Course:GEOG350/2024/Green Infrastructure in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside
Introduction
Urban ecology concerns nature in the city, green infrastructure for the people in the city and its interconnectedness with flora and fauna experienced as part of daily life (Douglas et al., 2012). This chapter will delve into the prioritization of green infrastructure and urban ecological strategies in the City of Vancouver, to analyze its role as an equitable and sustainable city. Due to the climate challenges, environmental inefficiencies and the presence of flora and fauna in the urban landscape, the implementation of green infrastructure and nature-based solutions is crucial for the efficient planning of the complex urban systems of today. Hence, we aim to provide solutions for the implementation of green infrastructure (GI) in Vancouver and the benefits of these services. It is important to ensure the equitable implementation of GI in order to avoid moments of gentrification and ecological racialization allowing people of marginalized and racialized areas full access to decision making within their community alongside nature based improvements.
To better showcase our analysis we will explore the effects of the current urban infrastructure present in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside neighbourhood and we will expand on the concepts of urban heat island effect, access to green space, and the impact of densification. By expanding on these concepts we will aim to propose a set of solutions in line with ecological urbanism by promoting the benefits of urban trees, improving the strategies for access to green spaces within the neighbourhood and the mitigation of gentrification as an effect of densification benefits in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside.
Glossary
Urban Heat Island Effect (UHI): As defined by EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency: “Heat islands are urbanized areas that experience higher temperatures than outlying areas. Structures such as buildings, roads, and other infrastructure absorb and re-emit the sun’s heat more than natural landscapes such as forests and water bodies.”
Downtown Eastside (DTES): The downtown eastside is the oldest neighbourhood in Vancouver which was originally an industrial area until developed into commercial and residential zones. Currently, the downtown eastside is one of the poorest neighbourhoods in the city hosting most of the homeless and low income populations.
Ecological Urbanism: Ecological urbanism is the process of living and co-existing with nature, not living over nature. Or as defined by Architectural Review it is the creation of an artificial ecosystem that achieves the interdependence and circular patterns of natural ecosystems (2015).
Overview
The proposed focus we are delving on within the City of Vancouver is the inequitable implementation of green infrastructure, leaving subjugated and marginalized communities aside from the benefits of environmental solutions in the Downtown Eastside. Although this challenge creates environmental segregation within Vancouver, this issue is also present as a global phenomenon. Analyzing the beneficial strategies to address this issue within Vancouver's Downtown Eastside context is challenging. However, we will aim to propose the most appropriate solutions and a local perspective to better assess this subject accordingly.
The Downtown Eastside of Vancouver, which is one of the few low-income and marginalized areas of the city. In looking at the Downtown Eastside we will identify the disparities of inequitable implementation of green infrastructure and how it impacts the community positively or negatively. Andi Scerri and Meg Holden (2013) inform us that by analyzing Vancouver's Greenest City Action Plan we are able to get a clear picture of the promotion of sustainable development and ecological restructuring and how that translates into different problems that the government must address to ensure equitable ecological urbanism. Those issues involve sectors like, ecological, economical, cultural and political problems. Though Vancouver does have various policies in place to stabilize equity amongst Downtown Eastside. Included are the Vancouver Agreement (2000) and subsection Revitalization without Displacement (2004), and the Healthy City Strategy (2014) focusing mainly on social development and well being. Though with these measures still in place Vancouver suffers widely from issues such as unaffordability, lack of housing and extreme heat catalyzing the urban heat island effect.. Within this chapter we hope to explore the impacts of ecological urbanism on affordability of the city and how we can better provide access to urban forests in areas that lack adequate green space in hopes to minimize the urban heat island effect.
Given that in 2015 the Downtown Eastside was identified as one of the hottest areas in the city due to its high percentage of impermeable surfaces, we will aim to assess a beneficial solution to the city and the community. Using Alexandra Lesnikowski’s analysis of social vulnerability to heart island effects in Vancouver we can determine higher social vulnerability corresponds with areas East Strathcona and West Grandview-Woodland. One solution we hope to explore through this chapter is the intersection of urban forestry in heat island affected neighbourhoods to provide better access to adequate green space and shade. Another possibly more realistic solution for the urban heat island effect in the DTES could be community gardens and green roofs. Solutions like this are typically low cost and low spatial impacts however since the area is greatly lacking green space there is a possibility it will not suffice.
In addition to the urban heat island effect explored by Alexandra Lesnikowski (2014), we will aim to find a solution to the lack of access to improved green space in the Downtown Eastside. The main focus we intend to explore is the aging and malfunction of green infrastructure in these given spaces. Altogether, the most important aspect of our research will be assessing the right solutions and opportunities to improve and expand these spaces to better meet the needs of the community. By analyzing the Downtown Eastside's Policy Plan, we expect to find improvements to the park and plaza infrastructure (e.g. water, power, lighting, grey water disposal, and storage), as well as maintaining the street tree canopy through the addition of beneficial species of urban trees, street surface and underground infrastructure.
