Greenway Implementation in Metropolitan Regions: A Comparative Case Study of North American Examples... A Report to the National,... U.S. Department of the Interior... January 1997

51 Pages·11.2 MB·English

by  Department of the Interior

Authors
SNRGE lonha L. Dreher
Aseniate robeens
bee of Vetere Becee- \‘ihool af Natural Reeource: and Lavironment
ee ee
ihe University af Michigan
40) t. VUniwersty Avenus
Ann Arts Michigan Sniveiii’
lel 414. 64-6465
Pas 4] : WW Ji
’ mail dle@ umuh edu
Anneke } Louie
(aduate Mudent (1994-1996
College of Architecture and Urban Planning
The Uniwereity of Michigan
000 Bonnwteel Med
Ann Arbor. Mu higan 48109. 2069
Project Collaborators
Rarbara Nelson Jameson
Outdoor Recreation Planner
Natronal Park Service
Ravers, Trask & Conservation Asuetance Program
S610 Vaughn Rd
Breckeville, OW 94414)
Rash to. Trask ( onservanc
Michigan ( hapter
913 W. Molenes, Suite 145
Lancing .M i 48910
Larry Deck
Propect Dhrector
Southeast Max hogan (sreenwaye Propect
1050 Lorrame YW
Ann Arbor. MI 48108
Norn (os
Preadent
The Csreenway ( ollaborative |
150 South Prtth Awenur
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-1911)
Table of Contents
Peccutive Summary
latroduction
Urigin of project
Relationship to Southeast Michigan Greenways
(yoale
Hewl Literature bh} weew
Research Methods
( ase study selection criteria
Document review
Key informant interviews
Analysen
Orientation to Seven Metropolitan Regions
(Chattanooga. Tennessee
| hicago Minow
Indianapolis. Indiana
State of Maryland
Minneapoln. Minnesota
Portland, Oregon
erento, Ontano Canada
Findings: Cross Case Content Analysis
Proyect conception and leadership
Proyect participants
( itizen involvement
Institutional structures for implementation
Funding
Policy and legulative environment
Ownership and management
Conflicts and barnen to greenway implementation
Discussion "9
Key ingredients, What does it take
( hallenge:
Strategic trends
Direction: for future research
List of Works Consulted 4)
Appendices
Append A Last of crtees considered for case study ‘4
Appenda B List of interviewer: >
Appenda (Reference maternal for seven case studies ;
L
List of Tables
lable | lntetveew grnde
lable ( ompareen af anginal greenway objectives for sewer cane
se
lable 3. ( ompareon of greenway eyetem chatactetietnes fot sewen case etudy citer
lable 4 lritvateng greveagre on rr Barvigat sevrye
lable 5. rman participant erenupre ,
lable @ Regional ccmrrdinatoon beosate
lable * Funding source: and ademunietering bodies for ceri n region '
lable n thw nerehip ated Manage rive rt eretitere lot cere « ate atuech regres &
List of Figures
Figure | Map of North America showing seven case study ete
Figure 2) Map of Chattanooga greenway vyetem
Figure Map of Northeastern Illinon regional greenway:
Figure 4 Map of Indianapole greenway evetem
Figure $ Map of Maryland greenway eyetem
Figure 6 Map of Minneapole metropolitan region
Map of Portland greenway system .
