When governments sell land always put in clawback provisions

DC sold many school buildings in the 1980s and 1990s, mostly to nonprofit organizations.  The city's building inventory was large because segregation meant duplication of facilities.  Over time, many of these organizations sold the buildings off, to great profit.  But there was no provision in the sales contracts for the DC Public School System to get a portion of the increased sales price.

For example, Wormley School was sold to Georgetown University which eventually sold it to a developer for more than 5x what it paid ("University to Sell Wormley Property," Georgetown Hoya).

Although to be fair, partly they took advantage of new market conditions.  When the property sold first, DC was just about ready to take off in the c. 2000 change of consumer attitudes towards urban living which again favored cities.  

It makes sense then that the building is now condos but DC should have gained more from the transaction ("Apartment in Georgetown’s Wormley School Lists for $2.8 Million," Mansion Global).

Another building sold to the DC Teachers Credit Union, and they had offices there for awhile, has long since been converted to in-demand Capitol Hill condominiums.

Parkland, Florida is dealing with that now.  Decades ago they sold for $850,000 a piece of property to the county school system for an elementary school to be built in their community.  But the school was never built and the school system recently sold the same property for $14 million to the Broward Health hospital system ("Parkland seeks $850,000 refund from school district after land sale to Broward Health," Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel).

Parkland wants their money back.  But they, like DC, didn't put provisions in the contract that the property should revert back to them if never used, or to be paid back the cost of the property if it were to be sold to a third party.

Traditionally, land bequests to governments and nonprofits most often include this provision of giving land with conditions that the property revert back to the original owners if the use changes.  

A D.C. streetcar passes the Douglas Memorial United Methodist Church near the H Street Corridor in Washington on March 7, 2018. (Evelyn Hockstein/For The Washington Post)

That's why the United Methodist Church on H Street NE in DC, formerly a "white" church, decided to integrate as the neighborhood changed.  They didn't see a future as a "white church" and wanted to sell the property but the conditions of the bequest made them change course ("This H Street church was a hub of the community in the 1960s, then came the riots. It never thrived again.," Washington Post).

Cy Pres Review.  I am not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt, but in some states, the State Attorney General's office is active in overseeing land sales and other dissolution acts involving nonprofits.  Such sales are supposed to be made with the continuation of the  property or monies still being used by nonprofits.

This is called Cy Pres Doctrine ("An Historical and Empirical Analysis of the Cy-Près Doctrine," University of Louisville School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series No. 2023-3) and the funds involved, Cy Pres Funds  In Pennsylvania this is in the news because of the closure of the University of the Arts.  A bunch of buildings were sold off by the bankruptcy court, not necessarily for non profit uses.  And a number of schools agreed to take their students.  

The Moore College of Art, the only independent private school of art in the city, argues it should get the bulk of the money, because it's closest organizationally to what UAS was institutionally ("Who should get the $63M endowment money of UArts? Depends on who you ask," WHYY/NPR, "University of the Arts’ $77 million endowment remains mired in court proceedings two years after the school closed," Philadelphia Inquirer) and New York AGs have been particularly active.

Among others, the AG was involved in the selling of Girard College and the move of the Barnes Institution ("Changing Donor-Imposed Restrictions: Cy Pres and Equitable Deviation," New York Community Trust) from Lower Merion Township to Philadelphia.  

Speculative ventures such as constructing this building without having tenants lined up put Cooper-Union at financial risk ("The Indicator: Cooper Union, I Love You but You’re Bringing Me Down," ArchDaily).

In New York State, a major case concerned Cooper-Union College, owner of the land under the Chrysler Building, the lease funds free tuition for the school, but the school wanted to start charging tuition because of financial exigency.  

They were allowed to do this, but with strict conditions ("A Second Chance for Cooper Union").

DC's AG hasn't been particularly proactive in these situations ("DC's Source Theater sold: cause for a cy pres review?").  I argued review should have occurred with the sale of the YWCA in Downtown and the Corcoran Gallery--its collection to the National Gallery, its building and art school to George Washington University ("When BTMFBA isn't enough: keeping civic assets public through cy pres review").

The YMCA at Rhode Island and 17th Street NW as another example.  I never got around to writing about a similar experience  with the YMCA in Dupont Circle. They sold their property to a developer and the recreation use at that site was abandoned.

YMCA said they didn't have experience with a facility serving both workers and residents and that they tried their best to increase membership but were unsuccessful ("Downtown YMCA to close amid rising competition from upscale gyms," Post; "Akridge to redevelop YMCA at 1711 Rhode Island as boutique office," Washington Business Journal).  From the Post:

The YMCA approved a deal to sell the hulking, 1970s concrete building to Akridge, a big local developer, for an undisclosed amount. At 100,000 square feet, it’s the YMCA’s biggest facility in the region, and the property, according to the D.C. Office of Tax and Revenue, has an assessed taxable value of $27.2 million. ...

The National Capital facility was never a typical one for the YMCA. The nonprofit organization traditionally serves neighborhoods, not business districts, and Reese-Hawkins said the money from the sale of the building will boost the organization’s community, after-school and summer programs throughout the region.

She hopes to eventually open another full-service YMCA in the city and is in talks with community leaders to assess the best fit. There are no gyms in the District east of the Anacostia River, and Reese-Hawkins said it is possible that one could land there.

The building that will replace the YMCA.

They never opened another full-service YMCA in DC.

The AG got involved in some cases but didn't meaningfully shape the outcome.  

For me, except DC City Government also lacks the imagination, Corcoran Galley should have been transferred to the city creating its first locally controlled arts museum--the other museums in the city are run by the federal government.  And the Corcoran School of Art and Design should have been merged into UDC ("Should community culture master plans include elements on higher education arts programs?").

With the sale of the YW and the YM the organizations argued that the money received would support their programs generally.  But the sale of these properties came at the expense of the availability of recreational resources made available to residents in the center city, and they had received membership fees and donations for years from patrons of these facilities, making the argument for there being a clear DC citizen interest.  

Both the YW and YM should have been "forced" to put some of that money towards the creation of a new city recreation facility serving those areas--if the city's Department of Parks and Recreation had a clue.  A proactive AG and some consultants could have shifted the dialog.

Parkland and cy pres?  With the Parkland case, I'd argue that the State AG could step in and do a cy pres review, and as part of a settlement, make the City of Parkland whole.

