UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Community development : an integral technique in the process of community planning Barcham, Donald William Priestly 1965

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

Item Metadata


831-UBC_1965_A8 B35.pdf [ 4.51MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0104765.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0104765-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0104765-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0104765-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0104765-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0104765-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0104765-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: AN INTEGRAL TECHNIQUE IN THE PROCESS OF COMMUNITY PLANNING by DONALD WILLIAM PRIESTLY BARCHAM B.A., University of British Columbia, I963 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of Community and Regional Planning We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA April, I960 V In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requ i rements f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Co lumbia, I agree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and study* I f u r t h e r agree that p e r -m i s s i o n f o r ex tens i ve copy ing of 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 the Head of my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s understood that, copy ing or p u b l i -c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l ga in s h a l l not be a l lowed without my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n ® Department of Community and Regional Planning The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Co lumbia, Vancouver 8, Canada Date A p r i l . 1965 ABSTRACT In order to ensure genuine public acceptance of both planning proposals and of community planning per se, professional planning practices should involve a high degree of active citizen participation. The process of democratic action in contemporary North American urban areas is frustrated by the institutionaliza-tion of authority and responsibility, and as a result, the usual approach to the resolution of planning problems is often manipula-tive and managerial. Professionals tend to plan for the community rather than with i t . Planning is conceived as a six-step process beginning with problem identification, and proceeding through goal formation, survey and analysis, design of a plan, plan implementation, and evaluation and reorientation. Community development, a process by which members of a community learn why and how to participate in the planning and control of changes which will affect them, is suggested as a technique whereby personal interest and democratic participation can be reinstilled in today's complex communities, as determining forces in the planning process. Community development achieves not only a l l the advantages of active citizen participation, but is concerned also with the progress of the individual, the development of co-operative facilities, and the strengthening of the process of democratic action. The process of community development involves fourteen elements, arranged according to seven periods over time, which can be integrated with the planning process. Although this integration appears to detract from the efficiency of the usual planning process, i t does create good will and co-operation between citizens and technical planning experts, and provides continuity to the planning process through the conservation of organized community resources. It is no surprise to members of the planning profession to find that the degree of public acceptance of local government planning proposals is directly related to the amount of citizen participation which occurs during the evolution of those proposals. But for planners to relate the relative degree of public acceptance of a planning proposal to the number of elements of community development which were evidently utilized, either implicitly or explicitly, in the evolution of that proposal, is another matter. From a detailed study of five local government planning proposals developed in the City of Vancouver, i t is concluded that community development should be used as a technique in the planning process, in order to gain the advantages of active citizen participation, and to ensure that the proposals will be acceptable to the people they are to affect. The responsibility for executing the community development process rests with the technical planners, the local municipal administration, and the leaders of the community in question. The financing of such a scheme would be shared between the community to be affected, and the municipal government, either through voluntary subscriptions, or tax revenues, or both. The conclusion based on the analysis of the case studies supports the arguments subtended previously. However, because planning is action oriented, i t is concluded that the only true method of testing the hypothesis would be by attempting to apply a community development program in conjunction with the planning process, in an actual problem situation. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ix Undertaking a post-graduate thesis is a formidable task, not only for the candidate but also for the people upon whom he is dependent for aid and guidance. Throughout the thesis project Dr. K.J. Cross, Assistant Professor of Community and Regional Planning, provided constructive criticism and encouragement for which I am indebted. Dr. Coolie Verner, Professor of Adult Education, was instrumental in my pursuit of the thesis topic as he f i r s t introduced me to the concept of community development, and subsequently provided me with access to his personal library which proved to be a unique and invaluable source of literature. Mr. H.W. Pickstone, Deputy Director of Planning, and the entire staff of the City of Vancouver Planning Department deserve a special note of thanks for their co-operation and forbearance in my analysis of the case studies. Finally, I wish to express my thanks to Dr. H. Peter Oberlander, Professor and Head, Community and Regional Planning, for his contagious enthusiasm over the past two years, and to my wife, Carol, for her understanding, encouragement and long hours of typing throughout the same period of time. With such assistance, even the most formidable task is not unsurmountable. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. THEME, CONCEPTS AND BACKGROUND 1 Theme 1 The Planning Process . . 2 The Usual Approach to Solving Municipal Planning Problems and the Advantages of Active Citizen Participation k Examples of Active Citizen Participation . . . . . . 9 Summary < e « , , 12 II. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS LU The Introduction of Change and the Process of Adoption iii The Concept of Community Development 16 Community Development and the Planning Process . . . 19 Summary 33 III. THE HYPOTHESIS AND METHOD OF TESTING 36 Community Development as a Kay to Public Acceptance of Planning Proposals 36 Method of Testing the Hypothesis 38 IV. ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PLANNING PROPOSALS 1|6 Proposal One: A Collective Parking Scheme . . . . . kl Proposal Two: A Collective Parking Scheme 50 Proposal Three: Concerning the Future Use of a Public Works Yard . . . . . . . . . 51 Proposal Four: A Scheme to Revitalize Chinatown . . 56 v i i CHAPTER PAGE Proposal Five: The Rezoning of a Light Industrial Area . $9 Summary 62 V. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN THE PLANNING PROCESS: A CRITICAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 66 A Critical Evaluation 66 Recommendations . . . . . 71 Suggestions for Further Study . . 83 BIBLIOGRAPHY 8$ LIST OF TABLES v i i i TABLE PAGE I . Summary. Integration of the Planning Process and the Community Development Process 35 II. Summary of Case Study Observations . • 6 l CHAPTER I THEME, CONCEPTS AND BACKGROUND City planning and democratic action are compatible. The organizational intricacies of contemporary North American urban areas frustrate the process of democratic action through the institutionalization of authority and responsibility. City planning practices should involve a high degree of citizen participation throughout the various stages of preparation of local planning proposals. As is pointed out in this chapter, the usual approach to the solution of local planning problems is inadequate, and new techniques must be found to ensure such participation, and ultimately, genuine acceptance of the proposals and the idea of community planning, by those to be affected. I. THEME I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselvesj and i f we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take i t from them, but to inform their discretion by education. Thomas Jefferson It is a basic assumption that the members of a democratic society themselves control that society, and have an active role in determining their own destiny. Under these circumstances, the T^homas Jefferson, cited by T.J. Kent Jr., The Urban General  Plan, p. x i i i . 2 democratic quality of city planning is indicated by the amount of informed public participation in the planning and control of changing situations in community l i f e . This study points out why, and suggests how citizens should participate in community planning. II. THE PLANNING PROCESS There are two concepts of the planning process, one of which may be termed nbehavioral,,, the second "technical". The behavioral concept of the planning process represents the sequence of political action which leads to guided change and integrated physical development. For example, F. Stuart Chapin Jr. suggests three stages in this sequence: 1. Goal specification 2 . Decision-making 3. Plan execution, evaluation and reorientation.* The technical concept of the words "planning process" refers to the stages of creating and implementing a plan, to solve a planning problem. This is the defined work program of a planning agency, and may be expressed as a five-step process involving: 1. Research into an identified problem. 2 . Analysis of collected data. 3. Synthesis of analysed material. %.S. Chapin Jr., "Foundations of Urban Planning", Urban  Life and Form, p. 22U. 3-lu Design of a plan. £. Application or implementation of the plan. The term "evaluation" has been intentionally omitted from step five, as the writer is convinced that evaluation of completed (whether or not implemented) planning proposals, by the responsible government planning agency, is a rare occurrence. The technical concept of the planning process is an integral part of the behavioral concept. The behavioral concept, provides for a democratic political framework for determining the goals of planning, for conceptualizing alternative methods of attaining those goals, for executing the plan, for a continuous evaluation of past actions and decisions, and for reorientation of the process in accordance with changing situations. The responsibility for the decisions regarding goal specification rests with the political processes at work in society. The conceptualization of alternative methods of attaining democratically specified goals involves the f i r s t four steps of the technical planning process. Plan execution is normally carried out through the application of government policies which are actually political manoeuvres and should not be considered part of the technical process although technical procedures may be involved. Such integration of the two concepts provides a six-stage planning process which is suited to the political framework of a democratic society: 1. Problem Identification 2. Goal Formation 3 . Survey and Analysis h» Design of a Plan 5>. Plan Implementation 6. Evaluation and Reorientation These six stages constitute the total planning process as conceived for the purposes of this study. III. THE USUAL APPROACH TO SOLVING MUNICIPAL PLANNING PROBLEMS AND THE ADVANTAGES OF ACTIVE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. The Usual Approach The achievement of an objective regardless of its goodness is of no value in a democracy i f at the same time basic democratic values are weakened, or ignored. In commenting on his v i s i t to America in 1 8 3 0 , Alexis de Tocqueville wrote: These Americans are the most peculiar people in the world ..... In a local community in their country a citizen may conceive of some need which is not being met. What does he do? He goes across the street and discusses i t with his neighbour. Then what happens? A committee comes into existence and then the committee begins functioning on behalf of that need, and you won't believe this but it's true. A l l of this is done without any reference to any bureaucrat. A l l of this is done by the private citizens on their own initiative.3 In pioneer communities, the spontaneous co-operative group action which impressed de Tocqueville stemmed from an environment hostile ^Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Vol. I, p. 1 9 1 . 5 to familiar customs and traditional behavior; an environment lacking institutional systems and authority; a simple pluralistic society in which any individual could initiate action to resolve local problems. But in complex contemporary North American communities, personal interest and responsibility has yielded, for purposes of administrative effectiveness, to formally organized institutional effort, resulting in the loss of democratic participation. Local government planning proposals usually evolve in the following way. As a result of their own awareness of certain problems, or, upon receipt of a directive from council, and having applied the i n i t i a l four steps of the technical planning process identified previously, the planning agency may submit a proposal to the elected representatives of the people, for their approval. The proposal, though valid, may die here, or be made public through the usual channels of communication, and through some method of allowing the citizens to express their views on the proposal. The use of public hearings is a common technique for this purpose. The techniques vary in detail from administration to administration. Frequently, the sequence to be followed will be dictated by statute. How the proposal is publicized and implemented varies also with its nature. Some types of proposals require public hearings, others require only approval by the local council. At fi r s t glance, this procedure appears to be quite democratic, performed as i t i s , through the elected representatives in the locality. But, the effort put forth, is indeed highly institutionalized, and democratic participation suffers as a result. Under this system, citizen 6 participation in the planning process is limited to criticism of completed schemes, which are frightening in their complexity. The citizen is expected to grasp in toto, a project which has slowly evolved, step-by-step, in the mind of the planner, and other technical "experts". If the proposal is not accepted by the public, planners and council wonder why. If the proposal is accepted, chances are the public s t i l l does not completely- understand i t , or its potential ramifications and influences. Certain interest groups may understand, and be largely responsible for either defeating or supporting a proposal. It must not be assumed, however, that the desires of such groups are in accord with the interests of the community-at-large. Frequently, the same special interest groups are represented at one public hearing after another. The individual citizen is s t i l l reluctant to "fight city hall". Dr. Coolie Verner, Professor of Adult Education at the University of British Columbia, points out that: It is not uncommon to find communities in which one special area such as recreation, health, social welfare, or public schools is developed out of proportion and without regard to total community needs because the leadership in that institution is more successful in manipulating community action to that end.