- Need some exercise after eating too much this Thanksgiving? Here is a review of choice locations for fall leaf-gazing in New York City’s parks (The New York Times)
- Does your neighborhood have a problem with speeding traffic? How about inserting a park into the street? San Francisco completes its final “Pavement to Parks” plaza with a new 7,500 square foot space (Streetsblog San Francisco)
- Department of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar signs off on plan to refurbish the National Mall, calling it “America’s Front Yard” (NPR)
- Researchers in St. Louis release a sobering analysis of parks and walking facilities in poor and minority neighborhoods, noting that low-quality amenities are a significant factor in public health issues (St. Louis Beacon)
- An urban agriculture organization in Oakland is set to receive a $4 million grant to turn a brownfield site into an innovative, multi-use “urban farm and park” (Grist)
- San Jose is weighing options for putting millions of dollars worth of unspent park development fees to use, hoping to finance the construction and maintenance of parks across the city (Mercury News)
Several cities across the country rolled out bike share programs this year. Denver’s B-cycle program (more than 400 bikes at 42 solar-powered stations) was unveiled last Earth Day as the first large-scale municipal bike sharing system in the United States. Washington, D.C. first opened a limited network of kiosks called SmartBike in June (100 bicycles at 10 locations), then most recently instituted the new Capital Bikeshare program (1,100 bicycles at 114 solar-powered stations) in the District and Arlington, Virginia in September. Minneapolis launched its NiceRide system of 700 bikes at 65 stations which operated April through early November.
So what are the prospects of bike sharing for city park systems? In Minneapolis, the stations are mostly located outside of parks but users may be checking the bikes out and using city trails and parks that are nearby or on their way to destinations. For instance, a cyclist could take a bike from the University of Minnesota and travel along the Mississippi River parks and Stone Arch Bridge. Or, someone may check a bike out downtown and head to the Minneapolis Institute of Art or Midtown.
One of the exciting opportunities these new bike share programs present is the possibility of greater connectivity for the urban park system. The more locations available to pick-up or return a bicycle, the more options residents will have to visit parks or use trails as part of their every day activities. Some programs even cater to tourists by providing daily and monthly memberships in addition to the annual agreements most users are familiar with, allowing these visitors to participate in the program and possibly even advocate for one in their own city.
As more cities climb on board this trendy and convenient mode of transportation, it will be interesting to see if the park supporters and bicycle champions work in tandem to push not only for more bike lanes through the city, but trails and connections to all of the parks in the city.
- Civil disobedience becomes a central strategy in the struggle to build more off-leash dog parks in Baltimore (The Baltimore Sun)
- And speaking of dog parks, Cambridge, Mass. is proud to have the first ever “Park Spark,” two 500-gallon tanks that convert dog waste into methane gas, which is used to light a street lamp (CBS News)
- San Francisco gives its parks their highest grades ever, as the Park Standards Annual Report demonstrates city-wide improvements for five years running (The San Francisco Examiner)
- Friends of Dallas parks meet for the first “Love Your Parks” summit, focused on finding ways to stimulate funding and protect the park system’s budget from the vagaries of the economy (The Dallas Morning News)
- Neighbors of St. Paul’s bustling Como Park are considering solutions to an overabundance of cars, including new parking ramps, bike trails, and a park-and-ride service (Twin Cities Pioneer Press)
- Four finalists have been selected in the design competition for Minneapolis’ riverfront park, which will ultimately transform 5.5 miles of Mississippi River shoreline north of downtown (Minnesota Public Radio News)
“Cities large and small are the most sustainable living models, and the viability of a sustainable city rests on the success or failure of its urban parks,” said Thomas Balsley, the landscape architect responsible for designing Main Street Garden in Dallas and Curtis Hixon Park in Tampa. But what kind of urban parks provide the best benefit to the health of a city? According to Balsley, “Smaller parks, not large destination parks, are the key to a vibrant city.”
Balsley, along with Willis Winters from the Dallas Parks and Recreation Department and Karen Palus from the Tampa Parks and Recreation Department, discussed their strategies behind designing Main Street Garden and Curtis Hixon Park in a session at the 2010 American Society of Landscape Architects Annual Meeting and Expo in Washington, D.C. The panel discussed their experiences and provided excellent insight into what it takes to develop a successful urban park.
In 2001, Dallas was jolted by a decision unlike any other before. The Boeing Company chose to move its headquarters to Chicago rather than Dallas because there was a lack of vibrancy in the city center. At the time, only 240 people lived in downtown Dallas, all in a single apartment building. The numerous city employees vacated the area after their nine-to-five workdays and no real thought was given to attracting residents to live in the business district. This lack of a 24-hour tenant presence resulted in a stagnant city center, a place that Boeing did not want to call home for its new corporate headquarters. The decision was a wake-up call for city officials and a new emphasis was placed on revitalizing their downtown, with particular interest in urban parks.
