Los Angeles: Angels in the Parks

Not all angels have wings.  Some are clearly grounded and quietly working in Los Angeles city parks thanks to the partnership between the Recreation and Parks Department (RAP) and the Los Angeles Parks Foundation.  Just over $106 million has been secured to put 50 new parks in the city in the neighborhoods most in need, based on a 2009 RAP assessment that found that many dense areas of the city lacked sufficient park space.

LAPF Logo1Under its 50 Parks Initiative, 53 sites for new parks have been acquired by the city – taking advantage of the real estate downturn and bulldozing foreclosed homes in some cases – and are being developed into parks, playgrounds and recreation areas.  A quarter of the 50 parks are smaller than an acre in size.

“With the addition of the 50 Parks Initiative, about 20% of the parks established during this department’s long history will be the work of the last seven years,” says Barry Sanders, Recreation and Parks Commission President.  One important partner in this initiative has been the Los Angeles Parks Foundation, founded in 2008 and just hitting its stride.

“Probably thirty years of thinking preceded the creation of the foundation,” says Judith Kieffer, Executive Director of the Foundation.  But like many successful start-ups, it took the convergence of some good leaders – including Sanders – and Jon Kirk Mukri, General Manager for the Recreation and Parks Department.  Sanders now wears two hats as head of the Parks Commission and chair of the Foundation.  “Barry is absolutely the right person for the job – and probably the only one who can make this dual-hat role work,” says Kieffer.

The Foundation’s mission is all about a partnership with RAP.  They are not leading but listening, doing things with and for the department as a support organization, not a policy advocate with a “distinct and bright line of separation” between them so as to be independent enough to bring real value.  They promote the department, raise funds for parks and develop a broader constituency for the fate of public parks.

It Takes Two
“We have a good working relationship and we communicate constantly – one of the keys to making our partnership work.”

It worked well when the Republic of Korea came to the Mayor with a request to restore the Korean Friendship Bell, a gift from the Republic to the city in 1976.  The bell sits high on a hillside in Angel’s Gate Park and had become so rusty that it had stopped ringing.  Korea wanted to provide funds so that the bell would be fixed. The Foundation accepted the funds and then hired an expert to repair the bell which now once again rings for ceremonies and services.

LAPF Photo 2Typically there is some re-energized interest in projects that drive their joint interest; there is no formal priority setting.  The Foundation receives donations designated for a specific purpose that the RAP is interested in and the Foundation acts as a record-keeper.  In other cases, they will take the lead and take on the role of general contractor while working closely with the department. They have helped to construct huge projects, especially ones that have been in the system for years lacking the funding to move forward – and including the 50 Parks initiative.

The 50 Parks Initiative was generated by the department and may be the largest urban park expansion in the country.  RAP spearheaded all the initial fundraising and the Foundation supported them.  Together, everybody was cranking to find sources of funding from numerous public and private not for profit sources.  The Foundation hosted meetings with major donors and local banks; teamed with RAP while they pitched the idea to other city agencies, like Housing; and secured funding from philanthropic foundations that only give to nonprofit corporations.

As of May of this year, 45 sites are now publicly owned and ready to be developed as parks.  RAP has built 13 of the sites already.  Once again, the Foundation plays a role in helping with site development, often taking possession and then hiring a contractor to build, working with the city at every step.  “We get a right of entry from the city to take ‘temporary ownership’ of a park, hire developers, get the park built and then turn the site back over to the city.”

Corporate Partners
One way that the Foundation has provided value is by building a reputation with the corporate community, with new partners stepping up for the parks in big and small ways.  The challenge is to gain their support for not only the upfront capital expense but the long term maintenance of a new facility.  “The sustainability issue is probably the key thing in making the partnerships work. No one wants to do anything that is a downstream maintenance issue for the city.”

So for any capital project or program where the parks department sees a need, the Foundation raises additional funds – as they did for the restoration of the mounted patrol horse unit, where they identified funds for the ongoing need for trainers, feed, vets, etc.  Originally created in the early 1970′s, the Ranger Mounted Unit was established to provide services to the users of Griffith Park’s extensive bridle trails. The Foundation, as one of its first projects, provided the funding to restore the unit and add more horses to the fold.

In another case, the Foundation is raising funds for the planned nature conservancy in Griffith Park and the goal will include a $5 million endowment, thanks to their outreach efforts in helping donors understand the value of an ongoing reserve.

