Project Orientation
Assembly is an initiative of the Center for Active Design, made possible by generous support from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. Š 2016 Center for Active Design
Contents 3
Initiative Overview
4
The State of Engagement
7
From Innovations to Evidence-based Guidelines
9
Project Framework
10
Project Objectives
13
Understanding Place-based Design
14
Design Meets Civic Life
16
Our Research Process
17
Historic Precedents
18
Resource Analysis
19
Gaps to Explore
20
Original Research Opportunities
23
Project Timeline
1
2
The Center for Active Design (CfAD), with funding from the Knight Foundation, is leading a pioneering initiative to understand how place-based design informs a range of civic engagement outcomes: civic trust, participation in public life, stewardship of the public realm, and informed local voting. The findings will be translated into practical design strategies and disseminated in an upcoming publication known as Assembly: Shaping Space for Civic Life. Assembly will serve as a groundbreaking resource for city leaders and designers who seek to strengthen their communities by harnessing design to support civic life. The Center for Active Design is a non-profit organization that promotes architecture and urban planning solutions to support healthy, engaged communities.
3
The State of Engagement Communities across the U.S. face concerning trends related to civic engagement, from low voter turnout to increasing social and economic divides. Informed, engaged communities are fundamental to a strong democracy. Historically, public spaces such as libraries, parks, and plazas served as essential venues to share ideas, play, and socialize. These public spaces have experienced disinvestment over time, as communities across the U.S. have grappled with concerning trends related to civic engagement:
Distrust is increasing. The share of the population that believes “most people can be trusted” fell from approximately 50 percent in the 1970s, to one-third in 2012.1
How can communities re-build a sense of trust and connection, and foster collaboration on local priorities? Neighborhoods are becoming more economically and politically segregated. The number of neighborhoods with concentrated poverty has increased dramatically since the 1970s.2,3
How can communities support positive interactions and shared access to public amenities across diverse groups? Decades of suburbanization and urban disinvestment have taken a toll on many U.S. cities, resulting in vacant lots and abandoned homes that are associated with increased crime, poor social connections, and negative mental health outcomes. In many neighborhoods, the recent housing market collapse further exacerbated these conditions.4
How can communities revitalize neighborhoods, and cultivate a sense of stewardship among citizens? Voter turnout in local elections is abysmally low—typically hovering around 20 percent for most cities.5 Young voters are particularly disenchanted: nearly three-quarters of Millennials don’t believe that politics is an effective means of changing society.6 4
How can communities build confidence in the local political process, and empower young voters?
5
Kansas City's Better Block initiative revitalized a streetscape and created space for community gathering using temporary furniture installations, landscaping, and two-way bike lanes. The initiative inspired community members to become stewards of their block, and sparked dialogue about long-term urban design improvements.
In Tulsa, Oklahoma a former truck yard was transformed into Guthrie Green, a park that serves as a central hub for social and cultural events. Designed by SWA Group, Guthrie Green incorporates gardens, a central lawn, a pavilion, and interactive fountains. The site inspires community pride and civic trust, inviting a diverse array of visitors to participate in public life.
6
From Innovations to Evidence-based Guidelines Successful initiatives across the country point to promising opportunities to enhance civic engagement. Cities at a Turning Point Despite troubling engagement trends, promising innovations are emerging across the country. Citizen-led initiatives are utilizing creative design strategies to mobilize residents and reinvigorate streets and public spaces. For example, Better Block initiatives are transforming neighborhood street life; citizens are installing their own wayfinding signage via Walk Your City; and polling locations are getting an upgrade from local artists through initiatives like Next Stop Democracy. Simultaneously, many city leaders are recognizing the role of design, planning, and policy in shaping public space and supporting the richness of public life. Cities like Portland, Oregon have seen great benefit from removing prohibitions against outdoor music or sidewalk cafes, and inviting people to live life in public and interact with neighbors and strangers. NYC and other cities are transforming underutilized roadways into new pedestrian plazas and dynamic public spaces. These successful examples point to a critical opportunity for shaping a new field of study around the relationship between place-based design and civic engagement.
