Applied Science, Faculty of
Community and Regional Planning (SCARP), School of
DSpace
UBCV
Folkes, Sharon
Master of Arts in Planning - MA (Plan)
University of British Columbia
The objective of this thesis is to analyze and evaluate the citizen participation process for the planning of Pacific Place on the north shore of False Creek in Vancouver, British Columbia. The Pacific Place development is a large-scale comprehensive development which will change the character of Vancouver over the next ten years. A literature review of citizen participation was undertaken. This identifies the basic elements of democracy and citizen participation - political equality, popular sovereignty, representation, and the public interest. The current form of representative democracy and elite decision making in society today is accepted and results in a recognition of interests and power in the decision making process. A model which accounts for these elements is selected for the analysis and evaluation of the Pacific Place citizen participation process. The Benwell model of citizen participation contains six dimensions: 1. representational - representativeness, general public, interest groups, goals and objectives of the actors; 2. citizen involvement - the participation techniques used; 3. form of communication - information dispersal, information gathering, interaction between planners and public; 4. phasing/timing - vis a vis the planning process; 5. power/influence/authority - success in meeting goals and objectives; 6. scale of decision - political context, scale of development. It is concluded that the process was representative and that the extent of the techniques was good. The process was constrained by the goals and objectives of the City and the developer, the lack of variety in techniques, the form of communication, the multi-phased planning process, the political context, and the scale of development. The power/influence/authority dimension shows that the City and developer were successful in meeting their objectives and thus wield more power. While some public and group objectives were achieved it is difficult to determine whether this was a result of the planners' influence or citizen input. Therefore power is attributed, with uncertainty, to certain groups and the general public. The Pacific Place citizen participation process, while extensive, cannot be described as truly participatory according to popular theory and analytical frameworks for citizen participation as no advisory role, influence, or decision making responsibility was guaranteed to the public. The potential of citizen participation is discussed in relation to democracy, urban development, and power. It is concluded that true participation is difficult to achieve but that some level of participation beyond informing and consulting must be promoted in order to bring planning closer to democratic values. It is recommended that the process could be improved with a variety of techniques such as workshops, better questionnaires or surveys, a citizen advisory committee, and a newspaper insert. Recommendation for theory and future research are also provided.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND THE REDEVELOPMENT OF URBAN LAND A CASE STUDY OF THE NORTH SHORE OF FALSE CREEK by S H A R O N F O L K E S B.A. Hons. Political Studies, Queen's University, 1986 A T H E S I S S U B M I T T E D IN P A R T I A L F U L F I L M E N T O F T H E R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R T H E D E G R E E O F M A S T E R S O F A R T S in T H E F A C U L T Y O F G R A D U A T E S T U D I E S T H E S C H O O L O F C O M M U N I T Y A N D R E G I O N A L P L A N N I N G We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F BR IT I SH C O L U M B I A October, 1989 © Sharon Folkes, 1989 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at The University of British Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. School of Community and Regional Planning The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V 6 T 1W5 Date: 3 October 1989 ABSTRACT The objective of this thesis is to analyze and evaluate the citizen participation process for the planning of Pacific Place on the north shore of False Creek in Vancouver, British Columbia. The Pacific Place development is a large-scale comprehensive development which will change the character of Vancouver over the next ten years. A literature review of citizen participation was undertaken. This identifies the basic elements of democracy and citizen participation - political equality, popular sovereignty, representation, and the public interest. The current form of representative democracy and elite decision making in society today is accepted and results in a recognition of interests and power in the decision making process. A model which accounts for these elements is selected for the analysis and evaluation of the Pacific Place citizen participation process. The Benwell model of citizen participation contains six dimensions: 1. representational - representativeness, general public, interest groups, goals and objectives of the actors; 2. citizen involvement - the participation techniques used; 3. form of communication - information dispersal, information gathering, interaction between planners and public; 4. phasing/timing - vis a vis the planning process; 5. power/influence/authority - success in meeting goals and objectives; 6. scale of decision - political context, scale of development. ABSTRACT It is concluded that the process was representative and that the extent of the techniques was good. The process was constrained by the goals and objectives of the City and the developer, the lack of variety in techniques, the form of communication, the multi-phased planning process, the political context, and the scale of development. The power/influence/authority dimension shows that the City and developer were successful in meeting their objectives and thus wield more power. While some public and group objectives were achieved it is difficult to determine whether this was a result of the planners' influence or citizen input. Therefore power is attributed, with uncertainty, to certain groups and the general public. The Pacific Place citizen participation process, while extensive, cannot be described as truly participatory according to popular theory and analytical frameworks for citizen participation as no advisory role, influence, or decision making responsibility was guaranteed to the public. The potential of citizen participation is discussed in relation to democracy, urban development, and power. It is concluded that true participation is difficult to achieve but that some level of participation beyond informing and consulting must be promoted in order to bring planning closer to democratic values. It is recommended that the process could be improved with a variety of techniques such as workshops, better questionnaires or surveys, a citizen advisory committee, and a newspaper insert. Recommendation for theory and future research are also provided. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ii Table of Contents '. • iv List of Tables vi List of Figures vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT viii I - INTRODUCTION 1 THE NORTH SHORE OF FALSE CREEK 1 THIS THESIS 2 WHY CITIZEN PARTICIPATION? 4 SCOPE OF THE THESIS 5 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS 7 DEFINITION OF TERMS 9 II - HISTORY OF THE SITE 11 EARLY HISTORY 11 THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT AND FALSE CREEK 12 THE CITY OF VANCOUVER AND FALSE CREEK 15 III - THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 20 INTRODUCTION 20 DEMOCRACY AND CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 20 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION, INTERESTS, AND POWER 25 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND THE PLANNING PROCESS 30 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION - DEFINITIONS AND MEANS , 33 THE DEVELOPMENT OF MODELS 37 IV - THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 41 INTRODUCTION 41 FRAMEWORKS FOR THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 44 CONCLUSION 58 V - THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS 61 INTRODUCTION 61 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND THE CITY OF VANCOUVER 61 THE FALSE CREEK POLICY BROADSHEETS 62 THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS 64 THE METHODS DESCRIBED 69 THE MEETINGS DESCRIBED 73 CONCLUSION 84 iv Table of Contents VI - ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS 85 INTRODUCTION 85 THE REPRESENTATIONAL (STRUCTURE) DIMENSION 86 THE CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT DIMENSION 91 THE FORM OF COMMUNICATION DIMENSION 97 THE TIMING/PHASING DIMENSION 100 THE POWER/INFLUENCE/AUTHORITY DIMENSION 104 THE SCALE OF DECISION DIMENSION I l l VII - CONCLUSION 115 URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 115 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND DEMOCRACY 116 THE PACIFIC PLACE EXPERIENCE 118 THE RECOGNITION OF POWER 121 FINDINGS 123 BIBLIOGRAPHY 124 LIST OF MEETINGS 130 v LIST OF TABLES TABLE I - EVALUATION FRAMEWORKS 43 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 - FALSE CREEK 18 FIGURE 2 - PACIFIC PLACE , 19 FIGURE 3 - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT SCHEDULE 67 vii A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T I would like to thank my advisor, B rahm Wiesman, for his guidance and support while I undertook the challenge of writing this thesis. I would also like to thank Henry Hightower for the time he took to read and comment on my prospectus and numerous drafts. Many thanks to Jul ia Gardener and J im LeMaistre, the other members of my defense committee, for their comments and ideas. Coralys Cuthbert of the False Creek Planning Group was very helpful and provided a lot of information. Concord Pacific Developments Ltd. also provided a lot of resource material for which I am grateful. viii I - I N T R O D U C T I O N THE NORTH SHORE OF FALSE CREEK The north shore of False Creek in Vancouver is one of the most spectacular waterfront, sites in North America. It totals 204 acres, comprises one sixth the area of the downtown Vancouver peninsula, and has been subject to numerous development proposals over the last twenty years. Most recently, the land was owned by the Province of British Columbia which set up a crown corporation, the B.C. Place Corporation, to manage the site. One of the most recent proposals covering part of the site was the North Park plan; the result of a co-operative Provincial and City planning process during the early 1980's. In 1986 the Province hosted Expo 86, an international transportation and communications expositon which temporarily transformed the north shore location into a spectacular public festival site. After Expo the Provincial government suddenly abandoned the North Park plan and decided to sell the whole site to a private developer. A proposal call was announced and, amidst much controversy, the site was sold to a single, off-shore developer, L i Ka-shing, and his development company, Concord Pacific. The developer, Concord Pacific, presented an elaborate proposal for its development called Pacific Place. The City of Vancouver set out its policy for the site under seventeen major headings in a report called the False Creek Policy Broadsheets. The False Creek Planning Group (under the direction 1 I N T R O D U C T I O N of the City of Vancouver Planning Department) and Concord Pacific then began discussions for zoning and development approval. The planning process was set in motion. The site is scheduled for an overall rezoning in November, 1989. Subsequent area development plans will be approved separately. The original North Park parcel was rezoned separately as a test rezoning and is called the International Village. The citizen participation program, concurrent with this process, was organized by the Planning Department. Thus far, it has been a lengthy and intensive process involving numerous public meetings and generating some controversy. The enormous scale of the development ensures that it is a newsmaker. There is no doubt that it will change the face of Vancouver. While the process is far from complete this study will describe and evaluate the events which have occurred to date in order to analyze and evaluate citizen participation from a broader perspective. THIS THESIS How does the Pacific Place citizen participation process fare when evaluated and analyzed by popular frameworks of citizen participation? What level of citizen participation was achieved and was it adequate? D id the process allow for participation by a representative public? How effective was citizen input in contributing to the planning and form of the development? Was citizen participation influenced by factors external to the planning process? 2 I N T R O D U C T I O N The objective of this thesis is to describe and analyze the citizen participation process in the planning and development approval process for the north shore of False Creek. M y analysis will emphasize that the participation process was constrained by the political and economic interests inherent in the decision making structures and processes for planning the site. The land use planning process is influenced by urban development interests through our political decision makers. While the stated objective of the City and the developer for citizen participation was public input into the planning process, there is no doubt that another objective included public acceptance of the proposal. The effectiveness of citizen participation is a function of the system in which it must operate. A number of questions must be answered in order to approach this anaylsis properly. Why should citizen participation be promoted in the planning of large urban sites? How does it contribute to the planning and development of these sites? What criteria do we select in evaluating a citizen participation process? What institutional structures and decision making processes are necessary for citizen participation? How do we improve a citizen participation process which is lacking? A basic assumption in this thesis is that planning must provide some opportunity for citizen participation. Planning is a public process which should meet basic democratic expectations. A n effective planning process provides for public input at key points in the process. Another assumption is that major urban land redevelopment, particularly a project such as the north shore of False Creek, provides an opportunity to serve diverse 3 I N T R O D U C T I O N community needs. This is possible within the present urban development structure when government is willing to control development in accordance with the interests of the public. A well-organized citizen participation process will identify these interests. For comparison, it can be argued that the development of the south shore of False Creek provides an obvious example of a successful process serving the public equitably. This was accomplished with extensive citizen participation. A basic ideological assumption is also accepted. The Provincial Government and the City of Vancouver are guided by a belief which limits public sector land development. The role of government is to support private sector activity. This constrains the planning and citizen participation process in urban redevelopment. WHY CITIZEN PARTICIPATION? The analysis of the current citizen participation process provides two opportunities. First, it is a practical opportunity to provide suggestions for improving future planning for the site. Second, it contributes to planning knowledge which is helpful in the development of the discipline. Much work has been done in the field of citizen participation, particularly as it relates to planning. But while we can devote much time to implementing a citizen participation process we should not ignore the importance of evaluating this process. 4 I N T R O D U C T I O N This thesis has practical application in critiquing a current citizen participation process and providing suggestions for improvement. It contributes to our knowledge of the planning process. It also contributes to our knowledge of citizen participation as it relates to planning. Planners are constantly challenged by the dilemma of making decisions about the future. The extremes are to entrust the planner to make the decisions or to rely on the public. By evaluating citizen participation a contribution can be made to future programs employing improved techniques and levels of participation. SCOPE OF THE THESIS The scope of this thesis is limited to citizen participation and planning for the north shore of False Creek from the sale of the site in Apr i l , 1988 to October, 1989 when the Official Development Plan (ODP) was ready for approval. The thesis will focus on the citizen participation process for planning the development and not related issues such as ownership, developer selection, provincial/municipal relations, and foreign investment, although it must be emphasized that these issues have determined the form of the planning process and, in turn, the citizen participation process. Reference will therefore be made to these issues when relevant. The planning process for the Pacific Place development is at issue in this thesis. A well accepted model of the planning process requires that goals and objectives be set, alternatives be developed and evaluated, and that an option be selected and implemented. 5 INTRODUCTION The planning process for Pacific Place followed a revised model to suit the scale of the development. There are two aspects to this issue of process: one option was presented for public appraisal rather than a selection of alternatives, and, the planning process was multi-phased to allow for overall and area development plans. This issue of "planning process" raises serious concerns about the actual influence of citizen participation. The public may have believed it was not worth the time or effort to participate in a future which appeared to be decided and a process which was confusing. The planning process is influenced by many different interests which requires that the analyst recognize the distribution of power. The goals and objectives of each actor and the distribution of power will vary in the planning process. The actors identified in this case include the City of Vancouver planners, the developer, the politicians, interest groups, and the general public. Goals and objectives will also differ depending on whether they are defined by the process or product (outcome) of citizen participation. Different goals and objectives imply different approaches to evaluation of the citizen participation process. One interest may consider participation a success according to its objectives of process while another, using product objectives, may consider it a failure. The analyst must link actors, objectives, and the resulting process and product of citizen participation to isolate the issue of power. Success in meeting the objectives of actors will be emphasized as one approach to the evaluation of participation in this thesis. 6 INTRODUCTION The analysis of citizen participation in planning also requires a political context. Citizen participation is influenced by the current political and economic situation; events which may seem unrelated to planning and citizen participation can, in fact, determine the outcome of the process. A plausible analysis of urban planning should start by rejecting even the possibility of carving out an area of activity and trying to analyze it in isolation from the overall social/historical context in which it occurs. Unless . the analysis embraces the totality of society, we are doomed to produce distortions and invalid views. We will explain little. (Roweis, p. 160) ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS Chapter II provides a brief historical description of the site and the present state of planning for the Pacific Place development. Chapter III includes a discussion of citizen participation theory and presents one model of citizen participation as an introduction to other evaluation frameworks. This model accounts for the process and product of participation. This model also accounts for the stages in the planning process at which participation may occur. A political context is provided which allows for variation in actors, their objectives and in levels of power distribution. As a result, participation is demonstrated to be a function of the system in which it occurs. Chapter IV describes and critiques the evaluation frameworks found in the literature review. Chapter V gives a detailed description of the citizen participation process for the Pacific Place development. The techniques are identified, including public meetings, the 7 INTRODUCTION distribution of information, 8aid other methods. The subjects covered at some of the meetings are described in order to identify the concerns of participants. Chapter VI brings together the evaluation framework and the Pacific Place citizen participation process. The analysis of citizen participation emphasizes the process and political/power context of citizen participation. The participation techniques that were used are critiqued in general. Chapter VII concludes the thesis and discusses the role of citizen participation in planning and urban development. Citizen participation is discussed in relation to basic democratic values and in terms of current decision making structures and processes. The Pacific Place participation process is discussed in relation to these concepts and recommendations are provided for the future. Sources of information included books and journal articles on citizen participation theory. Sources for the Pacific Place development included City of Vancouver Planning Department documents (including Reports to City Council and minutes from public meetings) and City Council minutes. Concord Pacific Development Ltd. also provided very thorough information on their public meetings. Newspaper clipping files at the Vancouver Public Library and the University of British Columbia Library were used although my own clippings file was more extensive. I attended most of the public meetings concerned with the development. 8 INTRODUCTION DEFINITION OF TERMS Citizen participation is the preferred term in this thesis. There are many related terms which are assumed to have a common definition. These include: public consultation, public participation, and public involvement. First, the "citizen" is emphasized because it implies the opportunity for individual activity. "Public" is more of an aggregrate term. The existence of organized interest groups which aggregrate an interest is recognized. Citizen participation assumes activity by interest groups and individual citizens. Second, the "citizen" has certain rights and obligations; there is a democratic origin to the relationship between the individual and government. Citizen participation implies activities relating to government, in this case relating to planning and urban development. "Participation" is used because it implies activity by the citizen. "Consultation"' and "involvement" are limiting terms which do not assume the right of the citizen to actually influence or make decisions. In a democratic context, "participation" is closer to political equality and popular sovereignty which are the basic elements of democracy. Reference is frequently made to goals and objectives in this thesis. It is most important that the goals and objectives of each actor be identified; in most cases these will be different. This assumption may cause difficulties for the analyst but ensures rigourous evaluation. Goals are the overall, intended result of participation. Goals might include improved planning, more democratic decision making, and changes in policy and plans. Objectives are related to more specific aspects of participation such as information 9 INTRODUCTION dissemination, the generation of alternatives, information gathering, or decision making responsibility. (Rosener, 1978, p.458) 10 II - H I S T O R Y O F T H E S I T E EARLY HISTORY In many North American cities, waterfront land is being transformed from industrial use to people-oriented multiple-use development. This is also the experience of Vancouver on False Creek and other waterfronts. The north shore of False Creek was part of an 1884 Federal Government grant to the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. The C P R used it for railyards and leased some of it to industry which valued the harbour access located around the Creek. When the CPR moved its railyards outside of the city the property was transferred in 1969 to the C P R land development subsidiary, Marathon Realty. This was the beginning of many proposals for redevelopment of the site. Ear ly proposals included a 1969 plan for a residential and marina development and a 1974 plan for a residential and commercial project. The 1974 proposal was withdrawn because Marathon could not accept a City of Vancouver policy that the development include one third low income housing through a write-down of land costs. (Gutstein, p.35) Industry continued to use the waterfront site. In 1977, the Provincial Government began studying potential uses of the site and in 1978 proposed that Marathon build a multi-purpose stadium on one section, although no 11 H I S T O R Y O F T H E S ITE immediate agreement resulted. In 1979, Premier Bill Bennett appointed a committee to select a location for the stadium in Vancouver. The Committee selected the False Creek site and the Province put together a plan for the stadium and some commercial development. With the selection of the stadium site, it was not long before the Province purchased all of the north shore property from Marathon for $30 million in cash and $30 million in property. THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT AND FALSE CREEK In January, 1980 the Provincial Government announced its sponsorship of Transpo 86, an international transportation and communication exposition to be located on the False Creek site. The Government set up the B.C. Place Corporation, a market-oriented development company, to manage the property. Construction was started on the stadium. In Apr i l , 1980 the B.C. Place Corporation and the City of Vancouver began a co-operative planning process to look at residential and commercial development for the property after Transpo 86. There was some disagreement over