Local Cultures – Global Spaces
Abstract
“Option A produces more light on the public realm than Option B” is a phrase that planners sometimes say. It hints, developments produce light rather than shadows. Is this deceit? This paper explores possible frameworks that make well-intentioned people make such phrases. Planners rarely intend harm. Our professional oath compels doing public good. Yet, the state of contemporary urban settlements, and decisions made to transform them, speaks to the contrary: Decreasing affordability, weakening ecologies, etc. As a result, those impacted by our plans are frequently adversarial while planners get frustrated by complaints of their plans ruining neighbourhoods, and exacerbating dispossessions and unaffordability. Despite this, many still see planning as ordering chaos to produce the “civil” for “everyone.” We validate this by embodying the idea that change itself is good. Harm and ‘evil’ is hidden by the nature of the mindset behind the act of governance. Furthermore, planning is rarely seen as imperial because it begins with the civil; yet, it is because it begins with the civil that the imperial element intensifies. We ask, • How is the notion of the civil produced and understood by planners, particularly with regards to place-making and the “public”? • How do planning tools (E.g., visual graphics) produce the civil while doing harm? Besides the reference to Hannah Arendt’s banality of evil, two other theoretical tools will aid addressing these questions: First, James C. Scott’s concept of “legibility” and administrative “simplifications” necessary for modern governance. Second, querying how planners justify their reliance on legibility, is Baruch Spinoza’s question on why people strive for their own subjection as if it was salvation. Particularly, we ask, why do we willingly engage with what Spinoza call “passive forces” which can decrease our capacities to act and think critically. This theoretical framework will be read through examples of regulations and
Patrick Foong Chan is a writer-designer with interests in developing theoretical-writing as a tool/space for counter-colonial experiments, especially in the context of Pacific-Rim settler cities. Besides mentoring master students at University of British Columbia’s School of Community and Regional Planning, he is also an urban designer with Vancouver’s Planning Department. He has presented at conferences in Asia, Australia, and North America; and published in various academic journals. He was the recipient of the AMPS’ Critical Futures Award (2022) for best paper.
Erick Villagomez is an educator, independent researcher, and designer with academic and professional interests in the human settlements at all scales. He is a Lecturer at the University of British Columbia’s School of Community and Regional Planning where he teaches several graduate and undergraduate courses focused on settlements, urban design, and representation. Erick is also the Chief Editor for Spacing Vancouver, an online collection of articles related to architecture, environmental, and planning issues in British Columbia.
Sylvia Grace Borda is an award-winning arts-architectural researcher, social innovator, and educator. As a Women4Climate Graduate Fellow, C40 Cities (2019) she is an advocate for adopting nature-based solutions, improving citizen well-being, and sustaining inter-generational community knowledge exchanges in order to address climate challenges in the built environment. As founder of Earth-Art-Studio, her practice is dedicated to building functional and meaningful public art spaces in historically disinvested areas. She is the recipient of the City of Vancouver Heritage and Education Award (2023), COP26 British Council Creative Climate Commission Prize (2020-21), and Lumen Prize (2016)