Parks & Recreation Magazine November 2020

N OV E M B E R 2020 N R PA .O RG

P&R SYSTEM PLANNING IN A NEW ERA WHY PARK AGENCIES SHOULD RETHINK THEIR APPROACH

Strengthening Agency-Foundation Relationships Green Solutions Help Create Cleaner Waterways

Shade Systems offers lots of imaginative solutions for shading your water parks and pool facilities, such as our versatile Offset Single Post Pyramids shown. Support columns are cleverly designed to stay out of the way for safety and convenience.

TM

Shade never had it so cool

®

Insist on the Shade Systems advantages at pools and waterparks: TM

√ Support columns are located to the BACK of the shades, allowing unobstructed traffic flows and enhancing safety near water activities. √ Turn-N-SlideTM fastening system for quick and easy canopy removal. √ Colorful CoolNetTM shade fabrics provide up to 99% U.V. screening. √ All stainless steel hardware and cables for maximum corrosion resistance. √ Most comprehensive warranties in the industry.

1.800.609.6066 shadesystemsinc.com/pools-and-waterparks

contentsnovember 2020 volume 55 | number 11 | parksandrecreation.org

FEATURES

32 A New Approach to Parks and Recreation System Planning David Barth, Ph.D., CPRP, AICP

Whether you wish to transform your entire community, reposition your department or parks and recreation system as being more essential, or simply increase the quality of the services and programs you provide, this new approach to parks and recreation system planning can help you meet your goals.

38 Making the Most of Your Partnerships Nick Pitas, Ph.D., Andrew Mowen, Ph.D., and Samantha Powers, MS

The data gathered from a nationwide study of park and recreation agency-foundation relationships serves as the basis of recommendations these subject matter experts make for agencies hoping to get the most out of their partnerships.

2

Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

44 Proctor Creek Turns to Green Innovation

Aaron Lee Wiener, PLA, and Michele White, CAE, IOM

Learn how a successful multi-partnership is helping to create cleaner and more vibrant waterways, parks and communities for the city of Atlanta, Georgia, through the shared implementation and management of trash traps.

PHOTO COURTESY OF GROUNDWORK ATLANTA

Project team members install a trash collection device, called a Litter Gitter, in a park located in Atlanta, Georgia.

For everywhere the Sun adds sizzle, There is shade.

For sky blue days, Play days and school days, The too-hot-to-handle Are suddenly cool days.

Just step underneath.

Be refreshed.

Feel the Ahhhhhh.

Wherever there is sun, We have you covered.

©2020 Landscape Structures Inc. All rights reserved.

To learn more and inspire your outdoors, visit playlsi.com/shade.

contents november

columns 6

departments 10 We Are Parks and Recreation CPRP: Four Powerful Letters in the Park and Rec Field 10 Share Your Industry Expertise in Parks & Recreation Magazine 11 2020 NRPA Directors School — This Year’s Unique Experience for Students 12 GivingTuesday: Make a Difference on December 1! 12 Member Benefit: The Perfect Gift for Staff — Certification (at a Discount) 13

Perspectives Striving to Learn More and Be Better Kristine Stratton

8

Editor’s Letter Investing in Knowledge Vitisia Paynich

16 Finance for the Field Creating New Parks in Advance of Development John L. Crompton, Ph.D.

18 Advocacy Advancing Policies for Green Infrastructure in Parks Kyle Simpson

14 Research Falling Tax Revenues Affect Park and Recreation Budgets Kevin Roth

15 Park Pulse Make Parks and Recreation a Part of Your Family Tradition this Holiday

50 Operations The Benefit of Walking Tracks 50 Cory Corullo Making Public Restrooms Safe During COVID-19 51 Kip Earlywine

52 Park Essentials 55 Advertiser Index

20 Health and Wellness Research with Juvenile Justice Involved Youth as a Matter of Ethics Maria León, MS

22 Equity Mixed-Method Evaluations Paint a Park Equity Portrait Lauren Redmore

24 Conservation Park and Recreation Professionals Advancing Greener Parks Wende David

26 Law Review Citizen Activism Can Preserve LWCF-Funded Park Resources James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D.

56 Park Bench A Bike Park for Everyone Nate Grinzinger

The State Side of the LWCF has provided 50/50 matching grants to states and local governments for the acquisition and development of public outdoor recreation areas and facilities.

Cover image: © Denisismagilov | Dreamstime.com Photo Edited by Kim Mabon

Parks & Recreation is printed using soy ink on at least 10 percent post-consumer recycled paper, and is mailed in a wrap — only when required — that is plant based and certified compostable. If you are interested in helping us go even greener, email us at prmagazine@nrpa.org and ask to opt out of receiving the print magazine. Parks & Recreation is always available to read in an ezine format at ezine.nrpa.org.

4

Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

Page 26

B O B C A T. C O M / S O L U T I O N S

Source two leading brands of equipment from one knowledgeable government sales team. Request your proposal for products from Bobcat, Doosan Portable Power or both.

CONTACT OUR SALES TEAM: 1.800.965.4232, Opt. 2 Bobcat is a Doosan company. Doosan is a global leader in construction equipment, power and water solutions, engines, and engineering, proudly serving customers and communities for more than a century.

Bobcat ® and Doosan® are registered trademarks of Bobcat Company and Doosan Corp. respectively in the United States and various other countries around the world. ©2020 Doosan Bobcat North America. All rights reserved. | 1409

P E R S P E C T I V E S A M E S S A G E F R O M N R P A’ S L E A D E R S

Striving to Learn More and Be Better I was excited when our editor let me know that this month’s magazine issue will focus on research and evaluation. This is a foundation of who we are as park and recreation professionals — always striving to learn more and serve our communities better. In fact, when this November issue of Parks & Recreation magazine comes out, we will be looking back on our firstever virtual conference, NRPA Virtual, and, you guessed it, evaluating how we did against our goals. We will be asking and answering questions, such as “Did we reach as many people as we wanted to?” and “Did attendees feel they learned and grew through the experience?” and “Did our sponsors and exhibitors gain value from their investments?”

Research and evaluation are indispensable tools for understanding whether we are having a positive outcome and expanding our vision of what is possible.

Research has helped us to understand, more fully, the difference that our field can make in the health and resiliency of our communities. A prime example of this is the Commission on Social Determinants of Health, launched by the World Health Organization in 2005, to examine the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age. In fact, we covered this topic in our June issue (nrpa.org/AgentOfPublicHealth). The research findings of this commission revealed that parks and recreation can play a significant role in individual and community health, including influencing things like early childhood experiences and development, social support and community inclusivity, neighborhood conditions and physical environment, and recreational and leisure opportunities. Fast forward, and these social determinants of health are now an explicit part of our strategic plan. This type of research helps us recognize a fuller vision for how we make a fundamental difference in people’s lives.

Speaking of our strategic plan, we have research and evaluation components built into each of our strategic goals. Ensure Access for All is our goal to close what is currently a gap of 100 million people who do not have ready access to a park (tpl.org/10MinuteWalk). Over the next three years, we will evaluate the outcomes of our work to ultimately close that gap. Overall, we will 6

Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

be measuring our success against the following key questions: • How well have we supported park and recreation professionals in serving their community? (For example, usage of research and best practice resources, completed certifications, and online and in-person training) • What impact have we achieved on the ground? (For instance, community members who have increased access to the benefits of quality park and recreation opportunities) • How well have we succeeded in harnessing public will in support of parks and recreation? (For example, increases in investments in park and recreation agencies, including growth in per capita operating budgets and full-time park and recreation staffing, and the success of park and recreation ballot initiatives across the country) Harnessing public will, phrased in our strategic plan as Build a Movement, is our primary strategic goal. We must increase support for parks and recreation, so that we have the resources we need to close the gap in quality park access, build climate-ready parks, and increase the health and well-being of communities through our park and recreation programs. Essential to this movementbuilding is advancing a strategic research agenda that will help us tell a compelling story of the vital nature of parks and recreation. We want to demonstrate how the park and recreation field is an essential solution provider for our most pressing health, environmental and social issues.

Research and evaluation are integral tools for our work at NRPA and for your work in your communities. Earlier this year, we created an evaluation resource hub (nrpa.org/EvaluationResourceHub) on the NRPA website with tools to help you in your evaluation efforts. We look forward to building out these tools over time and to helping you get the most out of them. As we continue, know that we will be striving to learn more and be better with you.

KRISTINE STR AT TON President and CEO

2377 Belmont Ridge Rd. | Ashburn, VA 20148 2 703.858.0784 | nrpa.org

NRPA’S MISSION: To advance parks, recreation and environmental conservation efforts that enhance the quality of life for all people.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Chair of the Board of Directors Michael P. Kelly Chicago Park District Chicago, Illinois

Past Chair Jack Kardys

J. Kardys Strategies Miami, Florida

Treasurer Xavier D. Urrutia

Alamo Colleges District San Antonio, Texas

Secretary Nonet T. Sykes

Atlanta Beltline, Inc. Atlanta, Georgia

At Large Carolyn McKnight-Fredd, CPRP

Eagle Methods Management Consulting Dallas, Texas

At Large Mike Abbaté, FASLA, LEED AP Abbaté Designs Portland, Oregon

President and CEO Kristine Stratton, Ex Officio

National Recreation and Park Association Ashburn, Virginia

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Michael Abbaté, FASLA, LEED AP Abbaté Designs Portland, Oregon

Kathy Abbott

Boston Harbor Now Boston, Massachusetts

Karen Bates Kress Park Advocate Emigrant, Montana

Susie Kuruvilla Gurnee Park District Gurnee, Illinois

Joanna Lombard University of Miami School of Architecture; Miller School of Medicine Department of Public Health Sciences Miami, Florida

Carolyn McKnight-Fredd, CPRP Eagle Methods Management Consulting Dallas, Texas

Joshua Medeiros, Ed.D., CPRP, AFO City of Bristol Parks & Recreation Bristol, Connecticut

Ian Proud PlayPower Lewisburg, Pennsylvania Atlanta Beltline, Inc. Atlanta, Georgia

Xavier D. Urrutia Alamo Colleges District San Antonio, Texas

Lakita Watson, CPRP Richland County Recreation Commission Columbia, South Carolina

Greg A. Weitzel, M.S., CPRP City of Las Vegas Parks and Recreation Las Vegas, Nevada

Philip Wu, M.D.

Jesús Aguirre, CPRE Kong Chang

LIFE TRUSTEES Beverly D. Chrisman

City of Saint Paul Parks and Recreation Saint Paul, Minnesota

Lexington, South Carolina

Jose Felix Diaz

Fort Mill, South Carolina

James H. Evans

Victor Dover

Rosemary Hall Evans

Angelou Ezeilo

Sugar Hill, New Hampshire

Earl T. Groves Gastonia, North Carolina

Richard Gulley

Richmond, Virginia

Charles E. Hartsoe, Ph.D.

Balboa Park Conservancy San Diego, California

Harry G. Haskell, Jr.

Monica Hobbs Vinluan

Kathryn A. Porter

Jack Kardys

J. Kardys Strategies Miami, Florida

Michael P. Kelly

Chicago Park District Chicago, Illinois

Park and recreation professionals everywhere have stepped up to serve their communities in unprecedented ways during the COVID-19 pandemic. NRPA is here to support you and provide the most up-to-date resources related to the COVID-19 pandemic. In our dedicated resource center you can find: •

Printable infographics on how to use parks safely

•

Continually updated guidance for parks and recreation

•

Public policy updates and action alerts around key legislation affecting the field

•

Examples of how park and recreation agencies are responding to the pandemic

•

Guidance for managing a positive case of COVID-19

New York, New York

Greening Youth Foundation Atlanta, Georgia

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Ashburn, Virginia

for Serving Your Communities

Anne S. Close

Ballard Partners Miami, Florida

Dover, Kohl & Partners Town Planning South Miami, Florida

YOU are a HERO - Thank You

Nonet T. Sykes

(Retired) Kaiser Permanente Northwest Region Portland, Oregon

Seattle Parks and Recreation Seattle, Washington

COVID-19: RESOURCES FOR PARKS AND RECREATION

Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania Mendham, New Jersey

Perry J. Segura New Iberia, Louisiana

R. Dean Tice

Find all these resources at: nrpa.org/Coronavirus

Round Hill, Virginia

Eugene A. Young, CPRP Baton Rouge, Louisiana

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

7

EDITOR’S LET TER

Investing in Knowledge This ongoing pandemic undoubtedly brings to light the inequities that long existed before the novel coronavirus. It also places greater importance on research and evaluation, which offers a roadmap for park and recreation agencies — especially as they develop their master plans. Perhaps NRPA’s Lauren Redmore sums it up best in the Equity column, “Mixed-Method Evaluations Paint a Park Equity Portrait,” on page 22 — in which she contends, “Evaluation provides park and recreation agencies with a powerful set of tools to understand how they serve members of their community, where they fall short, and how they can fill service gaps that have left some community members behind.” The key, however, is not to depend solely on one type of evaluation, like customer surveys, but to rely on a variety of data-gathering methods that provides a more complete picture that ultimately allows park and recreation leaders to redistribute resources and services in a fair and equitable manner.

In this month’s cover story, “A New Approach to Parks and Recreation System Planning,” on page 32, author David Barth discusses how today’s most pressing issues — such as a global health crisis, wildfires and urbanization — are influencing the way park and recreation professionals perceive the field at large and how they now approach system planning. “This broader perspective encourages park and recreation agencies to transcend their silos — and leverage their resources — to plan and collaborate with other public and private agencies to meet as many of the community’s needs as possible,” Barth writes.

Collaboration and partnerships are pivotal to a park and recreation agency’s supplemental revenue, as pointed out in the feature article, “Making the Most of Your Partnerships,” on page 38.

Contributors Nick Pitas, Andrew Mowen and Samantha Powers examine the agency-foundation relationship and offer ways to effectively leverage the benefits of these alliances. In addition, they share data from a nationwide survey they conducted, in partnership with NRPA, on agencyfoundation relationships. Survey participants included leaders from park and recreation agencies and nonprofit foundations. “Overall, about 40 percent of agency leaders report that their agency benefits from the support of a park-specific foundation,” according to their findings.