^ Examples are many in the field of planning, particularly the day-to-day "project planning" of municipalities, where pressures result in specific studies being made, to justify the proposals and desires of the political and community power structure. Frequently, ^Coolie Verner, "The Community Development Process", U.S. Community Development Review, Vol. 6, March, 196l, p. 3>7. the comraunity-at-large is obscured by patronizing the forces at hand. Advantages of Active Citizen Participation To be successful over a period of time, any planning proposal, regardless of how good i t is from the planner's point of view, must fi r s t be genuinely accepted by the community. Sociologists know that most successful changes are self-motivated. Law, force, or manipulation may result in the overt public acceptance of a planning proposal, but people's personal values will not be sincere. Under such circumstances, conformity must be policed. Resistance to planning proposals is often due to something deeper than mere dis-approval of the new idea. Indeed, i t may be a reflection of a resistance to the concept of planning for the public interest. Resistance to plans is an indication that the methods and processes are at fault. The naive assumption that any group of persons will f a l l in with any plan about which they have not been consulted, and which has not taken the social situation into account has been proved false so often in history that i t s survival is one of the world's mysteries.5 Citizen participation throughout the planning process ensures that the final plan will be acceptable to a true majority of the community to be affected by that plan. The desirability of such participation is perhaps widely recognized, but seldom practised. Apathy, dis-interest and ignorance must be overcome. Techniques must be developed not only for those purposes, but for ensuring that community resources and energies are put to their best use. ^J.H. Kolb and E. de S. Brunner, A Study of Rural Society, p. 8 Probably no single technique will have universal application, however, some technique is preferable to none at a l l . For, citizen participation does pay dividends. The Baltimore Urban Renewal Study Board notes that experience has demonstrated that a high degree of neighbourhood and individual participation is essential i f the gains to be made through renewal efforts are to be sustained and are to provide a foundation for further progress. In the words, of the Board: The neighbourhood plan must be based on the desire of the residents expressed through their own leadership. It must be their plan i f i t is to maintain their support." The Board's report goes on to recognize a fact which other cities might well consider in assessing their approach to planning proposals, when i t states that: "Failure to achieve this kind of continuing resident participation has been the greatest failure in Baltimore's 7 efforts to date."' A recent seminar in Hawaii sponsored by the Oahu Development Conference and the Ford Foundation recognized the increasing importance of citizen participation in planning. It pointed out that forward-thinking planners agree that the citizen should not be subjected to a "hard sell", last-minute campaign, rather that he should be actively involved in the creation of a plan, not convinced of its merit. It was suggested that although only the Baltimore, Urban Renewal Study Board, Report to Mayor  Thomas D'Alesandro Jr., p. 6. 7Ibid. 9 professional planner can contribute technical studies and keep a plan moving according to established planning p r i n c i p l e s , the planner must r e a l i z e that his ideas can be enriched by c i t i z e n thinking and suggestions. "He w i l l not attempt or expect to get good res u l t s from c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n which comes only at the eleventh-hour public hearing on a p o l i c y . " A t h i r d testimonial to the advantages and d e s i r a b i l i t y of active c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the planning process originates with the Citiz e n s ' Council on City Planning i n Philadelphia. The Council recognizes that i n helping people work toward the planned development of t h e i r c i t y : The process of "how" i s equally important as "what" i s achieved. The rights and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of individuals are recognized and respected, and at the same time the i n d i v i d u a l i s modifying his interests f o r the welfare of the group. Community groups are learning to use the forces of government to a t t a i n c o l l e c t i v e l y the goals toward better l i v i n g which they cannot reach as i n d i v i d u a l s . 9 IV. EXAMPLES OF ACTIVE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION C i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n can occur either spontaneously, on a voluntary basis, or i t may be induced and assisted by l o c a l government. One of the best known examples of spontaneous c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s Chicago's "Back of the Yards Movement". °E. Engledow, " A l l Are Involved i n Planning", The Sunday  S t a r - B u l l e t i n and Advertiser. Honolulu: December 27, 196k, p. A18. ^ C i t i z e n s ' Council on City Planning, Annual Report  19gO-I95l> p. 12. Baltimore's approach to community organization for urban renewal, part of which is cited above, is an example of government-assisted citizen participation. A lesser known case, where active citizen participation has assisted in the planning process is described below. Strictly a voluntary movement, i t is indicative of the type of organization which can benefit both citizens and civic officials. The Neighbourhood Association of Back Bay The Neighbourhood Association of the Back Bay, (along Boston's Charles River), is an illustration of the growth and contribution of a local improvement association in a middle and upper class residential area. The progress of the Association is indicative of how, once organization has been initiated, a citizen's group may move forward in determining the destiny of its environment. In this case, conservation of the neighbourhood was the goal. The Neighbourhood Association of the Back Bay began as a result of joint meetings of several church organizations. A speech by a realtor, on "The Future of the City of Boston" led to subsequent speeches of local application, by other citizens and civic employees. After one talk, during which the meeting was exposed to the efforts and accomplishments of citizens in other districts of Boston, a motion was passed to appoint a committee to investigate the establishment of a Back Bay Neighbourhood Association. The committee planned an organizational meeting and invited about seventy-five persons as representative of various interests such as: schools, churches, rooming-house operators, professional groups, property owners, clubs, realtors, and tenants. The f i r s t agenda called for discussion of local land use problems, and a talk by the leader of an established citizens' association from another part of the city. The consensus of the meeting, attended by about fi f t y people, was to proceed immediately with the formation of a neighbourhood association. The ad hoc Planning Committee was transformed into an Organizing Committee to set up the new association. Within two months, by-laws and recommendations were drafted and approved. Because of specific proposals by city officials to alter the area's zoning pattern, the f i r s t meeting of the Association created a Zoning Committee, to study zoning problems in consultation with the City Zoning Commission, The City of Boston elects its nine councilmen at large, rather than from specific geographical districts. Many of the people feel themselves to be isolated from direct participation in the City's government. Within one year of its conception, the Neighbourhood Association of Back Bay had provided an audible voice in municipal administration for its residents. Membership had risen from fif t y , to seven hundred as a result of successful negotiations with civic officials, and an all-out membership drive. In that f i r s t year alone, the Association had consulted with l o c a l o f f i c i a l s , and agreed upon decisions regarding: demolition of old buildings; t r a f f i c and parking problems; a proposed underground garage; and removal of zoning height l i m i t a t i o n s , to t h e i r mutual s a t i s f a c t i o n . The Association's p o l i c y of co-operation on common interests provides c i v i c o f f i c i a l s with a single point of view from a neighbourhood com-posed of a number of fundamental c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t . For a l l concerned, the paths to progress have been smoothed. V. SUMMARY A six-step planning process, and the usual approach to the solution of municipal planning problems have been described i n t h i s opening chapter. Some d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with current practices has been both expressed and inferred i n a plea f o r a return to more democratic processes of action i n urban planning. Advantages and examples of active c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the planning process have been pointed out. In reviewing the advantages to be gained by c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the planning process, reference i s found to: sincere acceptance of self-motivated change; sustained gains; maintenance of support; enrichment of ideas; recognition of right s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ; and modification of i n t e r e s t s . By what methods and techniques could such i d e a l circumstances be created? How can the personal interest and democratic p a r t i c i p a t i o n which so amazed de Tocqueville be r e i n s t i l l e d i n today's complex communities as determining forces in the planning process? How can Jefferson's remedy of informed discretion through education be achieved? The concept of community development as a process by which members of a community learn why and how to participate in the planning and control of changes which will affect them is described in Chapter II. The concept is new, only as applied to urban planning problems. It appears to be an ideal technique for assuring public acceptance of local government planning proposals, as i t achieves not only those advantages of citizen participation as outlined above, but is concerned also with the progress of the individual, the development of co-operative facilities, and the restoration of the process of democratic action. CHAPTER II THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS Proposed innovations generally follow a sequence of checks and balances before they are accepted by those people they are to affect. The concept of community development provides simple sequential steps in introducing planned changes which evolve through active citizen participation in the planning process. The concept of community development, and how the community development process and the planning process may be integrated, are described in this chapter. Details of a fourteen-element community development process which is used to investigate a postulation in Chapter Three are presented. Having established the desirability of citizen participation in the planning process, in Chapter One, community development is proposed as a technique by which this may be attained. I. THE INTRODUCTION OF CHANGE, AND THE PROCESS OF ADOPTION "Planned" changes are the most extensive type of cultural change in today's societies. Change involves the alteration of complex patterns of behavior. As most human behavior is learned, primarily through instruction, then any attempt to promote changes in behavior should be approached through deliberate instruction. People resist change i f their attitudes, perceptions, or beliefs are challenged. They are more likely to accept a proposal i f obvious improvement is offered. A situation must be created in which people want to change realizing that the new way is a better way. The need for an innovation must be perceived i f the innovation is to be accepted. In introducing changes, simple sequential small steps are best and most effective. Initially, the community must be made aware that something new exists, or that a problem requiring a solution exists. Interest in the problem or new idea must be gained, and i f the program to promote awareness is successful, interested people will themselves seek further information. An appraisal or evaluation of the new idea, or the approach to the problem, is the next step. This usually requires a detailed educational program involving co-operative local opinion leaders as much as possible. Prior to overall adoption of a proposed change, the proposal i s usually given a t r i a l period to reduce the element of risk. With planning proposals, such a test is not always possible, so the experience of others may provide proof of validity. Should the idea prove to be valuable, individuals will accept and adopt i t . The foregoing is a brief outline of what is called the adoption process, and is suggested as the steps through which any new innovation must proceed before being accepted by the people i t will affect. In point form, they are: 1. Awareness 2. Creation of Interest 3. Appraisal or Evaluation 1+. Trial 5 . Adoption Planned changes then should be approached through deliberate instruction; should take into account the cultural values and past experiences of the group to be affected, and offer obvious improvement to a perceived problem. The planning process should provide for the creation of, awareness of, interest in, and appraisal of, the new idea by those i t is to affect. Finally, the new idea must be validated in the minds of those to be affected i f i t is to be acceptable. The planning process usually fails to do a l l this. Quite often, professional leader-ship plans for the community rather than with i t . I. THE CONCEPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community development is the process involved in educating community members to take deliberate action to achieve community change. Members of the community learn how and why to participate in the process of change by being actively involved i n changing situations in community l i f e . They learn to understand clearly the issues which are to be resolved. The concept of community development embodies three considerations in community change. 1. Community development provides an approach to the solution of some specific problem which can be resolved at the community level. It is also appropriate to pan-community problems which lend themselves to being resolved community by coimunity. 2. In community development programs, the means employed is more important than the solution itself. "While the immediate problem may be the provision of off-street parking in a commercial centre, tentatively solved by the development of collective parking facilities, the principal objective of the community development program is that of helping the local people to learn how to solve their common problems. The concern is with the education of the citizens, rather than the factor of change itself. In community development programs the citizen's attitude towards new ideas is more important than the adoption of a single idea. This provides a basis for continuity in the solution of community problems. 3. Community development is only one of several types of purposive change.^ It is frequently confused with community action. The sole concern of community action is the result of that action; no continuity is provided. Community development, however, is concerned with the process through which action is achieved; continuity is provided. Any program of community development involves four basic steps.1"*" At this point, i t is necessary to describe the four ^See Phillips Roupp (ed.), Approaches to Community  Development, p. 16. l^As Suggested By CC. Taylor, "Community Development Programs and Methods", Community Development Review, No. 3, Dec. 1956, pp. 3k-k2. 