DC's Source Theater sold: cause for a cy pres review?

WBJ image.

In a follow up to the blog entry "Lack of a system breeds more of the same: Source Theater, Washington DC, up for sale 2006, 2024," from last December, the Washington Business Journal reports ("Source Theatre building on 14th Street NW sold to restaurateurs for $4.5M,") that the building has been sold to restauranteurs.  

The original asking price was more than $5 million, and CulturalDC, the owners of the property, although it had been acquired with funding from DC government, sold it to the restaurant group because they offered more money than the primary tenant, the Constellation Theatre Group.  From the Washington City Paper ("CulturalDC Sells Source Theatre to Restaurateurs):

“On multiple occasions, Constellation asked CulturalDC for a meeting to discuss a deal and share our funding sources, but they would not accept our invitations. Finally, in April 2025, Constellation sent our Best and Final Offer of $4.1 million. We know the email was received, yet CulturalDC chose not to respond and instead, allowed the offer to expire.”

For years, Source has served as the home base for several performing arts organizations, including Constellation and local opera company IN Series, as well as a site of CulturalDC’s own programming. The public listing for the building had an asking price of $5.8 million; it later dropped to $5 million, according to WBJ. But the price it ultimately sold for was $4.5 million—just $400,000 more than Constellation’s April offer.

President and CEO of Theatre Washington (and former City Paper publisher) Amy Austin expressed grief over the sale, writing via email: “I am sad that the Source Theatre has been sold to a restauranteur/developer and will no longer be available as a much-needed performance space for our ever evolving theatre community. The Source was a special place that holds a collective almost 50-year history of memories and experiences that touched countless audiences and artists.”

The city government evidently is too busy putting money into professional sports, $500+ million for basketball and hockey, and $1 billion for football, to address the matter of the Source Theater, which I believe was acquired with DC funds.  (The reality is that governments only have so much capacity for dealing with such matters, and the Source Theater likely fell through the cracks, because the city doesn't really have an arts and cultural agency in the sense of cities like Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, etc.)

In "When BTMFBA isn't enough: keeping civic assets public through cy pres review" (2016), I argue that the State Attorney General should intervene in nonprofit real estate matters, when the property will lose its non profit use as a result of the sale, for a review if not recession of the sale.  Cy pres provides for independent review of decisions by nonprofit organizations.

The doctrine originated in the law of charitable trusts, but has been applied in the context of class action settlements in the United States. When the original objective of the settlor or the testator became impossible, impracticable, or illegal to perform, the cy-près doctrine allows the court to amend the terms of the charitable trust as closely as possible to the original intention of the testator or settlor to prevent the trust from failing. -- Wikipedia

While the State AGs in New York (Cooper Union College), Pennsylvania (Girard College, Art Museum) and DC (Corcoran Gallery of Art) have taken on such matters, the outcome isn't preordained, and they don't necessarily use the frame of review--keeping the facility open, for arts uses--that I would.

For example, the Pennsylvania AG didn't get involved in the sale of the assets of the University of the Arts, which shut down last year.  Through the sales, some of the properties maintained their cultural use, others will not ("Keeping Avenue of the Arts for the Arts,' Philadelphia Citizen).

Similarly, the DC AG did not push what I thought should happen ("Should community culture master plans include elements on higher education arts programs?" [2016]).

While CulturalDC may have financial problems of its own, hence the sale, I'd say its worthwhile in the public interest for the sale to be rescinded in favor of a purchase by Constellation.

BTMFBA: London edition

The Buy the Mother Fucking Building Already series of articles about how arts groups (independent retail and nonprofits) should buy their own buildings to protect their interests.  The premier example is SEMAEST of Paris, which focuses on buying and holding retail space and making it available to independent retailers.

-- "BTMFBA: the best way to ward off artist or retail displacement is to buy the building," 2016

-- "BTMFBA: maintaining arts spaces in the face of rising real estate values | Seattle, New York City," 2024
-- "New form of BTMFBA in San Francisco," 2023
-- "A wrinkle on BTMFBA: let the city/county own the cultural facility, while you operate it (San Francisco and the Fillmore Heritage Center)," 2021
-- "BTMFBA: Baltimore and the Area 405 Studio," 2021
-- "Revisiting stories: cultural planning and the need for arts-based community development corporations as real estate operators," 2018
-- "BMFBTA revisited: nonprofits and facilities planning and acquisition," 2016
-- "BTMFBA: artists and Los Angeles," 2017
-- "BTMFBA Chronicles: Seattle coffee shop raises money to buy its building," 2018
-- "Dateline Los Angeles: BTMFBA & Transformational Projects Action Planning & arts-related community development corporation as an implementation mechanism to own property," 2018
-- "From BTMFBA to 'community right to buy,'" (2024)

although sometimes nonprofits can't be trusted either.

-- "Lack of a system breeds more of the same: Source Theater, Washington DC, up for sale 2006, 2024," 2024
-- "When BTMFBA isn't enough: keeping civic assets public through cy pres review," 2016

=====

It turns out that London has a similar organization, focused on the arts, called the Creative Land Trust ("Mayor launches groundbreaking Creative Land Trust").  Starting in 2019, it aimed to get 1,000 spaces, recognizing that there is demand for 14,000 such spaces across the city.  I don't think they've come anywhere near to that amount of space under control as of yet, while SEMAEST, much older, has more than 700,000 s.f. under control.

-- Creative Places Create Value: The Impact of Creative Workspace on Local Residential Property
-- Urban Precarity: Affordable Art Studios and Creative Flight in the Post Covid City, Kings College, London

One of their projects, small at 4,600 s.f., is in a new build residential complex.  And two floors in a building in Hackney Wick (a cool district I stayed in in 2018).

Sydney, Australia is modeling a similar program ("Sydney launches cultural strategy with plans for a new Creative Land Trust to boost affordable artist workspace Creative Land Trusts: a proven solution for growing affordable creative workspace in cities," World Cities Creative Forum, "The radical property plan to bring artists back to Sydney," "The plan to use White Bay Power Station to fix Sydney’s live music crisis," Sydney Morning Herald).

Sydney’s proposed Creative Land Trust is closely modelled on the same-name scheme launched by the City of London in 2019 to fix its acute shortage of rehearsal and studio spaces. The scheme involves allowing properties gifted or transferred by public or private landowners to working artists, musicians and writers at a subsidised rate.

