naheeno park community garden research project...
Post on 24-Sep-2020
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
NaheenoParkCommunityGardenResearchProject
FINALREPORT
Preparedfor:SFUCommunityTrust130-8960UniversityHighStBurnaby,BCPreparedby:SarahBeerB.A.Master’sCandidateUrbanStudiesProgramHarbourCentre2100Vancouver,BC
I. BACKGROUNDINFORMATION
OneofthefirstcommunitygardensonBurnabyMountainandSFUCampuswasestablishedintheearly1970swithintheboundariesofNaheenoPark(SeeFigure1).NaheenoParkCommunityGarden(NPCG)islocatedonSimonFraserUniversitylandandhasatotalof94individualgardenplots(SeeFigure2).1Thegardenwasfoundedbystudentswhowerededicatedtocommunity-ledgrassrootsdevelopmentandcontinuestooperateasacommunitygarden.
Currently,theSFUCommunityAssociation(SFUCA)islicensedtooperate,manage,andmaintaintheNPCGsinceFebruary2016.InpartnershipwiththeSFUCA,theSFUCommunityTrust(theTrust)isassistingwiththecoordinationofgardenmaintenanceandadministrativedutiesassociatedwiththeNPCG(SeeFigure3:AdescriptionofhowSFUorganizationsassistwiththeoperationalmanagementoftheNPCG).
Figure1:LocationofNaheenoParkCommunityGarden
Figure2:MapofNaheenoParkCommunityGarden
1TheNaheenoParkCommunityGarden:LicenseAgreementstatesthat“SFUistheregisteredownerofthoselandslegallydescribedasParcelIdentifierNumber:025-571-117…”.
Inapproximatelythreeyears,theTrustwillnotbeabletocontinuetoprovideadministrativeandoperationalsupporttotheNPCG:theTrustwillbeclosingoperationsbytheyearof2021.Also,theLicenseAgreementbetweenSFU,SFUCA,SimonFraserSustainabilityAssociation,andSFUCommunityCorporationwillendintheyearof2019.Consideringtheseimpendingorganizationalchanges,andwithdirectionfromtheTruststaff,IdevelopedaresearchprojectonhowtheNPCGcurrentlyoperatesinordertoprovideinformationandrecommendationstoinformfuturedecisionspertainingtothecommunitygarden.
Figure3:NPCGOperationalStructure
II. RESEARCHOBJECTIVES
Thefollowingobjectivesguidedtheresearchproject:
Objective1-ToidentifypreferentialoptionspertainingtoappropriateleadershipandoperatingstructurefortheNPCG
Objective2-Toidentifythebenefits,challenges,priorities,andoperationalneedsidentifiedbycommunitygardenersandassociatedcommunityorganizations
Objective1wasdevelopedtoidentifyanappropriateorganizationtotakeontheoperationalresponsibilitiesoftheNPCG.Objective2wasincludedintheresearchwiththeunderstandingthatthereisagapinavailableinformationpertainingtothecurrentoperationalexperiencesofgardenersandSFUorganizations.TheoverarchinggoalofthisresearchprojectistocollectinformationandshowcaseresearchfindingsthatwillprovideabetterunderstandinghowtheSFUCommunityTrust,inpartnershipwithgardenersandconnectedentities,couldproceedwithplanningfutureoperationalchanges.
• SFUCommunityTrust- In-KindContributionofServices
•SFUFacilitiesServices- In-KindContributionofServices
•SFUCommunityAssociation•NaheenoPark
CommunityGardeners
GardenMaintenanceWasteManagement
CultivationHarvesting
Organization,Coordination&DecisionMaking
AdherancetotheLicenseAgreement
GeneralAdministration&FinancialManagement
WasteRemoval&WaterProvision
III. METHODOLOGY
TheNaheenoParkCommunityGardenResearchProjectwasimplementedduringthemonthofJuly2017andfinalizedbythemiddleofSeptember2017.Theresearchmethodologyconsistedofthefollowing:
• DocumentaryReview
Areviewofkeydocumentswasconductedpertainingtoproposals,SFUagreementsandpolicies,communitygardenresourcesinreferencetothemesofcommunitygardenmanagementandoperationalstructures.Thefollowingkeydocumentswerereviewed:
SFU,CityofBurnaby,andNPCGDocuments
1. NaheenoParkCommunityGardenGeneralInformation2. NaheenoParkCommunityGardenHandbook&Policies3. NaheenoParkCommunityGardenLicenseAgreement4. NaheenoParkCommunityGarden2017Budget5. NaheenoParkCommunityGarden:SiteRedevelopmentProposal20176. SustainableSFUGardenersSurvey&DialogueReport7. EmailsfromNaheenoParkGardenersduringtheyearof2015
CommunityGardenOperationalResources
8. TheBaragaHandbook:Bylaws,PoliciesandProceduresoftheBurnabyandRegionAllotmentGardensAssociation
9. BurnabyFoodFirst:LocalFoodSecurity10. CanYouDigIt:
a) DescriptionofGardenCommitteesb) BenefitsofCommunityGardensc) AYearinaCommunityGardend) Troubleshootinge) 10AwesomeTipsforInclusiveCommunityGardening
11. CityofSurrey:HollyParkCommunityGardenGuidelinesandAgreement12. CityofVancouver:InclusiveCommunityGardens
• Walkabouts
Onthreeoccasions,IwalkedthroughtheNPCGandobservedthegardentocompareandcontrastresearchfindingswithvisiblecharacteristicsofthegarden.
