A Practical Guide to Great Urban Parks: How To Benefit From and Finance Your Urban Park by Madeleine Spencer

A Practical Guide to Great Urban Parks: HOW TO BENEFIT FROM AND FINANCE YOUR URBAN PARK A 2017 TOP ISSUES COUNCIL REPORT A PUBLICATION CREATED BY MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION

ABOUT IDA

IDA The International Downtown Association is the premier association of urban place managers who are shaping and activating dynamic downtown districts. Founded in 1954, IDA represents an industry of more than 2,500 place management organizations that employ 100,000 people throughout North America. Through its network of diverse practitioners, its rich body of knowledge, and its unique capacity to nurture community-building partnerships, IDA provides tools, intelligence and strategies for creating healthy and dynamic centers that anchor the wellbeing of towns, cities and regions of the world. IDA members are downtown champions who bring urban centers to life. For more information on IDA, visit downtown.org. IDA Board Chair: Tim Tompkins, President, Times Square Alliance IDA President & CEO: David T. Downey, CAE, Assoc. AIA

IDA Top Issues Councils The IDA Top Issues Councils are a strategic research initiative that brings together industry leaders to produce research briefs on the top urban issues identified by IDA members in the areas of economy, experience and partnership. Each council is led by a chair, comprised of place management professionals sharing their expert knowledge, and supported by both IDA staff and the IDA Research Committee. Those selected to serve on a council contribute their expertise to the growing, relevant body of knowledge on the place management industry. IDA Research Committee Chair: Kristopher Larson, CEO, Downtown Grand Rapids, Inc. IDA Director of Research: Cole E. Judge IDA Research Associate: Faith Broderick

IDA would like to thank MIG, Inc. for their generous financial support of the Urban Parks Council. MIG is a proud partner of IDA and a sponsor of the 2017 Urban Parks Top Issues Council. Transform your downtown. Inspire your organization. Build your community. MIG can help your city and downtown capitalize on strengths, solve critical problems, garner community support, and create real, lasting change. Learn more at migcom.com. International Downtown Association 910 17th Street, NW, Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20006 202.393.6801 downtown.org

© 2017 International Downtown Association, All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form—print, electronic, or otherwise—without the express written permission of IDA.

I N T E R N AT I O N A L D O W N T O W N A S S O C I AT I O N

Top Issues Council Urban Parks

helping to build a dynamic and diverse downtown that is the regional center for culture, commerce and entertainment. The Alliance creates community events, promotes downtown Salt Lake City, and advocates for public policies that encourage smart urban growth. During his tenure, the Alliance has helped to influence more than $5 billion worth of public and private investment in Salt Lake City’s central business district. Jason also leads policy initiatives for immigration and urban development for the Salt Lake Chamber, Utah’s largest business organization, where he also serves as the organization’s executive vice president.

Stacie West council chair

Jane Jenkins President and CEO, Downtown Oklahoma City, Inc., Oklahoma City, OK Jane Jenkins has been the President and CEO of Downtown Oklahoma City, Incorporated since 2009. With 30 years of experience in downtown revitalization and management, Jane is an internationally recognized speaker and expert on urban issues. She is a former Chairman for the International Downtown Association Board of Directors and is also active in the International Economic Development Council, Urban Land Institute, and the American Institute of Architects. In 2014, Jane earned accreditation from the Congress for New Urbanism and she was recently named a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Place Management in Manchester, England. A former high school educator, Jane was named 1982 Teacher of the Year at Union High School in Tulsa, Oklahoma. She holds a Master of Public Administration from the University of North Texas in Denton.

council vice chair

Ryan Smolar Lead Consultant, Downtown Inc., Santa Ana, CA Ryan Smolar is an award-winning creative community development consultant working in Southern California. He has over 10 years of experience working with business improvement districts, colleges, cities, and nonprofits. He specializes in socioeconomically challenged communities, where he designs programs that accelerate local economies and that foster community vitality, resilience and pride. His projects work with community processes, use-based placemaking, and new tools.

council members

Jason Mathis Executive Director, Downtown Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City, UT Jason Mathis is a lifelong resident of Salt Lake City and a longtime leader in Utah’s nonprofit community. His professional work spans two decades in urban development, healthcare and tourism. Since 2008, Jason has served as executive director of Salt Lake City’s Downtown Alliance. In this role, he oversees all aspects of Alliance programs,

Director, NoMA Parks Foundation, Washington, D.C. Stacie West is the Director of Parks Projects. Stacie was formerly a community planner with the D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation, where she led development of the comprehensive Play DC Parks and Recreation Master Plan and orchestrated an improvement initiative to renovate all city-owned playgrounds. She also previously worked for the District Department of the Environment creating a public outreach strategy for the 20-year Sustainable DC plan. Stacie has a Masters of Community Planning from the University of Maryland, College Park.

Rebecca Lieberman Policy & Research Information Analyst, Times Square Alliance, New York, NY Rebecca Lieberman is the Policy & Research Information Analyst for the Times Square Alliance. She is a recent graduate of Barnard College of Columbia University in New York City, where she studied urban planning, economics, and applied mathematics. She is a leading historian on roundabouts in New York City. Rebecca is passionate about urban place-making, public transportation, and bike share programs. When not immersed the ins-and-outs of Times Square, you can find her running through Central Park.

Maggie Collister Research Director, Charlotte Center City Partners, Charlotte, NC In February 2014, Maggie joined Charlotte Center City Partners as Research Director. Her primary responsibilities include providing relevant economic and market data and research on issues impacting the quality of life and business environment in Center City Charlotte and communicating those ideas and findings both internally and to the business community and public. Maggie spent 10 years with The Littlejohn Group as a consultant to residential developers and homebuilders, providing supportive data and analysis for residential and mixed-use projects across the southeastern US. She brings a keen awareness of the types of information and analysis that businesses utilize in their development and locational decision-making process. She has consulted on a variety of community planning projects, ranging from small area plans to multi county regional housing studies.

Maggie holds a Masters in Geography from UNC Charlotte and a Bachelor’s in Industrial Design from the University of Cincinnati.

Dan Biederman President, Biederman Redevelopment Ventures Corp, New York, NY Dan Biederman is the founder and president of BRV Corp., as well as co-founder of Grand Central Partnership, the Chelsea Improvement Company, 34th Street Partnership, and Bryant Park Corporation; he currently serves as the President of the latter two of those downtown management organizations. Mr. Biederman consults public and private parties on, among other things, the art of downtown management, economic development, and rehabilitation in a host of cities throughout the country. Mr. Biederman has written, lectured, and taught extensively in the field of urban management, and advises many cities and private property-owners on the establishment or turnaround of parks and plazas, business improvement districts, and self-financing neighborhood redevelopment projects; his publications include articles in Urban Land and the Harvard Business Review.

Jennifer Casillas Vice President of Public Space Operations & Events, Downtown Seattle Association, Seattle, WA Jennifer has over 15 years of project management, event planning, operations and logistics experience that has included roles in the wine industry, to healthcare, to higher education and currently as Vice President, Public Space Operations and Events at the Downtown Seattle Association. In her role, she oversees a variety of non-profit/public partnerships, including the dayto-day management of public parks and spaces, implementation of art installations, activationg various programming that embody the placemaking philosophy to make existing urban spaces better for all.

Phil Myrick Director of Place & Performance Design, MIG, Inc., New York, NY Phil Myrick, is Director of Place and Performance Design for MIG, a planning and design firm founded on research in human environments and environmental psychology. Phil has worked for more than 20 years helping communities achieve their goals to create more vibrant and connected communities, enhance livability, attract new people downtown, and catalyze economic growth. Phil’s work in Placemaking planning and urban design spans from North and South America to Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. His recent projects include Hemisfair Park in San Antonio and Transit-Oriented Developments in the City and County of Honolulu. Phil joined MIG in 2013 after 18 years with the Project for Public Spaces, an organization renowned for their leadership in the practice of Placemaking.

