The map compiles information culled from a survey that was made by DoUC and distributed at last year’s ELN Studio.  The survey asked people to identify their places of civic engagement, and the various groups they work with or would like to work with in the future in order to carry out civic projects.  The result is a map that provides a snapshot of ELN’s individual membership and the networks they are working with in the city.

Prologue

Shortly after the enviro-economic double meltdown of 2012 an emergency meeting was held at an undisclosed location somewhere at the bottom of Lake Ontario.  The meeting, affectionately dubbed by the press years later as “lacus mos servo” (the lake will serve), was attended by various government officials from both Canada and the United States, business leaders, the intellectual elite, various unions and a random selection of regular people.  The meeting would have serious consequences for many pundits, leaving much of the prevailing theories, policies and economic models of the day obsolete. The decisions that came out of the meeting were described as “fantastical” by some and “desperate” by others.  There were also the usual empty but threatening references to Hitler and Communism. But a narrow majority of the assembly agreed that transformation was inevitable and that a certain regional view, centred on the shared resource of the lake, was the best approach.

Shortly after the meeting, a plan was released entitled “Lake Ontario City- A New Tomorrow”.  The plan outlined how the lake would once again become the centre of all natural systems, infrastructure, economies, leisure and relationships- the lake would become life.  Accompanying the plan was a series of vignettes, which illustrated the major transformations that would occur within the region.  Although vague in nature, these vignettes were seen as a necessary provocation for the full-scale implementation of the plan.  Lake Ontario City was the future, it was unrelenting and unforgiving – most importantly though, it became real.

A Tale of Two Territories

The Plan contains one major organising principle – the division of the Lake Ontario region into two zones – an East Zone and a West Zone – that together encompasses the entire territory surrounding the Lake.

The West Zone stretches from the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station in Clarington counter-clockwise around the lake to Rochester.  The Zone is designated for the clustered growth of high-density settlements. In this sense it is a continuation and extension of the urbanization process that has dominated the region for the last century, commonly referred to as the Golden Horseshoe.  The West Zone extends the Horseshoe across the U.S. Canadian Border to Rochester opening up a large swathe of developable land between Niagara Falls and Rochester along the lakeshore. A high-speed rail loop connects the entire zone, traversing Lake Ontario from Rochester to Clarington, creating a North American Randstad. Where in Holland the empty centre of the Randstad is a protected agriculture core dubbed the Green Heart, Lake Ontario City’s empty centre is dubbed the Blue Heart.

The East Zone runs clockwise from Clarington to Rochester around the eastern half of the lake.  The Zone is designated for low-density settlements, artisanal and agricultural production and eco-leisure tourism.

The Great Energy Reef

In the centre of Lake Ontario lies the Great Energy Reef. It is a combination of energy production, aqua-culture, and water basin research. It is a loose assemblage of semi-autonomous floating barges, which reconfigures to meet the challenges of the day. At its core is a floating fish farming compound, which houses farming units, processing and distribution plants, and docking points.  Lake Ontario used to contain a wealth of fish species, which supported several fisheries around the lake. The investment in fish farming is an attempt to revive the local fishing economy, while at the same time, environmental policies informed by L.O.W.E.R. Lab attempts to revive the natural fish stocks in the lake. Because it is located in the centre of the lake on the border between the U.S.A. and Canada, a special agreement allows the free flow of fish products in both directions through on site distribution plants. On site processing also ensures that food moves from farm to table as quickly as possible, giving Lake Ontario City a reputation for having the best fresh water fish cuisine in the world.

The Lake Ontario Water Ecology Research Lab (The L.O.W.E.R. Lab) has its headquarters on the Great Energy Reef, with several roving labs, which set off to different corners of the lake to collect different samples and monitor lake ecologies.  The heart of the L.O.W.E.R. Lab sits beneath the Great Energy Reef on the lake’s floor, where it can monitor deep-water ecologies as well as the intake mechanisms of several deep-water cooling systems that have been installed to cool the central business districts of Lake Ontario City’s main hubs.  An educational branch is also located here, where classroom fieldtrips give students a unique view of the Lake and its significance to the region.