The city of Atlanta, Georgia, knows all too well the benefits of forging partnerships, especially when it comes to finding solutions to its plastic-pollution dilemma, which is the focus of the feature story, “Proctor Creek Turns to Green Innovation,” on page 44. Contributors Aaron Lee Wiener and NRPA’s Michele White provide an in-depth look at why Atlanta’s Parks and Recreation Department, Department of Watershed Management and its partners have been testing trash traps, installed within Atlanta’s parks, to improve “water quality and stream habitat by removing the waste that heavily impacts these urban waterways.” The Proctor Creek case study is a prime example of how other cities across the United States can integrate trash trap technology into innovative workforces to mitigate pollution in waterways.

We hope that sharing people’s stories in this issue and in future issues will assist you with your own research and planning as you navigate through the rest of the year. After all, “an investment in knowledge pays the best interest.” — Benjamin Franklin

VITISIA “VI” PAYNICH Executive Editor Print and Online Content 8

Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

PRESIDENT AND CEO Kristine Stratton VICE PRESIDENT OF COMMUNICATIONS AND CHIEF MARKETING OFFICER Gina Mullins-Cohen gcohen@nrpa.org EXECUTIVE EDITOR, PRINT AND ONLINE CONTENT Vitisia Paynich vpaynich@nrpa.org ASSOCIATE EDITOR Lindsay Hogeboom lhogeboom@nrpa.org WEB EDITOR Jennifer Fulcher-Nguyen jnguyen@nrpa.org PUBLICATION DESIGN Kim Mabon/Creative By Design CreativeByDesign.net SENIOR CORPORATE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER Michelle Dellner 949.248.1057 mdellner@nrpa.org DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR Meghan Fredriksen 703.858.2190 mfredriksen@nrpa.org PHOTOGRAPHY Dreamstime.com or NRPA (unless otherwise noted) MAGAZINE ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS Anthony-Paul Diaz, Chair Michael Abbaté, FASLA Neelay Bhatt Ryan Eaker Beau Fieldsend Kathleen Gibi Paul Gilbert, CPRP Tim Herd, CPRE Brian Johnson, CPSI Denise Johnson-Caldwell Roslyn Johnson, CPRP Michele Lemons Sam Mendelsohn Maria Nardi Lisa Paradis, CPRP Paula Sliefert Shonnda Smith, CPRP, AFO Anne-Marie Spencer Stephen Springs

WE ARE PARKS AND RECREATION CPRP: Four Powerful Letters in the Park and Rec Field

By Brooke Adams, CPRP

PHOTO COURTESY OF BROOKE ADAMS, CPRP

M

Brooke Adams, CPRP

y name is Brooke Adams, CPRP. I am an administrative assistant and a Certified Park and Recreation Professional — CPRP. Those four letters mean the world to me.

Starting at the age of three, I worked for my dad’s business. He is an artist and our family traveled all over the country working every car show, air show, horse show, dog show and state fair you could imagine. Growing up in the family business, I had the unique experience of being involved with customer service and administrative work almost my entire life. Due to the traveling nature of the business, my siblings and I were homeschooled. As traveling homeschoolers, parks were a frequent outlet for us, and recreation programming provided much-needed socialization with our peers.

I always loved participating in park programming and was thrilled to be able to spend my high school years working as a lifeguard for my hometown parks and recreation department. When the opportunity presented itself to pair my passion for customer service and administrative work with the park and recreation profession, I knew I had found my calling.

I had the opportunity to attend my first NRPA Annual Conference in 2018. My department was named a finalist for the Gold Medal Award, and as a part of my department’s Gold Medal Application Committee, I was able to attend. Engaging with other professionals from across the country and attending the highcaliber sessions further fueled my passion for my work. I knew at that point that I wanted to do something to increase my knowledge of the field, as well as make myself a more valuable asset to my department. I was aware of the CPRP certification and its importance, but I was unsure about my eligibility. I am a front-line staff member. As an administrative assistant, I am the person who ensures that my park and recreation

10 Parks & Recreation

department runs efficiently and effectively on a daily basis. Due to my position and lack of a field-related degree, I felt unqualified and was quite nervous to apply. However, after researching the process and receiving encouragement from my director, I was excited to learn that I met the minimum requirements for the certification based on my years of experience in the field and my job responsibilities. I then received the notification that I had been approved to move forward with the exam.

The process of studying for the exam was arduous yet exhilarating.

In each section I was able to learn something new and recall a situation in which I could apply the knowledge. I also was able to build my confidence in my existing knowledge,

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

as there were many things I already knew. Wanting to take the exam as soon as possible, I scheduled it for a date just six weeks after I received the study materials. I spent every free moment reading, studying and absorbing as much information as humanly possible. The day of the exam, I pictured the woman at the testing center letting me know as gently as possible that I had failed.

Though I had spent countless hours preparing, the test itself seemed difficult in the moment and I felt wholly unprepared; but I passed! Reflecting on the experience, I believe that it would have been difficult to pass the test without my baseline knowledge of the industry.

CPRP — those four small letters mean the world to me. I didn’t hesitate to add them to my signature line, and I have to stop myself from pointing them out to anyone who passes by. The application, studying and even the test-taking portion of the whole CPRP experience gave me a confidence boost.

I would encourage anyone to look at the criteria and take the time to pursue the certification. It has elevated my position, and it elevates the standards for front-line staff in our department as a whole.

My name is Brooke Adams, CPRP. Please don’t forget those four letters after my name.

Brooke Adams, CPRP, is Administrative Assistant at Waukesha (Wisconsin) Parks, Recreation and Forestry (badams@ waukesha-wi.gov).

Share Your Industry Expertise in Parks & Recreation Magazine

T

he editors of Parks & Recreation magazine are gearing up for 2021, and we want to extend an invitation to you, our parks and recreation community, to submit your ideas for case studies, best practices and success stories. Do you have a good case study or park and recreation success story you want to share with our members? Are there key trends that merit a closer look? Do you have expansive field expertise and insight on health and wellness, equity or conservation that you want to impart on our readers? If so, we want to hear from you!

Before submitting an editorial inquiry, please familiarize yourself with the magazine by perusing through a few recent issues on ezine.nrpa.org or parks andrecreation.org. If you are interested in writing for Parks & Recreation, please review our editorial guidelines at nrpa.org/ EditorialGuidelines.

The editors of Parks & Recreation magazine welcome you to submit your ideas.

Enjoy the...andOutdoors Keep It Clean

TM

Commercial quality receptacles designed for outdoor use.

Choose the size, shape, material, lid and color to fit your landscape.

Collect trash, recyclables, smoking ash, even pet waste.

RJ Thomas Mfg. Co., Inc • Cherokee, Iowa 800-762-5002 • pilotrock@rjthomas.com • pilotrock.com

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

11

W E A R E P A R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N

2020 NRPA Directors School – This Year’s Unique Experience for Students

T

his past summer, NRPA conducted the 14th year of the NRPA Directors School. However, this time, it was presented online due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The NRPA Directors School is a premier, exclusive twoyear professional development opportunity that prepares new and potential park and recreation directors to be effective leaders.

This pinnacle school offers top-tier learning and a capstone experience for the park and recreation professional’s journey.

Seventy-five emerging leaders attended this year’s NRPA Directors School, with 20 students receiving scholarships thanks to the generosity of The Toro Foundation. On September 1, 34 students graduated, leaving with the knowledge

and confidence to face emerging challenges, improve operations and maximize positive impacts on their communities.

Thanks to a knowledgeable and committed team of instructors (who are park and recreation leaders and industry thought leaders), students focused on topics, such as leadership and development, budget and finance, politics, strategy and communications. Students participated in simultaneous and non-simultaneous course facilitations that included breakout groups, polling activities and lively chat discussions. Instructors also were available for office hours throughout the two-and-a-half weeks to provide additional assistance and resources.

Students completed case study projects in groups that encouraged

GivingTuesday: Make a Difference on December 1!

I

n 2012, GivingTuesday (giving tuesday.org) was conceived with one succinct goal: to establish a day that inspires people to do good. Fast forward eight years and this singular goal has evolved into a global movement that has made a difference in the lives of millions of people. Each year, GivingTuesday occurs the Tuesday after Thanksgiving, with this year’s event taking place on December 1.

As park and recreation professionals, you have the power to

12

Parks & Recreation

build strong, vibrant and resilient communities by supporting NRPA and your park and recreation colleagues who make their communities better places to live, work and play. Following are a few ways that you can support NRPA and our profession on GivingTuesday: Make a one-time contribution.

Contributions of cash or securities help us advance health and wellbeing and climate-ready parks and put equity at the center of parks and recreation.

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

collaboration while proposing reallife solutions to issues facing the park and recreation field today. Year One students proposed business plans to address issues, such as natural disasters, legal concerns, marketing and public relations, and strategic planning. Year Two students presented best practices that agencies can use to address issues, including equity, postCOVID-19 remote work environments, facility maintenance, social isolation of older adults and underrepresentation of teens.

The NRPA Directors School is typically offered in August each year, in person, at the Hyatt Lodge in Oak Brook, Illinois. If you are ready to advance your leadership and elevate your park and recreation agency, mark your calendar for August 15 to 19 for the 2021 NRPA Directors School.

Become a monthly supporter.

Make a monthly gift to NRPA via electronic payment using a credit or debit card.

Make a gift of appreciated stock. Gifting appreciated stock is a great way to reduce or eliminate tax obligations and support the cause of parks and recreation. To make a gift of stock, contact Nury Márquez at 703.858.2163 or at nmarquez@nrpa.org.

Match employees’ contributions. Many employers will match their employees’ contributions to NRPA. Inquire if your company has a matching gift program and how you can access the match.

Member Benefit: The Perfect Gift for Staff – Certification (at a Discount)

T

his holiday season, give your staff the gift of advancing their career and becoming a certified professional. With NRPA group certification discount packages, you can provide your employees with the opportunity to earn the Certified Park and Recreation Professional (CPRP) and/or the Certified Park and Recreation Executive (CPRE) certifications at a discounted rate.

By taking advantage of the group certification discount packages, you are showing your employees that you value them and your agency’s overall success. Aside from the monetary value your agency will receive, the package discount encourages your team to apply, study and test together for the certification. Study materials, such as the CPRP Study Guide, CPRP Practice Exam and Management of Park and Recreation Agencies text, also are included at a discounted rate.

Group Certification Discount Packages: • Premier Agency Package – NRPA’s Premier members can now save up to $95 on applications by applying for a group discount • Agency Package – Allows for three or more individuals to apply for a group discount regardless of membership status with NRPA (additional fees may apply) • University Package – Your university’s faculty, staff and students may apply for group discounts on application fees and study materials through NRPA. For more information and to

take advantage of this NRPA Member Benefit, please visit:

nrpa.org/Certification/CPRP/ How-To-Apply.

Patent Pending

Patent Pending

Connecting since 1962.

I N T R O D U C I N G T H E S T E L L A O F S U N N E™ C O L L E C T I O N .

For over 58 years, Victor Stanley has designed, engineered and manufactured timeless site furnishings so you can bring communities to life. Our new Stella of Sunne collection features a classic, minimalist look inspired by Scandinavian design aesthetics. Its eased edges and clean lines transform any environment into a comfortable and inviting space. ™

V ICTORSTA N L EY.COM

ParksandRec_5 x 7.5_REN_STEEL.indd 1

10/7/20 2:18 PM

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

13

RESEARCH Falling Tax Revenues Affect Park and Recreation Budgets

By Kevin Roth

S

eventeen and one-tenth percent: that is how much state and local tax revenues plummeted this spring in the face of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and the resulting recession. In September, the U.S. Census Bureau released its Quarterly Summary of State and Local Tax Revenue (tinyurl.com/y67ewhn5) data for the second quarter of 2020, and the picture it painted was not pretty.

State and local governments’ tax revenues totaled $335.1 billion between April and June of this year, down 17.1 percent from $404 billion collected during quarter one. These are “seasonally adjusted” estimates, in which the Census Bureau controls for the seasonal variations one sees typically with tax revenues during different times of the year (e.g., tax payment deadlines and differing consumer spending patterns).

State and local tax revenues also were off 20.9 percent from the same quarter a year earlier, the largest yearto-year percentage decline in state and local government revenues going back to at least 1993. By comparison, tax revenues had been growing, on average, 4.5 percent year-to-year since 2012. Further, the largest yearto-year decline from the 2007 to 2009 Great Recession was a 16.7 percent drop in 2011, two years after the U.S. economy had resumed growing. The most significant tax drop resulting from the 2001 recession was a relatively modest 2.3 percent.

In 2020, quarter two revenues fell across every significant tax category, albeit at vastly different rates. Consumer spending dropped sharply, the result of both rising unemployment and governmentmandated shutdowns. As a result,

14

Parks & Recreation

sales tax revenues slumped 16.2 percent during the quarter. Property tax collections held relatively stable this past spring, slipping 2.2 percent. In quarter two, individual and corporate income tax revenues were down 37.2 percent and 47.3 percent, respectively, from the same three months in 2019.

Some of the state and local government tax revenue decline was due to the delay of this year’s income tax filing deadline from April 15 to July 15. Some of the “lost” income tax revenue will simply reappear in the quarter three tax data.

But with millions of people who have lost their jobs, been furloughed and/or suffered a pay cut, income tax revenues will remain challenging for some time. Similarly, falling business income and companies going out of business will suppress corporate income tax revenues.

Some of these tax revenues likely will recover relatively quickly (e.g., some sales tax categories). Others perhaps have not yet reached their lows for this recession (e.g., property tax revenues). Further, each location’s situation is unique, each experiencing varying impacts from the public health crisis and recession and having different tax structures.

Regardless of this variability, the

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

COVID-19 pandemic and resulting recession had a sudden, sharp detrimental impact on state and local government tax revenues. There is little evidence that quarter two represents the “bottom” and that tax revenues will quickly rebound to pre-pandemic levels overnight. Short of assistance for state and local governments from Washington, D.C., state and local budgets will remain uncertain over the coming years.

Government leaders historically have cut park and recreation budgets to balance their budgets. This pattern repeated itself early in this crisis, with two-thirds of local park and recreation leaders reporting in late June (nrpa.org/ParksSnapshot June24) that they had slashed their current year operating budgets, with the typical cut between 10 percent and 19 percent. With state and local tax revenues unlikely to recover quickly, park and recreation agencies likely will be on the defensive as they work to protect their budgets.

