Last month featured a new type of event: the Heart of the City conference, Canada’s first national conference on urban parks. Organized by Toronto’s Park People, the event brought together advocates from across 10 provinces to discuss the past, present and future of parks across the country.

Representing the VPSN, I numbered among 100 delegates representing the interests of people and parks, including multiple nonprofit advocates for public space. I often found myself next to community organizers, urban farming champions, landscape architects, city politicians and a vast array of other attendees who all had parks in common. This strong diversity of background enriched both the program and the discussions held in the unplanned spaces in between. In many ways, the spontaneity of connection that the conference fostered was exactly the ambition of a well-designed park: it created a community out of strangers.

Themes of community, placemaking and inclusion were strong throughout the conference and formed the focus of the presentation given by panelist Sabina Ali, co-founder of the Thorncliffe Park Women’s Committee (TPWC). Through the work of Ali and TPWC, Thorncliffe Park evolved from a dejected-seeming, underutilized green space to a vibrant place that, through events like the Winter Carnival, resident-led arts programs, markets and bazaars, actively works to counter the social isolation often faced by new immigrants (particularly women).

Thorncliffe Park, ninth annual Neighbours’ Night Out. Photo: Toronto Centre for Active Transportation, Hannah Nogiec

This type of grassroots, community-led change was the topic of several discussions led by panelists, including Caroline Magar, development coordinator of Les Amis du Champ des Possibles. A landscape architect, Magar along with other Mile End residents was instrumental in convincing the City of Montreal to rezone into a park a parcel of greenspace that, while contaminated and previously industrial, was particularly well-loved. In recognizing the potential of Le Champ des Possibles to increase urban biodiversity, Les Amis worked to design a new version of an urban park, based on the idea of novel ecosystems, and collaborated with local artists to create a field guide that grounded the space in its own ecological identity.

However, the fact that communities have the power to exclude, as well as include, was also touched upon. In the keynote, Jay Pitter engaged the room on this point, providing a variety of strategies for ensuring inclusive placemaking. She urged us to use a collective leadership model when creating public spaces and to challenge our geographical imagination, as it typically leaves out some people. While parks advocates are often dedicated and tireless, she mused, looking at the mostly white faces in the conference room, they are not necessarily diverse. By using a collective model (which decouples planning from any one particular group), we can create space for more diversity and ensure that the framework used for consultation and planning represents the population for which it aims to provide improvements.

Pitter also challenged attendees to acknowledge the violent histories that exist in our public spaces, a result of exclusion. These histories have prevented not just community-building, but also the ability of traditionally excluded groups to assert their rights to public space (both in design and in use). Ryan Gorrie acknowledged these histories in his presentation on the Indigenous Placemaking Council (IPC), a group that specializes in indigenous placemaking, which the IPC sees as a process of reconciliation. Through a co-design process, the IPC works with traditionally marginalized communities, ensuring that they can see themselves reflected both in the design framework and in the end product. Through this, the IPC hopes to correct a reality that often denies visibility to First Nations culture in public spaces, despite indigenous presence on this land for thousands of years.

With the conference spanning two full days of packed programming, these summaries are really only a brief cross-section of the contents and touch lightly on the variety of topics broached. However, as interesting as all of the speeches and workshops were, the real highlight for me was being able to connect with parks advocates from across the nation. I hope the success of the event was enough to inspire its annual occurrence; indeed, the organizers have let us know that they’d like the conference to happen again in the future.

If you’d like to read more about the various conference delegates and the work they’re doing to improve parks in their cities, you can find the list here.

All photos under Creative Commons license 

So what’s all this about?

Designed to spur action on gender-based discrimination and improve equality, Vancouver’s Gender Equality Strategy envisions a city where all those who self-identify as women “have opportunities to fully participate in the political, economic, cultural and social life of Vancouver.” The strategy is very much a localized complement to larger national and international efforts.

Now that the policy is dated by more than a decade, the City has recently resolved to establish a process to review and update it by having staff work with the Women’s Advisory Committee. The revised strategy will also integrate other “recently adopted policy, such as that in the Healthy City and Mental Health and Addictions Task Force, and [will take] into account a change in national and provincial context” (Council motion, April 16, 2016).

