Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf ·...

20
Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn and Brooke Adams Vail ABSTRACT Whether providing sustenance during the World Wars, an avenue for grassroots activism in the 1970s, or a local food source for a modern world focused on "sustainable" living, community gardens have proven adept at conforming to society's needs. Today a broad range of organizations seeks to maximize the community building and food security benefits commonly at- tributed to the success of community gardens. Their development and administration must address concerns related to their long- term sustainability to position them for success as permanent and valuable parts of the urban landscape. The research for this project Involved two methods: a literature review and interviews with community garden leaders with various roles in the plan- ning, development, and management of a range of community gardens across the United States. The research reveals that suc- cessful community gardens are often grown from four "seeds": secured land tenure: sustained interest: community deveiop- ment: and appropriate design. The recommended considerations include design, development and administration factors. KEYWORDS community gardens INTRODUCTION W hether providing sustenance during the World Wars, an avenue for grassroots activism in the 1970s, or a local food source for a modern world fo- cused on "sustainable" living, community gardens have proven adept at conforming to society's needs. Today, a broad range of organizations seeks to maxi- mize the community-building and food-security ben- efits of community gardens. Further proliferation of community gardens is likely to persist as the urban landscape of the United States expands and a grov^dng percentage of the population realizes the benefits of communit>' gardens. Research has shown that community gardens have the potential to provide social, political, and environ- mental benefits to direct participants and the surround- ing community (Francis 1987; Herbach 1998; Howe, Viljoen, and Bohn 2005; Hynes and Howe 2004; lies 2005; Kingsley and Townsend 2006; Naimark 1982; Patel 1991). Despite these benefits, many community gardens face a wide range of obstacles that affect their long-term viability. In an attempt to explore the key factors sup- porting the long-term success of community gardens, this study conducted interviews with four community garden leaders from across the United States with expe- rience in the planning, design, construction, and man- agement of dozens of gardens. Their responsibilities ranged from the management of community gardens, consulting and support, oversight of open-space pro- grams, to the leadership of community groups involved in a range of empowerment projects, including com- munity gardens. The interviews focused on the devel- opment of a framework for comtnunity garden viability rather investigating specific community gardens as case studies. The research revealed that successful long-term community gardens overcome obstacles by basing the growth of their gardens on four "seeds:" 1. secured land tenure; 2. sustained interest; 3. community development; 4. appropriate design. DEFINING COMMUNITY GARDENS The term community garden came into use about the time of World War I, initially referring to collectively grown gardens and to gardens with individual plots (Lawson 2005). Over time people began to associate the term with neighborhood gardens with individual plots and common management (Lawson 2005). Lawson ex- plained that, while we assume community gardens are "grassroots" efforts, "such ventures rely on a network of citywide, national, and even international sources for advisory, technical, financial, and political support" (2005, 3). Gardens are seen as democratic locales unit- ing diverse groups in effons at self-help, and locations for teaching skills, "civic-mindedness," and gardening as a way to reintroduce nature to urban areas (Lawson 2005). Often, garden creation is a community-based at- tempt to improve local social and physical situations. Today the American Community Gardening As- sociation (ACGA) defines community' gardens broadly as "any piece of land gardened by a group of people" (ACGA n.d-, n.p.). This definition encompasses a wide

Transcript of Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf ·...

Page 1: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

Sowing the Seeds of SuccessCultivating a Future for Community Gardens

Lee-Anne S. Milburn and Brooke Adams Vail

ABSTRACT Whether providing sustenance during the WorldWars, an avenue for grassroots activism in the 1970s, or a localfood source for a modern world focused on "sustainable" living,community gardens have proven adept at conforming to society'sneeds. Today a broad range of organizations seeks to maximizethe community building and food security benefits commonly at-tributed to the success of community gardens. Their developmentand administration must address concerns related to their long-term sustainability to position them for success as permanentand valuable parts of the urban landscape. The research for thisproject Involved two methods: a literature review and interviewswith community garden leaders with various roles in the plan-ning, development, and management of a range of communitygardens across the United States. The research reveals that suc-cessful community gardens are often grown from four "seeds":secured land tenure: sustained interest: community deveiop-ment: and appropriate design. The recommended considerationsinclude design, development and administration factors.

KEYWORDS community gardens

INTRODUCTION

Whether providing sustenance during the WorldWars, an avenue for grassroots activism in the

1970s, or a local food source for a modern world fo-cused on "sustainable" living, community gardenshave proven adept at conforming to society's needs.Today, a broad range of organizations seeks to maxi-mize the community-building and food-security ben-efits of community gardens. Further proliferation ofcommunity gardens is likely to persist as the urbanlandscape of the United States expands and a grov̂ dngpercentage of the population realizes the benefits ofcommunit>' gardens.

Research has shown that community gardens havethe potential to provide social, political, and environ-mental benefits to direct participants and the surround-ing community (Francis 1987; Herbach 1998; Howe,Viljoen, and Bohn 2005; Hynes and Howe 2004; lies2005; Kingsley and Townsend 2006; Naimark 1982; Patel1991). Despite these benefits, many community gardensface a wide range of obstacles that affect their long-termviability. In an attempt to explore the key factors sup-porting the long-term success of community gardens,this study conducted interviews with four community

garden leaders from across the United States with expe-rience in the planning, design, construction, and man-agement of dozens of gardens. Their responsibilitiesranged from the management of community gardens,consulting and support, oversight of open-space pro-grams, to the leadership of community groups involvedin a range of empowerment projects, including com-munity gardens. The interviews focused on the devel-opment of a framework for comtnunity garden viabilityrather investigating specific community gardens as casestudies. The research revealed that successful long-termcommunity gardens overcome obstacles by basing thegrowth of their gardens on four "seeds:"

1. secured land tenure;

2. sustained interest;

3. community development;

4. appropriate design.

DEFINING COMMUNITY GARDENS

The term community garden came into use about thetime of World War I, initially referring to collectivelygrown gardens and to gardens with individual plots(Lawson 2005). Over time people began to associate theterm with neighborhood gardens with individual plotsand common management (Lawson 2005). Lawson ex-plained that, while we assume community gardens are"grassroots" efforts, "such ventures rely on a networkof citywide, national, and even international sourcesfor advisory, technical, financial, and political support"(2005, 3). Gardens are seen as democratic locales unit-ing diverse groups in effons at self-help, and locationsfor teaching skills, "civic-mindedness," and gardeningas a way to reintroduce nature to urban areas (Lawson2005). Often, garden creation is a community-based at-tempt to improve local social and physical situations.

Today the American Community Gardening As-sociation (ACGA) defines community' gardens broadlyas "any piece of land gardened by a group of people"(ACGA n.d-, n.p.). This definition encompasses a wide

Page 2: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

variety of community gardens including neighborhoodgardens, school gardens, therapeutic gardens, publichousing gardens, demonstration gardens, job-traininggardens, and children's gardens. Community gardenshave been created at schools, healthcare facilities,housing complexes, and parks. Gardens take variousforms, including site gardens, where paid or unpaidworkers tend entire gardens, and plot-styie gardens,where individuals, groups, or families are assignedplots. Plot-style gardens do not always serve the orga-nization and structure of educational, therapy, group,market, and training functions addressed by broaderurban garden programs (Lawson 2005). Plot-stylegardens are generally adopted for community-basedindividual gardens.

RATIONALE FOR COMMUNITY GARDENS

The primary economic benefit of community gardensis the subsidy of grocery expenses (Linn 1999). The cropsize and thus the grocery-bill savings are directly cor-related to size of plot, cultivation intensity, and climate(Pate! 1991; Sommers 1984). A conservative estimate isthat a family can save approximately $475 a year (Patel1991; Sommers 1984). In addition to the financial sav-ings, community gardens provide fresh produce thatmay be unavailable (Morland et al. 2002). At a largerscale, local governments may benefit from investingin community gardens because the development andmaintenance costs of community gardens are typicallyless than those of traditional parks (Herbach 1998).Aside from the found savings, investing in communitygardens increases the park system's user base, as tradi-tional parks do not serve people interested in gardening(Francis 1987).