The energy component of the Great Energy Reef is ambulatory in nature, roving out on barges into the lake, using the reef as a docking point for repair, maintenance, and reorganization.   Floating wind barges are hexagonal in shape, and move to the windiest point of the lake to capture energy with anchors keeping them stabilized in place. Several wind barges can link up to increase stability. Solar panel units are also placed on hexagonal barges and can move and rotate to optimize sun capture. Each barge is outfitted with mobile energy storage devices which when full can travel to retrofitted power stations on the lakeshore to fuel the grid. The hexagonal shaped barges transform into a sleeker narrower shape for efficient movement across the lake.

As a result of the Great Energy Reef policy Hamilton becomes the leading centre for wind turbine manufacturing and wind energy research, supplying the lake with all of its turbines, and an army of skilled technicians to maintain and repair the fleet.  McMaster University takes a leading research and development role refining the technology for future citizens of Lake Ontario City. Likewise Rochester becomes a leading manufacturer and developer of solar panel technology and the Rochester Institute of Technology becomes a main centre for solar energy research.

Ontario Power Generation and the privatized energy companies of New York State have an invested role in the Great Energy Reef, with plans to slowly decommission their lakeside power generation plants, most of which are nuclear, and retrofit them so that wind and solar energy can be directly fed into the grid, through the mobile energy storage units.

The Voluntary Prisoners of Prince Edward County

A county once known for its zoomer-friendly gastro-tours, Prince Edward has transformed itself into a hybrid worker’s colony/ leisure zone. Under the Plan for Lake Ontario City, every citizen is obliged to spend a year-long retreat working the land. Prince Edward County, with its picturesque setting and it exalted artisanal products, has become the favourite destination for voluntary imprisonment with a lengthy waiting list of volunteers, but other regions around the lake are also equipped for this program.  Citizens can choose at what point in their life they want to spend the year, or choose to break up the year into several shorter stays, thus the program is considered to a certain degree ‘voluntary’. Many citizens come back from the experience so invigorated from working directly with the earth that they choose to engage in the program multiple times.

The Voluntary Prisoners program allows organic and local production of food to flourish in the region because of the constant supply of cheap labour. This in-kind subsidy allows them to compete against the larger industrial food producers that have dominated the global food economy.  Volunteers are given free meals and lodging, and beyond that are expected to live-out an ascetic year absent of most of their possessions. In return they gain a valuable education in natural ecology, artisanal practices, and sustainable living – some of which can be put to use back home, and otherwise filling countless hours of entertaining cocktail conversations. Several eco-leisure programs are also included to make their stay more lucrative including bog diving, horse riding in the sand banks, and grape stomping festivals.

The Misty Mountains of Oswego and South Shore Trash Couture

The result of a political impasse, Toronto had been without a local landfill for several years, having to schlep its garbage over 500 kilometres to a landfill in Michigan. With the new Plan, that problem was solved with a new land-forming project started across the lake near Oswego.  The south shore of Lake Ontario is one of the snowiest places in North America. The mayor of Oswego, an avid skier, wanted to promote a ski tourism industry, however without a significantly hilly terrain, and not enough people interested in cross-country skiing, it seemed unlikely that this would ever take off. Seeing Toronto’s garbage conundrum, he suggested that Oswego begin a landfill project that would take the garbage from all of the cities around Lake Ontario and literally make their own mountains.  Garbage is loaded onto specially manufactured trash barges from all points of Lake Ontario and shipped to Oswego’s port. The project has just begun, but already in its first phase, has managed to form a handful of bunny slopes and a cross-country trail.  The new formation is called the Misty Mountains, for the lake effect fog that rolls off the hills in the summer time.