Figure 8 =M ap of Toronto regional greenway syetem
Figure 9 ( onceptual modeh of greenway institutional structures L
Purposes of Report
teeny treset cet coed 15 ed ag reed Fat HeNty aiud wates sgeeaset
Thus report preent finding: from rmeanh prrente + toners
We then conducted in depth telephone ctor ccm:
on uinategin for implementing greemindy spurt:
with key wvbormante at each ote We cele ted people &
|) -ommpares greemudy implementation i"
interview by wang love! planning din wrnente aed reter
seven North American metropolitan region: toh trom people binwledgeatele alent greene aye
The purpose of thu vewarch « to provede natronally bor each ete we interviewed a: leaet cone
person trom « local publa agency and one from « pr
information to aunt the Southean Michigan
vate group National Park Service (NES) pereonnel
Crreemway projet in developing properal: for
involved in partnuler provi were alee inter vermed
coordinating the smplementation of an imict
We be wel egend a ort af question: to gether invbormetin
connected greenway rytcm in the seven county on the following unplhementation facter:
Detrou metropolian region lhe finding: © PROSE T COMCEPTION Ant LEADER Orr
thould aloo be useful as other citie workt o © PROC T PARTIC IPaNTe
implement greenway plans Thi reearch fill © CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
4 gap about the proces for implementing © INSTITUTIONAL STOEL TUBES Poe
IMPLEMENTAITC I
greemway ryticm
& Fi ntine
© POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE ENVIRONMENT
© COOWNEROMIT AND ManactwEtnt
@ aia a. Summary
© CONFLICTS AND BARRIERS TH) COEW w War
IMPLEMENTATION
Following data collection three goal: were used on
analyring the data fire to describe and understand
cach case a an individual greenway project. second
to do a crow-case content analyen. and therd to extract
Selecoft Stiudyo Snit es
the rect terpecert ant theme: and patterre that can
inform future implementation eflort:
A set of criteria was developed for selecting North
Amencan greenway etudy oter Theer include among
other. mult jurediscocpe.n muoltinplea plroye c:
Findings
objycoemplecxitty orf cvommedor snet.wor ks We chow
tt Metropregoroml: iandt oanen eta te
Project Conception and Leadership
@ CHATTANOOGA. TENNEREES
The seven case etudy areas have widely differing
© CHICAGO, ILLUInotl
point: of ongin. from gramroot organization: to state
@ INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA
government Two proyect: are noteworthy for then
@ MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA gramroot imitation ( hattanoogs and Indianapoln
© PORTLAND, O8F00N At the other end of the scale «, of course, the otate
© TORONTO, ONTARIO CANADA initiated program in Maryland Between thee erereme
@ STATE OF MARYLAND greenway systems have been started by cxmt og regronal
agencies in Portland Toronto and ( hago Sernelarh
the greenways system in Minncapole hae becn instiated
Research Methods at the munnipal and county level through indrdua!
projects Strong leadervhap «2 critncally emportant factor
Using written maternal on the greenway networks.
the vison and commitment of one powerful indradual
we compared bas charactsuech rasw wane.c bo:un d
nm sometime: the key to greenway projpect succew
anes. proyect histones. and primary natural features
Elsewhere. (euch as in Maryland and Minneapole
We also compared the orginal abyectrves. which included
a strsenose nof gpub lic priority. over many decades 0
recreation. conservation. neighboernhhanoceomedn: .
a more notable factor than the leadership of one indradual
protection of natural features. environmeendutcaatilon .
