15 Minute City (Districts) - Parks Planning and Parks Services (April 3, 2023)
Providing Great Bones for a Human Scale Community but....
Vlog Overview
My return to the academy (in 2014) to earn a PhD after 32 years of parks planning and operationalization of recreation and leisure services practice (1982-2014) uncovered many practice realities extensively studied by researchers. I will share park development policy and practice decision-making practice using an academic lens (i.e., institutional theory).
Each vlog, called Ice Sculptures, have a short video presentation followed by key takeaway notes. I will use lots of “I” and “me” to personalize my experiences, with lots of examples. My personality is such that I like to have fun, be a bit irreverent, hence some of my memes, bad puns and (weak) attempts at humour. My goal is to provide a level of nuance to seen and unseen aspects of decision-making processes. The vlog provides an informed perspective, but my perspectives and opinions based on my experiences and studies.
Ice Sculpture
The 15 Minute City (Districts) - Parks Planning and Park Services (April 3, 2023)
The 15 minute city is an urban planning concept that seeks to create more human scale development. It is a concept that started in Paris and has been adopted across the world, including a version in Edmonton. Edmonton has adopted a version, called “15 Minute Districts.”
The 15 Minute City Defined
I will use excerpts from a recent paper on the 15 Minute City that appeared in Smart Cities by Georgia Pozoukidou and Margarita Angelidou, entitled “Urban Planning in the 15-Minute City: Revisited under Sustainable and Smart City Developments until 2030.”
The 15-minute-city (FMC) model for urban development and planning represents a relatively new way of thinking about urban planning and policy that is centred on the human scale and experience of the city. Its core premise is that cities should be designed so that, within a walking or cycling distance of 15 min from their residence, citizens should be able to meet all their daily needs: work, home, food, health, education, culture, sports, and leisure. To this end, it gives prominence to the neighborhood as the basic element of spatial and functional organization and argues that cities should be organized into neighborhoods within which any need should be satisfied within a 15-minute walk or bike ride. Beyond proximity, other important planning principles of the FMC include an enhanced land-use mix, the optimization of land use by allowing for multiple functions in one place, and varied and affordable housing options. The envisioned outcome is the development of complete, self-sufficient neighborhoods that are designed to ensure safe and convenient ways for citizens and visitors to access the amenities that they need in daily life.”
The authors identify 8 premises of the concept.
Planning in neighbourhood units of appropriate size and characteristics
Allocation and hierarchy of urban amenities on a city wide scale
Accessibility by proximity
Mixed use and multi-temporal urban environments
Urban planning favouring active transportation
Inclusive and socially rich neighbourhoods in a just city
Governance and civic engagement to legitimate the goals, motivations and FMC plan
Urban planning for innovation and intelligence.
It is from this frame that I comment on the 15 minute districts application here in Edmonton.
Planning in Neighbourhood Units of Appropriate Size and Characteristics
The authors envision neighbourhood units of appropriate size and density such that the majority of residents can fulfill their basic daily needs within just a few minutes of walking or cycling, typically within 600 to 800 metres, or an average area of two square kilometers using a mixed land use regime.
Parks Planning and Park Services (Edmonton)
Neighbourhood planning has a long history, and continues to be the basis of planning in Edmonton. Since the 60s development has been based on car orientated low density development. For the past 15 years, regional governance density targets have increased, as have suburban neighbourhood density approvals. City Plan and its predecessor (i.e., the Way Ahead) has encouraged greater density in mature areas as well.
Neighbourhood boundaries are largely defined by arterial and collector roadway networks, in both mature areas and suburban neighbourhoods. The area, size and configuration of neighbourhoods are proposed by developers and are vetted and approved by the administration and city council. City Plan have reshuffled approved plan areas into new groupings called districts, and communities of communities, in order to ease and expedite redevelopment processes.
Allocation and Hierarchy of Urban Amenities On City Wide Scale & Accessibility by Proximity
The FMC model suggests that in the past smart city planning has assumed that agglomerations of populations generates the need/demand for urban amenities. Instead, the journal authors suggest that each type of amenity has a specific catchment area on a city wide scale.
The type, distribution and number of amenities in an FMC neighbourhood is a determinant of success. To support local access basic amenities and living should be available nearby, thus requiring a mixed land use regime. Most basic services should be available between 500-800 metres from a residence. FMC suggest localization of workplaces as well. This can occur by encouraging work from home, developing common shared work places and working during transit. This will fundamentally shape employment allocation models. This may require downsizing of central offices and encouraging hybrid work from home arrangements.