Along with corporate support comes the issue of donor recognition.  The Foundation is finding ways to work with the city on signage that recognizes donors, such as plaques on benches – trying to reflect corporate support without compromising the public park experience.  Recently the city had its first ‘naming’ request and is learning the importance of a program and policies to recognize donors.  More requests are coming, too, from promoters, regarding events in the park that can provide value to both to themselves and the city.

A Business Model Taking Shape
The LA Parks Foundation is small.  They currently have two half time employees who provide help with bookkeeping, communications, the website and membership.  Judith herself works three quarter time.  And this year, a new full time project manager has been hired which they share with the department.

They share that staffer with RAP so both can take advantage of his expertise.  RAP, like many other city park departments across the nation, has seen both cutbacks (30% of their operations budget in the last 4 years) and the retirement of some of its most seasoned staffers.

“Typically we don’t do fundraising for city staffing – this has been a baseline issue for us.  As much as we work well with the department, we know we can’t underwrite their staffing.  We try to be sensitive about the best place we can provide value.”

The Foundation has just crossed the $6.5 million level in fundraising since 2008.  They have exceeded their budget every year since forming as the community embraces the idea of a private entrepreneurial partner committed to the city and its goals for parks.  Their success is linked to a 15-member board that uses its own gifts to leverage more – their giving provides a floor for the Foundation’s operations.  When the Foundation takes on a larger role in construction projects, they work with donors and the city on support for their administrative efforts.

“I also needed to understand and see how the city worked in order to figure out how we could work together,” said Judith. There are no weekly staff meetings between the two organizations, but Judith is talking all the time with the department, and she is out in the parks – a lot.  She also attends meetings with park advisory boards, other city departments, city council members and potential donors.

“We team up all the time and represent each other as needed on the same mission. This integrating of our resources around a common mission has absolutely been the key ingredient to our success.”  The City now embraces the partnership and sees how the Foundation can serve the department – and the staff sees it as a tool for them to have more success around their initiatives. “Everything we do is collaborative; we are hand in glove to get where we need to be.”

As the organization grows and takes on additional projects with the city and with friends of the parks groups around the city, they are looking more thoughtfully at their own future.  “We have always had an annual strategic plan which we revisit regularly with the board.  We are poised for a longer term view to help us identify where the next growth spurt will come from.  The fact that we have exceeded our budget expectations every year – that’s a good sign.”

Lessons learned?  “It was so critical that I work very carefully and slowly to integrate the foundation into the city system; building good relations with the city was key.  We slowly built trust as a reliable partner who wanted to work on their behalf – because the city can take money from donors and offer tax benefits without a foundation.  But RAP knew that money was being left on the table by donors not comfortable with giving money to the city for any number of reasons.”

Los Angeles already has a library and a police foundation.  The LA Parks Foundation is the third of its kind, and one more example of the importance of a private partner playing the role of a go-between, adding value with its flexibility and business-like approach.

KBlahaKathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solution

May’s Frontline Park

Each month, City Parks Alliance recognizes a “Frontline Park” to promote and highlight inspiring examples of urban park excellence, innovation, and stewardship across the country. The program also seeks to highlight examples of the challenges facing our cities’ parks as a result of shrinking municipal budgets, land use pressures, and urban neighborhood decay.

Boston, MA

Image Courtesy of Rose Kennedy Greenway Conservancy

Image Courtesy of Rose Kennedy Greenway Conservancy

The Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway is a 15 acre, 1.5 mile long stretch of parks in the heart of Boston created as part of the mitigation plan for the massive public works project known as the “Big Dig.”  Developed and constructed by the State of Massachusetts, the project reworked both road and public transit systems in downtown Boston, adding bridges, two tunnel systems, multiple interchanges, and restoring a city street network.  The state worked with local neighborhoods to develop and implement plans for the 15 acres of parks, which are grouped by the neighborhoods they are adjacent to – North End Parks, Wharf District Parks, Fort Point Channel Parks, Dewey Square Park and Chinatown Park each has their own character and features.

Image Courtesy of Rose Kennedy Greenway Conservancy

Image Courtesy of Rose Kennedy Greenway Conservancy

Operation, programming, and maintenance for the Greenway are handled by the Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway Conservancy, a model example of the type of public-private partnership emerging in cities across the United States.  Funding sources include private donations, grants, and earned income, as well as public funding for maintenance and operation.  The Greenway faces some unique maintenance challenges due to the fact that it is essentially a very long, large roof garden covering an interstate, which means that it has minimal soil depth.  Despite this challenge, the Greenway is one of the few organically maintained urban parks in the United States.  Some site furnishings in the park were manufactured by DuMor, Inc.

