City Market Affordable Housing, 2007 Urban Design Award Winner for Urban Architecture

Guess what, Edmonton – we’ve managed to fool a couple of different organizations into believing that we’re a real news outlet. Yes, that’s right, we’re starting to get added to people’s press release lists.  This is great news, as it helps a bit with news gathering; but because most press conferences occur during the day, it means we can’t attend, what with our REAL JOBS.  Enjoy your free coffee, jerks.

Anyway, I am going somewhere with this; today at 10:30 a.m., the City is going to hold a press conference launching their 3rd biennial Urban Design Awards.  I know this because I got a press release for it.  Thanks, City of Edmonton!

Today’s “launch” is actually fancy-talk for the first day of the City’s call for submissions.  There are awards in six categories;

• Unimplemented urban design plans
• Implemented urban design plans
• Urban architecture
• Civic design projects
• Urban fragments
• Community improvement projects

Since I have no idea what any of those things actually mean, I went back to the 2007 site.  The submission form from 2007 explains the categories in a bit more detail; though maybe don’t spend your morning poring over it (I know how you kids love architecture) because I assume that there will be a 2009 version of the form put up after the press conference.

Welcome to Edmonton! Home of your sci-fi wasteland nightmares since 2008.

Maybe instead, we can just check out some award winners from 2007.  It kind of makes me laugh that the controversial-and-wicked-expensive-and-also-deeply-terrifying-welcoming pyramid won an award  for unimplemented urban design plan (though in the interest of full-disclosure, it must be said that back in 2008, I lobbied hard to make this Edmonton’s new entrance sign).

Other award winners in 2007 included Enterprise Square, Bergstrom Block and the Terwilligar Drive Pederstrian Overpass.

The call for submissions will remain open until October 8.   Tell your architect friends.

]]> http://theedmontonian.com/2009/07/28/2009-urban-design-awards-launch/feed/ 0 http://theedmontonian.com/2009/07/22/pt-4-better-late-than-never-or-plan-municipal-development-even-harder/ http://theedmontonian.com/2009/07/22/pt-4-better-late-than-never-or-plan-municipal-development-even-harder/#comments Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:44:19 +0000 Sally http://theedmontonian.com/?p=2389

Do you guys remember all this jazz? When I went to City Hall for the first time to try and wrap my brain around the Municipal Development Plan?

Part of my efforts to do so included sending an e-mail to all the City Councillors, in search of answers to some of my questions. In the end, I talked to a few folks, far more than I ever expected would return my calls – but about two weeks ago, I received an e-mail from the the City’s planning and development department, letting me know that Councillor Bryan Anderson had passed my questions on to them.

They asked for clarification on some of my concerns, because, y’know, I’m barely literate – and then last week I received this incredibly thorough answer sheet from Councillor Anderson’s assistant, Erin Poulsen (no relation).

Wow, you should totally read it, because it’s written in PLAIN ENGLISH, which meant Jeff didn’t have to play English-to-Sally interpreter for me, as he usually does. The first page is filled with my questions, and the next two are all the answers.

If you aren’t so inclined, or if you don’t have the time, here’s the Coles notes of the things I found important. It’s mostly the MDP backstory that I didn’t know.

-The Municipal Development Plan (MDP), because it has not yet been approved by Council, is still in the draft stage.

-The very first draft of the MDP was presented to Council in November of 2008. A multitude of folks came out to throw their two cents in, and the MDP project team took their concerns and looked into them. Based on this research, some changes were proposed to the document- and those changes were discussed at the hearing I went to back in June.

In September, Council is going to discuss and vote on these proposed changes. After that, the new, amended version of the MDP will be reviewed again at another Public Hearing in November.

(To see copies of the draft MDP, the draft Transportation Master Plan and the City’s 10 Year Strategic Plan, go here. Minutes from the Council meeting that I went to are available here.

The rest of the answers pertain specifically to food security, and are largely a retread of ground we covered here. But it’s still totally worth reading, if only to marvel at the fact that people with real jobs took time out of their day to answer me.

Seriously, team, we are going to be so g.d. informed when September rolls around. This is going to be the first City Council issue ever where I actually know wtf is going on. Thanks City of Edmonton!

The fight for City Centre is on!

This WAS going to be a long, drawn out story about the history of the Edmonton City Centre Airport (ECCA) and the debate around its closure.

But instead, I’m just going to point you in the direction of a couple of websites that have all the information you’ll need to make an informed decision. Granted, it’s the decision of Edmonton City Council – but it’s your council and you tell them what to do.

So…poke around the “Save Our Airport” website to find out who wants to keep the municipal airport open, and why…then check out “Not My Airport” for more information, including opinions from those who want the land developed into a medium to high-density neighbourhood.

You can also follow (or participate) in a live debate on the City Centre Airport on Twitter. Jump into conversations with people using the #ecca hashtag, or search #ecca to find out what people are saying.