The public health emergency demonstrated once again how parks and recreation are an essential government service. The 2020 NRPA Engagement with Parks Report (nrpa.org/Engagement) finds that 82 percent of U.S. adults agree with this sentiment. With so much uncertainty, it has never been more critical for our professionals to make the case for the essential nature of parks and recreation.

Kevin Roth is Vice President of Research, Evaluation and Technology at NRPA (kroth@nrpa.org).

NRPA PARK PULSE

Make Parks and Recreation a Part of Your Family Tradition this Holiday

3 in 4 U.S. adults say it’s important for people to have access to outdoor amenities during fall and winter to continue or create new family traditions.

Local park and recreation professionals and their agencies provide a variety of amenities where families can gather, including: Parks

Picnic areas

Campgrounds

Parents (86%), Gen Xers (85%) and millennials (83%) are most likely to say access to outdoor amenities during the cooler season is important.

Each month, through a poll of 1,000 U.S. residents focused on park and recreation issues, NRPA Park Pulse helps tell the park and recreation story. Questions span from the serious to the more lighthearted. The survey was conducted by Wakefield Research (www.wakefieldresearch.com).

Visit nrpa.org/ParkPulse for more information.

Pavilions

FINANCE FOR THE FIELD Creating New Parks in Advance of Development Forward-thinking measures mean inserting a reimbursement clause in parkland dedication ordinances

By John L. Crompton, Ph.D.

C

leveland Metroparks’ “Emerald Necklace” is one of the finest regional park systems in the United States. Its excellence is primarily attributable to the determination and vision of William Stinchcomb, who was hired by the Cleveland Parks Board in 1915 as its first engineer of parks, and presided over the system for 40 years until 1957. At the time of his hiring, Cleveland was the sixth largest U.S. city. However, in 1920, the park district held the title to only 109 acres of land that had been donated to it.

Soon after his appointment, Stinchcomb choreographed authorization through the state legislature for the system to levy a 1mill tax for capital acquisition. He jus-

tified the levy by arguing, “Land is rising in value, so unless we buy it now, it will cost the taxpayers almost double in a few years. The $200,000 we can get from the levy

Reimbursement clauses require developers to provide land or a fee-in-lieu of dedicating land, exclusively for the acquisition and development of parks.

16

Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

will enable us to buy. Then the adjacent land will rise [in value] and this will be reflected in the tax duplicate and hence yield more taxes.

Thus, in a sort of circle, the improvement pays for itself.”

He focused his efforts on assembling parkland, believing it was critical and that park development could come later. By 1930, he had acquired 9,000 acres in nine large reservations. This approach was adopted by several of the early park systems and its

instigators are widely praised for their vision today.

Contemporary Application In contemporary times, many would applaud the wisdom of such a long-term perspective by elected officials, but such visionary actions are rare. They require those of us who are current office holders to support investment of tax funds on projects that will not come to fruition for a decade or more in the future. Hence, while current elected officials incur the political cost of raising taxes, the benefits accrue for future officials — an unappealing scenario to most of us.

This political conundrum can be resolved by including a reimbursement clause in park dedication and/or impact fee ordinances.

These ordinances require developers to provide land or a fee-in-lieu of dedicating land, exclusively for the acquisition and development of parks. Many communities have passed such ordinances, because they embrace the principle that parks should be financed by new homes that have created the demand for new parks.

Most of the time, communities opt to take fees-in-lieu of land, because the amount of land required to be dedicated is too small for practical use as a park. When a threshold amount of revenue from these fees has accrued, a community then seeks to buy land for a park. Unfortunately, by the time this threshold is achieved, it has frequently become too expensive and exceeds the revenues available, because land prices have risen as intensity of development in the area has increased.

To avoid this situation, a reimbursement clause could be insert

ed into an ordinance. A typical clause states, “If the city acquires parkland in a zone in which a feein-lieu is paid, the fee may be used to reimburse the city the costs of the park’s acquisition and development.” This enables a city to buy parkland ahead of development by using certificates of obligation or general obligation bonds for which it will be subsequently reimbursed from the fees received from future development. It apportions the cost of providing park facilities for new development before it is needed to each new development in proportion to its impact on the park.

Negotiations with landowners during times when activity in the real estate market is slow, when a bargain sale becomes available, or when the land is beyond the community’s existing developed areas may result in good park and recreational land being purchased at a relatively low price.

It also will be easier to acquire substantial tracts of (say) 50 to 300 acres during this time, rather than after development reaches these outlying areas. While these acquisitions provide more land than the community currently needs, they provide additional capacity needed to accommodate new growth.

Adopting this approach is likely to be supported by developers, because the existence of parks makes new developments more attractive to homeowners. The public also is more likely to support a park bond issue if they are aware the increase in taxes to pay the annual debt charges is likely to be small because the dedication fees will contribute to paying these charges. The following example illustrates this principle: A fast-growing city in Texas issued

Certificates of Obligation to purchase two neighborhood park sites of 12 to 15 acres in advance of development. At $20,000 an acre, this involved a commitment of $240,000 to $300,000 per park. These purchases were made seven years in advance of development. This time frame was adopted because it had long been used successfully by the school district in its planning. The certificates were repaid over time by (1) the cash-inlieu payments that the dedication ordinance required developers to contribute for neighborhood parks, and (2) 20 percent of the property taxes the city obtained from residences in close proximity to these parks. The 20 percent proportion was used because it was the estimated premium created by the presence of the parks.

Adopting this approach is likely to be supported by developers, because the existence of parks makes new developments more attractive to homeowners.

Because parkland dedication ordinances are a component of a city’s subdivision regulations, these ordinances usually are the purview of the planning department. However, they are in the operational sphere of park departments. This suggests that park boards and directors should take a proactive role in making city managers and elected officials aware of the potential of using this reimbursement clause approach.

John L. Crompton, Ph.D., is a University Distinguished Professor, Regents Professor and Presidential Professor for Teaching Excellence in the Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences at Texas A&M University and an elected Councilmember for the City of College Station (jcrompton@tamu.edu).

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

17

Advancing Policies for Green Infrastructure in Parks

NRPA’s Greener Parks for Health resources offer all the tools P&R professionals need to communicate about, advocate for and institutionalize green infrastructure in parks.

By Kyle Simpson

T

he planning, designing and implementation of green infrastructure in individual parks and park systems can further enhance the quality of life for surrounding communities through increased health, environmental, social and economic benefits. In order to better support the park and recreation profession in advocating for and receiving necessary investments, NRPA has identified green infrastructure and how it can be supported and implemented in local parks as a top legislative priority.

NRPA has become a leading voice on Capitol Hill in advocating for parks as optimal spaces for equitable green infrastructure development.

18

Parks & Recreation

Through our creation of a green infrastructure policy working group — which gathers national green infrastructure leaders to strengthen the case for green infrastructure at the federal level — NRPA has become a leading voice on Capitol Hill in advocating for parks as optimal spaces for equitable green infrastructure development. To build on this leadership and create a federal policy agenda for advancing green infrastructure in parks

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

as a solution to climate change and health inequities, NRPA has developed the Greener Parks for Health (nrpa.org/Greener ParksForHealth) initiative.

In partnership with the Willamette Partnership, NRPA conducted extensive research, including a policy scan at the federal, state and local levels, and an in-depth assessment of the park and recreation field, including cross-sector workshops and key informant interviews, to better understand the barriers and opportunities to advance green infrastructure in parks.

This informed the recently released Greener Parks for Health suite of resources, which offers all the tools and solutions park and recreation professionals need to communicate about, advocate for and institution-

PHOTO COURTESY OF ROGER FOLEY

ADVOCACY

why they should support green infrastructure, we have messaging tools and tailored actions for key audiences that can help you gain support before exploring shifts in policies to better allow for these projects. You can find these resources at nrpa.org/ GreenerParksForHealth.

While these strategies for implementing green infrastructure won’t happen overnight, continuing the conversation with policymakers on all levels will continue to make the case that green infrastructure is vital, especially as disparities in our nation’s political and social systems continue to be underscored, the negative effects of climate change continue to increase, and demand for more equitable park access grows.

A constructed wetland built in a community park in a formerly industrialized area of Chattanooga, Tennessee, collects and cleans runoff before it flows into the Tennessee River.

alize green infrastructure in parks to improve community well-being, especially in communities facing environmental, health, economic and social injustices.

In addition, it highlights unique policy areas at the federal, state and local levels that can be used or explored to support these projects. As a national organization representing park and recreation professionals on Capitol Hill, it is our goal to act on the federal policy recommendations laid out in the Greener Parks for Health Policy Action Framework.

During this past summer, we shared these findings with Congress to spark interest and illustrate the ways that parks are vital to keeping our communities healthy.

While Congress has done an exceptional job of funding green infrastructure in the past through things like the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, we challenged them to think creatively about other policy areas to provide resources for green infrastructure, like using Medicare financing to implement green infrastructure projects in parks that lead to positive health outcomes for local communities. This innovative thinking was highly praised, and something that NRPA will continue exploring over the next three years.

The federal policy recommendations are just a small portion of the Greener Parks for Health resources; they specifically highlight policy recommendations that your state and local community can consider to improve access to green infrastructure, and I would encourage you to consider them for your community.

If you feel your local officials still need to hear about

Editor’s Note: This column has been adapted from its original version posted to NRPA’s Open Space Blog (nrpa.org/Blog). To read the full text, visit nrpa.org/Green InfrastructurePolicies.

Kyle Simpson is NRPA’s Senior Government Affairs Manager 20_2022_Parks n Rec_NOV Mod: September 17, 2020 3:13 PM (ksimpson@nrpa.org).

Print: 10/06/20 1:40:53 PM page 1 v7

1,100 SHELVING CHOICES IN STOCK

π

ORDER BY 6 PM FOR SAME DAY SHIPPING

COMPLETE CATALOG

1-800-295-5510

uline.com

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

19

PHOTOS COURTESY OF TEXAS JUVENILE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

HEALTH & WELLNESS

Conducting ethical research with human beings requires a shift from researchers being recognized as the sole experts to researchers working with others in the community and sharing the decision-making power.

Research with Juvenile Justice Involved Youth as a Matter of Ethics

By Maria León, MS

Y

ears ago, I was working with a recreation department in a juvenile justice facility and on my last day, one of the staff said, “I’m so glad it was you, ‘cause we were really worried that it was going to be somebody who didn’t get it.”

This sentiment is not unfamiliar to those who have been told someone from a college or university was going to come into their space

and do a project of some sort.

Many of us feel that twinge when we hear that an outsider is coming in. However, that passing statement

The young people park and recreation professionals try to help often are the ones with the greatest insight to inform research questions and theories.

20 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

has stayed with me in the best of ways. It has shaped my approach to working with communities of all types — especially in my work in the juvenile justice system.

The September issue of Parks & Recreation focused on equity, highlighting challenges and disparities that exist in the world of parks and recreation that have become readily apparent in light of a pandemic and nationwide Black Lives Matter protests. For researchers and those who use research, these moments remind us to examine how and why we conduct research.

Valuing the Voices of Youth Many young people, especially those involved in the juvenile justice system, have been through

multiple events where consequential decisions were made about their lives, usually without their input.

Some people may argue that these youth have given up their right to an opinion or that they do not know what is best. However, those statements can only get us so far, and at a certain point they cease to be helpful in the efforts to improve outcomes for youth in the juvenile justice system and communities overall. When a young person is asked, “What do you think would help you be successful?” they usually articulate specific needs and provide nuanced ideas for solutions.

The reality is that the young people park and recreation professionals often try to help are the ones with the greatest insight to inform research questions and theories. In order to conduct meaningful research, the facility administrators, staff and youth are most valuable as co-researchers. This requires listening to the challenges young people say are the biggest hurdles they face in returning back home rather than telling them what their problems are. In youth development, we often use the phrase “youth are assets, not problems to be solved.” This requires that we in the field hold the dignity of youth in the highest regard. Youth, even in a jail cell, are people first — they are not test subjects or a petri dish at our disposal — even if they are, quite literally, a captive audience. We must respect their agency and ability to choose whether or not to participate in a research study, even if we believe it is for their benefit. Human research with the goal of improving lives should not diminish people in the process.

The task of improving the well-being and quality of life of communities necessitates that we use ethical research practices. Ultimately, research informed by the people who are most directly impacted will have greater utility and meaning for communities. Conducting ethical research with human beings requires a shift from researchers being recognized as the sole experts to a researchers working with others in the community and sharing the decision-making power.

Oftentimes, as researchers, the work we do with youth has far more utility for folks on the ground than the work we perform in an ivory tower. For researchers with a desire to play a part in creating solutions, we must listen to and work with, not against, those who are in the communities we wish to serve. We are on the same team, working to create healthier, happier communities for everyone.

Maria León, MS, is a Doctoral Candidate and Graduate Research Assistant in Youth Development at Texas A&M University, Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences (maria_leon@tamu.edu).

We build to ORDER to meet your CUSTOM needs!

Available in 16 standard colors!

C.

D.

440 SM

B.

with optional: A. Pet Fountain B. Jug Filler C. Hand Wash D. Recessed Hose Bibb with Locking Cover

A.

See all available options online!

Most Dependable Fountains, Inc.™ 901-867-0039

Researchers who strive to create solutions must listen to and work with those in the communities they wish to serve.

www.mostdependable.com

qPage_440.Cat_NRPA.indd 12:20:07 PM P A R K1 S A N D R E C R E A T I O N . O R G | N O V E M B E R 2 07/14/2020 2 0 | Parks & Recreation

21

EQUITY

While evaluation requires a basic understanding of the principles of study design, sampling and analysis, it also is an art with skills gained through practice employing a suite of complementary mixed methods.

Mixed-Method Evaluations Paint a Park Equity Portrait

By Lauren Redmore

I

n recent months, the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has laid bare the impact from decades of disinvestment in communities of color and low-income communities. Environmental justice researchers and advocates have long emphasized the need for equitable distribution of quality parks and programming to reduce adverse health effects and improve quality of life throughout our society. For many others, it took the collision of a global pandemic with the Black Lives Matter movement to truly understand why.

Evaluation provides park and recreation agencies with a powerful set of tools to understand how they serve members of their community, where they fall short, and how they can fill service gaps that have left some community members behind. For agencies without dedicated staff on hand to assist with program evaluation, it may be tempting to begin and end program evaluation with cus-

22 Parks & Recreation

tomer service surveys conducted at program events and in community centers. Extrapolating results to infer about the needs of the wider community, in this case, is problematic when you consider groups that may not be represented in the survey sample.

