Bridging Connections: an exploration of the , collaborative planning process

Abstract

Alexis Miller, Collaborative planning is not standard practice. The Provencher bridge MCP Candidate redevelopment is a model example of comprehensive collaborative planning, and a seminal piece for ’s municipal infrastructure University of projects. Susan Freig, MCP, was awarded the opportunity to implement in collaboration with the best public consultation process she could design. This was no tabula Susan Freig, MCP rasa; misgivings, misinformation and tension between St. Boniface and Owner and Principal, the City of Winnipeg branded this project as contentious. As such, a Freig and Associates comprehensive collaborative planning process was created, rooted in relationship building, knowledge sharing and trust. It focused on an open, honest and transparent course of action while ensuring the public were given the information they needed to make an informed decision. Consultation methods were unique and sensitive to the needs of stakeholders involved, provided a dissemination of information and gave both the affected and broader community the power to be heard. What resulted from this community driven process exceeded anyone’s expectations; the creation of an icon: the Esplanade Riel. 1 Facts: a course of action emerges

In June of 1996, Susan Freig, owner and Principal at Freig and Associates completed an extensive community profile on the Provencher Bridge Project for the City of Winnipeg. Downtown and St. Boniface were thoroughly outlined to provide the foundation and context for a planning and public consultation process (Freig, 1996). This work, a balanced understanding of both the quantitative and qualitative attributes of each community, highlighted the need for these Map: communities consulted in Alexis Miller in collaboration communities to become partners with Susan Freig the process, (1) Downtown (2) North St. Boniface in the planning process. In (3) St. Boniface addition, it was noted that the schism between St. Boniface and Background: The City wanted a clean slate the City of Winnipeg extended and to move forward in a manner an ordinary beginning? well beyond the Provencher that was acceptable for affected Bridge project; it was embedded A Provencher Bridge, Esplanade publics. As such, a successful in cultural rivalries from an Riel collaborative planning consultation process had to not earlier time in history (Freig, process resulted from the City of only address, but also alleviate 1996). The community profile Winnipeg’s need to rehabilitate suspicions and empower the provided a historical perspective or redevelop the Provencher community members of St. and brought to light the idea that Bridge in the mid 1990’s. In Boniface to become actively this project could be bigger than dire need of repair, the City engaged in the project. the bridge itself, it was viewed initiated a predetermined plan as a potential catalyst for further that antagonized and alienated neighbourhood improvements. community members in St. Interviews with St. Boniface Boniface, Winnipeg’s French community organizations were quarter. Consequently, the conducted, an uncommon project ground to a halt and practice in typical community tensions between St. Boniface profiles, to gain a deeper and the City branded the project understanding of the knowledge as contentious. Community about and the attitudes towards members had no trust in the the project. This process City; this fractured relationship provided valuable insights as to was the basis upon which a how community members could comprehensive collaborative be engaged and established planning process began. consultation priorities.

2 “A planning and The majority was in favour consultation process that of replacing rather than rehabilitating Provencher Bridge emphasizes substantive, (Prairie Research Associates, constructive public 1999). Furthermore, the results input for a project that indicated that two alternatives is technically, socially, were strongly favoured: the New Paired bridges and the New politically and financially Conventional bridge options. acceptable, would enable Survey’s were provided to enrich the community to make a the planning process for both PAC tangible contribution to members and for City Council consideration (Freig, 1999). The the development of their PAC, 16 individuals representing community”. 15 St. Boniface, Downtown and community wide stakeholder groups participated in ten three Two years later, Susan was A communications plan and hour meetings from October awarded the opportunity brand was established to create 1998-May 1999. These meetings to design and implement a “immediate pubic recognition produced a near unanimous public consultation process. for the project and its related consensus to recommend the Building on her previous work print materials” (Freig, 1999, p. New Paired bridges alternative in the community profile, a 2). Each tactic centered on the to City Council (Freig, 1999). year long comprehensive, specific stakeholders involved. This option was approved and mixed methods approach to Bilingual surveys, newsletters, resulted in a $68 million dollar community engagement was newspaper advertisements, open development sponsored by all created. Consultation methods houses, site visit, a project hotline three levels of government. on this project were designed and the creation of a project specifically with a focus on advisory committee (PAC) were the range of affected publics, established. These strategies notably: provided a dissemination of information and gave both · St. Boniface residents, the affected and broader city businesses and community communities the power to speak organizations and to be heard. Information was distributed to 18,000 homes · Downtown residents, and businesses, over 700 people businesses and community attended the open houses and organizations 1575 people responded to · City-wide general public surveys. Conducted in April 1999, the surveys highlighted · Provincial interests practical considerations in keeping or replacing the bridge; · Media responses indicated that the Image: Paired bridges: · Politicians (Freig, 1996, p. general public reinforced the Provencher Bridge (curved) 30). opinions of the affected publics. and Esplanade Riel (straight)