The Greenway has quickly become a hub for activity in Boston, hosting more than 350 events in 2012 alone, in addition to regular attractions like the Mobile Food program (food trucks and trikes), a seasonal carousel, and interactive water features that attract millions of visitors each year.

For more information on the Rose Kennedy Greenway, please visit:

Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy Greenway Conservancy

MassDOT

City of Boston Parks & Recreation Department

The “Frontline Parks” program is made possible with generous support from DuMor, Inc. and PlayCore.

A P3 Throwdown

Last week I had the pleasure of being in Boston for an afternoon discussion among park advocates talking about public-private partnerships (P3s).  The meeting took place during a two day visit of the City Parks Alliance board, of which I am a member, and on a couple of spring days with the parks so full of blooming tulips and blossom-laden cherry trees that even the tourism office couldn’t have done a better job of producing.

Credit: Emerald Necklace Conservancy

Credit: Emerald Necklace Conservancy

The discussion was arranged as two panels – one of public sector park agency representatives, and the other of private sector park partner organizations.  The goal of the discussion was to hear a bit from both panels about the benefits and challenges of partnerships between the two.  It turned out to be a revealing and meaningful discussion about the murky territory in which park partnerships now find themselves.

On the public side sat Ed Lambert, Jr., Massachusetts Commissioner for the Department of Conservation and Recreation; Toni Pollak, Boston’s Park Commissioner, and Liam Kavanagh, First Deputy Commissioner for New York City Parks.

On the private side sat Doreen Stoller, Executive Director for Houston’s Hermann Park; Tom Powers, Executive Director for the Boston Harbor Island Alliance; and Yvette Bowden, President of the Piedmont Park Conservancy in Atlanta.  Both Doreen and Yvette sit on CPA’s board of directors.  Jeff Cook, from the Trustees Collaborative for Boston Parks, moderated the panel.

Other than Tom’s relationship to the Massachusetts agencies, no other speakers had ties to each other, so the discussion flowed with the ease that distance from a home base provides.  This allowed the roomful of Boston park advocates and CPA board members a chance to hear, maybe a little more candidly, about the ongoing development of P3 relationships in parks – which for some is that often-recalled process of sausage-making.

Nobody disagreed about the value of private partners in advancing accountability and responsibility – and maybe most importantly, a better management protocol – for parks.  “In 1975, when Daniel Moynihan proposed giving Central Park to the National Park Service to manage there were more city staff working in the park than the Central Park Conservancy has today,” said Liam, “and yet it was considered a failing park.”

Much credit was given by the public agency representatives for the efficiency, flexibility, and enhanced design standards and funding brought by private partners to public parks in the last three decades.  On the flip side they noted that these benefits hadn’t come without challenges – privatization concerns, equity concerns, the added maintenance costs of new capital investments and the need for more guidance in inviting private partners and their demands into public parks.

“There is a continuing role for public agencies to broker a conversation about the role of P3s in parks management,” said Ed.  And from Liam, “There is a need for better ground rules.”

From the private partners on the panel we learned about the demands they face as the public agency budget gaps in their cities grow, along with the expectation that the private sector should fill it – and increasingly not just with capital investment dollars, but with funding for operations and maintenance.

Their challenge is that park donors want recognition, accountability, and a commitment from the city about their role and their investment, a commitment – at least for ongoing maintenance – that is getting harder to negotiate.  After all, it’s supposed to be a partnership.

The shift in thinking about funding for public parks in the last few decades has been monumental.  There is an increasing expectation that the private sector will share in the responsibility of taking care of public parks.  All of this change is occurring without the benefit of a playbook, and rapidly enough that the question was asked, “Have we given up on a strategy to raise more money from the public sector?  Are we now leaving it to the private sector to innovate around funding?”

Credit: Emerald Necklace Conservancy

Credit: Emerald Necklace Conservancy

Thank goodness there is an amazing amount of experimentation; for the moment, minimal guidance (intended or not) and the ambiguity that goes with it is allowing a period of learning in this important transition.  Some of the brightest moments in the discussion came in the form of war stories from both sides about how they managed to find solutions to funding challenges, donor demands, contracting and permitting snafus, and misguided policies.

“With complexity comes opportunity,” said Tom Powers.

