Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The District of Chilliwack : a case study in the political process of decision making Munn, Enid Lucille 1981

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1981_A8 M96.pdf [ 5.07MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095150.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095150-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095150-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095150-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095150-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095150-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095150-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095150-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095150.ris

Full Text

£ A  THE  DISTRICT STUDY  OF  CHILLIWACK: A  IN THE OF  POLITICAL  DECISION  CASE  PROCESS  MAKING  by ENID B.A.,  LUCILE  THE U N I V E R S I T Y  A  THESIS  OF  MUNN  BRITISH  SUBMITTED  FULFILLMENT FOR  OF  THE  THE  IN  OF  1969  PARTIAL  REQUIREMENTS  DEGREE  MASTER  COLUMBIA,  OF  ARTS  in THE (School  F A C U L T Y OF o f Community  We  accept  conforming  THE  GRADUATE  and R e g i o n a l  this  thesis  to the r e q u i r e d  UNIVERSITY  OF  May  Enid  STUDIES  BRITISH  as standard  COLUMBIA  1981  L u c i l e Munn,  Planning)  1981  In p r e s e n t i n g  this thesis i n partial  f u l f i l m e n t o f the  requirements f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t  the L i b r a r y s h a l l make  it  and study.  f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r reference  I further  agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by t h e head o f my department o r by h i s o r her r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .  It i s  understood t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain  s h a l l n o t be allowed without my  permission.  Department o f The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date  D F - f i  i?/7<n  3ZL  Columbia  written  ii  Abstract  U n d e r s t a n d i n g how g o v e r n m e n t ' s p l a n , make d e c i s i o n s and i m p l e m e n t p o l i c y p r o g r a m m e s i s o f v i t a l c o n c e r n t o t h e p l a n n e r s who are e x p e c t e d to i n t e r v e n e in society's c o m p l e x p r o b l e m s and f o r m u l a t e s o l u t i o n s t h a t c a n be implement ed. A r e c e n t model examines p o l i t i c a l d e c i s i o n making p r o c e s s e s and i s o l a t e s four f a c t o r s which i n f l u e n c e d e c i s i o n o u t c o m e s : 1) t h e r o l e s p l a y e d by a c t o r s i n t h e i s s u e ; 2) the n a t u r e of the d e c i s i o n making e n v i r o n m e n t ; 3) t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e i s s u e ; a n d 4) the type of planning and i n t e r v e n t i o n s t r a t e g i e s u s e d . The m o d e l was u s e d as a f r a m e w o r k f o r e x a m i n i n g a d e c i s i o n making e p i s o d e i n the D i s t r i c t of C h i l l i w a c k , which centered around the i s s u e of community growth i n an a r e a t h a t h a d b e e n c i r c u m s c r i b e d by t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land R e s e r v e s . The m o d e l h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t c o m p r e h e n s i v e , classical p l a n n i n g m e t h o d s , w h i c h a r e g o a l - o r i e n t e d and f o c u s on l o n g - t e r m h o r i z o n s , a r e l i k e l y t o be r e j e c t e d i n d e c i s i o n making p r o c e s s e s . T h i s was c o n f i r m e d i n the Chilliwack case, along w i t h the h y p o t h e s e s t h a t a p r o p o s a l for change t h a t i s i d e o l o g i c a l l y c o n t r o v e r s i a l , i n f l e x i b l e , and d i f f i c u l t t o p r e d i c t i n i t s c o n s e q u e n c e s , w i l l l i k e l y be r e j e c t e d . The f a c t t h a t the C h i l l i w a c k plan was e a s y t o programme and had a l i m i t e d s c o p e o f costs and b e n e f i t s c o u l d not o v e r c o m e i t s d r a w b a c k s , therefore, t h e s e h y p o t h e s e s were not u p h e l d i n the c a s e s t u d y . The m o d e l ' s f r a m e w o r k p r o v i d e d a u s e f u l means o f e x a m i n i n g a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g why the p a r t i c u l a r outcome of the case study o c c u r r e d . I t c l a r i f i e d the inappropriatn e s s o f m e t h o d s a n d m e a n s u s e d by t h e C h i l l i w a c k d e c i s i o n m a k e r s and p l a n n e r s i n a t t e m p t i n g t o a c h i e v e their g o a l s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , the s t u d y p o i n t s out that p l a n n e r s n e e d new a p p r o a c h e s , s k i l l s and k n o w l e d g e i n o r d e r to a c h i e v e s o c i a l l y a c c e p t a b l e and w o r k a b l e s o l u t i o n s to complex s o c i e t a l p r o b l e m s .  iii  PREFACE  The  c a s e s t u d y f o c u s e s on t h e D i s t r i c t  which i s l o c a t e d the  Chiliwack  District  amalgamated w i t h  Chilliwack  since  t h e Township of C h i l l i w a c k ,  and t o g e t h e r t h e two became t h e  s p e a k i n g , many r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e D i s t r i c t  t h r o u g h o u t t h e s t u d y s h o u l d have  t h e t i m e frame was p r i o r t o t h e a m a l g a m a t i o n  switching  the of  between r e f e r e n c e  new d i s t r i c t ,  references  a l l references  to the c i t y  level  date.  the problem  t o t h e o l d t o w n s h i p and to the m u n i c i p a l  g o v e r n m e n t were t e r m e d t h e D i s t r i c t  City  referred  m u n i c i p a l e n t i t y as t h e T o w n s h i p o f C h i l l i w a c k ,  However, t o s i m p l i f y t h e s i t u a t i o n and a v o i d of  Valley.  of C h i l l i w a c k .  Technically  to t h i s  Columbia's Fraser  c o v e r e d by t h e c a s e s t u d y , t h e C i t y  i n w h i c h i t was l o c a t e d ,  of  Cheam R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t a t  e a s t e r n extreme of B r i t i s h  During the period of  i n the Fraser  of C h i l l i w a c k  level  of C h i l l i w a c k  and any  o f g o v e r n m e n t were t e r m e d t h e  of C h i l l i w a c k . I n f o r m a t i o n and d a t a c o l l e c t e d f o r t h e c a s e  came f r o m t h e D i s t r i c t  of C h i l l i w a c k ,  study  the A g r i c u l t u r a l  Land C o m m i s s i o n , U r b a n Programme P l a n n e r s , d e p a r t m e n t s o f t h e B.C. g o v e r n m e n t , t h e F r a s e r the  F a r m l a n d C o m m i t t e e , and  Cheam R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t , private  and p u b l i c  t h e Save  organizations.  iv  The  data  base  memorandums,  constituted information reports,  briefs  and from  staff,  a n d members  statistics,  interviews  with  from  maps,  brochures,  planners,  of the various  letters,  government  o r g a n i z a t i o n s and  departments. A in  map  of the D i s t r i c t  the preface  of C h i l l i w a c k i s included  f o r the reader's  specific  areas  phsycial  c o n s t r a i n t s imposed  Agricultural The regularly  of the d i s t r i c t  Land  throughout  Community  E. L.U.C.  Environment  F . C.R.D.  Fraser  O.C.P.  on t h e community  the  by t h e  used  the study:  Agricultural  Lower  and f o r c l a r i f y i n g  are the abbreviations  C.P.A.C.  L.M.O.R.P.  i n locating  Reserve.  following list  A.L.R.  convenience  Land  Planning  Cheam  Advisory  and Land  Secretariat  District  Official  Community  Committee  Use Committee  Regional  Mainland  Official  Reserve  Plan  Regional  Plan  vi  LIST  Table  Table  Table  1:  2:  3:  OF  TABLES  F a r m l a n d s D i s p u t e d by Chilliwack in the Department of A g r i c u l t u r e ' s A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Reserve P r o p o s a l  Page  26  C o r r e l a t i o n s Between A c t o r s and I m p o r t a n c e t o I s s u e  Roles Page  80  S k i l l s and Knowledge Urban P o l i c y Making  in  Page  111  Needed  the  vii  L I S T . OF  Figure  Figure  Map  1:  2:  FIGURES  F i e l d of P o s s i b l e Outcome  & MAPS  Decision Page  88  C o n c e p t u a l Framework f o r A n a l y z i n g D e c i s i o n Outcomes  Page  88  The  Page i i i  District  of C h i l l i w a c k  viii  CHAPTER  CHAPTER THE  OUTLINE  1:  CONCEPT  OF  COMMUNITY  DECISION  MAKING  Introduction The S t u d y o f Community D e c i s i o n An H i s t o r i c a l Perspective The N a t u r e o f U r b a n Decision Making A Model  of  Community  The H y p o t h e s i s o f - V a r i a b l e S e t 3: Strategies - V a r i a b l e S e t 4: Issues  CHAPTER THE  CASE  Policy  Making:  Planning  Decision  and  Making  the Bolan & N u t t a l l Model P l a n n i n g and Intervention Characteristics  of  Public  2: STUDY:  THE AND  D I S T R I C T OF A COMMUNITY  CHILLIWACK PLAN  E s t a b l i s h i n g the A g r i c u l t u r a l Land in Chilliwack E a r l y C o n f l i c t s Over Reserve Boundary Chilliwack's Agricultural  Reserve  the A g r i c u l t u r a l  Land  Response to the F i n a l Land R e s e r v e Plan  C h i l l i w a c k ' s F i r s t Community The D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n 1976  Plan:  Chilliwack Applies t o Remove L a n d s the A g r i c u l t u r a l Land R e s e r v e Studies on D e v e l o p m e n t Upland Areas  in  M e e t i n g s Between C h i l l i w a c k Government Officials Chilliwack Develops Community Plan  an  From  Chilliwack's  and  Official  CHAPTER  OUTLINE  CHAPTER  3:  AN  EXAMINATION  Page  OF  CHILLIWACK'S  EARLY  DECISION  MAKING  II  PROCESS  Page  48  Page Page Page Page Page Page Page  49 49 51 52 53 54 54  Page  55  Page  58  Summary  Page  59  Conclusion  Page  60  Page  63  Page Page Page Page Page Page Page  64 64 66 69 72 74 77  Page  79  Page  82  Page  86  Page  92  Introdution C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of P u b l i c I d e o l o g i c a l Content C o s t s and B e n e f i t s F l e x i b i l i t y of A c t i o n Programming A c t i o n R i s k s and Uncertainty Ease of Communication Planning Action  Strategies  or  CHAPTER  Intervention  CHILLIWACK  The  Nature  -  Strategies  4:  THE  The  Issues  of  ISSUE  WITHIN  the Opposing  THE  MODEL'S  FRAMEWORK  Forces  Basis f o r Opposition A D e f i n i t i o n of the Issue I d e o l o g i c a l C o n f l i c t W i t h i n t h e Community I d e o l o g i c a l C o n f l i c t O u t s i d e t h e Community Opposition t o R i s k s and U n c e r t a i n t i e s C r i t i c i s m of the Planning Method Summary  The  Role  The  Compromise  The  Balance  Summary  of Veto  Power  Aspect  of D e c i s i o n  of D e c i s i o n  Making  Outcomes  Over  Time  X  CHAPTER  OUTLINE  CHAPTER  5:  Page I I I  THE  IMPLICATIONS  OF T H E MODEL FOR COMMUNITY  The  Model's U s e f u l l n e s s  as a Case  PLANNING  Study  Framework The H y p o t h e s e s on t h e C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Issue The H y p o t h e s e s on P l a n n i n g a n d Intervention Strategies A d d i t i o n a l Relevant F a c t o r s i n the Model  Page  95  Page  95  Page Page  98 102  Page Page  105 105  Page  109  REFERENCES  Page  115  BIBLIOGRAPHY  Page  121  The P l a n n i n g I m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e C h i l l i w a c k Case Study The N a t u r e o f D e c i s i o n M a k i n g Planning S k i l l s Required i n Decision Making  Processes  1  CHAPTER  THE  1  CONCEPT OF COMMUNITY  DECISION  MAKING  -2-  INTRODUCTION  Over clear ing  the  that  past  two  decades,  society  has  been  far  too  little  of  time  and  sums  of  plans  and by  to  them,  enact  shelved to  or  desired  As  end  been  on  or  the  hours  development  bodies  been  many  result  experienc-  half-heartedly  eventually well,  and  Incalculabe  wasted  been  increasingly  much  administrative  have  completion.  too  plans!  have  or  become  abandoned  plans  have  empowered  have  or  failed  actually  had  effects.  When  plans  frequently  through  that  which  of  have  political  the  pernicious  has  the  upon  produce  money  programmes  followed  planning  application  of  i t has  to  have been  failed put  authorities  on  to  be  the  and  to  implemented,  planner's  the  blame  inability  communicate  to  get  persuasively 2  the  virtues  this  is  problem  and  attractions  possibly may  lay  the  case  of  in  elsewhere,  their  some  since  plans.  Although  instances, i t appears  the  real  that  even  3 some  of  seems the  the  to  best  laid  l i e partly  will  to  tackle  plans  in  the  are  easily  matter  problems  and  of  to  thwarted.  The  governments  put  into  problem  lacking  effect  the  4 knowledge complex that the  and  political,  take  place  general  in  that  social,  attributed  is  known  in  creating  large  about  these  is  be  to  are  and  ineffectiveness  be  planning  solutions  measure  will  the to  complicated  effective,  There  psychological  this of  known.  then  to  intervene  fact  and  process that  interactions? i t must  numerous  interactions  planning the  are  be  so  may little  If  the  planner's  -3-  responsibility create  in  understand  government  There planning  to  these  systems,  i s another  reason  been  ineffective  implemented.  This  relates  decision  model,  distinct  parts:l)  2)  adoption  of  the  ation who  of  chosen  the  this  In  rather  early the  other  development  a  one  linking  which  prime  really must  a  of  and  general  of  the  key  concern deal  of  the  with  managerial  and  project  action  dimension  or  been in  processes,  in  proposes with,  produce  an  but organizfrom  called  any  the  social  to  pivotal  system?  resolution  Understanding  therefore,  the  the  through  should  p r o f e s s i o n i f i t expects in  are  programme.  i n problem  continually.  assist  action,  John  not  fuse  action, of  inform-  plans  he  processes, of  planners;  planners  are  simply  part  integral  by  plan^  actually  an  framework  to  that  not  four  recycling  model,  of  planning and  must  has  into  Therefore,  and  be  3)implementation  current  actions  to  classical  plans  4)  instruments  process  planner  d e c i s i o n making  the  to,  particular  knowledge  and  why  failed  the  deciders;  proposed.  planners just  in  classical  to  closer  become  a  this  plans  move  i t is a  faces  effectively ills .  the  d e i c i s o n making  result,  nature a  are  in  that  implementation  revise  proceed  words,  c r e a t i o n of  element  that  d e c i s i o n making  The  As  of  to  of  by  help  explain  have  alternative  plans  results  out  must  planning  ation's  the  deciders  any  plans,which  of  administrators;  information  planning  action.  preparation  help  is divided  by  the  that  process  plan  made,  with  plans  these  points  accord  planning  why fact  to  intervene.  to  and the  to  forth  of  Friedmann but  to  will  one  concerning  use  this  set  has  c o m p l e x i t i e s * and  solving  of  and  the be to  society's  -4-  THE  STUDY  OF  COMMUNITY  DECISION  MAKING:  AN  HISTORICAL  PERSPECTIVE: The past,  study  o f community  centered  around  the concept  context,  power  the  of i n d i v i d u a l s  to  acts move  other  decision  c a n be c o n c e i v e d going  individuals  making  of  'power'.  as a word  about  has, i n the In  which  this describes  the business  to a c t i n r e l a t i o n  of  to  trying  themselves  g or  to organic  or i n o r g a n i c t h i n g s .  community  power  have  political  science,  been  These  concentrated  studies of  i n the f i e l d s  s o c i o l o g y , and t o a l e s s e r  of  extent,  psychology. The  political  different making, and  a  positions  i n that  that  a powerful  social The  there  pluralist  idea  that  sees  a system  has been  elite  group  h a d two  basically  o f community 'elitist'  The e l i t i s t  decision  making  of people  who  on t h e o t h e r  i s a ruling  where  power  group  will  elite  philosophy  i s carried possess  among  out  the  social  hand,  or class  i s shared  decision  philosophy  p r e s t i g e i n a community's  philosophy,  there  an  viewpoint.  community  class,and  have  on t h e m a t t e r  'pluralistic'  contends by  scientists  wealth, milieu.  r e f u t e s the  and, i n s t e a d , several  competing  9 groups. ation  of p o l i t i c a l  shaping the a  Each  socially  pluralists  community  argue  decision  access  resources}"  binding  'structuralist'  have  and w i l l  have  decisions!''" Both  their  case  position; making  to a d i f f e r e n t  that  from  what  i s , they  i s determined  some  combin-  voice i n  the e l i t i s t s c a n be argue  by an  and  considered that  environmental  -5-  structure laws,  which  class  uncover  the  i s made  this  and  form  making  is  a  as  Here,  relevant  actors  however, is  they  because  are  and  the  access  can  often  in  positions  they  for  in  social any  imposes  on  institutions,  the  like.  is  to  To  learn  community  which  which  they  resources  operating, i t . This  skills,  limitations roles  by  to  or  episodes.  conditioned are  determined  struc-  making  be  technical  the  views  decision  s i t u a t i o n may  necessarily  overcome  of  approach  stage  the  and  structure  make-up  structure  informal  normally  which  the  financial they  have  environmental  political  play.  Sociologists of  a  as  12 behavior.  personalities,  structure  study  the  'process'  not  their  wealth  on  merely  environmental  of  political  position  features  the  features  shape  tural  by  such  positions  other  decision  of  levels, political  what g o v e r n s community The  up  community  have  played  power  as  as  important  political  a  role  in  s c i e n t i s t s and  the they  have  13 generally referred the  favored  the  elitist  to  as  stratification  pattern  of  social  principal,  i f not  the  view.  Their  view  theory  which  proposes  stratification only,  in  determinant  a of  is  community the  frequently that is  pattern  the of  14 power. elite'  Stratification of  political  upper  class  and  civic  studies  assert  citizens rules leaders  are  that  a  single  'power  community  life  and  subordinate  to  this  that  -6-  group, seen  which  why  elitist one is  rules  i n i t s own  the p l u r a l i s t position,  view  i n that  iterests.  i s the polar  power  group  but i s a v a r i a b l e  shared  among  different  community  the various  community  resources.  among  these p l u r a l  represent that  the 'public  wealth,  positions shift  status  constrained  greater  political  however,  power  environment.  1  really  studies  studies  alternative This  cleavages  c a n be s a i d  to  acknowledges  influence  roles  and  and p o s i t i o n s  the groups  the process  of  mutual  view  fragmented,  may  as each i s  assumes  i n the d i s t r i b u t i o n  view  as  i n community  of  decision  i t c a n be  has a l s o  argue view  said  from  decision  'process' approaches  and s o c i o l o g i s h t s .  philosophies  and  compete  a r e many  view  roles  time  making  6  and t h i s  approaches,  making.  of e q u a l i t y  be i d e n t i f i e d  scientists  with  the p l u r a l i s t  and a d i s p e r s e d ,  Psychologists' can  may  of the  as they  There  among  through  In e f f e c t ,  degree  groups  be  and r o o t e d i n  shifts  This  these  o f power  or constrains  adjustment^  a much  interest'.  the balance  that  a n d no o n e g r o u p  and a u t h o r i t y  of a c t o r s ,  with  group  groups  opposite  i s not s t a t i c  elite  for  I t can r e a d i l y  been To  that  adopted  clarify elitist  i s labelled  a process  by b o t h  position approach  approach  can c o n c e i v a b l y  with  a psychological  approach  t o t h e community  been  used  investigators  i n other  political various  pluralist  process  b y some  t o power  a l l these and  a structuralist  making  and t h e to  be  decision  identified  which  disciplines.  has  7-  Psychology's has  been  and  has  less  interest  has  Beyond  this of  community  than  kind  forms  of  attitudes  and  in  to  goals'!"^  Especially literature,  a  on  attempts  in  which  perspectives be  to  how  has  community  set  decision  collective  1  based  of  or  on  the  used  any  a  the  opposed  to  contrasting  stratification  and  of  different setting.  values, activites,  managing systems  larger  towards  science  variety  theoretical  there  of has  these  early  theoretical  to  than  governing  'individual'  pluralism,  tended  rather  principles  However,  understanding  the  disputes,  fundamental  (as  of  is  political  work,  methodological  to  organization  political  from  there  social  behavior,  of  this  psychology  into  systems  behavior.  much  social  prospect  of  l e v e l ^  approach,  in  make-up  prominent  insight  amount  described  forth  action  behavior), elitism  on  the  modify  urban  vast  political  concentration to  to  direct  the  be  disciplines  However,  contribute is  two  community  i n d i v i d u a l and  t h e o r e t i c a l support order  actors.  nationally  provide can  other  making  psychological  profile  can  decision  the  local  This  that  beliefs  explicit  1  can  able  in  of the  on  the  which  being  entities  of  at  making.  which  of  center  personality  intervention  prospect  that  political  those  decision  behavior,  lends  to  of  community  interest in  psychology  group  The  than  important  tended  rather  area  from  or  actors  an  prominent  evolved  influential  interest in  studies decision  perspectives  formed  the  basis  -8-  from  which  behavior actual  contemporary  have  grown.  real-world  actions  behavioral  'Behavioral  decision  i n models  o f some  models  models'  making, type,  of  decision  seek  to  to describe  duplicate  these  and t o p r e d i c t  outcomes  19 in  future  decision  ' normative how  models'  one s h o u l d  which for  employ  behavior  unless ions  which  and o t h e r  action  of the e a r l i e r  has d e s c r i b e d  as  one w h i c h  to  describe  attacks  i s incremental, i t scurrent  the problem  this  case,  made  at synoptic  solutions  the r e a l  world i n that  ills  i s always  or somprehensive  to the problem  or t h e i r  forms  of  policy  making  process attempts  remedies  and  time.  a n d no  analysis  situat-  collective  t h e community  partial  of  artificial  decision  over  axioms  situations.  models  stages  and  criteria,  desireable  and p o s s i b l e  i n successive  the analysis  decision  duplicate  behavioral  of  circumstances,  c a n be somewhat  closely  to  as s t a t e m e n t s  of d e c i s i o n  specify  beforehand,  prescriptions 20 i n the r e a l world. One  objectives,  which  ther  are i n contrast  i n various  components  models,  behavior  They  c a n be v i e w e d  a c t or decide  prespecified  These normative decision  situations.  then  In  attempt i s  of a l l possible  hard-to-measure  spill-over  21 effects.  This  of  Charles  it  describes  move  away  i s the ' d i s j o i n t e d i n c r e m e n t a l i s t '  Lindblom  and D a v i d  the r e a l  from  crises  world  Braybrooke  a n d , t o some  s i t u a t i o n , where  incrementally,  strategy  rather  extent,  communities than  move  -9purposefully does  not  toward  desired  completely  there  have  been  which  have  not  targets.  describe  real  d e c i s i o n s made been  world  by  incremental,  However,  this  behavior,  governments remedial  or  model since  and  institutions  serial,  but  22 rather  have  focused  There  are  understanding ific of  matter  Roy  view  Burke  of  the  many  of  of  on  planned  different  policy  making  community  and  James  diverse  parametric  change.  approaches  to  the  study  and  the  more  processes  decision  Heaney  making.  provides  conceptual  a  The  recent  and spec-  work  comprehensive  frameworks  of  the  over-  numerous  23 theories on  one  decision  of  and  influence'  within that  which  formal  of  elaborate  in  and  and  legal  and  of  focuses  developed on  of  Hunter,  on t h e ' s t r u c t u r e the  formal  institutions  framework  (or  the  behavior  the  actions of  they  formal  in  which  responsibilities)  balances  by  their  field  Floyd  focus  and  study  drawn the  from  they  the  influence  checks  have  agencies  and  structure  been  i s comprised  activities of  has  example,  Banfield,  goals  their  that  present  theorists  For  collection  structure  the  the  Edward  The  Nuttall,who  other  theory.  their  circumscribes informal  of  concept  (the  community,  exist.  Ronald  that  making  structure a  and  and  Dahl  that  b e h a v i o r a l model  Bolan  works  Robert  models  recent  Richard own  and  of  and  the  individuals  take  in  order  decentral-  24 ization In  can  addition,  social  be  they  movement  overcome draw  and  from  change,  by  informal  Robert from  centralization).  Hoover's John  study  of  Friedmann's  historical  -10-  analysis and  of varying  Lindblom's  idea  that  public have  probed  making  incremental  there  policy  making  process.  taken  as  described  recent  planning  and from  the nature Before  at the nature  paper  styles,  are p r a c t i c a l  into  be  planning  Braybrooke  approach,  limits  based  on t h e  of r a t i o n a l i t y  numerous  other  of the planning  in  theorists and  model,  of p o l i c y  and d e c i s i o n  deals  making  by D e n n i s  with  a look  Rondinelli  the concept  who  decision  describing their  predominantly that  from  will behavior,  in a  fairly  of managing  urban  change.  THE  NATURE  OF URBAN  Dennis and  also  Rondinelli  suggests  new  planners  i f they  episodes  a n d manage  nature  POLICY  describes  approaches  AND  urban  that  change.  where  resolution  DECISION  the nature  are to e f f e c t i v e l y  of the process  socio-political  PLANNING  of p o l i c y  with  decision  emphasizes  policies  making  are necessary f o r  deal  He  MAKING  a r e made  of c o n f l i c t  among  the  political  through groups  making  the  with  25  varying  values  to  or lose  gain  elicit  Through  from  each  involved  political  altered,  i n the process  other  process,  with  interaction  respect  would  to their  and s o c i a l  stand  divergent  ends and  adjustment,  i n policy  or r e j e c t e d .  