Winston Churchill Memorial Trust...Churchill Fellowship 2001 Ian Hunter 1 1. Introduction This...

Winston Churchill Memorial Trust

Ian Hunter

The Management of Urban & Regional Parks

Churchill Fellow 2001

Front

Alcatraz Island, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, San FranciscoParc Luxembourg - Paris

Rockefeller Center – New York

Index

Executive Summary i

1. Introduction 1

2. Acknowledgments 2

3. Parks & recreation agencies 3

4. Urban parks and places 4

5. Overview of parks and recreation agencies in USA 6

6. Overview of urban parks in the UK 9

7. Themes

7.1 Leadership, vision and sense of purpose

7.2 Funding crisis

7.3 Agency culture

7.4 Parks renaissance and the Urban Parks Movement

7.5 Innovation, policy and planning

7.6 Public : private partnerships and alliances

7.7 Open space planning and design

7.8 Maintenance, monitoring and security

7.9 Seamlessness of parks and recreation

7.10 Branding of Parks and Recreation

11

11

12

15

17

19

22

24

26

29

30

8. Major lessons and conclusions 32

9. Dissemination 38

Appendices

1 Churchill Fellowship program

2 Six lessons of a great park system

3 Publications list

4 Profile

39

41

42

47

Executive Summary

Ian HunterPrincipal, Parks. Brisbane City Council. PO Box 1475. Brisbane 4001Telephone (07) 3403 4050

The management of urban and regional parks and public spaces.

My Churchill Fellowship program was tailored to explore some of the mostsignificant parks and recreation agencies in the United States, Canada and London. A short stopover in Paris was also included.

Many organisational trends in public policy have originated in the United States (egReinventing Government) and United Kingdom (Compulsory CompetitiveTendering). Australia has a relatively short history of public park development andmanagement in keeping with its recent development since white occupation. Myinvestigation of major urban and regional parks focused on those managingagencies with longer, deeper histories, faced with more extreme circumstancesrequiring different solutions. This included varying degrees of development,financial resources, community engagement, regulation, and programming ofactivities.

Great park systems of New York, Chicago, Boston, Baltimore, Minneapolis, SanFrancisco, Seattle, Portland, Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal were inspected anddiscussions with officials were undertaken. Equally special were the smaller cities,towns and communities such as Needham - Massachusetts, Yarmouth - Maine,Newport and Block Island in the state of Rhode Island. While these communitiesprovided a contrast in scale they did not demonstrate any less desire than the largecity parks agencies, to represent and engage with their community, to innovate, topersevere, protect and enhance, and to balance competing interests.

A re-occurring theme throughout my travels has been the extent of innovation withinthe agencies. Within North America and particularly USA, organisations were verystable compared with Australian agencies. Leadership, corporate knowledge, staffloyalty and training were markedly higher than that experienced in many parksagencies in Australia. This stability seemed to allow a longer-term perspective to betaken and is more in keeping with the resource and facilities to be managed. Organisational stability has not generally been matched by funding consistency.

Many US park systems are in various stages of recovering from decades of declineand neglect. A park renaissance is under way in North America and UnitedKingdom as Government of all persuasions discover the power that parks andpublic places contributes to a city’s or community’s livability, prosperity and sense ofcivic pride. Much of the renewal has been achieved with a combination ofleadership and creative solutions. Particularly instructive were the foundations forthis renewal to flourish. It has necessitated new relationships, alliances, priorities,and previously unthought of solutions. The return to fundamentals is also part ofsome renaissance programs.

This was the key message of the Urban Parks - Great Cities, Great Parksconference held in New York City in July 2001. Leaders in parks and major US andinternational cities spoke of the excellent value that parks and other public spacesgive to cities. The provision and sound management of a city’s public open spacehas been recognised by the World Bank as one of the top two livability factors in anurban environment. The path to achieve this is many and varied and is the core ofmy Churchill Fellowship report.

Highlights of the places visited and people met.

I was privileged to meet some of the most senior and respected parks andrecreation leaders within the industry (variously named, including Commissioner,Borough Commissioner, Director, Superintendent, Chief Executive Officer, ChiefParks Officer, or General Manager). This was usually followed by an inspection of across section of parks and recreation facilities with a range of parks and recreationprofessionals. Irrespective of position all gave their time generously and offeredgreat insight to their work and environment.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Churchill Fellowship 2001 Ian Hunter1

1. Introduction

This report outlines the findings of my Churchill Fellowship tour of United States,Canada, London and Paris, investigating the management of urban and regionalparks. The twelve week program, from mid May to mid August 2001, provided aunique opportunity to obtain a snap shot of highly regarded parks and recreationagencies of both large cities and smaller towns.

As a parks and recreation professional within the public realm my position entailsthe planning, development and management of public spaces, be they wild naturalplaces or highly prominent city parks. The central theme of the Fellowship was toconsider how the organisations responsible for the provision of these spacesexcelled in the management of these areas.

Visiting approximately 25 cities and communities, each had a special sense ofplace. The staff and volunteers showed a passion to engage, represent and uplifttheir communities with a view to both the present and future generations. Thedeep sense of custodianship was matched by the desire to provide programs andspaces to create delight, fun and learning.

In the following report reference is made to ‘parks and recreation agencies’ or‘agencies’. Agency is a generic term to mean the authority charged to manage theresource under consideration. An agency can refer to a dedicated authority undera separate governing statute, a non-profit organisation, private business, or anorganisational unit within a local, state or national government department.

My conclusions and findings are my own current professional perspective, subjectto the modification through self-assessment, peer discussion and general review. This I welcome if only to enrich the debate.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


2. Acknowledgments

A three month sojourn overseas covering four countries and 25 cities andcommunities does not occur without the support of a great many people.

To the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust who made this wonderful experiencepossible I thank the Trust for giving me this superb opportunity.

The Australian parks and recreation industry has always been generous in timeand assistance and this was more than matched in USA, Canada, UK and France. To these professionals both overseas and in Australia who gave guidance andinsights in preparing my program, your help was invaluable.

People who manage public parks have the good fortune to be in the mostsatisfying and rewarding professions imaginable. I have been privileged to meetremarkable parks and recreation professionals at all levels that give so much totheir communities and visitors. In so many instances these extraordinary peopleopened their organisations for me to observe both the inspiring work and the areasin need of improvement. To all parks colleagues I thank them for their wonderfulassistance.

One of the results of this generosity was the home-stay opportunities, where parkprofessionals opened their homes and their lives outside work to make myAmerican experience more complete. This helping hand will not be forgotten,especially during times of rising global tensions.

The Brisbane City Council has been most supportive in my Fellowship and I wishto specifically thank Michael Kerry, Divisional Manager - Urban Management, andthe parks and environment team for their patience and dedication during my leavefrom Brisbane.

This report is dedicated to my father, Ken Hunter, a fellow parks and recreationdirector, who also dreamed of this Fellowship but it was his son who realised thebenefits that often come with successive generations.

Extended travel is difficult away from home and loved ones. Without the support,strength and love of my wife and our daughters, the Fellowship would have been afutile excursion.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


3. Parks and recreation agencies

The operating environment, be it social, political, fiscal and legal, within the UnitedStates, Canada and United Kingdom has in general terms been more acute thanthat experienced by agencies within Australia. The longevity of both theinstitutions and the resources and services they manage offers Australianagencies many insights – possibly the best crystal ball into the effects of sustainedapplications of extremes and cycles. Exploring the benefits and disadvantages ofthese provide a window into our possible future in the management of urban andregional parks in this country.

Of particular fascination in my program were:

§ The fiscal limitations started through the Californian Proposition 13 movementin the 1980’s (no new taxes) and how US government agencies, andspecifically local government parks and recreation agencies, found innovativesolutions to acute funding circumstances;

§ The management of distinctive and unique cultural and landscape elements inkey Canadian cities;

§ The impact of Compulsory Competitive Tendering and market forces on thepublic parks in the United Kingdom;

§ The creation and provision of bold and quality urban parks and landscapes inParis;

§ The management of unique nationally significant landscapes, such as GrandCanyon and Yosemite National Parks.

From the perspective of specific issues the list of professional interests included:

§ Parks asset management and provision

§ Private : public partnerships and alliances

§ Community engagement

§ Management of parks and the provision of recreation services and programs

§ Park enterprises and revenue raising opportunities

§ Agency and resource strategic planning

§ Special needs of children, the disadvantaged, elderly, youth, etc.

Given the breath of each of these issues not all are documented in this report. Dimensions of each will be reported on and developed over the ensuing monthsand years.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


4. Urban parks and places

Within large city parks agencies a diverse array of public parks are commonlyprovided. This range includes intensively developed and utilised Central BusinessDistrict squares and plazas, local and regional parks, outdoor leisure facilities, andbushland with near-wilderness values. Parks and recreation agencies manageparks of all dimensions. These include house-lot sized community gardens inBrooklyn - New York, to the massive Grand Canyon National Park, and widelydifferent character such as modern Parc Andre Citroen in Paris to the spectacularCrissy Field - San Francisco. Each provides a source of information, inspirationand understanding to the respective locale.