CONTENTS

Executive Summary 6 How To Use This Guide

Section One: Definitions What is a Great Urban Park?

How a Great Urban Park Works

Section Two: Inputs Partnership 14 Money 16 Land 17 Neighborhood Context

Section Three: Activities Measuring Your Park

Designing/Building A Park

Activation & Programming

Fundraising 27 Park Management

Section Four: Outputs & Impacts Effects of Parks

Equity 30

Section Five: More Info Case Studies

Where to Go Next

Reference Endnotes 48 Photo Credits

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Executive Summary A great urban park is a dynamic, thriving space, that is amenity and program rich, safe, and attractive. It is equitable and accessible to all who live, work, play, pray and pay in the local community. This publication is a resource guide for both current and potential park stakeholders (government partners, publicsector partners, and private-sector partners) to advance collaboration and capacity building within the management of an urban park to maximize benefits, while equitably and intelligently sharing costs and responsibilities. The results: A dynamic, thriving space that is accessible to all. This report defines a great urban park, how it works, and how it is funded. The report is divided into four sections: Inputs - Partnership, Neighborhood Context, Land Partnerships of businesses, property owners, park users, government and nonprofits benefit when they join and invest (relative to their expected return) in the activities of making a great urban park. Activities - Funding, Designing and Building, Measuring, Managing Great urban parks come from a well-coordinated crosssector effort amongst park benefactors and beneficiaries to fund, design, manage (coordinate, program, maintain, market) and measure the park.

Output and Impacts - Effects of Parks, Equity, Public Utility, Economic Return The activities inside of a great urban park result in a well maintained and activated park, that serves as a neighborhood benefit, incentivizes growth and prosperity, and establishes a partnership structure based on return for ongoing success. Great urban parks generate public utility by increasing population health, equity and happiness while economic return increases property value and development, business sales and tax revenues. Case Studies of Great Urban Parks Learn how communities have implemented the lessons in this guidebook. • Herald and Greeley Square Parks, New York City, NY • Yards Park, Washington, D.C. • Hemisfair Park, San Antonio, TX • Charlotte Rail Trail, Charlotte, NC • Westlake Park, Seattle, WA • Myriad Botanical Gardens, Oklahoma City, OK • Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library Learning Garden, Long Beach, CA

IDA

Urban Parks

How To Use This Report This is a resource guide for both current and potential park stakeholders to advance collaboration and capacity building within the management of your urban park to maximize benefits, while equitably and intelligently sharing costs and responsibilities. The results: a dynamic, thriving space that is accessible to all.

Who Should Read This Report Government partners Public-sector partners Private-sector partners • City finance department • Tourism bureau • Urban place management • City parks department • Arts council organizations: BID, PBID, PBIA, etc. • City elected officials • Hospitals and health agencies • Developers, property owners and • Public works department • Park nonprofits and conservancy businesses • City management department groups and employers adjacent to parks • Regional and national park • Neighborhood leaders, community • Corporate sponsors and marketers authorities groups, residents and individuals • Universities and anchor institutions

IDA

Urban Parks

SECTION ONE

Definitions

1 9

DEFINITIONS

What Is A Great Urban Park? A great urban park is a dynamic, thriving space, that is amenity and program rich, safe, and attractive. Great urban parks are equitable and accessible to all who live, work, play, pray and pay in the local community. They produce public utility and realized economic benefit when its design, management and programming align its benefactors with its beneficiaries.

The 5 Features of a Great Urban Park 1. They are small 2. They are surrounded by diversity 3. They mix public and private together 4. They occupy important locations 5. They are designed to draw people in

How Are Great Urban Parks Made Strategies to achieve a great urban park: • Use transit as a catalyst for attracting visitors • Make management of the park a central concern • Develop strategies to attract people during different seasons • Acquire diverse funding sources • Design the park layout for flexibility • Consider both the “inner park” and “outer park” • Provide amenities for the different groups of people using the park • Create attractions and destinations throughout the park • Create an identity and image for the park

IDA

Urban Parks

DEFINITIONS

Why Great Urban Parks Matter Excerpts from The Trust for Public Land: Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System 1. Property Value More than 30 studies have shown that parks have a positive impact on nearby residential property values. 2. Tourism Value Calculating parks’ contribution requires knowing the number of park tourists and their spending. 3. Direct Use Value Most direct uses in city parks are free of charge, but economists can still calculate value by knowing the cost of a similar recreation experience in the private marketplace. This is known as “willingness to pay.”

5. Community Cohesion Value Numerous studies have shown that the more webs of human relationships a neighborhood has, the stronger, safer, and more successful it is. 6. Reducing the Cost of Managing Urban Stormwater Parkland reduces stormwater management costs by capturing precipitation and/or slowing its runoff. 7. Removal of Air Pollution by Vegetation Trees and shrubs remove air pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, ozone, and some particulates.

4. Health Value Recent research suggests that access to parks can help people increase their level of physical activity. The Parks Health Benefits Calculator measures residents’ collective economic savings through the use of parks for exercise.

How A Great Urban Park Works The Great Urban Park Model: What it takes to make an urban park great! This model is based on successfully managed urban parks from across North America that addresses what it takes to make and maintain a Great Urban Park (GUP) from the inputs to the measurable end results (impacts). Inputs

Activities

Output

Impacts

• Partners • Property Owners • Businesses • Government • Users • Nonprofits • Neighborhood Context • Land

• Funding • Design • Measuring • Management • Coordination • Programming • Maintenance • Marketing

• Well Maintained and Activated Park • Actionable Information/Data • Neighborhood Amenity/Growth Incentives • Partnership Structure

• Public Utility • Health • Happiness • Equity • Economic Return • Property Value • Sales Profit • Tax Revenue • Development • Cost Savings

DEFINITIONS

The â&#x20AC;&#x153;Great Urban Parkâ&#x20AC;? Model

Inputs Partnerships of businesses, property owners, park users, government and nonprofits benefit when they join and invest (relative to their expected return) in the activities of making a great urban park.

Output The activities inside of a great urban park result in a well maintained and activated park, that serves as a neighborhood benefit, incentivizes growth and prosperity, and establishes a partnership structure based on return for ongoing success.

Activities Great urban parks come from a well-coordinated crosssector effort amongst park benefactors and beneficiaries to fund, design, manage (coordinate, program, maintain, market) and measure the park.

Impacts Great urban parks generate public utility by increasing population health, equity and happiness while economic return increases property value and development, business sales and tax revenues.

IDA

Urban Parks

SECTION TWO

Inputs

2 13

INPUTS

Partnership Who makes a Great Urban Park? The more citizen involvement, the better. Capturing the genuine interests of residents, businesses, property owners, community associations, employees, employers, visitors and the like from the beginning will set the project off on the right foot. Many times, urban parks are one of the few, or only, public gathering spaces in the community leading to differing opinions regarding activations, use and maintenance.

Who are park partners? The possibilities for park partners are abundant, from official city departments that have an interest and/or responsibility for the park to the adjacent neighbors who may see the park as their front porch. Consider all the possibilities for collaboration when creating a group of key stakeholders:

Why are park partners important? Convening a strong and diverse group of partners is crucial for successful urban parks.

How to reach park partners? Methods to convene partners in meaningful ways include:

• Establishes a collective voice to share the vision and goals for the park • Addresses and considers the wants and needs of different stakeholder groups • Ensures that all viewpoints and opinions are being considered • Establishes a relationship with all sectors • Creates a conduit for potential sponsors, funders, programs and events

• Recurring partner meetings • Events at the park • Public meetings • Feedback forums • Surveys and questionnaires • Park websites • Phone and tablet apps

IDA

Urban Parks

INPUTS

Public-Private Partnerships Many urban parks require the need for a public-private partnership to be established for a variety of reasons, which may include: financial needs, aging infrastructure, growing demand for services, creating efficiencies, and a desire for outside expertise.