• 1FocusGroupSessionwithCommunityGardeners
ApreliminaryonlinesurveywassenttotheemaillistofgardenerstodeterminetheavailabilityandwillingnessofgardenerstoattendafocusgroupsessionduringthemonthofAugust.Out95gardeners,thelargestnumberofgardenerswhowouldattendafocusgroupsessionwasonAugust23rd,2017.Intotal,5gardenersattendedthefocusgroupsession.
• Semi-StructuredInterviews
Seveninterviewswerecarriedoutwiththefollowingparticipants:
ElizabethStarr,SFUCampusPlanner-SFUFacilitiesServices/CampusPlanningJayHaynes,Grounds&Maintenance-SFUFacilitiesServices/CampusPlanningErinDaly,ExecutiveDirector-EmbarkSustainabilityPabloVimos,GardenCoordinador-EmbarkSustainabilityMichaelDenhamer,GardenCoordinator-CanYouDigItPansyHui,Manager,Communications&CommunityRelations-SFUCommunityTrustJacintSimon,DevelopmentManager-SFUCommunityTrust
• 1OnlineSurvey
Although,themajorityofgardenerswereunableornotwillingtoattendafocusgroupsession;almostallgardenerswerewillingtocompleteanonlinesurvey.Consideringthedetailedinformationreceivedfromtheothermethodsapplied,theonlinesurveywasdevelopedinordertoseekadditionalinformationandconsultthewidergardenmembership.Outofthe95gardenerswhoweresenttheNPCGOnlineSurvey,57gardeners(60%)respondedtothesurvey.
Theonlinesurveywasdesignedwithcloseendedquestions.Thismeantthatgardenershadtoselectthemostrelevantresponseprovidedwithinthesurveyandgardenerswerenotabletowritetheirownresponses.
ThefollowingindicatorswereappliedintheOnlineSurvey:
1. Gardener’slevelofsatisfactionwithNPCGoperations2. Areasofgardenoperationsthatgardenersareleastsatisfiedwith3. Thefirst,second,andthirdaspectthatgardenerswouldbegintochangeaboutthe
NPCG4. Imageswithcharacteristicsthatbestreflectgardeners’visionoftheNPCG5. NumberofgardenerswhothinkthattheNPCGneedsapaidGardenCoordinator,
comparedwiththenumberofgardenerswhoareopposed6. NumberofgardenerswhothinkthatSFUCommunityAssociation,FacilitiesServices,
Embark,ortheNPCGitselfshouldbetheorganizationalbodythattakesonNPCGoperations
7. NumberofgardenerswhothinkthattheNPCGshouldhavemultipurposegardenspaces,comparedwiththenumberofgardenerswhoareopposed
8. Numberofgardenerswhowouldliketoattendgardenworkparties,comparedwiththenumberofgardenerswhowouldnot
9. Numberofgardenerswhowouldliketorentasmallerplot(witharentalfeelessthanthecurrentgardenplotfee)thantheircurrentgardenplot
10. Numberofgardenerswillingtohavetheirgardenrentalfeesraisedupto$10,$25,$50,$100,andover$100inordertocoversomeofthecostsofimprovementstotheNPCG
IV. RESEARCHFINDINGS
NaheenoParkCommunityGardenBenefits
Focusgroupparticipantsidentifiedfivekeybenefitsandmotivationsforwhytheyparticipateinthecommunitygarden(SeeFigure4).Consideringdocumentsreviewed,thesearecommonbenefitsidentifiedbymanycommunitygardeners,aswellascommunitygardenadvocatesandmunicipalitiesinMetroVancouver.Itisimportanttonotethatthebenefitsofgardeninggobeyondgrowingfood.ThevalueoftheNPCGspacewererevealedinconversationsaboutwhyresidentsandSFUstudentscontinuetoparticipateinthecommunitygarden.
Figure4:BenefitsandmotivationsidentifiedbyNaheenoParkCommunityGardeners.
KeyOperationalChallenges
Inthefocusgroupsession,gardenersdescribeddiversechallengespertainingtoinsufficientfunding,gardendesign,animalsenteringthegarden,organizationalstructure,andgardenmaintenance.Manyofthechallengesthatgardenersacknowledgedwerealsodescribedbyinterviewees,surveyparticipants,andwithintheNaheenoParkSiteDevelopmentProposal.Inordertosummarizeresearchresults,Figure6revealskeyoperationalchallenges.