Council analysis of the 2021 census found the number of artists, musicians, writers in greater Sydney fell by 11.6 per cent when in every other capital city the population of creatives had increased, showing the impact of rising property prices on the creative sector.

... Over the last decade, Sydney’s cultural infrastructure has shrunk by the equivalent of three Sydney Opera Houses, Lord Mayor Clover Moore will tell cultural leaders. Of that lost space, 14,400 square metres was once production space occupied by artists, musicians, writers and performers, a decline of 28 per cent over that time.

... The council identified the need to help the “missing middle” in its updated cultural strategy that is to be voted on by councillors on June 24. “There is a notable lack of midsized venues, mid-sized organisations and opportunities for mid-career artists,” it noted.

To this end, Moore said city council would boost cultural funding by $20 million over the next 10 years. Out of this, 50 individual fellowships per year, start-up grants and artist residencies would be funded with writers to be given space to work in City of Sydney libraries and community centres.

The difference between these programs and DC is that DC doesn't want to be on the hook for creating, buying, and holding such spaces.

From BTMFBA to "community right to buy"

 BTMFBA, or Buy The Mother F------ Building Already, is a set of blog entries about how arts groups specifically and nonprofits more generally, need to own their facilities in order to be able to control their futures.

-- "BTMFBA: the best way to ward off artist or retail displacement is to buy the building," 2016

-- "BTMFBA: maintaining arts spaces in the face of rising real estate values | Seattle, New York City," 2024
-- "New form of BTMFBA in San Francisco," 2023
-- "A wrinkle on BTMFBA: let the city/county own the cultural facility, while you operate it (San Francisco and the Fillmore Heritage Center)," 2021
-- "BTMFBA: Baltimore and the Area 405 Studio," 2021
-- "Revisiting stories: cultural planning and the need for arts-based community development corporations as real estate operators," 2018
-- "BMFBTA revisited: nonprofits and facilities planning and acquisition," 2016
-- "BTMFBA: artists and Los Angeles," 2017
-- "BTMFBA Chronicles: Seattle coffee shop raises money to buy its building," 2018
-- "Dateline Los Angeles: BTMFBA & Transformational Projects Action Planning & arts-related community development corporation as an implementation mechanism to own property," 2018

although sometimes nonprofits can't be trusted either.

-- "Lack of a system breeds more of the same: Source Theater, Washington DC, up for sale 2006, 2024," 2024
-- "When BTMFBA isn't enough: keeping civic assets public through cy pres review," 2016

‘David Cameron’s talk of a volunteer-led “big society” became a cover story for funding cuts and the closure of leisure facilities.’ Photograph: David Rowe/Alamy

Under Conservative control of the UK from 2010-2024, local governments were severely crushed by actions of the central government, austerity and other cuts, and further mandates meant that local governments faced up to a 2/3 drop in revenues.

Many local governments have gone bankrupt and are blamed for lack of probity and good management, when really it is a mark of system failure.

Many shut down facilities like libraries and recreation centers ("Councils reduce library and culture spend by almost £500m since 2010, new analysis shows," CCN), and got involved in bad real estate deals to try to earn revenue ("Councils’ disastrous journey into commercial property investments," LandlordZone).  From the article:

English councils collectively went on a near £7bn commercial property buying spree, a journey which has now proved to be responsible for bringing some of them to the edge of bankruptcy. Their commercial investments, often made at huge distances from their boroughs over the last eight years or so, involved the purchase of office and industrial buildings, shopping centres, cinemas and even solar farms. 

 And despite their impressive looking multi-page strategy documents justifying their investment cases, many of which are still available on these council’s websites, the edifice eventually came tumbling down. In the case of many of these councils it has led to budget cuts to many services, redundancies, fire sales of council properties and an appeal to central government for bailouts.

The Labor government has introduced a proposal giving communities the right of first refusal on properties up for sale, to pursue community/public good/social infrastructure goals ("The Guardian view on a ‘community right to buy’: unleashing the power of the local," Guardian).  From the article:

In theory, the bill will give communities a head start over private investors in bidding to save, run and, in some cases, repurpose valued buildings and assets. As the local government minister, Jim McMahon, told the House of Commons last week: “When we talk about important community assets, we see from an economic point of view that it is far better for them to be used and be productive, but … we also recognise that they are hugely important to community identity and pride.” 

That is an insight to be built on by a government that, while understandably prioritising growth, sometimes tends to an overly technocratic understanding of its mandate for change. The new “right to buy” legislation can help shift the balance of power in less well-off areas, where local development has too often meant more betting shops or fast food outlets. But Labour’s overall communities strategy needs to be considerably fleshed out if its impact is to be transformative.

In places that have suffered from underinvestment and a sense of disconnection from power for decades, the white paper’s aspiration to boost local engagement and “community voice” will only be fulfilled through a long-term injection of major funding and support. In a recent report [Fixing the foundations: A communities strategy for Britain], the Power To Change thinktank recommends the creation of a community growth network, dedicated to building up organisational capacity and confidence in areas where the social fabric has been steadily eroded.

Now you could argue that other attempts by local councils to own properties, or mis-management or failure to keep control of buildings in a nonprofit portfolio doesn't bode well for this policy.

The failure of ArtScape in Toronto ("Artscape tried to launch a ‘game changer’ for artists. Now it’s on the brink of collapse," Toronto Globe & Mail) is another illustration that arts groups buying properties with the expectation of major revenue generation are likely to fail.

I think the issue here is the focus on maintaining and extending social infrastructure rather than revenue generation and that this new policy is workable.  And how Power to Change recommends capacity building is an important add on to better enable success.

Lack of a system breeds more of the same: Source Theater, Washington DC, up for sale 2006, 2024

 A lot of my thinking about arts revitalization and more generally as an element of a community's culture was influenced by the failure of a bunch of DC arts organizations around 2003-2006.  

The Source Theater was one of the failures ("Debt-Ridden Source Theatre Closes, Plans to Sell Building," "Source Theatre's Last Act: Building To Be Arts Center," Washington Post, 2006).

The actual Source Theater group disbanded, and with the purchase by Cultural Development Corporation later in 2006, the building was retained for use by cultural groups, more as a rental facility.