18 steps so that the relationship of community development to the planning process may be discussed. The description of these four steps is then expanded into fourteen elements to be used in the examination of a number of selected planning proposals. The f i r s t step involves the systematic discussion of common-felt needs by members of a community. This recognition and discussion of needs may arise spontaneously or i t may be induced by an outside agent. The second basic step is one of systematic planning to carry out the f i r s t self-help undertaking that has been selected by the community. The scope of an i n i t i a l project must be within the community's capacity to resolve. This stage acts to mobilize the resources of a community, and should lead to local group responsibility. The organization, responsibility, initiative and self-confidence of community groups are established in this stage. It is of no help i f local government agencies step in and take over, rather they should assist the community in its organization. The third step in the sequence is to encourage the complete harnessing of physical, economic and social potentialities of local community groups. At this point, sceptical and mildly interested members become involved. It is a known fact that i f an innovation is accepted by a group, cautious individuals are more likely to accept i t also. By this time, the process will be established and the project will be nearing completion. Step four in the procedure results from the self-motivated, self-help, experience. The community and its groups develop self-confidence, competence, and group pride. Aspirations lead to seeking out new projects to tackle. The community has learned how to take part in controlling change. Community development functions as an education-for-action process. It helps people plan and follow a course of action leading to goal achievement by equipping them with the ability to recognize and define common problems, and to accumulate the knowledge essential to their solution. By its nature, a community development program results in citizen participation. The concept has been applied extensively in underdeveloped countries and in rural North America, to aid people in bettering their way of l i f e . It has not been used extensively in urban areas except in a few wide-spread instances in underdeveloped nations, and in one or two North American slum areas. Even so, the processes involved were not always recognized as community development. Although community development programs usually deal with simple problems in relatively homogeneous communities, the idea could also be adopted in complex urban areas, in programs of city planning. The integration of the community development process with the planning process is detailed in Section III. III. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND THE PLANNING PROCESS Taylor's four-step approach to community development, described previously, is one of the best known of many concepts of the community development process. However, i t does not provide enough insight into what actually occurs in carrying out such a program. The need for a generally accepted detailed framework for the process of community development has been recognized recently by Frank H. Sehnert, Community Consultant at Southern Illinois University, in his study A Functional IP Framework for the Action Process in Community Development. ^ From a summary and analysis of twenty-six different concepts of community development, Sehnert synthesizes their common character-istics into a detailed procedural framework divided into seven periods in time. Within these seven time periods, fourteen steps, or "elements" are defined which constitute the complete community development process. It is these fourteen elements within their chronological periods which this paper suggests can be integrated with the planning process to bring about active citizen participa-tion in community planning. The time periods involved have no fixed length but will vary with the nature of the community or project. In the overall community development process as outlined below, the "Operational Period" is the one which is most concerned with achieving a specific end within the broader purpose of mobil-izing a community to take an active part in that achievement. -^prank H. Sehnert, A Functional Framework for the Action  Process in Community Development, (preliminary draft, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University), 1961. 21 The Introductory Period Democracy gains nothing from efforts to get p a r t i c i p a t i o n where there i s no basis of i n t e r e s t or competence.13 I n i t i a l l y , someone or some group must be aware that a problem or need exists within the community. The f i r s t element then i s the i n i t i a t i o n of the problem or idea. An awareness of the problem may be spread by communication with selected persons who the innovator feels might also be concerned. Gradually, the idea to do something about the problem takes hold and the f i r s t interested persons begin to consider sharing t h e i r concern with others. L o g i c a l l y , the next element i s the involvement of others i n the r e a l i z a t i o n that a problem exists about which something should be done. Through access to community groups and organiza-ti o n s , the consciousness and comprehension of the problem or need i s established. Sehnert suggests that t h i s may be done by holding a meeting of representatives from various community organizations to promote in t e r e s t i n the i d e a . ^ His suggestion i s important to the t h i r d element i n the process which involves legitimation  of the idea to engage the community i n a process of action by gaining widespread approval, reducing opposition and apathy, and consulting with outside experts f o r procedural guidance. Using representatives of organizations allows the ideas to f i l t e r down •^Arthur Hillman, Community Organization and Planning, p. 37, c i t i n g Neva R. Deardorff, "Planning f o r Youth", Survey  ffid-monthly, Vol. 80, No. 121*, A p r i l , 19kk. l^Sehnert, ag. c i t . , p. 96 to the membership, and to be discussed in turn among non-members. Thus, the ideas seem to come from within the community and are more likely to be acceptable. Where opposition to launching into a process of problem solving is met, arrangements should be made to reduce i t by contacting key personalities in community and clique groups. Within the planning process, this is the f i r s t part of step number one, "problem identification". For the professional planner this may be an easy and obvious observation. As the f i r s t three elements in a community development program, however, how the idea evolves is of the utmost importance. The involvement of the whole community at this stage will prevent the growth of suspicions which may defeat the process before i t really begins. Even with the completion of the introductory period, the problem and the approach will not be totally understood, but part of the community will have recognized that a certain problem does exist, and that the f i r s t steps being taken to resolve i t are their own. The Preliminary Period Two elements constitute the preliminary period, the f i r s t of which involves the formation of a preliminary group to initiate the community development process. A temporary steering committee may be set up, for example, which appoints several study committees to aid in developing the program. Sehnert refers to this officiat-ing group as an "initiating set" which acts to formalize to some 23 extent the undertaking of the process.^ The second element i n this period, and the f i f t h in the process is the preliminary study of the present situation. This stage attempts to establish the limits of both the recognized problem, and the community i t affects. In short, i t is an analysis of the present situation leading to an understanding of the profile of the community and it s problems: the unique qualities of the community are investigated. Within the planning process, this i s s t i l l "problem identification", except that instead of just identifying the problem i t goes on to examine the matrix within which the problem exists. The local decision making process i s examined; a community census taken; relationships between community groups are looked at; community values and attitudes are determined. It is important that the participants obtain for themselves this know-ledge of their environment in order to ward off any false assumptions they may be prone to make. Outside guidance by planners and other professionals may be required here, as the type of information to be gathered and the difficulty of analysing i t may prove to be more than the laymen can handle. But, as Sehnert states: Even though outside professional resources are needed to assist the community during this period there is a 1 % b i d . , p. 101 danger that they will do the job for the community instead of with the community, which can jeopardize the process. If these persons understand the process, i t is not too difficult for them to adapt their expertness to the needs of the participants in the community situation. If they do not understand i t , , their experience may become harmful to the community.1" Here, professional resources of the local government and the community-at-large, supplement and complement the community situation rather than dominate i t . If the community development process i s to have meaning for the citizen, co-operation among professionals, coupled with understanding of the community development process, is requisite. In completing the preliminary period as many citizens as possible should be taking part in gaining an objective look at their community. A l l information pertinent to the problem and the environment should be summarized and openly discussed. Again, the process and problem should be legitimized in the minds of the people, and the process to date evaluated. Note that these functions recur throughout the process, and are instrumental to the educational value of a community development program. With the problem identified, the environment understood, and the people interested, the process advances into the next phase. The Planning Period The one element in this period aligns itself with the second step, "goal formation", of the planning process. Sehnert l 6Ibid., p. 10li. 2$ refers to this sixth element as establishing goals and objectives of the process. Frequently, professional planners attempt to establish goals on their ownj goals which take the form of specific projects. Within the community development process, however, the information accumulated in the preliminary period is used as a basis for establishing goals in conjunction with the community. Most important is how to achieve the projects with maximum community involvement. This requires considerably more s k i l l and understanding than mere manipulation of people through power and authority. Every professional has an area of specialization to which he is devoted. The planner's area of specialization is the community as a whole, yet the normal planning leadership pattern is often manipulative and managerial, for reasons of ease and expediency. The entire community must have an opportunity to become involved in goal formation. This requires thinking, consideration, and judgement. The members of a community must be given ample opportunity to exercise these processes. Planning, after a l l , is a political function and, 17 "politics is the slow public application of reason". The people must be active in the formulation of goals in order to think and reason creatively and critically. Sufficient time must be allowed for the goals, and object-ives to be reviewed, altered, and accepted by various community 17Theodore H. White, cited by T.J. Kent Jr., The Urban  General Plan, p. x i i . groups and individuals. The again recurring legitimation and evaluation, of goals formed and the processes involved, act in this stage to determine the reasons for dissenting opinions and adverse feelings. A l l facets must be accounted for or further opposition to the program may develop. Once goals have been determined and accepted, the community development process proceeds into the organizational period and the training period: two phases which seem to f i t between steps two and three of the planning process. That is to say, once goals and objectives have been formed, further organization and training of community members is required before proceeding with survey and analysis of specific problems. Organizational Period During the organizational period, the seventh element of the community development process is carried out. This element involves the formation of an organizational structure to co-ordinate the process. This is a cr i t i c a l component. Sehnert feels that: The right organizational structure is so important to the success of the community development process in a community, that a follow up program needs to be adopted which will check the feelings and opinions of each and every group in the community to make sure they have officially endorsed the structure, or i f not, why not.l" It is during this period that a l l the community's resources are mobilized. But no model organizational structure should be ^sehnert, og. cit., p. 113. imposed. Alternatives should be developed and the citizens should decide which form of organization best suits their own needs. By creating the organizational structure, the citizens come to appreciate its reasons and importance. Here, as throughout the program, competent leadership in the community development process can make learning more efficient by reducing the element of t r i a l and error. A typical organizational structure might include a new steering committee, special subsidiary committees, and chairmen to report from each. Groups may be organized by city blocks, by interest, or for ad hoc purposes. The structure should be flexible, not too formalized, and include a representative majority of citizens. Established local organizations must be considered and given time to accept and take part in the new community structure. Again the proposed structure must be validated and evaluated by the citizens by allowing sufficient time for corrections and adjustments to be made in order to satisfy negative reactions. Well-planned meetings, involving small^ group discussions, not long-winded speeches, can be used to culminate in the election of officers to head the approved organizational structure. The technical knowledge of a professional person can be sublimated i f he becomes an elected officer, and such persons may be more valuable to the process in a consultative role. Sehnert is a strong believer in community-wide meetings to advance this period of organization. At this point, the entire process to date should be reviewed and stabilized. Misconceptions, doubts and fears can be allayed, and i f necessary, further outside resources called upon, provided that they do not attempt to monopolize the program. Now organized, community leaders and their appointed or elected assistants must be trained in the skills necessary to administer a process of community development. The Training Period The training of elected and appointed leaders in necessary  administrative skills is the sole element which occurs in this period. The new steering committee, committee chairman, discussion leaders and recorders, and committee members must a l l be instructed to perform their functions. Many sources omit this step, but Sehnert recognizes its importance in enhancing the community development process. During the training sessions, participants learn how to conduct meetings, organize committees and plan agendas. Types of fact-finding procedures are discussed, and methods of summarizing and presenting findings are taught. Discussion leaders learn how to stimulate those who do not talk enough, and how to cope with those who talk too much. The use of research reports in discussions is also learned. Recorders learn how to take concise, meaningful minutes, and how to present them to the general meeting. These concepts and skills will be new to most participants 29 so they should be encouraged to practice them in the training meetings. Undoubtedly, skilled instructors in adult education, and small group techniques will be required throughout the period. Such instruction equips those who are uncertain of their capabili-ties with confidence in the knowledge that they are gaining a better understanding of their roles. Other types of sessions included for committee members should be organized by the steering committee concurrently with the leadership training in order to strengthen the foundation of the process, and to ensure that community members do not lose interest through lack of participation. Meetings and workshops to define planning and community development further, and forums on citizen responsibility in community affairs, inject more education into the process and encourage maintenance of interest. Not a l l training will take place during this period, as some individuals will have been trained in prior stages through the nature of the process. The length of time required for the training period will depend largely on the. interest of the people, the nature of the community, and the skills of professional consultants utilized. Prior to proceeding with the operational period, the value of the training sessions, how they could be improved, and how they will contribute to subsequent stages, should be reviewed and agreed upon by a l l concerned. The Operational Period This period constitutes the backbone of the community development process, and may be compared to the following steps in the planning process: 3. Survey and Analysis k» Design of a Plan $. Plan Implementation Here also, is the backbone of the planning process. The f i r s t of two elements in this period is the administration of research and project committee operations; the tenth element in the process being the carrying out of research operations so that a l l citizens can see tangible results. At this time, the actual execution of action towards specific improvements in the community takes place. Periods leading to this stage have laid the groundwork for an intelligent approach to coping with particular problems. Operations during this period must be skillfully co-ordinated. Research operations should be structured to ensure total citizen participation, guided by the advice of professionals, carried out in an objective manner. Precisely what happens during this period is dependent upon the goals and objectives specified during the planning period. In a separate chapter, Sehnert elaborates on the components of this operational period as they might be applied in any program 19 of community development. 