23. 5% 65+ 9.8% 11.3% 10.2% 13. 5% SOURCE: Vancouver Planning Department: Riley Park N.I.P. Basic Information, 1976. 1971 Census. 62 ETHNICITY: RILEY PARK AND VANCOUVER CHART 5 . 2 B r i t i s h I s l e s French German I t a l i a n Chinese Indo-Pakistani ! Japanese Greek Dutch Scandinavian Portuguese/ Spanish East European Other/ Not Stated Vancouver Riley Park J 52.9% 46.7% SOURCE: Vancouver Planning Department: Riley Park N.I.P. Basic Information, 1976. 1971 Census. 63 Association, and u n t i l recently, the Community Resources Advisory Board, provided forums for c i t i z e n involvement i n education, s o c i a l services, housing, and recreation (Riley Park, 1977, 2) . Local and c i t y wide ethnic societies based i n th i s community include the Polish Community Centre and the Welsh H a l l . 5.1.2 Grandview Woodlands: Grandview Woodlands and Riley Park are s i s t e r projects i n the sense that they took place at the same time and with s i m i l a r schedules. Planning began i n Grandview Woodlands i n 19 76 and a committee was formed there i n November of that year. The project i s s l i g h t l y larger and has a $2.5 m i l l i o n budget. 5.1.2.1 Neighbourhood Characteristics : Figure 5.1 i l l u s t r a t e s the boundaries of the Grandview Woodlands's N.I.P. area and the Grandview Woodland's l o c a l area. The N.I.P. area i s much smaller than the Grandview Woodland's l o c a l area, which includes a large amount of t r a n s i t i o n a l multiple family r e s i d e n t i a l and i n d u s t r i a l land use, not permissible within a designated N.I.P. area. Unlike the Riley Park N.I.P. area, the Grandview Woodland's N.I.P. area overlaps another c i t y l o c a l area, namely, the portion of Cedar Cottage located south of East Broadway and north of Grandview Highway. According to the 19 76 Census, there are over 13,000 people i n the Grandview Woodland's N.I.P. area. There 64 are over 4,385 dwellings, 56% single family, 18% duplexes and 26% apartments. 56% of the houses are owner occupied. By comparison, 49% of the dwellings i n Vancouver as a whole are single family dwellings. Commercial f a c i l i t i e s are concentrated mostly along Commercial Drive, although a smaller number of stores on V i c t o r i a Drive and corner groceries throughout the area also must be mentioned. The N.I.P. area i s served by at least eight schools, both public and parochial, including Britannia High School, Britannia Elementary, MacDonald School, Templeton Junior High School, Lord Nelson School, Laura Secord School, Grandview Annex, and St. Francis Parish School. The area i s served by f i v e major parks including Garden Park, McSpadden Park, V i c t o r i a Park, Grandview Park and Templeton Park. The age d i s t r i b u t i o n showed a marginally younger population than the Vancouver norm i n 19 71 i n the Grandview Woodland's l o c a l area. The age composition pyramid shown i n chart 5.3 i s more comparable to Riley Park's than to Vancouver's. Chart 5.4 i l l u s t r a t e s the area's ethnic d i s t r i b u t i o n . Unlike Riley Park, t h i s l o c a l area's ethnic composition shows two strong non B r i t i s h ethnic concentrations, the Chinese and I t a l i a n . Of a l l Vancouver communities, i t has-the second smallest proportion of residents with B r i t i s h o rigins (City Planning Department, 1975, 10). Zoning i n Grandview Woodlands i s primarily r e s i d e n t i a l . GRANDVIEW WOODLANDS:  AGE COMPOSITION COMPARED WITH VANCOUVER SOURCE: Census Canada, 19.71. 66 ETHNICITY: GRANDVIEW WOODLANDS AND VANCOUVER CHART 5,4 SOURCE: City of Vancouver. (1975) Planning Department, Grandview Woodlands: An information handbook, 11. 67 Like Riley Park, most of the area i s zoned RSI and RS2. Unlike Riley Park, a large part of the N.I.P. area i s zoned RT2, which permits duplexes and two family housing. Shopping i s located along both sides of Commercial Drive and zoned C2 (City Planning Department, 1975, 21). 5.1.2.2 P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the Local Area: This community i s extremely well organized with strong media, strong community council and several c u l t u r a l societies representing ethnic communities. Unlike Riley Park, t h i s community has a weekly news-paper which makes i t easier for the Grandview Woodlands resident to become aware of l o c a l events. However, the community has several non English speaking ethnic enclaves. Hence, l o c a l planning events are not known nor understood by everyone i n the community because of language b a r r i e r s . Nevertheless, the l o c a l English newspaper s t i l l plays an important role i n disseminating information, and i n establishing a community i d e n t i t y , a very basic function which was not performed to the same extent by any agency i n the Riley Park area before N.I.P. Exist i n g formal groupings include the Grandview Woodlands Area Council (which i s an association of area residents), the B r i t t a n i a Board of Management and the various school committees. The area has a firm t r a d i t i o n of involvement by area residents which was no doubt reinforced i n recent years by the Britannia Centre planning experience. The Centre i s a large multi-service f a c i l i t y combining 68 1) schools, 2) l i b r a r y , 3) a t h l e t i c f a c i l i t i e s 4) public information and 5) s o c i a l services. After years of lobbying by groups i n the community, funds were a l i o - . .: cated, and a planning process was established for t h i s new f a c i l i t y i n 19 74. Planning was centred on a com-mittee c a l l e d the Britannia Planning Advisory Committee (B.P.A.C.), which was comprised of four representatives from the School Board, Parks Boards, and the c i t y , as well as s i x c i t i z e n representatives from Grandview Woodlands and Strathcona (selected by the Grandview Woodlands Area Council). While the centre of a c t i v i t y for Chinese groups i s i n neighbouring Strathcona, I t a l i a n s are well organized by the I t a l i a n Folk Society and Circolo Arbuzzese, an I t a l i a n Mens1 Club. The I t a l i a n Community Centre i s an impressive new structure located just outside the N.I.P. area boundary on Grandview Avenue. 5.2 Planning Products: 5.2.1 Riley Park Neighbourhood Plan: The concept plan, contained i n Appendix 2, includes both recommendations for c a p i t a l expenditures (see table 5.1) and non c a p i t a l measures. Of the t h i r t y - n i n e items i n the plan, nineteen were non c a p i t a l proposals. Proposed non c a p i t a l measures included: 1. further negotiation with e x i s t i n g agencies (out-side c i t y government) toward s p e c i f i c goals, 2. further research and study, 3. policy goals for physical changes (eg., land use, and, 4. community organization for implementing the plan. 69 -Since the primary costs of s o c i a l programs are operating expenses (mostly for labour costs), c a p i t a l allocations only provide for a small portion of the needs of s o c i a l programs. Nevertheless, the committee hoped to provide for a portion of the community's s o c i a l needs by meeting the c a p i t a l costs of desirable s o c i a l programs. They hoped that t h i s would serve as an incentive for c i t y wide s o c i a l agencies, eg., the Neighbourhood Houses Association, to meet operating expenses. The draft plan contained an organizing strategy referred to, here, as the binodal improvement strategy. Accordingly, the N.I.P. plan was oriented toward focussing the community around certain key recreational areas, i . e . , Riley Park, St. George Park and the linkages i n between (see figure 5.2). However, neither the binodal strategy, nor the l i n e a r walkway were retained for the f i n a l concept plan, and there i s no evidence i n the committee meeting minutes to suggest that anybody but Larry Beasley, the project planner, f e l t that strategy was necessary. The events which led to the deletion of the binodal improvement strategy are explored i n a subsequent section dealing with planning process. The binodal Improvement strategy i s mentioned because i t led to a strong emphasis on f i n a n c i a l provisions for Riley Park, St. George Park and Main Street which i s a natural connector between the two parks. 70 l a g F IGURE 5.2 R L E Y P A R K PATTERNS FOR STRATEGIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE COMMUNITY mm V ^ r S major7 Significant l i n o I . C Pedestrian -* connect ions existi n g parks.schools &' public open space focus of l o c a l park recreation a c t i v i t y Convenience Conmercial [ Specialized Rec./; Leisure Centres [ 7\ Local Commercial Centre General Suburban Commercial B1EHZ3II7 Streets as pedestrian yjj^ Tot Play Areas rn P Focus for i n f i l l multiple hous ing focus for group commercial parking 71 TABLE 5.1 CAPITAL ALLOCATIONS IN TWO N.I.P. PROJECTS Riley Park Grandview Woodlands Social Programs $710,000* $ 90,500 Parks Improvements 267,200 460,000 Street Improvements 190,000 382,000 School Improvements 75,750 1,035,000 Contingency Fund 198,010 120,922 Commercial Area B e a u t i f i c a t i o n 170,000 Administration and Planning 374,0 40 252,078 Housing Projects — 250,000 TOTAL 1,985,000 2,590,500 *Includes c a p i t a l funds for a l i b r a r y , neighbourhood youth centre, community van, r o l l e r skates for a proposed rink. 72 TABLE 5.2 RILEY PARK: CAPITAL EXPENDITURES Allocations for Geographically Unspecified Projects 1. Neighbourhood House $200,000 2. Youth Centre 150.000 3. Community Van 20,000 4. Street Improvements 190,0_00 5. Storefront Library . ioO-,000-$660,000.. Allocations for Projects Located Outside the A c t i v i t y Nodes 1. Pedetrian Light Crossing at 33rd and Ontario $ 20,000 2. Cartier Park Improvements 45,200 3. Brock School Improvements 21,000 4. Brock Annex 17,250 5. Wolfe School Improvements 29,0 00 6. Riley Alternate School Improvements 5,000 $137,450 Allocations for Projects Located Within A c t i v i t y Nodes: 1. Riley Recreation Complex $225,000 2. Roller Rink i n Recreation Complex 15,000 3. H i l l c r e s t Park/Melrose Improvements 75.800 4. Riley Park Exterior Improvements 6 8,200 5. Prince Edward Park Improvements 78,000 6. Main Street B e a u t i f i c a t i o n 170,000 7. Livingstone School Improvements 3,500 $535,500. Administrative All o c a t i o n s : 1. N.I.P. Staff and Office $374,040 2. Contingency Fund 19 8,010 $572,050 73 5.2.2 Product: Grandview Woodlands The concept plan produced by the Grandview Woodlands N.I.P. Committee forms Appendix 3. I t was presented to council shortly after the submission of the Riley Park plan i n June, 1977. Non c a p i t a l recommendations are contained i n a section e n t i t l e d "Land Use and Development". Policy recommendations were made by committee members on the assumption that the committee could influence c i t y policy for the future. Thirteen non c a p i t a l p o l i c y recommendations were presented i n the "Land Use and Development" section under the subjects of: 1. housing, 2. commercial areas, 3. t r a f f i c and parking, and 4. recreation. Like the Riley Park p o l i c i e s , these can be divided into categories including: 1. policy d i r e c t i v e s , 2. needed policy research, and 3. l i a i s o n needed with other agencies and departments. The plan broke c a p i t a l expenditures into seven substantive areas, (see figure 5.1), eg., schools, housing, streets improvements. Site s p e c i f i c or project s p e c i f i c breakdowns were made for street improvements and school improvements although not for parks improvements and community s o c i a l service expenditures. Schools improvements 74 constituted the largest single category of expenditure of the t o t a l (see Appendix 3). 5.3 Process E v e n t s - The Development of the Committees: 5.3.1 Riley Park Planning Process: Theoretically, the committee was to become the focus of the planning process. While council has the f i n a l decision making power, i t i s not l i k e l y to challenge decisions which are based on l o c a l concerns and values, nor i s council on record as having ever challenged recommendations i n the concept plan of a N.I.P. committee. At the other end of the decision making process, other organs for public input do not have as c r u c i a l a role as the committee's. They provide passive forms of issue development and feedback to be used by the committee i n reaching i t s decision. Meanwhile, the committee i s expected to take an active role by grappling with issues, viewing a l l sides of every matter, making trade offs and reaching policy conclusions. There was an evolving plan of action by the s t a f f to engage the c i t i z e n r y . At f i r s t the s t a f f worked mostly through e x i s t i n g neighbourhood groups i n an e f f o r t to make i t s way into the community. Exist i n g organizations were used to provide legitimacy to the s t a f f . According to Larry Beasley, the l o c a l area planner i n Riley Park, the s t a f f spent a month and a half engaged i n a "carefully orchestrated process" of entering the area. I t spent twenty evenings, during that 75 period, attending the meetings of organizations l i k e the School Consultative Committees (parent groups), the Community Resources Board and the Tenants' Association. When the s t a f f was f i n a l l y presented to the public at a public meeting i n lat e November, 1976, two established organizations sponsored i t s entry to the neighbourhood. They were the L i t t l e Mountain Human Resources Advisory Board, which represented the working class, and the Riley Park Community Association, which represented the middle to upper-middle class. Organizational contacts, i n addition to rendering legitimacy to the s t a f f , played a role by giving community organization advice. For example, one organization, the L i t t l e Mountain Community Resources Board, was c r u c i a l i n advising the s t a f f on the location for the s i t e o f f i c e . This i s an important community organization variable since i t i s a source of informal and formal contacts with i n d i v -iduals i n the community. I t effects the project's v i s i b i l i t y , appeal, and legitimacy. The Resources Board advised the s t a f f to locate the s i t e o f f i c e between 21st and 25th Avenue, on the west side of Main Street, because i t was cen t r a l , on the route to the community centres and parks, within the shopping d i s t r i c t , near bus stops, and on the same side of Main Street as the L i t t l e Mountain Housing Project. The "project" i s the area's only high density as well as low-income housing project. The s i t e selected f i t t e d 76 these c r i t e r i a , except the only available store front was about four blocks south of 25th Avenue. The s i t e o f f i c e was established i n the f a l l of 1976 before the s t a f f was formally introduced to the area at a public meeting, but individuals began meeting there with the s t a f f . Both the s i t e o f f i c e and the public meetings required p u b l i c i t y which was d i f f i c u l t since Riley Park does not have a community newspaper. The s t a f f generated p u b l i c i t y the hard way, using pamphlets d i s t r i b u t e d extensively throughout the neighbourhood. E x i s t i n g community organizations also generated "word-of-mouth." p u b l i c i t y . At the next stage, the s t a f f organized a committee which was to become the organizational centre of the decision making process. The purpose of the public meeting held i n late November was to lay the groundwork for i t . About 150 people appeared, which was more than anticipated. Advice from public groups that autumn had led the s t a f f to expect only 30 people. Approximately 17 - 20 people signed to j o i n the N.I.P. Committee of which 15 appeared at the Committee's f i r s t meeting. The f i r s t two meetings of the committee were devoted, among other things, to the development of terms of reference to define the committee's r o l e , membership, and operating procedure. Such terms,. drafted by Mayor Vol r i c h while he was an alderman, were offered as a model with s t a f f a l t e r a t i o n to incorporate changes pro-77 posed by other N.I.P. committees i n the past. The committee made several changes to t h i s d r a f t , a f t e r dealing with several contentious issues. I n i t i a l information from the committee showed that they l i v e d i n a c l u s t e r that excluded over half of the N.I.P. area, comprising the northern and the eastern parts. Seeking a much broader representation became a goal of the s t a f f and the committee. While i n the previous stage, neighbourhood organizations appeared important i n giving advice to the s t a f f on matters of organization, at this stage the committee assumed that r o l e . At the f i r s t meeting on December 14, a committee member suggested that additional people i n the community could be reached i f a newsletter was prepared i n various languages. Members also showed concern for involving youg people i n N.I.P. planning. While these matters were dealt with i n one manner or other, the geographical representation was dealt with by the s t a f f planner, proposing another public meeting at s i r Charles Tupper School to inform residents north of King Edward Avenue about the program. This was announced to the committee at the January 18 meeting held on January 26, 1977. A committee member gave a b r i e f presentation to approximately t h i r t y people at the meeting, and about ten of them attended the next committee meeting on February 1 as guests. Under the terms of reference, the guests could become members by attending three consecutive meetings and f i v e became members on the 78 February 15 meeting. This strategy was so successful that another public meeting was held on February 9 at General Brock School which resulted i n sixteen guests at the February 15 meeting of which f i v e became committee members. Beasley claims that he was s a t i s f i e d that these e f f o r t s gave representation to portions of the neighbourhood which otherwise would have been l e f t out. After motivating d i f f e r e n t c i t i z e n s to j o i n the committee, the planner assisted the committee i n the day to day organization of t h e i r task. At f i r s t , Beasley recommended a work schedule which outlined the things that had to be done during the s i x month concept planning stage. Each weekly meeting had an agenda prepared by Beasley i n conjunction with the committee chairman. Members claim that they had to inform him one week i n advance i f they wanted an item placed on the agenda, although most of the agenda was usually l e f t to Beasley and his s t a f f . In an interview, Beasley indicated that these tasks would have been too time consuming and routine for the committee given t h e i r voluntary nature. Furthermore, his goal was to make the committee's task an i n t e r e s t i n g one so as to develop enthusiasm. Beasley claims, however, that the agendas he prepared were primarily a function of the substantive concerns of committee members. Beasley was, however, a popular planner and committee showed a great deal of tr u s t i n his leadership. In f a c t , the minutes of one committee meeting indicated that some 79 members would have preferred seeing him continue as chairman rather than face the d i f f i c u l t task of selecting someone else. Even after another chairman had been appointed, committee meetings I attended revealed the planner was s t i l l not too far removed from the chairmanship r o l e . Soon before the planning deadline, Beasley assumed a role of enforcing the meeting agenda by hastening the members into resolving issues, asking members to terminate discussion and vote on options put forward so that the order of business could be completed. Beasley also influenced the committee by occasionally helping them to adjust t h e i r planning framework. Toward the beginning of the planning process, members decided to form into subcommittees covering substantive areas l i k e schools, commercial and street projects and parks, and a strategy oriented group to integrate the d i f f e r e n t substantive groups. When Beasley perceived that t h i s approach was slow and that members were d i s s a t i s f i e d , he influenced members into changing t h e i r approach. Beasley opened the A p r i l 29, 1976 meeting by stating that i t was now time "to begin p u l l i n g together a l l of . . .