Ironically, the building has been put up for sale again, 18 years later ("Small D.C. theater companies have a challenge: Finding theaters The stalwart Source Theater is up for sale, shining a spotlight on the issues many under-the-radar companies face in post-lockdown Washington," Washington Post).  From the Post:

... the Source Theatre, an intimate 120-seat stage at 14th and T streets NW that has served audiences for nearly 50 years, is up for sale — a turn of events that has arts leaders pointing the finger at both city leaders and one another. 

“Since the pandemic, the arts community, specifically the theater community, has not bounced back,” says Kristi Maiselman, executive director and curator for the arts nonprofit CulturalDC, which owns the Source. “If the city wants arts spaces, they have to find a way to support them in this landscape.”

With audiences not yet returning at pre-pandemic levels, many small theaters are turning to the city government for support. And the D.C. government spends more on the arts per capita than any state. But it isn’t just small companies asking for help, which makes a race for resources that much tighter.

Gosh, I've been saying that for almost 20 years.

Also see "“Free Our Source”: Theatre Washington Calls on CulturalDC to Keep Source Theatre a Theater," (Washington City Paper).  The discusses how the Theatre Alliance of Washington has called on the property owner to sell Source Theater to them or a similar organization.

The failure to think about those failures in terms of rethinking the local arts ecosystem as a network led to pieces such as:

-- "More on (DC's) Cultural Infrastructure," 2009 
-- "Building the arts and culture ecosystem in DC: Part One, sustained efforts vs. one-off or short term initiatives," 2015
-- "The song remains the same: DC's continued failures in cultural planning as evidenced by failures with Bohemian Caverns, Howard Theatre, Union Arts, Takoma Theatre...," 2016

-- about discipline-focused approaches to the creation of arts districts and arts presentation:

-- "Reprinting with a slight update, 'Arts, culture districts and revitalization'," 2009/2019

and what I would do were I given the task of creating in DC a robust local arts ecosystem--as opposed to the federal arts institutions "given to" and within DC such as the Smithsonian Museums, National Gallery of Art, Kennedy Center, US Botanic Garden, etc.

-- "What would be a "Transformational Projects Action Plan" for DC's cultural ecosystem," 2019

DC spends a lot of money on the arts, but it doesn't protect its interests very well, especially because it's not interested in managing and owning property.  Ultimately owning facilities is key to protect the city's interest.

This piece, "Cultural resources planning in DC: In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king" (2007) on the failures of organizations back in 2003-2006,  includes an extract from a memo from 2006 on how DC should organize cultural planning and presentation  that I wrote for use in a board planning exercise by the then reorganizing Historical Society.  From that memo:

Proposals/Recommendations

1. That DC develop a comprehensive cultural development, management, and funding plan, setting priorities for the development, harvesting, and funding of cultural resources assets;

2. And consider the development of an allied tourism management and development plan, either separately or within the same framework;

3. create a comprehensive Cultural Resources Management office, likely merging a variety of programs and assets currently spread around various agencies

4. Provide funding, both for capital improvements and operations, that that also considers providing significant ongoing funding to cultural resources deemed important.

5. Develop an open and transparent grant process.

I guess I should have added to the list, the thread about arts facilities being owned by a city, county, or community development corporation as a portfolio, the series Buy the Mother Fucking Buildings Already: 

-- "BTMFBA: the best way to ward off artist or retail displacement is to buy the building," 2016

-- "BTMFBA: maintaining arts spaces in the face of rising real estate values | Seattle, New York City," 2024
-- "New form of BTMFBA in San Francisco," 2023
-- "A wrinkle on BTMFBA: let the city/county own the cultural facility, while you operate it (San Francisco and the Fillmore Heritage Center)," 2021
-- "BTMFBA: Baltimore and the Area 405 Studio," 2021
-- "Revisiting stories: cultural planning and the need for arts-based community development corporations as real estate operators," 2018
-- "When BTMFBA isn't enough: keeping civic assets public through cy pres review," 2016
-- "BMFBTA revisited: nonprofits and facilities planning and acquisition," 2016
-- "BTMFBA: artists and Los Angeles," 2017
-- "BTMFBA Chronicles: Seattle coffee shop raises money to buy its building," 2018
-- "Dateline Los Angeles: BTMFBA & Transformational Projects Action Planning & arts-related community development corporation as an implementation mechanism to own property," 2018

Revitalization in a distressed residential-industrial neighborhood: Pullman, Chicago, Illinois

I came across an interesting case study by the Chicago Business School, The Pullman Historic District: A partnership in place-based community investment, about the revitalization of the distressed neighborhood of Pullman, in Chicago.  

The effort was sparked by Park Bank, a locally focused community bank ("It shouldn't be a surprise that big banks are more comfortable dealing with large businesses | Community banking"), and its community development corporation which was doing a lot of housing rehabilitation.  It was also very much committed to community organization and involvement.

In planning, most cities use a 4 to 7 step ladder to summarize the economic health of a neighborhood: distressed, emerging, transitioning, and healthy.  Pullman is distressed.  The closure of various industrial businesses over the past decades decimated its economy.

With the Great Financial Crisis in 2008, the community bank was acquired by US Bank, which decided to continue to commit financial and technical assistance resources to the revitalization program in Pullman.

Main Administration Building of the Pullmans Palace Car Company, 1893. From a publicity brochure published by the Pullman Company. Pullman Company Archives of the Newberry Library, Chicago, Illinois.

Pullman was an industrial community, known for being the home of the Pullman railcar operation, which finally went kaput in 1955, although it manufactured cars elsewhere into the 1980s, and was later absorbed by Bombardier.

The community bank developed a plan to redevelop an old industrial site, which was complicated because of its size, community needs, and contamination.  

Historic Pullman homes come in a variety of different styles and sizes throughout the neighborhood. NPS Photo/Stephanie Schneider.

The original intent was to build retail and housing on the brownfield site, but wrt housing they realized they didn't need to build more, but instead should be focused on rehabilitation and re-occupancy of existing housing.

Just before the acquisition, the community bank received $50 million in New Markets Tax Credits, which passed to USB.  To meet self-dealing strictures, they spun off the CDC and gave the NMTC to it, which provided vitally needed capital.

At the time, Walmart was the only retailer interested. which was controversial, but people got a store and entry level jobs.  A community benefits agreement provided other inducements, as did the creation of a community center (eventually taken over by the parks department), and two light industrial facilities, for a total of about 1,200 jobs.

