Emerald Networks: Reviving the Legacy of City Parks

A place of life and motion that will make us more conscious of

being one people.

HOR ACE BUSHNELL

Elizabeth Mossop is a founding principal of Spackman Mossop + Michaels landscape architects, based in Sydney and New Orleans. She is also professor of landscape architecture and former director of the Robert Reich School of Landscape Architecture at Louisiana State University. Her practice is focused on the design of parks, urban spaces, infrastructure, and urban revitalization.

EMERALD NETWORKS Reviving the Legacy of City Parks

It is time to begin another era of visionary parks. We must elevate the discussion of urban parks and understand their profound importance to our cities. Emerald Networks surveys a series of urban park systems — their plans, evolution, and current status — and highlights contemporary projects within those existing park systems. In addition to outlining the development of parks thinking in the United States over time, Emerald Networks also explores changes in the context for urban parks today.

The historic principles guiding these systems still provide a useful lens for examining parks. The idea of parks as the lungs of the city, providing access to clean air and sunlight, translates into today’s broader idea of parks as critical to public health, for exercise, stress relief, and contact with nature.

Olmsted’s prophetic ideas of park utility — that “service must precede art”— are gaining traction in the 21st century as we think of parks in terms of their urban performance and their multi-layering of uses. Crucial to these earlier ideas is the systematic thinking about parks as connected circuits or green ribbons. While this approach is currently languishing, the connectivity for people, hydrology, and habitat is key to making parks effective and cities successful. The importance of parks in their expression of democratic ideals and their role as public space, from which no one is excluded, is of increasing significance in today’s more fragmented and diverse societies. Today there are also other concerns driving new thinking about parks. Economic issues loom large, both in terms of how to make parks economically sustainable and how they can be a part of strategies for economic development. In addition to being ecologically and socially sustainable, parks must be resilient to change of all kinds, since their use and programs will continue to develop over time. As infrastructure changes, opportunities for parks emerge and their role as green infrastructure becomes increasingly important. All of these approaches can serve to sharpen our thinking on how to advocate for better park systems.

We have to make urban parks and their urban agency central to people’s thinking about cities, urban revitalization, and resilience. Too often parks are perceived as a luxury that can be dealt with at some point in the future when everyone has jobs

and housing. But a healthy city requires an integrated system of open space that addresses issues of public health, safety, and community resilience.

North American cities are confronted by a range of issues in which parks can play a vital role: collapsing, outdated infrastructure; deteriorating public health; social fragmentation; air, water, and climate issues; and so on.

We now have more data on how park systems perform, and we have more understanding of the role of open space in cities, at a time when more value is being placed on increasing urban density.

We need to build from these historic park systems and learn from their legacy. They illustrate very clearly how important connectivity and access are to parks, and yet how difficult these are to achieve. This is the key issue that requires a broader urban vision.

By looking at a range of contemporary parks, Emerald Networks also allows us to think about what innovation looks like in park systems today. We can see how the implementation of sophisticated ecological ideas and new technology will be key in the future: we can manage parks as ongoing ecological systems rather that horticultural treasures — using perennial meadows instead of lawns, selecting diverse and resilient plantings, conserving water, and creating habitat. Parks can use the latest technology to manage water and energy use beyond park boundaries, and in smart operating systems.

Creativity can also be applied to new funding mechanisms, creating green jobs and harnessing urban development to build investment in parks.

Visionary park plans should not be a thing of the past. Our cities need the kind of ambitious thinking that informed the creation of these historic parks. Let’s use investigations like Emerald Networks as the foundation for a new public discourse that propels park systems into the center of our thinking about city futures.

ELIZABETH MOSSOP September 2015

1

2

Cities with park systems designed by historic visionaries are endowed with a legacy of generous, well-connected open spaces. However, the financial pressures facing today’s cities, along with new thinking about park use, can challenge these historic frameworks.

Emerald Networks explores how cities are i nnovating within historic park visions to meet contemporary needs.

Emerald Networks first appeared as an exhibition at Northeastern University, sponsored by Sasaki Associates in collaboration with the Humanities Center, the Northeastern Center for the Arts, the College o f Social Sciences and Humanities, and the College of Arts, Media and Design.

3

4

5

envisioning THE SYSTEM Visionaries such as Daniel Burnham, William Christmas, Horace Cleveland, Pierre L’Enfant, Arthur Coleman Comey, and Frederick Law Olmsted planned the future of cities and their park systems based on an understanding of “the genius of a place,” with the democratic ideals of the growing nation in mind. These designers based their plans on a much deeper set of principles than pure aesthetics.

HISTORIC SYSTEM FORMS

Squares Historic park systems composed of evenly dispersed urban squares, like Raleigh, were founded on democratic ideals. This urban framework established a logic for modular expansion of the city over time.

PRINCIPLES THEN “The Lungs of the City” The belief that bad air caused illness — the miasma theory of disease — pervaded the public consciousness through much of the 19th century. Olmsted and others asserted that public parks, envisioned as vast green spaces where residents could escape urban congestion and breathe clean air, could serve as “the lungs of the city.”

6

“Service Must Precede Art” Olmsted believed that parks must move beyond aesthetics to perform environmental and “sanitary” functions. The parks and park systems he designed respected and restored hydrologic flows and other natural systems. “Service must precede art...” he wrote, “So long as considerations of utility are neglected or overridden by considerations of ornament, there will be not true art.”

“Green Ribbon” Olmsted, Cleveland, and Burnham envisioned a city’s open spaces not as discrete places, but rather as a connected circuit, or “green ribbon,” that allowed for pedestrian, habitat, and hydrologic connectivity.

Rings

Axes

Park systems such as Boston and Hartford are composed of a ring of parks encompassing the city. These systems often follow natural drainageways, and have the potential to reduce flooding in surrounding neighborhoods.

Baroque style plans such as L’Enfant’s plan for Washington, DC, located significant open spaces and monuments on natural topographic high points, linking these prominent plazas with ceremonial boulevards.

“To the People” The planning of park systems was often intended to express the democratic ideals of the growing nation. Parks dispersed evenly across city neighborhoods were meant to give every urban dweller a backyard. Parks also became the places where all classes within the city could interact. Burnham stated in his Plan of Chicago, “the lake front by right belongs to the people... Not a foot of its shores should be appropriated by individuals to the exclusion of the people.”

7

NATURAL

PARK SYSTEMS The history of urban parks in the United States can be separated into roughly five eras.

These eras represent the social and political ideals of the time as well as a changing relationship between humans and nature.

8

Pleasure Grounds 1850–1900 Large landscaped parks located on the edges of cities were meant t o simulate nature and provide city dwellers with the opportunity for retreat and recreation.

Cities founded these parks on the democratic ideals of the mixing of all social classes in the landscape.

SOCIAL Reform Park 1900–1930 Cities created new parks, often located in the centers of neighborhoods a nd each no larger than a few city blocks, to encourage social reform f or immigrant populations. These spaces were intended to bring people together to assimilate to an American way of life.

9

RECREATIONAL Recreation Facility 1930–1965 This era of park planning focused on extending a government service — the urban park — to all areas, including the suburbs. Park planning at this time prioritized active program, including recreational facilities, sports fields, and resident programs.

CONNECTIVE Open Space System 1965–1990 By the 1960s, people began to recognize limitless recreational opportunities in their everyday surroundings.

Trail systems and green boulevards connected small pocket parks, neighborhood parks, and regional open space to create park networks.

10

ECOLOGICAL Sustainable Park 1990–present Present-day park planning focuses on the reclamation of post-industrial lands a s park space and encourages a harmonious relationship with natural systems. With an increased ecological awareness, park planning today focuses on rehabilitating waterfronts, landfills, railways, and highways to create habitat, restore natural systems, and provide recreational amenities.

11

12

13

reviving THE LEGACY Cities with historic park visions are endowed with a great legacy. These cities often have grown around generous parklands that are well designed and thoughtfully distributed across neighborhoods.

However, today’s reality of maintaining these historically planned systems can sometimes become a burden.

Maintaining vast swaths of manicured parkland in a struggling economy is often unsustainable, both financially and environmentally.

The challenge today is to honor the vision of these historic plans while leveraging them to promote sustainability and resiliency, community connectivity, social equity, and economic development.

The changing approaches to program and use, as well as the shifting roles of infrastructure, are also morphing historic park systems.

Emerald Networks explores park systems in seven cities then and now.

PRINCIPLES TODAY Sustainability and Resiliency

Today’s park systems must satisfy the triple bottom line of social, economic, and environmental sustainability, and must be resilient to rising waters.

14

Active Programming and Use

Today’s park program has different spatial and temporal requirements than program at the time of the visionaries’ plans.

Community Connectivity

Discrete parks from historic plans were often realized, but links between them were not, offering an opportunity for new connections today.

MIN N E A POLI S

BOS TON H A RTFOR D

CH IC AGO WA S H INGTON , DC

R A LE IG H

Each selected city has a strong historic planning legacy and great park projects today. The cities also represent a diversity of park system types, sizes, and city characters.

HOU S TON

indicates park system size

Social Equity

As in Olmsted’s time, parks still have the power to be shared spaces that bring together diverse groups.

Economic Development

Studies like those from the Trust for Public Land show that park systems have the power to draw investment to city centers and neighborhoods.

Rethinking Infrastructure

Contemporary cities with an industrial past are left with many remnants of earlier infrastructure, which can be reimagined within their park plans.

15

A place of life and motion that will make us more conscious of being one people.

HOR ACE BUSHNELL

16

HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT General Plan of 1912 Carrere & Hastings

The City of Hartford is a model of visionary historic park planning, influenced by several significant historic figures. In 1853, Reverend Horace Bushnell began an effort to establish Hartford’s first city park.

He envisioned this green space as a healthy antidote to increasing industrialization — an “outdoor parlor” for the cultivation of manners, a place for the mixing of social classes, and the visual gateway to the capital city for those arriving by train. In 1853, Bushnell Park became the nation’s first voter-approved, municipally-funded public park, putting Hartford on the map as an early model of public park planning.

Reverend Francis Goodwin, considered by many to be the father of Hartford’s park system, established a network of public parks during the city’s Gilded Age. The years of 1894 to 1905 became known as the Rain of Parks because much of the city’s parkland was accrued during this time, giving the sense that parks were raining on the city.

All three Olmsteds worked on Hartford’s parks. Frederick Law Olmsted, a parishioner of Horace Bushnell’s church, was born and buried in Hartford. He made an early recommendation that the park system should be a series of “public grounds that literally ringed the city boundary of 1870.”

Following Olmsted’s vision, the General Plan of 1912 by architects Carrere & Hastings proposed interconnecting large parks around the city with a series of trails and greenways. Much of the connectivity in this plan was never realized, but remains a possibility today. By the 1930s, Hartford had the greatest amount of parkland per capita of any city in the nation.