Beyond building a tourism economy, and the revenues created from receiving the garbage, a new spin-off economy has begun. Avid eco-designers have moved to Oswego and started up a series of studios to adaptively reuse the refuse. Furniture designers, industrial designers, and even fashion designers are using Lake Ontario City’s trash to make innovative new objects.  Internships at these studios are available through the Voluntary Prisoners program.

Epilogue

The Two Zones, The Great Energy Reef, the High-Speed Rail Loop, the Voluntary Prisoners program, and the Misty Mountains, were the first vignettes proposed in the “Lake Ontario City – A New Tomorrow” document. Remarkable was how quickly these proposals gained universal acceptance and were implemented.  It seemed that creating a dialogue based around a common resource, had a way of creating clarity and unity. Creating synergistic trade-offs became an aggressive policy direction and an institute entitled Department of Synergistic Efficiencies (DOSE) was given the sole task of pursuing just that – efficient mutually supportive trading of goods, resources, and skills between cities and citizens.

Lake Ontario City has become so successful in coordinating regional goals that is has been used as a model for other Great Lakes Cities.  Lake Eerie City was established next as an agreement primarily between Toledo, Cleveland, Buffalo, London and Detroit.  Lake Michigan City followed as an all-American pact between Chicago, Milwaukee, Grand Rapids and Green Bay. Lake Superior and with Lake Huron, with significantly fewer settlements on their shores, struck up agreements respectively called Lake Superior Country and Lake Huron Country focusing on rural synergies between different areas of the lake, and safe and renewable exploitation of resources.  Eventually a union of the five great lake cities was established – and it was good. Lacus Mos Servo. The lake will serve.

In the fall of 2010 DoUC worked closely with On Site Review to produce a companion piece to On SIte 23: Small Things. The issue is available for all On Site subscribers and will be on sale at the next On Site issue release party in the springtime.  In the meantime, you can peruse the issue here.

Secrets of the Beehive

Bees may have more to do with architecture than we think. In the past few years, these proverbial labourers have entered into the conversations of designers as a handful of projects and headlines have appeared highlighting their importance to our ecosystem and our own daily life. Rooftop honey farms and community apiaries are some of the design projects emerging in response to increased awareness about the ecological significance of bees.

For many architects, the idea of designing for bees offers exciting possibilities in environmental design. Wary of an already omnipresent greenwash manifested in architectural renderings, designers are seeking to raise the bar in sustainable thinking by pursuing what Italian architect Stefano Boeri has calls “a non-anthropocentric urban ethics.” This means going beyond an ethic that simply aims to satisfy the needs of humans to an ethic of satisfying the needs of all life forms.

Bees have emerged in the design world as one of the first species to be considered in this new urban ethic, confronting designers with two essential questions–”What exactly are the life needs of bees and how can we design with those needs in mind?”

Ironically, bees are a good starting point in non-anthropocentric thinking precisely because we are so dependent on them. According to a recent report by environmental economist Nicola Gallai in the transdisciplinary journal Ecological Economics, it is estimated that bees are responsible for $218 billion worth of our crop production worldwide through the pollination services they provide. Roughly one-third of what ends up on our plate is in some way or another produced through animal pollination, and some plant species are wholly dependent on bees cross-pollinating their seeds during bloom season for survival. The almond tree is a good example. Every year in February, beehives are trucked in from around America to park in Californian almond orchards to ensure that there will be another season of almond trees, making it the largest “managed pollination” practice in the world.

The current interest in locally produced food has also exalted the profile of the bee, with urban agriculture and honey farming revealing the productive role that bees play in the city. The close relationship between humans and bees is one of the reasons many say that bees can play an important educational role in getting people to better understand ecological processes. Community groups and food activists have responded in kind by installing beehives in community gardens to play such a role.

In 2005, honeybee populations suddenly began to decline through a mysterious phenomenon called Colony Collapse Disorder. Beekeepers reported a 45 percent drop in the population of their colonies and until recently, there was no rational explanation for this die-off. The event had the media and several important thinkers postulating a dystopian world without bees–most notably in Douglas Coupland’s 2009 novel Generation A. The news also helped propel bees into popular conversation and is possibly responsible for some of the new bee-related design propositions we are seeing today.