objectives and each authority produced its own report. The Corporation produced its "B .C . Place Concept P lan" in January, 1981. The City adopted some preliminary planning principles in February, 1981. A Citizens Advisory Committee was appointed in July, 1981 and a 12 H I S T O R Y O F T H E S I TE public consultation program was initiated as well. The City adopted the final "Development Objectives for B.C. Place" in Apr i l , 1982. The differences between the Corporation and the City were still fairly critical and in June, 1982 a joint report the "B .C . Place Issues Paper" was published detailing these differences. This paper was also the subject of several public meetings. The B.C. Place Corporation and the City of Vancouver were able to overcome their differences and the North Park plan covering 10.6 acres of the site was approved in time for Expo 86. With Expo 86 (renamed from Transpo 86), the property was temporarily transformed into a busy festival site. Visitors were given an opportunity to view a model of potential development on the site including the North Park plan. Expo 86 finished in October and in December, in an abrupt reversal of expectations, the Provincial Government announced a three month moratorium on North Park while the Government reconsidered its options. In March , 1987 the B.C. Enterprise Corporation was formed with the amalgamation of the B.C. Place Corporation and the B.C. Development Corporation. The objective of this corporation was the re-organization and sale of government land holdings. Not surprisingly, one month later, the North Park plan was abandoned and the False Creek site was put up for sale. In Apr i l , 1988 a Hong Kong developer, L i Ka-shing, and his development company Concord Pacific Development Ltd. were selected as the new owners of the site. The events 13 H I S T O R Y O F T H E S I TE leading up to the selection were secretive and conflict-ridden. Premier Bill Vander Za lm and Grace McCar thy were accused of interfering in the responsibilities of the B.C. Enterprise Corporation by promoting the interests of different prospective purchasers. Critics of the sale also argued that proposals should have been made public as the property was a valuable public asset. Some argued that public consultation should have determined whether the land should have been sold at all. The secrecy surrounding the conditions of the sale angered members of the Provincial New Democratic Party and the municipal Committee of Progressive Electors Party; who strangely found themselves aligned with the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver in criticizing the behind closed doors deal. (Vancouver Sun, March 24, 1988, p.Bl-2) Some critics argued that prospective developers should have presented their proposals at public hearings in order to get some indication of public reaction to the options. A Sun editorial argued; It's scandalous that the owners of one of North America 's choicest pieces of real estate have to rely on street rumours to learn what's happening with the sale of the property. (Vancouver Sun, March 29, 1988, p.B2) A t the community level, J im Green of the Downtown Eastside Residents Association argued that the con trovers}' was detracting from real neighbourhood concerns. It's a real threat to us. How will it affect us? What will it do to our community? That 's what our worries are. (Vancouver Sun, Apr i l 12, 1988, p.A8) 14 HISTORY OF THE SITE This concern culminated in a community meeting in late April, 1988 sponsored by COPE and local interest groups to discuss the sale of the site. It was painfully obvious that the Provincial Government had no intention of involving the City of Vancouver or its citizens in the future of the site until the property was sold. The Provincial Government ran an advertisement in the newspaper announcing the sale. Concerning public input, it stated; While the city has already established preliminary policy guidelines for this area, it is only now - with a developer in place - that the public review and decision- making process can begin. (Vancouver Sun, April 28, 1988, p.B6) With the sale of the site the planning and development approval process was revived. Concord Pacific proposed an elaborate comprehensive development called Pacific Place. There is no doubt that the earlier controversies influenced the process that resulted. THE CITY OF VANCOUVER AND FALSE CREEK When Expo 86 closed, the City of Vancouver was preparing a new set of policies for the site; updating those prepared for the North Park plan. With the Provincial Government indecision during late 1986 this did not proceed very quickly. When the Provincial Government announced that the site would be sold, the City started another review of policies for the north and south-east areas of False Creek. This review was undertaken during the Provincial selection process for a purchaser and developer of the north shore property. City Council provided opportunities for public input 15 H I S T O R Y O F T H E S ITE on its draft Policy Broadsheets but shied away from involving itself in the controversy surrounding the sale of the site. This is crucial to the analysis of citizen participation; the secrecy of the Provincial Government and the unwillingness of the City of Vancouver to interfere effectively negated any citizen participation until a private developer with a specific development proposal was selected. When the sale was completed, the City announced that it would work with the developer in the planning of Pacific Place. A co-operative planning process was organized. The City set out terms of reference for this process, in particular, the independence and objectivity of City staff in dealing with the developer. Planning staff would be accountable to City Council. "The process also included "co-operative public consultation under the auspices of the Ci ty . " (Manager's Report, June 24, 1988, p.2) It is important for the developer to understand and the public to see, that while there is a co-operative relationship, City staff remain independent, and that issues of public interest are articulated and resolved to City Council's satisfaction. (Manager's Report, June 24, 1988, p.3) It is interesting to note that the timetable for the co-operative planning process was approved in June, 1988; before the City Policy Broadsheets or the public consultation program were approved. Originally, Concord Pacific had requested Official Development Plan approval for the whole site by January, 1989 and the earlier rezoning for the International Village (formerly called the North Park site) by September, 1988. The City approved a schedule for O D P approval in July, 1989 and International Village rezoning in March , 1989. This was revised again in February, 1989. The O D P schedule was 16 H I S T O R Y O F T H E S I TE extended to October, 1989 while the International Village schedule was extended to June, 1989. The problems of scheduling planning independent of citizen participation would soon become obvious. For the purpose of this thesis, the citizen participation process did not start until the selection of a developer and the planning process was initiated. The problems with this approach will be discussed in the analysis. Before describing the citizen participation process for Pacific Place, it is important to consider theory and evaluation frameworks for citizen participation. 17 FIGURE 1 - FALSE CREEK from - City of Vancouver, Planning Department, False Creek Workbook, April, 1989. BURRARD INLET FIGURE 2 - PACIFIC PLACE I l l - THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION INTRODUCTION In order to analyze and evaluate the citizen participation process for the Pacific Place development it is necessary to have a good understanding of citizen participation theory. Citizen participation is usually discussed in relation to democratic theory, particularly the rights and obligations of citizenship. Relating citizen participation to its democratic origins will assist in the development of a framework for the analysis and evaluation of citizen participation as it occurs in the current political context. In this chapter, concepts relating citizen participation to democracy are presented. Two approaches are discussed - the classical and the comtemporary, each of which promotes different levels of participation. Interests and power are identified as major themes in the planning process and in citizen participation, leading to a discussion of the viability of citizen participation. Definitions and means of citizen participation are provided and a model is described to introduce frameworks for the evaluation of citizen participation. DEMOCRACY AND CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Democracy is based on two values: political equality and popular sovereignty. (N.M.Rosenbaum, p.43) Citizen participation is derived from both these values. Political 20 T H E O R I E S O F C I T I Z E N P A R T I C I P A T I O N equality states that all individuals should be given the opportunity to take part in the governing of society through direct decision making or influence on decision makers. In present day democracies this is achieved through representation. Popular sovereignty ensures that government is responsive to as manj ' citizen needs as possible. In most academic approaches there are two traditions of democratic theory and participation - the classical or citizen theory and the contemporary or elitist theory. The classical approach is based in the theoretical traditions of 18th century liberalism and the ideas of John Stuart Mi l l and J . J . Rousseau. The individual determines self values and goals; the sum of these in society is majority rule and is identified by participation. This is the basis for decision making and authority in society. Through political equality the full diversity of interests and values bearing on a problem can be brought into policy debate and can be incorporated into the final decision. (N.M.Rosenbaum, p.44) High levels of participation are needed to identify these interests. This approach assumes an ability and a willingness of the individual to participate. It assumes a rational and informed participant and a tolerance to defer to the decision of the majority. Participation is also seen as key to the personal development of the individual; it promotes responsibility to society. But critics of this approach, the contemporary or elite theorists such as Robert Dahl and Joseph Schumpeter, refute most of these assumptions. While the classical theory of democracy is a normative theory of what could or should be, the contemporary theory is a mixture of empirical and normative theory, it is derived from experience. 21 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (Kweit and Kweit, p.38) Evidence of participation programs prove that individuals do not participate as fully as possible. Data from large-scale empirical investigations into political attitudes and behaviour undertaken in most Western countries over the past twenty or thirty years, have revealed that the outstanding characteristic of most citizens, more especially those in the lower socio-economic status groups, is a general lack of interest in politics and political activity. (Pateman,p.3) The reality of democracy is a representative democracy in which elites control decisions and pluralism is the face of participation. Representative democracy is promoted as a more efficient process. One of the main arguments of the contemporary theorists is the destructive potential of full participation as espoused by pure democratic theory. If all citizens were to demand a place in the decision making process, no decisions would be made due to conflict and the burden of process. Elite theorists believe that the very stability of society is dependent on minimal participation. Non-participation is not an indictment of the system but a testimony to its success in satisf3'ing the interests of its polity. And far from being a threat to the system, it is a benefit since the lack of participation shields the political system from unreasonable and overwhelming demands and gives the political elite the necessary manoeuvering room to govern effectively. (Kweit and Kweit, p.21) In a representative democracy, citizens elect leaders to represent them and make decisions. Often these leaders have elite origins and represent elite interests. The theory of pluralism assumes that similar interests organize to influence decision makers. The influence of these groups is a function of status, membership, resource accessibility, subject expertise, and media attention. (Fagence, p. 154) As a result, some groups wield more power. Of course, the representativeness of these elites is also questionable and is the reason given by classical theorists who call for a return to broader participation. This is 22 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION the dilemma of representative democracy. Thus, some contemporary theorists have focussed on other elements such as representativeness and accountability. (Fagence, p.132) Representativeness ensures that, although elites control decision making, diverse interests are represented. Accountability of decision makers to society is the mechanism by which representativeness and quality of decisions is guaranteed by citizens being able to remove the representative who performs unsatisfactorily. Fagence argues that citizen participation must be considered in terms of representation and the public interest. (Fagence, p.50) First, if not all citizens can participate then institutional structures should be representative and accountable. Elected representatives should represent a cross-section of the population and represent their interests. Second, the public interest becomes a convenient concept to aggregrate interests as society will never be able to serve all interests. Defined democratically, the public interest must correspond to the common good (the basic objective of democracy). But it is difficult to define the public interest; we are forced to recognize that there are many competing interests - this is the assumption of pluralism. (Fagence, p. 73) If elites routinely monopolize interest identification, the public interest may not be defined accurately. The public interest is an abstract term which can be used to dilute discussion on issues. 23 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Fagence warns that this difficulty is routinely, and often deliberately, ignored in planning practice; In the activities of urban and regional planning, the imprecision has facilitated its use to legitimize bureaucratic or political preferences of planning strategies, of development or change of use decisions, of programming or phasing decisions, and to justify the inequities in the effect of planning proposals. (Fagence, p. 71) Kweit and Kweit define two versions of the public interest: collectivist and individualist. (Kweit and Kweit, p.45) The collectivist public interest is seen as higher than the aggregation of individual interests. Representative democracy limits participation to ensures that this public interest is paramount in decision making. The individualist version assumes that the public interest is an aggregration of individual interests and must be identified by full participation. A dilemma develops between protecting the public interest and promoting the democratic value of participation. In general terms, classical democratic theory is very much like participatory democracy assuming high levels of participation and an individualist public interest. Contemporary democratic theory is like representative democracy with limited participation and a collectivist public interest. The conflict between the approaches endures. It is argued here that representative democracy cannot function with a collectivist public interest when the reality of elites and power is recognized. The public interest is a controversial concept in planning, when mixed with the power of elites and planning it becomes more controversial. 24 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION CITIZEN PARTICIPATION, INTERESTS, AND POWER Scaff presents an interpretation of participation from two viewpoints: 1. to share in common life without regard to self-interest; 2. to gain power for individual benefit and to protect interests. (Scaff, p. 10) In the first approach, participation is seen as interaction; the individual identifies with the common interests of the community and seeks a cooperative approach to achieve social justice. The second approach is concerned with power and its distribution. Participation is seen as instrumental action. It is an activity undertaken to protect individual rights and interests. Participation is used to influence decision makers; The function of participation in the theory is a protective one; the protection of the individual from arbitrary decisions by elected leaders and the protection of his private interests. (Pateman, p. 14) Scaff s approach serves as an introduction to two other issues in participation theory: interests and power. There is no doubt that citizen participation cannot be separated from issues of interest, power and decision making. One of the most enduring studies of citizen participation is Sherry Arnstein's 1969 study. She presents a typology of participation in terms of the distribution of power from decision makers to citizen participants. These levels of participation form a ladder as follows: 1. citizen control 2. delegated power 25 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 3. partnership 4. placation 5. consultation 6. informing 7. therapy 8. manipulation. At the bottom two levels, there is no real participation, only education of citizens by the decision makers. The next two levels are token forms of participation; participants hear and are heard. Next, placation provides participants with advisory input while partnership allows participants some power in negotiating with decision makers on plans or programs. The top two levels, delegated power and citizen control, involve power redistribution and decision making responsibility resting with citizens. The significance of Arnstein's work remains in the recognition of levels of citizen participation in relation to power distribution. The emphasis on power takes account of the reality of the elitist and pluralist decision making structures in society today. Arnstein's criticism of citizen participation is its institutional and system maintaining bias. Arnstein warns the reader not to be impressed by "participation in participation". It allows the powerholders to claim that all sides were considered, but makes it possible for only some of those sides to benefit. It maintains the status quo. (Arnstein, p.216) A power and conflict approach to participation is also taken by M.J. Bruton. (1980) According to Bruton, planning and decision making are processes for the present and 26 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION future distribution of resources. This produces conflict and citizen participation is a mechanism by which this conflict is made obvious. The power of different groups is important in the distributional bargaining that takes place during planning. Bruton recognizes that elites control the planning process; his assumption of distributional bargaining in citizen participation also recognizes elites. Power can be measured by the success in meeting objectives. . Arnstein's and Bruton's power interpretation of citizen participation is important because of the reality of current decision making structures. If the elitist-pluralist view of representative democracy is reality, full participation is not possible. Power cannot be distributed equally and the public interest is subject to biased interpretation. Then, as some contemporary theorists argue, some citizen participation is necessary to provide fairness in public decision making. Citizen participation is a guarantee that many interests will be identified. The reality of many competing interests is accepted here; of concern to planning analysis is the influence of these interests on the decision outcome or plan. In citizen participation, it is crucial to identify the interests involved and the goals and objectives each actor brings to the participation process. What is important for those engaged in participation exercises is to recognize that others will be approaching the exercise with a different set of objectives." (Gutch, p.22) In the planning process, the different interests include developers, elected representatives, planners and other professionals, interest groups, and the general public. 27 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Interest groups and the general public want their needs served whether this be in housing, park space, or economic development. Planners want to promote good planning but there is also a concern to preserve bureaucratic discretion in planning. (Berry et al, p. 18) Bureaucrats often argue that if society demands effective and efficient government activity then bureaucratic discretion must be guaranteed. (Fagence, p.338) Some planners argue that high levels of citizen participation can be disruptive to an efficient process and professional planning practice. The development industry has its own interests to protect; within a competitive development market this is obviously profit-oriented. In dealing with the planning process, developers want to get approval as soon as possible in order to begin development. As with most regulatory structures, one method of dealing with bureaucratic inefficiency is to garner support from politicians who bring pressure on the planners to deal more efficiently with developers. At the same time, there is recognition that some public consultation should occur, although the main reason for its use remains; to reduce the potential of unpopular or questionable decisions, agencies frequently use citizen participation as a means of improving, justifying, and developing support for their decisions. (Langton, p.7) Because of the socio-economic structure of society and the power of elites, many theorists argue that decision making is always biased to elite interests. Citizen participation can be used to support these outcomes; "it functions to provide a cloak of legitimacy for elite decisions and hence for the system in which decisions are made." (Scaff, p.82) 28 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION If society vests responsibility for planning and decision making in professional planners and politicians and these officials are pressured by elite interests, we may question the representativeness of their activities, and in turn the democratic value of the decision making. Citizen participation then becomes a mechanism to promote interests not represented by elite decision making and interest groups. If citizen participation is to be of value in theory and practice, then a modified contemporary approach must be adopted. It must recognize elite decision making and power, but it must also recognize citizen participation as a democratic necessity in public decision making. The relevance of this discussion to citizen participation is crucial. If planning and decision making are elite processes, in which not all interests are included, then these processes become undemocratic because the common good is denied. Citizen participation is an institutional response which tries to ensure that all these interests are included. Pluralism and representative democracy are a reality and citizen participation can only improve the inequities that are characteristic of these processes. It also provides a check on bureaucratic discretion which is increasingly prevelant in our complex society. The challenge to participation theorists and practioners is to identify the appropriate level of participation. This discussion argues that the appropriate level is that level which satisfies democratic values of equality and the common good. Representative democracy may be necessary; it does not mean that elite interests should prevail. Full redistribution of decision making to citizens is not possible but participation should go beyond informing and consulting. It should include opportunities for advising 29 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION and influence in which informed, committed citizens can interact with planners and decision makers. If a realistic appraisal of citizen participation is to take place, it must be approached in a democratic context with consideration of the common good, equality, diverse interests, power, and decision outcomes. When citizen participation is not evaluated properly, its democratic origins are denied. An obvious approach to the evaluation of citizen participation with a democratic perspective is to identify the level of citizen activity and the impact of citizen input on the final plan or decision. The relation of citizen participation to democracy is of sufficient importance that citizen participation should not be analyzed as an isolated process subject to certain criteria of process and product objectives (success of meetings, design changes, etc.). It must be analyzed as part of the planning and decision making processes. Consideration of the extent of citizen participation must take place in the context of more general evaluation of the health and efficacy of democratic institutions and practices in specific situations. (Langton, p.9) CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND THE PLANNING PROCESS Citizen participation is generally heralded as an important component of the planning process; it should be evaluated as such. There are many approaches to planning 30 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION but planning theory has a generally accepted process with the following steps: 1. Task Definition 2. Goals Identification 3. Situation Appraisal 4. Possibility Generation 5. Options Packaging 6. Assessment of Options 7. Decision Making. *Process evaluation at each stage* (Boothroyd, p.32) Ideally participation should take place at each stage but there are constraints such as time and expertise which make this difficult. It is probably better to include citizens at stages in which their opinions are more valuable, where more community-minded discussion would be appropriate. These stages include: goals identification, situation appraisal, assessment of options, and decision making. Task definition, possibility generation, and options packaging are the responsibility of the professional planner. The effectiveness of citizen participation within the planning process is potentially limited by a number of constraints: structural, administrative, and political. (Berry et al., p. 7) Structural factors include the alignment and integration of the participation process with the planning process, the participation techniques, and the participants and their goals and objectives. Political factors include the level of interest group or citizen activity, the power of elites, the salience of the issue, and the legal guarantees of access to the 31 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION planning process. Administrative or bureaucratic factors include: 1. expertise - citizens may not have adequate knowledge which interferes with the expert approach of the planner; 2. routinization and regularity - citizen participation may interfere with the established process; 3. efficiency- citizen participation incurrs costs in staff time and overhead; 4. self-maintenance - planners are protective of their independence and power. (Kweit and Kweit, p.75) Citizen participation is also determined by the characteristics of the public. Citizen participants must be be motivated to participate; they must have knowledge of the issue and the ability to communicate. Thej' must have time to think about an issue and form opinions. The process of decision making is so composed of compromise and the recycling of consideration that it requires both intellectual and physical stamina of a high order on the part of any aspriring participant. (Fagence, p.130) Participants want to believe that their participation will make a difference to the plan; the commitment of time and effort must produce results; the citizen's acquired statutory right to information and consultation is of little meaning if he doubts that his involvement will have little impact on planning. (Fagence, p.346) Non-participation is often cited as proof of dis-interest but it may be a result of the above constraints. In a pluralist system interest groups assist in the aggregation of interests. Formal citizen participation programs make it easier to be involved although more radical groups may be suspicious of co-optation. Fagence argues that interest group 32 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION activity has actually diluted individual participatory activity. (Fagence, p. 196) He warns that some interest groups may have overly specialized interests and may not be representative. But interest groups do serve a valuable function as obvious lines of communication, as bargaining representatives, and as quick organizers. They also have specialized knowledge of their particular subject/area. The mass media also influences citizen participation because of its control over and interpretation of information. Although planners and politicians usually control the release of information, the media industry can be particularly ruthless if it senses public displeasure over certain issues; it often serves to feed this displeasure. There is value in media coverage because it educates the widespread public and serves as a feedback mechanism to present the results of the participation program. