Nci workshop brazil1
-
Upload
aditbrasil -
Category
Business
-
view
359 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Nci workshop brazil1
AGENDA
I. Introductions.II. Overview of the NCI Charrette System.
a. What is the nature of the problem?b. What is a charrette?c. What is the NCI charrette system?d. How do charrettes work?
III. Tools & Techniques for Collaborative Solutions.a. How do we know if a project is ready for a successful charrette?b. Project assessment and team organization: “Project start-up
intensive.”c. Designing the process: making meetings work. d. Stakeholder analysis.e. Stakeholder outreach, education and communication
strategies.IV. Hands-on Exercise.V. Discussion.
The National Charrette Institute
• The National Charrette Institute (NCI) is an IRS 501(c)(3) nonprofit educational institution
• We teach professionals and community leaders the NCI Charrette System™, a design-based, accelerated, collaborative project management system that harnesses the talents and energies of all interested parties to create and support a feasible plan
• We advance the fields of community planning and public involvement through research, publications and facilitation
20 years of healthy community transformation
Design +
Codes +
Process =
Transformation
Downcity, Providence, RI
NCI Charrette System NCI Management & Facilitation
• Portland, DC, Harvard, Miami, Vancouver BC, UK • Also available on-site for your organization
NCI Training History
• 1st public training offered in 2002• NCI Training Certificates: 2,194
Data through 12/11
NCI Charrette System Course
Day One:• Three phases of the NCI
Charrette System• Practice public “hands-on”
meeting exercises Day Two:• Case studies presentations• Project assessment exercises
– Guiding principles– Objectives & measures– Stakeholder analysis– Charrette purpose and
products– Project complexity
Day Three:• Project Organization
– Charrette system road map
– Charrette ready plan– Team formation– Charrette schedule
• Plan Implementation• Lessons learned
NCI Charrette Management and Facilitation Course
Day One:• General charrette
management• Studio set-up & management• Public gallery management• Communications and the
press• Public meeting facilitation skill
building exercise
Day Two:• Charrette design decision
process• Charrette team design pin-up
simulation• Production and presentation
management
The Situation in a Nutshell
Forbes Magazine
The general situation.
• Fear of growth, in spite of economic dependence on its continuation.
• Fear reinforced by environmental rhetoric that emphasizes the damage.
• Bad democracy: emphasis on quantity and not quality or functioning of public participation.
The politics of planning...
• Citizen intervention focused on technical and procedural means to stop projects.
• Technical discussions become politically charged, political decisions become technically obscure.
• Political paralysis reinforces “business as usual” development patterns.
• Pervasive fear among developers of “meeting the neighbors.”
• Breakdown of faith in democratic process on all sides.
The ironic results of misunderstanding democracy.
• In the name of procedural fairness and democracy, we’ve created an unreliable process that undermines civic capacity and leads to reactionary politics (NIMBY).
• Public involvement has become part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Change is hard for everyone
The community development system resists transformative change
• Outdated codes and standards
• Narrow financing conventions
• Public fear of new development
• Lack of a shared community vision
The work of specialists
• Solving each problem, one at a time, with technical skill and precision.
• Each “solution,” dictated by its own “necessity,” creates new problems.
The problem with a system of experts
• Diane Vaughn, The Challenger Launch Decision.
• The best technical knowledge often produces well-supported decisions that add up to disaster.
Complex projects and problems require collaborative solutions.
• Create an exemplary plan that leads to implementation
• Create positive ongoing working relationships• Save time and money: good government• Build community trust in government• Complex problems require
collaboration
Goals of a collaborative planning process
• Create an exemplary plan• Stakeholders own and support the plan• Avoid costly rework• Implement the plan
Why is collaboration so difficult?
• History of bad process, endless unproductive meetings
• The “trained incapacity” of specialists.• Diversity of viewpoints.• Pervasive suspicion of full collaboration.• Fear of unbridled democracy– the rule of “the
mob.”• Requires good leadership, process, facilitation
with the resources to make it happen
Strategies and tools for collaboration
Holistic Collaborative Process•Inclusive, cross-disciplinary, transparent, timely
– Tools: ex. NCI Charrette System, Integrated Design
Collaborative Project Start•Commitment to robust inclusive process
– Tool: Project start-up intensive– Tools: Guiding principles, objectives and measures,
stakeholder analysis, project roadmap
Well-run Public Meetings•Input with potential for impact
– Tools: Skilled facilitation of hands-on workshops
Each puzzle piece protects its domain.
zoning
open space
transportation
financing
density
utilities
retail
affordability
residential transit
environmental
marketing
architecture
politics
construction
sales
engineering
public involvement
parking
public space
When each piece sees it’s place in the whole…
zoning
open space
transportation
financing
density
utilities
retail
affordability
residential transit
environmental
marketing
architecture
politics
construction
sales
engineering
public involvement
parking
public space
zoning
open space
transportation
financing
density
utilities
retail
affordability
residential transit
environmental
marketing
architecture
politics
construction
sales
engineering
public involvement
parking
public space
A coherent vision is supported …
zoning
open space
transportation
financing
density
utilities
retail
affordability
residential transit
environmental
marketing
architecture
politics
construction
sales
engineering
public involvement
parking
public space
… and the community is transformed.