When agencies draw conclusions about the wider community based on surveys conducted at agency events, results may be biased.

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

Bias can unintentionally justify current levels of service and may exacerbate community inequities.

In other words, an agency may not be asking the right questions of the right people, and this has consequences for the trustworthiness of the evaluation.

Relying on a single method for evaluation — such as customer satisfaction surveys — limits the types of questions agencies can ask, the ways that residents can express themselves, and the individuals who are included in the evaluation in the first place. To mitigate this threat, dedicated evaluators often work with complementary types of data, including qualitative, quantitative and spatial, which is frequently elicited through the use of mixed methods.

Qualitative vs.

Quantitative Data Qualitative data is subjective information conveyed through words and phrases. It can be gathered through surveys with questions that ask anything, such as someone’s preferences or level of satisfaction. When qualitative data is acquired through interviews, agencies can explore questions of “how” and “why” with key stakeholders, including those who do not participate in programming.

Qualitative data gathered through interviews also is useful to guide the elaboration of valid survey instruments by ensuring that agencies ask relevant questions and capture important demographic information.

In contrast, quantitative data is information that comprises objective numbers and characteristics that can be measured. For example, evaluators might want to find out how many days a week someone uses a park, or how much more someone would be willing to pay in taxes for additional services. Other types of data include spatial and temporal information, which can tell agencies how resources or service gaps are distributed across space and time.

By building a mixed-method evaluation that relies on a combination of data types, evaluators also can ensure that they sample from, or speak with, many different stakeholders across the community. This includes people whose responses fall outside of the normal range — such as responses that are discounted as “outliers” that may be excluded from an analysis focused on averages. The truth is that evaluators can learn

just as much from a handful of people who are considered outliers — often the most vulnerable or the most resilient members of a community — as they can from those who tell us what is happening on average.

The Art and Science of Equity Evaluation for equity is as much art as it is science. While evaluation requires a basic understanding of the principles of study design, sampling and analysis, it also is an art with skills gained through practice employing a suite of complementary mixed methods.

It may help to imagine that each method used in an evaluation is a color of paint on a canvas. An

Evaluation provides agencies with a powerful set of tools to understand how they serve members of their community, where they fall short and how they can fill service gaps.

artist who paints with many colors creates a more realistic image.

It is impossible to paint an image that replicates real life, but when the goal is to evaluate for equity, agencies should aim to paint an accurate and colorful picture of what is happening in their community. Agencies that succeed not only elevate the quality of life of all community members, but also are better able to justify to constituents and decision-makers alike the value they bring to their communities.

Lauren Redmore, Ph.D., is NRPA’s Evaluation Manager (lredmore@nrpa.org).

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

23

PHOTO COURTESY OF GAVIN WHITE/PITTSBURGH PARKS CONSERVANCY

CONSERVATION

Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy’s Great Urban Parks Campaign project at McKinley Park in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Park and Recreation Professionals Advancing Greener Parks

By Wende David

N

RPA envisions a future where greener parks, or those that incorporate multi-benefit green infrastructure elements, are viewed as essential community infrastructure that provides environmental, health, economic and social benefits to build community resilience and advance community health and well-being. As the disparities in the nation’s political and social systems continue to be underscored, demand for park access grows and climate change worsens, there is significant momentum among the park and recreation profession to work to ensure equitable distribution of greener parks. Based on a review of the literature, policies and perceptions around parks, green infrastructure (GI) and health outcomes, NRPA developed the Greener Parks for Health resources (nrpa.org/GreenerParksForHealth) to provide park and recreation professionals with the tools to communicate about, advocate for and standardize greener parks to improve community well-being, especially in communities facing environmental, health, economic and social injustices. These professionals already are taking advantage of our resources to build upon successes in their communities to advance greener parks.

24 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

Addressing Environmental Challenges Like many other midsize cities in the nation’s rustbelt, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, is working to confront aging stormwater infrastructure that threatens residents’ health, safety and quality of life through repeat flooding and combined sewage overflows. These environmental challenges are especially problematic for historically marginalized neighborhoods in Pittsburgh, where lower-income populations and communities of color are concentrated. The Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy (PPC) has been integrating GI into their

city-wide planning efforts and park redevelopment projects, but communicating the benefits of GI to elected officials, community members and city leaders remains a challenge for PPC staff.

When the Greener Parks for Health Communications Toolkit (nrpa.org/ GreenerParksForHealth) reached the PPC’s communications team, they immediately began integrating the recommended language and social media hashtags into the communications materials they were sending out about their ongoing green infrastructure park projects. This helped PPC broaden their reach and more effectively communicate the impact of their work. It also forms an important communications foundation to build on when PPC and the Pittsburgh City Council resume negotiations about investing the funds generated by a recently passed property tax increase aimed at city park improvements. As Gavin White, community projects manager at PPC notes, “It’s great to have national resources at our disposal, and examples of how other cities successfully invest in green infrastructure projects in parks.

These accomplishments give us credibility when we discuss green infrastructure projects with our community.”

In Worcester, Massachusetts — a city of about 200,000 people, just 40 miles west of Boston — green infrastructure is a more

established community strategy.

As part of a statewide climate resilience plan that helps Massachusetts cities tap into federal funding, the Parks, Recreation and Cemetary Division of the City of Worcester’s Department of Public Works and Parks includes green infrastructure as part of its Open Space and Recreation plans. These are the types of policies that the Greener Parks for Health Policy Action Framework identifies and recommends.

“Although Worcester has been including green infrastructure as a community-wide stormwater management practice for over a decade, we see other cities struggling to institutionalize it in the way that we have,” says Robert Antonelli, assistant commissioner at Worcester Department of Public Works and Parks. “The Greener Parks for Health resources are important because they showcase successful ways that communities are doing this work and offer tactical guidance for city leaders to follow. Having the high-level policies in place is critical to supporting green infrastructure work on the ground.”

The highest level of policy support relies on federal legislation and funding. NRPA and the Parks & People Foundation in Baltimore, Maryland, hosted a Capitol Hill meeting with Senator Ben Cardin’s office to discuss the Greener Parks for Health Policy

“The Greener Parks for Health resources are important because they showcase successful ways that communities are doing this work and offer tactical guidance for city leaders to follow.”

“We have a good relationship with our state legislators, but teaming up with a national organization to strategically talk about ways to advance green infrastructure in parks really elevates the profile of Parks and People.”

Action Framework. Steve Preston, park design and construction manager at Parks & People Foundation, shares, “We have a good relationship with our state legislators, but teaming up with a national organization to strategically talk about ways to advance green infrastructure in parks really elevates the profile of Parks & People. Talking about our park projects and the Greener Parks for Health tools with Senator Cardin’s office gave us an opportunity to deepen our relationship and share how our work in some of Baltimore’s highest-need communities can serve as a model for park improvements throughout the city and the nation.”

These Greener Parks for Health resources not only provide clear guidance for how to communicate about and advocate for green infrastructure in parks, but also offer a specific opportunity to start a conversation with elected officials, community members and key agency leadership about green infrastructure. To view the research and Greener Parks for Health resources, please visit nrpa.org/ GreenerParksForHealth.

Wende David is NRPA’s former Senior Conservation Program Manager.

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

25

L AW R EV I EW

The State Side of the LWCF has provided 50/50 matching grants to states and local governments for the acquisition and development of public outdoor recreation areas and facilities.

Citizen Activism Can Preserve LWCF-Funded Park Resources

By James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D.

T

he Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is intended to create and maintain a nationwide legacy of high-quality recreation areas and facilities and to stimulate non-federal investments in the protection and maintenance of recreation resources across the United States. The State Side of the LWCF has provided 50/50 matching grants to states and local governments for the acquisition and development of public outdoor recreation areas and facilities. Since its inception in 1965, the LWCF State Grants program has funded $3.9 billion projects in every county in the country totaling 41,999 projects (tinyurl. com/y4ed558n).

Section 6(f)(3) of the LWCF Act is the cornerstone of federal-compliance efforts to ensure that the federal investments in LWCF assistance are being maintained in public outdoor recreation use. The regulation governing “Conversion Requirements” of Section 6(f)(3) of the Act assures that once an area

26 Parks & Recreation

has been funded with LWCF assistance, it is continually maintained in public recreation use unless the National Park Service (NPS) approves substitution property of reasonably equivalent usefulness and location and of at least equal fair market value. 36 CFR 59.3.

As a result, as described here-

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

in, Section 6(f)(3) can provide informed local groups and citizen activists with a significant legal tool to ensure LWCF-funded park resources are preserved. In so doing, private citizens can effectively challenge any conversion approved by NPS when a local government entity attempts to divert LWCF-funded park and recreation resources to another public purpose.

Park-to-School Renovations In the case of Save the Park & Build the School v. National Park Service, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131439 (U.S. Dist. Ct S.D. Calif., 7/24/2020), school renovations encroached on George Berkich Park, a park in the City of Encin-

itas, California, owned by Defendant Cardiff School District. The renovations intruded on 9 percent to 14 percent of the land protected by the Section 6(f)(3) boundary of the park, replacing “grassy parkland and walking path with school buildings, paved parking, a pickup and drop-off area, and biofiltration basins.” Plaintiff Save the Park is a nonprofit organization comprised of people who live near the park and use it for recreation.

Save the Park sued the District, seeking a preliminary injunction to block any further construction or demolition within the boundaries of their local park. In so doing, Save the Park alleged an earlier approval of the renovation project by NPS violated the LWCF. In 1993, the District and the City of Encinitas received renovation funding for the park under the LWCF. As noted by the federal district court: “That funding came with a string attached, which provides the federal hook in this case.” Specifically, Section 6(f)(3) of the LWCF required the park to be retained for public outdoor recreation unless the Secretary of the Interior finds a proper substitution of similar recreation properties. 54 U.S.C. § 200305(f)(3).

Save the Park initially sued the District in state court, contending that the District began renovating the park without necessary approval from NPS. In November 2019, the state court granted a preliminary injunction putting a stop to construction in the 6(f)(3) boundary of the park.

In February 2020, the parties settled the state court action and the state court dismissed the case. Under the settlement agreement, the

District agreed not to convert parkland without first obtaining NPS approval. The agreement included a general waiver of claims, but Save the Park reserved the right to “use any ruling issued and any evidence obtained in the state court litigation to challenge any action taken

by NPS in connection with the project.” For its part, the District reserved the right to “challenge the meaning, effect, or significance of any rulings used by Save the Park in such proceedings.”

On April 24, 2020, NPS approved conversion of the park and construction resumed. Before filing this federal lawsuit, Save the Park first sought to have NPS reconsider its approval. When it became clear that NPS’s reconsideration would not occur quickly, on June 12, 2020, Save the Park filed a claim in federal district court to halt construction activities in the now-demolished park. In addition to the School District, Save the Park named as defendants: NPS, Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt, Director of NPS David Vela and Director of the California Department of Parks and Recreation Lisa Mangat.

In its lawsuit in federal district court, Save the Park was seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the District from engaging in further construction and renovation activities within the LWCF-funded boundary of George Berkich Park, and from denying the public access to the park for outdoor recreational use. Save the Park maintained the requested relief of a court-issued injunction was warranted because NPS’s consent to the conversion was not “properly-granted nor fully reasoned.”

Preliminary Injunction Requirements As noted by the federal district court, to prevail on its request for a preliminary injunction to temporarily halt the District’s renovation project, Plaintiff Save the Park would have to show all of the following: (1) a likelihood plaintiff will succeed at trial in proving the merits of the claim; (2) a likelihood of irreparable harm to the plaintiff in the absence of preliminary injunction relief; (3) the balance of the equities tips in favor of the plaintiff; (4) an injunction in favor of plaintiff is in the public interest.

Likelihood of Success on the Merits Save the Park argued the federal district court should set aside NPS’s “hasty” consent to the project in an LWCF-funded park because NPS approval was “arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion” in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.

As cited by the federal district court, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq., required a federal court to set aside an agency action if it is “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law,” “without observance of procedure required by law,” or “unwarranted by the facts to the extent that the facts are subject to trial de novo by the reviewing court.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2).

Without making a final determination of this issue, based on the plaintiff ’s complaint at this preliminary stage of the proceedings, the federal district court found Save the Park was indeed likely to be able to show

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

27

L AW R EV I EW

that NPS’s initial “hasty approval” of the project violated the APA.

Section 6(F)(3) As described above, the court acknowledged the implementing regulations of Section 6(f)(3) of LWCF “assures that once an area has been funded with LWCF assistance, it is continually maintained in public recreation use unless NPS approves substitution property of reasonably equivalent usefulness and location and of at least equal fair market value.” 36 CFR § 59.3(a). Further, the court noted that these LWCF-implementing regulations “preclude NPS from considering a conversion application unless, among other requirements,” the following conditions are met: (1) The applicant has proposed replacement property that meets recreation needs “at least like in magnitude and impact to the user community as the converted site,” 36 C.F.R. § 59.3(b)(3)(i); (2) The proposed replacement property “has not been dedicated or managed for recreational purposes while in public ownership,” 36 C.F.R. § 59.3(b)(4)(ii); and (3) “The guidelines for environmental evaluation have been satisfactorily completed and considered

by NPS,” 36 C.F.R. § 59.3(b)(7).

Comparable Replacement Property In the opinion of the federal district court, Save the Park likely would be able to succeed in showing that NPS failed to properly heed these regulations. Specifically, the court found Save the Park was “likely to succeed in showing that NPS failed to properly consider whether the 28 Parks & Recreation

replacement property the District offered meets the criteria in the NPS regulations.” In so doing, the court found the District’s proposed replacement property failed to comply with the applicable LWCF regulations: The District’s proposed replacement property consists neither of land that “has not been dedicated or managed for recreational purposes while in public ownership” or of land that “meets recreation needs at least like in magnitude and impact to the user community as the converted site.” 36 C.F.R. § 59.3(b)(4) (ii); 36 C.F.R. § 59.3(b)(3)(i).

Specifically, the court noted: “The replacement property consists partially of hardcourts that the District and the City of Encinitas agreed, via a 1994 amendment to a Joint Use Agreement, would be ‘available for general public recreational use in perpetuity.’” Accordingly, citing the plain language of 36 C.F.R. § 59.3(b)(4)(ii), the court found the hardcourt property already had “been dedicated or managed for recreational purposes while in public ownership,” and, thus, “that past designation renders it ineligible for use as replacement property.”