There is evidence to suggest that Toronto is becoming an important centre for bee-related projects and research. Several key figures are pushing a broader discussion around bees and expanding our collective imagination as to the future role that they can play in the city. In 2008, the Fairmont Royal York made headlines when it announced that they would start their own honey manufacturing on the 14th-floor roof garden. The story was widely circulated as it nudged against preconceptions of the downtown being a concrete island, and spoke to the bee’s versatility in searching out food sources and navigating to its vertigo-inducing home base. Local not-for-profit food distribution organization FoodShare mirrored the hotel’s efforts by implementing several beehives in local community gardens, and initiating a group called the Toronto Beekeepers Cooperative, which offers courses in honey harvesting.

York University professor Laurence Packer has also been instrumental in bee research and conveying the importance of bees to a broader public. Working with the David Suzuki Foundation, he helped release a small booklet, which profiles the 22 major species of bees in Toronto, as well as several other important pollinators. He urges the public to look beyond the honeybee to the larger, more complex and diverse world of wild bees. Together with his team of researchers, they are hoping to study how bee pollination can help sustain a burgeoning urban agriculture movement. The study would be one of the first to focus on the effects that wild bee pollination has on urban food production.

Finally, International Pollinator Week debuted this summer, further entrenching Toronto as a centre for all things bee-related. The event was organized by York University student Sabrina Malach and the week-long event included workshops, exhibits, lectures and a cabaret–all aimed at communicating to the public the importance of pollinators and fostering new partnerships and collaborations between pollinator enthusiasts.

Having established the global and local significance of bees, and how bees are a logical stepping stone in non-anthropocentric thinking, the important question now is to ask what the implications are of designing for bees in the public realm?

At the basic level, promoting rooftop gardens, on-site hives, and native plant vegetation which wild bees thrive on, are seemingly easy steps in this direction–although there are technical, policy, and client obstacles that need to be overcome. Anecdotal stories have already pointed to beehives being placed too close to ventilation systems, thereby causing bees to subsequently invade the interiors of buildings. Also, the negative notion of bees as pests needs to be countered to convince clients that fostering a healthy on-site bee population is a good idea in the first place. Probably the thorniest issue, however, is a legal one. Most jurisdictions place spatial limits on beekeeping. In Ontario, the law requires that any beehive be placed a minimum of 30 metres from a property line. In a city where property widths are an average of 7 to 10 metres, this effectively rules out the idea of beekeeping in the city. Most new beekeepers simply ignore the law, but including mention of beehives in any set of drawings used in a building permit application is a quick way to rapidly become entangled in a bureaucratic mess.

Perhaps the more interesting question of designing for bees emerges at the urban and regional scale. Urban development can have many deleterious effects on local bee populations and some cities do substantially better than others in fostering a sustainable environment for bees. Berlin, with its verdant landscape and numerous plots of vacant land, has one of the healthiest populations of bees in Europe. Conversely, Phoenix, Arizona is a heavily paved and sprawling city, and has seen its bee diversity plummet throughout the course of its urban development. In Michael Klemens’s book Nature in Fragments: The Legacy of Sprawl, he documents how typical patterns of urban sprawl can help kill off whole species of bees in a given area. Because the foraging radii of certain smaller species are limited, a development pattern that includes a lot of pavement or hard surfaces can effectively cut off a bee from its nest, thwarting access to the plant sources it requires. Isolated parks and green islands are not enough to sustain populations, as inbreeding weakens the genetic code of the species. The alternative is to plant continuous green strips in order for bees to thrive in urban environments.

