Samantha Brockfield BUP Senior Problem Synthesis August 2010.
-
Upload
kayli-raye -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of Samantha Brockfield BUP Senior Problem Synthesis August 2010.
ONE BLOCK AT A TIME:THE ROLE OF ORGANIZING IN SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Samantha Brockfield BUP Senior Problem SynthesisAugust 2010
“This is the lesson the planning community now needs to learn: it must take responsibility for its acts in a historical, unpredictable society rather than in a dream world of harmony and predetermined order. To make modern cities meet human needs, we shall have to change the way in which city planners work. Instead of planning for some abstract urban whole, planners are going to have to work for the concrete parts of the city, the different classes, ethnic groups and races it contains. And the work they do for these people cannot be laying out their future; the people will have no chance to mature unless they do that for themselves, unless they are actively involved in shaping their social lives.”
- Richard Sennett, The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity and City Life. 1970
SYNTHESIS STRUCTURE• Introduction • Site Description: Avondale’s Avenue District
• Problem: Planning and Control
• History
• Urban and Regional Context Literature Review and Case Studies • Existing Conditions • Analysis and Forecasting
Goals and Objectives
Alternatives
Recommendations
Implementation
Summary•
INTRODUCTION
To succeed and be sustainable, neighborhood revitalization must start at the ground level with local people making the decisions that matter for their families and their community.
Local residents and stakeholders should create and drive plans for developing their communities.
Today’s cities need a new type of planner.
SITE DESCRIPTION: AVONDALE’S AVENUE DISTRICT
This area is bounded by the following Avenues: Erkenbrecher Forest Dury Burnet
Because all eight streets in the district are Avenues, it is named “The Avenue District”.
SITE DESCRIPTION: AVONDALE’S AVENUE DISTRICT
49 % homeownership rate, long-term owner occupancy, historic housing stock, central location.
Proximity to regional destinations and Burnet Avenue revitalization.
Deteriorating housing stock, absentee landlords, litter, congested on-street parking
High crime perception, mistrust from history of institutional expansion, economic downturn, foreclosures.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The traditional approach to community development aims to revitalize neighborhoods using a top-down planning process. Planning should not manipulate and control communities but rather lay foundations for vibrant and abundant community life. Today’s economic and political environment presents an opportunity for an entirely new approach to city planning.
HISTORY
Community Development Corporations (CDCs)
Originally formed, driven and controlled by membership made up of local residents
Focused on rebuilding localized economies and improving public services
Today most have lost touch with original mission and membership
HISTORY
1980: Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC)
Corporate and foundation dollars to CDCs
Large-scale projects 1986: Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LITC)
Incentive for private investment in affordable housing narrowed CDC focus and concentrated decision making
HISTORY
Foreclosure crisis: vacancy and unemployment are swiftly accompanied by a downward spiral of blight, crime and urban decay.
US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP)
The model post-real estate boom: Comprehensive Community development
URBAN AND REGIONAL CONTEXT
• Avondale:
• Low income African American community
• Surrounded by growing institutions
• Population 16,300
• 4th largest in Cincinnati
• Negative public perception
Priorities:• Safety
• Health
• Economic Development
• Education
• Housing
URBAN AND REGIONAL CONTEXT
URBAN AND REGIONAL CONTEXT
LISC Sustainable Communities Program Uptown Consortium Place matters funding collaborative Obstacles to progress:
Concentrated power and resources Damaged organizational relationships Unclear goals and values Lack of willingness to change
LITERATURE REVIEW
Traditional Methods and Alternate Approaches Validation planning Relational organizing and social capital Sustainable community development
VALIDATION PLANNING
Professionals as experts who generate plans
Site visits to define problems Community “forums” Efforts to minimize transparency and
participation for various reasons Find local representatives to
demonstrate buy-in for proposed developments
SOCIAL CAPITAL
Social Capital: Extent to which members of a community can work together effectively
(Community Building Institute, 2010)
Engaging residents in creative problem solving
Creating strong social networks to help them further their objectives
Bonding (internal) Bridging (external)
COMMUNITY BUILDING
Necessary components of community: Commonality: Shared needs and interests Interdependence: Shared community
ownership and responsibility Collective capacity: Support is generated
locally through relationships
ASSET BASED COMMUNITY BUILDINGSource: Neighborworks Place Based Training
COMMUNITY ORGANIZING MODELS
Rejects the notion of poverty as pathology
“The Golden Rule”: never do anything for someone that they can do for themselves.