(the committee's) thinking to date into a cohesive plan for the improvement of the neighbourhood". The s t a f f presented a report on committee accomplishments to date along with a set of options for improvements comprised of committee and s t a f f thinking. The committee was tol d that 80 i t was now time to i n d i v i d u a l l y review the options and to select p r i o r i t i e s . The committee readily accepted t h i s structuring of the -planning process and thus' the subcommittee method was dropped. When asked how the c i t i z e n s f e l t towards the planner's dominant role i n e f f e c t i n g changes i n d i r e c t i o n , Beasley indicated that although he directed the .process changes, most were usually preceded by a process of "informal communication". Following meetings participants would t e l l him i f i t had been unsuccessful because of the way i t was organized. Over a three day period, "10 phone c a l l s " would be received from people d i s s a t i s f i e d with what had gone % on, often suggesting alternatives. Frequently however, the s t a f f appreciated problems i n the decision process which the committee may not have re a l i z e d , and, i n these cases they would i n i t i a t e action on t h e i r own. According to Beasley, "that's r e a l l y part of our r o l e . We are ' f a c i l i t a t o r s ' . The important part i s that we do not co-opt (the members of the committee)..." In t h i s case, people complained about the approach because most sub-committees found t h e i r work d u l l . Members had developed many planning interests after four months of involvement, and working on a r e s t r i c t e d subject area l i k e streets and sidewalks seemed boring. The strategies subcommittee was the most motivated, and seemed to be the one which attracted the most i n t e r e s t . Beasley adds that he could deal with more issues when the group worked as 81 a whole because he could benefit more from the c o l l e c t i v e "brainpower" of the entire gorup. When asked i n an interview where he drew the l i n e at structuring the planning process, Beasley indicated that he was greatly influenced by what people were prepared to do. Their t r u s t i n him depended on his faithfulness to the substantive concerns of the committee. Trust i n the s t a f f was c r u c i a l to getting co-operation from such a structured approach to c i t i z e n involvement. In addition, both the s t a f f and the committee shared a sense of urgency i n the task at hand. Fear of loosing the NIP grant added to the need for a l l to co-operate. According to Beasley, What we t r y to do i s to have the c i t i z e n s f e e l the same pressure on deadlines that we f e e l , and then they make the decisions on what they want dealt with... F i r s t we got t h e i r p r i o r i t i e s and, that sort of thing so that we weren't just putting something inside our heads... We just put forward t h i s work program. They disagreed with some things. They moved things up, they moved things back, they added things, and a l l that sort of thing. They changed i t but they did i t with an understanding of the sort of pressures that motivate us to do i t i n the f i r s t place. 5.3.2 Grandview Woodlands Planning Process: Much of the impetus for bringing N.I.P. to Grandview Woodlands came from the Local Area Planning Committee which saw i t as a means of protecting the area's single family character i n the face of encroaching apartment development. The N.I.P. area (see figure 5.1) only i n -cluded the single family d i s t r i c t located east of Commercial Drive and for the most part, south of Hastings Street, but 82 this did not prevent three Local Area Planning Committee members from taking part i n the N.I.P. committee, despite the fact that two of them resided outside the N.I.P. area. The N.I.P. committee may have been redundant since the Local Area Planning Committee could conceivably have served both functions. When asked why the N.I.P. committee was started, Buholzer claimed that the Local Area Planning Committee made the decision, that committee f e l t that the d i f f e r e n t boundaries required i t , not only because the N.I.P. area covered a smaller area, but also because the N.I.P. area crosses into another l o c a l area, i e . , the portion of Cedar Cottage north of the railway gorge. According to Buholzer, i t was not necessary.to undergo a c a r e f u l process of entering the community before forming a committee since the Planning Department had already established a l o c a l presence through the Local Area Planning Committee. This precluded the need for a c a r e f u l l y thought out process of contacting the community. A public meeting was held following a great deal of p u b l i c i t y i n the l o c a l media. The i n i t i a l organizational meeting for the committee produced twelve people ready to act as a planning committee. This turnout seemed small to both the new committee and the s t a f f and both expressed concern over t h i s . One new member suggested that p u b l i c i t y could be sought i n the Highland Echo to encourage others to j o i n the committee. Buholzer f e l t that a few N.I.P. improvements • 83 of a highly v i s i b l e nature could be approved and implemented quickly to pu b l i c i z e the N.I.P. program i n the area. The committee decided at the December 2 meeting to employ part of the N.I.P. fund to immediately develop garbage containers, trees for the Laura Secord School and an information kiosk. As i t happened, the proposals were not adopted by council u n t i l a f t e r the completion of the concept planning stage because of t h e i r low p r i o r i t y on the council agenda. Also, no new members were introduced to t h i s committee throughout the concept planning stage and membership remained stable at between ten and twelve people. The meetings i n Grandview Woodlands were quite informal i n the sense that there were hardly structured by the planner. For personal reasons, one member of the Grandview Woodlands Committee also attended a few Riley Park N.I.P. meetings. This placed him i n an excellent position to compare the two planner's approaches. Jaschke f e l t that Beasley played a very dominant role i n the Riley Park Committee compared with B i l l Buholzer, the area planner i n Grandview Woodlands. During the conceptual planning stage, Buholzer would usually spend long periods at committee meetings not speaking, but l e t t i n g the committee discuss issues as i t wanted. Jaschke was surprised to f i n d Beasley single-handedly defining the committee's options, presenting them on a blackboard, and asking the group to decide. 84 When asked about the role of the planner i n the conceptual planning stage, Mary Bosze, a l o c a l resident and committee member indicated that he "listened and made notes", he put i t a l l together and prepared reports, he collected information and compiled s t a t i s t i c s , he informed the committee about the f e a s i b i l i t y and implications of t h e i r propositions using both his experience and his knowledge of what had been attempted by other committees elsewhere, and he represented the committee at c i t y h a l l . While Beasley was the director i n Riley Park, Buholzer was a " l i s t e n e r and a note taker". However, Buholzer himself feels that t h i s role evolved over a period of two months and that, at f i r s t , he took a more dominant role i n d i r e c t i n g the committee u n t i l i t learned and grew s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t . 5.4 Different Forms of Public Involvement 5.4.1 Riley Park: Among the alternate opportunities for getting c i t i z e n s involved i n Riley Park was a questionnaire, and the low return on the f i r s t one necessitated a second one. In March 197 7, a tab l o i d s t y l e newsletter was issued to every household i n the N.I.P. area. I t contained information on the nature of the N.I.P. program, the N.I.P. planning committee i n Riley Park, the s i t e o f f i c e , 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 program, an upcoming "community discovery walk" and a two page community goals questionnaire. Community goal options defined by the 85 N.I.P. committee were presented for consideration i n the questionnaire. Because the f i r s t questionnaire was rejected late i n the planning process, and the second questionnaire was completed l a t e , the committee undertook a draft plan be-fore the res u l t s of the second questionnaire were a v a i l -able . For the second questionnaire, a 5% random sample was developed, and a high return rate was ensured through follow up by committee members who telephoned sample households near, t h e i r home to personally request that the questionnaire be answered. The second questionnaire (table 5.3; also discussed i n section 5.5.1) sought community p r i o r i t i e s by asking respondents to select s i x low p r i o r i t y items from a given l i s t . While the results showed a high l e v e l of agreement on the importance of youth and crime problems i n the area, the second sample rated s o c i a l problems highly as opposed to physical problems. Three of the f i v e preferred options were s o c i a l programs and one of the remaining two was a non-physical improvement to ret a i n the N.I.P. committee for dealing with problems (see table 5.3). Curb and side-walk improvements were rated second and t h i r d from the bottom. Because of the influence of the questionnaire, the f i n a l concept plan increased the t o t a l a l l o c a t i o n for s o c i a l programs from $595,000 i n the draft plan to 86 TABLE 5.3 RILEY PARK: RESULTS OF THE SECOND COMMUNITY QUESTIONNAIRE Col l e c t i v e P r i o r i t y Rating of Suggested Planning Measures 1 Least Unpopular Items 1. solutions to vandalism. 2. a committee to keep i n touch with problems i n l o c a l area. 3. youth program improvements. 4. more s o c i a l problem programs. 5. improvements to exi s t i n g parks. 14. a l i b r a r y . 15. shopping area improvements. 16. more parking. 17. additional curbs, sidewalks, l i g h t i n g . Most Unpopular Items 18. more parks. 1 Respondents were asked to select six least important measures. 87 $710,000 while parks, schools, streets and b e a u t i f i c a t i o n programs were a l l reduced. The s o c i a l needs' a l l o c a t i o n swelled with an a l l o c a t i o n for l i b r a r y books and for r o l l e r skating equipment for Riley Park Arena. Both these allocations re f l e c t e d the high p r i o r i t y which the second questionnaire had given to youth needs as w e l l . In addition to public involvement, the planner also affected the substance of the plan. Most notably, the binodal strategy (see section 5.2.1.), according to committee members, was an idea put forth by Larry Beasley to organize spending on physical programs. Several public meetings were held throughout the planning process. These were the highly publicized meetings held i n public schools. In addition, i t must be emphasized that the committee meetings were also open to the general public. Non members often influenced decisions made at committee meetings. Two school p r i n c i p a l s joined the committee's May 31 meeting to help i t refine i t s proposals for school improvements, suggesting ways of implementing proposals and convincing the committee to cancel some of the proposals which they viewed as im-p r a c t i c a l . Even private c i t i z e n s were sometimes e f f e c t i v e at a l t e r i n g the plan. Residents l i v i n g along the r i g h t of way of the proposed l i n e a r walkway attended the June 7 meeting and spoke against the .proposal. The l i n e a r walkway was a proposed scheme for beautifying the streetscape and 88 constructing pedestrian shelters along r e s i d e n t i a l streets between the two recreational nodes outlined i n the draft plan. Larry Beasley defended the scheme arguing that the walkway was needed "to connect major community spaces and to provide a clear rationale for selected improvements to some streets". The walkway was a central part of the binodal improvement strategy which Beasley advocated, the major piece of strategy developed i n t h i s plan. Committee members, when forced to choose between s a t i s f y i n g these c i t i z e n s and s a t i s f y i n g t h e i r planner, bowed to c i t i z e n pressure, and decided that the money could be better used for general street improvements. The formal public meetings occured both at the beginning and at the end of the planning process. Early meetings were held to p u b l i c i z e the presence of the committee and to encourage a better geographic balance of representation i n the committee (see section 5.3.1.), and not to a l t e r the plan substantively. Policy was discussed at the May 4 and 5 public meetings when the public was introduced to the d r a f t plan. The general public was allowed another chance to object to the plan at the June 8 and 9 public meetings. The May 4 and 5 public meetings influenced the committee to eliminate proposals i n the d r a f t plan for two miniparks and street closures between 18th and 19th Avenues on Quebec Street. These proposals were l a t e r discussed at the June 7 committee meeting where members reca l l e d how unpopular they had been at public meetings. I t was also noted that the neighbour-8y hood needs' survey rated new park space the lowest, and Beasley added that the City Engineering Department was opposed to street closures for park purposes. As a r e s u l t , the $130,000 minipark proposal was deleted from the concept plan. Other forms of public involvement included a neigh-bourhood walk. The neighbourhood walk was held on Saturday, March 19, and attracted over seventy people, including three aldermen, the Director of Planning, an architect and sixteen committee members. Beasley, d i r -ected the walk through the N.I.P. area i n which participants could see the area problems for themselves. At best, t h i s process had only an i n d i r e c t impact on policy development as a learning process i n which c i v i c o f f i c i a l s and l o c a l residents could begin to understand l o c a l problems and i n which l o c a l residents could be encouraged to view t h e i r neighbourhood as a whole. 5.4.2 Different Forms of C i t i z e n Involvement Used i n Grandview  Woodlands The f i r s t major source of outside input for the committee was the Local Area Planning Committee. This i s discussed i n section 5.3.2. When asked how the Local Area Planning Committee members on the N.I.P. committee influenced the N.I.P. committee, B i l l Buholzer f e l t that they introduced an orientation to family needs and the goal to support the family character i n the area. This was a goal which was 90 i n i t i a t e d and developed within the Local Area Planning Committee, and which i s related to preventing apartment construction i n the area and i t s t r a n s i t i o n from a family to a single person orientation. While Buholzer f e l t that the complete ramifications of t h i s goal were not f e l t u n t i l the implementation stage, i t may have been ref l e c t e d i n the importance given to school improvements i n the allocations made within the plan. 46% of the t o t a l a l l o c a t i o n after administrative costs are removed went to school improve-ments whereas the figure for Riley Park was 5%. Buholzer f e l t that t h i s high a l l o c a t i o n for school improvements i s unparalleled i n Vancouver N.I.P. programs. The dynamics underlying the high p r i o r i t y given to schools can be traced. Much of i t i s the r e s u l t of what Buholzer refers to i n an interview as the " t r a v e l l i n g road show", the practice of holding committee meetings i n schools. He f e l t that the deficiencies and opportunities i n schools were more readily apparent to committee members when they held t h e i r meetings there and could see them for themselves. He f e l t that the p r i o r i t i e s i n the plan were primarily the r e s u l t of the location of the meetings, p a r t i c u l a r l y since they were especially i n f l u e n t i a l . , during the committee's formative second and t h i r d months of existence. The inputs provided from the School Consultative Committees and from the school p r i n c i p a l s and parents -y l of school children underscore the openness of committee meetings. This e f f o r t at maximizing inputs from non-committee members seemed to o f f s e t the fact that the committee i t s e l f was very t i n y . In any event, of the ten itemized proposals for improving the four schools mentioned i n the plan, f i v e of them were contributed by School Consultative Committee members at these meetings rather than actual N.I.P. Committee members. Improvements to parks constitute the second largest block of allocations i n the plan. Many of the l o c a l parks improvements were conceived at design-ins at which l o c a l residents would attend a meeting held i n the park i t s e l f where they would o f f e r suggestions. Of the twenty park improvements contained i n the plan, eight were mentioned at design-ins. Since the plan did not provide estimates on an itemized basis, there i s no way to compare the combined value of proposals conceived i n design-ins with those apparently conceived e n t i r e l y i n the N.I.P. Committee. Representatives from the Grandview Legion Sports Committee attended several design-ins as well as a subsequent N.I.P. Committee meeting i n which they reiterated t h e i r support for some of the design-in proposals. The plan proposed s i x forms of street improvements and be a u t i f i c a t i o n . Commercial Drive improvements and re s i d e n t i a l street improvements were conspicuous by t h e i r high costs, $175,000 and $146,000, respectively. The l a t t e r proposal was conceived by a committee member, and 92 the committee decided to apply the a l l o c a t i o n i n the form of a subsidy to the l o c a l resident's portion of regular Local Improvement Provisions i n which property owners on a block share the expenses for improvements with the c i t y government. Commercial Drive improvements were primarily conceived by committee members acting on t h e i r own. The committee complained, according to the minutes of one committee meeting, that l o c a l merchants f a i l e d to co-operate when i n v i t e d to a public meeting. A meeting was c a l l e d , but i t was not very wel l attended. Those few merchants who did attend were primarily concerned with parking problems i n the area. No N.I.P. funds were allocated to solving t h i s problem, although