be p u b l i c  that  policies  criteria,  of the p a r t i c i p a n t s  compromised,  groups  of p a r t i c u l a r  of r a t i o n a l i t y ,  and p r i o r i t i e s  ratified,  In t h i s  the enactment  interpretations  decisions are  from  responses  values, means.  and g o a l s .  The  or private  the  making  groups  organizations  -11-  which  may  have  expertise,  specialized  analytical  Essentially, interests  each  and  personnel,  skills  group  i t s own  and  pursues  information,  influence i t s own  conception  technical  resources.  perceptions  o f what  i s the  and  public  interest.  With  each  iculty  arises  policy  problems  each  group  define  following  in defining are  tends  components to  group  of  the  often  a  problem.  the whole  problem  complex  to p l a c e  the  i t s own  concisely,  problem  this  emphasis  way,  i n terms  each  of  the  both  to b e g i n w i t h  different In  interests,  and on  because  because  varying  group  a part  diff-  tends  and  then 2 6  mobilizes Although more  no  one  correct  among  them  problem, some  support  f o r i t s own  perception  than  any  perceptions  of  of  other,  in deciding  according  definition  to  how  a  social  i t falls  precisely  Timothy  a problem  of  problem on  or  the  be  problem. is  who  more  inherently  p l a n n e r to  broadly  Cartwright can  the  to  define  contends  useful  choose the  that  than  others  27 for in  planning which  a  purposes.  problem  This  i s so  i s perceived  possible  solutions  to  in  a  i s perceived  which  problem  strategy  that  reasons,  the  he  may  have  that  effective in defining  determines  problem  i s appropriate  because,  and,  the  determines  the  for i t s solution.  problem  he  the  range  on  kind For  way  of these  whatever  i s to help  way  of  s e c o n d l y , the  planner capitalizes the  firstly,  discretion  solve.  -12-  Other the  fact  that  evaluated, erate  characteris itcs policy  with  analys i s  happens  are  the f i n a l  points  participants  comprehensively, information their  Another  is  between  a problem  politicians interactions and  even  final  needing  policies  implemented, whether  on w h i c h  a n d on t h e i r  not only  when they  making when  cases  designed  Rondinelli's  analyze  final  groups 29 .  directions, making  the options  the f a c t s ,  i s the long  implement  lead  when  i s effective  and l a g  perceives  that  stage  solutions.  implementation  Even  based  predispositions.  there  when Political  can take  resolution  years  before  a solution i s  i t i s difficult  to  and t h e  do i t s u b j e c t i v e l y ,  and c o n f l i c t  are developed.  i t was  to e v a l u a t e  the public  program  of debate  i n many  policy  do t h e p o l i c y  they  compromises  influence  final  and i d e o l o g i c a l  or not the p o l i c y  condition  i n part  leaders  preceding  actually  out of  r e c t i f y i n g and t h e f i n a l  and c i v i c  decades  What  depend  but also,  t h e moment  the d e l i b -  of a c t i o n  capacity  i n policy  after  possibilities.  of determining  limited  made  courses  will  interests  problem  being  systematically  desired  and s t a t i s t i c s ,  own  are not  include  i s derived  out that  have  making  policy  i n the process  the process  Rondinelli  times  groups'  alternative(s)  involved  choice  of the various  i s that  In  on  alternatives  the best  a m o n g s t the v a r i o u s chosen  of d e c i s i o n  to  evaluate  in correcting  the  30 ameliorate.  propositon  on t h e n a t u r e  of  community  -13-  decision under and  making  conditions  partial  evolve, ness  A  MODEL  decision  structuralist well,  researchers  itself  all  although  sought  observe  the f u l l  dwell  unlike  on s m a l l e r  decision  at important  making  out these range  a model  communities, processes  of governing  could  these  and i t s  i n d i v i d u a l actors, the environment.  It i s their  i n communities  they  urban  where  As  c a n be  Essentially,  of the United  research  of both the  and p l u r a l i s m  studies  large  o f community  t o t h e community.  societal  of complex  previous  better  analysis.  c a n be a p p l i e d  areas  little  the elements  elitism  the case  and t h e e f f e c t i v e -  done  to the authors.  the model  metropolitan  behavior,  developed  and t h e b r o a d e r  problems  professional  policy  approaches  of both  looking  erately  have  the o v e r a l l process  that  large  groups  information  MAKING  incorporates  according  contention  in  have  and p r o c e s s  view  consequences,  sizes,  DECISION  that  combinations  accommodated,  issue  i n comprehensive  and N u t t a l l  making  i s c a r r i e d out  incomplete  As a r e s u l t ,  administrators  OF COMMUNITY  Bolan  risk,  of interested  solutions.  and p u b l i c  legislators  formulation  of the s i t u a t i o n i n which  the resources  planners  policy  of uncertainty,  ignorance  of proposed  than  i s that  used  were  States.  areas  where  of  centered  They  delib-  they  could  and d i v e r s e  political  which  tended to  often  i t was b e l i e v e d  be more  readily  that  observed.  -14-  Bolan  and  interactions four  that  elements,  some m a n n e r . the  actors  N u t t a l l break  each  These  development  or  are  of  process; to  quantitative  analysis  elements  in  their  New  of  high  of  the  hospital.  The  constant,  that  issues  and  employed on  a l l of  ship and  the  these  is  standing  the  occurred  in  eastern of  prime  end  was  centered  of  two  Boston's  planning  issue.  They  elements  the  two  of  the  of  District British  concern  to  the  in  a  purport  present the  community of  of  two  in  Pittsburgh develop  research  case  Columbia's to  as  a  decision  Fraser  of  the  the  public  relation-  element  making  to  making  located  held  hypotheses  means  at  Valley.  understand  new  strategies  study a  and  and  were  each  decision  these  Boston  to.explain  model  nature  first  number  Chilliwack,  planner  the  Their  intervention  issues'  the  4)  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of and  the  question.  to  their  developed  the  of  a  in  2)  policy  and  expressways  of  in  strategies  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  elements  nature  the  effort  or  which  relevant  intent  at  redevelopment  into  outcome  the  issue;  on  making  process;  planning  issue  urban  elements  of  outcome  of  public  kind  the  last  of  nature  these  final  kind  i s , the  the  between  It on  in  surrounds  the  political  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  making  the  of  final  that  with  of  the the  decision  deal  school  city  1)  process  decision  affects are:  the  study  last  the  the  3)  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  finally,  which  in  the  community  environment  developed  York,  in  elements  involved  socio-political  that  occur  down  and  process.  focus of  under-  episode  that  the  Since deal  i t is with  -15-  plannlng  and  intervention  of  the  issue  in  the  decision  focuses  on  The  at  Chilliwack making  these  issue  two  at  development  of  a  touched  in  the  off  Agricultural primary how  Nuttall's Set  4)  are  istics process  of or  and  intervention  Variable  Set  3)  is  the seen  that  their the  final that  work  actors  the  nature  be  two  roles  Variable  more or  Sets  the  were the  next  section  at  nature  of of  the the  model  deemed  and  provide  Chilliwack  were  case  case,  useful  study.  four,  more  charactermaking  strategies focusing these  additional  in  the  characteristics.  Where  postulates  (Variable  making of  the  than  they  and  issue  out  planning  study  Of  discover  policy  field  the  the  influence  the  environment.  model's  which  to  either  in  this  Chilliwack the  able  was  (Bolan  the  elements,  than  to  to  decision  roles  to  is  of  be  issue  of  of  decision  decision  understanding  aspects  the  and  the  province.  strategies  the  model.  around  creation the  component  Nuttall  district  in  nature  study  nature  two  may  their  of  into  looks  these  relevant  the  the  situations or  and  examination  outcome  planners  appears the  the  planning  examining  on  by  case  centered  the  the  important  Bolan  (A.L.R.)  and  an  been  for  1970's  because  present  the  has  plan  Reserves  Therefore, to  of  present  It  in  the  the  variables  readily  elements  early  and  clearly  process,  community  to  affected  process.  was  Chilliwack  Land  concern  the  strategies  were and  latter  insight  used. some  clarifying  The  additional the  -16-  THE  HYPOTHESIS  Variable  Set  The to  OF  3:  model  which  a  THE  Planning proposes  public  the  decision  the  way  i t is  presenting  BOLAN  issue  outcome.  Bolan  and  N u t t a l l model  the  purposes  strategy  below,  of  this  NUTTALL  general  seen  and  amount  of  the  the  set  study.  out  manner  involved outcomes.  First,  the there  degree  influence  collected,  paraphrased in  and  will  information  actors  been  the  Strategies  understood  decision  have  and  MODEL  Intervention in  and  i t , a l l affect outlined  for  is  introduced  are  and  that  The  which  AND  in The from  present are  the  hypotheses, the manner planning  hypotheses:  1.  'Planning p o s i t i o n ' - i t i s h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t where planning i s attached to a power c e n t r e ( r a t h e r than to i n d e p e n d e n t and a d v i s o r y p l a n n i n g b o d i e s ) , i t w i l l be m o r e i n f l u e n t i a l i n g u i d i n g p u b l i c d e c i s i o n m a k i n g .  2.  'Planning method' - i t i s h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t where p r o b l e m s o l v i n g i s o f an i n c r e m e n t a l or o p p o r t u n i s t i c n a t u r e ( r a t h e r than of a comprehensive c l a s s i c a l m e t h o d ) , i t i s more l i k e l y to g u i d e or d i r e c t p u b l i c a c t i o n .  3.  'Planning type' - i t i s h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t where planning deals with the immediate, focuses on m e a n s a n d deals w i t h s e l e c t i v e and n a r r o w l y s t r a t e g i c information ( r a t h e r than l o o k i n g to a l o n g - t e r m time h o r i z o n , being g o a l o r i e n t e d and f o c u s i n g on c o m p r e h e n s i v e a n d complex information s y s t e m s ) , i t i s more l i k e l y t o g u i d e a c t i o n .  Secondly,  there  are  the  action  or  intervention  strategies'  hypotheses: 1.  I t i s h y p o t h e s i z e d that a c t i o n s t r a t e g i e s which little d i s t u r b t h e s t a t u s quo a r e m o r e l i k e l y t o be a d o p t e d by a p o l i t i c a l s y s t e m t h a n a r e a c t i o n s d e s i g n e d to b r i n g a b o u t s o c i a l c h a n g e by r e d i s t r i b u t i n g r e s o u r c e s and c h a n g i n g e x i s t i n g i n s t i t u t i o n a l and organizational s t r u c t u r e s ( i . e . r e a l l o c a t i n g w e a l t h or power).  -17-  2.  In  I t i s h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t a c t i o n s t r a t e g i e s designed to c h a n g e i n d i v i d u a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s t e n d more t o w a r d a c t i o n than programmes t h a t attempt m a s s i v e changes i n aggregate societal behavior.  essence,  action -  -  be  work  reallocate  efforts  to  change  individual  efforts  to  change  institutions  Set  model  4:  and  preference  the  distribution  Characteristics  postulates where  with  respect  to  are:  that  proposals are  administratively  the  at  to  consequences  or  variables  efforts  expected  and  three  strategies  Variable  The  the  field.  characteristics  easily  or  of  of  societal and  Public  Issues  generally, positive are  easily  accomplished  both  The  specific issue  action  predictable in  generally l i e within  the  behavior.  organziations  and  of  resources  hypotheses  can their  economically a  social  that  deal  value with  are:  1.  I t i s h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t i f the i d e o l o g i c a l content ( i . e - b a s i c v a l u e s ) of a p r o p o s a l f o r change does not c r e a t e a l o t o f c o n f l i c t by c l a s h i n g w i t h w i d e l y - h e l d v a l u e s , t h e r e w i l l be a g r e a t e r t e n d e n c y toward p o s i t i v e a c t i o n ; b u t on t h e o t h e r h a n d , s h o u l d a p r o p o s a l s e r i o u s l y c o n f l i c t with widely h e l d v a l u e s , then there w i l l be a t e n d e n c y to r e j e c t i t .  2.  It i s hypothesized that proposals that influence r e l a t i v e l y few p e o p l e i n a manner o f l i m i t e d i n t e n s i t y and with l i m i t e d b e n e f i t s a r e more l i k e l y t o be accepted; however, p r o p o s a l s a f f e c t i n g a l o t of people w i t h a s u b s t a n t i a l measure of i n t e n s i t y w i t h r e s p e c t to both c o s t s and p o t e n t i a l b e n e f i t s a r e u s u a l l y rejected.  3.  It i s hypothesized that proposals which are f l e x i b l e and r e v e r s i b l e and c a n be c h a n g e d a t a l a t e r t i m e , i f p r o v e n i n a p p r o p r i a t e o r i n n e e d o f m o d i f i c a t i o n , a r e more l i k e l y t o be a c c e p t e d ; t h a n p r o p o s a l s t h a t a r e irreversible o r i n f l e x i b l e o v e r t i m e ( e . g . u r b a n e x p r e s s w a y s as opposed to s o c i a l w e l f a r e programmes.)  - 1 8 -  4.  I t i s h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t programmes t h a t are to be c a r r i e d out t h r o u g h a s i n g l e agency or r e l a t i v e l y few i n d i v i d u a l s a n d w h i c h e n t a i l few e x t e r n a l coordination p r o b l e m s a r e m o r e l i k e l y t o be a d o p t e d t h a n are proposals i n v o l v i n g much c o o r d i n a t i o n among a l a r g e and d i s p e r s e d number o f a u t o n o m o u s g r o u p s i n o r d e r t o c a r r y them out - t h i s i s l a r g e l y b e c a u s e o f t h e uncerta i n t y t h a t t h e p r o p o s a l w i l l a c t u a l l y be c a r r i e d o u t as p r o p o s e d .  5.  I t i s h y p o t h e s i z e d that p r o p o s a l s which are e a s i l y p r e d i c t a b l e i n t h e i r c o n s e q u e n c e s and w h i c h h a v e minimal r i s k s , w i l l have p o s i t i v e d e c i s i o n s reached on t h e m p r o v i d i n g o t h e r f a c t o r s a r e f a v o r a b l e also. Where p r o p o s a l s h a v e h i g h r i s k s and u n c e r t a i n consequences, p o l i t i c a l s y s t e m s a r e more l i k e l y to h e s i t a t e to a c t .  6.  I t i s h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t w h e r e an i s s u e c a n be clearly c o m m u n i c a t e d a n d s u b s e q u e n t l y u n d e r s t o o d by those a c t o r s who w i l l d e a l w i t h i t , i t w i l l be m o r e l i k e l y t o be a c t e d u p o n ; on t h e o t h e r h a n d , p r o p o s a l s and i s s u e s w h i c h a r e a b s t r a c t and r e q u i r e sophisticated p o w e r s o f c o n c e p t u a l r e a s o n i n g a r e more l i k e l y to be r e j e c t e d b e c a u s e t h e y a r e n o t c o m m u n i c a t e d w e l l .  There to  are  other  understanding  important  to  time  and  the  that  act  in  fact  that  one  groups For of  of  are  groups  manner  decision always  the  may,  not  the  study  This  issue at  of  the  may  just  on  any  times,  anticipated  parts  of  the  or  desired  by  a  the  than  and  these  community.  of  networks other  and  result,  affect local  groups  with  more  matter  each  i t . As  significantly  deals  the  of  making  be  number of  most  dimension  may  within  relevant  the  decision  independently or  and  the  there  acting  be  are  dimensions  issue  located  operate  processes  latter  makers  which  include  nature  there  model  making  particular  issues,  on  influences a  any  which  decisions  and  issue.  not  complex  present  number an  of  decision  the  for  group  aspects  an  outside  issue  decision  make  in  makers.  -19-  The  time  factor  dimension  i n decision  interactions lead  period  being  groups  involved,  affect  an i s s u e ' s  The  model  which  also  as  all-or-nothing  iation,  that  was  decisions  allows  in  issue their  rejection  issue its an  in relation  i s s t i l l  understanding  resolution,  of the actors that  through  or  can  and N u t t a l l  since  and  The m o d e l ,  This  other  may  I t can a l s o  or redefined  In addition,the a n d means  o r means  go  but the  complete  means o f an  retained, way,  i n the  periods  but  where  original  assists  through  ranges  the course  the other  model  and  their  be u l t i m a t e l y work  ingredients  to t h e i r  and  over  negot-  therefore,  o r means  a t one e x t r e m e goals  a  continuous  goals  goals  outcomes  final  are the e s s e n t i a l  of each  variable',  either  bargaining  a continuum.  a goal  goals  words,  However,  end. O r i g i n a l  that  to Bolan  of the o r i g i n a l  i s changed  that  the p o l i c y  see d e c i s i o n  In other  which  acceptance  used.  over  long  the 'dependent  studies  to the f i n a l  independently  goal  on  compromises.  along  i s rejected.  original  means  largely  at the other  involve  of- a r e a s  concern  or r e j e c t e d .  the c h a r t i n g  i n the sense  means  community  lying  political  to the issue's  number  Of  propositions.  complete  operate  can occur  attention  and g o a l s ,  as  processes  significant  outcome.  are usually  means  scale  from  many  the  i n the nature  outcome.  are reached  any p l a n ,  an  final  as a v e r y  Since  relevant  advocated,  accepted  they  both  decision changes  focuses  the fact  sees  many  i s the d e c i s i o n  proposal  up  and i n any o t h e r  is  can  make  recognized  processes.  i n knowledge  the goals  of  making  and l a g t i m e s ,  making in  that  i s also  of  -20-  clarity when  and  either  completely  It  ambiguity or both  intention  aspects  of  factors  in decision  the model  two  Variable  how  the nature  the  outcome  of  that  them  the f i n a l  are clear,  outcome  merely  may  occur  u n s e t t l e d , or  ambiguous.  i s the  strategies  and  Sets  used of  of  of  the present  to a s s i s t making  will  be  study  in clarifying  processes. used  as  a  In a d d i t i o n ,  and  the community's  the d e c i s i o n  making  these  framework  the C h i l l i w a c k i s s u e  to s o l v e  to examine  how  for the  problems  process.  these  important the  model's  determining planning affected  21  CHAPTER  THE  CASE  STUDY:  THE  II  D I S T R I C T OF  COMMUNITY  PLAN  CHILLIWACK  AND  A  -22-  ESTABLISHING  The  THE  issues  AGRICULTURAL  establishment  the  province  efforts  Land  by  The in  an  permitted  manner  that  to r e t a i n to allow  i n which  Regional  initial  of the  throughout  The  involved  Districts,  a five  out of  Reserves  government.  initially  general  co-ordinated  the  Provincial  Columbia  Agricultural  legislators  each m u n i c i p a l i t y  year  supply  of  f o r immediate  growth  i ni t s '  t h e A.L.R.  received  to t h i s  needs  and  land  to d e f i n e  i t looked  A.L.R.  F.C.R.D.  plan  o f t h e A.L.R.  this  t h e A.L.R.  resulting  from  w e r e made,  and  on  plan  in  t o make  their  their adjust-  area's Commission  C h i l l i w a c k the  complete  i t smunicipal  areas  boundaries,  of the Regional  the combined  on  Chilliwack  to t h e Land  to t h e Land  then  Fraser  of A g r i c u l t u r e  supposed  allowed  The  boundaries  based  within  a l l other  and C h i l l i w a c k went  adjustments  was  modified  T h e F.C.R.D.  after  were e s t a b l i s h e d  i n which  the Department  i f necessary,  submit  i t sapproval.  freedom  from  T h e F.C.R.D.  plan,  then  (F.C.R.D.),  proposal  District.  boundaries  i n t h e f o l l o w i n g way.  District  draft  ments  The  Regional  evolved  Land  reserves  the i n t e n t  the reserves  situated,  while  these  CHILLIWACK  area .  Regional  for  I t was  Chilliwack occurred  Cheam was  be  Columbia  IN  of A g r i c u l t u r e , and t h e B r i t i s h  o f t h e A.L.R.,  urban  up  by m u n i c i p a l i t i e s ,  establishing  out  the B r i t i s h  Commission.  should  study  of the A g r i c u l t u r a l  for setting  Department  RESERVE  i n the C h i l l i w a c k case  the  procedure  LAND  efforts  District.  of the  Commission,  to the Environment  where and  -23-  Land for  Use  Committee  Secretariat  further perusal.  plans  did  other  government  the  not  concerns  This  conflict  of  the  approval  and  Land  Use  Committee  the  Land  Commission  the  legal  The  A.L.R.  Fraser  designated up  to  the  problems  EARLY  present  A.L.R. areas  to  in  their  proposal, where  development  the  the  a  insured  immediate  the  Provincial  i t was  for  the  before  1973  and  District number  of  with  Finally,  the  Cabinet's being  plan  Environment  returned  designated Regional  A.L.R.  plan  essentially  of  A.L.R.  instance  Cheam  District  the  of  officially  Fraser  Government  objectives  for  Department.  (E.L.U.C.)  16,  C h i l l i w a c k has  growth-related  as  District.  was  from  to  officially  that  time  been  planning  community.  OVER  receiving  of  Regional  solve  CONFLICTS  After  plan  Cheam  the  Provincial  departments,  where  December  struggling  with  Forestry  received  the  department  resource the  of  the  THE  AGRICULTURAL  Department  of  LAND  committments  plan or  identified  conflicted  with  BOUNDARY  Agriculture's  Chilliwack officials proposed  RESERVE  the  with  Lower  initial thirty-six  either  Mainland  local Official  33 Regional been  used  Plan by  Chilliwack's directing  (L.M.O.R.P.) C h i l l i w a c k up own  growth.  zoning  objectives. to  bylaw,  that as  The  time, the  L.M.O.R.P.  together  community's  had  with means  of  -24-  2300  These  thirty-six  acres  and C h i l l i w a c k  acres  of this  about  130 a c r e s  was  planned  habitat  or f o r public  for  the proper they  t h e 2300  Most or  (as p a r t acres  of these  industrial  Stage Long  Maps Range  land  that  their  the urban  Therefore,  areas  matter.  they  areas  felt  requested A.L.R.  be a l l o w e d  were lost  were  only  developed  seven  a l s o had  areas  of  to a g r i c u l t u r e  were  entirely  Chilliwack  but t h i s  of the Current reasonable  to develop  of these  f o r urban  uses  was  Commission Stage that  f o r urban view  uses. on  thirty-six  to the extent  f o r a l ltime.  i n farm  urban  the Current  p a t t e r n by Land  i t was  plan.  had e i t h e r  Commission,however , had a d i f f e r e n t  There  eight  t o the Land  farmland,  on t h e b a s i s  thirty-six Land  growth  planners  essential  document  the d i s t r i c t ' s  these  areas,  conflict  Maps w h i c h  showed  remainder  the f i n a l  This  officials  were  from  and  therefore,  proposal  o f t h e L.M.O.R.P.  Chilliwack  they  were  use d e s i g n a t i o n s under  Maps,  that  A.L.R.  thirty-six  an u n a c c e p t a b l e  areas  Chilliwack  areas  2146  conservation  of Chilliwack,  be e x c l u d e d  obviously  the  these  about  uses  The  o f t h e F.D.R.D. p l a n )  f a r into  The  purposes.  recreation.  extending  standards.  approximately  as a w i l d l i f e  development  submitted  Commission that  felt  constituted  and c o m m e r c i a l  forindustrial  f o r use e i t h e r  politicians  areas  wanted  forresidential  and  when  conflict  that  Of t h e r e m a i n i n g  use, seventeen  were  -25-  partly and  being  the  these  last  to  acres,  acres  to  be  These one  of  Table  1  Table  of 1  River  i t was the  excluded  and  by  physical  these  under  the  Chilliwack  i s , Sardis  referred  expanse  of  the  Fraser  of  Chilliwack  of  and  areas  i n part  long  established at  of  the  is located.  removed  from  approximately  the  through that  to  as  on  in  down  around the  the  The  the  and  area  southern  sixty  end  total  A.L.R.  at  i n the  percent  of  In  other  number  that  Road  the  the  that is  the  interchange  and  the  land  corridor  total  2300  boundary City developed (consis-  Forces  wanted  amounted acres,  the  Vedder  Armed  Chilliwack  is  the  Mall);  finally,  Canadian  the  Fraser  newly  Sardis;  Land  in  former  Shopping  the  It  from  Corners  urban  the  the  c o r r i d o r '.  the  for  district  including:  of  into  words,  s i x areas  the  through  amount  acres.  down  requested  extends  where  1287 .  specifies  including  of  Vedder  Cottonwood  urban  The  south  one.  first  'urban  north  entire  1014  broken  and  actual  section  the  Chilliwack.  acres  to  the  be  of  i n each  the  Land  remaining  areas  u r b a n i z a t i o n which  River  ting  Crossing,  and  the  of  Under  approximately  areas  number  holdings. f o r the  really  twelve  dispute  area, constitute  commercial  retained  can  vacant  e x c l u s i o n of  allow  eventually excluded.  that  frequently  did  areas  general  illustrates  were  impossible  outright  they  acres  two  rural-residential  thrity-six  Commission Table,  allow  illustrates  exclusion  base  were  however,  twelve  number  main  two  for agriculture,  circumstances,  Commission 2300  used  or  to  -26-  TABLE FARMLANDS  D I S P U T E D BY  AGRICULTURE'S -  Acres  1  CHILLIWACK  AGRICULTURAL  LAND  I N THE DEPARTMENT RESERVE  PROPOSAL  R e q u e s t e d f o r E x c l u s i o n by C h i l l i w a c k E x c l u d e d by t h e C o m m i s s i o n  and  ACRES REQUESTED FOR E X C L U S I O N BY 1.  SARDIS  2.  CHILLIWACK  3.  VEDDER  4.  SOUTHERN  URBANIZED  AREA*  5.  NORTHERN  URBANIZED  AREA**  6.  FRASER  RIVER AREA***  7.  MAJUBA  HILL  8.  RYDER  9.  PROMONTORY  ROAD  MOUNTAIN INTERCHANGE  L A K E AREA ROAD AREA  OF  Acres  ACRES R E Q U E S T E D BY THE  CHILLIWACK  LAND  COMMISSION  246  112  249  128  501  197  334  237  23  23  46  15  333  333  234  0  180  180  10.  YARROW  52  29  11.  GREENDALE  10  10  12.  