Category: You Are a City Maker

Who does your city want to be?

 

Who do you want to be?

~ Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

 

Hazel realized wearily that Bigwig was probably going to be troublesome.  He was certainly no coward, but he was likely to remain steady only as long as he could see his way clear and be sure of what to do.  To him, perplexity was worse than danger; and when he was perplexed, he usually grew angry.

~ Watership Down, Richard Adams

 

The exchange that takes place in a city revolves around three elements – self, other and place – at any scale. Just as I need to have a sense of my purpose, so too does my city. As I work toward my purpose, I am in relationship with others and the places around me. Place is the habitat I find myself in, and that too is at scale. It is the office I work in, my home, my block and neighbourhood and city, as well as my country and my planet. At every turn, there is an exchange that takes place between me, others and place.

In a simple statement, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach articulates a pithy question that leads to purpose and destination. This is a question that can be put to me and my city with equal import. Richard Adams articulates the struggle of the human condition when we are unsure of what to do, and the emotional charge embedded in uncertainty. Cities are no different – when we lack a sense of purpose to our cities, we certainly feel the emotional charges. It shows up in our exchanges in others, and the quality of the habitats we build for ourselves.

Here’s a wicked question for you and your city –

Who does your city want to be?

An example of how my city is figuring this out: Make Something Edmonton.

_____ _____ _____

This post is part of Chapter 8 – The City Making Exchange. Here are some plot helpers of Nest City: The Human Drive to Thrive in Cities, the book I am sharing here while I search for a publisher:

_____ _____ _____

 

City making

 

nestworks all in small.057

Cities are about getting where we want to go – at every scale.

As individuals in cities, when our basic needs are met, we are able to pursue our passions. We pursue opportunities to dig deep into the work we love. We pursue improvements that will make life better. We contribute all of this to the city-life experience. Its a messy place, often making us feel uncomfortable, but it spurs us on to a never-ending quest, should we choose, to think, make and do new things.

How can we know if we are making the cities we want and need? By choosing to build cities purposefully, a necessary transaction emerges: we need to know if we are getting what we are seeking. The next series of posts explore the relationships between citizens and cities – the city making exchange – and the feedback loops we need to make cities that serve us well.

What do we need from our cities?

What do our cities need from us?

 

_____ _____ _____

This post is part of Chapter 8 – The City Making Exchange. Here are some plot helpers of Nest City: The Human Drive to Thrive in Cities, the book I am sharing here while I search for a publisher:

_____ _____ _____

The Cornice

 

Over spring break I took a leap of faith.

The final climb
Photo taken by my friend and fellow cornice traveller, Ron.

I climbed up, beyond the highest reaches of the ski lift, up onto a cornice of snow on Marmot Mountain in Jasper National Park. For years I have watched in awe as skiers appear as little specks as they climb, linger, and drop with smooth and curvy beauty down the mountain. Last week, I was one of those wee specks and I now know why they linger.

As I gained altitude, so too did my anxiety. I realized that going down the way I came up could be potentially worse than the ski jump down. Was skiing down truly something I could do?

After the climb, the view itself reminded me to pause and gather myself. The view served as a wonderful distraction from the feat that lay ahead. I could see the whole landscape – the mountain tops and the valleys that are unseen from the lower altitudes I inhabit.

The mountaintops
Mountain tops beyond the edge of the cornice
View to Portal Creek
The upper reaches of Portal Creek and the Tonquin Valley

And with my friends, from 9 to 55 years old, I stood on a threshold: go back the way we came, or find a new way. We chose to go over the edge. When it was my turn, I chose to jump over the edge.

Young travel companions

As I embark on my exploration of Chapter 8 – The City Making Exchange with you, these words from John O’Donohue’s blessing, For the Time of Necessary Decision, ring true:

Trust that a richer life awaits us there,

That we will lose nothing

But what has already died;

There are times when jumping over the edge is the right thing to do. As I reflect my sharing my writing in progress with you, I know far less about this last third of the book than the previous two. I am jumping into Nest City’s third part and trust that I will learn what I need to learn.

What are you jumping into?

–

_____ _____ _____

This post is part of Chapter 8 – The City Making Exchange. Here are some plot helpers of Nest City: The Human Drive to Thrive in Cities, the book I am sharing here while I search for a publisher:

_____ _____ _____

 

–

Neighbourhood is up to us

 

 

In the excitement and anticipation of getting to the heart of a favourite neighbourhood, its ‘bumping place’, on a bright and fresh day hinting of spring, I lost my wallet. I had a choice: explore without any hint of purchase, or leave and go look for my wallet. The call of the wallet, more as a sense of security in knowing that it was not truly lost, won.