Understanding Common Elements

The management of public parks in all their forms, entails an understanding of thefollowing common elements:

The resource - regional park, manicured garden, city square, nationalconservation reserve, landmark, outdoor recreation facility. Issues ofaccess and linkage, sustainability and safety.

The community - how people behave, interact, and respond in a publicspace. Building partnerships and alliances into the community. Issuesof sociability, uses and activities, and comfort and image.

Organisational skills of finance, staff relations, strategy, policy, politicalmandate, risk management, structure, etc.

While there are no codified formulas or one ‘golden key’ that will unlockmanagement excellence in the provision of park services, there are neverthelessgenerally accepted principles understood by experienced and successful parkmanagers leading highly regarded park agencies in the US. These principles formpart of my recommendations and findings.

A strong phenomenon in the US was the contribution that parks and public placesmake to the livability of a city or town. The emphasise on the management ofopportunities within and from this public realm, be they for reasons of social,cultural, spiritual, health, or visual delight, elevates a mere resource or physicalentity into the consciousness and soul of the community.

Successful park agencies and their leaders instinctively understand this truth.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Great Cities-Great Parks New York Conference

The Project for Public Spaces’ (Urban Parks Institute) New York City conferenceGreat Cities - Great Parks in July 2001 celebrated the rediscovery of the publicrealm with two internationally acclaimed city mayors - Richard M Daley, Mayor ofChicago and Enrique Penalosa, former Mayor of Bogota, Colombia. Bothaddressed the substantial contribution parks and public spaces have made to theircities.

President of the Project for Public Spaces, Fred Kent, presented to the World BankChairman and Board in July 2001. The World Bank determined that public parksand spaces are one of the most important indicators of city livability, along with airquality. In doing so the World Bank is highlighting how many Third World countrieshave retained parks and spaces as communal spaces heavily used by the public. This is without the effects of indiscriminate erosion from motor vehicles, private andsectional interests and narrow interpretation of a public park (from the BritishVictorian style public park epitomise by the ‘keep off the grass’ signs).

In this regard the World Bank is now redefining wealth of a community and in doingso is placing parks and public spaces at the forefront a city’s livability.

L - Parc Andre Citroen – Paris. A contemporary urban park that displays varied spatial definition

R – Crissy Field - Golden Gate National Recreation Area in San Francisco, was developed using

private funding

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


5. Overview of parks and recreation agencies in USA.

While the North American part of my program included three key Canadian cities,namely, Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal, I have not made structural conclusionsof the Canadian parks and recreation agencies. Instead the findings from visitingthese unique yet very different cities are integrated into the main body of the reporttitled ‘themes’.

The US has four levels of government - Federal, States, Counties and Cities /Towns. Federally, the National Parks Service (NPS) manages many famousnationally significant landscapes such as Yellowstone, Yosemite and GrandCanyon National Parks. Less obvious landmarks under NPS managementinclude Liberty Island (Statue of Liberty), and the Golden Gate National RecreationArea (San Francisco) and many of the national memorials in Washington DC.

States often manage significant regional parks, while county jurisdiction sometimesoverlaps city and town government, or may compliment the local governmentsphere. In general terms county government is weak on the east coast (eg NewEngland States) and strong in the west. At times the roles of county and citygovernment is combined such as San Francisco.

Many city government parks and recreation departments compete for budget fundswith strong police and fire departments and schools commissions (eg New YorkCity). In other instances autonomous parks and recreation boards are popular andare highly regarded by the public (eg Chicago and Minneapolis). Some possesstaxing powers that sustain their services and programs, such as Vancouver BC.

Special Park Districts have a focused mandate to manage a dedicated resource, inthis instance the provision of parks and recreation services. A separate land ratingsystem is commonly used to fund special park agencies. Typically they includeregionally significant parks and outdoor recreation facilities (such as public golfcourses, ski fields, trails, and environmental education centres), located indormitory suburbs adjacent to city metropolises. Special districts are usuallycreated with the passing of a State statute and are generally stable authorities thatcan draw upon long histories and relationships.

The Special Parks District Forum 2001, hosted by the Hennepin Parks District,Minneapolis, provided a detailed review of a well regarded special park district. The other special parks district visited included one of the International ParksStrategic Partners Group (IPSPG) members, namely the East Bay Regional ParksAuthority, located at Oakland - California.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


The IPSPG* consist of the leading parks agencies in Australia and New Zealand,plus two member agencies from the United States. Its purpose is for memberorganisations to share best practice management initiatives, improve knowledgeand provide professional development opportunities to the broader industry. Theequivalent association in the United States is the Urban Parks and RecreationAlliance of parks and recreation directors from the major US cities.

The concept of the US parks system as a continuum from National Parks (andNational Recreation Areas, Landmarks and Memorials) through to local city andtown parks, has recently been advocated by the National Park System AdvisoryBoard. The launch of the publication Rethinking the National Parks for the 21st

Century sets out the goal of encouraging US parks and recreation professionals tohave a strategic look at the nation’s outdoor recreation needs. It recommends thatthe parties join in creating a common vision of an American System of Parks - anational network of parks, reserves, open spaces, greenways and recreation areastouching all communities and accessible to all citizens.

A defining feature of US agencies is the strongly integrated manner in which openspace resources are managed. Typically agencies combine parks and recreation(leisure) services and use this base to leverage into many allied programs such asdisadvantaged communities, social problems, education, corporate development,etc. This is matched by the seamlessness of management from strategic planning,policy, and park development through to operations, regulation and (mis)usemanagement, volunteers and events programs.

The commonly applied principle of client (or purchaser) : provider relationships thatform the structure of most agencies in Australia, New Zealand and UK, were notused in any of the organisations visited except local authorities in London. Withinthe US, agencies expressed disbelief that such a system could exist, let alonework.

* Members include the cities of Brisbane, Melbourne and Adelaide, Parks Victoria, ACT Government Canberra Parksand Places, Centennial Park - Sydney, NZ Department of Conservation, Auckland Regional Council, NSW NationalParks and Wildlife, Cleveland Metroparks (Ohio) and East Bay Regional Parks.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


L - Newport Rhode Island. One of the world’s great coastal walks, Cliff Walk passes the former summer mansions ofUS millionaire industrialists.

R - Minneapolis Sculpture Garden – managed by the Minneapolis Parks and Recreation Board in partnership withcultural institutions. Claus Oldenburg’s Spoon and Cherry.

L - Hennepin Parks – Minnesota, defies the US trend towards very safe play equipment.

R - Mill Race Park on the banks of the Mississippi River, interprets Minneapolis’ rich history of flour production.

L - Parc Bechy – Paris. A contemporary park with well defined spaces creating outdoor rooms.

R - Grand Canyon National Park attracts extraordinary number of visitors, mostly travelling by private transportation.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


6. Overview of urban parks in the UK

Compulsory competitive tendering (CCT) and client-provider delineation have beencentral public policy principles within Australia for more than a decade. With theintroduction of CCT by the Thatcher Government in the 1980’s many servicestraditionally provided by government, and particularly local councils, were requiredto document and tender the work on the open market. The efficiency of the marketto achieve the service at the most competitive price was given priority.

New Zealand and Australia launched a wave of deregulation and competitionmeasures in the mid-1980’s to improve efficiency. This culminated in theAustralian competition policy, extensive organisational restructuring (intopurchasers and providers), and Victoria’s own CCT imposed on Local Government.

With the election of the UK Blair Government a review of CCT was undertaken. The concept of Best Value was introduced in an attempt to give balance toreasonable selection criteria. In reality ‘best value’ principles were often used byAustralian local governments with the application of non-financial selection criteria.

After many decades of decline from the 1950’s, the operation of CCT had driven Britishparks into a state of crisis. Too frequently the focus on cost competitiveness andacceptance of the lowest bid through the tender process meant that skill retention anddevelopment suffered. The rich heritage of British horticultural skills was depleted inless than two decades. Public parks, and especially complex heritage parks, sufferedbadly.

To rectify the parlous condition of these cultural landscapes the British governmentintroduced the National Heritage Lottery – Urban Parks Programme in 1996, forthe upgrade of heritage parks throughout Britain. Furthermore, in 1999 the BlairGovernment commissioned an inquiry by the Environment Sub-Committee of theEnvironment, Transport and Regional Affairs Select Committee, to report on thestate of Britain’s public parks and gardens.

One such reserve that has benefited from the Heritage Lottery funds has beenBattersea Park, in London’s Wandsworth Borough. Battersea Park is a significantVictorian park on the banks of the Thames. It is a good example of the impacts ofthe cyclic nature of managing complex public landscapes and facilities.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


With the introduction of CCT, Battersea Park underwent substantial change. Thelandscape was simplified and horticultural detailing was lost (contractor short-cuts),trees were not adequately maintained, investment in below-ground parkinfrastructure (irrigation, fountains, drainage) was low, and staff training was poor(apprenticeships were dropped by contractors). Contract management becamethe focus of purchaser departments, and issues of usage and longer term planningwere of lesser priority.

The lack of an agreed master plan for Battersea Park increased the ad-hocdecision making resulting in an eclectic array of features and facilities with little dueregard to the heritage values of the park. Park management became contractmanagement and issues of leadership, opportunities and local identity were oftendiminished.