ROSEDALE  93  23  2,301  1,287  TOTAL  ACRES  T h i s a r e a i s l o c a t e d N o r t h o f F r e e w a y 401 a n d e x t e n d s North to the C i t y of C h i l l i w a c k ' s boundary; i t includes lands near the a i r p o r t . This area i s located North of the C i t y b o u n d a r y on F a i r f i e l d Island.  ***  This area i s located for i n d u s t r i a l use.  on  the Fraser  of  River  Chilliwack's  and  needed  -27-  1399  acres.  the  corridor.  Table of  The Land  Of t h e r e m a i n i n g  1, w h i c h  includes  the d i s t r i c t  Road  Areas),  and  Yarrow  had  been  areas ural  Hill,  requested  excluded  making  575  Ryder  Commission  considered  urban  services.  solely  on t h e b a s i s  of the lands'  land,  of  system  of c l a s s i f y i n g  virtually  and b e r r i e s  of  soil  class  i s only  crops  right  agricultural  This  classes with  vegetables optimum  highest  production.  has seven  producing  Commission  one h u n d r e d  i s the second  agricultural  System  area  the Land  to grains  through  capability  Canada  or  area  was  excluded for agricult-  f o r urban  from the  of fine given  Land  develop-  Class  2  under the of  soils  Inventory  1 lands  being  capable  cultivated  crop,  from  and f o d d e r  a more 7  Each  the c a p a b i l i t y  combinations.  to produce to Class  acres  individual  land use  excluded  rating  Class  a n y common  and c l i m a t e  able  there  the a g r i c u l t -  capability  on i t s a f f i n i t y  t h e Land  urbanized  Canada-wide for  nor only  F o r example,  which  Greendale  of the p r o p e r t i e s , the adjacent  a n d was n o t r e t a i n e d  northern  of  thirty-six  individually  ment.  uplands  and Promontory  f o r r e l e a s e . There  i t s d e c i s i o n on t h e s e  and t h e e x i s t i n g  production  Lake  in  of Rosedale,  treated  ural  illustrated  communities  village  from  acres.  t h e Land  capability  712 a c r e s  i n the southern  i n t h e two w e s t e r l y  of land,  patterns  s i x areas  and i n t h e e a s t e r l y  Commission  excluded  acreages  ( i . e . Majuba  902 a c r e s  When  Commission  crops,  Each  restricted  lands,  because  successive range of  which  have  no  and c o n s t i t u t e rocky  land  forms or  -28-  small one  unmappable  hundred  range with  of  soil  of  the  and  acres  climate.  best  was  development.  On  the  adjacent  urban  exclusion Vedder Corners new of  of  Road  the  an  for  uses.  This  major  property  frozen  the  1972, had  been  Chilliwack  commercial, District  No.  at  a milk  of  the  Health. Valley  Fraser Milk  Land  working  toward  the  interchange place  since mainly  plant  some  already  sewered  residential  properties of  the  and  been  to  lands and  plant  and  Foods  the  establishment  a  of  of on  Limited in  early  Limited, a  i t s properties  after  three  Provincial  Development  construction  residential  by  Association,  The  out  correct  Frosted  1967.  the  relatively  formed  the  establishment for  a  industrial  processing  Valley  at  the  Cottonwood  these  partly  and  guarantee  wanted  had  area  services  in  Producers  Sardis  treatment  of  i n s i s t e n c e of  the  and  10  conditions at  only  restrictions  included  light  the  plant  i t was  this  wide  technically  existing  area  in  Fraser  been  and  a  lands,  minor  necessarily  the  had  1  as  released.  owners  joined  system  took  Sewer  food  Department and  Centre  to  was  instance,  in  such  producing  existence  not  For  Interchange  A.L.R.  sanitation  the  lands  Class  due  to  i t was  did  area.  district  to  this  sides  hand,  areas  Shopping  sewer  two  2  of  Chilliwack,  Therefore,  other  similar  in variety  in  on  Class  capable  Although  farmland  adjacent  be  crops,  differences  or  bodies.  would  regional  some  of  water  which  sewerage around  the  the  sewers  December  21,  1972,  -29-  of  the  which  'land was  the  commonly  the  main by  happened  was  for  the  forerunner  properties  serviced  those  as  of  Provincial the  Land  Order-in-Council,  Commission  Act,  was  called.  The had  freeze'  trunk the  that  agriculture, to  the  shopping  but  the  fact  is,no  road  or  Land  which  had  even  properties  in  place  the but  these  centre  no  that  the  exclude  irreversibly  damaged  lines milk  the  readily  food  from  plants  the  A.L.R.,  commencement',  land  foundation  such  as  excavations,  improvements, Land  were and  excluded  alters  construction,  a l l  E s s e n t i a l l y what  'substantial  which  similar  not  to  The  were  District  refused  trunk  lands.  was  work  lines.  been  the  lands  there  and  meant  not  Sewer were  Commission  though  of  physical  slabs  in  the  that  drainage  concrete  lines  some  and  that  question  individual lateral  properties  accessible  in  on  Commission  adjacent  refused  the  34 exclusion. for of  the some  lines  This  three of  the  reached  officials  who  expansion  area  In  r e f u s a l was  property cost  of  owners the  residential saw of  general,  this  Land  serious who  system  development, of  setback,  expected  sewerage  part  various the  a  the  but  to  not  be  only  relieved  when  the  trunk  also  for  Chilliwack  community  as  a  critical  uses. Commission  proportion  of  the  properties  area  north  of  the  freeway,  case  south  of  the  freeway  excluded  requested  however, where  the  the  for  a  large  release  opposite  policy  was  to  in  was  the the  keep  the  -30-  Sardis  farmlands  Chilliwack, requested all  of  east. the Lake  were  released  Commission  a l l 333 south  was  refused  easterly  areas  retained  by  RESPONSE  TO  the  that  area  THE  and  further any  of  of  Ryder  Rosedale,  were  the Land  area  of  as  to e x c l u d e  upland  acres  acres  Road  f u r t h e r lands  1287  areas  of Yarrow,  of Greendale,  some  that  upland  and  f o r growth. released  and  Commission.  FINAL  AGRICULTURAL  the Land  Commission  LAND  PLAN  1300  planners  of  and  plan  off i c i a l s area  fact  acres  designation  their  southern  directly  i n t h e most  were  Despite almost  the  the  i n the Promontory  a l l allowed  CHILLIWACK'S  final  acres  result  acres  RESERVE  Hill,  the v i l l a g e  final  1014  180  acres  but  Yarrow The  Majuba  However,  234  In  the Commission  on  the  in tact.  the  t h e A.L.R.  elected  was  five  land  reserves  boundaries  officials  revealed.  claimed a  from  In  were  the months  that  t h e Rand  year  supply  prior  i n the very  land  to  excluded the  area,  upset  final  Chilliwack  when  the  following, Chilliwack  Commission  of  had  had  not  f o r growth  allowed  and,  at  35 best,  they  were  that  their  Land  Commission.  Commission  own  given  should  establishing failure taken  A.L.R.  t o do  place.  a  year  proposal  I t was have  three  their held  been  They  ignored  contention  that  a public hearing  the  final  A.L.R.  so  meant  that  T h i s , however,  had  supply.  plan  and  incorrect was  not  the  by  the  the Land  before  Commission's  procedures  the  felt  case  had  since  the  -31-  legislation during its  the  allowed time  A.L.R.  when  each  input  Regional  into  the process  District  was  only  establishing  proposal.  Elected plan  for public  would  Chilliwack  not  only  make  officials  perceived  that  the  A.L.R.  planning  difficult  f o r them,  but  36 would  stop  result,  growth  they  Commission. develop  a  The  and  community's that  discussed  Chilliwack  plan  type  of  future.  such  their  suggestion  community  direction  ion  altogether  given  the  land  was  development  would  that  would  the  with  reflect  As the  more  clearly  of  Land  define  the  f o r the  Commission's the  a  Chilliwack  envisioned  Land  constraints  community.  dilemma  made  which  I t was  a plan  in their  growth  expectat-  options  t h e A.L.R.,  for  especially  37 with had  respect been  to  the h i g h e r  pointed  native  growth  valley  farmlands,  community.  the  A.L.R.,  and  the  the  exclusion for  the  planning had  Although were  of  these  that  of  i n the some  of  Commission  situation,  first of  depended  by-laws,  to  a  valley  that  there  b u i l d i n g on southern  of  these  lower  lands.  It  were  alter-  the  upland  lands  areas  were  agricultural  i f and  when  crisis'  was  take  active  of  still  in  capability  indicated a willingness lands  excellent  to  Chilliwack  consider needed  growth.  This for  Chilliwack  namely  they  Land  to  options  the  them  out  capability  and  time  their on  or'land  to r e a l l y community.  Up  t h e L.M.O.R.P.,  the market  place,  to  an  that  their to  forcing role  point  own  dictate  Chilliwack i n the  i n time,  they  basic  zoning  their  community's  -32-  planning could  policies.  take  This  t h e major  values,  needs,  up  a community  with  ness but  of their also  mental the  goals,  a time  toward  resources  plan  when  that  examining  and o p t i o n s  which  reflected  attitudes  were  potentially  really  p h y s i c a l , economic,  the changing  towards  occurring  they  their  i n order  not  only  at various  t o come  the unique-  and s o c i a l planning  local  environment,  and  environ-  levels  througout  province.  CHILLIWACK'S  After Land  FIRST  a plan  which  land  PLAN:  between  i t took  the Development  the  COMMUNITY  discussions  Commission,  develop as  step  local  matters  was  T H E DEVELOPMENT  Chilliwack  fifteen  months  was c o m p l e t e d  Plan  use patterns  and t h e  f o r Chilliwack to  by e a r l y  1 9 7 6 a n d was b a s e d  already  officials  PLAN 1 9 7 6  1 9 7 6 . I t was on t h r e e  i n t h e community,  known  factors:  t h e L.M.O.R.P.,  3 8 and  t h e 1970 C h i l l i w a c k Z o n i n g  that no  was p r o d u c e d  public The  input  by C h i l l i w a c k ' s  into  Development  of  Chilliwack  was  basically  its Plan  a n d was a land  single  or m u l t i - f a m i l y  upland posed  and a i r p o r t .  development a number  focused  Planning  only  on t h e U r b a n  which  designated  one o f t h e f o l l o w i n g  residential,  core  The P l a n n i n g  to replace  of reasons  document  Department  f o rurban-oriented  use document  the c o r r i d o r into  I t was a  and had  formulation.  intended  within  industrial  By-Law.  why  growth this  Corridor  uses a l l  only. I t lands  categories;  commercial,  Department  commercial,  d i d not advocate  i n the valley  and a c t u a l l y  was n o t a v i a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e ,  -33-  mainly serve also  relating both  order  1983  from  which  be r e m o v e d .  1,560 a c r e s  The the  must  were  Development  planners  were  would  and e l e c t e d  required;  This  the  and e x i s t i n g future.  with  land  scale  and t h a t  officials  industrial  land  CHILLIWACK  APPLIES  o u t ; from  1991 onward, 1,634 a c r e s , o f  a plan  community which  another  than  planning  from  years  into  t h e L.M.O.R.P.,  a t a more  approximately  by  perpetuated  thirty  significantly  i n t h e community  stages:  a new a p p r o a c h  toward  i t was o p e r a t i n g  i t accommodated  have  i n a g r i c u l t u r a l use.  use p a t t e r n s  that  would  t o come  and from  d i d not r e f l e c t  I t d i d not deviate  the exception  plan.  lands  was a t o t a l . o f  C h i l l i w a c k . I t was e s s e n t i a l l y  past  development  have  to  document and  i n the following three  at the time  Plan  was d e s i g n e d  planning  detailed  1 9 7 6 a n d 1 9 8 2 , 585 a c r e s  acres  The p l a n  t o be i m p l e m e n t e d ,  t h e A.L.R.  t o 1 9 9 0 , 430 a c r e s  619  in  t e n year  f o r the plan  be removed  between  costs.  as a l o n g - r a n g e , t h i r t y y e a r  as a s h o r t - t e r m ,  In to  to development  detailed  s i x times  more  t h e L.M.O.R.P. h a d !  TO REMOVE LANDS FROM  THE A G R I C U L T U R A L  LAND  RESERVE The  next  Development from for  Plan,  t h e A.L.R., approval  thirty Land  step  years  Reserve  by C h i l l i w a c k o f f i c i a l s was  to apply  or i n t h e i r  of a land  t o have  words,  use plan  completing  the needed  they  were  lands  making  f o r C h i l l i w a c k over  and n o t t h e immediate o f 1800 a c r e s  upon  release  39 of land.  from  The f i g u r e  the  removed  application t h e next  the Agricultural o f 1800 a c r e s  -34V  was  quoted  actually only  i n this  covered  about  A.L.R.,  1634  but  exclusion  1834  the f i n a l  instance,  were in  in April,  request  65,000  with  i t was  acres  and  pointed 50,000  Reserves.  developable steep  acres,  escarpment  from  the e x i s t i n g  that  both urban  barriers  urban  left  into  urban  were  per  and  at that  of r e s i d e n t i a l  these uses and  were  upland which  growth  adaptable  areas  would  could  place  were The  supposedly  an  I t was  average  there  left.  He  was  3,000  only  Mayor  were  7,200 areas  made  with  separated  i t clear  protruded  cost  into  and p h y s i c a l  In a d d i t i o n ,  where  pointed  growth only  For  3,000  physically  high  supported  contained  upland  services.  farmland out  rate  of 6  percent  year  d i d acknowledge  that  purposes,  not  commercial  accommodate on  the  however, or  the d i s t r i c t ' s  opportunities^  was  that  a three  for residential  restrictions  o f employment  were  c r e a t i n g both  rate, land  another  t h e A.L.R.  development.  experiencing  hillsides  and  of urban  was  supply  and w h i c h  area,  Chilliwack annum,  percent  Land  the f a c t s .  i n t h e A.L.R.,  and  development.  to the e x t e n s i o n  intruding  75  to the  district  first  acres.  of C h i l l i w a c k  Chilliwack with  Reserves  conflicts  were  that  out of the  1720  went  and  their  slopes,  approaches  development  urban-rural  that  area  in Chilliwack's  request  the Mayor  of these  of which  t o come  reflected  of s t a t i s t i c s out  This  have  Plan  anticipated  at approximately  and  steep  the Indian  as  exclusion  a number  originally  would  rested  1976,  i n undevelopable  Indian  the  figure  first  the Development  I t was  of this  application,  Commission  since  acres.  acres  Chilliwack's  the  instance  industrial tax base  -35-  Chilliwack s  exclusion  1  both  in  the  Locally, itself  and  private  i t caused  the  creation  and  meetings Other  public  the'Save  farmers  to  with  It Use  groups also  The in  was  since  A.L.R.  ments  are  exclusion  land  municipality's make  a  for  was  a  only  newspaper about  Chapter  by  out  of  dealt  this  had  public  farmland.  agricultural  request. to  Various  have  a l l these  a  say  groups  body  Environment  with  that  decisions the  and  calling  in are  4.  requests by  final  that  province.  Chilliwack  organized  churces  also  by  area's  Chilliwack's  the  in  Chilliwack's  are  and  made  not  the  and  the  case  A.L.R.  but  not  a p p l i c a t i o n , where  the  Land  by  in  the  application,  local  Land  of  Land  govern-  Commission.  individuals case  Commission  of  a  can  only  recommendation.  When it  the  concern  organization  Formed  group  of  expressed  (E.L.U.C.)  makes  requesting  vocal  P r o v i n c i a l Government's  adjudicated  latter  the  much  throughout  Committee'.  departments  in  a  labour,  protested  concerns  the  of  exclusion  from  detail  Committee  The  the  generated  sectors  citizens,  Government  matter.  dealt  Farmland  protest  private  Provincial  the  concerned  institutions  the  request  E.L.U.C.  released  confirmation 16  acres  writer,  separating  of  of the  their  the  values  1720  were  Chilliwack's from  the  decision,  rest  of  Land  excluded.  Mayor of  the  November  the  was  41 Province.  1976,  Commission  According  hopping  25,  mad  to and  However,  Act one  talking i t  did  -36not  take  because  long  those  of  of  The  these  manner  not  since was  alter  before  the  view no  was  barriers which  Reserves.  A.L.R.,  was  4  official same  land  that  by the  made w o r s e  as  place  on  a  the  to  work  on  economical  of  colleague.  A.L.R.  resulting  as  well  was  from  highway,  and  by  difficult  the  1977  A.L.R.,  the  consequence  prior  to  outgoing  railway,  a  of  modest  more  before  was  a  i n November  district,  what  release  places  a  problems the  10.  42  his  even  having  Environment  for  position as  at  No.  the  in  the  toned-down  facilities  areas.  view  him,  in  area  Mayor  planning  To  the  situation  of  i t .  A.L.R.  His  was  3  Chilliwack's  unsuccessful.  In  refusal  government  the  the  the  created  a l l planning  v a il i• Ad .  of  traversed  that  residential  unsewered  had  the  forces  for  a  mostly  accommodating  utilize  opinion  of  provide  of  was  District  grounds  thereby  the  Chilliwack  Despite  of  would  in  aiming  Sewer  their  applied  This  Minister  the  office  had  was  regroup  they  A.L.R.  in  the on  to  Mayor's  that  li o n g e r  the  Mayor  corridors Indian  order  in  new  area's  case  possible  restrictive  hydro  to  to  later  and  were  Chilliwack's  new  the  development  in  was  established, the  which  brief  the  change  the  from  community,  lots,  the  months  properties  the  officials  request  Chilliwack's  than A  did  first  removed  enabling  six  acres  Mayor's  in  sewered  It  the  serviced  growth and  382  lands  pleaded  Chilliwack  approximately  exclusion version  for  late  second  January, to  exclusion  1978,  exclude  attempt,  E.L.U.C. any  of  the  they  announced 382  were the  acres.  44  -37STUDIES  ON  When ion to  DEVELOPMENT  E.L.U.C.  application, assist  IN  refused  in a  development  costs,  and  development  of  upland  worked  the  Department  get  the  study  Analysis the  Branch  of  complex  and and  water  study  and  variable,  second  designed  costs  and  uplands  and  of  part  as  Lake  The  as  to or  of  A.L.R.  the  lowland  the methodology  found  of  1978,  was  of  t o be  which  development  anticipated  A.L.R. w o u l d ultimately  drainage,  be  geologically  were  Ryder  a  and  serve serve  cost  as  which  areas.  of  the  developing  evaluate  lands  that  enough  preliminary  would of  stable  Lake  development  feasibility  process  to  the  Chilliwack  slopes  parts  the best  areas.  develop-  geology, surface  were  I t was  would  Spring  areas  the urban  the  i n the  released.  analytical  Ridge  of  characteristics  base  gentle  and  t r y and  Promontory  the  Land  analysis  been  the  the  Resource  had  the  suitability,  to  resource  By  the p r o j e c t  determine  of  Province's  a data  willing  residential  Housing  and  basic  provide  was  exclus-  Environment  the p h y s i c a l  however,  of  the  and  Lake  for  Chairman  Consequently,' those  benefits  outside  The  areas.  climate  the Ryder  working model  that  areas  i n t h e A.L.R. w o u l d  The  and  serve  upland  such  development.  were  to  on  acre  the P r o v i n c e  a detailed  Ryder  1720  determine urban  Affairs  out  information  covering  Mountain  areas.  AREAS  first  feasibility  quickly.  Mountain,  Chilliwack's  underground  for  way  was  to  the M i n i s t r y  carried  the h i l l s i d e s  report  a  under  technical  ment  market  with  that  study  of Municipal  Chilliwack  This of  the  UPLAND  Chilliwack's  i t did confirm  Chilliwack  Commission  CHILLIWACK'S  the  both i n  Chilliwack  a  case  study,  any  area  of  the  but  -38province. but  the  stage  The  feasibility  which  Prior upland had  upland  i s the  to  areas  been  two  study  Chilliwack  reports  done  study  in  October,  1976,made  of  developing to  of  which  320  It  was  the  only  urban  that a  the  to  assuming  acre  i n both  the  that  to  lowland units  unit,  to  between  report the  on  uplands  of  Their  rationale  for using  and that  utilizing  twenty-three  A.L.R.  model.  of  of  there.  of  in  480  in favor  the  the  units  were  in  also  1976.  acre  or  densities  urban  would more  of  cost than  45 uplands.  acre  that  a  dealt  Chilliwack  with at  parcels.  higher  the  They  as  four  development  2.0  was  sewers.  from  together  d e s i g n a t i o n on  installation  upland,  planners  1.25  per  concluded  the  put  The  lots  per  in  p e r s p e c t i v e of  rural  lowland  density  acre  outside.  services  report  economics  per  located uplands,  acres  of  The  the  A  cost  dwelling units  valley.  there  Corporation  acres  four  the  Government,  the  dollars  second  properties  and  Department  hillsides  million  the  providing essential  the  6.3  either  the  the  800  Chilliwack,  study  analysis  development  r e q u i r e an  consequently  of  and  from  densities  would  the  development  strictly  the  A.L.R.  and  density  rural  densities  to  Development  difference  Planning  hillside  by  of  Provincial  lowland  in  and  used  working  require increasing  5.6  Chilliwack's  be  r e s p e c t i n g development  of  same  would  the  comparative  uplands the  by  costs  a  the  approach  Dunhill  40%  development,  now  completion  of  corridor  were the  30%  achieve  a  acres  acres  found  showed  by  800  can  awaits  official  preliminary  adjacent  base  development  this of  data  L.M.O.R.P.  concluded approximately  accommodating  that  -39-  development  of  development  would  units  with  With  the  being had  a  the  community's  in  the  six  accommodated  MEETINGS  in  a  Commission convince problem  or  and  Chilliwack community problem sides  of  to  the  of  the  Land  Chilliwack's been based to  his  the  of  had  view  people.  growth the  growth  GOVERNMENT  Chilliwack with  either in of  rate  planners could  be  was  feel  of  shared  had  by  Chilliwack,  development-generated  that  people  former for  stated  to  to  solving  Land try  and  the the that  subsidize so  land  solution. the its on  a l l  Minister  at  application  intention  the  ord'ei  responsible  Act,  officials  reasonable  not  The  OFFICIALS  Chilliwack's  a  capable  exclusion  like  did  issue.  been  Commission first  AND  negotiate  simply  government's  on  years  seriousness  and  This  communities  depend  six  officials,  Chilliwack  Agriculture,who  range,  1978,  financially  alone.  of  and  officials was  annum  dwelling  11,000  population  per  occasions  try  3,000  approximately  CHILLIWACK  of  about  upland  46 uplands.  E.L.U.C.  them  of  only  1977  number  addition,  estimated  the  BETWEEN  In  support  percent  that  Throughout on  only  popultaion  determined  met  lowlands.  they  creation time i t  of  had  agriculturally-  would  47 revenue.  of  A  not  have  spokesman  -40-  for  t h e Save  time  of C h i l l i w a c k ' s  Agricultural which  Land  Reserve  seeking  land  on  reduce  stated  application,  was  should  committment  A.L.R. would  Committee  second  the government  financial the  the Farmland  that  the  a p r o v i n c i a l resource  be  responsible  the government's the tendency  exclusions  at the  i n order  and  for  that  part  a  toward  of m u n i c i p a l i t i e s  to b u i l d  a tax base  48 to  support  felt the  that  services. i f society  policy  necessity province  The  i n general  of p e r s e r v i n g to equalize  between  Chairman was  going  to  a g r i c u l t u r a l land,  taxation  those  of the Land  areas  structures  with  Commission  accept i t was  across  a  the  a g r i c u l t u r a l land 49  and  those  having  Even  the M i n i s t e r  1977  that  limited could  deserved  give  talk  such  little  as  had  t o be  were  more  sound  those  t h e A.L.R.  stated  in early  prospects  had  been  the government  and  financial was  Chilliwack's  way  the various  used  by  He  solutions experiencing, as  f a r as t h e  government  unsatisfactory  perspective.  being  of the P r o v i n c i a l  Chilliwack  extremely  Director's or l e s s  some  coming  officials  Planning  growth  of the n e c e s s i t y  district's proved  Affairs  a l l the consideration  providing  problems was  whose  outside  them.  Government  there  land  of Municipal  municipalities  Despite  to  industrial  felt  from the  bodies the  talks  the government  -41-  departments air  their  chests^ staff It  as  grievances There  toward  was  had  a s a means  was  letting  and g e t t h e i r some  bitterness  Chilliwack  complaints  of the A s s i s t a n t  intentionally discriminated  by t h e  treatment  Planner  officials  o f f their  expressed  t h e P r o v i n c i a l Government's  the opinion  been  of simply  that  against.  planning  of  Chilliwack.  Chilliwack  He was  quoted  saying: " P e r h a p s t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t b r o u g h t o u t i n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n ( f o r t h e e x c l u s i o n o f t h e 380 a c r e s ) i s t h a t i f g u i d e l i n e s to t h e Land Commission A c t were a p p l i e d t o C h i l l i w a c k as t h e y were a p p l i e d elsewhere i n the province, t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n and, i n d e e d , t h e o r i g i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n , would never h a v e b e e n n e e d e d . One i n d e e d m u s t s u s p e c t that p e r h a p s C h i l l i w a c k was s i n g l e d o u t f o r t h i s ^2 treatment because of p o l i t i c a l f a c t o r s " .  A  f e e l i n g akin  various  Chilliwack  provincial over  the years.  came  direction was  be  before  was  surfaced along  with  their  toward  community  t h e A.L.R.,  there  were t h e  which since  highway,  and hydro  had d i c t a t e d t h e 1960's. growth  autocratic  corridors.  t h e community's  Finally,  pattern  t h e A.L.R.  and t h i s  and s o m e t h i n g  that  policy would  5 3 i n a dictatorship. officials  were  understandably  the s i t u a t i o n i n which  they  found  had n o t been were  anger  their  the established  considered  occasionally i n  had a f f e c t e d  of the r a i l ,  of development  expected  they and  which  t h e L.M.O.R.P.,  Chilliwack by  Even  effects  destroying  reversal  officials,  policies,  fragmenting Then  to helplessness  being  ignored  given  disheartened  themselves,  however,  by t h e p r o v i n c i a l a u t h o r i t i e s  consideration  i n their  dilemma.  