Intersecting perspectives: A participatory street review framework for urban inclusivity

Abstract

Urban demographic changes, evolving multiculturalism, and heightened tourism flows have underscored the importance of designing public streets that serve heterogeneous populations. Despite municipal policies advocating equity and universal access, many streetscapes still fall short of accommodating the wide-ranging practical and cultural differences that exist among diverse user groups. This paper introduces and applies a participatory methodology—“Street Review”—designed to capture how individuals from varying social positions evaluate an array of streets within a multicultural metropolis. Grounded in the context of Montréal, known for its overlapping layers of historic and modern neighborhoods, multilingual communities, and continual inflows of short-term visitors, this framework draws upon qualitative interviews, focus groups, and a systematic rating of street images by 12 participants. The analyses focus on perceived inclusivity, accessibility, aesthetics, and practicality for both long-term residents (post-occupancy) and newcomers or suburban visitors (pre-occupancy). Findings from examining 20 selected streets (represented through 60 vantage points) indicate that most streetscapes offer moderate levels of user-friendliness, with only a handful of locations scoring especially low on supporting vulnerable populations or signaling cultural welcome. A smaller subset approached higher performance in certain areas but rarely satisfied all participant groups. In situating these results within global debates around inclusive urban design, public space, and the interplay of tourism with social equity, we illustrate how group-based deliberations can generate constructive insights and spotlight deeper conflicts rooted in identity, memory, and everyday mobility. These reflections inform planners and policymakers in striving for streets that address the convergence of diverse user experiences and emerging global challenges in urban policy.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.