• Who We Are

    City Parks Blog is a joint effort of the Center for City Park Excellence at the Trust for Public Land and the City Parks Alliance to chronicle the news and issues of the urban park movement. Read more about us.
  • Urban Park Issues

  • Enter your email address to receive notifications of new City Parks Blog posts by email.

  • Archives

  • Urban Green Cover Ad

Golf Course conversions to public parks

Millbrook Green-banner

The former Millbrook Golf Course, now a public park, in Windsor, CT.

A recent article in CityLab discussed the continuing decline of golf in the United States and mentioned that the total number of private golf courses has shrunk, especially in the wake of the Great Recession. While the article focused on the potential conversion to residential and commercial uses, it did mention the conversion of private courses into public parks in a number of cities and towns across the country.  The Trust for Public Land is an active participant in creating public parks from private golf courses.  We work with towns, cities and towns in acquiring golf courses for public parks for a variety of both environmental and recreational uses. Our most recent acquisition is in Windsor, CT, but we’ve also acquired golf courses recently in Marin County, California, Portland, Oregon, Rancho Canada, California and Golden, Colorado.   More about this trend in our updated post, below.

Executive Summary:

The total number of golf courses has been steadily shrinking in the US for the past decade or so.  According the “The World of Golf” study published in 2015 by The R & A (Global Governing body for Golf) the number of courses in the US is 15,372, down from a high of 16,052 courses around the year 2005[1].

Data collected by The Trust for Public Land for the annual City Park Facts report shows the current number of public golf courses in the 100 largest U.S. cities is 413, up from 400 in 2010. Thus, the number of public golf courses is 2.69 percent of the current overall total.[2]

While we have not seen many examples of public golf courses being converted to parks, we do find 19 public or private golf courses being purchased and converted to public parks in the past 12 years. The Trust for Public Land has been an integral part of the latter effort, working on 9 of the 19 in the past 12 years.

Usage in golf courses, according to the National Golf Foundation is declining. In 2000, there were 28.8 M golfers, growing to 29.42 M in 2009, then falling by end of 2016 to 23.8 M golfers.[3] The number of rounds went from 518.4 M rounds in 2000 to 465.5 M rounds in 2013.[4] [5]

Examples of Golf Course to Park conversions in the past 10-12 years. We’ve found a total of 15 in the past 12 years that have been acquired, now in process to convert them into parks or nature preserves or fully converted. Many more have been considered, especially in Florida, Texas, Arizona and California. A current trend is also considering them for conversion to housing subdivisions or commercial or industrial development.  Recent examples include: Tampa [See: http://www.tbo.com/news/localgovernment/pasco-commission-okays-quail-hollow-golf-course-conversion/2330077 ] among many others.

Current / recent golf course conversions to public parks:

Historic conversions of golf courses to public parks:

Examples of restoration techniques and processes used to convert golf courses to parks:

References:

Footnotes:

[1] – Information from the R & A and The National Golf Foundation – websites.

[2] – City Parks Facts 2017, The Trust for Public Land –

[3] – “Annual participation report uncovers favorable trends for the game’s future” April 22, 2017 in Golfdigest.com

[4] – Information from The National Golf Foundation – http://secure.ngf.org/cgi/faqa.asp?

[5] – Information from Statista – https://www.statista.com/statistics/227420/number-of-golfers-usa/

Announcing ParkScore 2018

The Trust for Public Land Releases 2018 ParkScore® Index

Ranking Park Systems in the 100 Largest U.S. Cities

Index Reports Improvements in Park Access and Funding Nationwide, but More Progress Needed to Ensure All Residents Live within a 10-Minute Walk of a Park

San Francisco – Minneapolis has the best park system in the United States, according to The Trust for Public Land’s 7th annual ParkScore® index, which was released today by the nonprofit organization.

Minneapolis narrowly edged neighboring Saint Paul to earn top honors for the third consecutive year. A different regional rivalry claimed third and fourth place, as Washington, DC, barely outscored Arlington, Virginia, to hold on to third. In another big move, Chicago cracked the top 10 for the first time in ParkScore history.

Among the largest 100 ParkScore cities, public spending on parks reached $7.5 billion in 2018, a $429 million increase over the previous year. This additional funding contributed to a slight increase in park access overall. According to The Trust for Public Land, 70 percent of residents in ParkScore cities live with a 10-minute walk (or a half-mile) of a park, up from 69 percent last year.