the "Land Use and Development" section indicates that the committee w i l l "study" solutions to t h i s problem. The four remaining proposals i n the streets and be a u t i f i c a t i o n section were conceived by the respondents i n a survey conducted by the Planning Department before the N.I.P. Committee had been formed (Grandview Woodlands N.I.P. Committee Minutes). These include: 1. protective tree planting along the Macdonald and Laura Secord School s i t e s , 2. twenty-four new l i t t e r containers, 3. four community b u l l e t i n boards, 4. a series of bus shelters. The t o t a l cost of these proposals was $71,000. The three former proposals were submitted to council soon after the f i r s t meetings of the committee. The committee had 93 hoped to establish a high p r o f i l e for the planning process by developing fast tangible results of the committee 1s eff i c a c y before the plan was completed. I t thereby hoped to increase community involvement i n the planning so as to increase community commitment to the improvements. However, because of time constraints these items were not dealt with i n council u n t i l f i v e months after •-concept planning was completed. In t h e i r interviews, committee members claimed that the provision of a s o c i a l needs' section i n the plan was based on two surveys prepared by Kathryn Gallagher, a University of B r i t i s h Columbia s o c i a l work student. The f i r s t was an account of e x i s t i n g c h i l d care programs in Grandview Woodlands which was completed i n March, 19 77 and the second was a questionnaire of s o c i a l needs which was also completed that month. Of the two studies, the s o c i a l need study was the most important. The sample size for the questionnaire was two hundred and thirteen including the community's "most active" people. Eighty questionnaires were returned. The survey established that job s k i l l s , unemployment, language s k i l l s and adequate accomodations for families with children were the highest p r i o r i t y items. The survey also confirms that the bulk of the "active members of the community" i n Grandview Woodlands agree that family housing i s i n short supply. When asked i n th e i r respective interviews why the y4 plan did not address employment related issues, both Mary Bosze and Larry Buholzer f e l t that these were national or regional problems, However, the concept plan does address housing d i r e c t l y , which was another issue considered important by Gallagher's survey r e s u l t s . The committee's plan of action regarding the housing problem was suggested by B i l l Buholzer. The minutes from the committee meetings reveal that Buholzer was responsible for introducing the idea of a housing co-op or housing society to the committee. In an interview, Buholzer claims that this was the only proposal which he advocated to committee members. According to the minutes, members were' concerned about The f e a s i b i l i t y of t h i s type of project. Buholzer conceded that the K i t s i l a n o N.I.P. committee had experienced d i f f i c u l t y i n establishing i t s project, but added that the Strathcona Area Housing Society, operating under the Strathcona -.Property. Owners' and Tenants' Association, was more successful. Buholzer had a C.M.H.C. representative attend a committee meeting and describe the kind of project which he had i n mind. The a l l o c a t i o n for t h i s project t o t a l l e d $250,000. The l a s t major form of public input was the committee's questionnaire which was known as the Neighbourhood Needs and P r i o r i t i e s Survey. Buholzer f i r s t suggested the need for a survey when he put forth what had come to be the acceptable sequence of measures for entertaining public 95 TABLE 5.4. GRANDVIEW WOODLANDS: RESULTS OF THE COMMUNITY QUESTIONNAIRE IMPROVEMENT % OF RESPONDENTS INDICATING HIGH PRIORITY T r a f f i c and Parking 65 .0% Better Housing 62 .1% Streets Improvements 55 Seniors' Housing 52 19-Park Improvements 48 7 9-• O xi Better Bus Service 48 • O Xt School Improvements 44 • 8 % Commercial Drive Improvements 40 .9% Space for Community and Cul t u r a l Use 33 .5% More Park Space 29 . 1% Space for Senior A c t i v i t i e s 28 .6% Better Day Care 26 . 1% 96 input i n N.I.P. projects across Vancouver. Soon, the committee decided to have a questionnaire and beginning at the January 6 meeting, i t started preparing one by discussing possible questions. At the January 13 meeting, a committee member reported that assistance i n administering the questionnaire had been lined up from Vancouver Technical School students. While the committee established guidelines for preparing the questionnaire, i t was decided that the actual preparation was a technical task and i t was completed by the s t a f f . The survey was administered with help from the Technical students i n the l a s t week of January, and 36% of the sample returned completed questionnaires, making for an e f f e c t i v e 5% sample of the community. How the questionnaire resul t s were used i s questionable, however. On the l e v e l of general p r i o r i t i e s the respondents rated suggested improvements i n the order depicted i n table 5.4. There i s l i t t l e resemblance between the outcome of the survey and the plan. Items that were given low p r i o r i t y i n the survey results were exceptionally high p r i o r i t y items i n the plan (eg., schools) and high p r i o r i t y items i n the survey resul t s were excluded e n t i r e l y from the plan (eg., t r a f f i c and parking, and senior c i t i z e n housing). When the survey results were disclosed at a committee meeting, the minutes quote one committee member as saying that the results did. not ref-Lee t* what" he had i n 97 mind for the community plan. This comment was not challenged according to the minutes, and no further mention was made of the survey i n subsequent meetings. 5.5 _ Analysis, Descriptive • and Substantive Methodology: 5.5.1 Riley Park: 5.5.1.1. Descriptive Representation The occupational composition of the planning committee members who work was not t y p i c a l of the labour force of the neighbourhood as a whole (see chart 5.5). The committee was overrepresented i n the professional, medical, teaching and managerial categories, and i t was under-represented i n blue c o l l a r f i e l d s such as transportation, processing, construction and primary industry as well as white c o l l a r f i e l d s such as sales and service. The committee also d i f f e r e d from the community on the le v e l of educational attainment. Chart 5.6 indicates that 29% of the committee had completed grade twelve or gone beyond t h i s l e v e l while the corresponding figure for the community was 12%. The age d i s t r i b u t i o n of members twenty and older (approximate voting age population) was s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from the age'distribution i n the community (chart 5.7) Regarding geographical representation, the homes of committee members l i v i n g within the N.I.P. area and the businesses of other committee members are shown on figure 5.3. I t divides the N.I.P. area into seven sub-^ 98 CHART 5,5 O c c u p a t i o n Type P r o f e s s i o n a l / M a n a g e r i a l C l e r i c a l S a l e s / S e r v i c e I n d u s t r i a l B l u e C o l l a r LABOUR FORCE COMPOSITION:  CITIZEN'S COMMITTEE AND RILEY PARK R i l e y P a r k C i t i z e n ' s Committe 1 5 members O t h e r I 1 . 5 i 1 member SOURCES: V a n c o u v e r P l a n n i n g D e p a r t m e n t : R i l e y P a r k N.I.P, B a s i c I n f o r m a t i o n , 1 9 7 6 , 1 9 7 1 C e n s u s . DISCUSSION WITH LARRY BEASLEY: The data from Table 5 . 1 . was combined into 5 basic categories, i n c l u d i n g "blue c o l l a r " (primary, processing, construction and tra n s p o r t a t i o n ) , " s a l e s / s e r v i c e " and "pr o f e s s i o n a l / managerial: ( p r o f e s s i o n a l , managerial, medical and teaching). Chi squared analysis was used to compare the "observed" and "expected" f r e -quencies of the occupation of committee members. Expected frequencies were based on the Riley Park d i s t r i b u t i o n . Results: x 2 = ( 3 5 , 2 * * d.f. 99 LABOUR FORCE COMPOSITION: CITIZEN'S COMMITTEE AND CHART 5,5 RILEY PARK (continuation) NOTE: When c a l c u l a t i n g c hi square and determining that the differences between the committee and the community were s i g n i f i c a n t with respect to occupation, the "other" occupational category was l e f t out for methodological purposes. 100 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT:  RILEY PARK COMMUNITY AND CHART 5.6 N . i . p . COMMITTEE COMPARED Riley Park 1 Years of Schooling C i t i z e n ' s Committee D i s t r i b u t i o n j 67% 0 - 1 1 20 x = 25.6 DF = 2 s i g n i f i c a n t at .005 SOURCES: Charts 5.2 and 5.3 Vancouver Planning Department: Riley Park N.I.P. Basic Information, 1976 (1971 census). 101 CHART 5,7 VOTING AGE POPULATION AGE DISTRIBUTION: RILEY PARK COMMUNITY AND N.I.P. COMMITTEE COMPARED Age 20 - 3.4 35 - 54 55 - 64 6 5+ Riley Park Citizen's Committee Di s t r i b u t i o n x = 9.9 29 DF = 3 SOURCES: s i g n i f i c a n t at .05 Charts 5.2 and 5.3 Vancouver Planning Department: Riley Park N.I.P. Basic Information, 1976 (1971 census). 102 RILEY PARK c H O M E S O F C O M M I T T E E M E M B E R S F i Q u r e 5.3 16 AVE . C c c c c c c c o c c 5 c c c - c c c c to c cc '-to < li. c c c c c c c c T W E N T Y - N I N T H c c c T H I R T Y - F I R S T c c c c c c c c c S ° -h AVP c c c 103 p I L E Y P A R K : isub-are^ populations -COMMITTEE C O M M U N I T Y F i g u r e 5.4 X 2= 27 DF = 7 S i g n i f i c a n t a t :005 104 areas, and the d i s t r i b u t i o n of households within the N.I.P. area was compared with the d i s t r i b u t i o n of households and businesses represented on the committee (figure 5.4). One sub-area bound by Ontario Street, 2 9th Avenue, Prince Edward and King Edward Avenues was extremely overrepresented. The sub-area to the south of i t was s l i g h t l y overrepresented while the others were either: adequately represented or underrepresented. 5.5.1.2 Substantive Representation: .Substantive representation i s examined in two ways. In Riley Park, the i n i t i a l opinions of the committee members regarding planning needs were compiled i n an opinionaire, and these are compared with the planning needs expressed by the rest of the community i n a community questionnaire. Secondly, geographical substantive representation was examined. This reviews the relat i o n s h i p between representation within sub-areas and proposed expenditure i n these sub-areas. The second community questionnaire was discussed e a r l i e r in section 5.4.1. of t h i s chapter. As indicated in that section, sampling problems with the f i r s t questionnaire influenced the s t a f f to plan t h i s survey. They incorporated a 5% random sample, and to ensure a high return rate, committee members telephoned sample households, using them to return t h e i r questionnaire responses. P r i o r i t y ratings for possible planning measures based on questionnaire r e s u l t s are reported i n 105 t.able 5.3 (see section 5.4.1.). Meanwhile, the committee "opinionaire" of i t s own p r i o r i t i e s rated items i n the order shown i n table 5.5. TABLE 5.5 RILEY PARK: RESULTS FROM THE COMMITTEE OPINIONNAIRE Rank Order of P r i o r i t y Problem Areas i n Opinion of Committee Members: Pedestrian Main Street Main Street Parking Recreation Centre Improvements Neighbourhood House Street Trees Sidewalks The two surveys are not absolutely comparable. The community questionnaire asked questions about vandalism and youth programs, and the committee opinionaire did not. The l a t t e r asked questions about hypothetical programs while the former dealt with needs. Nevertheless, some of the programs supported by the committee ref l e c t e d the needs orientation of i t s members, and support for cer t a i n types of programs r e f l e c t the kinds of problems that concern respondents. Using t h i s as a basis, three high p r i o r i t y proposals by the committee are low community p r i o r i t i e s , i e . , pedestrianizing Main Street, more Main Street commercial parking and sidewalks on r e s i d e n t i a l streets. Hence, the l e v e l to which the-committee ref l e c t e d the community's wants before the questionnaires appears to be l i m i t e d . 106 .Substantive representation in Riley Park i s now examined i n d i r e c t l y through an analysis of the geographical disbursement of funds allocated by the plan. This method i s d i f f e r e n t from the above i n that i t focusses on decisions rather than preferences evident at the outset of the planning process. The section dealing with descriptive representation specified sub-areas i n the N.I.P. area a r b i t r a r i l y , showing that there was disproportionate representation between sub-areas i n the voluntary committee. Carrying t h i s one step further, the l e v e l of representation in each sub-area i s compared with the amount of s i t e s p e c i f i c spending in those sub-areas on a per household basis (see table 5.7). In the f i r s t place, some f i n a n c i a l a llocations had to be withdrawn from analysis including non s i t e s p e c i f i c a l l o c a t i o n s , e.g., administrative and planning costs, allocations wherein s i t e selection was deferred (e.g., the storefront li b r a r y ) and provisions a f f e c t i n g a number of neighbourhood sub-areas (e.g., general r i g h t of way improvements). The remaining allocations t o t a l l e d $772,950 of which $640,000 was allocated to s i t e s i n three adjacent sub-areas of the community. Moreover, these are the three best represented sub-areas on the committee, and table 5.7 shows a strong s t a t i s t i c a l r elationship between representation and l e v e l of spending i n sub-areas. 107 TABLE 5.6 RILEY PARK: LOCATIONALLY SPECIFIC N.I.P. EXPENDITURES IN CONCEPT PLAN BY SUB-AREAS PROJECT SUB-AREA COST 1. Improvements/Riley Park Recreation Complex 2. Roller Rink i n Riley Arena 3. H i l l c r e s t Park and Melrose Park Closure and Improvements 4. Riley Park Exterior Improvements 5. Cartier Park Improvements 6 . Prince Edward Park 7. Pedestrian Activated Light at Ontario and 3 3rd Avenue 8. Main Street B e a u t i f i c a t i o n between 24th and 29th 9. Brock School Improvements 10 . Brock School Annex Improvements 11. Livingstone School Improvements 12. General Wolfe School Improvements 13. Riley Alternate School Improvements Southwest Southwest West of Ontario Southwest Southwest Central Northeast West of Ontario Southwest $225,000 15,000 75,800 68,200 45,200 78,000 10,000* 10,000* Central Southwest 136,000* Central Northwest 3 4,000* Central Southwest 21,000 Central Southeast 17,250 Central Northeast 3,500 West of Ontario 29,000 Central Southwest 5,000 Total $772,950 The pedestrian activated cross walk connects two sub-areas. Both sub-areas were given an equal share of the allocation for purposes of analysis. Regarding the Main Street beautification, the two sub-areas affected by that proposal were given a share proportional to the number of blocks affected in each sub-area. 108 TABLE 5.7 RILEY PARK: RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SPENDING PER  HOUSEHOLD AND A REPRESENTATIVENESS RATIO BY SUB-AREAS SUB-AREA SPENDING/ PARTICIPANT/ HOUSEHOLD RANK HOUSEHOLD RATIO RANK 1. Northeast 2. Northwest 3. Central Northeast 4. Central Northwest 5. Central Southeast 6. Central Southwest 7. Southwest 8. West of Ontrario 187 72 30 278 400 1104 (7.5) (7.5) (4.) (5) (6) (3.) (2) (1) 1:97 1:436 1:87 1: 236 1: 190 1:45 1: 53 1:52 (5) 18) (4) (7) (6) (1) (3) (2) .79**, s i g n i f i c a n t at the 5% l e v e l . 109 Problems i n Geographical Substantive Representation Analyzing the geographical d i s t r i b u t i o n of N.I.P. funds and t h e i r r e l a t i o n to concentrations of committee member homes within a r b i t r a r y sub-areas s i m p l i f i e s a very complicated issue. Sub-areas should be determined using functional c r i t e r i a . For example, allocations made to schools should be analyzed i n terms of t h e i r catchment areas rather than a r b i t r a r y boundaries. In the case of parks, allocations should be compared with the number of committee members and the number of homes closes to each park. In the case of both parks and schools, t h e i r catchment areas would be d i f f e r e n t . This shows that geographical substantive representation cannot be viewed in generalized terms, and each variable would have to be reviewed separately. In addition to t h i s complication, many intervening variables may affect geographical substantive representation. Substantive representation may be d i f f i c u l t to observe because a strategy proposed in the plan suggests strong rationales for investing i n certain portions of the community. In Riley Park, strategy was not a part of the f i n a l concept plan, but strategy may have shaped the outcome of the plan because of the binodal concept which exphasized parks and walkway improvements (see section 5.2.1.). As a r e s u l t parks became a major portion of the f i n a l concept plan, and 110 3 of the 4 parks are within the 3 southwestern sub-areas of the neighbourhood, making these sub-areas well endowed by the proposed N.I.P. disbursements. Therefore, since geographical substantive representation can be influenced by strategy which has nothing to do with the committees geographical biases, and since sub-areas must be defined d i f f e r e n t l y for each issue, i t cannot be applied because of these unwieldy constraints. 5.5.2 Grandview Woodlands 5.5.2.1. Descriptive Representation: Member occupational c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s suggest that t h i s committee had a large contingent of professionals and ;-managers (see chart 5 . 8 ) . Also, the findings suggest that people employed i n sales/service, and construction/manufact-uring/ primary industry were underrepresented. There i s not enough data to show that t h i s was s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , however. No information i s available on the educational attainment of the committee, although occupational c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s suggest that the educational attainment of members may also be higher than those of the larger community. The ages of committee members diverged sharply with those of the community. Not suprisingly, there was no representation from people younger than twenty-one. I l l Unlike Riley Park, no representation existed amoung people s i x t y - f i v e and older(see chart 5.9). This divergence between participants and the community i s not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , however. The geographical d i s t r i b u t i o n of committee members i s plotted on figure 5.5. Viewing the d i s t r i b u t i o n , there appears to be a concentration of committee members' residences i n the southeast of the community. However, there i s no r e a l c l u s t e r i n g on the map and no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the d i s t r i b u t i o n of households and the d i s t r i b u t i o n of committee members' residences i n thi s case (figure 5.6). 