Jane Jacobs on slums

By Flavie | Published: July 24, 2010

Conventional approaches to slums and slum dwellers are thoroughly paternalistic. The trouble with paternalists is that they want to make impossibly profound changes, and they choose impossibly superficial means for doing so. To overcome slums, we must regard slum dwellers as people capable of understanding and acting upon their own self-interests, which they certainly are. We need to discern, respect and build upon the forces for regeneration that exist in slums themselves, and that demonstrably work in real cities. This is far from trying to patronize people into a better life, and it is far from what is done today.

Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities.

Posted in Urbanism | Leave a comment

Nelson, B.C., a town from the West

By Flavie | Published: July 23, 2010

This post is part of my research on cities and places.

The best coffee shop in Nelson, British Columbia, is also the best place to do some people-watching and understand what the town is really about. I’m savouring a cup of coffee on the large terrace of Oso Negro and letting my white skin progressively get redder under the sun of this warm summer day, when the guy sitting on the same bench starts talking to me. About his plans, about Nelson, and about following your dreams. He bought a piece of property somewhere in the mountains and is planning on moving there to start a small farm and grow some vegetables with the help of his friends and the occasional WWOOFer.
“Nelson is a nice town but it doesn’t make sense to live here,” he says, gesturing at the buildings around us. “When you’re so close to the mountains, you might as well explore them.” Swoosh, his hand cuts through the air as he pronounces these words.
As we’re talking – or rather, as he is talking, since the discussion will end without my saying anything about myself – I can’t help but notice he looks out-of-place. Handsome, probably in his late twenties or early thirties, he’s wearing rather tight pants, a t-shirt, some nice shades and one of these fedora hats that have come back in fashion in the past couple of years.
This guy could very well belong to the streets of Williamsburg or The Mission or any other trendy neighbourhood of a large North American city. Maybe then he would also ride a fixed-gear bike and know the best parties in town. But he’s hanging out in Nelson, a small artistic community of 10,000 located in the heart of the mountainous Kootenays, dreaming about growing some vegetables in a remote part of the region and be completely surrounded by nature.
I remember when I was living in Paris, having a stranger start a conversation with you while you’re chilling was the last thing you wanted in your life. I tried several times to go read in the park, each one of them ending with my giving a fake phone number to an insisting guy after an annoying conversation he started without ever checking if I that was OK with me. (I didn’t grow up in the city, and therefore didn’t possess that legendary rudeness that allows Parisians to deal with these situations by using a local form of “fuck off.”) These were not the kind of people you wanted to be around. Here in Nelson, I guess talking to strangers is sort of expected. It’s a small town and everybody knows each other. Also, in Nelson everybody’s kind of crazy.

Read More »

Posted in Research | 1 Comment

Portland, Vancouver: perfect urban planning, perfect cities?

By Flavie | Published: June 22, 2010

I couldn’t help but comment about this article published on www.newgeography.com about Portland’s and Vancouver’s urban planning model, in which its author wonders if these models could be applied to Australian cities. These comments might upset some of you, but I choose to speak honestly.

There seems to be somewhat of a discrepancy between the way certain cities portray themselves to the outside world and the reality. Vancouver is often praised for its highway-free boundaries and high-density downtown core. I found these areas (downtown, Yaletown and the West End) to be mostly spiritless and, dare I say it, soulless. Some vast areas of Yaletown and the West End are strictly residential (we’re talking about huge condominium towers here) and deeply lack these small stores that usually give life to neighbourhoods. In the West End, I walked by some condo buildings whose first floor was non existent – the structure relied on cement pillars, suppressing all hopes of creating a community feeling. What would Jane Jacobs think about this?

Downtown, I noticed a certain disrespect for the history of the neighbourhood. The façades of the old buildings that have not been razed are not carefully maintained, unlike neighbouring tourist-friendly Gastown. It took me several times walking on Granville street to realize that the cement façades of most clubs and theatres were in fact layers hiding gorgeous art deco structures. One of my friends, who had lived in Vancouver for several years, had never noticed them. The neon signs that had become a symbol of the city have been banned.

When I visited Portland, having read so much about their dynamic urban planning department and enterprising city government, I expected something else than the small city I found. Don’t get me wrong, I love Portland. It’s a very vibrant city where many innovative initiatives are taking place. But Portland, with its cute houses and low-density, is a Pacific Northwest city, and by definition not walkable. Can any amount of well-intentionned urban planning change this?