7 Basically, what Sehnert proposes is the course of action followed by a planning agency in resolving 1 9Ibid., Chapter V, pp. l U 0-l#. 31 a planning problem: i.e. the "technical" planning process. The major difference is that the citizens do most of the work; are kept informed at a l l times; determine which plan to adopt; and are instrumental in implementing the chosen proposal. The citizen is given every opportunity to participate effectively. The planners and associated professionals act as guides in supplement-ing the process by providing the community with specialized tools and techniques of problem solving: a strategic role of competent leadership to reduce elements of t r i a l and error. By the end of this period, the original problem facing the community has been resolved; but more important i t has been done by the people who are affected, through the community development process. Community development appears to be less efficient than usual planning procedures, emphasizing as i t does the means by which the problem is solved. In the long run, however, such may not be the case, for, as C.E. Merriara points out in his book Q.'ra. the Agenda of Democracy: Effectiveness is determined not merely by the complete concentration of the power to decide, but also by that general good will and co-operativeness without which wise decisions cannot be made, or, i f made, cannot be carried out.20 The Continuation Period The final period in the evolution of a community development 2 0C.E. Merriam, On the Agenda of Democracy, pp. 96-97. program consists of elements eleven to fourteen. Because the project has terminated, does not mean that the process should end also. Conversely, the continuation period provides continuity to the process through the conservation of developed community resources. A parallel may be drawn between this period, and step six of the planning process, "evaluation and reorientation". Neither process ever ends. The evaluation of the evolution and progress of the  community development process is element number eleven. At this time, the entire process is critically examined in the light of its effects, impressions and uses. The techniques and outside resources used are reviewed and judged, as i s the overall success or failure of the entire program. Professional community workers can contribute valuable assistance to this assessment. During this step improvements should be suggested, and areas where further information might lead to a better understanding of the environment delineated. Upon this basis, the expansion of the process in the community becomes possible. New problems are recognized, and new goals established. New leaders and committees are formed. The process may even be applied to issues of a larger scale, with the impetus emanating from the community which has seen how successful i t can be; and the second time around should prove to be less complicated. Final consultation with professional advisors is the next element in the process. Sehnert realizes that how or when a professional consultant withdraws from a community situation is not clear. The best leaders, however, will know their task is completed when the people say "We have done i t ourselves". Should he be retained, the consultant can aid the community in re-orientating the process, and establishing new community groups and positions. The fourteenth and final element in a community develop-ment program is one which is seldom taken in the planning process, namely, follow up. Periodic return visits to the community to introduce new resources, and to use the successful situation as an example for other areas to follow, maintain contact between the professionals and the laymen. Encouragement to undertake further projects can be stimulated by keeping open channels of technical information from specialists and researchers, to the community level. IV. SUMMARY Having traced the process through which an innovation must go, prior to being adopted, the concept of community development, has been described in this chapter and suggested as a technique to ensure active and continuing citizen participa-tion in the planning process. The fourteen elements inherent in any community development program have been described, and indications have been given as to how those fourteen elements could be integrated with the physical planning process. Table I, page 35, summarizes this integration in tabular form. An attempt is made in Chapter Three to further justify the use of this technique, by testing a simple hypothesis, through the analysis of a number of planning proposals developed in a major municipality in British Columbia. The words of David S. Lilienthal, as applied to citizen participation in the work of the Tennessee Valley Authority, pro-vide an apt sequel to this chapter. Here is the l i f e principle of democratic planning - an awareness in the whole people of a sense of this common and moral purpose. Not one goal, but a direction. Not one plan once and for a l l , but the conscious selection by the people of successive plans It is because the lesson of the past seems to me so clear on this score,... the people must be in on the planning; their existing institutions must be made part of i t ; self-education of the citizenry is more important than specific projects or physical changes.^1 2 1David E. Lilienthal, T.V.A., Democracy on the March, p. 191. 35 TABLE I. SUMMARY INTEGRATION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS AND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS PLANNING PROCESS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS STEPS TIME PERIOD ELEMENTS 1. Problem Identification I Introductory 1. Initiation of Idea 2. Involvement of Others 3. Legitimation of Idea II Preliminary k» Formation of Preliminary Group to Initiate Community Development Process 5. Preliminary Study of Situation 5. (a) Legitimation and Evaluation 2. Goal Formation III Planning 6. Establishing Goals and Objectives of the Process 6. (a) Legitimation and Evaluation of Goals TV Organizational 7. Formation of Organizational Structure V Training 8. Training Elected and Appointed Leaders in Administrative Skills 3. Survey and Analysis U . Design of a Plan 5. Plan Implementation VI Operational 9. Administration of Research and Project Committee Operations 10. Research Operations Conducted so that A l l Citizens Can See Tangible Results 6. Evaluation & Reorientation VII Continuation 11. Evaluation of Evolution & Progress of Community Development Process 12. Expansion of Process in Community 13. Final Consultation l U . Follow Up o.w..». CHAPTER III THE HYPOTHESIS AND METHOD OF TESTING An hypothesis relating community development to the planning process is proposed below, and a method is described for testing that hypothesis. A number of problems which came to light during the investigation are reviewed, and the final approach to testing the hypothesis is described. A few comments on the validity of Sehnert's community development framework in conducting such an investigation form the concluding section. I. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AS A KEY TO PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF PLANNING PROPOSALS In order to be successful, any plan, for an area's future development, regardless of its technical merit must f i r s t be acceptable to those who are to be affected by its implementation. Examples have been given, illustrating how active citizen participation aids in the creation of publicly acceptable, and subsequently successful planning proposals. The use of community development was suggested in Chapter II as a means by which active public participation in the planning process can be achieved. The use of the technique would ensure that the proposals ultimately developed were publicly acceptable; and by the nature of the community development process, democratic-ally developed and implemented. That the degree of public acceptance of a planning proposal is directly related to the extent to which citizen participation occurred in developing that proposal comes as no surprise to members of the planning profession. The problem is how to achieve such participation. The proposed answer to the problem is to utilize the technique of community development in the planning process wherever possible. While the writer was employed with the planning department of the City of Vancouver, B.C., i t became apparent that certain procedures used to involve citizens in the planning process, were similar in nature to the elements of the community development process, as outlined in Chapter II. For example, briefs were received from local interest groups regarding their criticism of completed proposals; key planning personnel frequently addressed meetings to elaborate, i f not on specific schemes, at least on planning in general in the city; public hearings were held, which allowed brave citizens to express their personal convictions about proposed plans. The most acceptable schemes; (i.e. those which appeared to meet the least resistance from the people they were to affect), appeared to have involved a higher degree of public participation than less acceptable ones. As stated previously, this came as no surprise to members of the planning profession. But, cursory examination also suggested that the most acceptable schemes also exhibited evidence of having involved procedures which could be interpreted as analogous to the elements involved in a program of community development. On this basis i t seems logical to postulate that: the degree of public acceptance of local government planning proposals varies directly with the extent to which elements of community development are utilized in the planning process. If proved valid, the above hypothesis could be used to further justify the case being advanced for the use of community development as a technique in the planning process. It was necessary therefore to develop some means for testing the veracity of the statement. II. METHOD OF TESTING THE HYPOTHESIS It was decided to analyse a number of local government planning proposals in an attempt to assess f i r s t , the degree of public acceptance of each, and second, the extent to which elements of community development (as outlined in Chapter II) were utilized, either consciously or inadvertently, in the formation and implementation of those proposals. Three local planning agencies in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia were approached, and were requested to provide access to pertinent files and individuals so that the investigation could be carried out. A l l three agencies were willing to co-operate in the study, and subsequently, a number of problems unfolded in the following respects. 39 Determination of the Degree of Public Acceptance Some objective method of accurately assessing public accept-ance of a planning proposal would be most desirable. It soon became evident, however, that within the limitations of time and resources available for the study, i t would not be possible to develop a reliable measurement technique which could be universally applied. Where votes by the community-at-large had occurred, an estimate might have been based upon the proportion of those voting in favour of a proposal. However, municipal elections and polls seldom attract anywhere near a majority of citizens, and the result so obtained might not be a true reflection of overall community feeling. Furthermore, very few planning proposals ever get voted on by the people they are to affect, since decisions rest with their elected representatives. Therefore, to base conclusions regarding the hypothesis solely upon the few proposals which have been voted on would not be advisable, as there is no guarantee that such proposals are representative of a l l local government planning proposals. Each of the three planning agencies consulted advised that, considering the difficulties outlined below, a subjective approach to determining how accept-able a proposal was, would be preferable, and where possible, might be supported by substantive evidence. Political and Administrative Variations The political and administrative atmospheres of different municipalities vary greatly. To attempt any classification of planning programs from different jurisdictions, in terms of their acceptability, might be misleading. Personalities and power structures would both affect the apparent relative acceptability of selected proposals. In some cases, many planning proposals are blocked by civic administration before they even get to be considered by council, let alone the public. It is fel t that i f several different municipalities were to be used as sources for case materials, the cases chosen would have to be of the same type in each area. For example, a l l proposals studied would have to relate to shopping centres, or to parks, or to some other consistent category. Significant also, is the fact that political and administrat-ive atmosphere varies not only between municipalities, but also within any one municipality over time. Although recognized, the factor of change over time could not be avoided, as the time required to complete a project frequently exceeds the length of time for which administrative, political and technical personnel hold office. Scale of the Proposals Municipal planning proposals range from minor changes i n zoning by-laws, to overall master plan schemes. Obviously neither extreme would be suitable for testing the hypothesis: the former is too simple, the latter too complex. It was decided therefore to restrict the selection of proposals to planning projects such as collective parking schemes, park proposals, and other similar schemes which might be thought of as components of an overall plan. The "community" involved in these proposals will vary in both size and character. In speaking of community development, the precise definition of the word "community" is not important. It may be a geographical area ranging in size from a neighbourhood to a region. Or i t may be a "community of interest", character-ized by the particular interest or function its members share. It is the function of the community development process to bring these persons together i n developing an awareness of, and a solution for, their common problems. Community projects vary not only in type and scale, but also according to responsibility. The