In reaching this determination, the court noted, in December 2019, the District had sought to revoke the 1994 public recreation designation of the hardcourt property “after it became clear that it needed more land to support the conversion” request to the NPS. The District’s action was apparently prompted by NPS’s rejection of a prior conversion proposal based, in part, on NPS’s concerns about “recreational utility” of that earlier proposal.

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

The federal district court, however, found the District’s revocation of a public recreation designation “can’t erase the past” fact that “the hardcourts had previously been dedicated for recreational use while under public ownership.” In the opinion of the court: “The District’s apparent attempt to circumvent the regulation by closing recreational space to the public so it could immediately offer it up again as replacement property was ineffective and ultimately futile.”

Further, the court found: “Another section of the purported replacement property — comprising nearly five-eighths of the total asserted area — is a parking lot.”

Citing the applicable LWCF regulations, the court found the District, as an applicant to propose to convert property, must “evaluate that property in order to determine what recreation needs” the replacement property fulfills. 36 C.F.R. 59.3(b)(3)(i): While the replacement property and the replaced property need not provide identical recreation experiences,” 36 C.F.R. 59.3(b)(3), the applicant must “evaluate proposed replacement property in a similar manner to determine if it will meet recreation needs which are at least like in magnitude and impact as the converted site.”

In this particular instance, the federal district court found “the proposed parking lot will not replace another parking lot, other support facilities, or any other property that fulfills needs similar to those a new parking lot will fulfill.” Instead, the court found the parking lot “replaces grassy parkland.” Despite any “advantages of having space to park adjacent to the parkland,” under the applicable LWCF regulation, the

court found “a parking lot simply does not ‘meet recreation needs’ that are ‘like in magnitude and impact’ to the recreational purposes served by grassy parkland.” 36 C.F.R. 59.3(b)(3)(i).

Accordingly, the federal district court concluded: “Save the Park is likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that NPS approval of the proposed replacement property was arbitrary and inconsistent with the LWCF regulations.”

Consideration of Environmental Guidelines As noted by the federal district court, LWCF regulations also required the District and NPS to ensure “[t]he guidelines for environmental evaluation have been satisfactorily completed and considered.” 36 C.F.R. § 59.3(b)(7).

In this particular instance, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) if there was substantial evidence that a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The EIR would usually include a project description, a map and probable environmental effects.

In this case, Save the Park claimed NPS could not rely on the District’s EIR. Specifically, Save the Park argued: “NPS’s reliance on the EIR was ill-considered in the face of a state court order...that vacated parts of the EIR and repudiated the District’s prior approval of it.” In response, the District argued that “the state litigation settlement bars Save the Park from arguing that the EIR violated CEQA.” The federal district court, however, noted: “The settlement agreement’s general release of claims is

limited by a specific carve-out of challenges or any action taken by NPS in connection with the Project.” As characterized by the court, “Save the Park’s contention that NPS relied on faulty environmental impact data poses such a challenge.” Accordingly, since the state court had already repudiated the District’s approval of the EIR, the federal district court found Save the Park was “likely to succeed on its claim that NPS could not rely on the District’s EIR.”

Likelihood of Irreparable Harm As described above, the second of the required four points to prevail on a request for a preliminary injunction also would require Save the Park to show it would suffer “a likelihood of irreparable harm” if the federal district court failed to issue a preliminary injunction in this case. As a general rule, an injunction to prevent any further harm would be appropriate when an award of money damages is an inadequate legal remedy. In this particular instance, the federal district court noted: “Both sides appear to agree that injury resulting from violation of the LWCF are environmental in nature and, as such, typically can’t be adequately remedied by money damages.”

The District, however, disputed “whether issuing a preliminary injunction at this point” would “accomplish its objective — preventing further harm” because “the harm had already occurred.” Specifically, since the “entirety of George Berkich Park” was “already demolished,” the District claimed “an injunction will simply render the land unusable for any recreational purposes whatsoever.”

In the opinion of the court, the District’s argument erroneously assumed “the District or the City of Encinitas will not rebuild the Park — and that they cannot be required to do so” by court order. In fact, the court found “the project is neither complete nor nearly so” and Save the Park was seeking a court order to “require the Park be rebuilt.”

The court noted: Although the parkland has been demolished, no structures have been built in the old 6(f)(3) boundary. Save the Park’s claims are not mooted [i.e., no judicial relief available] by the demolition, since plaintiffs ultimately seek rebuilding of the demolished parkland.

Further, in the absence of a preliminary injunction, the court found: “Permitting further construction at this point within the 6(f)(3) boundary would render any later amelioration of the park more difficult and expensive.” As noted by the federal district court, judicial review under the APA, provides courts with “broad powers to order mandatory affirmative relief,” which, in this case, could involve a court order to rebuild the park.

Accordingly, the court held Save the Park had effectively shown it would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief.”

Balance of Equities As described above, the third of the required four points to prevail on a request for a preliminary injunction would require Save the Park to show “the balance of the equities tips in favor” of issuing an injunction to temporarily halt the District’s renovation project. In balancing the environmental and economic concerns in this case,

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

29

L AW R EV I EW

the federal district court found “the potential environmental harm the LWCF is designed to protect” outweighed “the economic harm the District will suffer from constructions delays”: [E]conomic harm does not generally outweigh the environmental harms protected by LWCF. As a general rule, the public interest in preserving nature and avoiding irreparable environmental injury outweighs economic concerns in cases where plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their underlying claim.

Accordingly, the federal district court held: “Save the Park is likely to succeed on the merits, the prospect of environmental harm prevails and tips the balancing process in favor of issuance of an injunction.”

Alleged Lack of Diligence The District also opposed Save the Park’s injunction request on the basis that Save the Park was not diligent in seeking relief from the federal district court. In so doing, the District relied on the general proposition that “parties seeking relief from an administrative decision concerning public construction projects must act ‘with haste and dispatch.’” According to the District, construction of the project restarted in late April 2020, but Save the Park didn’t file its lawsuit until June 12, 2020, and did not seek a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction until June 26, 2020.

The federal district court, however, acknowledged that “seeking injunctive relief is not the only means of diligently addressing a matter.” On the contrary, in this particular instance, the court found 30 Parks & Recreation

a prompt challenge on the part of Save the Park could take the form of asking NPS to reconsider its conversion approval. In the opinion of the court, Save the Park had acted “with haste and dispatch” by promptly challenging NPS’s approval of the District’s school renovation project: Within a month of NPS’s issuing its initial approval, Save the Park prepared and served on NPS a voluminous petition requesting reconsideration. Although there was delay following Save the Park’s submission, it was occasioned by NPS’s assurances that it would consider the submitted material and issue “updates” within two weeks. All the while, counsel for Save the Park continued to press NPS to move quickly. When it became clear that NPS’s updates would not take the form of a decision — and still less than two months after NPS issued its initial approval — Save the Park filed this action.

Accordingly, the federal district court found: “Save the Park’s early and continuous communication with NPS seeking reconsideration of the agency’s decision, along with its prompt filing of this lawsuit once it realized that NPS wouldn’t reach a quick decision, sufficiently establish Save the Park’s diligence in challenging NPS’s approval.” Under these circumstances, the court, therefore, held the “balance of the equities favors Save the Park.”

Temporary Injunction in the Public Interest As listed above, the fourth of the required four points to prevail on a request for a preliminary injunction would require Save the Park

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

to show “an injunction in favor of plaintiff is in the public interest.”

In this particular instance, the federal district court found Save the Park had succeeded in showing “the public interest favors injunctive relief — if only temporarily.”

In so doing, the court found “Save the Park rightly notes that the public has an interest in ensuring that public agencies comply with their own regulations.” On the other hand, the court acknowledged, “this interest would normally be outweighed by the competing interest in ensuring that school is open and ready for use by students when the school year begins.” However, in light of present circumstances, the court recognized the District’s schools were not scheduled to open on time in 2020 due to state health department restrictions in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. In the opinion of the court, it was, therefore, unlikely that “the District will need to be ready to accommodate students in classrooms in September — or for that matter in the immediate future.” Further, the court found the “relatively brief time to wait for NPS to reach a decision” would support the “issuance of time-limited injunctive relief ” requested by Save the Park: NPS’s counsel estimated at the hearing that the agency may complete its reconsideration around the end of August. A reversal or modification of NPS’s decision would substantially alter the likely outcome of this lawsuit, potentially clarifying whether an injunction for a longer term would be appropriate...

Considering the slim likelihood that schools in San Diego County will be open for in-person learning in the fall and the high likelihood that further

NPS action will clarify the issues in the next several weeks, the Court finds that the public interest favors issuance of an injunction, if only temporarily.

Conclusion Having found Save the Park had satisfied the four requirements for a preliminary injunction, the federal district court ordered the District to be “enjoined from engaging in any construction or demolition within the original 6(f)(3) boundary of George Berkich Park.” The court’s order allowed for the following exception: “[C]onstruction of the biofiltration basins and turf may proceed consistent with the terms of the settlement agreement between Save the Park and the District.” Further, the preliminary injunction was scheduled

to “expire at 11:59 p.m. on August 31, 2020, unless renewed and may expire earlier if so ordered by the Court.” In so doing, the federal district court renewed “its request for NPS’s prompt reconsideration”: If the National Park Service (NPS) decides, one way or the other, on reconsideration of the approval of construction prior to August 31, 2020, Save the Park and the District must promptly inform the Court.

During the hearing, the Court impressed upon NPS’s counsel the urgency of NPS’s reconsideration and urged NPS’s counsel to relay the Court’s message to the agency.

Having succeeded in obtaining a preliminary injunction to temporarily halt the District’s school renovation project, Save the Park increased

the likelihood that a more thorough NPS reconsideration might ensure a more favorable outcome for Save the Park, in which their park is either rebuilt and/or any replacement property will have equal market and recreational value as required by Section 6(f)(3) for any NPS-approved conversion of an LWCF-funded park and recreation resource.

See also: “Economic Development Ongoing Threat to LWCF Legacy,” James C. Kozlowski, Parks & Recreation, Sep. 2016, Vol. 50, Iss. 9 mason.gmu.edu/~jkozlows/law arts/09SEP16.pdf James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D., is an Attorney and Associate Professor in the School of Sport, Recreation and Tourism Management at George Mason University (jkozlows@gmu.edu).

Webpage with link to law review articles archive (1982 to present): mason.gmu.edu/~jkozlows.

Creating Equity-Based System Master Plans NRPA’s online tool can help you create master plans grounded in equity and inclusion. nrpa.org/ParkMasterPlanning

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

31

Parks and recreation system planning should not only address traditional park and recreation challenges, but also be robust and comprehensive enough to address broader community-wide issues.

32 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

A New Approach to Parks and Recreation

System Planning How today’s environment is shifting our thinking about the future of the profession

By David Barth, Ph.D., CPRP, AICP

M

uch has changed since NRPA published its Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines in 1996. In those simpler times, park and recreation agencies focused on things, like playgrounds, ball fields, boat ramps and youth athletics. Now they’re also involved in socioeconomic and environmental issues, such as the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, wildfires, urbanization, social equity and services, habitat restoration and economic development.

In recognition of these increased complexities, there are no longer any nationally accepted standards for parks and recreation planning. Each community must determine its own standards, level-of-service (LOS) metrics, and long-range vision for its parks and recreation system based on commu-

nity issues, values, needs, priorities and available resources.

Even NRPA’s 1996 guidelines recognized that “a standard for parks and recreation cannot be universal, nor can one city be compared with another even though they are similar in many respects.” Therefore, it’s time for a new approach to parks and

recreation system planning; one that not only addresses traditional park and recreation challenges, but also is robust and comprehensive enough to address these broader communitywide issues.

First, we need to broaden our perspective of parks and recreation systems, in order to respond to societal shifts and expectations in a meaningful way.

Parks and recreation facilities should no longer be regarded as isolated, but rather as elements of a larger, interconnected public realm that also includes streets, museums, libraries, stormwater systems, utility corridors and

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

33

SYST E M P L A N N I N G

other civic infrastructure. Alternative dimensions of parks and recreation systems, such as equity and climate change, should be considered from the onset of the planning process. And, each site or corridor within the system should be planned as high-performance public spaces (HPPSs) that generate multiple economic, social and environmental benefits. This broader perspective encourages park and recreation agencies to transcend their silos — and leverage their resources — to plan and collaborate with other public and private agencies to meet as many of the community’s needs

as possible. As a result, parks and recreation systems can be repositioned as essential frameworks for achieving community sustainability, resiliency and livability.

Second, we need to replace the traditional linear, narrowly defined parks and recreation system master planning (PRSMP) process with a cyclical, open-ended process that is constantly updated and integrated with other foundational public realm plans, such as long-range transportation plans, stormwater master plans, habitat conservation plans and future land-use plans. Such an ongoing, collaborative planning process can lead

Figure 1: New Approach to Parks and Recreation Planning

Source: Barth Associates, LLC 34 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

to the development of an integrated public realm that can generate far more benefits for a community than the traditional siloed parks and recreation system. This proposed new approach, illustrated in Figure 1, differs from the traditional approach in several ways.

Project Initiation, Planning and Dimensions A noteworthy difference between the traditional PRSMP and the proposed new approach is the amount of time and thought given to the initiation and planning phase of the project, including the

development of a project charter, project plan and a readiness audit.

Careful and thoughtful planning is critical to identifying opportunities to generate greater resiliency and sustainability benefits for the community, as well as building the credibility and support needed to implement key recommendations.

The eventual success or failure of many plans can be traced to the amount of time spent initiating and planning the process. Once a PRSMP process begins, it is very difficult to change its scope, budget and deliverables midstream.

A key component of the initiation phase is the identification of the desired, alternative “dimensions” of parks and recreation planning to be addressed during the process, as listed in Figure 2.

Identification of these dimensions during the initiation phase has direct implications for the makeup of the project team, the scope of work, the areas of focus and the eventual success of the project.

Decision-Making Framework Another feature of the new PRSMP approach is a more thoughtful and nuanced “decision-making framework” to replace absolute standards and classifications, providing parks and recreation agencies with the freedom and flexibility to respond to community issues and needs.

Such a framework may include: the agency’s mission and vision; agency and community values; guiding principles; residents’ needs and priorities; community context; desired experiences; and servicedelivery models. Collectively, these components encourage thoughtful, context-based solutions rather than pre-conceived standards.