Interestingly,intheonlinesurvey,themajorityofgardeners(84%)expressedthattheyfeltsomelevelofsatisfactioninregardstohowtheNPCGcurrentlyoperates.Consideringthemanychallengesidentified,gardenersfeelgenerallysatisfiedwithoverallNPCGoperations(SeeFigure5).
Accordingtogardeners,‘GardenMaintenance’wastheleastsatisfactorydimensionofcurrentgardenoperations.However,whenaskedwhatwouldbethefirstaspectthatgardenerswouldchangeaboutNPCGoperations,gardenersdidnotspecifythattheywouldchangeaspectsofgardenmaintenance.Rather,‘improvementtothelandscapedesignofpathboundariestopromoteaccessibility,safety,andwalkability’wasthemostselectedoption.Subsequently,gardenerswouldchangethefollowing(indescendingorderaccordingtothemostselectedoption):
ENJOYMENTOFGARDENINGGrowingfresh,healthy,organic,andhomegrown
food.
ASPACEFORWELLBEING&
MENTALHEALTH.
CONNECTIONTO
COMMUNITY
INTERACTIONWITHNATURE
LEISURE&RECREATION
1. Improvementtothelandscapedesignofpathboundariestopromoteaccessibility,safety,andwalkability
2. Increasesunexposureofgardenplots3. Decreasethefrequencyofunusedandunmaintainedplots4. Improverainwaterdrainageandhydrologicalconditions5. Decreasethefrequencyofaccumulatedgardenmaterialsandwastewithinplots,along
pathways,andgardenareas
Thefirsttwoitems,alongwiththefourth,directlyspeaktoissuesofgardendesignandthethirdandfifthitemaddressissueofgardenmaintenanceandplotuse.
Figure5:Overall,howsatisfiedordissatisfiedareyouwithNaheenoParkCommunityGardenoperations?
Figure6:SummaryofKeyNPCGOperationalChallenges
TheVisionoftheNaheenoParkCommunityGarden
Theappearanceofthegardenwasoneofthemostdebatedtopicsinresearchfindings.Someindividualsandgroupsdiscussedhowtheywouldliketohavea“tidier”and“orderly”appearancetothegarden.Ontheotherhand,someintervieweesappreciatedthe“wild”orlessstructuredappearanceofthegarden.Ininterviews,peopleattributedalackofgardenmaintenancewiththedisorganizedoruntidyappearanceofthegarden.Thefollowingissueswerementioned:
• Diversegardeningpractices• Aneedforimprovedlandscapedesign• Lackofcommunityorganizationandparticipation
Insuffientfunding
•Lackoffinancialresourcestosupporttheprovisionofcollectivegardenservicesandresourcesandimprovedlandscapedesign.
GardenDesign•Shade:Areasofthegardenareshadedbysurroundingtreesandlacksufficientsunexposure(particularlytheSouthrow/Westside).•Pathways:Somepathwaysaretoonarrow.Somearenotmaintainedwhichaffectsmobilityandaccessibility•PlotSize:Largegroundlevelplotsarelessaccessibleforpeoplewithdisabilitiesandseniors.Largeplotsrequiremoretimecommitmentsandmaintenancethansmallplots.Currentplotssizesareinappropriateforpeoplewhoarestartingoutasgardenersorindividualswhodonowishtocommittocultivationandmaintenanceofalargeplot.•Slope:TheNPCGisonaslopedparceloflandwhichaffectssoildepthandhydrologicalcondtions.Akeyissuewhichcausesfloodinganddrainageissuesandaffectsgardeningproductivity.•PublicSpace:Multipurposegatheringspacesarenotincorporatedintodesignwhichnegatesthecommunityfromaccessingandbenefitingfromthespace.•LocationofWatertap/Hoses:Gardenerswithsouthernplotshavedifficultycarryinghosesfromtheotherendofthegarden.
Animals�Bearshaveenteredintothegardenandgardenersexpressconcernaboutsafety•Deerhavejumpedoverthefenceandconsumedgardenproduce
OrganizationalStructure•GardenCoordination:Lackoforganizedmeetings,workshops,andworkpartieswiththeparticipationofgardenersinordertofullymaintainandoperatethegardenwasakeythemeintheresearchfindings.•Governance:Lackofclarityandcommunicationintermsofrolesandresponsibilitiesofgardenersandconnectedcommunityorganizaitons.•Vision&Objectives:Thereisnoformaldocumentedvisionorobjective(s)ofthecommunitygarden.Notably,thereiscommunitydebateinregardstothefuturevisionofthecommunitygarden.