Evidence-based Design Guidelines Assembly seeks to broadly impact the design and management of public spaces, build confidence among key decision makers, and establish clear metrics for understanding civic engagement outcomes. In order to achieve these goals, the initiative will ground design recommendations in a solid understanding of existing and emerging evidence, drawing from a range of fields such as urban planning, political science, and behavioral psychology. By using clear, simple language and presenting examples of successful projects, the publication will appeal to a wide range of practitioners. While our primary audience will be city officials and policy makers, Assembly will be equally valuable to architects, planners, researchers, and community-based organizations. U.S. cities are the geographic focus of this initiative, although many recommendations will apply to other geographies. Assembly will serve as an invaluable tool for cities seeking to reverse negative engagement trends, attract new residents and businesses, and build a more vibrant, robust civic life. Ultimately, the Assembly initiative will demonstrate that designing for civic engagement represents a critical investment in a city’s appeal and long-term viability.
7
8
This Project Framework is intended to create a common vocabulary and serve as a guiding resource for partners enlisted in the publication development process. Drawing upon the successful model used to develop New York City’s Active Design Guidelines, CfAD is convening a diverse, multi-disciplinary group of expert advisors and practitioners. Over the next three years these professionals will work together to cultivate evidence, research project examples, identify best practices, and craft a set of practical, cost-effective design strategies that can support robust civic engagement outcomes. The Project Framework is a living document, and will be revised periodically as the Assembly initiative progresses.
9
Project Objectives Four core objectives help define our understanding of civic engagement, identify metrics for success, and point to potential design interventions. The term civic engagement has various definitions and interpretations. In order to cultivate a common understanding of civic engagement for this initiative, CfAD has established four project objectives with input from advisors and Knight Foundation representatives:
1. Civic trust and appreciation: Individuals feel they are a part of a collective civic identity. As such, they appreciate the value of public spaces and feel invited to participate. Individuals recognize local government and other responsible parties that provide and maintain collective civic assets.
2. Participation in public life: Public spaces entice and provide the opportunity for contact and socialization with neighbors and strangers, facilitating equitable access and positive interactions among diverse groups.
3. Stewardship of the public realm: Individuals feel responsible for public spaces and express that in a practical way, by advocating for improvements and additional funding, and by participating in maintenance, programming, and beautification.
4. Informed local voting: Those who are eligible to vote feel informed about their choices, are registered, and cast a ballot in local elections. Individuals demonstrate their civic engagement in local politics by contacting officials, signaling support for issues, and exhibiting knowledge about the role of local government. These objectives will assist in defining specific metrics throughout the project and illuminating potential design interventions, as outlined on the opposite page.
10
Civic trust and appreciation weaves throughout the other three objectives. This objective captures perceptions, while the other objectives are behavior-driven. Civic trust may reinforce or be reinforced by those behaviors.
Designing Solutions for Civic Engagement Objective
Objective
Objective
Civic trust & Participation Stewardship appreciation in public life of the public realm
Objective
Informed local voting
Sample Metrics
Sample Metrics
Sample Metrics
Sample Metrics
Trust in neighbors
Informally socialize in public spaces
Maintain and beautify public space
Register and vote in local elections
Attend local events in public spaces
Advocate for public space improvements
Confidence in local government
Actively engage in dialogue about local issues
Sample Design Opportunities
Walkable streetscape
Public spaces
Polling locations
Civic buildings
Wayfinding signage
Community gardens
Public messaging
Desired Outcome
Civically Engaged Communities
11
Walk Your City helps community members design and install their own informational street signs. In San Jose, Walk Your City signs are making it easier to navigate to neighborhood destinations on foot, facilitating access to local civic assets.
12
Understanding Place-based Design Design has a measurable impact on behavior. Assembly will identify placebased design solutions to inspire acts of civic engagement. Place-based design addresses the physical aspects of a community that are unique to the local culture and environment. Assembly will examine the role of place-based design as a tool for supporting civic engagement behaviors, such as participation in public life and stewardship of the public realm.