Figure 2: Alternative Dimensions of Parks and Recreation System Planning • Accreditation by the Commission for Accreditation of Parks and Recreation Agencies (CAPRA) • Before- and after-school care • Bicycle and pedestrian access • Branding • Capital improvement program • Commercial recreation • Compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) • Comprehensive plan goals • Construction delivery methods • Cost recovery • Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) • Design standards and details • Economic development • Educational opportunities • Environment • Esports • Flood control • Funding • Gentrification • Green infrastructure • Health and wellness • Homelessness • Impact fees • Income inequality • Land development codes • Land use

Feedback and Consensus Building The new approach provides numerous opportunities throughout the planning process to pause, present and discuss interim findings; determine if additional lines of inquiry are needed; and build consensus with key stakeholders and decisionmakers regarding the direction of the process. Typical formats (online or in-person) often include staff review meetings, stakeholder focus group meetings, advisory committee presentations, and oneon-one briefings and workshops with elected officials. Such feed-

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Level-of-service standards Marketing Mental health Needs and priorities Neighborhood stabilization Operations and maintenance Opioid abuse Organizational mission and role Organizational structure Park classifications Partnerships Permitting Political priorities Programs — recreation, social, educational Quality of life Redevelopment Resource protection Safety Sea-level rise Service delivery models Social equity Staffing Stormwater treatment Technology Tourism Transportation Wildlife habitat Youth development Source: Barth Associates, LLC

back loops are critical for eventual approval, adoption and implementation of the master plan.

Evaluation of Existing Conditions While the traditional approach to evaluating existing conditions focuses solely on parks and recreation facilities, the new approach also emphasizes the evaluation of the specific dimensions identified in the initiation phase. Each topic requires an in-depth analysis of existing conditions and issues, and their implications of the parks and recreation system. For exam-

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

35

SYST E M P L A N N I N G

ple, research and discussions with the public works or engineering department may reveal new information, such as the need for additional stormwater treatment or floodwater storage in certain areas of the community or the opportunity to meet recreation needs and stormwater needs on the same site. Investigation into crime rates and safety issues could identify hot spots that might benefit from additional security, nighttime recreation programs, or design modifications in accordance with guidelines for crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED). Parking and transportation issues could be investigated to determine the potential role of parks in providing trail connec-

tions, bike-share stations, overflow parking, transit stops or other multimodal transportation solutions.

What’s more, discussions regarding housing and economic development could detect opportunities for parks and green spaces to stabilize neighborhoods, improve property values and catalyze redevelopment.

Preliminary Implementation Framework The purpose of the preliminary implementation framework (PIF) is to initiate implementation discussions as early in the process as possible; traditional processes often leave implementation discussions for last, which can doom the project to failure. The PIF is particularly

important for plans that address numerous dimensions, such as transportation, stormwater and social services, which will be implemented by agencies other than a parks and recreation or planning department.

In addition to traditional forms of implementation — such as capital improvements, additional staffing, new programs and increased maintenance — the PIF may include updates to comprehensive plans or land development regulations; partnerships with other agencies, businesses or nonprofit organizations; changes to staffing or organizational structure; refocused delivery of programs and services in response to the agency’s mission or residents’ priorities; and changes to maintenance and operations procedures.

Figure 3: Potential LOS Metrics for Alternative Dimensions Dimension

Potential Metrics

Bicycle and pedestrian access to parks, open spaces, natural areas, civic sites and other elements of the public realm

• Miles of paved multiuse trails • Percentage of the long-range bicycle and pedestrian network vision completed • Percentage of parks and open spaces with bicycle and pedestrian access • Percentage of complete streets

Green infrastructure and stormwater treatment

• Percentage of community tree canopy coverage • Improvement in water quality of key water bodies • Percentage of stormwater treatment projects incorporating green design practices

Health and wellness of community residents

• Percentage of residents considered obese • Participation in fitness and wellness programs • Reduction in chronic health conditions such as type 2 diabetes and heart disease

Social and educational programs

• High school graduation rate • Local unemployment rate • Percentage of households considered by the United Way to be AssetLimited, Income-Constrained, Employed (ALICE)

Economic development

• Increase property values adjacent to new or improved parks and open spaces • Increase number of businesses opened in response to new or improved parks and open spaces • Increase in public and private sector jobs created through parks and open spaces

Source: Barth Associates, LLC 36 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

Accreditation by the Commission for Accreditation of Parks and Recreation Agencies (CAPRA) is another form of implementation.

Needs Assessment Process The new approach proposes a more rigorous, scientific methodology than that used by many communities. Needs assessments are often scrutinized by the public, stakeholders and elected officials; parks planners need to be able to defend their methodology, data collection process and findings. If done correctly, a needs assessment is a type of applied social research that involves developing a research design, gathering and analyzing the data collected from various sources, and using the results to inform policy and program development. In our practice, we use a mixed-methods, triangulated approach that compares the findings from quantitative, qualitative, and secondary research techniques and data to identify top priorities. As with the evaluation of existing conditions, the needs assessment process should solicit public input regarding the entire public realm, as well as community-wide resiliency and sustainability needs.

Level-of-Service Standards The 1996 Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines state that “we must realize an open space standard is not so much an exemplary measure to be used in some form of comparison or judgement of adequacy or accomplishment, but is an expression of a community consensus of what constitutes an acceptable level of service.” Therefore, the new approach encourages public agencies to revisit their core values, principles and goals; and to develop LOS metrics that effective

ly reflect their aspirations. In addition to the traditional park metrics of acreage, access and facilities, for example, some communities may also wish to establish new metrics related to resiliency and sustainability as outlined in Figure 3.

Collaborative Visioning As mentioned above, a key attribute of the new approach is the collaborative planning of the park and recreation vision concurrently with planning of other public realm elements, such as streets, bikeways and trails, civic spaces, stormwater treatment facilities and utilities.

Collaborative planning is also required to address broader community-wide dimensions, such as health, equity and economic development. Strategies to increase collaboration includes concurrent scheduling of PRSMPs with other foundational public realm plans, such as comprehensive transportation plans (CTP) and stormwater master plans; concurrent, multidisciplinary needs assessment processes — including site visits, interviews, focus group meetings, public workshops and surveys; and multiagency and multi-departmental reviews of proposed capital improvements to identify opportunities for partnerships, collaboration or joint use. Collaborative brainstorming by people with different perspectives and backgrounds often can yield far more innovative and imaginative ideas than can visioning that involves only those of similar mindsets.

Implementation Strategy The implementation phase of the PRSMP represents the culmination of all the analyzing, planning, ideating, discussing, meeting, surveying, thinking and visioning activities described above. Consistent with the

previous phases of the planning process, the new approach to PRSMP emphasizes a collaborative approach to implementation involving community leaders, elected officials, multiple departments and agencies, businesses and other key stakeholders. An effective implementation strategy requires that participants transcend the silos of their departments or agencies; identify opportunities for partnerships or joint use; leverage available resources, regardless of the source; and actively look for ways to generate multiple benefits for the community through implementation of projects, programs and initiatives.

Embracing a New Approach Regardless of your aspirations — whether you wish to transform your entire community, reposition your department or parks and recreation system as being more essential, or simply increase the quality of the services and programs you provide — the new approach to parks and recreation system planning can help you meet your goals. Following this process will result in a PRSMP that is more relevant to the needs and issues of your community and elected officials, more collaborative, more credible and more likely to be successfully implemented and transformative. And, adoption of this new approach can yield numerous benefits for park and recreation agencies and their communities, including increased recognition, quality of life and resiliency.

To hear David Barth speak about PRSMPs, tune in to the November bonus episode of Open Space Radio at nrpa.org/NovemberBonusEpisode.

David Barth is the Principal of Barth Associates, a firm specializing in parks and recreation system planning (david@ barthassoc.com). He is the author of the new book Parks and Recreation System Planning: A New Approach for Creating Sustainable, Resilient Communities (tinyurl.com/yyvxhjme).

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

37

Making the Most of Your

PARTNERSHIPS

By Nick Pitas, Ph.D., Andrew Mowen, Ph.D., and Samantha Powers, MS

Learn what makes a park and recreation agencyfoundation relationship effective to maximize the benefits of these valuable partnerships

38 Parks & Recreation

P

arks and recreation is an essential local government service. Park and recreation professionals and their agencies deliver vital services, programming and amenities that millions of people enjoy every day, often at little or no direct cost. Well-funded park and recreation services advance community health and well-being, better prepare communities for the impacts of a changing climate and help ensure equitable access to the wide-ranging benefits of recreation. Studies conducted by NRPA and others have consistently demonstrated strong support from both officials and the general public for their local park and recreation agency.

Despite this broad base of support, park and recreation professionals often find themselves jockeying for limited tax revenue with other local government services, including public safety, education, transportation and social services. Unfortunately, parks and recreation consistently loses out in these head-to-head competitions, historically receiving only about 2 percent to 3 percent of total local government expenditures on average (tinyurl.com/y4ckhml8).

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

PHOTO COURTESY OF TIYE ROSE, RACE FORWARD

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

39

PA R T N E R S H I P S

The data gathered by this process generated not only a snapshot of the agencyfoundation relationship, but also serves as the basis of recommendations we make for agencies hoping to get the most out of their partnerships.

In a nod to this reality, local public park and recreation agencies often must seek funding from other sources. One approach taken by many agencies is to partner with nonprofit park foundations or “friends groups.” Although such partnerships have a long history in the delivery of local park and recreation services, they may be more necessary than ever in light of the budgetary and staffing issues brought on by the Great Recession and the global coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

Until now, there has been a lack of research on the characteristics

and conditions that lead to effective and sustainable partnerships between park and recreation agencies and their nonprofit partners.

As a result, we worked with NRPA on a nationwide study of agencyfoundation relationships that combined a survey of park and recreation agency leaders and in-depth interviews of leaders from both agencies and nonprofit foundations (nr pa.org/AgencyFoundation Relationships). The data gathered by this process generated not only a snapshot of the agency-foundation relationship, but also serves as the basis of recommendations we make for agencies hoping to get the most out of their partnerships.

Snapshot of the AgencyFoundation Relationship Overall, about 40 percent of agency leaders report that their agency benefits from the support of a park-specific foundation. Compared to municipalities without a park-specific foundation, agencies with a park-specific foundation

serve a larger average population (302,000 vs. 120,000) and manage: • More acreage on average (6,100 acres vs. 1,300 acres) • More parks and recreation facilities on average (46 facilities vs.

24 facilities) • A greater average annual budget ($14 million vs. $7 million) Most park and recreation leaders view the agency-foundation relationship positively. The majority of respondents see the relationship as “very” or “extremely” strong (68 percent), close (66 percent) and effective (58 percent).

Recommendations for Maximizing the AgencyFoundation Relationship Fundraise (and more)!

Park and recreation leaders are most likely to see the agencyfoundation relationship in terms of fundraising, perhaps unsurprisingly given many agencies’ neverending budgetary challenges. Seventy-three percent of survey respondents say that their foundation

A Majority of Park and Recreation Leaders Views the Agency-Foundation Relationship to be Strong, Close and Effective 80 70

(Percentage Distribution)

68%

66% 58%

60 50 40 30 20

24%

21%

28%

10 0

Agency-foundation relationship is “strong”

Agency-foundation relationship is “close” ■ “Extremely” or “Very” ■ “Moderately”

40 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

Agency-foundation relationship is “effective”

is a “very” or “extremely” important partner in this regard.

However, park foundations can be much more than just an agency’s fundraising arm. To get the most from this partnership, we recommend park and recreation leaders work with their park foundation to find areas to contribute beyond direct financial support. Some of the other roles in which park and recreation leaders see their foundation as a “very” or “extremely” important partner include: • Special events (35 percent) • Capital construction projects (28 percent) • Parkland or Facility acquisition (27 percent) • Marketing (24 percent) • Lobbying/Advocacy and Political activity (24 percent) Lean into flexibility and versatility.

As a nonprofit (and nongovernmental) organization, park foundations have greater flexibility at an institutional level. For example, park foundations may have significant leeway in terms of how they fundraise, where to allocate the funds and how quickly to take action. Park and recreation leaders

should make use of that flexibility whenever possible and work with foundations to envision creative strategies that address outstanding issues in ways that public agencies cannot.

In describing this characteristic flexibility, one park and recreation agency leader shared with us how their foundation collaborates with a local craft brewery and local apiarists (beekeepers) to brew a beer using honey collected from honeybee hives in the parks. A portion of the proceeds fund park-related causes in partnership with the local agency. Interviewees related a variety of examples like this one, emphasizing the importance of encouraging outside-the-box thinking from foundation partners.

Park foundations can serve as a source of knowledge, skills and connection not necessarily present in a local agency. For example, people who volunteer to serve at park foundations come from all walks of life. Tap into that knowledge base when appropriate — maybe a board member comes from a financial or legal background, or perhaps someone has a connection with an influential local leader who can bridge prior community engagement gaps.

Park and recreation agency-foundation relationships may be more necessary than ever in light of the budgetary and staffing issues brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Communication is key.

Communication is critical to the success of the agency-foundation relationship in many ways. Part of the communication equation has to do with frequency: agency leaders who report more frequent communication with their foundation are more likely to enjoy better and more effective relationships with their agencies’ foundations.

We note that frequent communication is not, by itself, enough.

Both agency and foundation leaders stress the need for purposeful communication that is focused on aligning long-term goals and objectives, as well as day-to-day operations. An overwhelming ma-

Communication is critical to the success of the agencyfoundation relationship in many ways. Part of the communication equation has to do with frequency....

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

41

PA R T N E R S H I P S

Directly related to the idea of communication, both agency and foundation leaders emphasize the importance of building strong interpersonal relationships across organizational boundaries. jority of agency leaders also note that the ability to communicate (verbally and through writing) and listen is a key skill for them and their peers.

Build relationships.

Directly related to the idea of communication, both agency and foundation leaders emphasize the importance of building strong interpersonal relationships across organizational boundaries. Several leaders note that having a close

connection with the leadership at their partner organization has been a critical factor in the success of the agency-foundation relationship.

Conversely, hostile relationships between the organizations’ leadership often undermine these partnerships (and the goals of both entities).

Healthy relationships must go beyond just an agency’s and foundation’s leader. Building a culture where the staff at both organizations are able to work together in a cordial, professional and productive fashion is just as necessary.