How can resistance turn into collaboration and positive community transformation?
The NCI Charrette System
Pleasant Hill Bart Station, 2000
• 25-year deadlock• Organized citizen
opposition controlling the press
• Challenging deal (developer, County, BART)
• Boycott of charrette threatened
Pleasant Hill Bart Station, 2005
• Unanimous adoption with no opposition
• Design maintained with new architect
• Head NIMBY chairs committee
• Survived 5-year lag• Construction begins
Urban Advantage
Lennertz Coyle & Assoc.
75% Completion, 2010
Observed problems with charrettes.
• Highly variable in form, content, and success. • Lack of clarity with respect to public expectations.• Difficulty with follow-through to implementation.• The need to cultivate local champions, not always
achieved by out-of-town consultants.• Disappointment and disillusionment, often
proportional to the excitement of the charrette itself.
• Weak preparation.
The NCI Charrette System™
• What is the NCI Charrette System?• What is a NCI Charrette?• Charrette System Tools and Techniques• Nine Charrette System Strategies
The NCI Charrette System
research, education, charrette preparation charrette
planimplementation
Project Status Communications
Product Refinement
Presentation and Product Finalization
Project Assessment and Organization
Stakeholder Research, Education, Involvement
Base Data Research and Analysis
Feasibility Studies and Research
Charrette Logistics
Organization, Education, Vision
Alternative Concepts Development
Preferred Plan Synthesis
Plan Development
Production and Presentation
1111 2222 3333
The Charrette System Phases
1-9 months 2-4 months
Strengths of the Charrette System
Support• Mobilizes the collective energy
of all interested partiesFeasibility• Addresses all aspects of
feasibility concurrentlyTime and Money• Reduces project timeline,
increases productivity, reduces costly rework
Sustainability and Design• Seeks the best sustainable
solution, not the lowest common denominator
LCA Town Planning and Architecture
Charrettes accelerate timelines
NCI Charrette System Core Values
Sustainable Community Planning• Holistic planning solutions support socially,
economically and environmentally sustainable communities.
Collaboration•Each individual’s unique contribution supports the best outcome. Transparency•Clarity in rules, process and roles is essential to collaboration.Shared Learning•Including all viewpoints assures reduced rework and facilitates implementation.Direct, Honest, Timely Communication•Respectful communication fosters an environment of trust and reduces rework.
Drawn for The Washington Post, 1988, by Roger K. Lewis, FAIA, Professor, U. Maryland School of Architecture
What is a NCI Charrette?
• The NCI charrette is a multi-day collaborative planning event that engages all affected parties to create and support a feasible plan that represents transformative community change
Origin of the term “charrette”
• At the École des Beaux Arts in Paris during the 19th century, proctors circulated a cart, or “charrette,” to collect final drawings while the students frantically put finishing touches on their work
La Charrette, by Alexis Lemaistre c.1889
Misconceptions about the term “charrette”
A NCI charrette is not:
• A one-day workshop
• A multi-day marathon meeting involving everyone all the time (stakeholders participate at key moments)
• A “visioning session” without an action plan and implementation strategy
When should you use a charrette?
Charrettes are best for:
• High stakes projects• Volatile, yet workable,
political environments• Complex design
problems• Projects that include
imminent development
What can a charrette do?