Parks Planning and Park Services (Edmonton) - both Allocation and Proximity
Park amenities are planned on a catchment area basis using a parks classification or typology, using proximity and service area as the measure. Playgrounds, community gardens serve local neighbourhoods (<5,000 people), schools, sports fields, community halls and small scale skate and water play features serve a small of neighbourhoods but are located on neighbourhood parks. Major Recreation centres, skate parks, water play features, major field sport tournament venues serve an even broader population and are located on District Parks serving a larger population base (i.e., <60,000). The river valley park, trail and natural area system serves the entire city (1M).
There are existing or planned public park lands in every neighbourhood in Edmonton. Every square inch of the city has an area/neighbourhood plan, now called districts, that include park and school sites within them with an operationalization plan in place (i.e., what social actors fund, builds, program and maintain, etc). Some neighbourhoods have more space (land) than others (i.e., suburban vs mature areas) in part based on history (i.e., planning legislation changed in the 60s to ensure more and better planned sites), and/or because program varies by neighbourhood (i.e., the Joint Use Agreement). In other words, the historical park system planning assumptions as it is today provides for a great bones or structure of for an FMC approach.
A previous vlog entitled “Pulling Back the Curtain - Area Plan Park System Planning - September 30, 2022” walked through the development of a new are plan - Riverview Area Plan, that created multiple new neighbourhoods. That vlog identified park land programs and allocations across an area plan based on neighbourhood program and associated size, identifying park uses that draw users from geographical communities as well as communities of interest (e.g., schools, community leagues, sports fields, etc). It included a central district park. serving the entire area plan. That program system was previously described on November 9, 2022 called “Parks as Systems of Program Systems.”
Mixed Use and Multi-Temporal Urban Environments
The outcome of a successful FMC will see use patterns change as peoples schedules are different, and cause potential competition between spaces. Some have called the separation of space and time chrono-urbanism.
Parks Planning and Park Services (Edmonton)
Increased density will support and enhance community league operations through the provision of more volunteers. This is more true of condominium owners than renters.
Use patterns in parks evolves by time of year, time of day, the specific amenities provided, and the associated programs (i.e., minor sports, festivals, etc.). The use pattern is likely to change in a way that mirrored what happened during Covid times in Edmonton. Parks were used more often and at all times of the day likely in greater numbers, in addition to the ebb and flow noted first. It will result in more social interactions and associated benefits. This may in fact be the primary benefit of the FMC concept for parks.
Urban Planning Favouring Active Transportation Including Linked Public Spaces
FMC supports walking and cycling as modes of movement, and away from car orientated transportation. Physical design of neighbourhoods supporting FMC include increasing the number of internal connections within the neighbourhood and increasing the number externally to nearby neighbourhoods and areas. Access to high quality public spaces activates movement and contribute to health and wellness benefits of the community. Advocates of FMC suggest roads could be transformed into green spaces or mixed modes routes (i.e., people and cars).
Parks Planning and Park Service Perspective (Edmonton)
The planning and development of the park system since 1960 has planned on a systems basis connecting with other urban infrastructure systems (i.e., roads, utilities as well as housing, commercial and industrial lands). Neighbourhood and district park and school sites are located on collector roadways or sometimes arterial roadways to facilitate student bussing or parent drop off which is more common today since the growth of special school programs. Collector roadways include sidewalks on both sides of the road that can accommodate walkers and cyclists. Edmonton has been expanding the on-street bikeway system that can and does link to the parks system. Typically walkway linkages are considered in neighbourhood plan approvals reviewed by planners and transportation engineers. Arterial roadways often include bike trails. The opportunity exists for exploration of closure of roadways for active transportation and green space linkages and/or creation of more links inside and outside neighbourhoods in order to create more linkages. To my knowledge this has not occurred to date.
Inclusive and Socially Rich Neighbourhoods in a Just City
FMC neighbourhoods are socially rich and diverse communities living in close proximity to one another with a diversity of employment and affordable housing opportunities for residents that are increasingly diverse culturally.
Parks Planning and Parks Services (Edmonton)
Park systems planning, development and operation is based on the park master plan of the day. Typically those documents include high level policy directions to be all inclusive regardless of age, income, culture, gender, education, sexuality etc. Changes to parks have historically required a need assessment developed with and for the community. Special need populations of any kind are addressed in those processes. Park and user needs should be evaluated by both quantitative and qualitative measures. As well, as previously mentioned there are no park deserts in Edmonton.