On Saturday, I attended Myrna Kostash‘s writing workshop hosted by the Canadian Authors Association. This little trek without my wallet started from Holy Trinity Anglican Church, where we gathered for the day, only a few blocks from Old Strathcona Farmers’ Market. I took advantage of the opportunity for an extra long lunch break to acquire fresh groceries, a walk in the fresh air and fulfill the writing task as assigned: explore the neighhourhood.

Upon arriving at the market, I made my way to a bank machine, where I realized that my wallet was not with me. I quickly made the decision to leave the market and retrace the day’s steps. I needed to both know where it is and if possible return to obtain the fresh apples and tomatoes that were calling me. I sped along the sidewalk, found my wallet, sped back to the market and proceeded to gather my needed nourishment for the week. (Here are some of Edmonton Journal photographer John Lucas’ photographs of the market, a hub for food and bumping into people.)

On my way back to the church, I noticed that I had been speeding back and forth along the same path. I noticed I had a choice I wasn’t noticing.

The physical layout of the Strathcona neighbourhood, in a grid, offers many paths of travel. I chose to go straight up the street and arrive at the church from a new angle, with a new perspective. On my new route, I quickly caught up to an elderly gent shuffling uncomfortably along the icy sidewalk. I slowed, easing myself into a new pace, simply stepping in behind him. After a few moments, the path widened, allowing me to modestly accelerate beside him, and as I did we began to chat about the state of our neighbourhood’s sidewalks.

He observed that despite a city bylaw requiring property owners to shovel sidewalks adjacent to their property, he was required to ‘rat’ on his neighbours. The City does not have the resources to scour the city for offenders, but rather awaits complaints. Complaining is what will compel neighbours to shovel and avoid the treacherous ice.  In the end, we decided that it was a beautiful day and our discomfort on the ice would not last long.

This quick exchange highlighted how each neighbourhood, each place we inhabit, is a place that we create. While this gent, myself and all the surrounding residents did not build this neighbourhood one hundred years ago, we continually recreate it – even with our shovelling practices. The basic structure of the city is in place here for a walkable neighbourhood. The rest is up to us, bylaw or not.

Where is the heart of your neighbourhood?  

Where do you bump into your neighbours?  

_____ _____ _____

This post is part of Chapter 7 – (Un)known Possibilities, here are some plot helpers of Nest City: The Human Drive to Thrive in Cities, the book I am sharing here while I search for a publisher:

_____ _____ _____

 

City waterworks

 

In less than 24 hours we have our second water main break on our block. A crew worked all night, patched things up and now there is another break so they are at it again. I am a happy citizen knowing that these folks are diligently working to make sure our city infrastructure is in good shape.

Water main break

It is easy to take our city infrastructure for granted. Yesterday evening we felt like we were in a campground, having to go outside, around the corner for potable water. (The City has a portable trailer of water for just these situations.) Any water used in the kitchen we have to carry, so we are super efficient; we cook and wash with just what we need, no more. The toilet can not be flushed on a whim. We brush our teeth with a glass. The laundry has to wait.

It takes great effort and collective thoughtfulness for our neighourhoods to have everything they have. It is not by chance. It takes equally great effort and collective thoughtfulness – and maybe more – for our neighbourhoods to continue to have what they need to be vibrant and live, serving citizens well. We don’t build our cities once and then enjoy them for the rest of our lives. Our infrastructure needs maintenance or it deteriorates, whether it is the pipe bringing water to homes or the pothole crew fixing up a nearby street for the second time this month. There is a lot to look after, too. In 2011, Edmonton had 3681km of water main and a total of 385 water main leaks to repair.

As we organize ourselves into cities, we also organize local government to look after the needs of the population congregating in each place. These folks are what Marilyn Hamilton calls civic managers – the people whose work is creating and looking after civic infrastructure on the public’s behalf. They play a crucial role in setting up the infrastructure before inhabitants arrive, as well as long after a neighbourhood is established. They get the work done, and they also leave messages in my mailbox letting me know where I can get water. They also appeared at my door this am to tell us there was a second break. They are looking after the infrastructure that we rely on.

