A new report written by Rachel Clark, Kelly Whittier, Claire Summa, and Dana Moskowitz at the Sumner M. Redstone Global Center for Prevention and Wellness, a school within the George Washington University, calls attention to the current state of the local parks in Washington D.C. Currently, the majority of the parks found in D.C. are run by the National Park Service (NPS), given the status of our nation's capital as federal land.

The report calls attention to the fact that the NPS is mostly known for its efforts towards preservation, something that does not work wonderfully when placed into a local park context. This is because, the authors purport, the NPS is good at preserving, but not activating a space, leaving the many D.C. parks the service is charged with running ill equipped to handle the needs of local residents.

 
In response to this report, the NPS emphasized that around two thirds of national parks are near or in cities, with a focus on recreation or historical importance. The spokesperson, Katie Liming, from the NPS made it clear that the ideas presented are sound, but that the perspective on D.C. park management was incomplete.

After coming across this article discussing the report, from a publication called the DCist, LASN wanted to get the Landscape Architect angle on the story as well as directing the report at the NPS to see their thoughts on the matter. In an interview with Tammy Stidham, the lead planner for parks in the DC area, LASN tried to uncover how the NPS approaches planning and design in these unique urban parks.

When asked what the breakdown is for deciding how much of a project site should be designed versus how much should be protected, something the report bemoans the NPS for mishandling, Tammy told LASN that it was always on the forefront of her mind when planning. She spoke of how there needed to always be a balance between maintaining historical materials and developing in areas that see use by the public, just like at any national park, in these urban Washington D.C. parks.

The best way to accomplish this, she relayed, was through educating the local community on the historical value of places that may seem to be underdeveloped. That way, if a resident feels they may not understand why their local park is not hyper-developed, they can look to the NPS and understand why that is not the case.

When LASN mentioned how negative the report was towards the NPS, Tammy agreed that it promulgated the idea that the NPS does not regularly run urban parks, which is simply untrue. Aside from Washington D.C., with urban parks like those found in Ward 8 that clearly balance history with development, the NPS is always designing with people in mind. One perfect example is the Golden Gate Bridge, part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, where countless people spend time there as residents of San Francisco. Even Yellowstone, a massive National Park, has a sign out front that reads, "For the Benefit and Enjoyment of the People."

https://dcist.com/story/23/05/12/nps-should-turn-over-parks-to-d-c-government/

https://redstone.publichealth.gwu.edu/sites/g/files/zaxdzs5276/files/2023-05/a-redstone-global-center-report-neighborhood-park-service.pdf