Battersea Park has received from the Heritage Lottery Fund UKsterling 6.4M overthree years to commence its restoration, with a further UKsterling 1.6M (25%)obligatory contribution from Wandsworth Borough Council. It is early days,however a vision of the park is emerging and locals and visitors are once againtalking about the park becoming a special place.

The story of Battersea Park is not unusual in Britain today. The pride once given toBritain’s public parks is returning. Ambivalence and a narrow contractual style of parkmanagement are being replaced with a combination of passion, caring, fun,sophistication, learning and value for money. Hope is emerging that previouslyneglected heritage parks will in the future contribute strongly to civic pride andcommunity opportunities.

L - Battersea Park Art Gallery – London. Battersea Park is undergoing substantial upgrading after more than a decadeof decline.

R - Royal Parks Authority – London. Seasonal colour opposite Buckingham Palace

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


7. ThemesIn many of the parks and recreation agencies visited during the Fellowship, the seniorofficial heading each agency was both a community leader with a public profile as wellas a successful organisational manager. The relationship with the elected Mayor (orBoard President) was typically close and complementary. For example, the ElectedOfficial made major announcements while routine communications through a range ofmedia (printed and electronic) was made by the parks agency head.

The press within the US is seen as an important institution and is held up todemonstrate the nation’s freedoms and public policy transparency. Numerous timesduring the Fellowship agency heads were actively utilising the press to further themission of the agency and raise awareness. The prevailing principle seemed to be toallow “a thousand flowers to bloom”.

The following themes have been identified to provide insight into current internationalbest practice.

7.1 Leadership, vision and sense of purpose

The prevailing culture of the US allows, in the most part, directors / managers of parksand recreation agencies to have a direct relationship with the general public and usersof the agency’s facilities and services. This was also true of the Canadian seniormanagers. The lack of purchaser - provider delineations in the US system allows thewhole parks and recreation service to be planned, promoted, addressed and held toaccount by one agency.

On numerous occasions during the Fellowship I shadowed executive meetings, publicmeetings and on-site discussions. In every instance the decision making processeswere entirely holistic, from strategic thinking, planning, practical problem solving,implementation and feedback. Financial, social, political and resource implicationswere discussed.

Most major parks and recreation agencies are headed by leaders who are willing andable to:

§ Actively engage with the community

§ Advocate a vision for the parks system

§ Secure the necessary political support

§ Encourage regular, practical innovation

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


§ Leverage into complementary programs (such as urban renewal, gangs impactminimisation, education etc.)

§ Develop positive relationships with all parties

Many senior parks professionals have extensive experience at a senior level, oftenwithin the same agency. This depth of knowledge of the community to be servedallows new approaches and programs to be better targeted and less prone to fad oreclectic management style. Essentially they are seasoned talented leaders andmanagers.

The way an organisation structures itself is a result of a mix of political priorities,dominant culture, industrial scene, legal requirements and turnover of senior officialsand staff. The US parks agencies are, in general, very stable in terms of organisationalstructure and leadership. Substantial change, initiative and improvement are veryevident. There was little evidence of the revolving door syndrome of senior officersand organisational restructuring every few years.

It is common to have a park agency with a well-respected leader and director’s positionwith ten to fifteen years experience in the job. Furthermore, parks and recreationagencies have been in place for many decades and are likely to remain so. Thisstability is in stark contrast with our corporate environment where takeovers andrestructuring is the effect of a dynamic competitive market.

Industry leading parks and recreation agencies display both stability and change. Stability is the means by which the programs and services are delivered however anenvironment of readaptation, innovation and review is clearly evident.

7.2 Funding crisis

Most of the innovative funding and management arrangements have arisen fromextended periods of neglect and subsequent deterioration of public places.

Typically the motor vehicle dominated the use of public spaces in North America,through new freeways and other transportation routes, carparks and worsening airquality. This was combined with an era of planning and design that readily createdsoulless and plainly unattractive public spaces resulting in these areas beingabandoned by the general public.

People undertaking undesirable activities in public parks such as drug dealing, sexualacts, vandalism, and sleeping out, reinforced the public’s perception that these areaswere unsafe and had to be avoided. By the early 1980s urban parks such as CentralPark, Prospect Park (both New York City) and Golden Gate Park in San Franciscowere seriously degraded.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Furthermore, the popular low tax movement in the US (from Proposition 13), resulted inraising the bar further by reducing government investment in the public realm. Fromthe 1980’s governments (particularly cities and counties) have typically had a statutoryresponsibility to seek a 2/3rds majority of voters to approve an increase in public taxesthrough a separate ballot or referendum.

In the United Kingdom a different phenomenon was at play. In the 1980’s theThatcher Government drove financial management to local government with the useCompulsory Competitive Tendering (CCT). The seminal book ReinventingGovernment reinforced the economic view of governance. The US authors Osbourneand Gaebler advocated free market and small strategic government. These conceptswere very influential in public policy formation in the 1990’s within US and UKgovernments.

In British parks all operational work was documented and packages tendered to theopen market including recently privatised Council work crews. Essentially thehorticultural complexity of many UK heritage parks and knowledge that was developedto understand and manage these areas was largely lost in the transition to contract. Park managers became contract administrators. Horticultural and park managementskills established over many generations or years were severely diminished within adecade. Lowest common denominator standards were, at times, a ruse for theunderlying agenda of cost reductions.

To address the obvious investment shortfall the Blair Government utilised the HeritageLottery Fund to direct monies to restoring important heritage public parks and gardens. Currently the fund amounts to UKsterling 150M. The Best Value program attempts tobetter balance monetary and non-monetary considerations in determining how best toprovide a service or facility to the community. It is now a mandatory requirement ofLocal Government in the UK.

It is unclear whether the 1999 Parliamentary Inquiry and the subsequent Urban WhitePaper and sub-committee activity will produce the quantum change sought by industryleaders. At worse the issue of the decline of British public parks has receivedunprecedented attention from Whitehall.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


L - Toronto’s parks have suffered from a lack of civic leadership and resources

R - Rose Garden Playground – Portland – Oregon. The City of Portland’s Parks and Recreation is a recognised leader within theUS parks industry.

L - Home Suite Home art installation program builds on the runaway success of the Bulls on Parade. Navy Pier - Chicago.

R – The popular Central Park markets in the university town of Davis – California.

L - By the early 1980’s Calvert Vaux’s masterpiece of Bethesda Fountain and Terrace in Central Park, was seriously degraded

R - Minneapolis Parks is one of the most highly regarded and well-resourced parks systems within the US.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


7.3 Agency Culture

As a business management graduate using the Harvard case study technique I hadassumed that the low union participation rates of business would be more or lessmatched in government sectors. Moreover, that the business principles and practicesthat had originated and or been heavily advocated from US sources would be wellrefined within North America government.

This is not the case. US parks and recreation agencies typically have very high unionmembership rates as is the situation throughout other agencies within local and countyauthorities. This fact is not particularly significant on its own however it is symbolic ofthe organisational cultural environment of the parks and recreation agencies.

The sweep of business processes, many ideological in origin, such as compulsorycompetitive tendering, downsizing, rightsizing, reengineering, process review, balancedscorecard, triple bottom line, etc were not readily evident. Contracting out of mainactivities such as park maintenance, cleaning, repairs, mowing and recreationprogramming was not common in the US agencies and communities visited.

Similarly, substantial organisational restructuring is not common place. Certainlygroupings change (eg regionalisation verses centralisation) as well as politicalappointees but the regular rolling restructuring of departments within city and countygovernments does not occur with the same frequency in Australia.

Are these stable organisations old, tied and lacking renewal? Surprisingly, by anymeasure, they demonstrate exactly the opposite when assessed on outputs andoutcomes. In general terms, agencies:

§ Are intensely community focused

§ Have deeper and broader corporate history and knowledge

§ Are more stable

§ Positively contribute to the social fabric of the community

§ Make excellent use of these strengthened community relationships throughalliances and partnerships

§ Encourage more comprehensive career structure with strong representation ofwomen and minorities groups

§ Foster leaders and managers who have an eye on both results and long termtenure.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


§ Have staff that are passionate, innovative and not risk adverse to try somethingnew.

In part the above phenomenon can be explained by the nature of the persona ofAmericans - passionate, motivated, can-do, risk taking, conservative, alternative, braveand inspiring.

While the relative stability of US agencies is sometimes rooted in legislation, it is astrong sector-wide cultural norm threading its way through many organisations. Asone US manager who had recently visited Australia commented “park professionalswho stay more than five years in the same organisation in Australia are expected to belooking to move on, while in the USA you are likely to be just starting a longrelationship with the agency”.

Stable tenure appears to provide an organisational environment that better suits thepark resource being managed. Wide and frequent fluctuations in priorities, programsand organisational structures stall initiatives and absorb substantial energies andresources. While some US agencies may lack refined corporate systems andprocesses they make up for innovative community focused programs and initiativesdelivering meaningful results.

Strong representation of a broader cross section of the community was particularlyevident in senior parks and recreation positions. The long association of cityauthority’s combined parks and recreation functions allows an effective career ladderfor women and minority groups to move through different streams. Management skillsof staffing, budgets and other resources are nurtured and used in related fields.

