Turning the Invisible, Visible: Imagining and Creating Emerald View Park Creating Emerald View Park, Pittsburgh’s newest regional park, is challenging for many reasons, not least of which is helping people to envision a large regional park in this unexpected place a steep, degraded hillside. The panel will examine the process that is creating a new public place on forgotten land. Presenters: Presenter: Ilyssa Manspeizer Mount Washington Community Development Corporation Co-Presenter: Andrew Schwartz Environmental Planning & Design, LLC Co-Presenter: Eva-Maria Simms Duquesne University

1. Imagining and Creating Emerald View Park
ProWalk ProBike ProPlace
TURNING THE INVISIBLE, VISIBLE

2. Turning the Invisible, Visible: Imagining and Creating Emerald View Park
Speaker Information
•Ilyssa Manspeizer, Ph.D.
•Executive Director, Mount Washington Community Development Corporation
•301 Shiloh Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15211 ilyssa@mwcdc.org
•412.481.3220 x203
•Eva Simms, Ph.D.
•Professor of Psychology
•Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, PA 15282 simms@duq.edu
•412.396.6515
•Andrew JG Schwartz, AICP CUD, RLA, LEED® AP
•Managing Principal, Environmental Planning and Design
•100 Ross Street Pittsburgh PA, 15219 AndrewSchwartz@epd-pgh.com
•412.261.6000

3. Turning the Invisible, Visible: Imagining and Creating Emerald View Park
Presentation Outline
•Setting Context: Mount Washington’s Environmental History (Ilyssa Manspeizer)
•Neighborhood Nature Commons and Deterritorialization (Eva Simms)
•Getting Boots on the Ground to Reclaim the Nature Commons (Ilyssa Manspeizer)
•Creating Experiences with Context Appropriate Trails (AJ Schwartz)

4. Which invisible nature spaces could you bring to light in your neighborhood? How does the specific character and context of this space influence the kinds of trails or other amenities that could go there? How can your challenges become your solutions, and ultimately your strengths?

6. Mount Washington’s Environmental History
Robert Griffing

7. By 1874…

8. By 1911…

9. By 1915…

10. By 2005…

11. Landslides worsened by undermining

12. Abandoned mine drainage

13. Contaminated soil

14. Abandoned roads and foundations

15. Remnants of 60 years of illegal dumping

17. Eva-Maria Simms, Ph.D.
Psychology Department,
Duquesne University, Pittsburgh
THE NEIGHBORHOOD NATURE COMMONS: HOW NEIGHBORHOOD WOODS ARE LOST AND FOUND

18. The Invisibility of Nature
•Neglect of urban non- park green spaces
•Invisibility of nature
•Trashed neighborhood woods

19. Garbage
THE SYMPTOM OF INVISIBILITY
3,500 volunteer hours
140 tons of garbage (280,000 pounds)
Over 6 years

20. What is the perception
of nature by city
dwellers so that it is
o.k. to trash natural
spaces ?

21. Territorialized Urban Landscapes
Urban landscapes have political and economic use functions and are “territorialized”, i.e. they form a nexus of psycho- social attitudes, practices, and conceptual realities which make them “real” to a community.

22. Logging, Mining, Pollution
The "Indian" Steps in 1911.
Note the lack of vegetation on what is now a forested slope

23. Foraging, coal digging, foot travel

24. To forget that natural places are there……
DE-TERRITORIALIZATION

25. Deterritorialized Nature Places

26. Nature becomes
• invisible
• unused
• trashed
THE FERAL LANDSCAPES

27. Invisible Nature Spaces
•Unused
•Undifferentiated “Green stuff”
•Eco-phobia
•Fear of “nefarious activities”
•Unknown territory
•Falling real estate prices
•Forbidden to children

28. “Oh, you mean the junky wooded slopes at the end of my street?”

29. Garbage is a symptom:
THE LOSS OF THE NATURE COMMONS

30. The Commons
Refers traditionally to the elements of the environment - - forests, atmosphere, rivers, grazing land – that are shared, used, and enjoyed by all.
The Hauberg, Siegerland

31. The Tragedy Of The Loss Of The Commons
•Forgetting that natural places are part of our commons
•The bio-ethical failure to understand and manage our commons
Garbage is a symptom

32. HOW can we
integrate natural
places into our
commons?

33.  Community
conversations
 Community involvement
 Reclaiming the green
spaces as “ours”
PSYCHOLOGICAL CHANGE
HOW can we integrate natural places into
our commons?
Making
Nature
Visible

34.  Fostering familiarity
 Hikes
 Clean-ups
 Education
 Birding and botany
 Developing attachment
 Developing Topophilia through
nature practice
PSYCHOLOGICAL CHANGE
HOW can we integrate natural places into
our commons?
Making
Nature
Visible

35.  Neighborhood Organization
 Trails for hiking/biking
 Maintenance/Care
 Signage
 Next to parks we find
Increases in
 Real Estate Prices
 Economic Activity
 Safety
COMMUNITY PARK
DESIGNATION
HOW can we integrate natural places into
our commons?
Re-
Territoria
lize

36. Make Nature Visible In Urban Neighborhoods !
CLAIM THE WOODS AT THE END OF YOUR STREETS !

37. Attachment and Identification with Nature
Attachment to nature as a particular place
Conversations and actions within the local commons
Inclusion of natural habitat in the neighborhood commons
Political changes: protect and conserve natural habitats and diversity one neighborhood at the time.