It is evident that there is a mountain of work to do in order to properly plan and design with bees in mind. Official plans, land-use maps and strategic park planning all need to work together in hemming the negative effects of needlessly sprawling urban development and fostering healthy bee populations. Policies regarding beekeeping need to be altered, and green roof practices need to be refined. Most importantly, an education campaign needs to be sustained to get people over their fears and misconceptions about bees. However, such an ominous workload should not overshadow the strides that have been made by simply beginning to address the issue. Non-anthropocentric design thinking opens up new opportunities for ecological design innovation, and it is evident that bees have become the stepping stone to this kind of thinking.

The following project was a collaboration between DoUC and Samo Pedersen(NoMadSpaceLab) for the Solar Park South competition held this summer in Calabria. The competition called for  a strategic plan for the re-use of an about-to-be-decomissioned highway.

Botanical Highway

The Botanical Highway is a response to societies changing attitudes towards the way we understand and view the natural landscape and local culture. It attempts to create a series of different interconnected events, experiences, production methods, and mobility options, which will transform the Autostrada del Sole into a new kind of park suitable for the 21^st century.

A New Kind of Park

The idea of passive only recreation is a value that no longer defines how contemporary society uses and enjoys parks.  Botanical Highway allows the user to customize their own programatic experience by creating a multiplicity of activities and mobility methods, which constantly transforms the character of the park.  For some the park is a place of knowledge by experiencing local food production. For others it is a place to experience an active lifestyle by exploring the various bike trails,  bungee jumping points, and the opportunity to scale the Favazzina Viaduct. This method of programatic customization allows the park to constantly respond and change to the needs of the individual user.

Key Elements of Botanical Highway

Botanical Highway does not rely on the concept of sustainability, but instead incorporates it in a number of different ways through both its design and program. By connecting with the already existing natural and physical relationships which surround the Autostrada del Sole, physical interventions will have a minimal impact on both the natural environment and the local population.  Proposed agricultural interventions build upon and enhance local fauna and production methods.  All forms of proposed transportation and infrastructure will be powered by renewable energy, whose power sources are located along the route.

A New Story for the Autostrada del Sole

Botanical Highway will become a new destination gateway for the south. Commuters, locals, and visitors will experience the landscape and the unique culture of the region in a way they never have before.

DoUC will be featured in a lecture/exhibition held by Conditions Magazine this Friday November 26th 2010 at Gallery 0047 in Oslo.  DoUC recently took part in a competition curated by Conditions entitled The Future of Competitions – Tell Them What They Need. The contributions will be shown following a talk by Space Group Oslo founding partner Gary Bates.

Below are the details:

Lecture and exhibition in collaboration with 0047. Nov.26th 2010. Doors open at 7pm, lecture by Gary Bates at 8pm

Gallery 0047

Schweigaardsgt 34 D
0191 OSLO, NORWAY

The current space is bland and oppressive, wedged beside the monolithic cartoonishness of an aggressively post-modern Metro Hall. The space is large but feels small, needlessly cluttered and obstructed by two follies and a raised concrete planter.

Our proposal StairSpace is a three-dimensional park that addresses the dense nature of its location by maximizing its program through vertical extrusion.  Its structure is derived from the theatre uses directly adjacent to it, playfully intermingling the relationship between audience and stage, by inserting several stages into a staircase  structure – after all in the public life of the street the spectator is also the spectacle.  In the summer movies are projected onto the façade of the Princess of Wales Theatre and seats can be heated to allow for such events in the early spring and late fall. During TIFF, StairSpace becomes a platform for viewing celebrities and during the rest of the year, it serves as an iconic meeting place for concert-goers, workers, and tourists alike.

All the original uses of the space are re-mixed to allow for more diversity and dynamics.  Metro Hall parking garage exits are housed under the structure as well as bike shed parking.  An arcade runs under the structure on the south end and connects John Street to Metro Hall’s King Street entrance.  The arcade also includes an elevator access point.  The pre-existing garden is extruded and placed on the StairSpace stages.

Current Site Situation

Our contribution is an analysis of the Vancouverism urban development model – and how the narrative of Vancouverism has been used to propel the careers of several Canadian planners, architects, and developers. Because we’re really nice, we’ve provided the full text and the info-graphic spread in this post.  Be sure to print out the spread and pin it up to your wall, and the next time someone talks about how great Vancouver is point to it and then wag your finger.  Let the graphic do all the talking for you.