Strong organizational ties have the bonus of sustainability: a robust organizational relationship is likely to outlive the retirement of one or more key figures.

Formalize ties.

A common feature of many highly successful agency-foundation partnerships is a formalized agreement

Park and recreation leaders should leverage the flexibility of nonprofit foundations by working with them to envision creative strategies that address outstanding issues.

42 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

or memorandum of understanding (MOU). An MOU between an agency and its foundation establishes clear roles and responsibilities for both partners, encouraging close collaboration and alignment on funding priorities. Survey respondents noted each of these characteristics as essential features of the agencyfoundation relationship.

A more formalized agreement also can help avoid many of the potential pitfalls of agencyfoundation relationships. Leaders point out that an MOU can help mitigate the risk of conflicts about funding priorities, reduce confusion over the proper process for a project or decrease the number of missed opportunities in the community.

Engage with the community.

Successful agency-foundation relationships benefit from an

Park and recreation agency leaders report that community trust in the agency and community trust in the foundation are essential features of the agency-foundation relationship.

engaged public. Park and recreation agency leaders report in our survey that community trust in the agency and community trust in the foundation are essential features of the agency-foundation relationship. Successful publicengagement surrounding the agency-foundation relationship will not only help build familiarity and trust, but also can build awareness regarding the need for donations, volunteers and other park-related causes.

Having a frequent and open dialogue with the public also allows park and recreation agency leaders to develop a deeper understanding of the community that they serve.

There are no one-size-fits-all solutions in community projects. Cultivating engagement with the public promotes an enhanced communityspecific cultural knowledge that results in better outcomes.

Focus on equity.

One of the greatest challenges agency and foundation leaders note is an ability to equitably deliver the benefits of the agencyfoundation relationship to all cor

ners of the community. For many interviewees, equity emerges as the chief missed opportunity for the agency-foundation relationship, a priority that leaders on both sides of these partnerships want to address.

One specific issue related to equity is ensuring foundationfunded projects address issues beyond more affluent communities.

Agency and foundation leaders speak of both the importance and difficulty of working to fund projects where residents are less affluent, less capable of advocating for themselves, or less likely to donate to a park foundation. Leaders of both organizations must proactively work to overcome an “only in my backyard” mentality to ensure these relationships foster equitable access to high-quality park and recreation amenities and services.

Make the AgencyFoundation Relationship a Priority Although park foundations have long been a valuable partner to many public park and recreation agencies, their importance may only grow in light of the global pandemic and re-

sulting recession. For agencies currently partnering with a foundation, maximizing the potential benefits of that relationship will be critical to ensuring the ongoing delivery of high-quality park and recreation services to the community.

Even more critical is for agencies that do not currently engage in this type of partnerships to explore the development of a park-focused foundation to help navigate these challenging times. Begin by reaching out to key stakeholders within the community, your peers at nearby agencies or existing community foundations. While an excellent agency-foundation relationship will not develop overnight and the task may seem daunting, as the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu once said, “A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.”

Nick Pitas, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor of Recreation Management at the State University of New York-Brockport (npitas@brockport.edu). Andrew Mowen, Ph.D., is Professor of Recreation, Park and Tourism Management at the Pennsylvania State University (amowen@psu.edu). Samantha Powers, MS, is a Ph.D. candidate in Recreation, Park and Tourism Management at the Pennsylvania State University (sammie.powers@psu.edu).

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

43

GREEN INNOVATION

Proctor Creek Turns to

The Litter Gitter is a small-stream litter collection device that uses floating booms to guide trash into a collection container.

44 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

Local parks in Atlanta, Georgia, help solve the plastic-pollution problem

PHOTOS COURTESY OF GROUNDWORK ATLANTA

By Aaron Lee Wiener, PLA, and Michele White, CAE, IOM

P

lastic waste plagues communities across the world, often accumulating in waterways. An average 8.8 million tons of plastic waste enters our oceans from waterways around the world every year (tinyurl.com/y65vvhxe).

While the problem spans the globe, the solutions begin locally. Over the past year and a half, the city of Atlanta, Georgia, and its partners have been testing solutions to plastic pollution in local parks throughout the city.

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

45

TRASH TRAPS

One of the results of decades of disinvestment in the neighborhoods of Atlanta’s Proctor Creek Watershed have been waterways disproportionately burdened by litter and trash pollution. In 2019, a community-driven litter and plastics reduction project kicked off as a partnership between Atlanta’s Parks and Recreation Department and Department of Watershed Management, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the West Atlanta Watershed Alliance (WAWA), Groundwork Atlanta and Park Pride. Through their vision and with support from The CocaCola Company’s World Without Waste Campaign and NRPA, these neighborhoods have adopted innovative trash-catchment systems (trash traps) to help create cleaner and more vibrant waterways, parks and communities.

Over the past year, the community has combined two trash trap

technologies with green jobs training and litter education programs.

The trash traps, installed within Atlanta’s parks, are improving water quality and stream habitat by removing the waste that heavily impacts these urban waterways.

Since trash traps sit within Atlanta’s parks, community members can easily see the systems, discuss the topic of waste in waterways and participate in educational outreach programs on the importance of litter reduction. The maintenance of these systems created local green jobs — employees gather data on the material collected and then properly recycle, reuse or dispose of these materials.

A History of Proctor Creek Proctor Creek, a nine-mile tributary of the Chattahoochee River located on Atlanta’s west side, runs through residential, industrial, commercial and parklands. This waterway and its tributaries connect more than 35

PHOTO COURTESY OF NRPA

Many groups came together to make green innovative solutions a reality for Atlanta's Proctor Creek Watershed.

46 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

Atlanta neighborhoods, many with local and national historical significance. It sits within a watershed encompassing approximately 16 square miles that is home to approximately 60,000 people.

Proctor Creek has been plagued by pollution, especially escaped trash and illegal dumping. When combined with a history of community neglect and increasingly flashy flow characteristics (the rapid increase in flow shortly after precipitation and equally rapid return to base conditions shortly after), the litter creates an unsafe environment for the surrounding neighborhoods. Nearby areas have experienced environmental and health issues from numerous brownfields (polluted land that was previously developed and is not currently in use) and potential Superfund sites (polluted locations requiring a long-term response to clean up hazardous material, as designated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation

WAWA and Workforce Development team members perform educational outreach by sorting trash and the Escaped Trash Assessment Protocol (ETAP).

and Liability Act of 1980), impaired water quality, pervasive flooding and combined sewer overflows.

Atlanta’s Westside neighborhoods, English Avenue, Vine City, Castleberry Hill, Ashview Heights and the Atlanta University Center — home to several historically Black colleges and universities — served as an incubator for African American leaders of the civil rights movement. These communities were home to some of Atlanta’s most notable citizens, including Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Coretta Scott King, Maynard Jackson, Andrew Young and Julian Bond. While these communities are hubs of African American culture in Atlanta, they are also among the most impoverished in the city with about 67 percent living below the federal poverty level.

The Project and Technology The trash catchment effort in Proctor Creek began with a study by Georgia Tech students. They analyzed the watershed to provide recommendations for the placement of the traps and assisted with design calculations to determine the hydrologic loading of the traps (volume of water capable for the traps to handle).

Using information from the Georgia Tech report, the project team decided to test two different trap technologies: • The Litter Gitter, produced by Osprey Initiative — a smallstream litter collection device that uses floating booms to guide trash into a collection container.

• The Bandalong Litter Trap, produced by Storm Water Systems Inc. — a large, industrial-grade aluminum system that uses the water’s current to guide debris into a litter trap.

These passive systems are designed to capture floating debris without trapping wildlife. They have few to no moving parts, require minimal maintenance beyond emptying collected trash from the systems and allow stream currents to move trash into the collection receptacle. The locations and types of trash traps installed were selected to match the characteristics of the stream. The Bandalong’s heavy-duty construction and multiple anchoring points make it ideal for the strong, sudden flows that occur in Proctor Creek, while the flexibility and compact nature of the Litter Gitter make it

suitable for the smaller tributaries.

Initially, five Litter Gitters were installed at three different park locations in the watershed. The Bandalong is located at the site of the future Proctor Creek Park; this waterway is the largest of all the locations, and requires a system, such as the Bandalong, to withstand its larger flows and larger debris.

The technology providers were able to offer expertise and assistance for this project that proved invaluable. When considering what technology to use, some vendors offer training while others can provide full service for rental and maintenance, which are important considerations for a successful project.

Throughout the past year, the sites and the technology were evaluated for their effectiveness. Smaller traps that don’t require multiple anchoring points are able to be moved easily. While this allows for nimbleness, they also are more susceptible to impacts from debris and storm surge.

The Georgia Institute of Technology’s pre-project evaluation of the watershed and possible locations proved vital; however, having the ability to move traps based on efficiency helped to ensure a flexible program.

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

47

TRASH TRAPS

Gathering the Data Data collected by analyzing the trash captured by the different technologies provides insight into the amount and types of trash found in the watershed and can help identify potential sources for this trash.

For example, older trash can indicate a historic dumping site, while newer trash can point to the need for improving the number, location and emptying of receptacles.

The methodology used to collect this information is called Escaped Trash Assessment Protocol (ETAP), which was created by the Trash Free Waters Program of the EPA (epa.gov/trash-free-waters).

It is an easy way to collect reliable data on trash found in waterways and communities. The ETAP data shows the weight of materials collected, the waste type (paper, metal, glass, plastic, etc.) and categorical amounts (bottles, chip bags, cups, cans, etc.). Data collected reveals trends at each location and additional mitigation and outreach that should be employed. Projects should carefully consider the level of data needed and the ways this

data might be used to help advance efforts in the local community.

The Atlanta sites have collectively removed a total of 454.22 pounds of recyclables and 1,040.52 pounds of trash from the watershed through the end of June 2020.

The higher-capacity Bandalong, which is in a larger body of water fed by tributaries, accounts for more than half the material collected, even though it was installed in November 2019. The details from the ETAP process have helped the partners identify litter trends in specific parts of the watershed that are helping them form strategies for outreach to the community, as well as businesses to help prevent waste from entering Proctor Creek.

Workforce Development Installing trash traps begs the question: Who will operate and maintain these devices? Groundwork Atlanta recognized this as an opportunity to increase green jobs and develop a workforce around the maintenance and operation of this technology in Atlanta.

Through collaboration with Geor-

Workforce Development team members clean and collect materials from the trash traps on a regular maintenance schedule or after heavy rain.

48 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

gia Trade-Up, alongside the trash trap manufacturers, Groundwork Atlanta trained local crews on maintenance for each technology and methods to collect data utilizing ETAP. Currently, two teams each consisting of two to four local community members maintain both of the traps. Team members clean and collect materials from the traps on a regular maintenance schedule or after heavy rain.

By connecting Atlanta residents to employment created through this and other green infrastructure projects, benefits in local communities are multiplied. The value of investing in resources and people to help clean up the environment and maintain safer, healthier places to live, work and play cannot be understated.

Education and Outreach WAWA initially planned to educate Proctor Creek-area high school students on nonpoint-source pollution (pollutants accumulated in precipitation runoff that enters into waterways from land) its impact on waterways, as well as ways to use the ETAP process to understand the types of waste in local waterways. Their initial tours focused on working with the maintenance team to clean out the traps and the ETAP sorting activity, along with discussing watershed dynamics and nonpoint (stemming from many places) and point-source (stemming from a single place) pollution. But as COVID-19 started to impact communities in the early spring, in-person educational outreach had to be reconsidered. With WAWA’s extensive experience with engaging the local community, they pivoted and are creating an online portal with integrated educational videos, engagement and learning outcomes to educate local groups through a

virtual experience. This new platform will be able to virtually engage a broader audience while still allowing for the in-person educational experience when suitable.

The Bandalong Litter Trap is a large, industrial-grade aluminum system that uses the water’s current to guide debris into a litter trap.

Case Study for Others The Proctor Creek project is helping the EPA and other cities and organizations learn how to incorporate trash trap technology and innovative workforces to address pollution in waterways.

“I believe that water issues are the largest and most immediate environmental and public health issues affecting the world right now,” says Andrew R. Wheeler, administrator of the EPA, in his 2019 remarks (tinyurl.com/y24jt864).

Among those issues is litter in waterways; common trash from consumer goods is the major cause of pollution in our waterways and oceans.

EPA is concerned about the effects of litter on the environment, wildlife and human health.

Partnerships are working to keep our public places and waterways clean from litter and create healthy ecosystems. Although it is a worldwide problem, solutions are being implemented within local urban communities, like Proctor Creek.

“The Atlanta Department of Watershed Management is committed to improving the water quality in Proctor Creek and being a good steward of all our city’s 10 watersheds,” says interim Department of Watershed Commissioner Mikita K. Browning. “We look forward to working with and supporting our fellow community stakeholders and environmental partners through the Trash Trap initiative to help keep our local creeks and streams clear of trash and debris.”

Throughout the Proctor Creek project, other groups have reached

out to discuss installing trash traps in their communities and to identify best practices and ways to replicate the program in other locations.

It also contributed to the creation of The River Network’s newly released toolkit, Waste in Our Waters: A Community Toolkit for Aquatic Litter Removal (tinyurl.com/yybavyku).

This toolkit has been released to help other organizations across the country explore the trash trap concept in their communities.

Several universities also have made a connection to discuss the impacts of the project and to use data collected to improve litter trap technology to spur future innovation in this area. New technology is continuing to surface in the trash trap arena and will only continue to expand the effectiveness of the technology to clean waterways.

Through the past year, plans have been made for how this project can continue impacting the watershed and what additional partners can help. Chattahoochee Riverkeeper (CRK), which was already working on a separate trash catchment program, will assist in stream litter collection efforts in Proctor Creek

from a strategic environmental lens and help support the workforce development teams.

When undertaking a similar project, it is crucial to involve nonprofit, community, government and philanthropic partners to maximize the layered technological, environmental and socioeconomic impacts of these projects and retain a holistic vision for watershed restoration. With strong partnerships in place, this new innovative program will hopefully continue to benefit Atlanta and the Proctor Creek Watershed and serve as an example for other communities.

Special thanks to Glen Behrend (City of Atlanta, Department of Watershed Management); Cynthia Y. Edwards, PE (Region 4 Urban Waters, EPA); Carley Queen (Groundwork Atlanta); Darryl Haddock (West Atlanta Watershed Alliance); and Jordan Yu (Chattahoochee Riverkeeper) for the information they provided for this article.