Thank you to the City of Edmonton and Epcor, the City of Edmonton’s company that is doing the work behind my house, for looking after our waterworks. I appreciate what you do to support all that happens in our city.

What are the essential infrastructures we provide ourselves in cities?  

 

_____ _____ _____

This post forms part of Chapter 6 – Emerging Thresholds, of Nest City: The Human Drive to Thrive in Cities. Click here for an overview of Chapters 4-7 (Part 2 – Organizing for Emergence). Click here for an overview of the three parts of Nest City.

_____ _____ _____

 

 

 

Be a part of feedback loops in your city

We only know how well our city is doing when we have feedback loops, giving us data on our city’s performance.  I have been exploring to date the relationship between our economic life – and our ability to create diverse, new work – and our city habitat.  The only way to fully comprehend the relationship between our work and the cities we build (our habitat) is through feedback systems.

A couple of simple feedback loops have popped up in my city of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada this week about the city we are building.  The topics: a growth coordination strategy and design guidelines for our new neighbourhoods.

The City of Edmonton released this week a draft Growth Coordination Strategy, highlighting the  necessary steps to coordinate the city’s population growth to ensure environmental, social and fiscal sustainability.  This is an effort to consider more information as we make decisions about how to build our city.   The local news media have covered this story, providing feedback to the wider population: Edmonton Journal, Metro News,  Even City Councilor Don Iveson has information for constituents on his web site.  Little bits and pieces were on the radio this morning, and a bit on twitter under the #yeg hashtag.  It’s emerging as a public conversation about what we are building, who pays for it and what it costs.

In the meantime, Edmonton is developing design guidelines for Edmonton’s new neighbourhoods.  The City is asking the public what they think are the building blocks of great new neighbourhoods.  At the beginning of this project, the City is offering a way for the public to reflect on the city we are building.  Everyone can see the collection of photos people are posting on flickr or pinterest.  Everyone can see the twitter feed using the hashtag #yegDNN.  There is even a blog for the project.  Most importantly, citizens are discussing in IdeaShare the city we are building and what they want from it.  (Here is a link for more information on this project.)

The work of creating Edmonton to day did not rely only on planners and engineers.  Politicians make critical decisions about infrastructure.  Business owners and leaders make decisions about where to locate their business.  Builders and land developers choose what to build.  Citizens make decisions every day that impact the physical shape a city takes, and certainly the spirit of a city.  NGOs also make key decisions that affect how a city takes its shape.  So how do a couple of reports in City Hall serve the role of feedback loops?

City Hall prepares reports, which is one form of feedback. It also creates opportunities for citizens to discuss and reflect on our city.  Even if you don’t read the document, the media coverage is helping us collectively reflect on what we build, where we build it, why we build it and what it costs. If you are a citizen of Edmonton, I invite you to take a look at the Growth Coordination Strategy.  More importantly, they will be asking for citizen feedback.

In the case of the design guidelines for new neighbourhoods, the IdeaShare is a fantastic way for citizens to see what we collectively think about the city we are building for ourselves.  If you are looking for ideas, you might want to check out Edmonton’s promising practices that have been documented.  There is no report yet for this project, but you have an opportunity to help it take its shape.  More importantly, you can reflect and be part of shaping our city habitat here in Edmonton.

In future posts, I will be articulating more intense feedback loops.  In the meantime, look for ways to provide and be a feedback loop.  Be a part of the city’s feedback system.  That work will certainly create city habitats that serve us well.

 

 

The inviting city

A city can leave its mark in an instant.  For former Canadian Governor General Adrienne Clarkson’s parents, Rio de Janeiro was a happy moment on a perilous and uncertain journey in their migration to Canada from Hong Kong in 1942.  (For more details, see her book, Room for All of Us.)

While the Red Cross’ Gripsolm was docked in Rio, her parents explored the town and found cafes full of couples dancing the samba.  Her mother forever carried the urge to return to Rio and ‘really learn to samba’.  I can only imagine the mark a festive dance in a festive place would make on a young refugee couple making their way from a way of life that put their existence in peril, still on a perilous journey heading to uncertainty.  In my imagination, I see the young couple fearful for themselves and their two small children (Clarkson was two and a half), concerned about the family left behind, their well-being on the Gripsolm, and if all the effort to flee to Canada would be worth the effort.  Perhaps this brief moment in a city that loves to dance reminded them of what makes them feel good despite the circumstances.