• Revitalization and infill• Sustainable
communities• Economic development• Regional visions and
plans• Comprehensive plans• Form-based codes• New neighborhoods• TOD plans
Kendall, FL
Kentlands, MDHillsborough Co., FL
Charrettes result in feasible plans for:
In-house Charrettes
• A charrette is not necessarily a public event if all stakeholders are “in-house”
• The public-at-large does not have to be involved in a project when the public is not an “affected party”
Examples:– LEED building design– Military construction– Hi-tech manufacturing
Charrette Trends
Government agencies requiring charrettes:• Baltimore County, MD• Davidson, NC• Belmont, NC• Sarasota County, FL
Recent RFPs requiring charrettes:• Renaissance Project, Baltimore, MD• Columbia Town Center, Columbia, MD• City Center Housing, Santa Monica, CA• Spokane Valley, WA• Providence, RI• Chico, CA• Montgomery County, MD• Surfside, FL• Takoma Park, MD
Charrette Request for Proposal Template
A complete framework for specifying a NCI charretteprocess in a RFP
Free for download at: charretteinstitute.org
NCI Charrette SystemTools and Techniques
The NCI Charrette System
research, education, charrette preparation charrette
planimplementation
Project Status Communications
Product Refinement
Presentation and Product Finalization
Project Assessment and Organization
Stakeholder Research, Education, Involvement
Base Data Research and Analysis
Feasibility Studies and Research
Charrette Logistics
Organization, Education, Vision
Alternative Concepts Development
Preferred Plan Synthesis
Plan Development
Production and Presentation
1111 2222 3333
The Charrette System Phases
1-9 months 2-4 months
The NCI Charrette SystemPhase One: Charrette Preparation
Research, Education, Charrette Preparation Tools and Techniques
research, education, charrette preparation charrette
planimplementation
Project Assessment and Organization
Stakeholder Research, Education, Involvement
Base Data Research and Analysis
Feasibility Studies and Research
Charrette Logistics
1111 2 3
charrette logistics
project set-up and
organizationstakeholder involvement
base information
feasibility studies
Guiding Principles
Objectives, Measures, Strategies Draft
Stakeholder Analysis
Charrette Purpose and Products
Complexity Analysis
Charrette System Road Map
Charrette Ready Plan
1.11.11.11.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
1.1 Project Assessment and Organization Tools and Techniques
Charrette System Road Map
Charrette Ready Plan Schedule
Outreach and Engagement
Engagement and Information Exchange
Secondary Stakeholder Analysis
Educational Events
1.2 Stakeholder Research, Education, and Involvement Plan Tools and Techniques
charrette logistics
project set-up and
organizationstakeholder involvement
base information
feasibility studies
1.1 1.21.21.21.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
Stakeholders’ unique contributions
Elected officials
Neighbors Urban designers
Environmentalists
Business owners
Developer
Fire Chief
Transportation engineers
1.2 Stakeholder Research, Education and Involvement Plan
Tool: Educational Events
Purpose: To establish a description of a future state based on shared community values that acts as a guide for the project decision making process surveys
Process: One or a number of efforts including educational lectures, workshops, neighborhood walks, and preference surveys
Base Data Research and Gathering
SWOT Analysis
1.3 Base Data Research and AnalysisTools and Techniques
charrette logistics
project set-up and
organizationstakeholder involvement
base information
feasibility studies
1.1 1.2 1.31.31.31.3 1.4 1.5
Conceptual Sketching and Testing
Pre-charrette Project Brief
1.4 Feasibility Studies Tools and Techniques
charrette logistics
project set-up and
organizationstakeholder involvement
base information
feasibility studies
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.41.41.41.4 1.5
Studio Logistics and Set-up
Charrette Team Formation
Charrette Scheduling
Meeting Planning
Pre-charrette Logistics Summary
1.5 Charrette Logistics Tools and Techniques
charrette logistics
project set-up and
organizationstakeholder involvement
base information
feasibility studies
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.51.51.51.5
1.5 Charrette Logistics
Tool: Studio Logistics and Set-up
Purpose: To provide a functional space for charrette team work and public participation
Process: The charrette manager works with local staff to organize all charrette logistics to support a sustained, focused effort
Charrette studio
Charrette gallery
1.5 Charrette Logistics
Tool: Charrette Team Formation
Purpose: The assembly of a cross-disciplinary charrette team is informed by the skills required to complete the desired products, and to assure holistic, diverse feedback
Process: Based on the project complexity analysis and the charrette products list, the charrette manager appoints a diverse team of specialists
The Charrette
Charrette Roles and Process
Charrette Team• The multidisciplinary charrette
team works uninterrupted to produce the plan at the charrette studio
Drop by the studio(Unscheduled)
Urban Design Associates
Stakeholder meeting(Scheduled)
Dover Kohl
Public meetings(Scheduled)
LCA Town Planners
Charrette Roles and Process
The Stakeholder’s Role• Stakeholders provide vision, input and review at key
moments during scheduled and impromptu, meetings• They are not there all the time!
