Event Reflection: Chicago Green Space Zoning Proposal Open House
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Event Reflection: Chicago Green Space Zoning Proposal Open House
Introduction
The city of Chicago’s municipality urban planning department has continuously increased and renovated the existing green spaces around the city as a mandate following a proposal by the Chicago council. Following this mandate, the Lincoln Park green space zoning proposal open house was held on June 27th, 2019 at Avenue park center North of Chicago city. The meeting was scheduled to commence at 11 am and end at 5 pm to give the facilitator of the meeting and the audience sufficient participation time. The need for an increasing number of green spaces in Chicago has become a fundamental part of the urban planning initiatives given the immense benefit that green spaces avail both to the city’s economically and the city’s inhabitants’ health. The purpose of the scheduled meeting was to inform the member of the public about the green space planned installation and consequently receive feedback from members of the public and other stakeholders within the north of Chicago which is the proposed location of the green space. The meeting was held at the inform/consult level of participation whereby information was dissipated by the facilitators and feedback received from the stakeholders who are directly affected by the installation of the proposed green space.
Area Overview
The proposed location for the installation of green space is located north of downtown about 20 minutes’ drive from Chicago CBD. Previously, the proposed location was used as the city’s dumbing cite before it was reclaimed and converted into its current use as a nature sanctuary. It is bordered by 12th street beach on the eastern side, Adler planetarium on the north, and a long stretch of industrial businesses on the western side. Generally, Chicago is home to thousands of shrubs and trees and the north of Chicago is no exception because the proposed location has fairly blossoming trees that were planted when the land was reclaimed. Although the municipality had proposed putting the reclaimed land into other uses, the proposal to convert it into a green space seemed the most appropriate due to various reasons. For one, Chicago is one of the states in the U.S recognized for its exemplary in intertwining its web of urban concrete with green spaces. It has become a culture in Chicago to host most of its events in its multiple green spaces as a way of celebrating the city’s heritage and a way to recognize how critical these areas are to the city and the people themselves. In addition, the city planners have reiterated the need for a green space in the north of Chicago, given that the area has multiple heavy industries and green space would come in handy as a natural solution to air purification.
Actors
The Chicago city chief urban planning officer, Mr. Rendoll McGraw was the facilitator of the meeting. The audience consisted of about 20 to 30 people from diverse interest groups such as human right groups, church leadership, environmental conservation groups, members o different political affiliations, non-profit organizations such as Habitat for Humanity and area residents and business owners who had vested interest in the proposed location previous use. All the guests were present ready to join the conversation. The proposed use of the land was expected to attract heated debate, especially from the business community and human rights advocacy groups because the previous use of the land had attracted lucrative businesses whose owners were not in agreement with the proposed new use of the land. Nonetheless, the use of the public property must consider the greater good of a larger population even if a few members of the society may not agree with the proposed use. Only then can the theme of inclusivity be considered to have been applied in the use of any particular public property.
Techniques Used
The facilitator of the meeting Mr. Rendoll McGraw called the meeting to order at exactly 11 past half and introduced himself as the Chicago chief urban planning officer. He then introduced the three members of his panel who will each contribute to the meeting by expounding a specific topic that will address the new proposed use of the land and how it will affect the city’s economically, environmentally, and even socially. He pointed out that the audience will be free to air their views suggestions, comments, or post a question to the experts during the presentation. The chief planning officer introduced the group of experts in the following order; Chicago chief city engineer Mr., George Broni to present the appropriateness of the proposed location for a green space project. Blad Donaldson, Chicago city’s environmental officer to present how the proposed green space will impact north Chicago and finally Dr. Burton M. Goldsby to present the economic impact that the proposed green space will have in the city of Chicago. As the presentations began, I posed my question to Chicago city’s environmental officer on why the municipality felt that the proposed Green Space would have any positive environmental impact in the city. He answered that having green spaces in designated areas near heavy industrial manufacturing areas is critical due to their effectiveness in purifying the chemical saturated air. This goes a long way in evading the health damages that polluted air can have on the inhabitants of the said location. Each presentation took about 2 hours with each precentor taking about 30 minutes to present their expert research views and opinions while the rest of the time was used to interact with the audience. Every resent played the role of the moderator in terms of delegating specific time to every member of the audience how participated. Human rights advocacy groups and members of the business community presented a heated debate which indicated that the topic was quite controversial. As Creighton puts it, controversial issues during public participation are determined by various aspects such as the significance of the impact the decision will have on those with existing vested interest related to the subject matter, which was exactly being experienced during the meeting (Creighton, 2005).