17

H IS TORIC VISION | H A RTFOR D, CON N EC TICUT

18

19

PA R K S T O D AY | H A R T F O R D , C O N N E C T I C U T

ADDRESSING THE ISSUES OF A STRUGGLING URBAN CITY The City of Hartford park system has all the ingredients of a world-class network. With abundant acreage and a centuries-long history of park design, Hartford today benefits from a rich legacy of urban parks, ranging in size from small pocket parks to large parks that are a regional attraction for the city. Yet this abundance is also an obstacle. Recent economic challenges have brought increasing difficulty in maintaining the system’s vast acreage and highly utilized fields, in projecting a sense of safety to citizens, and in communicating park offerings and events to the diverse community.

Historic Park vision Network vision (trail, boulevard, greenway)

Park System Today Park vision realized Trail network Additional parks City limit ½ mile

20

iQuilt Plan

Revitalization of the Connecticut Riverfront

Greenwalk

Capital City Parks Guide

21

PA R K S T O D AY | H A R T F O R D , C O N N E C T I C U T

Our plan is to increase connectivity from the neighborhoods to the city’s parks and between the parks.

MAYOR PEDRO SEGARR A

HARTFORD’S PARK SYSTEM HAS A LOT OF SPACE, WITH VERY LITTLE FUNDING TO MAINTAIN IT. $

29.8

247

22.9 176

$

16.5

12.6 $131

12.9 $

40

31 $37

Hartford

$

DC

97

$ $

39

Chicago

acres per thousand residents

22

75

$

7.6

87

$

38

$

Raleigh

Minneapolis

$ per resident for park maintenance & operations

31

$

4.6 6

$

Houston $ per resident for new construction

29

$

Boston

ASPIR ATIONS & CHALLENGES Restoring the Legacy Decades of budget cuts and staff reductions have challenged Hartford’s many acres of park space. The once-strong legacy is showing clear signs of wear and tear. Challenges include dealing with illegal dumping, maintaining heavily used athletic fields, and keeping up with tree maintenance.

Balancing Finances and Affording Maintenance Park budgets must balance new construction with ongoing maintenance. Hartford’s parks have seen increased budgets for construction to improve existing parks, but funding for maintenance has remained low. Prioritizing projects that generate new revenue or that reduce maintenance once completed — for example, restoring a meadow to reduce the need for lawn mowing — can decrease funding needs.

Retrofitting Historic Parks to a New Generation of Park Users Hartford is an increasingly diverse community with many young residents and growing families. The historic parks were designed for activities that are less common today. Hartford’s parks must evolve to meet the needs of current residents while remaining true to their history.

Improving Connectivity and Access Although the parks in Olmsted’s vision were largely implemented, the connective boulevards and greenways between them were not. The largest parks are located on the city’s edges, but the densest neighborhoods are located near downtown and the city’s center. Trails line the Connecticut River, but it is more difficult today to get around the rest of Hartford without a car.

23

CONTEM POR A RY PROJ EC TS | H A RTFOR D, CON N EC TICUT

Capital City Parks Guide Sasaki Associates

The Capital City Parks Guide aims to renew Hartford’s park system legacy, creating a fiscally and environmentally sustainable green network for the 21st century and beyond.

Addressing key issues of maintenance and safety, Sasaki’s plan identifies opportunities for revenue generation and strategic partnerships with schools, neighborhoods, and businesses. The plan also seeks to reposition the park system as a connected network of high-quality, diverse parks — as originally envisioned — that prioritize investment and reduce maintenance burdens. Connectivity is enhanced ecologically through improved green links along the Connecticut and Park Rivers, as well as socially through citywide improvements for walking and bicycling. Formal adoption of the parks guide is anticipated for this fall.

ELIZABETH PARK

SIGOUR

POPE NORTH GEORGE DAY PLAYGROUND

POPE PARK

Park Type %

Regional 68%

REGIONAL

Special Use - Golf

16%

Special Use - Natural

3%

COMMUNITY SPECIAL USE

Mini-Park <1%

24

URBAN AG. Neighborhood

3%

Community

11%

KENEY PARK WAVERLY

KENEY PARK WOODLAND

RIVERSIDE PARK

RNEY SQUARE PARK

BUSHNELL PARK

PARK H

E K

RIVERFRONT PLAZA

BARNARD PARK

COLT PARK

CHARTER OAK LANDING

ROCKY RIDGE PARK

HYLAND PARK

25

CONTEM POR A RY PROJ EC TS | H A RTFOR D, CON N EC TICUT

iQuilt Plan Suisman Urban Design (lead), Michael Vergason Landscape Architects, Smith Edwards McCoy Architects, Domingo Gonzalez Associates

The iQuilt Plan is downtown Hartford’s awardwinning urban design plan. Its hallmarks are walking, culture, and innovation.

The plan capitalizes on two of Hartford’s greatest strengths: its extraordinary concentration of assets in arts, culture, and landscape, and its exceptionally compact downtown. The centerpiece of the iQuilt is the GreenWalk — a walkable one-mile chain which weaves together new and existing green spaces to connect historic Bushnell Park to the Connecticut River waterfront. Downtown’s cultural assets are close but scattered; the GreenWalk organizes them into a coherent, walkable, and green cultural district, with enhanced sidewalks, complete streets, and vibrant public spaces.

26

Revitalization of the Connecticut Riverfront Riverfront Recapture

Riverfront Recapture is a nonprofit organization that has transformed the Connecticut River parks over the last several decades; this model based on partnerships and revenue generation could be replicated across the rest of Hartfordâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s park system.

Riverfront Recapture began working with ConnDOT in the mid-1980s to integrate riverfront access in the redesign of a downtown highway interchange. Mortensen Riverfront Plaza, completed in 1999, was a result of this partnership.

Since then, Riverfront Recapture has continued to expand its partnerships to support programming, capital improvements, and maintenance. Businesses, schools, city departments, and many volunteers help contribute to the parksâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; success.

27

No nation, perhaps, had ever before the opportunity offered them of deliberately deciding on the spot where their capital city should be fixed.

SEPTEMBER 11, 1789, LETTER FROM PIERRE Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ENFANT TO PRESIDENT GEORGE WASHINGTON

28

WASHINGTON, DC L’Enfant Plan, 1791 Pierre Charles L’Enfant

Pierre Charles L’Enfant’s plan for Washington, DC, is considered one of the world’s most significant city planning achievements. It combined a careful understanding of the site — a diamond-shaped 10-square-mile plot at the confluence of the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers — with a vision for the new nation’s future.

L’Enfant laid out the plan as a Baroque framework, with grand radial avenues overlaid on a gridded system of streets. The avenues, designed to be tree-lined and monumental, would visually connect the most topographically opportune sites through the city, where monuments, significant structures, and civic landscapes would be constructed.

The two most symbolically significant building sites anchoring these boulevards were reserved for the White House and the US Capitol.

L’Enfant identified 15 large park spaces at the convergence of the avenues, to represent the states.

In 1900, as the District neared its centennial, an opportunity was identified to test the ideas of the burgeoning City Beautiful Movement in the form of a comprehensive park system plan built on L’Enfant’s vision. Recommendations of the McMillan Commission Plan (1902) included the reclamation of the National Mall as a continuous park on the historic marshland of the Potomac Flats, the redesign of landscapes including the Capitol grounds, and the creation of a comprehensive park and recreation network that linked a ring of Civil War fortifications around the city.

More than two hundred years after L’Enfant first drafted his plan, Washington, DC, is still characterized by his broad tree-lined avenues, connected open spaces, and axial views to our nation’s monuments.

29

H IS TORIC V ISION | WA S H I NGTON , DC

30

31

PA R K S T O D AY | W A S H I N G T O N , D C

BALANCING NATIONAL LANDSCAPES WITH LOCAL NEEDS Washington, DC, is known for its iconic open spaces like the National Mall. It is also home to a rapidly growing number of local residents.

The city’s green spaces are in high demand by residents and tourists alike, and balancing these competing demands is complicated.

Many different local and federal agencies are responsible for maintaining open space in DC. In addition, open space is diverse — parks, malls, waterfronts, parkways, and more — and it is not distributed equally throughout the city.

As a result, some green spaces suffer from overuse, while others are visited less frequently.

How can the city’s open spaces best balance national aspirations with growing local needs?

Historic Park vision Network vision (trail, boulevard, greenway)

Park System Today Park vision realized Network realized Additional parks City limit ½ mile

32

White House

CityCenterDC

US Capitol

Canal Park

11th Street Bridge Park

33

PA R K S T O D AY | W A S H I N G T O N , D C

Carbon, water, and electricity are the three defining design issues of our day. We’re hoping to tackle two of them within the realm of landscape.

CHRISTIAN GABRIEL , NATIONAL DESIGN DIRECTOR FOR L ANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AT THE US GENER AL SERVICES ADMINISTR ATION

DC’S PARK SYSTEM LOOKS GOOD ON A PER-RESIDENT BASIS, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE TOURISTS WHO ALSO USE THE SYSTEM? $

247

22.9 176

$

16.5

12.6 $131

12.9 $

40

31 $37

Hartford

$

DC

97

$ $

39

Chicago

acres per thousand residents

34

29.8

75

$

7.6

87

$

38

$

Raleigh

Minneapolis

$ per resident for park maintenance & operations

31

$

4.6 6

$

Houston $ per resident for new construction

29

$

Boston

ASPIR ATIONS & CHALLENGES Renewing National Landscapes to Meet Evolving Needs The 21st century has introduced extraordinary new demands on DC’s prominent civic landscapes. One example of updating landscapes for present-day needs is Sasaki’s design for the Lincoln Memorial landscape and Reflecting Pool.

The design resolved accessibility and security issues, increased the resilience of the site, and incorporated sustainable solutions, all while preserving the defining character of this national landmark. Sasaki’s design eliminates potable water use; instead, water from the Tidal Basin is filtered and recirculated, improving water quality.

Improving Parks and Recreation for Neighborhoods Washington, DC, is a growing city, and from a resident’s perspective, the city is increasingly underserved in recreation opportunities. Quality varies significantly from park to park, and some areas lack sufficient green space altogether.

One effort to improve open space for residents is the DC Playground Improvement Initiative, which has improved more than 40 local playgrounds since 2012.

Increasing Collaboration Many different agencies manage parts of DC’s open spaces, presenting both a challenge and an opportunity. Although these groups have not always communicated historically, partnerships to improve green space, recreation opportunities, and park connectivity are increasing. One example of growing cooperation is CapitalSpace. This initiative formalized collaboration among many agencies, including the National Park Service, DC Department of Parks and Recreation, and DC Public Schools.