The recent announcement of the new Commissioner of Parks by the New York MayorMichael Bloomberg illustrates the depth of talent fostered within the organisation. Adrian Benepe commenced as a temporary summer employee assisting in themaintenance of New York’s parks, and after two decades of development in a rangeof roles has been appointed to lead the US$400M parks and recreation department. In Australia agencies responsible for parks only and not recreation combined withparks, tend to lack diversity and struggle to recruit a broad variety of staff.

Leading agencies also gave particular emphasis on developing young and talentedpeople by providing incremental growth and fostering depth of understanding overmany years. Agency stability and multiple related paths for career developmentassisted in this staff development.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


7.4 Parks renaissance and the Urban Parks Movement

The relatively low provision of open space within some highly populated metropolisesleads to a focus on issues of quality. The use of parks as a primary meeting place hasits origins in ancient eras, but one that has growing currency in North America and theUnited Kingdom.

The US Urban Parks Institute (Project for Public Spaces) is a non-profitorganisation that has the mission of furthering the knowledge and understandingof the provision and management of urban parks. It helps people create vibrantplaces that strengthen communities and revitalise cities.

Established thirty years ago by the current President, Fred Kent, the Urban ParksInstitute has positioned itself as one of the most pre-eminent voices advocatingand supporting the US parks renaissance.

The financial crisis in government funding has resulted in many self-help organisationsand activities. This grass roots movement has been assisted in a stable economicenvironment with an atmosphere of rising national wealth. This is in part due to theunique American environment of self-expression, achievement and individual rights. Ifyou want something, you go out and get it.

In an environment of declining social capital, parks are being used as a location tostrengthen what Robert Putnam terms bridging social capital. As one of America’smost distinguished parks directors, Charles Jordan - Director of Parks & Recreationwith the City of Portland Oregon, stated “parks are the last remaining, most democraticspaces in the United States”. Open to all people irrespective of age, creed, colour andeconomic circumstance, urban parks are being managed not as assets or ahorticultural exercise, but rather as a bundle of special opportunities to bringcommunities together. How to realise this lofty goal has captured the intense attentionof the parks and recreation profession, governments and the general public.

A full range of activities are actively promoted by agencies including festivals, markets,leisure programs, arts programs, outdoor dining, contemplation and spiritual renewal,local history and cultural interpretation, social groupings, appreciation of nature, andsport and physical fitness activities. However all this activity needs to be balanced withthe need for public spaces to be a respite from the normal city activity and the overtpressures of commercial intent.

Organisational distinctions between various forms of open space management areminimised with an agency that manages and is held accountable for the completehuman experience as well as the asset. If it is greenspace in the public realm, wherepublic use (and abuse) and expectations need to be managed, then typically a parksand recreation agency will manage this space. Interestingly this included public

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


squares and plazas, thereby creating a new organisational aggregation called Parksand Public Spaces.

The Greenstreets program is one such initiative. Established by the New York Parksand Recreation Department, Greenstreets entails the upgrading and maintenance ofprominent road intersection corners and streets by volunteers. At the end of 2001approximately 1,700 Greenstreets have been established since 1994. This initiativehas given a marked lift in the quality of streetscape open space in New York.

Similarly, the highly respected Mayor of Chicago, Richard M Daley, has heavilypromoted a holistic view of the urban open space and landscape quality to includeextensive civic investment in parks, street trees, public and private landscaping effortsand other public institutions. The link between quality public spaces and livability hasbeen a significant fillip to overturning Chicago’s past gritty corrupt city image. MayorDaley stated that every US$10M investment in open space improvements has reapedsubstantial political and civic benefits compared to the same quantum invested in amajor road or other expensive engineering infrastructure.

It is not just about the size of the capital injection by government or private source butalso distribution is important. In a ground breaking court case in the late 1980’s theChicago Park District was found to have practices that discriminated against certainlocalities within the city. Fair apportionment of services and programs are nowmandatory within the service, assisted by community consultative structures andprocesses.

Litmus Tests

The litmus tests used to assess livability of international cities such as New York,Chicago, Boston, Paris etc include:

§ Quality of parks’ development and maintenance

§ Absence of graffiti

§ Cleanliness of streets, sidewalks and other public spaces

§ Public safety in public places (primarily the percentage of women)

§ Quality of street trees and public landscaping

§ Degree of socialisation and interaction.

§ Effective control over private signing intruding onto the public realm

§ Quality of private landscaping

The quality and quantity of public realm elements such as parks and other public openspaces, consistently rates as a crucial indicator of public pride, civic management and

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


livability. Investors are influenced by what they see. Mayor Daley observed that in hispitch for the Boeing headquarters to move from Seattle to Chicago that his City’squality of lifestyle and city management competence was no better demonstrated thanby the quality of the public parks and streetscapes.

All over the US and in parts of Canada cities are re-investing in their parks and openspaces. Well-educated professionals move to those cities offering employment andlifestyle, and bring with them heightened expectations of a quality urban environment.

Urban Parks Forum of the United Kingdom has reinforced the international movementwith the Lotteries Heritage Fund funding a commitment to further the aims of this newurban parks not-for-profit organisation. The strategic alliance with the US Urban ParksInstitute has the makings of an international network of committed professionals andassociates advocating for better use, management and protection of urban parks andspaces.

Research into success stories and factors that have greatly enhanced urban parks andspaces is being communicated to civic leaders and professionals and an ever-informedpublic, all over the world. Within Australia the International Parks Strategic PartnersGroup has the potential of being a leading advocate to inform and support the creationand management of popular urban parks.

7.5 Innovation, policy and planning

For an organisation to foster innovation and creativity it requires a work environmentthat nurtures work traits that would horrify the average senior manager in Australia. Personal work habits such as ignoring rules, customers and organisational norms havebeen found to be precisely what creative individuals sometimes do to have their ideasnoticed and implemented. A Stanford University academic* refers to the weird rules ofcreativity where a strange managerial counter-intuitive environment exist.

Sutton identifies the crucial settings needed to encourage innovation, these being:

§ Rewarding success and failure, punish for inaction

§ Find some happy people and get them to fight

§ Encourage people to ignore and defy their bosses and peers

§ Hire slow learners (of the organisational code)

§ Decide to do something that will probably fail then convince yourself and everyoneelse that success is certain.

* Stanford Professor Robert Sutton – Harvard Business Review Sept 2001

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


While this organisational environment may seem irreverent or worse, in conflict with themanagement of a parks agency and the longevity of the resource under its control, theunderlying theme is one of maintaining an element of freshness, clarity and new ideas. Rules, regulation, policy, and strategies can systematise a work environment to thepoint where left field ideas are stifled.

The surprise during the discussions with leading park agencies throughout NorthAmerica was the general lack of detailed policy in favour of applied innovation. Oftenthese initiatives demonstrated multiple community benefits and values. Certainlylengthy planning processes involving community consultation was evident. Within theUS and Canadian agencies a culture of nurturing an innovative and creativeenvironment was clearly demonstrated. Senior managers made decisions as leaders,in close consultation and concurrence with the political officials.

A deep understanding of the agency’s customers was integral to exploring possibilitiesand potential that can not be adequately expressed in a strategic document. Innovation tended to relate to initiatives that were practical and attractive, and weretherefore popular with both elected officials and the general public.

Positive acclaim increased employee and agency morale which in turn created theconfidence, trust and understanding that are the hallmarks of highly respected parkagencies.

The establishment of the International Mosaiculture Festival in Canada illustrates thepower of clever ideas. On a tour investigating ice sculpture for a winter festival with theMontreal Botanic Gardens, the former Director (and now Parks and Recreation Director- City of Montreal) Lise Cormier discovered the Chinese art of sculpture with plants. Set within a wire frame the technique has been adapted and made into an art form. The International Mosaiculture Festival now attracts over a million tourists to Montreal’sOld Port area to witness themed living sculptures from fourteen countries.

A bright idea adapted, and presented to the world hungry for unique authenticexperiences.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


L - Puget Sound Naval Base – new public open space for Seattle, transferred from the Department of Defense

R - Simple functional park assets matched with exceptional design and maintenance standards has raised Chicago’s parks to bea central issue in promoting livability.

L - Great Cities – Great Parks conference in attracted many leaders across USA. Delegates in Central Park, New York

R - Launch of the Brooklyn Foreshore Master Plan by Mayor Giuliani and Parks Commissioner Stern. July 2001.

L - Shanghai China exhibit in the International Mosaiculture Festival, Montreal. Mosaiculture is a new art form made using liveplants

R - Water play pond in an Olmsted heritage park – Portland, Maine.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


7.6 Public : private partnerships and alliances

As discussed, the funding crisis within American parks has resulted in agenciesexploring alternative arrangements to fill the substantial void in public funding. Puttingaside the social equity considerations (discussed under the theme of funding) it isworth considering the underlying principles and policy associated with the many wellpublicised public : private partnerships.

The most acclaimed parks partnership in North America and arguablyinternationally is the partnership between City of New York - Parks and RecreationDepartment and non-profit organisation called the Central Park Conservancy. Central Park is 840 acres (336 hectares) of prime Manhattan real estate createdafter a design competition won by the father of US landscape architecture,Frederick Law Olmsted in the 1850’s. Central Park was universally celebrated inits day. It is surprising therefore that by the 1980’s after a series of near bankruptAdministrations that Central Park was a place reserved for muggers, drug dealers,murderers and those sleeping rough in humpies.

