5.1.1. Strategy of ‘Enabling Service Localization in Neighbourhoods’

Thus, this strategy can also be called as ‘building compact and networked city from bottom up’, or ‘Strategy of creating compact neighbourhoods’ On the other hand,

The second strategy relates to the socio-economic dimension of neighbourhoods and relies primarily on socio-economic policies rather than structural transformations. It requires aligning the socio-economic policies to the neighbourhood scale and governing the type of ‘service’ that should be availed either by building ‘density and diversity’ or directly by ‘public actions.’ Example: Deciding which services should be housed in the ‘newly built’ or ‘abandoned/ existing’ ground floor retail shops or buildings. This can be done by implementing various socio-economic policies and incentive instruments. Thus, this type of Strategy can also be called as ‘buildings neighbourhoods based on access from bottom up’ or ‘Strategy of reducing time poverty in cities. The following two subsections further elaborate the shared as well as specific characteristics of these two interrelated and complex strategic dimensions of creating ‘walkable’ and ‘proximate’ city with neighbourhoods and people as focal point.

5.1.1. Strategy of ‘Enabling Service Localization in Neighbourhoods’

From a spatial planning perspective (in a free market economy), enabling services and amenities to be localised in neighbourhoods requires structural changes in neighbourhoods based on creating density and diversity and increasing pedestrianization through urban design measures. This strategy can also be called as ‘building compact city from bottom up’, or ‘Strategy of creating compact neighbourhoods’ Transforming neighbourhoods to the compact city ideal requisites infill densification and diversification in underutilised lots and brownfield areas. This infill densification needs to be prioritised near transit hubs to avail localization of services close to from where people commute.

Generally, this densification is bought about by amending zonal regulations. For example, increasing the allowable limit for floor area ratio (FAR) is a common tool for increasing density. Such tools activate private developers to increase density within their properties. As suggested from the literature reviewed on compact cities and observing the case studies, building (compact) cities from local scale of neighbourhoods requires a ‘placebased approach’ to city making. A place-based approach warrants ‘comprehensive strategic framework’ to resolve the issues of creating compact cities (Barca et al., 2012). A place-based approach mandates co-creation of neighbourhoods with communities. By doing so, it gives a fine-grained focus on the issues of the neighbourhood. It helps to identify potentials and difficulties for infill development of density and diversity by looking at existing resources in the neighbourhoods. For example, Portland has added inclusionary zoning policy through which it is allowing production of different building types in

neighbourhoods as per what is needed in each area. Moreover, it is giving incentives to local communities to become private developers and therefore generating buy-in from citizens to develop density in a socially sustainable manner. Similarly, by engaging with communities, Melbourne is identifying issues that exist in neighbourhoods and brainstorming the provision and regulation of pedestrian environments. For example, Melbourne in its pilot projects, developed the campaign program of ‘coffee with cops’ in which citizens helped identify the critical issues of safety in the neighbourhood which deter them from walking or biking. It should be noted that such campaigns also help bringing ‘non-planning departments of the public sector’ to engage more in the local issues. They mobilise resources by treating citizens as social capital, increase social cohesion and thereby lead to budget savings. Thus this example reiterates the co-creation feature of ‘place-based approach’, i.e., ‘all of government’ emphasis on co-creating neighbourhoods with communities. A common feature among all the three case studies is the pedestrianization and greening of school streets, community centres and transit hubs to prioritize access of vulnerable populations like elderly people and children within neighbourhoods. These features of density, diversity and pedestrianization although create a walkable and service rich environment, but also endanger gentrification and displacement. Thus, these structural actions, policies and campaigns should be equally strengthened by focussing on economically weaker groups, using tools like affordable housing, and rent controls. Going beyond affordable housing, Portland has created a ‘Neighbourhood Economic Strategy’ (a combination of various welfare policies and actions) to invest in retail shop development by specifically providing support to the vulnerable groups. Through this strategy, the city intends to not only create diversity of retail in neighbourhoods but also protect vulnerable groups from gentrification and displacement that pedestrianization and greening fosters. Similar set of strategies can be seen in Paris. Through its ‘made in Paris’ campaign, it is supporting vulnerable populations by promoting local production spaces in the neighbourhoods in the form of fab-labs and other hybrid spaces. This gives a clue that governance of creating compact neighbourhoods or governance of enabling service provision by creating compact neighbourhoods requires a co-ordination of the micro (neighbourhood) as well as macro scale (city) policies. Melbourne Addendum (an updated version of Plan Melbourne document) states that through their pilot projects they realised that the ’20 minute neighbourhood’ policy needs to be included in all plans and projects at metropolitan level. It requires an integrated approach to planning procedures, aligning land-use, transport and socio-economic policies to neighbourhood scale. Additionally, feedback loops can be an important instrument to track the co-ordination of spatial development of the local neighbourhood scale and the macro ‘city scale’.