Gardening may "enhance a person's psychological,spiritual, and physical sense of well being" (Sommers1984. n.p.) and reduce stress levels (Howe, Viljoen, andBohn 2005). In addition, gardens offer ethnic minori-ties a place to "express tbeir local and ethnic identity"(2005, 57) by providing a place to grow specialty fooditems not otherwise available and, for some, a place to

connect with their agrarian cultural heritage (Friends ofBurlington Gardens [FBGl 2005).

In addition to individual benefits, community gar-dens are widely believed to have far-reaching commu-nity benefits. Perhaps the most publicized benefit ofcommunity gardens is that they aid in creating a sense ofplace and fostering community pride in neighborhoods(Herbacb 1998). Community gardens often becomecentral meeting areas and event spaces in a neighbor-hood (Naimark 1982). Having a space where neighborscan meet and socialize increases social networks withinthe community (Kingsley and Townsend 2006).

Social networks, community, and sense of place arekey elements of social capital (Kingsley and Townsend2006). Increasingacommunity's social capital empowersthe individual (Kingsley and Townsend 2006) and addsto the "ability of a community' to take interest in and toshape its own future" (lies 2005, 85). Tbis often resultsin community activism and a commitment to enactingpositive changes within the community (Lawson 2005).In lower-income and neglected neighborhoods, the ac-tivism that comes from participation in a communitygarden may be enough to revitalize tbe neighborhoodand give residents new hope for the future.

The environmental impact of community gardensis perhaps the most evident benefit. Often, gardens takeup vacant lots in urban areas that are left in disrepair.Community gardens beautify tbese sites and add greenspace to blighted urban areas. The gardens also recon-nect people with natural processes; this in turn makesthem more aware of their surroundings and increasestheir desire to protect the environment, particularly intiie immediate area of tbe garden (Naimark 1982).

THE EVOLUTION OF COMMUNITY GARDENS

Tbe roots of community gardens in the United Statesgrew out of Detroit at the end of the 19th century. In1894, during a depression lasting from 1893 to 1897,Mayor Hazen S. PLngree sought to relieve the urban poorof Detroit by using gardens both to provide food and toimprove the morale of unemployed laborers (Lawson

72 Landscape Journal 29:1-10

Page 3: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

2005). News of Pingree's success spread across the coun-try' and began a national movement (Lawson 2005). AI-thougli urban gardens were widely embraced duringthis time, they were also viewed as a tetnporary gestureto help the poor until the economy recovered or peoplewere able to establish new careers (Von Hassell 2002).

Years later, as World War I took hold, people againturned toward community gardens as a means of relief(Lawson 2005). During this period, changes occttrredat tlie structural level as national groups became moreinvested in the success of the gardens. With the adop-tion of a hierarchical structure of administration, thegovernment and national organizations disseminatedtechnical information and resources for the gardens,while the implementation and organization of the pro-grams fell to local voltmteer organizations (Lawson2005). The temporary nature of the gardens meant thatonce a crisis was resolved the parties involved focusedtheir efforts elsewhere; the hierarchical organizationdid not foster the local leadership required to supportthe establishment of gardens as a sustainable commu-nity resource {Lawson 2005).

In the 1970s people inspired by beautification,health and food security' began to take part in grassrootsactivism to rebuild their own comtnunities, (Lawson2005). The focus of the gardens shifted to their positiveimpact on social connections, which in turn inspiredaction toward physical and social reclamation" (Law-son 2005, 206). This was partly due to a change in theorganizational structure of the gardens, allowing formore community ownership of the garden projects. Thegardens still relied on financial and technical supportfrom outside agencies, but citizens of the communityincreasingly took over the planning and developmentof the gardens (Lawson 2005).

METHODS

The research for this study involved a literature reviewand interviews with community garden leaders. Theliterature review provided information about Amer-ica's largest and most successful community garden

progratTis but little infortnation on community gardenswith less institutional support and organization. Thisgave an incomplete picture of comtnunitygardetis.

For the purposes of this study, a successful com-munity garden is defined as a garden that has main-tained community interest more than ten years after itsinception. This study attempted to combine existing lit-erature on the largest and most successñil communitygardens with in-depth information from communityleaders with a range of experience involving smaller,programs demonstrating a capacity for longevity.

The success of community gardens is the productof many factors such as community characteristics, lo-cation, site characteristics, economic challenges, andleadership. These factors interact in unique ways thatare difficult to predict. This study assumes that thecomplexity of these factors is best understood throughan in-depth dialogue rather than through a broad ex-ploration of topics or cases. Long, loosely structuredinterviews were conducted with individuals involvedin successftU community garden programs. In so muchas was possible, participants were selected to obtain abreadth of information on different garden types, orga-nizational structures, and degree and type of govern-mental support. Participants were also chosen to reflecta range of community sizes and geographic locations.Finally, participants involved in programs lAith Website{s) were selected to provide sufficient backgroundinformation for situating the interviews within the con-text of program structure, organization, priorities, andso forth, thoiigh this may bias the results to reflect gar-dens or programs with greater institutional support orhigher levels of organization.

Based on the criteria noted above, six program co-ordinators received an e-mail inquiring about their will-ingness to participate in an interview. Four organizersagreed to participate. The interviews with the organiz-ers were conducted by phone between September andNovember 2007 (Table 1). Eacb participant was asked aseries of general questions related to community gar-den initiation and startup, management, and successand failure (Table 2). The loosely structured nature of

Milburn and Vail 73

Page 4: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

Table 1. Interview participant information

ContactDate Personalcontacted information Organization Location

Citypopulation Program structure

Joe Mathers

Jim Rint

Lucy Bradley

Leslie Pohl-Kosbau

10 Oct.2007

11 Oct.2007

02 Nov.2007

26 Sep.2007

Community gardendeveloper for18 years.

Executive director ofFBG for 7 years.Worked for 8 yearsas the director of theNational GardeningAssociation's YouthGarden Grants program.

NCSU Uftan HorticultureExtension Specialist.Spent 11 years as theUrban HorticultureExtension Agent inMaricopa County, AZ.where she workedextensively withcommunity gardens.

Has spent 33 yearsworking as the firstand only manager ofPortland's CommunityGarden Program.

Community Madison, wl 214.098^Action

Friends of Burlington, VT 38.889''BurlingtonGardens(FBG)

North Raleigh, NC N/A^CarolinaStateUniversity(NCSU)Extension

Portland Parks Portland, OR 539,950^and Recreation;CommunityGardensOffice

The community garden program.one of many run by the nonprofitcommunity-action agency CAC,provides leadership training.technical advice, and supportservices for the 31 gardens inMadison.

Grassroots nonprofit, incorporatedin 2001 and dedicated to assistingcommunity gardens in Vermont,stems from a nonprofit started in1972.

Extension horticulture departmentassists interested communitiesand organizations with finding thetools and resources necessary tostart and maintain a communitygarden.

City of Portland Parks andRecreation Department, inexistence since 1975, operates30 community gardens in thisprogram.

»U.S. Census. (2006). http://factfinder.census,gov[January 17, 2008).''U.S. Census. (2000), http://factfinder.census.gov[January 17. 20081,

Extension works across the State of North Carolina, wherever its services are requested.

the interviews allowed the participants to focus on is-sues they considered important. Responses were typed,coded, and analyzed using content analysis within thecontext of available information about the participant'sorganization{s), garden(s), program structure(s), as wellas relevant information from the literature. In general,the participant responses reflected ideas and themesfound in the literature review. The results of the inter-views were consolidated with the relevant Uterature,and the four "seeds" were identified.