In comparison, certain cities that have rather moribund urban planning departments nonetheless have an urban fabric that works pretty well, relying on other frameworks such as history to maintain vibrant neighbourhoods (Montreal and Seattle, I’m talking about you.) I’m not staying that urban planning is useless. Montreal has been suffering dearly from poor planning (for those of you who know the city, names like Griffintown and Turcot may mean something to you. The old city would have been razed if it wasn’t for Phyllis Lambert!) What I’m getting at is that trying to export some urban planning models that have been created according to local determinants isn’t right. Each city, even if it can get inspired from what has been done elsewhere, must develop its own planning strategy. What’s more, things that work on paper don’t necessarily feel right in real life. Vancouver is the most livable city in the world according to the Economist and its urban planning model is widely praised. That’s a great PR campaign they don’t even have to pay for. The thing is, when you get there it’s another story. And here I am, ranting about Vancouver once again…

Posted in Urbanism | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Meat: Martha Stewart loves butchers too!

By Flavie | Published: June 22, 2010

Whatever you think of Martha Stewart, sometimes she gets things right. Her TV show recently featured a meat-cutting demonstration with Joshua Applestone from Fleisher’s Meats. Stewart and Applestone cut up a half hog while explaining the process.

“We have to know where our meat comes from, what it is eating, how it was raised humanely, how it was killed humanely,” said Stewart at one point.

Watch the video:
http://www.marthastewart.com/article/how-to-butcher-a-pig

Posted in Food | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Portland, sustainable capital of North America – Part 2

By Flavie | Published: June 22, 2010

Naomi Cole manages the EcoDistricts initiative with the Portland Sustainability Institute. The nonprofit will work in five districts over the next few years to lower carbon emissions, improve energy efficiency, and engage residents to develop vibrant and sustainable communities.

Beer + coffee + music = Portland

How did the idea of EcoDistricts come about?

Portland has been building green buildings really well for the last 10 years, but there’s another level after that. You have even more opportunities with green buildings that are connected with water sharing, air conditioning and other energy efficiency features.
Our strategy is based on five pilot districts. All five of the districts are urban renewal areas and they have very different typologies. We have the [Portland State] University, we have a neighbourhood called the Lloyd district and that’s primarily commercial properties, the South Waterfront, which has seen significant development in the last ten years. The last two are called Gateway and Lents. They are primarily residential, lower-income. We have done the least work to date out there.
The stake-holders in the districts are going to have very different relationships. The challenges around how you make decisions will be very different.

What are the steps that you will be taking to develop these EcoDistricts?

There are a handful of sustainable district developments in the world that we’ve looked at. But what’s unique about what we’re doing is that we’re working with existing neighbourhoods. The hope is that they become neighbourhood-driven instead of developer-driven.
We’re going to do a comprehensive audit in order to understand what the assets in each district are. The next step would be feasibility studies to figure out how realistic the project is. And then it will be a matter of finding funding. We’re imagining a three year timeline.
We see EcoDistricts working as two pieces of physical strategy: hardware and software, because it’s also an opportunity to see how people can change behaviour.

What has been the feedback from the community so far?

People have been widely enthusiastic. In the university district, for example, there’s been significant interest from professors and students who wanna do research. The Lloyd district has also received positive feedback.
The East Portland district is less known. We’ve had warnings that there have been a lot of planning development there and they haven’t seen a lot of change. We’ve been trying get our technical advisers to connect with the people who are actually living in this EcoDistrict.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Portland, sustainable capital of North America

By Flavie | Published: June 17, 2010

This is an interview I did with Michael Armstrong, senior sustainability manager for the city of Portland.

The city of Portland has taken a number of groundbreaking measures over the years to increase its sustainability. How do you get the support from the public to enact such measures?

Michael Armstrong: A big part of what we do about setting a vision is setting public engagement. We do that through surveys and public workshops attended by the mayor, and we’ve also been working in small groups. We learn a lot from this, and people understand how things work city-wide.

There’s a long tradition of that here. There is this well-established institutional culture and citizen engagement. We sort of joke about this, some people say “do we really have to get people’s opinion on this issue?” Well in Portland, we do. In Portland people care and that’s how they understand the outcomes. People who have less interest in what the municipal government is doing are less likely to move to Portland than, say, Houston.

Some of these measures, like promoting local food, aim at changing people’s behaviours. How do you do that?