Charrette Phases
The Five Phases of the Charrette
Charrette Phases
Charrette Work Cycles
alternative concepts
public meeting review
open house review
public meetingconfirmation
public meeting vision
plandevelopment
preferred plan
Charrette Stakeholder Meetings
2.12.1
organization, education,
vision
alternative concepts
development
preferred plan
synthesisplan
development
production and
presentation
Start-up Team Meeting
Charrette Team Tour
Primary Stakeholder Meetings
Charrette Public Meeting #1
2.1 Organization, Education, Vision Tools and Techniques
2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5
2.1 Organization, Education, Vision Tools and Techniques
Process: Base data debrief and review of schedule, roles, and responsibilities
2.1 Organization, Education, Vision
Tool: Start-up Team Meeting
Purpose: To orient and introduce team members
2.1 Organization, Education, Vision
Tool: Charrette Team Tour
Purpose: To assess, document and measure the project site and context
Process: The team and stakeholders tour
the site, the surrounding area and local examples of smart development
2.1 Organization, Education, Vision Primary Stakeholder Meetings
2.1 Organization, Education, Vision
Tool: Primary Stakeholder Meetings
Purpose: Check in with important people before the first public meeting to assure that they will attend and to gather last minute advice
Process: The charrette manager sets up meetings based on the stakeholder analysis typically with elected officials, landowners and community leaders
2.1 Organization, Education, Vision Public Meeting #1
2.1 Organization, Education, Vision
Tool: • Charrette Public Meeting #1Purpose: • Explain the project and process • Introduce the charrette team • Provide the technical background• Teach basic good planning principles • Solicit a project vision from the public• Inspire a sense of “a historic moment”Process: • Brief presentation by team • Small table public workshop • Report back
Charrette Public Meeting #1: Hands-on Exercise
• Groups work on visioning exercises at tables
Concepts Team Meeting
Alternative Concepts Development
Initial Stakeholder Reviews
Alternative Concepts Refinement
Public Meeting #2 or Open House
2.2 Alternative Concepts Development Tools and Techniques
2.12.1
organization, education,
vision
alternative concepts
development
preferred plan
synthesisplan
development
production and
presentation
2.22.22.22.2 2.3 2.4 2.5
2.2 Alternative Concepts Development Tools and Techniques
2.2 Alternative Concepts Development
Process: Review of hands-on drawings and flip charts from public meeting
Tool: Concepts Team Meeting
Purpose: Distill the prominent themes for development into concepts
Charrette Public Meeting #1: Hands-on Exercise Results
2.2 Alternative Concepts Development
Tool: Alternative Concepts Development
Purpose: Create a large set of plan options that reflect all the input gathered to date
Process: The charrette team begins concept development based on team meeting direction
Alternative Concepts Development
2.2 Alternative ConceptsInitial Stakeholder Reviews
2.2 Alternative Concepts Development
Tool: Alternative Concepts Refinement
Purpose: Reduce the alternative concepts to a manageable number
Process: The charrette team identifies the strengths and weaknesses of each alternative with the aim of merging good ideas, eliminating bad ones, and developing new ideas
2.2 Alternative Concepts Public Meeting #2
2.2 Alternative Concepts Development
Tool: Public Meeting #2 or Open House
Purpose: Present the design alternatives and solicit participant feedback for incorporation into the next round of revisions
Process: Evening public meeting wherein the team presents the work to date and receives feedback
Plan Synthesis Team Meeting
Concept Synthesis Into Preferred Plan
Intermediate Stakeholder Reviews
Public Open House
2.3 Preferred Plan Synthesis Tools and Techniques
2.1
organization, education,
vision
alternative concepts
development
preferred plan
synthesisplan
development
production and
presentation
2.2 2.32.32.32.3 2.4 2.5
2.3 Preferred Plan Synthesis Tools and Techniques
2.3 Preferred Plan Synthesis
Tool: Concept Synthesis Into Preferred Plan
Purpose: Synthesize the alternative concepts into a preferred plan
Process: The charrette team arrives at a preferred plan by considering the project constraints as well as accumulated stakeholder input
2.3 Preferred Plan Synthesis
Sustainability
Transportation
Stakeholder Surveys
The Preferred Plan reflects multiple viewpoints
Objectives & Measures
2.3 Preferred PlanIntermediate Stakeholder Reviews
Plan Development Team Meeting
Plan Development and Refinement
Intermediate Stakeholder Reviews
2.4 Plan Development Tools and Techniques
2.1
organization, education,
vision
alternative concepts
development
preferred plan
synthesisplan
development
production and
presentation
2.2 2.3 2.42.42.42.4 2.5
2.4 Plan Development Tools and Techniques
2.4 Plan Development
Tool: Plan Development and Refinement
Purpose: To perform design studies on the preferred plan that address issues essential to its advancement
Process: Each design team member performs detailed design studies of the preferred plan
Plan Development Studies
Existing condition Proposed infill plan
Urban design rendering
Plan Development Studies
Plan Development Studies
Existing condition Proposed infill plan
2.4 Plan Development Intermediate Stakeholder Reviews
Production Team Meeting
Final Stakeholder Reviews
Production
Final Charrette Public Meeting
2.5 Production and Presentation Tools and Techniques
2.1
organization, education,
vision
alternative concepts
development
preferred plan
synthesisplan
development
production and
presentation
2.2 2.3 2.4 2.52.52.52.5
2.5 Production and PresentationTools and Techniques
2.5 Production and Presentation
Tool: Production
Purpose: To complete the assigned drawings and documents to a refined level capable of informing and inspiring the public
Process: The charrette manager carefully orchestrates the production to allow time for rehearsal and final review by the client
2.5 Production and Presentation Final Charrette Public Meeting
2.5 Production and Presentation
Process: • Charrette team presentation
– project summary, charrette log, evolution of plan, final plan
• Q&A and public input• Open house
Tool: Final Charrette Public Meeting
Purpose: Illustrate and explain the complete plan drawings and supportive data, inform and inspire all participants to support their plan
Example Charrette Products
Example Charrette Products
Example Charrette Products
Example Charrette Products
Sustainability – Local Food
Example Charrette Products
Sustainability – Rainwater Treatment
Example Charrette Products
Proposed open spaces
Existing open spaces
Example Charrette Products
Example Charrette Products
Example Charrette Products
Making it Happen:
• Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
• Comprehensive Plan
• Land Development Code
• Tax Increment Financing
• Code Enforcement
• Enterprise Zone
• Brownfields
• Future Rail Transportation
Phase Three: Plan Implementation
3.0 Plan Implementation Tools and Techniques
research, education, charrette preparation charrette
planimplementation
Project Status Communications
Product Refinement
Presentation and Product Finalization
1 2 3333
3.0 Plan Implementation Tools and Techniques
4 - 6 weeks max.