Design elements will be explored at a range of scales:
Greenbridge is an affordable housing redevelopment in King County, Washington designed by GGLO. Residents benefit from a well-connected network of bicycle and pedestrian paths that facilitate participation in public life. Community gardens create enticing opportunities for stewardship. Neighborhood identity and community pride are further enhanced through cohesive public art, outdoor furniture, and landscaping.
•
Whole neighborhoods, including land use, street layout, transportation infrastructure, and open space
•
Specific sites, such as parks and plazas, community gardens, public buildings, local landmarks, and public markets
•
Components and objects, such as sidewalks, public art, plantings, street furniture, lighting, signage, and site-based technology
13
Design Meets Civic Life
C O M M U N I T Y
How can place-based design offer an invitation to participate in civic life? Assembly will explore key design qualities that capture the spirit of public space.
1. Prioritizing safety, comfort, convenience
SIGN UP!
How can design provide a sense of order and safety, encouraging participation in public life and removing barriers to access for diverse user groups?
2
1
2. Eliciting positive emotions How can design prompt feelings of delight, playfulness, community pride, and civic trust?
3. Embracing unique community context How can design reflect local culture, history, neighborhood scale, and natural features, inspiring a sense of community ownership and encouraging acts of stewardship?
4. Creating a sense of agency How can design be flexible, adaptable, and welcoming to all, so that diverse user groups feel comfortable adapting public space for informal, non-prescriptive uses?
5. Inspiring interaction
14
How can design create nodes of interaction to facilitate contact, collaboration, and civic dialogue among diverse user groups?
6. Conveying civic information How can design increase awareness about public events, local elections, and community initiatives, and recognize specific groups involved in creating and managing public spaces?
PUBLIC SCHOOL
COMMUNITY CENTER
COURTHOUSE
TRAIN
4 MINUTES
6 MINUTES
3 MINUTES
10 MINUTES
4
C E N T E R
3
VOTE
COMMUNITY BOARD 3
6 5
COMMUNITY BOARD 3 MEETING
SIGN UP FARMERS MARKET
PLA NT SA LE
LOT CLEAN UP ELECTION SPECIAL
VOTE
OPEN HOUSE
P.D. 105
Our Research Process Drawing from an in-depth literature review and original research, Assembly will identify evidence-based design solutions to impact civic engagement. While there is a strong history of connecting design to civic engagement, the research to date has been diffuse and disconnected. Research is distributed across many different academic disciplines—including political science, urban planning, environmental psychology, architecture, sociology, public health, economics, and anthropology. These disciplines utilize a range of methodologies, rely on different theoretical assumptions, and frame their outcomes of interest in a variety of ways. CfAD’s literature review and analysis of existing survey data considered evidence across these disciplines, gleaning top-level insights and illuminating gaps to explore. Assembly’s original research will fill in gaps using a variety of methods, including a national survey, field experiments, and analysis of project examples. Through this multi-faceted research approach, Assembly will generate practical, place-based design guidelines that are grounded in evidence.
Research Phases
1
Analyze Existing Resources
Historic Precedents Academic Research
16
Project Examples Data Sets
2
Identify Gaps & Strategies
3
Conduct Original Research Data Analysis National Survey Field Experiments Project Example Analysis
4
Publish Design Guidelines
Historic Precedents Assembly builds upon a historic foundation of research connecting place-based design to elements of civic life. Timeline: Investigating Design and Civic Life 1961
In The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Jane Jacobs observed, “the trust of a city street is formed over time from many, many little public sidewalk contacts.”7
1971
William L. Yancey investigated the connection between spatial and social relationships in public housing, arguing that semi-public spaces and facilities support the development of informal social networks.8
1980
William H. Whyte’s The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces famously tracked how people move through and interact in public spaces.9
1986
Jan Gehl's research explored “soft edges,” such as front yards and porches, which facilitate engagement at the border of public and private spaces.10
1994
In The New Urbanism: Towards an Architecture of Community, Peter Katz emphasized planning principles to enhance access to services and amenities in the public realm, thought to result in an improved sense of community.11
2000
In Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam posited that community trust and civic identity springs, in part, from opportunities to interact with friends and neighbors—opportunities that “the design of our communities and the availability of public space will encourage.”12
2010
New York City’s Active Design Guidelines provided a userfriendly tool that translated public health research into place-based design strategies to support community health and quality of life. 13
2018
Assembly: Shaping Space for Civic Life will build upon these historic precedents to outline practical, evidence-based design solutions that support civic engagement.