3 Actions & Interviewing potential key As aforementioned, consultants stakeholders from over 45 were considered resources, Interactions: community groups enabled making this a genuine endeavor moving forward Susan to gauge their perceptions to foster a community driven and willingness to participate collaborative approach. It was The ultimate goal of the in the process. Despite negative noted that the PAC were : participation process was to attitudes and distrust in the City of create a meaningful, open, Winnipeg, community members “pleased, not just with the honest and transparent dialogue were receptive and ready to outcome of the process, where community members get involved. Community but that they were part stakeholders were joined on the could participate knowing their of a new approach to input mattered. Additionally, PAC by the City of Winnipeg the process was designed to Public works and Planning dept; public consultation on integrate transportation planning consultants were understood to public works projects- with community planning by be resources only (Freig, 1999). one that offered public taking into account social, input at the earliest economic, environmental, land The PAC created guiding use and technical data (Freig, principles that revolved around opportunity and created 1999). Community members knowledge, communication and the circumstances for were outlined as partners in the respect of differing opinions. A the public to participate facilitator was hired to support the community profile and treated with the fullest level of as such as PAC members. A key agenda of each meeting, which feature was knowledge sharing were organized in four phases to knowledge”. within the PAC and beyond. Each ensure the breadth of knowledge individual on the PAC was a on the project was shared and Emile Chartier, artist, activist, representative of and responsible understood before moving long time resident and former to the external organizations they forward. The first phase involved president of the Old St. Boniface were a part of. background information, the Residents Association and second to determine goals, the PAC member, reflected the third to select bridge alternatives above sentiments during an and the fourth to make a informal interview session. recommendation based upon He felt as though the meetings their knowledge, information were efficient and prompt; the sharing and broad public input atmosphere and discussions were (Freig, 1999). The goals open and fair (they had stuck to prioritized in phase two included: their guiding principles) and he fiscal responsibility, culture and did not consider the committee heritage, aesthetics and economic to have been bought. Being an development. In relation to phase active community member and three, it is important to note that engaging with many different Wardrop Engineering’s bridge organizations throughout his life, alternatives were based upon he acknowledged that sometimes the four conceptual alternatives one knows when people have developed by the PAC. It is made decisions before entering a uncommon for the public to meeting; this was not the case in guide the engineering process. this process.

Image: Landmark within a landmark, Salisbury House on 4 the Esplanade Riel Outcomes: A respect for history is an integral part of the design as the bridge extraordinary results? reestablishes previously severed link to . It has become What began as the contentious a gathering place for local redevelopment of the residents and tourists alike; the Provencher Bridge ended with bridge is now a Winnipeg icon an extraordinary process and appearing regularly in media extraordinary results. The and marketing material, on collaborative planning process blogging sites and Flickr. It was with the PAC in conjunction with even made into a film entitled the mixed methods approach to “Crossing the Red”. Susan public consultation exceeded was awarded a Transportation everyone’s expectations. It was Association of Canada Medal far more successful than ever as well as the International City thought possible. Susan was County Management Program pleased by the unity between such Excellence Award for Citizen a diverse group of stakeholders Engagement. Lastly, the client (Freig, 1999). Amazingly, one (the City) was supportive of member of the PAC identifies as Image: Esplanade Riel the entire process and was not reconnecting to Broadway a community planner in relation afraid, even though it could to this project. The engineers have opened the door more Also, he was pleasantly surprised involved were exposed to a than what they were prepared at the level of detail in the design community driven process and a to deliver or pay for. No one on selection process. Not only broader range of planning issues; the PAC anticipated a restaurant did the PAC come up with the this may not have occurred on the Esplanade Riel, as such, conceptual alternatives, they in a typical consultation. to install washroom facilities made design decisions on almost However, in exposing the in the middle of the bridge everything, including lighting “bigger planning picture” to the cost one million dollars! It was standards. He appreciated the PAC, some members saw this completed, but this situation was amount of information that was as an opportunity to discuss brought to light after the fact and shared; even minor specifics other issues outside the scope slightly tainted all the hard work were shared and explained. Emile of the project. Provencher done by the PAC. Regardless asserted that people who hold or Boulevard was infused with of this hiccup, the project is a run meetings have a propensity investment after construction model example of the power of (whether they are aware of it or of the Esplanade Riel; it was a authentic collaboration. not) to intimidate people; it’s catalyst for revitalization. The important not to intimidate your pedestrian bridge was named guests. During the PAC process after Louis Riel, a symbolic he perceived everyone to be on gesture since he is thought to the same page, there were no represent the tensions that define intimidation or hierarchy during Canadian history. This is a rather the meetings. Speaking from his appropriate way to unify the own experience, he was proud of communities on either side of the and believer in the collaborative Red River. consultation process.