In fact, in spite of the challenges, P3s continue to grow.  Toni Pollak cited the fact that Boston has 176 park partners and they are actively soliciting more.  And not just private partners, but partnerships with other government entities like public works, water departments, state agencies and the Corps of Engineers – many of which are now working with the city on a massive daylighting and restoration project for the Muddy River.

Not surprisingly, success breeds success: good parks are highly used and operational demands are increasing. Houston’s Hermann Park saw 6 million visitors last year, supported thankfully with 20,000 volunteer hours.  Visitation at the Boston Harbor Islands is up 160% since 2004.  Piedmont Park, once considered a park only for Midtown Atlanta residents, now serves visitors from 80 different zip codes across the city with a budget that is over 40% earned income.

This netherworld of parks transitioning from being publicly supported to being supported by a mix of public and private funding is, on the one hand, challenging both sides to distraction; but on the other hand, if you can live with a little ambiguity it is an amazingly creative moment in time.

The discussion touched on key questions for advocates and agencies as the parks movement grows.  How can private partners help to move donors from only making sexy capital investments (and the ribbon-cutting and naming rights that go with them) to a more sophisticated understanding of the value of different kinds of investments that will pay returns?  The value and opportunity, for example, in linking operations to programming or the leveraging of earned income from projects that can spin off funding to pay for more equity in parks and programs.

Can the private sector get more sophisticated in leveraging its gifts and investments to require more from the public sector?  How can the public sector get smarter about leveraging funds from outside the parks budget by making a stronger case for parks’ role in aiding transportation, housing, stormwater, and public health solutions?  How can both partners work harder on solutions to move money and other resources from the neighborhoods that have money to those that don’t?  And best of all, how can the growing number of P3s operating around the country get smarter and more competitive through networks like the one that City Parks Alliance offers?

Both sides shared their beliefs in the value of communication, constant dialogue, and a shared sense of mission, strategies and master plans, all with the end goal of building trust.  Without a playbook you have to trust that your partner is going to support you.

“Our work with the city every day is about establishing a new business model,” said Yvette.  “We are listening, talking and working to understand what the city wants – how can we leverage, create and get the resources we need to keep our parks successful.  And most importantly, we are working to assure that Piedmont Park is part of the city’s vision for what it wants to be.”

All the public agency representatives commented on their great appreciation for private partners and their often powerful board members.

“We have a robust committee structure to help our members direct their energies and help us keep moving projects along,” said Doreen.  And from Liam, “These guys have great access, great stories and a good understanding of the need to help push the conversation in a political discussion.”

In some ways the overflowing room was a testimony to the strength of belief in public-private partnerships for parks; when you added up the money, volunteer time, professional in-kind service, professional expertise, new park acreage and countless program schedules just for the parks represented in the room, it was a value of hundreds of millions of dollars.

For all the recognition of the value of ‘private’ partnerships, all of the panel members agreed on the need to continue to affirm that public parks are public, and “…that no nonprofit controls the space.”

“We are stewards for the public,” said Ed.   “Our goal is to protect public access to public parks while acknowledging that our parks need private partner contributions.”

Credit: Emerald Necklace Conservancy

Credit: Emerald Necklace Conservancy

In spite of the ambiguity that results from adding more stakeholders to the park planning and management process, private partnerships are resulting not only in more dollars for parks but a keener sense of management for parks – and the people who use them – turning all that energy and stirring of the pot into real outcomes around design, programs and the user experience.  These kinds of discussions and workshops hosted by the City Parks Alliance are a pleasure for those of us who care about public parks.  It’s a wonderful opportunity to have the chance to hear a bit of inside wisdom from leaders in the field, even as the field sorts itself out and morphs into something new.

KBlahaKathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solution

A Park for the Ages

Mil1According to Wikipedia, Anish Kapoor’s contract to create the popular sculpture, Cloud Gate (more commonly known as the “Bean”) for Millennium Park, stated that the constructed piece should be expected to survive for 1,000 years.  Even the name for the park reflects a longevity that is visionary – and forever – as it approaches its tenth anniversary.

