Though streets typically make up the largest percentage of our public space they are too frequently used exclusively for the movement and storage of vehicles. But the pandemic has shown how our streets have the potential to be so much more. Rapid response programs have allowed people to dine outdoors in the roadway, opened up streets for strolling, and made space for expression and protest. In short, they have shown that streets are places in their own right, not just conduits to somewhere else. 

Globally, the pandemic has sparked conversations about how else public space can and should be used. But, in spite of all this, something is still missing because most cities do not have a comprehensive, citywide strategy for public space management.

Globally, the pandemic has sparked conversations about how else public space can and should be used. But, in spite of all this, something is still missing because most cities do not have a comprehensive, citywide strategy for public space management.

The Neighborhood Empowerment Project is an initiative of Open Plans, a New York City-based non-profit that uses journalism and advocacy to empower citizens to shape their communities. Last spring, right as the pandemic began, we launched our Office of Public Space Management proposal to call for comprehensive and equitably distributed public space management in New York City.

During the research phase of the proposal development, we found three cities that have public space management frameworks that grant neighborhoods control of local decision-making. In these cities, neighborhoods solve small problems, engage in placemaking initiatives, and plan for future changes, based on the community’s needs and choices. Not only are these neighborhoods empowered in local decision-making, but they also have budgets and staff to implement their own plans.

‍Government actions, laws, and policies have a major impact on promoting or restricting the possible transformation of streets and making successful places. We can and must do better. Here are several places that are already doing it well and a few ideas for how public space management could be done better here in New York City.

1. London, UK

London has a borough system that is fully independent of the Greater London Authority (GLA). The GLA “works with the boroughs and other key partners to achieve bold improvements to London’s streets and squares.” Each borough receives funding from the London municipal government and provides most neighborhood services, including trash collection, park maintenance, and local road improvements. By doing simple things—maintaining some of the cleanest London streets, planting more trees, regularly repainting yellow lines at intersections, and introducing clear signage—the Borough of Hackney is now considered the most pleasant place to live in the city. 

One potential downside of this approach is that boroughs, both in London and New York City, that do not prioritize public space will lag behind their counterparts. This emphasizes the need for strong leadership from the Mayors of both cities to ensure public space management happens across the city.

2. Minneapolis, MN, USA

Minneapolis has seventy 501(c)(3) neighborhood associations, all independent from the City, complete with a neighborhood-elected board of directors. Each association receives funding from the City and individual donors for community participation activities in the following areas:

• identifying and acting on neighborhood priorities;
• influencing City decisions on plans, policies, procedures, programs, and services; and
• increasing involvement in civic and community life.

These associations have done everything from improving waste management to implementing local art projects, such as the Corcoran Neighborhood Organization’s “Paint the Pavement.” Supported by general city funds, specific Neighborhood Revitalization Funds, and private donors, this Neighborhood Organization worked with 100 local volunteers to create a pavement mural that “slowed traffic, built community, and showed an appreciation for art.”

Last year, Minneapolis updated its model after a study found that funding overwhelmingly went to wealthy, white areas of the city. The City of Minneapolis now uses Neighborhoods 2020 as the “community engagement process to redefine the roles and expectations of neighborhood organizations that receive funding through the Community Participation Program”. These changes add more oversight to the program with a framework to ensure it is more equitable going forward. 

Not only is this model worthy of emulation, but so is the City's ability to reflect on its room for growth and make changes accordingly. All governments should take stock of what is working and what isn't, and make improvements accordingly.

3. San Francisco, CA, USA

In 2004, San Francisco passed a Community Benefit Ordinance that gave the City the authority to create special assessment districts. These districts “create a localized framework for the city to provide services focused on landscaping, improvements and maintenance in public realm areas.” Using this framework, the city recently created Green Benefit Districts (GBDs) to offer residential areas a framework in which to improve their streets sidewalks and open space. GBDs have their own board of directors, staff, and funding.

In the first-ever GBD covering Dogpatch and Northwest Potrero Hill, the property owners voted to assess themselves $.095 per square foot to fund public space improvements. This funding covers supplemental maintenance and small-scale projects. On more ambitious projects, the GBD has the capacity to raise outside money and to work with City agencies. Within two years, in Dogpatch Northwest Potrero, they renovated Fallen Bridges Park; transformed Tennessee Street, a pedestrian corridor which had become littered with garbage and parked cars, by planting new street trees and revising parking rules; and created a footpath through an old grove.  

Though successful for the Dogpatch Northwest Potrero Hill neighborhood, the model has been hotly debated in other San Francisco neighborhoods. One possible downside is that much like traditional BID models, GBDs have the potential to prioritize homeowners and property value over other stakeholders and outcomes. The GBD bylaws stipulate that 60% of the board of directors must be property owners. For example, the Dogpatch and Northwest Potrero Board is comprised of nine property owners, four tenants, and two “public space enthusiasts”. This prompts the question, will property owners really represent local priorities equitably?

New York City Can Do Better

The bottom line is that London, Minneapolis, and San Francisco have frameworks for local stakeholders to be included, empowered, and engaged in civic life, resulting in effective and efficient problem-solving and enhanced quality of life. Many of these aspects are still missing in New York, yet for better or worse, practitioners globally look to New York City for inspiration.

Looking to the future, several groups have proposed how to fill New York CIty's existing public space management gap.

• Last Spring, Open Plans called for an Office of Public Space Management that can “remove silos between agencies and build capacity” by assigning public space managers to districts across the city, creating a street hierarchy that enables public space managers to manage and program living streets, and setting clear guidelines to empower residents.
  

• This past August, the Municipal Arts Society launched a campaign for a Director of the Public Realm. The Director of the Public Realm, a position dedicated to coordinating and marshalling the vast array of agencies to act quickly in times of crisis and think creatively in moments of calm about long-term improvements to the health and equity of public space across the city.
  

• Most recently, the Urban Design Forum announced 21 Visions for 2021 to “define a new plan for our city and give every New Yorker a voice in its future.” These visions were shaped by 46 Urban Design Forum fellows to build a future where each New Yorker has, “a healthy home, a dignified workplace, a safe commute, and a beautiful neighborhood,” and they included a proposal to create an Office of the Public Realm. 
  

These three proposals highlight how important New York City public spaces are and how much work there is to be done to improve their management. They show us that we must evaluate our current processes, innovate and iterate, and adapt best practices to our local context. 

Now is the moment to question why we do the things we do in New York City and to imagine how they could be done differently.

Now is the moment to question why we do the things we do in New York City and to imagine how they could be done differently. First, as the pandemic continues and post-pandemic plans form there must be a framework in place to support the Open Streets, Outdoor Dining, and Open Culture in addition to our parks, beaches, and plazas. New York City must iterate and refine these programs to ensure their long-term success. Second, the New York City budget cycle is happening now and resources must be allocated to public space care and management. Third, top to bottom, New York City’s political landscape is about to be turned upside down. Due to term limits, from Mayor to City Council and beyond there will be significant change this election cycle.

We hope to see the next administration embrace public space and we are optimistic because several leading candidates have embraced these ideas. But in the meantime, there is a lot of work to be done. Spring is here and people are once again flocking to public space. We need action from this administration to set the next administration up for success. 

Jackson Chabot is a Transportation Policy Associate at Open Plans in New York City, New York, USA.