Key questions to ask to form successful partnerships: Structure

Control

Assets & Liabilities

Risks

Who should be general partners and/or limited partners?

Who will make the operating decisions?

What liabilities could partners bring?

Who will make the management and strategy decisions?

What assets and strengths could partners bring?

What are the risks taken with various partners (financial, sustainability, longevity)?

Tips to keep in mind: • Public and private entities must agree on a shared vision • Keep public sector interests in mind • Private entity(ies) must have the right motivation • Constant communication is key

INPUTS

Money What are the cost categories associated with a Great Urban Park? Maintenance Keeping the park clean and attractive is the corner stone of a successful park. Capital Improvement Fund Create a dedicated fund, as most parks are undercapitalized, which leads to deferred maintenance, underperformance and ultimately, failure. Programming Filling the park with the right programming helps sustain usership and generate revenue.

Restrooms Staffing restrooms, upkeeping facilities. Marketing Parks need to be promoted, including on-sight signage. Administration Parks need dedicated oversight and advocacy. Land Costs and Acquisition If this is a new park, there may be costs when acquiring land or additional land for park usage.

IDA

Urban Parks

INPUTS

Land The key to determining what your great urban park (or parks!) will look like is determining what land you have available. Do you have existing parks that need a refresh or major overhaul? Vacant lots? Finding space for parks in a dense urban neighborhood can be difficult if you don’t already have some dedicated spaces, but with a little creativity, you may be able to add “parklets” or park elements throughout the neighborhood. The following tables may help you think about your available land in the context of park development. Additionally, if you are trying to develop more than one park space, or a network of small parklets, master planning for your system of parks can help optimize the available land, even if you do not have funding identified for each project. When land is scarce - or your park dreams are big! - creative thinking about your available space can help extend parks out of central squares or plazas and into your broader neighborhood. Thinking of parks as a whole, as well as “deconstructed” parts or activities can help make up land deficits.

Land Ownership and Park Development Land ownership type

Potential arrangements and agreements

Existing public park

Partnership with the local government and/or parks department to redevelop the park

Vacant lot, for sale

Public-private partnership to purchase lot

Vacant lot, not for sale

Temporary park activation; license agreement to develop park for a finite duration

Privately owned, publicly accessible space

Agreement with building/land owner to activate space, or make capital improvements (note that municipal bond funds may not be eligible to pay for park development on private land)

Public rights-of-way (sidewalks, trails, trail easements, triangle parks, underpasses, cloverleaf interchanges, “leftover” pieces of public land, etc.)

Agreement with local municipality to fund and/or develop park elements or actual park if space is sufficient. Trails with easements can present an opportunity for linear parks

INPUTS

Land Type and Park Development Types of Space

Sample Park Elements

Temporarily available vacant lot

Temporary installation of traditional park features

Pocket park/parklet

Playable art, seating, seasonal plantings, raised community garden plots, outdoor game tables, outdoor fitness equipment,skate park elements

Public rights-of-way (small or linear)

Seating, seasonal plantings, raised community garden plots, interactive art, outdoor game tables, outdoor fitness equipment, bicycle infrastructure

Public rights-of-way (larger or of ample space to fence; think of underpasses or other “leftover” infrastructure space)

Seating, art installations, outdoor game tables, outdoor fitness equipment, bicycle infrastructure, skate park, dog park

Plaza space - large

Seating, seasonal plantings, art installations, fountains, outdoor game tables, bicycle infrastructure

Plaza space - small, including extra space near building entrances

Seating, seasonal plantings, art installations, neighborhood signage, playable art/kid’s activities, bicycle infrastructure

As an example, Downtown Santa Monica, Inc.’s Downtown Community Plan notes several types of public spaces that would be appropriate for park space, including green, plaza, courtyard, pocket park, sun deck/view terrace, parklet, paseo, and esplanade.

IDA

Urban Parks

INPUTS

Neighborhood Context In addition to considering the type of land available and any necessary agreements you may need to develop a new park or refresh an existing park, parks should be considered in the context of their surrounding neighborhood and any comprehensive area, or parks and recreation plans that guide development in your city.

Most parks serve their immediate neighborhood, and in a downtown context, this may include residents as well as daytime workers. Generally, people may walk anywhere from 15â&#x20AC;&#x201C;20 minutes, or 0.75-1.0 mile to get to an amenity such as a park. Bike infrastructure may be desired, but parking is generally not needed for a neighborhood-serving park. If you are developing a large destination park, you will likely need to consider parking and transit.

Neighborhood Context Checklist Use this checklist to consider neighborhood context.

Element

Considerations

Comprehensive Plan

Does your city have a comprehensive plan? Note any guidance provided on parks and open space, neighborhood character, or urban design for your parkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s neighborhood.

Zoning Code

Are there any requirements for park location or conflicting adjacencies in your cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s zoning code? Are parks allowed by-right in your neighborhood, or will you need to seek zoning relief to develop a new park?

Neighborhood Boundaries - Official

Does your neighborhood have official boundaries? Are you restricted to those boundaries for park development?

Neighborhood Boundaries - Unofficial

Note any environmental barriers (rivers, steep slopes, etc.) or built environment barriers (highways, major developments that limit walkability, etc.) that help define your neighborhood.

Transportation

Neighborhood-serving parks will mostly be visited by pedestrians. Is your neighborhood walkable? Where are the primary routes? Are there other parks within walking distance (15-20 minutes, 0.75-1 mile)? Larger parks or destination parks may require parking, and locating these parks near transit can ease the need for extensive parking. What transit options are available? For all parks, connecting to bike trails and infrastructure provides a healthy benefit for residents.

Land Use

Is your neighborhood mixed-use? Primarily office or primarily residential? A land-use map may help in identifying ideal locations for a park (or areas where you may avoid park development).

IDA

Urban Parks

SECTION THREE

Activities

3 AFTER

ACTIVITIES

Measuring Your Park

How do you measure a Great Urban Park? Measuring Park Usage Why should you monitor and analyze park usage? • Data driven understanding of the park leads to more successful activation and programming • Information to support investment from stakeholders • Ensure that the park programming is serving the targeted community • Help inform the design of future parks and helps address the needs and adaptations within the current park • Develop market data to help support investors and businesses associated with the park • Identify and address safety issues and concerns • Information about barriers to park use • Economic impacts

Collection Tools • No one tool can accomplish all the tasks • Cameras, electronic counters and observation can determine overall number of users, access points and time trends • Observation and surveys can determine demographics, use patterns and access points • Surveys can be used to get direct feedback • Retail sales can show changes in spending due to park/park programming • Changes in rents/property values can show the premium that an adjacent park has on the values of properties

How can you collect data? • Pedestrian Counters • Best for linear, greenway type parks • Cameras • Plaza style parks • In person observation • In-depth information can be determined • Intercept survey • User feedback • User survey (online) • Apps Check-ins • Retail Sales • Property Value Change • Rent Changes 22

IDA

Urban Parks

ACTIVITIES

Designing/Building a Park How do you design a Great Urban Park?

Community Engagement - before, during, and after planning, design, construction

Develop a plan for maintenance and operations

Determine project outcome based on available resources

Plan for the program and/or elements of the park

Determine project outcome based on available resources a. Do you have a blank slate (vacant parcel)? b. Are you refreshing or renovating an existing park? i. Is it a complete overhaul or a small capital improvement? c. How does funding/budget dictate what you can afford to build? d. Do you have multiple potential projects in your downtown area? You may want to consider a parks master plan for the area (or look to see if your municipality has guidance on future parks projects), even if you only have the time and resources to fund designing and building of one park. e. Based on the size of land available and park needs in your city, are you creating a neighborhood-serving park or a large destination park that may include entertainment options or attractions? Community/Partner Engagement f. This is similar to the “chicken and egg” issue: i. Start early to build support and possibly support for funding. ii. Or wait until you have a sense of what your budget will dictate before beginning outreach. downtown.org | © 2017 International Downtown Association

Design the park

Construct the park

Park planning/programming Given resource constraints and opportunities, you shoul begin to think about a high-level programming for the park. g. If it’s an existing park, what are the historic uses? Are those uses still popular? h. For a renovation, what may have changed since the last time the park was renovated: i. New stormwater management, sustainability, or building codes? ii. New or changing populations of park users – will you see an increased use based on population growth? Have families moved into your area? Seniors aging in place? iii. Rules on vending and other revenue-generating opportunities. i. User data is key: For all parks (new and existing): i. Is your future park located in a primarily residential, primarily office, or a true mixed-use neighborhood? Residents and employees often want different park amenities, but successful urban parks can often meet a wide variety of needs.