)V
Proper: Pertieiponte lnetitutiomel Mrwetures
Thee cenalitente ated partiverehaee thet ate hertned ave Veallewmong the bovevatvon cf vieteal cronenne annd coon
pred ragee the etrongeet aenete thet predate corngletecn cof A ee i ee
greene, cottons Somme parte apente are active cont to wok an organising method on yetitith ow
in cettony phases of the propect while others are orate atrrangernent boo venpehernertatinty TUhy e oe tect dios aon:
throughout « proyects evaluation The NPS River thee ottuctutee bot the ewer cane otedewe Ac on the
Trae ond ( onserveteon Acwtene (HTC A! program wither parameter: of ut ctudy there a wede variety
wae cnwolved on three of the proyecte we ctuded Sate i the way partcapant: are ongenied bor actron fore
grrrerninen’ agem ree off olercet alway: invhved in thee cotvee with bauly ample (or fe) othwcturee bow
greener propeet development Hegronel gevernennet : unplementation are addrmerd | hattancnge
are typrcalh invohed where they eat at all lidranageelee and Minneapolis bellemeng thar the
In treet care the local want of government i the freeones connpiles eotasatocere onyf hnage Marvlend Ietlend
reer influential level in the planning and unplemenrs and Toronto ate outlined The ceMttaprvedtocen caf the
Breer way cornered: ot beoarde ate corthined ae well ae
ton of greenmay evereme In the omaller metropolitan
areas, the city oF cownty @ the level at which thee pro a hurnber of inetitutvonal madele ae chown on Fapure A
pects become reality In others the regional greenwa Funding
eyetem may ercompan doen: of local jparreda trom
There are a rusrnbeer of trvcdele tor funding greene a
cach umplementing emall but critical portion: of the
proyects At the came time there are some conentent
plan “son profit groupe are involved un all ceven etuds
sites and are critical partners in many cases The partic: source: that are weed throughout the country cach a
the Intermodal Surface Tramportation EMcwncy Act
patron of the academy community « alo apparent in
out let of greenway cmplementen Prvate consultant: (IST RA) tumde weed on all the cases we crudied The ' m€ ¢ Thaha
Summary
section gore through funding sources and ademmenietts
brome epeciic otreto rtheg prtoceshs aee w ell
ton approaches city by city and then cummarive: the
Crtesen lnwolvement main funding mower Attitude: towards funding differ
actow cases, as dor: availability of funding It 0 clea
bach of the seven cote we etudied hae some bevel of
that yuet becauer a tegeon hae more funding avaiable
crten unvolvement: However the extent of publi par
toupvaanet: diramoatincal ly In some cau no formal dor not necemarthy eneure that evetem: euccestul coor
dination Likewne a lacko f money dor not necessarily
proces: for publ particapation exrete at the regional
mean that a greenway eve0t neotr teannd le The reecarch
level A looe gramroot: support network weeme: to ext
thows thet diverse funding source: are preferable
but acteve at the level of indridual proyects. cote and
count without much particaaproaundt ithoe nid es and that ISTEA « not the only anewer to greenway
implement ation
of a regronal eyetem Greperojenct: wcovear layrge gro
graparheae whcerae plub l parncipa«n pierohangp e
Policy and Legislative Environment
better accoatm a mpore llocaul prboyecte -byd proy ect
A mumber of politcal and regulatory factors are
scale Sometime the decentraloif tzhae ptuibloi npa r
important for the completion of greenway network:
houpation proces has been mentunonaolni a edidre ct
First, the adoption of the greenway plan ivelf « an
war by nving funding to public involvement Public
important etep In some cases the plan » adopted into
involvement and education wa particularly critical on
the wltemate approval of the bond measure that funds legal frameworks and in other cases it serves a a regronal
guideotl friamneweor k Other legal factor: can help ov
open ypacet acquiuitn Piorotlnan d Both Chartanoogs
and Indianapoln benefited from the collaboration hinder the implementation of a greenway wvetem
OF the cases we studied. Portland: example » probabh
of the NPS Rover. Trash. and Conservation Asentance
most comprehensve. in terms of a greenway imutiative
Proganrd iam pmub li particypaion proceme: In
being strongly ted to other plans for growth manage
( hattanooga an exteneve parncipapnroocne s
ment and land-use planning The Regron 2040 growth
reduced conflict in the implementphaasteri aonnd i n
concept. looking 50 years into the furure. i the gusding
Indranapoln public involvement war accomplihed with
document Although i 1 not a regulatory document
citerem: mapping the greenway amenitim they envinoned
n serves as an important framework The 2040 growth
concept. coordinated by the Portland metropolitan
regronal government. Metros deugned to deal with
V
heecutioe Summary
Figure A. institutional Models for Implementation and Acquisition
Mode! txemple =——(éséA dvb ges Disadvantages
1 Mrang contalived agency directly infiverces indianapolis
Unified Potential difficulty in connecting
Projects wither sengle (or few) juriadictians Chattanooga to bordering jurisdictions or
@ Direct contro!