Cities are constantly inviting us to enjoy them.  What is not constant is our reaction. Rio invited these young refugees to feel good, and significantly, they fully accepted the invitation.  I imagine other refugees declined the invitation to explore Rio and did not step off the ship.  Others will have explored the city and engaged in various degrees.  Some will keep walking when they hear the music.   Others will pause and listen.  Others will go inside and see exactly what’s happening.  Others will move to the front of the crowd for the best view.  Others will take their turn on the dance floor.  Others will take a turn making the music.

It is up to us to make a decision about what we make of the invitation.  It’s not possible to take everything in, nor are we interested in everything the city has to offer.  That is the beauty of the diversity of the city – there is something for everyone.

But it isn’t only about being invited, it is also about making invitations.  In Rio, someone set and prepared the venue.  Someone invited the musicians.  Someone provided food and refreshment.  Someones cleans up afterwards.  Following what makes us feel good, we all play various roles in the myriad of invitations the city makes to its citizens and visitors.

Whether inviting or being invited, the choice at every turn is simply degrees of participation and finding one that suits.  I am not a musician and I’ll dance a little.  To fully enjoy, I am often happy to watch or walk by knowing that something compelling could be around the corner.  In other instances I put myself on the stage or serve on the clean-up crew.

In cities, we each take our turns making invitations and being invited.  We offer and we receive joy.  The choice at every turn is when and how we participate in the dance that is the city, knowing that we will feel good.

As Clarkson puts it: some of the most frivolous things in life are the most important.

The power in consultation

What on earth is “true public consultation”?  This question begs to be asked after reading an article in the January 8, 2012 Calgary Herald.  Reporter Clara Ho’s first two paragraphs:

An environmental group is demanding a ‘true public consultation’ after learning of pro-posed plans to clear cut more than 700 acres of trees in the west Bragg Creek are in Kananaskis Country.
 
Sustain Kananaskis – comprised of Bragg Creek residents, trail users and outdoor enthusiasts – is calling for Spray Lake Sawmills and Alberta Sustainable Resource Development to hold a ‘transparent approval process that includes facilitated, accessible and meaningful public consultation in regards to logging activities in Kananaskis Country’.

A little more on the dynamics of the situation, as I read it:

  • The Government of Alberta (through Alberta Sustainable Resource Development) approved a 10 year logging plan that delegates forest management activities to Spray Lakes Sawmills.
  • Spray Lakes Sawmills has conducted ongoing public consultationover the last 10 years on various forest management activities.
  • Specific to west Bragg Creek, Spray Lakes Sawmills has consulted with stakeholders.  The next opportunity for the public to learn more and share concerns is at an open house January 26.
  • Sustain Kananaskis’ mission is to hold Spray Lake Sawmills and ASRD accountable to all Albertans affected by the proposed logging.
  • 90 percent of the trails will be affected in some way by the logging, including 30 km of new trails.
  • Sustain Kananaskis is advocating for a transparent approval process that includes public consultation, not just stakeholder consultation.
  • Sustain Kananaskis is demanding full public consultation so that dialogue can occur.

On the surface, the conflict appears to be about citizens (in the form of Sustain Kananaskis) demanding true, meaningful and full public consultation.  On their web site, Sustain Kananaskis defines ‘proper’ public consultation in three stages: let people know what’s going on (notification), seek their opinions (consultation), and involve them in the formulation of objectives, policies and approaches (participation).  By their own definition, they are getting consultation; they have been and are being asked for their opinion.  Whether they like the decisions made with their input is another story.

Sustain Kananaskis is actually looking for one of two things.  In the realm of consultation, Sustain Kananaskis is looking for evidence that their opinions and input affect the decisions of the decision-makers, in this case Spray Lakes Sawmills and ASRD.  In the realm of participation, Sustain Kananaskis is really seeking a role as a decision maker to shape the future of Kananaskis Country consistent with their vision.

The underlying issue in Clara Ho’s article is about who has the power to make decisions.  As is often the case, those without the power would like to have some.

The question I am left with:  Under what conditions can power be shared while maintaining our expectations for accountability?

An entrepreneurial city hall

I can’t wait to see the GO Centre this Saturday, Edmonton’s latest recreation facility.  It sounds remarkable – three huge gymnasiums that can be 12 full size basketball courts or 25 volleyball courts.  And a gym for the gymnasts.  It is both a facility for the U of A teams and a community centre. And unlike most recreational capital projects in cities, it came in on budget.  And the price tag was only $38 million.

