“CommUniversity” Partnerships

1 OCTOBER 15, 2010 – IDAHO APA Conference

2

Presentation Overview• Introductions• Community/University Partnerships• University of Idaho’s Building Sustainable Communities Initiative• University of Idaho’s Partnership Model• Academic Program Chronology• Community Projects• Community Insights • Student Insights• Value Added• Lessons Learned• Session Discussion Questions

3

Introductions

• Tammi Laninga, UI Bioregional Planning and Community Design faculty

• Wayne Benner, Chair, Priest River Community Advisory Board (university/community interface)

• Michele Vachon, UI Building Sustainable Communities Initiative and graduate student

• Morgan Bessaw, UI Bioregional Planning and Community Design program graduate student

Quick Poll

• How many of you have worked with a university on a project before?

4

5

Community-University Partnerships• Historic University/

Community Involvement– Land Grant Universities– Design Centers

• University of Chicago• University of Maryland

• Critiques– Treating communities as

“pockets of need, laboratories for experimentation, or passive recipients of expertise

• Recent Resurgence of Partnerships– Support by University

Presidents and Provosts for universities to “be engaged in problem solving for the broader society and the state and local community”

– Broadening Pedagogical Paradigms (service-learning)

6

Focus: Bioregional Planning and Community Design

InterdisciplinaryM.S. Degree

GraduateCertificate

Upper-Division Undergraduate and GraduateCourses

UI - CommunityEngagement

UI Extension

Service LearningParticipatory

Research

Focus: Professional Development and Capacity Building

Audience: Elected and Appointed Community Leaders

Certified Public Official Program

Learning and Practice

Collaborative(LPC)

Collaborative for Effective Planning and Governance

(CEPG) Academic Programs

BSCI

7

Bioregional Planning Practice

Considers ecological boundaries & functions

Engages citizens and communities

Emphasizes solutions within the limits and potential of a region

Considers Historic, Cultural, Economic, Social and Political Values

Learning and Practice

Collaborative(LPC)

Collaborative for Effective Planning and Governance

(CEPG) Academic Programs

8

Participating Colleges/Departments• College of Art and

Architecture– Landscape Architecture– Architecture

• College of Natural Resources– Conservation Social Sciences

• College of Letters, Arts and Social Sciences– Political Science

• College of Science– Geography

• College of Engineering– Civil Engineering

(Transportation)

• College of Agriculture– Agricultural Economics and

Rural Sociology– Extension

• College of Education– Health, Physical Education,

Recreation and Dance

• College of Law• College of Graduate Studies• UI Extension

9

University of Idaho Partnership Model

Community

UI Extension

Landscape Architecture

Bioregional Planning

Architecture

Academic Planning Program

• Atlas• Comp Plan

1st Semester

• Studio I• Hands-on

2nd

Semester • Project scale

3rd & Beyond

11

Where have we worked……

• CDA Reservation, Plummer• Priest River• Valley County & Cascade

Where next?• Clearwater Basin• City of Moscow

How did it all begin?

• Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, Brownfield division, contacted U of I about several upcoming projects in Priest River– Old dump site –grants in place, needed design concepts– Waterfront - development options (commercial and park)

• City ready to update comprehensive plan, • Community interested in economic development ideas• Summer of 2009 –

– Faculty/staff from U of I met with the mayor and about 20 interested community members.

12

Commitments from the City of Priest River

• Mayor formed the Priest River Community Advisory Board – interface between city and university

• City agreed to support student/faculty travel and printing costs

• City gave U of I $10,900, which was also used as in-king match on joint grant application

Fall 2009 Projects

• Architecture, landscape architecture and planning programs focused class work in the region – City master plans– Old dump site/new park conceptual designs– Regional atlas

15

Spring 2010 Studio Projects

• Priest River, ID1. Waterfront Redevelopment

Project

2

2. Comprehensive Plan Update & Future land use map

3. Economic Development Case Studies

4. Community Engagement Project, including a Participation Toolbox

16

Priest River:Community Engagement Project

17

1. Create a youth voice, instill pride within the community.

2. Establish a community vision.

3. Find local organizations or individuals to keep PRIDE moving forward.

4. Create a toolbox of resources for the community to use in future community engagement.

Goals:

18

What Happened:1. Researched active organizations in Priest River area – Complied contact information for community

2. First two meetings: Facilitated conversation with community members to identify: - Strengths- Values

3. Third and fourth Meetings:- Presented findings from previous meetings- Created an action plan for identified strategies- Generated commitment for action strategies

4. Presented results to community with “tool box” of resources

- Threats- Strategies

Community Packet ‘toolbox’

• Teambuilding exercises• Community case studies• Active community groups• National Park Service Community Toolbox• Meeting data and results• Community worksheets• Articles• Resources19

Results:• Student constraints– Funding– Compressed time frame• Lack of community trust• Differences in schedules• Unable to recover materials

• Community apathy and fear• Good experience for what working in a

community can actually be like!!