I recently caught up with Ed Uhlir, Executive Director for Millennium Park, Inc. (MP, Inc.), to talk with him about lessons learned at the Park and what has surprised him about its success.  “The biggest thing is that it turned out to be such a huge economic engine for the city,” he said. Uhlir recognized the importance of high quality design in creating real estate value but he’s not sure anyone would have predicted the size of the impact that Millennium Park has had.  A 2011 Texas A&M report on the impact of the park tells us,

…it is clear that Millennium Park has generated the following economic impact on the City of Chicago: $490M in total park construction; $ 2.45 Billion in new construction near the park; 70,070 direct, indirect and induced jobs created by new construction in the area; a 57% increase in new residential units near the park (3,587 units since 2005); 29% premium on park units sold with views of the park; five million annual visitors which generate $1.29B in tourism dollars; $5.9M in annual operations costs that feed the local economy; 2,126 new underground parking spaces at Millennium Park; an 11% increase in hotel rooms (751 rooms) near the park; $173.5M donated by 115 founders to specific projects within the park; and 11 fortune 500 companies that donated to the park.

How did that happen?  Ed says, “It’s the world-class art and design.  It has branded the park and added value to the image of Chicago.”  And, I would add, it represents the kind of success that results from effective leadership and a strong public/private partnership. “The private partnership enabled us with flexibility and the ability to be more selective in getting great design.”

One of the things that the Millennium Park planners did so well was to incorporate great art and design that gives the park a sense of beauty beyond its landscaping and gardens.  The challenge now is to continually position the park as cutting edge, with more creative contributors.  “We do have new ‘beans’ every couple of years,” said Ed.  The formal Boeing Galleries in the Park – two outdoor galleries designed for public exhibitions – are a home for changing shows of contemporary art.  Every two years a new show is staged, generally from an artist outside the United States.

Mil2
And Millennium Park continues to expand its brand by making connections to the properties around it.  The elegant Nichols Bridgeway leads south to the new addition of the Art Institute.  East of the Park, and across Frank Gehry’s BP Bridge over Columbus Drive, there are plans for transforming Daley Bicentennial Park into Maggie Daley Park, a thirty-acre park and children’s play space, with a better connection to the city’s lakefront.

The increase in surrounding property values and the creation of new jobs is one important gauge of the park’s success, but just as important has been the impact the park has had on tourism.  One interesting measure for this, says Ed, is Trip Advisor.  There are over 2,600 reviews for the Park on Trip Advisor, with almost all of them calling their visit “excellent” or “very good.”  Ninety-eight reviewers called their Millennium Park experience “average.”  Out of curiosity, I checked out Trip Advisor reviews for a few other signature parks around the country: New York attractions take the cake with the High Line receiving 5,300 positive reviews, and Central Park has over 12,000 reviews; Olympic Sculpture Park in Seattle has 152 reviews; and Discovery Green in Houston has 60 reviews.

With park visitation up to 5 million annually, the City of Chicago is focusing on its “brand” across the country and world and is opening tourism offices with one of their pitches being, “Come visit Millennium Park.”  Foreign visitors are the fastest growing group of visitors and – though still a small number in comparison to local and regional visitors – they spend more money.

Ed believes that in addition to great art and design, great programming is what brings people to the park, which hosts over 600 free events annually.  “There are lots of opportunities in this small space and everything is free thanks to donors who sponsor many of the programs,” he says.  But there is a potential conflict between donors who made gifts and wanted everything to be free for park users, and the city which needs to balance its budget to keep the programs running.  Endowments, not just for the art but for programs, are now a key part of fundraising.

MP, Inc. currently has $25 million in restricted and unrestricted endowments (not including a $10 million pledge for the outdoor concert pavilion).  Their goal is to double that.  “The private-public partnership is important to making the park work and endowment money helps assure that the partnership continues into the future.”

Half of the board of MP, Inc. is original to when work on the park began in 1996.  Some of them feel like they have accomplished what they set out to do and are ready to move on.  Now, younger family members of original donors are joining the board as membership diversifies from those who built it to those who are committed to enhancing it.  Program endowments – such as the one from McDonalds to manage the Cycle Center and present free morning exercise programs, or Boeing’s endowment of the outdoor art gallery – are increasingly important to keeping the park successful through high quality programs.

When the park opened, The Financial Times described Millennium Park as “…a genuinely 21st-century interactive park [that] could trigger a new way of thinking about public outdoor spaces.”  These days Millennium Park is as much a venue for driving economic impact in the city as it is a respite from the tall, dark skyscrapers that surround it.  Keeping the park vibrant will require the same kind of focus on excellence that made it a success.  Like a museum, the Park will have to manage its art and attractions to keep them fresh – and cutting edge – in order to keep people coming and driving its economic impact.  And that will take new and committed public-private partnerships for managing the park for the next 1,000 years that Cloud Gate shines.

KBlahaKathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solutions.