Maintenance&GardenResources•GardeningPractices:Someplotsarenotsufficientlyweededorbecomeabandonedandunusued.Also,dumpingofgardenwasteininappropriatespacesofthegardenhasbeenanotherkeyissue.•SFUFacilitiesServicesMaintenance:Gardener'sexpressedthatwaterhasbeenturnedoffduringthegardenseason.Workorderrequestshavebeenslowlyprocessedandwasteremovalhasdelayed.
Inordertoprovidesomegeneralideaofhowgardenersenvisionthelandscapeoftheircommunitygarden,themostfeasiblemethodwastoaskgardenerstoselectimagesinresponsetothequestion:WhichofthefollowingimagesdemonstratescharacteristicsthatbestreflectyourvisionfortheNPCG?Gardenerswereabletorespondtothisquestionbyselectingimages;theycouldselectasmanyimagesastheysawfit.Theresultsofselectedimagesarelistedbelowindescendingorder:startingwiththemostselectedimage.62.26%ofgardenerssaidthatcharacteristicsofImageOnereflectedtheirvisionoftheNPCG.AsopposedtoImageSix,only3.77%ofgardenersselectedthisimage.InsomesectionsoftheNPCG,ImageFivereflectsthecurrentappearanceofthegarden.Notably,ImageFivewasoneoftheleastselectedimages:13.21%(7gardeners)selectedthisimage.ImageOneImageTwo
ImageThreeImageFour
ImageFiveImageSix
Thesefindingsmaysuggestthatmostgardenerspreferagroundlevelgardenwithdefinedandweededplots,pathways,andsufficientsunlight,amongothercharacteristicsidentifiableinImageOneandTwo.Furthermore,thereshouldbefurtheranalysisoftheseimagesandwhyexactlygardenerschoseImageOnecomparedto,forexample,ImageFiveandSix.
MultipurposeGatheringSpaces
Semi-structuredinterviewsanddocumentsdiscussedthecommunitybenefitsofpublicmultipurposegatheringspacesintegratedwithincommunitygardenlandscapes.However,inthecaseoftheNPCG,researchfindingssuggestedthatthereweredeliberationsastowhethermultipurposegatheringspacesshouldbeincludedinthegardendesign.Decidedly,surveyrespondents(71.70%)statedthattheydidnotbelievethatmultipurposegatheringspaceswereappropriateintheNPCGenvironment(SeeFigure7).
Figure7:Doyouthinkthatthecommunitygardenshouldhavemultipurposegatheringspacesforpublicuse?
Thequestionofhowrespondentsconceptualizeandunderstand“multipurposegatheringspace”wasnotdeterminedinthisresearchproject;thiscouldhaveaffectedresearchresults.Furtherquestionsarisefromthesefindingssuchas:howdogardenersdefineandunderstandmultipurposegardenerspace?Whydo38respondentsopposetheinclusionofmultipurposegatheringspacewithintheNPCG?Whyare15respondentsinfavourofincludingmultipurposegatheringspacewithintheNPCG?IfthegardenersandSFUorganizationsconsiderimprovinglandscapedesignanddevelopingavisionfortheNPCG,multipurposegatheringspacesopentothewiderpublicshouldbeaprioritizedtopicfordiscussion.
PlotSize&Design
Largegardenplotsrequiregardeningskills,timecommitment,andphysicalabilityinordertomaintain,cultivate,andharvestgardens.Documentson‘inclusivegardenspaces’
revealedthatsomecommunitymembers,suchasseniors,youth,children,andpeoplewithdisabilities,mayrequirealternativegardendesigns.Forexample,raisedgardenbedswithsmalldimensionsareeasierforpeoplewithbackissuesorwhorequirewheelchairs(AnexampleofraisedgardenbedisshowninAboveSection“TheVisionoftheNaheenoParkCommunityGarden”–SeeImage6).Smallraisedbedsdonotrequiregardenerstostandorbendoverbecausetheycansitinachairandreacharoundtheirplottocultivateandweedtheirgarden.
Theonlinesurveyconsultedgardenersregardingthepreferenceforasmallergardenplot:11outof53respondentssaidthattheywouldpreferasmallerplot.Thereasonsforwhythe11respondentswouldpreferasmallerplotareunknown.However,someaspectsofthelatterexplanationmaybeapplicable.
Notably,gardenersdidnotpreferImage6(characterizedbysmallraisedgardenbeds)andthemajorityofgardenerspreferredImage1(characterizedbygroundlevelbeds).IftheNPCGcontinuestosolelyofferlargegroundlevelplots(approximately8ft.x32),comparedtodiverseplotsizesandamultifunctionaldesigntomeetcommunitygardener’sneeds,thegardenwillexcludecertaingroupsofresidentsfromparticipatinginthegarden(i.e.seniors,peopleinwheelchairs,inexperiencedgardeners).Thequestionremains:howcantheNPCGensureamoreinclusiveandaccessiblespacefordiversecommunitygroupsofdifferentages,languages,abilities,andsocioeconomicbackgrounds?