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION - DEFINITIONS AND MEANS Many definitions of citizen participation have been formulated. A sample are listed here. 1. purposeful activities in which citizens take part in relation to government. (Langton, p. 17) 2. any action which involves the application of an individual's discretion and which results in the determination of a policy or the committment of a decision. (Fagence, p. 129) 3. a process which includes interaction, influence on development, and learning. (Sadler, p.2) 4. a categorical term for citizen power, the redistribution of power that enables the have-not citizens presently excluded from the political and economic processes to be deliberately included in the future. (Arnstein, p. 216) 33 T H E O R I E S O F C I T I Z E N P A R T I C I P A T I O N 5. a systematic process of mutual education and co-operation that provides an opportunity for those affected, their representatives, and technical specialists to work together to create a plan. (Connor, 1985, p.I-1) 6. a process which permits citizens to partake of decision making. (Burton, p.3) These definitions communicate different objectives for participation but they all assume some activity on the part of citizens. The achievement of objectives is dependent on the techniques used. Theorists constantly emphasize that techniques must be matched to objectives. The oft-heard cry, "We can't get the citizens to participate", is all too frequently related to the fact that the participation techniques selected by public officials are inappropriate or unsuited to program objectives and the capability of citizens, so while public officials claim apathy, citizens claim inequity. (Rosener, 1977, p. 114) Judy Rosener has devised an extensive matrix of citizen participation techniques and functions (objectives). The functions include: 1. identify attitudes and opinions 2. identify impacted groups 3. solicit impacted groups 4. facilitate participation 5. clarify participation process 6. answer citizen questions 7. disseminate information 8. generate new ideas and alternatives 9. facilitate advocacy 10. promote interaction between interest groups 34 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 11. resolve conflict 12. plan, program, and policy review 13. change attitudes toward government 14. develop support/minimize opposition. (Rosener, 1977, p.116-17) Techniques can be distinguished by factors other than function: the number of participants involved, the level of issue awareness required, the impact on decisions and the representativeness. Conventional means of participation are typically: brochures, newsletters, surveys, questionnaires, public meetings, drop-ins or exhibitions, and citizen advisory committees. There are many other means available. Brochures should be easy to read, on-going, and widely distributed. Surveys and questionnaires are helpful if they identify opinions which might be missed at public meetings. The selection of questions and interpretation of responses in surveys is very important and can be subject to bias. It is almost impossible to guarantee representative quality unless a sample is selected rather than distributing questionnaires at meetings or through the mail. Public meetings are useful for informing people but they are riot always representative of the population and the process is easily dominated by organized interests or the planning authority. The traditional public meeting is the last of the blood sports and it should be outlawed. Most of the objectives which lead an agency to hold a public meeting can be accomplished more effectively by other means. (Connor, 1977, p.68) 35 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION People do not want to sit through long meetings, particularly if they are too intimidated to speak publicly. It is difficult to get real feedback in a meeting. To be effective, meetings should be held at a neutral site and be small and local in nature. Exhibitions and drop-ins are good because they facilitate one-on-one communication without a strict time constraint and without interruption. Participants can spend time looking at displays and ask questions or make comments to staff. The drop-in house should be in an accessible location, preferably a location that is well-used or a busy pedestrian area. Citizen advisory committees are usually just advisory and provide minimal representation. They should not be the only form of citizen participation. But citizen representatives, if articulate and well known in the community, can serve as contact persons and ensure that diverse community interests are considered. The committee focusses on the issue at hand and not other issues as is the case with permanent citizen commissions. Other participation techniques are available which involve higher levels of citizen activity; these include group process techniques such as workshops. These techniques require a commitment of faith and time by the authority and are not often used for these reasons. The future may bring techniques which use advanced communication technology such as computers (referenda) and interactive television. 36 THE DEVELOPMENT OF MODELS THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION In the discipline of planning there are many planning theories each making different assumptions about society and decision making. A similar situation has developed in citizen participation theory. The democratic origin of citizen participation, placed in our current representative/bureaucratic form of democracy, has resulted in different interprations of citizen participation. Two major approaches assume opposing purposes for citizen participation: administrative and citizen. (Glass, p. 181) The administrative perspective assumes that participation should be used to improve support for planning, it contributes to the needs of administration. The citizen perspective views participation as contributing to participatory democracy to include citizens in planning and to improve the quality of plans. Models have been developed using each perspective as a starting point. These models look at the component parts of citizen participation in order to evaluate and analyze the participation process. It is argued here that the basic elements of democracy, in their revised representative form, must be used in discussing citizen participation models. The higher purpose of participation is its democratic purposes, administrative purposes should be considered secondary. Because of its democratic, rather than administrative, bias the citizen perspective becomes the only acceptable perspective for developing models of citizen participation. Thus, the common good, political equality, and popular sovereignty must be achieved with representativeness and the recognition of diverse interests. The distribution of power is 37 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION assumed to be a crucial factor in representative democracy because of the presence of elites in decision making, it should be explicitly identified in citizen participation. Citizen participation can be viewed as more than a process of techniques and a product, it is influenced by the system in which it occurs. Process, product, power, and context become identifiable elements in citizen participation models. An interesting model was developed by Mary Benwell in a study of structure planning in the United Kingdom. Benwell recognizes the dilemma of participation in the administrative/citizen perspective debate but she is quite definite in her treatment of participation as a mechanism for influence, she assumes a citizen perspective. (Benwell, p.6) Benwell developed a model of citizen participation beginning with six descriptive dimensions: 1. the representational (structure) dimension - representativeness, interest groups, general public, goals and objectives of each actor. 2. the citizen involvement dimension - the participation techniques used. 3. the form of communication dimension - information giving, gathering, interaction betweem the planner and the public. 4. the timing/phasing dimension - vis a vis the planning process. 5. the power/influence/authority dimension - success in meeting goals and objectives. 6. the scale of decision dimension - political context, scale of development. The dimensions are used to describe and analyze component parts of a citizen participation process but also to identify the external factors which influence decision 38 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION making and planning. The representational dimension permits some judgement of the representativeness of citizen participation by identifying the actors and their goals and objectives. The citizen involvement and communication dimensions identify techniques and the style and level of communication which helps to relate the techniques to the objectives. The techniques and form of communication become the process while the objectives become the intended product. The timing/phasing dimension evaluates the integration and alignment of participation in the planning process. Benwell argues that citizen participation should take place at three points during the planning process: the selection of objectives or aims, the evaluation of alternatives, and at the review of the completed plan or decision. Community input is particularly important because these are "stages at which values represent a dominant and deliberate input and at which judgements and choices are conciously being made." (Benwell, p.28) The power dimension makes the actors' interests and participation goals and objectives explicit; power is identified by success in achieving objectives. This is a very important dimension on which participation should be evaluated because it is at the heart of the democratic value of participation and decision making -' whether true equality can be achieved. The scale of decision dimension provides a broader context for the analysis of participation by identifying external influences. To analyze the citizen participation process, Benwell looked at the planning authority and various publics, the community, the planning process, and the citizen 39 THEORIES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION participation process and activities. Data was collected on three variables: descriptors of the authority and its area, descriptors of the planning process, and descriptors of the participation activities. These were operationalized as: 1. Authority and Area: the area to which the plan refers, the extent to which the authority plans corporately, committee arrangements made in connection with planning; 2. Planning Process: date of commencement, kinds of process by which the first plan was prepared, stages at which the public were involved; 3. Participation Activities: the kinds of public involved at each stage, techniques employed, kind of communication/feedback sought at each stage, levels of response by the public. (Benwell, p.20) The results were used to develop four styles of participation very similar to Arnstein's ladder: statutory informing, choice validation, incremental interaction, and intensive public involvement. Benwell's descriptive dimensions, although used to develop styles of participation, provide an excellent starting point for analysis and evaluation because of their process, product, power, and context considerations. In the following discussion of twelve evaluation frameworks for citizen participation, the frameworks will be evaluated according to certain elements derived from this discussion of democracy and citizen participation as synthesized in the Benwell framework. The dimensions will serve as criteria for evaluating the evaluation frameworks. 40 IV • THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION INTRODUCTION Evaluation of citizen participation is not a high priority in many programs; often success is assumed in having carried citizen participation through at all. (Checkoway and Van Til, p.35) In some instances, and according to the objectives of the authority, this may be adequate. From a democratic perspective, evaluation must look at the level and quality of participation and the influence of participation on decisions and plans. There are certain challenges to be faced in evaluation, primarily in developing frameworks for evaluation. Many models have been devised but few are able to satisfy both process and product analysis. Often one perspective is taken, usually that of the planning authority; rarely is consideration given to the experiences of the citizen participants. Rarer is the model which allows for a political context. Without a systematic approach to evaluation, the worth of a public participation program is determined by the individual impressions of the people who initiated or participated in it. (Homenuck, Durlak, Morgenstern, p. 103) There is also validity to the argument that it is impossible to develop an unbiased set of criteria for the evaluation of citizen participation because of the different goals and objectives of participants. (Taylor, p.47) The difference between the administrative and citzen perspectives of citizen participation serve as an example. 41 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Berry et al. present three common approaches to evaluation: 1. composite judgement or a blending of technical standards and the analyst's perception reflecting "assessments of what was realistically possible in the program, and whatever hidden agenda criteria are operative." (Berry et al, p. 10) 2. representativeness, "all such measures carry an unstated assumption that the closer the participants come to reflecting the demographic characteristics of the affected population, the more likely it is that actual policy outcomes will reflect the preferences of that population." (Berry et al, p. 10) 3. responsiveness of agencies to the policy demands of the public, "responsiveness comes closest to tapping the question of power, of who gets to affect the decisions being made." (Berry et al, p. 10) "Representativeness" relates to the previous discussion of the democratic quality of the process. "Responsiveness" touches on the issue of power; citizen power can be judged by the influence of citizen input on the outcome. Perception is also important; the analyst must look at the context and the political and economic influences affecting the process. This discussion of evaluation frameworks will assess the frameworks according to their treatment of some basic elements developed in the previous discussion of democracy and citizen participation. A table is provided summarizing the elements of each framework. These elements are best presented in the Benwell framework: 1. representational dimension. 2. citizen involvement dimension. 3. form of communication dimension. 4. timing/phasing dimension. 5. power/influence/authority dimension. 6. scale of decision dimension. 42 T A B L E I - E V A L U A T I O N F R A M E W O R K S Y= =YES N= :NO NE= =NOT EXPLICIT FRAMEWORK REP TECH COMM PROCESS POWER CONTEXT Langton Y- Y NE •. N ". N N Vindasius NE Y Y Y NE N Hampton Y Y Y N NE N Homenuck Y Y Y N NE N Glasser NE Y Y N NE N Ontario N Y Y NE Y • N Farrell N- • Y N N NE N Taylor Y N NE N - Y N Kweit/Kweit Y Y Y . Y Y Y Alterman Y NE . NE . Y Y NE Kelly Y Y Y Y Y Y Rosener Y Y NE Y Y • Y REP =representational TECH=citizen involvement COMM=form of communication PROCESS=timing/phasing POWER=power/influence/authority CONTEXT^scale of decision 43 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FRAMEWORKS FOR THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION LANGTON (1978) This is a very simple framework which evaluates participation according to its function. Langton describes the purposes of participation to be improved decision making and the development of consensus and support for decisions. The model is composed of several elements including purposes, activities, citizens, and government. Each element results in a number of planning issues and related evaluative issues. They are as follows: 1. Elements - what was achieved and why?, to what extent were goals met and why?, to what extent were objectives accomplished and why?, what intended and unintended outcomes resulted and why? 2. Government - what levels of government were involved?, in what respect was each agency of government involved?, in what ways and why were policies and decisions affected? 3. Citizens - what kinds of people participated and why?, how many ways of participation were used and why? 4. Activity - what activities were undertaken?, how long did each acitivity last?, what practices enhanced the success of each activity?, how much activity did the activity cost? Langton's approach is good because it considers representation, techniques, and changes to decisions, policies, and plans. But the framework does not specify whose goals and objectives are under consideration; they could be those of the planning authority. The developer is not even mentioned as an actor. The approach fails in the exclusion of any reference to power redistribution or a context for participation in the planning process. It 44 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION is simple framework for evaluating the mechanics of a participation program in which a political context is not considered. VINDASIUS (1975) The Vindasius model is one of the simplest frameworks available. It was first used by Environment Canada to evaluate a public involvement program for a water resources planning process. It incorporates three elements: 1. provision of information to citizens. 2. receipt of information from citizens. 3. incorporation of inputs into planning process. Evaluation is completed in terms of objectives achievement (effectiveness) and costs (efficiency) and the influence of the process on results. The emphasis on information identifies techniques and communciation. Representation is not measured. The framework is weak in its emphasis on agency objectives and success or failure is judged by those administering the program. Integration of the planning process and participation process is assessed in this framework. Power redistribution is not identified although this could be measured through the third objective of the incorporation of citizen inputs into the planning process although this is not explicit. A political context is not provided. 45 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION HAMPTON (1977) This approach was used in assessing public involvement in structure plans in the United Kingdom. Hampton was more adventurous in setting the purposes of participation as: improvement of the planning process and the increase of citizen power in decision making. The objectives of participation are indentified as: 1. information disperal - what, who, alternatives? 2. information gathering - what, who, opinions? 3. interaction between planners and the public. Techniques are assessed under each objective by the information generated and by the type of public involved. This approach is valuable for its recognition of different publics and the resulting input. Representation, techniques, and communication (because of the emphasis on interaction) are obvious. But this is not put into the context of the planning process; the emphasis is on information and not actual power distribution as evident in the decisions taken. Although Hampton specifies power redistribution as a purpose of citizen participation no obvious measure is provided. Also, Gutch warns that the three aims of participation as identified by Hampton are really aims of communication and should not be used as evaluative measures of participation. (Gutch, p.6) Benwell also used these as measures of communication which make up just one dimension in her framework. This weakness is also seen in the Vindasius framework. 46 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION HOMENUCK, DURLAK, AND MORGENSTERN (1977) Homenuck et al. developed their framework in order to discover the extent to which participation programs achieve set objectives. They isolate two evaluation components; one in terms of the contribution of participation to the planning effort and the plan or decision outcome and the other to the impact on the planning authority and its long term goals. The evaluation of the planning effort is based on two dimensions - function and process. Function dimensions include: 1. information dissemination - how much, who received? 2. information collection - how much, who submitted? 3. respond/evaluate - who, opinions? 4. create/initiate - who, new ideas? 5. mutually educate - new information? Process dimensions include: 1. recruit participants - how, who? 2. make decisions - who, what type? 3. interact - between planners and participants? 4. reduce data - how? 5. establish boundaries - issues? Measures are attached to each of these dimensions, both quantitiative and qualitative. First, evaluation determines whether the citizen participation program achieved basic program functions. Second, an evaluation is made of the process according 47 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION to the achievement of functions. Homenuck et al suggest that to understand the success or failure of program functions, the analyst should look to the process. The methodology is completed with an evaluation of planning input and the impact on long term agency goals such as improvements to the planning process, agency reputation, and program cost effectiveness. The Homenuck emphasis on function and process makes the framework valuable for the representation, technique, and communication dimensions and very obvious measures are provided. But the objectives are limited to the effect on the plan and the planning authority. Participant objectives are not explicitly identified unless they correspond to the function dimensions (which are intended to be planning authority objectives). There is no obvious fitting to the planning process and stages at which participation might take place, even with the emphasis on the process dimensions. Power redistribution is not obvious although there is a measure for citizen participation in decision making under the process dimension of who makes decisions. A political context is absent. GLASSER, MANTY, AND NEHMAN (1975) This approach was used for water resources planning with a focus on techniques rather than the citizen participation process as a whole. It rates the effectiveness of 48 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION techniques on a high, medium and low scale for two criteria - communication and the objectives of education and participation techniques. Communication measures include: 1. degree of public contact 2. degree of impact on decision makers 3. degree of user satisfaction 4. ease of use and preparation 5. ability to respond to various interests 6. degree of two way communication. Education and participation technique objectives measures include: 1. inform/educate 2. identify problems and values 3. get ideas/solve problems 4. feedback 5. resolve conflict/research consensus 6. implement solutions. This approach is very subjective and considers only techniques. It is valuable in identifying the communication dimension. Representation may be difficult to measure. There is no mention of power or the planning process; it is the act of participation that is being evaluated. Power could be measured by the participation objectives measures (e.g. implement solutions) but this is not obvious. A political context is not included. 