Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Eight | Civic Engagement and Positive Promotion of Democracy

 Gaps in park master planning frameworks

-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part One | Levels of Service"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Two | Utilizing Academic Research as Guidance"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Three | Planning for Climate Change/Environment"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Four | Planning for Seasonality and Activation"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Five | Planning for Public Art as an element of park facilities"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning, Part Six | Art(s) in the Park(s) as a comprehensive program "
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Seven | Park Architectural (and Landscape Design) History" 
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Eight | Civic Engagement"
-- "Gaps in Parks Master Planning: Part Nine | Second stage planning for parks using the cultural landscape framework" 

Civic engagement.  Public facing civic assets--libraries, parks, schools, sustainable mobility programs like walking, biking, and transit, Safe Routes to School, public markets, farmers markets, etc.--should seize the opportunity to strengthen civil society through how they organize and deliver services and opportunities for participation.

-- "Community cleanups and other activities as community building and civic engagement activities" (2011)
-- "Outdoor library book sale as an opportunity for "social bridging"/triangulation"
-- "Here are 10 new year resolutions for saving American democracy," Guardian
-- "2024 resolution: Save democracy," Washington Post

I argue that urban planning is upside down in that elementary schools are the basic building blocks of stable neighborhoods, yet for the most part this is ignored by planning systems.

Schools can bring neighborhoods together (although they need technical assistance and support to be able to do so.)

-- "National Community Planning Month: Schools as neighborhood anchors"  (2022)
-- "School closure and consolidation planning needs to focus on integration planning at the outset as a separate process" (2023)

Civic Agriculture and community food systems. A few years ago when I was doing research on public markets I came across the book Civic Agriculture: Reconnecting Farm, Food and Community, which posits a more locally controlled and democratically involved regional food system, as opposed to the one we have, dominated by huge corporations.  

That's the basis of the farmers market and public market movement, although more recently it's morphed into the concept of local-regional food hubs to support small business.  It's an interesting book.

Projects like the Tomato Independence Project in Boise ("Foodies and Farmers Wage War Against Tasteless Tomatoes," Boise Weekly, Building a Better Tomato," Edible Idaho) planting fruit trees ("How Angelenos are battling food insecurity by using hyperlocal apps to share their bounty," Los Angeles Times) and the UK's Real Bread Campaign focus on shifting people from manufactured mass production bread to artisan bread, even the creation of micro-bakeries and "community supported bakeries" ("Real Bread Campaign gears up for 10th annual Sourdough September," Bakery&Snacks). 

In any case, people like to volunteer, hold classes, do demonstrations, etc., at farmers and public markets.

These kinds of ideas can be extended to other public facing programs.

Civic Environmentalism (paper)

is a type of social action where citizens come together to solve environmental problems as a means to improve their communities. The goal is to ensure a sustainable community for future generations through participation in democratic processes. 

Ecological place 

is a concept related to civic environmentalism. It is the idea that people are attached to their place or immediate habitat, which is a portion of the greater environment. The feelings of ownership attached to their place are what bring community members together and motivates them to become democratically involved to make their place a sustainable community.

Los Angeles has citizen oversight committees for every park facility (Park Advisory Boards, "Park Advisory Boards in Los Angeles," 2023).  Most parks don't.  

-- Park Advisory Board: New Member Handbook, Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks

Similarly, parks with Friends groups--I participate in Friends of Fairmont Park because I think the parks in the area of Sugar House should be planned as a network--have the opportunity for more involvement and input compared to the average park. 

Parks agencies can engage citizens as programming providers, community experts, and volunteers, by creating parks and recreation committees and systems for developing and offering program for each facility. 

William H. Whyte and "triangulation."  Whyte, who had been editor of Fortune Magazine, became interested in cities and public space, and pioneered methods of urban observation, including how people used public space.  He wrote a particularly important  book on cities and activation, City: Rediscovering the Center.

One of his concepts is what he called "triangulation," where people who didn't know each other talk to each other.  Triangulation is the process: 

in which a stimulus provides a social bond between people. Strangers are more likely to talk to one another in the presence of such a stimulus. The stimulus might be musicians, or street entertainers, or an outdoor sculpture. Museum professionals will note the relation of these stimuli to landmark exhibits which have a similar effect.

Anne Lusk and the social bridge. In her dissertation on greenways, she calls this same phenomenon a social bridge. 

I joke that in neighborhoods, kids--walking them around the block, in strollers, on playgrounds, etc., and dogs--are the primary social bridges. 

The opportunity for triangulation is fostered by designing flexible spaces that provide for these kinds of opportunities.