17
Resource Analysis Seven broad findings have emerged from a literature review and data analysis. To support Assembly, CfAD first conducted a literature review to synthesize crucial themes and findings across diverse fields of thought, from urban planning to sociology to architecture. CfAD also conducted an independent analysis of Knight Foundation’s Soul of the Community (SOTC) survey data. Drawing from the literature review and SOTC analysis, we can summarize the connection between place-based design and civic engagement in seven broad findings:
1. Walkable, mixed use neighborhoods are associated with greater social interaction and stronger social networks, which impact civic trust and participation in public life.14–21
2. Urban parks and plazas provide opportunities for intercultural and intergenerational interaction in public space—particularly in urban communities.22, 23 People in neighborhoods with parks are more likely to report a sense of civic trust and willingness to help others.24–26
3. Natural elements and green spaces attract people as places for socialization, boost neighborhood satisfaction, and contribute to civic trust.27–31 Gardens serve as a place for social engagement and may have radiating effects on the stewardship of surrounding areas.32
4. Signs of disorder such as trash, graffiti, and vacant lots, have a negative impact on civic trust.33, 34 Individuals may be more conscientious stewards of their communities when public spaces are well maintained.35
5. Proximity and accessibility impact participation. People are more likely to participate in public life and utilize civic spaces that are nearby, easy to access, and welcoming.36, 37 Greater distances and lack of transportation options are associated with lower voter turnout.38, 39 Additionally, long lines can dissuade turnout and negatively color voters’ experience.
6. Community aesthetics and beauty are associated with civic
18
engagement outcomes.40, 41 Knight SOTC survey data point to strong connections between community aesthetics and trust in local leaders, participation in public life, and stewardship. Aesthetics also influence individuals’ sense of being able to make a difference in their community, which in turn is highly correlated with political participation rates.
7. Arts and social event programming are also associated with civic engagement outcomes, including stewardship. For example, Knight SOTC data indicate that people living in communities with high availability of arts programming are 10 percent more likely to work with others for change.
Soul of the Community (SOTC) was a threeyear study conducted by Gallup from 2008-2010 of 20,000 adults across 26 Knight communities to understand the role of community attachment in a city’s economic growth and wellbeing.
Gaps to Explore Which critical research gaps will Assembly address? How can we expand thinking around place-based design and civic life? The literature review and initial data analysis shed light on critical research gaps to be further explored through the Assembly initiative:
Clarify the role of specific design elements. By drawing upon real-world project examples, original research, and professional experience, CfAD will refine broad findings into actionable, concrete design recommendations. Assembly will explore the role of specific design elements that influence neighborhood connectivity, park and plaza design, community aesthetics, etc.
Capture additional design topics. Many aspects of place-based design impact civic life, but have not been thoroughly researched. Assembly will take the lead in expanding this field of thought by examining such topics as: • Public buildings: There is more to learn about design implications for public buildings, such as libraries, schools, and community centers. Assembly will explore how the siting and design of public buildings impact civic engagement outcomes. • Public infrastructure: While walkability is prominently associated with community interaction and satisfaction, Assembly will investigate how various types of infrastructure (e.g. transit facilities, bike lanes, and surface parking) impact civic engagement outcomes. • Place-based technology and messaging: Technology is integral to the experiences of everyday life, yet scholarly research is still catching up to this shift. Assembly will examine how technology and messaging can be harnessed within the public realm to promote informed local voting, and enhance other civic engagement outcomes. • Public programming: Knight’s SOTC data points to the potential for investigating how design can elevate arts, programming, and social events within a community. Assembly will explore how design elements can facilitate formal and informal public programming to impact civic engagement outcomes.
