At roughly 1000m2, the new park will occupy roughly a third of a city block – and will be part of an overall redevelopment of the block that also includes a non-market housing project.

This is an interesting site, and one that is prominently located in the Mount Pleasant neighbourhood. There’s lots of potential for the new public space to serve as a ‘gateway’ to the area, but there are also some challenges that will need to be accounted for as well. Chief among them: the task of creating an inviting gathering area next to a busy arterial road.

So how do you think the park should look and feel? This initial survey gives you a chance to share your ideas on the character of the space, potential activities, design and landscaping treatments and more.

• Read the Information Booklet
  
• Take the Survey

Back in 2011, the City of Vancouver announced its goal of becoming the greenest city in the world by 2020. The City’s Greenest City Action Plan 2020 is the roadmap to getting there, outlining 10 goal areas and 15 measurable targets. The original 2011 plan has since been updated, but the core goals and strategies remain.

The plan’s goals go beyond addressing climate and sustainability issues, they recognize the health benefits associated with access to nature and green space: “Whether they take the form of a community garden, a city park, a greenway along your block, or the seawall, green spaces have been shown to benefit our physical and emotional health by reducing blood pressure, cholesterol, and stress. These spaces also contribute to our sense of community by creating places for recreational activities, for children to play, and for neighbours to meet and socialize.” (Greenest City Action Plan Part Two: 2015-2020)

One of the key targets set out in the plan is to have all Vancouver residents living within a five-minute walk of a park, greenway or other green space by 2020. The indicator chosen to measure this is the percentage of total city land that is within a five-minute walk, defined as a 400-metre radius, of a green space. When you measure the five minute access to city’s parks and green spaces, you will get a map that looks something like this:

This City of Vancouver map shows access to green spaces (Vancouver Board of Parks and Recreation)

How close are we to meeting this target??

Well, we’re actually pretty close. As of 2014 we’re about 92.7% of the way there! (That is to say that 92.7 percent of Vancouver is within 400 meters of a park, greenway, or other greenspace). This is encouraging. After all, scholarly and anecdotal research suggest that a person’s proximity to a given park relates directly to how much he/she will use it and, likewise, the more parks you have nearby, the more opportunities you have to use a park. But before we celebrate our amazing progress in solving this problem perhaps we ought to ask: to what extent was this a problem in the first place?

The answer: it wasn’t, really. The baseline measured in 2010 was already 92.6 percent.

There are two important questions to ask here: “Is this the best way to measure green space?” and “What counts towards the total of green space?” (In the case of the “Shrink the Pink” map, parks, greenways, community gardens count all count towards the total.)

With respect to the first question, there are many different ways to measure green spaces for planning purposes. For example, Vancouver’s very first city plan—the 1928 Bartholomew Plan —compared the number of park acres to the population of an area. The metric used was persons per park acre. Harland Bartholomew and Associates recommended approximately one acre for every 100 persons in the city. Since then, the method of comparing park area to population has stuck, often used as an informal metric for assessing “park rich” versus “park deficient” neighbourhoods. It’s important to note, though, that the specific proportion that Bartholomew recommended has changed over time.

Looking at area per capita or the inverse, population per unit of area, can give us important information about how many people are served by a certain amount of green space. If you look at the green space per capita (or per 1000 persons) in a neighbourhood and compare it against a larger area, such as green space per capita in the whole city, you can see how one neighbourhood stacks up against one another or the city-wide average. (See, for example, the map below.) This type of tool helps planners and policy makers work towards equitable distribution of green space among the population.

This VPSN map shows the different levels of open space compared with the population of each neighbourhood (VPSN)

As park space per capita metrics typically rely on census statistics, the focus indirectly tilts towards residential population figures. This makes sense on one level; however, the daytime and nighttime population of neighbourhoods can change dramatically depending on employment and other occupational patterns. Or put another way around: isn’t it also important to make sure there are parks and greenspaces near employment centres as well?