49 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION MINISTRY OF COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL SERVICES (ONTARIO) (1974) In this approach three components make up the evaluation methodology: 1. total input (effort) 2. total output (effectiveness) 3. cost-benefit ratio (efficiency) Programme effort (input) includes the type and quantity of activities undertaken and agency resources used; these are measured by process indicators (description of activity) and performance indicators (extent of activity). There is no attempt to judge quality at this stage. Performance effectiveness (output) looks at the extent of goal and objective achievement by examining output. This is done with effectiveness indicators (extent of public involvement) and change indicators (in citizen attitudes and plan or decision). Programme efficiency examines the achievement of goals and objectives against activities with an emphasis on cost. This framework is certainly comprehensive and provides many measures for the different indicators. It allows for various objectives including citizen objectives although representation is not measured. Communication is described by performance indicators. There is some mention of integration with the planning process in an effectiveness indicator measure but this is not emphasized. The change indicators put a lot of emphasis 50 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION on community education, empowerment and changes in outcome (plan) which are helpful in regard to power and influence. A political context is not included. FARRELL, MELIN, AND STACEY (ENVIRONMENT SASKATCHEWAN) (1976) This is the most agency-oriented of the evaluation models discussed here. Agency objectives in citizen participation are key: 1. to enhance public acceptance. 2. to provide a source of data for planning. 3. to educate the public to deal with planning issues. They identify seven types of public involvement: persuasion, education, information/feedback, consultation, joint planning, delegated authority, and self-determination. Evaluation is done in relation to these types of participation, based on three factors: the outcome (objectives achieved), the process (success of techniques), and the attitudes of the actors. Evaluative indicators are developed for each factor for each type of involvement. The model is helpful because it recognizes levels of participation but it is weak in its emphasis on agency objectives. There is no measure for representation or communication. There is no explicit treatment of the planning process in this model, nor is a political context recognized. Power is only obvious at the higher levels of involvement such as self-determinism. 51 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION TAYLOR (1979) This approach was derived from citizen participation in structure planning in the United Kingdom. The framework assesses the effectiveness of participation with the provisio that an unbiased assessment is impossible because of differing objectives of participation. Taylor collected evaluation criteria from planning authorities and local citizen groups. The authorities emphasized: 1. meeting some demands 2. time and effort of participants 3. quality of public suggestions 4. representativeness 5. adequate explanation for suggestions not used. 6. number of suggestions The local groups selected: 1. quality of suggestions 2. meeting some demands 3. response from planners 4. representativeness 5. response from elected representatives 6. proportion of population represented. 52 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Taylor concluded that both the authority and interest groups placed emphasis on the quality and use of input. Power is recognized by meeting some demands. Representation is obvious while techniques and communication are not. The emphasis on process and product makes no reference to participation at different stages of the planning process. The framework suffers from a dependence on process and product criteria; Taylor could have developed a political context for these criteria to.round out the model. But the model is one of few to to make citizen objectives explicit and this is helpful. KWEIT AND KWEIT (1981) This team developed a model to evaluate citizen participation in a community planning issue. They set out three goals for citizen participation: redistribution of power, improvements in citizen attitudes, and improvements in service delivery (for our purposes, decisions or plans). These goals are affected by environmental, authority organizational, and structural characteristics related to the citizen participation process. The authors emphasize the problem of different goals in the evaluation exercise and the need to balance the costs and benefits of participation. They point to the lack of consensus over criteria for evaluation when there are different interpretations of the public interest. Evaluation proceeds by using measures under the environmental, authority organizational, and structural characteristics to evaluate the affect on the three goals. Environmental measures include the flexibility of local government, the level of political 53 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION party and interest group activity (amount of conflict), and the identification with the community. Authority organizational measures include the attitudes of officials and staff to citizen participation, the resource base, and the organizational structure (organic or mechanistic) of the planning authority. Structural measures include the techniques used, communication style, and the stages of the planning process at which participation takes place. Kweit and Kweit warn; Participation, in some cases, is considered a panacea to cure the ills of the polity, but it is simply a change in process. By this change in process, however, participation advocates claim that changes will occur in the distribution of power in society, in the attitudes of citizens towards the government and in the types of policies produced by these governments. Introducing citizen participation does not guarantee that the expected effects of power will automatically materialize. (Kweit and Kweit, p. 162) The Kweit and Kweit framework is good because it attempts to consider power redistribution as well as more simple process and product factors. Power redistribution is a fundamental goal of citizen participation in this framework. Representation, techniques, and communication are included in the structural characteristics. There is inadequate reference to the planning process though; it is mentioned only once. A political context is provided in the environmental characteristic. 54 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION ALTERMAN, HARRIS, AND HILL (1981) This framework was devised to evaluate one structure plan in the United Kingdom. Alterman et al. agree with other analysts in warning of the influence of different actors with different views of participation. A given case of participation can thus be viewed as a set of strategies each defined from the point of view of the set of goals of a particular participatory group. In attempting an evaluation it is thus crucial that the point of view from which evaluation is undertaken should be clearly defined. (Alterman et al, p. 178) The suggested points of view for evaluating the effect of citizen participation are: 1. the plan. 2. community development. 3. democratic procedure. 4. government. The methodology begins with the affect of citizen participation on plans as identified in changed goals, objectives, policy, and means. These are measured through the types of participants, issues (residential, transport, environment, public facilities, recreation) and the target of responses (goals, objectives, policy, means). There is a recognition of the relationship between stages of the planning process, the techniques, levels of public involvement, and the type of participant. This approach is very good for considering the objectives of the participants and power which is measured by the effect of citizen input on plans. The influence of citizen 55 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION participation on democracy and community development comes very close to a political context. Representation is identified by the type of participant. Techniques and communication must be described in the analysis (which Alterman does) as they are not part of the actual methodology. There is consideration of the planning process because of the separation of goals, objectives, policy and means; this assumes citizen participation throughout the planning process. KELLY, LANG, AND MARGOLIN (1979) This is an interesting evaluation framework which directly relates citizen participation to the urban policy planning process. Four stages of participation, related to the planning process, are identified: goals conference, forum conference, specific plans, and the charrette (final plan). Each stage has specific techniques, decision processes, outcomes, levels of citizen involvement, types of participants, and objectives for each participant. Kelly et al. emphasize that citizen participation techniques will differ at each stage. Evaluation should be completed after each stage. The model is interesting because it also considers different types of decision making - rational comprehensive, disjointed incremental, and mixed scanning. The point here is to make a case for the utilization of all of these stages as key components for a decision making process that is citizen oriented and combines the strengths of rationalism with the strengths of democratic incrementalism. (Lang, p.231) As an evaluation framework, the approach is good because it considers both agency and public objectives. It puts an emphasis on citizen participation as it relates to the planning process and the power relationships that govern this process. Power and 56 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION representation are dealt with explicity because it is assumed that citizens with diverse interests will be participating at each stage and that they will influence decisions. At the same time, the framework deals with more basic elements like participation techniques and levels of communication. The only weakness in the framework is the absence of a political context in which to analyze external influences on citizen participation. ROSENER (1978) Rosener developed a framework for the evaluation of citizen participation using evaluation research methodology. She begins with the who, what, where, when and how of citizen participation. These define the actors, the goals, the objectives, the issues, and the stages of planning at which participation takes place. A participation evaluation matrix is developed which crosses knowledge of a cause/effect relationship between a participation program activity and the achievement of specified goals and objectives with the agreement on program goals and objectives, whose goals and objectives they are, and the criteria by which success or failure will be measured. Successful citizen participation is achieved when there is agreement on goals and objectives and the achievement of these with the selected techniques. Rosener's model is helpful because it makes the goals and objectives of all actors explicit; power redistribution is assumed to be a potential goal. The achievement of goals and objectives are directly related to the techniques used although communiction is not explicit. Representation is identified by the types of participants. The planning process is 57 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION central to the model. But the model is still process and product oriented; a political context is absent which would be valuable for analysis. CONCLUSION It is evident that there are many elements in evaluation and that many approaches can be developed depending on the selection of these elements. The frameworks discussed have both positive and negative elements. They recognize a diversity of goals but more often that of the planning authority. Cost-effectiveness is not a major consideration. Many theorists ignore the integration of the citizen participation process with the planning process. Power is mentioned only by those theorists who recognize the political nature of planning and have approached their analysis in this context. Others come close to it by including a measure for the use of citizen input in the plan or policy. Sewell presents two other important issues in evaluation; the need for independent evaluation and on-going rather than post-program evaluation. (Sewell, 1977, p.215) The most effective citizen participation model and evaluation framework will start with the basics of participation as it relates to the democratic process. Political equality, popular sovereignty, representativeness and the public interest are concepts which provide a theoretical basis for citizen participation in democratic society. Political equality and representativeness assume that a decision process should ensure that all interests are included whether these are directly represented or entrusted 58 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION to community leaders or politicians. The public interest is actually a variety of interests; it is assumed here that these are easily identified at the grassroots level of neighbourhood concerns and issues. It is also assumed that these interests can be identified for planning purposes; that they can also be ignored is a problem for citizen participation. The citizen participation evaluation framework should be integrated with the planning process. It should identify opportunities for input at each planning stage. It will not assume public acceptance of pre-determined goals and plans and a reactive role for citizens. Techniques will be matched to the objectives and participants. Different levels of communication provide another test of quality. There are outcome or product considerations as well. Changes in the plan or decision are proof of some power distribution and flexibility in the process. People should be satisfied with their participation in the process. The difficulties faced in developing such a framework are obvious. It requires a quantitative and qualitative approach; criteria and measures must be selected to evaluate the effectiveness of techniques and efficiency of the program. The analyst must be very perceptive; a context must be developed which accounts for the political, economic, and administrative factors which influence citizen participation in the planning and decision making process. The frameworks which best seem to meet these requirements are the Benwell; Rosener; Kelly, Lang, and Margolin; and Kweit and Kweit approaches. The Benwell 59 THE EVALUATION OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION framework was developed as a model of citizen participation but it meets all the requirements of an evaluative framework because of its emphasis on process, product, power, and context from a democratic or citizen perspective. The Benwell framework will be used in the evaluation and analysis of the Pacific Place citizen participation process. The dimensions will be adopted as criteria and, if appropriate, measures will be provided. Other frameworks will be mentioned when appropriate. 60 V - THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS INTRODUCTION The citizen participation process for the Pacific Place development was coordinated by the City of Vancouver Planning Department through the False Creek Planning Group. Concord Pacific Developments Ltd. took part in this process and sponsored some meetings as well. In this chapter, I will describe the citizen participation process and the methods used. It is important to note that the public was previously involved in planning the site and planning of the south shore of False Creek in the early 1970's. The B.C. Place Advisory Committee did a lot of work from October, 1981 to December, 1984 in the preparation of the North Park plan. Expo 86 had a display of an overall development proposal during the exposition and collected public comments on the proposal. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND THE CITY OF VANCOUVER The City of Vancouver develops citizen participation programs according to three models which were adopted as policy in the early 1970's. The three models are education, consultation, and partnership. The education model promotes awareness and support for policy and change in citizen attitudes; public meetings are the preferred method of participation. It is used for project development, usually on one site. The consultation 61 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS model seeks to share information, identify impacts and involve citizens in developing alternatives. It is used to study areas and issues. Preferred methods include public meetings, workshops, and task forces. The partnership model is similar to the consultation model but a Citizen Planning Committee is organized to manage the planning process. The partnership model is used in area planning. The planning and participation process for Pacific Place followed the consultation model. (Standing Committee of Council on Neighbourhood Issues and Services, April 6, 1989, p.9) THE FALSE CREEK POLICY BROADSHEETS Citizen participation in the planning process started in April, 1988 with a review of city policy for the False Creek basin. This was prompted by the Provincial Government announcement that the North Park plan was cancelled and that the site would be sold. A draft set of False Creek Policy Broadsheets was prepared by the Vancouver Planning Department for public consideration. The Broadsheets were based partially on earlier City policy for North Park. In March and April, 1988 three workshops were held with special interest groups in three issue areas: parks, recreation, and community facilities and services; design, business, and development; and housing. Special Council workshops were also held. Six public meetings were held in April and May, 1988 to gather comments on the draft Broadsheets. After the public meetings, the draft Broadsheets were revised and tabled with City Council in June. 62 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS There was some controversy over the adoption of City policy while Concord Pacific was well into the design stage of development. (Vancouver Sun, June 25,1988, p.A3) Under much public criticism, Council decided to delay hearing public delegations concerning the draft Broadsheets until planners met with Concord Pacific to discuss the design concept as it related to the draft Broadsheets. City Council was divided on the issue; some members felt that City Policy should be adopted as soon as possible as Concord Pacific was already designing the project. Other members believed that Concord Pacific designers were working within the draft guidelines anyway and that it would be helpful to compare the design to the Broadsheets. When City Council voted to delay the acceptance of the draft Broadsheets, there was much criticism over the appearance that the City was allowing the developer to determine policy for the site. (Vancouver Sun, June 25, 1988, p.A3) Delegations were given an opportunity to address Council in August, 1988 when the Policy Broadsheets were accepted. Forty-seven delegations were heard over two meetings. The issues focussed on household and income mix, density, soil contamination, boating, the seawall walkway, park space, public transit, and community facilities. Shortly after City Council approval of the Broadsheets, Concord Pacific organized a series of meetings for public comment on the International Village design concept. When the sale of the site was finalized in May, 1988 Concord Pacific was quick to begin design work on the project. The International Village was considered separately from the overall official development plan as a test rezoning. The meetings, held between September, 1988 63 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS to June, 1989 included five public meetings, five interest group meetings, and four meetings with City appointed committees. The separate rezoning process for the International Village was accepted by Council and the Planning Department because a lot of planning work had already been completed with the earlier North Park plan and it was a separate parcel with infrastructure in place. (Manager's Report, February 2, 1989, p.l) The intention to use it as a test process was good but there were difficulties which will be discussed in the Analysis. Meanwhile the False Creek Planning Group was preparing a public involvement program for City Council. Although the report was completed by October, 1988 it was not submitted until January, 1989 as the municipal elections took place in November and approval was delayed until the new Council took office. The public involvement process was approved in February, 1989 with a revised and lengthened planning schedule (the second rescheduling) to allow for the extra time needed to complete the official development plan for the public hearing. The schedule served as a guide to the False Creek Planning Group until October, 1989. Concord Pacific did not prepare any formal citizen participation program but agreed to the City process. THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS The public involvement process was organized by the False Creek Planning Group and was outlined in a Report to Council. It included three sections: the principles of public 64 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS involvement, the planning process, and the program of public consultation. The report used the terms "public involvement" and "public consultation" interchangably. Although not designated as objectives of the Pacific Place public involvement process, the Report stated; "the intents of public consultation are to inform and to receive advice from people." (Planning Department, January 18, 1989, p.l) The organizing principles of the process were classified by purposes, process, and publics. The purposes included: 1. to inform people so they may provide ideas based on knowledge. 2. to receive ideas and advice. 3. to help everyone learn in order to create a better place. 4. to adjust the north shore of False Creek plans and the surrounding areas to achieve a complementary whole. 5. to achieve support for the plan through fulfilling needs. 6. to achieve a place of and for Vancouver. The process was intended to: 1. be considerate of all those affected by change. 2. provide people and organizations effective means and sufficient time to understand the issues and proposals and influence the plan. 3. afford opportunities to understand and influence throughout the planning and approval process. 4. facilitate city approval in a timely way. 5. focus discussion on the development of this new community and its relationships with its neighbours. 65 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS 6. seek to reach many people and organizations in an unfiltered, open way. 7. be continuously open to new people and seek representative viewpoints of the various publics. 8. include existing community organizations and council appointed advisory groups. The organizing principles also identified the publics to be consulted: the general public, the neighbouring communities, and special interest groups. The Report emphasized the importance of recognizing special interest groups and neighbouring communities. The Report stated; "The proposed public involvement process will be keyed to the planning process." (Planning Department Report, January 18, 1989, p.2) The planning process is described in these stages: 1. issue identification. 2. policy formulation. 3. overall plan preparation. 4. detailed area plan preparation 5. implementation (rezonings, subdivisions, capital plans, housing programs). The first two stages were completed by August, 1988 although issue identification is an on-going endeavour. The overall development plan was scheduled for completion by November, 1989. The International Village rezoning (ADP)' was given approval at a public hearing in June, 1989. A timeline was used to illustrate the public involvement schedule. (Figure 3) 66 FIGURE 3 - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT S C H E D U L E from - City of Vancouver, Standing Committee on Finance and Priorities, Report to Council, January 26, 1989. OVERALL PLAN 3 Cm S i * a w Owgn Ptnt PubteMeMMtng I Pubic Into Meeting Pubic M»*irig I m m (A AREA PLAN §2 35 ~* O m C 33 "D m CACO J O m Houwtg PmnaFeoaGraups DcagnPanat DTESQuul iu ia WMtEnd Mi P i M u m . , Cofftffwvfy On>gnPmf Comnunty Public M n i n g OTIS/Sntfnona WMt End Ml Ptoaunt N U d i * D u t M C o n r n s a • u w » « * » * « d U M Planning Gomnwan PubfcMaabng I Pubic M M n g Pubic Haanng Cofrvnuntty Housing OarignPanat •ubieWwiahoa Public Maatng Pubic I Pubfie 6 7 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS The stage of detailed area plan preparation will begin when the overall official development plan is in place. A more detailed public consultation program will be developed at that time but will follow a process similar to that used for the International Village. The implementation stage of rezonings, subdivision and development permits makes no allowance for any unusual public involvement; only the required advertisements in newspapers and site signage. The actual program of public involvement included newsletters, work in progress displays, public meetings, community meetings, workshops, informal meetings, guest speaking engagements, focus groups, surveys, interactive television and radio, submission of briefs, and public hearings. A mailing list of 700 names was maintained by both the City and Concord Pacific to inform people of meetings and for newsletter distribution. Concord Pacific also made 52 presentations to business and service groups; these meetings were for information purposes only, although some discussion occurred. While City Council debated the public involvement and planning process schedule in February, 1989 meetings were already taking place. Three public meetings were held in February and March for the International Village rezoning. Six public meetings were held in April for the overall plan with an emphasis on the waterfront options. A workshop format was used at two of these meetings. The International Village rezoning was passed at a public hearing in June, 1989. Two public meetings and five interest group meetings were held in June and July for the overall plan. Two public meetings and six citizen committee meetings were held in August and September for the overall plan. A complete list of meetings is provided in the Appendix. 