Planning for unplanning: parks and recreation
The Post has an article, "Rec leagues vs. Pick-up games: two sides of the playing field," about the use of recreation facilities in the city, and how organized leagues with permits for the use of fields trump the use of fields for "unorganized" pick up athletic activity. The example is soccer.
I understand how government agencies want to minimize their work and conceive of most activities as a regulatory or rationing-type function. If you have facilities ("Assets") you manage them, and ration their use through permits and fees.
On the other hand, a parks and recreation agency could conceive of its mission as enabling the recreation and parks needs of interests of all demographics, systematically, and stepping in to assist various constituencies/demographics when they way that they are accustomed to using facilities doesn't fit with the standard paradigm.
In basketball, it is not uncommon for court time to be scheduled for "pick up" basketball. And in swimming, "open swim" time.
In soccer, in DC, at Petworth, and likely other places, DCPR should schedule field use for "pick up" soccer as well, in view of mission goals of serving diverse segments of the population, including those who don't play in leagues.
And in some other jurisdictions, there is more accommodation for this. In Arlington County although they charge, and in NYC, a group PSNYC / Pickup Soccer NYC has organized the unorganized, at least the English speakng ones... And this piece from the New York Times, "Pelada: Pickup, the Essence of a Game," references a book, Finding the Game: Three Years, Twenty-five Countries, and the Search for Pickup Soccer on pickup soccer around the world.
Note that this is an issue across recreation and parks planning. The most organized parks constituencies tend to be people affiliated with team sports and leagues. Without taking extra steps to ensure that other constituencies are represented, it's very easy for recreation planning to end up focused primarily on team sports.