The Bartholomew plan also recommends that a neighbourhood park “should be within walking distance (considered to be a half-mile) of practically every person in the city.” This is close to the metric mentioned above regarding the Greenest City Action Plan. One issue with this metric is that it doesn’t measure population density. It doesn’t differentiate between a neighbourhood with high demand for green space (e.g., heavily populated area whose residents live mostly within the prescribed radius from, say, several small neighbourhood parks) and a neighbourhood with lower demand for green space (such as a sparsely populated area whose residents live within the radius of several small neighbourhood parks or even a sparsely populated area with large parks). A recent Park Board study (Parks Provision Standard and Metrics Study: Network-Based Assessment of Access) takes a deeper dive into this issue of green space access in Vancouver. Based on a model that estimates various elements of the pedestrian environment (such as slope, stairs, busy streets, local streets and controlled/uncontrolled stoplights), the study assesses pedestrian access to green space in a more practical and realistic way. However, as noted above, this measure does not differentiate between areas of high and low demand for green space. Equally importantly, it does not speak to quality of green space.

This takes the question of measurement in a different, but fundamentally important direction. Qualitative aspects of green space are a significant driver for the actual use of the space, as well as the health and wellbeing benefits derived from green space. A focus on quality also suggests that it actually doesn’t matter how close you are to green space, or how much of it exists per capita, if the space in question isn’t usable, is poor quality, unsafe, lacking in amenity.

Measures of quality could consider one or more indicators shown by research to produce key health and wellbeing benefits, such as safety, accessibility, noise, biodiversity, aesthetics, recreational space, canopy cover, spaciousness, historical or cultural associations, etc., although these may differ from place to place or even between demographic groups.

The moral of the story, though, is that each approach to measurement reveals different aspects of the park and greenspace “situation” in Vancouver. And as with many things, focusing on a single measure may have its limitations.

What counts?

The second important question noted above is “what counts towards the total?” A lot depends on what you choose to measure and map. The percentage of coverage that I’ve noted above can be mapped out by drawing a 400-metre buffer around these green spaces.

From the “Shrink the Pink” map above, you can see that there are a few stubborn pink areas that are not within a five-minute walk of any green space.

In this “Shrink the Pink” map, green space includes public community gardens, city parks, greenways, and some public school grounds. As you see, it does not include any private green space, leaving the residents of some west side neighborhoods that likely do have access to private green space “in the pink.”

And while some of the City’s greenways such as the Arbutus Greenway [I’ll insert a link here] are leafy, verdant and quiet, not all measure up in quality. For example, the Central Valley Greenway runs from the Olympic Village along First Avenue and then along Great Northern Way, does a slight jog near the VCC–Clark station on the Millennium Line and then joins North Grandview Highway, where it runs alongside the SkyTrain tracks out to Burnaby and beyond. There are certainly lots of very green spaces along this greenway, but other parts of it (such as Great Northern Way) don’t feel all that green.

It is also important to consider green spaces that support a diversity of users and uses. While it is helpful to look at green space in the aggregate (all types compiled—such as the Shrink the Pink map), there should also be an opportunity to measure different types of green space separately. For example, the types of green spaces that serve seniors may be different from the types of green spaces that serve young children. Another example: greenways serve transportation and exercise uses but are not successful as gathering spaces. Some may even consider that the inclusion of greenways that are zoned as transportation corridors towards the green space total may be an overly broad definition of green space.

Lastly, the measure of quality also has its constraints. The broad range of potential indicators points to a difficulty with measuring quality: it is not clearly or consistently defined, is often somewhat subjective, and can pose a challenge for measurement. In terms of a more generalized approach, one potential way around this is to measure user satisfaction. It’s not perfect, and while user satisfaction is a personal measure, it may, nevertheless, help address quality, since quality could be perceived differently from person to person or from neighbourhood to neighbourhood. A number of cities across Canada – and beyond – use this approach, usually administering it through an annual or semi-annual survey.

What’s next?

The Vancouver Park Board recently launched its year-long parks and recreation master plan process, called VanPlay. As part of this, the Park Board has also been looking at the question of park measures and metrics. It will be interesting to see how they choose to tackle this matter, as we’ve already seen, each of the measures identified above has merits and limitations. One way forward is to think about regular updates on a combination of metrics – for example, in a fashion similar to the one employed in Los Angeles County.