The national nonprofit organization is leading a movement to put a park or natural area within a 10-minute walk of every U.S. resident. More than 200 mayors have endorsed the 10-minute goal.

“The research is clear: quality, close-to-home parks are essential to communities. Everyone deserves a great park within a 10-minute walk of home,” said Diane Regas, President and CEO of The Trust for Public Land. “These rankings are the gold-standard for park access and quality, and empower people to hold their leaders accountable.”

Charlotte settled at the bottom of the ParkScore list, ranking just below Fresno, CA, Mesa, AZ, and Hialeah, FL. Fort Wayne and Indianapolis declined to participate in ParkScore 2018 and were not ranked. Gilbert, AZ, was not ranked because the necessary data was unavailable.

THE DETAILS:

This year, ParkScore rankings are based equally on four factors: Park Access, which measures the percentage of residents living within a 10-minute walk of a park; Park Acreage, which is based on a city’s median park size and the percentage of total city area dedicated to parks; Park Investment, which measures park spending per resident; and Park Amenities, which counts the availability of six popular park features: basketball hoops, off-leash dog parks, playgrounds, “splashpads” and other water play structures, recreation and senior centers, and restrooms.

The addition of restrooms and splashpads to the Park Amenities rating factor is a significant update and improvement for ParkScore in 2018. The index also now includes volunteer hours and charitable contributions in its calculation of parks spending, providing a ranking boost to cities whose residents strongly support their park systems.

ParkScore champion Minneapolis scored well on all ParkScore rating factors. In Minneapolis, 97 percent of residents live within a 10-minute walk of a park, and 15 percent of city area is reserved for parks. Second-place finisher Saint Paul outscored Minneapolis for park amenities but fell to second overall because of its smaller median park size (3.2 acres vs. 5.7 acres). Fifth place San Francisco remains the only city with 100 percent 10-minute park access, but the city’s small median park size of 1.3 acres negatively affects its overall ranking.

Boise successfully defended its title as the best park system for dogs, with a nation-leading 6.7 dog parks per 100,000 residents. Norfolk, VA received top marks for basketball hoops, Madison scored best for playgrounds, and Cleveland edged out New York for splashpads and water features.

“High quality parks make cities healthier in nearly every way. Proximity to parks increases physical activity levels among children and adults, reducing risk for obesity, diabetes, and other serious health conditions. Parks also help clean the air, mitigate the risk of storm damage, build relationships among neighbors, and contribute to economic growth,” said Adrian Benepe, senior vice president and director of city park development for The Trust for Public Land.

According to The Trust for Public Land, the 10 highest-ranking park systems in the United States are:

Rank       City                             ParkScore  (Max: 100)

  1.        Minneapolis, MN         84.2
  2.        Saint Paul, MN             82.4
  3.        Washington, DC           81.9
  4.        Arlington, VA                81.6
  5.        San Francisco, CA        79.6
  6.        Portland, OR                 78.3
  7.       Cincinnati, OH               78.2
  8.       Chicago, IL                      76.1
  9.       New York, NY                 74.8
  10.       Irvine, CA                        73.4

ParkScore uses advanced GIS (Geographic Information Systems) computer mapping technology to create digital maps evaluating park accessibility. Instead of measuring distance to a local park, ParkScore’s GIS technology takes into account the location of park entrances and physical obstacles to access. For example, if residents are separated from a nearby park by a major highway, ParkScore does not count the park as accessible to those residents, unless there is a bridge, underpass, or easy access point across the highway. The Trust for Public Land collaborated with GIS industry leader Esri on GIS design and implementation.

Municipal leaders can use ParkScore-generated maps to guide park improvement efforts, studying park access on a block-by-block basis and pinpointing the areas where new parks are needed most. The website is free and available to the public, empowering local residents to hold their elected leaders accountable for achieving equitable access to quality parks for all.

For more information about ParkScore, visit http://www.tpl.org/10minutewalk and join the discussion on Twitter @TPL_org, #ParkScore #10minwalk.

The Trust for Public Land creates parks and protects land for people, ensuring healthy, livable communities for generations to come. Millions of people live within a 10-minute walk of a Trust for Public Land park, garden, or natural area, and millions more visit these sites every year. To support The Trust for Public Land and share why nature matters to you, visit http://www.tpl.org.