In response, Balsley’s firm was selected to design Main Street Garden, a 1.7-acre park occupying a full city block on the east end of downtown. The site with its historic buildings offered an excellent opportunity to bring life back into the city’s center. As Winters said, “Main Street Garden served as the reason to revitalize the buildings surrounding the area.”
Main Street Garden was designed with an inviting streetscape encouraging people to stop and visit, not just pass through the park on their lunch break. Innovative lighting techniques such as study shelters encouraged use well into the evening hours. Other design elements included a large lawn that can be adapted to multiple uses, a green roof canopy over a concession kiosk, café and dining terrace, botanical garden, urban dog run, playground, stage and an interactive stream fountain that has proven to be popular with children of all ages.
As Balsley discussed the project, he explained that creating a successful design for the park is only part of the job. A large part of the work is managing an oftentimes-contentious public process. He offered some tips for success including:
- Share your experiences: Be open about your past experiences, offering insight into your successes and setbacks.
- Form client/designer collaboration: Work with your client encouraging communication and teamwork.
- Advocate for a committee format: Be open to the idea of a community process.
- Maintain reasonable expectations: Encourage stakeholders to understand what is possible and what may be unachievable.
- Listen, and prove it: Encourage an open dialogue and act upon what you hear.
- Avoid preconceived notions: Be open to all ideas and viewpoints.
- Hang your ego outside the door: Avoid the “designer knows best” mentality.
Palus who shared the background behind the redevelopment of Curtis Hixon Park emphasized Balsley’s advice. “This is a story of a city that invested in its people by creating a meaningful public space,” she said. However, the park had many organizations and interested parties who had conflicting opinions as to how the park should be developed. Recognizing that differing ideas would be a challenge, the stakeholders agreed to be open to all options, yet keep in mind that the park would be developed for the benefit of the entire city, not one specific group. After navigating the public process, the result was a dynamic park that has proven to be a central gathering space for the entire city.
Like his previous work at Main Street Garden, Balsley designed 6.0-acre Curtis Hixon Park with attention to incorporating the park into its present surroundings. Special awareness was given to connecting the park to adjacent cultural assets such as Kiley Garden and the Tampa Museum of Art. This was achieved through a terraced lawn and a promenade garden at the edges of the park. At the street entrance is a large Louver water fountain, frequently used by children and adults to cool down during the hot Tampa summers. When the water sprays upwards, it distorts the view of the park, revealing and hiding different features. The park also has a playground and dog park and even incorporates a segment of the Riverwalk, connecting the David Straz Performing Arts Center to the Glazer Children’s Museum and the Tampa Museum of Art. The paving along the Riverwalk contains a mechanism for misting and creates “fog clouds,” another clever strategy to promote cooling in the summers. Within the park is a large lawn sloping towards the river, featuring what Balsley described as “urban rafts,” large platforms rising out of the slope for sitting, lounging or gathering. These “urban rafts” have become a central part of the park, attracting both people watchers and visitors who want to be seen. People watching was a prominent feature in the design, with both overlooks and rotating chairs incorporated for users to choose views of the waterfront or park.
An attractive park is an essential part of a vibrant city. Both Main Street Garden and Curtis Hixon Park have strong elements that bring visitors to their parks. They also connect to the surrounding area, encouraging growth of businesses and housing. It would be interesting to see how usership has increased at these parks since their openings.
And for those who will be in Dallas today, Peter Harnik will be giving a presentation entitled “Rebirth of the City Park” at the 21st Century City Conference. Come learn more about the efforts the park movement has played in Dallas.
New York landscape architect Thomas Balsley delights in promising to show friends what he calls “the greatest untapped open space opportunity in America.” He then takes them to the top of the Empire State Building and points to the ocean of rooftops visible to the horizon in every direction.
A city receives exactly as much sunlight and rainfall as it did before development when the area was a virgin forest or grassland, but now much of the meteorological action is off the ground on top of structures. Although most individual houses have sloping roofs that are perhaps better suited for solar collectors or conduits for rain barrels, most large institutional or residential buildings have flat ones that could potentially be used for parks. Rooftops represent the rare resource that is increasing. Most are private, but a significant number are publicly owned. And some of those are large–the tops of schools, libraries, government office buildings, post offices, concert halls, convention centers, parking ramps, and bus stations can all extend to well over an acre. Moreover, large private rooftops, such as those on shopping centers, big box stores, and warehouses, are purchasable or leasable, just like any other private property.
The green roof movement, still in its infancy, is mushrooming in popularity along with the green building movement in general. But merely being green does not make a roof a park. That oft-cited Chicago City Hall green roof is a marvelous creation but it isn’t a park, just as the much older green roof on the Time-Life Building in New York City isn’t a park–neither is freely open to the public. There are already thousands of rooftop gardens, pools, and recreational facilities on top of luxury condominiums, apartment buildings, office buildings, and hotels across the country, but they are private facilities for residents, workers, guests, and members only. They are the vertical equivalent of parks inside gated communities.