On July 8 Edmonton City Council meets to decide the fate of the City Centre Airport. It could be their final vote on the matter, ever.

Alright. When we left off, I was having a very special feelings moment

GEA's Michael Walters addresses the crowd

First off, there were A LOT of people there. Hundreds. So many, in fact, that the Greater Edmonton Alliance (GEA) held a pre-meeting debriefing to explain the details of what was going on, and how to behave in Council Chambers (which was nice, because as I’ve already established, I was pants-wettingly nervous about being there in the first place). The rules were basically just to be quiet. You can’t applaud, cheer, boo, hiss, argue or “rabble rabble rabble” in any way.

"...and the race for the best seat at Folkfest begins!"

We were also instructed that the group was obviously over capacity for council chambers, and that any overflow of people could sit in the lobby or in an adjoining room and watch the whole affair on CCTV(on some pretty pimp TVs, I might add).

And then they let us inside. CHAOS! And by CHAOS!, I mean hundreds of people politely heading up the stairs, and then waiting patiently to get inside.

Once inside, it was standing room only. The council welcomed everyone, made a few jokes about how we’re welcome all the time if we’d like to come back and then they called the first of many speakers for the evening.

Two things happened almost right off the bat:

1) I began to piece together that the gist of the GEA’s argument was this: in Edmonton’s current draft of their municipal development plan (basically a giant plan of how to develop the city and its transportation over the next 30 years) the council wants to maintain the option to develop certain land on the edges of the city for housing. That is a change from the last draft of the MDP, back in November, where they had said they wanted to make protecting agricultural land a priority.

So what does that mean? Instead of saying that all this land will be zoned for agriculture, the city would like to keep their options open, and maybe let the people who own it develop it for housing. But the GEA would like to see that property protected, because it seems obvious that there wouldn’t be much incentive for people to NOT develop that land for residential or commercial purposes. And ultimately, that land is owned by people who have their own interests to look out for as well.

(See? This is really interesting. It’s like a big soap opera. About land.)

2) I made a new friend, almost immediately, whom I will now refer to, for anonymity, as my new BF. My new BF was passionate about this issue, and spent much of the evening loud-whispering her disdain for the proceedings, despite the previously mentioned ‘cone-of-silence’ rules in effect in chambers. She also asked me repeatedly what I thought and who was talking. Sometimes she would mime clapping above her head after someone made a point she liked.

"I support this point!"

Then she would take notes on a lone, tiny piece of paper. Hmmm.

TO RECAP: lots of folks are mad because the city went from saying they would “Ensure access to local food through a secure land supply and neighbourhood level approaches to local food, gardening and smaller scale food production” to saying “they would ensure access to local food through neighbourhood level approaches to local food, gardening and smaller scale food production.”

So now local food economy and security can be developed by you and me and everybody we know, gardening;
a point re-iterated by a few of the councilors throughout the meeting. They weren’t being dicks about it, really. It’s true, we can’t expect the city to do all the work. We have to help out as well.

loud noises coming from my mouth!

This was also a point poorly received by the crowd, probably because they felt they were just going to wind up having the responsibility dumped entirely on their shoulders. (I could tell this because I am very astute. Also because my new BF kept loud-whispering it to me.)

Finally, I get to see why these things are so complicated. Everybody has a point.

Yes, we can garden ourselves. And that might be awesome. I could get behind that.

And yes, it would be nice if we had lots of protected agricultural land to have great local food raised on. Also great.

And yes, it also only seems fair that the people who bought the land ultimately get the vote on what they do with it. And also, yes, someday we may need that land for housing. Good god, I wouldn’t want to be in the middle of this.

I was busy thinking these thoughts and scribbling down notes when my new BF decided it was time for a candy break. And by time for a candy break, I mean it was time to slowly unwrap what could only have been a ball of pure sound, wrapped in tinfoil and reverb and wailing cats. This went on for several minutes, and completely overrode my ability to focus on anything but the noise.

"candy?" "no thanks."

Then, more notes.

What a night. By the time the meeting concludes, I am left with a few insights, but mostly more questions:

For City Council:

• Why did the protection of agricultural land change?
• What about people who can’t garden, whether because they live in apartments, they are physically incapable, or they just don’t have time?
• Can you just re-zone the specific land to which you are referring?
• Could the city just buy the land back and deem it for agricultural use only?

For the land-owners:

• What do you plan to do with your land?
• Could you get behind a local food economy?
• What was the land zoned for when you bought it?

For the GEA:

• Would you be okay with the city compromising, and zoning the land for a mix of residential, commercial and agricultural uses?
• Whose interests do you represent?

Alas, fellow illiterates, once again, we find ourselves confused. So I think the only thing we can do is email these questions to the people who can answer them: a few city councillors and the folks at the GEA. I’ll even see if I can’t drum up a land owner.