Understand the relationship between objectives. The majority of existing academic research revolves around civic trust and participation; less studied is the impact of place-based design upon stewardship and informed local voting. Assembly seeks to illuminate the relationship between the four civic engagement objectives using original research methodologies.
19
Original Research Opportunities A variety of original research methods will be used to illuminate connections between place-based design and civic engagement. Research Outlook CfAD plans to conduct the following original research to further our understanding of the relationship between design and civic engagement: observational data analysis, a national survey, field experiments, and analysis of project examples. These priorities are based on an understanding of existing research gaps, directions emerging from a 2015 Advisory Session with multi-disciplinary experts, and strategic opportunities for collaborating with partners in a range of cities.
Observational data analysis CfAD is drawing upon select existing data sets and conducting rigorous quantitative analysis using the lens of Assembly’s four civic engagement objectives. This analysis will identify baseline relationships between placebased design elements and civic engagement outcomes, and will generate testable hypotheses to inform the national survey and field experiments. CfAD will continue to build upon its preliminary analysis of SOTC data. Other data sets to explore include municipal-level voting records and U.S. Census data. Where possible, geocoding and mapping will be used to further connect civic engagement outcomes to place-based design elements.
National survey A national survey is currently under development to test the effects of specific place-based design elements on individual-level measures of civic engagement. The survey will be administered in Spring 2016 to gather data from a large sample of residents across eight cities. In addition to investigating correlations between design and civic engagement, the survey will use experimental methods to test for causal relationships. Experiment questions will hone in on design features that support civic engagement—such as optimal outdoor furniture designs that increase participation and social interaction, or optimal municipal building design features that maximize trust in local leadership. 20
The survey’s large sample size will allow for comparisons across cities, shedding light on which design features have the strongest, and weakest, impacts on specific civic engagement outcomes. The survey will help standardize and prioritize metrics that can be applied throughout the course of the Assembly initiative.
A national survey of residents in eight cities will examine the effects of placebased design on civic engagement in Spring 2016.
21
Queens Plaza, designed by Marpillero Pollak Architects, creates a convenient place of respite within a busy transportation corridor. Designated walking paths, bike lanes, and highly visible crosswalks facilitate safe access to the plaza, which has become a destination for engaging in public life. A variety of seating options provide space to rest and encourage social interaction among diverse users.
Field experiments Original field experiments allow for deeper investigation into the broad findings from the literature review, data analysis, and national survey. Experiments will explore how, where, and when specific design elements can be most effective. Field experiments will be conducted in collaboration with local community organizations and research partners, and will build upon opportune capital projects scheduled to take place between Spring 2016 and Fall 2017.
Project examples CfAD is gathering real-world design projects that have demonstrated impacts—both positive and negative—on one or more of the four civic engagement objectives. Detailed analysis of these projects will illustrate context-specific strategies, and illuminate implementation approaches and challenges experienced by a range of cities across the U.S.
Conclusion Assembly is a groundbreaking initiative that will lead to a fuller understanding of how place-based design improves civic engagement, particularly with regard to civic trust, participation in public life, stewardship of the public realm, and informed local voting. The research will inform specific design strategies for cities to support civic life. The Center for Active Design welcomes suggestions on relevant research initiatives and design projects that may inform the development of Assembly. To share ideas, write to info@centerforactivedesign.org. For general project updates and information, join the CfAD mailing list at www.centerforactivedesign.org/subscribe.
22
Project Timeline 2015
Project Management Advisory Committee Meetings Project Framework, Messaging & Branding Outreach & Building Demand
Research Planning Literature Review & Project Examples Original Research
Publication Development Feedback from Advisors Develop Design Themes & Strategies Write & Edit Content Production Dissemination
2016
2017
2018
23
Citations 1.