carrying out of a proposal may be a government responsibility, a private responsibility, or a co-operative task, involving both public and private enterprise. For example, collective parking schemes are a co-operative venture, planned by the municipality and the merchants involved, built, maintained and financed by the municipality, and paid for on a local improvement basis by the property-owners. Park and highway projects are usually a government responsibility, seldom involving public participation, or private funds. Occasionally, proposals arise which are strictly the responsibility of private enterprise, to implement and maintain. Proposals for the reorganization of shopping areas, accompanied by enabling h2 legislation are exemplary of private enterprise bearing the burden of public decisions. In choosing planning proposals for this study, i t was decided that this facet of responsibility should be kept in mind as a possible basis for selection. It was necessary to resolve these problems and formulate a consistent approach to testing the hypothesis put forth on page 38. Ultimately, the method described below was adopted as most compatible with the circumstances by which the investigation was limited. The Final Approach to Testing the Hypothesis Limitations of time and resources and variations in political and administrative atmospheres, led to the decision to restrict the study to planning proposals within a single municipality. To do so, was expedient for the investigator, and seemed to provide the most stable political and administrative atmosphere attainable, with the exception of changes over time which, as they cannot be controlled, will not be accounted for in the study. The degree of public acceptance of local government planning proposals was to be estimated subjectively, through analysis of available records, and opinions expressed by planners and public participants. Where possible, substantive evidence (e.g. the per-cent of ratepayers who signed a petition for a proposal involving local improvement procedures) was used to aid in the assessment of public acceptance. Proposals were grouped U3 into three categories: 1. Highly Acceptable 2. Marginally Acceptable 3. Unacceptable A highly acceptable project would be one which met l i t t l e or no opposition from the people i t was to affect. Marginally accept-able proposals were those which met considerable opposition, yet were accepted, at least overtly, by a majority of the citizens involved. To be classified as unacceptable, a proposal must have met strong opposition from the community, representing a majority of those to be affected by the proposal, or, ultimately, must not have been implemented. The planning department consulted was requested to provide access to information regarding individual projects which their staff had developed, presumably through the normal planning process. To aid in the selection of proposals suitable for the investigation, the planning agency was asked to classify them according to responsibility; i.e. public, private, or co-operative. Through a detailed analysis of information contained in planning department fi l e s , plus the aid of the planning staff and key citizen participants, each selected proposal was analysed, in terms of Sehnert's fourteen element community development process outlined in Chapter II, to determine the extent to which elements of community development were utilized in formulating and implementing that proposal. Prior to proceeding with the investigation in depth, i t was thought necessary to provide some indication as to the validity of Sehnert's framework for such purposes. Comments on the Validity of the Fourteen Element Framework for Research Purposes In commenting upon Sehnert*s functional framework for the community development process, Kenneth Haygood, Chairman of the Community Development Section of the Adult Education Association of the U.S.A. remarked: However, I do think that i t is possible to define a framework which can be accepted by virtually everyone working i n the field of community development. Along this line, I think that your CSehnert'sJ conceptual framework is sufficiently extensive and inclusive.22 From the same source, i t was noted that Charles E. Ramsay, Professor of Sociology, Colorado State University, commented upon the framework in the following manner. Being primarily interested in research, I looked at i t Lthe framework^] f i r s t from the point of view of hypotheses suggested for tests. I find that the elaboration and detail in breaking down the community development process is most helpful in this regard. ... I find the framework you suggest for the process of community development helps me a great deal in evoking a more systematic scheme for evaluation, ^ At the University of British Columbia, Dr. Coolie Verner, Professor of Adult Education, supported the use of Sehnert's "Cited in a letter from F.H. Sehnert, Southern Illinois University, to Dr. Coolie Verner, University of British Columbia, January LU, 1963. 23lbid. U5 framework as a guide for testing the hypothesis advanced on page 38.2ii In his own validation of the framework, Sehnert applied i t to the analysis of two community development programs in Southern Illinois. He found that the steps, elements and time periods involved, could be identified through the study and analysis of records, reports and articles compiled during the programs. For this investigation, a pilot study was made of a success-ful collective parking scheme, through analysis of planning department f i l e s , and consultation with persons involved. Results of the pilot study encouraged the author to continue with the collection and analysis of other planning proposals, in an attempt to test the hypothesis that: tbs degree of public acceptance of local government planning proposals varies directly with the extent to which elements of community development are utilized in the planning process. Details of the investigation are presented in Chapter IV. ^Personal interview. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PLANNING PROPOSALS From the l i s t of proposals suggested by the City of Vancouver Planning Department, two each were sought according to whether they were: 1. Highly acceptable, 2. Marginally acceptable, 3. Not acceptable. Initial indication as to the degree of acceptability of the projects was gained from the experience of the planners involved, and from the author's prior knowledge of certain proposals. Each pertinent project f i l e was studied to determine the chronological order of events, and i t was found that files them-selves do not reflect the total planning process. Much information had to be obtained from outside and human sources, in order to identify adequately which elements of community development were incorporated, either explicitly or implicitly in each proposal. In a l l , fourteen interviews were necessary; eight with city planners, four with key citizens, and two with other civic officials. It was soon determined that the investigation would have to be limited to proposals involving small communities or neighbourhoods, and only local government agencies. In attempting to analyse an urban renewal scheme, i t was found that the partner-ship arrangement between the three levels of government and the numerous agencies involved so complicated the issue that i t was Impossible, under the limitations of time and resources, to identify the steps necessary to reveal elements of community development. Ultimately, five proposals, each an individual project, were obtained which seemed to represent a range of both public acceptance, and responsibility. The five proposals examined also exhibited considerable variation in the extent to which elements of community development were utilized in their evolution. I. PROPOSAL ONE: A COLLECTIVE PARKING SCHEME Classified by both the planners and merchants involved, as "highly acceptable", the f i r s t proposal analysed concerned the provision of collective parking facilities at the rear of stores in a suburban district shopping centre. Seventy per cent of the property owners involved signed a petition favouring the proposal. Projects of this nature involve the co-operative responsibilities of the municipality to finance, design, build and maintain the parking lotsj and of the merchants, to determine the extent of the facilities and pay for them on a local improvement basis. A problem of traffic circulation and parking in the district was recognized by a small group of the area's businessmen. Further-more, construction of a nearby integrated shopping centre seemed to threaten the existence of the older, less well-equipped shopping area. Initiation of the idea to do something about their common problems occurred when one member of the small group consulted the local Chamber of Commerce. The involvement of others had then occurred, and apparently, the problem was considered legitimate by members of the Chamber of Commerce, as they contacted the local Planning Department by way of a letter to the Mayor and Council. The formation of a preliminary group occurred when the Chamber of Commerce set up its own committee to investigate and report on how the problem of parking and circulation might be solved. Preliminary study of the situation then took place in the form of an on-going process of ideas and studies by the Chamber of Commerce committee. Concurrently, research in the City Planning Department led to a scheme to provide collective parking facilities in established suburban district commercial centres. This may be said to have resulted in the establishing of goals» and i t was indirectly done in conjunction with the community. The Planning Department's report suggested also, that each shopping district should be encouraged to provide its own organization to work with city officials, and to manage the facility: i.e. i t encouraged the formation of a co-ordinating organizational structure. The Chamber of Commerce had already taken this step. City Council directed that the Planning Department's general report be submitted to various local shopping areas for their comments. Thus, they allowed for evaluation and legitimation of goals, and a majority of the shopping areas favoured the new legislation. In the same study area, professional advice was sought by the Chamber of Commerce to administer research and project committee operations. The merchants' ideas regarding location and extent of the new parking lots were submitted to the Planning Department, which in conjunction with the municipal Engineering Department prepared a detailed layout for the scheme. During this period, the merchants were able to see tangible results through meetings and correspondence with municipal officials. Thus, they were kept well informed as to details of the project. Some opposition was met regarding fences around the project, but was quickly resolved. The proposal took three and one-half years from the time of problem recognition, to the official opening of the collective parking lots. The Chamber of Commerce talked with owners of residential properties which were to be purchased by the city for parking purposes. Further testimony to the high degree of public acceptance of the proposal is given by the fact that no expropria-tion proceedings were required in the acquisition of necessary properties. Throughout the development and implementation of this i n i t i a l proposal, ten of the fourteen elements involved in the community development process can be identified. In order of occurrence, they were: 1. Initiation of the idea 2. Involvement of others 3. Legitimation of the idea , k» Formation of a preliminary group 3>. Preliminary study of the situation 6. The establishing of goals 7. Formation of a co-ordinating organizational structure 8. Evaluation and legitimation of goals 9. Administration of research and project committee operations 10. Research operations conducted so that a l l citizens could see tangible results. No evidence was found to indicate that any of the other four steps inherent in a program of community development, had occurred. The number of elements identified in comparison with the other four case studies, 'is summarized in Table II, page 6 l . II. PROPOSAL TWO: A COLLECTIVE PARKING SCHEME Initiation of the idea for this particular collective parking proposal came from the City Planning Department as part of a larger development plan for the district in question. No other groups or individuals were involved. The Planning Department's ideas filtered down to the local merchants and property owners through a report to City Council. The proposal was rejected by the merchants' association, on grounds that the locations suggested for parking lots were not suitable. Despite the merchants' objections to the scheme, the Planning Department persisted in its proposal, claiming that although i t was not in the best location, the scheme would help to meet an urgent, immediate need. During the next year and one half, detailed plans and estimates for the scheme were drawn up by City departments, and a l l that was required was a petition, bearing the signatures of sixty-seven percent of a l l the property owners who were to pay for the project on a local improvement basis* The petition found no support. Examination of Planning Department files revealed no other elements of community development in the process of developing this "unacceptable" proposal, aside from initiation of the idea. A complication was discovered in an interview with the current president of the district's Commercial Association. One of the reasons the petition went unsupported was that rumours of extensive real estate options and a possible major development involving part of the proposed parking area, were circulating in the community, and many merchants adopted a "wait and see" attitude. Since that time, however, three years have elapsed and the centre is s t i l l without adequate parking faci l i t i e s . III. PROPOSAL THREE: CONCERNING THE FUTURE USE OF A PUBLIC WORKS YARD The yard in question was located adjacent to a suburban district shopping centre, in an area which is rapidly developing as a major high-rise apartment zone. The ultimate proposal for the yard is considered to be "highly acceptable" to those i t will directly affect. In May 1957, the local community association expressed an interest in the site for parking purposes to serve the nearby 52 retail area. Two months later, the community association, in a letter to Mayor and Council, anticipated presenting a concrete proposal to municipal authorities regarding the use of the works yard as a parking lot. This action can be construed as the initiation of the idea to put the works yard to a more suitable use. The involvement of others occurred when City Council replied that any formal proposals should be made only after the City Engineer had been consulted by the community association. The project to put the works yard to community use stagnated for a period of about eighteen months, after which time, two other groups expressed interest in the site. Early in 1959, the local community centre requested use of the adjacent works yard for a parking lot and small park site. At about the same time, the City Board of Parks requested use of the site for park purposes. These two actions are considered to be a repetition of initiation of the idea, to put the still-functioning works yard to a higher use. As the ¥orks Department had no intention of vacating the site for several years, interest in its future lagged again for about two years. In April 1962, the district Commercial Association applied to the City to have the yard removed from the area, and the site converted into a parking lot. No action was taken, as the Works Department s t i l l wished to retain the site for its own use, and the Commercial Association failed to gain sufficient support for a collective parking scheme which included the controversial 53 works yard-Two more years passed, and in January of 196k, the question of the future use of the works yard was turned over, by City Council, to the Civic Development Committee for study and report. Preliminary study of the situation may be said to have occurred when the Commercial Association began to consider alternative parking areas, following a Planning Department report that the yard was