68 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS THE METHODS DESCRIBED When the sale of the property was completed Concord Pacific opened an Information Centre at the Plaza of Nations on the Pacific Place site. The Information Centre was open seven days a week and some evenings. A large model of the proposed development was on display and staff were available to answer questions. When it closed in Novemeber, 1988 Concord Pacific announced that 17,000 people had visited the Centre and 4,600 people had filled out the questionnaires provided. The questionnaire listed twelve questions requiring yes or no responses. A selection are listed here: 1. Do you like the general concept as presented in the model? yes-98% no-2% 2. Do you like the idea of extending False Creek to Pacific Boulevard to form tidal lagoons? yes-97% no-3% 3. We are emphasizing residential development rather commercial development for the site. Do you agree with this approach? yes-95% no-4% 4. Do you think the International Financial Centre will upgrade the Georgia Viaduct area? yes-84% no-14% 5. Do you like the proposal for a large park adjacent to Science World, as shown on the model? yes-71% no-27% 6. Would you like to live at Pacific Place? yes-71% no-27% 7. Would you like to work at Pacific Place? yes-79% no-20% Three drop-ins were organized by the False Creek Planning Group and these were quite successful. Visitors were able to move freely around the model and displays. They could ask questions and make comments. Questionnaires were used at the June and August, 1989 drop-ins. 69 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS A workshop format was used at the two of the April and May, 1989 meetings to discuss the lagoons and bays waterfront options, the planning principles, and development effects. The intention was to move away from the meeting format and develop group discussion. The workshop used a workbook to promote discussion. Three land use and issue oriented questionnaires were used by the False Creek Planning Group during public meetings and drop-ins. The first questionnaire was actually a workbook used in two of the public meetings held in April and May, 1989 to discuss the overall plan. Short presentations were given on the lagoons and bays options for the waterfront, the planning principles for False Creek, and the development effects. Participants were organized into small groups with a facilitator who assisted the participants in completing the appropriate workbook section after each presentation. Participants were also given the option of completing the workbooks on their own time and returning them to the False Creek Planning Group. There were 49 workbooks completed although 200 people attended the meetings. The workbook results showed that 45% preferred the bays option for the waterfront, while 33% preferred the lagoons option. The most important principles selected by the respondents were: integration with the city, building on the setting, and maintaining a sense of a substantial water basin in the centre of the city. The development effects identified most often were transportation, environment (views and water use), and housing. (Planning Department, May 9, 1989, p.7) Space was provided for other planning principles or development effects which respondents felt should be included. 70 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS Respondents were asked to include solutions for the negative development impacts identified; this evoked some good responses. The second questionnaire was used at a daytime drop-in and evening meeting held in June, 1989 for consideration of the overall plan. The questionnaire dealt with specific elements of the plan. It included questions on the street system, parks, housing, shopping, water use, community facitlities, and development impacts (particularly transportation, housing, and retail use). Only 23 questionnaires were completed so only the comments were compiled for use by planning staff. The third questionnaire was used at the August, 1989 drop-in at Granville Island and the September public meeting. The questions focussed on building heights, density, housing, office uses, marinas, and public facilities and parks. Over 100 questionnaires were completed although the results had not been compiled at the time of writing. Both the False Creek Planning Group and Concord Pacific produced and distributed newsletters. The mailing list, which was kept by the False Creek Planning Group and Concord Pacific, was useful in distributing these newsletters. The first Concord Pacific newsletter was distributed in December, 1988. The newsletter described the process of planning and citizen participation and gave details on the International Village design concept. The International Village section included the issues raised at ea.rlier public meetings and the resulting changes to the development proposal or the reasons for no alteration. The issues included: density, height, community and recreational services, 71 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS development process, soils, housing, marketing of housing, parking, parks, development impacts, traffic, and views. The second Concord Pacific newsletter was actually just an update distributed at the June 22, 1989 public hearing for the International Village. Issues (similar to those in the earlier newsletter) raised during the public involvement process were listed as were the responses to these issues. The first False Creek Planning Group newsletter, False Creek Planning News, was distributed in April, 1989. The newsletter listed the major issues (lagoons, development impacts, soil contamination), a list of upcoming meetings, a summary of city goals from the False Creek Policy Broadsheets, and proposed uses for the site. The newsletter provided information on other developments as well, including the Bosa site and the southeast shore of False Creek. The second issue of False Creek Planning News in June, 1989 reported on the results of earlier public meetings, particularly the selection of the bays option for the waterfront. The impacts of development (transportation, housing, retail, views) and methods to deal with these impacts were also discussed. The soils issue and remediation plans were described. The August, 1989 issue of False Creek Planning News described the neighbourhoods proposed for Pacific Place, community facilities, and the impact studies 72 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS being undertaken to deal with housing, retail, and transportation concerns. Announcements for future meetings were included. All newsletters included the names, addresses, and phone numbers of contact people at Concord Pacific and the False Creek Planning Group. Over 4,000 copies of each issue of False Creek Planning News were distributed. In August, 1989 a planner from the False Creek Planning Group and a Concord Pacific representative took part in a local community issues television show through the community cablevision station. Viewers were able to telephone and ask questions and make comments about the development. There were not many callers although the discussion was very good and challenging questions were raised by the moderator. The Pacific Place Soils Remediation Group, was organized by the Provincial Government, to deal with the soil contamination problem on the site. A library was opened for public reference. The soil remediation studies and plans were available for public viewing. Two public meetings were held to discuss the remediation plans. It should be emphasized that the soil contamination problem was a prominent issue at other public meetings. THE MEETINGS DESCRIBED This section will describe some of the meetings held and the issues raised by participants. All meetings were advertised in the Province and Vancouver Sun 73 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS newspapers; sometimes advertisements were put into the neighbourhood newspapers. The mailing list was also used to notify people and organizations of meetings. The meetings were held at a variety of locations, usually in the evening. False Creek Policy Broadsheets Public Information Meeting Strathcona Community Centre May 10, 1988 30 people This meeting was one of five sponsored by the False Creek Planning Group to discuss city policy for the north shore of False Creek. Concord Pacific representatives did not attend the meeting. A slide show was used to demonstrate some of the potential land uses for the site. The issues raised by participants included: transportation, pedestrian safety, linkages to adjacent neighbourhoods, and access opportunities for these residents (particularly for park use). Views were also mentioned, although the speakers had different opinions. One speaker disliked highrises because of the loss of views; another speaker argued that tall buildings would allow view corridors. The soil contamination problem was mentioned as was the need for a full and equitable range of housing and community services. Density was a concern. Changes to the waterfront were also mentioned; most speakers supported maintenance of the Creek although they were concerned about the quality of the water. One speaker complained about the process of consultation arguing that one week of meetings was inadequate. Further, the Policy Broadsheets were not distributed until one 74 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS week before the meetings; this did not allow the public enough time to consider the information. This meeting was interesting because it occurred shortly after the sale of the site was announced. When people saw the Concord Pacific proposal, they questioned the influence of City policy on the development; it appeared that the developer had already decided on the design concept. False Creek Policy Broadsheets City Council Meeting City Hall August 23 and 30, 1988 47 delegations These meetings were held to allow delegations to speak on the draft False Creek Policy Broadsheets before acceptance bj' City Council. Most speakers focussed on issues such as livability, density, environmental safety, and access to the waterfront. Some speakers requested more social housing. Derek Murphy of the B.C. Housing Coalition stated; "We call for a 33% minimum of affordable housing, 50% of it family. The market trend is that we are losing a lot of affordable housing." (West Ender, September 1, 1988, p. 16) Peter Hebb of the Vancouver Board of Trade opposed this arguing; "Large social housing projects quickly become dangerous slums. The Board questions the wisdom of thrusting low income families into a milieu of high income, high-tech lifestyles." (West Ender, September 1, 1988, p. 16) The Broadsheets were approved with minimal changes. The water basin and shoreline policy was changed to ensure that development would be evaluated by the effects 75 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS on the size of the basins and the useability of the Creek. The waterfront walkway policy ensured that the walkway would be at the water's edge. Of more concern was the residential density policy which was changed to allow densities higher than the proposed target densities if acceptable to the community design. Park space of 2.75 acres per 1000 population in addition to the waterfront walkway was guaranteed. Soil conditions were to be guaranteed before decisions were made about certain parcels. Access to facilities and amenities was guaranteed to residents of adjacent communities. Social housing remained at 20% of the housing stock although many participants wanted to see a higher amount. International Village Design Concept Public Information Meeting Mount Pleasant Community Centre September 19, 1988 50 people This meeting was one of five meetings sponsored b}' Concord Pacific to begin consultation on the International Village design concept. City planners attended the meeting as well. A slide show was used to present the design concept for the Village. Public concerns included housing mix, livability, park space, community facilities, parking, integration with adjacent neighbourhoods, street patterns, public access, and urban design. Some comments were directed at the participation process in that it was difficult to conceptualize the physical design of the site with the graphics provided. Another speaker argued that it was difficult to evaluate the proposal without knowing the specifics of the rest of the development. A recurring complaint was the vagueness of the concept plan. Some participants complained that only four days notice was given for this meeting; better advertising was needed if public participation was to be effective. 76 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS North Shore of False Creek Public Meeting Shaughnessy Heights United Church January 16, 1989 100 people This was an independent meeting organized by the Shaughnessy Heights United Church Outreach Committee. It was intended for information purposes only although some issue oriented discussion took place. A four member panel consisting of Stanley Kwok (Concord Pacific), Craig Rowland (False Creek Planning Group), Brahm Wiesman (UBC School of Community and Regional Planning), and Jim Green (Downtown Eastside Residents Association) made short presentations. Social housing was identified as a major issue. Public comment focussed on transportation, housing mix, heights and views, park space, and the sale of the site. International Village Rezoning Open House (daytime) Chinese Cultural Centre February 22, 1989 70 people This open house was sponsored by the False Creek Planning Group for the purpose of providing more detailed information on the International Village rezoning proposal. Concord Pacific representatives were present. A model and land use maps were put on display and the Report to Council on the rezoning application was available for distribution. Comments sheets were used by many participants; staff also took comments and answered questions. 77 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS The concerns of Chinatown and Gastown merchants were the focus of this open house. There was concern that the retail component of International Village might decrease activity in these areas although most merchants appreciated that the retail component of the Village had been reduced from its original amount as a result of impact studies completed after the approval of the Policy Broadsheets. There were concerns over the adequacy of parking. There were complaints about the lack of open space around buildings although designers pointed out that this was in keeping with the character of adjacent areas which was the intention of the Village design concept. The loss of views was a frequent complaint. The False Creek Planning Group reported that most comments were positive and that people were eager to see development on the site. International Village Rezoning Public Information Meeting Chinese Cultural Centre February 22, 1989 70 people This meeting was sponsored by the False Creek Planning Group for the purpose of providing information of the International Village rezoning proposal. Concord Pacific representatives attended the meeting. A volunteer translator was available for participants needing translation in Cantonese. Presentations were made on the issues associated with the proposal and the design concept changes responding to these issues. A Concord Pacific representative made a presentation on the design concept and explained the influence of the design principles - livability, layering of uses, and linking with adjacent areas. 78 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS Public discussion resulted in many concerns including the absence of a swimming pool, lack of social housing, loss of views, building heights, soil contamination, traffic circulation problems, and the need for impact analyses. Other speakers stated their appreciation for the location of the park, and the reduction in retail space. Chinatown merchants were quite vocal about the importance of linking the Village with Chinatown. Derrick Cheng of the Vancouver Chinatown Merchants Association stated; "We are afraid that people will stop there and think that its Chinatown and the old part of Chinatown will become a ghetto." (Vancouver Sun, February 23, 1989, p.A3) He requested that the design be multicultural and not strictly Asian. Official Development Plan Public Information Meeting Granville Island Room April 18, 1989 40 people This meeting was sponsored by the False Creek Planning Group with Concord Pacific representatives in attendance. It was one of two meetings which ran as a workshop. The purpose of the meeting was to provide information and to receive public comment on the overall plan. Three presentations were made on the bays or lagoons options for the waterfront, the planning principles, and development effects. Small discussion groups were formed and with the guidance of a facilitator each participant completed a workbook (questionnaire mentioned previously) containing questions related to the presentation topics. This meeting functioned as a workshop because of the time spent in small discussion groups while completing the workbooks. 79 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS Official Development Plan Public Workshop Plaza of Nations June 3, 1989 (9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) 50 people This workshop was sponsored by the False Creek Planning Group with Concord Pacific officials in attendance. It actually functioned as an drop-in whereby the public could view the model and land use maps. Planning department and Concord Pacific representatives were available to answer questions and take comments. A questionnaire was available for more detailed comments. Official Development Plan Public Information Meeting Robson Square Media Centre June 5, 1989 15 people This meeting was sponsored by the False Creek Planning Group with Concord Pacific representatives in attendance. The purpose of the meeting was to present the overall development plan and to discuss the plan and the resulting development effects. A slide show was utilized to present the plan. A questionnaire was used as a basis for discussion. Public concerns focussed on the density, views, and the dilemma of promoting automobiles or improving public transit. Some participants were concerned that a road running adjacent to the waterfront would turn into a congested strip. There was some discussion about the density of the marinas and the effect on the waterfront. The soils problem was still considered critical with one speaker suggesting that the contaminated 80 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS parcels be cleared out and used for a marina. One speaker praised the location of a park near the Roundhouse. International Village Rezoning Public Hearing Vancouver Playhouse June 22, 1989 125 people The public hearing for the International Village rezoning was held as required by the development approval process. There were many speakers at the meeting and the issues mentioned were typical of earlier meetings. These included the lack of social housing and the loss of affordable housing in adjacent neighbourhoods due to increasing property values and displacement. One resident argued; "The minute you vote to rezone this land, you have taken a giant step towards gentrification. People will be evicted and they won't have any place to go." (Vancouver Sun, June 23, 1989, p.A2) There were concerns about the increase in traffic and the parking and retail impacts on Chinatown. One speaker complained that the impact studies being undertaken were reactive rather than proactive and would come too late in the process. The soil contamination issue was the focus of much comment with academics from UBC and SFU and a lawyer from the West Coast Environmental Law Association criticizing the methods and results of the technical studies. One speaker warned that local residents had already dubbed the proposed park "Poison Park". There were many speakers in favour of the rezoning proposal; most representing business or local merchant organizations. They emphasized the economic benefit to be 81 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS gained from the development. There were thirty speakers in total; twelve were opposed, sixteen were in support and two focussed on specific concerns without stating support or opposition. The public hearing was marred by an incident which questioned the presence of due or fair process. All speakers were required to register before the hearing to ensure orderly public comment. Jim Green of the Downtown Eastside Residents Association complained that, although he had signed up early enough to ensure his place as first speaker, he was upset to see a Concord Pacific employee registering six or seven speakers. These speakers appeared to be unrelated to Concord Pacific; they should have registered themselves. This also resulted in a longer wait for individual speakers who registered themselves. The public hearing did not finish until 1:30 a.m. because of the extensive speakers list. The site was rezoned according to the application which was an altered version of Concord's original submission. Retail space was reduced from 500,000 square feet to 200,000 square feet. The F.S.R. was decreased from 4.08 to 3.43. Design of residential units was changed to improve livability. Social housing remained at 20% of the proposed number of residential units. Although the Director of Social Planning proposed that some co-operative housing units be guaranteed this was not approved. 82 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS Model Display Granville Island August 24 - 27, 1989 uncounted This was a very successful endeavour by the Planning Department and Concord Pacific. The model was displayed near the Public Market which is very busy and results in a lot of pedestrian traffic. Site design sketches and section sketches were used to provide more visual images. A plan of illustrative land use provided more detail on each parcel. The third questionnaire was provided at this location as were copies of the latest False Creek Planning News. View Analysis Public Information Meeting Granville Island Room September 7, 1989 100 people This meeting was organized with an emphasis on views from the south shore of False Creek and the impact of the overall development on views. Computer modelling was used to illustrate the impact of proposed buildings on specific views. The results were presented in a slide show. Large photos superimposed with proposed buildings were displayed on the wall. An update was provided on the planning process for Pacific Place including the major decisions made to date (False Creek Policy Broadsheets, Bays vs. Lagoons, International Village) and a description of the stages in the process (official development plan, sub-area zonings, development permits). 83 THE PACIFIC PLACE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS The Vancouver views study was described and it was suggested that views should be considered in the context of other development (e.g. Granville South) where density would be very high. A lot of emphasis was placed on the dilemma of saving views versus providing much needed housing. The presentation on views was informative although some of the slides were confusing as only the outline of proposed buildings was super imposed on the photo. Of course the mountain view was still very obvious through the building which would not be the case if it was built. In most cases, the photos were well done. Most speakers complained about the tall buildings and the loss of views. As one speaker stated; "catching a glimpse is not enough." One speaker complained that the presentation took much too long (one hour and twenty minutes). One speaker spoke in support of highrises arguing that an increasing population necessitated more housing. CONCLUSION After the Official Development Plan is approved at a November, 1989 public hearing the citizen participation process will continue. There are many different parcels to be developed and each will have an area plan and a separate planning and participation process. These are yet to be organized by the False Creek Planning Group although the process will be quite similar to that which took place for the International Village. It is certain that there will be more interest in the plans for parcels directly across from the south shore of False Creek; views will be a major issue for participants. 84 VI - ANALYSIS OF T H E CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS INTRODUCTION The Pacific Place citizen participation process will be analyzed and evaluated using the Benwell framework described in Chapter III. Summarized again, it includes six dimensions which will be adapted as criteria: 1. representational (structure) dimension - representativeness, general public, interest groups, goals and objectives of the actors; 2. citizen involvement dimension - techniques used in the process; 3. form of communication dimension - information dispersal, information gathering, interaction; 4. timing/phasing dimension - vis a vis the planning process; 5. power/influence/authority dimension - success in meeting objectives; 6. scale of decision dimension - political context. This framework permits a multi-dimensional analysis making the citizen participation process a function of the system in which it occurs. The first four dimensions provide an evaluation of process. 'The power/influence/author ity dimension evaluates product and, in some cases, process. The scale of decision dimension provides the context which is crucial for a broader analysis of citizen participation in planning. 