Some  -42-  concessions land the  from  had been  made  i n the form  t h e A.L.R. w h i c h  first  stages  are discussed  of the province's  mid-1978  Chilliwack politicans  the  Commission  Land  land  situation  asked the This as  was  that  were  the previous  absolutely  eventual  t o t h e Land  officials  felt  r e l e a s e . The r e s u l t  Commissioners exclusion  said  they  applications  Chilliwack  and would  made  view  give  a bare-bones  to exclude  plan of growth.  farmland  such  on t h e 521 a c r e s  fair  body  b u t i t was a n  exchange  request  their  f o r community  that  considered f o r was  that the  consideration to  by i n d i v i d u a l  each  at  from  The Commission  be s e r i o u s l y  of this  would  completed. In  firsthand  Commission  should  4, a n d  the Commissioners  essential  application  was  went.  to present  r e l e a s e s of  i n Chapter  two a p p l i c a t i o n s h a d b e e n ,  report  Chilliwack  invited  and t h e Commissioners  n o t an o f f i c i a l  official  study  t o go o u t a n d l o o k  Chilliwack officials  lands  of minor  land  owners i n  on t h e b a s i s  of  i t s  own m e r i t s .  In having were  a d d i t i o n to the t a l k s , during  beginning  1978 w i t h to plan  agencies again  Discussions  were  the  on t h e m a t t e r  Council  started  by  from  outside  would  be an O f f i c i a l  they  could  g e t some f u n d i n g  the Planning  Community  f o r i t s development.  from  their  the inside  of developing  This  Affairs  Chilliwack officials  Plan  were  community, their  Department a community (O.C.P.),  the Department  they  district. with plan. by  which  of Municipal  -43-  CHILLIWACK  By  October  planning first  of  1979,  consulting  steps  requesting which  DEVELOPS  taken the  would  firm  by  the  Council  work  with  had  retained  to  the  O.C.P.  develop  Consulting  to  appoint  the  of  the  more  of  of  occupation,  pursuits  or  The  Advisory  together,  of  of  urban  people  since  in  the  occupations  business,  and  Committee  member,  three the  purpose  a  the  Chilliwack's  was  they  of  stressed  were  whole heard.  to  to  funnel  committee,  well  In  man  as  from  in  a  distinct to  community  thus  the  that  of  the  O.C.P.  who  one  or  location  within  recreational  the  Community  Council  physical  C.P.A.C.  C.P.A.C. members information  business  areas.  consultants  that and  general  Planning  support  issues.  From  and  It in  the  was clari-  beginning  individually  views  Chilliwack  areas  included  estate,  geographic the  got  Chilliwack's  real  farm  assist  the  the  Chilliwack  planning  allowing  the  a l l of  former  engaged  public  as  the  farming,  a  C.P.A.C.  the  on  represented  addition,  included  women h o m e m a k e r s  fying it  also  of  appointed  Public  with  including  such  be  (C.P.A.C.)  members  concentrations.  One  developing  (such  satisfied  community,  private  interests).  Committee the  a  Committee  geographic  interest  conservationist  were  people  Chilliwack  special  consultants  Planning  expanse  and  fifteen  in  PLAN  was  Advisory  consultants  representative  community,  Planners  an  were  factors  to  COMMUNITY  Chilliwack  asked  the  ten  OFFICIAL  They  the  that  AN  back  public  to to  the be  -44-  To  further  insure  opportunity  to  a  public  series  Three  of  and  C.P.A.C.  an  such.  each  held,  Rosedale.  members  of  i t strongly  community's meetings  one  each  Based  on  in the  Chilliwack's  came  out  that  There  see  the  of  no  satellite a  strong  desire  to  of  greater  desire  Chilliwack's  life-style 5  the  to  small  which  had  at  in  to  the  their  by  saw  the  Chilliwack  i t  turn  area,  and  1980.  June  protect  local  centres  June,  City,  citizens  district  the  typified  held  issues,  expressed  Vancouver  retain  urban  were  public the  an  development  views  wanted  was  had  Chilliwack  and  was  rural  their  citizens  a g r i c u l t u r a l community  commuter there  Chilliwack  information  were  in  and  meetings, as  discuss  meetings  Yarrow,  that  as  into but  a  rather  identity protect  of  the  agricultural  4  community. It  was  citizens valued  becoming  in  general  their  life-style, had of  well the  the  earlier  physical  the  matter  district, industries  jobs of  for  planning  of  a  of  public  there  and  The  In  the  trend  the  Save  to  the  the  that  the  issues  very  real  addressed.  over  rural  concerns than  There  years  administration  in  past  decade  Committee  just  economic  public the  a  economy.  the  they  Farmland  of  Chilliwack  Chilliwack  protect  However,  some be  what  sense to  spectrum  concentrated and  time  wanted  were  problems  been  first  view.  broader  agriculture  m i l i t a r y base).  and  voice  employment had  the  thinking.  the  covered  protection  for  heritage  represented  and  the  were  farming  public  farmland  clear  was In  in  their the  two  (including  toward  -45-  growth  in  only  especially real  in  estate,  becoming  the the  service areas  meant  less  that  rather  concentrating  in  a  major  in  the  concern  commercial out  to  be  the  matter  of  of  away  and  newer  Corners  from  over-abundance  the next  that the and,  was  of  other  for  the  Planning  not  interests  the  floor  issues  the only  other such  more  activity  turned  so  than  had  been  City  such  as  the  Cottonwood  Chilliwack for  the  therefore  elderly,  of the  the  to  take  the  Chilliwack  had  size  have  should  needs  was  of  of  its  clarify over  the  transportation a  population  requirements  community's  concern  an  over  of  backbone  space  for  industry^  from the  committees  as  issue  the  standing  process  members  retail-  of  the  which  this  Another  area  concerned  district,  and  Retail  space  would  of  even  were  were  sector^  months  development  long  Department,  i t s other  members,  the  addition,  increasingly  growth  into  areas  and  matter  controversial,  In  community  The  course,  months  over  the  and  opportunities  employment was  economy,  insurance,  diversified  downtown  a g r i c u l t u r a l industry  Input  and  the  retail  becoming  residential  the  most  d i r e c t i o n commercial  requirements  more  and  Chilliwack's  employment  community  Centre.  of  The  decade.  finance,  income  commercial  Shopping  population.  trade,  agricultural land^  shifting into  lower  the  of  local  than  development one  of  sector  of  of  the  developing  C.P.A.C.,  Mayor, when the  agriculture  the  but  public of  O.C.P.  also  Council's  appropriate,  and,  the  from  Planning  individual  representing course,  came  the  over  Chilliwack's Committee, council  specific Consulting  -46-  Planners. drafted having must  the  with been  now  final  At the time  i t sgoals, ratified  community  freeze  land which  just  pushed  them  two  chapters  will  outside  course  been  means  and t h e C o u n c i l .  being  eight  public  It  for their  officially  years  problems  both  a d o p t e d as  making  and  i n the C h i l l i w a c k  The A.L.R.  sparked  to a  officials to economic  community.  The  of p o l i t i c a l  ultimately  conflict  "land  related  the d i s t r i c t ' s  which  case.  and  for solutions  in their  inside  the  of events  the process  o f t h e community  since  planners  a search  examine  occurred  of p o l i c y  followed  over  into  growth  and  before  f o r the d i s t r i c t ' s  physical  that  t h e C.P.A.C.  i n Chilliwack.  and  making  p o l i c i e s and  a s i g n i f i c a n t chain  planning  crisis  objectives,  t h e O.C.P. h a s  plan.  started  community  study,  to the Chilliwack  and i n p u t  has been  1  by  be p r e s e n t e d  perusal  It  of thi s  next  decision  boundaries  affected  resolution  that  the  was  47  CHAPTER  AN  EXAMINATION  OF  CHILLIWACK'S  3  EARLY  DECISION  MAKING  PROCESS  -48-  INTRODUCTION  Prior a  brief  Sets  to  review  will  be  in relationship  producing  the  considered decision  purely  little  making  would  local  on  this  to  viewed  their  local  The  Issues  understanding that  they  the  even  beyond part how  position the  the  overall  At  by  decision  is  the  early  Chilliwack planners  and  as  was  though  the  there  issue  must  have  effects  boundaries.  issue will  problem  and  Sets  provide  a  view  advocating  makers  Planning  Characteristics  with  a  possible  dealing with  the  examined,  the  been  that  Chilliwack decision  C h i l l i w a c k was  their  that this  hypotheses  posed  why  be  Variable  Chilliwack  that  district's  the  Variable  theoretically  on  resolution issue.  will  fact  spillover  the of  of  examination  though  be  entirety,  to  of  better  the  proposal  were.  After  its  by  its  event  the  I n t e r v e n t i o n S t r a t e g i e s and  Public  to  of  in  r e l e v a n t model  This  conducted  planning  models  the  Plan.  would  of  study  initial  out  be  early  understanding  solutions.  the  there  better  of  i n view  i n f l u e n c e areas  Focusing  and  to  phenomenon,  that  case  made  carried  tended  doubt  the  Development  necessary  politicians a  examining  Bolan  examining  Development  decision took  Plan,  making  place  in  with  respect  theoretical  examined,  along  outcome.  Nuttall,in  the  process  point,the  and  isolation  with order  focus and  the  to  the  model other to  Chilliwack's  will  will model  be  returned  conflict Chilliwack again  have  considerations  understand  the  final  -49-  The respect  first to  Plan  attributes  hypotheses  1976,  of  CHARACTERISTICS  Ideological  The  of  Chilliwack's  Development the  set  is  the  OF  PUBLIC  first  content  ideological theorized values  toward there of  at  the  own  there local  a  to  realistic  need  for  required (3%)  of  a the  the  plan the  for  period  of  the  dealing  with  little  only  one  meant  between  urban  of  amount  be  a  elected  to  to  by the  be  the  general  its  values  Chilliwack's local  A.L.R.  who  readily  plan  that  content  councilman  i t could  the tendency  know  over  prepared  The  over  was  adopted  represented  and  the  community's  growth.  thirty of  we  with  Essentially,  ideological  revealed  the  will  conflict  d e c i s i o n makers.  deals  conflict  revealed  was  agenda  change.  there  the  i t was  then  for  Although  over  It  public  outcomes  little  plan.  when  which  removal total  is  the  and  how  proposal  level.  was  to  proposal,  obviously  compromise  land  Over  Set  decision  conflict  Plan,  There  by  a  a  on  Department  the  pursued  of  in  political  Planning  opposed  was  relating  i f there  action  Development  politicians.  and  that  u l t i m a t e l y was  public,  Variable  influence  implicit  positive  the  promotion  with  ISSUES  hypothesis  the  basic  and  examined,  Content  may  is  the  be  issue.  characteristics  it  choice  to  what of  years was  the  Development  considered  farmland  in  a  Plan  small  Chilliwack's  percentage A.L.R.  -50Th e  land  would  ten-year local  phases.  farmland  growth would took  provide place  more  main  urban  This  was  an  Chilliwack level,  land  few  for  the  through  the  existing  the  districts two  would  be  the and,  valley  could  saw  to  valley  area  of  a  At  of  one  complete in  the  In as  preserve  B.C.  an  resources.  This  providing the mean  located  be in  a  committments  farmlands  would  over-tax  happen  s e r v i c e s to  burden  lost the  to  than on the  hills  that  development  would  community  and  words,  area  valley  citizens,  from  sacrifice  other  hillside  to  and  as  district  and  a  that  away  expected  many.  community  far  swing  the  that  was  ideological  base  would  growth  district.  as  tax  revenue  and  farmland  the  financial  would  i f  Plan  local  to  service  than  meet  expensive  be  the  patterns  their  future  and  urban  to  Firstly,  not  from  philosophy  benefit  economic  lands  secondly,  industry  of  ways. more  a  efficient  Development  concerned.  essentially  benefit  the  represented  with  for  less area  three  sacrifice  unattractive plan  were  straining  least  to  the  and  in  tact.  southern  was  the  in  the  of  already  for  for  but  small  cost  away  officials  designed  a  once  orderly  both  development  heavily laden  as  growth  propsal  established  an  would  A.L.R.  officials  Chilliwack  for  ideologically  this  the  seen  alternative  hillsides  a l l at  amenities  the  the  plan,  was  turn  into  from  removed  This  in  with  directing  was  be  p a t t e r n , which  The of  not  this  at  area  servicing  the  local  district and  in  local  taxpayers since decision  -51-  makers  believed  there  valley  for  type  farmland appeal  this  for to  future  the  growth  Costs  Benefits  The  second  costs  and  taken  on  wide  and  benefits, process. context  that  are  reveals  at that  was  discussed  in  makers  Chilliwack  narrow  therefore which  a  cost  would it  a  would  could  also  rural-urban Department.  planned  benefit benefit  conflicts,  the the at  had  be  4.  as  little the  district's  in  and  the  area  by  urban  the  agricultural  by  urban  local  areas  the  of  be  decision  as  within and a  plan  making  their  area,  a l l at  tax  base.  Not  the  district,  community  according  political  community's  expected,  citizens  serviced  and  will  Plan  perceived  a  broadest  the  this  Development be  in  its  of  is  involve  costs  rejected  However,  I t was  least  of  impact  of  i f action  proposals  issue  could  and  occur  scope  the  managed  preserving  distribution  intensity to  Chapter  a l l local  be  to  potential  i t differently.  better  of  with  the  Where  and  context,  benefit  plan  likely  viewed  deal  with  Chilliwack  the  in  to  the  problems.  considerable  detail  saw  that the  a  community  would  community  of  had  likely  the  ideal  therefore,  proposal.  more  situation  a  are  available in high  deals  distribution  t.hey  The  who  hypothesis  Looking  at  use.  economic  particular  broad  land  generations,  and  benefits a  of  no  politicians  immediate  and  was  to  the  by  only but  reducing  Planning  -52-  The  hillside  recommend  i t from  and  politicians.  For  example,  there  were  income in  that  the high  hillside  not  beyond  who  the main  immediate uplands  would  cost  have  would  t o meet  growth  would  market  could  be  provided  housing  the  areas.  industry of  expansion,  to develop  benefits.  be  general  increased  the upland  f o r urban  planners  of the middle  i t would  requirement  time  to  a n d no  f o r new  t o pay t h r o u g h  the time  some  that  the range  n o t accommodate  areas  take  units  time  of s e r v i c i n g  little  a l l drawbacks  of housing  were  hand,had  of the Chilliwack  i t was  A t t h e same  plan  be a b l e  the other  as b e i n g  the d i s t r i c t .  for  them,  the p r i c e  seen  on  the perspective To  families  community  a  plan,  taxes Furthermore,  and  would  allowing since  the  for residential  uses .  Flexibility  This  of  Action  particular variable  the  Chilliwack  issue,  are  inflexible  and i r r e v e r s i b l e  programmes  that  institutional social that  deal  irreversible  issue  areas  growth,  that  However,  time  issues  as  structures  growth that  eventually  Chilliwack  especially  over  are truly  physical  was  a l l physical  such  i n Chilliwack  and w h i c h  level.  with  or government  programmes  farming  since  i s especially appropriate  was was  be  those  reorgainizing  or  introducing  going  I t was  the  of the  at the general  makers  fact  to occur i n  at the heart  opposed  plans  and i t i s o n l y  flexible.  decision  i f i t could  development  to  welcomed  transformed  into  public physical  economic  -53-  terms  such  as  commercial that  a  and  inflexible did  sanctioned  this  Programming  This  a  it  are  hold  deals model  deal  groups, this  of  was  hillside  complexities  and  the  the  dispersed  rejected.  because  the  and  For  Development  implemented  municipal  development  potential  site  areas  the  Government  proposal would For  on  the  this  entail  slopes,  matter  an  uplands technical  financial  not  conceive  alone.  The  external  decision  many  negotiations  of  were  makers.  other  feasibility  could  proposal  the  and  co-ordinating  extensive  extensive  On  involved  example,  require  and  program  local  departments.  southern  officials  following the  programs  and  on  to  where  out  co-ordinated  data  of  carrying  be  physical  deterrent  approach.  together  would  problems  politicians  put  programme  a  that  to  case,  development  such  of  be  likely  implementation  Chilliwack  problem  are  factors.  finance  planning  among  different  to  Chilliwack  co-ordination  of  since  rejected,  and  existing  Provincial  the  hypothesis  research  their  of  be  by  to  through  and  model's  to  long-range  especially  easy  ultimately  number  likely  because  with  not  could  a  The  hypothesized  they  relatively  the  more  true  also  hand,  generated  expansion.  traditional  The  great  Chilliwack, was  not  variable  autonomous  Plan  plans  base  Action  proposal.  involve  tax  industrial  therefore,  the  growing  a  of  studies  with  the  assistance, being  able  coordination  considerable  -54-  Risks  and  Uncertainty  The  hypothesis  here  states  and  consequences  uncertain,  For  the  development  that  hillside  the  d e c i s i o n makers  proposal. plan's  There  ability  was to  a  there  deal  of  to  even  co-ordinated  reveneus  contrast,  the  lands  viewed  was  out  needs  for  would  assist  the  ranging  provision  Ease  of  with  Plan  next  met.  30  the  public  a  risky. the  along  By  valley the  various  development  number  of  the  Using  development  transportation  r e c r e a t i o n a l parks  in  c e r t a i n t y about  phased  i n meeting  local  was  for  the  affordable  Chilliwack's  tidy,  about  expected  plan  physical  years,  This  of  of  for  risky  implemented.  proposed  feeling  following  district a  a  kind  act.  pattern land  would  community  goals  system  the  to  waterways.  Communication  variable  abstract  difficult rejected  be  of  This require  By the  from  this  Development  consequences. laid  for  high  to  a  uncertainty  and  are  understandable  i t as  growth  area,  tax  i t is  population  the  risks  hesitancy  need  support  scarce  a  Chilliwack's  to  be  is  perceive  housing, or  where  proposal  would  good  meet  that  to than  understood  by  Chilliwack's  relates  powers  of  communicate issues the  that  actors  Planning  to  the  fact  conceptual  well, can who  they be  will  Department  that  reasoning  are  more  clearly have put  when  to  issues and  likely  perceived deal  together  with a  are to  be  and them.  straight  -55-  forward  proposal  community focused  that  development.  on  and  was  master  land  use  plan.  to  politicians  hand,  pursuing  clarifying moving  to  hillsides years  of  there  was  an  upland  as  a  could  real  Variable  to  The which  be  as  the  for  issue  to  both  decision  will the  to  makers for  with  of  plan  that future  a  comprehensive  communicable the  would  of  perceived  persons that  As  cope  homes  and  basic  short,  the  hillside  and  present  sort and  out was  with  five  relating  services  in  proposal clearly  understandaby  avoided  growth.  made  hypotheses  the  well,  and  the  other  involve  number  community.  justify  be  of  to  10,000 p e o p l e or about  community  now  plan  i t . On  planners  the  In  a  easily  c o n t r o l l i n g the  growth  of  form  i t was  accommodate  difficult  where  the  deal  approach  location  development  programme.  examination Set  to  since  alternative  intervention  PLANNING  costs  growth  local  An  only  thorny  higher  going the  issues  in  such,  had  Chilliwack,  the  the  to  such  As  hillside  population  to  was  a  traditional  physical  presented  who  a  E s s e n t i a l l y , i t was  c o n t r o l l i n g the  development  the  employed  of  deal  the with  model's  second  planning  and  strategies.  STRATEGIES  first  hypothesis  attachment  influential  in  independent  and  to  a  relates  power  center  directing public advisory  to is  'planning theorized  decision  planning  bodies.  making  position' to  be  than  Chilliwack  in  more are could  -56-  be  expected  to  proceed  in  their  relative  ease  since  the  attached  to  power  center.  the  a  out  of  Planning  and  responsible  to  planning  of  and  strength  did  not  have  much  Secondly, The  character than on  are  Department  which  was  elected  function not  real  that  i s more  the  is  is  planning  problems by  the  in  fact  quantifying the  plan's  slim. a  In  these  back-up  half-hearted  guide  systems  among  they  came  power  attached  center.  in  a  The  position  position  in  many  that  the  classical  are  character  carry  planning  any  and,  outrightly  and  in  in  or  approach  was  social is  qualified  extensive fact,  some  erroneous  method  a  identified  method  out  focus  relation-  Chilliwack  issues  this  action,  institutional,  operating by  in  which  interdependent  chosen  Chilliwack's  public  methods  economic,  relationships  that  opportunistic  direct  planning  not  variable.  suggests  planning  However,  was  method'  or or  that  method  did  data  words,  planning  advisory  function  social,  district.  that  other  to  comprehensive  the  of  this  incremental  various  interdependencies  an  'planning  quantifying  community.  and  was  ultimately or  with  position  therefore,  in  classical  etc.,  classical  the to  environmental, The  was,  process  power.  comprehensive  among  council  merely  likely  i d e n t i f y i n g and  ships  words,  related  solving  planning  other  there  hypothesis  problem  was  district's  making  In  the  community's  decision  was  which  and  of generally  somewhat identified  of  -57-  the  various  their  third  'planning oriented systems  means plan  v a r i a b l e under  type'.  which  of i n f o r m a t i o n  i s planning and d e a l s certainly  with  focuses i s less  which  deals  highly  their  community  about  t o be a c h i e v e d .  It i s unclear  used  to achieve  such  goals  conflicts  that  existed  industry  to the area  for this  once  as  although  public  problem  I t was  also  how  Plan  provided  transit  and t h e r e t e n t i o n o f t h e o l d downtown  impression by  adhering  would  the primary  exists, that  business  around  to the p h y s i c a l development  somehow  automatically  be a c h i e v e d  the  system;  the m u n i c i p a l i t y ' s  and c u l t u r a l  t h e d e c i s i o n makers  t o be  bringing  waterways;  as  goals  of the urban-  parks  core  there-  planned  developing  City  and r e c r e a t i o n a r e a s  was  goal-oriented,  i n the d i s t r i c t ;  public  on  Chilliwack's  and  t h e means  the minimizing  a local  focuses  t h e numerous  about  action,  the plan  growth  the Development  use; p r o v i d i n g  comprehensive  information.  o f an e f f i c i e n t l y  little  goal-  the immediate,  focus,  focus.  and  to guide  strategic  t h e end p r o d u c t  but s t a t i n g  long-term,  likely  were  land  to quantify  stragegies i s  on c o m p l e x  immediate  had a s h o r t - t e r m on  that  with  had a l o n g - t e r m  to solve  also  focusing  rural  but f a i l e d  planning  It i s theorized  planning  designed fore  systems  relationships.  The  than  inter-dependent  Chilliwack  center.  perceived  plan, i n due  these  The  that, goals  course.  -58-  ACTION  OR  Of  INTERVENTION  primary  the  action  any  great  and  concern  strategy extent  individual  or  little  change  system.  in  and  were  to  land  short  Government because  more  then  challenging  urban  a  likely  growth  land.  taken  of  district's  institutions  returning  to  a  last  status  status  and  option.  a  quo.  to  not be  that local  Plan  was  filled uses  actually  Provincial of  long  nor  decision  A.L.R.  land.  that  modify  been  the  standing  established  that  the  their  district  was  intent  disrupted makers  development,  organizaitonal  took  and  those  changed  hillside  was  plan  out  require  The  societal  for  the  to  political  The  them  the  had  strategies  designed  agricultural  degree. quo  are  implementation  return  did  action  Chilliwack  Development  to  institutions  by  areas  not  changing  aggregate  organizations  intensive  i n d i v i d u a l and  resort  new  the  to  and  alternative  as  quo  by  rounded  behaviour  the  force  than  forth  developing  P r o v i n c i a l Government of  the  that  status  some  significant the  or  d i r e c t i o n that  the  would  the  therefore,  societal  any  or  that  adopted  put  through  and  to  be  The  wanted  pattern  quo  patterns,  individual  behavior  Plan  policy  plan,  i s whether  changing  rather  to  allocated of  or  status  maintain  Chilliwack  disturb  is hypothesized the  use  new  had  Chilliwack's  on  would  behavior  Development  existing  which  It  disturb  solely  variable  r e d i s t r i b u t i n g resources,  societal  are  The  designed  them  this  i n d i v i d u a l behaviour,  behaviour,  the  to  chosen  by  organizations.  which  STRATEGIES  behaviour  by  perceived which changes,  -59-  SUMMARY  With  respect  perceived the  the  by  growth and  areas.  benefit  planned a  That  the  no  for  were  that  appeared  the  extreme  plan  could  of was  be  was  the  position which  to  have area,  would  to  have  the  action  community  by  the  local  over  into  proposal  that  a  case.  Plan and to  reject  The  substantially was  i t  was  apparently  to  physical  well  structure.  since  was  a  amenities  revenue  time,  growth,  the  easy  a  related  officials  and  local  growth,  i t as  decision especially  bolstering easy  to  uncertainties  communicate  to  the  their  Variable  good  i t was  Set  that  shown  planning  deals that  position  with  the to  for  the  those  who  planning  Chilliwack put  tax  programme,  with i t .  