SUCCESSFUL COMMUNITY GARDENS

In the 1990s, the ACGA conducted two surveys to bet-ter understand the community' garden movement. Thesurveys revealed that the two factors most threateningthe long-term viability of gardens were tack of sustainedinterest and the loss of land (ACGA 1996). The ACGA

found a rise in community garden popularity, withabout two-thirds of the gardens having been developedin the ten years prior to the survey (ACGA 1996). butnoted that a significant numher of those gardens wereunlikely to last more than ten years.'

Gardens are considered successful if they providebenefits to the environment, community, and indi-viduals. A community garden that secures land tenure,sustains interest, and acts effectively as a communitydevelopment tool will thrive. In addition, appropriateand effective designs enhance longevity by creatingspaces that people love. The development and admin-istration of the garden is also central to success: theproject must consider a wide range of issues and bebased in a community management and leadership ap-proach. Planting the four "seeds of success" at the startof the development of a community garden helps en-sure its success in the long-term.

74 Landscape Journal 29:1-10

Page 5: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

Table 2. Study interview questions

Interview question

1. Is your organization involved in picking community garden sites? What criteria are usedto locate the sites?

2. Do groups or individuals always seek out your organization's help when trying to starta garden, or is the organization seeking out new neighborhoods to start gardens in?

3. If your organization is seeking out new neighborhoods, what criteria are used to decidewhat neighborhood a garden would work best in?

4. Has your organization found gardens to be more successful in certain types ofcommunities {i.e. with the elderly, certain ethnic groups, renters vs. owners, lowerincome areas)?

5. If people are coming to your organization to start gardens, are they typicallyindividuals, established neighborhood groups, or something else?

6. Does your organization require a certain level of group organization before they getinvolved?

7. Has your organization had gardens that it has worked with fail? Why?8. Has your organization ever started work on a new garden and not followed through with

it? Why?9. What do you see as tbe main reasons why gardens have succeeded?

10. Have you found that there are some steps you can take when starting a garden thaihelp them succeed in the future?

11. Is land tenure a major issue? What arrangements are made for land with most ofthegardens (lease, own, trust)? Is it different for each site and/or neighborhood?

12- Are there other major issues the gardens and gardeners have to deal with, especiallyinitially?

13. Are there any other neighborhood organizations, nonprofits, or groups that help withthe community gardens? Does your organization work with them in any way?

SEED OF SUCCESS #1: LAND TENURE

Community gardens have a unique history in thatthey have existed consistently as an interim land use.This feature does not lend itself to stähle land-tenurearrangements. Development pressures are strong forvaluable urban land, and gardens in such areas mustcompete with more profitable land uses. As Herhachnoted, "Very few gardens are owned hy the communitygroups that run them. Still fewer are held in trust or areowned by cities that plan on keeping them gardens inperpetuity" {1998 n.p.). Estahlishing a permanent orlong-term land arrangement from the onset helps sus-tain user interest and dedication to the garden (Bradley2007), though securing land tenure is no guarantee ofcommitment or interest on the part of residents.-

Securing property does not address all the con-cerns a community garden might face, but it allowsgardeners to develop the site with fewer physical con-straints (Naimark 1982). The common options for landtenure arrangements include leases, land trusts, andpartnering opportunities. In addition, many communi-ties have found success using policy and planning toolsto address land tenure (Pohl-Kosbau 2007). Cities in-

cluding Seattle, Boston, and San Francisco have madesignificant progress in impro\ing the permanency oftheir community gardens as a result of the efforts of thecommunities housing the gardens, garden staff, and lo-cal government.

Leases

Many community gardens operate on leased land{MacNair 2002). A lease is a contract with a landowner(lessor) allowing the lessee use of the land for a speci-fied amount of money and period of time. Althoughcommon, leases can be terminated on short notice, andare not ideal for establishing land tenure {Schukoske2000). Gardens may lease land from any willing partner,but interested groups can include universities, schools,municipalities, churches, apartment complexes, andhealthcare facilities. The Friends of Burlington Gardensin Vermont recently used a short-term lease to "get acritica! mass to develop" (Flint 2007) after which it ne-gotiated a longer lease.

According to Lucy Bradley, a lease of five to tenyears is needed to make a startup effort worthwhile(Bradley2007; see also MacNair 2002). Other sources in-dicate that a ten-vear lease is ideal because ofthe time

Milburn and Vail 75

Page 6: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

and effort people put into the garden (MacNair 2002). Ineither instance, wben entering into a long-term lease,the lessee is wise to partner with an organization v\ithlong-term stability, such as an established nonprofit or-ganization or land trust (MacNair 2002).

Land Trusts

A land trust is a "nonprofit organization that, as all orpart of its mission, actively works to conserve land byundertaking or assisting in land or conservation ease-ment acquisition, or by its stewardsbip of such land oreasements" {Land Trust Alliance n.d., n.p.) througb pur-chase, donation, or bequest of conservation easements(Land Trust Miaiice n.d.).

The type of land a trust protects depends on thefocus and goals of the trust, but these can be closelyaligned with tlie objectives of a community garden(MacNair 2002). Trusts manage gardens directly orlease space to garden organizations (Herbach 1998).Unlike a t\'pical lease, a land trust affords greater se-curity; as the land is permanently protected as openspace or designated for use as a community garden(MacNair 2002). Using land trusts to secure commu-nity garden sites is a relatively new idea, but has beensuccessful in cities such as Philadelphia, Pennsylva-nia through the Neighborhood Gardens Association(NGA), and Madison, Wisconsin through the MadisonArea Community Land Trust (MACLT) (Campbell andSalus 2003: NGA n.d.). In all cases, placing the gardeninto a land trust Is a time-consuming process requir-ing a responsible and committed group of gardeners(ACGA 1998).

Government Partners

Local governments have proved less than stable part-ners when it comes to leasing land. However, in ch-ies embracing community gardens, the gardens canpotentially be incorporated into the open space net-work with other recreational uses (MacNair 2002).Short-term leases of one or two years are common forgovernment-owned land (Herbach 1998). Many cities

are hesitant to commit to long-term leases becausethey would rather see the latid developed to expandthe tax base (Naimark 1982). If a community gardensite is designated for development, gardeners havelittle recourse when the city chooses to develop thesite, though city-owned sites are not usually on thespeculative market, and are somewhat protected fromdevelopment pressures (Herbacb 1998).

There are benefits to working witb the governtnent.In many locations, the city locates land for gardens andprovides staff with developmental, organizational, andmaintenance skills. Community gardens integrated intothe parks department are more easily protected fromfuture development as they may be located in protectedopen space (Department of Parks and Recreation, n.d.;Flint 2007; MacNair 2002). Mtuiicipally nin communitygardens are accessible to everyone (Pohl-Kosbau 2007),unlike those run by nonprofits that may target mem-bers of specific groups (Hess 2005).

Other Partners

Churches, schools, healthcare facilities, nonprofits, andhousing developments all may be champions of com-munity gardens. One of the primary ways they supportcommunity gardens is to allow a garden to be built ontheir land. Although leasing land from one of these or-ganizations is possible, and may provide a steady landarrangement, it is more common for the partner orga-nization to run the commmiity garden (Covenant Com-munity Garden n.d.).

SEED OF SUCCESS #2: SUSTAINED INTEREST

While securing land is critical to protecting the future ofcommunity gardens, they would not exist without theinterest and support of gardeners and their surround-ing communities. A 1996 ACGA survey found the mostcommon reason for failure was lack of interest. Severalfactors should be considered in developing a commu-nity' garden project to maximize initial and sustainedcommunity interest in the project. These include the lo-

76 Landscape Journal 29:1-10

Page 7: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

cation of the garden, community outreach, leadershipopportunities, and funding.

Location

A community' garden's location may have substantialimpact on the engagement of people in the project. Tbegarden should be in close proximity to the intendedgardeners, and be no more than a short walk or bikeride away (MacNair 2002).