As part of this process, the City is looking for feedback from groups and individuals, which it will integrate into the updated strategy. You can provide comments on the strategy either via the Talk Vancouver survey (open now!) or at the April 19 gender equity forum (4–8 pm, Creekside Community Centre).

Where public space comes in

When we think about how gender politics play out in physical cityscapes, we need to think about for whom, and by whom, public spaces are designed. Often, the lens through which spaces are shaped is male by default and does not necessarily consider the different ways women navigate their environments. This lack of spatial inclusion in many ways perpetuates inequality between genders.

As a group, we at the VPSN believe that the points below are key to bridging the equity gap between genders in the context of public space.

The importance of data

Gathering local data on how women use public space is key to equitable planning. The collection must moreover take into account how different groups of women – based on dimensions such as age, race and economic class – use the space.

Without baseline data, planning rests on assumptions and information that are not specific to context. For instance, while we know that women tend to use transit in more heterogeneous ways than men, in part because of their propensity to fill caretaking roles, we don’t know how women residents of Vancouver use TransLink. In Vienna, gathering data on women’s use of transit and public space was key to the early progressive, gender-based planning projects for which that city is known worldwide, and such data-gathering continues to influence infrastructure design there.

Cycling on Union Street, Vancouver. Photo: Paul Krueger

Data are additionally integral to driving where we build new public spaces and what facilities they contain. For example, women with children – both their own and other people’s – tend to be among the most frequent users of public space. With this in mind, we can look at our city and make family-friendly public space decisions in the context of the services these women use.

City staff and foundational thinking

Gender should be integrated into the organization of the City through the creation of roles specific to the pursuit of gender equality (such as Vienna’s project manager of gender mainstreaming). Gender experts must work within a variety of City departments, from Engineering Services to Planning, Urban Design and Sustainability; from Community Services to Development, Buildings and Licensing.

The City can also implement gender budgeting, a process that “[reviews] all parts of the budget from a gender-perspective and [presents], in a separate chapter, who benefit from different items in the budget.”

Finally, gender awareness training should be a mandatory component of employing City workers. By embedding gender sensitivity in the DNA of the City as an organization, we can work towards more intersectional and equitable planning.

Visibility in public spaces

We’d like to see the City work to increase the visibility of women in public spaces, with a keen eye towards ensuring diverse representation. This can be done through events and marches like Take Back the Night or a women-led Jane’s Walk, and through public art that emphasizes and documents women’s presence in public space. This is key, as for centuries, going all the way back to the ancient Greeks, citizens have used public space as a way of exercising their rights and participating in democracy, and yet women, especially young girls above the age of 12, are much less likely to do so. Through the symbolic interactionism of making sure that women can see other women using public space, we can begin to change this.

Experimentation

Let’s treat our city as a living lab, experimenting with the creation of equitable spaces, without being afraid to fail. Since it began investing in gender-sensitive planning in the nineties, Vienna has completed more than 60 gender-mainstreaming pilot projects. Making use of the pilot project model would allow Vancouver to test-run options, see how public spaces are used by women and witness what works and what doesn’t. The City could also encourage women-only design competitions of varying scales, allowing women to remake previously male-designed spaces in their own ways.

Safety

While discussions around safety often focus on increased lighting and security cameras (whose importance we don’t dispute), we’d like to see the conversation broadened to include the protective role of actual human beings. To quote Jane Jacobs in The Death and Life of Great American Cities, “there must be eyes upon the street, eyes belonging to those we might call the natural proprietors of the street. The buildings on a street equipped to handle strangers and to insure the safety of both residents and strangers, must be oriented to the street. They cannot turn their backs or blank sides on it and leave it behind.”

Additionally, women should be equally present as symbols of safety: as security guards, bus drivers and SkyTrain attendants. Thus they would not only serve as resources for women wishing to seek help from other women, but they would act as empowering symbols: women as purveyors of safety.