In addition, a key aspect to bear in mind in marginalized areas of developing cities is the impact of gentrification. Since our case study will be focusing on the Downtown Eastside we will aim to find the appropriate solutions for the application of densification as an ecological solution to sustainable development. Pelczynski & Tomkowicz (2019) indicate that the impact of densification may become a catalyst to loss of comfort and quality of life; increasing the risk of heat island effect and local pollutants emissions. As well as, increasing the risks of social conflicts threatening local identity and urban heritage (2019). Therefore, determining the right steps to improve the municipal planning strategy in these neighbourhoods is essential for preserving the local well-being and identity of its inhabitants. To better assist this issue, we propose the prioritization of community advocacy and consultation supporting a better suited densification plan for the residents of the DTES, as recommended in the The Norquay Village Neighbourhood Centre Plan further explained in the next section.
Case Study of the City of Vancouver's Downtown Eastside
The City of Vancouver, often recognized for its progressive urban planning and architecture, has emerged as a global leader for its phenomenon on sustainable design, known as “Vancouverism” (Brunet-Jailly, 2016). The city’s commitment to environmental stewardship has been evidenced through the implementation of its comprehensive action plans that include the Greenest City Action Plan, Vancouver City Plan and the Rain City Strategy to provide the most efficient land-use frameworks for a livable, affordable and sustainable city. Due to the complexity of urban systems, a holistic approach towards design and planning must be adopted in ways that acknowledge their complexity, in order to facilitate the repair and restore process of its contemporary urban fabric (Beatley, 2020). Although the city of Vancouver and its main downtown area have set the bar for their admirable urbanism and promotion of a social mix, maximizing the benefits set by city planning can ameliorate the future development of the city and its surrounding communities (Brunet-Jailly, p. 378, 2016). Hence, incorporating measures and reforming the planning system to provide equitable design and innovative green infrastructure through an ecological urbanism lens, can holistically benefit the city for all its urbanites.
Though the efforts of Vancouver are admirable and comprehensive some communities and neighbourhoods get omitted from the innovation. Below is a diagram of the DTES of Vancouver depicting a heat map of an average summers’ day in the city. It is apparent that the DTES experiences at least 15 degrees celsius hotter than the wealthy neighbourhoods that have more trees, canopy cover and permeable grounds. Heat manifests this way because the DTES has significantly less canopy cover on streets and more exposed concrete which causes heat to procure stronger.
To combat the urban heat island effect and also introduce equitable development of green spaces and practices. The first method to introduce as a solution is the planting of urban trees at the street level along sidewalks. This can be a good way to lower the UHI effect and equitable develop more green spaces. As “they can act as insulators around buildings reducing summer heat and lowering winter cold” (Chapter 50, 643). Though this would not be a substantial green space like a park it would make DTES more accessible in terms of walkability and living environments for many. Even though it would not be the development of a full park or urban forest, trees at the street level actually do a better job than grass at deterring extreme heat and reducing surface level temperatures (Armson et al 2012). In turn, trees along major pathways would not only benefit peoples’ comfortability while navigating the city but also aesthetically improve the DTES. The implementation of trees along sidewalks could revolutionize life in the DTES in an affordable attempt at reducing the UHI effect.
The second solution to more closely combating social equity issues within the city in terms of fair access to urban green spaces is the development of more urban parks within the DTES where vacant, unused land is. Urban parks provide a variety of biodiversity to a given area and spaces that foster more connection through means of gathering. Urban parks would be an extremely beneficial way to add in community spaces, equitable access to green space, and aesthetics. Not only urban parks but “sustainable parks incorporate elements such as native plants, enhanced ecological process, green infrastructure, resource self-sufficiency, permeable surfaces and wetlands, recycling water, energy efficient design for facilities, and use of recycled material” (PG 327). The development of sustainable urban parks would be greatly beneficial to the residents of the Downtown Eastside as it would increase their access to green space but also reduce and mitigate the UHI effects. The City of Vancouver has a very detailed action plan for the DTES regarding many categories such as transportation, affordability and green spaces and parks. In the green spaces and parks section it is listed that the neighbourhood at the moment has five relatively small urban parks scattered along the edges of its borders. Below in figure 2, there is a map of existing urban parks located in the Downtown Eastside (City of Vancouver, 130). In figure 1, to the right is a map of Vancouvers' land use in 1984 depicting the different ways development has been constructed, in this it is apparent that the downtown eastside is very industrial and lacks green space.