Rallies people around specific issues or problems, targets people in power develops strategy, demands and tactics for winning.
Originally confrontational in style
COMMUNITY ORGANIZING MODELS
Relational approach aims to build sustainable community networks
The term consensus organizing is more popular with funders
Focuses on both bonding and bridging capital
Basis of Sustainable Communities model
GRASSROOTS REVITALIZATION
Leaders committed to participation as top priority
Intensive organizing efforts Urban planners who create common
spaces as community victories Courageous funders who understand
value and commit to connective strategies (Putnam, 2003)
CASE STUDIES
S. Bronx Banana Kelly Development Corporation Comprehensive Community Revitalization
Program
Chicago LISC New Communities Program Quality of Life Planning Englewood
S. BRONX 1970 - 1990 Devastated by
urban renewal, disinvestment, arson
Community organizing fueled revitalization
1990’s affordable housing boom
Photo: Jimmy Carter’s 1977 Visit to South Bronx (Teresa Zabala / NYT)
CASE STUDY: LESSONS FROM THE BRONX
Banana Kelly Corporation Economic decline as catalyst Efforts led by residents, fueled from
resources inside the neighborhood Membership organization for the
curved section of Kelly Street Self help / sweat equity
CASE STUDY: LESSONS FROM THE BRONX Johnson’s War on Poverty programs
resulted in affordable housing boom Power grab attempts Members became staff, leadership
narrowed Eventually surpassed by newly formed
CDCs due to competition for resources Author disapproves of CCRP’s
approach, believing it treated poverty as pathology
LESSONS FROM BANANA KELLY
Neighborhood success as function of resident control
Residents of urban neighborhoods are the solution, not the problem.
To prescribe solutions for urban neighborhoods is to manipulate and enslave
To see an outcome accomplished without the requisite participation further debilitates those without power
CASE STUDY: LESSONS FROM THE BRONX
Comprehensive Community Development
By the 1990’s CDCs had produced 22,000 units of affordable housing
Funders concerned about the limits of housing revitalization
CCRP focused on developing CDC capacity
Incorporated community organizing to decrease dependency
CCRP VISIONING & PLANNING
• Collaborative planning process• Community, implementers and outside
experts• Develop shared vision and strategies • Task forces, workshops early action
projects• 1996 APA Presidential Award• Basis for new LISC Comprehensive
Community Building Institute
CASE STUDY: CHICAGO LISC NEW COMMUNITIES PROGRAM
CCRP - inspired 14
neighborhoods MacArthur
Foundation 10 year $47 million
Six to nine month process Led by a task force of 20 -
30 people Five or six major meetings Subcommittee structure Outreach effort to the
community. Respond to physical
development, transportation, education, health and jobs.
CASE STUDY: CHICAGO LISC NEW COMMUNITIES PROGRAM
Published Plan:
Community history
Issues Work
program Renderings
of proposed projects
Photos Maps Vision Strategies Projects Programs
CASE STUDY: CHICAGO LISC NEW COMMUNITIES PROGRAM
State a clear vision for the future Address the neighborhood’s key
problems Describe projects and programs that
can be implemented Are achievable within five years Have widespread support in the
community Assign responsibilities Timeframes for implementation
CASE STUDY: CHICAGO LISC NEW COMMUNITIES PROGRAM
Early action important
Intensive LISC involvement
10 week process
Upheld by city depts.
CASE STUDY: CHICAGO LISC NEW COMMUNITIES PROGRAM
ENGLEWOOD 2 African
American communities
85,000 residents
Vacant land UnemploymentPoor schoolsAccess to transportation Lack of retail
“Englewood Seeks turnaround After Long Slide” Source: www.teamenglewood.org
CASE STUDY: CHICAGO LISC NEW COMMUNITIES PROGRAM
Englewood: 2004 Quality of Life Plan
500 individuals 100 organizations 10 strategies, 48
projects
• Public spaces• Retail• Recreation• Health • Education• Youth employmentwww.teamenglewood.org
ENGLEWOOD’S PLAN
CASE STUDY: CHICAGO LISC NEW COMMUNITIES PROGRAM
Plan progress: Crime reduction Block clubs Youth
employment New retail Agricultural
districtYouth Job Training Program
Source: www.teamenglewood.org
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Avenue District as a pilot
Target area defined by neighborhood character:
Land use, housing stock conditions, tenancy, history and demographics.