35

CONTEM P OR A RY PROJ EC TS | WA S H I NGTON , DC

11th Street Bridge Park OLIN; OMA

The proposed 11th Street Bridge Park — the first elevated park in DC — connects the historically divided Anacostia and Capitol Hill neighborhoods.

The design by OLIN and OMA transforms an outdated highway bridge into a series of programmed spaces. Based on community input, each proposed room promotes the two neighborhoods’ physical, environmental, and economic health. The architectural X formed as the new civic spaces cross the Anacostia River will add a new destination to the District’s collection of iconic monuments.

OLIN and OMA were awarded the project in October 2014. The park is expected to open in 2018.

36

37

CONTEM P OR A RY PROJ EC TS | WA S H I NGTON , DC

Canal Park OLIN

With a focus on environmental sustainability, Canal Park is a hub and destination for a high-density, mixed-use neighborhood.

Canal Park is a new open space for an emerging neighborhood in DC. Designed by OLIN, the park is configured to act as one continuous linear rain garden, mimicking the location’s former historic canal system. The park’s central lawn is one piece of the park’s comprehensive stormwater system. Tree pits and underground cisterns capture and treat rainwater that falls on the site. The water is then reused to fill the park’s water features and irrigate its vegetation. This process reduces the city’s total potable water consumption by 1.5 million gallons annually.

Construction of Canal Park was completed in 2012.

38

CityCenterDC

Gustafson Guthrie Nichol

Building upon L’Enfant’s original plan, CityCenterDC introduces a mixed-use, pedestrian, and transit-oriented neighborhood to DC’s downtown core.

CityCenterDC is a 10-acre development

by Hines | Archstone that organizes a mix of housing, office, and retail spaces with a grid-like street network. The neighborhood’s landscapes, designed by Gustafson Guthrie Nichol, include small-scale streetscapes, plazas, a neighborhood park, and green roofs. A variety of programmed public activity ensures central areas, like The Park at CityCenter, are active throughout the day and around the year.

CityCenterDC was completed in 2014.

39

Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir menâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s blood and probably themselves will not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work, remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will not dieâ&#x20AC;Ś DANIEL HUDSON BURNHAM

40

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

Plan of Chicago, 1909

Daniel Hudson Burnham, Edward H. Bennett, and the Commercial Club of Chicago In 1893, the World’s Columbian Exposition attracted global attention to the City of Chicago and the fair’s director of works, Daniel Hudson Burnham. After the fair, as Chicago increasingly felt the pressure of rapid development and expansion, city leaders realized a strategic plan was needed to guide its growth. In 1906, Burnham and his collaborator Edward Bennett were commissioned by the Commercial Club of Chicago to begin work on a plan for the future of the city — the Plan of Chicago.

Considered the pinnacle of the City Beautiful Movement, the plan focused on six major physical design elements: improvement of the lakefront, planning of the street network, development of a highway system, improvement of freight and passenger railway systems, acquisition of an outer park system, and the creation of a civic center composed of cultural institutions and government.

Burnham and Bennett planned an open space system, road networks, and rail corridors as inseparable parts of a grand vision encompassing a 60-mile ring around the city. The park network, which emanated from the lakefront and the iconic Grant Park, included civic spaces connected by grand boulevards and a ring of large parks and conservation lands at the edge of the city. Implementation of Burnham and Bennett’s plan took place over the course of 20 years, and though some portions were never completed, its legacy of a large and connected network of open spaces and lakefront parks is still a significant part of the city’s identity today.

41

H IS TORIC VISION | CH IC AGO, ILLINOI S

42

43

PA R K S T O D AY | C H I C A G O , I L L I N O I S

IMPROVING LIVABILITY AND IDENTITY IN AN EVOLVING CITY Known as the City in a Garden, Chicago benefits from its location on the shores of Lake Michigan and from its strong planning legacy. The Plan of Chicago established the city’s open space legacy more than 100 years ago. Within this historic framework, the city is reinventing many of its iconic landscapes to enhance urban livability and civic identity. Today, expansions of green space in growing neighborhoods and improvements along the lakefront and riverfront are helping infuse Chicago with new civic life.

Through these varied efforts, innovative design and programming are activating new, culturally significant spaces for Chicago’s next century.

Historic Park vision Network vision (trail, boulevard, greenway)

Park System Today Park vision realized Trail network Additional parks City limit ½ mile

44

Navy Pier

Chicago Riverwalk DOWNTOWN

Maggie Daley Park

45

PA R K S T O D AY | C H I C A G O , I L L I N O I S

It is essential that all Chicagoans have access to world-class parks and open spaces... we are connecting communities.

MAYOR R AHM EMANUEL

CHICAGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S STRONG PARK SYSTEM BAL ANCES SPENDING IN MAINTENANCE AND NEW INVESTMENTS. $

29.8

247

22.9 176

$

16.5

12.6 $131

12.9 $

40

31 $37

Hartford

$

DC

97

$ $

39

Chicago

acres per thousand residents

46

75

$

7.6

87

$

38

$

Raleigh

Minneapolis

$ per resident for park maintenance & operations

31

$

4.6 6

$

Houston $ per resident for new construction

29

$

Boston

ASPIR ATIONS & CHALLENGES Embracing New Technologies for Better Decision-making New technologies are helping the Chicago park system better track performance. New systems allow staff to analyze enrollment trends, perform market analysis, and track project costs and budgets in real-time. Partners like Northwestern University are helping develop these tools.

Focusing on Children Chicago has taken a special interest in improving parks and recreation opportunities for children. Getting outdoors promotes good health for children now and also encourages them to live active lives as they grow older. Today, the number of children participating in recreation programs in Chicago has been increasing, to more than 50,000 in 2012.

But with 600,000 children in the city, much work remains to be done.

Reclaiming Land for New Parks In a densely built city like Chicago, finding land for new parks requires creative thinking — and sometimes recycling previously used sites. Millennium Park, a 25-acre park completed in 2004, was formerly owned by the Illinois Central Railroad. In the Little Village neighborhood, La Villita Park has replaced a previously abandoned industrial site, bringing much needed green space to the dense urban neighborhood.

47

CONTEM POR A RY PROJ EC TS | CHIC AGO, ILLINOI S

48

Chicago Riverwalk Sasaki Associates

The Chicago Riverwalk is one of a number of initiatives led by former Mayor Daley to reclaim the urban waterfront for the ecological and recreational benefit of the city.

Sasaki’s plan, inspired by the life of the river, finalizes the framework for the future of public access from the lake to the confluence of the river’s urban branches. The latest phase of work — from Lake Street to State Street — expands the walkable area along the river banks, creating a distinct identity for each block that, together, creates a dynamic experience.

This expansion into the river completes the historic vision for a Chicago civic promenade developed by the 19th century urban planner Daniel Burnham.

The Riverwalk is currently under construction and is projected for completion in 2016.

49

CONTEM POR A RY PROJ EC TS | CHIC AGO, ILLINOI S

Maggie Daley Park Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates (MV VA)

Connecting to Grant Park and Millennium Park, Maggie Daley Park will create a continuous public green space in Chicago’s downtown, enhancing Burnham’s historic vision.

MVVA’s curvilinear design for Maggie Daley Park contrasts with the formal layout found in adjacent Grant Park. Maggie Daley Park’s winding path network connects flexible active and passive recreation areas that adjust to accommodate seasonal use. The park includes an innovative play garden, rock-climbing wall, ice-skating ribbon, and open green.

Maggie Daley Park is currently under construction, and some portions of the park are already open for public use.

50

Navy Pier James Corner Field Operations

Current renovations to the historic Navy Pier reflect the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s identity and culture, reviving public interest and enhancing the visitor experience.

The design by James Corner Field Operations carries this iconic waterfront destination into its 2016 centennial. The reimagined pierscape enhances the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s connection to Lake Michigan through diverse programming and engaging landscape elements and amenities.

Construction is currently underway. Phase I of the project is expected to be completed by 2016.

51

Union Square, a beautiful eminence which commands a view of the town, and a fine prospect of the surrounding country.

In the centre of this Square the State House will be placedâ&#x20AC;Ś Four open squares reserved for publick purposes.

WILLIAM CHRISTMAS

52

RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA Plan of Raleigh, 1792 William Christmas

Raleigh was settled in the 1740s and founded as North Carolina’s capital city in 1792. That same year, the General Assembly chose Senator William Christmas, a surveyor, to envision the lots and streets of the new capital. Christmas laid out 400 acres of city fabric through 1,000 acres of woodland, in a geometric grid meant to emulate the plan of Philadelphia.

At the center of the plan on a topographic high point was Union Square, the planned site of the state capitol, with four axial streets radiating out to divide the city into four wards. Fayetteville Street, extending southward from Union Square, was dedicated as the high street along a ridgeline.

Christmas envisioned four public green squares (Moore, Nash, Caswell, and Burke) as civic open spaces serving the quadrants of the city. Nearly 40 acres — one-tenth of the total plan — was reserved as open space for the city, and existing canopy trees were preserved on the park sites.

Three of the five squares identified in the 1782 plan — Union (the location of the state capitol), Moore, and Nash Squares — remain as public open spaces today. Two others — Caswell and Burke Squares — were lost to civic building projects in the 19th century. The governor’s mansion sits on Burke Square, but the site is not open to public access.

Today the City of Raleigh is focused on reviving and reclaiming the historic squares, with a master plan underway to renovate Moore Square. The city also is working to connect trails and create new riparian parklands, consistent with the historic plan’s legacy of preserving open space.

53

H IS TORIC VISION | R A LE IG H , NORTH C A ROLIN A

54

55

PA R K S T O D AY | R A L E I G H , N O R T H C A R O L I N A

GROWING A PARKS SYSTEM IN A R APIDLY GROWING CITY Raleigh is an up-and-coming technology hub, near the top of many national rankings for its affordable housing, highly educated population, and pleasant quality of life. Ranked the second-fastest-growing city by Forbes last year, Raleighâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s population has skyrocketed over the past 15 years. As the city grows, the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Department must balance outward expansion of the park system with renewal of existing resources.

Overall, the department has managed this balancing act quite successfully. Residents perceive the existing park system as well maintained. In addition, Raleigh has a robust regional trail network that provides access and recreation opportunities across the city.

Historic Park vision Network vision (trail, boulevard, greenway) Parks realized and lost

Park System Today Park vision realized Trail realized Additional parks City limit ½ mile

56

Trail Network Improvements

Downtown Raleigh Experience Plan

Moore Square Master Plan DOWNTOWN

57

PA R K S T O D AY | R A L E I G H , N O R T H C A R O L I N A

Parks are public places that serve multiple purposes; they’re kind of like the city’s living room.