The funds for the GO Centre are from federal, provincial and city governments. $4 million in private donations were also made by individuals, businesses and community partners.[1] The donations are not what are unique about this project – it is the entrepreneurial spirit within Edmonton that is worth noticing.  One of the two usual suspects –  the City of Edmonton or the University of Alberta – could have built the facility with $4 million dollars in sponsorship.  But what happened here reveals so much more of Edmonton’s creative entrepreneurial spirit.

The sports of volleyball, gymnastics and basketball came together as an unusual partnership: the Edmonton Grads Club, Ortona Gymnastics Club, Edmonton Volleyball Centre Society and the University of Alberta.  As a partnership, they declare that the GO Centre project “harnesses the talents and energy of all partners to address critical issues and to create a prime venue for growth and expansion of recreation and sports opportunities for all people in the Region.”[2] They organize

d themselves to meet the needs of their organizations, their sport communities, the University community and the wider community.

What I appreciate about this project is that the handful of Edmontonians needed to get the project underway stepped up to do it, and chose to look after their own organizations needs, but also that of the larger community[3].  Federal, provincial and city government supported their work.  The GO Centre builds on the City’s Recreation Master Plan and delivers on a trend toward multi-purpose facilities with versatile and flexible spaces.  They take it a step forward and build a facility for sports that are underrepresented.  They are thinking beyond traditional boundaries of partnership: the U of A is served, the community is served, the Edmonton Capital Region is served.

In all of this, I find myself curious about the role of City Hall in this entrepreneurial spirit.  At a minimum , the City is responsible for the basic infrastructure on which we build our city.  The roads to get places, the pipes to move water and wastewater, the waste we generate.  On this we build our city – and our recreation facilities.  In addition, the City brings rules and regulations for what we build and where, and ensure that the minimum standards for construction meet safety and construction standards through the permitting and building inspection processes.  The City provides emergency support in policing and fire protection.  All of this, in the strictest sense, is a service not performed by others in community.  For the provision of these services, the word ‘entrepreneurship’ in City Hall is not about competition, but finding the balance between creativity and efficiency in the delivery of these services.  Outside these service areas, however, entrepreneurship takes on a different meaning.

Case in point – recreation facilities.  The City builds and operates recreational facilities, but unlike the service areas noted above, other players also provide facilities and programs.  The city is a player among many.  That immediately conjures a picture of these players in competition with each other.  But the GO Centre illustrates that that is not what is happening.  Entrepreneurship in this case is big scale collaboration to work in new ways to build what really needs to be built.  Multi-sport facilities already exist for hockey, swimming, indoor soccer (Tri-Leisure Centre, Millenium Place, Terwilligar).  The GO Centre meets a whole new need and compliments the facilities that are already in place.

City Hall could have fought this, with hurt feelings that others are stepping on its feet as a recreation service provider.  The City could have insisted that its role is to build such facilities and missed the opportunity for the community to meet its own needs.

In the end, entrepreneurship at City Hall doesn’t quite mean that it gets more business like.  It means that it recalibrates its authority to make more room for partnerships.  An entrepreneurial City Hall will:

  1. Acknowledge that it is not all things to all people
  2. Recognize that the city knows what it needs
  3. Support partnerships that enable the needs of the community to be met
  4. Provide infrastructure to support the initiatives
  5. Establish (and enforcing) the rules that ensure what we build meets our collective standards.

An entrepreneurial city hall is one that makes room for the city’s creativity – the ultimate entrepreneurship.

 

 

For readers interested in Spiral Dynamics integral: The GO Centre partnership is an ORANGE initiative.  To do more of this kind of work, City Hall will have to recalibrate its BLUEness.  It doesn’t lose its BLUEness, but adjusts its focus to provide the structure needed for the city’s entrepreneurial ORANGE spirit to emerge more fully.  What would BLUE in service to ORANGE really look like?
The GO Centre’s ORANGE flavor is also interesting because it fully intends to deliver on PURPLE and RED threads by building community and providing a healthy place for competition and sport.

[1] Scott Hennig, “Partnership, not taxes, the way to GO,” Edmonton Journal, p, A21, September 29, 2011.