Transit

By understanding how women use transit in Vancouver, we can start to change the way we build infrastructure and better allow for mobility of care. Sidewalks can be widened where needed to allow more room for strollers and wheelchairs, a measure that has been taken in Vienna (significant given that European streets in general tend to be even narrower than Vancouver’s). The City could investigate methods of surfacing park pathways that would be environmentally sound while encouraging a diversity of abilities (wheelchairs, walkers, etc.). Research has also shown that as women tend to be more risk-averse than men, building bike lanes, especially separated ones, can help bridge the gender gap in cycling. And of course, we have to be vigilant when it comes to making public transit safe for women and continue to make people aware of the See Something, Say Something campaign run by Vancouver’s transit police.

Bathrooms

Finally, there need to be more female washrooms in public space, period. This is a very simple requirement that’s consistently overlooked, particularly in the Downtown Eastside.

What you can do

Gender mainstreaming and equitable public space planning make up a vast topic, and this article only scratches the surface.

Speak your own mind! What do you think could make Vancouver work better for women? Come to the April 19 forum at Creekside Community Centre. If you can’t make it, share your thoughts via the Talk Vancouver survey.

Top image: Hot tub parklet, Vancouver. Photo: Paul Krueger

All photos under Creative Commons license 

You may have heard of the BC Hydro Seed project, which proposed to redesign and enhance three open spaces in downtown Vancouver, in exchange for the opportunity to build underground substations.

Heralded as innovative by some and considered by others as being of uncertain scientific merit, Seed was a short-lived blip on our public space radar. On March 8, the City of Vancouver passed a motion to delay a decision on the controversial project, introducing a timeline that proved disagreeable to BC Hydro, which had hoped to receive the green light by March 31. The utility rescinded its proposal shortly thereafter.

Promoted as a solution to increased energy needs and scarce utilities space in Yaletown and the West End, Seed had proposed building one underground substation each at Emery Barnes Park and Nelson Park. The savings in property values that BC Hydro would have realized by building on City-owned property would then have been diverted to improving park land and providing public amenities in the form of a school, housing, and recreation facilities. Organized by the same firm that led the marketing and outreach campaign for the Site C dam on the Peace River, the consultation process spanned January and February, taking place in the form of four open houses, four small group discussions, two PAC meetings and an online survey. Incidentally, the consultation wrapped up one week after BC Hydro released a Stantec report on the impact of the plan, providing little time for respondents to incorporate the information from the report into their feedback.

Despite the whirlwind timeline, the proposal garnered a positive response from reporters at The Province and Metro Vancouver, with a more subdued one from the Vancouver Observer and News 1130. Amid the flashy BC Hydro consultation materials, it was difficult to see who would oppose a plan that would finance improved public space, a new school and a new daycare centre in the densest area of Vancouver. A little digging, however, shows how the downsides came to outweigh the upsides.

Though BC Hydro often cited the existing substation at Vancouver’s Cathedral Square as proof of the technology’s safety, the science on exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) is very much unresolved, particularly where children are involved. A 2014 article published in the Journal of Biosciences and Medicines states that “There is … some epidemiological evidence that prolonged exposure to higher levels (more than 0.4 μT) of power frequency magnetic fields is associated with a risk of leukemia in children.” According to the U.K. government, “a number of studies” show “a possible link between exposure to magnetic fields in the home (and/or living close to high voltage power lines) and a small excess of childhood leukaemia,” though the studies aren’t conclusive as to cause. In his earlier (2003) book Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields, P. Stavroulakis cites evidence that rates of childhood cancer are 2.7 times greater when kids are continuously exposed to levels above 0.3 μT. He goes on to reference a 1995 study funded by the Environmental Protection Agency that suggests that “daycare centres should not be built in areas where exposure exceeds 0.2 μT,” because of increased health risks. In fact, EMF measurements taken at Cathedral Square Park have ranged from 0.2 μT to 10 μT.

In response to the Seed proposal, the Vancouver Parks Board commissioned an independent environmental study that would delve deeper into the potential health effects of underground substations. This report, however, would not be published until one week prior to the March 31 deadline: a factor that may have contributed to the City’s motion to postpone a decision. (The report is still unpublished as of this writing.)

