During a webinar presented by the Legacy Fund for the Environment, we had the honor of hosting a discussion with Juliette Patterson, founding partner of the agency Catalyse Urbaine. With over 20 years of experience in architectural and landscape architecture projects, she combines environmental sensitivity with public well-being.
A graduate of McGill University and Harvard University, Juliette Patterson is a prominent figure in the field. She has led numerous citizen workshops for municipalities and citizen groups, demonstrating her commitment to public participation and improving our urban environment. This article revisits the key themes and ideas shared during the webinar, highlighting the main topics covered by Juliette Patterson.
Let’s clarify what the term “design charrette” means. It is an intensive and creative ideation exercise, carried out within a limited timeframe. This democratic tool allows citizens to express their vision and participate in the future development of a public space or area.
Design charrettes influence decision-making by putting citizens’ ideas on paper. These drawings and proposals then inform decision-makers and contribute to collaborative planning.
The term “charrette” originated at the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris in the 19th century, where architecture students worked all night to finalize their projects before submitting them.
Juliette then explored how this tool can influence decisions about public spaces, with concrete examples of Montreal projects. The discussion concluded with the role of citizens in influencing decision-makers through design charrettes.
There was a charrette that passed through the streets where the Fine Arts students were. Early in the morning, they would throw the architectural plans into the cart from their windows, which would then be sent to the École des Beaux-Arts to ensure they didn’t miss the deadline. The concept of a charrette therefore involves intensive work carried out in a short period of time to stimulate creativity, with several people contributing.
The first example is an ideation charrette, also called a design charrette, which concerned the urban promenades of Saint-Laurent. This event, organized by the borough ten years ago, aimed to bring together interested citizens and professionals to develop interventions in the public domain, particularly in Vieux Saint-Laurent. The intention was to improve the usability of green spaces.
At the Côte-Vertu metro station, the environment was not very welcoming: little greenery, lots of asphalt, and a risky crossing between buses and cars. The idea was to think about solutions to make Old Saint-Laurent more welcoming, with more biodiversity and active travel.
This charrette lasted two days. On the first day, participants toured the site. They developed analytical tools: a list of criteria to assess the usability of public spaces. For example: are there enough places to sit? Is it protected from the elements? Is the area safe at night? Is there vegetation? Participants rated the usability of public spaces on a scale of 1 to 10 to guide their work on the second day.
The second day was devoted to the design charrette. In teams, participants chose a specific location, such as Décarie Boulevard here, and brainstormed ways to improve biodiversity and usability. The Catalyse Urbaine team also presented them with examples of developments carried out in other cities to fuel their thinking.
Most of the day was devoted to teamwork. At the end of the day, each team presented their proposals, and elected officials were present. The borough mayor also gave closing remarks.
As is often the case in this type of charrette, there were many architecture and urban design students, as well as other citizens involved in improving their environment.
This charrette brought together engaged citizens of all ages. There were younger participants as well as people from diverse backgrounds who worked in teams. To structure their ideas, they first used Post-it notes before moving on to more detailed plans. They provided them with special paper, used by architects, allowing them to draw directly on the plans and imagine what the project might look like.
No architectural training was required to participate. The goal was to express a collective vision for public spaces and imagine possible improvements.
This collaborative work took place during the second day of the charrette. After this design phase, the teams presented their proposals to several representatives from the urban planning department and elected officials from the borough. They shared their ideas on improving user-friendliness and how these spaces could better meet citizens’ needs.
Once the charrette was completed, the architects and landscape architects from Catalyse Urbaine gathered the drawings and ideas from the five participating teams, synthesizing these proposals into a comprehensive plan that incorporated all the suggestions. For example, one team worked on Décarie Street and envisioned several improvements such as intersections, an outdoor stage in a park, business locator signs, street markings, and many other improvements. All these ideas were compiled into a summary report. This document presents the findings and conclusions of the charrette, highlighting citizens’ expectations for Old Saint-Laurent. The goal was to improve the usability of public spaces, promote biodiversity, and showcase the neighborhood’s points of interest.