85 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS THE REPRESENTATIONAL (STRUCTURE) DIMENSION The Pacific Place participation process was satisfactorily representative and provided an opportunity to include the general public, and community and interest groups in the planning of the development. The model display and drop-ins atttracted a wide audience, especially those who might not attend meetings. Special meetings were organized for the community and interest groups in order to focus on specific concerns. Planners maintained an extensive list of contact persons for interest groups. It seems that a real effort was made to include community groups in the process. Each group had a separate meeting to minimize the problem of mixed meetings in which one group might dominate the discussion.The Downtown Eastside Residents Association (DERA) took part in three special meetings. A meeting was organized for the False Creek water users such as kayakers and sailors. Neighbourhood interests included the Yaletown property owners, the Strathcona and Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood Associations, and the False Creek South residents. Meetings were also held with City Council advisory groups such as the Disabled Committee, Seniors Committee, Bicycle Committee and the Urban Design Panel which ensured that special interests were included. It is difficult to determine the representational quality of the process as suggested by Berry in which the participants should mirror the population. (Berry et al., p. 10) Neither the False Creek Planning Group nor Concord Pacific kept detailed records of participants by population characteristic. This would be extremely difficult to measure especially in a drop-in or meeting format. 86 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS The public meetings appeared to have a good mix of participants; with the participation of organized groups more diverse interests were represented. There were some interested citizens who could be described as over-participative. They attended most meetings and sometimes dominated public discussion. This is a common problem in participation programs and the developers and planners coped very well. Goals and Objectives of the Actors Goals and objectives are another means by which to identif}' the representational quality of participation. Goals are the overall intended results of participation. Objectives are related to more specific functions of participation activities. (Rosener, 1978, p.458) Success in meeting objectives leads to success in reaching goals; this explains the importance of technique selection in a participation program as certain techniques can be used to attain certain objectives. The goals and objectives of each actor in the Pacific Place participation process were quite different. Some were easily identified through public documentation, others could be inferred through statements or actions. Concord Pacific's stated objectives were to inform the public and to solicit public participation in the planning process. (Concord Pacific Newletter #1, p.2) As Concord Pacific wished to obtain rapid approval for development there is no doubt that rapid public acceptance of the development was also a goal. The City of Vancouver detailed its objectives in its program for public involvement/consultation. (Planning Department, January 18, 1989) According to general 87 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS City policy for citizen participation; "the objectives of public consultation are to inform, achieve support, and receive advice from people." (Standing Committee of Council on Neighbourhood Issues and Services, April 6, 1989, p.9) At times this may permit influence on plans. It is important to distinguish public consultation or involvement from citizen participation. The definition is important as it assumes a certain level of citizen activity. Public consultation was selected as the level of participation for Pacific Place. This approach seeks to share information, develop alternatives, identify impacts, and create awareness. Of most interest in this analysis will be the effect of the consultation process on the opportunity, as stated in City policy, for adjustment and influence on the plan. Was the emphasis on consultation or participation? This will be discussed in the power dimension section. The stated objective of support for the proposal was also very important as the City Council wants to promote private sector development. Inferred city goals and objectives might have included an efficient participation program as the planning process was commonly referrred to as a "fast-track" process. (Globe and Mail, June 19, 1989, p.l) The goals and objectives of the organized groups varied. For the purposes of this analysis, I have divided the groups into three categories: advocacy groups, neighbourhood groups, and business groups. 88 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS Advocacy groups included DERA, the Tenants Rights Coalition, End Legislated Poverty, the B.C. Coalition of the Disabled, the First United Church and others. These groups ususally represented the low income neighbourhood in the downtown eastside. They focussed on the issue of social housing for low income and family households and wanted to see more social housing on the site. This was mentioned at every meeting. They were concerned about the impact of the development on existing affordable housing in adjacent neighbourhoods. Contaminated soil and park space was also a big concern with these groups. The goal and objective of these groups was to have some guarantee of influence which resulted in changes to the development proposal in response to their concerns. Neighbourhood groups were more concerned with the impact of the development on their neighbourhoods. The Strathcona, Chinatown, and Gastown groups were most concerned with traffic, parking, park space, public access to the site, and retail activity. Residents of the south shore of False Creek were most concerned with view preservation. Their goal and objective was to ensure that their opinions were heard and that plans changed to diminish the impacts. Business groups were not very active in the participation process although there were some presentations made at the City Policy Broadsheets Council meetings and the International Village public hearing. Concord Pacific made over fifty presentations to business and service groups. The Vancouver Board of Trade and the Business Council of British Columbia representatives spoke in favour of the development. Special meetings were held with merchants in Chinatown and with adjacent property owners (e.g. 89 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS Yaletown). As their participation during the process was minimal their objectives were really only to learn about the development, state their opinion, and ensure publicly stated support for the project. It is difficult to identify the objectives of the general public but an assumption is made that an open process allowing for input and influence in the planning process was desired. Speakers at meetings mentioned concerns similar to those stated by the representatives of groups: density, housing, livability, traffic, views, and the impact on the False Creek water basin. As emphasized by most citizen participation theorists, it is crucial to identify all goals and objectives. These interests must be explicit if citizen participation is to be evaluated with democratic values in mind. It is obvious that the goals and objectives differed between actors. Advocacy groups see changes in the plan as important, the developer sees public acceptance as more important. The objectives of citizen participation cannot be separated from long term goals. The City and Concord Pacific want the development to proceed for economic benefits and growth. Groups such as DERA want to improve and protect their neighbourhoods. The process appeared to be representative. No interests were obviously excluded. But a true evaluation cannot be made of representative quality until the power dimension is discussed. First, the citizen involvement dimension will be evaluated as it relates to the goals and objectives identified in the process. 90 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS THE CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT DIMENSION This dimension is best measured by the variety of techniques employed and the level of the response. The techniques used in the public consultation process give a real sense of the motivations of the City and Concord Pacific. The techniques were selected according to their objectives. Public and special group meetings were the most frequently-used technique with over 60 meetings held by October, 1989. Interest fluctuated with high attendance at meetings focussing on more detailed plans and at meetings closer to the date for City approval. For example, the February and March, 1989 meetings preceding the International Village public hearing were very well attended while an April, 1989 meeting for the overall development was a wasted effort with few people attending. People may have considered the overall development less important at the time because the International Village rezoning was in-process. The ODP was not set for approval until November, 1989. The process of the meetings was quite good. Most began with a slide show presenting the design concept. Descriptions were given of current plans and changes to the plans. Updates on the planning process were provided. Open public discussion followed. Concord Pacific was innovative in posting file cards with public comments on the wall during meetings. These were collected into binders and saved for future reference. City planners recorded the minutes of their meetings. Sometimes participants complained that the presentations preceding public discussion were too long but this was infrequent. 91 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS Meetings were held in the evening at community centres and other public meeting places; most were easily accessible. But the problems associated with a strict public meeting format (e.g. uncoordinated discussion, length) were recognized by the City and other techniques were used. Planners also organized three daytime drop-ins which varied in success. People could walk through freely, look at the model and land use maps, and discuss their concerns with planners and Concord Pacific representatives. The first drop-in was held at the Chinese Cultural Centre and was quite successful. It was held on a weekday which may have limited the attendance but the intention was to attract local residents and merchants who would be in the area on a weekday. The Plaza of Nations drop-in on the Pacific Place site was advertised as a workshop which is inaccurate as there was no organized format; it was a drop-in. The drop-in was held on a Saturday which improved the opportunity for attendance. Unfortunately, the Plaza of Nations location was a poor choice as access was difficult. It is not a busy pedestrian location; it is crossed only by people walking along the seawall. Transit service is not frequent and parking is difficult. A better drop-in was held at Granville Island over four days in August, 1989. This was an excellent location and a lot of people took time to look at the model. The two workshops held in April and May, 1989 were very successful because participants could really take time to think about the development and use the workbooks in round table discussions with planners acting as discussion facilitators. The workshops 92 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS were used to collect opinions on the lagoons and bays option and the overall plan. The workshops could be a valuable tool during the area development plan process when more detail is needed. The workbook and two questionnaires were very useful in soliciting comments from those who would not normally speak at public meetings. It is unfortunate that only 175 were completed. The workbook and questionnaires focussed on issues and concerns and allowed for suggestions and solutions by participants. The workbook included a section in which participants were asked for their opinions on the bays and lagoons options for the waterfront. The results were instrumental in the decision to maintain the bays. But there were problems with the workbook. The seven planning principles for the False Creek basin were listed and respondents were asked whether "the big ideas are important?" (False Creek Workbook, p.5) It would be difficult to disagree with any of the "big ideas". Respondents were asked to include any other "big ideas" they believed were important. This may have been too abstract an exercise for most participants who wanted to see the details of the development. The workbook was used at the April and May, 1989 meetings at a time when people wanted to start thinking about the details of development and the impacts it would have on the city. The workbook was effective in identifying development effects, both positive and negative. This made participants more aware of the changes to come with the development. The questionnaires were much weaker in design and avoided obvious issues such as the amount of social housing, density, and views although the second version was 93 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS somewhat improved. There was one question for each use and most were abstract in nature. The housing question asked; "Do you think that all of the neighbourhoods would be good places in which to live?" (City Questionnaire, May, 1989, p.l) Questions concerning street patterns, parks, shopping, and water use also followed this simplicity. The August, 1989 questionnaire was improved with more direct questions concerning building heights, views, density, social housing, office use, marinas, and community facilities. Both questionnaires provided comment sections. The Concord Pacific questionnaire used at the Information Centre display in 1988 was also poorly designed. It was obviously a public relations exercise (all questions were stated positively) rather than a genuine effort to promote public input into the planning process, although 4,600 people took the time to complete the questionnaire. The results were published in local newspapers. A section for public comment was provided but these results were not published. Concord Pacific recorded the comments for their own use; the results were balanced between negative and positive responses. The Concord Pacific Information Centre at the Plaza of Nations was an exceptional effort. It was kept open for seven months, seven days a week. This provided adequate opportunity for the public to get a general idea of the design concept and to prepare themselves for the formal participation process to follow. The City and Concord Pacific newsletters were well written and distributed through a mailing list of 700 names. The first City issue did not appear until April, 1989 but the content was thorough and informative. Concord Pacific's first newsletter was very helpful 94 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS in listing public concerns raised during previous meetings and the appropriate design response or plan change. The City Policy Broadsheets were well written in a land use and related issues format. Each page listed the issues, facts, past policy, and proposed policy. Illustrations were included. There were some complaints that the Broadsheets were not distributed until the meetings were announced but there were an adequate number of meetings which gave people an opportunity to attend. There was some dispute over the proposal for a Citizen Advisory Committee similar to that used during the B.C. Place planning process. Some City Council members argued that such a Committee would ensure well-rounded discussion and a community perspective. But this proposal was not accepted by other Council members who argued that another Committee was not needed and that adequate representation would be afforded through the program of public involvement. (Standing Committee of Council on Finance and Priorities, January 26, 1989, p.2) Both arguments are valid. A Citizen Advisory Committee would add another layer of "process" but it might also serve a useful function as a focus of community interests. People who did not want to deal with planners or the developers could discuss their concerns with the committee members. The techniques used most frequently in this participation program (meetings, newsletters, questionnaires) were the most basic available. Some were successful (e.g. 95 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS workshops) and some were failures, usually the result of poor design (e.g. questionnaires) or implementation (e.g. Plaza of Nations drop-in). Meetings were, by far, the preferred technique. Meetings are valuable because they promote interest and are usually covered by the media. But with over 60 meetings of which over 30 were open to the public we should question the level at which participation could be maintained. Of course the number of meetings is related to the scale of the development and this must be taken into account. It is beyond the intent of this thesis to determine the appropriate scale of development but there is no doubt that it influences citizen participation. A large multi-use development requires many public meetings; perhaps this results in participation overload. While the workshops and drop-ins were successful, they were used only a few times when planners realized that some new approaches were needed. It is unfortunate that a variety of techniques were not used such as detailed questionnaires, more workshops (for the International Village), a Citizen Advisory Committee, and better information dissemination (e.g. a newspaper insert). Perhaps citizen input would have increased. In a British study of participation, a survey of participants and planners was taken to identify the preferred and most used techniques in citizen participation programs. (Spires, 1979) Participants consistently identified newsletters, questionnaires, and direct contact with planners as preferred techniques. Planners selected meetings, exhibits, and questionnaires. The Pacific Place citizen participation process seems to support these results. The combined workshop/workbook and drop-ins were the most successful techniques while meetings produced mixed results. 96 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS There is no denying that a genuine effort was made with the consultation program. The extent of the techniques proves this point. But the techniques selected served only certain functions. They were selected because they suited the objectives of the City and Concord Pacific, to inform and receive input. No technique was used which guaranteed influence or an advisory function to the participants. This limited the participants' success in meeting their objectives. The next dimension provides another approach to discussing the relationship between techniques and objectives. THE FORM OF COMMUNICATION DIMENSION Techniques can be described by the type of communication which occurs; the form of communication may actually represent an objective. Benwell describes this dimension by three functions: dispersal of information, gathering of information, and interaction between the planner and public. An assumption is made that interaction is more conducive to citizen influence because of the feedback which occurs between the planner and the participant. Thus a variety of forms of communication should be expected in a participation program. Dispersal of information serves to educate, information gathering provides a basic form of consultation, while interaction attains a higher level of participation. The purposes of the Pacific Place public involvement program were to inform and receive advice; these are the same as information dispersal and gathering. The techniques used in the Pacific Place citizen participation process included all three functions, although information dispersal and gathering were more frequent. The public meetings were used for the dispersal of information although some information 97 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS gathering did take place. Newspapers advertisements announcing the meetings described them as "Public Information Meetings". The special meetings with interest groups might have functioned on all three levels, particularly the meetings with the Seniors and Disabled Committees in which expertise was high and interests were specific. The newsletters were also used for information dispersal as was the Concord Pacific Information Centre. The three drop-ins are difficult to classify; they probably met all three functions. But they were oriented to public relations or information dispersal. There was minimal information gathering and interaction because planners and Concord Pacific representatives spent most of time explaining the design concept and planning process to the public. The workshops involved a high level of interaction but were used only two times. The use of workbooks and questionnaires improved the information gathering function although the number completed was small. Information dispersal and gathering appear to be the most frequent communication functions which occurred during this process. There was little opportunity for interaction and real feedback. The drop-ins might have facilitated interaction but the planners were limited in the time spent with each person. Interaction probably occurred at the special interest group meetings and with over 25 such meetings this is promising, but interaction with the general public was not as frequent. More workshops might have increased the interaction function. Improved information gathering might have resulted had better questionnaires been used. Perhaps a more detailed survey or a questionnaire placed in a newspaper which would reach a larger audience. 98 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS The communication dimension provides an interesting level of analysis. An important component of participation is the level at which planners deal with the public as evident in the detail of the plan, the participation technique used, and the resulting communication function. A recurring complaint during the Pacific Place process focussed on the abstract and vague nature of the plans. This was a more frequent complaint at meetings early in the planning process. It was not until meetings were held closer to the date of the public hearing for plan approval that more detail was available. The Concord Pacific meetings in Fall, 1988 for the International Village design concept presented very general plans and participants found it difficult to respond to Concord's request for ideas and criticisms. As one participant stated; "When are we going to have the facts so we can predict what sort of impact this is going to have on our lives." (Vancouver Sun, September 23, 1988, p.B5) It appears that if plans are rather general the response of the public will be the same. When meetings were held for the International Village in February and March, 1989 before the public hearing, attendance was high and citizen input was more focussed. This is a dilemma for planners who do not want to immerse the public in detail at an early stage in planning. The Pacific Place process was placed between two extremes. With the unveiling of the initial design concept in May, 1988 the proposal seemed to be decided. At the same time, the public was asked for opinions on the False Creek Policy Broadsheets. Then, the developers and planners requested public input on the general design concept for the International Village. With the process underway, the first public request was for more detail. This is an instance in which workshops would have helped. 99 A N A L Y S I S O F T H E C IT I ZEN P A R T I C I P A T I O N P R O C E S S The quality of communication was influenced by the phasing of planning and participation. In the next section, I will discuss the problems resulting from the phasing of the planning process. The planning and particpation process for Pacific Place forced the public to deal with public objectives, general design concepts and detailed use information at the same time. It is not surprising that some citizens complained about the process and found it difficult to contribute. It appears that the functions of information dispersal and gathering were the most frequent form of communication. This is in agreement with the techniques used (newsletters, meetings) and with the main purposes of public consultation - to inform and receive advice and to achieve support. Interaction, which might have contributed to the objectives of some participants, was not obvious or important. THE TIMING/PHASING DIMENSION Benwell states that participation can occur at three stages of the planning process: the selection of objectives, the evaluation of alternatives, and the evaluation of the final plan. These are stages at which public values are needed. Benwell distinguishs these "policy" stages from the "design" or "analys is" stages which are the responsibility of the planner and developer. The Pacific Place process was constrained by two aspects of process: 1. it did not follow a systematic planning proces; 2. the process was multi-phased and "fast-tracked". 