38. Topophilia
Reterritorialization
Bioethical affirmation
Local knowledge/Familiarity
ATTACHMENT
TOPOPHILIA
BIOPHILIA

39. Ilyssa Manspeizer, Ph.D.
Mount Washington Community Development Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA
GETTING BOOTS ON THE GROUND TO RECLAIM THE NATURE COMMONS - EMERALD VIEW PARK

41. Challenges
Create a Park on land that is:
Degraded
Fragile
Invisible

42. Challenges Solution
Create a Park on land that is:
Degraded
Fragile
Invisible

43. Master Implementation Plan (2005)
Master Trail Plan (2010)
Restoration Plan (ongoing)
PLANS

50. Challenges Solution Results
Create a Park on land that is:
Degraded
Fragile
Invisible
•6,000 trees planted
•280,000 pounds of garbage removed
•10 miles of trails
•15,000 volunteer hours
•Over 30,450 hours of employment
•5 Park entrances
•$4.5 million invested
•Local and national awards received
•Committed park users and supporters

51. Andrew JG Schwartz AICP CUD, RLA, LEED® AP
Managing Principal
Environmental Planning & Design
Pittsburgh, PA
TRAIL PLANNING AND DESIGN IS ABOUT USER EXPERIENCE, CONNECTIVITY, FUNCTIONALITY AND LONGEVITY

52. Opportunities and Challenges
to Trail Building on
Mt. Washington
•Steep slopes and poor urban soils
•Illegal dumping and former landfill areas
•Open mines and mine subsidence areas
•Isolation and limited visibility
•Existing network of unplanned and poorly constructed trails
•Illicit use of ATV, dirt bikes, etc…

53. Steep Slopes

54. Poor Soils and Landslide Prone Areas

55. Illegal Dumping and Former Landfills

56. Planning and Design Principles/Objectives
•Provide a trail connection/trailhead within a ¼ mile walking distance to nearly 30,000 persons
•Conserve and embrace the “wild character” of the hillside
•Use existing or natural materials; minimize mechanical construction
•Accommodate universal accessibility as much as practical
•Solicit/involve residents to build awareness and ownership
•Make connections to Downtown and the GAP

57. Connecting to Regional Commuter Trails and Downtown Pittsburgh

58. Leverage Proximity to the Great Allegheny Passage

59. The Typical Mt. Washington Pedestrian/Bike Experience

60. Common Trail Building Considerations and Inputs
•Soil Composition and Gradient of Terrain
•Types of Trail Users
•Desired Width of the Trail Tread
•Longitudinal Slope of the Trail
•Existing Drainage Patterns and Groundwater Sources
•Surrounding Street and Block Patterns
•Availability of Building Materials – Soils, Rock, Timber, Stable/Moveable Debris
•Vistas, Plant Communities and Geological/Cultural Assets
•Level of Access for Construction and Maintenance
•Transit Connections

61. Typical Trail Typologies
Unpaved Multi-Purpose
Hiking/Mountain Biking
Paved Multi-Purpose
(Walking/General Biking)
(Walking/Blading/General Biking)

62. PLANS, CONSTRUCTION, TRAINING, ENGAGEMENT AND ENJOYMENT

63. Trail Master Plan

64. Trails by Type

65. Trailheads and Signage

66. Trail Phasing

67. Traditional Construction Techniques

68. Early Trail Sections – Variations in Invisible Spaces, Experiences and Levels of Difficulty

69. Early Trail Sections – Variations in Invisible Spaces, Experiences and Levels of Difficulty

70. SUCCESSES AND ON-GOING OPPORTUNITIES

71. Awards and Recognitions
•2012 City Parks Alliance Frontline Park
•2013 PA-DEL Chapter of ASLA Honor Award for Planning
•2014 National Park Service Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program

72. By-Products of the Trail Building Effort

73. gototrails.com: Connecting the Emerald View Trails to the World

74. iOS App

75. OUR WOODS
OUR NEIGHBORHOODS
OUR NATURE COMMONS

76. Which invisible nature spaces could you bring to light in your neighborhood? How does the specific character and context of this space influence the kinds of trails or other amenities that could go there? How can your challenges become your solutions, and ultimately your strengths?