Lawns had turned into dust bowls, park infrastructure including precious heritagelandscapes and buildings were badly deteriorated and no sane or self-respectingindividual would travel through the park and feel safe. Only scant funds werebeing spent on Central Park and there was neither the political will nor priority toattend to its obvious problems.

Twenty years later Central Park through the Central Park Conservancy is a safe,exquisite, active, peaceful and fascinating respite location in New York. TheConservancy’s sole purpose is to maintain, manage and promote Central Park. From 1981 to 2000 it has raised US$142 million of private funds to restore andmaintain Central Park. A substantial endowment reserve fund allows theConservancy to maintain the park from interest earned. New York is exceptionaland this description also applies to the wealth surrounding Central Park, howeverthe underlying reasons for success provides powerful insights when identifying theessential elements of a holistic integrated parks management public (not-for-profit)enterprise.

In considering these elements information and inspiration is also drawn from two ofthe numerous successful public : private partnerships in the US, namely ProspectPark Conservancy (Brooklyn, New York City) and Golden Gate National RecreationAreas in San Francisco. Lead by exceptional leaders they demonstrate the powerof leadership over bureaucratic management indifference.

The key elements of an effective and successful parks not-for-profit enterpriseinclude:

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


1. Engagement of the community, businesses and interest groups throughsuperior communication, effective consultation and tailored programs

2. Focus on an individual flagship park

3. Good branding / marketing

4. Highly skilled professional staff and employees

5. Passion to make a difference

6. Demonstrated results with a bias to sensitive action

7. Effective relationship between the Parks & Recreation agency and the not-for-profit organisation

A defining element of the not-for-profit park agencies was the degree of employeesatisfaction. In simple terms employees were happy to be part of a focusedintegrated organisation. Four elements appeared to be central to the organisationbeing a good employer:

§ Leadership – for a not-for-profit organisation to succeed it needs to advocateand demonstrate to the city government a brighter future under newmanagement. Strong credible leaders are crucial.

§ Effective communication – understanding how a leaders’ actions contribute tothe work individuals undertake, and a sense that an individual can make adifference.

§ Sticking to the basics (and knowing what the basics are) – not-for-profitagencies are intensely focused on delivering a better park (system) and are notreadily distracted by management fads and trends.

§ Delivery – considerable public support and (often) private funds are securedwhen people see positive changes to the park resource. All agency activity isdirected to practical improvements.

The private : public partnerships are but one of a number of strategies adopted byinternational park agencies to enhance their park systems. Others include:

§ Use of volunteers eg Seattle Parks

§ Fund raising eg Prospect Park Conservancy and Golden Gate NationalRecreation Area

§ Grants eg Prospect Park B Brooklyn NY.

§ Earned income eg Chicago Park District, Boston Parks and Recreation.

§ Minimising costs eg New York City B Parks and Recreation

The challenge for public parks agencies is to draw upon these elements andprinciples to adapt and respond to contemporary issues and needs whilerecognising the custodian responsibilities of managing a cultural landscape.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Whether it is a not-for-profit agency or a government department or indeed anindividual’s pursuit, the ability to muster the collective energies of participants tofocus on a relevant and understandable goal that people believe will make adifference, is central to the successful management of city parks.

7.7 Open space planning and design

Many great cities have had a guiding master plan to direct the creation of the city’sparks networks. Famous far-sighted plans include the Burnham Plan of 1890 forChicago, Frederick Law Olmsted’s Emerald Necklace in Boston and the two greatmetropolitan parks in New York City, namely Central Park and Prospect Park. Othersinclude the Golden Gate Park, Crissy Field and The Presidio (in San Francisco), andBaltimore’s Druid Hill Park. All have been defining developments based on visionaryplans.

Many North American cities visited during the Fellowship have had a longer period ofdevelopment than that of most Australian major cities. Most of the decisions relating tothe broad structure of the city and its public open spaces had been made for at least50-100 years. Both visionary and poor decisions are part of the fabric of the city. Cherished places continued to be revered while solutions and opportunities were beingexplored to counteract deficiencies.

In all the cities visited, existing open space was considered precious and substantialefforts were being made to increase land for parks and open spaces. In mature citiescomplaints of having too much public open space are never heard. The inevitablemarch of urban development and systems (roads, rail, cultural institutions, parking andsectional interests) hunger for seemingly cheap land ensures the original allocation isconsiderably reduced by incremental decision making.

The destructive effect of sustained small poor decisions is now being reversed throughthe power of directed incrementalism. Although big schemes are not dead. Boston’sBig Dig involves the burying of a major freeway in the harbour district to provide openspace to reconnect the harbour to the city. The closure and transfer of the huge PugetSound Naval Base to the City of Seattle will make an important contribution to theCity’s open space opportunities. Innovative parks and recreation agencies are,however, recognising that the impact of a simple clear-sighted plan with the activemanagement of parks and engaged communities provides a formidable foundation ofthe great parks system.

Two shining examples of such transformations, at opposite ends of the mainstreampolitical spectrum, include Chicago and New York City.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


L - San Francisco from above the CBD looking out to Alcatraz Is. A city using hilltop parks and borrowed vistas.

R - Granville Island Vancouver BC. A successful tourism designation with strong commercial base.

L - Marvin Billips (second on left), Baltimore’s Director of Recreation & Parks (and current President of National Recreation &Parks Association) with a parks policewomen and executives.

R - Dual paths in one of Chicago’s premier lakeside parks - Lincoln Park

L - City of Boston’s respected Mounted Park Ranger Service is a tangible sign of the commitment to security

R - Prospect Park - Frederick Law Olmsted’s masterpiece is managed by the innovative Prospect Park Conservancy for the Cityof New York.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Poor administration, corruption and financial crisis in part resulted in both of these citiesbeing often titled brash, gritty, unsafe and uninviting. Over the past decade or two arevolution has been under way with the major upgrade of capacity, skills andimportantly quality of the public landscape.

Parks and greened road reservations have been upgraded but not without acommensurate attention to the on-going upkeep of these areas. Typically this hasbeen from both public and private resources.

Other cities have had a high quality of park and public space maintenance for manyyears. These include Minneapolis, Portland (Oregon) and Vancouver BC.

Other metropolises appear to be struggling to give due attention to the public realm. Toronto has a widely held reputation as one of the cleanest cities in North America. While the city clearly has many excellent integration programs to encourage socialinclusiveness, its clean and green city reputation is at risk. General deterioration ofstreet and park furniture, planters, public landscaping and general litter, illegal posteredhand bills and signs, and presence of graffiti, collectively pointed to a lack of civic careand attention.

Successful cities have attracted parks and recreation leaders to positions withsubstance and influence. A range of tools are used to supplement sound planning andpractical policy including appropriate consultative processes, applied research,operations monitoring and reporting, and effective marketing.

7.8 Maintenance, monitoring and security

Just as persistently poor decision making can progressively result in the decline of aparks system, so too can many small positive decisions and acts move to progressivelyimprove an open space network. The power of incremental progress was amplydemonstrated throughout the Fellowship.

As one of the most persistent urban forms (along with boulevards, rivers and majorpublic buildings and monuments) public open space is not resilient in the face offrequent radical changes in form and management. Typically, US urban places arecarefully monitored by interest groups and the general public to ensure mostinappropriate developments are defeated. For example, New York’s Partnerships forParks, Friends of Hudson River Park and Audubon Society, Toronto’s Friends ofDufferin Grove Park, and San Francisco’s Friends of Recreation and Parks, provide ahigh level of accountability through various degrees of support, questioning andmonitoring. The role of the many non-profit organisations is a notable feature of parksmanagement in North America.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


The active monitoring of the public’s use of open space is universally applied for allagencies visited. Strong public support not only existed in the USA where security isan important issue but also in more European cities such Montreal - Canada, Londonand Paris. The Royal Parks Agency (London) for example operate thirty (30) parkpolice, some mounted, to manage their public park estate. The public presence ofuniformed officers, be they National Park Service (Smokey Bear) Rangers, the air wingof the East Bay Regional Parks Authority, and the mounted police in Vancouver BC orBoston parks, indicate an acute awareness of the importance of public profile, safetyand addressing misuse of parks.

Dogs were by far the most contentious of park usage issues faced by almost allagencies. Given the intensity of emotions on both sides of the fence and the intensityof use of open space, many park agencies were struggling with how to resist the oftenwell-resourced dog lobby. Prospect Park Alliance (managers of Prospect Park)established FIDO (Friends in Dog Obedience) while other agencies were fightingsolicitors through the courts acting, at times, on a pro-bono basis in support of dogrights.

This line of logic says that if couples or families want to have a dog as opposed to achild then they (the dogs and their owners) should not be discriminated on the basis oftheir family mix. Children’s rights should equate with dog rights on the basis that theadults pay more or less the same city taxes.

The issue of homeless in parks was particularly informative. It would not surprise manythat the Republican Mayor Giuliani of New York Council actively pursued zerotolerance of misuse of parks. There is no overnight sleeping of the homeless inCentral Park. This park along with other public facilities are actively monitored forvandalism, public safety, illegal uses (eg golf, vehicles etc). This is due to an effectivecurfew from 10pm to 5am.