At present the majority of rooftop parks are ones at ground level built over subsurface parking garages–places like Millennium Park in Chicago, Hudlin Park in St. Louis, and Yerba Buena Garden in San Francisco. This wonderful urban solution is referred to, at Boston’s Post Office Square, as “Park Above, Park Below.” Older facilities are of relatively conventional ornamental design; new ones increasingly incorporate more ecological features. Both Nashville’s new Public Square and Austin’s new City Hall collect all the gathered rain for later use as pumped irrigation water.
Putting parks on rooftops higher than street level is, thus far, much rarer. For one thing, keeping the plant material alive is a challenge because of more extreme conditions of wind, sunlight, thin soil, and lack of trees. For another, there are concerns about the structural strength of buildings and potential water leakage as well as issues of human access and security. Also, what park uses are appropriate on rooftops? Flower gardens, lawns, benches, and pathways? Courts (surrounded by cages) for basketball, tennis, and volleyball? Community gardens? Playgrounds? Dog parks? Miniature golf?
These are complex questions that require a good deal of research–both into the issue of “rooftops” and of “parks.” Some of the investigation is generic, some of it needs to be highly specific, on a city-by-city basis. How many flat rooftops does, say, Miami have? What is the total combined acreage? How many are on public buildings and what is that combined acreage? How many of them are large, say, an acre or more? How many of those large ones are relatively uncluttered with air conditioning units and other paraphernalia? How many are accessible by the public? How many happen to be in areas underserved by parks? This entire field of inquiry is so new that there are almost no data available, although there will be breathtakingly quick progress now that aerial photography is so widely available through Internet programs.
One of the most famous, and one of the oldest, rooftop parks is NCNB Plaza (also called Kiley Garden) in Tampa, Florida. Rarely known for urban innovation, Tampa backed into its moment of leadership as a result of authentic civic outrage over the sale and destruction of its historic rose garden for the erection of a 33-story bank tower. In a creative (and expensive) gesture of repair, North Carolina National Bank agreed to restore the lost green space by putting a park on top of the new tower’s parking deck. Designed by (and named after) prominent landscape architect Dan Kiley and opened in 1988, the plaza is 8 feet above ground level.
Kiley Garden represents all that is great and all that is problematical about rooftop parks. On the positive side, it provides outstanding views of Tampa’s downtown and of the Hillsborough River and its riverwalk. It came into being in a high-land-value location which, under other circumstances, would never have yielded a public park. On the other hand, there were design and construction shortcomings that ultimately–nineteen years later–forced a total and complete renovation, including the removal of every tree, shrub, and blade of grass, as well as the many architectural elements. Of course, almost every aspect of technology has evolved in the past two decades, and the lessons of Kiley Garden can be used to help make rooftop parks more successful in the future.
The two places that have taken rooftop parks the furthest are New York and San Francisco–not surprisingly, since they are the two most crowded big cities in the country.
At 28 acres, New York’s Riverbank State Park is so large that it contains a pool, a skating rink, a theater, four tennis courts, four basketball courts, a wading pool, a softball field, a football field, four handball courts, a running track, two playgrounds, a weight room, a boat dock, and a restaurant. It was built on the roof of a new sewage treatment plant on the Hudson River and provides an exciting template of how large public buildings can be constructed to do double duty.
San Francisco has St. Mary’s Square, a full-fledged, off-the-ground, up-in-the-air park amid the high rises in the Financial District. Moreover, St. Mary’s Square will soon be getting an addition (on another rooftop) thanks to a far-reaching law–Proposition K, The Sunlight Ordinance–passed by voters in 1989. That ordinance, aimed at preventing the proliferation of shadows in already-chilly San Francisco, restricts any new construction that would block sunlight on a public park. (Among other things, the law gave birth to a unit of measurement that has probably never existed anywhere else in history: the “solar-year square-foot-hour of new shade.”) St. Mary’s is the place where the irresistible force of San Francisco’s development pressure met the immovable object of the arc of solar radiation.
Because of its location and open-space importance to workers and residents, St. Mary’s was given the most stringent designation under Proposition K: zero tolerance. The square could not have a single additional square-foot-hour of sunlight taken away. An office tower was proposed that would have blocked a small amount of sunlight–only in the early morning, four months out of the year–but that was enough to kill the proposal, until a wonderful solution was proposed. The developer offered to create a public park on the second-floor roof of the building’s garage. The 5,000-square-foot roof was located in such a way that it received much more sunlight; in fact, the developer calculated that the amount of sunlight hitting the rooftop park addition would be 40 times greater than the sunlight lost to the old park by the building’s shadow. And, because of the steepness of the site, the second-story location actually intersected with the ground plane of a portion of St. Mary’s Square, removing the need for steps or handicap accessible designs.
Overcoming the hurdles of rooftop park technology and getting people up off the ground can be challenging. But rooftop parks could make a big difference when it comes to urban beauty, livability, and recreation. This abundant resource beckons, particularly in extremely dense communities that are very short of parkland.