Tagged: urban green spaces

Public Park Funding: UK and USA Models

Our public parks in the UK are under increasing pressure, with limited resources available for maintenance and management. Public sector funding for discretionary services like parks is projected to fall by 60 per cent or more over the next decade.  New business models are needed along with management tools and partnerships to create a more sustainable future for the way our parks are used and maintained. Not only could this lead to greater financial security for parks, it could also create new opportunities for employment and education, increased health and well-being, and greater biodiversity.

rethinking parks

NESTA have produced a report ‘Rethinking Parks’ by Peter Neal which highlights the need for new business models to run parks, given the cuts in government funding, and discusses 20 international examples of how parks innovators are doing just that.  The report highlights that there will be challenges in developing and adapting new business models for parks. This includes ensuring public parks are integral to, and reflective of the surrounding cultural, socio-economic and physical context. In some contexts private management models for public parks may offer a sustainable financial model, while in other areas cooperative management with local communities may be a more viable option.

Screen Shot 2015-07-13 at 09.11.29

London Councils, which represents 32 boroughs and the City of London, said budget cuts had put local services, such as social care, under pressure.  It warned funding for community groups and volunteers who maintain the parks is under threat, as they prioritise other services, such as looking after homeless people.  If the cuts continue, councils may be unable to stop the parks being sold off and run privately by 2025, it warned.  Councillor Julian Bell, chair of London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee, said: “We have got to do everything we can to protect our parks for our future generation.”

The Challenges of Providing Public Space with Private Funds by Liz Camuti| The Dirt | 06/10/2015 

The following article was published in The Dirt published by the American Society Of Landscape Architects.

“In an age of ample private wealth and an increasingly constrained public sector, a number of American cities have become dependent on privately funded conservancies to maintain and refurbish their public parks. A new report by Peter Harnik, Hon. ASLA, and Abby Martin from The Trust for Public Land’s Center for City Park Excellence explores the rise of such city park conservancies — private organizations that use donations to rebuild, renovate, and, in some cases, maintain some of the most iconic parks in the country. Interspersed with examples from 41 conservancy organizations that have a collective experience record of nearly 750 years, the study serves as a how-to guide for building successful relationships between city governments and urban park conservancies.

While many park-support organizations exist throughout the country, including friends-of-parks groups and business improvement districts, the study defines a conservancy as a “private, nonprofit park-benefit organization that raises money independent of the city and spends it under a plan of action mutually agreed upon by the government.” Throughout the study, Harnik and Martin maintain that the key to this relationship is that the land remains the city’s and the city retains ultimate authority over everything that happens there.

New York’s Central Park Conservancy, which was founded in 1980, is generally considered the catalyst for the conservancy movement. Following a nationwide recession in the 1970s which severely damaged NYC’s already declining parks department, NYC Mayor Ed Koch and parks commissioner Gordon Davis appointed Betsy Barlow Rogers as Central Park Administrator. Rogers created a revolutionary public-private partnership that would bring private money and expertise together with the City of New York to restore Central Park. The study contends that to this day, New York has used conservancies more so than any other city and continues to provide lessons for other public-private partnerships.

Since the formation of the Central Park Conservancy, urban park conservancies have become a favored tool for revitalizing many parks across the country (about 50 percent of major cities have at least one). However, the strength of the study is that is does not gloss over the inevitable conflicts that arise when trying to build a successful public-private relationship, nor does it consider conservancy support as the panacea for urban park management. As was the case with the Central Park Conservancy, most conservancies are founded to restore dilapidated historic parks and address shortcomings in governmental funding. Yet, this can often create an ideological conflict.

For every person that is skeptical of government, there is another who is skeptical of increasing private control over public space. While many city governments often lose the capacity to maintain a park’s programs and amenities without private support, putting too much responsibility in the hands of a conservancy can lead community members to suspect a park is becoming completely privatized. For example, civil right attorney Larry Krasner, who defended a group of Occupy Wall Street protestors, states, “I think there is a trend of analogizing public space to shopping malls. I think a lot of people view that as a sad state of affairs. It seems to indicate that government is insufficiently funded or not able to provide services we used to take for granted.” The study is upfront and honest about the challenges these conflicting mentalities can create for restoring, maintaining, and improving urban parks.

Among these challenges, there are two that conservancy-supported parks appear to face time and again: Maintenance and safety. According to the study, finding the money to cover basic maintenance costs can be a challenge – often the challenge – for conservancies and city governments alike. While big capital projects are more flashy and attract private donations, maintenance is less sexy. For this, Harnik and Martin offer one thoughtful solution inspired by the Central Park Conservancy: Have conservancies build in “a long-term maintenance fee to the initial budget of each capital project – an upfront gift that becomes a permanent trust fund.” Such a solution ensures that the maintenance of donor-attracting capital projects does not fall solely on the city government’s shoulders.