We actually think food is relevant to the overall strength of the community. We want these changes to have a health impact, a carbon impact, and local economics impact. The ways we can influence that are somewhat limited, but what the city can do is to support farmers markets, or community-supported agriculture. We have turned city-owned lands into public garden projects. We have a zoning code that we make sure is not getting in the way of these things. We can help people see the relationship between food choices and climate change for example. This goes back to seeing our community as a resource.

Read More »

Posted in Environment, Urbanism | Leave a comment

What bee crisis?

By Flavie | Published: June 14, 2010

Today I’d like to go back over this Guardian article I tweeted about last week, which brings a new perspective on the bee crisis.

You’ve probably heard of the Colony Collapse Disorder, this phenomenon that has been affecting beehives across North America for the past few years, causing the disappearance of millions of bees. The seriousness of the crisis has been underlined by scientists. Indeed, what would become of our crops if we couldn’t rely on these pollinators? Should we expect a major food crisis?

Flickr user Tie Guy II

Author Nathanael Johnson, however, asks another question: how does this issue fit into the big picture? And comes up with this subsersive answer: the crisis might not be where we thought.

In short, Johnson explains that CCD hasn’t affected food production that badly in North America, where crop productivity hasn’t gone down. What’s more, the number of bees across the world has actually increased, as well as honey production. But this trend isn’t necessarily a good sign. The global production of pollinator-dependent crops has been growing at a much faster pace than those that don’t rely on bees, in a way that could disturb ecosystems. The culprit? Products such as cashews and chocolate, whose demand worldwide has been growing. How much can this system sustain itself without reaching a plateau, or an environmental crisis? Nobody knows yet, but according to Johnson, things don’t look to good.

The crisis they foresee is one driven not by mysterious die-offs but by market pressures plainly visible in the produce aisle. It has to do with people in poor nations developing an appetite for good cocoa and coffee. It has to do with people in wealthy countries assuming that tomatoes will be ripe and readily available year-round. Bee scarcity, in other words, is an economic problem caused by economic forces.

This article caught my attention not only because of the original thesis it brings forward, but also because I’ve been studying the new waves of specialty coffee and chocolate in North America. I had never thought that these trends could have such environmental implications, yet this is a perfect example of the butterfly effect. “Chocolate depends on pollinators, and yields from cocoa farms have doubled since 1961,” writes Johnson. This raises the same question asked by the meat slaughterers I wrote about two weeks ago: do you know what it takes to produce your food?

Posted in Food | Leave a comment

Meat is back, part 2

By Flavie | Published: June 1, 2010

This is the second part of my two-part series on meat. This post is not intended to criticize vegetarianism or veganism, but rather to analyze a trend that has been developing in North America.

DIY butchering

Flickr user misterjamin

Why limit yourself to the supermarket or the butcher shop to get your meat? A number of communities around the country have taken the CSA model (Community Supported Agriculture) to a new level, allowing its members to team up and buy meat directly from the farmers. In Berkeley, CA, the local Slow Food chapter has turned its meat CSA into a social networking platform where communication between neighbours is facilitated in order to better manage orders.

In Portland, food writer Camas Davis recently launched the Portland Meat Collective, modelled on traditional CSAs. PMC also seeks to empower its members by organizing butchering courses. This summer, classes include Basic Pig Butchery, Sausage Making, Real Coq au Vin and Charcuterie. Davis describes the classes as a “community experience,” some sort of sacred ritual through which participants get to learn how to cut and prepare their meat for the ultimate act of eating. And I don’t mean that to be sarcastic. PMC students truly seem to have fun and rediscover the importance of caring for their own food.

San Francisco also has its meat workshops. Every third Sunday of the month, Holly Park Market’s Avedano’s teaches an intensive butchery class where students spend an afternoon cutting a lamb and a pig carcass and perfect their knife technique. The shop also offers a curing class and a carving class (for chickens.)

Read More »

Posted in Food | 1 Comment

Meat is back, Part 1

By Flavie | Published: May 25, 2010

Smoked reindeer heart. Flickr user The Hamster Factor.

Meat is back. Of course, it never totally went away. Montrealers still lined up in front of Schwartz’s deli, even in the coldest temperatures, Oprah still indulged on Seattle’s Ezell chicken, and the kitchen still smelled of bacon every Sunday at brunch time. But meat had become a guilty pleasure. By eating it, we were condoning animal cruelty, climate change, food poisoning and chronic health problems exposed and vilified by years of vegetarian activism and investigative journalism. A bunch of smart-ass chefs, butchers and other food-lovers are changing all that by bringing the ethics and pride back to animal foods.