ACTIVITIES

Design A landscape architect will typically take you through four phases: • Concept Design • Schematic Design • Design Development • Construction Documents You can have an optional phase that involves the landscape architect in planning/programming prior to, or as a part of, concept design. Construction methods Design-Build: Delivery method wherein you work with one entity, and other trades are subcontractors. For parks, you might hire a general contractor, and the designer is a subcontractor to the project.

ii. Does your residential stock consist of mostly apartments/condos or mostly single-family homes? Residents without yards may have different park inte ests than residents who have access to outdoor space. For new parks: iii. What activities do people want that are not available in nearby areas? For existing parks: iv. What activities do people want that aren’t available at this park or in nearby areas? v. Who uses the park now? vi. Are there groups that aren’t using the park? Are there equity barriers to entry issues with park use? j. Know the limitations: i. Not every park can do everything or provide every activity for their community. Does your park have nearby areas to do desired activities? Is your park part of a ne work of urban or city parks that offer similar programming or opportunity? ii. Will you provide single-use activities or spaces that are easily convertible into a variety of uses (i.e. – a lined, permitted soccer field vs. a great lawn that can host occasional soccer games).

Design-Bid-Build: Delivery method wherein you hire the trades for the design and construction phase separately. You may design the park fully, then bid the design out to general contractors. There may be an optional continuing relationship with the designer. Modifications of this include designing a concept and bidding at that phase, or “marrying” the designer to a builder. Traditional design-bid-build construction is the most common type of delivery in the U.S. Construction Manager at Risk: Delivery method wherein you hire a construction manager to consult during the design phase and then transition into a role similar to general contractor during the building phase. Integrated Project Delivery: Delivery method wherein risk is spread evenly to the owner, designer, and builder. This is not very common in the U.S. Operations and Maintenance This is an important aspect of designing a park that should be considered throughout the design process. Who will operate and maintain the park? What is their capacity to maintain the park? How much will operations and maintenance cost, based on the types of materials you are selecting for the park?

IDA

Urban Parks

ACTIVITIES

Activation and Programming How do you program and activate a Great Urban Park?

“When there are few reasons for people to go to a park, fewer people use them and they will cease to be valued.” What is programming? Creating a high performing park depends on attracting diverse users by offering them a wide variety of activities. This is called programming, which falls under two basic categories: 1. Permanent uses that are built-in elements of the park, such as playgrounds, athletic facilities, community centers, retail kiosks, paddle boats, and so on. Together, these elements are referred to as the park program. 2. Temporary activities and events, such as kids’ programs, concerts, movies, etc. Underutilized parks: • The number one culprit for underutilized parks is due to not layering in permanent program elements (category 1). • Once this mistake is made, almost no amount of temporary programming (category 2) can make up for this park’s underlying problem of offering nothing to do. Be goal-oriented: who are you trying to attract? Although parks are for all, you need to have specific audiences in mind during planning and design. Example Goal: bring new families downtown Potential program elements: play areas, affordable food, a plaza where parents can meet, a dog area, and fun events.

A model park development process: A Vision and Program Plan An active and successful park begins by determining the park’s program, based on knowledge about, and input from, the potential users of the park. This can be described in text and laid out in simple concept diagrams. The less emphasis placed on permanent program elements in this phase, the fewer people will visit the park. Management Plan Once a general program is developed, a rough management plan should be developed to confirm that the program can be operated and sustained financially. This should define roles and responsibilities, outline a sample calendar of the types of programs and events envisioned, and include a simple proforma analysis of costs, revenues and revenue sources. Classic mistake: building an amphitheater without a plan for who will program and manage it. Design With a strong idea of the program and management, design can proceed, and will create many iterations and options of how to achieve the vision and program plan. Ideally the program will be used to create enjoyable and layered settings, rich with amenities and a strong sense of identity.

ACTIVITIES

Implementation Activation starts on Day One, with a series of launch events and heavy promotion of activities offered in the park. A well-articulated media campaign would begin even before opening day to generate excitement and press. Remember: Parks are about People We only reap the promise and potential of our urban park by nourishing healthy human social activity. Some key program elements that have universal appeal are: • Food • Water elements • Entertainment • Places to sit that are part of an active area Commercial Uses in Parks • Are a positive contributor to the park experience • Are a source of revenue and an additional layer of management and security • Should be selected very carefully, so ensure they share the vision and maintain high standards

Temporary Programming • Allow flexible spaces where your events can take place • Build in the infrastructure you’ll need to run those events • Power • Water • Inside storage • Audience and stage orientation • Paths wide enough to accept farmer market tents Activations Existing underutilized spaces can be activated without a complete redesign. • Placemaking, Creative Placemaking Principles of Activation • Simple and Sustainable • Comfortable and Colorful • Convincing and Concentrated • Connected • Programmed • Local and Authentic

IDA

Urban Parks

ACTIVITIES

Fundraising How do we fund a Great Urban Park? Funding varies greatly from park to park, but some formula of the following methods are generally used: • BID/PBID Taxes • Allowing Park Vendors • Renting Park Facility to Restaurants and Shop Owners • Site Sponsorship • Private Events/For-Pay Events • Park Usage Fees • Bonds, Loans • Government Grants/Placemaking Grants/Art Grants • Friends of the Park/Nonprofit Fundraising • Development Fees/Benefits for Public Use/Access • Reclamation/Greening/Environmental Funds • Cost Savings through Intelligent/Shared Maintenance

ACTIVITIES

Park Management How do you manage a Great Urban Park? There are multiple existing models to be considered for park management, many that are variations of publicprivate partnerships working together toward a shared goal. These partnerships can vary to meet the needs of those involved. Reasons to consider a public-private partnership: • financial needs • aging infrastructure • growing demand for services • creating efficiencies • utilizing outside expertise Services that could be included in a public-private partnership: • funding procurement • design work • building and construction • daily management of operations • permitting and signature authority Best practices for a public-private partnership: • public and private entities must agree on shared vision • keep public sector interests in mind • private entity(ies) must have the right motivation • have measurement and reporting tools in place • constant communication is key In urban parks, an effective public-private partnership depends on full commitment from all agencies, complete transparency through the process, continuous refinement of ideas, clearly defined roles and responsibilities, to have a level of comfort with a modest allocation of risk, and the ability to continue to create and innovate.

IDA

Urban Parks

SECTION FOUR

Outputs & Impacts

AFTER

OUTPUTS & IMPACTS

Effects Of Parks What are the effects of a Great Urban Park? Public utility and economic return. Neighborhoods Parks that are poorly maintained, mismanaged, and underfunded can have deleterious effects on their surrounding communities.

Parks with active management, lucrative partnerships and fastidious upkeep are assets, and can drive investment while becoming centerpieces of their neighborhoods. Economy and Jobs Local and regional parks have a huge impact on our economy. According to a national study, they generated $140 billion in economic activity and supported almost 1 million jobs from their operations in 20131.