20

21

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDIES

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDIES

• Research Goal– Hypothesis Generating Study– To examine case studies of rural communities that have been

successful in achieving community and economic development goals in the face of changing rural conditions

Communities selected incorporated successful strategies into their economic development and revitalization efforts

RESEARCH FOCUS AND SCOPE OF WORK

22

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDIES

• Relationships within a community• Social networks as an asset• Positive or Negative

• Knowledge through education and experience• Increases in productivity correspond to higher wages

• Natural amenities and resources• Natural Amenity Index as proxy

• Wages, Labor vs. Non-labor Income

Social Capital

Human Capital

Natural Capital

23

Financial Capital

Priest River’s Capitals Framework

24

Natural Capital• Natural Amenity index = 5 • Waterfront, virgin lumber, scenery,

national forest, mountains• Recreation, Water Sports, Snow

Skiing, camping, hiking, mt. biking, fishing

• Priest River Experimental Forest (1911)

Physical Capital• Buildings: Beardmore Building

Renovation 2009• Historic Charbonneau Hotel-

Renovation underway• Priest River Museum• Albeni Falls Dam

Human Capital • Education

• Priest River Lamanna High School

• Priest River Elementary• West Bonner County Library• Creative class 19% in 2000

Social Capital• Community Groups

• Priest River’s Soup Kitchen/ Churches to 4H and boy scouts (93)

• Priest River Timber Days Celebration

• Voter turnout 78% (2008)

Lessons from Peer Communities

25

Leavenworth

Cultural Tourism

Main Street

Common Vision

Dayton

Historic Preservation

Regional Spill-over

Agrotourism

Hailey

Resort Tourism

Quality of Life

Bedroom Community

Lessons from Peer Communities

26

Twisp

Tourism

Art

Ecology

Burlington

Energy

University

Regional

Coeur d’ Alene

Tourism

Open Space

Natural Amenities

Important economic and social trends taken

from case studies•Downtown Renewal•Quality of Life•Attract Creative Class/ Growing Industries•Diversified economy•Celebrate town heritage in future development•Think regionally/ maximize use of natural amenities•Sustainable projects•Cooperation with one vision

What does this mean for Priest River?

27

Partner Community Benefits• Students help citizens imagine the future• Volunteer hours – “grant match” -@ $17/hour• Publicity = donor interest• Conceptual designs, draft plans/ordinances• Faculty and student expertise• Spin-off projects for focused student work

28

Benefits to the Community

Increased citizen involvement in

community decision making

Increased citizen awareness of community

planning issues

Increased community’s ability

to gain grant funding

Value Added

Stu

dents/ faculty

2,167

hours

$36,839.85 VALUE

31

Community Quotes:

- Community Engagement“All the students made the

community of Priest River feel important, in my opinion, and when a community feels that they are more than "Just a Grade" then individual pride in the community, as a whole, becomes more stimulated and I feel the students excelled in this regard.”

Common Vision“I have truly enjoyed working

with the students and faculty. I learned a lot of great ideas and hope to continue being educated for the next two years.”

Priest River – “Value Added”•+University of Idaho $163, 846• $40K of which goes directly to community for “economic development coach” for 18 mos.)

USDA Rural Community Development Initiative

Grant

•Community Strategies Grant $24,295•Full-time Summer Intern, Part-time during school year

Inland NW Community Foundation

•PRICELESS!!!•Grant writing for Chamber•Victory Garden Series, Food preservation, etc.

Extension training

•Visioning process, by David BeurleFuture’s Game

- $2,50032

Garden Intern

University Benefits

• Hands-on/applied learning• Faculty and student research• Successful grants (student volunteer hours)• Regional Awards (C. Peter Magrath

University/Community Engagement)

To learn more, please visit us on the web:http://www.bioregionalplanning.uidaho.edu/

34

35

Student Quotes

“working with the community of Priest River made the experience real. We were able to provide documents and maps that would be used. It made the hard work worth while.”

“utilizing students is a good way to get participation from communities, since they can be seen as a third party, impartial source; and it also is a good way for students to add value to their education by adding real world experience.”

36

Lessons Learned

• Community– Commitment to get the

community engaged

• “From my standpoint I believe the city did not do enough to prep the community for the UI program. We should have had 50% city participation and 50% UI and I feel it was more 10%, 90% with the City expecting to get a lot for nothing.”

• University– Coordination among

numerous departments– Contracts/money– Academic calendar vs.

community calendar

THANK YOU!Questions/Comments

37

Discussion QuestionsPartnership Questions1. Have you partnered with a

University or other group?2. If so, what projects?3. What are some lessons

learned from your partnership experiences?

4. What are the advantages/challenges of working with Universities or other partners?

Engagement Questions1. Does your community

have good public involvement in decision making?

2. What steps has your community taken to engage community members/increase citizen participation?