strategies, in  expansion  urban  risks  deal  dictated,  and  Development  was  be  was  further  A.L.R.  to  that  logical  providing  welcoming in  i t  a  no  urban  seen  c i t i z e n s by  minimal  second  was  be  of  the  perceived  bo r n  would  makers  for  represented  unfettered  Chilliwack  the  It  inflexible  assisted  Chilliwack  and  councilman.  actually  Finally,  On  i d e o l o g i c a l l y sound  irreversible physical  kind  base.  was  decision  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , i t was  environment  hypothesized  makers the  that  reason  model  issue  Chilliwack  a l l Chilliwack  proposal  planning  the  extreme  The  physical  cost  how  a g r i c u l t u r a l land,  opposite  farming would  one  between  onto  the  Plan  only  compromise  at  public  Development  opposed  to  together  -60-  and  carry  out  a  was  attached  to  the  planning  method  sive  classical  were  planning  have  mitigated  to  the  true. in quo  the  as  would  This  proved  a  the  be  council  was  at  or  with  of  according  be  the  to  case  a  the  fact  that  the be  to  adopted  with  comprehen-  this  i t was a  should  was  strategy  by  they  according not  employed  maintain  model,  That  focus,  plan,  intervention  to  likely  part  case,  s i t u a t i o n attempted  center.  in  the  Chilliwack's or  power  goal-oriented  acceptance in  Department  least  together  action  more  to  Planning  long-term,  However,  such,  that  chosen  against  Chilliwack  the  municipal  with  Finally,  and  since  approach,  model.  the  plan,  the  an  status  approach  political  the  Chilliwack  issue  strictly  system.  politicians.  CONCLUSION  Looking perspective who  had  these they  to  of  implement  as  outlined  the  six  them.  district's  with  in to  With  from  the  propel  Plan  their  the the  to  planners, disturb  that  plan  they  the  seen  status  quo,  matter  of  planners why  that hoped  of  the  criteria  attributes  and  this  most  acceptance.  strategy be  those  picture  prepared  positively  to  the  and  toward  rated  action  i t was  on  issue  and  clear  perspective, on  from  makers  fairly  proposal  the  the  a  position  hypotheses  respect  little  the  Development met,  decision  i t , gives took  hypotheses,  Chilliwack would  the  Chilliwack  makers  The  to  tend  the  deal  policy did.  would  at  chosen  one  and  on  Of  five by  of the  which  therefore,  i t  -61-  was  readily  The a  able  fact  that  comprehensive  term, its  acceptance  would  the  to was  be a  dealing purely  section was of  the  will  revealed the  issue.  plan  case  was  have  form  part  Chilliwack with local  the  this  of  with  the  a  long-  against  the  model.  to  the  Chilliwack  to  by  be  the  scrutinized  bodies  making  politicians  planners  that  process. appeared  issue  from  the  perspective  that  phenomena,  this  was  not  next  examine  the  conflicts  and  the  model  how  that  relates  so.  arose to  of  to  government  decision  style  with  positively i t had  and  the  mitigated  respect  other  planners  in  according  perceived  and  was  planning,  however,ultimately  public  politicians.  Plan  of  should  not  eventually  Although  focus,  was  politicians, general  method  politicians  the  the  Development  the  makers.  the  by  by  decision  Overall,  adopted  the  goal-oriented  this  by  be  classical  However,  and  to  the  The once final  the  i t  plan  outcome  62  CHAPTER  THE  CHILLIWACK  ISSUE  WITHIN  4  THE MODEL'S  FRAMEWORK  -63-  THE  NATURE  We  OF  have  model's  hypotheses  of  view.  Chilliwack  and  there  was  revealed  the  in  was  of  very  vocal  the  form  of  really  this  group,  Save  only  in  network,  c o n s i s t i n g of  officials  and  the  made  was  not  the  only  of  the  community  would  have  three  kinds  the  private  cultural there strong  of  their of  input  outside  independent  organizations  were  the  opinions  with  the  the  of  public.  other  into  at  plan  arose  and to  the  beyond staff.  Chilliwack Their  got  voice  aired  and  politicians  paid  making  and  unit  and  of  elected decision  the  plan,  affect  issue.  Out-  the  making  operating.  against  Plan,  networks  issue.  There  Firstly,  labor,  government  Development  that  of  networks  rallied  i t  proponents  Chilliwack  that  in  decision  local  decision  as  until  planning  that  the  to  development  expanded  Chilliwack  both  their  point  Committee.  This  such  its  their  the  groups  from  presented  this  local  the  plan's  proposal,  was  and  balanced  views  interdependent on  the  viewpoint  operating  lay  to  Farmland  opponents  network  of  of  the  plan  stage  was  the  public  the  both  to  of  been  network  more  general  makers,  side  up  a  any  terms  not  making  combination  represented  at  had  politicians  local  planners,  plan  It  the  in  satisfactory  form.  opposition  the  the  local  Plan  perspective  opposition  decision the  a  public  its final  Chilliwack  the  the  apparent  A  was  Development  i t was  general  in  FORCES  from  However,  no  confines  the  only  Overall,  the  local  OPPOSING  examined  proponents. point  THE  church  the  plan.  departments and  finally,  which were  there and  were agri-  Secondly, that  voiced  there  was  -64-  E.L.U.C., ment's  that  Cabinet  outside  autonomous  committee  that  ultimately  decision  forces  in  the  come  of  the  ment  of  these  Chilliwack  would  making  networks,  community  itself,  overall decision external  issue  was  of  together  making  clearly  Provincial  affect  were  decision  the  the  to  process.  and  than  a  These  opposing  the  With  groups  complex  plan.  with  critical  making  more  the  Govern-  final  the  out-  involve-  networks, local  the  community  ma 11 e r .  THE  BASIS  FOR  The  main  centered  OPPOSITION  thrust  hypotheses  would the  have  A  on  and  various  the  issue  Rondinelli making.  He  the  in  and  to  was  steeped  proposal  various  in  planning  planning  there  this  both  focusing  on  the  and  the  i t is  community and  relevant  to  un-  plan outside  ideological  Chilliwack  the  basic  considerable  locally  the  on  uncertainty'.  over  was  matters,  defined  with  specifically  conflict  issues,  Plan  con-' examine  issue.  Issue  to  paper  pointed  and  dealing  'risks  consequences  other  his  in  Development  Set  'ideology'  Before  tends  Variable  more  area.  the  the  and  the  the  to  Issues  organizations  D e f i n i t i o n of  The  to  other  Chilliwack  flicts how  about  on  Public  issue  implicit  certainty  of  related  Chilliwack  values  opposition  predominantly  Characteristics  The  of  out  confirm on  the  that  the  point  expressed  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  few  issues  are  by  urban  defined  in  Dennis policy the  same  -65-  way  b y a l l who  ally,  each  p a r t i c i p a t e i n the p o l i c y  interested organization  will  making place  process.  a  Gener-  different  58 emphasis the  two o p p o s i t e  were mer  on a d i f f e r e n t  t h e Land really  land,  i t s mandate  resource  Chilliwack naturally healthy or  Commission  had t o d e f i n e  since  scarce  Council  the issue was  Council's  emphases  placed  For instance, concerned  was  the  A.L.R.  would  affect  the  entire  Lower  Mainland.  making  i s that  support clear  other  happens  growth,  f o r urban  i n the process  definition  of the problem.  support  released  from  proceed.  meetings,  its  voice  definition  t h e A.L.R.  The group  lic  involved  the Farmland  f o r i t s p o s i t i o n that  both  i n order  mobilized from  of o p p o s i t i o n of the issue  within  of the  acres  tries This  was  should  support  and o u t s i d e  to the plan ran parallel  clearly  most  which n o t be Plan  to  a t i t s pub-  Chilliwack, heard.  to the Land  policy  to mobilize  f o r the Development  significant  from  throughout  Committee,  farmland  pro-  and Hous-  of p o l i t i c a l  f o r i t s own  t o t h e Save  since  Affairs  land  group  province's  of the i s s u e ,  o f s o many  individual  respect  farm-  economically  components  of M u n i c i p a l  t h e demand  of  hand, the  the other  definitions  the release  for-  On  the area  on d i f f e r e n t  how  The  the  each  with  rallied  about  what  j o b t o keep  case  and p r e s e r v e  as community  the M i n i s t r y  ing  Generally,  land.  were  Council.  as t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n  to p r o t e c t  There  Basically,  i n the Chilliwack  and t h e C h i l l i w a c k  saw t h e i s s u e  and g r o w i n g .  of the problem.  organizations  of a g r i c u l t u r a l  i t was  rather,  blem.  minded  component  The  a n d made group's  Commission's  - 6 6 -  point  of  view,  life-style cerned  in  about  farmland,  in  a  i t also  were  by  solution, Having  that  was the  hypotheses  Development or  the  align  these  stated Plan fact  issue  group  such  continuance  of  which  represented  open  life  could  that  traffic be  of  con-  the  define  points  the  various were  as  space,  jams  and  experienced  to  of  Chilliwack  components  bound  to  make  a l l , difficult  definitions  of  view  the  previously,  the  the  resources  or  on  groups  against  this  pollution  to  respecting  were of  ways  placed  main  was  into  population.  satisfactory  with  As  no  smaller  participating  to  ogy  a  emphases  possible  Issues.  see  life-style,  different  reviewed  the  to  activity,  with  only  and  non-renewable  p o s i t i v e q u a l i t y of  divergent  problem  further  Not  wanted  agrarian  community  There The  destroying  farming  overall  i t went  community.  not  Chilliwack's  the  the  but  increasing  however,  the on  of a  the  the  final  to  problem,  achieve. i t is  Chilliwack  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  most  of  the  i t mainly  uncertainty  of  on  the  issue.  issue  Public  opponents  to  the  the  of  ideol-  basis  consequences  of  the  proposal.  Ideological  To of  a  Conflict  reiterate  proposal  theorized  that a  for  the  Within  hypothesis  change  i f there  implicit  in  positive  action.  the  proposal,  Community  on  influences is  little  there  However,  the  the  decision  conflict  will  should  how  be a  a  ideological  over  greater  proposal  content  outcome, basic  is  values  tendency  seriously  it  toward  conflict  -67-  with  widely  rejection is, to  held  values,  of the proposed  according  makers  has a l r e a d y  Since  viewed  the C h i l l i w a c k  of the community  stance  on  It  not u n t i l  was  that and  the issue  i t became politicians  ideological The  that  position  ideological basis  British  Columbia's  Whereas  the concept  way  society  viewpoint  was  precedence  being over,  more was  given  physical  rial  activities  by  changing.  development  To t h e  urban  devel-  politicians. unveiled  between  citizens issue use  that  growth.  i n the  the l o c a l  planners their  i n the  centered  community. around  priorities.  farmland  should  The  a g r i c u l t u r a l sector  with, The  and  values the  f o r the d i s t r i c t ,  of r e s i d e n t i a l , Those  urban  make  intensive  acknowledged  i n the community.  represent-  and  status  sector.  and  and p u b l i c l y  of land  existed  equal  decision  and i d e o l o g i c a l  a discrepancy  view  growth  likely  to the C h i l l i w a c k  of other  officials  of economic  easy  heard  important  the urban  of C h i l l i w a c k ' s  importance  that  Plan.  involved  values  complete  was  long  are not  the o f f i c i a l  of the C h i l l i w a c k  had  of the s i t u a t i o n  t h e A.L.R.  their  apparent  changing  f o r the various  society's  tion  and  how  had n o t been  was  there  toward  i d e o l o g i c a l l y sound,  had n o t been  abundantly  essence  communities  between  plan,  the plan  a tendency  the Development  public  opment  be  values.  i t was  compromise  will The  discussed  and p l a n n e r s  a realistic  that  social  been  in Chilliwack  politicians ing  held  there  action.  to the model,  cut o f f widely  It  then  uses, of  frequently behind  the p o s i -  overriding by means  commercial citizens  who  and  of the indust-  spoke out  -68-  on  the issue  they  valued  adamant  were  the i d e a l  that  preserved  i n the future  voice  land  the ranks  that  aligned  Committee.  people  have  farmland concern  was  with  with  space  people  and s o c i a l  o f community  of l i f e  that  good  that  since  along  with  be  was  the Farm-  stewards  that of a l l  of hungry on.  would  to the d i s t r i c t  goes  there  had t h e view  to b u i l d  the p o p u l a t i o n ,  h a d come  environment growth.  i n a world  a resource  the s t y l e  the congestion  t o be  were  o f t h e Save  councilman  and, that  and  officials,  the viewpoint  responsibility  twice  p e r s e , however,  protection  of C h i l l i w a c k ' s  too valuable  Chilliwack  want  process  resources  t o h i m was  that  physical  The d i s s e n t i n g  a great  non-renewable  development  of environmental  Chilliwack's  Amongst one  not against  Of  exist  i t was  people, additional in a  f o r open  and t h e y  d i d not  increasing  popula-  tions.  At plan,  t h e same  t h e Save  However,  i t was  n o t known  represented  zens,  or whether  a  politicians'  few y e a r s  that  the councilman  the Farmland  voice  the  time  later  public  viewpoint.  This  when  Save  the Farmland  group  espoused  public  Committee, citizens,  the values  was  this  actually  n o t t o be  was  group's citi-  aligned found  finally  out  with until  incorporated  In the meantime, the  predominantly  the only  to the  protesting.  of C h i l l i w a c k ' s  process. being  objecting  also  whether  was  was  input  planning  was  view  the general  the community's  Chilliwack  for certain  the predominant  into  local  Oommittee  was  community  of the d i s t r i c t ' s  made  up o f  voice,  agrarian  This  life-style  -69-  and  the  potential  activities goal  of  These not  self-sufficiency some  willing  to  Ideological  took  removal  some  had of  hand,  the  the  Land  moving  less  hillside  poorer space  the of  range  Land  lands  willingness  to  the  larger  f o r the  group,  at  farming  scale,  the  province.  least,  were  there  were  give  of  area  Chilliwack.  allow  i n the  included excluded  the from  favorable  significance  to  I t was  the  requested  urban  lands  the  on  would  Other  other in  these  those  that  the  the  hillside  16  by acres  Commission's  industrial in a  view  re-  south-  compromises  and  the  provide  recommendation  agriculture,  were  consider  i n a d d i t i o n to  Commission's  and  position  growth  A.L.R.  these  district's  c o n s i d e r a t i o n to  local  was  On  would  i n the  A.L.R.  preserving  possibilities  body  Commis-  because  compromise  A. L . P..  development not  a  lands  These  out  Land  of  which  i n Canada.  Commission  to  The  value  come  cropping  A.L.R.  issue.  acres  not  lands  network,  basic  1700  d i d have  soils.  be  i n the  should  i n order  were  Community  the  farm  the  valuable  posals, of  that  of  since  Commission  valley  this  f o r the  agricultural  areas  that  the  stood  A.L.R.  for residential  properties  that  a voice  stand  the  capability  increasing  production  d e c i s i o n making  Commission  issue  ern  which  the  Chilliwack the  Outside  had  best  at  of  cut o f f .  which  a wide  goal  finally,  values  local  from  the  i n food  the  f o r example,  lands  the  see  of  networks  farmland, for  of  Conflict  Outside  sion  of  i n C h i l l i w a c k and,  were  other  achievement  seventy that  i t  proacre was  -70-  necessary locate  to encourage  i n C h i l l i w a c k to support  There on  were  opposing  the  other  the plan  large  most  Federation  was  up  made  Land the  brief  even  was  unjustified.^^  a  com-  The  British  Committee,  which  as an a d v i s o r  to the  the r e l e a s e of  a thirty  year  as t h i s  quote  Commission  basis,  from  their  reveals:  b e e n s a i d many t i m e s b e f o r e t h a t C h i l l i w a c k i s on t h e w r o n g p l a c e b e c a u s e t h e l a n d was t o o be p u t u n d e r c o n c r e t e a n d b l a c k t o p ; why k e e p t ? L e t u s s t o p w i t h t h a t NOW b e f o r e i t i s t o o 61  groups, Plan,  past  and p r e s e n t  land  Committee  development  of such  against  top q u a l i t y  Development  Columbia  to productive  i n part  of  recommended  generations  These  to have  view  i n mind  that  planning  and t h a t  soil  out of food  which  questioned  also  h a d some  planning  condemned  to spread  f o r having  years  and a c t e d  capability  release  of A g r i c u l t u r e Advisory  the Federation's  next  taking  as c o m p l e t e l y  concentrated  the B r i t i s h  devoted  to  strongly  to the Land " I t has located good t o doing i late."  the  on  also  the blanket  was  industries  community.  the a g r i c u l t u r a l  For instance,  of farmers  Commission, land  on  of which  agriculture,  Columbia  and  based  of A g r o l o g i s t s viewed  acreage,  mercial  the farm  o r g a n i z a t i o n s which  Chilliwack lands.  Institute  It  agriculturally-oriented  given  sense  planners  lands  should  the inherent  strong  criticism  and e f f o r t s .  with  avoid  values  the highways  The  rezoned  from  who  i n the  of C h i l l i w a c k ' s  f o r having  i n to the developers,  agricultural  be d o n e  production.  the community  out along  should  Save  allowed  strip  the urban  lobbied  f o r urban  the Farm-  over  uses.  core the  This  -71-  resulted  i n a hodge-podge  community  planning,  the  taxpayers  out  that  filling, in  development being  t o t h e community  higher  and d e v e l o p m e n t  densities  B.C.  Institute proposal  thorough  vestigation  upland  high  developments.  the a l t e r n a t i v e s  Chilliwack's without  zoning  t h e end r e s u l t  to s e r v i c e these  the d i s t r i c t ' s  The  with  of spot  a n d no  costs  The g r o u p  f o r growth  to pointed  were i n -  of the numerous  acres  areas.  of A g r o l o g i s t s were  because  planning  i t appeared  of the area  of development  critical  t o be  going  and w i t h o u t  possibilities  on  of ahead  serious i n -  the lower  capabil-  62 ity  lands  felt on  available  mountain  large  of  lands  slopes.  area  south  the Cultus  o f tjie  Lake  Valley  there  could  be p r o v i d e d The  unpopular this  addition, plan  would with  was  groups  On be  Park,  both  was  and t h e r i s k s  uncertainty in  Plan  could  was  on w h i c h about  housing  there  i n the  support  of was  area extensive  side  of t h i s  Columbia  acres  of land  which  and w a t e r  systems.  ideologically  and o u t s i d e  i t .  out that  boundaries,  sewer  density  on d e v e l o p m e n t  pointed  t o 4,000  inside  basis  inherent  focus  the n o r t h e r l y  3,000  of A g r i c u l t u r e  f o r high  that  independent  not the only  there  also  district's  C h i l l i w a c k Development among  plan  should  group  Provincial  development.  area  should and  This  residential  but  The F e d e r a t i o n  the C h i l l i w a c k C o u n c i l  already  the a  i n the v i c i n i t y .  the  opposition  very  community, rested.  the consequences  of the  In  -72-  Opposition  This the  to  Risks  hypothesis  decision  this  is  are  not  and  may  Chilliwack of  ment the  this  of  economic  growth  their  could  have.  urban  land  should for  land  for  lands  oped  or  in  were and  reached.  viewed  As  their  was  clearly  politicians  there  concern main  soon  were  over  there  other  more  Where  is  a  risks  hesitancy  in  the  purposes  The  and  Chapter with  laid  that  attainment  to  and  a  physical  3, feel-  developout  for  adherence of  a  variety  district.  Chilliwack's some  decision  government  the  the  Affairs  but  throughout  m u n i c i p a l i t i e s that  departments  on  the  that  in  the  the  the  were  developed.  These  lands  located  in varying  amounts  in  proposal of  demand  Valley.  either  be  for  officials  context  Fraser  Plan  demand  Accordingly,  felt  makers  Development  impact  Region.  isolation,  in  Plan  perceived  the  was  Mainland  predictable  discussed  consequences  Municipal  not  to  were  concern  Lower  other  in  well.  structured  for  urban  but  Development  goals  of  as  i t s consequences.  The  examined  were  A.L.R.  be  social  the  systems  favorable), positive  proposal,  in  that  are  allow  The  contend  Nuttall  uncertain  would  Department be  are  p o s i t i v e f e e l i n g s by  expressed  and  circumstances  pattern  and  affects  a l l factors  readily  Despite  the  political  clearly  easily  (and  years.  Bolan  uncertainty  are  community  30  to  in  in  that  consequences  officials  the  next  that  only  c e r t a i n t y about  of  about  process.  where  minimized  decisions  ing  theorizes  consequences  however,  risks  Uncertainties  c o n t r o l l e d group  high  act;  making  true  tightly  and  were  being not  Abbotsford,  There develin  the  -73-  Matsqui,  Mission,  previous  year,  nated  twenty land  Plan  miles  for  west  have and of  on  a  the l i n k a g e s  between  as p a r t  there  would  would  acres  be v e r y  than  to use the  many  local  trips  about  under  on t h e  the proposal  consideration  o r by  be  flooded  the Vedder  mean  land,  more u s e  the freeway.  Indian  would  trips,  This  being  highway  lands.  Such  in dollars  at the rate  development, areas  systems  for local  to the p r o v i n c e  Resources  because was  of  about  however,  that  not generate  by  Service  I n some  too  be  for floodproofing,  known  how  but i n other  much  part land  areas  conof the  River  internal  i n the southern  i t was  very  portion  the Fraser  the d i s t r i c t ' s  River  were  a significant  in either  community. required  areas  road  would  freeway.  i n the Water  or could  the p r o p o s a l  system  through  Urban upland  on  considerable  f o r a replacement  costly  per mile.  i n the southern  sloughs  redesign  less  had a  would  road  traffic  agricultural  place  plain  going  community  development  be p r e s s u r e  took  Personnel  the l o c a l  t o be n e g o t i a t e d  of prime  twenty-five  area  mainly  the  Official  located  of Highways  of the urban  through  would  have  i n loss  cerned  had been  the consequences  Increasing  restrict  replacement  and  was  Just  Mainland  community,  of C h i l l i w a c k ,  about  would  which  i n t h e Lower  This  of u n c e r t a i n t y  case,  1 2 0 0 acres  i n the Department  the freeway  the  Township.  housing.  the freeway.  which  and L a n g l e y  over  1 category  at Matsqui.  Officials amount  Ridge  f o r example,  t o a n URBAN  Regional  Maple  flood  creeks  and  of the f i l l  i t was  would extreme-  -74-  ly  difficult  as  overcoming  services  to  bearing  could  consideration Plan  would  damage  be  in  issues Plan  otherwise,  their  were  point  posal  these  and  agencies  of  the  there  problem  the  urban  as  a  land  and  was  a  growth  government result  as  the  financial  Development  even  of  well  underground real  was  in  It  was  the  creation  to  control, the  planning  the  resultant  be  borne  officials which  then  the  making  previous  a  amount  of  area  of  incremental  data  base  uncertainties costs,  both  the  based  some  were  financial  their  extent  the  the  private  to  focus  and  proposal  could  implications  making  be  the  of  pro-  other  process.  opposition  year  to  the  concerned of  that  Development  with  problem  Chilliwack  had  method  which  physical  growth  plan  for  prepared  the  each and  location use'.  used  whether  solving  planning  period,  allocated was  is  method  previously  thirty  that  to  that  long-range  land  had  and  Method  hypothesis  a  by  broader  comprehensive  of  over  and  decision  determined  classical,  risks  were  the  on  or  the  to  Planning  the  of  consequences  focused  a  the  buildings  The  the  view,  significant  on  and  of  Another  comprehensive  used  have  general  involved  Criticism  some  Chilliwack  however,  used.  for  community  generated  expected,  a  because  the  would  sector.  on  Plan  to  Filling  flood.  Development  only  need.  problems  respect  generate,  These  public  the  expensive.  with  payments  winter's  and  estimate  basically centered  designed of  land  However, was  is  slim  the  and  uses  -75-  ques t i o n a b l e .  For  example,  growth  figues  was  be  to  munity the  was  from  growing  have  Planning  justify  removed  combined  would  to  the  at  the an  population  increased  the  Department  amount  A.L.R.  average of  from  the  of It  maintained  rate  1976  population  a g r i c u l t u r a l land  of  district  the  developed  6%  per  and  figure  that  the  com-  annum  and  that  Chilliwack  of  which  37,055  City  people  to  6 3 90,000 6%  people  figure  housing  population  for  of  a  both  a  1971  to  not  under  average  However,  these to  based  that  was  time.  net  a  district's  the than  the  cyclical  rate,  case  gain  starts half  on  particularly  the  housing  than  on  that  area's nature  reliable  of  distort  the  Chilliwack, 1971  and  in  1977,  the  basis  may  long  which  1976  dramatically  rate  actual  term  between  this  net  short  for  peaked  of  since  development  fact  housing  examination  The  growth  over  in  closer  rather  provide  and  less  A  1976,  community's  This  back  2000.  i t was  during  yearly  fell  year  that  does  pattern.  6%. and  growth  predicting  term had  from  market  periods  the  revealed  gain  housing  by  in  then  of 1976  dropped  64 again  in  1978.  state  of  overbuilding  kets . ^ ment was  The  Plan's  By  6%  growth  early  Secretariat . The Secretariat process  of  the  summer  in  both  rate  population  questioned  making  the  by  also  the  the  had  was  1977  there  housing  figure  figures  on  of  used  and  to  considerable issue.  