This infographic shows different green space metrics applied in Los Angeles County

Still other, more nuanced metrics may be developed – and we’ll look forward to exploring those further if and when that happens.

In the meantime, we would encourage you to get involved in the VanPlay conversation. We’re looking forward to a process that (hopefully) balances consideration of density, demand, quality and user satisfaction as well as access, rather than focusing on one or even two of these measures. You can look forward to more on the VanPlay initiative in our future posts.

We want to hear from you!

We’re running a survey about your use of green and open spaces. We’d love for you to participate by clicking here.

The VPSN has been involved since the beginning – participating in workshops, presenting to the Citizens’ Assembly, and monitoring the way in which public space issues were being handled throughout the plan. (In the interests of disclosure, we’ll note that VPSN Director Andrew Pask was also the lead City planner for this initiative, so we were fairly certain that public space issues would be on his radar!)

In advance of the Plan going to City Council, our Board of Directors met to review the draft document. We prepared a letter outlining our support of key policy initiatives around complete streets, streets as places, and the creation of new and enhanced plazas and parks. An excerpt of the letter follows.

The Vancouver Public Space Network was a contributor to the development of the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan during the community plan team’s outreach on the topics of transportation and public realm. We’d like to briefly touch on parts of the plan which hold promise and which we feel will benefit current and future residents both in this area and of the city generally.Complete streets

Complete Streets

The VPSN has previously appeared before council to support Transportation 2040, the plan update to the City of Vancouver’s 1997 Transportation Plan. We are glad to see that the Grandview Woodland plan reflects Transportation 2040’s commitment to supporting active transportation through emphasizing complete streets in Grandview Woodland. The principle of complete streets ensures that the balance between different modes of travel, the varying needs of members of the community, and the role of the neighbourhood within the region can be addressed while also addressing the risks associated with using our roads.

Protected Cycling Facilitiesling Facilities

Given the important social, economic and environmental benefits of higher levels of cycling, and the significant mode share already found in Grandview Woodland, we commend the City’s continuing commitment to completing the City’s protected bike network to better connect cyclists with destinations like Commercial Drive. We urge the City to continue its work in mitigating conflicts between different road users while also building infrastructure that makes safe travel for all ages and abilities using active modes convenient, enjoyable and efficient.

Where possible, we also encourage the City to partner with local business owners and members of the community to continually gauge and quantify the impact in a holistic fashion, and to share this information as much as possible with the public and other neighbourhoods as we continue to pursue our Greenest City and Green Mobility goals.

Streets as Places

Given the important civic role they play, VPSN is heartened to see streets recognized as places.

This important type of public space has been undervalued over the past half century; major commitment will be necessary to renew it. Further, we support the development of the innovative “shared spaces” strategic streets. The fact that the plan also accounts for the potential that these spaces become car free is a resilient strategy. VPSN also finds the plan’s focus on placemaking encouraging. The gateway features are a smart way to encourage a greater sense of place, while the enhancement of streetscapes in shopping areas are likely to improve the public realm and support local merchants. We also strongly endorse the support for community initiated public spaces and look forward to the outcomes.

A commitment to increasing the number of street trees is a valuable first step; we recommend further setting a clear target in the number of trees planted to add clarity and certainty to this effort. The mention of laneways of places is also promising; similarly, we welcome a stronger assertion of the importance these spaces play in the larger overall vision of public space for Grandview Woodland, as well as the other contributions they might make to social life and local economic activity in the area.

Plaza and Park Improvements – Grandview-Woodland Plan.

Plazas and Parks

The emphasis on quality of plazas and other public spaces is another positive aspect of the plan. Quantity is not the only metric on which to measure the success of public space. In Grandview-Woodland, there is a need for more public space, but there is also great demand for greater quality in these spaces. Having noted this, we also find the commitment to create new plazas to be a very positive step as well. We hope that all five new plazas suggested in the plan come to fruition.