100 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS The planning and development approval process for Pacific Place was organized soon after the site was sold. The Planning Department and Concord Pacific agreed to a co-operative process and schedule which was approved in June, 1988. This is significant for two reasons. First, the City was still considering its Policy Broadsheets; these were not approved until August. Indeed, the public was still being asked for their opinion of the planning principles or "big ideas" in the workbook used at meetings in April, 1989. Second, the public involvement process was not approved by Council until February, 1989. For almost seven months, design activity and preparation for development approval was on-going without any formal participation program. Of course, some participation occurred; Concord Pacific held some meetings and published a newsletter. But, it is obvious that the Pacific Place planning and participation process was not a systematic process as outlined by many planning theorists. The process does not meet Benwell's suggested stages for citizen particpa'tion. It could be argued that the public was given an opportunity to participate in the identification of objectives and issues during the public consultation phase for the City Policy Broadsheets. But even this was taking place while Concord Pacific was designing. The City recognized that timing and phasing was not perfect; While overall planning principles for False Creek may be established by Council in the near future, it is obvious that Concord Pacific's specific zoning proposals will require direct attention in parallel with this effort. (Manager's Report, June 24, 1988, p.2) . This "parallel" effort denies the value of a systematic planning process in which objectives are set before a plan is designed. The appearance of designing a development alongside the selection of objectives is questionable. As mentioned in Chapter IV, some 101 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS Council members and citizens were appalled by the Council's decision to permit Concord Pacific and the Planning Department to discuss the Policy Broadsheets in relation to the Concord Pacific proposal before the Broadsheets were approved by Council. Benwell's suggestion for participation at the second stage, the evaluation of alternatives, did not occur in the Pacific Place planning process (with the exception of Lagoons vs. Bays). The public was presented with one development proposal when the site was sold to Concord Pacific in April, 1988. Although the concept was only preliminary, it was a design proposal in response to the Provincial Government's request for development on the site. The Provincial Government's intention was to select a proposal which would approximate the final development and to begin the development approval process when the selection was made, not to start all over again when a developer was announced. The planning process for Pacific Place was described in the Report to Council on public involvement. (Planning Department, January 18, 1989) The stages included: issue identification, policy formulation, overall plan preparation, area plan preparation, and implementation. There was never any mention of developing alternatives and allowing public input into the evaluation of these alternatives. Developing alternatives would be difficult and costly. Perhaps it is too much to expect a developer to provide alternative designs for a project of this scale. Time is also a problem; the schedule for development approval was altered twice, in June, 1988 (International Village from September, 1988 to March, 1989, ODP from January, 1989 to 102 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS July, 1989) and again in February, 1989 (International Village extended to June, 1989, ODP extended to October, 1989). Concord Pacific's initial schedule was unreasonable but the length of the process was still a concern to the company. Conforming to a systematic planning process which includes the development and evaluation of alternatives would have caused more delay. Perhaps one design concept is acceptable if it is still subjected to a rigourous citizen participation process. There was an evaluation and selection of the bays or lagoons options for the waterfront. Although Concord Pacific received preliminary approval for the lagoons concept from City Council in August, 1988 public consultation in April and May, 1989 resulted in a decision by City Council to select the bays option. The third stage of participation, the evaluation of the final plan, was anything but straightforward. The planning process was not only co-operative in having the developer and planners work together, but experimental in phasing, in allowing the International Village parcel to be rezoned in advance as a test process. This separation of the International Village from the rest of the site might have damaged the effectiveness of citizen participation because of the mixed phasing. For example, in February and March, 1989 the City sponsored some meetings for the International Village rezoning. In April and June meetings were held to discuss the overall development; the planning principles were also discussed at these meetings. In June, the public hearing was held for the International Village rezoning. The public was expected to adjust to the different levels of planning - objectives, design, rezoning, design, objectives, rezoning. It must have been 103 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS frustrating and confusing. In the evaluation and analysis of a planning and participation process, this cannot be overlooked. The controversy over the Provincial Government sale of the property is also related to the timing and phasing of the planning process. A systematic land use planning process should begin as soon as decisions are made about a site. In the case of the north shore of False Creek, the Provincial Government took a unilateral decision to abandon the public development plan, put the property up for sale, and select the purchaser and developer. The real planning and participation process did not start until this was completed at which time the "fast-track" process would begin. The timing and phasing of the planning process is important because it influences the success of citizen participation. The public was aware of the controversy over the sale of the property; when the developer was finallj' selected the public saw a development proposal. There is no doubt that many people believed that the proposal signalled the end rather than the beginning of the decision process for the site and their interest subsided. When the City commenced its multi-phased planning and development approval process with Concord Pacific even committed participants found it difficult to keep up; the fluctuating attendance at meetings is proof of this point. THE POWER/INFLUENCE/AUTHORITY DIMENSION Benwell considered this, not as a dimension, but as a determinant and consequence of the participation process. Initially, power can be attributed to the City and the 104 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS developer which organized the consultation process; techniques were selected according to their objectives. I have decided to measure this dimension by the success in meeting the goals and objectives of each actor; this becomes the product of citizen participation. Quite simply, for the public this is measured by influence and changes to the plan; for the planners and developer it is measured by public acceptance. The dimension provides a measure of the power and influence of each actor in the process; it gives an indication of the real outcome of a participation process from a product perspective. Power and influence bring the analysis closer to the democratic character of the decision making process. There is a dilemma in assuming that changes to the plan can be attributed to citizen influence. Kweit and Kweit state; The ability of citizens to achieve the services they desire from government is certainly what would normally be considered a form of power. To conclude; however, that policy impact is an indication of power redistribution is to ignore the basic definition of power posited by Dahl; that is the ability of A to get B to do something that he would not otherwise have done. (Kweit and Kweit, p. 127) Citizen influence on a plan would be difficult to prove and the issue is not resolved in this analysis. Therefore, power is attributed to participants with uncertainty. The False Creek Policy Broadsheets provide the first opportunity to isolate public influence. During the April and May, 1988 meetings participants stressed their concerns over density, social housing, park space, public access to the site, soil quality, traffic, and views. As a result of public input, the Broadsheets were revised to guarantee public access to the site. Unfortunately, the density policy was changed to allow higher densities in 105 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS appropriate areas, although participants had criticized proposed densities. A major concern of some advocacy groups was the amount of social housing. Some groups requested that the provision be increased to 33% or 50% of the housing stock but this was not accepted by Council. The Broadsheets were amended to guarantee that soil toxicity be resolved before development approval, although Concord Pacific requested that this not be included. Water quality was to be studied but not delay development. The waterfront walkway was required to follow the waterfront as much as possible. While the Broadsheets incorporated many public values anyway, citizen input did have some impact on the final policy. But some changes were questionable. The soil quality guarantee would have been enforced by the Planning Department and City Council anyway. Guaranteed access to the site by adjacent residents was a minor victory. The refusal to ensure more social housing or moderate income housing was frustrating in light of the rental housing crisis occuring in the city at the time. The change to the density policy went against public opinion. The International Village rezoning was the second opportunity to judge citizen impact. At information meetings, participants stressed density, development impacts (mostly on property values and the loss of affordable housing), retail space, traffic, soil quality, and social housing. As a result of criticism by local business and suggestions by the Planning Department, the retail component was reduced from 500,000 square feet to 200,000 square feet. Density was decreased from an F.S.R. of 4.08 to 3.43. There were 106 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS changes to the form of development in the distribution of family housing to improve privacy, sunlight, and access to play areas. Again, these changes might have resulted primarily from the influence of planners. Social housing remained at 20%, although the International Village is adjacent to the downtown eastside, a low income neighbourhood that could be gravely affected by rising land prices. At the public hearing, Jim Green of DERA complained that, as the most impacted neighbourhood, they had not been given enough opportunity to participate and influence the final plan. The desparation of social housing advocates was evident at the International Village rezoning public hearing. Federal and provincial government funding for social housing could not be guaranteed until development was approved and formal applications could be made for social housing. This did not stop speakers from ensuring that their views were heard. A member of the Special Council Committee on Urban Natives waited until 12:45 a.m. to request that Council require a guarantee for 20% native housing within the social housing units designated for International Village; this amounted to 32 native housing units. Of course, Council could provide no such guarantee. Social housing advocates were also concerned that subsidized units designated for the site would decrease the number of units available for the rest of the city. This issue was not resolved. A major controversy in the International Village rezoning was the contaminated soil and the siting of a park on this soil. The City Policy Broadsheets required that a soil remediation plan be approved by the Province and the City before the rezoning was 107 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS approved. This plan was completed and approved but not to the satisfaction of many citizens. At the International Village hearing at least ten of the speakers focussed on the weakness of the techncial studies. Unfortunately, this issue was not settled; the City and the Pacific Place Soils Remediation Group were certain that the remediation plan was adequate. The International Village rezoning was changed. The retail interests of local business owners were considered. Average densities were reduced and the residential form of development was altered. But social housing was not increased, or even guaranteed. The soil quality issue is difficult to judge; with all the technical guarantees of safety, public refusal to use the park may be the end result anyway. The overall development plan provides the final case to measure the impact of citizen input. The change from lagoons to bays on the waterfront was the most significant example of successful citizen impact on the plan. The influence of public opinion should not be underestimated in this case. Concord Pacific publicly stated that the lagoons option was their preferred design but they were forced to accept the Council decision. Participation in the planning of the overall development took place on a general level because of the scale of the project. Meetings and other participation techniques emphasized land use but not in great detail. The problems arising from this approach were discussed in the section concerned with the communication dimension. When area development plans for the individual parcels (neighbourhoods) are put to public discussion there will be more public input as was the experience with the International Village. 108 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS The overall development plan was altered. Building heights were reduced and the number of residential units was reduced from 10,000 to 7,600 and building heights were reduced. This reduction is significant particularly as people were concerned with density and loss of views. The towers were set further back from the waterfront. But, as in the Policy Broadsheets and International Village examples, it is difficult to determine whether these changes resulted from the influence of planners or citizen participants. Social housing was not increased and some people still disagreed with the density, heights of buildings, and loss of views. The effect of power and influence in planning is recognized by most participants in the process, especially community groups. DERA members realized that if they were to have an effect on the decisions made for the site they would need to increase their influence. In May, 1988 they requested that City Council support their request to Concord Pacific to fund a planner/architect consultant for DERA. The consultant would review proposals, do impact studies, and advise DERA. The Council agreed to support this request but DERA never got their consultant as Concord Pacific would not provide the funds. Providing community groups with experts or funds to hire their own experts is not a new idea but it is unlikely that Concord would support such a request. The results show that citizen input had some impact on the development. The development provided a lot of public amenities in the initial design proposal such as community facilities, parks, and the waterfront walkway, and this response must be recognized. Public access to the site is guaranteed, and density, waterfront design, and 109 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS retail space were changed. Some of the changes would have been inevitable (e.g. soils policy) while others were ignored under obvious controvers}' (e.g. social housing). Advocacy groups achieved some success; they were able to change parts of the plan but significant issues such as social housing and views were seen as major losses. As Kweit and Kweit point out; Before it can be concluded that power has changed hands, citizens must be given legal authority to force the officials to comply, or officials must demonstrate, over time, that not only are they willing to respond to specific citizen requests, but that they are also willing to allow citizens to determine the basic direction of policy. (Kweit and Kweit, p. 127) Neighbourhood groups achieved their objectives because some of their concerns were recognized. Concord Pacific and the City met their objectives; public acceptance was achieved, excluding a few advocacy groups and citizens who still saw faults in the plan. The other objectives of informing and receiving information were also achieved because of the extensive participation process undertaken. The developer truly believed that citizen participation was a success. Stanley Kwok of Concord Pacific stated; "It's not possible to satisfy all the interest groups all the time but this plan meets the civic and public concerns." (Vancouver Sun, August 26, 1989, p.A5) These results suggest that power and influence rested with the developer and the City, from a power perspective citizen participation was successful only for certain groups on certain issues. 110 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS THE SCALE OF DECISION DIMENSION Benwell did not define this dimension because she did not use it in her study; therefore I am defining it to suit this analysis. The scale of decision can be defined by the size of the development, the number of interests/actors involved, and the political salience of the issue. The Pacific Place development is a project which involved the Provincial Government, the City of Vancouver, and a private developer. It is a large development comprising one sixth of the land area in the downtown peninsula. It is also one of the most valuable waterfront development sites in North America. Because of the scale of development and complexity of the process, the planning and citizen participation process is not an isolated process occurring independent of political and economic interests. A political context must be included. This scale and context can be explained in three ways. First, the controversy over the Provincial Government sale of the property set the stage for the planning and participation process. Second, the public may have believed that private development, especially on the scale of Pacific Place, will proceed with or without their participation because of the private market bias of the Provincial Government and the City of Vancouver. Third, the size of the development was so enormous that people may have found it overwhelming.. Although the public involvement process was extensive, citizen participation may have been constrained by these three factors. The controversy over the sale of the property has been referred to as it influenced the phasing of the planning process, but this discussion will emphasize the political 111 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS implications. The Provincial Government made a unilateral decision to sell the site without consulting the City of Vancouver or its citizens. The north shore of False Creek was a valuable public resource and the citizens of Vancouver, and perhaps citizens throughout the province, should have had some say in the decision regarding such a valuable and spectacular piece of property. Decisions concerning the development of public land are crucial to community planning. Many people were bitter about the sale. But the public did not have a say in this decision; the opportunity for public input would occur later. Even this opportunity was damaged by the sale of the property. When the developer was selected and a proposal was unveiled people may have believed that the development plan was final. The Concord Pacific Information Centre Model may have confirmed this perception. Of course, interested citizens believed that they could change the plan to include their concerns over social housing, density, park space, traffic patterns, soil quality, building heights, and views. But others may have believed that Concord Pacific's proposal was not alterable in any significant way. Participation may have been constrained because of this factor. Other controversies cropped up during the sale. The relationship between the City of Vancouver and the Provincial Government was unclear at the time. City Council did not involve itself in the sale but emphasized that it would have complete control over zoning and development approval. There were rumours about the value of the property and people were concerned that this meant a guarantee of certain zoning with or without city agreement. When the sale was finalized, Grace McCarthy wrote a letter to City Council promising a financial bonus if density guarantees were promised; the City declined 112 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS the offer. These incidents set the tone for the planning and participation process to follow. After all the controversy, many people were relieved to see anything happen on the site. The favourable response to the model displayed at the Information Centre supports this argument. Second, both the Provincial Government and the City of Vancouver support the private market in land development and land use. The intention of the Provincial Government in selling the site was in keeping with the intensive privatization program at the time. A secondary objective was to achieve the best financial return possible. There was also the benefit of attracting Pacific Rim investment to British Columbia; the purchase of the site by Li Ka-shing was a real success for the Government in this respect. The City Policy Broadsheets confirmed this goal as well; A high quality development resulting from a good, quick, co-operative planning process would create a good image for Vancouver in this larger marketplace. (Manager's Report, June 24, 1988, p.l) The City Council majority in Vancouver is pro-development and hopes to promote Vancouver as a global city providing financial services and development opportunities for investors. A co-operative planning process with Concord Pacific was one method of improving the relationship between the City and the development industry. But we should question the value of this co-operative relationship following the controvery of the sale. There is a traditional arm's length relationship between planners and developers; with Pacific Place this changed. The public perception that the planners and developers were working too closely might have damaged the potential of citizen 113 ANALYSIS OF THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS participation if the public believed that their opinions would be ignored by planners who were, in their opinion, under the influence of development interests. Finally, the scale of the development is also important. It is an enormous development, involving multiple uses, and a multi-phased planning process. The public was overwhelmed by the length and complexity of it all. As one private consultant planner stated; "it is so big that it's difficult for even a professional to comprehend, for the non-expert it's incomprehensible." (Globe and Mail, June 19, 1989, p.A8) This explains the arguments of some critics who believed that the site should never have been sold and that a slower, incremental, public development should have taken place. This issue is beyond the scope of this thesis but it is an example of external influences on the citizen participation process. The identification of the scale of decision and a political context is important in the analysis of this case study. The Provincial Government was a major influence on the planning process because of its political and economic goals. The City of Vancouver concurred with these goals and tailored its formal processes accordingly. The result was a citizen participation process which met the goals and objectives of the developer and the City. While some participants were successful in meeting their goals and objectives the development plan was changed, the events occurring external to this process constrained participation activity. 114 VII - CONCLUSION URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Urban development is a dynamic, competitive process involving large private development companies and multiple levels of government. The bureaucratic process of planning, which controls land use, is very complex. With most complex government and private sector processes, it is difficult to imagine any opportunities being provided for the general public to participate. Yet citizen participation is still considered to be an integral part of the urban planning process. This is based on the assumption that, although planning bureaucracy and large corporations make the day-to-day decisions regarding urban development, in cases of large-scale redevelopment, the general public should be informed, consulted and influence the outcome. Changes to land use are the visible result of government and private sector activity. The public is more likely to have opinions on land use because it takes place in their neighbourhood, influences their life in some way, and is almost permanent in its built form. As a result, citizen participation has been institutionalized by planning departments. While most planners are interested in the process of participation programs, planning theorists have also analysed participation from a power and political context approach 115 CONCLUSION which is of value to the development of theory and the role of planning in a democratic society. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND DEMOCRACY Citizen participation originated with democratic values. To achieve the democratic aim of the common good, values of political equality and popular sovereignty were developed by democratic theorists. But present day society cannot function with a democracy in its classical form of full participation. Even representative democracy is difficult to achieve with the obvious influence of elites and power and the effect this has on the general public. Burueaucratic decision making structures, under the influence of elites, cannot afford the loss of power or time which is required if citizens are to have a say in decisions. More often, citizen participation is a mechanism used to inform the public and gain their acceptance of decisions. It does provide a check on the decision makers, the bureaucrats, and the elites, but this is obvious only in extreme situations. Representative decision making satisfies the general public. They have faith in their representatives. The debate between advocates and critics of participation continues. Perhaps citizen participation is an ideal which is difficult to achieve. Many people are not interested in participating even when provided with ample opportunity. They may be satisfied with the policy or development proposal or they may prefer to leave the decisions to their representatives because they are busy with other responsibilities. But there are still people who want to participate and this is the reason that citizen participation must be 116 CONCLUSION promoted. These active citizens recognize the democratic value of participation. It is accepted here that citizen participation must be included in the planning process. Citizens and interest groups participate because they want to promote their interests, they want to see changes in the development which respond to their concerns. The planners and developers judge the participation process according to its influence on the process leading to development. They want public acceptance in reasonable time without any extreme public influence on the development. These are the opposing purposes of citizen participation mentioned earlier: citizen and administrative. Recognizing these different interests and purposes in a citizen participation process alongside the more obvious democratic realities of elite power in decision making should make us suspicious of the real influence of citizen participation. This thesis rejects the evaluation of citizen participation which considers only a process approach. The recognition of interests, power, and the democratic origins of citizen participation requires that a product and context approach be adopted as well. The Benwell multi-dimensional framework affords an analysis of process, product, power, and context. This was used in the evaluation and analysis of the Pacific Place citizen participation process which provided an example of the successes and failures of citizen participation in large scale urban redevelopment. 