NEW YORK—The New York City Department of Parks and Recreation relies heavily on public-private partnerships to maintain the city’s green space. Some say it’s a boon as budget cuts sweep the city; some say it opens the door to the commercialization of what was once pristine parkland.
NYC Park Advocates President Geoffrey Croft recalls the 7500-square-foot Chanel advertisement that made headlines in 2008 when it took over the band shell in Central Park. Well-connected organizations give private corporations greater access to park space, whether it is a giant ad, a restaurant, or some other commercial enterprise, says Croft on his blog, A Walk in the Park.
The parks are still public property under the jurisdiction of the Parks Department, but private entities such as Central Park Conservancy, or Battery Park City Authority, help maintain the grounds. Their primary function is fundraising; they petition public officials or approach private corporations for funds.
“We’re not a company like IBM,” says Eugene Patron, the spokesperson for Prospect Park Alliance, a non-profit organization that works with the city to maintain Prospect Park in Brooklyn. “People often say it’s the privatization of public space, but the alliance started as a community organization. It is still public space, we just help the parks department raise funds and implement best practices,” countered Patron in a phone interview.
At a City Council Hearing in April concerning security in the city’s parks, Deputy Commissioner of Parks and Recreation Liam Kavanaugh noted that private fund-raising saves the department money, which can then be distributed to parks not engaged in a private partnership.
Croft says city officials talk about the redistribution of these funds, “but when you ask for details, the conversation ends pretty abruptly.”
Some councilors at the hearing complained about the disparity between public-private parks in Manhattan and the less “sexy” parks in the outer boroughs. Parks that rely on the public coffers alone have a far lower standard of security and general upkeep than their public-private counterparts, found the council.
“I don’t think anyone’s against helping out,” says Croft. He feels the funds raised should, however, be distributed more equitably.
Private Ownership
Some of the city’s public spaces are not public-private entities but fully privately owned and operated. The city gives real estate developers an incentive to include public space in their plans.
A density bonus allows developers to build more units than would otherwise be allowed according to zoning restrictions as long as they include space that benefits the community. However the Department of City Planning (DCP) has found the benefits to the community are often minimal.
According to a database of privately owned public spaces on the DCP website, of the 163 in central midtown, 46 are classified as marginal, defined as “lacking satisfactory levels of design, amenities, or aesthetic appeal deters members of the public from using the space for any purpose.”
“Such spaces usually have one or more of the following characteristics: barren expanses or strips of concrete or terrazzo, elevations above or below the public sidewalk, inhospitable microclimates characterized by shade or wind, no functional amenities, spiked railings on otherwise suitable surfaces, dead or dying landscaping, poor maintenance, drop-off driveways, and no measurable public use,” according to the DCP website.
One Penn Plaza is one such space. It is a strip of greenery about ten feet wide and running the length of the building entrance. Stone slabs line the garden, and many local office workers and passersby sit on the stone perimeter to enjoy their lunches or relax in the afternoon. In spite its being elevated above the sidewalk, a lack of variety in the garden- which mostly consists of bushes, and no shade or functional amenities, it is a busy place.
Other privately owned public spaces are classified as “destination,” meaning they attract visitors from outside the immediate neighborhood. Included among these are the covered pedestrian space and landscaped terraces of Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue.
In 2007 and 2009, DCP stepped up efforts to enforce regulations in these spaces, ensuring that they are inviting places for the public. Nevertheless, the Design Trust for Public Space held a potluck in April of this year to draw renewed attention to the problem.
The gathering was held at the IBM Building Atrium at Madison Avenue and East 57th Street, one of the approximately 503 privately owned public spaces (POPS) in New York City. The event description stated: “the quality and utility of these 503 POPS has been inconsistent, and many have fallen into disrepair or become inaccessible.”
The DCP’s database is over 10 years old, and the department declined to comment on whether a more up-to-date assessment would be made of the city’s POPS.