EXISTING STAKEHOLDERS :
Avondale Community CouncilCenter for Closing the Health Gap, Avondale do
right! Greater Cincinnati Urban League Cincinnati Children’s HospitalAvondale Redevelopment Corporation The Model GroupUptown Consortium – Burnet Avenue
Revitalization Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical GardenRockdale Academy / Community Learning Center
2009 LANDSCAPE PROJECT
Chase Bank LISC ARC Zoo 100 volunteers 40 yard trees Improved
streetscape New relationships
basis for block club
AVENUE DISTRICT BLOCK CLUB
• Residents working together to improve their neighborhood
• Begun November 2009
• Monthly meetings
• Quarterly report to council
• Average attendance: 15 homeowners
• Accomplishments
• Current projects
EXISTING CONDITIONS: 232-238 NORTHERN AVE
• 0.5 acre vacant land
• Formerly housing
• 2 parcels
• Litter and weeds
• Overgrown vegetation
• Retaining wall, graffiti
SITE BACKGROUND
VISIONING: PUBLIC SPACE
NORTHERN LARONA COMMUNITY PARKILLUSTRATED VISION
NORTHERN LARONA COMMUNITY PARKENTRANCE (PERSPECTIVE VIEW)
Institutional expansion has created severe competition for on-street parking.
There are also underutilized off-street parking facilities.
ANALYSIS AND FORECAST
Sustainability applied to communities: The fields of urban planning and community development have traditionally aimed to improve quality of life for all people yet poverty, segregation and disenfranchisement remain prevalent. Clearly the traditional model is not sustainable.
ANALYSIS AND FORECAST
CDCs are locally based yet externally controlled, working in specific communities yet ultimately accountable to outsiders
In order to begin building the platform for sustainable community development, we must achieve a basic level of social capital using relational organizing as a tool.
However public policy, banks and foundations are barely warming up to the importance of this approach to ensuring the sustainability of community development. While resident driven neighborhood revitalization is generally appreciated, there is not sufficient support for the organizing required to build social capital.
ANALYSIS AND FORECAST
The district block club shows that neighborhood improvements can be achieved by bringing local residents and stakeholders together and also connecting them to outside resources. While the physical change may seem insignificant to some, each improvement represents a new or strengthened relationship
ANALYSIS AND FORECASTING
Block club concept gaining approval with Avondale community council
The Avenue District as a pilot for sustainable community development in Avondale. Other potential districts that share neighborhood character: land use, housing stock conditions, tenancy, history and demographics : Harvey bounded by Glenwood, Vine and Forest Neighborhood bounded by Harvey, Reading, Ridgeway
and Forest Glenwood from Reading to Greenwood Challenges involved
ANALYSIS AND FORECASTING
Foreclosure Property speculation and abandonment Strategic and accountability questions Challenge for relational organizing
approach ACDC – opportunity for new approach
to community development in Avondale.
GOALS AND OBJECIVES
Goal: Outline recommendations for the role of organizing in the comprehensive community development model to create meaningful leadership roles for residents and become more sustainable.
Objectives a. Define implications for urban planners: new
roles, responsibilities and relationships with communities.
b. Describe a workable social capital strategy for Avondale based in relational organizing.
IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES
1. Traditional model of community planning will remain dominant in Avondale. Business as usual, no emphasis on social capital development.
IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES
2. Efforts are made to compromise the two approaches in Avondale. The sustainable communities model is touted as a way to build new institutional capacity without any meaningful community organizing component.
IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES
3. The sustainable communities model is used to develop support for a consensus organizing approach to sustainable community development. An entirely new type of community planning emerges.
EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
1. Top-down, controlling process prevails. No new leadership or local control in low income communities and thus no sustainable change will be achieved. Improvements that are made will be those created from the top-down and maintained at the will of disconnected outside forces. This is a frightening proposition considering the prospect of deepening market failure because poverty and powerlessness breeds violence.
EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
2. Funder efforts to develop institutional capacity without valuing the consensus organizing approach will not achieve the desired long-term impacts. Simply giving more power and resources to the same people does not improve communities if they do not share it. Similarly, new programs and policies in and of themselves do not engage people in their neighborhood.
EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
3. Relational organizing methods are used to increase citizen leadership and build institutional capacity in select target neighborhoods to demonstrate the efficacy of the model. Once a strong task force is built in this way, the community begins developing a quality of life plan. These plans connect communities with resources for implementation and early action. Planners work with communities to develop their vision into plans.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The sustainable community development model is used to develop support for a consensus organizing approach to neighborhood revitalization in Avondale.