5.5.2.2 Substantive Representation: The Grandview Woodlands plan i s not amenable to analysis for geographical to substantive representation because some allocations were not itemized according to s i t e as they had been i n the Riley Park plan. 112 CHART 5.8 Occupation Type Professional/1 Managerial C l e r i c a l LABOUR FORCE COMPOSITION:  CITIZEN'S COMMITTEE AND GRANDVIEW WOODLANDS Grandview Woodlands* Citizen's Committee Sales/ Service In d u s t r i a l Blue C o l l a r Other 44% ] 1 9-SOURCE: City of Vancouver. (1975) City Planning Department, Grandview Woodlands: An information handbook, 13; Information on the committee attained through an inter-view with Tom Phipps, the Area planning assistant. * Information i s on the l o c a l area and not the N.I.P. area, and only r e f l e c t s the current c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the N.I.P. area i n a rough manner. 113 AGE DISTRIBUTION OF VOTING AGE POPULATION: GRANDVIEW WOODLANDS AND GRANDVIEW WOODLANDS N . I. P. COMMITTEE COMPARED CHART 5,9 Grandview Woodlands Age 20 - 34 Citizen's Committee Di s t r i b u t i o n 36% —jm M V . 35 - 64 65+ 50% 14% x = 4.52 DF = 2 not s i g n i f i c a n t SOURCE: Data on N.I.P. area collected from Planning Staff f i l e s i n Grandview Woodlands. Approximate ages of committee members from an interview with Grandview Woodlands planning assistant, Tom Phipps. 114 115 Grandview Woodlands sub-are a populations COMMITTEE COMMUNITY Figure 5.6 t»Nl NORTH Of I1ASTII-. HUSTINGS GRANDVltW PARK NIP area BROADWAY = 4.56, DF = 4 not s i g n i f i c a n t 116 For example, a $360,000 a l l o c a t i o n for parks i s made with-out specifying which park gets how much. This makes i t impos-s i b l e to ascertain geographic biases i n the committee's park planning at thi s stage. Unlike park a l l o c a t i o n s , however, school all o c a t i o n s were earmarked for the d i f f e r e n t schools involved (see Appendix 3, Provisions of Grandview Woodlands N.I.P. Plan), making this portion of the plan amenable to geographical analysis. More-over school expenditures constituted the largest category of c a p i t a l allocations made for thi s plan, with 40 per cent of the project money going for thi s purpose. School all o c a t i o n s also played a larger role i n the o v e r a l l plan than the t i t l e of those disbursements would suggest. According to Konrad Jashke, a member of the N.I.P. committee during the concept planning stage, most schools investments were made to provide much needed indoor recreation f a c i l i t i e s rather than to provide educational or extr a c u r r i c u l a r f a c i l i t i e s for-the schools themselves. And since schools all o c a t i o n s were intended for community recreation purposes instead of for educational purposes, catchment areas designated by park access charac-t e r i s t i c s are more appropriate than school catchment areas when designating sub-areas. Hence, the sub-areas designated i n the descriptive geographical representation section are u t i l i z e d i n this case since they are defined by major a r t e r i a l s which r e s t r i c t access for children to and from parks. Concen-t r a t i n g on a single issue area and u t i l i z i n g appropriate functional boundaries for designating sub-areas precludes many of the problems encountered when applying this methodology to 117 Riley Park. While the school investments i n d i f f e r e n t sub-areas varied, they were greatly determined by the needs posed by d i f f e r e n t schools. For example, the northwest sub-area i s serviced by Britannia School and Britannia High School. One of these i s a recent structure, and the other was recently refurbished. Both are bolstered by a recently developed multi-service community centre i n which recreation f a c i l i t i e s and s o c i a l services are combined on one s i t e . This accounts for the absence of schools investment by the N.I.P. Committee i n that sub-area. Another factor i s the type of schools i n a sub-area. The southwest sub-area i s f a i r l y i s o l a t e d by busy a r t e r i a l streets and has only one small school, i e . , an annex of a larger school located two blocks away, outside the N.I.P. area. Since the annex had no school consultative committee of i t s own, no investments were made for schools i n that sub-area. Much of the investment i n the southeast sub-areas was concentrated i n the Grandview Triangle, that tiny wedge between East Broadway, the railway gorge and Nanaimo Street. According to Jashke, t h i s was because the Triangle, which had fewer households than the southwest sub-area, was i n desperate need of recreational l e i s u r e f a c i l i t i e s , since the other neighbourhood playground was inaccessible due to busy a r t e r i a l s . Nevertheless, there i s no s t a t i s t i c a l relationship between investment per household i n school improvements 118 and the number of committee members l i v i n g i n a sub-area (see table 5.9). The northeast sub-area, which has the second highest per capita household l e v e l of investment for school improvements i n the plan, also has the second lowest l e v e l of representation i n the committee per house-hold. The northwest area which received no school improvements i n the plan also has the second highest l e v e l of committee representation (table 5.9). One sub-area received no representation i n the committee whatsoever, and was not able, as a r e s u l t , to a r t i c u l a t e i t s needs. The southwest sub-area received no N.I.P. money for schools improvements, and none of the parks planned for improvement were located i n that sub-area. Yet, 1,118 or 11% of the N.I.P. area 1 s'_ house-holds were.located there, and there i s a.demonstrable shortage of parkland i n t h i s area and adjacent-areas outside the N.I.P. boundaries. 5.6 Analysis of the Assumptions Underlying the Process Oriented Methodology: The assumption underlying the process oriented methodology states that d i f f e r e n t forms of c i t i z e n involve-ment are necessary for the neighbourhood community to a t t a i n a more complete expression of the values of i t s many d i f f e r e n t people. To support the assumption, an attempt w i l l be made to prove that d i f f e r e n t forms of c i t i z e n involvement w i l l produce d i f f e r e n t substantive results i n the planning process. In other words, i t must 119 TABLE 5.8 GRANDVIEW WOODLANDS: THE TOTAL LEVELS OF SCHOOLS SPENDING BY SUB-AREAS NORTH OF ADANAC Templeton School MacDonald School 2. NORTHEAST Lord Nelson School St. Francis School 3. NORTHWEST Britannia School 4. SOUTHWEST Grandview Annex 5. SOUTHEAST Laura Secord School Unspecified a l l o c a t i $ 60,000 $125,000 $355,000 NIL NIL $495,000 SOURCE: City of Vancouver, The Grandview Woodlands N.I.P.  Concept Plan, 1977 Allocation made for the adjacent park. Parks allocations not specified by site. 120 TABLE 5.9 GRANDVIEW WOODLANDS: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN  SPENDING PER HOUSEHOLD AND REPRESENTATIVENESS RATIO BY SUB-AREAS SUB-AREA ' RATIO: COMMITTEE SPENDING PER HOUSE-MEMBERS/HOUSEHOLD HOLD FOR SCHOOLS 1. North of Adanac 1:750 $ 93 2. Northeast 1:715 $390 3.. Northwest 1:213 NIL 4. Southwest 0 members NIL 5. Southeast 1:223 $431 *T = .65, not significant. SOURCE: City of Vancouver, The Grandview Woodlands N.I.P.  Concept Plan, 1977. 1 2 1 be proven that people responding to the same issues i n d i f f e r e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n contexts i n the same community w i l l respond d i f f e r e n t l y . In Riley Park, this assumption can be supported very e a s i l y . The committee made i t s preferences well under-stood on various issues early i n the process through an opinionaire, and t h e i r values did not coincide with those expressed by people i n other forms of c i t i z e n involvement. The following were the most important forms of c i t i z e n involvement, and they produced results which contradicted the committee's stand: 1. community questionnaire (social versus physical p r i o r i t i e s ) , 2 . public attending committee meetings (linear walkway), and 3. public meetings (miniparks). In Grandview Woodlands, however, the d i f f e r e n t forms of c i t i z e n involvement used did not always produce the same degree of c o n f l i c t . Only the community questionnaire produced substantial opposition to the values of the committee. Known as the Neighbourhood Needs and P r i o r i t i e s survey, i t produced results which were not r e f l e c t e d i n the decision made by committee members. In other cases of c i t i z e n involvement, there i s no evidence that p r i o r i t i e s or values contradicted those of the committee. However, inputs produced recommendations which r e f l e c t e d the d i f f e r e n t perspectives of non-122 committee members, i e . , since committee members lacked the expertise of other members of the community. This included Kathryn Gallagher's s o c i a l need survey administered to two hundred and thirteen of the commun-i t y ' s "most active" people, design-ins held i n parks and inputs from School Consultative Committee members. While the opposition voiced to committee proposals was not as great i n Grandview Woodlands this may have been a function of the d i f f e r e n t ways i n which the planning processes were designed. In the f i r s t place, the amount of information d i s t r i b u t e d to the community was not as great i n Grandview Woodlands. No d r a f t plan was publicized in the community, for the general public to respond to, and no public meetings were held to provide a forum for opposition before the concept plan was completed. These seem to be important steps i n testing the l e v e l of community acceptance of committee proposals. These findings from both Riley Park and Grandview Woodlands support the view that a large number of d i f f e r e n t inputs are necessary i n the process to express points of view that are not represented i n the committee. To r e s t r i c t c i t i z e n involvement to the committee i t s e l f would have omitted these points of view. Each form of c i t i z e n involvement provided a unique contribution to the process which other forms would have excluded. As a r e s u l t , the representativeness of c i t i z e n involvement can best be evaluated not by analysing the planning 123 committee, but by considering the numbers of forms of c i t i z e n involvement used i n the process and t h e i r e f f i c a c y i n shaping the d i r e c t i o n of planning. 5.7 Analysis, Process Methodology: Using data presented i n sections 3.2 and 3.3, the process oriented methodology i s applied to the two case study projects. 5.7.1 Community Organization E f f o r t s by Staff Professionals to Influence Representation: The e f f o r t s undertaken i n Riley Park to increase representation on the committee were considerable. Substantial p u b l i c i t y was derived through l e a f l e t s d i s t r i b u t e d to a l l households. Beasley showed great concern for the uneven geographical d i s t r i b u t i o n i n the committee and scheduled several public meetings i n strategic locations i n the community. Although section 5.3 shows that the e f f o r t was not a perfect success, the meetings greatly improved the geographical d i s t r i b u t i o n of committee representation. In Grandview Woodlands, B i l l Buholzer suggested that the committee make some immediate improvements so as to give the committee a higher p r o f i l e and image of efficacy i n the community. This i s a technique recommended i n the N.I.P. Operator's Handbook. While four recommendations were made and submitted for council approval, council's timetable prevented them from being adopted and im-plemented on time to have an impact on the commi.ttee' s membership during the concept planning stage. Hence, 124 there was no impact from t h i s organizational e f f o r t at the concept planning stage. 5.7.2 Evidence of Research used to Formulate an Understanding of the Different Segments of the Community: A l l N.I.P. projects were preceded by a research e f f o r t conducted by the City Planning s t a f f . Information was gathered from census tracts on the socio-economic ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the community including incomes, e t h n i c i t y , occupation, age breakdowns and housing. This information and information on land use and zoning previously collected by the Department were included i n a comprehensive information package given to the l o c a l area planner before entering the community. According to John Winsor, manager of the Local Area Planning D i v i s i o n , most of t h i s information was collected by summer students hired by the Planning Department. In addition to t h i s , i n Riley Park, Larry Beasley claims that he and his s t a f f conducted an "orchestrated process" of seeking out groups, learning about clubs, associations and s o c i a l service agencies, and generally establishing a network of contacts through meetings with these groups. On the basis of t h i s work, i t became the s t a f f ' s understanding that the better part of Riley Park was balanced between low income welfare and poor working class people l i v i n g i n older single family housing and i n the "housing project" on one side of the scale, and 125 middle to upper middle class shopkeepers, professionals, self-employed workers, and home owning working class people on the other side of the scale. Moreover, there i s evidence that these contacts and t h i s information was used in designing the process, e.g., i n the introduction of the N.I.P. project to the community and the selection of a s i t e o f f i c e . In Grandview Woodlands, the s t a f f entered the project with a si m i l a r information package to the one used for the Riley Park Local Area Planning project. However, Buholzer denied that a " c a r e f u l l y orchestrated" entry was needed because of the p r i o r presence of the Local Area Planning Committee i n that area. Parts of the Grandview-Woodlands N.I.P. area are not included i n the Grandview Woodland l o c a l area. Moreover, those portions of the N.I.P. area did not have Local Area Planning Committee representation. The portion of the N.I.P. area which i s not within the Local Area Planning area did not receive special attention to ensure a broad l e v e l of representation from that sub-area. In short, even i f a c a r e f u l l y orchestrated entry process had been applied with the creation of the Local Area Planning Committee, i t was not geared to introducing the N.I.P. planning process to those portions of the N.I.P. area outside the Grandview Woodlands l o c a l area. 126 5.7.3 Evidence that Other Forms of C i t i z e n Involvement were Based on an Understanding of the Community Derived from  the Research E f f o r t : In Grandview Woodlands, the most obvious area i n which s o c i a l research benefitted the p a r t i c i p a t i o n e f f o r t i s i n the involvement of ethnic groups. Ethn'ic groups were i n v i t e d to prepare proposals to meet t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r needs. The I t a l i a n groups submitted proposals for bocce courts and unsuccessfully requested that money be spent on the I t a l i a n Community Centre located just outside the N.I.P. boundary. While the I t a l i a n presence i n t h i s neighbourhood i s highly v i s i b l e , deliberate e f f o r t s to involve I t a l i a n groups and consider t h e i r input seriously were promoted by documented information on e t h n i c i t y i n the neighbourhood. A more subtle area i n which an understanding of community structure influenced process was evident i n Riley Park where the s t a f f focussed on e x i s t i n g organ-izations and leadership i n the community to research and s o l i c i t important contacts. Learning about and establishing these contacts provided the s t a f f and committee with the amount of p u b l i c i t y and f a m i l i a r i t y to make possible the large turnouts at committee meetings. The incidence of l e t t e r s to s t a f f , outsiders attending committee meetings and informal s i t e o f f i c e contacts appeared to be greater i n Riley Park than i n Grandview Woodlands and t h i s may have been because a more 127 sophisticated contact network was development i n Riley-Park. The l e v e l of consideration given to s o c i a l struc-ture when locating the s i t e o f f i c e probably promoted un s o l i c i t e d s i t e o f f i c e contacts as w e l l i n Riley Park. 5.7.4 Evidence of the Impact of Different Forms of C i t i z e n Involvement on the F i n a l Plan: The number of d i f f e r e n t forms of c i t i z e n involvement used i n the two projects were quite s i m i l a r . In addition to the planning committees, both projects used open committee meetings, a s i t e o f f i c e , public questionnaires and public meetings held at the beginning of the planning process. In Riley Park these methods were supplemented with public meetings to consider the draft concept plan, public meetings held at various locations to broaden the base of a representation and a neighbourhood walk. In Grandview Wood-lands planning committee, meetings .were held in conjunction with School Consultative Committee meetings, and the involve-ment of the Local Area Planning Committee was relevant. However, the effectiveness of measures taken i n the two projects i n shaping process i s quite d i f f e r e n t . The methodology does not provide a guideline for determining a minimum number of c i t i z e n involvement techniques. This i s partly because of the lack of c r i t e r i a for making t h i s kind of judgment and because the problem i s a s i t u a t i o n a l one defying guidelines. Planners and researchers must decide on t h e i r own using t h e i r own judgment based on t h e i r special understanding of the 128 community. In t h i s case study, c e r t a i n observations can be made regarding how one planning process was more representative than the other. The involvement of School Consultative Committees i n Grandview Woodlands resulted i n the heavy emphasis on schools i n the plan. Not only did i t have a clear impact on the plan, but judging by the dominant size of the school expenditures, the School Consultative Committee had the largest impact on the committee's thinking since i t was the only group exclusively concerned with schools. In Grandview Woodlands, there i s no evidence that the questionnaire altered the content of the plan. Almost a l l the high p r i o r i t y items i n the plan were low p r i o r i t y items i n the community questionnaire r e s u l t s . Moreover, the comment made at a committee meeting that the questionnaire results did not conform to what members had i n mind i l l u s t r a t e d that the committee was not prepared to seriously consider c o n f l i c t i n g strategies to the family needs model. On the other hand, changes i n the concept plan i n Riley Park did occur as a r e s u l t of the questionnaire. Many committee members favoured physical improvements and at the behest of Larry Beasley, physical improvements were developed into a planning strategy referred to i n t h i s thesis as the binodal improvement strategy. I t became apparent as a r e s u l t of the questionnaire and public meetings that popular support for physical 129 improvements r e l a t i v e to s o c i a l programs was limited. Clear evidence i s shown i n the Riley Park findings that the open committee meetings, public questionnaires, and preconcept plan public meetings a l l had a demonstrable impact on the concept plan. In Grandview Woodlands, only the Local Area Planning Committee c l e a r l y affected the content of the plan and the degree of overlapping member-ship i n the two committees resulted i n l i t t l e difference between the pr e v a i l i n g philosophies of the committees. As a r e s u l t , the N.I.P. committee cannot be viewed as a completely d i s t i n c t form of c i t i z e n involvement separate from the Local Area Planning committee i t s e l f . There i s l i t t l e evidence to suggest that as many r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t positions were present i n Grandview Woodlands as were evident i n Riley Park. Many ideas were proposed and subsequently contradicted through other forms of c i t i z e n involvement i n Riley Park including a lin e a r walkway, various street closures, miniparks and school expenditures. Most s i g n i f i c a n t l y the predominance of the school needs orientation i n Grandview Woodlands prevented the development of d i f f e r e n t scenarios i n that planning process. 