Like in DC at the time, when Walmart was expanding to cities. I ended up writing many entries on the issue:

-- "Walmart: in the city, vs. of the city," 2011
-- "Lessons from Walmart's foray into DC," 2011
-- "Wal-mart plays hardball with DC," 2013
-- "What community benefits are supposed to be versus what people think they are about," 2013
-- "More Walmart in DC," 2013
-- "6Ps, Walmart in DC and "I hate to say I told you so"," 2014
-- "Lessons from Walmart's foray into Washington, DC," 2011
-- "Piling on City Council for Walmart," 2013
-- "I hope for Aspen Hills' sake that Montgomery County is smart enough to learn from DC's planning errors with regard to Walmart's entry," 2012

-- op-ed piece, Washington Business Journal, "Temper Walmart glee with planning") 

While the case study lauds the Walmart as using an architectural style sympathetic to the local historic architecture, it looks a lot like the one on Georgia Avenue in DC.  At least the DC one has underground parking exclusively, rather than a big parking lot in front.  Vague historic aesthetic, nothing particularly specific.

To put into scale the jobs issue, the peak employment of the Pullman manufacturing plant was 10,000.  And there were many other businesses in the area, like International Harvester. So today, they have recaptured fewer than 20% of the jobs when the community was successful.  This is the reality of urban deindustrialization, either:

• closure of businesses
• consolidation of businesses with employment reduction
• replacement of workers with capital
• businesses moving out of cities 
• layoffs and tiered wages ("How the American South Drives the Low-Wage Economy," American Prospect)
• businesses moving overseas.

This is why I get angry when Republicans say "Democrats destroyed cities."  Elected officials didn't make those decisions.  And why spending upwards of $200 million on community improvement doesn't seem to have immediate effect.  From the study:

Place-based investing seeks to create positive economic and social returns in a given geography—say, a neighborhood: Pullman—through a coordinated influx of capital and development. The idea is layered: financial investors will see financial returns; “social” investors will see financial returns and community impact; and the community will benefit from economic development in the form of jobs, access to goods, services, housing, and quality of life. 

According to CNI10, the investments it spearheaded in Pullman between 2010 and 2019 brought $350 million dollars into the community, leading to the development of more than a million feet of commercial, industrial, and recreational space; creating 1,500 permanent jobs, a 43 percent increase for the area; and leading to a 136% percent rise in residential property values. Jennifer Bransfield—now the organization’s chief operations officer and general counsel— indicates that a majority of this investment occurred within a single census tract.

National Monument.  In 2015, the Pullman manufacturing site was designated as a national monument, the Pullman National Historic Park.  Planning document.

Evaluation.  The case study discusses the difficulty of evaluating the success of the funding.  Time, causality, and replicability are issues.

My point would be that as a distressed community, revitalization will take decades, especially given the nature of the types of vacant land, which cost extranormal amounts to come back online.

It presented Census data, which finds the area is still losing population and wage growth is stagnant.

Lessons.  "Don't drip money." Invest large amounts.  New Markets tax credits can be a good capital source.  The area has a logistics hub opportunity, brownfield site attracted other funding sources.

Future.  Chicago Neighborhood Initiatives, the re-branded CDC, is now working beyond the Pullman neighborhood, is developing a microenterprise funding initiative, and developing its capacity to invest and help other areas grow.

Planning relevance.  I think this project is a good example of my "best practice revitalization planning" approach, including the elements:

• a robust plan
• an implementation organization
• funding
• serendipity -- jumping on opportunities, like the National Monument
• recognition of the length of time required to execute the program

Crain's Chicago Business: Crain's Forum on Rebranding Chicago

Not as scintillating as the Boston Globe series ("Blueprints for a downtown Boston | Boston Globe"), but at least the business community is concerned about reputation and brand and identity management.  

One of my earliest pieces "Town-City branding or "We are all destination managers now"" (2005) was later expanded into the concept of a city's elected officials and stakeholders are its brand managers in commercial district revitalization framework plans I wrote in 2008 for Cambridge, Maryland, and Brunswick, Georgia.  

From destination managers to city brand managers to community asset managers.  What I wrote about "destination managers" and "brand managers" can be rewritten to encompass the civic asset network:

Just as the study team believes that “we are all destination managers now,” elected and appointed officials in particular and in association with other community stakeholders serve not only as a community’s “brand managers,” they also function, either by commission or omission, as a community's "asset managers"—whether or not they choose to think of their roles in this manner. 

That means that decision-making on land use and zoning, business issues, infrastructure development (roads, sewers, water, utilities, transit), technology (broadband Internet, etc.), the natural environment (open space, rivers, tree cover, watershed, etc.), and quality of place factors (arts, culture, historic preservation and heritage, education, public schools and libraries, urban design, etc.) must be consistent and focused on making the right decisions, the decisions that collectively achieve and support the realization of the community’s desired vision and positioning in terms of quality of life/placemaking, economic health, and the stewardship of physical assets and the built and natural environment.

"Town-city management: We are all asset managers now" (2015) is a further extension of these ideas, in part around risk management ("Where is the risk management approach to police misconduct and regularized killings of citizens?," 2020).

Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland and DC are taking big reputational hits because of crime, homelessness, general disorder and other issues--abetted by the constant playing of these issues in conservative media.  

OTOH, having lived in DC in the 1980s and 1990s when things hit bottom, I am anti-disorder to the nth degree.  

I don't understand when elected officials don't appreciate how important getting public safety under control was to inward investment and population growth in the 2000s.  My lesson from the bad times is that it's very easy for disorder to get out of control.  

In DC, the social justice push to ease treatment of criminals has been counter productive.  Elected officials saw their actions as a way to address structural racism and other issues.  While perpetrators looked at these measures as a cue to commit more crime.  (DC has other issues in addressing crime too.

An extremely lenient approach to crime committed by juveniles--which these days ends up with rampant car jacking, weapon-assisted robberies and assaults, and murders--and prosecution by a special unit of the Department of Justice, which can be somewhat disconnected from responding to the need for crime suppression.

DC Crime Facts is a great e-letter on these issues.

From "What does Chicago need next? A rebranding":

With the Democratic National Convention coming to town this summer, Chicago has a rare opportunity to regain its swagger and reposition itself as a global city at the top of its game, a city second to none as a place to live and work. 