In addition to the potential health effects, the City was concerned with the factor of property values. Both Emery Barnes and Nelson parks are city-owned properties of considerable worth. To provide an idea of this value, 1290 Homer Street, three blocks from Emery Barnes and a small fraction of the size of either of the parks, was assessed a land value of $8,199,000 in 2016 (figure courtesy of Colliers International). Thus Seed promised to provide major cost savings to BC Hydro (which had requested a 99-year lease on both properties), the vast extent of which would likely not have been publicly reinvested. Indeed, the City’s requirement that BC Hydro pay a price based on the cost of buying the land outright reinforces this further as the reality (and was cited by BC Hydro as prohibitive to pursuing the project).

In addition, approximately 4% of Emery Barnes would have been permanently lost to substation infrastructure (vehicle access and intake structure and exhaust shafts), with 45% of the park lost during construction, estimated to take a minimum of three years. One hundred percent of Lord Roberts School Annex would have been out of use for a minimum of three years as well. Moreover, although the individual trees at Emery Barnes would have been replanted for the purposes of retaining their net number, the removal of mature trees would have cost the park 95% of its overall canopy. Additional plantings would have been difficult because trees cannot be planted above underground substations.

While an enticing proposition, the Seed proposal demanded many questions and offered few answers. The additional constraint of a tight three-month timeline made reaching a thoughtful decision all the more difficult. Overall, it certainly seems that the City’s decision to postpone a final say on the proposal (and to push it past the May election, which no doubt would have impacted provincial support in the event of a shift in government) was in the best interest of Vancouverites. The City’s further requirement that BC Hydro pay the City a price based on the cost of buying the land outright makes a revival of the proposal unlikely.

It’s conceivable, however, that a similar proposal might resurface in other municipalities, particularly where land is limited. Should this occur, it’s key to keep in mind the lessons our City has learned: pursue independent scientific investigations into EMF impact, weigh carefully the potential benefits against the value of owned land, and don’t be rushed by swift timelines.

Top photo: Cathedral Square, the site of Vancouver’s first underground substation

Walking through the downtown eastside, past nondescript facades, nosy Vancouverites cannot help but be overwhelmed with curiosity. What exactly goes on behind the doors of the city’s oldest homes and warehouses?

Once a year, the Eastside Culture Crawl provides answers to this very question. By encouraging artists to open their homes and workshops to inquisitive passersby, the event shines a spotlight on the eastside and its dense creative diversity.

Beginning in 1997 with the participation of three studios and 45 artists, the Crawl, now in its 18^th year, has grown to include more than 400 hundred painters, photographers, furniture makers, potters, glassblowers, weavers, printmakers, sculptors and other visual artists in 79 buildings.

Even stretched over four days, to take in all of the Crawl’s talent is a feat. Plodding along the map, you are likely to be waylaid, lost in conversation with creators whose passion is palpable. And this is the great draw of the crawl: meeting the makers themselves. Sometimes awkward, sometimes tired, sometimes perfectly at ease, the vibrant presence of so many visual artists in so small a neighbourhood provides a vivid range of colours to the cultural mosaic that is East Vancouver.

Among those who colour the landscape is street photographer Louise Francis-Smith. Bringing to mind the work of the infamous Fred Herzog, Francis-Smith’s images provide a curiously intimate examination of life in Chinatown and the Downtown Eastside.

Speaking to Louise, a long-time resident of Strathcona, one realizes that these photographs are the creation of someone who has not simply walked down the neighbourhood’s patched and pitted streets, but of someone who knows the subjects of her photographs by name – someone who has breathed in the warm aromas of New Town Bakery and inquired into the whereabouts of the man who feeds the pigeons at Carrall and Pender. They are the photographs of an artist who has truly lived in the area she so warmly depicts.

Another such colourful artist is industrial designer and furniture maker, Sholto Scruton, whose black walnut hutch beckons to be touched upon entry into the workshop.

Isolated apart from the artist, Sholto’s pieces would no doubt be breathtaking. However, speaking to him about the tradition of woodworking, passed down from his grandfather to his father, and then to him, infuses the pieces with a new depth. Like the fir from his father that provides the workshop a stunning set of doors, the wood is more than simply a material – it is a method of storytelling and a container of history.