Lusk wrote about how to design greenways to promote social interaction: 

Except for a minimal number of elements, the environment does not facilitate interaction between strangers. While someone could hold open a door and a person passing through could say thank you, necessary ADA regulations are making many doors automatic. 

If social capital is to be increased and interaction between people who know one another and people who do not know one another improved, environments that might foster positive interaction should be built. At the destinations, social bridge elements could be incorporated in the built environment. These social bridge elements include four types:  

1) Assist, 2) Connect, 3) Observe, and 4) In Absentia. 

An assist social bridge is the built element that allows one person to assist another person. A connect social bridge is a form of William Whyte's triangulation where a third element is watched, such as people kayaking, and strangers talk as friends. An observe social bridge is the positive feeling when a kindness is witnessed and that kindness is facilitated by the element in the built environment. An in absentia social bridge could be experienced in the perception of the person who created or maintained the space for the enjoyment of the recipient. 

Designing spaces to foster interaction.  There's an article, "‘Sticky’ places are urban planning lifelines Shared spaces build community and are key to alleviating America’s loneliness epidemic. Here’s how to create them," in the Boston Globe about how to design park spaces to foster interaction and connection.  From the article:

These spaces make people feel welcome, represented, and connected to their neighborhoods, and this, in turn, builds social connections between visitors. Though the Lincoln Park volleyball group formed organically, it was no accident. 

The park was designed to spur the interactions that allowed the spontaneous group to grow. In 2018, the City of Somerville renovated the park, turning it from baseball fields into a lively space with a skate park, parkour area, basketball court, multiple playgrounds, hammock poles, a community garden, and much more. 

Also see "Third place issues" (2024) and "Strangers are good for us," an op-ed by David Sax in the New York Times.  Plus an interesting article about picnic tables versus benches as staging points for interaction ("The power of the picnic table (bench)," Guardian).  The picnic table promotes interaction while benches tend to promote isolation within more active spaces.

Create civic engagement plans for parks at the macro and micro scales for the parks system as a whole, as a network and mechanisms for individual parks and facilities like Park Advisory Boards, friends groups, etc.

-- Barriers and Strategies to Connecting Urban Audiences to Wildlife and Nature: Results from a Multi-Method Research Project, NC State Extension 

Create a citizen capacity building infrastructure on parks, open space, and recreation practice. 

I believe in conferences can be great training events.  Park Pride, the friends group in Atlanta, and the Bay Area Open Space Council have annual conferences.  The latter conference includes advocacy activities, while Park Pride focuses on technical training.

Park People of Canada does local events and a national conference.  But a series of programs/training events doesn't have to rise to the level of a conference.  In NYC the CityParks Foundation runs Partnership Academy as a training resource.  Tree-focused groups like DC's Casey Trees group provide trainings for citizen foresters.  Seattle's Department of Neighborhoods supports neighborhood-initiated projects and other programs.

In Calgary, neighborhood associations run the recreation centers and represent their neighborhoods on a variety of issues.  The Federation of Calgary Communities provides technical assistance to these groups ("Community association planning committees a hidden gem," Calgary Herald).

It goes without saying that when there are friends groups, to some extent conservancies, etc., there are more opportunities for citizens to weigh in on parks issues. 

But often planning engagements are constrained in terms of knowledge development and the ability to truly participate.  I argue that the Project for Public Spaces "How to Turn a Place Around" workshop (outlined better in the first edition, less so in the second edition) is a great model for citizens addressing issues in their communities, including underperforming parks.

But there is also A Citizen’s Guide to Improving Your Park, by Building Memphis and the national organization Trust for Public Land is active in many communities, helping citizens to improve their local parks.

Volunteerism.  There are many ways to volunteer, including picking up litter, planting trees, monitoring dog parks, teaching sports, organizing a picnic, etc.  (The National Park Service has a model program for volunteers and their printed materials are good resources for other programs.) 

In the past, I took the child next door to a volunteer event during National Parks Week, and I became involved in Friends of Fairmont Park here in Salt Lake, because of a tree planting and trash pick up event on Earth Day two years ago.

We can categorize volunteer programs in terms of how activities are directed--internally or externally focused programs.  

For example, trail and parks ambassadors deal more directly with park patrons, so it is externally focused, while some people are content to volunteer on plant maintenance, and not deal with the public very much.  The Regional Parks Ambassador Program in Greater Minneapolis-St. Paul is focused on reaching traditionally underserved segments of the population.  

Citizen science programs ("How volunteer butterfly catchers help climate-change research in WA parks," Seattle Times) are another way people can participate.  There are many types, including measuring water and air quality, counting various types of fauna sightings, etc.