MITCHELL SILVER, FORMER R ALEIGH PL ANNING DIRECTOR

R ALEIGH IS A GROWING CIT Y INVESTING TO REVITALIZE AND EXPAND THE PARK SYSTEM. $

29.8

247

22.9 176

$

16.5

12.6 $131

12.9 $

40

31 $37

Hartford

$

DC

97

$ $

39

Chicago

acres per thousand residents

58

75

$

7.6

87

$

38

$

Raleigh

Minneapolis

$ per resident for park maintenance & operations

31

$

4.6 6

$

Houston $ per resident for new construction

29

$

Boston

ASPIR ATIONS & CHALLENGES Meeting Growing Demands for More Green Space Downtown New businesses, restaurants, cultural attractions, and residents are moving to Downtown Raleigh and are in need of more green space. With downtown largely built out, Raleigh must look to other means of adding open space. Two promising options include adding parklets — temporary mini parks — and converting underutilized land into public parks.

Reclaiming Historic Squares Moore and Nash Squares are underutilized today because of loitering and maintenance concerns, but Raleigh is looking to renew both squares. Moore Square is envisioned as a welcoming, vibrant urban square; in contrast, Nash could become a quiet place for relaxing amid the growing Warehouse District.

Broadening Input to Park Decisions Recent planning efforts in Raleigh have featured an inclusive process, reflecting a shift towards experience-based park planning models. This model helps ensure the park system is adapting to meet the needs of the growing and changing population.

Preserving Heritage, History, and Memory A key stopover point for jazz musicians traveling from New York to Atlanta, Raleigh historically was a key African American social hub. John Chavis Memorial Park was a regional draw for African Americans during segregation — a counterpart to the whites-only Pullen Park across town.

A master plan is currently in progress to renew and restore Chavis Park.

59

CONTEM POR A RY PROJ EC TS | R A LE IG H , NORTH C A ROLIN A

Downtown Raleigh Experience Plan Sasaki Associates

Devereux Meadows

The Downtown Raleigh Experience Plan recommends a set of strategic public investments for the next decade to further enhance the Raleigh experience for residents, workers, and tourists by building on its authentic sense of place.

Sasaki is working with the City of Raleigh to develop the next big ideas to make Downtown Raleigh a better place to live, work, and play. The plan identifies five catalytic project areas throughout downtown. These are the areas where strategic public investment can best improve walkability, access to green space, and active retail. Citywide links, such as north-south greenways, connect downtown to adjacent neighborhoods and nearby green spaces.

Caswell Square

The downtown plan is currently in its final stage of development, scheduled for adoption this year.

Nash Square

Dix-Devereux Greenway

Dix property

60

William Peace University

Governorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Mansion

Chavis-Oakwood Greenway

Moore Square

Shaw University

John Chavis Memorial Park

61

CONTEM POR A RY PROJ EC TS | R A LE IG H , NORTH C A ROLIN A

GRANULAR PAVEMENT & MOVABLE CHAIRS PUBLIC RESTROOMS & UTILITY ROOM ENTRANCE CIVIC LANDFORM (WITH EMBEDDED PUBLIC BATHROOMS,

FAMILY AREA

NATURAL PLAY VALLEY CHILDREN’S PLAY

CAFÉ

LINEAR PLAZA

NATIVE EDGE

LINEAR PLAZA

PLAY MOUNDS

6 16

2 15

7

ENTRY PLAZA

5

13

18

8 12

17

20 14 10

19

11 4

9 1

3

PERIMETER WALL

NATIVE EDGE CIVIC PLAZA

Moore Square Master Plan

WATER PLAY CENTRAL LAWN

CUSTOM DESIGNED BENCHES NATIVE EDGE

Christopher Counts Studio

2010 MASTER PLAN CONCEPT The redesign of Moore Square, one of three remaining

CENTRAL LAWN

EVENT STAGING AREA

Moore Square is one offrom the two squares Christmas’ 1792 four-square town plan in the capital City of Raleigh, North Carolina. It is a public squares thesurviving historic Plan ofofWilliam Raleigh, will provide public space with a rich history and a magnificent stand of mature oak trees, giving it tremendous potential to shape the new identity of Raleigh in the 21st high Like quality space tothe support Raleigh’s recent Century. manypublic cities throughout United States, the City of Oaks is enjoying a resurgence of life in its downtown core. As an increasing number of young adults, empty nesters, and new residents move back to downtown for its amenities and urban lifestyle, improvement of the quality of Raleigh’s public downtown revival. space is critical to its continued economic and cultural growth. This investment in improvements to Moore Square will distinguish Raleigh as a city with premier public spaces and act as a catalyst for downtown growth and economic development. As the City of Raleigh continues to draw new urban dwellers The proposed Moore Square Plan, designed

by Christopher attracted to a burgeoning downtown lifestyle, the Master city will require beautiful civic spaces to sustain this flourishing urban activity and landmark cultural growth.

The Moore Square MasterStudio, Plan concept design honors the Square’s while establishing a forward looking vision for a 21st century urban Counts reflects the site’s cultural historyhistoric while heritage providing space. The Master Plan seeks to elevate the status of the Square to its historical importance as one of the original four squares of the City of Raleigh, while opportunities for expanded activities today. To preserve the square’s giving physical expression to the progressive, contemporary and diverse aspirations of the citizens of Raleigh today.

iconic grove of mature oak trees, the design team performed rigorous analysis to understand existing conditions and developed management strategies to protect tree health during construction.

Master plan confirmation for Moore Square is currently underway.

Construction is projected for completion in 2017.

62

STORM WATER CISTERN, & UTILITY ROOM)

Trail Network Improvements City of Raleigh Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resource Department

Raleigh has more than twice as many miles of trails per person than the average park agency, and the city is exploring ways to make the system even better.

FARMERS’ MARKET AREA

The trail network reaches to all corners of the city, but plugging key gaps, especially in and around downtown, is a high need. Raleigh is also exploring a bicycle share program that could better link North Carolina State University with downtown and the surrounding parks and cultural resources. The Capital Area Greenway Planning & Design Guide, adopted at the beginning of this year, will guide the future management and expansion of Raleigh’s trail and greenway network.

ENTRY PLAZA

GRANULAR PAVEMENT & MOVABLE CHAIRS PERIMETER WALL

9

63

...an extended system of boulevards, or ornamental avenues, rather than a series of detached open areas or public squares.

HOR ACE WILLIAM SHALER CLEVEL AND

64

MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA

The Grand Rounds, 1883 Horace William Shaler Cleveland

In 1883, with increasing development pressure on the rapidly urbanizing Twin Cities, Minneapolis formed a Board of Park Commissioners, independent from the city government. The board quickly hired landscape architect Horace William Shaler Cleveland to create a master plan for the park system.

In his 1883 plan, Cleveland envisioned a connected system — a circuit of open spaces joined by public boulevards — rather than a set of discrete parks. He believed this system should highlight the unique topographic and environmental features of the land in Minneapolis, suggesting parkways on both sides of the “priceless jewel” of the Mississippi River Gorge. These parkways would encircle Lake Calhoun, Lake Harriet, and Lake of the Isles and continue to create a 20-mile circuit around the downtown.

William Watts Folwell — the first president of the University of Minnesota and president of the Minneapolis Parks Board from 1895 to 1903 — bemoaned the failure to implement much of Cleveland’s plan and led the board to develop a more expansive framework, dubbed the Grand Rounds, building on Cleveland’s plan. Additions included expanding the Chain of Lakes to integrate Cedar Lake, extending an east-west parkway to connect to a park in the city’s northeast corner, and extending the circuit south to the University of Minnesota campus.

While implementation differed in some significant ways from both Cleveland’s initial plan and the subsequent Grand Rounds plan, Cleveland’s vision of a chain of open spaces connected by grand public boulevards and encircling Minneapolis has become a defining feature of the city today.

65

H I S TO R I C V I S I O N | M I N N E A P O L I S , M I N N E S O TA

66

67

PA R K S T O D AY | M I N N E A P O L I S , M I N N E S O TA

CELEBR ATING A TOP PARK SYSTEM Ranked first for the past two years by the Trust for Public Land, the Minneapolis park system is considered one of the best in the country. Today, 94% of Minneapolis residents live within a half-mile of a park, and nearly 100 miles of off-street trails further enhance connectivity, access, and recreation.

Factors contributing to the system’s success include a history of great leadership, a governmental structure that allows greater authority for parks and recreation, and an engaged, supportive citizen base.

The Park and Recreation Board’s vision is “in 2020, the Minneapolis park system is a premier destination that welcomes and captivates residents and visitors.”

This aspiration is clearly already within reach.

Historic Park vision Network vision (trail, boulevard, greenway)

Park System Today Park vision realized Trail network Additional parks City limit ½ mile

68

RiverFirst

DO

W

Nicollet Mall

Water Works

NT

OW

N

69

PA R K S T O D AY | M I N N E A P O L I S , M I N N E S O TA

The reinvented Nicollet Mall will be another shining jewel in the crown...one of the many ways we are integrating our gorgeous river with our bustling, growing downtown.

MAYOR BETSY HODGES

A L ARGE COMMITMENT TO MAINTENANCE WILL HELP MINNEAPOLISâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S PARK SYSTEM REMAIN ONE OF THE BEST IN THE COUNTRY.

29.8

$

247

22.9 176

$

16.5

12.6 $131

12.9 $

40

31 $37

Hartford

$

DC

97

$ $

39

Chicago

acres per thousand residents

70

75

$

7.6

87

$

38

$

Raleigh

Minneapolis

$ per resident for park maintenance & operations

31

$

4.6 6

$

Houston $ per resident for new construction

29

$

Boston

ASPIR ATIONS & CHALLENGES Maintaining a Successful Park Network for Future Generations The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board was founded more than 130 years ago. The board’s structure as an independently elected organization has helped it develop and sustain a parks system that is among the best in the country. Today, strong park leadership is planning ahead to make sure the system will continue to thrive.

Renewing Aging Facilities Minneapolis’s park system has evolved over the decades, and many facilities now need repairs and renovation so they can continue to serve their communities. For example, most of the city’s recreation centers were built in the 1970s. Today, the city is taking steps to reinvest in the park system.

Sustaining a Top Park System Ecologically Like many parks around the country, local plants and animals face invasive newcomers — non-native species that spread quickly when introduced to an area, choking out other vegetation and disrupting natural cycles. Invasive threats in Minneapolis include Oriental bittersweet, Japanese barberry, and zebra mussels. The Park and Recreation Board is taking steps to limit the spread of these harmful species.

Reconnecting to the Mississippi River Historically the Mississippi Riverfront was industrial, lined with rail and manufacturing facilities. Over the past decades, there has been a shift to reclaim the riverfront for public use, completing missing links in the city’s Grand Rounds.