ipart| )
systems or for broader plans
@ [fective for amalie:
juriedictions within a May not leverage diverse source:
large: network of funding
Strong leadership can
be effective and visible
(ood possibilities for
Citizen involvement in
the broad vison
ui Strong central leadership Plan May not be a priority
Can coordinate multiple within each local jurisdiction
agency efforts
Potentially less grassroots
Strange: funding base trom support and publi
wider geagaphaire a participation
Coordinofa wtorit aocrnos s
various gaagiaphw areas
Broade: perspecatndi vvieso n
AllMoroe pwragrsetan ve
juriadicttoi prooncesed
with(oro ahueatd o f
slomowre erelructa nt
purrtdic trons
Encourages Courdinaton
Laordination may be aptina
amapurni adigcti on: between pur adic tron:
increpoawetr ea!d t he Implementmaayt hie toinow e
toca! love: with shared responetrlaictroys :
Leadercatn ideuveplo p many agenciet
wn toca! puriadhctions
Regio:o ctnatea fulndi ng
can be prioritized across
entire propect
Grassefrforotso arte sdon e No regional leadershifpo :
at a manageascballe eov e coordination
a long penoaf dti me
Shared regional vision is lacking
@ Amrpoom ltore priv ate
@ Lack of commitment by reqrona!
groups top ut forth inthatrves
governmisea n batrne s
@ Strlooca!n cogntr o!
Less ability to take advantage
of funding possibilities in a
holistic way for the network
the integration of land use, transportation, water, and all seven cases conflicts arose when property rights were
openspaces, Metros Greenspaces Master Plan is tied perceived to be threatened. In addition, respondents i
very closely to this long-term plan and complements Toronto and Maryland pointed out the conflicung
regional land-use and transportation planning objectives and values of recreation and nature preserva
tion, leading to conflicting project goals
Ownership and Management
In the cases we studied, following the implementa:
tion of greenway systems, many of the properties are
Synthesis
owned and managed at the local level through parks
departments and other city and county government Key Ingredients: What does it take!
agencies. The maintenance of some corridors has been
1, Commitment and Leadership
adopted by various groups, including Boy Scout troops
and church groups. Chicago's greenway system has an According to our interviewees, the biggest factor in
infrastructure in place for ownership and management greenway success seems to be commitment, not money
of greenways through its unique system of 150 Park The people we spoke with talked at length about com
mitments affiliated with their respective projects — by
Districts and six Forest Preserves
public agencies, frends groups, and influential individ
A mixture of ownership and management is found in
uals, Grassroots support is the hallmark of the greenways
several places, for instance in Chattanooga, Maryland,
movement, However, citizens commitment is not
Portland and Toronto. In these cases, the eventual man-
enough. Physical implementation is a hybrid of grass
agement of these lands seems to be more complicated
roots and ‘higher’ support. Elected officials must join
and somewhat uncertain, Some creative cooperative
in to deliver the physical reality of a greeaway system
agreements will be needed in these cases. For instance, tT Tathaaa
Beyond that, the determination and motivation of a
in Maryland's greenway program, most of the greenways Summary
leader is critical, local organizers need to bring in key
involve a variety of owners and combination of public
political leaders and continue to demonstrate the lead
access areas, private parce nd areas of restricted
ership throughout the life of the project. This leadership
access. Many of the counties do not have the resources
can then provide the structure for people to quickly
to monitor all of the properties acquired through the
and creatively make the greenway vision become reality
greenways program The Waterfront Regeneration Trust
Out of that commitment by various individuals and
in Toronto has created some unique scenarios that link
groups, another important ingredient emerges — a plan
ownership and management for multiple benefits.
of action agreed upon by these various parties
Sometimes agreements are made with private industries
for a waterfront trail easement, whereby a municipality
2 Education and Public Participation
maintains the trail, but industry provides the land.
Education of and involvement by the public seem to
Conafnd lBarriiersc tot Gresenw ay be two of the most successful tools for greenway imple.
