Citizens seen as planners

Press, 29 July 1976, Page 7

Citizens seen as planners

Participation by citizens in planning was possible in New Zealand, but only if neighbourhood people came together to make it happen, an American urban planner said in Christchurch. “This sort of thing began to develop in the United States about five years ago, and it has become institutionalised,” said Professor John L. Hancock, of the University of Washington. “Planners used to say that people would simply muck up the process, but in the long run their participation legitimises what the planners do,” he said. “As the people really began to make contributions, the planners became excited about it.” Professor Hancock admitted that the bureaucracy, generally, still sees citizens participation as a threat to its power and efficiency. “There is less confusion the other way," he said, "but I think the new process works very well. It works if your goal is a higher quality! of life.

"If your goal is a more efficient movement of people and goods — more highways and high-rises — then it would work better from the top down.” Professor Hancock said that citizen participation in the United States "ranges from tokenism to various degrees of power-sharing.’’ Many cities had developed community planning agencies, with w’orkers attached to community councils. Those councils were encouraged. he said — "You have to bring them into the I process from the very beginning. You don’t present them with a plan. You attempt to define problems, and reach solutions, together.”

He said that citizen participation usually worked best on a neighbourhood scale.

! “Neighbourhoods have dif[ferent needs, and you can’t I sit upstairs and figure but | what those needs are.’’ he added. “You send a community worker down, a sensitive 1 person — maybe somebody ifrom that kind of neighbour-

hood — and that approach is really useful.

“It brings people together who haven’t really been talking to each other. There may be a lot of conflict and divisiveness, but at least they begin to see each other. People can tell planners a lot about their neighbourhoods, and planners can tell ! them where the resources are to get what they want.”

: Professor Hancock said the new approach was “part of | a whole new shift in planning all over the world. The people have to bring the pressure. People in the United States 10 years ago started to realise that some planning was destructive. They came especially from low-income and minority groups. They were very vulnerable at first, but not after they came together.’’

As soon as neighbourhoods form effective pressure groups, “politicians have to do something,” he said. “They can stall for a while, but you can make it pretty embarrassing for them. “If you wait for the bureaucrats to bring the people in,

you could wait forever. The people have to get the feeling that they can modify the process—and they can.” An awareness that neighbourhoods are being destroyed by motorways or other developments they do not want was a way of bringing people together quickly, Professor Hancock said. “When people begin to lose control of their communities, they start getting together.”

In many American cities, he said, even half-completed motorways had been stopped by effective pressure, including legal action and votes.

“Individuals cannot deal with institutions on an individual basis,” he added. “They have to come together.” In Seattle, Washington, an old marketplace was seen by city officials as a good place for urban renewal and a convention centre. That plan was rejected by the people, who wanted to keep the marketplace.

“So now, most of the housing is being renovated for old people, and a special planner is in there,’’ Professor Hancock said. "The city is encouraging preservation, often by private developers, of these areas,”

The American planner said citizen participation was something that could not be ignored by local governments, but neighbourhood attitudes must change from apathy to action.