71

CO N T E M P O R A RY P R OJ EC T S | M I N N E A P O L I S , M I N N E S O TA

Nicollet Mall

James Corner Field Operations

The Nicollet Mall redesign updates an iconic pedestrian thoroughfare to create a more pedestrian-friendly street, to increase greening in the city, and to catalyze economic growth in the surrounding urban area.

Originally designed by Lawrence Halprin, a well-known landscape architect, Nicollet Mall is home to the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s highest concentration of jobs and valuable real estate.

With downtown populations on the rise, the City of Minneapolis enlisted James Corner Field Operations to redesign this beloved public space. Retaining the original curvilinear street design, the proposed plan looks to create a downtown destination, a greener and more attractive place to walk and experience the city, a place to appreciate public art, and an opportunity to engage in social interactions. This investment in the public realm also aims to spur new economic growth and increase access to other parts of Minneapolisâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s park system.

The project is currently under construction and is scheduled for completion in 2017.

72

73

CO N T E M P O R A RY P R OJ EC T S | M I N N E A P O L I S , M I N N E S O TA

Water Works

SCAPE / L ANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Rogers Partners

Located on one of the Mississippi River’s most dynamic sections, the Water Works design will express the riverfront’s history, address the needs of its community partners, and enable new kinds of use and enjoyment.

The location’s complex natural bluff ecology and man-made, water-powered milling inspired SCAPE to design the space as three distinct zones. Each proposed area interprets the riverfront’s rich history, expresses its natural features, and increases its connection to the area’s growing mixed-use neighborhoods.

SCAPE has recently completed the schematic design of Water Works. The first phase of the project is scheduled for completion in early 2018.

74

RiverFirst Tom Leader Studio Kennedy & Violich Architecture

The RiverFirst initiative is a 40-year vision to transform Minneapolis’s upper riverfront from a historically industrial riverfront to a public amenity.

RiverFirst is a proposed park plan and implementation framework to focus investment in Minneapolis’ greatest natural amenity — the Mississippi River. Focused on four major themes — water, health, mobility, and green economy — the RiverFirst initiative seeks to reconnect the riverfront to adjacent neighborhoods and offer new opportunities for socialization. RiverFirst proposes new parks, expanded economic opportunities, and a robust outreach process to bring together residents, businesses, and local organizations.

The RiverFirst plan was adopted by the City of Minneapolis in 2012. Many of the plan’s suggested priority projects are currently in the schematic design phase.

75

The use made of the parks ranges from the highly organized play of the small childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s playgrounds and recreation centres to the complete restfulness and simple appeal of natural landscape in reservations of forest, meadow, and valley.

ARTHUR COLEMAN COMEY

76

HOUSTON, TEXAS

Houston: Tentative Plans for Its Development, 1913 Arthur Coleman Comey

The first citywide plans for Houston resulted from a local desire to create a network of open spaces and boulevards tied to the region’s bayous. Cambridge, Massachusetts, landscape architect Arthur Coleman Comey proposed the first city park system in his 1913 report to the Houston Park Commission: Houston: Tentative Plans for Its Development. Comey’s plan included an inner greenway system following the bayous, an outer ring of larger parks encircling the city, and dispersed smaller neighborhood amenities such as playgrounds, recreation centers, and squares. Comey not only designed a physical layout of the parks, but also proposed transportation network improvements and the formation of a “Metropolitan Improvement Commission” to plan and administer the city’s public works projects.

The first portions of a citywide park and parkway system were completed under the guidance of renowned St. Louis landscape architect and planner George E. Kessler. The centerpieces of his design were Hermann Park and Main Boulevard.

Though the full extent of Comey’s 1913 plan was never realized, a number of the large urban parks were created and are treasured by Houstonians today. Contemporary efforts in the city, such as the Bayou Greenways initiative, propose connected greenways that closely follow Comey’s original plan.

77

H IS TORIC VISION | HOU S TON , TEX A S

78

79

PA R K S T O D AY | H O U S T O N , T E X A S

KEEPING UP WITH DIVERSE DEMANDS IN A LARGE AND GROWING CITY With more than 400 parks totaling nearly 50,000 acres, Houston’s park network is among the largest in the country. Add to this a rapidly growing population — Houston was the eighth fastest growing large city from 2000 to 2012 — and extreme and changing weather, the result is a system that is dealing with many diverse strains. Comey and Kessler’s foresight in the early 1900s left a well-served central city in terms of park acreage, but today, many parts of the inner city are in need of reinvestment.

In contrast, many outer communities need new park space and trails to keep up with growing demand.

Overall, less than half of Houstonians live within walking distance to a park, and given Houston’s auto-oriented development patterns, increasing walkable park access and promoting active living throughout the city is especially important.

Historic Park vision Network vision (trail, boulevard, greenway)

Park System Today Park vision realized Additional parks City limit ½ mile

80

Memorial Park Master Plan

Buffalo Bayou Promenade Discovery Green

81

PA R K S T O D AY | H O U S T O N , T E X A S

Changing neighborhoods through parks has been the core principal behind the work weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve been doing at the Houston Parks and Recreation Department for the past ten years.

JOE TURNER, DIRECTOR, HOUSTON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT

HOUSTON HAS A L ARGE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL RESOURCES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION AND REINVESTMENT $

29.8

247

22.9 176

$

16.5

12.6 $131

12.9 $

40

31 $37

Hartford

$

DC

97

$ $

39

Chicago

acres per thousand residents

82

75

$

7.6

87

$

38

$

Raleigh

Minneapolis

$ per resident for park maintenance & operations

31

$

4.6 6

$

Houston $ per resident for new construction

29

$

Boston

Discovery Green. ©Hargreaves Associates

ASPIR ATIONS & CHALLENGES Managing a Large and Growing System Houston’s park system today is racing to keep up with growing demand while also sustaining its historic and older central parks. These twin challenges of inward investment and outward growth are exacerbated by the size of the system. To address diverse challenges across a large city, Houston has adopted a sector approach to park planning. The current parks master plan is looking at each sector individually, to provide a more focused view of each area’s distinct challenges and opportunities and create more equitable access to high quality parks across the city.

Dealing with Water Houston’s experience with water over the past ten years has been a roller coaster ride. After facing Hurricane Ike in 2008, Houston experienced years of below-average rainfall in one of the worst droughts in history. Then, earlier this year, heavy rainfalls brought severe flooding to the city. With anticipated changes over the next century, the roller coaster is likely to continue, with hotter temperatures leading to more dry spells for the city. Parks and bayous will become increasingly important for the city, helping to store and absorb rainfall, but they will also need to incorporate new species that can withstand prolonged droughts.

Generating Revenue Today, $1.4 billion is needed for renovations, new parkland, and new amenities to meet existing community needs. In addition, another $2.5 billion is anticipated to be needed over the coming decades to keep up with growing demand.

Partners like Hermann Park Conservancy, one of the first and most successful conservancy models in the country; Buffalo Bayou Partnership; and Trees for Houston are playing an increasingly important role in sustaining and improving Houston’s park system.

83

CONTEM POR A RY PROJ EC TS | HOU S TON , TEX A S

84

Buffalo Bayou Promenade SWA Group

Reconnecting the city of Houston to the waterway that gave it life, the Buffalo Bayou Promenade transformed a degraded, channelized waterway into 3,000 linear feet of rich urban parkland.

SWAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s design added over 20 acres of park space to Houstonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s inner city, negotiating difficult conditions of overhead freeways and utilities, steep slopes, limited access and flood-prone land. The Buffalo Bayou Promenade project provides continuous pedestrian and bike trails, public art, and a unique lighting installation that changes with the phases of the moon.

Construction is underway, with the entire park scheduled for completion at the end of summer 2015.

85

CONTEM POR A RY PROJ EC TS | HOU S TON , TEX A S

Memorial Park Master Plan Nelson Byrd Woltz

A 1,400+ acre park that has long been a jewel of Houstonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s park system, Memorial Park is embarking on a long-range plan for a more sustainable and resilient future.

Nelson Byrd Woltzâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s long-range master planning effort for Memorial Park envisions a cultural and environmental revitalization of a park that has suffered several natural disasters and years of deferred maintenance.

Building on recent investments such as the beloved Living Bridge, the long-range plan is engaging experts, stakeholders, and the community to balance active and passive uses and promote an ecological design.

In April 2015, Houston City Council unanimously passed the Memorial Park Master Plan and improvements are now underway.

86

Discovery Green Hargreaves Associates

This highly programmed urban park has become a signature open space for Houston, drawing activity to its downtown.

Hargreaves Associatesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; design (with Page Southerland Page Architects) focuses a range of active and passive recreation opportunities at a key downtown location adjacent to the George R. Brown Convention Center.

Park program includes an interactive fountain, two acres of botanical gardens, a custom-designed playground, and an amphitheater with outdoor stage.

Discovery Green was opened in April 2008.

87

88

89

We want a ground to which people may easily go when the dayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work is done, and where they may stroll for an hour, seeing, hearing, and feeling nothing of the bustle and jar of the streets where they shall, in effect, find the city put far away from themâ&#x20AC;Ś FREDERICK L AW OLMSTED

90

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS The Emerald Necklace, 1894 Frederick Law Olmsted

Boston’s park movement began in the 1850s as a reaction to the success of New York’s Central Park. The Boston Parks Commission was formed in July 1875, and this group proposed a contiguous park system from Boston Common to West Roxbury. During the 1870s, Frederick Law Olmsted designed two major park projects in this system — Arnold Arboretum and the Back Bay Fens. In 1887 he was commissioned to develop a plan to connect these parks as well as to design additional parks.

The park system that Olmsted envisioned, now commonly referred to as the Emerald Necklace, was a string of nine parks connected by green boulevards and extending seven miles from downtown Boston through its neighborhoods. The system included the Boston Common, the Public Garden, the Commonwealth Avenue Mall, the Back Bay Fens, the Riverway, Olmsted Park, Jamaica Pond, Arnold Arboretum, and Franklin Park, strung together by a series of parkways. The three parks that predated Olmsted’s plan — the Boston Common, the Public Garden, and the Commonwealth Avenue Mall — were seamlessly knit into his greater vision.

Olmsted envisioned this ring of parks to include active and passive recreation spaces, garden walks, and a zoo. His vision for the Back Bay Fens portion of the plan focused on its potential for sanitary improvement — here he proposed a salt marsh restoration that would aid in storing flood waters from the Muddy River and Stony Brook. Olmsted’s work on the Boston park system continued for almost 20 years and resulted in the acquisition and development of over 2,000 acres of parkland for the public good.