5 . 7 . 5 The Planner's Influence on the Process: The differences i n the styles of the two planners may have influenced the representativeness of the plans produced. While B i l l Buholzer i n Grandview Woodlands was careful to suggest that the committee use the d i f f e r -130 ent forms of c i t i z e n input usually employed i n Vancouver l o c a l area planning projects, evidence suggests that he f a i l e d to use moral suasion to ensure that the committee employ these approaches when time was ripe for implement-ing them. The foremost example i s that committee's f a i l u r e to use the res u l t s of the community needs questionnaire, that project's only e f f o r t at considering extensive public input. This may have been related to the relaxed approach Buholzer had towards the committee's deliberations. Larry Beasley i n Riley Park may have defined the options of the committee too closely throughout the planning process, i n the opinion of Konrad Jashke from Grandview Woodlands. His e f f o r t s at defining scenarios and structuring decisions were important, however, i n speeding up the decision processing and forcing committee members to think about t h e i r decisions c a r e f u l l y . 131 CONCLUSIONS Representation i n l o c a l area planning i n general has been c a l l e d a false issue. In a conversation, Rhonda Howard, the current l o c a l area planner i n Grandview Woodlands asked how representation i n participatory bodies can become an issue without also focussing on representation i n representative bodies for comparison. This question can be answered very simply. Members of Vancouver's c i t y council are elected at large by those who care enough to vote i n elections. They represent a l l but the most i n d i f f e r e n t elements of society. The c i t i z e n advisory committee can p o t e n t i a l l y represent an even smaller minority i n municipal p o l i t i c s , the most active of private c i t i z e n s , i e . , those who p a r t i c i p a t e i n committees. However, l o c a l area planning i n Vancouver has had a r e a l purpose i n making c i t y p o l i c i e s more sensitive to l o c a l p r i o r i t i e s i n a c i t y which does not benefit from ward aldermen to give voice to those l o c a l p r i o r i t i e s . As important as i t i s , proponents of l o c a l area planning cannot afford to suppress the representation issue because c i t y government departments that have a stake i n centralized policy development (see Anderson, 1976; Needleman, 1974) w i l l continue to raise the issue at t h e i r expense. Representation: The major conclusion that can be reached from t h i s Li2 research i s that the source of representation i n the N.I.P. planning process has been the process and not the committee's c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . This was demonstrated by focussing on the relationship between the planning process and the product. Despite t h i s p o t e n t i a l for the planning process to supplement the representativeness of the committee with other forms of p a r t i c i p a t i o n the values of the community cannot a l l be brought into play no matter how much e f f o r t i s taken. On the l e v e l of geography, unequal represent-ation from sub-areas of the community are refl e c t e d i n the d i s t r i b u t i o n of allocations between sub-areas. While the hypothesis was not explored, t h i s i s l i k e l y to be the case with sectoral as well as s p a t i a l biases i n the committee. The dynamics of geographical representation, to some extent, defy description. In the f i r s t place, unevenly di s t r i b u t e d turnouts at organizational meetings may have been a function of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of perceived urban problems i n the neighbourhood. Perhaps areas with many perceived urban problems e l i c i t e d more p a r t i c i p a t i o n than the more complacent sub-areas? On the other hand, poor turnouts from certain sub-areas may be related to the culture of poverty problem. People may withdraw from p o l i t i c s i n response to the re p e t i t i v e f a i l u r e of the p o l i t i c a l system to provide t h e i r neighbourhood with i t s equitable share of resources 133 i n parks, schools or road and gutter works. The culture of poverty argument i s the well u t i l i z e d rationale of the community organization movement. Alinsky and his di s c i p l e s argued that the urban poor (or i n t h i s case, lower income sections of the city) needed a special pro-fessional to give them the knowledge, understanding, organization and high expectations to pursue a more equitable share from the urban p o l i t i c a l system. The cause of uneven p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s probably s i t u a t i o n a l . I t i s only introduced here to demonstrate that t r a d i t i o n a l indicators of descriptive and substantive representation cannot be used i n a l l cases because uneven representation i n participatory groups may be the cause of or the r e s u l t of our perception of urban problems i n certain sub-areas. From the planner's point of view, perhaps unlike that of committee members, a l l parts of a neighbourhood deserve equal consideration and scrutiny i n the a l l o c a t i o n of N.I.P. resources and i n the development of poli c y . The selection process for N.I.P. projects including the designation of neighbourhoods deserving of t h i s special assistance, and the selection of precise project boundaries i s the stage at which parts of the c i t y are included and excluded from consideration i n N.I.P. a l l o c a t i o n s . Once an area has been selected, the project planner and his s t a f f have a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to ensure that no area within the project boundary i s excluded from consideration through c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . 134 The fact that the sub-area of Grandview Woodlands south of F i r s t Avenue and west of V i c t o r i a did not have committee members had serious ramifications. This sub-area i s c l e a r l y lacking i n recreation opportunities, and i t i s s p a t i a l l y detached from the rest of the c i t y and even from the rest of the N.I.P. area, yet i t received no N.I.P. allocations i n the plan. The sub-area south of East Broadway, which has a comparable size and population received considerable amounts ofimoney f° r recreation f a c i l i t i e s b u i l t on school property based on the rationale that i t was s p a t i a l l y i s o l a t e d and lacking i n recreation f a c t i l t i e s . The difference between the two sub-areas can only be accounted by the fact that the one which received the N.I.P. a l l o c a t i o n had three representatives while the sub-area west of V i c t o r i a and south of F i r s t Avenue had no representatives. Uneven representation both s p a t i a l l y and s e c t o r a l l y , may not always be the product of either "comfortable complacency" or "quiet despair", but i t may simply be a technical problem. Often, the location of a s i t e o f f i c e , the location of committee meetings or the location of organizational public meetings may influence membership. For this reason, membership i n the committee should be dealt with i n a technical manner by the s t a f f . In t h i s case study, both the second series of public meetings held i n Riley Park i n poorly represented sub-areas and the " t r a v e l l i n g road show" meetings held 135 together with School Consultative Committees i n Grandview Woodlands were well considered e f f o r t s at broadening representation i n the committee i n the f i r s t case, and external to the committee i t s e l f i n the l a t t e r case. However, the l a t t e r strategy did not e f f e c t i v e l y meet the challenges posed by the s p a t i a l -composition- 'of- Grandview Woodlands as the t o t a l exclusion of a sub-area of that community shows. The fact was that the area south of F i r s t Avenue and west of V i c t o r i a Drive does not have a school or School Consultative Committee to use as a basis for i n f i l t r a t i o n u t i l i z i n g that strategy. Evaluating the effectiveness of e f f o r t s at broadening representation must be a very broad minded process. Even with s i g n i f i c a n t and time consuming e f f o r t s , represent-ation within the sub-areas that had any representation continued to be inconsistent. To a great extent "comfortable complacency" must be used to account for the poor representation of certain areas when reasonable e f f o r t has been taken to make the d i s t r i b u t i o n of committee members more proportional. 6.2 Assessment of Methodologies: Descriptive, Substantive and Process Oriented Method-ologies a l l contribute to our understanding of the rep-resentativeness of a planning process. The problems associated with the former two methods have been dealt with extensively elsewhere. The c r i t i q u e concentrates on the incompleteness of any analysis based e n t i r e l y on 136 the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the N.I.P. committee and the methodologies' i n a b i l i t y t o examine the many forms of c i t i z e n involvement t h a t are u s u a l l y supplement to the a c t u a l committees' involvement. The a p p l i c a t i o n of the process o r i e n t e d methodology i l l u s t r a t e s t h a t one p r o j e c t e x h i b i t e d e x c e p t i o n a l success at i n c o r p o r a t i n g a l a r g e number of d i v e r s e p o i n t s of view i n the p l a n u s i n g d i f f e r e n t approaches to c i t i z e n involvement, i e . , R i l e y Park. The d e s c r i p t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n methodology, however found the R i l e y Park N.I.P. committee u n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e on a l l l e v e l s . The s u b s t a n t i v e : . r e p r e s e n t a t i o n methodology e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t the committee was u n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e because i t d i d not express the same o p i n i o n s as the g e n e r a l p u b l i c i n separate q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . The g e o g r a p h i c a l s u b s t a n t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n methodology was too d i f f i c u l t t o apply i n R i l e y Park because a l a r g e number of i s s u e s were d e a l t with on a s i t e s p e c i f i c b a s i s , and i t was i m p o s s i b l e to s p e c i f y sub-area boundaries which a p p l i e d , f u n c t i o n a l l y , i n a l l cases. In s h o r t , the process o r i e n t e d methodology, by viewing the p l a n n i n g process over a p e r i o d of time, and through the many forms of p u b l i c i n p u t , was the on l y methodology which i s capable of i s o l a t i n g p o s i t i v e d i r e c t i o n s i n r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . 137 In the case of Grandview Woodlands, the process oriented methodology was superior because i t s q u a l i t a t i v e approach made analysis possible i n a case where quantitative analysis was hampered by the small size of the N.I.P. committee. The major shortcoming of the process oriented methodology i s that i t does not establish how many forms of input are necessary for any p a r t i c u l a r planning project. This p a r t i c u l a r aspect of the methodology i s omitted because of the s i t u a t i o n a l nature of t h i s problem. Nevertheless, the methodology generated enough information to adequately evaluate the projects by comparing t h e i r performances. Future reasearch should focus on the development of f l e x i b l e c r i t e r i a for evaluating each project i n i t s own r i g h t . 6.3 Comparisons Between Case Studies: These two case studies make i t possible to compare the benefits of: 1. dominant or passive approaches by -the planner in the planning process, and 1 3 8 2 . small or large committees at the centre of the planning process. However, t h i s study has not been a proper comparative study, and any comparative conclusions can only be suggestive i n nature. F i r s t l y , there i s evidence to show that Larry Beasley was forced to assume a more dominant role by the large planning committee. The large committee prevented the rapid development of indigeneous leadership. According to one committee member interviewed recently i n Riley Park, leadership emerged with time i n the year following the completion of the concept planning stage. In Grandview Woodlands, on the other hand, leadership was already present i n the committee as a re s u l t of the p a r a l l e l Local Area Planning Committee. The introduction of planning strategy i n the form of unifying p r i n c i p l e s for action depended on the planner i n Riley Park. In Grandview Woodlands, the strategy of preserving the neighbourhoods for families originated with the p a r a l l e l Local Area Planning Committee and not with the planner. The strategy was so central to the thinking of those who became the leaders i n the community that the N.I.P. committee unquestioningly adopted i t as i t s own. When l o c a l input was injected i n the planning process from outside the committee which did not conform to the family needs concept, as was the case with the question-naire r e s u l t s , the input was rejected. 139 In Riley Park, where strategy was fostered by the planning s t a f f (the binodal improvement strategy), i t became secondary to strongly supported p a r t i c u l a r i s t i c inputs from outside the committee. This was i l l u s t r a t e d when the committee decided to cancel the $165,000 l i n e a r walkway proposal because of objections posed by residents l i v i n g i n the area of the walkway concerned about possible increased pedestrian t r a f f i c and related f a l l -out . While Larry Beasley's dominant role was i n sharp contrast to the approach used by Buholzer i n Grandview^ Woodlands, evidence suggests that the conditions that he worked under i n Riley Park, and which e l i c i t e d his res-ponse are closer to the norm for N.I.P. projects. What separated the Grandview Woodlands project from the Riley Park one was a consensual foundation for selecting issues to which strategy could be addressed. A l l i n the Grandview Woodlands committee agreed that the area had to be secured for the future as a neighbourhood for f a m i l i e s , i f not exclusively for single family housing as opposed to single person oriented apartments. Much of t h i s grew from a perceived threat that an adjacent apartment d i s t r i c t west of Commercial Drive would undermine the neighbourhood's status quo. Under these conditions, the role of the planner i s less one of forging consensus from a disparate group of interests as i t was i n Riley Park, and more one of a low key f a c i l i t a t o r and information gatherer. 140 Since N.I.P. program c r i t e r i a precludes the selection of neighbourhoods i n which redevelopment i s expected to rapidly cancel any investments made i n r e h a b i l i t a t i o n , the selection c r i t e r i a i s biased i n favour of stable, often complacent neighbourhoods l i k e Riley Park where issues within the parti c i p a t o r y planning process are r e l a t i v e l y uncontroversial and less i n t e r r e l a t e d . In Grandview Woodlands, the committee was smaller and easier for the planner to work with. That committee reached i t s own agreement as to what i t wanted from the planning process, unlike Riley Park where the planner had to foster a sense of planning strategy that would give unity to the plan. To t h i s extent, the role of the planner i n Grandview Woodlands may have been easier In f a c t , the planner's role must have been deceptively easy because certain noticeable omissions are evident on Buholzer's part. L i t t l e e f f o r t was taken to analyze the make-up of the dommittee and to seek a better d i s t r i b u t i o n of l o c a l residents i n the committee and a certain well defined geographical sub-section of the community was l e f t out from representation as a r e s u l t . The community questionnaire was another clear omission on the part of those concern i n Grandview Woodlands. •'•While h i s r o l e i n N.I.P. may have been easier, the fac t that B i l l Buholzer was responsible f o r two projects at once may have made his task as d i f f i c u l t or more d i f f i c u l t than Larry Beasley's i n R i l e y Park, however. 141 The refusal of the committee to make use of the question-naire can be viewed as a f a i l u r e of the s t a f f to enforce a well j u s t i f i e d convention on the part of N.I.P. projects in Vancouver, and an i l l u s t r a t i o n of the callous disregard for popular public opinion i n the committee. This evidence suggests that the planner's role i n fostering planning strategy and developing c i t i z e n involvement outside the committee i s just as important when the committee and c i t i z e n s assume a dominant role i n a project. 6 . 4 The Role of Citizens as a Learning Process: The development of a u n i v e r s a l i s t i c outlook i n the planning process was apparently a more acute problem in Riley Park than i t was i n Grandview Woodlands where; ,; the committee quickly inherited a well integrated i d e a l about the future of t h e i r neighbourhood. The Riley Park committee members exhibited a number of d i f f e r e n t orientations i n terms of t h e i r planning goals. These included members of s o c i a l service agencies, community organizations, and cer t a i n " s o c i a l l y conscious" members of the community, each with a d i f f e r e n t idea about the s o c i a l problems i n tne community or how to deal with them, and they also included a number of c i t i z e n s s t r i c t l y concerned about t h e i r area's physical appearance and the 1 4 2 need for physical improvements to t i d y the area up. This was not only a function of the larger committee and the absence of a perceived predominant neighbourhood problem, i t also arose because of the way i n which the committee was recruited from a large number of d i f f e r e n t organizational meetings held i n various parts of the community. The Riley Park committee nevertheless had to prepare a neighbourhood plan which was couched in a language and a form which could be accepted by council. The plan submitted to council had to convince c o u n c i l l o r s that i t was based on planning p r i n c i p l e s with the future of the community i n mind and that i t was not a number of di s j o i n t e d p a r t i c u l a r i s t i c a l l o c a t i o n s . This actually happened and c i t i z e n s quickly became more interested in discussing strategy and organization for the plan than isolated substantive subjects l i k e housing or parks. This does not mean that they forgot t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r i s t i c goals e n t i r e l y . Nevertheless, the committee, p a r t i c u l a r l y the u n i n i t i a t e d one, has a commitment, when i t submits i t s p a r t i c u l a r i s t i c goals into the process, to learn about "planning" from the planner as much as the planner has a commitment to learn the committee's values. 