MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906302764

One Person’s Trash is Another Person’s Treasure: The Public Place-making of “Mount Trashmore”

2009· article· en· W2906302764 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amanda J. Johnson, Troy D. Glover, William P. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Park and Recreation Administration · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPlace Attachment and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrownfieldRedevelopmentEnvironmental planningContext (archaeology)Urban sprawlBoroughEnvironmental justiceUrban planningEnvironmental resource managementBusinessGeographyPolitical scienceCivil engineeringPublic administrationEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Across North America, brownfields serve as poignant symbols of neglect, environmental injustice, and community failure. More often than not, communities are left to suffer alongside these neglected landscapes. As a result, brownfield sites—often abandoned, contaminated, underutilized, and derelict—create a unique dilemma for urban and regional planners, city park administrators, and communities. Often recognized as valuable spaces, communities are beginning to demand that brownfield areas undergo remediation, revitalization, and redevelopment efforts to create a useable community space. As a result, all levels of government are committing resources to address this problem and facilitate revitalization efforts. In the context of brownfield redevelopment, there remains a strong case for park development given the assortment of social benefits generally associated with urban greening projects. Furthermore, brownfield redevelopment is generally well-suited to park development because it can revitalize natural habitats, limit urban sprawl and the consumption of agricultural land, and achieve environmental justice and sustainable development objectives (Moore, 2000). The current case study examines one instance of a proposed brownfield redevelopment project in the City of Kitchener, Ontario. Results of this study indicate the public reaction to the proposed redevelopment of a local brownfield site surprised city planners in that “Mount Trashmore” already had a community-based sense of place embraced by many residents. From the perspectives of policymakers, planners, and residents alike, plans for brownfield redevelopment must necessarily take into account the sociocultural meanings various stakeholders assign to the properties in question. In the present case study, two key concepts—sense of place and the privatization of public space—were identified as important contributors for support or opposition of brownfield redevelopment. Although residents surrounding the brownfield site believed redevelopment of the area was necessary, the proposed private park development threatened local residents’ access to the park as well as the sense of place attributed to the area. As such, managers must recognize the way their agencies move forward with the (re)development of landscapes, particularly brownfields, is not self-evident. The case of “Mount Trashmore” reveals the unique set of circumstances that characterizes brownfield redevelopment and makes the sense of place of local residents particularly relevant to explore.?

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Park and Recreation AdministrationSame topicPlace Attachment and Urban StudiesFrench-language works237,207