FutureGardenCoordination&OrganizationalStructure
InterviewsandthefocusgroupsessionrevealedthatindividualswereinterestedinexploringwhetherornottheNPCGshouldcontractaparttimeGardenCoordinatorforthegardenseason.ThisquestionaroseinacknowledgementsthattheNPCGdoesnothavespecificpersonorgroupofpeoplewhodedicatetimetocommunitybuildingandparticipation,aswellasorganizationalandmaintenanceactivities.Operationaldocumentsdiscussedthatitisabestpracticetohaveatleastonevolunteerorpaidgardencoordinator(Seethe‘GardenCommittees’resourceontheCanYouDigItWebsite).Therefore,thesurveyaskedgardenersiftheythinkthattheNPCGneedsapaidGardenCoordinatorposition(SeeFigure8).Themajority(64.15%)ofonlinesurveyrespondentsstatedthattheydidnotdeemitnecessaryfortheNPCGtohaveapaidGardenCoordinator(SeeFigure8).Ifapaidgardencoordinatorpositionwasconsiderednecessary,thequestionremains:howwouldapaidgardencoordinatorpositionbefunded?
Operationaldocumentsrecommendworkpartiesandgardenmaintenancecommitteesasbestpracticesinordertoensureproperupkeepandoversightofgardenplotsandtheoverallgardenspace.Intermsofgardenersthemselvesmaintainingandcultivatingthegarden,respondentsweredividedintheirresponsesastowhethertheywouldliketoattendworkparties(SeeFigure9).54.72%saidtheywouldliketoattendaworkpartyand45.28%saidthattheywouldnotliketoattend.ThereasonsforwhygardenersdonotwanttoattendworkpartiesneedstobefurtherunderstoodinordertocreateappropriateopportunitiesforgardenerstomaintaintheNPCG.
Figure8:DoyouthinkthattheNaheenoParkCommunityGardenneedstohaveapaidGardenCoordinatorpositionduringthegardenseason?
Figure9:Wouldyouenjoytheopportunitytoattendscheduledgardenworkpartiesduringthegardenseason?
ConsideringtheSFUCommunityTrustendstheiroperationsinapproximately2021,SFUorganizationsinterviewedhavebeeninterestedinbeginningdiscussionsastowhichSFUorganizationshouldtakeontheoperationalresponsibilityoftheNPCG.Onlinesurveyresultsrevealedthat45.28%(24respondents)believedthattheNPCGitselfshouldbecomeresponsibleforoperations(SeeFigure10).
Figure10:WhentheSFUCommunityTrustendstheiroperationsinapproximately2021,whatorganizationalbodydoyouthinkshouldtakeontheoperationalresponsibilityoftheNaheenoParkCommunityGarden?
Thisparticularresearchfindingsuggeststhatthereisaperceptionthatcommunitygardenersshouldberesponsibleforfullgardenoperations(administration,financialmanagement,maintenance,gardencoordination,legalresponsibilitiesetc.).However,thesurveyresultisinconclusiveastowhethergardenersascollectivegroupfeelthattheywouldbewillingtotakeonthefullresponsibilityoftheNPCG.However,thisisapossibilitywhenconsideringoperationaldocumentsreviewedinthisresearchproject;manycommunitygardensareself-run,withoutapaidgardencoordinator,andastrongorganizedvolunteermembershipwithinMetroVancouver.
AnassessmentoftheNPCG2017Budget,interviews,andthefocusgrouprevealedthattherewasaconsiderableamountofexpensesthathavebeencoveredthroughin-kindcontributionsthroughtheTrustandFacilitiesServices(SeeTable1).Thefollowingchartisnotanexhaustive,norquantified,listofexpensesincurred.Yet,thelistvisualizeshowfinancialresponsibilityofinsurancecoverageandgeneraladministrativedutiesandfinancialmanagementofthegardenarecurrentlyhandledbytheTrust.Therefore,ifcommunitygardenersdecidedtoassumethefullresponsibilityoftheNPCG,furtherconsiderationneedstotakeintoaccountwhatorganizationalstructureandcapacityisnecessaryforgardenerstobeabletosuccessfullyassumethefullresponsibilityoftheNPCG.
NPCGBUDGETITEMS2017
ActualCostsCoveredbyPlotFees
SFUCommunityTrustIn-KindContribution
SFUFacilitiesServicesIn-KindContribution
Materials&Supplies PlotReplacementItems X ReplacementofGardenHoses X SoilDelivery X WaterProvision XInstallationofAboveGroundHose X OtherExpenses InsuranceCoverage X MaintenanceWorkRequestAdministration X XGarbage&CompostRemoval XGeneralAdministration&FinancialManagement(estimated125+hours)
X
Table1:NaheenoParkCommunityGardenActualExpenseList
PlotFeeIncreasesforGardenImprovementProjects
Akeyconcernexpressedbygardenersandinterviewparticipantswashowtocoverthecostsassociatedwithfutureupgradesandoperationalimprovementstothecommunitygarden.Onewaytocoverasmallportionofthesecostswouldbetoincreaseplotrentalfees(currentfeesareatanannualrateof$50/$25forSFUstudents).Theonlinesurveyaskedgardenersiftheywouldbewillingtocoverthecostsofimprovementsthroughanincreaseinplotrentalfees.Thesurveyresultsrevealedthat32.08%(17people)werewillingtohaveplotrentalfeesincreasebyanadditional$10/plot;following28.30%(15people)whowerenotwillingtopayanextrafeeallocatedtoimprovements(SeeFigure10).Therangeofresultssuggeststhatsomegardenerswouldbewillingtodonatetogardenimprovementprojectsbutafeeincreasewouldnotbefavourableoptionformanygardeners.