Dynamics Among Participants
The north of Chicago is a highly industrialized location that hosts several mega manufacturing businesses. The majority of the residents is a black community and Hispanics who mostly work in the manufacturing firms. The white community holds a minority population density in this part of the city but happens to own most of the manufacturing businesses. Listening to the members of the audience from the various backgrounds, I discovered that each represented an interest group and presented a rather well-articulated argument that addressed the concerns that each group felt the need for clarification before the said Green Space is established. For instance, the Human Rights advocacy group representatives aired their concerns that the previous use of the land was serving the interests of the poor and most vulnerable citizens of north Chicago and therefore its demolition my have adverse economic effects on the said group which will consequently affect their lives. Despite the heated debate that was directed to the municipality representatives, the audience seemed excited at the idea of the city owning a Green Space particularly in the northern part which will be the only one of its kind.
Strengths and Weaknesses
The meeting’s facilitators had in mind the sensitivity of the matter and therefore had allocated it sufficient time which was further divided into three sub-categories to allow all the critical areas of the matter to be addressed with the guidance of an expert, this was one of the vital strengths of the meeting. The meeting facilitator’s decision to delegate presentation duties to a team of experts indicates that he was not intending to advocate issues but rather intended the meeting the members of the public and the team of experts to engage freely without any particular party guiding or dictating the direction that the conversation should take. According to Creighton, (2005), a meeting leader is tasked with the responsibility of ensuring the meeting meets the fairness standards by establishing guidelines that will see the audience and the moderators interact without any form of intimidation (Amado et al., 2010). The reception of the members of the audience was exceptional which established a cordial rapport between the facilitator and the audience. Looking at the presentation location, the public address system, the righting, and the number of presenters versus the time allocated for the meeting was a vital strength that made the meeting a success. Byson et al., (2013), points out that the success of a meeting depends largely on the success pre-preparations which ultimately affects the quality of a facilitator’s presentation (Bryson et al., 2013).
The meeting organizers did not seem to have a backup electricity plan because during the presentation by one of the experts, the electricity went out for about 15 minutes which brought the meeting to a standstill Creighton (2005), insists that facilitators should choose meeting venues with electricity back up plans, including other technological devices back up plans because, despite their effectiveness, they have a great potential of ruining a rather successful meeting.
Most Surprising Issue Observed
I was most surprised by the reception that the facilitators received from the audience that was likely going to be affected by the conversion of the piece of land into a city Green Space. Although people with vested business interests in the proposed location were critical about the plan, they rather seemed excited that North Chicago will have its first green space. The use of simple language with perfect and well-designed illustrations made the presentation quite enjoyable to the audience particularly those that were more critical about the proposed plan. Creighton, J. L. (2005) points out that the use of simple language to explain complex issues goes a long way in making the audience agree with what is being proposed.
The suggestion of ways Process can be Improved
Even though the meeting was a success, my suggestion to improve this process would be to prepare summaries of the presentations to be made. Urban planning entails detailed complex issues that a person who has never interacted with such jargon may find it’s meaning irrelevant and difficult to grasp during a presentation. This may lead to the public objecting to what is being proposed solely because they cannot seem to grasp the matter (Brooks, 2002). Preparing summaries and distributing them to the audience gives them a clue of what the presentation is about and would be rather receptive and eager for an in-depth explanation.
References
Creighton, J. L. (2005). The public participation handbook: Making better decisions through citizen involvement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brooks, M. P., & the American Planning Association. (2002). Planning theory for practitioners. Chicago, Ill: Planners Press, American Planning Association.
Bryson, J. M., Quick, K. S., Ladderback, C. S., & Crosby, B. C. (2013). Designing public participation processes. Public administration review, 73(1), 23-34.
Amado, M. P., Santos, C. V., Moura, E. B., & Silva, V. G. (2010). Public participation in sustainable urban planning. International journal of human and social sciences, 5(2), 102-108.