5 Lessons Planners should not be viewed Being transparent with people as simply cogs in a bureaucratic may involve a dialogue Learned: wheel. Other key factors surrounding the process, what where to go from here... included representing oneself we are attempting to do and with honesty and integrity. why it is important. It’s not a True collaboration only occurs Being human and showing that matter of convincing people per when every stakeholder believes you are not immune to mistakes se, but rather, deepening their in and is committed to the and that you are committed to understanding of their role in the process, including the client. fairness while respecting other project. As Emile put it: “process Both the time and money people’s time and points of view. is like a marriage- people have involved in designing and Genuinely listening, fostering to understand both sides”, this administering a comprehensive an atmosphere of openness and includes the opposition. There collaborative planning process inclusiveness in each meeting, was a group who wanted to save must be viewed as a worthwhile ensuring your guests are the old Provencher Bridge; they endeavor. If a collaborative comfortable. A good process were small and represented a approach was taken initially is one that is facilitated, so all point of difference you will find with this project, the results from members have the opportunity to on any project. However, it’s the first redevelopment efforts speak and be heard, knowing that important to hear and address may have produced something their opinions matter and that their concerns within the project different; rather than St. Boniface their time is being used wisely. if possible. community members derailing the project. Never underestimate It’s vital to be aware of power The importance of visual a well-organized community dynamics and to even the playing representation should be with clout. When the project field in groups when needed. emphasized as well. During the was resurrected, establishing Emile Chartier reiterated this open houses and in the newsletters trust within the community was idea as well. Politics are always of this project, the public was vitally important. Susan and present and in relation to the exposed to accessible images. her firm needed to emphasize PAC, some of its members had It’s typical to use engineering independence from both the relationships already, and not all drawings, with bridges shown City and the engineering firm; of them positive. Although they in plan or section using CAD, this was key in resolving may have put their differences but on this project, hand drawn suspicion, garnering support aside for this project, little things sketches with explanations for a collaborative process such as seating arrangements were used in order for them to and beginning from a neutral could have caused tension. be straightforward and easy position. Food is an obvious must have at to understand. Visuals are an community meetings, but pre- effective way of communicating arranged seating arrangements technical information; they may not be a good idea. In are more approachable than addition, it should be noted that words and can spark people’s not everyone likes process. As imaginations. Ensuring clarity planners, and as this case-in- of information is incredibly point highlights, a good process important to mitigate confusion is paramount to building a and misunderstanding. successful project.

Image: Looking East towards St. Boniface 6 In closing, we all should aim to do the best we can with what we have. This project was given the time, budget and commitment to become something illustrious, the second time around. Every project should start with a community profile, which includes outreach to community leaders; this approach not only builds a strong foundation and relationships, it may assist in addressing potential problems early on. Taking this extra step shows the planners sincerity and desire for community input at the beginning of a project.

Abridgment:

Commonly, public participation is a superficial process and often what is touted as collaboration is really not the case; comprehensive may be the goal but is not the norm. The design of the public participation process for the Provencher Bridge, Esplanade Riel project is an exemplary example of how collaborative planning processes should be done. A decade ago it was considered Project Awards: the “most comprehensive public consultation ever undertaken The Winnipeg Accessibility Certificate of Engineering for a public works project in Award Achievement Winnipeg’s history” (Manning & Préfontaine, 2007). This project Transportation Association of International City County was ahead of its time and could Canada Medal Management Program easily be viewed as trailblazing Excellence Award for Citizen and a best practice model of Best Trade Contractor Award of Engagement authentic collaborative planning. Excellence

7 References: Freig, S. (1999). Provencher Bridge Consultation Process Final Report.

Manning, G. & Préfontaine, G. (2007). Crossing the Red: Heritage Interpretation at Esplanade Riel. Cited at: www.chrs.ca/conferences/2007/pdf/abstracts/Glen%20Manning%20and%20 Guy%20Prefontaine%20-%20Crossing%20the%20Red.pdf

Prairie Research Associates Inc. (1999). Results of Public Consultation on Provencher Bridge Alternatives.

Wardrop Engineering (1999). Provencher Bridge Alternative’s Draft Working Document.

Images:

Unless indicated, all maps and images in this report were produced and edited by Alexis Miller.

Additional Resources:

Video: About A Bridge: Winnipeg’s Esplanade Riel www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGPApX_pLes

Photos: Esplanade Riel www.flickr.com/search/?q=esplanade+riel

Social Media: Esplanade Riel on Facebook: www.facebook.com/pages/Esplanade-Riel/108059085889591

Research: van Ginkel, R. & Dr. Emile Shehata (2004). Provencher Bridges: Winnipeg moved beyond the utilitarian structures of the past for its new pedestrian bridge, and commissioned a beautiful landmark. Cited at: www.tac-atc.ca/english/resourcecentre/readingroom/conference/conf2003/pdfs/ ginkel.pdf

The Keystone Professional: Achievement Award Presented to The Cite of Winnipeg and Wardrop Engineering Inc. for the Esplanade Riel (Provencher) Bridge. Cited at: www.apegm.mb.ca/pdf/Keystone/05apr.pdf

Esplanade Riel Pedestrian Bridge, Winnipeg, Manitoba: DSI receives Best Trade Contractor Award of Excellence for its products and onsite execution for the new stay cable pedestrian bridge in Winnipeg. Cited at: www.dywidag-systems.com/references/details/article/esplanade-riel-pedestrian- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esplanade_Riel bridge-canada.html 8