Figure10:Howmuchwouldyoubewillingtopayontopofcurrentfeesinordertocoversomeofthecostsforgardenimprovements?
V. RECOMMENDATIONS
Consideringtheresultsoftheonlinesurvey,gardenersidentifiedthreekeypriorities:
1. Improvementtothelandscapedesignofpathboundariestopromoteaccessibility,safety,andwalkability’
2. Increasesunexposureofgardenplots3. Decreasethefrequencyofunusedandunmaintainedplots
LandscapingforCommunityGardenImprovements
Thefirsttwoprioritiesrelatespecificallytoimprovingaspectsoflandscapedesignandmaintenance.Theseactionitemswouldimply,forexample,wideningandlevelingpathways(Item#1)andtrimmingtreesthatbordertheNPCG(Item#2).If,forexample,pathways,plots,gardenslope,shading.andwatertapsandhoseplacementwereaspectsimprovedwithinthelandscapedesign,wouldtheseimprovementsalsoassistgardenerstomoreeasilymaintainandcultivateall94plots?Wouldoveralloperationsimproveifanappropriateandcreativelandscapedesigntookintoaccountgardener’sneedsandacommunityvisionoftheNPCG?Followupquestionsarenecessarypertainingtotheimplicationsandcostsinvolvedinaddressinggardendesign.
ItisevidentthatthereareahostofissuesandchallengesassociatedwithNPCGoperationsthatdirectlyrelatetothelandscapedesignandmaintenanceofthegarden.Also,carefulconsiderationofmultipurposegardenspacesandprovidinganinclusivegardendesignismuchneeded.Onefirststepcouldinvolveorganizinga‘DesignCommittee’comprisedofcommunitygardenersandrepresentativesfromSFUorganizations.TheCommitteecouldworkdirectlywithSFUFacilitiesServicesindevelopingalandscapedrawing.Inordertobeginthiswork,theCommitteeand/orgardenerswouldneedtodothefollowing:
1. SubmitanSFUFacilitiesServicesProjectInitiatingForm(PIF)stipulatingtheneedforalandscapedrawingandfortheintendedpurposeofimprovinggardendesign.Thisformwillendupina‘bluefolder’onaFacilitiesServicesProjectManager’sdeskforreview.
2. Ifthereisnopresentbudgetforthedevelopmentoflandscapedrawings,potentiallyFacilitiesServicesoralandscapearchitectcouldvolunteertheirservicestocarryoutaninformal‘napkin’drawing(aloosesketchofthegarden)oradetailedlandscapedrawing.ThisdesignphaseinvolvesaconsultationprocesswithgardenersandSFUorganizationsinordertoproduceadrawingthatreflectedtheneedsforimprovements,upgrades,andvisionoftheNPCG.
3. Afteronedrawingormultipledrawings(consideringdifferentdesignoptions)havebeendeveloped,apricingphasebeginsinwhichtheProjectManagercarriesoutacostestimatebasedonthedrawing(s).
4. TheProjectManagerwouldpresentthecostestimateandconsultwiththeCommitteeinregardstotheviabilityofobtainingfundstocoverthecostsofthenewgardendesign.
5. IfthegardenersandSFUorganizationswereinagreementwiththegardendesignandcostsproposed,afundraisingplanwouldneedtobedeveloped.
ThesearesomeoftheinitialstepstoconsiderifSFUorganizationsandcommunitygardenerswishtoimprovethelong-termviabilityofNPCGoperations.
Coordinating&OrganizingforCommunityGardenImprovements
Thethirdpriorityitem(decreasethefrequencyofunusedandunmaintainedplots)wasassociatedmoredirectlytogardenmaintenanceanduse;improvingthethirditemwouldmeandevelopinganappropriateoperationalstructurethatpermitsmaintenanceandoversightofplotusage.Intheonlinesurvey,themajorityofgardenersclearlystatedthattheydidnotwantapaidgardencoordinator.Also,resultsshowedthatmanygardenersbelievethattheNPCGshouldbetheorganizationalbodythattakesongardenoperations.Afullyself-runcommunitygardenisaviableoption;onethatisaprevalentoperationalmodelwithinthecontextofcommunitygardensinMetroVancouver.Documentsrevealedthatsuccessfulcommunitygardensheavilydependontheorganizationalskills,financialcontributions,andcommittedvolunteermembershipofgardenersthemselves.