Innovative Governance

“There should be more than one way to run a park.”  
                                                                –Adrian Benepe

So went the thinking behind the creation of Central Park Conservancy as recounted by Adrian Benepe, former New York City Parks Commissioner and now Director of Urban Parks for the Trust for Public Land.  Adrian was here in Miami this week, touring the city, talking with park advocates, and looking for ways that the national organization and its cadre of urban park experts could add value to Miami and Miami-Dade County parks.

Miami1Adrian talked about the challenges cities face in continuing to be the sole steward for their parks in the face of huge budget challenges, and a list of pressing needs longer than your arm.  Why not, he argued, find new models that not only bring more resources into the equation but also add more value?

His words ring true for cities across the country who increasingly see parks as part of their strategy for economic development while struggling to find new models for developing and operating them – or, as editor and columnist for Fortune magazine, Geoff Colvin sees it, “…developing the most crucial competency for every company today, innovating the business model.”  Substitute the word ‘parks’ for ‘company’ and all his ideas are relevant to our work.

In a recent interview with Urban Land magazine, Colvin extrapolates his ideas about business model innovation for real estate:

It’s a big story in commercial real estate, as the buildings tend to last a long time. But the buildings may last longer than the business model. In an awful lot of businesses, the model lasted for decades, if not a century. It just doesn’t anymore. The ability to envision different business models for a given property is going to be extremely valuable.

And, a source of competitive advantage.  The most important element of business model innovation for parks right now is around governance.   How can cities and their bureaucracies give way to more decentralized, resourceful decision-making?  Park visitors want so much more from their experience than one public agency can manage, even if they had all the financial resources to do so.  A better way is to find a structure that gives all the stakeholders the freedom to express their ideas – through social media to formal advisory roles to a full-fledged partnership stake.

The stakes here are high – as in the case of the High Line development, which has helped to trigger the construction of 40 new buildings, 12,000 new jobs and $200 million of new tax revenue (predicted to hit $900 million by 2020), not to mention the tourism dollars generated from nearly 5 million annual visitors.  Millennium Park, the subject of my next post, has generated $2.4 billion in new real estate construction in the last ten years according to a Texas A&M study.  If, as Adrian says, parks are becoming the linchpin for economic development strategies for cities, then we need to rethink our motivation for P3s as being about much more than a default option for governments due to a lack of money.

HighLine2The value of a conservancy as a private partner to park agencies is about constituency and constancy.  According to Adrian, in addition to Central Park Conservancy and Prospect Park Alliance, there are 200 ‘friends of the parks’ groups in New York City, as well as a set of city-wide park advocates – all working together to bolster parks.

It may be that we have to start thinking about the business model for parks as a system of interconnected activities and stakeholders; a system that demands flexibility and creativity in determining how a park does business in order to stay vibrant and relevant to its users.  Public agencies can’t have a monopoly on how they runs parks and continue to do it competitively and successfully; they will need to tap into partnerships, external resources and new programs to keep parks vital.

Colvin, in his interview with Urban Land magazine goes on to say,

The problem in doing [business model innovation] is primarily a cultural problem—people just having personal difficulty changing their view of what they do, what the company does. Anytime you change things, you threaten existing interests. Conceptually, making these changes is easy. Even technologically, it’s easy. It’s the human element that makes it difficult.

In Miami, we are challenged with bridging the gap between the city’s now well-established donors and advocates for arts and culture with a small but increasingly vocal group who care about the city’s parks.  Our parks, together with our extensive waterfront are our outdoor living room and another element of our urban culture.  Many of us see a need for a whole new way of thinking about our parks as the city and region experiences another real estate boom – before it becomes too expensive to do so.

Why not?  The weather here is fine, people are outside more than in most cities, and downtown Miami as well as Miami Beach are dense enough now to make bicycling an easy and convenient way to travel.  Why not green our paths and waterfronts and make it easier and more pleasant for residents and visitors to get around this beautiful place – and do it in a way that builds on our economic engine and strengthens peoples’ connection to the city?

Adrian reminded us that with Mayors Bloomberg (New York City) and Nutter (Philadelphia) leaving their jobs as two of the most high profile green mayors in recent history, there is a void in a national mayoral voice making the case for the value of investing in city parks. Who might step in and continue to lead us with innovative governance and business models for running our parks and enlivening our city life?

KBlahaKathy Blaha writes about parks and other urban green spaces, and the role of public-private partnerships in their development and management. When she’s not writing for the blog, she consults on advancing park projects and sustainable land use solutions.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 93 other followers