All this learning about City Hall really has me thinking about the current system of “staying informed,” which is based around you and me reading the newspaper and trying to make sense of it on our own. But didn’t we come up with that like 100+ years ago? I’m beginning to think that’s a dead paradigm for an era long gone. We haz internets now! My councillor is on Twitter, for Pete’s sake.

So I’ll be sending out these questions this weekend, hopefully to get some answers early next week. I’ll let you know what I come up with, if anything at all.

In the meantime, the next meeting about the MDP is on Monday. More details here. And if you would like to ask your councilor some questions of your own, go here.

(Two things before we delve into my experience at last night’s public consultation meeting at City Hall:

1) This is the first of a series of posts targeted at people who don’t understand or care about civic politics. If you don’t fall into that category and are looking for a point-by-point account of what happened, check out the article in this morning’s Edmonton Journal.

2) My account of last night’s meeting is going to be posted in several parts throughout the next few days, so if you’re interested check back regularly or follow us on Twitter.)

Okay. This is more than a little embarrassing to admit, but at 29 years old, I don’t know or understand anything about City Council.

Maybe it’s because I went to technical school instead of university, or maybe it’s because I’ve done my best to emotionally repress most of junior high and high school, but when it comes to the specifics of how government operates (at any level) I’m pretty much Simple Jack over here. My attempts to understand politics, whether through hearsay, the media, or even political science books all end the same way – with me wanting to beat my head against a wall, because I sort of understand what people are talking about, but then I also sort of don’t.

It’s like I’ve missed some pivotal plot point that everyone else around me caught; think of seeing “The Sixth Sense” and not getting that (uh oh, 1999 spoiler alert!) Bruce Willis was a ghost. The credits roll, and you’re looking around, and everybody else is nodding excitedly and talking about what just happened, and you’re totally lost. And I, personally, hate it. I want to be informed, and it has long been my opinion that more people would be engaged in civic politics if it didn’t just make them feel so incredibly stupid.

So what can I do about this? I consulted my thinktank:

What can I do about it, hipster?

Fry cook?

Toddler?

Hmmm. You raise some good points.

Upon reflection, I decided a good first step would be to attend a public consultation meeting. Because, as I always say, “when in doubt, attend a public consultation meeting.”

Now, let me set the scene a bit here by telling you that I was absolutely terrified to go to this meeting. Not only because of the obvious fears that come with walking into a room full of strangers (that I would arrive late, trip, knock something expensive over with a loud crash, try to pick it up before anyone noticed and have my pants fall spontaneously down, all in one fluid motion) but also because for all my attempts to understand what I was going to (I read archived articles online, a few blogs and websites, and the city’s draft municipal development plan overview), all I knew was:

- that I had heard the Greater Edmonton Alliance (GEA) citizens’ group wanted to get asses in the seats at City Hall to support local food economy and local food security.

- that I had a vague understanding of what the GEA meant by “food economy”(turning local food into a part of the local economy in a meaningful way) and “food security” (growing enough food locally to feed the entire city of Edmonton).

- that I was pretty sure the debate was about plots of land on the outskirts of town that some folks thought should be protected for agriculture, specifically in the context of building a local food economy.

- that I was pretty sure the City’s draft municipal plan wanted to keep the door open to using that land for housing instead of taking steps to protect it for agriculture.

All in all, if I’m really honest, I naively assumed this was going to be a movie cliche: Kevin Bacon wants to dance but the town elders say no! Citizens want land to grow vegetables on but City Hall says no! ZOMG the drama!

But when I got there, I was pretty bowled over by a number of things (I’ll get into specifics in my next post). What really knocked my socks off, though, was just how genuinely pleased the councilors were to have so many citizens on hand for the discussion (council chambers were over capacity).

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying I want to be BFFs with the Mayor or anything, and I probably won’t be inviting the council to see the new Transformers movie this weekend – but I thought it was great that they were so happy to see a big gang of people who likely just wanted to argue with them. I was pleasantly, sincerely surprised they weren’t the villains I think they’re sometimes made out to be.

So: if you’re interested in local politics but feel like you don’t have the smarts to get involved, here’s the first thing I’ve learned: City Hall isn’t a Roman Colosseum. It’s not a battleground, or an “us versus them” thing, which – after a lifetime of hearing political news boiled down to “for” and “against” arguments – was NOT what I was expecting. City council, not unlike soylent green, is just made up of people – elected people – who are trying to find some common ground between citizens, businesses, and other interests.

Granted, they’re not all perfect. Just like anywhere else, some people are driven by their conscience and some people are driven by their ego. Some people are nice and some people are dicks. But is that exclusive to politics? Hardly. And as soon as I started thinking about politics in terms of people, and stopped thinking about it in terms of absolutes and arguments, it got really interesting.

Yes, seriously…?

(For more details, photos and audio from the meeting, check back or follow our updates on Twitter.)