OneofthestrengthsoftheNPCGisitslargemembershipwhichcouldbedispersedinadecentralizedorganizationalstructure.Forexample,amaintenancecommittee,administrationcommittee,financecommitteeetc.couldbedeveloped.GardenerswouldneedtorefertotheBCCouncilofGardenClubsinordertobecomeaRegisteredSociety.Notably,therearespecificrequirementsofaRegisteredSocietysuchasorganizinganAGMandaccessingLiabilityInsurance.Formoreinformation,refertoCommunityGardenOperationalResourcesinSectionIIIofthisreport.IfgardenersthemselveswishtopursuetakingonthemanagementoftheNPCG,theywouldneedtoseekapprovalfromSFU.Forexample,theLicenseAgreementindicatesthattheNPCGislocatedonSFUownedlandandthereforedecisionspertainingtothedirectionofgardenmanagementandlandscapedesignwouldhavetobeapprovedbySFU.
Alternatively,theNPCGcouldcontinuetooperatethroughaseparateSFUorganizationthatholdsresponsibilityoftheLicenseAgreement.WhateverfutureorganizationalstructurethattheNPCGtakeson,gardenerswillremainaccountableforgardenmaintenanceandplotusage.Itisrecommendedthatgardenersconsiderworkpartiesorgardencommitteesaswaystomaintainandoperatethegarden.
TheresearchfindingsshowedthatSFUorganizationshavetakenondifferentrolesandresponsibilitiesoftheNPCG.Itishighlyrecommendedthatallgardenersareawareofthein-kindcontributionsbeingmadeonbehalfofSFUorganizationsinordertoassistwithgardenmaintenance,administration,financialmanagement,andserviceprovision.Gardenersshouldcontemplatebuildingtheirorganizationalcapacityandstructureinordertoimprovegardencoordination,participation,communications,andmaintenanceinpartnershipwithSFUorganizations.Clearlydefinedandcommunicatedrolesandresponsibilitiesofallentitiesinvolvedwouldimproveinter-organizationalcoordinationoftheNPCG.
Insum,thereisno“onesizefitsall”modelforsuccessfulcommunitygardenoperations.Multiplevisioningworkshopsessionsarerecommendedinordertofacilitatedialoguewithcommunitygardenersinregardstohowtheywishtooperatebeyond2019/20.ItisrecommendedthattheTrust,SFUFacilitiesServicesaswellastheSFUCommunityAssociation
attendmeetingswithgardenerstodiscussinterestsandconcernspertainingtothefutureoftheNPCG.
ThisresearchprojectwasintendedtoserveaspreliminarygroundworkforfuturedialogueonNPCGimprovementsanddevelopment.Researchfindingsrevealedthatgardenmaintenance,design,andcoordinationarethemainoperationalissuesoftheNPCG.Inconclusion,thesethreeissuesneedtoberesolvedinordertoimprovethefunctionalityofthegarden.Movingforward,communityconsultationshouldoccurwithgardenersandSFUorganizationsinordertoaddressthemanychallengesoutlinedinthisreport.Significantly,theresearchprojectidentifiedmanyaspectsthatwouldpromoteamoreappropriate,dynamic,andlongtermNaheenoParkCommunityGarden.
ADDENDUMS
FocusGroupQuestions
1. Whatarethemainreasonsyouparticipateinthecommunitygarden?
2. Whatarethecurrentoperationalissuesandchallengesfacedbycommunitygardeners?
3. Whatrecommendationsdoyouhavetoaddressthiscategoryofissues?
Addendum1:FocusGroupQuestions
OnlineSurveyQuestions
1. Forthepurposeofthissurvey,"GardenOperations"areunderstoodtoinvolveadministrative,leadership,coordination,andmaintenanceduties,aswellascommunitygardeningpracticesandgardendesign.Overall,howsatisfiedordissatisfiedareyouwithNaheenoParkCommunityGardenoperations?
2. Whichofthefollowingareasofgardenoperationsareyouleastsatisfiedwith?
3. IfyouweretochangeTHREEaspectsofthegarden,whatwouldbetheFIRSTaspectthatyouwouldchange?
4. WhichofthefollowingimagesdemonstratescharacteristicsthatbestreflectyourvisionfortheNaheenoParkCommunityGarden?Youcanchoosemorethanoneimage.
5. DoyouthinkthattheNaheenoParkCommunityGardenneedstohaveapaidGarden
Coordinatorpositionduringthegardenseason?
6. WhentheSFUCommunityTrustendstheiroperationsinapproximately2020,whatorganizationalbodydoyouthinkshouldtakeontheoperationalresponsibilityoftheNaheenoParkCommunityGarden?