Following the charrette, the borough awarded a contract to architects to translate these proposals into a master plan. The latter was officially adopted, illustrating the transition from a simple citizen reflection to a true urban planning project. For a charrette to have a real impact, rigorous monitoring must be ensured to ensure these ideas remain alive and are realized over time.
A little over 10 years ago, a design charrette was organized to reflect on the future of the Meadowbrook golf course. This event was led by the Friends of Meadowbrook group. Catalyse Urbaine was the organizer. Unlike the first charrette, this one took place over a single day and aimed to formulate development proposals for this vast green space.
The organizing team and the many participants worked in small groups, each seated around a table with printed plans of the site. Each team focused on a specific theme:
Finally, all participants addressed the question of the connection of this green space with the surrounding neighborhoods, as several cities and boroughs border this large site.
At the end of the day, each team presented their ideas to a panel of experts and city councilors from the three neighboring cities. As in the first charrette, these presentations allowed elected officials and urban planners to better understand the citizens’ aspirations.
After the event, Les Amis de Meadowbrook approached Catalyse Urbaine to transform these community ideas into a master plan to guide the future development of the site. This document proposes a 25-year vision focused on the gradual restoration of biodiversity without requiring immediate and massive reforestation.
Urbaine Catalyse developed a multi-stage intervention plan:
The ultimate goal was to create a sustainable environment where nature could regain its place while meeting the expectations of citizens.
To date, the City of Montreal has not yet adopted the master plan, and the site remains a golf course. However, the initial plan to convert the land into a residential development, which had triggered this citizen mobilization, has been abandoned—at least for the time being. Although the site has not yet been transformed into a park, it remains a protected green space where no construction has taken place.
This clearly illustrates the challenges of citizen participation in urban planning: a charrette allows for the expression of strong ideas and inspires change, but their implementation often depends on the political and administrative decisions that follow.
Design charrettes are effective tools for encouraging citizen participation because they are short, dynamic, and engaging. They allow citizens to express their views on the planning of a public space and propose concrete ideas. However, their ability to influence decision-makers remains limited. A charrette alone is not enough to guide planning policies: it must be complemented by other tools and be part of a broader process involving decision-making and regulatory authorities.
Technology offers several ways to make participation more inclusive. Not everyone can attend a charrette in person, whether due to a lack of time or interest in this type of event. To include a larger number of citizens, various digital tools can be used:
An image has considerable power in the decision-making process. Studies show that the brain does not always distinguish between imagination and reality: when a vision of a project is clearly represented visually, it becomes more tangible and credible in the eyes of citizens and decision-makers.
As part of a charrette, creating plans, sketches, or visual renderings helps to:
Strengthen mobilization by giving the community a clear objective. Thus, a strong image can help keep a project alive until it is taken on by the municipality and secures funding.
A well-organized charrette often relies on the expertise of professionals who have already worked on this type of process. Furthermore, the success of a citizen project also depends on the ability to mobilize the right people.
Working with the municipality can be an asset, as it has contact lists of key stakeholders (community leaders, local groups, and involved businesses).
If the initiative is independent, it is still possible to identify influential people in the neighborhood, those who are leading projects and who can help bring citizens together around a common vision. By combining participatory approaches, technological tools, and visual representations, a design charrette can truly have an impact and influence the future of an urban space.
It is definitely a good idea to invite elected officials from different levels of government. It’s important to have a designer on each team, someone who can take ideas and bring them to life visually. In conclusion, the total cost of the project was approximately $12,000, including the production of the plan, the organization of the charrette, and related expenses such as transportation and meals. A biodiversity study represents a similar investment, ranging from $10,000 to $15,000, and remains a key element in justifying the preservation of a site.
Don’t miss anything!