Veteran Cascades Butterfly Project volunteers 

Ellen Steel and Rich Booman admire a fritillary butterfly being released after capture and identification. Booman is in charge of recording species information on the survey data sheet. (Photo: Karen Povey / National Park Service.)

Red Butte Garden in Salt Lake City has a very active volunteer program where people help to maintain the space.

Citizen-delivered programming.  More places are "allowing" citizens to deliver recreation programming.  Baltimore County has set up their recreation program where programming is only provided by citizens.  They started this as a budget measure in the 1970s (now Harford County, Maryland does something similar too). 

Instead of by staff, programming is provided by interested citizens, organized and funded by volunteer Recreation and Parks Councils. While there are problems with this approach: 

(1) the County Parks Department doesn’t provide programming planning and guidance

(2) the Parks Department doesn’t provide capacity building training to the groups

(3) citizen interest tends to focus on team sports

(4) although nothing prevents citizens from offering programming outside of team sports

(5) wealthier communities tend to raise more money than poorer communities

(6) in the case of such significant financial disparities, from an equity standpoint, the County should step in with supplemental funds for the lower income areas; 

there is no question that citizens are engaged users and committed to and involved with the facilities.  

Buena Park kindergarten teacher Leslee Milch reads “The Pigeon has to go to School!” to children as part of her summer “Read to Me” program at George Bellis Park in Buena Park on Wednesday, July 12, 2023. Milch has been reading to the children during the summer for more than 25 years. (Photo by Leonard Ortiz, Orange County Register/SCNG)

Interaction systems.  Depending on the park, like the concept of "sticky spaces," set up systems to make it easier for people to connect to act, such as running together, walking your dogs together, playdates at the playground, programming at the playground like reading ("For 25 years, a Buena Park teacher has brought summer reading to the park," Orange County Register), being able to use creative street furniture, etc.

Create a networked structure for "friends of the parks" organizations.

-- Park Friends Group Guidebook, Park People of Canada

I don't understand why communities require separate friends organizations for every park, recreation center (and library). Why aren't they organized as a network, with administrative functions providing legal services, accounting, and technical support, with separate sub-groups for each facility.

The administrative team would negotiate sponsorships, provide training, etc., while the affinity groups would focus on programming and fundraising "for their park," without having to deal with "the boring" but important stuff like dealing with the IRS.

Conclusion. The Friends of the Parks organization in Chicago calls its annual conference, "Parks as Democracy?" focusing on topics each year that illustrate the theme.

From The Hill article, "Why public spaces are our best hope for community and democracy":

The shrinking number of opportunities to interact with people who look and think differently from us is undermining our ability to empathize and trust one another, and these trends are a threat to the future of democracy. While increasing trust, cooperation and communication across differences requires fixes at every level of society, we believe civic infrastructure is a key piece of the puzzle. 

Civic infrastructure — high-quality parks, libraries, community centers, and trails where everyone is welcome — provides the potential for people to connect across divisions of race, income and beliefs. These are places of gathering, belonging to everyone. For the most part, we haven’t invested in them for decades. 

However, things are changing. At the national level, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences’ Our Common Purpose Report called for building a Trust for Civic Infrastructure. Local communities across the country are also beginning to bring diverse people into public space in ways that will help build a vibrant, diverse democracy for generations to come.

It's a different way of working, but parks systems should consider expanding the opportunities to engage citizens in multiple ways, as a way of strengthening parks and developing stronger support for park funding and expansion (although generally, but not always, park funding referenda tend to pass without incident), but also encouraging civic engagement more broadly and as a way to strengthen democracy in a country where it appears to be weakening ("Do beautiful parks strengthen democracy?").

It can be tough to balance citizen self-interest and community interest.  OTOH, some citizens aren't so much interested in parks issues more generally, but just their own park, and specifically their own interest.  

In an old publication I can't find anymore, parks planner David Barth wrote about getting a broad response about park uses because otherwise very specific types of athletic fields can end up being the dominant preference.  

In the photo, someone wants to preserve a flexible field used for frisbee golf, while Salt Lake County proposes converting the field to soccer.  And they are trying to gather support.

On one hand, I can understand the change as a soccer field is in higher demand (for example I favor converting an underused baseball field to a super duper playground and again, the latter would have much greater use).

On the other hand, it's important to have flexible spaces that can be used for more than one thing, including "unprogrammed" uses.

Demographics of the area, and other extant facilities in the park, should shape this decision.

Include a civic engagement element in parks plans.  FWIW, I think there should be civic engagement elements in Master Plans, Transportation Plans, School Plans, Library Plans, Housing Plans, Economic Development Plans, etc.  Parks too.