7. Doyouthinkthatthecommunitygardenshouldhavemultipurposegatheringspacesfor
publicuse?
8. Wouldyouenjoytheopportunitytoattendscheduledgardenworkpartiesduringthegardenseason?
9. Ifyouhadtheoptiontorentasmallergardenplot(witharentalfeelessthanthecurrent
gardenplotfee),wouldyouprefertorentasmallergardenplotthanyourcurrentgardenplot?
10. Currentgardenrentalfeesareallocatedat$50($25forSFUStudents).Inthecasethatthere
wasaneedtocovercostsforimprovementstothecommunitygarden,oneoptionistoincreasegardenrentalfeestocoversomeofthesecosts.Inthiscase,howmuchwouldyoubewillingtopayontopofcurrentfeesinordertocoversomeofthecostsforgardenimprovements?
Addendum2:OnlineSurveyQuestions
WORKSCITEDBaragaGarden.(2015).TheBaragaHandbook:Bylaws,PoliciesandProceduresoftheBurnabyandRegionAllotmentGardensAssociation.Retrievedfromhttp://baraga.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/The-BARAGA-HANDBOOK-2015-Rev-5.4.1.pdf
BurnabyFoodFirst.(2016).LocalFoodSecurity.Retrievedfromhttp://burnabyfoodfirst.blogspot.ca/2016/03/local-food-security-report-released.html
CanYouDigIt.(2017).DescriptionofGardenCommittees.Retrievedfromwww.cydi.ca/resources
CanYouDigIt.(2017).BenefitsofCommunityGardens.Retrievedfromwww.cydi.ca/resources
CanYouDigIt.(2017).AYearinaCommunityGarden.Retrievedfromwww.cydi.ca/resources
CanYouDigIt.(2017).Troubleshooting.Retrievedfromwww.cydi.ca/resources
CanYouDigIt.(2017).10AwesomeTipsforInclusiveCommunityGardening.Retrievedfromwww.cydi.ca/resources
CityofSurrey:HollyParkCommunityGardenGuidelinesandAgreement.Retrievedfromhttp://www.surrey.ca/culture-recreation/7108.aspx
CityofVancouver:InclusiveCommunityGardens.Retrievedfromhttp://vancouver.ca/people-programs/building-community.aspx
GoogleImages.(2017).Pictureof‘ImageOne’.Retrievedfromhttps://www.google.ca/search?q=community+gardens&rlz=1C1EJFA_enCA676CA676&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUi4Hlp8bWAhVly1QKHdjhBRgQ_AUICigB&biw=1508&bih=740#imgrc=5mocc5Vzr9rBsM:
GoogleImages.(2017).Pictureof‘ImageTwo’.Retrievedfromhttps://www.google.ca/search?q=community+gardens&rlz=1C1EJFA_enCA676CA676&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUi4Hlp8bWAhVly1QKHdjhBRgQ_AUICigB&biw=1508&bih=740#imgrc=5mocc5Vzr9rBsM:
GoogleImages.(2017).Pictureof‘ImageThree’.Retrievedfromhttps://www.google.ca/search?q=community+gardens&rlz=1C1EJFA_enCA676CA676&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUi4Hlp8bWAhVly1QKHdjhBRgQ_AUICigB&biw=1508&bih=740#imgrc=5mocc5Vzr9rBsM:
GoogleImages.(2017).Pictureof‘ImageFour’.Retrievedfromhttps://www.google.ca/search?q=community+gardens&rlz=1C1EJFA_enCA676CA676&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUi4Hlp8bWAhVly1QKHdjhBRgQ_AUICigB&biw=1508&bih=740#imgrc=Dy3E9F4cfSbp4M:
GoogleImages.(2017).Pictureof‘ImageFive’.Retrievedfromhttps://www.google.ca/search?q=community+gardens&rlz=1C1EJFA_enCA676CA676&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUi4Hlp8bWAhVly1QKHdjhBRgQ_AUICigB&biw=1508&bih=740#imgrc=jOoi3GJWYp2v_M:
GoogleImages.(2017).Pictureof‘ImageSix’.Retrievedfromhttps://www.google.ca/search?q=community+gardens&rlz=1C1EJFA_enCA676CA676&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUi4Hlp8bWAhVly1QKHdjhBRgQ_AUICigB&biw=1508&bih=740#imgrc=HJetGqI3hkqU8M
SFU.(2017).NaheenoParkCommunityGardenGeneralInformation.
SFU.(2017).NaheenoParkCommunityGardenHandbook&Policies.
SFU.(2016).NaheenoParkCommunityGardenLicenseAgreement.
SFUCommunityTrust.(2017).NaheenoParkCommunityGarden2017Budget.
SFU.SustainableSFUGardenersSurvey&DialogueReport.
Vimos,P.(2017).NaheenoParkCommunityGarden:SiteRedevelopmentProposal2017
top related