Equity How do you make sure a Great Urban Park is equitable? Parks belong to everyone. As public spaces, successful parks are amenities that should serve all audiences, including: • Economic status • Ethnicity • Religion • Orientation • Gender identity • Age • Fitness levels • Race • Housing status Equity is a guiding principle that should govern decisions related to: • Private funding sources • Management • Operations • Fees • Rental facilities • Amenities • Rules of conduct • Access • Free speech It can be difficult to balance the need for a free and open space with creating a comfortable experience for all audience segments. By their very nature, urban environments invite diversity and multiple uses. 30

IDA

Urban Parks

OUTPUTS & IMPACTS

Private Funding Sources and Management There are big upsides to private funding mechanisms and management of public parks. A private nonprofit organization or park conservancy can often be more flexible, nimble and successful in generating revenue and can often avoid the bureaucratic morass that often makes park management more expensive or more cumbersome. When contemplating a private management structure, it is important to couple the communities’ needs with the mission of any organization charged with managing a public asset like a park. In a perfect scenario, a private manager sees themselves as stewards of a public asset, and develops policies and practices that will serve to underscore the public’s interest in an urban park. A private operator can offer significant benefits to a park’s management structure, amenities and community benefits. downtown.org | © 2017 International Downtown Association

Corporate Sponsors Successful parks can generate additional revenue through corporate sponsorships. Care must be taken to ensure that parks as public amenities safeguard their role as public spaces, allowing open access and being dedicated to creating a natural reprieve from urban life. When contemplating a potential corporate sponsorship, park managers should carefully weigh the benefits accrued to a sponsor and balance those benefits against the public interest. Questions to Ask: • Will corporate naming rights imply a public endorsement of a product or service? • Is the sponsor’s intent consistent with the overall goals of the park? • How will potential sponsor benefits impact the use of other park patrons? • Are the financial benefits or dedicated resources commensurate with the benefits the larger public will accrue from additional capital investments?

OUTPUTS & IMPACTS

Corporate sponsors may be more interested in financing signature capital projects. Park managers should consider how ongoing operational costs being financed may be associated with any capital investment. Corporate sponsorships can be very beneficial to creating and maintaining public parks. But wise park managers, city officials and BID operators should be deliberative in considering any unintended consequences of corporate sponsorships that may impact equity values and detract from a park’s primary purpose as a gathering place for all community members. Fees and Amenities Revenue generated by fees for park amenities and activities can be an important source of income for urban parks. As park managers, it is important to consider the kinds of fee-for-service amenities that parks might provide and balance the needs of the community with costs associated for activities. Typical amenities that can be a source of income for parks are: • Restaurants • Concessions • Ice rinks • Paddleboats • Horse-drawn carriages • Rock climbing walls • Facility rentals • Carousels Amenities can add revenue streams that support other activities. Park managers should be thoughtful about balancing community needs and access for all patrons to fee-forservice amenities or private elements of the park. If private sector vendors offer services for fees, park managers should ensure that rates are balanced with community needs. The basic value that must drive decisions is the public nature of a park and ensuring access for all to basic infrastructure and amenities.

ties will benefit as wide of a cross section of park patrons as possible. When considering recreational services, park managers should consider: • Age • Abilities • Income • Cultural values Geographic Locations Parks should be sited throughout a community to serve all areas of the city. In some communities, parks have been sited and funded in well-heeled neighborhoods that may be more organized or vocal in requesting park investment. Equity requires that city managers and BID operators consider the location of parks throughout a community, working to ensure access to all members of a population. Consider developing a network of urban or citywide parks with your park as a centerpiece or link in the chain. Some circumstances may make it easier to develop or invest in a park in certain neighborhoods through: • Community activism • Donations of land or money • Politically connected neighborhoods Constitutional Questions Constitutionally protected free speech rights and access applicable in other public settings general apply in parks. Although parks may establish rules of conduct and hours of operation that are more strict than other public spaces like city streets or sidewalks, constitutional considerations are an important part of designing rules of conduct and access. If the park is managed by a private foundation, there may be more stringent guidelines than in a park managed by a city, state or federal government. Some parks may also designate “free speech” zones or areas set aside for political protesting. Do your research so that you have a clear understanding of the rights of the management organization and the visitors to the space.

Recreational Services In considering the design of urban park amenities, it is helpful to think about the kinds of services and amenities that may be provided to ensure that investments in ameni-

IDA

Urban Parks

SECTION FIVE

Case Studies

CASE STUDIES

Case Studies Herald and Greeley Square Parks | New York City, NY Background & Context Herald and Greeley Square Parks were previously concrete and asphalt traffic islands, and sites of disorder: drug dealers, rats, graffiti and litter were prevalent. They were decorated only by one bronze monument and several trees in each “park.” The islands sit at the intersection of busy diagonal Broadway as it cuts into the street grid at Sixth Avenue. Nearby attractions include Macy’s Herald Square, the Empire State Building, and the 34th Street retail corridor. The 34th Street Partnership (34SP) was formed in 1992 to improve the neighborhood around the parks, and 34SP funds pay for the park’s sanitation, security and upkeep.

Challenges & Resolutions The two parks are extremely small - Greeley is 13,715 SF, Herald is 9,830 SF. They are used as an area of respite for shoppers and workers in the area, but they also are popular cut-throughs for pedestrians walking north and south through Midtown. The diverse set of users has made programming a challenge, and 34SP staff have learned to think creatively when planning events in the space. Additionally, all interventions, events and programs in the two parks must accommodate heavy foot traffic during all hours of the day, and loud noise from the traffic in the area. This places limits on programs 34SP can successfully run in the space.

Funding Principle The 34th Street Partnership Business Improvement District entered into a 10-year maintenance agreement with the Parks Department to turn two traffic islands into small urban parks. As a Business Improvement District, the Partnership is funded by an assessment on all buildings within its 31-block district.

Future of the Park In 2012, the City of New York pedestrianized Broadway between 35th and 32nd streets to create a more walkable Midtown. 34SP named the new space Broadway Boulevard. It was initially a challenge to keep the space, which was formerly roadbed, looking lush and welcoming, especially since it ran parallel to both Herald and Greeley Square Parks, with their trees and planting beds. 34SP began talks with the Department of Transportation to unite the new pedestrian space with the adjacent parks, creating two larger public spaces. These talks continue today.

Implementation & Management The effort to renovate these parks included cleaning them of all graffiti and litter, adding pavers and planting beds of colorful flowers, installing additional trees and tree pits, and scattering movable tables and chairs through the space. Two public restrooms were installed, one in each park, and are kept to a high standard by 34SP Sanitation Staff. While the initial capital overhaul of the spaces was a significant cost to 34SP, it ultimately allowed the two parks to generate revenue for the organization. Food kiosks were installed on the northern end of Herald Square and the southern end of Greeley Square, and in addition to concessions revenues, 34SP also receives revenues from the sale of advertising on these kiosks. Additionally, Greeley Square Park hosts a twiceannual artisanal food and drink market called Broadway Bites. Property values around the parks have increased, and retail in the district has improved significantly since 34SP began its work in 1992. The two parks were awarded an IDA Downtown Achievement Award in 2000.