Although community gardens have proven suc-cessful in a wide range of communities, the chances ofsustaining interest are greater if the garden addressesan unmet need. Herbach argues that neighborhoodswith a high density or large percentage of renters andcondominium owners are likely to have a "critical massof people looking for a place to garden" (Herbach 1998,n.p.). Groups most likely to be interested in communitygardens include senior citizens or others who mightnot have the land or tools to garden on their own (Suris,Braswell, Harris and Savio 2001). Areas with stablepopulation demographics are often most successful atsupporting a community garden for the long term, butgardens in diverse neigbborhoods often find it easier tosustain interest in the gardens as demographics change(Mathers 2007).

Problems of accessibility and democracy are evi-dent at community gardens as some groups, especiallychildren and teens, are traditionally excluded fromcommunity gardens. The transient nature of low in-come and rental communities are also a problem, aspeople are unwilling to invest in a community garden ifthey do not have a long-term commitment to the neigh-borhood (Mathers 2007).

Outreach

Reaching out to gardeners and non-gardeners withintbe neighborhood where a community garden is locatedis essential to the long-term success of community gar-den projects. The surrounding community should beinvited to the initial planning meetings for the garden.This ensures that the project will embrace the ideas

and hopes of a wide spectnim of community members(Payne and Fryman 2001). These meetings also de-termine the structure of tbe garden and its role in thecotnmitnity—often determining bow the garden is de-signed and organized. Community engagement in theearly stages of development maximizes the likelihoodof a gardens long-term success. Much of this processinvolves educating the community about the benefitsof community gardens and how members of the com-munity can share in those benefits. The initial planningprocess widens the pool of potential gardeners and "thegreater the number of individuals who commit to thegarden from the beginning, the larger the communityimpact when the garden reaches its goals" (Payne andFryman 2001, 6; Schmelzkopf 1995). If there is little in-terest at this early stage, another site should be chosen(Emerson n.d.). As the role of the community gardenchanges, its primary contribution to the communitymay be as a neighborhood green space or social center(Schmelzkopf 1995).

Wliile initial interest is important to starting a com-munity garden program, organizers should be preparedto continue outreach through the life of the garden (Flint2007; Mathers 2007). Organizers of community'gardensmay sustain support from tbeir neighborhoods by host-ing inclusive events such as festivals and parties (Em-erson n.d.) and offering learning opportunities such asgardening practices or cooking classes (Emerson n.d.;Twlss et al. 2003).

The distribution of a regular newsletter and orga-nizing events for gardeners to sbare information canovercome dwindling interest (Flint 2007). Otber ways toretain community interest may involve restructuring thegarden to serve a different demographic, such as youthgroups (Mathers 2007), Other tools to support gardeninterest include the creation of Web sites that build alarger community of gardeners, or the establishment ofadvisory councils or boards tbat include neighborhoodorganizations such as a food pantr^' or other membersof tbe community with an interest in food production(Bradley et al. 2007).

Milburn and Vail 77

Page 8: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

Leadership

Many community gardens have survived for long peri-ods because of the commitment and dedication of theirleaders. Leadership is important to the success of acommunity garden in two ways: 1) a vital leader sparksthe initial idea and has the motivation to carry it for-ward, and 2) community gardens, if organized properly,increase the local capacity for leadership development.

Ideally, the initial motivation for starting a com-munity garden comes from within the community-, asthis helps ensure that the ideas and goals of the projectare developed by local residents rather than an out-side organization (Mattessich. Monsey, and Roy 1997).Successful community building efforts tend to occur•'in communities containing at least some residentswho|m! most community members wül follow andlisten to, who can motivate and act as spokespersons,and who can assume leadership roles in a community-building initiative" (Mattessich, Monsey, and Roy 1997,25). In many cases, "you need that passionate person;without them the programs fizzle" (Bradley et al. 2007).

Once established, leadership roles must be dis-persed. People who succeed at completing small man-ageable tasks are empowered and encouraged to assumegreaterresponsibility (Payne and Fryman 2001). In addi-tion, allowing participants to share in leadership tasksencourages involvement and aids in replacing lead-ers or filling new leadership roles as they appear (Flint2007; Mattessich, Monsey, and Roy 1997). Allowingcommunity gardening participants to voice opinionsand participate in decision-making processes promotesleadership development (Payne and Fryman 2001). Aninclusive decision-making process helps comtnunitygarden organizations avoid potentially fractious issues(MacNair 2002).

Providing mentoring and leadership training inthe first three years of a garden's operation (Mathers2007) sustains leadership capacity as "new learning ex-periences increase people's interest, investment, andownership in the project" (Payne and Fryman 2001, 17;Mathers 2007). Developing a cadre of fresh leaders is

important. Mathers recommended limiting the dura-tion of leadership opportunities to two years so that noone "gets stuck in one position" (2007).

Funding

Several methods for acquiring funds have provensuccessful in community garden projects, includingfundraising, seeking donations, securing grants, andcharging fees. Fundraising is the easiest and most ac-cessible way for a group to raise money for its gardenproject. Fundraising is especially useful in helping toexpand infrastructure and garden programs once thegarden is established (Flint 2005). Fundraising buildssocial capital and encourages a wider range of individu-als to "buy in" to the gardens. In addition, fundraising isan excellent way to garner good publicity and reach outto the commimity (Emerson n.d.; Flint 2005). "In kind"contributions, such as donated materials and labor, arealso an effective way to reduce costs. Community busi-nesses, for example, may be vñlling to donate suppliessuch as lumber, fencing, and plants or tools such astractors (Bradley et al. 2007; Suris et al. 2001).

Grant money can be a crucial source of fund-ing for community gardens. Grants, often for a spe-cific purpose, are available from federal, state, city, ornonprofit organizations. Obtaining grant money is atime-consuming and technical process. Receiving andadministering grant funds requires 501(c)3 non-profitstatus (Suris et al. 2001). Partnering with a nonprofit or-ganization that can raise, receive and distribute grantmoney may be easier (Pohl-Kosbau 2007). Some citiesgive small grants to help establish new gardens (Parker2007). In some cases, gardeners may apply for fimdingthrough city programs (Flint 2007; Parker 2007).

Charging a fee to participate in a commimity gar-den is a standard practice. Fees generally contribute tomaintenance costs but provide the additional benefit ofsustaining involvetnent, as people who contribute finan-cially want to "get their money's worth." The willingness,or lack of willingness, to pay nominal fees often reflectsthe true level of commitment to a garden project.

78 Landscape Journal 29:1-10

Page 9: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

SEED OF SUCCESS #3: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

For a community garden to be a successftil communitydevelopment tool it must increase the comtnunlty's ca-pacity for meeting its economic, social, and physicalneeds (Lawson 2005). Payne and Fryman identified sev-eral characteristics of community gardens that makethem uniquely qualified for this task (2001):

• Gardens are places where people of all ages,races, and income levels can interact in a non-threatening way.

• Community gardens are continuous projects thatcan be sustained by community members ratherthan outside agencies.

• A wide range of skills is necessary to maintain agarden.

• The evolution of a garden offers unique challengesto participants.

" The residents control garden space.• Gardens have the potential for dramatic, short-term

visual effects.• The process of gardening allows people to feel pride

about doing something for their community.• The process of developing a garden empowers

people to realize that they can contribute in apositive way to their commutiity.

Maximizing community development potentialdoes not necessarily happen once a garden is started;rather, it depends on how the garden is developed.Community development "requires and helps to buildcommunity capacity to address issues and to take ad-vantage of opportunities, to find common ground andto balance competing interests. It does not just hap-pen—it requires both a conscious and a conscientiouseffort to do something (or many things} to improve thecommunity" (Frank and Smith 1999, 6). The success ofthe garden is often a combined effort of the gardenersand a pool of community resources and organizations[Schmelzkopf 1995).

Unlike the past, when gardens died along withgovernment interest, many community gardens now

continue to thrive because of the active involvementof the participants in all aspects of development andorganization (Von Hassell 2002). Today, communitygardens have also acquired mainstream popularity asa result of concern about community food security andthe importance of eating locally. These interests lenda different focus to the community garden as part of amovement to rebuild "a spirit of local community tiedto a place and restoring nature and food grouing in theinner city" (Hynes and Howe 2004, 172}.