91

H IS TORIC VISION | BOS TON , M A S SACH U S ET T S

92

93

94

95

PA R K S T O D AY | B O S T O N , M A S S A C H U S E T T S

SHARE YOUR VISION FOR BOSTON’S PARKS Great parks systems are often generated by an inspired vision and careful planning. B oston’s parks are the result of more than a century of creative thinking by designers l ike Frederick Law Olmsted.

As we look ahead to the next generation of parks and amenities, what are your ideas for enhancing Boston’s parks? THINK BIG AND BE CREATIVE!

Historic Park vision Network vision (trail, boulevard, greenway)

Park System Today Park vision realized Additional parks City limit ½ mile

96

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY CONNECTIVITY SOCIAL EQUITY SUSTAINABILITY AND RESILIENCY RETHINKING INFRASTRUCTURE ACTIVE PROGRAMMING AND USE

97

survey FEEDBACK Visitors to the Emerald Networks exhibition at Northeastern University were invited to share their vision for Boston’s parks. The majority of responses focused on the addition of specific active programs in the parks and the creation of an ecologically rich and sustainable system.

Active Programming and Use

Sustainability and Resiliency

Community Connectivity

42% OF RESPONSES

24% OF RESPONSES

22% OF RESPONSES

“Local art in the parks: an invaluable opportunity to connect tourists with the local artists that make our city unique.”

“Develop creative public spaces along the waterfront to adapt to rising sea levels.”

“Protected and connected bike paths bring communities together and liberate transit!”

Feedback emphasized the need for both passive seating and active play spaces for both children and adults. There was a desire for more local art and interpretive and educational programs in the parks.

98

Feedback emphasized the desire for the incorporation of reuse and green technologies into the parks, and creating layered spaces that function as habitat for plants and animals as well as people.

Feedback overwhelming focused on the desire for parks and trails to reinforce alternate transportation (walking and biking) rather than vehicular travel.

Rethinking Infrastructure

Social Equity

Economic Development

4% OF RESPONSES

4% OF RESPONSES

4% OF RESPONSES

“Create more permeable infrastructure that pays more attention to ecological systems.”

“Events in Boston’s existing parks that connect people regardless of who they are/ where they’re from, i.e., movie night in Copley Square!”

“Invest in open space, not olympic venues.

Maintain and improve Boston’s parks!!!”

Feedback focused on the reuse of abandoned lots as parks in areas of park need and the introduction of infrastructure that pays more attention to ecological systems.

Feedback highlighted parks as an opportunity to bring people from different backgrounds and parts of the city together and raise social awareness.

Feedback expressed a desire to invest in public spaces, and to make other tradeoffs or increase taxes to achieve this.

99

100

101

102

103

104

LOOKING FORWARD The Value of Park Systems

In conclusion, we would like to reflect on the park system as both the generative foundation of the Emerald Networks exhibition and book, as well as a valuable lens for the park user, steward, and designer. Park systems are an interconnected network of parks and parkways that are part of a comprehensive and balanced system within a city. The best park systems include offerings diverse in scale, program, and type — from highly urban pocket parks to great natural reserves — which collectively showcase the natural resources of the regional landscape while also providing a range of recreational experiences.

This definition positions the individual park as a unique contributor to the overall experience of a place. Within each park system, some parks contribute more to ecological health while others are expressive of unique cultural histories. Some parks serve to increase the sense of vibrancy and community in dense downtown areas while others provide escape from the bustle of the city. An understanding of a park’s role in the broader park system allows the agent, the designer, and the user to appreciate the park’s unique qualities and make informed decisions about how to appropriately adapt it to changing needs and times.

This thread of systems thinking runs throughout our case study cities and the projects selected as examples of innovative contemporary work. There seems to be, for instance, an ideal balance between large park necklaces and dispersed neighborhood parks. Park systems formed of historic squares, like Raleigh or Savannah, are now focused on implementing greenway parks and other measures to improve connectivity.

Parks with historic green necklaces, like Boston or Hartford, are focused on increasing levels and quality of service through dispersed neighborhood parks.

In concert with satisfying human need, park systems allow, ideally, for higher levels of ecological function and environmental health. From Houston’s bayous to the Chicago River to Boston’s old Muddy River, we see waterways are some of the most continuously connected systems in cities. Counter to our repeated past attempts to contain, bury, or divert our waterways, we see cities now actively reclaiming them as critical to system connectivity, environmental health, and, many times, the civic identity of a place.

Lastly, consideration of park systems allows us to better agglomerate and understand the economic value that parks bring to our urban centers. Cities across the United States are competing to attract and retain the best of the future workforce and contending for economic development and tourism.

Cities with well maintained, connected, and diverse park systems — including our case study cities of Washington DC and Minneapolis — often find themselves on lists of the most livable places or the best places to live. This is a feat that no one park can accomplish alone.

Rare will be the opportunity in the 21st century to create an entire park system, as many of the cities in Emerald Networks were able to do in the last century. Our opportunity, instead, is more nuanced and diagnostic. We have the opportunity to see the framework of the park system — whether realized or idealized — as a guide and a charge for us — the civic agents, the park users, and the design professionals — to enhance diversity, increase connectivity, and strengthen civic identity.

105

CREDITS [page 2] Weber Park. Source: Hennepin County Library Special Collections. [page 4–5] Emerald Networks Exhibition. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Christian Phillips Photography. [page 8–9] Clockwise from Top Right: Girls Ready for the Doll Buggy Parade at Riverside Park. Source: Hennepin County Library Special Collections.

May Day Celebration. Source: Hartford History Center, Hartford Public Library.

Weber Park Swimming Pool. Source: Hennepin County Library Special Collections.

Children Playing on Swings. Source: Hennepin County Library Special Collections.

A Day at Camden Park. Source: Hennepin County Library Special Collections.

[page 30–31] Washington DC Historic Map. Source: Image courtesy of the Norman B. Leventhal Map Center at the Boston Public Library.

Bridge Between Lake Calhoun and Lake of the Isles. Source: Hennepin County Library Special Collections.

[page 32–33] Washington DC Plan. Source: image ©Sasaki Associates.

Women Practicing Synchronized Swimming with a Mirror. Source: Hennepin County Library Special Collections.

[page 34–35] Clockwise from Top Right: “Cherry Blossoms Late Afternoon” by Ron Cogswell is licensed under CC BY 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/buP1MG

[page 12–13] Emerald Networks Exhibition. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Jessica Grant. [page 18–19] Hartford Historic Map. Source: General Research Division, The New York Public Library, Astor, Lenox and Tilden Foundations. [page 20–21] Hartford Plan. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates.

Weber Park. Source: Hennepin County Library Special Collections.

[page 22–23] Clockwise from Top Right: Riverside Park. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates.

[page 10–11] Clockwise from Top Right: Chicago Riverwalk. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Christian Phillips Photography.

Keney Park. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates.

Wilmington Waterfront Park. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Craig Kuhner.

The Lawn on D. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Christian Phillips Photography.

Charleston Waterfront Park. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Craig Kuhner.

Lincoln Memorial Landscape and Reflecting Pool. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates.

Dallas Trinity Riverfront. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Craig Kuhner.

106

Athletics, Tennis, 1956. Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf400889, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Bushnell Park. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates. [page 24–25] Capital City Parks Guide Plan. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates. [page 26–27] iQuilt Plan. Source: Images ©Suisman Urban Design.

“Planting Flowers at Charter Oak Landing!” by laura.ouimette is licensed under CC BY 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/MhSar

Open Space System 1965–1990. Lincoln Memorial Landscape and Reflecting Pool.

Source: Images ©Sasaki Associates. [page 36–37] 11th Street Bridge Park. Source: Image ©OLIN + OMA. [page 38–39] From Left: Canal Park. Source: Image ©OLIN. The Park at CityCenter. Source: Gustafson Guthrie Nichol, Image ©Daniel Swartz. [page 42–43] Plan of Chicago pl. 132, Chicago IL, c. 1908. Daniel H. Burnham and Edward H. Bennett architects, Chicago Transparency Co., photographer, Jules Guérin, renderer. Historic Architecture and Landscape Image Collection, Ryerson and Burnham Archives, The Art Institute of Chicago. Digital File #80380. [page 44–45] Chicago Plan. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates. [page 46–47] Clockwise from Top Right: “Buckingham Fountain” by Chris Pelliccione is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0, https:// flic.kr/p/nVf3Xi “Riverwalk Pool” by Jill/Blue Moonbeam Studio is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/38CQ2p

“Frank O. Gehry” by Rocor is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/oRF1LU [page 48–49] Chicago Riverwalk. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Christian Phillips Photography. [page 50–51] From Bottom: Maggie Daley Park. Source: Image ©Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates, Inc. Navy Pier. Source: Image ©James Corner Field Operations. [page 54–55] Raleigh Historic Map. Source: State Archives of North Carolina Map Collection. [page 56–57] Raleigh Plan. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates. [page 58–59] Clockwise from Top Right: “Staring Contest” by Leo Suarez is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/8q6bJa “Raleigh, NC” by James Willamor is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/kQthTu “Pullen Park” by Suzie Tremmel is licensed under CC BY 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/aGFdjR [page 60–61] Downtown Raleigh Experience Plan. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates. [page 62–63] From Left: Moore Square. Source Image ©Christopher Counts Studio.

Trail Network Improvements. Source: Image ©City of Raleigh Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Department. [page 66–67] Historic Minneapolis Plan. Source: Hennepin County Library Special Collections.

[page 68–69] Minneapolis Plan. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates. [page 70–71] Clockwise from Top Right: “Loring Park - Minneapolis, Minnesota” by Doug Kerr is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/amzwLw “img_1810” by Michael Hicks is licensed under CC BY 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/iq3qC “Lake Calhoun” by Christopher Cadlum is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/6Ag7KT [page 72–73] Nicollet Mall. Source: Image ©James Corner Field Operations. [page 74–75] From Left: Water Works. Source: Image ©SCAPE / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE. RiverFirst. Source: Image ©Tom Leader Studio. [page 78–79] Houston Historic Map. Source: Courtesy of Houston Metropolitan Research Center, Houston, Texas (Public Domain).

[page 86–87] Memorial Park Master Plan. Source: Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects, Image ©MIR. Discovery Green. Source: Image ©Hargreaves Associates. [page 88–89] Emerald Networks Exhibition. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Christian Phillips Photography. [page 92–93] Historic Boston Plan. “Plan of Portion of Park System from Common to Franklin Park” January 1894. Lithograph, Job #900, Boston Parks (through #950). Courtesy of the National Park Service, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site. [page 94–95] Emerald Networks Exhibition. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Christian Phillips Photography. [page 96–97] Boston Plan. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates.

[page 80–81] Houston Plan. Source: Image ©Sasaki Associates.