Hemisfair Park | San Antonio, TX Background & Context The City of San Antonio wanted to turn their former World’s Fair grounds into the most dynamic and catalytic destination in downtown, making the most of its centrality to the River Walk, The Alamo, the Convention Center and surrounding neighborhoods. While preserving some existing elements of the 1968 Hemisfair grounds, three major public spaces would be created on the downtown side of the park: Yanaguana Garden, a four-acre space with a focus on families and children; the Civic Park, a 9-acre central park for downtown; and Tower Park, a community park located at the base of the famous 750-foot-tall Tower of the Americas. In addition, the development of new mixed-use residential/retail buildings on sites adjacent to designated parkland would

IDA

Urban Parks

CASE STUDIES

help bring more activity and revenues to sustain the park. Hemisfair Park Area Redevelopment Corporation (HPARC) was set up by the City of San Antonio to develop and manage the district. The Hemisfair Conservancy has also been established as a separate and independent 501(c)3 nonprofit to assist with philanthropic funding and longevity of Hemisfair’s parks and open spaces. Funding Principle Hemisfair is being constructed on the foundation of a sophisticated financial model that includes bond funding, land leases, commercial leases, event revenues, parking revenues, a Tax Increment Finance Zone, and philanthropy. A publicprivate partnership (P3) development agreement will share the cost of building public parking, as well as restaurants and retail that will become part of the overall park attraction. As the mixed-use buildings along the park edge are completed, additional revenues will flow to the park organization, which is expected to become self-supporting by FY 2022. Implementation & Management The 2017 HPARC overall operating budget is $2.26 million, which comes from the following sources: 75% from City general fund, 15% from bond support, 5% from parking revenues, and 5% from lease and event revenues. Over time, the portions from city general fund and bond support decreases as the other revenues increase. HPARC will continue as the main entity to develop, activate and operate the park. Since Yanaguana Garden opened in late 2015, the staff has grown and shifted to match public use and provide programming. In the last year, conservancy programming staff has organized 124 specific activations, 36 of which were third party collaborations such as Pecha Kucha, Build SA Green, KLRN Play & Learn, Eva’s Heroes and Kidcation. Recurring activations include Art in the Park, Health & Wellness (yoga, Zumba, Cross Fit, youth fitness), Big Blue Blocks, Story Time, Southtown Cinema, First Fridays, and Chess Tournaments. Additionally, local families have organized 41 birthday parties, or almost one per week. By 2017, the event count has grown to over 500 events and includes several in-house large annual events such as Mockingbird Fest, Back to School, and Harvest Fest.

Challenges & Resolutions 1. Funding – it has been difficult to get philanthropy to see the need for parks, or for the private sector to provide funds to what is perceived as a city responsibility. Currently, HPARC Is undergoing a major capital campaign that hopefully will resolve this challenge. 2. Leadership – the project needs a champion who can ease political and funding challenges. With only two-year terms for the Mayor and City Council, city leadership frequently changes as evidenced by the city having its fourth mayor in nine years. 3. Communications – due to the complexity of the project as both a park and an urban district, it has been difficult for the public to fully understand and embrace what is happening at Hemisfair. Opening Yanaguana Garden helps give people a preview, but until the new buildings are built, the public is unsure how to react to development. Future of the Park According to the Hemisfair Community Impact study, “Yanaguana Garden has become the second most frequented urban park per acre in Texas after Klyde Warren in Dallas. An estimated 500,000 visitors visited Yanaguana Garden during its first year. 86% are locals, representing every City Council District in San Antonio. Foreign travelers from more than a dozen countries have visited the new park.” According to the Hemisfair Economic Impact report, Hemisfair will generate private investment seven times (7x) the total amount of public investment: $80 million in total public investment is expected to generate almost $540 million in private investment. To date, Hemisfair has leveraged $9 million of public investment in Yanaguana Garden into over $28 million of private investment in the Southwest zone including mixed-income residential, local restaurants and shops and public parking. The total economic impact of construction at Hemisfair over 10 years will likely result in $880 million of new economic activity and over 6,000 jobs. Once Hemisfair redevelopment is complete, total employment is projected at 2,000 jobs in the district. When the ripple effect is considered, San Antonio should see 3,700 new indirect and induced jobs from the work at Hemisfair. The result is an estimated annual impact of $400 million to the San Antonio economy.

CASE STUDIES

Yards Park | Washington, D.C.

Background & Context Yards Park is a 5.4 acre, multi-use park along the Anacostia River in the rapidly-developing Capitol Riverfront, a mixeduse neighborhood of Washington, DC, which is located between Nationals Park and the Washington Navy Yard, south of I-695. The park is the centerpiece of a redevelopment of a larger 42-acre redevelopment by Forest City of formerly GSA-owned land. The park was built prior to completion of the larger project, called The Yards, drawing users and visitors to the growing neighborhood at a time when very few amenities were in place. The park is primarily a series of lawns, plazas, and water features, focused on the river. They are flanked by outdoor seating at nearby restaurants, and centered on an iconic pedestrian bridge. The park draws neighbors from newly-opened apartment buildings, but also serves as a destination park, hosting large events such as a weekly summer concert series, temporary art installations, and annual festivals. Funding Principle Yards Park was developed in a public-private partnership between Forest City (developer), the District of Columbia Government, and the US General Services Administration.

Implementation & Management The District of Columbia owns Yards Park, and has conveyed operations and maintenance responsibility to the Capitol Riverfront BID. Through the BID, Yards Parkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s $1 million annual operating budget is financed by a diverse set of funding opportunities. Forest City, the developer of the larger Navy Yard project, pays a special assessment to maintain the park. A portion of new restaurant sales tax

IDA

Urban Parks

CASE STUDIES

revenue within the development (through July 2017) add to the budget. The Capitol Riverfront BID collects fees from sponsors and special events. Additional operating and maintenance expenses have come as single year line items in the DC Government budget. Challenges & Resolutions Yards Park has proven to be a very popular, successful park. An early capital challenge for the park came in the form of unanticipated visitor use. A water feature designed to be contemplative was quickly adopted by children and families as a splash pool. To accommodate this use, the BID made several annual fixes to the lining of the feature before finding a permanent, but costly, solution that allows the feature to be used as an interactive splash pool. In 2017, the BID will lose the dedicated sales tax revenue that funds

downtown.org | ÂŠ 2017 International Downtown Association

a portion of the annual operating budget for the park. They are working to resolve the funding gap through increased sponsorships. Future of the Park Yards Park primarily serves a growing neighborhood of mostly rental apartment units. It is located near Nationals Park (baseball stadium), which draws a significant number of visitors each year. As the neighborhood population grows, the park is expected to prosper further. Additionally, Yards Park hosts many large events that draw both local and nonlocal residents to the site, making it a major destination. Increased demand for large-scale, intensive events may challenge the public nature of the park. The BID may need to host more events for revenue and increased usage may drive up the annual maintenance costs of the park.

CASE STUDIES

Charlotte Rail Trail | Charlotte, NC Background & Context When Charlotteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Blue Line light rail system was constructed, there was a generous right of way included to insure access to the tracks. A sidewalk was built, as well as fencing and a buffer area. The sidewalk created a convenient place for people to bike and walk throughout rapidly growing Historic South End. Given that the district lacks park space, this right of way was identified as a potential linear park. Charlotte Center City Partners (CCCP) created a plan and set to work creating a vision for a linear park scattered with public art installations. The 4.5-mile park sees over 2,000 users daily. Funding Principle Charlotteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Rail Trail is funded by a mix of grants and private investment. The only public tax dollars spent on the park were in the planning stages. Implementation & Management The initial vision plan was paid for by Charlotte Center City Partners, as well as more technical plan contributed to by the city, county and CCCP. This planning work allowed CCCP to go to property owners to get buy in, interest in hosting projects, and achieve a comfort level with the idea of putting art on the privately-owned sites. Initial projects were installed via the generosity of a private donor, including a HexPong table, public chalkboard and seating areas. These provided momentum for the project. Concurrently, the project received $300,000 worth of funding from ArtPlace. Charlotte Center City Partners applied for this grant money which covered the costs of projects. An additional grant was received from KABOOM to create a kid friendly installation. The first privately funded property owner project was Transformer Park, which is a night-time light display created by Duke Energy. The lights illuminate their transformer in a variety of colors.

Challenges & Resolutions The biggest challenge the project has faced is a lack of clarity on how right of ways can be used. Many property owners believed that the transit authority would maintain those areas. They were unaware that they could improve the areas, and the process for doing so was unclear. Charlotte Center City Partners spearheaded the conversations with property owners to get buy-in for putting art on their land. They also coordinated with the transit authority to get projects approved. There is now a system in place to get approvals for projects.