Creating a commtmity garden with a beneficial ef-fect on a community requires more than simply build-ing a garden. The benefits associated with communitygardens that lead to community building develop overtime through the process of creating and maintainingthe garden (Herbach 1998). Gardens that are built by anexternal group and given to the community to main-tain are often abandoned and vandalized as none of theresidents feel responsible or have a sense of ownership(Schtnelzkopf 1995).

Build Relationships

Building positive relationships among gardeners, theimmediate neighborhood, and the larger communityis necessary for the garden to fulfill its potential as acommunity development tool. Personal relationshipsatnong gardeners are facilitated through formal and in-formal opportunities for social interaction (Paytie andFryman 2001}. Such interaction, as well as the opportu-nity to work together, encourages connections betweenthe gardeners that equip them to effectively tackleother issues affecting their neighborhood (Payne andFryman 2001). Interaction opportunities include par-ties, garden potlucks, educational workshops pairingexperienced and inexperienced gardeners, craft days,cooking and preserving classes, organic gardeningclasses, classes to share general gardening tips {Com-munity Action Coalition for South Central Wisconsin,Inc. [CAC] n.d.), and activities for children and families(Payne and Fryman 2001). Incorporating the neighbor-hood into the community garden project facilitates a

Milburn and Vail 79

Page 10: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

garden's positive impact on the community (Payne andFryman 2001).

Finally, a community garden should be connectedto a larger network of community groups and orga-nizations. Such relationships provide gardeners withservices, but more importantly, the "merging of agen-das among partners supports the garden and nurturesa collective passion to make deep and lasting positivechange in a community" (Payne and Fryman, 2001, 8).Coalitions with other community members and orga-nizations bring together gardeners, garden organizers,and partner organizations to strengthen communitygardens by linking them through shared stories, re-sources, and information (Payne and Fryman 2001),through an e-mail bulletin, newsletters, and joint con-ferences (FBG n.d.).

Organization

Organizational structure influences the character andfunctioning of a community garden. The garden mayhe run independently, or by a separate organization. Acommon arrangement is for an organization such as acity department, nonprofit, church, school or housingcomplex to run the cominunit\' garden. In these casesthe gardens are typically managed hy the gardeners,though the umbrella organization assists with certainaspects of the garden such as providing technical re-sources, educational opportunities, building materials,staff, and financial assistance. Two aspects of gardenorganization are important to the garden's success incommunity huilding^—the overarching organizationand the internal organization.

The most important aspect of the overarching or-ganization is that it he driven hy the needs and goalsof the community. Establishing a garden that is firstand foremost organized around the needs of the com-munity heips gardeners to concentrate on the purposeand focus of the garden while effectively utilizing theresources and services of partnership organizations(Mathers 2007; Mattessich, Monsey, and Roy 1997).

The internal organization of the community gar-den includes everything from denning garden rules and

determining member rights and ohiigations to decidinghow to best utilize resources and plan events (Von Has-sell 2002}. These decisions may be made through differ-ent organizational arrangements. Some gardens utilizea more formal arrangement with elected leaders whileothers focus on broad-based decision-making (Bradley2007; Bradley and Baldwin 2008; Von Hassell 2002). Astructured organization provides a framework enablinggardeners to have a voice and helps "promote stability,trust and a foundation for growth" (Bradley and Bald-win 2008, 7).

SEED OF SUCCESS #4: DESIGN

To function successfully, a community garden mnst hebased on an inclusive process of development (Pohl-Koshau 2007). Recommendations include workingwith a small group of stakeholders {at least eight to ten)(Pohl-Kosbau 2007), starting out small (Bradley 2007,Bradley et al., 2007), and developing a vision for a largerdesign so that there is a plan for additions as the needarises (Bradley et al. 2007; Bradley and Baldwin 2008).Other design factors fall into four general categories:site selection, accessibility, garden spaces, and site ele-ments, as identified in Figure 1.

No single design approach or feature can deliversecure land, sustained interest, and support commu-nity building; rather a combination of these factors maycreate a space that effectively responds to the needsof the community. First, the design process shoLild bea collaborative effort (Pohl-Kosbau 2007). In Portland,community garden design involves at least eight to tenstakeholders present (Pohl-Kosbau 2007). Lucy Bradleycautioned garden projects to avoid starting with toomany people and recommended that garden design bealtered later to accommodate growth (2007). Startingsmall was also the tactic used by Chris Burtner whencreating the Covenant Garden, as she was unsure aboutthe eventual popularity of the garden and the numberof available volunteers. Even with a small start, a visionfor a larger design is recommended (Bradley and Bald-win 2008).

80 Landscape Journal 29:1-10

Page 11: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

Site Selection Site Layout Site Elements

Ownership:

• Seek out vacant or underusedland owned by churches, schools,healthcare faciîitles, housingdevelopments, municipalities andnon-profits

Proximity;

Locate within 1/4 to 1/2 mile ofmost gardeners

Physical Characteristics:

• 6 to 8 hours of sunlight a day

• 8 to 9 inches of topsoil or theto get soil

• Access to water

Compact site rather than long andlinear

High visibility from the street andwithin the garden

Accessibility:

• Incorporate raised beds that areno more than 4' wide and 24" tall

• Minimum 36" wide paths

• Minimum 10' wide service gate

• Convenient delivery area

Garden Spaces:

• Plots should be geometric and rangein sizes from 24 to 2500 sq. ft. witha typical size of 200 to 625 sq. ft.

• incorporate a shaded seating areawith a view of the garden spaces

• Locate an open gathering space forevents either on the edge of thegarden plots or in between the plots

• Set aside space near the entrancefor communal planting of largercrops, ornamental plants or ademonstration garden

• Entrance and streetscape plantingsshould be ornamenta! and/orcommunally managed

Elements:

Include a sigh that is visible topassersby

Install a tool shed accessible to allgardeners

Plan to have a water source within50' of each plot

Include a transparent fence that iseasy to care for and maintain

Install a bulletin board in a centralcommunal space

Provide composting bins

Incorporate local artwork into thegarden {entrance features, sculpture,shade structures, paving)

Rgure 1. Proposed physical design considerations.

Site Selection

The first step in the design of a community garden isfinding a site and determining its feasibility' for sustain-ing a garden. Tbe site should be large enougb to ac-commodate tbe garden spaces and elements that bestrespond to the needs of the community. Tbe selectedsite sbould be suitable for a community garden in termsof its ownersliip, geographic, and pbysical characteris-tics. Considerations include land tenure, ownership,supporting partners, current and surrounding landuses, adjacent resources, and access to the site.

The geographic location of a community gardeninfluences long-term success. Emerson has found that"a garden located witbin walking distance of its gar-deners will receive more activity and therefore willbe safer and better maintained" (n.d., 12) and thatsuch a garden is more likely to have surveillance (Fig-tire 2). "Walking distance" depends on the individual

gardeners' health and preferences but the gardenprobably should be within a five- to ten-minute walk—a quarter to half a mile from the gardeners' homes—though some people are willing to walk up to a mileand a quarter, or for twenty minutes (Bicycle Federa-tion of America |BFA| 1998).

As noted previously, demographics of the sur-rounding community, particularly those of the popula-tion living within walking distance of tbe garden, mustbe considered. Gardens near renters or condomin-ium owners, senior citizens, low-income families, andpeople with different ethnicities are often successful.

Once a potential site is found, its physical char-acteristics should be considered. Mathers (2007) sug-gested that the garden site be compact, and moresquare or circular, rather than long and linear. At acompact site, all plots can be close to a centralized fa-cility such as the community area and tool shed, which

Milburn and Vail 81

Page 12: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

Figure 2. Adjacent residents, as well as rneinbers, provide surveillancefor community gardens in Seattle. (Courtesy of Brooke Adams Vail)

Figure 3. In Seattle, each plot requires access to water, directly orthrough a system of hoses. (Courtesy of Brooke Adams Vail)

eases logistics and facilitates interaction. Compact sitesincrease visibility, whicb prevents vandalism and pro-motes safety. Increased visibility also serves as free pub-licity to a curious public (Herbacb 1998). A long, linearsite may benefit visibility if the longest side parallels astreet or viewshed.

