How do you value a park or public space?

Because of the way I enter LJN I often miss pieces away from the forum and the blogs, so was delighted to see this articleA look at the CABE site shows a lot of interesting ideas on how these public spaces can be better used and even funded.There is a way that parks and open spaces can be better funded, better maintained and developed for the better of the community.Cabe touches on non-profit organisations and community involvement, in the uk we already have a couple of models that have proven to be very successful.The last 30 years the scourge of society - social housing - has seen that resident control out performs local councils in terms of service provision and value for money.Community halls have had equal successes, and in many places where these have previously been maintained by those who were more interested in property value than social value committees are now being replaced by those who are wanting to open the doors and get much more use.Many parks already have associations linked to them with local people who care about their parks. Similar rules to those associated under the right to manage regarding funding by local authorities could be applied to the management of parks. This would provide a baseline funding for maintenance and training of board members. Parks offer a much wider range of opportunities than housing management, and there is a wide range of funding opportunities that can be tapped into. Local groups can be far more effective in engaging the local groups than large beaurocratic organisations.Nor does each park need its own non-profit organisation. Several under the control of one organisation would allow for a more strategic approach to local needs rather than each replicating or competing with each other.Large open unused spaces provide bigger challenges in many ways, but also unique opportunities. This includes considering involving young people to develop an area and manage it, with appropriate support.In a recent consultation by the Chartered Institute of Housing one question raised was were housing associations doing enough to involve and empower young people. I was shocked at the response of the 'professionals' as it involved low levels of involvement like helping to pick up litter, or plant a few bulbs. My arguement was while this was a good way to begin engaging with young people at some point if you want to keep young people engaged you have to give them real responsibility and back that with appropriate funding.If open spaces, parks etc are to be valued and used we need to get away from the paternalistic attitudes of the later half of the 19th century and early half of the 20th century - here you go, we have provided an open space for you now use it and be grateful to a community led.If I see another unused basketball court or playground with no facilities for disabled children go up I'm going to scream.Any thoughts?

No worries Ofer, I can wait.

As mentioned in the article it is the council's responsibility, but not a statutory one. How councils deal with this responsibility varies a great deal. More often than not I think the main criteria is the biggest impact for the lowest cost and maintenance. As such there is not a great deal that goes into the planning of parks. One park near us had a lot of money invested in it. Astro turf, dog walking area, play equipment, nature garden, large grass area with a few seats. Local people who campaigned for the astro turf can hardly access it now. The nature garden was gutted earlier this year, and as it is fenced off used by dog owners because they can let their dogs off the lead and chat while the dogs run amok.

More and more it is being recognised that by involving residents in the decision making process gives much better results and satisfaction.

By taking control of the parks away from local authorities and giving it local residents you will open the way for much more creativity and better use of our parks. Rather than depending on a few people who have as much concerns about budgetry controls as how parks are used it would open the way for a much wider number of tallented designers to have an input.

Replies

steve loftus March 21, 2009 at 1:23pm

most of these sites are under the control of either local,district or borough councils,they may be willing to talk to someone interested in doing something with these sites.
i know the town council that we work for,has a fund called the "developers fund",anybody doing any building works has to put money in this fund,this helps fund projects for the increased housing/population.
grants are always available from local,district councils and playing field associations,disabled play grants,lottery,so on and so on.
Ofer El-hashahar March 22, 2009 at 12:14pm

First I must say George That I am sorry but still waiting for a new price list from the manufacturer- the one I had only had part of the sculptures and prices from last year. perhaps I will contact you.

but wanted to say that I searched and read a lot and just could not believe that in the country of gardening UK - so many of the [arks and open spaces are so boring.
Yes sure there are lots of amazing parks but most of parks offer lawn, few trees and playground that looks exactly the same with a fence around it.
It looks like health and safety is important but what about design- it seems like that is done by the supplier of playground structures or so.

I so many parks in israel and in here as I used to take my girls.
I saw many wonderful parks even very small ones that offered a lot to all ages- In israel all parks are planed in one government office by few talented designers- so I guess that is why.

I do wander if there are enough garden designers that market themself to this niche ?
One thing I found - there is a lot of budget for these in the UK.
dgeorgea March 22, 2009 at 2:46pm

Hi Steve,

I believe the fund you are talking about is Section 16 money. I believe there are rules that govern the use of this money. As the money is supposed to compensate for local disruption the money is available local to the works. Because of this I know we fall just outside of several funding opportunities which are available to communities near us.

Great if your in an area of heavy development though.

As most major developments take place in deprived and run down areas competition is often fierce and open spaces are often low on the priority list. Even where money is available for open spaces again competition can be just as fierce. I know one major funding stream is being conducted more like an auction, those who can raise enough support for their local park will get the money.

While parks remain in the control of councils it is often local communities who are responsible for raising the money to improve them.
dgeorgea March 22, 2009 at 3:17pm

No worries Ofer, I can wait.

As mentioned in the article it is the council's responsibility, but not a statutory one. How councils deal with this responsibility varies a great deal. More often than not I think the main criteria is the biggest impact for the lowest cost and maintenance. As such there is not a great deal that goes into the planning of parks. One park near us had a lot of money invested in it. Astro turf, dog walking area, play equipment, nature garden, large grass area with a few seats. Local people who campaigned for the astro turf can hardly access it now. The nature garden was gutted earlier this year, and as it is fenced off used by dog owners because they can let their dogs off the lead and chat while the dogs run amok.

More and more it is being recognised that by involving residents in the decision making process gives much better results and satisfaction.

By taking control of the parks away from local authorities and giving it local residents you will open the way for much more creativity and better use of our parks. Rather than depending on a few people who have as much concerns about budgetry controls as how parks are used it would open the way for a much wider number of tallented designers to have an input.
PRO

Phil Voice March 23, 2009 at 2:11pm

"Government should create places which co-exist with the natural environment rather than conflict with it," said Helen Phillips, Natural England's chief executive. "We have to redesign our cities in response to the climate change, and this means investment in green roofs, millions more street trees and more parks. Investment in grey infrastructure runs into billions [but] investment in green infrastructure remains tiny."

Cultivate greener cities, government told -Guardian
steve loftus March 23, 2009 at 6:09pm

the trouble is with street trees is, and i have experienced it, the cctv cannot see through the canopies of trees,but given the choice id have the trees
Cornish Apple Trees March 23, 2009 at 10:59pm

It is possible to set a fixed 'financial' value to parkland based on varying criteria; particularly if there are trees - everyone should be equipped with the 'Arboricultural Association's' Visual Amenity Valuation of Trees and Woodland - which is accepted by Councils and Insurance companies - but the best value in terms of dealing with any governmental body are the CO2 offset calculations.
Check out also Dr Jacqueline Burgess's work and the Landscape Research Group's journal, which has discussed this issue often.
Cornish Apple Trees March 23, 2009 at 11:50pm

Sorry, reading back through my answer it made little sense in context to the thread of the forum - as such what i believe is that without a real financial value to parks and open spaces, local government will not be able to make a viable decision in these modern times, (IN THE UK), despite all the 'holistic' and worthwhile values that can be placed on such areas.
I strongly urge anyone interested in this thread to check out the Landscape Research Group's journal, this argument has basically been solved over and over again and yet again the UK are lagging behind in the implementation of strategy; despite the fact that many of the academics leading the way in this field are British based.