Twenge, Jean M., W. Keith Campbell, and Nathan T. Carter. “Declines in trust in others and confidence in institutions among American adults and late adolescents, 1972–2012.” Psychological Science (2014): 0956797614545133.
2. Cortright, J., & Mahmoudi, D. (2014). Lost in Place: Why the persistence and spread of concentrated poverty—not gentrification—is our biggest urban challenge. Retrieved from http://www.cityobservatory.org 3. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/ wp/2015/04/16/who-millennials-trust-and-dont-trust-isdriving-the-new-economy/ 4. US Government Accountability Office, “Vacant Properties: Growing number increases Communities Costs and Challenges,” 2011. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1234. pdf 5. http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-voterturnout-municipal-elections.html 6. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/08/20/ millennials-don-believe-voting/ cGb7sx5ZvkmDCsNd3shTDO/story.html 7. Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Vintage. 8. Yancey, W. L. (1971). Architecture, Interaction, and Social Control The Case of a Large-Scale Public Housing Project. Environment and Behavior, 3(1), 3-21. 9. Whyte, W. H. (1980). The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Washington, DC: Conservation Foundation. 10. Gehl, J. (1986). “Soft edges” in residential streets. Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research, 3(2), 89-102. 11. Katz, P. (1994). The New Urbanism: Towards an Architecture of Community. New York: McGraw-Hill. 12. Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster. 13. City of New York. (2010). Active Design Guidelines: Promoting Physical Activity and Health in Design. 14. Talen, E., & Koschinsky, J. (2014). Compact, Walkable, Diverse Neighborhoods: Assessing Effects on Residents. Housing Policy Debate, 24(4), 717-750. 15. Lund, H. (2002). Pedestrian environments and sense of community. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21(3), 301-312. 16. Lund, H. (2003). Testing the Claims of New Urbanism. APA Journal, 69(4), 414-429. 17. Leyden, K. M. (2003). Social Capital and the Built Environment: The Importance of Walkable Neighborhoods. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1546-1551. 18. French, S., Wood, L., Foster, S. A., Giles-Corti, B., Frank, L., & Learnihan, V. (2014). Sense of Community and Its Association With the Neighborhood Built Environment. Environment and Behavior, 46(6), 677-697. 19. Rogers, S. H., Gardner, K. H., & Carlson, C. H. (2014). Walking builds community cohesion: Survey of two New Hampshire communities looks at social capital and walkability.
24
20. Wood, L., Frank, L. D., & Giles-Corti, B. (2010). Sense of community and its relationship with walking and neighborhood design. Social Science and Medicine, 70(9), 1381-1390.
23. Chiesura, A. (2004). The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landscape and Urban Planning, 68(1),129138. 24. Cohen, D. A., Inagami, S., & Finch, B. (2008). The built environment and collective efficacy. Health Place, 14(2), 198-208. 25. Peters, K., Elands, B., & Buijs, A. (2010). Social interactions in urban parks: Stimulating social cohesion? Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 9(2), 93-100 26. Rigolon, A., Derr, V., & Chawla, L. (2015). Green grounds for play and learning: an intergenerational model for joint design and use of school and park systems Handbook on Green Infrastructure: Planning, Design and Implementation (pp. 281). 27. Sullivan, W. C., Kuo, F. E., & DePooter, S. F. (2004). The Fruit of Urban Nature: Vital Neighborhood Space. Environment and Behavior, 36(5), 678-700. 28. Coley, R. L., Sullivan, W. C., & Kuo, F. E. (1997). Where Does Community Grow?: The Social Context Created by Nature in Urban Public Housing. Environment and Behavior, 29(4), 468-494. 