Tear, our last class was yesterday, any almost everybody showed up!! GO CLASS!
We were talking about City Development, and why they aren't sustainable. Basically, municipalities are "locked -in". They have a huge investment in current infrastructure, and it would cost too much money to change. When most suburbs were being developed in the 50's, they did not have a plan. Everything is connected: houses, roads, power lines, pipes, parks, sewers, EVERYTHING. To change one component would require changing them all, and this is simply too expensive, and would take forever.
People know this now, so they are coming up with new ideas and investing in sustainable infrastructure. A 100 year plan is necessary for ecological, social and economic well being. We should no loner be centered around cars.
Canada had come up with the Federal Gas Tax. The revenue is used by municipalities to fund sustainable infrastructure and planning capacity building ideas. However, the funds are only accessed through an integrated sustainability planning process. The plan needs to be realistic, and there are steps involved. First, community engagement is necessary. We could all do this very well based on all the useful knowledge Chris has taught us in class :) You need to understand the place you are to develop and then, create a plan, implement it and continually monitor the progress.
The problem with this is that there is usually not enough time to fully implement the idea. This means that small, non glamorous things may be put on the back burner in order to complete the politically urgent portions of the plan.
I found this lecture really interesting and we always hear about this "sustainable communities" and all the fancy things they are doing, but in reality the ideas may not be functioning.
It was also interesting to discover that the biggest drug problems occur in smaller, out of the way areas where children have nothing to do. I always thought it was a bigger problem in large cities, where drugs are easier to obtain. I didn't agree with the fact that mixed housing communities produce the less crime. In my hometown, there is a mixed housing area labelled "Smurf Village" because it consists of tall blue apartments, smaller blue houses, and larger family homes. The people who live in those apartments are low lifes, honestly, and so much crime is happening in there that the larger, richer families are vacating the area. Granted, a lot of crime for Riverview, NB is a couple of car break ins over 6 years yet there is a lot of domestic violence and drug use originating from the apartments.
On a lighter note, no body infiltrated my blue bin this week!
Friday, March 13, 2009
Monday, March 9, 2009
Presentations
It seems to me, from all the presentations over the past two weeks, that the healthiest community is a sustainable one. Most groups focused on areas that are creating community involvement by making greenspaces, work- living spaces or "co- housing" where everyone is living closer together. Is smaller better?
The community my group chose was the town of Okotoks, Alberta. Although we mentioned that becoming sustainable was a major focus of the town, we also showed how they were able to involve a lot of the residents. The town was expanding. I found it interesting there were no communities mentioned that came together to build a pulp mill, or an oil well. I'm sure they exist. A small town with a billion dollars worth of oil underneath them would band together to receive the largest possible profit, if it was on communal land. However, all examples, a few being Salt Springs, Milton and the co- housing project, were all about preventing mass expansion or losing environmental spaces.
It shows a shift is happening, a change in thought of the new generation. We are no longer focused on expanding and using all resources but rather, growing sustainably.
A few of the most interesting things mentioned in the projects were the Free Store, co- housing and charette process. I would really like to see how this Free Store works. I'm not going to lie, most of the crap I no longer use is, well, crap. I donate items to the Salvation Army because I figure that perhaps a homeless person would find the item acceptable for use or wear. My guess is that the store is based on moral decency, or shame. If you bring used goods into the store, the employees will be monitoring you. And seeing as how the population is so small, they will know who you are when you bring your holey underoos just to get rid of them!
On to co- housing. I wouldn't live there. I know that I am too superficial and private for that type of environment. Sure, I don't NEED my own lawnmower or guest room, but I want them. I also want a fenced in yard so that I don't have to talk to my neighbours. It seems a little university dorm like to me. I do enjoy the occasional block party, but it just isn't private enough...disease will spread.
The charette process seems a little fruitless to me due to the lack of participants. The idea is great, but I feel more of the citizens should want to participate for it to really make a difference. However, I suppose if the voice of a few is heard, it's better than none. There will be people who complain about the outcome, even though they didn't attend a meeting. Although, I don't remember ever attending a community meeting, I'm too busy watching my blue box.
The community my group chose was the town of Okotoks, Alberta. Although we mentioned that becoming sustainable was a major focus of the town, we also showed how they were able to involve a lot of the residents. The town was expanding. I found it interesting there were no communities mentioned that came together to build a pulp mill, or an oil well. I'm sure they exist. A small town with a billion dollars worth of oil underneath them would band together to receive the largest possible profit, if it was on communal land. However, all examples, a few being Salt Springs, Milton and the co- housing project, were all about preventing mass expansion or losing environmental spaces.