considered too far from the shops for use as a parking lot. Preliminary studies were also being conducted by the Community Centre Association, which presented the Civic Development Committee with a petition representing its four thousand members, requesting that the works yard be transferred to the Board of Parks for development and use as a sitting-out and ornamental park area, plus an extension to the community centre parking area. The petition contained three thousand signatures, and was supported by the Director of the Public Library, and the City's Assistant Health Officer. This action involved the formation of a preliminary  group, which represented a large segment of the community, and established specific goals and objectives, which were apparently a legitimate manifestation of the community's desires. Upon receipt of the petition, the Civic Development Committee instructed that the Planning and Engineering Departments should prepare reports on the possibility of shared use of the site, for retail-area parking, and community centre use, as well as on what alternative uses of the site might be feasible. The Civic Development Committee stipulated that these reports be prepared in conjunction with the district Commercial Association, and the Community Centre Association: i.e. research operations were to be  conducted so that a l l citizens could see tangible results. Having issued their directive, the Committee was at the same time, control-ling the administration of research and project committee operations. The district Commercial Association was unable to gain sufficient support from its members, for its proposed collective parking scheme on the works yard site. In the meantime, a proposal was submitted to the Planning Department to build a personal care home on the site. City Council seriously considered rezoning the site to allow the personal care home to be built, but quashed their own proposal when faced with a committee room f u l l of hostile citizens, opposing the proposed rezoning. The citizens convinced the Council that the property was needed for park and parking space. As a result, Council instructed the Director of Planning to prepare a development plan for the site. The plan was delayed by negotiations with merchants and a private developer who had an interest in the area, but i t was ultimately proposed that the now vacant works yard be offered for acquisition by the Board of Parks, for joint use as a park, and community centre parking fa c i l i t i e s . On March 5, 1965, the Town Planning Commission conferred and unanimously recommended that the site be used for park and community centre purposes. About two weeks later, City 55 Council turned the abandoned works yard over to the Parks Board at a price far less than its potential worth, to be used as the Planning Department had proposed. Needless to say, the proposal was considered by a l l con-cerned to be "highly acceptable". Even the merchants in the retail area were pleased with the final outcome, as they soon realized that the available parking space, though distant, might ease their own problem to some extent, and they after a l l , had been unable to gain adequate support from their members, to carry out their own proposal. Further evidence as to the acceptability of the proposal is borne by the three thousand signatures on the petition presented to the Civic Development Committee. Eight elements of the community development process have been identified in the analysis of the works yard proposal. In order of occurrence, recognizable elements were: 1. Initiation of the idea 2. Involvement of others 3. Preliminary study of the situation U. Formation of a preliminary group 5 . Establishing goals and objectives 6. Legitimation of goals and objectives 7. Research operations conducted so that a l l citizens can see tangible results 8. Administration of research and project committee operations. 56 The time elapsed since the project was completed is insufficient to have allowed the four steps in the continuation period of the community development process to be taken. Therefore, the extent to which elements of community development were utilized in the planning process, must be based on a total of ten, rather than fourteen elements. Eight out of ten elements is roughly equivalent to eleven out of fourteen elements: an indication that this highly acceptable proposal was rich in elements of community development. However, there is no indication at the time of writing, that evaluation, expansion, final consultation or follow up, are likely to occur. The number of elements of community development evident in the project is compared with the other case studies in Table II, page 6 l . As i t turned out, responsibility for the proposal rests with the Board of Parksj a local government agency. Had the site been allocated for collective parking, a co-operative distribution of responsibility would have been indicated. The personal care home, ini t i a l l y favoured by the City Council, would have been strictly the private developer's responsibility. IV. PROPOSAL FOUR: A SCHEME TO REVITALIZE CHINATOWN In January 196U, City Council received a report from the Planning Department, containing a number of ideas for the rehabilitation of commercial Chinatown. Preliminary evidence showed the proposal to be "highly acceptable", but further investigation led to its being classified as only "marginally acceptable". Initiation of the idea to make Chinatown more attractive, through the provision of pedestrian malls, traffic diversions, and off-street parking, was intended to stimulate action by property owners and tenants in the area. The report concluded that costs of such an undertaking would be shared, but that the improvement of Chinatown could only be achieved i f i t was wanted. The next step was to find out whether or not such improvement was desired. Involvement of others in the idea occurred when the Community Planning Association of Canada called a meeting of the Chinese merchants, and had the scheme presented to them by the Director of Planning. In the meantime, copies of the report had been sent to other interested groups, such as the local Visitors Bureau and the Chamber of Commerce, who wholeheartedly endorsed the project. Prior to the C.P.A.C. meeting, a community newspaper, the Chinatown News, stated on page two in an April 3rd editorial that the City Planning Department had provided "a spark that might yet ignite the imagination of our merchants. Let i t explode into a windfall." J Subsequently, the same newspaper conducted an opinion poll and found that ninety per cent of the people polled in the Chinese community were enthused about the proposal. ^Editorial in the Chinatown News, April 3, 196k, p. 2. No indication was given as to how many people were questioned. Judging by this criterion, and the interest shown at the C.P.A.C. meeting, the proposal appears to have been "highly acceptable". About a month later, on May 1st, 1°61|, another editorial on page two of the Chinatown News claimed; There is no dearth of capital in our Chinatown. We lack only men with vision and courage to provide dynamic leadership in projecting Chinatown into the future. 2" The statement that the community lacked the necessary leadership is noteworthy. Nevertheless, by the end of May, the Chinese Benevolent Association had established a pro-tern committee to meet with civic officials. The formation of this preliminary group led to a meeting with City planning officials, during which costs, division of responsibility, methods of financing, and phasing of development were discussed. The delegation approved the proposal, and in so doing, may have been expressing their legitimation of the Planning Department's goals. However, i t now appears that such was not the case. Having promised concrete proposals within two weeks of the meeting, the Planning Department proceeded with detailed technical investigations by asking the Traffic Engineer to conduct traffic studies in the area to be affected by the Chinatown scheme. Ten months have passed, and the City's share of the responsibility has bogged down for reasons which are not clear, but which cannot 2 6Ibid., May 1, 196U, p. 2. be attributed solely to traffic studies. Although the planners are s t i l l interested in the proposal, i t is apparent that some other officials are not. Unfortunately, the apparent enthusiasm and i n i t i a l organization in the Chinese community have been allowed to dissipate. As interest appears to have waned so greatly, and as the only substantive evidence regarding the acceptability of the proposal was the result of a limited opinion poll, the project is classified as "marginally acceptable". It has not been rejected yet, but neither has i t been implemented. A comment by the Director of Planning suggests that the report was universally accepted in principle; apparently, not in practice. Only three distinct elements of community development out of a possible fourteen were identified in this proposal: 1. Initiation of the idea 2. Involvement of others 3. Formation of a preliminary group. No actual legitimation of goals or ideas could be found, and the only reference to the possibility of forming an organizational co-ordinating structure, was the reference in the Chinatown News editorial that such resources were not to be found within the Chinese community. A comparison with the other four proposals is again provided on page 6 l . V. PROPOSAL FIVE: THE REZONING OF A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREA For an area showing distinct signs of commercial and industrial blight, the City Planning Department proposed a rezoning scheme which would change the status of one block from light industrial uses, to multiple family uses, and that of another block, from light industrial to commercial use. The proposal was the result of a planning report which was totally void of any evidence of citizen participation, and is classified as "unacceptable". The applicant for the zoning change was the Director of Planning, and i t may be said that he was responsible for the initiation of the  idea. Records show that one hundred and thirty persons were notified of the intent to rezone, and only thirty individual objections to the proposal were received. However, one of these "individual" objections represented forty-eight members of the local Chamber of Commerce who had unanimously agreed to oppose the scheme. Further investigation showed that of the one hundred and thirty people notified, only eighty-six were directly affected property owners; the balance being adjacent owners who were also considered to be "affected" by the proposal. It is apparent then, that thirty out of eighty-six people directly affected opposed the project. As well as this thirty, at least another eighteen may have objected, by way of the Chamber of Commerce submission. So, the total number of people opposed to the scheme can be estimated at approximately forty-eight; or, fifty-six per cent of the total number affected. This argument is supported even i f i t is allowed that a l l TABLE II. SUMMARY OF CASIE STUDY OBSERVATIONS 61 ELEMENTS OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Denotes Those Identified Under Each Proposal) PROPOSAL NUMBER AND DEGREE OF ACCEPTABILITY COMMENTS ONE THREE FOUR TWO FIVE HIGHLY ACCEPTABLE HIGHLY ACCEPTABLE MARGINALLY ACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE 1. Initiation of Idea • • • • • A l l Projects Must Be Initiated 2. Involvement of Others • • 3 . Legitimation of Idea U. Formation of a Preliminary Group to Initiate Community Development Process • • 5. Preliminary Study of Situation # 5a. Legitimation and Evaluation 6. Establishing Goals and Objectives of the Process • 6 a . Legitimation and Evaluation of Goals 7. Formation of Organizational Structure to Co-ordinate the Process 8. Training Elected and Appointed Leaders in Administrative Skills A Characteristic Element of Community Development 9 . Administration of Research and Project Committee Operations • # 10. Research Operations Conducted so that A l l Citizens Can See Tangible Results 11. Evaluation of Evolution and Progress of Community Development Process Not Normally Found in the Planning Process 12. Expansion of Process in Community N 13. Final Consultation « llu Follow Up •; n COMMENTS A Collective Parking Scheme The Public Works Yard Chinatown A Collective Parking Scheme A Rezoning Plan as.w.e. one hundred and thirty people notified were affected. Adding the individual protests to the collective one, yields a sum of seventy-eight; or, sixty per cent of the total. Further testimony to the lack of acceptability of the proposed zoning change, is the fact that in one block, where twelve land owners were involved, one hundred per cent of them objected individually and strenuously, to the proposed rezoning of their properties. Despite this over-whelming opposition, City Council in its wisdom, and within its enabling legislation, approved the rezoning application. When interviewed, one of the principal planners involved in the prepara-tion of the proposal admitted that perhaps he should have contacted the Chamber of Commerce at the time. The proposal is classified as "unacceptable", and exhibits only one element of a possible fourteen, of community development; viz., initiation of the idea. Fortunately, a l l projects do have to be initiated. VI. SUMMARY Proposal One, the "highly acceptable" collective parking scheme, manifested ten of fourteen elements of community develop-ment in its evolution. Case Study Three, the works yard scheme, also a "highly acceptable" proposal, shows evidence of eight of the fourteen elements of community development. The fourth proposal, relating to the revitalization of Chinatown, exhibited only three elements of the community development process, and is 63 considered to have been only "marginally acceptable". Finally, both proposals Two and Five, the second collective parking scheme, and the rezoning plan respectively, each involved only a single element of community development, and both were obviously "unacceptable" to the people they were to affect. The most frequently recurring elements were: 1. Initiation of the idea; apparent in five out of five proposals, 2. Involvement of others; apparent in three of the five proposals, 3. Formation of a preliminary group; also apparent in three of the five proposals. Any project, regardless of its type, must be initiated by someone. It is interesting to note that both the "highly acceptable" proposals were initiated by members of the community involved, and that both the "unacceptable" proposals were initiated by the Planning Department; i.e. from outside the community. The "marginally acceptable" proposal for Chinatown, although initiated by the planners, was intended to solicit citizen participation and to stimulate action by members of the community. Elements coincident in two proposals were: 1. Preliminary study of the situation, 2. Establishing of goals and objectives, 3. Legitimation of goals and objectives, U. Research operations conducted so that a l l citizens can see tangible results, 5. Administration of research and project committee operations. Each of these five elements was evidenced in the two "highly-acceptable " proposals. Legitimation of the idea initiated, and formation of an organizational structure, were found to have occurred only once in the five proposals analysed. Both occurred during the planning and implementation of the "highly acceptable" collective parking scheme. Of a l l the elements composing Sehnert's functional frame-work for the community development process, ten were identified at one time or another in the analysis of the case studies. The five which were not found were: 1. Training elected and appointed leaders in administrative skills, 2. Evaluation of the evolution and progress of the process, 3. Expansion of the process in the community, U. Final consultation, 5. Follow up. The last four elements listed above constitute the continuation period in a community development program. The lack of these five elements in the usual planning process is not surprising. Seldom are the planners concerned with the administrative skills of community leaders. It may be argued, however, that a deficiency of administrative skills on the part of community leaders might ultimately