39 years

Mapping & Documentation Field Notes

When the Vanderbilt Open Street program is activated, the amount of public street furniture increases, although it is sometimes unclear which furniture is reserved for private business use or public use. We did not observe additional street furniture added to the Underhill during Open Street hours.

VANDERBILT UNDERHILL

Figure 22. Map of Existing Seating (Vanderbilt)

Mapping & Documentation Field Notes

Street Features: Lighting

On Underhill Avenue there is street lighting, some lights around the school, and ambient light from nearby businesses and residences. Commercial spaces predominantly toward the southern end of the side that are still lit at nighttime provide some additional soft lighting. These lighting sources provide overhead light and increased perception of security; however, the site would benefit from additional soft, ambient light in select areas to improve the pedestrian experience.

VANDERBILT UNDERHILL

Figure 23. Map of Existing Lighting Fixtures (Underhill)

Mapping & Documentation Field Notes

Being a commercial corridor with residential buildings, Vanderbilt benefits—even more so than Underhill—from ambient lighting from businesses and residences. Similarly to Underhill, Vanderbilt has a good amount of street lighting.

VANDERBILT UNDERHILL

Figure 24. Map of Existing Lighting Fixtures (Vanderbilt)

Mapping & Documentation Field Notes

Place Audit: Assets on the Open Streets

Active Sidewalk Realm Bike Infrastructure

VANDERBILT

Long-time Small Businesses Tree Canopy

UNDERHILL

Educational Communities

Playgrounds and Open Spaces

Mapping & Documentation Field Notes

Place Audit: Challenges on the Open Streets

Inactive, Underutilized Block

Confusing Path for Cyclists

VANDERBILT

Images Source: UPM students

UNDERHILL Busy Through Traffic

Construction

Mapping & Documentation Field Notes

Street Features: Kevin Lynch mapping

FIgure 27. Kevin Lynch Mapping Analyis

Urban planner Kevin Lynch describes his methodology for analyzing the built environment of a city in his groundbreaking 1960 book, The Image of the City, as such:

“The contents of the city images so far studied, which are refer able to physical forms, can conveniently be classified into five types of elements: paths, edges, districts, nodes, and landmarks… Paths… may be streets, walkways, transit lines, canals, railroads… Edges are… the boundaries between two phases, linear breaks in continuity: shores, railroad cuts, edges of development, walls… Districts are the medium-to-large sections of the city, …which the observer mentally enters ‘inside of,’ and which are recognizable as having· some common, identifying character… Nodes are points, the strategic spots in a city into which an observer can enter, and which are the intensive foci to and from which he is traveling… Landmarks are another type of point reference… usually a rather simply defined physical object: building, sign, store or mountain.”

Community Engagement

Stakeholder Groups and Methodology

Our process for community engagement began by imagining everyone who uses or could use the Prospect Heights Open Streets. We determined these groups with the intention of hearing from previously unreached and underrepresented groups, such as commuters, volunteers, schools and schoolchildren, and long-time residents. We identified the following stakeholder groups:

We utilized three main outreach methods: informal interviews, observation mapping, and a robust online survey. Interviews took the form of in-person planned, in-person intercept, and zoom interviews. Observation mapping complimented intercept surveys where appropriate to better understand certain stakeholder groups, namely street traversers. In total, we engaged approximately 215 people.

Residents and Visitors Cultural and Faith-based Communities Educational Community, Youth, and Caregivers Management & Governance Stakeholders

Business Community

Street Traversers

Community Engagement

Grounded Theory

During and at the end of the engagement process, the UPM cohort began sorting through the qualitative data that we had gathered from all stakeholder groups using a method called grounded theory. Grounded theory is a systematic way to analyze qualitative data that allows trends and themes in the data to emerge through a coding process, which lets the data speak for itself.17

Grounded theory is an inductive approach that helps to buffer against confirmation bias, and the findings are closely tied to the data. The following pages explore the findings that emerged from the qualitative data—analyzed through grounded theory—from each stakeholder groups, as well as quantitative data pulled from the online survey in the resident & visitor stakeholder group. For the full boards created by the UPM Lab based on the grounded theory coding method, see Appendix B.

17. Delve Tool, “A Practical Guide to Grounded Theory.”

Axial Coding

Selective Coding

Image Source: Delve

UPM Lab Mid-Review with guests. Image source: UPM students

Community Engagement

Resident & Visitors

Resident & Visitor Survey

An online survey was created to gain an understanding of the views of Prospect Heights residents and people who visit the Vanderbilt and Underhill Open Streets program. The survey was made available online in both English and Spanish.

The survey was promoted to the community through PHNDC’s social media channels, flyers posted throughout the neighborhood and inside of businesses, and through conversations with residents and visitors on the Open Streets.

The survey was broken into four main sections, covering questions about the Open Streets Program in general, Vanderbilt-specific questions, Underhill-specific questions, and demographic questions. Responses provided qualitative and quantitative information about resident and visitor perceptions, experiences, and preferences regarding the Open Streets programs. All of the questions were optional, and all responses were anonymous. The analysis on the following pages provides key findings and metrics produced by the survey. Appendix A provides a full copy of the survey questions and results.

Community Engagement

Key Finding #1: The perception of the Open Streets program is varied and inconsistent between Underhill and Vanderbilt.

Through the survey it was found that respondents had different perceptions of the Open Streets program on Vanderbilt and Underhill in a number of different ways. These areas include: the feeling of welcoming within the space, the perception of safety, the sense of community established through the Open Streets program, and the people the Open Streets program is meant to serve.

It was found that respondents felt the Vanderbilt Open Streets was very welcoming, is safe, is inclusive and fosters a sense of community, and is utilized by the broader community beyond Prospect Heights. There was a difference of opinions however when asked about the Underhill Open Streets, which were viewed as less welcoming, less safe, was meant primarily for local residents, and was not inclusive and did not foster a sense of community. The discrepancy in views between the two Open Streets stems from the difference in ratio of commercial to residential uses, levels of programming and events, and management of bicycles and vehicles even with barricades in place. For a more detailed insight of responses please refer to Appendix 1.

Figure 29. Sense of Perception Results ( Source: UPM Residential & Visitor Survey)

Figure 30. Sense of Safety Results (Source: UPM Residential & Visitor Survey)