Vancouverism is Everywhere

Introduction

On the surface Vancouverism is a term used to define a newly celebrated planning model. Peel back the layers and it can mean much more – a global brand, a consultant commodity, a profitable development model, an instance of local boosterism, a set of succinct urban design ‘lessons’, an aspiration for other municipalities, and an aesthetically post-modern muddle.

Today Vancouverism can be seen and read everywhere – from the real estate section of newspapers, to waterfront condo ads in San Diego and Dallas, to new subdivisions in Beijing and Dubai.  How did a seemingly banal planning term transform itself into such a powerful narrative, advancing the careers of many planners and developers, and helping to form the future visions of municipalities around the world? DoUC offers a counter-narrative to the narrative, in an attempt to better understand just exactly why Vancouverism is everywhere.

Defining Vancouverism

As the legend goes, Vancouverism first cropped up in the early 2000s as a term American planners used to describe with a certain envy the set of policies enacted in Vancouver in the early 90s, which helped spur high-density residential development in the city’s downtown – development that took the form of skinny towers set on podiums, with well-defined public spaces and preserved mountain views. [i]It specifically refers to the 1991 Downtown Plan where much of the policy was conceived.  Additional to these physical qualities, it also described a development model which involved the negotiation of extra height and density for added public amenities and marketing safe and clean downtown living to prospective buyers predominantly raised in the suburbs.

Vancouverism was praised by North American planners at the time because it was seen as effectively reversing the tide of a typical urban devolution happening everywhere else on the continent, where downtowns emptied out, and residents fled to the suburbs. Critical to the profession, it strengthened the claim that planners mattered after all. It suggested that good robust planning policies put into a clear dialogue with the development industry, could create the kind of vibrant, mixed-use communities that planners had been striving for for decades.

High-Rise Roots

However credit should not fall completely on the shoulders of planners and their 1991 Plan. The roots behind Vancouver’s high-density success can be seen in several factors and events that predate it. Geography has been the most important and enduring factor.[ii] Vancouver was settled on a narrow peninsula, as a strategic point at the mouth of the Fraser River on the waterways of the Strait of Georgia, Howe Sound, Burrard Inlet and their tributaries. This prompted from the outset vertical urban expansion as opposed to horizontal.  By the late 1960s Vancouver’s near downtown West End neighbourhood already had the highest residential density in all of Canada. In 1955, a then young Arthur Erickson opened up the architectural discussion on high-density development with his Project 56 sketch, which showed a civic skyline of high-rises designed to complement the contours of the snow-capped mountains across the water.[iii] In 1956 the city of Vancouver passed “Plan 56”, a zoning by law allowing the first development of high-density development in the City.

In the 1980s an influx of investment from Hong Kong businessmen helped spur residential tower development further. [iv] Concerned about the impending handover of Hong Kong to China, they looked to other places to safely invest their wealth.  Vancouver, with a strong Chinese community, good connections to Asia, and a strong property market, was a good choice.  These businessmen exported what they new best, tall skinny residential towers, typical of Hong Kong’s skyline. Developers pressuring to build tall and build often. This prompted the city planning department to undergo the “Vancouver View Study”, completed by Busby and Associates.  The result was twenty-seven view corridors, which would help guide the development of tall buildings within the City. [v] This then led the planning department to put forth a plan that could manage this high-density growth, culminating in the 1991 Plan.

Tooting the Horn and Reaping the Benefits

Flash-forward to the beginning of the new millennium and the effects of continued investment in residential high-rises began to manifest itself in the city’s skyline.  Downtown neighbourhoods such as Coal Harbour, Granville Island, and False Creek saw several towers crop up, and many of these developments were lauded planning successes.  Concurrently, the Economist began to rate Vancouver as the number one most livable city in the world, while other livability indexes by Mercer and Monocle Magazine also gave it consistently high rankings.