[2] http://www.gocentre.com/about-edmonton-go-centre/

[3] Current board members: http://www.gocentre.com/edmonton-go-centre-board-members/

City By Design

Edmonton's children: Where they live, where they learn (Share Edmonton)The Edmonton Journal’s Sarah O’Donnell and Edmonton programmer Mack Male, have painted a picture for Edmonton residents and decision makers about how our city is growing, especially in light of recent Edmonton Public Schools decisions to close inner city schools.

The article and mapping show us where young families are living, and by implication where schools are needed based on the numbers of children nearby. Using this logic, it makes perfect sense to close schools where there are fewer children.  Need is based on numbers of children, no more no less.  Families move to the suburbs and school trustees follow the families. It’s that simple.

Or is it?  This conversation seems to make several assumptions.  I offer several below to test if they are the assumptions we are using, and /or if we wish to consciously create a new set of assumptions.  They drive how we build and adjust the city we live in, the city we are designing while living in it.

Assumption 1:  Growth just happens. Growth happens where we choose to make it happen.  Cities choose where growth will happen and has a legislative framework to guide growth.  Ultimately, the decision makers are City Council.  There are, however, many other decision makers that influence how and where we build: home buyers, developers and builders, school boards, health providers, realtors, etc.  We spend a lot of time and energy designing and building infrastructure to accommodate us living in this place together, and it is not haphazard. It takes years (and decades) to plan for Anthony Henday, LRT routes, water and wastewater systems, electricity, gas and our extensive roadway system.  We build all of this in the public eye.  None of it “just happens.”

Assumption 2:  We have unlimited funds for infrastructure now and in the future. We expand our city without contemplating the full costs of doing so.  We let school buildings close.  We let vacant land remain vacant when servicing infrastructure is near by.  We let land, and all the utilities serving that land, remain underutilized.  If we are not able to maintain our current infrastructure well now, how do we expect to do so in the future?  City Hall, for example, faces huge capital and operating budget challenges, yet we continue to spread ourselves thin.  We behave as if we have unlimited revenue now and in the future.  Are our pockets (as taxpayers) that full?

Assumption 3:  We need a lot of space from our neighbours. It seems that having oodles of space – in our yards and homes – drives Edmonton’s design.  Why are we afraid of being close to other people?  Or sharing park space instead of large private yards?  What is behind this?  What makes neighbours bad, especially if there are a lot of them?  Perhaps the devil is not in the density, but in the design of how we build the buildings and the space around them.  What if we built exciting spaces and ensured the services were on hand – like schools, LRT – to create viable neighbourhoods.  Viable from a social, environmental and fiscal perspective.  We have yet to really pay for all this space we are enjoying.

Assumption 4:  School boards don’t build cities – City Hall does. Schools have an absolutely critical role to play in physically building cities – look at the schools and green spaces everywhere.  They also play a key role in supporting the well-being of neighbourhoods. Schools are critical formal and informal gathering places that help make a neighbourhood healthy.  A school board’s decisions are critical.  They are not isolated from everyone else’s actions.  Our city builders include school systems (secondary and postsecondary), health systems, energy and water systems, city hall, and our builders and developers.  No one entity or initiative works completely in isolation – they all have a piece of the neighbourhood puzzle.

What if we switched those assumptions for the following principles in decision making at many scales (from citizen up to a large city network of organizations):

  1. Use current infrastructure before building new
  2. Create and design for exciting spaces where people want to spend time
  3. Bring nature to the people and people to nature
  4. Create and support a transportation system that moves people and goods efficiently (rather than the most cars/trucks efficiently)
  5. Integrate the interests and dreams of citizens, community organizations, our city institutions and our city builders
  6. Consider the cumulative costs of our city design choices – actively seek feedback on our choices

I suspect that these principles seem innocuous, but they are not when we  have the feedback systems in place to truly understand if our actions are in line with our goals.  The City of Edmonton, in creating and providing open source data, is providing a critical feedback loop for Edmontonians to understand how the city we are creating works.  There are exciting conversations ahead in Edmonton’s future.

Our collective actions -as  citizens, community organizations, school systems, business owners, city government, health providers, developers, builders, realtors, home buyers, etc.  – create our city.   Is it the one we want?

I wonder if the evidence shows that we are getting what we want, or if we are getting what “just happens.”

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/edmonton/schools+meet+suburbs+needs/3067140/story.html ttp://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/school+map/3056784/story.html