problematic  commercial  and  and  the  mar-  Develop-  unrealistic  Land  input It  a  justify  distorted  Environment  Chilliwack  was  Use  into  pointed  Committee  the  out  and  decision  that  the  -76-  Statistics  Canada  Chilliwack's 3.3%  and  areas  of  example,  Preliminary  average  that, the  when  annual  1976  growth  compared  Fraser  Valley,  Abbotsford  was  Census  to  rate  annual  this  growing  5%  indicated  since  1971  growth  figure at  data  was  per  had  rates  been  in  other  moderate. year,  that  For  Mission  at  66 8.7%  and  which the  Langley  lent  doubt  Chilliwack  that  was  Land  supply the  12.7%.  to  the  decision  immediately  Chilliwack the  at  of  land,  A.L.R.  around  growth.  At  supply.  The  best,  growth  could  be  vacant  land,  including  the  Another Chilliwack's  the  It  munity's  point  tax  on  and base.  to  was  there  the  of  upland  an  which  pointed  out  year outside  year approxi-  the  3.3%.  comThis  acres  of  properties  After areas  that  that  and  time could  growth.^  Secretariat  desire  left  three  of  650  A.L.R.,  immediate  a  infilling areas.  of  for  rate  population  something  be  in  available  land  five  development  the  A.L.R.  a  be  by  of  the  would  growth  hillside  development was  that  to  got  the  of  amount  by  infilling.  used  Chilliwack  Chilliwack's  It  be  base,  taken  community  at  non  years  the  supposed to  undeveloped  which  position  related  provision  both  developed  60  amount  data  establishing  residential  1981  the  position  of  their  centers  accommodated  additional  when  estimated  remaining  the  of  residential  allowed  for  and  partially  an  tion.  needed  1976  for  claimed,  Secretariat  acres  was  that,  the  i t was  between  house  not  a l l urban  munity  were  that  was  330  there  makers,  had  mately  existing  of  claimed  which  aspect  credibility  available  officials  Commission  Another  was  critical  ideological for  would that  considera-  industrial bolster not  of  the  land, com-  a l l Fraser  Valley  -77-  communities  could  ment  and  the  land  in  ried  out  of  at  by  industrial  the  wishing  remained  that  could  and  Although  preceding  on  and  plan  by  cited  a  Locations was  Section  directed  were  of at  were  the  received  Fraser other  development  of  the  It  from  of  survey,  car-  Ministry  railway  Valley.  areas  for  phone  r e a l - e s t a t e agents.  examples  factual  politicians the  to  even  planning  fundamental  other  illustrate  foundation order  to  companies  had  been  found  industries  In the  addition, Fraser  the  Valley  non-agricultural  problem some  method  of  used  in  had  the  most  gaps  by  their  taken  could  the  unsoundness  developed  solving,  information  organizations  the  support  Department  their  through  the  in  Planning  approach  serious  Secretariat  Upper  there  industrial  demand  which  the  develop-  heavy  enquiries  in  that  not  industrial  a  and  accommodate  ideological  sense,  few  extensive  industries.  The  the  The  have was  Industrial  locate  fact  ning  there  developers  to  related  to  Development,  relatively  ners  time  Chilliwack.  Economic  that  expect  a  be  Chilliwack community  failed  data.  these  decision  plan-  plan. plansupport  this  for i t s  flaws  making  to  In  criticized  and  the  comprehensive  i t had basic  of  were  focuse  process.  Summary  There as  were  expressed  The some  intended of  the  by  conflicts  organizations  move best  over  by  the both  Chilliwack  agricultural  plan in  based  and  officials  lands  in  on  outside to  Canada  its the  further was  ideology community. urbanize  unacceptable  -78-  to  many  individuals  appeared  to  additional  be  would not  have  have  had  There ted  to  or  were  also  the  development  in  sidered  the  such  a  other by  road  flood  of  on  areas  land  their  A.L.R.'s.  implications and  sequences  had of the  to the  of  act role  this  of  of  the  areas. other  was in  costs  one the  played  Provincial  the  province  The  of  to  the  such  financial  final  Plan  plan a  Cabinet  the  government  now  would  the  com-  would  lands.  would  and  spread in  be  rela-  lands  have  for  with  conthat  have.  The  tended  release  to of  environmental beyond  Chilliwack's  on  broader  the  d e c i s i o n making and  Environment  will  were  which  to  A.L.R.  apply  focused  proposal  which in  and  con-  proposal.  Chilliwack issue by  to  risks  associated  factor  farmland request  Of  considerations  problems  Another  of  area  Chilliwack  communities'  release  the  communities  the  there  area.  Chilliwack  local  environmental and  the  d e c i s i o n makers  Valley  Development  opponents  and  There  and  since  were  The  the  the  Chilliwack's exclusion  other  borders  outside by  for  criticism plan.  release  plain  encourage from  the  networks  effect  options  for  Fraser  the  precedent-setting  granting  with  financial  local  was  focus  appreciated  affected  were  a  growth  repercussions  There  been  and  associated  considered  munity.  organizations, especially  alternative  concern  uncertainties  and  be  the and  nature Land  discussed.  Use  unit  and  that  importance  Committee  of  -79-  THE  ROLE  OF  This outcome The  of  POWER  government  of  model  played,  VETO  decision  the c o n t r o v e r s y can  help  i n the  and  One primary  of  the V a r i a b l e Sets of  the  study,  i n the  decision  involved  and  determined  that  importance of  their  tions  to  four  between  issue'  went  'Mediator'  of  be  the r o l e  made  these the  that  roles  final  case  the  roles.  there can  back  to  the  Plan.  this  agency  the  theory  to  studies  individuals The  other  the  found  actor  with  making  ranked  of  they  deals  which  of  issue.  these of  average  strongest  'importance  holding  the  'Veto  their  process  the  and  and  Bolan  their  roles'  roles  that  play.  Using  the  a  roles  process  i n terms  that  i s not  the  a r e a number  be  outcome  'individual  to  i n the model,  present  individuals  and  critical  the Development  understanding must  was  Nuttall.  focus  Nuttall  unit  surrounding  therefore, a digression  Bolan  roles  making  correla-  to  Power'  the  and  correlation  rankings  6 8  can  be  that  seen  i n Table  2.  those  a c t o r s who  government  positions.  most  important  positions approval in  the  these  with of  role  roles  a project  official  or  were  possessed The  which  formal  decision  I t was  making  Veto was  predetermined  i n the  power  Power of  four  were  role,  'Public  for granting  or  In  roles.  with  Leader', or  the model's  ascribed roles,  case  usually  along  therefore, possessed  process.  perceived  veto  that  authority and,  found  studies in  the  third  were  denying  official  central  roles  four  case  rather  than  studies  80  TABLE  CORRELATIONS  BETWEEN ACTOR  All Cases  2  ROLES  AND  Inner Belt  Veto Power  .42  b  .42  Mediator  .38  b  .46  P u b l i c Leader  .35  Community  .34  Knowledgeable  b  b  IMPORTANCE  Manhattan Expressway  TO  Pittsburgh High Schools  .55  b  b  .43  b  .45  .49  b  .30  b  .41  b  b  ISSUE  Affiliated Hospital Center  .70  b  .47  b  -.02  .66  b  .19  .33  .48  b  .38  b  a  Expert on Process  .29  b  .33  b  .13  .56  Initiator  .27  b  .49  b  -.04  .06  .61  C o a l i t i o n Maker  .20  b  .36  b  .13  .06  .52  b  Judge  .20  b  .33  b  .12  -.15  .38  a  T e c h n i c a l Expert  .10  .03  .20  .27  .  .09  Significantly  different  from 0.00 a t the .05 l e v e l  Significantly  different  from 0.00 a t the .01 l e v e l  b  b  - 8 1 -  This however, was  role i t was  virtually  ment was  and the  of  not a  Land  Use  Plan.  in  or  itself,  i t had  exclude  the  E.L.U.C. to  be  that  excluded  dential  that  Plan.  additional In and  was  could  general, industrial  to  the  feasibility  In was case  a  the  Veto  same Power  studies,  that  E.L.U.C., the  that played  clear  in  assist  development  by  that  and  five  Chilliwack costs the  Nuttall  organization  years  in  for in  high  the  made  the  infilling  elsewhere  also  the  pursue  through  the resithe capa-  application  i t quite in  a  clear  study  and  market  upland  areas.  determined  individual actors an  to  to  develop-  a l l of  that  refusing  of  plan  A.L.R.  accommodated  development  Bolan  the  Chilliwack's  l i e  refusing  alternatives  A.L.R.,  to  suitability,  residential  i t is  be  on  willing  role  could  encroaching  was  sense  opinion  accommodated  felt  from  urban for  be  lands  province  determine  the  the  not  residential  Chilliwack  existed  a g r i c u l t u r a l land.  that  was  from  unit  on  did  by  i t  Environ-  community  retained  development  bility  these  by  of  to  the  action  plan  lands  and  needed  the  the  adjacent  by  authority  to  over  A.L.R.  i t was  Valley,  exclude  without  stopped  approval  development  Fraser  to  P r o v i n c i a l Government  acres  held  Rather,  This  development  E.L.U.C.  growth  was  issue,  that  power  the  Chilliwack  individual actor.  its official  veto  from  the  role  direct  16  in  conclusively  urban  only  farmland  uplands.  one  Although  indirect  residential  and  that  required  Development  by  existed  Committee.  denying  allowed  remaining  of  held  organization  granting  Power  predetermined  Development  ment  Veto  in  played  there  their  four  this  role  -82-  in  the C h i l l i w a c k  official itself In  role  rather  or had  found tion  by  that and  other  formal  Having  this  power  making  decision to  uphold  cultural  responding Plan,  THE  of the or  issue  proposal  However, of  Nuttall  i n a government  or deny  either  bargaining  thus  are not pure  the  case  at C h i l l i w a c k i n the y e a r s  motivation  Whether  official  by  behind  E.L.U.C. was  posi-  approval.  E,L.U.C.'s  acting  solely  p o s i t i o n to p r e s e r v e  agri-  the A.L.R., or whether  opposition  forces  i t was  to the Development  i t s motivation,  E.L.U.C. was  of the d e c i s i o n  making  a  process.  DECISION OUTCOMES  point  i n simple  and  community  to grant  i n the outcome  i t i s pointed  extended  and  a c t u a l l y a government  d e c i s i o n making  was  Bolan  or were  i t was  Whatever  and N u t t a l l  outcome  ascribed  case,  government  COMPROMISE ASPECT OF  community  r o l e s were  process.  was  but the exact  to the s t r o n g  Bolan  the d e c i s i o n making  holder  as e x e m p l i f i e d  component  took f o r  role  be known.  i s not known.  decisive  organization  or  gave E.L.U.C. a c e n t r a l p o s i t i o n i n the d e c i -  the o f f i c i a l land,  this  actor's  authority  process,  cannot  a predetermined  i n the p r o c e s s .  Power  in Chilliwack's  with  was  to i t d u r i n g  actors  the Veto  role  one which  the i n d i v i d u a l  agency  sion  This  than  ascribed  the model,  perceived  case.  out i n t h e i r episodes 'yes' or  favorably out t h a t and  have  decided outcomes  where  upon  to adopt  that  or was  are u s u a l l y  or r e j e c t . were  E.L.U.C.'s  past  studies  to focus  compromises  concessions  following  that  tended  'no' terms,  are u s u a l l y  decisions  model  on  is,a turned the  plan down.  result  of some s o r t This  was  made to the  r e f u s a l to e x c l u d e  -83-  the  1700 a c r e s  E.L.U.C. A.L.R.  from  allowed  against  on a m a j o r  for  u s e a s a new  was  land  was  a member  the removal  the advice  was  this  t h e A.L.R.  road  Only  of eight  acres  o f t h e Land  access  near  later, the Chilliwack  Commission.  This  a n d was  The a p p l i c a t i o n  by t h e l o c a l  of the p o l i t i c a l  from  the a i r p o r t  car dealership.  supported  a few months  party  M.L.A. which  parcel  intended  to exclude  at C h i l l i w a c k  was  i n power  who  i n B.C.  69 at  the time.  indicated and  The M i n i s t e r  the d e c i s i o n  of lesser  quite  capable  barley  bargaining  not  willing  of  farmland.  application refused hope be  net  that to  to allow  was  s growing  was  officials  f o r the release  which  allow  District  refused  Chilliwack's  major  10.  shopping  with  these  the land  was  producing  to carry  Chilliwack, of large their  that  tracts exclusion  b u t E.L.U.C. I t was t h e  a compromise  growth  on  i t was  second  t h e A.L.R.  could  i n the v a l l e y  affected  Although  t h e 129 a c r e s  by t h e t r u n k  willing  the lands  to exclude  and r e l e a s e d  serviced  No.  gravelly  season.  from  immediate  i n and around  that  382 a c r e s ,  makers  was  and had been  h a d made  land  decision  was  release  o f some  any o f t h i s  would  Sewer  process  a t the time  the s o i l  apparently  the wholesale  Community  had twice  compromised  the truth  and c o m p r o m i s i n g  especially  troversial  however,  year  of the Chilliwack  lands,  because  the Cabinet  to r e l e a s e  reached  was made  of a g r i c u l t u r a l production  i n the previous  Although a  quality,  of the Environment  by t h e c o n -  the P r o v i n c i a l  lands,  Cabi-  i t eventually  o f Sewer  District  lines.  These  lands  center,  Cottonwood  were  No.  10  adjacent  C o r n e r s , and  - 8 4 -  were  slated  for residential  Another issue,  but  major  this  This  concession  area  of  trunk  sewer  part  of  129  acres  end  at  base, and  way  this  The  main  Crossing  being  be  process  the  compromises  a  clear  a  rare  P r o v i n c i a l Government  the  latter  cessions in  turned made  the area  reached a  making  of  some down,  o r no  because of  of  segment  that  outcome,  as  and  the  Sardis  the  main  line  the  community  not  were  ideology  true  and  were  factors  such  as  In other  new  Plan  not  words,  by  with  f o r the  The  decisions  information  between  makers was  percent.  compromises  making  stage  decision  did  suggests  decision  negotiation  hundred  change  at  issue  the model  one  d i d not  this  the C h i l l i w a c k  but  Chilliwack  and  up  f a r south,  of  Development  stand.  linking  the  Chilliwack's  that  The  maker's  from  t h e A.L.R.,  of  extension  of the  southern  districts  gains.  decision  critical  south  to  E s s e n t i a l l y , the  and  to C h i l l i w a c k issue  conceded.  areas.  in a bargaining  the  the  extend  addition  extending  future  occurrence.  continued  part  sewer  that i n the  into  segments In  Chilliwack  the e x t e n s i o n  the b u s i n e s s  indicate  cut yes  10  would  southern  hillside  community  No.  main  Base.  f o r the  i n the  allowing  through  i n the  paved  southern  have  most  sewer  service  With  by  uses.  Commission  the  District  above,  would  reached  the Land  assisted  i n Sewer  corridor.  the  would  main  commercial  was  the d i s t r i c t ,  discussed  These not  further  the Canadian Forces  was  into  i t was  Chilliwack.  Vedder  urban  compromise  time  sewering  and  con-  E.L.U.C. that  were  modifying  the p r o p e r t i e s  at  i n c a p a b i l i t y f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l produc-  -85-  tion  from  release  the  by  the  agricultural Government in  the  in  process  of  decision were  making  flict  of  sistent  essentially  to  the  which  were  aimed  without  Chilliwack to  engaged  at  and  at  other as  at  every  the  areas  time  were  of  good  Provincial decision  The  a l l .  It  and  however,  making  group  district  in  of  the  Land  matter  and  Provincial  of  refusal period  their of  prove  farm-  of  events  extended  was  removing concessions i t s growth  compromise  that  per-  farmlands.  Government  Plan,  con-  the  s u b s t a n t i a t e d by  Development  in a  the  the  Commission  made  valley  on  Committee  such  in  release  Commission  the  collusion,  the  point  taken  the  initial  as  C h i l l i w a c k i n meeting  model's  the  levied  patronage  the  in  the  criticized  for  damaging  in  Farmland  also  the  veto  engaged  developers  on  the  had  involved  the  This  move.  stance  is well  down  f o l l o w i n g the  i t still  Save  position  assisting  the  Cabinet  groups  the  applications  Although  turn  the  the  Chilliwack officials  irreversibly  case.  with  by  possible political  A.L.R.,  outcomes  completely  months  compromise  conclusion,  decision  farming  Provincial  process,  such  no-compromise  from  of  the  whereas  A.L.R.^  a  until  n e g o t i a t i o n s and  making  against  lands  In  sacrificed  of  that  continuous  the  A.L.R.  these  municipal, authorities  and  from  needs,  fact  Government  of  the  case.  interest  alliance  were  process,  charges  in  Clearly,  process  decision  unwilling  serious  but  compromise,  Provincial  land  the  the  the  inclusion  Cabinet.  Chilliwack  in  of  lands  Despite power  time  the  aspect the  appeared in  the  government  bargaining.  -86-  The  negotiation period  resulting  in  There important making  THE  concessions  i s one  that  on  and  BALANCE  dimension, Nuttall  the  study  out  that  up  over  plans  the  are  made  them  both  these  sed as  earlier simple  on  a  up  and  in  acts  this of  compromise  decision  making  sequent  In  of  issue.  an  goals the  be  chapter,  of  of  as  a  goals  of  discussed  achieved  and  rejection  result  by of  means  d e c i s i o n making  a  means  both  are  can  tending  the  either As  cannot  be  They  involved  negotiations  there  time  Chapter  plan.  into  point  in  those  on  Bolan  action,  adjusted.  of  time  by  over  d e c i s i o n making or  the  forces  resisting  modified  and  be  case.  They  case  d e c i s i o n outcomes  or  now  incorporated  made.  balance  p o s i t i o n s reached  process,  course  be  course may  m o d i f i c a t i o n of  the  to  of  those As  will  involve  be  each  the  decision  clarified  a  adoption  actually  is  are  versus  aspect  as  TIME  d e c i s i o n making  how  issue.  Chilliwack  i t could  trajectory  E.L.U.C.,  community  This  factor  how  by  recognizes  explicitly  this  show  elements  of  the  OVER  plan,  of in  of  to  made  the  model  time.  not  about  will  course  achieve of  points  of  does  the  dynamics  relative  relevance  community  action  the  MAKING  model  which  that  issue  theoretically  plotted,  toward  the  and  of  the  DECISION  the  and  is  being  C h i l l i w a c k on  area  disucssed  OF  Although  be  final  compromises  to  in understanding  and  focused  saw  and  line 1, to or discusviewed are in  the  sub-  sides.  group  forces  -87-  acting the  both  within  ultimate  time  issue  trajectory  forces  line  themselves  up  outcome.  can at  assist  a  given  and  upon  Bolan  and  in  each  other  Nuttall  understanding  point  in  time,  to  affect  believe  how  the  change  that  a  balance  over  of  time,  and  72 ultimately the  basic  trates  bring  decision  that  there  may  fall.  outcome  unqualified an  issue  reflect  a  the The  the  balance  and  where  of plan  question issue the  the  the  two  the  back  following  scrutinized  2  by  of  formulated  by  the  of  as  government  means Total  place: and  and  and  their  of  case,  in  this  private  the  case  of  the time.  Develop-  Department, toward 2.  Figure forces  During  Development  was the  Once began  propelled  groups:  con-  illustrates  over  heading  Ambiguity. the  path  may  original  and  forces  opposition and  the  Chilliwack  The  of  outcomes  detailed  Planning  shown  how  the  complete  more  fell.  final  means  of  the  was  a  illus-  represents  outcomes  in  and  part  Chilliwack's  however, and  a  balance  Acceptance,  took  only  aligned  politicians  the Zone  events  of  represents  which  goals  illustrate  decision  the  into  represents  outcome  in  stages  local  original  1  developed  quadrant  represents  were  Figure  they  hand  quadrant  analyzing  i t s goals  into  the  acceptance 73  publicized,  both  right  decision  Unqualified was  quadrants  quadrants  change  been  basic  left  forces  initial  had by  of  final  depicts  Plan  Zone the  the  for  which  both  Figure  how  approved  of  outcome.  field  upper  other  framework  ment  The  means.  decision  four  r e j e c t i o n or  and  In  are  lower  ceptual  arrow  a  outcome  adoption  and  rejection.  goals  about  to  the this  Plan  E.L.U.C.  period was refused  -88-  FIGURE  1:  FIELD  OF P O S S I B L E  DECISION  M BA N S KD  OUTCOMES  OPTED  Ado  prfien  G-OPi L S  GOALS fOzSB C T E O  FIGURE  2 :  PkPOP  CONCEPTUAL OUTCOMES  FRAMEWORK  ZON£  Zow^ OP SE.PtR.CH FOR  FOR  ANALYZING  ZOA/e  DECISION  OF  \f\LTEflK\l\TNE GOALS  O F  Z O N E OF ILNQILALIFIEO ACCEPTANCE" G O A L S  T O T A L -  R.E~T£rCTE D ZONE  OF  UNQUALIFIED  RerfCT/oN  ZOA/E OP V MEAA/5 A M i 3 / 6 U / T y H.EAN5  TIME  TED  ZOtfE OF ^EflCCH FOft |/)LT£RA/AT/V£  fcfJCCTEO  T ( t P t T E C T o p o d  CH 1 L l~ I UJ F\ C>C C A S E  ^TuDif  ADOPTED  - 8 9 -  to  allow  the exclusion  Provincial to  and t h e Land  Official  Plan  were  Community  partly  formulating  were  either  time. sense  that  rejected  they  and  replaced  with  goal  the  original  goal  was  amalgamating goals  system the  remained  issue  words, the  the f i n a l  respect  The  stock  as t h e e v e n t u a l  up  goals,  What  i n t h e Zone  outcome  was  b u t was  upland  expansion  the goal  the e x i s t i n g  were  outrightly  of  commercial were  areas,  rejected den-  along  altogether. new  first  i n the  residential  out expansive  with  the goals  f o r the  farmlands  of increasing  of c a r v i n g  of  process  goals,  the goals  the southern  t h e same.  ended  original  with  such  and o t h e r s  commercial  replaced  to a t t a i n  earlier  the v a l l e y  the goals  of reducing  land  Other  onto  and o f d e v e l o p i n g  the  and  growth  i n the  developed  from  F o r example,  concessions  of the Development  rejected  actually  different  made  to the production  and t h e means  clarified,  or r e p l a c e d .  residential  trial  were  t h e A.L.R.; t h e  The g o a l s  o r were  were  turned  and p a r t l y  t h e O.C.P.,  goals  and  sities  accepted  modified  Some  Plan.  from  Commission  C h i l l i w a c k ; and t h e d i s t r i c t  the  of  Cabinet  of farmland  tracts  of upgrading,  with  As w e l l , of  indus-  servicing  of i n d u s t r i a l l y - z o n e d land.  provision these  changes  o f Means  largely  o f an u r b a n meant  Ambiguity.  similar  substantially  with  transit  was In  that other  respect  different  or  to  ambiguous  t o t h e means.  final  outcome  of the C h i l l i w a c k case  by  the point  of the arrow,  of  the goals  continua.  which  This  i s just  point  i s illustrated  on t h e p o s i t i v e  represents  the fact  side  that  -90-  most  of  main  means  of  the  original for  farmland  jectory when  from  the  event  of  over  time of in  Zone has  of to  the  be  what  Zone  means  the  was  Plan  O.C.P.  has  and  goals  and  approaches. Council  and  Planning  more  O.C.P.,  of  the  than  activity  Planning  Department.  citizens  right held,  The  meetings,  formulating took  during  the  fared  i t s  the  starting  phase  of  toward  however,  place  inclusion  from  the  start  of  was  the  opposite  the of  by  the  still  and  the the  was  a  some  the  planning  Chilliwack  Council's public,  far  doors  views  of  1976  in  the  different  the  process, the  consulting  Development  behind of  the  of  the  the  earlier  C.P.A.C.,  members  most  issue  the  used  relevant  in  in  Chilliwack public  and  used  year  1975,  subsequent  heading  O.C.P.,  Committee  that  the  Essentially,  through  Department,  from  the  tra-  departments.  the  planning  acres  between  The  from  Planning  O.C.P.  large  plotted  was.  the  where  were  of  moved  comprehensive  involvement  be  Mayor,  monthly  approach  The  general  developing  started. also  the  arrow's  1979,  is presently  Government  was  The  the  The  and  outcome  Ambiguity,  by  excluding  segment  Total  of  group,  was  could  this  although  Chilliwack issue  started,  O.C.P.  the  by  rejected.  of  accepted  means  planning  ings  was of  how  present,  goals,  i t s eventual  Provincial  The  1976,  the  still  U n q u a l i f i e d Acceptance.  relevant  twice  Plan  developing  clarifying  time  indicating  and  these  Community  developing  manner,  were  A.L.R.,  the  Official  same  point  the  Development  which  matter  achieving  represents  the  goals  when method  Plan of  the  Chilliwack's public which  meet-  -91-  excluded  citizen  Although of  this  the in  values,  tion  period lowed  after  official  this  weighed  time,  rejection.  alone,  mainly  Committee,  Prior  by i n c l u d i n g  the p u b l i c i n  making,  goals,  Plan  created  this  Planning  credibility,  with  harsh  voiced  with  citizens  eyes  of the P r o v i n c i a l Government  not  only  were  a  provincial policy  proposing of  their  support of  a planning own  community  to preserve programme  citizens.  the value  politicians  that  Overall,  of public  policy  Plan  making.  out-  citizens  general  likely  have  s e t back harmed i t s  politicians, makers.  and p l a n n e r s  was  public.  feelings.  would  decision  farmland,  opposition  of the  s i t u a t i o n , which  of C h i l l i w a c k ' s  fol-  the Farmland  e f f o r t s and u n d o u b t e d l y  that  that  and p r o p e l l e d i t  o f t h e Save  anti-Development  long  the plan  by C h i l l i w a c k  the  Chilliwack  opposing  resolu-  The  included  to the a t t e n t i o n  confrontation  along  conflict  unveiled.  proponents  Chilliwack  Department's  c a n be w o r k e d o u t  the general  of forces  the a c t i v i t i e s  the issue  conflicts.  and c o m p r o m i s i n g  and n o t j u s t  Opposition  consultation  was  o f t h e 1976 p r o p o s a l  through  major  s i t u a t i o n where  the balance  brought  where  means and e n d s  negotiation  bodies  and q u i c k l y  averted the  reduced  the e f f o r t s of the plan's  toward  public  the l i k e l i h o o d  the Development  the r e v e l a t i o n  During  be r e j e c t e d ,  the previous  of bargaining,  many  altogether.  