IDA

Urban Parks

CASE STUDIES

Liability is an additional challenge; even without improvements, property owners are liable for the right of way (much in the way homeowners are liable for their sidewalks). CCCP has taken on the liability insurance for several of the art installations and is responsible for their maintenance. Liability has been a deal breaker on several projects. Future of the Park The upcoming 2017 projects are focused on providing missing links on the trail. There are sections where the trail is disrupted and requires bridges and/or routing changes. Additionally, Charlotte Center City Partners is seeking grant money to build more art installations. This summer, the organization will also start a program of vendors on the trail. Notably, given that the rail trail is on private property, this is a simpler project than recruiting vendors into public parks. CCCP will also continue to build the brand and promote the trail. By creating a vision, Charlotte Center City Partners could get buy-in from private donors and property owners to invest in a community asset. The Charlotte Rail Trail is considered a key amenity in South End by residents and visitors and brings a high degree of visibility to the district, particularly via social media. To date, $900,000 has been invested in the project, 50% from private investment and 50% in grant money.

downtown.org | ÂŠ 2017 International Downtown Association

CASE STUDIES

Westlake Park | Seattle, WA Background & Context Westlake Park is in the center of the retail core and for years had been unofficially reclaimed by those partaking in illegal behavior, excessive litter and vandalism. After attempts at minor changes over the years, the Downtown Seattle Association (DSA) committed to a complete activation and programming plan for the park â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 24/7, 365 days a year. Since the intervention, the park has enjoyed a complete turnaround and data indicate a significant increase in overall park visitors and positive perception of the park. Funding Principle Every dollar, whether by private donation, city or partner funding or sponsorship revenue, is reinvested back into the park. The ability to leverage the core foundational funding to create a revenue stream provides an efficient way to continue enhancing the park.

IDA

Urban Parks

CASE STUDIES

Implementation & Management Westlake Park is managed by a public-private partnership and works in close collaboration with core partners. The Seattle Parks Foundation manages all private funds on behalf of the Downtown Seattle Association. The DSA obtains and manages all permitting and sponsorship revenue. Challenges & Resolutions Westlake Park presented many challenges to overcome as it was unsightly and unsafe. The DSA, with its partners, chose to confront the situation while taking the following into consideration: • Address a significant concern of members and ratepayers • Turn a liability into an asset • Compete with peer downtowns • Develop a new park management model for downtown To address these issues, the DSA chose to be 100% committed to the effort. This meant a significant financial investment and prep work to turn the park back to a downtown asset in very short order with music, food, games and various other additions that make it a vibrant and thriving downtown destination. With neighborhood support and city agency backing, the park turnaround has been a success. Future of the Park The results from activating Westlake Park have been outstanding. Westlake Park will continue to thrive with additional new activations including fresh flower and food trucks, cultural performances, recreational activities, rotating temporary art installations and sponsor involvement. Infrastructure enhancements are also being discussed to include lighting improvements, power upgrades and additional synergy between adjacent retail that resides on the park edges. This public-private collaboration with Seattle Parks and Recreation has established a new model for activating and managing urban public spaces in Seattle, a model that has already been replicated and scaled to positively impact various other urban parks.

CASE STUDIES

Myriad Botanical Gardens | Oklahoma City, OK Background & Context The Myriad Botanical Gardens is a 15-acre botanical garden and urban park in downtown Oklahoma City. Originally opened in 1988, the outdoor areas were completely redesigned and reopened in 2011 with enhanced green spaces, new gardens and visitor amenities including: a restaurant, childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s garden, performance green, pavilions, a childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s playground, a dog park and a seasonal ice rink. Funding Principle The Myriad Botanical Gardens is managed by a public/ private partnership. The nonprofit 501(c)3, Myriad Gardens Foundation, is responsible for managing the gardens and funding over half its annual operating cost. Through earned revenues and philanthropic support, the Foundation currently funds 57% of its $4.1 annual operating budget. The balance is funded through the Oklahoma Economic Development Trust and the City of Oklahoma City. 42

Implementation & Management The Gardens are managed using a public-private partnership model. The Myriad Gardens Foundation has an annual operating budget of about $4.1million. Of this amount, the Foundation raises over half through earned revenue, grants, donations, corporate sponsorships and an endowment. The City of Oklahoma City and Oklahoma Economic Development Trust provide the Foundation a management fee for the balance in monthly installments. The partnership agreement is for the Foundation to eventually earn and raise two-thirds of its annual operating budget.

IDA

Urban Parks

CASE STUDIES

Challenges & Resolutions The largest challenge for this project was to create a new management organization on a public-private model that would allow the City of Oklahoma City to reduce taxpayer funds needed to manage the Myriad Botanical Gardens in a quality manner after the gardens were upgraded. Challenges faced was to transition from city staff to nonprofit staff and have Myriad Gardens Foundation take on the management and for this new entity. In addition to hiring and training new staff, the organization had the challenge of quickly gearing up to earn significant revenues from philanthropic support and earned revenues to pay for most of operating expenses.

Future of the Park To fully complete the renovation of the Myriad Gardens, a capital campaign is underway to fully redesign and upgrade the interior spaces of the Crystal Bridge Conservatory, Visitor lobby and meeting spaces, as well as grow its permanent endowment. The capital improvements will bring the conservatory up to a first-rate exhibit and education level to attract more visitors, to increase membership and rental revenue, and to create a new gift shop and upgraded rental spaces. These improvements will enable the Myriad Gardens Foundation to achieve its goal of raising two-thirds of its annual operating budget each year with the City of Oklahoma City supporting the balance of one-third of the expenses in this public-private partnership.

The first challenge was met by taking advantage of the site to produce a variety of programs and events that earn revenue or attract corporate support. The city then hired professional managers and development staff to work with board members and community leaders to widen its capacity for philanthropic support from individuals, foundations, corporations and to grow its endowment.

downtown.org | ÂŠ 2017 International Downtown Association

CASE STUDIES

Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library Learning Garden | Long Beach, CA Background & Context Under the leadership of Vice Mayor Rex Richardson and area neighborhood associations, North Long Beach is transforming into one of the city’s most dynamic neighborhoods. Historically a blue-collar, white suburb of Long Beach, the northern part of the city has experienced demographic shifts over the last half-century that’s made it one of the most diverse neighborhoods in the nation, home to a majority of the city’s new arrivals, including African Americans, Latinos and Asians. While the area is undergoing what many call a “renaissance,” it has been a conscious and deliberate process to overcome serious inequities in health, wealth and education in North Long Beach when compared to other parts of the city. For example, you are likely to live seven years less if you live in North Long Beach than coastal Long Beach.

Serious attention is being placed on helping health outcomes in North Long Beach through the formation and funding of The Coalition for a Healthy North Long Beach, a cross-sector ad-hoc group who aims to increase whole fruit and vegetable consumption and promote healthy outdoor activity with funding from a Kaiser HEAL Zone grant. Funding Principle The Coalition for a Healthy North Long Beach is a consortium of stakeholders including the city’s health department, resident leaders and nonprofits from the health, food and transportation/walkability sectors. The coalition manages a multi-year, million-dollar grant aimed at helping health inequities in targeted census tracts of North Long Beach. In this instance, the grant monies were pursued as a catalyst for matching funds and energies from partners engaged in the HEAL Zone to build a public, edible garden adjacent to a brand-new library.