The Democrat lead City of Chicago also actively polices public parks and spaces. Thispolicy is not a hastily arrived decision but one that the City experimented in one sector(ward) due to a sympathetic Councillor. As parts of Lincoln Park became effectivelyout of bounds due to the association with the squatting by the homeless, city officialswere instructed to manage the issue away from parks and place people into suitablehousing. Throughout all premier urban park systems people were not permittedencamp overnight. It was not considered appropriate for the homeless, the public orthe facility.

The applauded urban renewal program developed by the City of Vancouver extractsmany desired social infrastructure benefits for the right to develop prime harbour land. The Coal Harbour and False Creek projects have for example, resulted in community

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


centres being developed for the rising residential population.

Opportunities exist for the implementation of low cost housing and properaccommodation for the homeless to be more effectively addressed as a public goodresulting in the considerable private investment in inner city localities. Low costhousing units near Pike Markets, facilitated by the Seattle City Council is one exampleof city initiated social infrastructure.

Transparent Performance

The use of transparent performance measurements was especially prominent. TheGreat Cities-Great Parks conference highlighted two US park systems using multiplefactor assessments of their performance. Portland (Oregon) and New York CityCouncils are using a systematic process of regular and independent site assessmentsand feedback to monitor operational activities. Key customer priorities included litterremoval, vandalism and other damage repaired, cleanliness, and the quality of turf,trees and other soft landscape treatments. The results are publicised through theinternet or other regular reporting means.

Security and policing are important elements of the American psyche. Park police orPark Rangers with powers of arrest, are a strong feature of major parks systems. Theirpresence is visible whether they are travelling in squad cars, on bicycles, on foot,horseback, etc. This level of police presence is more than matched in other publicplaces.

On-site permanent gardeners and park maintenance staff supplement the sense ofsecurity achieved with uniformed police officers. In this regard the keeper of the parkprogram in New York and Chicago is a useful model. They provide importantsurveillance of the public realm. Through active policing and park based maintenanceteams, a sense of security is achieved that is not commonly experienced in Australia. Good design and maintenance using the principles of Crime Prevention ThroughEnvironmental Design (CPTED) contributes greatly to the feeling a comfort and safetyfor all, thus making better use of public parks and places. Research into the use ofpublic parks and spaces consistently indicate that the presence of women in parks is akey indicator to their successful usage by a broad majority of the community.

A version of Gresham’s Law is applied in open space use in the US and Canada –‘that bad activities force out good’. While the homeless are not necessarily viewed asdangerous or undesirable it does alienate public space and represents in a small way abreakdown in society. If government cannot resolve the homeless in public parksdoubt exists as to the government’s (in this instance Council’s) ability to provide andmaintain a reasonable level of public safety. The same applies for the likes of

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


prostitution in parks, drug dealing, theft, aggressive behaviour, and begging.

The activity need not be overtly bad. As most people’s attendance in a public park isdiscretionary, activities that make people uncomfortable can turn potential park visitorsaway. Activities such as evangelising, overt commercialisation, loitering, over-dominance of interest groups, graffiti and poor maintenance and usage conflicts, can ina sensitive park context result in a narrower section of the public using public parks. Women, parents with children, the elderly, and minorities are often the first to avoidthese spaces.

Best practice parks agencies are acutely aware of these issues and actively manageand patrol their parks as a public demonstration that inappropriate use and behaviourwill be sensitively and properly managed to ensure the widest possible public benefit isachieved.

7.9 Seamlessness of parks and recreation

The linking of parks and recreation within most North American cities and jurisdictionsis very wide spread. While the debate in local government in the UK, Australia andNew Zealand continues, the opportunities that arises with linking the resource with theleisure potential has shown to be particularly powerful.

While recreation is more than parks, and vice versa, the majority of the governmentleisure services especially in city and county administrations are through the provisionof parks and recreation facilities. Examples abound. For example, disabled sailingacademy in Newport Rhode Island, dance classes and festival in Grant Park –Chicago, Clam Festival in Yarmouth Maine, First Choice Golf Program fordisadvantaged youth in Hennepin Minnosota, and Mosaiculture International Festival inMontreal.

The common thread of these programs is to take the resource or asset (the park oropen space) and explore how the space can be actively engaged for the benefit of thecommunity, be it a need to overcome a particular disadvantage or unashamedlytargeted at the main stream population. This engagement with the community hasbeen refined within North American parks and recreation agencies where considerableprivate : public partnerships and alliances has generated yet more opportunities.

This is not to say that US parks are programmed to an inch of their capacity. Manyparks or key sections within large significant parks are not scheduled, booked or

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


programmed. Central Park and Prospect Park in New York are good cases in point. Many areas within these parks are set aside for casual non-structured uses, while otherportions are heavily structured. Flexibility of spaces and a variety of activities createthe richness of experience in North American parks and recreation agencies.

The volunteer community is another interesting dimension. For most volunteers thedonation of their time and efforts is a way of giving back to the community. Successfulprograms focus not on the resource or the asset but rather the experience sought bythe participant in donating their time. These human outcomes include skill acquisition,friendships, socialising, health, fun, and learning. The linking of parks and recreationhas more readily allowed city and county administrations to tap into the strongcommunity involvement present in North America and particularly in the US.

The integration of the functions of resource (parks) and use (recreation) managementis matched with the application of a wide array of organisational tools. Leading parkagencies have responded to the electorate’s desire to reward action by blending a mixof initiatives that range from visionary plans, local schemes, useful policy and practicalon the ground proposals and works.

7.10 Branding of Parks and Recreation

Stability within many parks and recreation agencies has created an environment inwhich a strong brand identity can be developed.

Arguably the most successful of the private : public partnerships has been the GoldenGate National Recreation Area (part of the National Parks Service) and the not-for-profit Golden Gate National Parks Association. This unique partnership has allowedthe government agency to utilise private donations and funds to market and promotethe agency on its behalf.

This innovative synergistic relationship has produced some of the most memorablebrand imagery ever created. Even with such a strong and memorable brand it hastaken ten years of consistent and tightly controlled marketing management to obtainmarket penetrated in San Francisco, California and beyond.

Similarly, the Chicago Park District’s campaign of “Come Out and Play” draws uponthe rich musical heritage of that city with its infectious complimentary score. The strongsocial and community dimension to the marketing ensures that people are not justmerely informed of the potential of leisure opportunities in parks but they feel andexperience real activities and programs. Winning the hearts and minds through active

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


participation with and by the community is a distinguishable hallmark with many USparks and recreation agencies.

Parks agencies have positioned themselves as the expected and preferred supplier ofaffordable and quality leisure programs carried out in and around public open space. Many of these programs reach out into their communities and provide a positivecontribution to the humanity and caring of the community.

Urban and regional parks agencies are utilising marketing strategies as an importantfoil to the busy, commercialised and complex world that exists in most westerncountries. Parks and recreation agencies are successfully marketing their services withthe message that public parks are places where one can reconnect with the real world,with real senses, experiences and people.

These are the bonds that ultimately contribute to the meaning of community and aforward thinking livable city.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


8. Major lessons and conclusions

1. Leadership, purpose and civic pride

Pure competition policy and the pursuit of efficiency will not create a community.

Leaders are visible and engage the community to pursue their agency’s mission.

Leaders have a vision and strongly advocate a way forward with their community andconstituents.

Have a vision for the park system and make it credible.

2. Measuring and monitoring performance

Best practice parks agencies have developed objective and transparent indicators anddata to independently monitor performance of maintenance services irrespective ofwhether the service is provided internally or externally.

These results are tracked by head office and acted upon and reinforced by theexecutive manager.

3. Innovation

The organisational (sub)culture of an agency dictates the presence or absence ofactive innovation and creativity.

Innovation often originates from those who dare to challenge, ignore or avoid prevailingorganisational norms. Freedom to explore these ideas may require managers to adoptcounter-intuitive practices.

4. Design and Planning

The look of a public space matters, as well as the proper functioning of the locality orcity.

Ground surfaces should be free of litter, gum, graffiti and other matter.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Edges are important, as they direct traffic (pedestrian, vehicular, bikes, blades etc) toensure they traverse the correct surface.

Keep hard surfaces, treatments and furniture consistent (form, colour and materials)and simple.

Push plant material to provide colour, texture, shade and visual variety.

Create a landscape style unique to the region by utilising plants from around the worldwith a preference for high performing native species.

Design and build boldly in high profile locations; go soft and simpler in less prominentsites.

Employ the best designers (for built and horticultural treatments).

Brand similar spaces, eg urban parks signing program. It is a cheap and highlyeffective marketing campaign.

Plan for action and focus on tangible results.

5. Community outreach

Strong advocacy by not-for-profit lobby, advocacy and support groups will grow as theimportance of parks and public spaces grow.

Homelessness is actively policed in New York and Chicago parks and incidences ofsleeping out are immediately referred to appropriate shelter agencies.

6. Public : Private partnerships

Fostering effective partnerships with external organisations, such as non-profit groupsand commercial firms, can allow expertise and creative solutions to be realised thatmay not be readily obtained in a bureaucracy.

