I know that there are certain limitations this prospected assimilation of the classes faced, im just wondering if there are any sources out there that point to it being a success in any measure? im trying to create a balanced argument in order to illicit discussion with my seminar group. I seem to have plenty of reasons why it wouldnt work, but not many for why it would, or did.
Any guidance would be greatly appreciated!
Not really, no.
In general, the shift toward establishing and regulating (and policing) public parks in the 19th century was to make them more "socially neutral" which is to say, not overrun with unsightly poor people. It is in the second half of the 19th century that village houses started to be plotted with individual back yards, as opposed to being plotted around a shared semi-common area (a village green). This allowed middle and lower-class people to enjoy the 'private' outdoors experience that the upper class enjoyed on their own vast private parklands, and of course it served to deter the assimilation you are looking for since people no longer needed to visit a semi-public area to enjoy a taste of outdoor serenity.
In terms of the major civic parks, like Hyde Park in London, the fashionable (upper-class) set had their own hours and their own activities - such as horse and carriage riding - from which the lower and middle-classes were barred due to the cost of entry. Even royalty visited the London parks, both in official capacities and for leisure activities. Like the rest of the upper echelon though, they were there to be seen, not to mingle with people too far beneath them in rank. The only extent to which lower class people were present were as spectators. Hyde Park was the 19th century version of a celebrity hot spot, and neither does that lend itself to a blending of the social classes. Rather, it emphasizes the distinct separation.
The lower classes used the space differently, and they were intermittently barred from using it fully while the upper classes were around (they tended to come to London only when Parliament was in session). One example of this is public bathing in the Serpentine. It was technically outlawed in the 1840s, but this law was only enforced during 'the Season.' Similarly, the northeast corner (formerly near the Tyburn gallows, evolved into Speaker's Corner), had been the almost exclusive domain of the lower and middle classes since the end of the 18th century.
Certainly there were activities, some of which took place in public parks, where the classes did mingle freely, but these were isolated events. Concerts, sports, races, exhibitions, etc., are all included in this - but understand as well that any ticketed events kept the poor out, or kept them separate. Even the Great Exhibition was similarly class-segregated through its admission fees. You can find more activities where the classes mixed if you look outside the parks. Look at horse racing, charity organizations, musical societies, and church groups... but not out on the evening stroll. The best you might get here is one smartly dressed person respectfully acknowledging another, without knowing their background. It was nothing like the blending you seem to be looking for though.
Sources:
Hyde Park, Its History and Romance, Ethel Tweedie, 1905 -- less a formal history than an amusingly readable collection of stories and anecdotes
Our Social Bees, Andrew Wynter M.D., 1865 ch4 - similarly full of contemporary anecdotes