It shows a shift is happening, a change in thought of the new generation. We are no longer focused on expanding and using all resources but rather, growing sustainably.
A few of the most interesting things mentioned in the projects were the Free Store, co- housing and charette process. I would really like to see how this Free Store works. I'm not going to lie, most of the crap I no longer use is, well, crap. I donate items to the Salvation Army because I figure that perhaps a homeless person would find the item acceptable for use or wear. My guess is that the store is based on moral decency, or shame. If you bring used goods into the store, the employees will be monitoring you. And seeing as how the population is so small, they will know who you are when you bring your holey underoos just to get rid of them!
On to co- housing. I wouldn't live there. I know that I am too superficial and private for that type of environment. Sure, I don't NEED my own lawnmower or guest room, but I want them. I also want a fenced in yard so that I don't have to talk to my neighbours. It seems a little university dorm like to me. I do enjoy the occasional block party, but it just isn't private enough...disease will spread.
The charette process seems a little fruitless to me due to the lack of participants. The idea is great, but I feel more of the citizens should want to participate for it to really make a difference. However, I suppose if the voice of a few is heard, it's better than none. There will be people who complain about the outcome, even though they didn't attend a meeting. Although, I don't remember ever attending a community meeting, I'm too busy watching my blue box.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Juuuuuddyyyyy
Judy Brownoff came to speak to our class a few weeks ago and although I found her sweater a little distracting, she was an excellent speaker. Judy is a municipal counsellor of Saanich, the municipality I spoke of in one of my very first blogs. It was super exciting to have her there because I know about a lot of what Saanich is doing on the sustainable community front.
One of Judy’s main points was the Saanich Official Community Plan, or OCP. This was a huge document which had outlines many of the principles of community engagement that we have been discussing in class. Although their approach was slightly different than ours, the main idea was the same. The OCP followed 10 general guidelines:
1. Understand the needs, values and concerns of decision makers & stakeholders
2. Manage expectations & Keep people informed
3. Get people involved early
4. Meaningful input, various ways
5. Plan for the unexpected.
6. Open to varied ideas & opinions
7. Deal with facts & perceptions
8. Surveys as a policy tool
9. The value of focus groups
10. Continual tending of the process
(Brownoff, Personal Communication, 2009)
I really enjoyed her outlook on community and that nothing can happen within a community without informing and involving people.
Counsellor Brownoff then proceeded to explain Saanich’s plan for a new wastewater treatment facility and had us do an exercise on how to influence change and peoples thoughts on this development. She actually involved us, and wrote down our suggestions. She seemed genuinely interested in what we had to say, it wasn’t just to keep us occupied. You could tell she was really gunho about how to get the community to focus their mind and ideas on this important project.
From all this, I learned that there actually are communities out there that are involved, and do want to participate and have their opinion heard. I bet that people in Saanich don’t put junk into their neighbours blue bins on recycling day.
One of Judy’s main points was the Saanich Official Community Plan, or OCP. This was a huge document which had outlines many of the principles of community engagement that we have been discussing in class. Although their approach was slightly different than ours, the main idea was the same. The OCP followed 10 general guidelines:
1. Understand the needs, values and concerns of decision makers & stakeholders
2. Manage expectations & Keep people informed
3. Get people involved early
4. Meaningful input, various ways
5. Plan for the unexpected.
6. Open to varied ideas & opinions
7. Deal with facts & perceptions
8. Surveys as a policy tool
9. The value of focus groups
10. Continual tending of the process
(Brownoff, Personal Communication, 2009)
I really enjoyed her outlook on community and that nothing can happen within a community without informing and involving people.
Counsellor Brownoff then proceeded to explain Saanich’s plan for a new wastewater treatment facility and had us do an exercise on how to influence change and peoples thoughts on this development. She actually involved us, and wrote down our suggestions. She seemed genuinely interested in what we had to say, it wasn’t just to keep us occupied. You could tell she was really gunho about how to get the community to focus their mind and ideas on this important project.
From all this, I learned that there actually are communities out there that are involved, and do want to participate and have their opinion heard. I bet that people in Saanich don’t put junk into their neighbours blue bins on recycling day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