Chicago did it before, nearly 30 years ago, by giving itself a makeover for the 1996 Democratic National Convention that continued with the creation of Millennium Park. 

But this time, the city is approaching its moment in the spotlight without a CEO at the helm of World Business Chicago or its convention and tourism promoter, Choose Chicago. 

Chicago can counter the narrative that its best days are behind it by focusing on the strategic advantages that it’s always had as an affordable big city that attracts a deep pool of educated talent. 

 “The Chicago brand remains strong for fundamental reasons,” says Mike Grella, founder of site-selection consultant Grella Partnership Strategies in Atlanta. “It’s the third-largest metro area and a top 20 global economy. It has tremendous talent and some top colleges and universities. Those fundamentals aren’t going to change. 

”Chicago getting a bad rap, and are we making ourselves too easy a target by not putting our best foot forward to change the narrative? The nation’s third-largest city is still a city that works, but it also has a growing list of very real challenges, topped by crime, that must be addressed. 

“We are fighting perception, and you have to be aggressive, or it takes on a life of its own,” says Andrea Zopp, who was CEO of World Business Chicago, the city’s public-private partnership for corporate recruiting, from 2017 to 2020. 

... “It would be a serious mistake to move major entertainment venues to the suburbs,” Florida says. “The downtown of the future has to be an entertainment center, and sports are part of that.” He points to Detroit as an example. “Before, I would have said Detroit went too far with the casino, the stadia, the arena. . . .What we’ve learned post-COVID is that stuff is necessary. In a reduced office environment, attractions and visitation are so key. This is what Miami and Las Vegas figured out.”

• "What does Chicago need next? A rebranding"
• "Chicago can recover from its 'reputational hit'"
• "WHAT DO CHICAGO'S PEER CITIES HAVE GOING FOR THEM?" (data)
• "Chicago marketers make their pitches to promote the city"
• "Harris Poll: Chicago's flaws shouldn't overshadow its beauty and grandeur"
• "Commentary: Chicago in a position to claim a new title: 'City of solutions'"
• "Commentary: Forging partnerships with clear objectives is Chicago's superpower"

===

Interesting point comparing to Detroit, and the city as an entertainment machine--something criticized for years by suburban partisan Joel Kotkin ("The Renaissance of Cities," Government Technology, "Joel Kotkin: The man urbanists love to hate," Grist, "PERSPECTIVE ON CHICAGO: FROM CITY OF BIG SHOULDERS TO ENTERTAINMENT MACHINE?" New Geography).  From the last article:

It is this more gilded, elegant Chicago – home of arguably the nation’s and even the world’s greatest collection of 20th Century high-rise structures – that foreshadows the current city. The success of Millennium Park, the powerful if now fading condo boom, the city’s newfound celebratory culture (think Oprah Winfrey and Barack Obama), its growth in fine restaurants, nightclubs and other entertainments has persuaded some observers like the University of Chicago’s Terry Nichols Clark to declare that Chicago is indeed the model city of the future. 

Clark’s new urban vision sees a city that marries upper crust with proto-bohemian elements, providing a spectacle for the well-to-do and distracted. Such cities may no longer serve as a vehicle for class mobility, but as an “entertainment machine” for the privileged. For these elite residents, the lures are not economic opportunity, but rather “bicycle paths, beaches and softball fields,” and “up-to-the-date consumption opportunities in the hip restaurants, bars, shops, and boutiques abundant in restructured urban neighborhoods.”

And I have to temper my thinking about this too.  

One of the most important books I read in the late 1980s, pre-Internet, was Maximarketing.  Its basic point was that you have to focus on all channels, not just some, selectively. 

Another good book was the Marketing Imagination.

That's where cities are.  Needing to maximize all opportunities.  

And the legacy cities still have advantages in terms of cultural institutions, professional sports teams, colleges and universities, parks and other civic assets, public space investment.  Transit.

When such institutions are created in the suburbs, the reality is that they are suburban, less cosmopolitan, often less diverse, less likely to challenge the status quo ("Creative hubs in suburban communities," "Suburbs take their place in the cultural sun," Chicago Tribune, 1990, "Vancouver's suburbs fertile ground for cultural infrastructure," Toronto Globe & Mail).

Suburban – or so-called "edge" cities – are developing cultural infrastructure that, if not necessarily on par with what is downtown, is bound to impress. As they grow to view themselves less as bedroom communities and more as cities with cultural identities, these municipalities are focusing on the arts as a way to help them grow, and to demonstrate their maturity. 

... Dr. Baeker points to Vaughan, Ont., north of Toronto. He developed Vaughan's cultural plan guided by two questions: "One was how do we stop being a suburb? And how do we use cultural facilities and amenities and opportunities to create a sense of this being an urban centre, not a suburban area?" 

... "I think the suburbs are changing. I think there's a much more urban audience in and around Metro Vancouver than has historically been the case," says Mr. Shier , who points out urban epicentres are developing in cities such as North Van, Burnaby, Surrey and Richmond . " That demographic is shifting expectations. The expectation is that people can have this type of amenity in those urban cores, rather than having to travel to Vancouver to get it."

Although the drop in tourism, the increase in work from home and the impact of e commerce are decimating urban retail ("S.F.’s biggest mall lost nearly $1 billion in property value after retail exodus," San Francisco Chronicle, "How will Macy's closure impact SF's Union Square? Experts offer clues" and "These are the businesses thriving in SF's Union Square," SF ABC7,"Macy’s to close 150 namesake stores as sales slip, pivot to luxury with new Bloomingdale’s locations," Philadelphia Inquirer).

Union Square in SF, like shopping in Manhattan, and some time ago on the Magnificent Mile in Chicago, was special.  

Still maintained its relevance despite the move of retail to the suburbs in various forms.  No more.

And cities suffer disproportionately from homelessness and drug issues and disorder problems.  And cities have limited budgets and many priorities.

But there are plenty of us who still prefer to live in such an environment.

The challenge will be to get disorder under control.  Schools--an issue in cities like Chicago and DC.  Revive retail.  And make downtowns more balanced, more like neighborhoods.  

While fixing transit ("Ensuring the intertwined post-pandemic recoveries of downtowns and transit systems," Brookings) and a myriad of other issues.