[page 100–101] Emerald Networks Exhibition. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Christian Phillips Photography.

[page 82–83] Clockwise from Top Right: Discovery Green. Source: Image ©Hargreaves Associates.

[page 102–103] Emerald Networks Exhibition. Source: Sasaki Associates, Image ©Jessica Grant.

Buffalo Bayou Promenade. Source: Image ©SWA Group, Bill Tatham, photographer.

“Hermann Park Monument (HDR)” by Knowsphotos is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0, https://flic.kr/p/8jF6YD [page 84–85] Buffalo Bayou Promenade. Source: Image ©SWA Group, Tom Fox, photographer.

107

SOURCES Park Planning Beveridge, Charles E. “Olmsted — His Essential Theory.” Nineteenth Century 20, no. 2 (Fall 2000): 32-37. http://www.olmsted.org/theolmsted-legacy/olmsted-theory-and-design-principles/olmsted-hisessential-theory Fisher, Thomas. “Frederick Law Olmsted and the Campaign for Public Health.” Places Journal, November 2010.

Accessed February 2015. https://placesjournal.org/article/ frederick-law-olmsted-and-the-campaign-for-public-health/

Boston Emerald Necklace Conservancy. “Frederick Law Olmsted.” Emerald Necklace Conservancy website, 2014. Accessed February 2015. http:// www.emeraldnecklace.org/park-overview/frederick-law-olmsted/ Haglund, Karl. Inventing the Charles River. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003.

Library of Congress. “Boston’s Emerald Necklace by F. L. Olmsted” descriptive record. Library of Congress: American Memory website.

Accessed February 2015. http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/landscape/olmsted.html National Park Service. “Olmsted Park System.” National Park Service website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/ massachusetts_conservation/olmsted_park_system.html

Chicago Baer, Stephanie K. “Mayor Cuts Ribbon at Little Village Park.”

Chicago Tribune, December 15, 2014. http://www.chicagotribune. com/news/local/breaking/ct-little-village-park-opening-met20141214-story.html Burnham Plan Centennial. “The Plan of Chicago.” The Burnham Plan Centennial website. The University of Chicago Library, 2009.

Accessed February 2015. http://burnhamplan100.lib.uchicago.edu/ history_future/plan_of_chicago/

108

Chicagology. “1909 Plan of Chicago.” Chicagology.com, 2013.

Accessed February 2015. http://chicagology.com/planofchicago/ City of Chicago — Mayor’s Press Office. “Mayor Emanuel, Chicago Park District To Rehab, Build 77 Playgrounds This Year Through Chicago Plays! Program.” City of Chicago — Mayor’s Press Office press release, February 22, 2015. http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/ en/depts/mayor/press_room/press_releases/2015/february/mayoremanuel--chicago-park-district-to-rehab--build-77-playgrou.html City of Chicago. “Millennium Park History.” City of Chicago website, 2015. Accessed February 2015. http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/ depts/dca/supp_info/millennium_park_history.html Erbentraut, Joseph. “This Sparkling New Park Was a Toxic Brownfield Just 4 Years Ago.” The Huffington Post, December 20, 2014. http:// www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/20/la-villita-park-chicagosuperfund_n_6351140.html Field, Cynthia R. “Burnham Plan.” Electronic Encyclopedia of Chicago. Chicago Historical Society, 2005. Accessed February 2015. http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/191.html Sniderman, Julia. “New Era: 1990-21st Century.” In The City in a Garden: A Photographic History of Chicago’s Parks. Center for American Places in association with the Chicago Parks District, 2001. http://www.chicagoparkdistrict.com/history/city-in-a-garden/new-era/

Contemporary Chicago Projects Chicago Riverwalk. Sasaki Associates. “Chicago Riverwalk.”

Sasaki Associates website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.sasaki.com/project/134/chicago-riverwalk/ Maggie Daley Park. Chicago Park District. Maggie Daley Park website. Accessed February 2015. http://maggiedaleyparkconstruction.org/ Maggie Daley Park. Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates. “Maggie Daley Park.” Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.mvvainc.com/project.php?id=61&c=parks

Chicago Park District. Chicago Park District Strategic Plan. Chicago Park District — Office of Strategy and Policy, August 2012. http:// www.chicagoparkdistrict.com/assets/1/23/StratPlan-FINAL[1]2.pdf

Navy Pier. James Corner Field Operations. “Navy Pier.” James Corner Field Operations website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.fieldoperations.net/project-details/project/navy-pier.html

Chicago Park District. Chicago Park District Strategic Plan: 2014 Update. Chicago Park District, 2014. http://www.chicagoparkdistrict.com/assets/1/23/Strategic_Plan_2014.pdf

Navy Pier. Navy Pier, Inc. Navy Pier website. Accessed February 2015. http://navypier.com/

Hartford

Houston

Carrere & Hastings. A Plan of the City of Hartford: Preliminary report by Carrere & Hastings, Advisory Architects, to the Commission on the City Plan of the City of Hartford, Connecticut, in Relation to the Rectification of the Present Plan and the Development and Extension of the City of Hartford on Comprehensive Lines of Order and Harmony with Recommendations. Hartford, CT: Case, Lockwood & Brainard Company, 1912. (Hosley, William. “Hartford City Plan 1912 by Carrere & Hastings.” SlideShare, February 16, 2014.) http://www. slideshare.net/Billhosley/hartford-city-plan-1912-by-carrere-hastings

Bradley, Alice (Barrie) M. Scardino. Houston’s Hermann Park: A Century of Community. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press, 2013.

City of Hartford. “Hartford Parks.” City of Hartford website, 2015.

Accessed February 2015. http://www.hartford.gov/parks The Cultural Landscape Foundation. “City of Hartford Parks System.”

The Cultural Landscape Foundation website. Published October 16, 2009. http://tclf.org/landslides/city-hartford-parks-system Marteka, Peter. “Hartford’s Ring of Parks.” Hartford Courant, October 24, 2014. http://www.courant.com/courant-250/moments-in-history/ hc-250-hartford-parks-20141024-story.html#page=1 Trust for Public Land. The Park System of Hartford, Connecticut: Renewing a Historic Legacy. Trust for Public Land, October 2007. http://hartfordinfo.org/issues/wsd/parks/HartfordparkReport.pdf

Contemporary Hartford Projects Capital City Parks Guide. Sasaki Associates. Capital City Parks Guide: Plans for Hartford’s Regional, Community, & Neighborhood Parks. City of Hartford, August 2014. http://www.sasaki.com/ project/351/Hartford%202014%20Capital%20City%20Parks%20 Master%20Plan/ iQuilt Plan. Suisman Urban Design. “The iQuilt Plan for Downtown Hartford.” Suisman Urban Design website. Accessed February 2015. http://suisman.com/portfolio/projectsdowntown-hartford-iquilt-plan/ Revitalization of the Connecticut River. Riverfront Recapture.

Riverfront Recapture website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.riverfront.org/

Campion, Steve. “Heat Wave, Drough Poses Threat to Trees Across Houston.” ABC 13 Eyewitness News, August 11, 2015. http://abc13. com/news/heat-wave-poses-threat-to-trees-across-houston/920749/ City of Houston, TX. “General Plan.”

City of Houston website, 2015. Accessed August 2015. http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/general-plan City of Houston, TX. “Parks Master Plan.”

City of Houston website, 2015. Accessed August 2015. http://www.houstontx.gov/parks/masterplan.html City of Houston, TX. Plan Houston. Plan Houston website, 2015.

Accessed August 2015. http://planhouston.org/ City of Houston, TX Office of Sustainability. “Green Space.” City of Houston Office of Sustainability website, 2015. Accessed August 2015. http://www.greenhoustontx.gov/greenspace.html Click2Houston.com. “Ribbon-cutting ceremony for Houston’s first Hike and Bike Trail.” Click2Houston.com, July 9, 2015. http://www. click2houston.com/news/ribboncutting-ceremony-forhoustons-firsthile-and-bike-trail/34073052 Comey, Arthur. Houston; tentative plans for its development: report to The Houston Park Commission. Boston, MA: Press of Geo H. Ellis Co., 1913.

Fernandez, Manny and Richard Pérez-Peña. “Rain Spreads Destruction in Houston, Killing Four.” New York Times. May 26, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/27/us/texas-rains-bringflooding-to-houston-area.html?_r=0 Fox, Stephen. “Planning in Houston: A Historic Overview.”

Architecture + Design Review of Houston, Fall 1985: 12-14.

Gerken, James. “Texas Flooding Could Be A Preview Of Future Extreme Weather Events.” Huffington Post, May 26, 2015. http:// www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/texas-flooding-climatechange_n_7444062.html Houston Parks and Recreation Department. Master Plan Phase II. Houston Parks and Recreation Department, June 2015. http://www. houstontx.gov/parks/pdfs/parksector/06172015/Combined.pdf

109

SOURCES CONTINUED Houston Parks and Recreation Department. Parks Master Plan Phase II: What We Have, What We Need, and Where We Are Headed. Houston Parks and Recreation Department, June 18, 2015. http://www.houstontx.gov/parks/pdfs/2015/ HPARDParksMasterPlanPublicPresentation_061815.pdf Houston Parks and Recreation Department. “Park Partners.”

City of Houston website, 2015. Accessed August 2015. http://www.houstontx.gov/parks/partners.html January-Bevers, Deborah and Lindsey Roche. “Houston’s parks flood. That’s a good thing.” Houston Chronicle, June 24, 2015. http://www.chron.com/local/gray-matters/article/Houston-s-parksflood-That-s-a-good-thing-6344871.php Kotkin, Joel. “America’s Fastest- And Slowest-Growing Cities.” Forbes, March 18, 2013. http://www.forbes.com/pictures/edgl45emig/no-8-houston-tx/ Next City. “Cities Find Creative Ways to Fund Parks.”

Next City, January 8, 2015. https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/ cities-money-parks-funding-ideas Our Great Region 2040. Our Great Region 2040 website, 2014.

Accessed August 2015. http://www.ourregion.org/index.html Wilder, Forrest. “What Climate Change Means for Texas in 11 Charts.” Texas Observer, May 8, 2014. http://www.texasobserver.org/climate-change-means-texas-11-charts/

Houston Contemporary Projects Buffalo Bayou Promenade. Buffalo Bayou Partnership. Buffalo Bayou Partnership website, 2015. Accessed August 2015. http://buffalobayou.org/ Buffalo Bayou Promenade. SWA Group. “Buffalo Bayou Promenade.” SWA Group website. Accessed August 2015. http://www.swagroup.com/project/buffalo-bayou-promenade.html Discovery Green. Discovery Green Conservancy.