Tbe site should receive six or more hours of sun-light a day for optimum planting conditions (Naimark1982). There should be eight to nine inches of qualitytopsoil, though soil may be imported and raised bedsconstructed (MacNair 2002). Other challenges includetopography and access to water. Installation of a wa-ter meter may be costly, so finding a site with water,where water access may be negotiated with a neighbor-ing property, or where a group may cover the costs of

installation, is advisable (MacNair 2002; Emerson n.d.).The irrigation system sbould provide water for each plot.On average, a community garden should have one hosebib for every four plots {Suris et al. 2001) (Figure 3). Amore sustainable alternative to piped water is harvestingwater for reuse in cisterns, ponds, or retaining basins.

Accessibility

A community garden should be accessible to all mem-bers of the community—to broaden the appeal of tbegarden and to ease logistical concerns that migbt im-pede the garden's success in the future. The communitygarden should be accessible to disabled and elderlypeople, diverse ethnic groups, and functional services(Payne and Fryman 2001). The Madison Area MasterGardeners Association (MAMGA 2007a) has consoli-dated the key considerations relative to accessible gar-den spaces:

• places for people lo remain seated, standing, orleaning;

" shaded areas for people to stay out of the sun andheat;

• stable, flat, and slip-resistant surfaces;• barrier-free access to planting areas;• pathway width and surface materials

accommodating wbeelchairs, strollers, and crutches;• height and reach limitations.

A common strategy for providing accessible gar-den spaces is to install raised beds, which must alsoaccount for reach limitations. A bed that is 4 feet by 8feet (Friends of Troy Gardens n.d.) and 24 inches high(MAMGA 2007b) is recommended. Tabletop raised bedsare another option, providing enough legroom for a par-ticipant to sit in a chair or wheelchair while gardening.Typical dimensions for a raised bed are 36 to 48 incheswide and 30 to 33 inches high with 6 to 12 inches of soil(Iowa State University Extension n.d.). Aside from thebeds, entrances and paths must accommodate peoplewith disabilities. The Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA) guidehnes for path design, dimensions and con-

8 2 Landscape Journal 29:1-10

Page 13: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

ir jfr

struction ensure that a garden is fully accessible. Theprimary considerations are path width and path sur-face. Path widths of 36 inches and constructed fromsmooth materials such as concrete, asphalt, compactedcrushed stone or gravel, or plastic wood permit passageof wheelbarrows and single wheelchairs while 60 inchpath widths accommodate two wheelchairs (MAMGA2007a; Ferris, Nortnan, and Sempik 2001).

Gardens should support chajige and adaptation byethnically diverse groups of people. The design of thegarden should allow for the installation of culturallyspecific spaces (Payne and Fryman 2001). Forexatnple,the Hispanic garden tradition includes building a casita,or little shack (Schmelzkopf 1995). Casitas, unique toHispanic gardens, are used as social centers and placesto store tools, cook, or have parties (Warner 1987). Flex-ibility may also mean setting aside space for crops thatrequire more room to grow, such as corn.

Finally, the garden must be accessible for bulk de-liveries. Planning for tbis in advance may ease logisticalissues in the future. A community garden will receivedeliveries of building materials, compost, soil, andplants, and requires truck access. The garden shouldhave a minimum 10-foot wide gate, or opening, to allowfor required access (Naimark 1982). In addition, curbcuts and a driveway entrance help to accommodate de-liveries (Naimark 1982). The site design should accountfor these deliveries by locating vehicular access pointsnear storage areas so that the vehicles do not have todrive through the site.

Garden Spaces

The ability to facilitate community interactions makescommunity gardens valuable community assets. Theinteractions between gardeners and the communitymay be encouraged through the design of gardenspaces (Linn 1999). The importance of gathering spacesin a community garden should not be underrated—"common areas create a sense of place and build a com-munity garden's identity. An inviting shared space, evensomething as simple as a comfortable spot to sit in the

Figure 4. In Durham, North Carolina, small seating areas provideplaces for rest, relaxation, and socializing. Tue character, fiirniture. anddesign of these spaces enhance a sense of ownership. (Courtesy ofLeslie A. Titchner)

shade, gives gardeners and neighbors a place to gatherinformally, outside of organized meeting and socialevents" (Payne and Fryman 2001, 7). Both small (Fig-ure 4) and large (Figure 5) gathering areas are importantto fostering interaction among gardeners and the restof the community through social events and acti\ities.A shaded seating area uith chairs and benches, pref-erably with a view of the gardens, is sufficient, thoughsome gardens also reserve open areas, grass-covered orpaved, for use when there are parties or classes (Walter2003). These communal gathering spaces are typicallymore organic in form, whereas garden plots and pathsare more geometric (Walter 2003).

The number of garden plots should be based onanticipated participation, and their size varied accord-ing to the needs of the gardeners. Plot sizes may be 10 x20, 15 X 15, or 25 x 25 feet, all easily balved or doubled.Individually managed plots encourage a sense of own-ership and attachment to place, yet it is also importantto reserve some communal plots (Waiter 2003). The

Milburn and Vail 8 3

Page 14: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

Figure 5. Large gathering areas become the location for communityevents, decision making, and coliaborative effort in Durham, NorthCarolina. {Courtesy of Leslie A. Titchner)

Figure 6. In Seattfe, the tool shed often becomes the 'base of op-erations." with information board, water bibs, social area, and tools.(Courtesy of Brooke Adams Vail)

entrance spaces should be attractive and inviting, andthis is often where communal beds with ornamentalplantings are located (Walter 2003).

Site Elements

Features within the site contribute to the feeling ofcommunity and create a visible garden that is an assetto the neighborhood (Flint 2007). The most importantand common site features are tooi sheds, signs, fencing,compost hins. informational hoards, and public art.

Tool shed. The tool shed allows gardeners to store toolswithout transporting them back and forth with eachgarden visit (Emerson n.d.). The tool shed is also a com-munal social space (Figure 6).

Signs. A simple sign establishes the garden's identityand ownership, and provides information to outsiders(Walter 2003). Including a sign as part of an attractivestreetscape encourages the interest of the surroundingcommunity.

Fencing. A common concern when starting a commu-nity garden is security and vandalism. Eight-foot highfences reduce the problem to manageable levels (Suriset al. 2001). The issue of fencing is contentious andshould be considered within the context of the com-munity and its culturally specific values as some peoplebelieve that fences block out the community for whichtlie garden is intended (lobb 1979).

Compost bins. Compost bins enable easy disposal ofdebris and plant material on site, as well as serving as afree source of nutrient-rich soil (Emerson n.d.).

Information board. An information or bulletin boardhelps maintain comniunication between gardenersand the surrounding community by providing a loca-tion for information about garden rules, upcomingmeetings and events, and other general information(Suris et al. 2001).

Public art. The design of the community garden shouldbe open and flexible enough to allow gardeners to in-corporate some of their own ornamentation and art-work (Figure 7). In his study, Walter (2003) found thatornamentation was one of the most common elementsof a community garden. Some gardens seek out contri-butions from local artists such as ornate entrance gates(SEEDS in Durham, North Carolina, Figure 7), gardensculptures, hand-painted hricks, wood arbors, and mu-rals (Walter 2003). This helps to establish the garden'sidentity and sense of place.

The primary concerns for physical design are siteselection, site layout, and site elements. In selecting agarden site, ownership, proximity, demographics, andphysical characteristics are the most important con-siderations. In terms of site layout, the most important

84 Landscape Journal 29:1-10

Page 15: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

concerns are accessibility, hoth of site and gardenspaces. Incorporating these elements into the designof a commimity garden will not ensure its long-termsuccess, hut these elements are universally recom-mended by successful community gardens. In combi-nation with an overall design responding to the needsofthe community and gardeners, the elements can helpstrengthen the connections between the gardeners andthe community.