6.5 The Role of the Planner: The absence of clear program c r i t e r i a or guidelines i n evaluating the performance of the planner i n N.I.P. 143 programs makes i t d i f f i c u l t to c r i t i c i z e the performance of a p a r t i c u l a r planner i n a planning process. However, certain requirements appear obvious, including a f a i r l y broad based planning committee at the centre of the planning process, flanked by a good mixture of d i f f e r e n t forms of c i t i z e n input, and a sound l e v e l of consultation with implementing government departments. Evidence suggests that these elements i n the planning process cannot be l e f t to the committee i t s e l f , primarily since the committee usually consists of novices i n the planning process. The planner should serve as insurance against the r e p e t i t i o n of mistakes of previous projects. To assume that the planner must not contribute unless requested to do so i s to assume that the committee has nothing to learn from the planner beyond simple technical information or information on the c i t y bureaucracy. Everyone has a great deal to learn i n a planning process, and the c i t i z e n s cannot benefit to any great extent unless the planner does not hesitate to evaluate t h e i r proposals, outline scenarios, and suggest p a r t i c u l a r a l t e r n a t i v e s . A gneralized model for the role of the planner i n community organization i s based mostly on the e f f o r t s taken by Larry Beasley i n Riley Park. Table 6.1 i l l u s t r a t e s the role of the planner i n the form of three stages each with several role r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . The planner begins 144 TABLE 6.1. THE PARTICIPATORY PROCESS, ITS STAGES WITH THE ROLE OF THE PLANNER IN EACH STAGE STAGES Working through E x i s t i n g 1. Organizations 2 . Fostering a Planning 1. Organization within the Community (Committee) 2 . 3 . 4. 5. Seeking and Entertaining 1. Inputs from Unorganized Segments of the Community 2 . Completing a Concept 1. Plan 2 . 3 . PLANNER'S ROLE. gathering community information. atta i n i n g l o c a l acceptance. primary organizational meeting. secondary organizational meetings intended to generate a more representative group. committee s o c i a l i z a t i o n (re: requirements of the plan). committee s o c i a l i z a t i o n (re: planning process). agreement on a work schedule and procedures for implement-ing. working with the committee to develop a community questionnaire (extensive source of input). working with the committee to develop and implement other sources of inputs. developing selected issues into scenarios. proposing alternative options. providing additional technical information. 145 working i n a community using e x i s t i n g community organizations. The development of a new community organization i n the form of a planning committee with considered decision making r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s comes with the second stage. With t h i s stage also comes several c r u c i a l role r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s including one to develop as broad a committee as possible through public meetings, and i f necessary, follow-up public meetings to generate broad s o c i a l and geographical representation i n the committee. Most important, to ensure that the planner and the committee works as one, the committee must learn the same pressures and dealines experience by the planner. In the f i n a l stages i n the concept planning l e v e l of neighbourhood improvement, the planner and committee must deal with the unorganized portion of the community through mechanisms for public input. However, the approaches used i n t h i s respect are empirical since each community poses d i f f e r e n t challenges caused by i t s s p a t i a l ethnic, s o c i a l and economic make-up. Two general categories of inputs are available at t h i s stage, and to broaden the communities impact on the plan, a l l projects should employ methods which e l i c i t both kinds of inputs. F i r s t l y , extensive public input such as the random sample survey i s an opportunity to broaden the scope of the plan beyond pet issues fostered by an e x i s t i n g or aspiring community e l i t e . Secondly, intensive sources of public input gives those who are 146 s t r o n g l y committed t o t h e i r neighbourhood, and yet have n e i t h e r the time nor l e v e l of i n t e r e s t necessary t o p a r t i c i p a t e on a weekly b a s i s on the committee, a s p e c i a l o p p o r t u n i t y to gi v e i n depth i s s u e r e l a t e d i n p u t s . These i n c l u d e p a r t i c i p a t o r y o p p o r t u n i t i e s t h a t r e q u i r e a p e r i o d of v o l u n t a r y s o c i a l a c t i v i t y such as the p u b l i c meeting, d e s i g n - i n s , gaming s e s s i o n s or neighbourhood walks. And f i n a l l y , when these sources of in p u t have a l l had an impact on the committee, i t i s time f o r the committee t o s t a r t making d e c i s i o n s toward a f i n a l d r a f t p l a n , s e l e c t i n g between i s s u e s and determining p r i o r i t i e s . At t h i s stage the planner has another r o l e i n de v e l o p i n g s c e n a r i o s , o f f e r i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s t o those ideas being c o n s i d e r e d by members and dev e l o p i n g o p t i o n s , and g e n e r a l l y making the d e c i s i o n process a more aware and conscious one. 147 7;. POSTSCRIPT, This thesis probes the policy oriented early planning stage of Neighbourhood Planning proposed i n the process guidelines for the Neighbourhood Improvement Program. However, a dichotomy between planning and implementation i s always a r b i t r a r y , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n a grass roots planning environment l i k e Vancouver's Neighbourhood Improvement Programs. The dichotomy was nevertheless used to i s o l a t e an area of c i t i z e n involvement which i s especially important from a planning point of view: arousing public interest for u n i v e r s a l i s t i c a l l y (community oriented) motivated public involvement. Since the completion of the policy planning stage, much has happened to substantively a l t e r the content of the plans i n both Riley Park and Grandview Woodlands. For example, i n Grandview Woodlands, one project was dropped completely, the proposal to make improvements to St. Francis School. Much of the work of implementing the projects was carried out by implementation committees which included l o c a l residents not otherwise belonging to the main N.I.P. committee. Hence, the l e v e l of involvement i n d i f f e r e n t geographical areas of the community was increased as d i f f e r e n t schools generated t h e i r own group of parents with p a r t i c u l a r interests i n seeing the planned improvements implemented e f f e c t i v e l y . While the quantity of involved c i t i z e n s was extended, the focus remained i n the area of schools improvements with the development of implementation committees i n 148 Grandview Woodlands. No e f f o r t was undertaken to broaden the issue perspectives of the committee through such mediums as questionnaires. Undoubtedly, the time for doing this had been during the po l i c y planning stage and not the implementation stage when the committee had a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to concentrate on issue-concerns r a t i f i e d i n the concept plan. In Riley Park, the l a t e s t Six Month Progress Report (March, 19 79) showed that community organization was s t i l l an ongoing concern there as well. The report shows the committee was e x p l i c i t l y seeking to implement v i s i b l e projects f i r s t so as to encourage additional p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Also, continued analysis and -consideration of l o c a l planning issues was s t i l l a concern of the committee. Complex N.I.P. projects were being implemented by seeking conceptual development and achievement of approvals-in-principle f i r s t . Thus, implementation planning on a project by project basis was conducted using many of the planning process p r i n c i p l e s emphasized in this thesis' research on l o c a l area concept planning. 149 BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackoff, Russell L. (1974) Redesigning the Future: A Systems Approach to Societal Problems, New York: John Wiley and Sons. Alinsky, Saul. (1946) Reveille for Radicals, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Anderson, Grant. (1976) Local Area Planning i n Canada, University of Waterloo: Unpublished Master's Thesis. . (1977) "Local Area Planning: The Dream and the Reality", City Magazine, XI(7), March, 35 - 43. Anderson, Martin (1964) The Federal Bulldozer, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Arnstein, S.R. (1969) "A ladder of C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n " , Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners, XXXV(4), July, 216 - 224. Beasley, Larry, B i l l Buholzer, Dan Cornejo, Wayne Dickenson. (1977) Local Area Planning: A Review, Vancouver: Unpublished, January. Blecher, E.M. (1971) Advocacy Planning for Urban  Development, New York: Praeger Publishers. Bolan, R.S. (1969) "Community Decision Behavior: A Culture of Planning", Journal of the American  I n s t i t u t e of Planners, XXXV(5), September, 301 - 310. Bradley, Ray. (1973) "Community Action and P o l i t i c a l Change", Australian and New Zealand Journal of  Sociology, IX(2), 48 - 54. Bre i t b a r t , Myrna. (1974) "Advocacy Planning", i n Roger E. Kasperson and Myrna B r e i t b a r t , ed., P a r t i c i p a t i o n ,  Decentralization and Advocacy Planning, Washington: Association of American Geographers. Canada. (1969) Report of the Federal Task Force on Housing and Urban Development, Ottawa: Queen ' s P r i n t e r . Carney, P a t r i c i a . (1977) Social Communication i n Planning, University of B r i t i s h Columbia: Unpublished Master's Thesis Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. (1973a) Introduction to the Rehabilitation Process, Toronto: Peter Barnard Associates. . (1973b) New National Housing Act Programs, Ottawa: Government of Canada. City of Vancouver. (197 3) Local Area Planning, Vancouver: City Planning Department, June. 150 City of Vancouver. (1977a) Manager's Report to the  Standing Committee on Planning and Development, Review of Local Area Planning, Vancouver: City Planning Department, May. . (1977b) Review of Local Area Planning, Vancouver: ; C i t y Planning Department, September. . (1977c) Review of Local Area Planning: Recommendations, Vancouver: City Planning Department, September 22. Cole, Richard L. (1974) C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n and the  Urban Policy Process, Lexington: D.C. Heath. Cornejo, Daniel. (1975) Regional Development Planning:  An Analysis of the Approach i n Pictou County, Nova  Scotia, University of B r i t i s h Columbia: Unpublished Master's Thesis. Danneluzzi, L i d i o . (1978) C o n f l i c t i n g Expectations: The  Situation of the Local Area Planner i n Vancouver, University of B r i t i s h Columbia: Unpublished Master's Thesis. Davidoff, Paul. (196 5) "Advocacy Planning and Pluralism i n Planning", Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of  Planners, XXXI(4), November, 331 - 338. Davidoff, Paul, and Thomas A. Reiner. (1962) "A Choice Theory of Planning", Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e  of Planners, XXVIII(2), May, 103 - 115. Dennis, Michael and Susan Fish. (1972) Programs i n Search  of a Pol i c y : Low Income Housing i n Canada, Toronto: Hakkert. Draper, James A. (1971) "Introduction", i n James Draper, C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : Canada, Toronto: New Press. Ebers, Cornell. (1972) "What i s C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n " (transcript) i n Frances J. Frisken and H. Peter M. Homenuck, ed., C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : Views and  Alternatives, York University: Urban Studies Program. Fraser, Graham. (1972) Fighting Back: Urban Renewal i n  Treffan Court, Toronto: Hakkert. Friedmann, John. (1973a) "The Public Interest and Community P a r t i c i p a t i o n " , Journal of the American  I n s t i t u t e of Planners, I X L ( l ) , January. . (1973b) Retracking America, New York: Anchor Press. Friedmann, John and Barlay Hudson. (19 74) "Knowledge and Action", Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners, XL(1), January. 151 Frisken, Frances J . and H, Peter M. Homenuck. (ed.) (1972) Ci t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : Views" and Alternatives, - York" University: Urban Studies Program. Gans, Herbert. (19 6 3) The Urban V i l l a g e r s , New York: Free Press. Granatstein, J.L. (1971) Marlborough Marathon, Toronto: Hakkert. Guskin, A.E. and R. Ross. (19 71) "Advocacy and Democracy: The Long View", American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, XLI(1) . Hallman, Howard W. (19 7 3) "The Neighborhood as an Organizational Unit: A H i s t o r i c a l Perspective", i n George Frederickson, Neighborhood Control i n the  1970s: P o l i t i c s , Administration and C i t i z e n P a r t i c i - pation , New York: Chandler Publishing Company. Hamilton, Charles V. (1973) "Neighborhood Control and Urban Governance", i n George Frederickson, Neighbor- hood Control i n the 19 70s: P o l i t i c s , Administration  and C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n , New York: Chandler Publishing Company. Hardwick, Walter G. (1974) Vancouver, Don M i l l s : C o l l i e r -Macmillan, Canada. Head, Wilson A. (1971) "The Ideology and Practice of C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n " , i n James A. Draper, ed., C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : Canada, Toronto: New Press. Hightower, Henry C. (19 69) Planning Theory i n Contempor-ary Professional Education, i n American I n s t i t u t e  of Planners, Journal, XXXV, 5, 326 - 330. Hruza, Franklyn Lee. (1972) Seattle Model C i t i e s Program:  A case study of c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the planning  process during the i n i t i a l planning year, University of Washington: Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n . Hyman, Herbert. (1969) "Planning with C i t i z e n s : Two Styles," American I n s t i t u t e of Planners, Journal, XXXV(2), March. Jacobs, Jane. (1961) The Death and L i f e of Great  American C i t i e s , New York: Vintage Books. Jaffary, K a r l . (1972) "Alternate Ways to Give Citizens a Voice i n Policy Making" (transcript) i n Frances J. Frisken and H. Peter M. Homenuck, ed., C i t i z e n  P a r t i c i p a t i o n : Views and Alternatives, York University: Urban Studies Program. Jensen, Jens C h r i s t i a n . (1974) Urban Land Development,  P o l i t i c a l Process and the Local Area: Comparative  Study of K i t s i l a n o and Grandview-Woodlands, University of B r i t i s h Columbia: Unpublished Thesis. 152 Kaplan, Marshall. (1969) "Advocacy and the Urban Poor", Journal of the American I n s t i t u t e of Planners, XXXV(2), March. Kasperson, Roger E. (1974a) " P a r t i c i p a t i n g i n Public A f f a i r s : Theories and Issues", i n Roger E. Kasperson and Myrna B r e i t b a r t , ed., P a r t i c i p a t i o n , Decentrali- zation and Advocacy Planning, Washington: Association of American Geographers. . (1974b) "Dancing on a Federal St r i n g " , i n Roger E. Kasperson and Myrna Br e i t b a r t , ed., P a r t i c i p a t i o n , Decentralization and Advocacy  Planning, Washington: Association of American Geographers. . (1974c) "The Decentralization Enigma", i n Roger E. Kasperson and Myrna B r e i t b a r t , ed., P a r t i c i p a t i o n , Decentralization, and Advocacy  Planning, Washington: Association of American Geographers. Keating, Dan. (1978) "Looking Back at Community Organizing", i n City Magazine, I I I , 6, 36 - 43. King, James R. (1971) "The Impact of Model C i t i e s on Local Urban P o l i c i e s " , American Society of Planning  O f f i c i a l s , Proceedings, 1971, 36 - 39. Kotler, Milton. (1969) Neighborhood Government: The  Foundations of P o l i t i c a l L i f e , Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merril Company. Lipset, Seymour Martin. (1965) "Revolution and Counter-revolution: Canada and the United States", i n Thomas Forde, ed., The Revolutionary Theme i n Contemporary America, Lexington, Ky.: The University Press of Kentucky. Lorimer, James. (19 72) A Citizen's Guide to City  P o l i t i c s , Toronto: James Lewis and Samuel. Marshall-Kaplan, Gans and Kahn. (1973) The Model C i t i e s  Program, New York: Praeger Publishers. Martin, Bo Roland. (19 72) C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : I t s  Structure and D i s t r i b u t i o n among Various Socio- Economic Groups, University of B r i t i s h Columbia: Unpublished Master's Thesis. Model C i t i e s Service Centre. (1971) Model C i t i e s : A report on progress, Washington: National League of C i t i e s . Mogulof, Melvin B. (1970) C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n : The  Local Perspective, Washington: The Urban I n s t i t u t e . Moynihan, Daniel P. (1969) Maximum Feasible P a r t i c i p a t i o n , New York: Free Press.. 153 Needleman, Martin L. and C.E. Needleman. (19 74) G u e r r i l l a s  i n the Bureaucracy: The Community Planning Experiment  i n the United States, New York: John Wiley. Ontario, Committee on Government Productivity. (19 71) Gone  Today and Here Tomorrow: Issues Surrounding ,the  Future of C i t i z e n Involvement, Toronto: Queen's Pr i n t e r . Parsons, Talcott and Edward A. S h i l s , (1967) "Values, Motives and Systems of Action", i n Talcott Parsons, Edward A. S h i l s , Toward a General Theory of Action, Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Perryman, Gavin N. (19 7 5) The Functions of Evaluation Research i n C i t i z e n P a r t i c i p a t i o n Programs, University of B r i t i s h Columbia: Unpublished Master's Thesis. Ptarmigan Planning Associates. (N.D.) Summary of Strathcona Rehabilitation Project, Stage I I Evaluation, Vancouver, Unpublished report. St. P i e r r e , Paul Robert. (19 77) Public P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n  an Interagency Committee: The Airport Planning  Committee i n Vancouver, University of B r i t i s h Columbia: Unpublished Master's Thesis. Schmandt, Harry J. (19 73) "Decentralization: A Structural Imperative", i n George Frederickson, Neighborhood  Control i n the 1970s, New York: Chandler Publishing Company. Shahala, D.E. (1971) Neighbourhood Governance, National Project of Ethnic America, American Jewish Committee. Smith, Bruce L.R. (19 71) "Introduction", American  Behavioral S c i e n t i s t , XV(1), September. Snetsinger, Robert. (19 76) Diary of a Mad Planner, New York: Winchester Press. Stone, Robert L. (19 76) Local Area Planning: A Process  of C o n f l i c t Resolution i n Provincial/Municipal Land  Use Disputes, University of B r i t i s h Columbia: Unpub-lished Master's Thesis. Vancouver Urban Research Group. (19 72) Forever Deceiving  You: The P o l i t i c s of Vancouver Development, Vancouver: Vancouver Urban Research Group. 