7. Supplementary Funding for Parks

Six funding strategies used in North American Parks and Recreation agencies tosupplement tax dollars, include:

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


§ Public : private partnerships

§ Use of volunteers

§ Fund raising

§ Grants

§ Earned income.

§ Minimise costs

Wealthy communities have a greater success in utilising alternative funding sources,which can result in issues of equity throughout a city.

8. Volunteers

Volunteers are fostered by providing meaningful enriching experiences and not as ameans of reducing operational expenses.

Volunteers must be given proper agency support to sustain enthusiasm and effort overthe longer term.

9. Programming spaces

U.S. parks and recreation agencies often give equal attention (and resources) to theprogramming of activities, events and functions in parks.

Strong active engagement with the community ensures that sectional interests do notcapture valuable spaces.

Leading parks and recreation agencies uses active policing and educating role.

Leisure and cultural programs provide an important means of developing cross-program links and outcomes.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


10. Rejuvenation of Parks & Recreation agencies in North America and United Kingdom

The rejuvenation park and public spaces has been achieved by:

§ Direct political support and advocacy by powerful elected officials eg ChicagoMayor and Chicago Park District

§ Park Improvement Bonds eg Seattle Parks and Recreation Department

§ Agreement with elected officials to retain income generated by enterprises and cappark contributions in real or nominal dollars eg Vancouver Park Board

§ Public : private partnerships (eg Golden Gate National Recreation Area) areparticularly strong in affluent cities (San Francisco, Seattle and New York)

§ Park enterprises eg Chicago Park District

Strong long-term professional training is crucial to retaining and improving parkstandards and service, particularly young people.

Compulsory competitive tendering, as practiced in United Kingdom, has resulted in thesignificant decline in city and town public parks and gardens. Loss of horticulture skills,incremental simplification of the landscape and under-investment in facilities andassets were identified in the 1999 Parliamentary Inquiry into parks.

11. Maintenance

Clearly differentiate maintenance standards between high profile premier parks andmore remote less prominent locations.

Remove all graffiti immediately, it creates dissonance and heightens anxiety within thecommunity.

Parks departments in the Cities of New York, Boston, Chicago and Portland Oregonundertake objective park inspection and monitoring programmes. These are carefullymonitored and the results reported to the public.

The placement of dedicated park personnel within major parks provides a point ofreferral for the general public and assists public safety eg Keeper of the Park programin New York and Chicago.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


12. Use and abuse of parks

Without active policing, education programs and satisfactory maintenance, public parksare progressively used by people and activities that have the effect of excluding thegeneral public. This includes drug dealing and substance abuse, loutish behaviour,persons sleeping rough, sexual acts, (offensive) graffiti etc.

The general public, especially women, have an acute sense of personal safety inpublic spaces. The presence of at-risk activities or indicators, such as those mentionedabove, will result in a progressive boycott of those spaces by legitimate users.

13. Programs and events

Programs and events are useful tools to activate certain parks. The type, size andimpacts need to be carefully managed to avoid incremental damage over manydecades; sustained alienation of the general public; commercial dominance; andprotection of cultural and environmental landscapes.

14. Park development and facility provision

Keep it simple. Design for people. Actively encourage legitimate users. Activelyprotect and manage inappropriate usage and illegal activity.

Complex and expensive park furniture and other park assets are often designed anddeveloped for reasons other than end users. A discipline of approach and applicationof higher cost treatments need to be made strategically and with great care so as toavoid escalating recurrent expenditure or declining maintenance standards.

15. Urban factors that contribute to a City developing into a great international metropolis

Quality of the public landscape – parks, squares, landscape medians and verges, aswell as private landscape.

Investment in quality, challenging and or aesthetically delightful public art.

Cleanliness of the streets and public spaces.

Absence of graffiti.

Extent and seamlessness of the public programs

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


16. Performance of urban parks

The performance of urban parks and public spaces hinges on the extent and balanceof four key factors, namely:

1. Sociability

2. Uses and activities

3. Access and linkage

4. Comfort and image

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


9. Dissemination

The wide distribution of my findings from the Churchill Fellowship will be crucial toinfluencing and improving parks management in Australia. I commit to disseminatingthese findings and to improve understanding by the following means:

§ Presentations to key decision makers and parks and allied industry professionals

§ Through the practical demonstration and application of learnings acquired toexisting and future professional roles

§ Wide distribution of this report by all relevant means

§ Written articles and publications.

_____________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Appendix 1

Churchill Fellowship Program – 2001

Date Location Key Purpose

16 - 19 May Vancouver, Canada Vancouver Parks District

Civitas Consulting and urban design

Butchart Gardens, Victoria

20 - 22 May Seattle, Washington City of Seattle - Parks & RecreationDepartment

23 - 24 May Portland, Oregon City of Portland - Parks & RecreationDepartment

25 - 31 May San Francisco, California East Bay Regional Parks Authority

Golden Gate National Recreation Area(National Parks Service)

Presidio Trust

City & County of San Francisco - Recreation& Parks Department

1 - 2 June Davis, California City of Davis - Central Parks

3 - 4 June Yosemite Valley,California

Yosemite National Park - National ParkService

5 June Big Sur Coast, California Point Lobos historical residential landscaperestoration

6 - 7 June San Diego, California Balboa Park

8 June Los Angeles, California J Paul Getty Museum Garden

9 June Las Vegas, Themed landscapes

10 - 11 June Grand Canyon, Grand Canyon National Park (National ParkService)

12 - 19 June Minneapolis, Minnesota Hennepin Special Parks Districts ForumConference

Minneapolis Parks and Recreation Board

20 - 26 June Chicago, Illinios Chicago Park District

27 June - 2July

Toronto, Canada City of Toronto - Parks & RecreationDepartment

Parc Downsview Park Authority

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


6 - 9 July Newport, Rhode Island City of Newport, Parks, Recreation &Tourism Department

10 July Block Island, RhodeIsland

Town of New Shoreham

11 - 14 July Portland, Maine City of Portland, Parks & RecreationDepartment

Town of Yarmouth

15 - 18 July Montreal, Canada City of Montreal - Service des parcs,jardins et espaces verts

Mosaicultures Internationales Montreal

19 - 21 July Baltimore, Maryland Baltimore County - Recreation & ParksDepartment

City of Baltimore - Recreation & ParksDepartment

22 - 23 July Washington DC National Memorials and Institutions

24 - 31 July New York City, New York Great Parks, Great Cities - Conference

US Institute of Urban Parks / Project forPublic Spaces

City of New York - Parks & RecreationDepartment

Prospect Park Conservancy

Central Park Conservancy

1 - 6 August London, United Kingdom Royal Parks Agency

Wandsworth Borough Council

Urban Parks Forum

7 - 11 August Paris, France Contemporary and classic urban parkdevelopments

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Appendix 2

Six Lessons of a Great Park System (Harnick, 2000)

There’s Nothing More Important than a Vision

Moving from a Vision to Reality Requires a Plan

Nothing Happens Without Leadership

Parks have a True Value that can be Measured in Dollars & Cents

To Find a Great Park Department, Look for an EntrepreneurialAttitude

To Find a Great Park System, Look for a Commitment toImprovement

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Appendix 3

Publications collected during Churchill Fellowship

Organisation Reference titleForm of

publication

Vancouver Boardof Parks &Recreation,Canada

Butchart Gardens,British Columbia

Strategic Plan January 2001

Long Range Vision for Queen Elizabeth Park February 1999

Vancouver’s Urban Design – a Decade of Achievements

Your Guide to Leisure Services – Fall 2000 to Summer 2001

Various parks, cycling, botanic gardens material

Flower Guide

R

R

B

B

B

B

Seattle Parks &Recreation,Washington

Building the heart of your community – Community Center LevyProgram

1999 Community Centers & Seattle Center Levy

Ideas into Action – accomplishments of Seattle Department ofParks & Recreation 1993-1999

Proposed Parks & Recreation Tree Policy

Outreach – Parks Projects in your neighborhood

Park Development and Acquisition – Communication Plan 2001

Sand Point Magnuson Park progress update

Public Involvement Policy

Seattle Green – Open Space and Trails Guide

B

B

B

B

B

R

B , N

R

B

City of Portland –Parks &Recreation Dept,Oregon

Parks Assessment Manual – a Methodology and Guide for theEvaluation of Portland’s Parks

A Family Support Circle

2001 Youth Summit Directory

R

R

San Francisco, CAEast Bay RegionalParks Authority,California

Golden GateNationalRecreation Area(National ParksService)

Presidio Trust

Economic Assessment of Parks

Regional Parks of East Bay Regional Park District

Crissy Field Redevelopment material

Golden Gate National Parks Association Annual Report 2000

JR Ranger Activity Book

Discover Alcaltraz – a tour of the rock - GGNPA

Bay Area (Children’s) Discovery Museum – annual report 2000

People and the Park – The Presidio Trust 2000 Year-End Report

Directory of Organizations at the Presidio of San Francisco

R

B

R

B

B

R

R

R

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


City & County ofSan Francisco –Recreation &Parks Department,California

Assessment Project – Final Report & Appendices – Recreation &Park Dept. 1999

Strategic Plan 2000-2001

Creating Our Future – Renewing Our Promise – Draft StrategicPlan December 2000

Creating an Urban Park Movement – the San Francisco Story1996 – 2001

Inside R.A.P. – For Friends and Employees of the San FranciscoRecreation & Park Department