[…]

The long journey to this final draft of the Grandview Woodland plan is one more milestone in the broader unfolding story of this dynamic area. We welcome the opportunity to work with the City as it moves to put into action and bring to reality the ideas put forward in this plan.

1) Final Concepts for the Jim Diva (“Heart of Davie”) Plaza at Bute and Davie are being presented for comment on Thursday, October 22 (4-7pm) and Saturday October 24 (11am-2pm). Stop by the proposed plaza area and share your thoughts! | More info –

2) The Park Board is also holding an open house on Thursday, October 22 to review design options for a new park at Smithe and Richards. Drop in anytime between 4:30 – 8:30pm at the ArtStarts Gallery, 808 Richards Street. | More info –

3) Finally, Looking for other ways to engage? The City Council is also currently deliberating over the future of the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts.

A City staff report (PDF) has been prepared that outlines various technical considerations related to the decomissioning of this highway infrastructure. Several acres of new and improved park space are proposed as part of the discussion, as well as better neighbourhood connections, a “Georgia Wharf”, new housing and additional social infrastructure.

A presentation by staff took place on Tuesday, and members of the public were able to share their take on the removal of the viaducts starting today. Council is reconvening to hear from speakers on Tuesday, October 27. Review the report and share your thoughts by attending Council or sending your input via email – mayorandcouncil@vancouver.ca.

Surrey’s PARKit Design Challenge – Deadline May 17, 2013

The City of Surrey is calling for submissions in its PARKit Design Challenge, a competition for the design and installation of a summertime pop-up park in Surrey City Centre.

Individuals and groups are invited to submit their ideas for a creative sustainable outdoor public space capable of supporting mobile food vendors. The selected winner will receive up to $12,000 to fabricate and install their design. Honorariums will be awarded to second ($500) and third place teams ($250).

The PARKit site is located adjacent to Surrey Central SkyTrain station, in the North Surrey Recreation Centre parking lot. This area has become an important pedestrian hub, linking SFU Surrey and Central City Mall with the SkyTrain station and recreation centre.

“The PARKit Design Challenge is a wonderful way for the City to engage creative minds to help infuse life into concrete. The park will bring the community together and become a fun urban greenspace in our downtown core,” says Mayor Dianne Watts. 

PARKit Design Challenge entries are due May 17, with the winner announced on May 24. The site is expected to be installed by mid-July, and will remain open through August.

The City originally developed PARKit as a pilot project to create temporary public park space, and to test the feasibility of mobile food trucks in City Centre. The Program’s initial pilot site was activated in April and July, 2012, in the same location. The Design Challenge is the evolution of the PARKit concept. For more information visit surrey.ca/parkit.

:: For more information or to register – email to beautification@surrey.ca

Ironclad Art Challenge: Manhole Cover Design – Deadline April 15, 2013

Turn our streets into dynamic public art sites. Submit your manhole cover design and highlight the importance of our sewer system.

If you live, work, or study in Vancouver, submit your ideas for beautiful, artistically designed manhole covers that can remind us all that many of the choices we make – from how we care for our lawns and gardens, to where we wash our cars – have a direct impact on our ecosystem.

Details and dates for the Ironclad Art manhole cover design challenge

The Ironclad Art Challenge is a collaboration between the City’s public art program, and our engineering department. The challenge is open to anyone who lives, works, or attends school in Vancouver.

Submission deadline

We will be accepting entries in the challenge until 15 April 2013 at 4:00 p.m.

Choosing the winners

A selection panel will choose two winners, who will see their artwork turned into sanitary and storm sewer manhole covers, and used on streets across Vancouver.

Each winner will also receive a $2,000 cash prize, and up to $500 for participation in the fabrication process.

All submitted designs are also eligible for a people’s choice award, chosen by visitors to the exhibition at Interurban Gallery.

Announcing the winners

We will announce the winners at an award ceremony on Saturday 1 June at Interurban Gallery, 1 East Hastings Street, in Vancouver.

The event is open to the public and everyone is welcome to attend. An exhibition of designs will be held at the gallery from 28 May to 8 June 2013.

:: For further information or to apply: ironcladart.ca