Going Beyond Park Boundaries to Make Cities More Livable
Parks and recreation drive real solutions to the big challenges facing American cities. They are powerful agents helping communities address financial stability, environmental threats, and social isolation, just to name a few. In that regard, city parks have grown beyond their traditional physical and conceptual boundaries and now serve multiple functions as part of a system that enables cities to operate. This infrastructure framework provides health, environmental, and economic benefits, supporting our ability to live together in urban areas.
This changing role of parks is reshaping more than just our urban landscapes, it is also redefining how we govern, manage, and program our public green assets. No longer are these functions the sole responsibility of city officials but shared among a healthy mix of non-profit and community based organizations, business improvement districts, development corporations, private entities, and other public agencies.
Against that backdrop, City Parks Alliance and the San Jose Parks Foundation recently held a workshop in collaboration with San Jose Parks, Recreation & Neighborhood Services, with a guest speaker from Seattle Parks Foundation. It was the latest in City Parks Alliance’s PARKXCHANGE City Workshop program, which builds skills in effective public-private and cross-sector partnerships that strengthen America’s city parks, such as creating a shared vision, understanding risk, defining a governance structure, and establishing proactive communication.
The workshop focused on equipping participants with the tools to enact and sustain successful park partnerships. Participants identified barriers to their success including an affordable housing crisis that has increased the number of homeless people in its parks, difficulties enacting cross-agency partnerships, and long-term budget cuts to the Parks, Recreation, and Neighborhood Services Department. Despite these challenges, the opportunities for improvement are many. San Jose has developed a strong creative placemaking model for activating public spaces, leveraged limited public dollars for substantial private investments via its foundation, and most of all, San Jose residents consistently demonstrate that they highly value their parks.
While each city faces unique challenges these major themes and opportunities are echoed across the country. We understand that we need to change the conversation about and perception of America’s city parks, highlighting the vital services they provide to the community as a whole. Parks attract economic investment, creating jobs, they control stormwater runoff, lowering infrastructure costs, and even act as modern-day thoroughfares for commuters in a renewed age of bicycling and walking to work, reducing medical expenses. Despite these many benefits, public budgets for parks and recreation continue to fall short of need.
Seattle Parks Foundation and other city park advocacy organizations nationwide are working to increase funding for urban parks by drawing attention to the ways parks help solve our cities’ most pressing problems and the impact felt on everyday lives. During the San Jose event, we discussed input from an advocate for low-income housing about the features that make a neighborhood work for its residents. At the top of the advocate’s list were, of course, good housing, schools and transportation, but right up there with them were parks and open space. To low-income residents, parks are not luxuries, but must-have features that make their communities more livable with benefits that reach beyond the park boundaries.
The positive impacts of parks can be life changing—quite literally. How close you live to a park has a strong correlation to how long you’ll live. In Seattle, there is a ten-year difference in life expectancy between wealthier neighborhoods with better access to parks and public spaces compared to lower-income neighborhoods. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) declared that access to parks, “encourages community residents to participate in physical activity and do so more often. The closer you live to a park, the more likely you are to walk or bike to those places, and use the park for exercise.” A 2014 study also found that people who lived in neighborhoods with more green space had fewer symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress.
The statistics are alarming and the benefits of parks to human and community health, and to the bottom line are clear. According to the CDC:
- Nearly half of U.S. adults have chronic health conditions such as heart disease, diabetes, and obesity.
- One in three children in the U.S. is either obese or overweight.
- Mental illness affects more than 43 million Americans each year.
- As a country, we are spending $2.3 trillion annually managing and treating chronic and mental health conditions per year.
- Maintaining a healthy weight saves $1,500 per person in healthcare costs per year.
If we are to leverage the power of parks, we need the support not just from environmental advocates, but also to include health practitioners, business leaders, and institutional partner as champions. Strengthening that public-private mix is exactly the purpose of the PARKXCHANGE workshops. In collaboration, Seattle Parks Foundation, City Parks Alliance and others are taking new steps every day to expand the web of community partnerships to help cities tackle these challenges holistically and create a new form of civic infrastructure. To ensure this narrative continues to grow and evolve, we must reimagine city parks as more than nice-to-have features and see them as city-building tools.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
Social distancing is becoming the new normal, at least for those of us who are heeding the Center for Disease Control’s warnings and guidelines. But if you don’t have reliable, high-speed broadband, it is impossible to engage in what is now the world’s largest telecommunity. As many schools and universities around the world (including those of my kids) are shut down, these institutions are optimistically converting to online and digital learning. However, with our current broadband layout, this movement will certainly leave many Americans behind.
Accenture analysts recently released a report calling for cities to take the lead in creating coordinated, “orchestrated” mobility ecosystems. Limiting shared services to routes that connect people with mass transit would be one way to deploy human-driven services now and to prepare for driverless service in the future. Services and schedules can be linked at the backend, and operators can, for example, automatically send more shared vehicles to a train station when the train has more passengers than usual, or tell the shared vehicles to wait for a train that is running late.
Managing urban congestion and mobility comes down to the matter of managing space. Cities are characterized by defined and restricted residential, commercial, and transportation spaces. Private autos are the most inefficient use of transportation space, and mass transit represents the most efficient use of transportation space. Getting more people out of private cars, and into shared feeder routes to and from mass transit modes is the most promising way to reduce auto traffic. Computer models show that it can be done, and we don’t need autonomous vehicles to realize the benefits of shared mobility.
The role of government, and the planning community, is perhaps to facilitate these kinds of partnerships and make it easier for serendipity to occur. While many cities mandate a portion of the development budget toward art, this will not necessarily result in an ongoing benefit to the arts community as in most cases the budget is used for public art projects versus creating opportunities for cultural programming.
Rather than relying solely on this mandate, planners might want to consider educating developers with examples and case studies about the myriad ways that artists can participate in the development process. Likewise, outreach and education for the arts community about what role they can play in projects may stimulate a dialogue that can yield great results. In this sense, the planning community can be an invaluable translator in helping all parties to discover a richer, more inspiring, common language.