-- Transit is the answer plan, Chicago

Advocacy Agenda Detail 

1. Secure increased funding for transit operations
2. Develop a funding structure that is less reliant on rider fares, but instead focused on expanding access to opportunity
3. Build a coalition around the value transit brings to the Chicago region
4. Support communities’ efforts to improve the area around their transit stations and stops and pursue equitable transit-oriented development
5. Engage with communities in an inclusive and transparent way about how transit dollars are spent in the Chicago region
6. Secure increased funding for transit infrastructure
7. Partner with roadway agencies to build more transit-friendly streets and advance bus rapid transi

It comes down to the asset investment approach, be it social urbanism, revitalization, or a wide range of investment in key infrastructure projects like Oklahoma City:

-- "Updating the best practice elements of revitalization to include elements 7 and 8 | Transformational Projects Action Planning at a large scale," (2024)

-- "What is the competitive advantage for the post-covid city? Doubling down on place values" (2022)

-- "Defining place-keeping: The long-term management of public spaces," Urban Forestry and Urban Greening (2011)

-- "Now, a push to bring more culture — and connection — to Kendall Square," Boston Globe, 2022, (public space, access improvements, culture additions)

The Economics of Uniqueness: Investing in Historic City Cores and Cultural Heritage Assets for Sustainable Development

DC ("Bowser, business leaders pitch $400M plan to fix D.C.’s ailing downtown," Washington Post) and other cities ("Chicago leaders announce committee to revitalize downtown area, including State Street," WLS-TV/ABC, "State Street downtown has highest vacancy rate ever, but experts say there is hope," CBS2, "Mayor Brandon Johnson outlines vision for downtown revitalization" Chicago Sun-Times, "Downtown's next act: Converting offices to residences is the best hope for the Golden Triangle" and "All hands on deck': 5 more Downtown properties get big assessment cuts as woes deepen for city," "As foreclosure risks rise, nearly half of Downtown Pittsburgh office space could be empty in 4 years, report shows," Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) have announced initiatives to refocus on improving Downtowns-their central business districts.  

I'm pretty down on the capacity of DC's planning function though. From the article: 

Among the plan’s wide-ranging proposals: recruiting more universities to fill up excess office space, simplifying regulations to attract new small and international businesses, and creating a “history triangle” between Farragut Square, Franklin Park and Lafayette Square that would draw visitors from the Mall. 

... Still, city officials say that a more extensive, detailed version of the Downtown Action Plan will not be ready until May. For now, it takes the form of a summary of recommendations and broad spending priorities that the report’s authors say, if fully funded and realized, will help mitigate the negative trends threatening the viability of downtown and the city’s overall financial health. 

Downtown brings $2.3 billion in revenue to the city’s coffers each year, which represents about one-fourth of the city’s total local revenue annually. The report says annual tax revenue generated from downtown has declined by $243 million since 2019, and if current conditions are left unabated, could decline by an additional $193 million over the next five to 10 years. 

Office vacancy rates downtown have crept up to a record high of at least 21 percent so far in the first quarter of fiscal 2024, according to data provided by the DowntownDC Business Improvement District (BID). 

... Other investment recommendations focus on transportation, increasing retail opportunities, enhancing downtown’s parks and open spaces, and providing $2.5 million for a “dedicated team and marketing efforts to facilitate the transformation of Downtown D.C. into a global learning hub.” 

... In the realm of public safety, the plan’s short-term recommendations include a lighting assessment and an increased budget for a newly launched program to create “Safe Commercial Corridor” hubs to keep neighborhoods safe and clean through a combination of efforts from public safety and human services agencies. The first hub opened in Chinatown two weeks ago. 

The plan also focuses on making downtown more friendly to small businesses by simplifying licensing and permitting regulations and in April, launching a soft-landing program to attract international companies and start-ups. 

And to accelerate the number of housing conversions downtown — the plan notes there are now fewer than five units of housing there for every 100 employees — it suggests streamlining construction and building permitting processes while offering a 10-year suspension of the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA), a law that gives tenants a first right of purchase, for new housing projects that are not replacing existing housing.

Plus DC's central business district improvement districts are a bit less capable than those of NYC or the Center City District in Philadelphia.

-- DC Downtown Action Plan

Plus, change takes time.  A decade is just a start.  And DC may take a further blow if the professional basketball and hockey teams do leave the city for suburban Virginia.

Updating the best practice elements of revitalization to include elements 7 and 8 | Transformational Projects Action Planning at a large scale

TransMilenio bus routes.  Photo by Julio Plaza for the New York Times.

An email discussion I think, and an article, "How Bogotá Tried to Lead the Way for Better Bus Systems," in the New York Times about the decline of the Transmilenio BRT bus transit system in Bogotá, which has close to 2 million daily riders, got me thinking about my writings on what I called the six elements of best practice revitalization, which were later augmented by the concept of Transformational Projects Action Planning, a new term for the first element of "visionary planning."

From another NYT piece, "What We Learned From Bogotá’s Buses," about the article:

That’s a lesson I took away from my reporting. We live in divided, short-sighted times. Transformative projects like TransMilenio require long-term “cathedral thinking.” They don’t conform to election cycles. They’re not the work of any single person. They’re like cities themselves: endless, incremental, evolving and collective.

Commitment and time is an issue, and so is "continuous process improvement." These items need to be added to the list.

Six elements of best practice revitalization initiatives.  Besides the example of Pittsburgh, the elements came out of the articles I did for an EU National Institutes of Culture Washington Chapter project in Baltimore, where I wrote about revitalization efforts in 7 European cities.  

The examples of Bilbao ("Why can't the "Bilbao Effect" be reproduced? | Bilbao as an example of Transformational Projects Action Planning"), Dublin, Hamburg's HafenCity, Helsinki's Arabianranta district, and Liverpool were the key to the codification.