Through the City of Vancouver's action plan of revitalizing the DTES and connecting it more thoroughly to the downtown core and inlets they are expecting a surge in economy and boost of circulation throughout the neighbourhood. With this in mind the introduction of more sustainable urban parks with a larger access to public bathrooms and community spaces the DTES can be transformed from an already vibrant neighbourhood to one that has a range of economic independence and connectivity. Considering the impact of green infrastructure and its equitability, it is a complicated relationship of influence on factors like societal, economical and political structures. Shifting the dynamic of one of the oldest neighbourhoods in Vancouver without fail will have implications. It is exceedingly important to keep equitability in mind when adjusting the landscape of communities, especially one that supports Vancouver's most vulnerable populations. Hence building off of already present infrastructure and space, new but similar adaptations are easier to ensure the transition into equitable placement of green infrastructure with strategies like urban trees and sustainable parks.
Another main concern affecting the city of Vancouver, encompasses the planning model of “sustainability-as-density”, where a large scale of neighbourhoods are subject to densification pressures due to the benefit of upward and downward extensions of residential buildings (Quastel et al., 2012). Although this planning model was implemented to decrease unsustainable trends within the city, this practice sparked interest when economic inequality increased and the displacement of the low income, working class and indigenous communities were affected. Burnett (2013) suggests that despite the strategic location of Vancouver’s DTES, this area has experienced the lowest levels of social change and increasingly high levels of political resistance due to gentrification. Hence, providing a thoughtful implementation plan to densification should focus on improving the impact of social displacement and instead aim to highlight factors of social diversity and justice. Pelczynski & Tomkowicz (2019) propose urban densification as a measure to increase the efficiency of natural systems and space within city landscapes; this opportunity provides urban areas with improved urban structure, developed urban diversity and functions. Therefore, applying these strategies to improve the efficiency of the DTES city functions can economically benefit its residents through job availability, walkability and commercial access. However, residents of the DTES have faced challenges due to municipal government’s moves to raise the height limits of new developments, changing the urban fabric of the neighbuorhood and raising fears over the loss of affordable housing options and their communal social benefits (Brunet-Jailly, 2016).
A solution to gentrification by the efforts of densifying the city of Vancouver is the community planning process that involves the “return of the social” by Quastel et al. (2012). This entails that the municipal government places attention to public consultation to politicize the planning process and the effects of densification to the neighbourhoods’ urban fabric (p.1076, 2012). To better showcase this idea, Quastel et al. (2012) provides the case study of The Norquay Village Neighbourhood Centre Plan, which demonstrates the systematic challenges between gentrification and social justice, residential densification and how the effects of public consultation encouraged a more elaborate densification planning model that supported the needs of its residents. The map below displays the approved plan for the Norquay Village by the City of Vancouver in 2010 (Quastel et al., 2012).
The plan for the Norquay Village did not include any specific directions in equity concerns for current tenants, zoning for social housing or gentrification effects, yet displacement continued to be a priority for residents. Although this plan eventually benefited a large portion of the corridor’s residents, densification continues to challenge the quality of life of urbanites, it can be detrimental for the urban environments and may arise potential social conflicts (Pelczynski & Tomkowicz, 2019). Hence, reforming the planning system towards a socially-focused process of densification, where the community can have a personal role in the planning identity of their neighbourhood and seeks affordability for residents is essential for the well-being of communities. Burnett (2016) suggests that due to the prevalence of poverty faced by the residents of Vancouver’s DTES, the municipal government should prioritize a planning framework paying close attention to public contestation regardless of the capital investment efforts densification may bring to these areas of the city.
Lesson Learned
Urban trees, sustainable parks and densification are all common strategies to combat unjust outcomes of urban development such as the urban heat island effect and gentrification. Many other cities have begun to implement these strategies to combat socio-environmental issues such as the city of Pisa, Italy. In Pisa, researchers found that urban trees and sustainable parks greatly reduce pedestrian discomfort, help with carbon sequestration, reduce pollution and greater quality of shade in the streets (Frosini et al, 2023). Though Pisas’ summer temperatures are significantly higher by about 10 degrees celsius on a given day it can be inferred with the implementation of more urban trees and sustainable parks Vancouvers’ DTES residents will greatly benefit from the implementation. Additionally Lisbon, Portugal has implemented more green spaces into community lots to help with the mitigation of the UHI effect. Researchers uncovered that green spaces were significantly cooler than other surrounding areas, the highest at 6.9 degrees celsius in relation to temperature. There are many other success stories regarding the UHI effect that Vancouver planners can take information and comparisons from to further implement cooling strategies in a socially just way.