Discovery Green website, 2015. Accessed August 2015. http://www.discoverygreen.com/ Discovery Green. Hargreaves Associates. “Discovery Green — Houston Downtown Park.” Hargreaves Associates website. Accessed August 2015. http://www.hargreaves.com/projects/PublicParks/ HoustonDowntownPark/

110

Memorial Park. Memorial Park Conservancy. Memorial Park Conservancy website, 2014. Accessed August 2015. http://www.memorialparkconservancy.org/ Memorial Park. Nelson Byrd Woltz. “Memorial Park.”

Nelson Byrd Woltz website. Accessed August 2015. http://www.nbwla.com/projects/boards/memorial-park

Minneapolis City of Minneapolis. “Bicycling in Minneapolis.” City of Minneapolis website. Last updated January 26, 2015. http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/bicycles/ Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Comprehensive Plan: 2007-2020. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, October 17, 2007. https://www.minneapolisparks.org/_asset/9h52lq/ comprehensive_plan.pdf Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Superintendent’s Annual Report 2012: Parks We Are Proud Of. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, March 2013. https://www.minneapolisparks.org/_asset/ hk2pxy/2012_superintendent_annual_report.pdf Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Superintendent’s Annual Report 2013: Number One! Minneapolis Parks Ranked Best in the Country. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, April 2014. https://www.minneapolisparks.org/_asset/xtl6f9/2013_ superintendent_annual_report.pdf Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. Superintendent’s Annual Report 2014: Minneapolis Parks on a National Stage. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, February 2015. https://www.minneapolisparks. org/_asset/j2jr2h/2014_superintendent_annual_report.pdf Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board. “Vision and Values: Our Guide to Future Development, Operations and Maintenance of the Minneapolis Park System into 2020.” Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board website, 2015. Accessed February 2015. https:// www.minneapolisparks.org/about_us/mission_vision_and_values/ Roper, Eric. “Minneapolis Park Board Warns of Funding Shortfalls Ahead.” Star Tribune, September 14, 2014. http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/275024231.html Smith, David C. “Archive for the ‘Horace Cleveland’ Tag.” Minneapolis Park History (blog). Accessed February 2015. http://minneapolisparkhistory.com/tag/horace-cleveland/

Tishler, William H. and Virginia S. Luckhardt. “H. W. S. Cleveland: Pioneer Landscape Architect to the Upper Midwest.”

Minnesota History, Fall 1985: 281-291. http://collections.mnhs.org/ MNHistoryMagazine/articles/49/v49i07p281-291.pdf Trust for Public Land. “Walkable Park Access” tab. In “2014 City Park Facts Park Acreage, Access, and Distribution Data” Excel spreadsheet, supplement to 2014 City Park Facts. Trust for Public Land, 2014. https://www.tpl.org/2014-city-park-facts, spreadsheet download available at https://www.tpl.org/sites/default/files/files_upload/ CONSOLIDATED%20PARK%20ACREAGE%2C%20 ACCESS%2C%20AND%20DISTRIBUTION.xls Umbanhowar, Elizabeth. “Minneapolis, Minnesota: Minneapolis Waters: Life of the City.” Open Space Seattle 2100: Designing Seattle’s Green Network for the Next Century website. University of Washington Department of Landscape Architecture. Last updated May 6, 2006. http://depts.washington.edu/open2100/Resources/1_ OpenSpaceSystems/Open_Space_Systems/minneapolis.pdf

Contemporary Minneapolis Projects Nicollet Mall. James Corner Field Operations. “Nicollet Mall.”

James Corner Field Operations website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.fieldoperations.net/project-details/project/ nicollet-mile.html Nicollet Mall. Nicollet Mall Project. Nicollet Mall Project website, 2013. Accessed February 2015. http://www.nicolletmallproject.com/ RiverFirst. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board and Minneapolis Parks Foundation, with University of Minnesota College of Design and Walker Art Center. Minneapolis Riverfront Design Competition website. Accessed February 2015. http://minneapolisriverfrontdesigncompetition.com/ RiverFirst. Tom Leader Studio. “Minneapolis RiverFirst.” Tom Leader Studio website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.tomleader.com/ studio/projects/project_details.php?id_cat=3&id_proj=43 RiverFirst. Tom Leader Studio and Kennedy & Violich Architecture under the Minneapolis Park Board’s Minneapolis Riverfront Development Initiative, with Groundwork City Building and HR&A Advisors. RiverFirst: A Park Design Proposal and Implementation Framework for the Minneapolis Upper Riverfront. RiverFirst Initiative, March 2012. http://www.slideshare.net/MplsRiverfrontDesign/ riverfirst-vision-april-2012

Water Works. Law, Janette. “SCAPE with Roger Marvel named Water Works park designers.” Minneapolis Parks Foundation news release, July, 8 2013. http://mplsparksfoundation.org/2013/07/08/ news-release-scape-with-rogers-marvel-named-water-works-parkdesigners/ Water Works. Minneapolis Parks Foundation. “Water Works: A RiverFirst Signature Park.” Minneapolis Parks Foundation website, 2015. Accessed February 2015. http://mplsparksfoundation.org/projects/water-works/ Water Works. SCAPE / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE. “Water Works.” SCAPE / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.scapestudio.com/projects/water-works/

Raleigh Carlyle, Erin. “America’s 20 Fastest-Growing Cities.” Forbes, February 14, 2014. http://www.forbes.com/sites/erincarlyle/2014/02/14/ americas-20-fastest-growing-cities/ City of Raleigh. “Downtown Experience Plan.” City of Raleigh website. Last updated March 9, 2015. http://www.raleighnc.gov/ business/content/PlanUrbanDesign/Articles/DowntownPlan.html City of Raleigh. “Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources System Plan.” City of Raleigh website. Last updated March 9, 2015. http://www.raleighnc.gov/parks/content/PRecDesignDevelop/ Articles/2012PRSystemPlan.html McNeely, Ben. “Raleigh Squared: The City Started with Five Downtown Parks.” Raleigh Public Record, January 21, 2013. http://raleighpublicrecord.org/opinion/2013/01/21/ raleigh-squared-the-city-started-with-five-downtown-parks/ National Park Service. “Raleigh: A Capital City.”

National Park Service website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/raleigh/earlyhistory.htm UNC School of Education. “William Christmas’ plan for Raleigh, 1792.” Learn NC website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.learnnc.org/lp/multimedia/9699

111

SOURCES CONTINUED Contemporary Raleigh Projects

Washington DC

Downtown Raleigh Experience Plan. Sasaki Associates. Downtown Raleigh Experience Plan. City of Raleigh, January 2015.

DC Department of Parks and Recreation. District of Columbia Parks and Recreation Master Plan: Vision Framework. DC Department of Parks and Recreation, March 2014. http://dpr.dc.gov/sites/ default/files/dc/sites/dpr/publication/attachments/DCPRMP_ VisionDocument_web_0.pdf

Moore Square Park Master Plan. City of Raleigh. Moore Square Master Plan. City of Raleigh, 2011. http://www.raleighnc.gov/ content/PRecDesignDevelop/Documents/ParkPlanning/MooreSquare MasterPlan/2011MSqMasterPlanDocument.pdf Moore Square Park Master Plan. Raleigh Parks and Recreation Department. Moore Square Comprehensive Tree Strategy. Raleigh Parks and Recreation Department, March 2013. http://www.raleighnc. gov/content/PRecDesignDevelop/Documents/ParkPlanning/ MooreSquareMasterPlan/2012_0325_%20%20Moore%20Square%20 Comprehensive%20Tree%20Study%20Main.pdf Trail Network Improvements. City of Raleigh. “Capital Area Greenway Trail System.” City of Raleigh website. Last updated March 19, 2015. http://www.raleighnc.gov/parks/content/ PRecDesignDevelop/Articles/CapitalAreaGreenwayTrailSystem.html Trail Network Improvements. City of Raleigh Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Department. Capital Area Greenway Planning and Design Guide. City of Raleigh Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Department, January 2015. http://www.raleighnc.gov/content/PRecDesignDevelop/ Documents/ParkPlanning/CapitalAreaGreenwaySystem/ CAGGreenwayPlanningandDesignGuide.pdf

DC Department of Parks and Recreation. Washington, DC, Department of Parks and Recreation Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP), September 2, 2010-September 30, 2013.

DC Department of Parks and Recreation, 2013. http://dpr.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dpr/publication/ attachments/dpr_SCORP.pdf National Capital Planning Commission. “Parks and Open Space Element.” Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital. National Capital Planning Commission, August 5, 2004. http://www.ncpc. gov/DocumentDepot/Publications/CompPlan/CompPlanPartFive_ ParksOpenSpace.pdf National Capital Planning Commission, Government of the District of Columbia, and National Park Service. CapitalSpace: Ideas to Achieve the Full Potential of Washington’s Parks and Open Space. National Capital Planning Commission, Government of the District of Columbia, and National Park Service, 2010. http://www.ncpc.gov/ DocumentDepot/Publications/CapitalSpace/CapitalSpace_Plan.pdf National Capital Planning Commission, Government of the District of Columbia, and National Park Service. CapitalSpace: A Progress Report. National Capital Planning Commission, Government of the District of Columbia, and National Park Service, January 2012. http://www.ncpc.gov/DocumentDepot/Publications/CapitalSpace/ CapitalSpaceProgressReport.pdf National Park Service. “The L’Enfant and McMillan Plans.”

National Park Service website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/wash/lenfant.htm Stephenson, Richard W. A Plan Wholly New: Pierre L’Enfant’s Plan of the City of Washington. Washington, DC: Library of Congress, 1993.

112

Contemporary Washington DC Projects 11th Street Bridge Park. 11th Street Bridge Park. 11th Street Bridge Park website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.bridgepark.org/ 11th Street Bridge Park. Kratz, Scott. “11th Street Bridge Park Selects OMA+OLIN Design.” 11th Street Bridge Park press release, October 15, 2014. http://bridgepark.org/news/11th-street-bridgepark-announces-selected-design-team-oma-olin 11th Street Bridge Park. OLIN. “11th Street Bridge Park.” OLIN website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.theolinstudio.com/ flash#/projects/type/11th Street Bridge Park Canal Park. Canal Park Development Association, Inc. “About the Park.” Canal Park website, 2015. Accessed February 2015. http://www.canalparkdc.org/about Canal Park. OLIN. “Washington Canal Park.” OLIN website.

Accessed February 2015. http://www.theolinstudio.com/flash#/ projects/type/washington-canal-park CityCenterDC. CityCenterDC. CityCenterDC website.

Accessed February 2015. http://www.citycenterdc.com/ CityCenterDC. Gustafson Guthrie Nichol. “City Center DC.” Gustafson Guthrie Nichol website. Accessed February 2015. http://www.ggnltd.com/projects_detail.php?id=9

113

116