ParkServe 1.0 is released! How far are you from a park?

parkserve-arlington-top

The official version 1.0 of ParkServe is released!  Visit parkserve.tpl.org and look up your town or city.  The Trust for Public Land has mapped 13,913 urban communities – 85 percent of the population of the United States – and can show you where you’re nearest park is, what percentage of your community’s population is within a 10-minute walk and even includes the Park Evaluator tool to see how adding parks will help your community and it’s 10-minute walk score.

parkserve-arlington-map.PNG

Want details on how we developed ParkServe?  We have answers on our methodology page.

We’re looking for feedback and input too, so if you see a park that is missing or is incomplete, please let us know.

 

Urban Forestry Survey: Last Call

Cover photo

Hello,

We’ve sent this note out to the city parks agencies and non-profits in the 100 largest cities and have seen a great response, but wanted to put out one more call for survey responses.  If you work in Urban Forestry, please consider taking this survey and helping the NYC based Natural Areas Conservancy collect some great data and stories.

Thanks so much,

The Center for City Park Excellence at the Trust for Public Land.

We are looking for help in reaching appropriate individuals and organizations to participate in a web-based survey about urban forested natural areas. If your organization owns, manages, or works in urban forested natural areas, we request that a representative from your team to take the survey. We are primarily seeking information about organizations that manage and care for forests in cities, which could be done through hired staff or volunteers. If your organization does not work in urban forested natural areas but you know of someone who does, please forward the survey to them. This survey will be active until May 1, 2018.

Forested natural areas include woodlands and remnant forests – areas that are distinct from street trees and landscaped parks. Participating in this survey involves answering a series of questions that should take about 30 minutes to complete.

This survey is part of a collaborative effort between the Natural Areas Conservancy, Yale University and Trust for Public Land. The results from the survey will be compiled into a national report on the management of urban forested natural areas and shared with all participants.If you have questions or concerns please direct them to clara.pregitzer@yale.edu.

Follow this link to the Survey and for more information:
Take the Survey
Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser:
https://yalesurvey.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_6m4vNymGntvfiYZ?Q_CHL=email

Thank you for your time and participation.

Clara Pregitzer, Yale University & Natural Areas Conservancy
Sarah Charlop-Powers, Natural Areas Conservancy

How to build and maintain a dog park: best practices

Dogs play at The Trust for Public Land’s Potso Dog Park in Oregon. Photo Credit: Curtis Lee Farmer.

The Trust for Public Land gets many questions about dog parks from parks agencies, park advocates and the press about dog parks through the year, but especially around the release of our ParkScore Index and City Park Facts in late May. With the recent release of our rankings of the 100 largest cities for public dog parks, we thought we’d offer a compilation of best practices for building, maintaining and operating dog parks. People have many questions about “the right way” to build a dog park and want to bring together the right combination of people and resources to make it possible.  Based on those discussions, as well as some interviews and even some personal experience, we have put together this guide.  It will continue to be revised (we welcome your thoughts at ccpe@tpl.org) and posted on our Park Advocacy resource, Parkology.org.

A – Have a plan.  With so many dog parks in public parks, there are both best practices and lessons learned that both public agencies and park advocates could learn from.  The most important point is: have a plan. You can modify it as you go but being up-front about what you need to do helps everyone understand what is required and keeps the process public and transparent.

A plan should address all of those questions that people will ask as you move through both the approvals process as well as the funding process. It should answer some of the following questions:

  • What kinds of facilities you want to build?
  • Should the dog park or off-leash area be fenced or are you planning for open areas that are open during a certain number of hours during the day?
  • For open areas, are you planning to rotate from seasons to season in a larger park?
  • Are you planning water features, including drinking fountains, splash pads or pools?
  • Are you planning climbing or other agility features?
  • Are you including seating and shade?

There are many options and you should first consult what types of dog parks already exist in your community as well as any standards that have been developed or approved by public agencies. (We will cover this in detail in a bit.)