The appropriate adaptation of LISC’s Building Sustainable Communities program in Avondale is imperative to demonstrate the efficacy of the organizing approach in the region.
RECOMMENDATIONS
A planning process beginning at the local level requires systematic change in the traditional approach to urban planning and community development.
This requires a highly participatory process in which residents and local stakeholders drive planning efforts including required benchmarks for participation and local leadership.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Rally a task force of residents and stakeholders. Organizing staff will perform widespread mailings, phone-banks, door-knocking campaigns and community meetings to engage as many people as possible in the upcoming planning process. During the first two meetings the task force identifies community issues and creates committee for each.
RECOMMENDATIONS
2. Urban planners are initially a form of technical assistance. During visioning sessions (charettes) planners provide necessary data, maps and visuals and help the task force develop strategies for implementation.
Planners communicate goals and strategies to local officials, identifying potential project overlap and outside resources for projects.
RECOMMENDATIONS
3. The community task force then implements an early action project to build momentum for the plan’s success. LISC and planners have helped build partnerships and resources for implementation. Planners draft the resulting plan but do not publish it until the community approves it and determines roles for action.
IMPLEMENTATION
Avenue District Greenspace Schedule and budget Current project status
Avenue District Streetscape Parking campaign
AVENUE DISTRICT GREENSPACE
Phase 1 (2010) Water access, clearing, paths, signage, service drive and maintenance shed
Phase 2 (2011) Landscaping, garden, gazebo
Phase 3 - Benches, tables, trash cans, lighting
Phase 4 – Fitness track, playground Phase 5 - Performance area / stage
AVENUE DISTRICT GREENSPACE
Plan approved by city and county Leased to ARC Phase one began August, 2010 Long term maintenance and liability unknown Possible transfer to Zoo with deed restrictions Budget: $50,000 LISC/Chase and In-kind
$10,000 Phase 1 $20,000 Phase 2
BLOCK CLUB PARKING CAMPAIGN
PROJECT STATUS
Survey results showed consensus on section of Wilson Avenue.
City has worked with block club to address the issues of parking and lighting on this block.
Potential partnership with ArtWorks in 2011 for youth mural along the retaining wall to highlight block club success.
SUMMARY
At face value the comprehensive approach is more sustainable because it diversifies investment in the midst of housing market failure. However a relational organizing approach is what makes the model truly sustainable regardless of market forces.
When people are empowered to lead planning efforts in their own communities, synergistic relationships are formed which spur unexpected positive change in urban neighborhoods.
DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE ACTION
Making the case for consensus organizing to foundations, banks and the public sector by demonstrating the efficacy and sustainability of an organizing approach to community development.
Hiring and training sufficient numbers of community organizing staff.
Developing relationships with local government officials who will adopt and support the new community plans developed at the local level.
MAIN SOURCES MDRC, (2010). Creating a Platform for Sustained Neighborood Improvement: Interim Findings from Chicago’s New Communities
Program. Von Hoffman, A. (2003). House by House, Block by Block: The Rebirth of America's Urban Neighborhoods. Oxford University Press Putnam, R. (2004). Better Together: Restoring the American Community. Simon & Schuster Block, P. (2009). The Structure of Community Belonging. Berrett-Koehler Publishers DeRienzo, H. (2008). The concept of community: Lessons from the bronx. Milano: Ipoc.
Kretzmann, J. (1997). Building Communities from the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a Community's Assets. ACTA Publications
Local initiatives Support Corporation. (2006-2010). Building Sustainable Communities Strategic Plan. Mooney, A. (2010, February 16). Director, Chicago LISC. (S. Brockfield, Interviewer) Brockfield, S. (2009-2010). Avondale's Avenue District. Cincinnati: Avondale Redevelopment Corporation. LISC Chicago New Communities Program. (2010). Planning Handbook. Chicago: LISC. Civic Action Institute. (1981). Neighborhood Planning: A Citizen Participation Guide. Washington DC: Civic Action Institute. Partners for Livable Communities. (1994). The State of the American Cofmmunfity: Empowerment for Local Action. Washington DC:
Partners for Livable Communities. Ronald Thomas, M. M. (1988). Taking Charge: How Communities Are Planning Their Futures. Washington DC: International City
Management Association.
Twelvetrees, A. (1989). Organizing for Neighbourhood Development. Brookfield: Avebury.