154 APPENDIX 1 INTERVIEW OUTLINES 155 The purpose of interviews was to c l a r i f y events and issues discovered i n the sequence events derived from meeting minutes (Appendices 1 and 2). Instead of an interview schedule, a l l interviews were carried out with an outline for an in-depth discussion. In the informal interview approach, the answers to questions determine to a great extent the nature of subsequent questions. Answers usually require c l a r i f i c a t i o n or the manner i n which a question i s answered uncovers issues requiring follow-up. Separate outlines were necessary for interviews of planners or planning s t a f f and committee members. Out-lines were enforced by "important questions" which stimulated discussion and ensured the completeness of the interview. A. "IMPORTANT QUESTIONS" FOR PLANNING STAFF INTERVIEWS The following were interviewed with t h i s interview format: Larry Beasley - Riley Park planner B i l l Buholzer - Grandview Woodlands planner Tom Phipps - Grandview Woodlands planning assistant Kari Huhtala - Riley Park planning assistant Community Organization: 1. Describe the s t a f f ' s entry into the community before the N.I.P. committee was formed. 2. Do you think that the planner's e f f o r t s i n developing the committee constitutes community organization? How were interest groups dealt with at t h i s stage? 3. How important i s the committee i n the concept planning process? 4. Do you think that the planner has any responsi-b i l i t y to ensure that the committee i s represent-ative? How representative i s the committee? How do you measure representation? 5. Do you think your committee was large enough? How did committee size a f f e c t decision making? What were some of the factors a f f e c t i n g the size of the committee? 6. Once the committee was formed do you think that 156 your r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for community organization was shi f t e d somewhat? Was there any concern over the size of the committee expressed? By whom was i t expressed? Was any action taken to induce new members? Why wasn't i t effective? Decision Making Process: 7. Was i t d i f f i c u l t to induce involvement for non-f i s c a l as opposed to f i s c a l measures? "IMPORTANT QUESTIONS" FOR COMMITTEE MEMBER INTERVIEWS The following N.I.P. committee members were i n t e r -viewed : Patrick Brown - Riley Park Fred M i l l e r - Riley Park Konrad Jashke - Grandview Woodlands Mary Bosze - Grandview Woodlands Community Organization: 1. How did you perceive the role of the planner at getting people organized for involvement? Planning with c i t i z e n s ? How did he perform i n his role? 2. Did you have any p a r t i c u l a r reasons for wanting to be involved? Sp e c i f i c proposals of your own or at a group you belong to? What was the role of p o l i t i c a l motivation i n members generally? Decision Making Process: 3. How did your ideas change as the planning process developed? 4. Where did you f i r s t learn about t h i s project? 5. How many people were at the f i r s t public meeting as the project was organized? 6. How was the committee at dealing with non-fiscal decisions? Were they easier to deal with? 7. What role did c i t y departments/council play i n your involvement? 157 APPENDIX 2 RILEY PARK N.I.P. PLAN T.58 VI. The Neighbourhood Improvement Plan: On the basis of the N.I.P. Committee's expanding knowledge about the nature and d i s t r ibu t ion of local resources, a c t i v i t i e s and problems, Neighbourhoods -iuod Improvement Goals have been establ ished fo r the future of the area. These are related to parks and recreat ion, schools, soc ia l concerns, housing, commercial development and the general appearance of s t reets . These goals, which have essent ia l l y been endorsed by the community in publ ic meetings and through a survey, are l i s t e d in Appendix C. Guided by these Goals, the N.I.P. Committee has adopted a series of recommendations that form the Neighbourhood Improvement Plan. These recommendations also r e f l e c t the following p r inc ip le s : (A) Actions are recommended not only for expenditure of N.I.P. funds but also for a consideration of governments' po l i c i e s and for loca l se l f -he lp i n i t i at ives. (B) N.I.P. expenditures are meant to supplement, not replace, normal c i v i c spending programs and should provide an impetus for a l l ocat ion of supporting funds from other sources to achieve improvements. (C) Any cap i ta l gained in the future on the basis of a present N.I.P. expenditure should be reinvested in the Riley Park Neighbourhood. (D) A portion of the N.I.P. Grant should be retained fo r the time being in a Contingency Fund to support improvement projects not well enough defined at present to receive an a l l ocat ion and other projects whose need becomes apparent during the Implementation Phase. (E) Tentative N.I.P. Capital A l locat ions w i l l not be spent un t i l p a r a l l e l operating funding, i f required, i s c lea r l y secured. The Riley Park C i t i zens ' N.I.P. Planning Committee proposes the fo l lowing Neighbourhood Improvement Actions for consideration by City Council and other affected agencies and groups. The Committee voting on improvement proposals 159 Community Facilities & Services $710,000.°° TOTAL N.I.P. ALLOCATION 1 INTENT: It is important to expand soda! and leisure opportunities 1 for teens, seniors, families, cultural groups and community 1 organizations and to provide ways and means for the community ^ to resolve existing and potential social problems (crime, unemployment, troubled youth and families, etc.) ACTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS . (Those for City Council are shaded) i 1. N.I.P. DEVELOPMENT OF A NEIGHBOURHOOD HOUSE I FACILITY I Create a. iamily place. ior getting together, 1 Zeisure activities, community ygroup iunctions, I cultxxhal group iunctions, diverse & changing 1 programming to dz.aH utiXh social problems and j iociat services outreach. Emphasis to be on t&AS-structured, Iniormal community-deiined programming. Location ta be in the. northern part oi the community. Cone, operating funding and exact programming being Investigated. THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION5 for development of a Neighbourhood' House be set at $200,000.00 . , THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. PLANNING COMMITTEE develop arrange-ments for core operations funding in consultation with Civic Staff, the Neighbourhood Services Associa-tion and others for'report'backt«o CITY COUNCIL. 2. N.I.P. DEVELOPMENT OF A STOREFRONT LIBRARY FOR THE NEIGHBOURHOOD Books, equipment and iurnltare to be provided uiWi N.I.P. iunds. Building, staOing and operations to be. provided by the Vancouver. Library BoaAd subject to Investigations oi timing, sites, and the nature oi local library needi. Location to be in the Main Street local shopping anna. THAT a tentative N.I.P". ALLOCATION to provide books< equipment and, -furniture'for a storefront library be seUat' $100,000.00 subject to > participation by the Vancouver .% ' L1brai7^ Bj»'ard, '-  •'" •' ( • ">;'-"-.';'V^  THAT the VANCOUVER LIBRARY BOARD support the establishment of a storefront library in Riley Park subject to further investigations regarding implementation as required. E 3. N.I.P. DEVELOPMENT OF A YOUTH CENTRE Create a place ioK alt the young people in the community to get together, learn social and vocational skills, and help one another solve various social problems. I Emphasis to be on iniormal programing iet 1 by the youth participant*. • Participation ha& been oHered by the Little H Mountain' Youth Project. n Location to be in the centre oi the community. jj Core operating iunding being investigated. - THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION ' for development of a Youth Centre . be set at, $150,DOG.«0 THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. PLANNING COMMITTEE develop arrange-ments for core operations funding 1n consultation with the Little Mountain Youth Project and others for report back to CITY COUNCIL. 1 4. N.I.P. IMPROVEMENTS TO RILEY PARK RECREATION 1 COMPLEX 1 Provide a new common entrance in order to E develop a large meeting room [partially I dedicated to teens recreation) and I additional seniors "home-auiay-irom-home" I space. • Make modiiications to minimize impact oi 9 the Complex on abutting residences. 1 This H.1.P. Klldcat^^QOmpri*lhg};approxljhately 5 .1/.3 aithe total'iunds needed uiiM:have to be U matched by allocations ' irom the Province, ri Parks Board and/or other iunding sources which U am presently being Investigated. • B" Provide Immediate iunds to develop a preliminary H design proposal ior consideration by other H iunding sources. THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION fi for the N.I.P. share of joint | -funded Improvements to the Riley | Park Recreation Complex be set at • | $225,000.00 and THAT expenditure of f $6,000.00 of this amount be approved! by CITY COUNCIL for an Immediate | design study. | THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. I PLANNING COMMITTEE, in conjunction I with Civic Staff investigate joint 1 funding sources for the Recreation | Complex improvements for report 1 back to CITY COUNCIL. § 7 _16p _ COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SEKVIChS (CONTINUED; ACTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS (Those for City Council are shaded) N.I.P. DEVELOPMENT OF ROLLER SKATING AT  RILEY PARK RECREATION COMPLEX Provide. 300 pairs oi roller skates ior a summer roller ikatingyprogram at Riley Ice Rink. THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION for purchase of a roller skate collection be set at $15.000.00 6. N.I.P. DEVELOPMENT OF "COMMUNITY VAN"  TRANSPORT Purchase £ equip at least 2 vehicles [vans] ion. community £ school use -in transporting groups to local £ city so dallrecreation iacitities [with provisions ior use by the handicapped). Arrangements ior operations, maintenance £ storage are under investigation with the School Board and community groups. THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION for development of Community Van Transport be set at $20.000.00 THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P PLANNING COMMITTEE investigate with Civic Staff, arrangements for main-tenance, operations and storage for report back to CITY COUNCIL. 7, DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY LIAISON COMMITTEE  WITH TEAM POLICE Provide cooperative iorum to understand £ iind appropriate solutions to local police problems [crime, vandalism, street saiety, etc.). THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P PLANNING COMMITTEE and TEAM POLICE initiate a Liaison Committee. (No N.I.P. expenditure.) DEVELOPMENT OF BLOCK PARENT PROGRAM S FURTHER  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEIGHBOURHOOD WATCH •• PROGRAM ' r ~ Establish a volunteer network oi helpers to aid children who are sick, hurt or In trouble. Achieve maximum implementation oi neighbourhood Watch. THAT the- RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. PLANNING.COMMITTEE. SCHOOL CONSULTA-TIVE COMMITTEES, SCHOOL AUTHORITIES and POLICE implement the "Block Parent" & "Neighbourhood Watch Programs". (No N.I.P. expenditure.) 9. COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR PROGRAMS AIDING TROUBLED YOUTH Institute programs in local schools to identiiy and assist young people who are experiencing problems. Support present youth-oriented services. THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. PLANNING COMMITTEE request & support the Vancouver Resources Board to station child-care workers in local schools. (No N.I.P. expenditure.) THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. PLANNING COMMITTEE support the Little^ Mountain Youth Project as required (No N.I.P. expenditure.) 10. ESTABLISH EMPLOYMENT PREPARATION & ACTION  PROGRAMS IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD " Establish, classes on how to choose a vocation, apply ior a job S iunction in a work situation. Develop a job reierral services out qi'the Neighbourhood House. THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. PLANNING COMMITTEE initiate discus-sions with Canada Manpower & others to develop job preparation & action programs. (No N.I.P. expenditure.) 11. PUBLICIZE CITY EMERGENCY PROGRAMS & FACILITIES Mafee emergency services known to all in the community. THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P PLANNING COMMITTEE initiate discus-sions with Emergenfcy^Sewfce Agencies| to undertake local publicity about emergency services. (No N.I.P. expenditure.) 12. INVESTIGATE CREATION OF COMMUNITY NEWSPAPER Local tabloid managed by local residents to distribute local inionmation. THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. PLANNING COMMITTEE investif«rte start-ing a local newspaper, (NO N.I.P. expenditure.; 8 - 161-JParks $267,2aa o a j 1 TOTAL N.S.P. ALLOCATION ! I INTENT: It is necessary to improve existing park spaces to ] 1 accommodate a variety of recreational activities, E | -to insure'that •'park':space*'is"safe"*and pleasant-and , i to insure that outdoor recreation opportunities are J | convenient to all residents. 1 | ACTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS [ (Those for City Council are shaded) '• 13. N.I.P. IMPROVEMENTS TO HILLCREST PARK/MELROSE RIGHT-OF-WAY The CloiuAz o& Mzlnoiz Avenue, wai appAovzd by City Council on HovzmbzA 3, J972. Check Vw-dhLc iituation Azlatzd to UzlAoiz Avenue and Capilano Stadium. Ptovi.de. tznnii couAti, multiplz-puApoiz haAd iuA&acz play aAza, bznchzi, gaAbagz Ae.czpta.clzi, and picnic tablzi on and anound MzlAoiz. ' Clzanup and landicapz MzViabz. Renovate ^ieldhouiz Aziidzncz £ iacititizi [Azquzit Jt/ancOLLVZA PaAki-'BoaAd'to-match, fiundi {fin thziz Aznovationi). THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION for Melrose Right-of-way/Hillcrest I Park improvements be set at J $75,800.00 THAT the VANCOUVER PARKS BOARD \ allocate funds from the Fieldhouse \ Improvement Fund of its 1977 Capital I Budget to help rehabilitate the \ Hillcrest Park fieldhouse. 14. N.I.P. IMPROVEMENTS TO RILEY PARK (EXTERIOR) 9 PAovidz bznchzi, picnic tablzi, ganbagz Azczp-taclzi , lighting and pathwayi. ImpAovz play zquipmznt, wading pool & backitop. Augment f^izld diainagz woAki. CAzatz vzhiculaA baAAizAi at Jamzi S 32nd 1 StAzztzndi. Renovate y.zldhouJ,z ^acilitizi [Azqumt VancouvzA PaAki •BoaAd to match {undi &OA thziz Aznovationi). Make modi^icationi to minimizz impact o£ thz paAk on abutting AziU.de.nczi. THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION j for RiTey Park (exterior) improve- ; ments be set at $68,200.00 THAT the VANCOUVER PARKS BOARD ! allocate funds from the Fieldhouse Improvement Fund of its 1977 Capital ; Budget to help rehabilitate the > Riley Park fieldhouse. 5 j 15. N.I.P. IMPROVEMENTS TO CARTIER PARK | PAovidz tAzzi S planting, nzui backitop, bznchzi and ganbagz Azczptaclzi. Vzvzlop cAzativz play aAza. RzpaiA wzitzAly izncz and gAOii iuA^aczi. Initalt ipzdal iafizty cunbi and walkway along Pnincz EdwoJid StAzzt. . THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION for Cartier Park improvements be \ set at $45,200.00 : 16. N.I.P. IMPROVEMENTS TO PRINCE EDWARD PARK ! PAovidz bznchzi, picnic tablzi, tAzzi and landicoping, gakbagz Azczptaclzi & lighting. ImpAovz play zquipmznt. Rznovatz ^ieJLdhouiz facility and AZiidzncz : lAzquzit VancouvzA Panin BoaAd to match &undi ioA thziz iznovatiom ). Imtall ipzcial ia^zty cuAbi along Pnincz Edwand and Sophia StAzzti and additional \ auto boAnizAi. ! Augment f^izld dAainage. woAki. THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION ' ! for Prince Edward Park improvements \ be set at $78,000.00 THAT the VANCOUVER PARKS BOARD j allocate funds from the Fieldhouse t Improvement Fund of its 1977 Capital [ Budget to help rehabilitate the ! Prince Edward Park fieldhouse. 17. ACHIEVE LOCAL USE OF CAPILANO STADIUM I WoAk with VancouvzA PaAki BoaAd to dzvzlop 1 local uizi £OA Capilano Stadium now and to I cAzatz local-u&z iacititizi whzn Capilano | Stadium ii Azhabilitatzd latzA. THAT LOCAL CITIZENS initiate discus- \ sions with the Vancouver Parks Board \ to consider potentials for local use of Capilano Stadium. (No N.I.P. expenditure at this time.; 162 Streets and Circulation $2K>,©O0.°°; .] . TOTAL N.I.P. ALLOCATION 1 j INTENT: While the traffic situation in the neighbourhood 1 is generally not a problem, many local streets and ' 9 sidewalks need physical improvements and cleanup. 'A The truck & traffic problem on Main St. can not be h 1 dealt with locally but requires city-wide attention. 1 ACTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS I (Those for City Council are shaded) \ 18. STREETS & SIDEWALKS UPGRADED THROUGH LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROCEDURES Coordinate an e^ort to get petition* iigned and projecti underway through Local Improvement Procedure* to get aJLt neighbour-hood itreeti cuAbe.d/guttered, paved and iidewalked. j Fini*hAd,.petitioni .to be -com iderzd.in-order ol receipt by the City. THAT?tne RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P.p PLANNING COMMITTEE coordinate Local • Improvement petitioning to upgrade ; streets and sidewalks. 19. N.I.P. STREET IMPROVEMENTS FUND Provide (,undi to contribute to improving izlected itreeti/' iideuiaJLk* alter local Improvement petitioning result* are. known. High priority to be given to itreeti abutting ichoolt, S open ipaczi and along circulation alignment* that are iignilicant to the neighbourhood. Approach to allocating iundi to be determined a(jter Local Improvement petitioning ii completed. THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION j for a Street Improvement Fund be f: set at $190,000.00 . :L !' 20. N.I.P. PROVISION OF PEDESTRIAN-ACTIVATED LIGHT j AT INTERSECTION OF 33rd AND ONTARIO Provide light and aiiociated itreet improvement* | to in* are ia^e and convenient pedestrian : accuiibitity ^rom the iouthern apartment area 1 to the community {aciUXiu north o{ 33rd Avenue.. THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION ; for a 33rd/0ntario pedestrian \ signal and"associated street improve-r ments be set at $20,000.00 j/21. PROVISION OF BUS SHELTERS Provide bui ihelten along major bui routzi in the neighbourhood through the Commercial \ Bui Shelter Program recently approved in principle by City Council. THAT a fair share of bus shelters be I provided in the Riley Park neighbour-: hood through the Commercial Bus J Shelter Program. i \ 22. STREET CLEANUP CAMPAIGN THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. \ PLANNING COMMITTEE organize a i Neighbourhood Litter Cleanup j Campaign. :• I 23. LOCAL INVOLVEMENT IN CITY-WIDE TRUCK AND ! GENERAL TRANSPORTATION DELIBERATIONS " THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. \ PLANNING COMMITTEE seek representa- [ tion on Citizens' forums considering >' truck and traffic issues in the City of Vancouver. ; 1 6 3 1 Commerced Are® end $170,QOa0flt j Neighbourhood Identify T 0 T A L "•I-P- ALLOCATION J l INTENT: It 1s necessary to consol idate, reinforce and make i I competitive the local r e t a i l shopping d i s t r i c t on \ g Main. ..Street, ...to., upgrade Main Street.as an important i soc ia l place and to develop a sense of ident i t y I for the whole neighbourhood j ACTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ' (Those for City Council are shaded) \ 24. EVALUATE MAIN STREET ZONING Insure that zoning nsJ.nioKc.zs and conserves •Local retail shopping opportunities on Main Street [between 24th & 29th Avenues) and provides, over time, a separation between local retailing and general commercial activity. This study has been endorsed at a recent Merchants Meeting. THAT CITY COUNCIL authorize the ? PLANNING DEPARTMENT to evaluate existing Main Street zoning in Consultation with local merchants, > residents and others. (No N.I.P, [ expenditure.) \ ! .