Public agencies should develop a standard for dog parks with a public input process based on best practices that are generally available widely.  Required elements for dog parks generally include:

  • Complete Fencing around the perimeter of the designated area or natural barriers that prohibit dogs from leaving the area.
  • Double entry gate – A standard feature is a double-entry gate system with a gated waiting area for the dog and human to enter, remove the dog’s leash and then open the gate to the main off-leash area, reversing the process for exiting. This ensures that “unplanned escapes” will be kept to a minimum as well as allowing for leashing and unleashing in a separate area that allows dog owners to manage the transition into and out of the dog park.
  • Separate small and large dog areas. Allow for dogs of different sizes and ages to avoid interacting (and causing possible conflicts) by creating separate areas for differently sized dogs and their humans. Puppies and shy dogs then have the opportunity to interact and get used to the high level of activity that can occur in a dog park.
  • Surfacing plan (including renewal) – There are many surfacing options and the choices depend on weather, drainage and current conditions. That said there are many options ranging from artificial turf to engineered wood fiber to gravel. All have pluses or minuses and local knowledge of what works in other park facilities (such as playgrounds or other high traffic areas) is critical. For example, artificial turf is great, but it requires cleaning and built in irrigation and sanitizing systems are increasingly common. Natural turf is softer but requires a lot more care – including a need a plan for renewal, including temporary closures for regrowth.  Gravel, rock dust or some sort of crusher fines work well but can get stuck in dog paws and can get dusty in drier climates or seasons. Regular mulch or engineered wood fiber is increasingly used in playgrounds, but needs to be replaced often, depending on the usage patterns.
  • Alternative to a fenced gated site are areas that are subject to time restrictions for off-leash use. Prime examples are the Long Meadow in Prospect Park, Brooklyn, NY or the Boston Common, which has off-leash rotating areas depending on the time of the year. These set out specific areas as well as specific times of day for off-leash usage.
  • Dog waste plan (bag dispensers and trashcans) – a key requirement of any dog park is dealing with dog waste, as well as general trash and recycling. All dog owners should be strongly encouraged to bring their own bags (you never know where a dog will poop!) and is encouraged to “pack it out” to minimize the impact on the dog park as well as the ongoing maintenance and operations for the parks department.
  • A design to encourage movement. We’ve heard over many dog trainers as well as public health officials that a key ingredient in developing good park areas are designs that keep dogs and their people moving in the off-leash area. Many people might think that unclipping your dog’s leash once inside the double gate and plopping oneself down on a bench is all you need to do.   Dogs are pack animals and love to socialize, but also need to be managed by their owners. We all need exercise and having areas for object chasing, agility and other forms of activity mixed with socialization are a key part of a great dog park.

B – Make sure your dog park is open and inviting. Try to make your dog park inviting to everyone, not just dogs and their owners or walkers. As many case studies have shown, having a good working relationship with neighbors is critical to the success of any dog park. While such amenities might be considered frills, it is important to think about what makes your favorite park inviting and welcoming, as many of the same rules apply.

  • Water fountains or features for humans and pups. Having a source of water, especially in warmer climates, is key. Dogs can get easily overheated and we all want everyone to stay hydrated and safe.
  • Seating for humans. Generally, it is a good idea to keep people and their dogs moving, but everyone needs a break. Having seating is good; it can often double as an agility feature.
  • Parking and bike racks. Not everyone can walk their dog to the park; some people need to come via other means.
  • Shade. In general, we need to keep planting trees in our parks and dog parks are no exceptions.  Alternatives can include shade structures that are increasingly found in warmer climates over playgrounds.
  • Signage. It is very important to have park hours, Dog Park rules, opportunities for volunteering, and for joining local the friends of the dog park group clearly posted at park entrances.
  • Visual attractiveness, especially from outside the parks. It is important to be a good neighbor to the rest of the park, the adjacent street or residents and businesses. Improvements such as flower plantings, attractive street fencing, and artwork are always welcome and are another way that the local friends’ group can make a difference in the upkeep of the park.

One of the authors passes his community dog park to and from the subway each day and it’s a lively place with dogs and their people socializing, actively playing with their dogs, engaging with passersby (there’s a set of athletic fields and a very busy hike and bike trail in the immediate vicinity.)

C – Be open and communicative. Be sure to cast a wide net and work with likely as well as unlikely allies as you work to plan, build and run your dog park.

Pro-dog park groups should reach to the city parks department to determine if there are ordinances as well as design standards (including the elements mentioned above) that need to be followed in order to create a dog park. Pro-dog park dog groups should also reach out to current users of the park as well as local community leaders to understand the history of the community and the park, prior and current uses as well as other possible plans or efforts that may be already underway. This identifies issues and concerns that both individuals as well as other groups may have and allows all of the players to engage in a process with their eyes fully opened.