Parks Plan – San Francisco Community Parks Task ForceReport

Street Sheet – publication of the coalition on homelessness SanFrancisco

R

R

R

B

N

R

N

City of Davis –Central Parks,California

Parks and Open Space – Integrated Pest Management History

Adopt-A-Park & Davis Focus newsletter

Recycle – Sacramento Region

R

B

B

Yosemite NationalPark

Yosemite National Park, National Park Service, Guide

Concessioner Obligations – US Federal Register dated 4 May 00

B

Balboa Park SanDiego

The Romance of Balboa Park – Florence Christman P

Getty MuseumGarden, LosAngeles

Seeing the Getty Gardens

Architecture & Gardens – A Tour of the Getty Center

P

B

Grand CanyonNational Park

Grand Canyon, National Park Service, Guides

Grand Canyon Magazine

B , N

B

Hennepin SpecialParks DistrictsForumConferenceMinnesota

Conference Proceedings June 2001

Master Plan for a System of Parks

2001 Budget Summary

2001 Fees

First Tee Program – golf for youth

R

R

R

R

Minneapolis Parksand RecreationBoard, Minnesota

Policies, Rules and Rates 1998

Charter, Ordinances and Laws

The Minnehaha Park – Restoration Plan

Above The Falls – A Master Plan for the Upper River inMinneapolis

Minneapolis Sculpture Garden

Regional Recreation Open Space Policy Plan – Metro Council

2002-2007 Metropolitan Regional Parks – Capital Improvement

R

R

R

R

B

R

R

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Summary of 2001 Budget

Superintendent’s Annual Report 1999

Regional Parks – a map & guide to regional parks in the TwinCities Metropolitan Area.

R

R

B

Chicago ParkDistrict

City of Chicago

Come Out and Play – a guide of activities offered at ChicagoParks

Chicago Park District – 2001 capital improvement program

Here We Are – a guide to the Chicago Park District’s Parks &Facilities

(Park) Advisory Council guidelines

Birds of the Windy City

Chicago’s Green Rooftops

Chicago – It’s Priceless (guide of free events and attractions)

Guide to the Chicago Landscape Ordinance

Suite Home Chicago – an International Exhibition of UrbanStreet Furniture

Video of Chicago Parks TV commercials ‘Come Out and Play”June 2001

Holiday Delights

Brochure series – Celebrate Spring; Celebrate Valentine’s Day;Celebrate Black History Month; Picnics in the Park.

Constructed – the Millennium Garden Design Competition (GrantPark)

B

B

B

R

B

B

B

R

B

V

B

B

P

City of Toronto –Parks &Recreation Dept,Canada

Parc DownsviewPark Authority

1999/2000 Business Plan. Economic Development, Culture andTourism.

1998 – 2000 Council Achievements

Designing Downsview Park, Toronto. Van Alen Institute

2001 Parc Downsview Park News issue 5

R

R

R

B

City of Boston –Parks &Recreation Board,Massachusetts

Town of Needham

The Emerald Necklace Parks – Master Plan

Open Space Plan 2001 – 2005 – Outline

Parks & Recreation Dept Operating Budget

Boston Inspection Program

A Guide to the Parks of Boston’s Emerald Necklace

Open Space Acquisition Policy for Boston

Partnerships Innovation Fun. Annual Report 1997-1998

Summer Fun – 2001 Program Schedule

P

R

R

R

B

R

R

B

City of Newport,Parks, Recreation

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


& Tourism Dept,Rhode Island

Town of Coventry

The Newport Flower Show July 7-8, 2001

The Coventry Greenway

East Coast Greenway – 2001 State of the Trail Report

N

B

R

City of Portland,Parks &Recreation Dept,Maine

Town ofYarmouth, Maine

Portland Trails – Summer Newsletter 2001

Annual Report 2000

2001 Spring / Summer Youth & Adult Program Guide

B

R

B

City of Montreal

Service des parcs,jardins et espacesverts, Canada

Bienvenue au Parc des Iles de Montreal

Canal de lachine – au coeur de la cite publications

Montreal – City Hall and municipal institutions

Le Service des parcs, jardins et espaces verts

Mosaicultures Internationales Montreal 2000 – Album Souvenir

Montreal – a history to treasure

Les Quatre Saisons du Mont Royal. By O Foisy & P Jacobs.

PB , N

B

B

P

P

P

Baltimore County– Parks &Recreation Dept,Maryland

Baltimore County Local Open Space Manual

Baltimore County Department of Recreation & Parks 2002Annual Program

Maryland Land Preservation & Recreation Plan – Policies andfuture directions for the planning program

Department Directives

Baltimore County – Land Preservation & Recreation Plan 00-04

History of Baltimore County – Dept of Recreation & Parks – 50th

Anniversary Edition 1949 – 1999

Program & Facility Guide – 5 regions

R

R

R

R

R

R

City of Baltimore –Recreation &Parks Department,Maryland

Summer 2001 Program Guide

Baltimore – an Illustrated History. Suzanne Ellery GreeneChapelle

B

P

Great Parks,Great CitiesConference

US Institute ofUrban Parks

Conference Proceedings

How to Turn a Place Around – a handbook for CreatingSuccessful Public Spaces. Project for Public Spaces, Inc.

C

P

City of New York –Parks &RecreationDepartment

Prospect Park Alliance – Annual Report 2000

A Park for all People: selections from the archives of theProspect Park Alliance and Brooklyn Public Library collection,1880-2000

Central Park Conservancy 2000 Annual Report

R

B

R

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Prospect ParkConservancy

Central ParkConservancy

Pocket Guides for Central Park – Central Park Conservancy

New York’s Community Gardens – A resource at risk 2001

Partnerships for Parks

A History of Prospect Park – Prospect Park Alliance

Eight Seasons – 1998 – 1999 Biennial Report. City of New YorkParks and Recreation.

Parks Inspection Program – New York’s Parks & Recreation

The Rare Plant Propagation Project – Natural Resources Group

B

R

B

B

R

R

R

Royal ParksAgency, London,UK

WandsworthBorough Council

The Green Park – Strategic Management Plan Dec 1999

St James Park - Strategic Management Plan Dec 1999

Hyde Park - Strategic Management Plan Dec 1999

Kensington Gardens - Strategic Management Plan Dec 1999

Royal Parks - Annual Report and Accounts 2000-2001

Sky Space around London’s Inner Parks – a contribution to theGreater London Authority’s new Spatial Development Plan.

Summer Entertainment Programme 2001

Best Value Report on Wandsworth Parks

Battersea Park background notes

Adventure Playgrounds

Wandsworth’s Parks, Commons and Open Spaces

R

R

R

R

R

R

B

R

R , B

B

B

Other publications Land & People – The Trust for Public Land – Annual Report 2000

Building the American Commons – 25 years at the Trust forPublic Land

Rethinking the National Parks for the 21st Century – NationalPark System Advisory Board Report 2001

Public Use of Urban Parks – A methods manual for ParkManagers and Community Leaders. Urban Institute (US).

Restoring the glory of Forest Park

‘Places’ environmental design journal. Design HistoryFoundation. Winter 2001

R

B

R

P

B

KeyP - registered publication. R – report. B – brochure. V – video. C - conference proceedings. N – newspaper.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Appendix 4

Profile

I currently hold the position of Principal - Parks with the Brisbane City Council. Mymain role is to provide strategic planning and policy advice to Civic Cabinet andexecutive management regarding the Council’s parks, reserves and gardens. TheBrisbane City Council manages the largest urban parks network in Australia withmore than 1,850 parks covering approximately 12,000 hectares. I havecompetencies in revenue development and commercial opportunities, andbalancing and protecting open space values relating to recreation, environment,social, cultural, and visual amenity and creating large park developments featuringinnovation design and management.

For the past two years I have been Chair of the International Parks StrategicPartners Group, a group consisting of the dozen leading park agencies inAustralia, New Zealand and United States, and a member of Australia NewZealand Playground Standards Committee representing the Australian LocalGovernment Association. Locally I have been a member of the StateGovernment=s Roma Street Parkland development and management committees.

Prior to Brisbane I was Director of Parks and Community Services with the HobartCity Council responsible for sensitive city icons such as Salamanca Markets, MtWellington, and Hobart’s historic parks. I was also project director for thedevelopment of the State Hobart Aquatic Centre. My park managementexperience commenced in 1987 in the role of Parks and Recreation Manager withthe City of Fremantle, Western Australia.

I hold a Master of Business Administration from the University of Queensland,Company Director Diploma from the Australia Institute of Company Directors,Graduate Diploma of Business - Curtin University of Technology, and a Diploma ofApplied Science (Horticulture) from the University of Melbourne - Burnley.

Ian HunterJanuary 2002

Winston Churchill Memorial Trust...Churchill Fellowship 2001 Ian Hunter 1 1. Introduction This...

Documents

Transcript of Winston Churchill Memorial Trust...Churchill Fellowship 2001 Ian Hunter 1 1. Introduction This...