Charrette begins with input session, then design begins
Review & Revise
Final Review
project status communications
Project Management Team Debriefing
Public Communications
product refinement
presentation and product finalization
3.1 Information and Relationship Strategy Tools and Techniques
3.13.13.13.1 3.2 3.3
3.1 Project Status Communications
Tool: Public Communications
Purpose: Continue to inform the key stakeholders and public on the outcome of the charrette, the next steps, and how they can be involved
Process: Disseminate information though e-mails, websites, and publications such as The Town Paper
Document Review and Feedback
Document Revision
3.2 Product Refinement Tools and Techniques
project status communications
product refinement
presentation and product finalization
3.1 3.23.23.23.2 3.3
3.2 Product Refinement
Goal• Ensure that the Charrette
Plan is feasible
Tools• Document Review and
Feedback• Document Revision
Final Project Public Meeting
Project Closeout
3.3 Presentation and Product Finalization Tools and Techniques
project status communications
product refinement
presentation and product finalization
3.1 3.2 3.33.33.33.3
3.3 Presentation and Product Finalization
Goals• Solicit a final round of public input• Complete the full set of charrette drawings and
documents
Tools• Final Project Public Meeting• Project Closeout
3.3 Presentation and Product Finalization
Tool: Project Closeout
Purpose: Complete the charrette report and code documents required for a feasible plan
Process: The charrette manager directs the completion and distribution of documents
Principles of the NCI Charrette System
Charrette System Strategies
1. Work collaboratively 2. Design cross-functionally 3. Compress work sessions 4. Communicate in short feedback loops 5. Study the details and the whole 6. Produce a feasible plan 7. Use design to achieve a shared vision and create
holistic solutions 8. Conduct a multiple day charrette9. Hold the charrette on or near the site
Charrette System Strategies
1. Work collaboratively
• Collaboration is based on valuing each individual’s unique contribution
• Anyone who might build, use, sell, approve, or attempt to block the project is involved before the start of design and throughout the project
Risks of not working collaboratively
• Conventional processes involve people after the planning has started, resulting in a loss of trust from which it is very hard to recover
Charrette System Strategies
2. Design cross-functionally
• A multi-disciplinary team method results in decisions that are realistic avoiding costly rework
• Teams typically include planning, architecture, environmental, transportation, economics
Risks of segregating work according to specialty
• When a key specialty is left out of the planning and design process, there is risk of major rework or project failure
Charrette System Strategies
3. Compress work sessions
• Time compression facilitates creative problem-solving by accelerating decision-making and reducing unconstructive negotiation tactics
• Compressed work sessions promote “out-of-the-box” thinking
Apollo 13
Charrette System Strategies
4. Communicate in short feedback loops
• Regular stakeholder reviews quickly build trust in the process and foster true understanding and support of the product
Dover Kohl
alternatives refinement plan
public review
concepts
public review public review
Charrette Feedback Cycles
Participants work in a series of short feedback loops
Charrette System Strategies
5. Study the details and the whole
• Designs at varying scales inform each other and reduce the likelihood that a fatal flaw will be overlooked that could result in costly rework
Risks of not studying the details
• Conventional planning limited to “bubble” scale study may not deliver the desired community vision
Charrette System Strategies
6. Produce a feasible plan
• To create a feasible plan, every decision point must be fully informed, especially by the legal, financial, and engineering disciplines
• The focus on feasibility brings a level of seriousness and rigor to the process for everyone involved
Financial feasibility analysis
Charrette System Strategies
7. Use design to achieve a shared vision and create holistic solutions
• Design illustrates the complexity of the problem and can be used to resolve conflict by proposing previously unexplored solutions that represent win/win outcomes
Urban Advantage
Existing Condition Proposal - Computer Simulation
Charrette System Strategies
8. Conduct a multiple day charrette
• Most charrettes require more than four days, allowing for three feedback loops
Urban Design Associates
Risks of charrettes that are too short
• When feedback loops are too far apart, there is a risk that misunderstandings and concerns cannot be addressed in a timely fashion
• People can become set in their negative opinions and become obstructive
Charrette System Strategies
9. Hold the charrette on or near the site
• Working on site fosters the charrette team's understanding of local values and traditions, and provides the necessary easy access to stakeholders and information
LCA Town Planning and Architecture
Risks of not working on site
• High stakes projects require frequent discussions with stakeholders which can be made difficult if the charrette is not on or near the site.