The issue of maintaining public safety is slightly more complicated. The study provides several examples, including Piedmont Park in Atlanta and Civic Center Park in Denver, where public-private arrangements have gone awry in the wake of public safety concerns that discourage donors and visitors. While the Civic Center Conservancy stepped up programming and the Mayor of Denver allocated more money for policing and security after a 2013 shooting, specific suggestions for dealing with urban crime and public safety generally fall outside the scope of the study.

Though the conservancy-based approach to urban park management is still emerging, the study could have benefited from more examples of conservancies that were formed hand-in-hand with brand new green spaces. Of course, private organizations that are formed in response to governmental shortcomings will face unique challenges and conflicts, but what if these relationships were established at a park’s inception? The study cites this approach as a growing trend but gives few examples to support or deny its success.

Ultimately, the report serves as a comprehensive guide for philanthropists and mayors, as well as bureaucrats and board members, who wish to create and maintain successful partnerships that benefit our urban green spaces. For the rest of us, the study provides a reminder that the free parks we often take for granted are hardly free.”

Read the full report and also check out Trust for Public Land’s new City Park Facts 2015, which has tons of data on the top 100 park systems in the country.


Can rooftop gardens grow city’s vegetables?

2014-08-20 11.06.46 Rooftop gardens in cities could provide more than three quarters of the vegetables consumed in them, a case study from Bologna, Italy, suggests. If all suitable flat roof space was used for urban agriculture, rooftop gardens in the city could supply around 12 500 tons of vegetables a year whilst also providing a range of ecosystem services, the researchers say.  

Source: Orsini, F., Gasperi, D., Marchetti, L., et al. (2014). Exploring the production capacity of rooftop gardens (RTGs) in urban agriculture: the potential impact on food and nutrition security, biodiversity and other ecosystem services in the city of Bologna. Food Security 6(6): 781-792. DOI: 10.1007/s12571-014-0389-6.

Any unused roof space in a city represents an opportunity to add to that city’s green infrastructure. Urban green spaces and infrastructure, which include rooftop gardens, offer benefits for both wildlife and people. Not only can they produce food for city-dwellers, they can increase urban biodiversity and link together to form green networks, acting as corridors for wildlife. They can also reduce a city’s ecological footprint by filtering polluted air, absorbing noise and CO2 emissions, and controlling temperature by shading.

2014-08-20 12.01.20

In 2010, Bologna became the first Italian city to test rooftop vegetable gardens on public buildings, as part of a project led by the local authority, university and a non-profit organisation. Researchers followed the trial over three years between 2012 and 2014.

During this time, rooftop gardeners grew lettuce, black cabbage, chicory, tomato, aubergine, chili pepper, melon and watermelon, either in plastic pipes, recycled pallets filled with compost or on polystyrene panels floating in tanks, also made from recycled pallets.

On average, the recycled pallet system with compost produced the most vegetables for the amount of space used, a third more than the floating system and more than twice that of the pipe system. However, the amount of each type of vegetable produced by each system in each season varied considerably and the pipe system made use of hanging space when surface area was limited.

2014-08-20 12.01.34

From the results of the trials, the researchers were able to design an optimal growing system for a 216 m2 rooftop garden, which combined elements of each system in order to maximise productivity throughout the year. This included slightly more floating structures than pallets, as well as pipe systems along the railings. The researchers estimate that this hypothetical garden could produce more than three tonnes of vegetables per year.

Next, the researchers estimated the potential productivity of a network of vegetable gardens occupying all suitable flat roof space across the city. They used digital maps and computer-aided design (CAD) software to identify all the unused flat spaces on Bologna’s roofs and terraces.

Their calculations suggest that, if all available space (about 0.82 km2) was utilised, rooftop gardens in Bologna could produce around 12,500 tonnes of vegetables. This means that, based on actual consumption data for the city, rooftop gardens could meet 77% of residents’ needs for vegetables.

If all the spaces identified in the study were turned into gardens, they could capture an estimated 624 tons of CO2 each year. The study’s authors also mapped the connections between spaces that were within 500 m of each other showing that rooftop gardens could create a network with a total length of 94 km of green corridors for wildlife, including pollinating insects. The 500 m distance was considered appropriate by the researchers because most common bee pollinators have a flight foraging distance of 750–1500 m.

2014-08-20 11.06.39

Images above are of the London’s Southbank Centre roof garden, created as a partnership between Southbank Centre and the Eden Project, it was built from scratch by the Grounded gardening team from Providence Row Housing Association (PRHA) working with colleagues from Eden.  Unusual foods such as blue potatoes, narga peppers as well as a mini olive grove are being grown. They also aim to add more greenery to Southbank Centre, training vines, hops and ivy over the concrete walls. Raised beds, wild and pollinating flowers and the lawn will also be maintained.

Images: Carine Brannan