There has been a bit of controversy in the food scene here in Seattle, where I’m writing from. A couple of weeks ago, The Stranger, a local alternative weekly, published a severely critical piece about Bill the Butcher, a beloved local store chain specialized in organic and local meats. The stores aren’t as transparent as they claim, the article argues, and some of the meat isn’t really organic.
Bill, the owner, defends himself. The chain never pretended to be 100% organic, he says, and it doesn’t mean its products don’t meet high standards. “It takes a substantial investment and a period of years to get an organic certification and many local farmers and ranchers just cannot afford to pursue this,” reads an open letter published on the chain’s website.

This is just another episode in the meat saga that is well under way on North America’s West Coast. As the organic and locavore movements grow in popularity, so does the demand for meat coming from animals that have been raised ethically, fed with grass, and slaughtered in decent conditions – all within a reasonable distance. For those who could never bring themselves to vegetarianism, this is salvation. They can eat meat while keeping their conscience intact.

Read More »

Posted in Food | Leave a comment

Understanding slums and squatter cities

By Flavie | Published: May 17, 2010

Each day, about 200,000 people around the world move from the country to the city in search of better opportunities. This means two things: the end of the dominance of western metropolises in favour of third-world cities, and the growth of informal and illegal neighbourhoods commonly referred to as slums or squatter cities. This is what tomorrow’s world will be like.
About one billion people currently live in slums around the world. Current estimations predict this number will grow to two billion by 2030. Although slums have traditionnally been negatively portrayed, their role has been instrumental in urban, economic and social development of societies. I’ve chosen to present the three personalities whose work has transformed our vision of the current urbanization movement.

The idealist

Steve Brand is better known as the co-founder of the Long Now Foundation and the Global Business Network. His controversial ideas about environmentalism have been summed up in the book Whole Earth Discipline.
Brand sees contemporary slums as a means to limit population growth and provide opportunities to million of residents in developing countries. His short TED talk sums up why we should care:

Brand sees a huge potential in turning slums into sustainable neighbourhoods. Slums are already “green” because of their high density of population. Urban farms, green roofs, solar panels and mass transit systems could be implanted in order to make these communities self-sufficient.

Read Brand’s article in Prospect magazine here.

The pragmatist

Journalist Robert Neuwirth has been witnessing life in slums first-hand by spending several years living in various squatter cities around the world. He is the author of the book Shadow Cities: A Billion Squatters, A New Urban World and of the blog Squatter Cities.
Where some see poverty, Neuwirth sees neighbouroods that can be extremely vibrant, rapidly developing, home to intricate social networks and business opportunities. He notes that some of them are naturally evolving toward better standards of living, to the point where they become similar to any other neighbourhood. Neuwirth sees two conditions to this: the ability of residents to avoid eviction and remain on the land, and access to politics.
“The issue is not urban poverty,” he said as a conclusion to his 2005 TED Talk. “The issue is for us to recognize that these are neighbourhoods, this is a legitimate form of urban development.”
Neuwirth has been critical of the United Nations, whose Settlements Programme, also known as U.N. Habitat, has been ineffective. Its world headquarters are ironically located near Kibera in Nairobi, Kenya, one of the poorest slums.

Here is his PopTech! talk, slightly more informational than the TED one:

The theorist

Mike Davis’s Planet of Slums has been written from the comfort of his home. An urban theorist, historian, and political activist, Davis’s work is mostly theoretical and seeks to analyze slums from a global, historical and political perspective.
Davis notes the interest of the American military in studying slums. Modern warfare, having shifted toward urban guerillas, needs to understand the functioning of slums and capitalize on it.
He also underlines the rise of religious movements in slums, notably Pentecostalism and its importance in Latin America and Africa. “The largest self-organized movement of poor urban people in the world” according to Davis, Pentecostalism is responsible  for many social behaviours in squatter cities.
According to him, slums have been seeing a rise in political  and social movements within their limits. However he doesn’t believe in formal political institutions as a way for slums to access better living conditions, in large part because of corruption.
Davis’s work has often been described as “anti-urban” and “apocalyptic.” He has been rebuked for failing to see the potential of slums as sustainable communities.

Read Davis’s interview with BLDGBLOG.

Posted in Urbanism | 1 Comment