become a matter of concern to the planners, when they are faced with a variety of unresolved intra-community conflicts. Each of the five undetected elements are highly characteristic of community development programs, and one would not normally expect to find them being utilized in the usual planning process, where education of the citizens, and continuity of the process are relegated to a position of minimum attention and concern. CHAPTER V COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN THE PLANNING PROCESS: A CRITICAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Following a critical evaluation of the preceeding investi-gation, additional evidence is introduced in this chapter regarding the validity of the hypothesis and comments on the respective roles of planners, politicians and people, are made. Emphasis is given to the fact that planning in a democratic society can occur only within the limits of the process of political action. Briefly, few indications are given as to the role of the planner and others in making community development work. This particular section is intended to supplement the more detailed discussion about community development and the planning process presented in Chapter Two. After some general comments on financing the community development process, the thesis is concluded with a few suggestions for further study. I. A CRITICAL EVALUATION Assessing the Degree of Public Acceptance of Local Government  Planning Proposals Although some strictly objective means of assessing the degree of public acceptance of a planning proposal may have enhanced the scientific nature of the investigation, i t must be recognized that not a l l phenomena lend themselves to absolute measurement, "Public acceptance" is a case in point, and Proposal Four, " A Scheme to Revitalize Chinatown" supports this contention, being fraught as i t i s , with a myriad of complex underlying factors. The opinion poll, which concluded that ninety per cent of the community favoured the proposal, is an objective measuring device. It could not account, however, for the sociological and demographic problems inherent in the community; the fact that most merchants lease their properties from ethnic associa-tions and are not interested in spending money to improve what they do not own; the fact that most of these merchants are elderly, and their children lack interest in Chinatown, considering them-selves more a part of the larger Canadian community; or the fact that those younger persons who might be interested in the future of the area have no say in the matter as Chinese family customs recognize the oldest male as head of the household. So, the objectiveness of the opinion poll is of l i t t l e benefit, and may actually be misleading. Consideration of these factors, plus the rapid dissipation of i n i t i a l community interest and enthusiasm, was instrumental in classifying the Chinatown scheme as "marginally acceptable" even though the only available substantative evidence indicated otherwise. In the analysis of the two collective parking proposals, the number of signatures appearing on the required petitions provided objective evidence in the f i r s t case, to support how 68 highly acceptable the proposal was, and in the second case, where no one signed, to indicate how unacceptable i t was. Again, under-lying factors belie the true situation. Proponents of the f i r s t proposal ceased collecting names when the minimum requirements were met, as they had become involved in numerous problems of absentee ownership, one of which was created by a landlord in India. The merchants were unanimously in favour of the proposal, but owners' signatures were required. The question remains as to which group is most directly affected by the scheme. Lack of support for the second parking scheme cannot be attributed solely to the manner in which i t evolved, or to its technical merit. Rather, the "wait and see" attitude adopted by some merchants might well have eclipsed the presence of a more favourable attitude, prior to the rumour of major development in the area. Again, the use of a strictly objective measurement could be misleading. Apparently, each proposal must be considered within its unique over-all situation, and as many influencing factors as possible must be taken into account. Under such a variety of circumstances i t seems doubtful that any one means of measuring how publicly acceptable a planning proposal i s , could have universal application. The classification of each of the five proposals analysed in Chapter Four was based upon both subjective and objective evidence. It appears that such an approach is not only desirable, but necessary. Identifying Elements of Community Development As mentioned previously, i t soon became evident that files from the planning department did not wholly represent the total planning process. Considerably more information than anticipated had to be obtained from persons who were directly involved in the proposals. One planner attributed this difficulty to the peculiari-ties of the particular f i l i n g system. In reviewing the proposed change in zoning, a number of gaps in the specific f i l e had to be bridged by gathering information from a second f i l e which dealt with the area in general, not the specific project. The interviews conducted proved to be even more criti c a l in identifying elements of community development, than some of the files that were used. Interviews also provided the sole source of information regarding unrecorded factors and influences which affected the proposals in one way or another. In order to recognize elements of the community development process, the investigator must be familiar with their nature. His interpretation of case study materials will be dependent upon his prior knowledge of the community development process. As previously mentioned, each case is unique and must be studied within its over-a l l situation. Although the complexity of the task increases with the number of available sources, the accuracy and validity of interpretation increases concomitantly. 70 Limitations in the Scale of Suitable Proposals From the start, i t was intended to restrict the selection of case studies to individual planning projects. During the course of the investigation, an urban renewal scheme was considered as a possible case study, but was found to be a program, consisting of a number of projects, not simply a single project. It soon became evident that such a complex planning program does not lend itself to the same type of analysis as performed on the other five proposals. This does not mean, however, that community development techniques are not suitable for more extensive planning programs. Rather, i t is a result of limitations in time and resources for conducting this particular investigation. Conclusions The study would have been more conclusive had a larger number of planning proposals been selected and analysed. Because of the high number of unique extraneous factors, and variations in the amount of information available in different planning project fil e s , the investigation could not have been improved by the use of questionaires or formal interview schedules. Under the circum-stances, the method used was the most accurate possible but required close scrutiny of recorded data and numerous, rather lengthy interviews. Based solely upon observations derived from the analysis of the five selected planning proposals, as summarized in Table II, page 61, i t appears that the hypothesis developed in Chapter Three 71 is valid, that is to say: the degree of public acceptance of local government planning proposals does vary directly with the extent to which elements of community development are utilized in the planning process. This does not infer that the degree of public acceptance of a planning proposal is entirely dependent upon the utilization of community development techniques, but that the use of elements of community development in the evolution of planning proposals will result in a higher degree of public acceptance of those proposals. This conclusion strongly supports the line of reasoning presented in the introductory chapters. It follows therefore that the concept of community development should be explicitly integrated as a technique in the planning process, i f the advantages to be gained through active citizen participation are desired. II. RECOMMENDATIONS Regarding the Validity of Community Development in Urban Planning The desirability of active citizen participation in the planning process was established in Chapter One, and i t was suggested in the following Chapter that community development is a technique to ensure such participation. The analysis of the case studies suggests that the greater number of elements of community development that there are in evidence, the more accept-able a planning proposal is likely to be, to the people i t is to affect. Additional confirmation, as to the validity of the principles and practices of community development in improvement schemes in urban areas, can be found in the comments of the Baltimore Urban Renewal Study Board, some of which are quoted in the f i r s t Chapter. An article in the Community Development Review, entitled "Community Development in Urban Areas", summarizes the Board's conclusions regarding citizen participation, in the following manner. The Board studied a wide range of activities involved in urban renewal programs and concluded that effective urban renewal cannot be imposed upon communities, but must grow out of felt needs and desires. It was stated that the desire for community improvement can be fostered by neighbourhood groups, encouraged by professional community organization advice, and assisted by the concrete willing-ness of municipal government to aid community improvement activities. If individual citizens and neighbourhood and city-wide groups are to support urban renewal and devote their efforts to i t , the program must reflect their wishes. Community leadership must participate actively in the establishment and development of plans.27 The explicit integration of a community development program with the planning process is the best way to f u l f i l l the above require-ments when planning for the improvement of urban areas. In a study of over seven hundred communities, Edward Lindemann found that the ultimate success of a project is not 28 affected by the manner in which consciousness of need originates. In small articulated communities, the consciousness of need, or 27H.V. Williams, "Community Development in Urban Areas", Community Development Review, June 1957, p. 3 . 2^Edward Lindemann, The Community, pp. 12l|-125>. awareness of a problem may arise spontaneously, and lead into the initiation of community development. In complex communities, however, such awareness may originate through internal or external professional, institutional leadership. This notion is supported by P.G. Stensland who feels that in a great many cases, outside agencies and experts can begin "doing something to a community", and that such action may provide a natural starting point for self-help activities. Stensland points out quite correctly, that community development does not take place unless the externally planned and organized program of action is combined from the start with an educational program, the goals of which are understanding, involvement, and evaluation on the part of the affected people.^ Lindemann in turn, supports Stensland by concluding that: The manner in which the project proceeds, after i t has once been started is intimately related to the theory of Democracy, and is highly important in so far as ultimate success is concerned.31 The integration of community development and planning as suggested in Chapter Two, is further clarified below. The respective roles of the politician, planner, consultant and citizen are suggested f i r s t in isolation, then for each of the fourteen steps in the community development process. Some 2?P.G. Stensland, "Urban Community Development", Community  Development Review, June 1 9 5 8 , P. 3 U . 3°lbid. 3lLindemann, op. cit., p. 125 general consideration is given also to possible methods of financing such programs. Regarding People, Politicians and Professionals Planning is a political function, and the urban planner must function within the political framework of his community. At no time should the planner assume the role of the politician. The planner and the politician, however, have much in common since both are obligated to the community at large: the people. Other professionals such as sociologists and engineers who work as consultants with the planners assume the same responsibilities and obligations. In carrying out a program of community development, the professional experts will be required to act at the grass-roots level on numerous occasions. This must be done either through, or in conjunction with the elected representatives of the people. In cities which have a ward, or other geographical system of representa-tion, the "proper" representative for a specific program will be obvious. Where councillors are elected at large, a sympathetic or implicated ear must be sought. Traditionally, those who hold the reins of government must be involved prior to i n i t i a l contact with the citizens. Therefore i t may be necessary f i r s t to enlighten the politicians about the advantages and methods of community development. But this is possible only i f each professional is himself totally familiar with the community develop-ment process. The educational aspects of community development 75 commence at the professional level, not at the grass-roots. Throughout the community development process, the planners and their consultants will be required to play a number of roles. Daland and Parker postulate that the planner has four component roles under the usual circumstances. As an institutional leader, the planner f u l f i l l s the maintenance needs of his planning agency. As a professional planner, he is concerned with the technical activities of research, analysis and design, which ultimately produce "plans". The planner is also a political innovator, involved in persuasion, strategy, and timing, to gain acceptance of his proposals by persons in the community. His fourth role, is that of an educator, in attempting to inform the public of the consequences, and potentialities of planning per se, and of specific planning proposals*^ In the process of community development the planner is required to play a l l these roles, with somewhat more emphasis than usual, on the educational aspect. Murray Ross points to four approaches which professional workers may be required to take in community organization. He states that the primary role of the professional in community organization is that of a guide who helps the community establish, and find means of achieving, its own goals. As a guide, the professional worker need not operate as a passive follower, but ^Robert T. Daland and John A. Parker, "Roles of the Planner in Urban Development", Urban Growth Dynamics in a Regional Cluster of Cities, F.S. Chapin and S.F. Weiss, editors, pp. 190-196. may even take the initiative at any number of points in approaching a community that has not asked for help. In his role as an enabler, the professional worker acts as a catalyst by facilitating some process of organization in the community. He focuses thought on problems which seem to be shared throughout the community, and helps people see the nature of their discontent, and the difficultie involved in overcoming them. Ross points out that this role is as varied and complex as each situation the professional faces. Functioning as a social therapist, the professional helps the people to diagnose and understand the nature and character of their community. He must involve the community in a process which, through self-understanding, relieves tension and removes obstacles to co-operative work. Finally, the professional works with the community as an expert, providing information and direct advice in areas about which he may speak with authority.33 Planners, community consultants, engineers and others a l l play their respective parts as experts. In a program of community development, the planner may be required to assume a l l or any of these approaches to community problems. Although many of his consultants will be professionals, most will be laymen. Although his roles will be many, they must exclude that of "politician" i f the process is to conform to the political system of his community. 