still  of p o l i c y  priorities,  on, u n l i k e  may  has been  stages  began  from  t h e O.C.P.  happening  initial  early  participation  but they  going were  unacceptable  the C h i l l i w a c k  case  in  For against also  t o many tends  p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the early  to  stages  -92-  SUMMARY  In was  the  first  centered  were  operating  opposition makers.  a  planning  in  Power with  number to  the  plan, factual  to  the  plan  by  decision  departments  factors the  and  and  the  was  which  outcome  risks  and  for  these  i d e o l o g i c a l and the  the  basis  that  Opposition  of  affect  and  farmland  the  this  decision.  extended  from  the  the  of  commun-  value  con-  uncertainties  statistical  outcome model  Elements  Government period  district  of  A.L.R.,  in  usually  of  the  suggested, of  in  the  basis  not  a  to  on  and  strive  the  of  the  refused to  the  significant  position been  of  Veto  linked  positions.  Plan cut part  occurred  attain  a  has  negotiation to  necessary  a  model,  clear  E.L.U.C.  played  held  Development  Chilliwack,  bargaining  was  government  compromise,  toward  continued  they  to  when  which  E.L.U.C.  that  according  authority  the  the  culminated  proposal.  outcome  role,  final  as  vincial  of  issue  formal  The  the  the  plan.  discussion  networks  developed  the  were  the  and  government  a  likely  in  opposition  and  be,  of  These  inherent  implementation  to  are  proposal  exclude  role  out  making  case  Plan  chapter,  method.  The to  Chilliwack  three  this  decision  a l l opposed  p o l i c y making.  such  of  of  organizations,  hypothesizes  siderations of  types  Development  Cabinet  around  sections  the  the  Private  centered model  the in  to  Provincial  ity  on  two  issue yes of  or the  was  found  no Pro-  throughout during  their  which  original  an time goals.  -93-  Finally, decision change tion  making  over  one  the  how  the  to  those  trates and  at  held  both  means  Chilliwack the  and  decision  and  Chilliwack  as  an  The  making and  The  trajectory  the  model's the  of  each  the  balance  of  Plan,  finally  forced  officials  and  toward or  original case  can resolu-  toward  a method of  to  over which  of  plot-  determining  different  conceptual  forces,  planners.  positive  and  are  in  case,  programs  time  plan  of  forces  provides  over  in a  of  Chilliwack  plans  model  process means  balance  issue  times.  relationship  issue,  Development  such  forcing  initially.  the  the  then  goals  the  how  propelling  other  final  shown  episodes,  time,  moment  rejection ting  i t was  or  diagram the  time. were  i t s abandonment  final In  similar illusgoals the  resisting by  94  CHAPTER  THE  I M P L I C A T I O N S OF THE MODEL  5  FOR COMMUNITY  PLANNING  -95-  THE  MODEL'S  In the  USEFULNESS  examining  Bolan  Although  and  the  Nuttall  Bolan  and  view  to e x p l a i n i n g  used  them  issue.  formulating the  of  this  premises both  A  from  hypotheses,  one  two  developed  outcomes,  event  inherent  and  the  were  one  and  segment  of  the  the  second  decision  issue  were  event  the also  overall of  focus  an  with  study  the  making  in assisting  i n the model  case  with  general  used.  hypotheses  the present  entire  helpful  the p e r s p e c t i v e of  focuses their  dealt  Plan  the  were  Chilliwack examined  process.  The  understanding  outcome.  Overall,  predominantly  supported  instances.  comparison  will  event  reflected  the  overall  dealing  with  will  evaluated  be  planning aspects  and of  now  of  made  o f how  the v a r i o u s  f o r m u l a t i n g the Development outcome  the nature  of  first  of  the  and  intervention  the model  be  the  issue.  characteristics  then  the V a r i a b l e  strategies.  that  were  The  used  i n the  Plan  and  Variable  of  public  Set  Finally,  hypotheses  Set issues  regarding  the  present  other study  will  examined.  Hypotheses  The likely not  issue  of  the  The  Chilliwack  examination  supported  be  FRAMEWORK  in isolation  outcome  hypotheses  in  STUDY  i t s Development  model's  the  CASE  issue  first  eventual  both  A  Nuttall  to examine  This  AS  model  t o be  on  had  the  theorized  accepted  controversial,  Characteristics  had  than a  that  plans  rejected  limited  of  Issues  or programmes  i f they  scope  were  of both  are  more  ideologically  costs  and  -96-  benefits, to  were  accomplish  easily  (both  To  Development  Plan  compromise  expansion. ceived  as  the  in  was  also  being  their  had  no  Therefore,  the  action  the  the  it,  was  six  hypotheses.  Where behavior ment  the  Plan's to  on  not  did  that  to  oppose  have  option  year of  by  the  and  easy  of  of  urban  period.  must,  what  be  is  turning  down  were  Chilliwack's  the in  growth,  of  the  Develop-  more  reversed  by  was its  could  other that  of  a  later that  inflexible, very not  be  they  programme over  the  the  however,  area  than  implement  are  with  inflexible  growth  makers  acknowledged  officials  undoubtedly  implement,  five  to  or  dealing  their  in  proposals  be  per-  consequences.  follow  irreversible  community  was  to  regard  com-  urban  decision  modified  were  natural  There  in  that  Chilliwack  development  not  however,  they  growth the  was  idea can  did  to  reflected  to  predictable  Chilliwack  model,  The  It  sense  managing  the  officials  i f they  urban  expected  means  behavior  true.  this  thirty  i t was  i t had  by  costs  predicted  nature  manage  well,  i t  were  the  allowing  was  In  to  and  and  high  easy  that  that  nature.  was  farmland  in  of  Chilliwack  hold  sound,  attempting  i s , physical  the  planners,  and  accepted  inherent  and  Plan  flexibility.  be  politicians  As  easy  administratively),  Development  anticipated  likely  the  kind  were  were  apparent  taken  time,  and  beneficial. communicate  over  consequences  preserving  and  accepting  and  ideologically  understand  in  reversible  Chilliwack  between It  and  economically  predictable  municate.  a  flexible  did  that  long-range  more  flexible  an  irreversi-  -97-  ble  land  did  not  have the a  the  been  of  view  equally the  officials  the  some  best  Variable  pectives  of  the  the  i n t e n s i t y of  the  plan's  quences. benefit  before, as  the  seen  in  were  i t would  district to the  the  could  permit afford  and  in  the  the  to  or  the  groups from  those a  the  A.L.R.  the  issue,  pers-  dealing  of  as  they there  with  its  public  were  potentially considerable  consesome  growth  building  were  with  having  established  of  of  hypotheses  programme,  plan  as  government  other  were  Plan  plan  and  the  The  continue  as  Chilliwack  Development  viewing  the  which  that  in  expansion  them  way  predictability  upset  developers  outsiders  proposal  not  hypotheses  found  of  view  attitudes  the  viewed  from  ultima-  Canada.  the  issue  opposing  same  removal  possibly  involved,  public  issue  officials  i t would  of  decision  may  the  The  the  benefits  with  only  Plan  other  relevant  the  and  and  in  a l l of  in  costs  allow  the  the  Set  Chilliwack's  i t would  outcome.  These  in  makers  organizations  organizations  farmland  the  and this  values  justify  that  the  examining  and  example,  other  not  in  groups  final  inherent  flexibility  and  However,  For  been  Development  surfaced  opponents  locally;  pattern,  other  reprehensible.  could  the  the  had  explaining  acceptable,  departments  this  in  issue.  ideologically  of  the  decision  options.  However,  issue's  well  viewed  completely  of  district's  other  issue,  perspective the  the  officials  implemented.  affected  affected  in  pursue  Chilliwack  different  worked  however,  a f f e c t i n g the  point  tely  plan,  seriously  If makers  use  as  services  required. few  benefits  costs.  The  -98-  plan's  possible  spread  far  consequences,  beyond  the  proposal  since  eventual  impact,could  Plan's  effects  Valley,  on  some  on  to  the  of  the  not  relevant  two  hypotheses the  The  Hypotheses  On  the  on  basis  strategies  and  issue,  model's  the  Chilliwack's issue showed  that  therefore, their was  Plan  these  the  action  Chilliwack readily  Development  responsible  risky  The  Development  elsewhere  roadway  in  the  network  respective  of  respect  to  this  Variable  their  Fraser  and  on  A.L.R.s,  with  communicating  opposition's  the  and  Plan  or  other  were  possible  relating  programme,  viewpoint.  shown  were  These  officials  that  they  valued  bases.  and  Intervention  Set  The  was  in  able  to  through to  the  good carry the  in  strategies 'planning  out  how  the  Planning  district's  planning  affect  clarifying  s i t u a t i o n and  planning a  with  strategies  assisted their  Strategies^  dealing  intervention  viewed  directly  i t was  Set, a  Chilliwack's  Variable  developed.  was  a  predicted.  in  and  hypotheses  officials  outcome  was scope  their  the  Planning  of  It the  r e f l e c t e d how  both  environmental,  e f f e c t s , or  raised  analyzing  on  boundaries.  local  hypotheses  only  and  plan.  Development  proposal  own  toward  the  economic  development  implementing  in  the  easily  concerns  two  of  these  be  urban  of  final  ease  viewed  a l l of  attitudes  implementation  The  district's  Chilliwack's  community's only  not  both  how  how the  final  hypotheses  position'  formulation Department,  power  an  center,  and, of which or  -99-  Council. ning in  However,  type'  e v e n t u a l l y worked  the issue  hypothesis which  focused  on  solving  gramme  dealt  selective horizon,  type' with  and  because  opponents  factors.  dealt  with  concentrated  concerns  The  i t i s by  a  com-  approach.  on w h e t h e r  and f o c u s e d  a  pro-  on m e a n s a n d  i t had a l o n g - t e r m  and f o c u s e d  'plan-  t h e way i n  out; whether  or whether  goal-oriented  method'  o r by a n i n c r e m e n t a l  hypothesis  immediate  them  these  method'  method  information was  on  i s carried  classical  'planning  'planning  against  criticism  the 'planning  problem  prehensive, The  Chilliwack's  on c o m p l e x  time information  s y s t ems.  For  the C h i l l i w a c k d e c i s i o n makers,  development pletely ards  acceptable  posal  years  into  objected could  excellent  of acres  period.  Opposition  existing densities  urban  such  possibility  development  land  use p a t t e r n  However,  opponents  t h e same  by u r b a n  the plan's  made  i t clear  available  as t h e b e t t e r through  residential  of the  stand-  f o r another to the  pro-  because  district's  especially  there  to help  the  were  solve  of the  and a l l o w i n g  development.  com-  implementation  that  utilization  infilling  was  reasons,  expansion,  over  methods  of encouraging  past  further erosion  land  forces  lands  f o r new  any  required  planning  needs,  i t confirmed  to i t f o r p r e c i s e l y  agricultural  incremental  focus,  the f u t u r e .  not condone  comprehensive  i t sgoal-oriented  the d i s t r i c t ' s  hundreds  growth  with  because  and c l a r i f i e d  thirty  they  proposal,  their  There  agriculturally-oriented  Chilliwack community's higher  was  a l s o the  industries,  -100-  which  could  solving and of  be p e r m i t t e d  the d i s t r i c t ' s  the b a s i c  developing leaving the  zoned  the h i g h l y  as one means  of  f o r revenue-producing  of b e t t e r lands.  Chilliwack's  utilizing  Finally,  poorer  productive  soils  the e x i s t i n g  there  capability  was  areas  the o p t i o n  lands,  under  industry  of  thereby  the p r o t e c t i o n  of  A.L.R.  From Plan  the p e r s p e c t i v e  d i d n o t meet  likely  be  physical itself  base  Not  they  eventually  The dealt quo that  and  changes  rather  than  those  buting  resources  institutional more  likely  the plan  Overall, based  on  which  cause  adopted.  single  f o r the  above  respect  data  opposition  strategies  and  defeat.  the  strategies status  The model the status change  changing  structures  plan  growth  serious  disturb  social  would  Chilliwack's  or i n t e r v e n t i o n  disturb  a n d by  With  of  a  f o r the  to  behavior.  massive  or o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  t o be  was  programmes  ( i . e . wealth)  means,  the goal  there  little  and  of the q u e s t i o n a b l e  on a c t i o n  which  with  the planning  in societal  that  regulating  the proposal  to which  the Development  frame  criticized  because  propel  strategies  on  of reaching  hypotheses  the degree  force  action  Plan  time  d i d not deal  but a l s o  helped  model's  with  was  issue,  as a p r o p o s a l  a long-term  plan  i t rested.  the Development  criteria  concentrated  means  only  reasons,  on w h i c h  that  The  the only  management. described  I t had  focus  growth.  was  of the o v e r a l l  the model's  adopted.  goal-oriented  to  desire  prospect  industrially  i n t h e A.L.R.,  by  contends quo, redistri-  existing  ( i . e . power), are  to the a t t i t u d e  of  the  -101-  Chilliwack designed  officials,  solely  converting decision which  to  the  province were  reallocated  the  the  Land  power  suggested  In the  old  not  a  the  past.  case  of  the  status  land  use  disturbing  the  model  planning cials,  the  was  had  new  been  status  in of  the  quo  A.L.R.  into  hands  to  as  The  had  the  of  regain  the  oriented  be  these the  were In  quo, the  decision  insure land  model  plan  to  the  was  and by  plan  rejection  there  was of  the  new  Chilliwack's the  that was  a  patterns  protect  sense  their  was  that  use  rejected  other  groups  Chilliwack rejected  as  case.  Variable outcome  strategies  there  established  process.  would  to  attempting  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  action  affected  forces,  attempt  intentions  predictors  and  opposition  unacceptable  the  Chilliwack's  officials.  the  making  quo  of  status  attempting  status  of  suggested  Both  a  was  quo  which  Therefore,  an  that  change,  actually  case,  old the  wealth  and  hypotheses  good  social land  status  this  establishing  their  plan  actuality, to  quo  planning  was  study.  the  In  return  by  their  existing  resource.  opposition  decision  The  the  of  to  were  Chilliwack's  The  disruptive  part  be  continuation  order  and  long  this  of  precious  should  the  of  in  control  because  uses.  upset  rejecting  their  by  urban  had  true  the  tryint  Commission,  over  adopted  to  were  politicians  was  maintain  farmland  makers  this  used  making  Sets  of the by  the  were  process  the  Chilliwack  issue the  for  itself  most  case and  community's  the offi-  predominantly  in  -102-  the  manner  predicted  Additional  The that on  first  was  included  other  case  was  very  The  Veto  played the  Power  was  since issue,  E.L.U.C. taken been  by  decision control  Although  that  their  persistent  was  played  the Environment in bringing  have  other some  forces  about  played  ascribed  officials  organization. Use  the f i n a l cause  working  Committee  outcome of  t h e end  together  result,  i n the  and v i e w p o i n t s  the f i n a l  o f E.L.U.C.  unable  by a n  of the values  affected  one  and Land  d i d not n e c e s s a r i l y  position  that  taken  by  was  critical  to the p o s i t i o n  since  the Land  Commission  viewpoint, to gain  however,  an a l l y  the  had  community's  in their  fight for  farmlands.  Chilliwack  applications  model  to t h e i r  were  major  and N u t t a l l  are  o f t h e most  many  their  that  that  Chilliwack's  over  i n this  case  support  makers  not examined  one o f  i n the C h i l l i w a c k  role  unsympathetic  from  however, i t  i n the process The  i t arose  effects  studies,  but undoubtedly  surfaced  factor  conclusive  to the r o l e s  Bolan  a  case  in their  were  were  was  in their  E.L.U.C.  there  though  which  episodes.  instrumental  issue.  important  even  related  to i n d i v i d u a l s  roles  of the model  i t had  Sets  factor  apparent  important  aspect  because  making  roles  i n the Model  of the issue,  This  decision  these  Factors  two V a r i a b l e  study.  the hypotheses.  additional  t h e outcome  the  in  Relevant  by  was  repeatedly  f o r the e x c l u s i o n  efforts  to reach  refused  in  their  of  lands  from  the  their  goals  netted  reserve,  them  some  -103-  gains. Bolan  This and  decision tion, or  making  the  to  episodes  alternative sion  i n the  through upland  granting  proved  model t o be  the  issue  moved  the  decision  emphasize steps  of  rather  initially  identifying  that,  t o one  dimension  also  and  can  means  course  of  an  point  i s what  or  posi-  eventually Cabinet  of  some  and  lands  in evaluating the  run  sewer  the from  the  Land  Commis-  lines  through  or  that  time  component  the  aspect  of  another  changed, either  of  or  both  them  have case.  can  as be  the  of  negotia-  some  original  left  of  helped  action.  may  in Chilliwack's  at  in  entails  through  of  process  length  or, ideally  finally  form  forces  making  going  that  the  in  also  the model  policy  and  factor  over  a proposal,  fact  dimension  how  the whole  the  the  this  compromise,  completely  issue  rejected  manner,  This  happened  clarified be  few  entirely  by  treated  a l t e r n a t i v e s , then  a commitment  which  to  that  by  'no'  and  directions  establishing  making  again,  option,  up  'yes' or  exclusion  i n general,  and  this  out  were  assistance  informal  reevaluation  at  the  Nuttall  period.  various  cut  is either  permission  tions,  necessary,  of  i t in various  fact  point  the P r o v i n c i a l  in analyzing  making  the  both  brought  Reserve.  and  useful  They  concessions  development  Bolan  in a  by  aspect  in a clear  government  A g r i c u l t u r a l Land  their  end  form  Chilliwack  Although  second  model.  Some  community  Commission  a  o r programme  accepted.  the  reserve,  in their  a plan  completely  Land  illustrates  Nuttall  i n that  granted  the  fact  point, If  to  begin  The  time  goals  i s , over modified  the to  -104-  one  degree  was  shown  for  achieving  to  be  that  was  solving  dependent why  some  process number  them  the  work  assisted  worked of  many  ways  in  in  C h i l l i w a c k ' s case,  original  goals  had  r e j e c t e d and  been  desired  survived,  Chapter  out  and in  in  problems  but  that  much  plan  others  do  not.  clarifying  how  C h i l l i w a c k case the  toward  and  defeat.  case  and  that  i t  the  new  means  the  future  the  study  this  are  make  means had  success  society is  decisions  Bolan  and  decision  study.  and  Nuttall  making  There  were  a  p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s of  their  Some  today's  The  ideological  hindered  of  facing  we  strategies  this  1,  how  officials  proposal  and  in  complex  the  planning  pointed  out  i n which  community's  ners  Generally  understanding  plans  acceptable  be  the  pointed  on  hypotheses  the  another.  sought .  As in  or  success helped  of that  the the  in  finding  force  their  factors  that  Chilliwack  can plan-  politicians:  -  d i d not at t i tud w e r e no  -  d i d not n i n g ac r e su I t f a i l e d t o d e v e l o p an o b j e c t i v e a t t i t u t e t o w a r d their community i n o r d e r t o r e a l i s t i c a l l y s e e k and examine a l t e r n a t i v e g o a l s and m e a n s . d i d not r e c o g n i z e the p o t e n t i a l i n t h e i r area's resources - p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e i r land resources u t i l i z a t i o n i n s o l v i n g t h e i r economic concerns.  for  oriented their thinking predominantly to economic m a t t e r s and f a i l e d t o r e c o g n i z e t h a t t h e r e were s o c i a l and e n v i r o n m e n t a l f a c t o r s t o be considered.  -105-  -  f a i l e d to c o n s i d e r the v i e w s of c i t i z e n s on t h e i r own future.  -  were u n a b l e to d e v e l o p a sound b a c k g r o u n d of i n f o r m a t i o n a n d f a c t s on w h i c h t o b a s e a p l a n a n d analyzed t h e d a t a b a s e t h a t was p r o d u c e d from a p e r s p e c t i v e which supported t h e i r preconceived interests.  -  d i d not r e c o g n i z e the p l a n n i n g p r o p o s a l s on  -  f a i l e d to r e c o g n i z e the t r u e n a t u r e of t h e i r p l a n n i n g i s s u e s and c o n s e q u e n t l y p r o p o s e d a s i m p l e and inadequate s o l u t i o n to a complex problem.  Having involved  in  attention results  reviewed the  can  PLANNING  The  Nature  It not  of  they  Dennis very  decision  of  planning  the  OF  that  an  their  the  and  limiting  Bolan  they and  THE  the in  making  and  their  the  factors  process,  implications  of  our  these  process.  CHILLIWACK  Chilliwack  their  of  CASE  STUDY  the  were  process  common  part  that  of  most can  have  decision  Nuttall  be  model  a  can  policy  been  in  frequent  first  making, of  1 .  by The  preclude  occurrence  processes. step  making. have  to  were  outlined  Chapter  seem  planning  aspects on  have  would  their  to  makers  characteristics  described  traits  however,  decision  approach  behavior  which  integral  the  study  of  Making  making,  restrictions as  and  making  these  policy  them  nizing  on  unusual  Rondinelli  rational  focused  Decision  appear  case  i t s decision  d i s p l a y e d most  nature  makes  be  and  community's  negative implications t h e i r own community.  Chilliwack  IMPLICATIONS  would  community  such  now  particularly  since  the  issue  for planners  THE  the  the  to  Recog-  overcoming  Academic  some  really  works  practical  -106-  value  f o r planners  i n the f i e l d  profession's  understanding  cesses  affect  The  which  failure  logical will  and p o l i t i c a l  Nuttall forces  model  hinder  i n i s s u e s which  where  a matter  latter  case,  process.  The m o d e l  issue  critical  individuals will  factors  Returning Rondinelli, many  i n the other  to the nature  the C h i l l i w a c k  groups  nature  with  where  divergent  decision  out-  or i n cases  avoid  Especially  in  time-consuming  i n the d e c i s i o n as a  predictive  or a  in this  making  potential  making  case  there  socio-political  promust  environ-  o f t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n s and up  the d e c i s i o n  Bolan  field  and N u t t a l l  two V a r i a b l e S e t s  of d e c i s i o n  study  of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  socio-political among  with.  and  f o r a n a l y z i n g the  the d e c i s i o n  of the community's  be d e a l t  The B o l a n  o f an i s s u e  Of c o u r s e ,  psycho-  are planning  an i s s u e . may  affect  make  they  t o be u s e d  the nature  that  social,  i n progress,  be a b l e  likely  activities.  can a f f e c t  become  and o f t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  relevant the  should  community.  an u n d e r s t a n d i n g  ment  which  a r e put to use e a r l y  strategy will  i n a given  may  planning  plans.  framework  are already  f o r e v a l u a t i n g how  cess be  a useful  of the pro-  i n which  'inside'  the planning  nature  the outside  p r e v e n t i v e measures  i f they  planning  their  of p l a n n i n g  conflicts  tool  to judge  i n t h e community  comes  the  of their  environment  provides  a t work  of the i n h e r e n t  the success  by p l a n n e r s  undoubtedly  in assisting  provided  of t h i s  making  interests,  address  these  of the model.  as viewed  by  c o n f i r m a t i o n of  process,  conflict  i n which  such  resolution rather  as  i t s  takes  than  place  where  -107-  policy  making  choice.  In  nel,  where  occur  at  the  revealed  each  with  public  such  i t s own  process.  selves  and  Chilliwack's  of  the  problem  Eventually,  is  with  their  in  an  and  where person-  analytical skills pursuing  i t s own  that  Chilliwack's  organizations,  was  used  officials  were  can  process. of  and  con-  interactions  to  influence  found  discretionary  resources  Another  in  developed  since  to  policy  define  where  them-  powers  usurped  this  the  point  by  the  about  for  higher  of the  case.  Community of  first  1981,  complex,  was  fairly and  their  commercial long  If Plan  lead  process. major  expansion and  lag  policy  the  community's  is  passed years  aware  of  in  times,  and  eight  became  evident  definitions  making  refocused  interactions  end  community  are  decision  officials  Chilliwack's Official  the  matter  political  by  concisely  throughout  to  problems  d i f f e r e n t emphases  Chilliwack's  implementation  passed  as  place  specialized  making  Chilliwack  that  surfaced  farmland  evident  recently for  point  characterize  most  over  multitude  leverage  the  local  case,  even  district.  which  group  deliberative  fragmented  expertise,  decision  of  difficult  in  the  takes  and  levels.  Rondinelli's amorphous  are  control  fragmented  times  their  making  each  the  powerless,  administering government  of a  intellectual  i n t e r e s t , complex  point  At  almost  concern  With  a l l stages  case  have  technical  resources.  of  by  resources  groups  information,  ception  out  decision  power  dispersed  influence  the  carried  addition,  environment various  is  making,  and  ready  will  have  their  land  -108-  problem.  The  final  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s covered  the  statistics  are  interpreted.  only  has  prets  a  is  carried  and  i t becomes  making  can  attests the  to  Add  under of  that  politicians  to  an  quently  had  The istics in  of  little  community them  effects.  