Public parks agencies should seek input from groups that may, at first glance, not seem to be allies.  These can include:

Public Pet enforcement agencies, public animal shelters.  These can be sources of information like runaways/stray dogs, dogs chained in yards, dog bites, the number of dog adoptions, and other issues as well as identifying potential allies and other benefits of building a dog park.  These organizations can provide programming, including adoptions, run with a dog programs, on-site mini health clinics, obedience classes, licensing and vaccinations. (All of these programming efforts can go a long way in addressing some of the issues that often come up in news reports from the popular press, including sick dogs, misbehaving dogs or owner issues.)

Community based dog advocacy groups. These groups are often breed specific or rescue oriented.  Community and other friends’ groups are critical to the success of dog parks. In fact, a number of public park agencies require a friends group to help maintain and manage the park, even raise money to build portions of a dog park as well as fees or permits to maintain or fund improvements. More than any other partner, these mostly volunteer groups assume a strong “ownership” role in the park, helping maintain standards of behavior and cleanliness, keeping “eyes on the park” and managing community and park agency issues on a regular basis.

Non-profits involved in dog well-being – adoption agencies, low-cost spay and neuter clinics, animal shelters, vets in the area, dog affinity groups, agility and obedience trainers, and more.  Similar to the public pet agencies and shelters, these organizations are a great source of programming both at the dog park and off-site and aid in the education of dog owners as help with positive activation of dog parks.

D – Embrace the standards. Many city parks departments have developed standards for dog parks. What is even more important is outreach and communication about what you would like to propose and how you plan to go about it. Even if the standards are set and many dog parks have built in your community, the critical step is outreach. While the expenses associated with community outreach, collaboration with community groups, establishing a coalition to care for and maintain the dog park may seem high, they are essential to a successful dog park. We’ve provided a case study below to show how.

Case Study: RUFF and the DeFillipo playground and dog park in the North End, Boston.

RUFF (Responsible Urbanites for Fido) began in response to increased complaints about dogs and dog owners in the North End neighborhood of Boston. The North End is a close knit and tightly packed neighborhood that has been an Italian-American neighborhood for several generations and prior to that, an Irish Enclave and a Jewish enclave, all in the last 100 years.  RUFF began to organize and help address issues including keeping dogs on leash in parks, volunteer efforts to clean-up parks where dogs and their owners were going, raising funds to pay for mutt mitts and other supplies.

About four years ago, they began looking for public spaces to put in a pilot dog park, working closely with the Boston Parks and Recreation Commission as well as local community groups. Of all of the parks in the neighborhood, they ended up with what they thought was their last choice. It was multiple levels in and around the DeFlippo Playground. The park is historically known as the Gassy, from the days when a giant aboveground gas tank stood in the middle of the neighborhood. But, it was site for a dog park and they saw a great opportunity.

They raised some funds and embarked on a pilot project. They purchased fencing the site and had it installed, complete with gates that had to be manually locked and unlocked daily. To do this, they rotated through volunteers for the first few months. With a little fundraising, they installed automatic gates that unlocked in the morning and locked automatically at closing,

Through the pilot, which lasted several years, RUFF worked to address ongoing issues like excessive barking and dog waste), held gatherings with educational offerings and services (licensing, dog wash, vet check-ups), and continued to work with both neighborhood organizations and the public parks agency. Over time, they raised additional funds and worked out the details that would be required to build a permanent dog park, complete with artificial turf grass, an irrigation to clean and disinfect the turf in season, additional play features, additional safety features, and improvements to the pilot elements, including fencing.

The park unofficially opened in December 2017 and a formal opening is due to take place in spring, 2018. In the meantime, RUFF volunteers continue to do what they have been doing for the past four years: addressing neighborhood issues, daily maintenance and operations (shoveling snow, cleaning steps, and small repairs) and most importantly, enjoying the park.  More info at their FaceBook page.

E. Unique features, cool features, ideas and suggestions.

Off-leash dog parks are not just for playing, walking and running.  Swimming, agility and more are some of the many features being added to public dog parks in cities across the United States. We have highlighted a selection and will be adding to this list on parkology.org (Please contribute yours!)

F. Sample Standards and Policies for Dog Parks

Here are some examples of policies and / or standards that have been created by public agencies for dog parks.

G. Questions, comments?  Write the Center for City Park Excellence at the Trust for Public Land at ccpe@tpl.org.  We look forward to hearing from you.