Governance and Civic Engagement to Legitimate the Goals, Motivations and FMC Plan
Citizen participation in planning should address all the important aspects and qualities of the neighbourhood in a community setting. Participation should be encouraged including planning for equitable access to infrastructures, services, and amenities and envisioning places that enhance social interaction and cultivate a sense of community, safety, pride, and identity. Tactical urbanism or prototyping is a core element of developing a successful FMC, as it enables citizens to gain ownership of the city. FMC models demand more citizen centric public services. It also suggests a greater integration between other urban stakeholders, which I have previously referred to as institutions.
Parks Planning and Park Services (Edmonton)
Historically citizen engagement in parks and park services in Edmonton has been a hallmark of parks planning and parks services provision. Cost shared funding to community leagues on a neighbourhood by neighbourhood basis has been provided to develop local need assessments and cost share the construction of new park amenities (e.g., playgrounds, plazas, lighting). Volunteer run communities leagues also largely fund the construction of community halls (i.e., gathering places) and operation. Once park amenities are in place, volunteers run, minor sport programs, special events, flood ice rinks, create and manage festivals, groom cross country ski trails, line marking on sports fields, security at events, sweat equity in playground construction, etc. While not typically called tactical urbanism in parks, special events have been common for decades.
The creation of spaces in the land use change process relies integrally on the co-production of place described above. Policies and processes prior to 2006 required the development of a need assessment with the community prior to decommissioning spaces. Since that time, elected officials and administrators have removed this requirement, despite the integral role of the community in the co-production of place. Public spaces are being lost absent this up front community engaged process, instead leaving them to voice their support or concern at public hearings. Researchers have documented that public hearings are poor at developing community concensus.
Changes to to zoning regulations for housing has been said to address the social cost of regulations, but it also re-regulated the process to expedite approvals. Redevelopment of public lands can now be approved with minimal public input. I would argue this is contrary to FMC goals of an engaged citizenry.
Finally, commitment to civic engagement as per FMC is not measured by the volume of engagements, but also by the quality of them - engagement does not equal comprehension. Engaging the community in multiple overlapping and competing studies and outcomes simply overwhelm community social actors (i.e., volunteers) and complicates operationalization of outcomes for administrative staff (Hall, Grant and Habib 2017) and the community. For example, the Strathcona Public Realm Strategy is influenced by a Whyte Avenue physical infrastructure redevelopment process, an affordable housing initiative, a transit study on Whyte, the on-going debate around the Strathcona Health Centre, not to mention a gondola proposal along Whyte Avenue and the completed PlanWhyte commercial land study - each well meaning and each drawing on the community social actors for input. There have also been tactical urbanism pilot projects occurring as well on Whyte Avenue. Uncle….
Urban Planning for Innovation and Intelligence
FMC demands or requires the development of data collection and monitoring systems to be available in real time, in order to inform decision-making and systems management.
Park Planning and Park Services (Edmonton)
On-going data collection and monitoring in parks by the city includes data for indoor and outdoor bookable or paid facilities (e.g., sports field bookings, picnic shelter rentals, ice rentals, pool attendance, gym memberships, etc.). The data are used more reflectively (e.g., use statistics, cost recoveries) in budgeting and need assessments processes. Data collection practices have an inherent bias against non-programmable spaces or places (i.e., trails, nature spaces, flat or rolling green spaces for reading, suntanning, playgrounds, plazas, etc.) A more comprehensive and holistic data collection system using observation studies that include semi-structured interviews could fill that void.
Final Thoughts
Generally speaking, the parks and park system planned, assembled, constructed, programmed and maintained the past 100+ years have left Edmontonians with a legacy of great bones, a great structure, to facilitate a 15 minute city or district concept.
The concept as defined by Pozoukidou and Angelidou (2022) provided a frame to reflect on the concept as it may or may not apply to the parks business in Edmonton. The FMC concept is aspirational, as is City Plan itself. MDPs like City Plan provide multiple overlapping policy directives, many of which appear as part of the FMC discussion. Overlapping directives are an artifact, not a bug, of MDP implementation, and requires extensive interpretation when applied to a specific site.