Aaron Lee Wiener, PLA, is a Landscape Architect for City of Atlanta Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Park Design (alwiener@atlantaga.gov). Michele White, CAE, IOM, is Conservation Program Manager at NRPA (mwhite@ nrpa.org).

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

49

OPERATIONS The Benefit of Walking Tracks

By Cory Corullo

O

ne way communities can support people who want to get and stay healthy is by providing opportunities for an active lifestyle.

The best options are easy and accessible to all ages and abilities, since according to America Walks, “less than 50 percent of youth and 24 percent of adults get enough physical activity.” Walking is a great option that offers benefits for all ages, supporting both physical and mental health, without the need for any special skills or equipment.

To promote walking, communities can integrate walking tracks in schools and public recreation facilities. Even though no special equipment is needed, the type of track material does make a difference. The best choice considers the track’s overall functionality and durability along with the walker’s comfort and safety. Tracks can be constructed using a variety of materials, like asphalt or concrete, but synthetic track systems offer multiple advantages.

Engineered for the Optimal Health and Enjoyment of Users

PHOTO COURTESY OF ACTION FLOOR SYSTEMS

Synthetic urethane and acrylic floor systems have become the most common type of track installed around the world and a standard for major athletic competitions.

50 Parks & Recreation

These are designed based on performance standards for different activities, taking into account factors like durability and shock absorption to help keep users healthy.

Adequate shock absorption reduces stress on joints and lowers risk for short- and long-term injury.

Community walking tracks are a versatile amenity, fit for a range of activities for competitions, avid walkers and families. It’s easy to physically distance and still maintain relationships and healthy interactions for virtual runs and walks.

Indoor tracks with temperaturecontrolled environments are especially popular for year-round physical activity. Indoors or outdoors, tracks help residents develop more regular walking routines, as well as offer alternative environments that are safe and away from traffic.

Synthetic tracks can help promote walking, an activity that provides mental and physical health benefits for people of all ages.

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

Durability and Ease of Maintenance for Inside or Outside Tracks Since walking is an any-season sport, durability and ease of maintenance are critical to keeping tracks consistently accessible. Synthetic urethane and acrylic tracks are preferred for their durability, resistance to weathering and relatively low maintenance required to retain an even surface. They’re also spike resistant. In contrast, natural materials like concrete, asphalt or wood chips require constant upkeep to fill holes and level the surface, especially after inclement weather.

Synthetic urethane and acrylic track systems offer a seamless and non-porous surface that makes them easier to keep clean and sanitary. There are no grout and cracks where germs and harmful bacteria can saturate or hide. Plus, they resist odors and don’t absorb sweat.

A variety of coatings are available for proactive resistance to fungus and bacterial growth.

Adding a walking track to your educational sports or community recreation area encourages an active wellness culture in your community and helps make it a better place to live for everyone. Work with an experienced athletic floor system contractor to review the specifics of your location and identify the best synthetic urethane and acrylic track system that’s enjoyable for all. Let’s get walking!

Cory Corullo is the Director of Synthetic Sales at Action Floor Systems, LLC (cory@actionfloors.com).

PHOTO COURTESY OF RATCHAPON VIA ADOBE STOCK

Making Public Restrooms Safe During COVID-19

By Kip Earlywine

S

ome people will experience fear or anxiety when using a public restroom in the coronavirus (COVID-19) era. During this time, we should strive to protect visitors the best we can. Here are some ways to keep your public restrooms safe during the COVID-19 pandemic:

Restrict Access to Some Fixtures to Create Separation Between Users The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has broadly recommended people keeping a distance of six feet from all others at all times, when possible.

Unfortunately, most restrooms were not designed with this kind of distancing in mind — sinks and urinals are generally about half that distance away from each other. By taping off or covering every other sink or urinal, it sends a very clear message for users to avoid them.

Make Your Hand Dryers Inoperative It is believed that COVID-19 spreads primarily through tiny water droplets expelled through the breath of infected individuals.

Hand driers produce high-speed turbulence that keeps these droplets suspended in the air indefinitely, making the air within the restroom unsafe. Disabling these devices and replacing them with a touchless paper towel dispenser are strongly recommended.

Those paper towels also can be useful for visitors to use while touching the door handle when leaving the restroom.

Remove as Much Surface Contact as Possible Replace existing fixtures with hands-free activators. This could include toilets, urinals, faucets, soap dispensers, paper towel dispensers and hand-sanitizing liquid dispensers. Typically, these are battery operated and some are relatively easy to install. If possible, keep the entry door open (or remove it completely). For outdoor restrooms, consider using a privacy screen in front of the entrance to maintain privacy with an open door.

Frequently Refill Soap and Hand-Sanitizer Dispensers With people washing their hands at higher rates than before, there may be people going into your restroom just to wash their hands and nothing else! You can expect these supplies to need more frequent maintenance than in years past. This is one of the simpler, yet more critical, things you can do to make your restroom safer.

Maximize Ventilation Introducing outside air into the restroom space through ventilation can remove airborne droplets quickly. This is the easiest and most effective way to reduce airborne trans-

Restricting access from some fixtures within public restrooms can help keep patrons at a safe distance from each other during the COVID-19 pandemic.

mission of pathogens. Therefore, make sure that you have open windows and vents in the restroom. If you have a bathroom fan, it should be set to run continuously.

Disinfect Fixture Handles and Buttons Frequently Transmission of coronavirus may come from touching common surfaces that an infected person had previously touched. We recommend frequent disinfection of any permanent surface a visitor might touch with their hands, particularly the door handles on the stalls and entry door.

Easing the Public’s Concerns It’s best to find ways to keep your visitors at safe distances while minimizing their need to touch things and maximizing the air flow and access to hand sanitation. If precautions are taken, users should feel reasonably safe using public restrooms.

Kip Earlywine is Blog Editor for Green Flush Restrooms (kip@greenflushrestrooms.com).

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

51

park essentials

PIVOTING

INTO THE NEW NORMAL. ACTIVATE YOUR OUTDOOR SPACES WITH A SEASONAL ICE SKATING RINK! PROMOTE OUTDOOR ACTIVITY

Creating the Extraordinary Smart design helps us create the extraordinary. Novo® Playful Furniture shifts the paradigm of outdoor seating allowing everyone to be together learning, socializing and developing.

That’s the beauty of smart design.

MAXIMIZE OFF-SEASON SPACES ENCOURAGE SOCIAL DISTANCE STIMULATE LOCAL BUSINESS CREATE A COMMUNITY EXPERIENCE STAGE A SAFER HOLIDAY EVENT

It’s time to Join Our Movement.

bciburke.com Trademark(s) are the property of BCI Burke Company. © BCI Burke Company 2020. All Rights Reserved. 800-356-2070

CALL US TODAY (323) 776-9423 SOLUTIONS FOR ALL YOUR ICE RINK NEEDS SALES@ICE-AMERICA.COM

WWW.ICE-AMERICA.COM

NEW! NATURE SERIES

Let’s Put Paper—and 2020—in the Past

Featuring nature inspired laser patterns Color coordinated 33 gallon liners Neutral powder coated finishes

2020 has proven that citizen services need to be based on any time, anywhere, online access.

Let CivicRec® help you migrate your paper-based workflows to a cloud-based, modern, and intuitive recreation management system that will help you and your citizens move forward with confidence into a better and brighter new year.

Learn more at civicrec.com/nrpa

52 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

MADE IN THE

park essentials

Inspiring Responsible Dog Ownership Since 1994

DOGIPOT.com

800.364.7681

DOGIPARK.com

MAKE IT EASY

SOLVE ALL YOUR BUILDING NEEDS FAST • ECONOMICAL • VERSATILE • DURABLE • SECURE Installation in just hours - Standard Floor Plans or Custom Designs Minimal site preparation - Outfitting - Available Nationwide Precast Concrete Buildings outlast and outperform all other options Concessions • Dugouts • Electrical/Mechanical • Hazmat • Workshops • Offices • Press Boxes Waterworks • Restrooms • Locker Rooms • Field Houses • Security • Shelters • Storage & more!

Online Quote Form

EasiSetBuildings.com 866.252.8210

NRPA 1-2pg Easi-Set Buildings 2.2020 7.625x4.75.indd 1

12/19/2019 3:45:01 PM PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

53

park essentials

s ice e Pr st rvic ers e e w Lo eat S stom Gr c Cu fi rri Te

Recycled site furnishings • park signs

NiceRink_NRPA-3.625x4.75

jill@kochcreative.com

Bright Idea Shops, LLC Akron, Ohio 800-886-8990 fax 330-258-0167 www.brightideashops.com www.park-signs.net

SOLID. SIMPLE. AFFORDABLE. FAST.

NiceRink® on turf

RINKS THAT PAY FOR THEMSELVES IN TIME SAVED. Install on fields, courts, ponds and asphalt.

NRPA20

Fill with one flood.

Simple to maintain.

NiceRink® on a court

Engineered components to reuse year after year.

North American made.

NICERINK.com

888-NICERINK | RINK PROFESSIONALS SINCE 1991 54 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

NRPA

CONNECT

Blog nrpa.org/blog

nrpaconnect.org nrpa.org/connect-app

NRPA SOCIAL MEDIA @NationalRecreationandParkAssociation @nrpa_news

openspaceradio.org

@nrpa

parksandrecreation.org

National Recreation and Park Association

@parksrecmag

(or your favorite podcast app)

@openspaceradio

Landscape Structures Inc................................................. 3

Bobcat Company................................................................ 5

Most Dependable Fountains..........................................21

Bright Ideas Shops, LLC. ...............................................54 CivicPlus..............................................................................52

NiceRink..............................................................................54 Pilot Rock/RJ Thomas Mfg. Co. ................................... 11

Clear Comfort......................................................................9 Play & Park Structures/PlayCore................................. C4 DOGIPOT............................................................................53 Easi-Set Buildings.............................................................53 Ex-Cell Kaiser.....................................................................52

advertiser index

BCI Burke Playgrounds...................................................52

Shade Systems..............................................................C2, 1 ULINE................................................................................... 19

Goldenteak/The Wood Carver, Inc..............................54

Urban Fountains + Furniture.........................................54

Ice-America.........................................................................52

Victor Stanley......................................................................13

(ISSN 0031-2215) is published monthly by the National Recreation and Park Association, 22377 Belmont Ridge Rd., Ashburn, VA 20148, a service organization supported by membership dues and voluntary contributions.

Copyright ©2020 by the National Recreation and Park Association. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. Opinions expressed in signed articles are those of the writers and not necessarily those of NRPA. Issued to members at the annual subscription price of $30, included in dues. Subscription: $46 a year in the U.S.; $56 elsewhere. Single copy price: $7. Library rate: $58 a year in the U.S.; $68 elsewhere. Periodical postage paid at Ashburn, Virginia, and at additional mailing offices. Editorial and advertising offices at 22377 Belmont Ridge Rd., Ashburn, VA 20148. 703.858.0784. Postmaster, send address changes to Parks & Recreation, 22377 Belmont Ridge Rd., Ashburn, VA 20148.

PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G | N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 |

Parks & Recreation

55

Park Bench

A Bike Park for Everyone “If you build it, they will come” has been the mantra for the staff of the all new Crown Mountain Bike Park, centrally located between Aspen and Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The build of the bike park follows the construction of the Aspen Snowmass/Roaring Fork Valley International Mountain Biking Association (IMBA) Ride Center, which was awarded IMBA’s Gold designation for its world-class single-track mountain biking inside of a 50-mile radius, making the Aspen Snowmass/Roaring Fork Valley Ride Center one of seven locations in the world to receive this rating. In addition to the Gold-designated park in the Roaring Fork Valley of Colorado, there now lies a world-class biking training ground in the middle of the valley thanks to Crown Mountain Bike Park.

The new Crown Mountain Bike Park is anticipating 140,000 riders during 2021, and is planning to create a new bike school, as well as to form a local elite team of the valley’s best riders. Popularity of the park has exploded due to its progressive design, which includes features that focus on every stage of a rider’s development. The Crown Mountain Bike Park team has built a park that trains your kid for you. The park is a giant bike playground that has something for a two-year-old on a strider, a pro dropping in for a session and every rider in between. No matter people’s level of riding, they have something to ride here.

The variety at Crown Mountain Bike Park is second to none. The park includes a kids strider track, BMX race track, asphalt pump track, intro to mountain biking zone, five lines of progressive dirt jumps, mulch jumps, a green cross-country loop with features for beginners, a blue/black cross-country loop with features for intermediate to advanced riders, a wooden drop progression allowing riders to practice airborne drops, wooden wall rides, elevated wooden riding sections called “skinnies,” an expert back bowl with drops, jumps and wall rides, and a bike jump air bag.

Biking is not all that Crown Mountain Park has to offer. With your next visit to this gem, you will find 124 acres of open space that brings 67,000 visits by local athletes a year, and 120,000 annual dog visits and 400,000 total visits. Crown Mountain Bike Park is anticipating being open nine months of the year. The park is free to the public and open sunrise to sunset. The project to build the bike park was funded by Crown Mountain Park, sponsorships from companies and Great Outdoors Colorado, which awarded the park a $168,000 grant. The rest of the project was supported by in-kind donations from local companies.

– Nate Grinzinger, Crown Mountain Park Bike Park Director

PHOTO COURTESY OF BEN SAHEB

The new Crown Mountain Bike Park features a progressive design with features that focus on every stage of a rider’s development.

56 Parks & Recreation

| N OV E M B E R 2 02 0 | PA R K S A N D R E C R E AT I O N .O R G

Available on iTunes and Google Play | openspaceradio.org

The Official Podcast of NRPA

The Latest Park and Recreation News and Trends On the Go

Introducing the only face-to-face swing that features a recessed cell phone pocket to capture hands-free photos or video of treasured moments. Call us today to learn more!

de and wat c Co

You built a destination they’ll always remember.

Why not give them an experience they’ll never forget?

800.727.1907 | playandpark.com

Scan the QR

h

the

video!

PARKS & RECREATION NOVEMBER 2020 ◆ P&R SYSTEM PLANNING IN A NEW ERA ◆ STRENGTHENING AGENCY-FOUNDATION RELATIONSHIPS ◆ CLEAN WATERWAY SOLUTIONS