IDA

Urban Parks

CASE STUDIES

Implementation & Management The Vice Mayor and Long Beach Fresh, the local food policy council, brought Our Foods garden builders together with city health professionals, the Uptown Property & Community Assoc. (PBID), and the library to see how all could work together to install and manage a public food garden at the empty site adjacent to the library. While many were reluctant at first, mostly due to liability concerns and feeling like the project was outside of their purview, a partnership formed in which the Vice Mayor contributed $10,000 of his discretionary funds, the BID contributed $5,000 and the HEAL Zone grant added $10,000 to cover the $25,000 costs of building and operating the free, public, edible garden for 18 months. Challenges & Resolutions Once everyone was on the same page, the contractors built the garden, but the City of Long Beach had a hitch setting up water at the site. To this day, the promised water has not come and the garden contractors and BID clean team must manually water the garden. Resolution is hoped for soon, but it has been a major stumbling block to success. Regardless of issues over watering, it is estimated that nearly 500 pounds of free, organic food including kale, tomatoes, chives, swiss chard, lettuce, and herbs have been harvested by the community since the project began. There are currently talks of opening a Farmers’ Market or “Crop Swap” at the site where visitors will be able to share their backyard and garden-grown produce. downtown.org | © 2017 International Downtown Association

Future of the Park The Teaching Garden was funded to be built and maintained for 18 months with the expectation that the city enter into a development agreement for the site with a private developer. It seems that the timeline for that development has been extended outward as much as two years, prompting a discussion to renew the maintenance agreement for the garden. The group is currently working to install signage that explains the proper way to harvest from the site. The co-location of the garden next to a library helps promote good behavior and maximum use of the garden, over a garden that may be tucked away or inaccessible and hopes to promote that concept to future garden-builders.

CASE STUDIES

Where To Go Next Where can I get more help with implementing my Great Urban Park? 2016 City Park Facts by the Trust for Public Land

Green Urban Economy: Conceptual basis and courses for action, Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI), November 2012

Boston Park Value Report by the Trust for Public Land Center for City Park Excellence Bibliography by the Trust for Public Land

City Parks Alliance: Leveraging the Power of Parks

A Guide to the Healthy Parks Healthy People Approach and Current Practices, A Guide to the Healthy Parks Healthy People Approach and Current Practices, Proceedings from the Improving Health and Well-being stream of IUCN World Parks Congress 2014

City Parks Forum Briefing Papers, American Planning Association

The Health Benefits of Parks by the Trust for Public Land

Conservation Gateway: Greenprint Resource Hub, by the Nature Conservancy, The Conservation Fund and The Trust for Public Land

Inside City Parks by the Trust for Public Land

Center for City Park Excellence Research Library, part of the Trust for Public Land

Developer Exactions and the Creation of New City Parks by the Trust for Public Land

Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System by the Trust for Public Land New Public and Private Funding Strategies for Urban Parks by Catherine Nagel, City Parks Alliance via Meeting of the Minds

Downtown Parks: Funding Methods, Management Structures, and Costs by the Trust for Public Land

Parks by Project for Public Spaces

Economic Benefits of Open Space and Trails in Pinal County by the Trust for Public Land

Public Spaces/Private Money: The Triumphs and Pitfalls of Urban Park Conservancies by the Trust for Public Land

Excellent City Parks Report by the Trust for Public Land

Quantifying the Contribution of Public Parks to Physical Activity and Health, RAND Corporation and National Recreation and Park Association, 2014

The Excellent City Park System by the Trust for Public Land Florida Parks in the 21st Century by the Trust for Public Land Green Benefits in Victoria Business Improvement District: An Analysis of the benefits of trees and other green assets by I-Tree Eco, Cavat and GI The Green Edge: How Commercial Property Investment in Green Infrastructure Creates Value, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), 2013

Greening Americaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Communities, Smart Growth, United States Environmental Protection Agency

The Role of Parks in Shaping Successful Cities: A White Paper. Prepared for National Recreation and Park Association and American Planning Association. By Dena Levitz A Smart Investment For Americaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Health by The Land and Water Conservation Fund and City Parks Alliance Urban Green: Innovative Parks for Resurgent Cities by the Trust for Public Land

IDA

Urban Parks

REFERENCE

Endnotes Photo Credits

REFERENCE

Endnotes

Page 12 Karras, John. “The 5 Features of Great Public Spaces.” urbanSCALE. 22 May 2014. http://urbanscale.com/blog/5-featuresgreat-public-spaces/ Project for Public Spaces. “Signature Places: Great Parks we can Learn From.” http://www.pps.org/reference/six-parks-wecan-all-learn-from/ Page 13 Harnik, Peter and Welle, Ben. “Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System.” Trust for Public Land. 2009. http:// cloud.tpl.org/pubs/ccpe-econvalueparks-rpt.pdf Page 21 Downtown Community Plan: A City of Santa Monica Specific Plan https://www.smgov.net/Departments/PCD/Plans/Downtown-Community-Plan/ Page 28 Project for Public Spaces: Creating Great Urban Parks. http://www.pps.org/reference/creating-great-urban-parks/

Photo Credits Page 4 Baltimore Downtown Partnership. (2017). Lighted installation. Baltimore, MD.

Page 16 USBID. (2017). Aerial view of Union Square Park. San Francisco, CA.

Page 7 Downtown Santa Ana. (2017). Sunken City. Santa Ana, CA.

Page 17 Baltimore Downtown Partnership. (2017). View of an urban park. Baltimore, MD.

Page 8 Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership. (2017). Kids playing checkers. Pittsburgh, PA. Page 10 Baltimore Downtown Partnership. (2017). Parents and kids enjoying park. Baltimore, MD. Page 12 Ryan Smolar. (2017). Performing artist at Promenade Activation at Monthly Artwalk. Orange County, CA. Page 15 Miami DDI. (2017). City skyline. Miami, FL.

Page 18 Downtown Santa Ana. (2017). Neighbors turning old firehouse into microfarm and native landscape. Santa Ana, CA. Page 19 Downtown Santa Monica, Inc.’s. (2017). Downtown Community Plan - Park Types. Santa Monica, CA. Page 22 Downtown Winnipeg BIZ. (2017). Yoga in the park. Winnipeg, MB, Canada. Page 24 Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership. (2017). Aerial view of urban park. Pittsburgh, PA. IDA

Urban Parks

REFERENCE

Page 26 Downtown Santa Ana. (2017). Community re-branding. Santa Ana, CA. Page 27 Downtown Seattle Association. (2017). Overhead view of Pioneer Courthouse Square. Portland, OR. Biederman Redevelopment Ventures. (2017). View of Central Park. New York City, NY. Page 28 Greater Wichita Partnership. (2017). Pop-up Park. Wichita, KS. Page 30 USBID. (2017). Children posing in front of heart statue. San Francisco, CA. Page 31 Downtown Santa Ana. (2017). Monthly crop swap neighbors trading produce. Santa Ana, CA. Page 36 Capitol Riverfront BID. (2017). Yards Park light installation. Washington, D.C. Capitol Riverfront BID. (2017). Yards Park in Autumn. Washington, D.C. Page 37 Capitol Riverfront BID. (2017). Yoga class. Washington, D.C. Capitol Riverfront BID. (2017). Bridge with runners. Washington, D.C. Capitol Riverfront BID. (2017). Kids in the fountain with bridge in background. Washington, D.C. Page 38 Charlotte Center City Partners. (2017). Carpet murals. Charlotte, NC.

Charlotte Center City Partners. (2017). Symphony. Charlotte, NC. Page 40 Downtown Seattle Association. (2017). Westlake Park before. Seattle, WA. Downtown Seattle Association. (2017). Westlake Park before 2. Seattle, WA. Page 41 Downtown Seattle Association. (2017). People looking at ice sculpture installation. Seattle, WA. Downtown Seattle Association. (2017). Daytime parkgoers. Seattle, WA. Downtown Seattle Association. (2017). Older woman performing. Seattle, WA. Page 42 Downtown Oklahoma City. (2017). Myriad Botanical Gardens aerial view. Oklahoma City, OK. Page 43 Downtown Oklahoma City. (2017). Movie in the park at night. Oklahoma City, OK. Downtown Oklahoma City. (2017). Flower gardens and trees. Oklahoma City, OK. Page 44 Ryan Smolar. (2017). People in gardens. Long Beach, CA. Page 45 Ryan Smolar. (2017). Digital rendering of gardens. Long Beach, CA. Ryan Smolar. (2017). Harvest party in gardens. Long Beach, CA.

Page 39 Charlotte Center City Partners. (2017). Trail at night. Charlotte, NC.

downtown.org | ÂŠ 2017 International Downtown Association