Areas of alignment include systems planning on a urban amenities catchment area basis, accommodation of more close to home employment both on parks sites as well as greater density residential development in single family residential areas, support for active transportation planning, proximity of services, multi-temporal opportunities, and community engagement. These systematically planned urban amenities provide for collective social, cultural, economic and ecological benefits that improve individuals health and wellness, reduce social intolerances, connect individuals to their neighbours and nature. These urban amenities also act to reduce urban heat islands, remove and sequester pollution, and act to reduce and manage storm water system requirements. Finally, they provide places of employment for the construction and operation of park lands and bricks and mortar facilities located on them. These benefits are described more fully in my November 14 vlog entitled “Why Parks? A Summary of Benefits Research.”
In many ways the FMC conceptually aligns quite well with parks planning and service operationalization by the parks function that has occurred in Edmonton for literally the last 100 years. Parks are a unicorn category of municipal that relies heavily on others (i.e., the community) to co-produce services both close to home and across the park system. By its nature the parks institution is an engaging and co-dependent planning and service operationalization strategy, that could be used to inform, broaden and mature the FMC concept in Edmonton. For a more in-depth discussion, see my November 1, 2022 vlog entitled “Social Actors in Parks - Linking Land Use Planning and Parks Services Operationalization.”
Critically of concern to me is that FMC and particularly City Plan 15 minute districts demonstrate a developmentalist perspective. Development and redevelopment must also occur quickly, substantively and all across the city. City Plan has a goal to double the city population, including an additional 600,000 more people living in mature areas, without an under utilized land base to accommodate them, nor without an action plan to increase public spaces in these areas. One of the city strategies appear to focus on the redevelopment of its inventory of physically unencumbered public lands, including parks. I have vociferously critiqued this strategy as short term thinking. More recently, the process reviewing the Old Strathcona Public Realm Strategy (thus) far has not fully embraced, understood or enhanced and celebrated the history and culture of the area by focussing on space (land) not place. The same lack of institutional thinking was and is true for the loss of surplus school lands.
Further to that, City Plan and FMC describe outcomes, but do not describe or prescribe how the outcomes are to be operationalized, particularly on a specific area or site. There is no information provided that suggest how competing directives, ideas and outcomes are to be implemented. How you get from “a” to “b” requires interpretation for site application to occur. Who does this, with what knowledge base, with what directives, with what information, and in what timelines? What social actors are engaged and what roles do they play? Who has what power and agency? For FMC the answer is an engaged citizenry, but the mechanics of aspirational, not operational. The success of FMC outcomes is only as good as to the extent of meaningful citizen engagement.
Finally, the FMC has drawn unfriendly fire from places across the world. A February 17, 2023 article in the Globe and Mail by Erin Andersson reflected on the issue in Edmonton. The World Economic Forum referenced the FMC concept in 2021 that subsequently generated a host conspiracy theories around (i.e, lockdowns, electric fences, etc.). It is the potential operationalization of the concept that the community may be imagineering into undesirable outcomes. Are these outbursts a difference opinion on a policy issue/interpretation, a reaction to processes privileging one set of actors over another (i.e., economic over social outcomes), an objection to inauthentic processes, or a reaction to mis-information? In my Edmonton practice I have experienced all four, sometimes on a single issue. Mistrust of government institutions may be a broader issue that requires a more engaged and holistic if not slower approach to redevelopment of our cities, and particularly for public lands. With respect to the latter, we did this prior to 2006…back to the future?
References
Anderssen, Erin. “Edmonton is the latest ‘15-minute city’ to be caught in a global conspiracy theory.” The Globe and Mail, February 12, 2023.
Hall, Nathan, Jill L. Grant, and Ahsanul Habib. “Planners’ Perceptions of Why Canadian Communities Have Too Many Plans.” Planning Practice & Research, 32, no. 3 (2017): 243-258. doi: 10.1080/02697459.2017.1279918.
Pozoukidou, Georgia and Margarita Angelidou. “Urban Planning in the 15-Minute City: Revisited under Sustainable and Smart City Developments until 2030” Smart Cities 2022, 5, 1356–1375. https://doi.org/10.3390/ smartcities5040069
https://globalnews.ca/news/9483836/15-minute-city-edmonton-canada/
Previous Vlogs
“Old Strathcona Public Realm Strategy” - March 25, 2023
“Why Parks? A Summary of Parks Benefits” - November 14, 2022
“Parks as Systems of Program Systems” - November 9, 2022
“Social Actors in Parks - Linking Land Use Planning and Parks Services Operationalization” - November 1, 2022
“Pulling Back the Curtain - Area Plan Park System Planning” - September 30, 2022