Many of the buildings housing the Crawl’s artists could be described as such: containers of history. Having ascended creaking stairs to her workshop for the past twenty years, walled by whitewashed bricks of a bygone era, painter Galen Felde agrees. In many ways, the building at 339 Railway is as impressive as the works it houses.

Galen explains that it, like much of the surrounding neighbourhood, has gone through a number of transformations since beginning as a warehouse for Imperial Rice Milling Co. – some more meaningful than others. In 1986, facing an eviction notice from the city of Vancouver, the studio served as a site of resistance for the artists under threat. Lobbying the city for their right to remain, their efforts eventually culminated in the creation of a bylaw allowing artists to live and work in warehouse studios across Vancouver. It was the first of its kind in Canada.

Bringing together creativity, narrative and history, the Eastside Culture Crawl is wholly unique and succeeds not only in providing a greater understanding of visual arts, but of the downtown eastside as well. By showcasing the diversity and unbounded talent of the neighbourhood’s residents, the Crawl affords a deeper understanding of an area often spot lit solely for its poverty.

From street hawkers to pop-up parks, from the New York High Line to Barcelona’s La Boqueria, urban acupuncture materializes in many different ways. Its principle, however, remains static in that it is seeks to re-energize communities through small-scale design innovation.

An antidote to more often prioritized, top-down, infrastructural change, urban acupuncture explores bottom-up, grassroots design that is both low-cost and low-impact. Requiring a detailed understanding of the communities it seeks to improve, planners are encouraged to identify gaps in services and potential connection points, all while remaining sensitive to the identity and needs of the neigbourhood.

In many ways, it is a more “philosophical approach to urban planning.”

“Sometimes just one stroke of creativity is acupuncture powerful enough to make progress,” states Jaime Lerner, a global proponent of the movement whose belief in urban acupuncture largely guided the city planning of Curitiba, Brazil in the ’70s and ‘80s.

This creativity serves as an opposing force to “industrious mediocrity” brought with rapid, homogenous development. Above all, however, it lends legitimacy to public spaces by encouraging increased use, and fosters understanding between city-dwellers in its desire to connect residents and blur the boundaries between work, play, and living.

Examples of urban acupuncture have spread across Vancouver in recent years, from City Studio’s “Keys to the Streets” campaign, to the creation of the “Robson Redux.” Both have successfully enhanced existing public space, encouraging greater use by and interaction between residents.

Traditionally, vulnerable communities have most benefited from urban acupuncture initiatives, Lerner’s Curitiba serving as a prime example. During his tenure as mayor, a severe gap in the provision of utilities was identified in the city’s surrounding slums. Believing that the perception of the problem was far greater than its reality, Lerner devised a way of threading electrical cables and water pipes along the handrails bordering the steep staircases of the favelas.

Charging nominal fees for use, residents of this part of the city found their day-to-day life quite improved, while the initiative’s planning and implementation provided the favelas, often overlooked by planners, a sense of legitimacy. Investments in time, planning and resources imbue neighbourhoods with a sense of pride, particularly when done through bottoms-up design. Often, projects encourage city-dwellers from elsewhere to visit and utilize newly revitalized public spaces, forging connection between those of disparate backgrounds and resources.

In Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside, a neighbourhood often identified by its homeless population and drug abuse, this type of encouraged connection is invaluable. It discourages community outsiders from using labels such as “addict” to homogenize residents, instead allowing insight into the diversity and vivacity of the neighbourhood.

A fixture on Carrall Street since 2010, the Sunday Downtown Eastside Street Market is exemplary of urban acupuncture, providing such connections. Its recent application to move to a permanent location promises to increase its positive impact. An example of local entrepreneurship, the market allows as many as 200 vendors from the DTES to sell salvaged goods, which would otherwise be fodder for the landfill. Organized by a small group of volunteers and funded by the City of Vancouver, a concerted effort is made to ensure that the market is run efficiently, and that its integrity is not compromised by the presence of stolen goods.

It is, in many ways, an open-air thrift store.

Vendors, who are able to sell for free and avoid the purchase of an $800 street vending license, use the income to supplement social assistance. For many, the market supports the right of residents to work, while also recycling income back into the local economy.