PLANTING THE SEEDS OF SUCCESS:ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENTCONSIDERATIONS

Development and administration considerations (Fig-ure 8) are central to planning and organizing the gardenand the gardeners. This study has identified three pri-mary categories in the development process:

1. securing land;

2. working with the community; and

3. anticipating problems.

In tern:is of securing land, the primary focus shouldbe on determining a land tenure arrangement and plan-ning for the future. For the garden to he rooted in thecommunity and its decisions (Arnstein 1969), the com-munity must work together to establish a vision, orga-nize itself, and engage multiple members at every level.A communit>' garden that anticipates inevitable prob-lems is more able to effectively respond as a result of aneducated leadership that has identified and discussedissues. Creating a decision-making system based in di-alogue builds flexibility and resilience into the system,making a group more capable of addressing untbre-seen challenges.

The elements for consideration described in Fig-ure 8 are by no means inclusive of all the decisions thatcommunity gardeners must make during the develop-ment of a garden. Figure 8 does, however, present rec-ommendations for those issues identified through the

Rgure 7. In Durham. North Carolina, artwork (see also Figure 5) ex-presses and enhances a sense of ownership and community property.Fences and gates are often the recipients of artistic expression—signs, coiorful paint, and ornamentation—that reinforce the senseof entry and market the garden to the local community. (Courtesy ofLeslie A. Titchner)

literature and interviews as most crucial for sustaininga community garden for the long-term.

CONCLUSION

The factors contributing most to the success of a com-munity garden are land tenure, sustained interest, com-munity development, and overall planning, and design.Fach garden becomes a unique combination of whatworks best within a particular community as a result ofthe particular organizational structure, leadership roles,relationships, and design. Community gardens are dy-namic entities that must have the ability to respond tochange: strong relationships, clear leadership, and asolid organizational structure ensure that the garden isprepared to respond effectively to challenge. Ironically,as gardens become more secure, their organizations arelikely to become more structured and less flexible—anevolution undermining die very principles from whichcommunity gardens grow.

This study brings to light the importance of com-munity control in the creation and management ofcommunity gardens. Current approaches to "consultingcommunities" reflect an attitude wherein a governmentor non-governmental group retains control hy consult-ing with a commun!t>' only after key decisions are made.This approach is contrary to the principles underscor-ing long-term community garden viability. Outsidegroups often get involved because ofthe role that com-munity gardens play in providing park, play, and open

Milburn and Vail 85

Page 16: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

Secure Land Work with the Community Anticipate Problems

Land Tenure:

Arrange leases for a minimum of 5years; 10 years is ¡deal; less than5 years is best for areas with nohistory of community gardens

Pursue a land trust if there isdefinite long-term commitmentamongst the gardeners

Seek out municipally owned landif the city supports communitygardens

Seek out non-municipally ownedland if wanting to partner with aparticular organization such asa church or school

Planning:

Advocate for incorporating communitygardens into comprehensive plansand zoning ordinances

Establish a Vision:

• Invite the entire community to beinvolved in the planning process

• Establish garden goals that reflectthe ideas of the community

• Seek assistance from communityorganizations to execute the vision

V J

Organize the Gardeners:

Rnd a site accessible to the coregroup of interested gardeners

Establish leadership roles anddistribute them among gardeners

Arrange for leadership training andeducation

Adopt an inclusive decision-makingprocess and structure

Establish rules, regulations andmembership guidelines

Engage the Larger Community:

• Organize an advisory board

• Plan events and educationalopportunities (i.e. classes, parties)

• Create a gardener network throughemail bulletins, newsletters andconferences

V y

Secure Funding:

A basic budget to establish a gardenis between $1000 and $5000

Seek donated materials and supplies

Host fundraising events such as bakesales and potluck dinners

Seek assistance from a 501(c)3non-profit partner with applying forgrant money

Charge yearly membership fees ($10to $50 per year depending on whatthe fee covers and the plot size)

Start Smal l :

Have a vision for the future of thegarden, but implement it in stages

Be Flexible:

Establish a structure and designthatcan accommodate the changingneeds of gardeners

V y

Figure 8. Proposed development and administration considerations.

space in communities with little green space. Whilethe proposed "seeds" support long-term success, com-munity leaders, designers, planners, and governmentstaff must recognize when a garden has evolved from afood production space to what is primarily recreationaland leisure open space. Open space functions can beas iniportant as community gardens to communitybuilding, and perhaps may he the next natural step in acommunity garden's evolution. For designers, the mostimportant lesson is that of empowerment. The success-ful community garden ¡s less about a grand design thanabout facilitating a dialogue whereby the communityidentifies, prioritizes, and visualizes its garden.

Rising food and fuel costs bring to the fore the im-portance of having access to an inexpensive and localfood source that is part of a larger, diverse, urban foodnetwork. Despite this, many individual community gar-dens face an unsure future.There is no "one-size-fits-all"solution to this issue; some factors, however, have beenidentified as effective in creating successful communitygardens. These factors combine to form and guide aprocess for starting community' gardens and promotinglong-term viahility, stability, and success. This processshould help community gardens realize their potentialfor hecoming a key component in an integrated, local,food community network as they not only provide fresh

8 6 Landscape Joumai 29:1-10

Page 17: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

produce but also, when successful, have far-reachingsocial impacts.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thanks to Dr. Pat Undsey and Mike Jennings for feedback on thispaper.

NOTES

1. While the original fiinctíon of a community garden may befood production and community building, as time passes,the garden may no longer be needed for ihose functions. Asits use changes over time, the value of the garden to the com-munity changes, and the community may no longer need(he garden. If this occurs, ihe garden may be retained for itsenvironmental and open-space benefits.

2. Some may argue tliat interest or commimient should be evi-dent or proven before attempting to secure land tenure. Thismay be a "chicken or egg" issue.

REFERENCES

American Community Gardening Association (ACGA). 1996.National Community Gardening Survey: 1996. http: //Communitygarden.org/docs/iearn/CGsurveySepartl.pdf.[August 19, 20071.

— -. 1998. Securing Space. http://www.communitygarden.org/learn/resources/articles.php. ¡February 2, 2008).-.n.d. What Is a Community Garden? http. I lwww.communitygarden.org/learn/. [November 19,20071.

Arnstein, Sherry R. 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. JAIP 35[4): 216-224.

Balmori, Diana, and Margaret Morton. 1993. Transitory Gardens:Uprooted Lives. New Haven, CT: Yaie University Press.

Bicycle Federation of America (BFA). 1998. Creating WalkableCommunities: A Guide/or Local Governments. http://www.bikewalk.org/ncbw_pubs.php. jApril, 29,2008|.

Bradley. Lucy. 2007. Personal communication with the authors.November 2.

Bradley. Lucy, and Keith Baldwin. 2008. "How to Organize a Com-munity' Garden " (unpublished). Raleigh: North CarolinaCooperative Extension Service.

Bradley, Lucy, Jessamine Hyatt, Brenda Brodie. and Chris Burtner.2007. Cultivating community: Starting a congregation-sponsored community garden. Paper presented at themeeting of Come to the Table. Pittsboro, NC. Notes

available at http://www.comelotbetablenc.org/Cultivating_Communlty^Workshop%20Notes_l 1 -3-07.pdf. [September 29, 2009].

Campbell, Marcia Caton, and Uanieile Saliis. 2003. Communityand conservation land trusts as unlikely partners? The caseof Troy Gardens, Madison, Wisconsin. Land Use Policy 20(2): 169-180.

Community Action Coalition for South Central V\̂ isconsin, Inc.(CAC). n.d,Aboutus, http://www.cacscw.org/. IFeb-ruary2,2008].

Covenant Community Garden, n.d. Covenant Community Garden(pamphlet). FuquayVarina: Chris Burtner.