Charrette System Strategies
1. Work collaboratively 2. Design cross-functionally 3. Compress work sessions 4. Communicate in short feedback loops 5. Study the details and the whole 6. Produce a feasible plan 7. Use design to achieve a shared vision and create
holistic solutions 8. Conduct multiple day charrette9. Hold the charrette on or near the site
Available at NCI Website
Are you ready for a charrette?
Key Factors in Charrette Readiness
• Will the key stakeholders participate in a charrette fully and in good faith?
• Are there political and/or relationship issues that must be solved before a charrette can begin?
• Where does a charrette fit into a broader process?– It is important to be clear about the goals and
purpose of the charrette in relation to the overall project.
CurrentSituation
Implementation
ImplementationCharretteCharrette
CharretteCharrette
Consensus
Building
Consensus
Building
Consensus
Building
Consensus
Building
CBI Assessment:
•Initiate•Gather•Analyze
•Design•Share
Top Reasons Projects Fail
1. Unclear project mission• The project sponsor does not have, and/or does
not communicate, a clear project mission, guiding principles and desired outcomes. – Project team dysfunction– Stakeholders/community members undermine
the project
Top Reasons Projects Fail
2. Insufficient community organizing and outreach• Without the resources for conducting effective
outreach and relationship building, it is difficult to achieve a cross-section of stakeholder participation
3. Poor Data• Design is based on incomplete or incorrect data• Data arrives late resulting in design changes
Top Reasons Projects Fail
4. Time• Project takes years to complete• New players lack project understanding often
requiring project restart• Project loses momentum• Meeting fatigue
Focus: Four elements in preparation for successful charrettes.
• Project assessment and team organization. – “Project start-up intensive.”
• Designing the process: making meetings work. • Stakeholder analysis.
– Assessment of current issues and conflicts for “charrette readiness.”
• Stakeholder education.– Outreach and communication strategies based on stakeholder
analysis.
Research, Education, Charrette Preparation
research, education, charrette preparation charrette
planimplementation
Project Assessment and Organization
Stakeholder Research, Education, Involvement
Base Data Research and Analysis
Project Feasibility Studies and Research
Charrette Logistics
1111 2 3
Preventing project failure.
Collaborative project start-up:• Project partners share values and understand and
own the project process • Project process map is informed by all relevant
viewpoints• It is best to do this before setting the schedule
and budget
Project start-up “intensive.”
Key factors for success• Leadership supports the start-up process• Decision makers attend along with key staff• No primary partner is left out
– All key partners– Includes decision makers– Multi-disciplinary
Project start-up “intensive.”
Process• Establish understanding of roles• Create project purpose elements• Co-author guiding principles, objectives and
measures• Agree on involvement plan
– Conduct stakeholder analysis• Agree on project process
– Co-author project roadmap
Guiding Principles
• Guiding principles keep the project team and charrette participants on task, are used to resolve conflicts of opinion and help avoid costly rework and unnecessary effort that stems from following tangents to the core purpose of the project
Objectives & Measures Draft
Objective Measure
Improve pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular safety, especially in relation to pedestrian/vehicle interactions
Traffic speeds Pedestrian crossing distances
Treat storm water on site Acreage of natural filtering area
Provide for affordable housing Housing prices as percent of median income
Economic feasibility Project proforma, ROI (return on investment)
Provide easy, safe access to the regional trail system
Number of connections to trailDistance to trail from housing and commercial
Holistic Planning Process Checklist
Education and Research
The stakeholder involvement effort is properly funded
Project partners commit to early and frequent
stakeholder involvement
Stakeholder involvement plan is aimed at broad
demographic representation
Advisory committee members commit to being informed
project champions
Base data research is cross-functional, collaborative and
strategic
Designing the process(making meetings work)
NCI Collaborative Design System
Charrette Stakeholder Meetings
Charrette Ready Plan Schedule
Top Reasons Public Meetings Fail
• Poor attendance• Imbalanced community representation• Decision makers are not in attendance • Participants lack knowledge to make informed
decisions • Poor meeting facilitation
Meeting Facilitation: Preventions
• Preventions = things to do to keep the meeting on track
• Examples:– Meeting planning– Meeting “start-ups”– Check agreement
throughout– Next steps– Meeting evaluation
(+/∆)
Meeting Purpose and Outcomes.
Why meet?• Be clear on the purpose of the meeting before
you start planning
• Communicate the meeting purpose in meeting invitations and up front at the beginning of every meeting
Facilitator Goals
• Protect the people and the process• Create an atmosphere of trust and respect• Establish a safe environment for everyone to
participate – no one person or group dominates
• Help people feel that it was worth their time to participate because– they had a chance to provide meaningful input– their input has potential to make an impact– the meeting was well-run– and, the FOOD was great
What type of meeting do you need?
Type of Decision Stakeholder Characteristics Phase of the Project
It depends!