A handful of key local actors were quick to act on this publicity, and attribute the city’s success to its good planning and especially the 1991 plan. Whether or not the term ‘Vancouverism’ was first invented by outsiders to describe the Vancouver planning model, it was a handful of Vancouverites who championed the term and used it enough to ensure that the term stuck. As more and more municipalities asked how Vancouver got to the top, these local experts transformed themselves into international consultants, offering their knowledge of the process for a price.  Critical to the narrative of Vancouverism is a message of “you can do it” and a set of easy to implement steps tailored to helping out other cities. While many other cities consistently top the livability indexes, few have managed as Vancouver has, to couch their success in such a simple and catchy narrative.

Of all the experts spreading the gospel of Vancouverism, Larry Beasley has had by far the most impact. Born and educated in Las Vegas, Beasley moved to Vancouver in the 80s, and served as head of the city’s planning department throughout the 90s. Throughout the last decade he has made a business out of international consulting, working with cities as varied as Dallas, Rotterdam, Ottawa and Abu Dhabi.  A devout follower of New Urbanism, Beasley weaves much of the New Urbanist narrative of the decline of American cities to the existing Vancouverism narrative to create a hybrid story where brave and visionary planners champion the virtues of downtown living, and vibrant street life.  Beasley will be the first tell you that in his consultation he is not trying to export the physical design of Vancouver,[vi]but a process, which involves dream-sessioning, and open dialogue with developers and the public. That being said, one look at the renderings that have come out of his consultation sessions, and there is a creeping tendency towards an even grid, podiums of traditional row houses, and tall skinny glass-condominiums.  Some municipalities, such as Fort Worth, make no bones about replication – their goal is to become the “Vancouver of the South”. Meanwhile a new development in Dubai, Dubai Marina is openly based on Vancouver’s False Creek development.

Beasley has concentrated much of his consultation practice in Abu Dhabi.  The Abu Dhabi Planning Council contacted him when Vancouver started hitting the top of the livability indexes. [vii] Wanting the best of everything, they seemingly used the index to determine who would give the best urban planning advice. As special advisor to the crown prince, Beasley has been pivotal in the creation of Plan Abu Dhabi 2030 and several other projects.  He also drafted several of Vancouver’s top planners and bureaucrats to move to the UAE and work full time for the Urban Planning Council. [viii] Today several of the top positions on the council are filled by Vancouverites, including former deputy city manager Jody Andrews, manager of Vancouver’s eco-density team Michael White and Vancouver planner John Madden.  Furthermore, several Vancouver consultancies have been hired through Beasley to work on different Abu Dhabi projects, including Busby, Perkins + Will, and Civitas Urban Design.

Critics have also played a role in propagating Vancouverism.  Local architecture journalist Trevor Boddy was one of the first to write in detail about the term. Although not absent of critique, Boddy still regards the 1991 Downtown Plan with reverence, calling it one of North America’s most visionary and inspiring plans and placing it on par with New York City’s 1916 Zoning Ordinance and thinks that Vancouver is Canada’s only chance of having a truly world-class city.[ix] In 2008 Boddy curated a travelling exhibit in London and Paris entitled Vancouverism, designed to celebrate Vancouver’s architectural and urban legacy. While typically critical of Vancouverism in his written work, the travelling exhibit was unabashedly positive.

However it is Vancouver’s developers and architects that have reaped the largest financial reward from the global spread of Vancouverism.  While planners and critics talk of the benefits of skinny towers on podiums, it is the developers and architects who can promise the execution. Many cities that have been advised by Beasley and other champions of Vancouverism, have gone on to hire local Vancouver developers to build tall slender downtown condo developments for their cities.  Nat Bosa of Bosa Developments was given the chance to develop several projects in San Diego, after Beasley consulted with the municipality.  Bing Thom Architects was hired in Fort Worth to help it aspire to being the Vancouver of the South, through its ambitious Trinity River Project. Concord Pacific have developed several ersatz-Vancouvers in Toronto and its suburbs, and worked with major UAE property developer Emaar for various projects in the Middle East.  Their project Marina Dubai represents perhaps the most egregious usage of the Vancouver model.  Modelled after a development in Vancouver’s False Creek neighbourhood designed for wet and cool weather with towers oriented to preserve mountain views, the new development, Dubai Marina is placed in the middle of a blazing hot desert.