circumstances effective ingly  in  are their  apparent  to  new  to  of  making  restricting planners and  in  will the  It  limited and  plan  be  and  a  that  to to  conse-  charactermere of  start  their  under them  becoming the  appeared  policies.  need make  lack  problems.  that  needs  their  arguments,  major  intensity  is  decision  frequently  only  knowledge  74  was  inherent  seem  solutions  uncertain  alternative  these  would  theorists  proposed  solving  for  plan-  information  conceptual  a  not  inter-  policy  information  area's  environment.  planning  of  Department  accepted the  usually  that  and  and  they  participant  incomplete  risky  with  preconceived  fact  of  and  also  communities  search  planners  skills  work  the  misleading  required  to  but  through  facts  readily  in  What  each  that  Planning  and  decision or  out  how  smaller  desire  by  how  effectiveness  sound  solution  recognition  overcoming  negative  easy  making  this  clear  expertise  Chilliwack's  decision  capacity,  to  the  i t s errors  professional  deal  conditions  produce  fact  Rondinelli  subjectively  Chilliwack's  the  represent  pointed  abundantly  with  to  data  ignorance  its ability  in  evaluation  out  be.  base,  used  was  interests.  partial  data  It  quantitative  and  in  facts  limited  specialized ning  and  by  the  more  increas-  complex  nature  -109-  of  policy  beyond  planning  those  traditional  needed plan  of  these  to  effectively  Planning  Skills  need  to  trained  that  will  but  or  hinder  their  most  are  not  for  students  taught  knowledge  the of  part  of  of  or  solving,  of  the  the  or  job  which  at  social  least  or  that  say  planners  need  in  the  complex  have  skill  will  that The  not  planners knowledge  only  political  themselves  abilities  will  be  human  need  to  networks, and  can  better  either  necessary  i t will  themselves  to  i n any work  such  of  help  In  planners  necessary  the  required  addition the  particular settings  changes  be  to  information is included  calculate  traditional that  Processes  episodes.  until  Many than  and some  understanding  programmes.  will  situation.  to  that  go  discuss  skills.  and  inside  avail  knowledge  other  will  of  institutions,  to  that  analysis  arise  around  Planners  look  training  i s not  areas  process  center  skills  planner  encourage  that  in planning  planning  the  the  behavior  in planning  regular  implementing  allow  own  skills  operate.  social  to  success  section  i n D e c i s i o n Making  community's  their  next  they  define  need  have  quantitative  issues  behavior.  elsewhere,  skills,  episode  a  planners  requirements  the  i n as  also  how  Since  as  to  will  understand  with  required will  outside they  skill  Nuttall  organizational  look  The  Required  and  that  research,  i n which  Bolan  be  and  deal  system  be  for  making.  knowledge  political  and  demands  having  opportunity  planning  simply  approaches are  to  do  not  to  problem  impossible  to  -110-  bring  about,  be  built-in  use  o f new  ally  been  however, role  expectations  planning  advice-giver,  and  any number  bureaucrats wants  making, niques ner  setting  either where  are that  Table  3.^~*  case,  reveals  not in  come  close  how  clarifies  what  these  on  and t h e i r  supporting  use s m a l l  group  planner  and t h e v a r i o u s In such  approach  laws,  and a n a l y s t ,  groups,  some  decision  other  cases,  tech-  the plan-  or f i n d  of the s k i l l s  need.  His l i s t skills  a  work  some  skills  i s shown i n  and p l a n n e r s  there d i d  of problems that  were  less  mean  skills  obviously  of the aspects  could  and knowledge  to the C h i l l i w a c k  of the 'missing'  and o t h e r s  expands  of c e r t a i n  a  t h e new  the  tradition-  to accept  the types  Some  list  has  ready  of these  to a v o i d i n g  following  planning  politicians  the d e c i s i o n makers  absent  hinder  may  c a n be p u t t o u s e .  will  some  there  the s t a t i s t i c i a n  intervention.  o u t l i n e s what planners  that  the planner  coalitions,  to s e l l  episodes.  blatantly  roles,  skills  Applying  planning  were  have  such  Rondinelli areas  making  realize  the overseer  community  resource  of p o l i c y  will  expert,  f r e q u e n t l y n o t be  to organize  manage  Since  the model-maker,  of other  may  must  i n a j o b w h i c h may  methods.  the t e c h n i c a l  the  who  the planner  can  and  methods  so.  i n Table  arise  The  3 and  to the betterment  of  processes:  1.  A d v o c a c y and o r g a n i z i n g a b i l i t y - a l l o w i n g t h e s u c c e s s f u l i n c l u s i o n o f t h e p u b l i c i n d e c i s i o n making p r o c e s s e s , thus a v o i d i n g 'after-the-fact' public opposition.  2.  Information  collection,  q u a n t i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s and  -111-  TABLE  SKILLS  AND  KNOWLEDGE NEEDED  Persuasion  and  Information Client  3  POLICY  MAKING  manipulation  collection  and  and  communication  negotiation  Resource  mobilization  Advocacy  and  skills  group  ability  relations  decision  Organizational Intragroup  skills  ability  organizing  Interpersonal  Social  URBAN  analysis  Mediation  Small  IN  making  behavior  dynamics  psychology  Coalition  management  Entrepreneurial Techniques  of  conflict  Socio-political Opportunity Quantitative  experience  cost  exchange  processes  analysis  analysis  Contingency  Analysis  Performance  evaluation  Simulation,  resolution  gaming,  and  and  forecasting  strategy  techniques  design  -112-  forecasting techniques o f g o o d d a t a on w h i c h t o  a l l o w i n g the base planned  development action.  3.  O b j e c t i v i t y and c o m m u n i c a t i o n s k i l l s - a l l o w i n g r e a l i s t i c c o n c l u s i o n s t o be d r a w n f r o m b a c k g r o u n d d a t a and t h e s u c c e s s f u l t r a n s m i s s i o n o f critical i n f o r m a t i o n , be i t o p t i m i s t i c o r o t h e r w i s e , to p o l i t i c i a n s or the p u b l i c .  4.  Persuasion and m a n i p u l a t i o n - i n d u c i n g the accepta n c e o f new a t t i t u d e s , a p p r o a c h e s and p l a n n i n g programmes .  5.  Resource m o b i l i z a t i o n a b i l i t y - a l l o w i n g the gatherin t o g e t h e r a n d u t i l i z a t i o n o f i n d i v i d u a l and organizat i o n a l e c o n o m i c , i n t e l l e c t u a l and p h y s i c a l resources in problem s o l v i n g .  6.  S m a l l group d e c i s i o n m a k i n g - a l l o w i n g the use of group s e t t i n g s i n o r d e r to i n c l u d e the views and p r o p o s a l s o f b o t h p u b l i c and p r i v a t e c o m m u n i t y representatives.  7.  C o a l i t i o n management - a l l o w i n g the use of d i s p e r s e d o r g a n i z a t i o n s , g r o u p s and g o v e r n m e n t d e p a r t m e n t s i n programme d e v e l o p m e n t , i m p l e m e n t a t i o n and ongoing management.  8.  S o c i a l psychology - allowing a b e t t e r b a s i c unders t a n d i n g of community group b e h a v i o r and the social f o r c e s w h i c h c a n h i n d e r o r may be u s e d t o a s s i s t d e c i s i o n making processes.  9.  Intragroup dynamics - a l l o w i n g the u n d e r s t a n d i n g the i n d i v i d u a l components of groups, i n o r d e r to e f f e c t i v e l y u t i l i z e group dynamics i n p o l i c y f ormulat ion.  10.  I n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l b e h a v i o r the most b a s i c s k i l l s f o r t h e p l a n n e r to a l l o w the continual understanding o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l and collect ive behavior t h a t f a c e s her or him a l m o s t daily.  The planning minded  of  Chilliwack matter  attitude  community's  issue  which to  a  required  land  planners  was  and  use  complex a  fresh  concerns  politicians  and  controversial  approach  and were  problem unable  and  open-  solving.  The  to  up  muster  -113-  either be  and  instead  avoided  and  that  in  policy  was  needed  was  rejected.  hired  direction,  gave  in  have  their  district's will  be  in  yet  to  the  community  volved alone the  the  there  local  community  the  as  of  growth  but  process  should  to  of  be  was  Development  Plan.  In  conclusion,  the  framework  siderable As  a means  ning It  light  issues  could  sive  be  for  for on  quantitative  of  the  formulation.  i f any,  the  Chilliwack  the to  an  issue analyze  making  informal  analysis  day  working  conditions  or  que  i n more  academic  and  predominant  emphasis  on  outcome  which i t can  processes,  the  without  may  be  be  used  controlled the  e x i s t i n g or  manner  to  as  a  under  in-  sense  the  plan  to  and  at  the  provided  about  is  allowed and  this  a  shed as  i t  condid.  potential  plan-  model  has  value.  entailing  exten-  impossible  under  research  conditions  conditions  have  case  came  the  O.C.P.  hindrance  studying  and  approach  matter In  a  solve  the  opposition  considerable  Plan  to  methods  on  were  their  N u t t a l l model  why  in  Whether  and  decision  used  a  Community  their  approach  techniques  methods  informed  a l l that  i t ' s planning  intervention  now  were  that  out  Bolan  planners  and  be  little,  which  sort  implementation to  could  their  planners  planning  change  methods  Official  policy  earlier  useful  to  problems.  up  a whole  level,  the  successful  social  Eventually  consulting  incremental  and  that  planning  p o l i c y making  determined,  in  the  the  some  land  result  by  some  view  formulation.  development  employed  the  traditional  However,  ultimately  try  adopted  The  which  every-  techni-  model's  support  for  -114-  planned today,  social when  their  increasingly by  many  ning  of  planning  process  be  Nuttall limiting  decision final  which more  case  making  by  on  that  process  conclusion.  which  unable  the nature a r e more a useful  of t h i s  framework  the  process  plan-  decision  then  attention  and on  The B o l a n  means  and  f o r a n a l y z i n g the  methodology  i t brought  affected  suggests,  issues,  acceptable.  and f o r c l a r i f y i n g a n d how  problems are  to s u r v i v e  planning  f o r planners  has been  I f , as t h e model  of the p l a n n i n g study,  factor  community  the p u b l i c  accompanies  provided  effects  Chilliwack  at solving  programmes.  solving  model  attack  is a critical  are ultimately  focused  problem  arise  efforts  under  techniques  making must  change  used  i n the  the nature the issue  of the to  i t s  -115-  REFERENCES  CHAPTER  1.  1  "The C o u n c i l o f U r b a n D e v e l o p m e n t M e e t i n g : , D e c e m b e r 2 a n d 3, 1 9 6 7 , THE I N S T I T U T E OF HUMAN S C I E N C E S REVIEW, I , No. 1 ( W i n t e r 1 9 6 7 - 6 8 ) , p . 8, q u o t e d i n J o h n F r i e d m a n n , " N o t e s on S o c i e t a l A c t i o n " , JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF PLANNERS V o l . 3 5 , No. 5, S e p t e m b e r 1969, p. 311.  2.  F r i e d m a n n , J o h n , " N o t e s on S o c i e t a l Action" JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l . 35, No.5, S e p t e m b e r , 1969, p . 311.  3.  Herrington, J . Bryce PLANNING SMALLER C I T I E S Lexington B o o k s , D.C. H e a t h M a s s a c h u s e t t s , 1979, p. 191.  & Company:  4.  B o l a n , R i c h a r d S. a n d R o n a l d L . N u t t a l l URBAN PLANNING AND POLITICS, ' L e x i n g t o n B o o k s , D.C. H e a t h a n d C o m p a n y ; L e x i n g t o n , M a s s a c h u s e t t s , 1975, p. 1  5.  Ibid.  6.  Friedmann,  7.  B u r k e , R o y a n d J a m e s P. H e a n e y , C O L L E C T I V E D E C I S I O N MAKING I N WATER RESOURCE L e x i n g t o n B o o k s , D.C. H e a t h a n d C o m p a n y ; L e x i n g t o n , M a s s a c h u s e t t s , 1975, p. 63.  8.  9.  10.  John,  op. c i t . p.  Lexington,  312  PLANNING  Hunter, Floyd COMMUNITY POWER S T R U C T U R E : A STUDY OF D E C I S I O N Chapel H i l l : U n i v e r s i t y of North Carolina 1953, p. 2 Presthus, Robert MEN AT THE TOP New Y o r k : O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y  Press,  1964, p.  8.  D a h l , R o b e r t A. WHO GOVERNS? New H a v e n : Y a l e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 6 1 , p . 8 6 , q u o t e d i n W i l l i a m Domhoff , WHO R E A L L Y R U L E S ? , T r a n s a c t i o n B o o k s : New B r u n s w i c k , New J e r s e y , 1 9 7 8 , p r e f a c e p a g e X.  MAKERS  -116-  REFERENCES 11.  C o n n o l l y , W i l l i a m E. , "The C h a l l e n g e t o P l u r a l i s t Theory", in W i l l i a m E. C o n n o l l y , e d . , THE B I A S OF P L U R A L I S M , New Y o r k : A t h e r t o n P r e s s , 1 9 6 9 , p . 3., q u o t e d i n B o l a n a n d N u t a l l , o p . c i t . p . 12  12.  Bolan  13.  Presthus,  14.  Polsby, Nelson COMMUNITY POWER AND P O L I T I C A L THEORY, New Y a l e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1963, p. 8 - 13.  and N u t a l l , Robert  o p . c i t . , p. 10. op. c i t .  William,  Haven:  15.  Connolly,  16.  Bolan  17.  Ibid ., p . 9.  18.  Ibid,  p. 18.  19.  Burke  and Heaney,  20.  Ibid.  21.  B o l a n , R i c h a r d S., JOURNAL OF THE V o l u m e 2 3 , No.  22.  Ibid.  23.  Burke  24.  Bolan,  25.  R o n d i n e l l i Dennis, " A d j u n c t i v e P l a n n i n g and Urban D e v e l o p m e n t P o l i c y " , URBAN A F F A I R S Q U A R T E R L Y , V o l u m e 7, N o . 1 , S e p t e m b e r , 1 9 7 1 , p . 20.  26.  R o n d i n e l l i , D e n n i s , " U r b a n P l a n n i n g as P o l i c y A n a l y s i s : M a n a g e m e n t o f U r b a n C h a n g e " , JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l . 3 9 , No. 1, January 1973, p. 16.  27.  C a r t w r i g h t , T i m o t h y J . , " P r o b l e m s , S o l u t i o n s , and S t r a t e g i e s : A C o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e T h e o r y and P r a c t i c e o f P l a n n i n g " , JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF PLANNERS V o l u m e 3 9 , No. 3, May 1 9 7 3 , p . 1 8 1 .  and N u t t a l l ,  and Heaney, Richard,  op. c i t . op. c i t . p . 12.  o p . c i t . , p . 137.  "Emerging Views of P l a n n i n g " AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , 4, J u l y , 1 9 6 7 , p . 2 3 9 .  op. c i t .  op, c i t . , p. 235.  -117REFERENCES  28.  Ibid.  29.  Rondinelli,  30.  Ibid,  p.  31.  Bolan  and N u t t a l l ,  Dennis,  1973,  op. c i t . ,  p.  17.  16. op. c i t . ,  p. 22-23.  CHAPTER 2 32.  Atamenenko, G e o r g e , P l a n n e r f o r t h e B.C. A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission, I n t e r v i e w c o n d u c t e d w i t h Mr. Atamenenko, January, 1978.  33.  F r a s e r Cheam R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t , B R I E F ON BY-LAW NO. 3 2 , P r e s e n t e d a t a p u b l i c h e a r i n g i n t h e F.C.R.D., October 29, 1973.  34.  Environment and Land Use Committee o f t h e B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a G o v e r n m e n t , A P P E A L H E A R I N G FOR SARDIS LAND AND DEVELOPMENT L I M I T E D , V i c t o r i a , B . C . J u l y 25, 1979, p.25.  35.  Wilson, David, quoted i n "Planning C H I L L I W A C K PROGRESS, J u l y 6, 1 9 7 7 .  36.  S i m p s o n , W.G.R., f r o m a l e t t e r w r i t t e n b y t h e M a y o r t o the Deputy P r o v i n c i a l S e c r e t a r y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, A p r i l 22, 1976.  37.  Atamenenko,  38.  H a y w a r d , R., D i r e c t o r o f P l a n n i n g f o r t h e T o w n s h i p o f C h i l l i w a c k , I n t e r v i e w c o n d u c t e d w i t h Mr. Hayward, F e b r u a r y 13, 1979.  39.  T o w n s h i p o f C h i l l i w a c k , S T A T I S T I C S REGARDING DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1 9 7 6 , p . 4.  40.  S i m p s o n , W.G.R., o p .  41.  NORTH I S L A N D G A Z E T T E ( P o r t H a r d y ) , " B y e , B y e , S i m p " , D e c e m b e r 9, 1 9 7 6 .  42.  S i m p s o n , W.G.R., f r o m a b r i e f t o t h e H o n o u r a b l e J a m e s A. N i e l s e n , M i n i s t e r o f t h eEnvironment f o r the B r i t i s h Columbia Government, June 14, 1977.  George, op.  Versus  Moral  Committments",  c i t .  PROPOSED  c i t .  -118REFERENCES  43.  K i e r n a n , K e n , q u o t e d i n " K i e r n a n e x p e c t s new l o n g p l a n i n t h r e e m o n t h s " , CHILLIWACK PROGRESS, J a n u a r y 18, 1978.  44.  VERNON D A I L Y February  45.  D u n h i l l D e v e l o p m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n , D I S T R I C T OF C H I L L I W A C K , COMPARISON OF D E V E L O P M E N T C O S T S : LOWLAND A . L . R . AND UPLAND, O c t o b e r 2 6 , 1 9 7 6 , S e c t i o n 2, p . 1.  46.  Township of C h i l l i w a c k P l a n n i n g H I L L S I D E DEVELOPMENT, 1976.  47.  S t u p i c h , Dave, q u o t e d i n "Township mayor h i n t s p l a n c o n c e s s i o n " , C H I L L I W A C K PROGRESS May 1 9 , 1 9 7 6 .  48.  P i r i e , J e r r y , quoted f r e e z e opposed",  49.  Runka, Gary, q u o t e d i n "Gary Runka t a l k s L a n d " , C H I L L I W A C K PROGRESS, F e b r u a r y  50.  C u r t i s , Hugh, q u o t e d consideration'", M a r c h 16, 1977.  51.  H a y w a r d , R.,op.  52.  Wilson,  53.  Environment  54.  Semotuk, V e r n a , C o n s u l t i n g P l a n n e r to t h e D i s t r i c t o f C h i l l i w a c k , I n t e r v i e w c o n d u c t e d w i t h Ms. S e m o t u k A u g u s t 20, 1980.  55.  U r b a n P r o g r a m m e P l a n n e r s , C H I L L I W A C K : THE I S S U E S DEVELOPMENT, A B r i e f presented at the p u b l i c i n f o r m a t i o n m e e t i n g s , June, 1980.  56.  Semotuk, V e r n a , C o n s u l t i n g P l a n n e r t o t h e D i s t r i c t of C h i l l i w a c k , I n t e r v i e w c o n d u c t e d w i t h Ms. S e m o t u k , M a r c h 16, 1981.  57.  U r b a n P r o g r a m m e P l a n n e r s , COMMUNITY PLANNING FOR C H I L L I W A C K - S T E P 1: D E T E R M I N I N G THE I S S U E S , B r o c h u r e p r e p a r e d June, 1980.  NEWS, " L a n d 1, 1 9 7 8 .  range  Held",  Department,  i n "Chilliwack VANCOUVER SUN,  at  land  b i d to free land June 29, 1977.  about Chilliwack 1 6 , 1977.  i n " L i m i t e d growth a r e a s CHILLIWACK PROGRESS,  'deserve  c i t .  David,op. c i t . and Land  Use  Committee,  in  op. c i t .  OF  -119REFERENCES  58.  Rondinelli,  Dennis,  1973,  op.  c i t . , p.  16.  59.  Bryant, Fred, v i t a l key VANCOUVER  60.  B r i t i s h Columbia I n s t i t u t e of A g r o l o g i s t s , from t o t h e B.C. A g r i c u l t u r a l L a n d Commission, J u n e 7 , 1976.  61.  B r i t i s h Columbia F e d e r a t i o n of A g r i c u l t u r e Advisory Committee, f r o m a l e t t e r t o t h e H o n o u r a b l e J a m e s A. N i e l s e n , M i n i s t e r of the Enviornment f o r the B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a G o v e r n m e n t , O c t o b e r 20, 1976.  62.  British  63.  Township of C h i l l i w a c k P l a n n i n g Department, S T A T I S T I C S REGARDING PROPOSED D E V E L O P M E N T P L A N Summer 1 9 7 6 , p . 3, a n d R. H a y w a r d q u o t e d i n N e a l e Adams, op. c i t . ( s e e r e f e r e n c e 59).  q u o t e d i n N e a l e Adams, " C h i l l i w a c k to Socred farmland p o l i c y " , SUN, May 1 0 , 1976.  Columbia  Institute  of  Agrologists,  holds  a  letter  op. c i t .  1976,  64.  U r b a n P r o g r a m m e P l a n n e r s , D I S T R I C T OF C H I L L I W A C K : T A B L E DWELLING U N I T S C O N S T R U C T I O N BY T Y P E , 1 9 7 4 - 8 0 , B a c k g r o u n d d a t a f o r the O f f i c i a l Community Plan, early 1980.  65.  C H I L L I W A C K PROGRESS, " D e v e l o p e r s v i e w Chilliwack's o v e r b u i l d i n g p r o b l e m " , J u l y 13, 1977.  66.  E n v i r o n m e n t and L a n d Use C o m m i t t e e S e c r e t a r i a t , f r o m a Memorandum t o t h e E n v i r o n m e n t a n d L a n d U s e Committee, Re: C h i l l i w a c k A p p l i c a t i o n f o r E x c l u s i o n from A . L . R . ( A p p l i c a t i o n #9 ( 1 ) 5 2 ) , N o v e m b e r 5, 1 9 7 6 , p . 4.  67.  5  Ibid.,p.5.  68.  Bolan  and  Nuttall,  op.  c i t . , p.  69.  VANCOUVER March  PROVINCE, 21, 1977.  "What's  70.  VANCOUVER March  PROVINCE, 30, 1977.  "Land  71.  VANCOUVER P R O V I N C E , " P r o b e F e b r u a r y 21, 1977.  the  deal  84 difference?"  irks  sought  farm  i n land  specialists",  unfreezing  bid,"  -  -120-  REFERENCES  72.  Bolan  and N u t t a l l ,  73.  Ibid,  p . 135  CHAPTER  o p . c i t . , p . 36  5  74.  F r i e d m a n n , John, op. c i t . , p. 316-317; and H e r b e r t Gamberg, "The P r o f e s s i o n a l and P o l i c y C h o i c e s i n M i d d l e - S i z e d C i t i e s " , JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l u m e 3 2 , No. 3, May 1 9 6 6 , p. 175-177; and D e n n i s R o n d i n e l l i , 1973, o p . c i t . , p. 19-21; and B o l a n and N u t t a l l , o p . c i t . , p. 1 4 7 - 1 4 8 .  75.  Rondinelli,  Dennis,  1973, o p . , c i t . , p. 20.  -121-  BIBLIOGRAPHY  1.  A l t s h u l e r , A l a n A., University Press:  THE C I T Y PLANNING I t h a c a , 1965.  PROCESS,  Cornell  2.  B o l a n , R i c h a r d S., " E m e r g i n g V i e w s o f P l a n n i n g " , JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l u m e 2 3 , No. 4, J u l y , 1967.  3.  , "Community D e c i s i o n B e h a v i o r : The C u l t u r e o f Planning , JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l u m e 3 5 , No. 5, S e p t e m b e r , 1 9 6 9 .  4.  , " T h e S o c i a l R e l a t i o n s o f t h e Planner',' JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l u m e 3 7 , No. 6, Novemb e r , 19 7 1 .  5.  , a n d R o n a l d L . N u t t a l l , URBAN PLANNING AND P O L I T I C S , L e x i n g t o n B o o k s : D.C. H e a t h a n d C o m p a n y , Lexington, Massachusetts, 1975.  6.  B o n j e a n , C h a r l e s M., T e r r y N. C l a r k a n d R o b e r t L . L i n e b e r r y , e d s . , COMMUNITY P O L I T I C S , T h e F r e e New Y o r k , 1 9 7 1 .  Press:  7.  B u r k e , R o y , a n d J a m e s P. H e a n e y , C O L L E C T I V E D E C I S I O N MAKING IN WATER RESOURCE P L A N N I N G , L e x i n g t o n B o o k s : D.C. H e a t h and Company, L e x i n g t o n , M a s s a c h u s e t t s , 1975.  8.  C a r t w r i g t h , T i m o t h y J . , " P r o b l e m s , S o l u t i o n s and S t r a t e g i e s : A C o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e T h e o r y and P r a c t i c e o f P l a n n i n g " JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l u m e 3 9 , No. 3, May, 1 9 7 3 .  9.  C l a r k , T e r r y N., e d , COMMUNITY S T R U C T U R E AND COMPARATIVE A N A L Y S E S , C h a n d l e r Publishing:  10.  C o n n o l l y , W i l l i a m E . e d . , THE P r e s s : New Y o r k , 1 9 6 9 .  BIAS  OF  11.  Dahl,  Yale  University Press:  Robert  Haven,  A. WHO  Conneticut,  12.  District  13.  D o m h o f f , G. W i l l i a m , New B r u n s w i c k , New  14.  Friedmann, AMERICAN  GOVERNS?,  D E C I S I O N MAKING: San F r a n c i s c o , 1968.  PLURALISM,  Atherton  New  1961.  of C h i l l i w a c k , OFFICIAL  COMMUNITY  WHO R E A L L Y R U L E S ? J e r s e y , 1978.  John, "Notes I N S T I T U T E OF  PLAN, December 1980.  Transaction  Books:  o n S o c i e t a l A c t i o n " , JOURNAL OF THE P L A N N E R S , V o l u m e 3 5 , No. 5, S e p t e m b e r  1969.  -122-  15.  16.  ,"The P u b l i c I n t e r e s t and Community P a r t i c i p a t i o n : Toward a R e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f P u b l i c P h i l o s o p h y " , JOURNAL OF T H E AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l u m e 3 9 , N o . 1 , January 1973. , RETRACKING  AMERICA,  Anchor  Press:  Doubleday,  New Y o r k , 1 9 7 3 .  17.  Gamberg, Herb e r t , "The P r o f e s s i o n a l a n d P o l i c y C h o i c e s i n M i d d l e - S i z e d C i t i e s " , JOURNAL OF T H E AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l u m e 3 2 , No. 3, May, 1 9 6 6 .  18.  H e r r i n g t o n , J . B r y c e , PLANNING SMALLER C I T I E S , Lexington B o o k s , D.C. H e a t h a n d C o m p a n y , L e x i n g t o n , M a s s a c h u s e t t s ,  1979.  19.  H u n t e r , F l o y d , COMMUNITY POWER S T R U C T U R E : A STUDY OF D E C I S I O N MAKERS, C h a p e l H i l l : T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f N o r t h C a r o l i n a P r e s s , 1953.  20.  M a n n , L a w r e n c e D., " S t u d i e s i n C o m m u n i t y D e c i s i o n M a k i n g " , JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l u m e 3 0 , No. 1, F e b r u a r y 1 9 6 4 .  21.  M i c h a e l , D o n a l d N., ON L E A R N I N G TO PLAN AND P L A N N I N G J o s s e y - B a s s P u b l i s h e r s : San F r a n c i s c o , 1973.  22.  N u t t a l l , R o n a l d L . , E r w i n K. S c h e u c h a n d C h a d G o r d o n , "On t h e S t r u c t u r e o f I n f l u e n c e " , T e r r y N. C l a r k , e d . , COMMUNITY STRUCTURE AND D E C I S I O N MAKING: COMPARATIVE A N A L Y S E S , Chandler P u b l i s h i n g : San F r a n c i s c o , 1968.  23.  Polsby, Nelson, COMMUNITY POWER AND P O L I T I C A L THEORY, U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s : New H a v e n , C o n n e t i c u t , 1 9 6 3 .  24.  P r e s t h u s , R o b e r t , MEN AT T H E TOP, O x f o r d New Y o r k , 1 9 6 4 .  25.  R a b i n o v i t z , F r a n c i n e , CITY P r e s s : New Y o r k , 1 9 6 9 .  26.  R o n d i n e l l i , D e n n i s , " A d j u n c t i v e P l a n n i n g and Urban Development P o l i c y " , URBAN A F F A I R S Q U A R T E R L Y , V o l u m e 7, N o . 1 , S e p t e m b e r , 1971.  27.  28.  POLITICS  University  AND P L A N N I N G ,  TO L E A R N ,  Yale  Press:  Atherton  ,"Urban P l a n n i n g as P o l i c y A n a l y s i s : Management o f U r b a n C h a n g e " , JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN I N S T I T U T E OF P L A N N E R S , V o l u m e 3 9 , No. 1, J a n u a r y , 1 9 7 3 . Z a l t m a n , G e r a l d , P h i l i p K o t l e r a n d I r a K a u f m a n , CREATING CHANGE, H o l t , R i n e h a r t a n d W i n s t o n : New Y o r k , 1 9 7 2 .  SOCIAL  

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.831.1-0095150/manifest

Comment

Related Items