Framework of Engagement
One-way speech
presentation
newsletter
marketing
Two-way conversation
open house
Q&A
survey
focus group
Multi-way collaborative
dialogue
deliberative dialogue
activity workshops
charrettes
Type of Decision
Routine Controversial
Technical Decision
Values-Based Decision
Known, accepted values
Values in conflict
Decision Phase / Implementation Issues
Decision already made
Decision needs to be made
Single entity can implement
Implementation requires multi-party collaboration
Implementation Stage
Goal Setting, Idea Generation, Selection of Alternatives
People agree sponsor has right
to act
Legitimacy of sponsor action is in question
Sponsor has legal authority to make
decision
Sponsor needs others to take legal action
Decision-making Method(s)
• Top down: Leader decides and announces.• Consultative: Leader solicits input and decides.• Consensus. “It may not be my top choice, but I am
willing to support and help implement the solution.”• Always have a “fall-back” option.
Stakeholder Identification and Analysis
Stakeholders’ unique contributions
Elected officials
Neighbors Urban designers
Environmentalists
Business owners
Developer
Fire Chief
Transportation engineers
Stakeholder Analysis
• The Stakeholder Analysis lists the relevant viewpoints to be represented, the people, their affiliation, what a “win” is for each, and the level of engagement required for holistic, diverse feedback. This is the basis of the public involvement process.
Who are stakeholders?• Decision makers• People who may supply valuable information• People who will be affected by the outcome• People who have power to promote the project• People who have power to block the project
Stakeholder Levels of Involvement
Primary Stakeholders
SecondaryStakeholders
GeneralStakeholders
All are involved at key decision points
mor
e in
volved
less
invo
lved
Stakeholder Levels of Involvement
Stakeholder Level
Example Positions Suggested Involvement
Primary Elected and appointed officials (city council, planning commissioners, steering committee members), agency staff (departments of transportation, EPA, transit authorities), site property owners
Interviews before the charrette, meetings during the charrette, should attend all public events, may drop into the studio anytime
Secondary Non-governmental organizations (historic and art groups, churches, synagogues), individuals with businesses or residences directly affected
Interviews before the charrette, possible meetings during the charrette, should attend all public events, may
General Community members Should attend all public events, may drop into the studio anytime
Source: The Charrette Handbook p.38
Sample Stakeholder AnalysisViewpoint Person /
AffiliationIssues Win Level Outreac
h Strategy
Charrette Participation
Elected Official
Lucinda Wallis, Capital County
25 years of controversy, with nothing to show. Wallis is the project “champion.”
A plan and codes agreed upon by the developer, and the neighborhood. A bulletproof public process. A national exemplar project.
Primary Email, phone
Daily Team Meetings
Elected Official
Percival Moccasin, Capital County
Concerned about project costs. Interested in a non-controversial outcome.
A project that can be approved and supported by neighbors.
Primary Email, phone
Public Meetings
Neighborhood Activists
Carrie Snodgras, Kris Tal, Terry Jensen, Medford District Improvement Association
Deep distrust of County Supervisors and staff. Traffic, visual impacts, property values, safety.
Minimal traffic impacts, maximum housing, low buildings across from neighborhood, pedestrian access, local retail only, no increase in transit parking. The County must keep its promise and build the regional trail.
Secondary
Emails, letters
Separate Meeting
Neighboring Commercial Owners
Katrina Moskawitz, Hollywood Boosters
Workers have limited local services.
Compatible uses with existing business, amenities for office workers, traffic management.
Secondary
Emails, letters
Separate Meeting
Developer Tom Bates, Dick Bernard, Big Sky Development
Last development proposal failed.
Economic and market feasible plan.
Primary Email, phone
Daily Team Meetingsand Reviews
Stakeholder Characteristics
Known, easy to identify
Unknown, hard to identify
Small number Large number
Homogenous Diverse
Equal power and resources
Unbalanced power and resources
Important stakeholders have
power
Important stakeholders outside power structure
Outreach
Engagement and Information Exchange
Secondary Stakeholder Analysis
Educational Events
1.2 Stakeholder Research, Education, and Involvement Plan Tools and Techniques
charrette logistics
project set-up and
organizationstakeholder involvement
1.1 1.21.21.21.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
base data research
and analysis
feasibility studies and
research
Keys to Successful Public Participation
• Commit to collaboration and relationship building• Commit sufficient resources• Use people with local on-the-ground knowledge• Dig deep into the community• Engage the community before starting design• Work at three levels
– Person to person– Group meetings– Community-wide meetings
Advisory Committees as Champions
• Represent a cross-section of the community• All relevant viewpoints represented• Geographical and demographic representation• Advisory only• Fully educated on the project issues• Project champions committed to outreach and
education
Stakeholder Outreach and Engagement Methods
Outreach:• Phone calls• Faxes, e-mails• Web notices• One-on-one meetings• Confidential Interviews• Mailings• Signs• Newsletter announcements
Engagement:• Neighborhood meetings• Meetings at churches and