29. Holtan, M. T., Dieterlen, S. L., & Sullivan, W. C. (2014). Social Life Under Cover: Tree Canopy and Social Capital in Baltimore, Maryland. Environment and Behavior, 47(5), 502-525. 30. Zhou, X., & Parves Rana, M. (2012). Social benefits of urban green space. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 23(2), 173-189. 31. Chiesura, A. (2004). The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landscape and Urban Planning, 68(1),129138. 32. Krusky, A. M., Heinze, J. E., Reischl, T. M., Aiyer, S. M., Franzen, S. P., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2015). The effects of produce gardens on neighborhoods: A test of the greening hypothesis in a post-industrial city. Landscape and Urban Planning, 136(0), 68-75. 33. Ross, C. E., Mirowsky, J., & Pribesh, S. (2001). Powerlessness and the amplification of threat: Neighborhood disadvantage, disorder, and mistrust. American Sociological Review, 66(4), 568-591. 34. Perkins, D. D., Meeks, J. W., & Taylor, R. B. (1992). The Physical Environment of Street Blocks and Resident Perceptions of Crime and Disorder: Implications for Theory and Measurement. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12, 21-34. 35. Cialdini, R. B. (2003). Crafting normative messages to protect the environment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(4), 105-109. 36. Boniface, S., Scantlebury, R., Watkins, S. J., & Mindell, J. S. (2015). Health implications of transport: Evidence of effects of transport on social interactions. Journal of Transport & Health, 2(3), 441-446. 37. Henkin, N., & Zapf, J. (2006). How Communities Can Promote Civic Engagement of People Age 50-Plus. Generations, 30(4), 72-77. 38. Dyck, J. J., & Gimpel, J. G. (2005). Distance, Turnout, and the Convenience of Voting. Social Science Quarterly, 86(3), 531-548. 39. Haspel, M., & Gibbs Knotts, H. (2005). Location, location, location: Precinct placement and the costs of voting. Journal of Politics, 67(2), 560-573.
21. Zhu, X., Yu, C. Y., Lee, C., Lu, Z., & Mann, G. (2014). A retrospective study on changes in residents’ physical activities, social interactions, and neighborhood cohesion after moving to a walkable community. Preventive Medicine, 69 Suppl 1, S93-97.
40. Lekwa, V. L., Rice, T. W., & Hibbing, M. V. (2007). The Correlates of Community Attractiveness. Environment and Behavior, 39(2), 198-216.
22. Kaźmierczak, A. (2013). The contribution of local parks to neighbourhood social ties. Landscape and Urban Planning, 109(1), 31-44.
41. Garvin, E. C., Cannuscio, C. C., & Branas, C. C. (2013). Greening vacant lots to reduce violent crime: a randomised controlled trial. Injury Prevention, 19(3), 198-203.
Assembly Advisory Committee George Abbott Knight Foundation
Christine Gaspar Center for Urban Pedagogy
Nathan Adkisson Local Projects
Danny Harris Knight Foundation
Reena Agarwal Center for Active Design
Jennifer Mahar Fairmount Park Conservancy
Eric Boorstyn New York City Department of Design and Construction
Bridget Marquis Knight Foundation
Bryan Boyer Dash Marshall
Bobby Martin The Original Champions of Design
Travis Bunt One Architecture & Urbanism
Emily Munroe 8 80 Cities
David Burney Pratt Institute
David Nickerson Temple University
Amy Chiou #WTFwevote
Suzanne Nienaber Center for Active Design
Abbie Claflin Center for Active Design
Eric Oliver University of Chicago
Max Clermont 270 Strategies
Jeff Risom Gehl Studio
Dan Connolly ideas42
Jason Roberts Better Block Foundation
Benjamin de la Peña Knight Foundation
Meredith Sadin University of California, Berkeley
Joanna Frank Center for Active Design Jeff Fugate Lexington Downtown Development Authority
Gina Schwartz New York City Mayor's Office of Intergovernmental Affairs David Wilson University of Delaware
Photo Credits page 5: ©Mike Sinclair via Flickr page 6: ©Jonnu Singleton page 12: ©Richard Masoner via Flickr page 13: Steve Keating Photography page 21: ©Sam Oberter Photography
215 Park Avenue South, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 centerforactivedesign.org