„-25.,N..I..R.V.BEAUT.I.EI.CATION..J.O, JHE..MAIN .STREET . .... LOCAL RETAILING DISTRICT On Main Street between 24th 6 29th Avenues j provide improved sidewalk paving, street ! trees, landscaping, neighbourhood bulletin \ board, benches, garbage receptacles. pedestrian signs and ornamental lighting. Develop [with merchants) design concepts ior retail iacade Improvements. | Develop s-idmalk cleanup programs. Landscape <triangle at lith/Main. These' actions have been endorsed at a recent Merchants Meeting. ,, THAT a .tentative.N.I.P. ALLOCATION .1 to beautify the Main Street local retailing district be set at • $170,000.00 THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. • PLANNING COMMITTEE work with loca l merchants to develop design concepts i for facade improvements & sidewalk cleanup programs. !. :26. INVESTIGATE MEANS OF PROVIDING ADDITIONAL CUSTOMER PARKING IN MAIN STREET LOCAL ! RETAILING DISTRICT Devise solutions to the parking problem on Main Street including merchant-initiated collective parking lots through a Local Improvement Project; establishing 1-hour on-street parking limits; and making existing parking more generally available. These investigations have been endorsed at a recent Merchants Meeting. • THAT LOCAL MERCHANTS and COMMERCIAL . LANDOWNERS together with CIVIC STAFF invest igate means of solv ing Main Street parking problems. 27. START A MAIN STREET MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION Improve the Main Street local retailing district through collective Merchant Action [group sales, group iaceliits on buildings, small business counselling, group insurance and security arrangements, etc.) ; Local merchants have recently struck a steering committee to ionm a Merchants Association. THAT Main Street MERCHANTS develop a strong Merchants Associat ion. '28. ARRANGE NEIGHBOURHOOD EVENTS Organize and hold special neighbourhood events [such as a Riley Park Day, Main Street Festival, Open-Air Market, etc.) to build neighbourhood identity. THAT the RILEY PARK CITIZENS' N.I.P. PLANNING COMMITTEE in consultat ion with the Vancouver Social Planning Department and local merchants, invest igate ways and means to hold various neighbourhood events. 11 164 Schools $75,750.99 /j TOTAL N.I.P. ALLOCATION i INTENT: I t i s important to develop and encourage the use of selected appropriate school spaces "j by the local community for educat ional , j soc ia l and recreational purposes. ACTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS (Those for City Council are shaded) 29. N.I.P. IMPROVEMENTS TO BROCK SCHOOL Change, cra^t rooms and provide cra{t equipment fan. community use. Provide gym equipment and storage {or community use. Improve play area and landscaping. THAT a tentat ive N.I.P. ALLOCATION -' f o r Brock School Improvements be ! set at $21 ,000.00. \ s 1 ! T \ 30. N.I.P. IMPROVEMENTS TO BROCK ANNEX i Develop creative playground. THAT a tentat ive N.I.P. ALLOCATION ' for Brock Annex Improvements be set at $17,250.00 •< \ 31. N.I.P. IMPROVEMENTS TO LIVINGSTONE SCHOOL Change library/gym areas to facilitate community use. Work uiith Vancouver Parks Board and Vancouver School Board to develop social and recreational programming out o{ Livingstone School. THAT a tentat ive N.I.P. ALLOCATION fo r Livingstone School Improvements be set at $3,500.00 THAT LOCAL CITIZENS i n i t i a t e c discus-sions with the Vancouver School Board and Vancouver Parks Board to"... consider ways and means to develop soc ia l and;»eciieationa.l programming • out of Livingstone School. < 32. N.I.P. IMPROVEMENTS TO GENERAL WOLFE SCHOOL j Develop multiple use cosom hockey play \ facility. '. Provide landscaping and improved play area. THAT a tentat i ve N.I.P. ALLOCATION • fo r Wolfe School Improvements be set at $29,000.00 33. IMPROVEMENT TO TUPPER SCHOOL OPEN SPACE Cloie 23rd Avenue between Tapper School and schoolyard to provide continuous, safe open space. Street dos are costs & costs o{ installation o-{ sports S play equipment, and landscaping to be the responsibility o{ the Vancouver School Board. [No N.I.P. allocation.) • THAT CITY COUNCIL approve the " closure of-.23rd Avenue between : Tupper ScHool and schoolyard •for use.-as schooligrounds. ! 34. N.I.P. IMPROVEMENTS TO RILEY ALTERNATE SCHOOL Provide education equipment to meet special needs o{ the local students. Provide farnitare, carpet, etc. to enhance, the teaching environment. THAT a tentat ive N.I.P. ALLOCATION for R i ley Alternate School improve-1 ments be set at $5,000.00 i • ,165 Housing NO N . I . P . ALLOCATION INTENT: It 1s important to preserve the residential character of the neighbourhood while stopping deterioration; provide for additional types of housing; attract young -familiesj.to.„l.1,ve.,in.„the,..are.a.;, and,,retain a,balance of • j moderate-income rental and ownership opportunities. i ACTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS / (Those for City Council are shaded) ;• 35. DEVELOPMENT OF A NEIGHBOURHOOD HOUSING POLICY It ti ie.it that the. housing iituation in the area ihoald be investigated in a comprehensive manner, considering among otkeA tkingi •' the iecondary iuite iituation; new £ exciting hous-ing quality; approaches to providing diverse housing type £ tenure opportunities meeting local needs; £ methods to iacilitate housing maintenance. THAT CITY COUNCIL authorize the ! CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT to under- 1 take housing policy development '. for the Riley Park Neighbourhood, in consultation with local residents j with recommendations on neighbourhood' housing to be submitted to CITY COUNCIL at a later date. . 0 > j 36. ACHIEVE RESIDENTIAL REHABIL ITATION j • "?iw w&~A&pliiMi6fcdvt&0h,'t) i" the ''V&i'&dentiM. Rehabilitation Aiiistanct Program as ioon as poaible. Investigate wayi and means to rehabilitate ' the Little Mountain Housing Project. Achieve rehabilitation ol individual City-owned houses in the neighbourhood. THAT CITY COUNCIL request C.M.H.C. '. to issue the Riley Park N.I.P. Implementation Certificate of ' Eligibility as soon as possible so '[ that R.R.A.P. applications can begin to be-processed. THAT CITY COUNCIL direct CITY STAFF < to Investigate the economics of • applying R.R.A.P. to city-owned . . houses 1n Riley Park for report ; back to cm COUNCIL. THAT the R ILEY PARK C I T I Z E N S ' N.I .P. \ PLANNING COMMITTEE in conjunction : with Housing Project Tenants approach; B.C . Housing Management Commission to initiate rehabilitation of the . ,j Little Mountain Housing Project, j \ Administration and ADMINISTRATION $ ?25'2?2*2o I Future Planning CONTINGENCY $ l 9 8 , O i O . ° 0 \ TOTAL N.I.P. ALLOCATION I 3 . . —- ——. & 37. N . I . P . ADMINISTRATION Provide Planning Stall £ support to coordinate. f xn ellective. implementation ol N.I.P. [in \ cooperation with area residents) as well as promote. R .R .A .P . until June, 79SO. THAT, a tentative N . I.P. ALLQC*TJfflt ' l forprogram administration tJe'Sei'V -at $374,040.00 as per the buigtrt -attached as Appendix O. - ' J; 38. ONGOING C IT IZENS PLANNING COMMITTEE Continue the Riley Park Citizens ' N . I . P . Planning Committee to oversee SI.LP. imple-mentation; to initiate citizen action £ dis-cusiiom with government agencies ai recom-mended in this Plan; to move on local oppor-tunities £ problems as they arise; to in^lu-1 ence city policy; £ to respond to propoied j development. THAT the RILEY PARK C IT IZENS ' - NilsP. 1 PLANNI NG • COMMITTEE conti nue; with---': -its present organization and-terms \ Dereference to-advise City Council \ on-N;I.P. Implementation & represent • the community:on wartous planning ii matters. '• ij9. N . I . P . CONTINGENCY FUND H Fundi to provide lor later propoials which could 3 include [but not restricted to): play ipace in 3 the M/W iub-area; more park or itreeti improve-3 ments; low-coit daycare; local uses loA Capilano THAT a tentative N.I.P. ALLOCATION as a Contingency Fund be set at $198,010.00 ( / 13 166 APPENDIX 3 GRANDVIEW WOODLANDS N.I.P. PLAN 167 4 NEIGHBOURHOOD IMPROVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The N.I.P. Committee's approach to i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n preparing recommen-dations on the a l l o c a t i o n of N.I.P. funds has been based on a number of p r i n -c i p l e s , which are l i s t e d below to c l a r i f y the intent of the fo l lowing recommen-dations: - N.I.P. funding should be used to supplement, and not rep lace, normal c i v i c government programs which could d i r e c t l y bene-f i t the N.I.P. area. - Wherever pos s ib le , N.I.P. funds should be used as "seed money" to a t t r a c t funds for needed neighbourhood improve-ments from other sources and programs. The Committee intends to encourage the use of l o ca l improvement pe t i t i on s for s t reet improvements, the Canada Works Program to pro-vide labour for needed park and school improvements, and Vancouver School Board grants for development of playground f a c i l i t i e s at elementary schools. . - ..At,,.l east some, highly ...vjsJM be funded, so that h ighly apparent improvement r e s u l t s , and potent ia l benef i t in terms of increased publ ic c o n f i -dence in the area ' s future i s maximized. - A s i g n i f i c a n t proport ion of the Neighbourhood Improvement grant should remain unal located i n the Concept P lan , to permit a number of potent ia l improvement projects to be explored in more d e t a i l and to al low fo r unant ic ipated costs in p r i o r i t y p ro jec t s , i n f l a t i o n , and new projects which become f ea s i b l e during the implementation stage of the program. This would a l low ideas and suggestions from new pa r t i c i pan t s to be incorporated into the program a t a l a t e r date, and would encourage such p a r t i c i p a n t s ' invo lve-merit. improvements to local schools 1,035,000 Laura Secord School: make the school and grounds more usable by the general commun-i t y and improve recreat iona l oppor tun i t ie s for the students, by improving the playing f i e l d , providing a larger gymnasium, and developing a c h i l d r e n ' s playground. (495,000.00) Lord Nelson School: provide a c h i l d r e n ' s playground for school and community use, improve the playing f i e l d to the west of the school ajid i f poss ib le provide inde-pendent access to washrooms and changing rooms for a f ter - schoo l use. (125,000.00) St. Francis School: purchase land f o r , and share cost o f , gymnasium for school and general community use. (355,000.00) S i r Wi l l iam Macdonald School: provide c h i l d r e n ' s playground, improve gymnas-ium f a c i l i t y by adding storage space, and provide f a c i l i t i e s for serving morning meals to school ch i l d ren (provided that operating funds for such a program can be arranged from another source). ( 60,000.00) 168 improvements to local parks 460,000 Garden Park: improve tennis cour t s , soccer f i e l d and c h i l d r e n ' s play area, repa i r ex i s t i ng f ie ldhouse, and provide bocce courts . McSpadden Park: improve soccer f i e l d and c h i l d r e n ' s play area, provide landscaping, l i g h t i n g and tennis court s , and acquire f i e l d house or equivalent for washroom and changing f a c i l i t i e s . V i c t o r i a Park: provide bocce cour t s , washrooms i f pos s ib le , c h i l d r e n ' s play area, and minor improvements to increase usabi l i t y of park. Grandview Park: improve tennis cou r t s , provide c rea t i ve playground, repa i r and renovate wading pool and f i e l d house. Templeton Park: improve soccer f i e l d south of swimming poo l , provide l i g h t -ing in pool a rea, and provide p rac t i ce running track. street improvements and beautification 382,000 Conyiercial Dr ive: provide funds fo r basic beau t i f i c a t i on scheme ( t rees , pedestrian l i g h t i n g , benches, l i t t e r containers) and st imulate property owners' f i n a n c i a l p a r t i c i p a -t ion in more complete b e a u t i f i c a t i o n pro ject . (175,000.00) Protect ive Tree P lan t ing : p lant trees at S i r Wi l l i am MacDonald School and Laura Secord School for decorative and p rotect i ve purposes (approved by Council May 31, 1977). ( 12,000.00) L i t t e r Containers: provide-concrete l i t t e r bar re l s near neighbourhood grocery stores (approved by Council May 31, 1977). B u l l e t i n Boards: provide community b u l l e t i n boards at prominent l o c a -t ions to pub l i c i z e community centre and other neighbourhood events. Bus Shelters : provide regular s t y l e bus she l ters at locat ions where they would not be provided according to normal C i t y p r i o r i t i e s . ( 35,000.00) Res ident ia l Street Improvements: provide a subsidy to encourage the completion of loca l improve-ments including curbinq of res ident -i a l s t reets and construct ion of s idewalks, (146,000.00) with f i nanc i a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n by property owners. ( 4,000.00) ( 10,000.00) 169 community social services 90,500 Provide equipment for child care centres, office space Improvements for social service agencies serving the Grandvlew-Woodland area, and translate, publish and distribute an up-to-date directory of community services. housing infill and rehabilitation 250,000 Stimulate or sponsor a community-based non-profit housing co-operative or society to undertake small-scale infill housing and rehabilitation projects using National Housing Act programs. Acquire and clear land occupied by non-conforming land uses or residential,.buildings .which* are beyond rehabilitation,for develop-ment of non-profit housing. Funds allocated to the planning stage of the program (August 24, 1976). ( 69,546) Provide staff in the C i t y Planning ' Department to co-ordinate the implement-ation of neighbourhood improvement projects in co-operation with residents of the area, and promote the Residential (182,532) Rehabilitation Assistance Program, until June 1980. contingency fund 120,922 Retain a significant fund to support projects which are needed in the com-munity but not sufficiently advanced at this time to warrant an allocation of funds: including but not restric-ted to, after-school care and emer-gency day care facilities, senior citizens' and community meeting space, street Improvements to resolve local traffic problems, and additional allo-cations to projects listed above. planning and administration 252,078 170 j LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY land use and development issues i n the Grandview-Woodland N. I.-P. area are currently being reviewed by the C i ty Planning Department through i t s l o ca l area planning program. This program i s deal ing wi th the en t i r e Grandview-Woodland loc i i l area , which includes the Neighbourhood Improvement Area as well <is more unstable apartment r e s i den t i a l zones and i n d u s t r i a l d i s t r i c t s to the north and west. Planning po l i c i e s emerging from th i s program for cons iderat ion by C i t y Council w i l l have as t h e i r ob jec t i ve the preservat ion of the family r e s i d e n t i a l character of the Grandview-Woodland neighbourhood; the fo l lowing s p e c i f i c po l i c y d i r ec t i on s have been i d e n t i f i e d to date to deal with land use and development issues in the N.I.P. area: Housing Measures to accommodate s l i g h t l y higher r e s i d e n t i a l d e n s i t i e s , through i n f i l l , secondary s u i t e s , and care -f u l l y cont ro l l ed townhouse development are being con-s idered. Sens i t i ve use of the Standards of Maintenance By-law in conjunction with the R.R.A.P. program w i l l lead to a general upgrading o f r e s i den t i a l bu i ld ing s where th i s i s requi red. Commercial Areas Res ident ia l zoning schedules w i l l be a l te red to permit re tent ion and upgrading o f e x i s t i n g corner grocery s tores . Commercial Drive and Hastings Street commer-c i a l centres w i l l be encouraged to st ress t h e i r d i s t r i c t o r i en t a t i on and to provide pedestr ian sca le shopping opportun i t ies and amenit ies. Res ident ia l uses w i l l be encouraged on upper storeys along Commercial Dr ive. Spot d i s t r i c t commercial zoning w i th i n the r e s i d e n t i a l neighbourhoods w i l l be a l te red to a designation more compatible with nearby r e s i d e n t i a l uses. T r a f f i c and Parking Measures w i l l be invest igated to reduce the use of r e s i den t i a l s t reets by non-local t r a f f i c where t h i s i s a s i g n i f i c a n t problem. Required land dedicat ions ( for access to parking and loading areas) behind Com-mercial Drive and Hastings Street propert ies w i l l be gradual ly acquired as propert ies are redeveloped. O f f - s t r e e t parking spaces i n new r e s i d e n t i a l develop-ments w i l l be requ i red, and new r e s i den t i a l developments on major t r a f f i c a r t e r i e s (Nanaimo S t r ee t , Broadway, F i r s t Avenue) w i l l be encouraged to take the problem of t r a f f i c noise into account and provide protect ion f o r res idents . Improvements in bus serv ice on s p e c i f i c routes w i l l be explored with B.C. Hydro. Recreation Consideration w i l l be given to the improvement of the a c c e s s i b i l i t y of elementary schools f o r a l l age groups, p a r t i c u l a r l y in the " a f t e r school " hours. The "commune i t y school " concept w i l l be encouraged. In add i t i on to these s p e c i f i c p o l i c i e s which d i r e c t l y a f f e c t the N.I.P. a rea , 1t i s important to note that the r e a l i s a t i o n of the p r i n c i pa l ob ject i ves of the Grandview-Woodland l o ca l area plan w i l l determine to a large extent the success of e f f o r t s to conserve and strengthen the N.I.P. area east of Commercial Dr ive. The various r e s i den t i a l neighbourhoods in Grandview-Woodland are c l o s e l y In ter -dependent, and attempts to s t a b l i z e and re i n fo r ce the fami ly character of the N.I.P. area w i l l f a l t e r unless s im i l a r measures are succes s fu l l y implemented around the N.I.P. area in the Br i tann ia Slopes, Wall S t reet , and Woodland Park neighbourhoods. Shared services and f a c i l i t i e s which are p a r t i c u l a r l y or iented to th i s fami ly community (S i r Wi l l iam Macdonald and Br i tann ia Schools, the Br i tann ia Community Services Centre, and the Commercial Drive shopping area, for example),wil1 not continue t h e i r present o r i en t a t i on unless the r e s i den t i a l areas around them continue to provide housing opportun i t ies appropriate for a f am i l y - o r i en ted , mixed income, m u l t i c u l t u r a l populat ion. 

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.831.1-0094873/manifest

Comment

Related Items