33Murray G. Ross, Community Organization, Theory and Principles, pp. 200-228. 77 Towards Making Community Development Work Initially, small projects should be selected whose products and problems are not complex. Citizens must be shown how and why to participate in the planning process before major projects are attempted which might ordinarily be beyond their grasp. But, to assume them too naive to understand is to insult their intelligence. Care must be taken to see that this does not happen. Initiation of the Problem or Idea. The planner, politician, consultant, or citizen may assume the role of innovator. An awareness of the problem may be spread by communication with local leaders i n clubs and organizations. The planner or politician may approach key citizens directly in order to share their concern about the matter. The community consultant may resort to more subtle techniques, particularly i f he is familiar with the power structure of the district, and by being in the right places at the right times may start the process on its way. The Involvement of Others. Meetings of representatives from various community organizations should be called, perhaps by the politician, particularly i f he is popular in the area, or by the planning agency. If a community development consultant is being employed at this stage, he will likely encourage f i r s t persons who are interested to organize their own gathering to promote interest in the idea or problem identified. Legitimation of the Idea. This step follows as a result of the previous one. Having obtained access to various groups in the community, time must be allowed for the idea to take root throughout that area. If further contact seems necessary with opposing groups, the planners and politicians should shoulder the responsibility of seeing their innovation through. The Formation of a Preliminary Group. Both elected representatives and professionals should encourage the community ' to form a committee to initiate the community development process. Selection of the committee or "initiating set" should be left to the community, but the professionals should be ready with advice as to what skills and talents are required. People used to leader-ship roles are preferable, but outside professionals should not be part of the initiating set. Preliminary Study of the Present Situation. In helping the people to understand their community, the planner plays the role of technical expert, social therapist and educator. Techniques of carrying out various studies to arrive at an understanding of their environment may be passed on from the planner to the people. The planner advises, explains and guides. The initiating set co-ordinates and organizes. The citizens do the work in conjunction with the professional resources. Establishing Goals and Objectives of the Process, and the  Formation of an Organizational Structure to Co-ordinate the Process. Both these steps must involve as much citizen participation as possible. As an expert, and an educator the planner may advise the citizens on the ramifications of alternative goals and courses of action. The goals must stem from the needs and values of the community, not from the professionals. Similarly, the organiza-tional structure must be chosen, not imposed. It must meet the needs of the specific situation, hot of bureaucratic expediency. The preferred organizational structure will depend upon the goals and objectives set out by the community and will vary from situation to situation. His usual role as an administrator will aid the planner in advising upon this crucial step. Community-wide meetings, well-publicized through direct and indirect methods of communications, should be held during these two stages in an attempt to involve as many people as possible in the process. Such meetings provide an opportunity for further review and evaluation of the process to date, and can be used to introduce other civic officials who may be involved in some aspect of the proposed course of action. The Training of Elected and Appointed Leaders in Necessary  Administrative Skills. This step, as detailed in Chapter Two, is characteristic of the community development process. Unless the planning staff is skilled in methods of adult education, i t is advisable to solicit the services of adult education specialists to handle the training of the community organization. While the training sessions are being conducted, the politicians and professionals must see to i t that public interest in the process is not allowed to lag. This element concludes the fi r s t five time periods in a process of community development. In terms of the planning process, problems have been identified and goals formu-lated. To facilitate explanation, the remaining six elements of community development are considered in their respective time periods• The Operational Period. The two elements constituting this period require the planner to act as an-expert in conducting research operations, and as an institutional leader in helping community leaders to administer the operations of the research and project committees. His talents as a technical expert will probably have to be somewhat subordinated to ensure that the ongoing research operations are conducted in such a manner that a l l concerned can see tangible results. Professional impatience must yield to the slower vehicle of democratic participation i f the process is to have meaning for the citizens. During the operational period, the trained citizens become the technical assistants of the professionals, and at the same time, the professionals act as consultants to the citizens. During this period, the politicians involved can pave the way through council for the implementation of the scheme, should i t require either their vote of approval or the passing of enabling legislation. In stating his case, the political representative knows that he is supported by a united front. The Continuation Period. Throughout this period everyone involved in the community development process should participate in evaluating what has been accomplished, as well as the methods used. Both the planning process and the community development process are reorientated towards new horizons. The organized community, aware of its resources and limitations can be expected to tackle new projects. The planners and other professionals will know their job is completed when the people say "we did i t ourselves". Here, is the li f e principle of democratic planning. On Financing Community Development The major difficulty in utilizing community development as a technique in the planning process, will be one of financing. Obviously, funds will have to be allocated, or perhaps re-allocated to cover the costs incurred throughout the process. The incorpora-tion of community development will require not only budgeting at the municipal level, but fund-raising at the community level as well. At the community level, direct expenses will not be large at f i r s t . Many essential items will be provided by the people themselves. Meeting rooms, mimeographing of information, clerical supplies, and secretarial services may well be provided in f u l l or in part in this manner. There will, however, be a need for funds to cover outlays, such as postage, printing, hall rentals, refreshments and miscellaneous supplies to be used by the community organization. In some larger American cities, where some type of citizen participation is a requirement for workable urban renewal projects, funds have been raised by subscriptions from business and institutions. Other possible sources are the levying of annual dues on people involved, or the soliciting of contributions instead. Social events such as carnivals and card parties have proven successful for other purposes, and should be considered. Local and provincial governments might be approached, but should not be depended upon at f i r s t , as they might be contributing at a higher level. At the municipal level, an argument can be made that i t pays to spend a dollar now, to save two in the future. It has been illustrated how community development acts to create more acceptable planning proposals. In many cases, a considerable amount of staff time and taxpayers' dollars are spent "selling" a proposal after i t is completed, and inevitably, making altera-tions to suit the needs of the community. It is preferable that time time and money be spent in the beginning to ensure acceptable schemes the f i r s t time. Planners should not be assigned to community development projects on a part-time basis. They should be allowed continuous contact with the community. One morning a week in contact with the people, as is the present practice in Vancouver's urban renewal program, is not sufficient. At least one professional planner should be retained f u l l time as a community consultant. Other professionals can work through him, as required, on a consultative basis. In short, the money usually spent in "selling" a proposal would be better invested in educating the people who are to be affected by that proposal. III. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY From an academic point of view, i t would be interesting to extend the testing of the hypothesis to a number of other urban centres in order to determine whether or not the results obtained in Vancouver would be duplicated elsewhere. The conclusions based upon data gathered from separate municipalities could be synthesized to arrive at a general statement regarding the universal validity of the hypothesis. Having used the findings of the Baltimore Urban Renewal Study Board as supporting evidence in presenting the case for citizen participation, and subsequently, as further support for the hypothesis, i t would be most valuable to assess Baltimore's experience since 19!?6, and to try to establish the extent to which elements of community development have actually been explicitly utilized in their planning process. From Baltimore's experience, other cities might learn the advantages and limitations of such procedures. Planning is action orientated. Its goals are not to "make plans" and expound theoretical principles, but to resolve problems through the application of sound principles. The only true test for the hypothesis is to attempt to apply a community development program in conjunction with the planning process, and compare its products in terms of public acceptance, co-operative good will, and ultimate success, with those of a similar control project developed and implemented in the usual manner, over the same period of time. Functioning within the political system of a democratic society, planners and other officials who execute the planning process should be concerned with more than the social consequences of planned technological and physical change. Ideally, their concern should be oriented towards planned technological and physical change as a consequence of social action. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS Batten, T.R. Communities and Their Development. London: Oxford University Press, 1957* Chapin, F.S. and Weiss, S.F. (ed.). Urban Growth Dynamics i n a Regional Cluster of C i t i e s . New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1952: de Tocqueville, A l e x i s . Democracy i n America. Henry Reeve text revised by P h i l l i p s Bradley, New York: Kropf, I9I4.8. Du Sautoy, Peter. The Organization of a Community Development  Programme. London: Oxford University Press, 1962. Farrington, Frank. Community Development: Making the Small Town a Better Place to Live In and a Better Place In Which to  Do Business. New York: Ronald Press Co., Foster, G.M. Traditional Cultures and the Impact of Technological  Change. New York: Harper and Bros., 19o2. Goodenough, W.H . Cooperation i n Change; An Anthropological  Approach to Community Development. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1963. Hayes, W.J. The Small Community Looks Ahead. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 19U7. Hillman, Arthur. Community Organization and Planning. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1957. Hirsch, Werner Z. (ed.). Urban L i f e and Form. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc., 1963. Kent, T.J. The Urban General Plan. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 196k. L i l i e n t h a l , David E. T.V.A., Democracy on the March. New York: Harper and Row, 1953. Lindemann, Edward. The Community. New York: Association Press, 1921. L i p p i t t , R. et a l . The Dynamics of Planned Change. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 193>S\ 86 Loring, CL. et al. Community Organization for Citizen Participation in Urban Renewal. Housing Association of Metropolitan Boston, Inc., Cambridge: The Cambridge Press, Inc., 1957. Merriam, CE. On the Agenda of Democracy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 191*1. Nelson, L. et al. Community Structure and Change. New York: Macmillan Company, 1962. Ogden, Jesse. These Things We Tried. Charlottesville, Virginia: University of Virginia Extension Division, 19^7. Roupp, Phillips, (ed.). Approaches to Community Development. The Hague: W. Van Hoeve Ltd., 1953^ Ross, Murray G. Community Organization Theory and Principles. New York: Harper and Brothers, 195^ • Case Histories in Community Organization. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958. B. ARTICLES IN PERIODICALS Cousins, W.J. "Community Development, Some Notes on the Why and How", Community Development Review, No. 7, December, 1957, pp. 2 U - 3 C Fitch, Lyle C. "On the Necessary Relationship Between Politics and Planning", Ekistics, Vol. 16, No. 95, October, 1963, pp. 260-261. Lock, Max. "The Missing Half of Planning", RIBA Journal, Vol. 72, No. 1, January 1965, pp. 17-21. Mayo, S. "An Approach to the Understanding of Rural Community Development", Social Forces, Vol. 37, December, 1958, pp. 95-101. Niehoff, A.H-, and Anderson, J.C. "The Progress of Cross Cultural Innovation", International Development Review, Vol. 6, No. 2, June, 1961;, pp. 5-H» Saunders, I.T. "Theories of Community Development", Community  Development Review, No. 9, June, 1958, pp. 27-39. Stensland, P.G. "Urban Community Development", Community Development  Review, No. 8, March, 1958, pp. 32-39. Taylor, CC. "Community Development Programs and Methods", Community Development Review, No. 3, December, 1956, pp. 3U-U2. Verner, Coolie. "The Community Development Process", Community  Development Review, 1962. Verner, Coolie. "Adult Education for Tomorrow's World", Adult  Education, Vol. 26, No. 1, Summer, 1953. Verner, Coolie, and Hallenbeck, W.C " Challenge to the Adult Education Association", Adult Education, April, 1952, pp. 135-lUO. Williams, H.V. "Community Development in Urban Areas", Community  Development Review, No. 5, June, 1957, pp. 1-U. C. OTHER PUBLICATIONS Agency for International Development: Community Development in Urban and Semi-Urban Areas, Washington, D.C, the Agency, 196"27 Baltimore, Urban Renewal Study Board, Report to Mayor Thomas  D'Alesandro Jr., Baltimore, Maryland, 19fjo". Boston Redevelopment Authority, Boston's Workable Program for Community Improvement, Boston, 1962. National Federation of Settlements and Neighbourhood Centres, Dynamics of Citizen Participation, New York, 1958. Sehnert, F.H. A Functional Framework for the Action Process in Community Development, (Preliminary Draft), Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois, 1962. United Nations: Community Development in Urban Areas, New York, Report by the Secretary-General, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 1961, (ST. SPAA3.E/CN.5/356/REV. l ) . D'. OTHER SOURCES The City of Vancouver, Planning Department, i;53 West 12th Avenue, Vancouver 10, B. C. The Corporation of the District of Burnaby, Planning Department, U5U5> East Grandview-Douglas Highway, Burnaby 2, B. C. The Lower Mainland'Regional Planning Board, 1+26 Columbia Street, New Westminster, B. C. 


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



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"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items