Having applied to relocate to 58 West Hastings, the promise of a permanent home is an alluring prospect for the market. “By legitimizing and organizing activity that already takes place, the community shows that it is open to creating a better neighbourhood, and provides a way to keep the same neighbours without displacement of the low income population,” reads the DTES Street Market Operation Plan. The hope is to eventually increase the frequency of the market, an interest supported by many street vendors and community members.

With permanence, increased frequency and legitimacy, the market’s success as an instance of urban acupuncture will no doubt grow. Providing methods for connection between marginalized individuals and other Vancouverites, suffusing the local economy with income, and legitimizing the needs of the DTES through support from the City, will no doubt make the market a shining example of grassroots urban design.

Known for its natural beauty, skyrocketing property prices and a “most livable” designation, Vancouver has infrequently been characterized as a hub for innovative design. That was, however, until its diverse and creative scene of architects, craftsmen (and women), typographers and graphic designers to name only a few, were thrust into the bright light of Vancouver Design Week(s).

Spanning across 14 end-of-summer days, Vancouver Design Week (VDW) was a collection of events organized to showcase and raise public awareness of Vancouver’s “unique design ecosystem.”

Kicking off the celebration was the city’s first Urban Design Awards. Conceived of in the corridors of city hall by VDW Director Jennifer Cutbill and councilor Andrea Reimer, the award ceremony recognized the best in progressive built form.

“Design,” posited mayor Gregor Robertson, “Is about expressing what type of city we want [Vancouver] to be…[It] is one of the most important forces shaping our city and our lives.”

Highlighted across the night were designs that very much embodied Vancouver’s modern direction. Those prioritizing sustainability, density and aesthetics that differed from the City of Glass skyline, were rewarded.

In total, 36 projects were submitted, while ten received accolades. In the Landscape, Public Space and Infrastructure category, top prize was given to Sharp & Diamond Landscape Architecture for their restoration of Jericho Beach Park. Characterized as a project that “celebrates the interface between the natural and urban environment,” the restoration increased accessibility and public interaction with one of the city’s most widely used parks, while also restoring the diverse riparian ecosystem.

From here, VDW stretched on to reveal a truly interdisciplinary range of programming and presentation. Embracing the ambiguity of design as a discipline, events such as “Why I Design” at the Museum of Vancouver provided insight into the range of creation and the impetus behind invention. Showcased were more than 30 designers and projects like the “Snug Vest,” an inflatable vest that simulates hugging, positioned alongside FP Innovations’ impermeable exterior building material created from fused bark.

Drawing attention to the diversity of design also served to bring focus to how design influences daily life on a micro level:

“[Design] affects every aspect of our lives,” stated Robertson at VDW’s inaugural event, “from buildings, to our public spaces, to how we deliver services, to how we care for each other – all of that is wrapped up in design.”

This was similarly expressed at the “Demo Nite Edition 1: The Story Behind Design,” where objects that tend to blend into the background, such as a backpack, suddenly were highlighted, improved upon, and transformed into something like The Transfold Bag by Steven Enns.

As much as VDW was about diversity, it was also about connection. From industry socials to the Hawkers Neighbourhood Block Party, (which the city would do well to allow music for next year), to the studio tour, the attempt of participants to see through the eyes of local designers created a very positive dynamic. This interactivity also encouraged people to don their own design lenses and to express their ideas about the potential of design through the ‘Design is/can’ trope that was carried throughout the two weeks.

Provided the opportunity to traverse graphic design and architecture studios, and to speak to industry professionals happy to explain what fuels their passion was also a valuable experience for young designers. Trendy and eager with pen and paper in hand, these bright patrons were no doubt inspired by the previous generation they spoke to. This sharing of skills and knowledge, questions and answers, worked only to grow and strengthen the city’s culture of design.

While Vancouver’s horizon may not resemble cities like Barcelona or New York, where design is very much valued, its decision to follow in their footsteps and host the Vancouver Design Week certainly positions it on a similar plane. The fact that VDW was organized entirely by volunteers only further enunciates the city’s rich design present and its desire to make itself known.

In the end, the answer to the ‘Design is/can’ questions was: anything.