117 CONCLUSION THE PACIFIC PLACE EXPERIENCE The Pacific Place participation process was a success in its representative quality and in the extent of the process. Many public values were incorporated into the plan and it is assumed that citizen input influenced the plan although it is difficult to distinguish the influence of the planners and the participants. The citizen participation process for Pacific Place was constrained by the objectives of the City and the developer, the lack of variety in techniques, the form of communication, the planning process, the scale of development, and the political and economic influences on the process. The City of Vancouver and Concord Pacific Developments Ltd, through the co-operative planning process were able to ensure that their objectives (inform, receive advice, achieve support) were paramount in the citizen participation process. As a result, the process was organized according to these objectives. To ensure public acceptance of the development, the process took on a public relations orientation. The dispersal of information was key to achieving public acceptance and the techniques used emphasized this function. Public meetings, by far the most frequently used technique, emphasized "public information". Newsletters and drop-ins also emphasized the dispersal of information. Some information was gathered, through questionnaires and at public meetings, but this was not as extensive as the function of information dispersal. Interaction was rare, occurring at the two workshops and at some meetings and drop-ins. Benwell's multi-dimensional approach sheds light on citizen participation exercises. A process oriented evaluation might consider the Pacific Place program a success because 118 CONCLUSION of the extent of techniques. But Benwell relates the techniques to the objectives of all the actors and the achievement of these objectives through the techniques. Power becomes an explicit dimension by objective achievement. The Pacific Place citizen participation program cannot be described as an empowering exercise for the participants, although some changes were made to the plan. It did maintain the power and interests of the City and developer. In the Analysis, I argued that the multi-phased planning process constrained citizen participation. This conclusion is maintained although it should be recognized that the scale of development may have necessitated that the planning process follow this schedule. BenwelPs scale of decision dimension and the political context broadens the analysis. Unless the analyst recognizes the interrelationship between citizen participation, planning, and the political and economic system, the analysis and its contribution to the understanding of citizen participation and democracy is of little value. In the case of Pacific Place, the events preceding the planning process had a marked effect. Actors and interests outside of the formal planning process exerted influence. The Pacific Place citizen participation process was a mixture of success and failure when analyzed from a multi-dimensional perspective. Perhaps, the process was a success because the common good was achieved. The Pacific Place development will bring economic growth to the City and the Province, provide a lot of housing, and will maintain the False Creek waterfront for public use. 119 CONCLUSION But urban redevelopment causes negative impacts and disruption to some neighbourhoods. In a democracy, it is expected that citizens accept the changes for the benefit of society. But it is difficult to ignore that the neighbourhood which will be negatively impacted by this development is the poorest in Vancouver. It is well organized but it must struggle more than other neighbourhoods to protect its interests. There is no doubt that development impacts will cause real hardship in the downtown eastside. Citizen participation made these impacts and concerns obvious but the emphasis remained on development approval. In a development of this scale and almost certain financial success, would it have been difficult to provide more social housing and prepare mitigation plans for development impacts? If, for a moment, the analytical framework is ignored and the development process is considered alone, it is possible to conclude that a development of this size cannot be expected to successfully meet democratic objectives in the process of development and the form of development. The project is enormous. The planning process was time-consuming and very intensive in relation to the time and effort that citizens could afford. Perhaps expecting the process to achieve more than a public relations objective was expecting too much. But if decision makers are genuine about including citizens in the planning process these difficulties of scale can be overcome. Once this is accepted, the challenge is to select participation techniques which match the intensity of the development. This does not mean guaranteeing a citizen veto; techniques which are interactive and participatory are 120 CONCLUSION adequate. Citizen advisory committees, more workshops, and a wider distribution of more detailed questionnaires would have improved the Pacific Place participation process. But participatory techniques are only useful if there is acceptance of citizen participation for the purpose of improving the plan through citizen input or for promoting participatory democracy. If the purpose of citizen participation is administrative, to achieve acceptance or the plan and educate the public in planning matters, techniques will make little difference. The purpose is determined by those who control citizen participation and have the power to control the process. THE RECOGNITION OF POWER Power is a central theme in this analysis. Arnstein's ladder of citizen participation is based on a power interpretation of citizen participation in planning. The Pacific Place citizen participation process can be placed on the "consultation" rung of the Arnstein ladder which is best described as "participation in participation". The City's public involvement process did an excellent job of providing information and the public was consulted and their opinions gathered. . But the process did not move beyond consultation. The public was not given an advisory role or any guarantee that their input would influence the final plan. The Pacific Place citizen participation process was undertaken to satisfy a basic function of legitimation for the urban land development process. This process was supported by the public institutional structure of planning which organized a consultation 121 CONCLUSION process to inform and consult the public in order to gain support for development. As a result, certain interests were paramount over others. Power will never be transferred in any significant way in our present decision making processes. Elite decision making and interests have too much influence to allow such a major change in society. The most we can hope for is planning and decision making which provides some opportunity for citizen influence, not only information and consultation. Perhaps stepping up one or two rungs on the Arnstein ladder to placation or partnership would be some progress. Citizen participation in democratic society and in a public decision making process such as planning is only as good as the institutional structures which support it. While citizen participation is difficult to achieve in large scale developments involving multiple levels of the public and private sectors, it can be improved with explicit objectives, more interaction, and a greater variety of techniques of participation. Citizen participation is important in major development decisions which will change the shape and character of a city; this is the case with Pacific Place. This is the type of development which requires more public appraisal and influence over the outcome. That the site was sold in one piece to one developer with one proposal, with a stated guarantee by the Provincial and City politicians of a quick, co-operative development approval process, is a major factor in discussing citizen participation in this development. Unless the institutional structures are flexible enough to move beyond the political and economic 122 CONCLUSION interests which control them there is little hope for genuine citizen particpation as defined by democratic values. FINDINGS These findings cover three areas: the Pacific Place citizen participation process, theory and evaluation of citizen participation, and future research. Pacific Place Citizen Participation Process 1. Use more interactive techniques such as workshops, better quesionnaires, surveys, a newspaper insert (questionnaire), and a Citizen Advisory Committee. Theory and Evaluation of Citizen Participation 2. Promote citizen participation beyond informing and consulting, allow an advisory role for citizens. 3. Evaluate the citizen participation program within a framework which recognizes the influence of power, the planning process, the political context, and the scale of development. Future Research 4. Update the evaluation of the Pacific Place citizen participation process. 5. Research comparative studies with other redevelopment projects. 6. Research the influence of scale of development and the planning process on citizen participation. 123 BIBLIOGRAPHY Alterman, Rachelle, Harris, David, and Hill, Morris. "The Impact of Public Participation on Planning: The Case of the Derbyshire Structure Plan." Town Planning Review. (55-2) April, 1984, p. 177-96. Arnstein, Sherry R. "A Ladder of Citizen Participation." Journal of the American Institute of Planning. (35-4) July, 1969, p.216-24. Benwell, Mary. Four Models of Public Participation in Structure Planning. Bedford: Cranfield Institute of Technology, Centre for Transport Studies, 1979. Berry, Jeffrey, M., Portney, Kent E. , Bablitch, Mary Beth, and Mahoney, Richard. "Public Involvement in Administration: The Structural Determinants of Effective Citizen Participation." Journal of Voluntary Action. (13-2) April-June, 1984, p.7-23. Boothroyd, Peter. Draft Handbook on Community Planning Process. Vancouver: University of British Columbia, School of Community and Regional Planning. 1986. Bruton, M.J. "Public Participation, Local Planning, and Conflicts of Interest." Policy and Politics. (8-4) 1980, p.423-42. Burton, Thomas L. "A Review and Analysis of Canadian Cases in Public Participation." Involvement and Environment - Proceedings of the Canadian Conference on Public Participation, October 4-7, 1977 - Volume 2. Ed. Barry Sadler. Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta, 1977. Catanese, Anthony James. Planners and Local Politics, Impossible Dreams. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications Inc., 1974. Catanese, Anthony James. Politics of Planning and Development. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications Inc., 1984. Checkoway, Barry and Van Til, Jon. "What Do We Know About Citizen Participation? A Selective Review of Research." Citizen Participation in America: Essays on the State of the Art. Ed. Stuart Langton. Toronto: D.C. Heath and Company, 1978. *CITY OF VANCOUVER REFERENCES ARE LISTED CHRONOLOGICALLY City of Vancouver. Minutes of Special Council Meeting. April 11, 1988. City of Vancouver Planning Department. False Creek Policy Broadsheets. April, 1988 124 BIBLIOGRAPHY City of Vancouver, Standing Committee of Council on Transportation and Strategic Planning. Report to Council. May 19, 19S8. City of Vancouver. Manager's Report - Discussion on City Policies for False Creek. June 22, 1988. City of Vancouver, Standing Committee of Council on Finance and Priorities. Report to Council. June 23, 1988. City of Vancouver. Manager's Report - Timetable and Staffing for Involvement with Concord Pacific. June 24, 1988. City of Vancouver. City Council Minutes. June 28, 1988. City of Vancouver. Manager's Report - City Policies for False Creek. July 20, 1988. City of Vancouver. City Council Minutes. August 23, 1988. City of Vancouver. City Council Minutes. August 30, 1988. City of Vancouver, Gastown Historic Area Planning Committee/Chinatown Historic Area Planning Committee. Joint Meeting Minutes. November 10, 1988. City of Vancouver, Urban Design Panel. Meeting Minutes. November 22, 1988. City of Vancouver Planning Department. Public Involvement in Planning the North Shore of False Creek. January 18, 1989. City of Vancouver, Standing Committee of Council on Finance and Priorities. Report to Council. January 26, 1989. City of Vancouver. Manager's Report - Rezoning of North Park Area. February 2, 1989. City of Vancouver. City Council Minutes. February 14, 1989. City of Vancouver Planning Department. Public Information Meeting Minutes. February 22, 1989 (afternoon). City of Vancouver Planning Department. Public Information Meeting Minutes. February 22, 1989 (evening). City of Vancouver Planning Department. Public Information Meeting Minutes. March 6, 1989. City of Vancouver. Manager's Report - Citizen Participation in Planning. March 28, 1989. City of Vancouver, Standing Committee of Council on Neighbourhood Issues and Services. Report to Council. April 6, 1989. 125 BIBLIOGRAPHY City of Vancouver Planning Department. Public Information Meeting Minutes. April 20, 1989. City of Vancouver Planning Department. False Creek Workbook. April, 1989. City of Vancouver Planning Department. False Creek Planning News - Volume 1, Number 1. April, 1989. City of Vancouver Planning Department. Shoreline Configuration for False Creek - Bays or Lagoons. May 9, 1989. City of Vancouver. City Council Minutes. May 16, 1989. City of Vancouver, Urban Design Panel. Meeting Minutes. May 23, 1989. City of Vancouver Planning Department. False Creek Planning News - Volume 1, Number 2. June, 1989. City of Vancouver Planning Department. False Creek Planning Questionnaire. June, 1989. City of Vancouver Planning Department. Public Information Meeting Minutes. June 5, 1989. City of Vancouver. Public Hearing Information Package. June 22,1989. City of Vancouver. Special Council Meeting Minutes. (International Village Rezoning Public Hearing). June 22, 1989. City of Vancouver Planning Department. False Creek Planning News - Volume 1, Number 3. August, 1989. City of Vancouver Planning Department. False Creek North Questionnaire. August, 1989. Concord Pacific Developments Ltd. Public Information Brochure. July, 1989. Concord Pacific Developments Ltd. Collected Notes from September-October, 1988 Public Meetings and Results from Information Centre Questionnaire. July, 1989. Concord Pacific Developments Ltd. Pacific Place Newsletter 41. December, 1988. Concord Pacific Developments Ltd. Pacific Place Update. June, 1989. Concord Pacific Developments Ltd. Pacific Place Update. September, 1989 Connor, Desmond M. "Models and Techniques of Citizen Participation." Involvement and Environment - Volume 1. Ed. Barry Sadler. Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta, 1977. 126 BIBLIOGRAPHY Connor, Desmond M. Constructive Citizen Participation. Victoria: Development Press, 1985. Cullingworth, Barry J. Canadian Planning and Public Participation. Toronto: University of Toronto, Centre for Urban and Community Studies, 1984. Draper, James A. "Evolution of Citizen Paticipation in Canada." Involvement and Environment - Volume 1. Ed. Barry Sadler. Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta, 1977. Fagence, Michael. Citizen Participation in Planning. Toronto: Pergamon of Canada Ltd., 1977. Glass, James G. "Citizen Participation in Planning and the Relationship Between Objectives and Techniques." Journal of the American Planning Association. (45-2) April, 1979, p. 180-9. Government of Ontario, Ministry of Community and Social Services. .Analysis and Design of Public Participation Programme Evaluation in Ontario. 1974. Gutch, Richard, Spires Rod, and Taylor, Mel. Views of Participation - Three Papers Exploring How Different Actors in the Planning Process View Participation. London: Polytechnic of Central London, School of Environment, 1979. Gustein, Donald. "Vancouver Swings Right." City Magazine. (9-1) Winter, 1986, p.35. Higgins, Donald J.H. Local and Urban Politics in Canada. Toronto: Gage Educational Publishing Company, 1986. Homenuck, Peter, Durlak, Jerry, and Morgenstern, Jim. "Evaluation of Public Participation Programs." Involvement and Environment - Volume 1. Ed. Barry Sadler. Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta, 1977. Interview with Craig Aspinall, July 31, 1989. Interview with Coralys Cuthbert, July 26, 1989. Kweit, Mary Grisez and Kweit, Robert. Implementing Citizen Participation in a Bureaucratic Society. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1981. Lang, Michael H. "Citizen Participation in Urban Planning: Planners Attitudes." GeoJournal (14-2) 1987, p.227-35. Langton, Stuart. "Citizen Participation in America: Current Reflections on the State of the Art." Citizen Participation in America: Essays on the State of the Art. Ed. Stuart Langton. Toronto: D.C. Heath and Company, 1978. 127 BIBLIOGRAPHY Langton, Stuart. "What is Citizen Participation?" Citizen Participation in America: Essays on the State of the Art. Ed. Stuart Langton. Toronto: D.C. Heath and Company, 1978. Lucas, Alastair R. "Fundamental Prerequisites for Citizen Participation." Involvement and Environment - Volume 1. Ed. Barry Sadler. Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta, 1977. Mishler, William. Political Participation in Canada: Prospects for Democratic Citizenship. Toronto: MacMillan Company of Canada, 1979. Nelson, J. Gordon. "Setting the Stage." Involvement and Environment - Volume 1. Ed. Barry Sadler. Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta, 1977. Newspaper Clippings File. Vancouver Sun, Globe and Mail, Vancouver Courier, West Ender/East Ender. Sharon Folkes. September, 1987 - September, 1989. Pateman, Carole. Participation and Democratic Theory. London: Cambridge University Press, 1970. Personal Notes. Public Information Meeting. Strathcona Community Centre, May 10, 1988. Personal Notes. Public Information Meeting. Mount Pleasant Community Centre, September 19, 1988. Personal Notes. Public Information Meeting. Shaughnessy Heights United Church, January 16, 1989. Personal Notes. Drop-in. Plaza of Nations, June 3, 1989. Personal Notes. Public Information Meeting. Robson Square, June 5, 1989. Personal Notes. International Village Rezoning Council Meeting. June 22, 1989. Personal Notes. Public Information Meeting. September 7, 1989. Pollak, Patricia Baron. "Does the Citizen Matter? Toward the Development of Theory." Journal of Voluntary Action. (14-1) January-March, 1985, p.16-29. Priscoli, Jerry Delli. "Implementing Public Involvement Programs in Federal Agencies." Citizen Particiaption in America: Essays on the State of the Art. Ed. Barry Sadler. Toronto: D.C. Heath and Company, 1978. Rosenbaum, Nelson. "Citizen Participation and Democratic Theory." Citizen Participation in America: Essays on the State of the Art. Ed. Stuart Langton. Toronto: D.C. Heath and Company, 1978. 128 BIBLIOGRAPHY Rosenbaum, Walter A. "Public Involvement as Reform and Ritual: The Development of Federal Participation Programs." Citizen Participation in America: Essays on the State of the Art. Ed. Stuart Langton. Toronto: D.C. Heath and Company, 1978. Rosener, Judy B. "Matching Method to Purpose: The Challenges of Planning Citizen-Participation Activities." Citizen Participation in America: Essays on the State of the Art. Ed. Stuart Langon. Toronto: D.C. Heath and Company. 1978. Rosener, Judy B. "Citizen Participation: Can We Measure Its Effectivenesss? Public Administration Review (38-5) September - October, 1978, p.457-63. Roweis, Shoukry, T. "Urban Planning in Early and Late Capitalist Societies: Outline of a Theoretical Perspective." Urbanization and Urban Planning in Capitalist Society. Ed. "Michael Dear and Allen J . Scott. New York: Metheun and Company Ltd., 1981. Sadler, Barry. "Basic Issues in Public Participation: A Background Perspective." Involvement and Environment - Volume 1. Ed. Barry Sadler. Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta, 1977. Scaff, Lawrence A. Participation in the Western Political Tradition: A Study of Theory and Practice. Tuscon: University of Arizona Press, 1975. Sewell, W.R. Derrick. Ed. Public Participation in Planning. Toronto: John Wiley and Sons, 1977. Sewell, W.R. Derrick. "Public Participation: Towards an Evaluation of Canadian Experience." Involvement and Environment - Volume 2. Ed. Barry Sadler. Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta, 1977. Sewell, W.R. Derrick and Phillips, Susan D. "Models for the Evaluation of Public Participation Programmes." Natural Resources Journal. (19-2) April, 1979, p.337-58. Tyler, E.J. "Planning Public Participation." Involvement and Environment - Volume 2. Ed. Barry Sadler. Edmonton: Environment Council of Alberta, 1977. White, Louise G. "Approaches to Land Use Policy." Journal of the American Planning Association. (45-1) January, 1979, p.62-71. Vancouver Sun. Clippings File. Vancouver Public Library. September, 1987 -September, 1989. Vancouver Sun. Clippings File. University of British Columbia Library. September, 1987 - September, 1989. 129 L I S T O F M E E T I N G S CITY OF VANCOUVER MEETINGS Date Meeting/Location April 26, 1988 April 27, 1988 May 2, 1988 May 3, 1988 May 4, 1988 May 10, 1988 May 11, 1988 May 12, 1988 May 18, 1988 (afternoon) December 19, 1988 Parks, Recreation, Community Facilities and Services City Hall City Policy Broadsheets False Creek Community Centre Design, Business, and Development City Hall .City Policy Broadsheets Lord Roberts - Elementary School Housing City Hall City Policy Broadsheets Strathcona Community Centre City Policy Broadsheets King Edward Campus V.C.C. City Policy Broadsheets Carnegie Centre City Policy Broadsheets Robson Square Media Centre Soils Remediation Robson Square Media Centre 130 February 22, 1989 (drop-in) International Village Chinese Cultural Centre 70 February 22, 1989 (evening) International Village Chinese Cultural Centre 70 March 6, 1989 International Village Robson Square Media Centre 130 April 18, 1989 Overall Plan/Lagoons Granville Island Room ? April 20, 1989 Overall Plan/Lagoons Chinese Cultural Centre 20 April 24, 1989 Overall Plan/Lagoons Vancouver East Cultural Centre 15 April 26, 1989 Overal Plan/Lagoons Robson Square Media Centre 40 May 1, 1989 Overall Plan/Lagoons Robson Square Media Centre ? May 2, 1989 Soils Remediation Chinese Cultural Centre ? May 31, 1989 Overall Plan Vancouver City Planning Commission private June 3, 1989 (drop-in) Overall Plan Plaza of Nations 50 June 5, 1989 Overall Plan Robson Square Media Centre 15 June 27, 1989 Overall Plan DERA and Tenants Rights Coalition private 131 June 27, 1989 July 4, 1989 July 12, 1989 July 19, 1989 August 9, 1989 August 16, 1989 August 23, 1989 August 24-27, 1989-(drop-in) August 30, 1989 -September 1, 1989 September 5, 1989 . September 7, 1989 September 13, 1989 Overall Plan Strathcona Local Area Planning Program Overall Plan Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood Association Overall Plan Strathcona Community Centre Association Overall Plan Yaletown Property Owners and Business Owners Overall Plan Urban Design Panel Overall Plan Stratchcona Community Centre Association Overall Plan Vancouver City Planning Commission Overall Plan Granville Island Overall Plan Science World Overall Plan Seniors Committee of Council Overall Plan Disabled Committee of Council Overall Plan Granville Island Room Yaletown Urban Design Panel private private private private private private private 125 private private 125 private 132 September 18, 1989 Overall Plan Mount Pleasant Community Centre Association CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS/PUBLIC HEARINGS Date Meeting / Location private Attendance August 23, 1988 August 30, 1988 May 16, 1989 June 22, 1989 City Policy Broadsheets City Policy Broadsheets Lagoons/Bays Options International Village Rezoning 40 'l 4 100+ CONCORD PACIFIC MEETINGS (includes. 19 meetings with adjacent property owners between September, 1988 and May, 1989, and 52 presentations to service and business groups) Date Meeting / Location Attendance September 19, 1988 September 20, 1988 September 21, 1988 September 22, 1988 September 29, 1988 International Village Mount Pleasant Community Centre International Village DERA Executive International Village Robson Square International Village Strathcona Community Centre International Village Mount Pleasant Community Centre (school) 50 private 60 40 133 September 30, 1988 September 30, 1988 October 4, 1988 October 5, 1988 October 6, 1988 October 24, 1988 November 7, 1988 November 22, 1988 January 16, 1989 March 2, 1989 May 23, 1989 May 25, 1989 July 10, 1989 International Village 100 DERA International Village ? Robson Square Media Centre International Village ? Chinese Language Meeting Chinese Cultural Centre International Village .75 Robson Square Media Centre International Village private Gastown/Chinatown Historic. Area Committees International Village False Creek Residents International Village Council Committee for the Disabled International Village Urban Design Panel International Village Chinatown Merchants International Village Urban Design Panel International Village Urban Design Panel International Village Gastown/Chinatown Historic Area Committees Overall Plan private Yaletown Property Owners private private private private private private private 134
Thesis/Dissertation
eng
Planning
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use.
Graduate
Citizen participation and the redevelopment of urban land : a case study of the north shore of False Creek
Text