In some instances the Vancouver brand has gone beyond the tower-and-podium model, to include an eco-cottage element as well.  This is exemplified by a design prepared by the Vancouver firm Ekistics for a Beijing suburb suitably called Vancouver Forest, consisting of 800 luxury single-family homes set in a lush green environment. For Feng Jing New Town in Shanghai, designed to be a typical ‘Canadian’ neighbourhood, Ekistics employed a mixture of Vancouver-style tower-and-podiums with single-family cottages to create a ‘warm, friendly and active place” characteristic of a Canadian town.

In other instances, Vancouverism has been re-tooled to meet the demands of the resort economy.  Vancouver designers, architects, and developers have helped to develop resort projects in Cuba, Mexico, and China, using the same tower-podium method.  Tall skinny towers ensure that everyone has views to the ocean, and puts everybody within a minute’s walk of the beach, and requires very minimal changes from the model already employed for downtown residences.[x]

Vancouverism and its Discontents

While the global influence of Vancouverism is spreading, back home there is no shortage of criticism over the state of the city’s downtown, and the effects that twenty years of intense downtown residential development has had on it.  First there is the problem of over-saturation.  90% of the nine million square feet of new towers developed in the downtown over the last decade has been residential.[xi] Virtually no new office space is being built, and people are increasingly forced to find work out in the suburbs of Vancouver. Because of the aggressive residential policy Vancouver might prove to be the world’s first bedroom downtown. Then there is the question of aesthetics.  Placing glass and steel modern towers on podiums designed to look like neo-traditional row houses, or as some have put it ‘Hong Kong towers on New York City brownstones’ has become the signature style of Vancouverism.  After twenty years of development, Vancouver has produced little to no architectural gems in its residential towers.  Instead they have produced a post-modern muddle of glass, steel and fake brick. This has been attributed to the fact the Vancouverism is essentially a planner-and-develop-driven model which has left little room for the architect and architectural debate. Then there is the issue of street life.  While the podium designs were specifically intended to frame the street and provide the perfect setting for vibrant street life, most visitors have noted a conspicuous lack of it.  Perhaps this can be attributed to the fact that these condos are being marketed with suburban values of ‘predictability, cleanliness, and lack of architectural variety”, something Beasley has defended, emphasizing the importance of swaying people who grew up on the urban fringe to move downtown.  Regardless, the effect has been that of a lingering feeling of the suburbs in the downtown and of vertical gated communities.

Conclusion

Vancouverism is not just a planning trend, but a representation of how urban design and planning decisions are made today in cities around the world – and how private consultants and developers profit from it. The profession of city building has become overly reliant on ‘best practices’ and ‘precedent studies’ – neatly packaged anecdotes and soundbites which promise to solve a city’s woes.  Solutions to complex urban problems are no longer sought through rigorous analysis and critical thinking, but through the application of trendy best practices.  Global livability surveys set superficial goals for cities to be and act more like other cities and give legitimacy to some planning methods versus others.  Cities on top of those livability indexes who can put together a catchy narrative about their success can in turn pedal this to other cities for huge profits.  Vancouver planners, architects, and developers have all been able to cash in, in cities around the world simply by repeating the same talking points. Copenhagen and Jan Gehl’s success story about the reclamation of pedestrian streets is another example of such a packaged narrative.  It is only a matter of time before Vancouverism wears out its welcome on the world stage of development and a new city with its own success story takes its place.  It is at that point that Vancouver city builders can again take a long hard look at their city and re-assess just exactly where it is they want to go.