local organizations• “Living room coffees”
1.2 Stakeholder Research, Education and Involvement Plan
Tool: Educational Events
Purpose: To establish shared vision or base of understanding among key stakeholders prior to the charrette
Process: One or a number of efforts including educational lectures, workshops, neighborhood walks, and preference surveys
Educational Events
Educational Events• Lectures, presentations and
workshops by experts covering key subjects, e.g. sustainable design, traffic calming, affordable housing
Educational Events
Stakeholder Tours• Project site tour • Examples of sustainable development tools in
practice
City of Portland, Oregon Bureau of Planning
Educational Events
Neighborhood Walks• Groups of no more than eight • Mapped route• Group leader• Note taker• Renderer
Low-tech Outreach and Engagement Methods
High-tech Tools for Outreach and Engagement
Thin vs. Thick Communication
Social Media and Outreach
Opportunities
• Allows organizations to broadcast real-time updates on events, programs, meetings
• Supports rapid dissemination of information; good for outreach
• Enables two-way dialogue between organizers & stakeholders, and between community members
• Can be cost-effective and widely accessible
Challenges
• Better for dissemination of information, not brainstorming or discussion
• Potential problems with digital divide
• Not a replacement for face-to-face communication
• Must be carefully managed as part of a holistic communications strategy
PdxPlan.com
• 384,527 hits in the last 12 months
• Prominent links to various social media networks
Facebook.com/pdxplan
Currently 1,912 “likes”
Portland Plan Phase One Campaign Results
• 8,000+ completed surveys• 1,000 workshop attendees • Dozens of community group meetings • New participants: 31 percent of workshop
attendees reported they were not “public participation regulars”
• Social Media: 1,363 FB fans and 690 of Twitter followers
• PdxPlan.com: 134,000 hits over past 12 months with spikes in November (28,000) and December (40,000)
City of Ashland: Open City Hall
• Open City Hall has generated a number of useful ideas from the public, and has shifted the overall tone of the discussion
Open Town Hall by Peak Democracy
www.peakdemocracy.com/
City of El Paso: MindMixer
• The planning team talked to more than 1,200 participants
• More than 35,000 people followed the project on its website
City of El Paso: MindMixer
• Participants viewed and critiqued the charrette team’s plans, contributed ideas, and voted on ideas they liked
• Real names and addresses held participants accountable
• Local input led to greater context-sensitivity on the part of the planners
MindMixer
www.mindmixer.com
OMI Neighborhood, City and County of San Francisco: Crowdbrite Case Study
Crowdbrite
www.crowdbrite.com
Distance Participation
Challenges• Potential problems
with digital divide• Not a good standalone
solution• Requires some degree
of education about local issues for valuable contribution
Opportunities• Broader opportunities for
citizen engagement• Provides forum for
disenfranchised stakeholders
• May reach audiences who don’t typically participate- single parents, the elderly, etc.
• Lack of anonymity can discourage negative, heated, and one-sided discussion
Key characteristics of the charrette process..
• Collaborative and dynamic work process, integrating multiple points of view in a defined and compressed time frame.
• Short-feedback loops (short in time and space).
• Cross-disciplinary design (from the big picture to the details).
• Feasible, action-oriented outcome.
Making it work for you.
• The collaborators need to understand (and trust) the framework of collaboration.
• This is the work of long-term education, building social relationships and an enduring culture of responsible participation.
• Key starting points: participants prepared to own the process, experts prepared to support it, leaders prepared to help lead it.
• There are tools and techniques to support this work.
Hands-on Workshop
Exercise
Meeting Start-ups
• Welcome by Official
(the following should be posted hard copy in the front of the room)
• Meeting Purpose and Desired Outcomes• Agenda• Roles• Ground Rules• Parking Lot
Ground Rules
Ground Rules:
• Present a set of ground rules as a means to keep the meeting on track and to assure that everyone has a chance to participate.
• Ask if anyone has additional ground rules.
• Ask for permission to be the “traffic cop/ground rule enforcer.”
Ground Rules
Example Ground Rules:• Listen actively and respectfully• Be respectful and constructive• No one dominates• Be concise and stay on topic• Avoid cross-talking• No personal attacks• Silence your cell phones • Talk with your pen (for workshops)
The Parking Lot / Commons / Bike Rack
• Use a flip chart
• “Park” off-topic ideas
• Resolve or decide how to defer before end of meeting
Charrette Public Meeting #1: “Food for thought” lecture
• Walkable streets• Local food• Stormwater treatment• Mix of uses• Choices of housing• Transportation options• Safe and convenient
neighborhood parks and open space
• History of sustainable performance in the region
Sustainable Smart Growth Principles:
Charrette Public Meeting #1: Hands-on Exercise
• Groups work on visioning exercises at tables
Charrette Public Meeting #1: Hands-on Exercise
• Participants, not staff, from each table report back to the group
Charrette Public Meeting #1: Report Backs
Dover Kohl
Charrette Public Meeting #1: Hands-on Exercise
• Visit www.charretteinstitute.org for more information
David Brain, Ph.d.National Charrette InstituteNew College of FloridaCollaborative Community Design, LLC
Email: [email protected]@ncf.edu