Implementation mentation. They generate public commitment and help
minimize reactionary opposition. Several of the cities
A minor amount of opposition to the greenway
we studied relied heavily on education as a means of
initiatives was reported by all of the interviewees.
getting projects accepted and funded In Portland. by
Several respondents, for instance from Portland and
educatthie pnubgli c about the benefitso fp rotecting
Chatatttribuated na phoenomoenagl acacept,ance of
resources, the region was able to rally support for public
the greenway concept to very early public involvement
funding. And in Chattanooga, educatinagn d involving
and education. Similarly, in Indianapotlheires ,wa s
the people about the public process ultimately resulted
a good deal of community buy-in and acceptance.
in successful greenway implementaamtoingo ont,he r
Common trends were seen across all cases: some level of
benefits. It isi mportant to recognize that these projects
opposition was found prior to greenway implementation
take a long time to complete. Therefore. patience
and after the greenways were in place and people saw
becomes another asset.
the positive results and benefits, there was greater
accepfotr fuatunre pcrojeect s. In some cases opposing
factions are not necessarily against the idea of a green-
about taking land off of the tax rolls. Beyond that, in
y i
Executive Summary ww
Chall
1 Pimancing
hunding © always a challenge. although not necessarily
| Cooperation
the primary one Our research shows that diverse lund
Regardless of the institutional structure or the size of
ing sources are preferable and that money follows good
the greenway vision, lack of coordination among agen
ideas. In its query of officials in charge of successtul
cies and organizations seems to be the biggest imped:
conservation programs, the Trust for Public Land com
meni to effective and timely implementation. In many
piled the following advice on funding (Green Sense
cases, just getting different department: and peronnel
Autum '°S) and each point is relevant here
within the same city of county to work together is an
@ POSITION HE PROGRAM AS BIPARTISAN AND
enormous challenge An anetchatd onoe retspoende nt
NON PARTISAN "TRANSCEND PARTY AFFILIATIONS
used helps illustrate thu phenomenon Plans were being
(A STRATEGY USED SUCCESSFULLY IN PORTLAND
presented by two different departments at a city hearing
@ RESPOND TO LEGITIMATE CONCERNS
on the same day, neither aware oft he other One plan
(1N MARYLAND, THE BOARD OF BEALTORS CEO
was for storm water retention and the other for a green
SUCCESSFULLY ARGUED FOR AN EXEMPTION FOR
way and both dealt with the same geographic area FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYERS FROM THE STATE 6 BEAL
These groups obviously had mutually beneficial concerns. BSTATE TRANSFER TAK, THE LUCRATIVE FUNDING
yet were not communicina atu niifined gwa y SOURCE FOR PROGRAM OPENEPACE |
@ BE ACCOUNTABLE, SHOW SOLID FACTS ABOUT
< Regional Governance Simultancow With Local
ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND SaY HOW YOU WILi
Seale Work SPEND THE MONEY, THEN REPORT HOW Yo!
SPENT TT. (ANOTHER CRITICAL FACTOR IN
In many places, the lack of a regional governance
PORTLAND § SUCCESS STORY)
structure seems to be an enormous barrier A regional
@ CHOOTE PROTECTS THAT LEVERAGE PUBLIC FUNDS
greenway network needs, by definition, a real commut
DEMONSTRATED USE OF PUBLIC DOLLARS AS SEED
ment to regional planning and, in many cases, to
MONEY TO GROW PARTNERSHIPS 18 APPEALING IN
growth management. Where these prioritdioe nso t TODAY § CLIMATE OF CAREFUL SPENDING
exist. greenway networks are more difficult
© INVOLVE WILLING SELLERS. PRIVATE LAND CON
Furtlohw pueblicr undmerstoandirng oef ec,olog ical SERVATION GROUPS PLAY CRITICAL INTERMEDIARY
values and development issues exacerbates the challenge ROLES IN WORKING OUT WIN-WIN ARRANGEMENTS
This where the educational objective becomes critical. ® NURTURE STRONG COALITIONS. FIND AND KEEP
as promoted above In addition, the large size of metro- PRIENDS
politan greenway systems isa challenge in terms of
Strategic Trends
general public has trouble visualizing an abstract land. 1 Public-private Partnerships
use or geographic idea at a metropolitsacanl e Breaking
Everoney loowks ihn thee arrena eof c ivic lite. the
projects down into manageable and ‘imaginable preces
idea of public-private partnerships for problem-solving
