Community First: Co-Designing Township's Future with Residents

Engaging local residents in co-designing inclusive, resilient spaces that foster community connections and long-term well-being in an Eastern Pennsylvania town.

Community Engagement and Visioning, Civic Service Design, Community-Based Research, Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, Design & User Research, Canvassing & Outreach, Workshop Design & Facilitation (with residents, local officials, leaders, and agency representatives), Site Observations & Documentation, Cultural Probes, Recommendations Development, Focus Group Facilitation, Surveys & Data Collection, Public Meetings & Community Dialogues Facilitation, Resident Feedback Integration, Collaborative Planning & Strategy, Local Leadership & Agency Collaboration, Inclusive Decision-Making Processes, Community Empowerment & Capacity Building, Stakeholder Engagement & Relationship Building

Overview

Defining the Problem

The Community Facilities Project aims to create vibrant, inclusive spaces that foster connection, resilience, and community-building. Funded through the American Rescue Plan and managed by the the local Recovery Office, this initiative has allocated $7 million to establish central hubs for community services, cultural activities, and public engagement.

Given the town’s diversity, the Recovery Office faced challenges in addressing the distinct needs of each community.

As a community researcher, I played a key role in shaping this project by assessing local service provision, identifying community needs, and co-developing a shared vision for new facilities through comprehensive community engagement. I facilitated public meetings, focus groups, designed and conducted surveys, and led workshops to ensure that the voices of residents, service providers, and local leaders directly influenced the project’s direction.

To achieve these goals, the Recovery Office partnered with 3x3.co, a civic design firm specializing in community engagement. My colleagues and I played a key role in gathering input from residents, service providers, and local leaders through public meetings, surveys, and workshops, ensuring the project was shaped by community needs and aspirations. We documented key partners, services, and spaces, explored programmatic and spatial priorities for new facilities, and assessed the availability and use of existing spaces across the town.

This collaboration allowed us to gather and synthesize actionable insights, ensuring the final design recommendations for a community faciltiy responded to both immediate needs and long-term community goals.

Recognizing the essential role of libraries, parks, recreation centers, churches, nonprofit spaces, and schools in serving the community, we assessed these existing resources while exploring innovative solutions and partnerships to strengthen the township’s network of community facilities. An architectural firm conducted a comprehensive evaluation of physical spaces to determine whether renovation or new construction would best serve the project’s goals.

Meanwhile, my colleagues and I focused on understanding how these spaces were being used—what services and community initiatives they supported and whether they effectively met residents’ needs. Through site visits, we discovered that many valuable resources, including a fully equipped pottery studio and a computer lab, were underutilized. Community silos, lack of awareness, and missed opportunities for collaboration left these assets overlooked and unused.

As a result, a key objective of the project—beyond defining what community facilities should look like to best serve residents—was to encourage and foster greater collaboration and resource-sharing within the community. The goal was to connect local leaders, organizations, and residents, ensuring that underutilized spaces and amenities were put to good use.

Ensuring that community facility empowed residents, strengthed relationships, and enhanced quality of life was especially vital in such a diverse community. This initiative gave the county’s Recovery Office a unique opportunity to engage directly with residents, understand their needs, and connect them to an existing network of social and civic services. Ultimately, the project aimed to unite local voices and aspirations of local residents, ensuring that these facilities would be more than just buildings—they would be true reflections of the community’s collective vision.

As the project progressed, our research revealed a wealth of untapped potential within the community. With this realization, the county’s Recovery Office shifted the project’s direction. Rather than focusing solely on new construction, funds were redirected toward revitalizing existing community resources and establishing new civic services to strengthen ongoing initiatives. Funding was to be allocated amongst institutions with the greatest potential to create impact and strengthen community connections. This approach prioritized enhancing the existing network of services and facilities to better serve residents—rather than building a brand-new facility.

Ultimately, this shift represented a more sustainable and impactful approach—revitalizing and enhancing existing community assets while investing in spaces and services that would strengthen the fabric of the community for years to come.

Understanding
the Problem

Ideation

Our team and I applied design-led research methods throughout the community visioning process to explore key lines of inquiry, uncover both explicit and tacit knowledge, challenge assumptions, deepen understanding, and foster stakeholder discussion. The process was structured around three engagement “sprints,” each consisting of the following phases:

Outreach: Defining learning goals, recruiting participants, and initiating conversations.
Engagement: Conducting site visits and facilitating workshops.
Synthesis: Analyzing data and sharing findings with stakeholders.

Sprint 1: Historical and Contextual Understanding
The first sprint focused on developing a historical and contextual understanding of the Norristown community. This phase laid the groundwork for the Stakeholder Engagement Plan that would guide future engagement efforts.

Sprint 2: Opportunity Development
The second sprint concentrated on generating ideas and exploring different scenarios for the community facility, based on insights gathered from the landscape assessment.

Sprint 3: Prioritization and Refinement
In this final sprint, community members were asked to prioritize features for the community facility, considering programmatic elements, spatial needs, and overall facility goals.

As the community researcher most engaged in co-defining the roles and features of these facilities with the local community, my primary responsibility was to build relationships with residents and gather representative data on their needs and aspirations through in-person outreach. I conducted canvassing before community events, participated in site visits to local organizations, and hosted a tabling station at a community celebration to encourage broader participation and ensure more equitable engagement. By connecting with diverse resident groups—especially those who are typically harder to reach—I was able to foster trust and serve as a bridge between the community and the project, ensuring that every voice was heard and valued.