For the most part, the main ideas we aimed to explore were the specific mechanisms of ecological urbanism that can be implemented tangibly in order to make cities just and equitable spaces for their inhabitants. Vasquez & Dobbs (2020) ensure that access to green space for urbanites is essential for their wellbeing, as it provides a wide range of ecosystem services which provides communities with recreational activities and connection to nature that reduce urban health problems (p. 817). Hence, paying close attention to the role of planning and resource distribution in the context of Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside is most relevant for specifically deprived communities. The unequal distribution of green space evidenced the most deprived neighbourhoods through the lack of accessibility to these areas and the lack of quality infrastructure (Vasquez & Dobbs, 2020). Ensuring that the municipal government’s support must aim to reinforce policy improvements for the connection of low income and marginalized people to these spaces. Altogether, Vasquez & Dobbs (2020) suggest that the initiative to develop green spaces and plans for green infrastructure implementation in deprived communities is mostly produced by top-down approach with limited mechanisms for community participation (as cited in Ambrose-Oji et al. 2017). Therefore, it seems like promoting higher community participation could support developing areas focused on local people’s preferences; reinforcing local identity, social cohesion, and communal well-being (Vasquez & Dobbs, 2020). Similarly, community participation and advocacy can also benefit the impact of gentrification on densification pressures for sustainable city efforts. In her study performed in Oslo, Cavicchia (2021) determined that in order to ensure an equal resource distribution and the development of equitable spaces in cities, neoliberal housing policy, speculative housing practices and the commodification of the housing market strategies must be regulated. Although densification is considered to provide higher housing supply, to ensure equal conditions for city inhabitants, there must be a regulatory body that considers the community’s necessities as seen in the Norquay Village Centre Plan. Although municipal efforts could be improved, applying community advocacy can benefit planners to better act and design neighbourhoods to the best needs of their inhabitants to create better assisted communities.
References
Beatley, T. (2020). Biophilic Cities. In The Routledge Handbook of Urban Ecology (pp. 88–97). essay, Routledge. Retrieved 2024, from https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429506758.
Brunet-Jailly, E. (2016, April 26). Vancouver: The sustainable city. Academia.edu. https://www.academia.edu/24780215/Vancouver_The_Sustainable_City
Cavicchia, R. (2022). Urban densification and exclusionary pressure: emerging patterns of gentrification in Oslo. Urban Geography, 44(7), 1474–1496. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2022.2100174
Douglas, I., Anderson, P.M.L., Goode, D., Houck, M.C., Maddox, D., Nagendra, H., & Tan, P.Y. (Eds.). (2020). The Routledge Handbook of Urban Ecology (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429506758
“Downtown Eastside.” City of Vancouver, 2014, vancouver.ca/news-calendar/downtown-eastside.aspx.
Downtown Eastside Plan. Available at: https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/dtes-plan-implementation-summary-2017-2019.pdf (Accessed: 03 June 2024).
Frosini, Greta, et al. “The Impact of Trees on the UHI Effect and Urban Environment Quality: A Case Study of a District in Pisa, Italy.” MDPI, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 19 Jan. 2024, doi.org/10.3390/atmos15010123.
Hagan, Susannah. “Ecological Urbanism.” Architectural Review, 21 July 2020, www.architectural-review.com/essays/ecological-urbanism.
Jang, N. and Doyon, A. (2023) ‘Mise en œuvre équitable d’infrastructure verte’, Canadian Planning and Policy / Aménagement et politique au Canada, 2023, pp. 110–132. doi:10.24908/cpp-apc.v2023i1.15552.
Jang, N. and Doyon, A. (2024) ‘Increasing knowledge and trust to overcome barriers to green infrastructure implementation: A vancouver case study’, Urban Water Journal, pp. 1–10. doi:10.1080/1573062x.2024.2351856.
Lesnikowski, A. (2014) Adaptation to urban heat island effect in Vancouver, BC : A case study in analyzing vulnerability and adaptation opportunities, Open Collections. Available at: https://open.library.ubc.ca/soa/cIRcle/collections/graduateresearch/310/items/1.0075852 (Accessed: 02 June 2024).
Ruddell, D. et al. (no date) The urban heat island effect and Sustainability Science, The Urban Heat Island Effect and Sustainability Science: Causes, Impacts and Solutions. Available at: https://sustainabilitysolutions.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/The-Urban-Heat-Island-Effect-and-Sustainability-Science-Causes-Impacts-and-Solutions-Ruddell-Darren.pdf (Accessed: 03 June 2024).
Scerri, A. and Holden, M. (2013) ‘Ecological Modernization or sustainable development? Vancouver’s greenest city action plan: The city as “manager” of ecological restructuring’, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 16(2), pp. 261–279. doi:10.1080/1523908x.2013.836962.
Vasquez, A., & Dobbs, C. (2020). Ensuring Equitable Greenspace To Deprived Social Groups. In The Routledge Handbook of Urban Ecology (pp. 88–97). essay, Routledge. Retrieved 2024, from https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429506758.
Wesley, P.V. and Regan, H. (2018) Vancouver, Canada: 5 : Equitable Sustainability Planning within the P, Taylor & Francis. Available at: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781351124225-5/vancouver-canada-wesley-regan-peter-hall (Accessed: 02 June 2024).