helps. Defining specific corridors ot local resources can
is promoted and practiced Greenways are no different
help people get invested in a bigger vision. Severalo f
and, in fact, thrive on a mix of involvement by both
the seven cities have done just that: Portland identified
public agencies and private partners. Especially as the
14 target natural areas and 6 «rails and greenways pro-
positive economic impacts of open space protection and
jerts in order to provide citizens an opportunity to see development become clear. the private world 1 inclined
potential investments, Indianapolis broke its netwe rk
to cooperate and participate in greenway developments
into 14 specific corndors; Chattanooprgogar'ams i s
A consistent theme among the professionals interviewed
orgaarnounid z7 ceornddor s, and Toronto divided the for this report was that the future of the greenway
waterfront into 14 landscape units Subsequently. iden-
movement is in working more closely with the develop:
tifying greenway priorities at the small-scale, local level
ment industry, with the corporate world. and with the
is a logical follow-up. For instance, some plannerhasv e
private philanthropic community. In some cases. a lack
found that helping local junsdictions develop ‘teeder’
of coordination with the building and development
trails ist he key to getting them interested in regional
world has disadvantaged greenway efforts
trail systems. Officials’ first concern is providing better
local non-motorized tran:pofrort thaeitr iowon ncit i-
zens. They often need to see those local possibilities
y lil
Multiple Objectives According i one Of Our apronnvade Ate. th paren Nial
parks and recreation focus of the gieenway Movement
The future of the greetiway Mmeaverent depre tras it
ie part of the problery hie cries to achieve more thas
wrin, OF an Fapaneion ol chy pes tives and MOB ation
one feeult pet greehway preyect, vo that when precngyle
with other eacsal and ecologn al weues. More and mor
ash about greenways they will automatically assume that
the multiple benefite of greenways are being promoted
and advertieed. At the came time, much of the fuel het paeuees have heen dealt with w the precees. cin Nh a
habitat protection and water quality
behind greenway efforts has hiutorically come trom the
parks and recreation helds. Thu changing in the Having these other objectives front and center in
the greenway planning process is vitally important
Lares we studied 4 prominent theme was inNtegs ation
exhibited in two main ways socially and ecologically Portland demonstrated thie by tying thei open spac
Piret, some of the moet exciting greenway etorte have program to the ieue of growth management and th
a woctally rerponsive purpose In fact, they are being protection of natural habitats Ana in ft ronto. natural
implemented because of the positive eftects on dinad features and broregions have motivated the greenwa)
vision The linkage of greenway planning to other
vantaged populations through neighborhood revitalita
thon employ ment Opportunities edu ational programme watemhed f lanning meues ve be oming more wide
and involvement of urban youth In the opinion of spread. although rarely implemented along thove lines
one respondent the key factor to the success of duc to purvedictional boundaries One respondent in
Chattanooga’ project was the focus on social and cul Chicago stated that a watershed approach has been
tural revitalization an area of high community inter implicit in ther process boast not sO Mik h at the plan
eet Through this efor citirens learned of empower! inception. In the last three or four years, their aware
ment in cevec life nes of urban watersheds has been elevated (via storm
Executive
Secondly. the multiple objectives of land-use planning water management plans) burt this awarrnrn wi not vet Summary
and growth management are increasingly important tied to emaller scale greenway plans He called thu the
simul: for greenway development Part of the challenge new frontier for urban greenway planning Natural
feature protection and restoration will, like the restora
in the regard i the perennial issue of defining greenways
tron of neighborhoods and jobs. be central to successful
Much of the restoration work hoth in and outude
implementation strategies for urban greenways ©
urban areas. 1s broader than greenways themselves
Mem: MareMeet nem s >
Executive Summary vt