One of the challenges I faced was overcoming the skepticism many residents held toward local government outreach. Due to past experiences, many community members felt their voices were ignored and their contributions had little impact on policy decisions or funding allocations. Seen as a representative of the local government, I had to work diligently to build trust and show that the community’s input would genuinely shape the future of the town’s facilities. This was especially important, as the local government had previously struggled to effectively communicate how residents’ contributions were influencing policies and funding decisions, leaving some community members feeling disconnected from the process.

The research employed a mixed-methods approach, incorporating participatory workshops, surveys, focus groups, and site visits. This combination validated qualitative findings and engaged diverse community groups throughout the process. Over 160 residents participated in the engagement activities:

Public Meetings: Three highly participatory events brought together over 68 residents and local leaders to identify community assets, generate ideas for shared spaces, and prioritize key features. Activities included mapping existing community services, brainstorming potential programming, and defining spatial, programmatic, and governance needs. To ensure inclusivity, the meetings were held in both English and Spanish, allowing for broader participation and reflecting the community’s diversity.

Focus Groups: To engage harder-to-reach groups, I participated in facilitating three focus groups. These sessions used participatory activities such as card sorting to capture participants' visions for the community facility, as well as their accessibility and inclusion needs. In partnership with local community-based organizations (CBOs), we recruited participants and selected dates that would ensure a diverse range of voices were included.

Site Visits: Through site visits, I observed and documented existing community facilities and their programming, while building rapport with local organizers. These first-hand interactions provided valuable insights into the limitations of current spaces, the aspirations of those managing them, and the ongoing services and community needs they aim to address.

Cultural Probes: In partnership with local CBOs, I designed and implemented cultural probes to engage younger community members. Around 30 youth participated in asynchronous activities, sharing their expectations and desires for the future community facilities. This approach ensured youth voices were included and acknowledged their future role as key users of these spaces.

Provider Survey: To better understand available services, 3x3 conducted a provider survey, distributing it through local networks and government listservs. The survey gathered data on service types, geographic coverage, demographics served, and operational needs. The responses helped identify service gaps and informed the design of community spaces while also building a directory of local services and organizations.

Through these research methods, my colleagues and I developed a comprehensive, inclusive process that engaged a wide range of stakeholders. This approach ensured that the final community facility plan was informed by the diverse needs, priorities, and aspirations of local residents.

Based on community feedback, several key recommendations were made for the local community facilities project, emphasizing inclusivity, accessibility, and creating a sense of belonging.

The community emphasized several key institutional features, including language accessibility—particularly for Spanish-speaking residents—a centralized information hub to help residents easily access details about programs, services, and resources, and alternative financing options such as income-based fees or scholarships to ensure affordability. The importance of selecting accessible locations, along with improved transportation options and partnerships with public transit providers, was particularly stressed by elderly residents to enhance connectivity and facilitate access to local services.

The community expressed a strong interest in recreational programming for all age groups, ranging from families and seniors to children and youth. They advocated for expanded pool and aquatics programs, safe play areas for children with age-appropriate amenities and supervision, particularly after school hours. Residents also requested a variety of sports offerings, such as soccer and basketball, along with game rooms and a fitness area that includes classes like Zumba for different age groups, provided by both local organizations and the municipality. Additionally, residents highlighted the need for outdoor spaces for leisure activities such as gardening and fitness classes to promote engagement and well-being.

Social connection was a central theme, with an emphasis on intergenerational activities to foster community cohesion. Art workshops, storytelling sessions, and technology tutorials were suggested as ways to bridge generational gaps. Communal gathering spaces and lounge areas were also prioritized to provide inviting environments for casual interactions and community events. Shared kitchens were recommended to support food programs and cooking classes, while flexible, multi-purpose spaces were desired to accommodate various events, such as fairs, celebrations, and workshops.

While stakeholder groups had different perspectives on recreation and leisure, there was consensus that educational activities could also serve as a form of recreation. Key educational features identified included arts and crafts programs, inclusive co-working spaces, and civic education initiatives. These offerings would promote community engagement while helping residents better understand their rights and responsibilities, as well as how to navigate local government institutions.

To improve service coordination, stakeholders emphasized the need for shared governance over community resources, which could be achieved through a common event calendar, an online service portal, and a centralized information hub to facilitate collaboration and resource sharing among service providers. These recommendations reflect the community’s vision for a facility that not only meets physical needs but also fosters stronger social, educational, and service integration within the community.

Outcome

Incorporating input from the local community was crucial to the success of the project. The final deliverables included a comprehensive report and a community shareback session.

The primary outcome of the project was a detailed report that identified the needs of local residents and created an inventory of existing services, providers, and agencies. From the start, the project involved extensive community engagement, which led to a catalog of local assets, a review of ongoing initiatives, and a clear understanding of community needs. This process allowed residents to collaborate and develop a shared vision for how to best utilize the available funds effectively.

However, the report was not the only outcome of the project. Throughout the process, community engagement and workshops sparked unexpected moments of connection, enabling local agencies and leaders to form partnerships and share resources. For example, during one of the workshops facilitated by my team and me, a local facility with a kitchen offered its space for a local chef to host cooking classes.

This collaborative research not only identified current community needs but also provided valuable insights on the most effective ways to allocate funding to enhance local services and public spaces. Ultimately, the project will transform existing community spaces and introduce improvements to facilities, enabling them to host services, events, and gatherings that foster long-term engagement and connection within the community.

Project Outcomes

Please click on images to learn more about the design outcomes