Department of Parks and Recreation (Burlington, VT). u.a. Burl-ington Area Community Gardens. http://www.enjoyburlington.com/Programs/CommunityGardens.cftn.[February 2, 2008].

Emerson, Brian. n.d. From Neglected Parcels to Community Gar-dens: A Handbook, http://www.wasatchgardens.org/gardenresources.html. [February 2, 20081.

Ferris, John, Carol Norman, and Joe Sempik. 2001. People, land,and sustainability: Community gardens and the socialdimension of sustainable development. Social Policy andAdministration 35 (5): 559-568.

Flint, Jim. 2005. Fundraisingfor Success. http://www.burlingtongardens.org/gardenorganizer.html. [February 2,2008].. 2007. Personal communication with the authors, Octo-ber 11.

Francis. Mark. 1987. Some different meanings attached to cityparks and community gardens. Landscape Journal ñ [2]:101-112.

Fratik, Flo, and Anne Smith. 1999. The Community DevelopmentHandbook: A Tool to Build Community Capacity. Hull. On*tario: [.abour Market Learning and Development Canada.

Friends of Burlington Gardens (FBG). n.d. Vermont CommunityGarden Network. http://www.burUngtongardens.org/Vermont_Communlty_Gardens.hönI. [February 2. 2008[.

Friends of Troy Gardens, n.d. The Troy Enabling Garden, http: //wvyw.troygardens.org/enablinggard.htmi. [April 29,2008[.

Herbach, Geoff. 1998. Harvesting the City: Community Gardeningin Greater Madison. Wisconsin. http://wviiw.cityfarmer.org/madison.html. [August 20,2007].

Hess, David. 2005. Case Studies of Community Gardens and Ur-ban Agriculture: Portland, Oregon. http://www.davidjhess.org/PortlandCG.pdf. [August 19, 2007[.

Howe, Joe, André Viljoen. and Katrin Bohn. 2005. New cities withmore life: Benefits and obstacles. In Continuous Productive

Milburn and Vail 87

Page 18: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

Urban Landscapes: Designing Urban AgriruititreJor Sus-tainable Ciliés, ed. André Viljoen, 57-64. New York: Archi-tectural Press.

H\Ttes, H. Patricia, and Geneviève Howe. 2004. Urban horticul-ture in the cuniemporary United Slates: Personal andcormnunity benefits. Acta Iiorticiittiirae643:171-181.

Iles, Jeremy. 2005. The social role of community farms and gar-dens in ihe city. In Continuous Productive Urban Land-scapes: Designing Urban Agrictdturefor Sustainable Cities,ed. André VUjoen, 83-88. New York: Arcliitectural Press.

Iowa State University Extension, n.d.. Therapeutic Gardening:Creating Raised Bed Planters, https: //www.extension..iastate.edu/ store / UsUtenis.aspx?Keyword=rg 111.|Iune3.20081.

íübbj. (1979). The Complete Book of Community Gardening.NewYork: William Morrow.

Kirigsley, lonathan, and Mardie Townsend. 2006. "Dig in" to socialcapital: Conimiinicv- gardens as mechanisms for growingurban social connectedness. Urban Policy and Research 24(4): 525-537.

Land Trust Alliance, n.d. Frequently Asked Questions. http://www.ita.org/aboutlt/faq.shtml. [February 2. 20081.

Lawson, Laura I. 2005. City Bountiful: A Century of CommunityGardening in America. Berkeley: University of Califor-nia Press.

Linn, Karl. 1999. Reclaiming the sacred commons. New Village 1:42-49.

MacNair, Emily. 2tK)2. The Garden City Handbook: How to Createand Protect Community Cardens in Greater Victoria. Victo-ria. BC: Polis Project on Ecological Governance.

Madison Area Master Gardeners Association (MAMGA). 2007a.Accessible Garden Design Part A. http://www.madison.com/communities/mamga/library/index.pbp#Access.|April29, 2008J.. 20Q7h. Accessible Gardem Supplement, htxp:/Iwww.madison.comy communities/ mamga/ library/ index.php#Access. [April 29. 2008].

Matbers. Joe. 2007. Personal communication with the authors,October 10.

Mattessich. Paul. Barbara Monsey, and Corinna Roy. 1997. Com-munity Building: What Makes it Work. Saint Paul. MN: Am-herst H. Wilder Foundation.

Morland, Kimherly. .Steve Wing. Ana Oiez Roux, and CharlesPooie. 2002. Neighborhood characteristics associated withthe location of food stores and food service places. Ameri-can Journal of Preventive Medicine 22 ( I ): 23-29.

Naimark, Susan, ed. 1982. A Handbook of Community Gardening.New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

Neigliborhood Gardens Association, n.d. About NGA. http: //www.ngalandtrust.org/about.html. (February 2, 2008!.

Parker. Janet. 2007. New Garden Fund Grants for 2008.http://www.cacscw.oi^/ganlens/new_garden_fund_grants.htm. [February2,2008|.

Patel, Ishwarbhai. 1991. Gardening's socioeconomic impacts.Journal of Extension 2S (4). http://www.joe.org/joe/1991winter/al.html. [February 2.2008].

Payne, Karen, and Deborah Fryman. 2001. Cultivating Commu-nity: Principles and Practices for Community Gardeningasa Community-Building Tool. ed. Don Boekelhelde.Philadelphia: American Community GardeningAssociation.

Pohl-Koshau. Leslie. 2007. Personal communication wilh theauthors, September 26.

Schmelzkopf, Karen. 1995. Urban community gardens as con-tested space. Geographical Review %^ (3): 364-381.

Schukoske, Jane. 2000. Community development throughgardening: State and local policies transforming urbanopen space. Journal of Legislation and Public Policy 3 (2):351-392.

Sommers. Larry, 1984, The Community Garden Book: New Di-rections for Creating and Managing Neighborhood FoodGardens in Your Town. Burlington, VT: Gardens for All/Na-tional Association for Gardening.

Suris, Rachel, Cbris Braswell, Laura Harris, and Yvonne Savio.2001. Community Garden Stari-tip Guide, http: //celosangeles.ucdavis.edu/garden/articies/startup^guide.html. [February 2, 2008].

TWiss, Joan, |oy Dickinson, Shirley Duma. Tanya Kleinman,Heather Paulsen, and Üz Rilveria. 2003. Community gar-dens: Lessons learned from Califortiia healthy cities andcommunities. American Journal of Public Health 93 (9):1435-1438.

Von Hassell, Malve. 2002. The Struggle for Eden: Community Gar-dens in New York City. Westpon, CT: Bergin and Gar\'ey.

Walter. Andrew. 2003. A Pattern Language for CommunityGardens. Unpublished master's thesis. University of Geor-gia. Athens, http://www.cityfanner.org/pattern.html.|April29,2008[.

Wamer. Sam Bass. 1987. To Dwell is to Garden: A Histnr)'of Bos-ton's Community Gardens. Boston: Northeastern Univer-sity Press.

88 Landscape Journal 29:1-10

Page 19: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

AUTHORS LEE-ANNE MILBURN is an Associate Professor and BROOKE ADAMS VAIL recently graduated from North CarolinaProgram Coordinator at University of Nevada. Las Vegas. She is State University with a masters degree in Landscape Archi-a registered landscape architect, holding a masters degree In tecture. She received her undergraduate degree from ColgateLandscape Architecture and a PhD in Rural Studies—Environ- University in Hamiiton. New York, where she majored in Environ-mental Design and Rural Development from the University of mentai Geography. She currently works at Integrated Site DesignGuetph, Ontario, Canada. in Seattle.

Milburn and Vail 89

Page 20: Sowing the Seeds of Success - Faculty Web Pagesfaculty.cbu.ca/lsyms/litreviews/milburn.pdf · Sowing the Seeds of Success Cultivating a Future for Community Gardens Lee-Anne S. Milburn

Copyright of Landscape Journal is the property of University of Wisconsin Press and its content may not be

copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.