1. A commitment to the development and production of a broad, comprehensive, visionary, and detailed revitalization plan/s (Bilbao, Hamburg, Liverpool);
2. the creation of innovative and successful implementation organizations, with representatives from the public sector and private firms, to carry out the program. Typically, the organizations have some distance from the local government so that the plan and program aren't subject to the vicissitudes of changing political administrations, parties and representatives (Bilbao, Hamburg, Liverpool, Helsinki);
3. strong accountability mechanisms that ensure that the critical distance provided by semi-independent implementation organizations isn't taken advantage of in terms of deleterious actions (for example Dublin's Temple Bar Cultural Trust was amazingly successful but over time became somewhat disconnected from local government and spent money somewhat injudiciously, even though they generated their own revenues--this came to a head during the economic downturn and the organization was widely criticized; in response the City Council decided to fold the TBCT and incorporate it into the city government structure, which may have negative ramifications for continued program effectiveness as its revenues get siphoned off and political priorities of elected officials shift elsewhere);
4. funding to realize the plan, usually a combination of local, regional, state, and national sources, and in Europe, "structural adjustment" and other programmatic funding from the European Regional Development Fund and related programs is also available (Hamburg, as a city-state, has extra-normal access to funds beyond what may normally be available to the average city);
5. integrated branding and marketing programs to support the realization of the plan (Hamburg, Vienna, Liverpool, Bilbao, Dublin);
6. flexibility and a willingness to take advantage of serendipitous events and opportunities and integrate new projects into the overall planning and implementation framework (examples include Bilbao's "acquisition" of a branch of the Guggenheim Museum and the creation of a light rail system to complement its new subway system, Liverpool City Council's agreement with a developer to create the Liverpool One mixed use retail, office, and residential development in parallel to the regeneration plan and the hosting of the Capital of Culture program in 2008, and how multifaceted arts centers were developed in otherwise vacated properties rented out cheaply by their owners in Dublin, Helsinki, and Marseille).

Transformational Projects Action Planning.  There are other great examples of community transformation besides those.  

While the concept was spurred by my writings on the Purple Line light rail system coming to suburban Maryland,

-- "(Big Hairy) Projects Action Plan(s) as an element of Comprehensive/Master Plans," 2017

but also best practice programs I've across and not always written about.  

A period of time in Toronto where multiple projects were realized, the arts in Edmonton ("Downtown Edmonton cultural facilities development as an example of "Transformational Projects Action Planning""), revitalization in Hennepin County Minnesota and Minneapolis, the Metropolitan Area Projects program in Oklahoma City ("Change isn't usually that simple: The repatterning of Oklahoma City's Downtown Streetscape"), Portland's focus on urban revitalization and transit, social urbanism in Medellín, etc.

Social urbanism

-- "Social urbanism and equity planning as a way to address crime, violence, and persistent poverty: (not in) DC," 2023
-- "Experiments in Social Urbanism"
-- "'Social urbanism' experiment breathes new life into Colombia's Medellin Toronto Globe & Mail
-- "Medellín's 'social urbanism' a model for city transformation," Mail & Guardian
-- "Medellín slum gets giant outdoor escalator," Telegraph
-- "Medellín, Colombia offers an unlikely model for urban renaissance," Toronto Star

TPAP at multiple scales.  Over time, as I wrote more about it, I realized it should be applied at multiple scales ("A wrinkle in thinking about the Transformational Projects Action Planning approach: Great public buildings aren't just about design, but what they do," 2022).

(1) neighborhood/district/city/county wide as part of a master plan;
(2) within functional elements of a master plan such as transportation, housing, or economic development; and
(3) within a specific project (e.g., how do we make this particular library or transit station or park or neighborhood "great"?); in terms of both
(4) architecture and design; and
(5) program/plan for what the functions within the building accomplish.

Application of TPAP thinking to other topics. Besides the Purple Line writings, I've applied the concept to other areas of planning, albeit a lot on transit, such as:

--  "Ordinary versus Extraordinary Planning around the rebuilding of the United Medical Center in Southeast Washington DC | Part One: Rearticulating the system of health and wellness care East of the River," 2018
-- "What would be a "Transformational Projects Action Plan" for DC's cultural ecosystem," 2019
-- "Framework of characteristics that support successful community development in association with the development of professional sports facilities," 2021
-- "Two train/regional transit ideas: Part 1 | Amtrak should acquire Greyhound," 2021
-- "DC, Transformational Projects Action Planning, and the Baltimore-Washington Maglev project," 2021
-- "Nishi Kyushu Shinkansen, Japan, as an example of Transformational Projects Action Planning | Planning and executing complementary improvements across the transit network + advances in transit marketing" 2022

Commitment and time as element seven.  This item is implicit in the original list of six in that you need an implementation organization separate from government to keep the focus, especially because government interest waxes and wanes depending on who gets elected and their desire to work on their priorities, not the long term priorities developed by previous administrations.

The revitalization management process is never ending.  Not only does it take decades to see results, individual projects take a long time to come to fruition, e.g., two projects I was involved in in DC, one took 13 years, the other so far 23, although they are moving towards breaking ground.

In "Main Street Niches in a Mass Market World" Neal Peirce said that commercial district work takes at least 20 years.

DC is another good example in a different way.  Separate implementation organizations were dissolved by the Fenty Administration (2006) and incorporated into the Office of Planning and Economic Development (which is separate from planning), mostly so they could control what was done.  

But the city has never developed the capacity to be particularly good at that, and definitely the energy to revitalize the communities in the Anacostia River community has been moribund ever since, which has been about 15 years.  What a waste.

A great example of time and commitment is the German International Building Exposition (IBA).  It culminates in an exhibition, but is preceded by a multiyear phase of project development and implementation, and after the exhibition year, usually continues as more projects are finished.  It's easily a 10-15 year process.

-- The contemporary International Building Exhibition (IBA) : innovative regeneration strategies in Germany, MIT thesis

I argue we should do a similar program in the US.  

Adaptive management/Continuous process improvement/stasis versus dynamism/iterative process as element eight.  This follows from point six on serendipity and taking advantage of opportunities that fit the framework of the visionary plan, even if you didn't plan specifically.

That's to continue to improve.  Thomas Davenport calls this process innovation.  

Bogotá's new B.R.T. (bus rapid transit) public transportation system moves millions of passengers each day on bright red vehicles that course along dedicated lanes, avoiding the dense gridlock that clogs many roads in this city of 7 million. Photo: Scott Dalton for The New York Times.  "Buses May Aid Climate Battle in Poor Cities," July 9, 2009

Obviously, there is the New York Times example of Transmilenio and its failure to adapt and improve after its launch in 2001, in response to great success, and greater need.  

There was an initial round of improvements, better integrating the feeder bus network, and expanding lines.  But after that, and admittedly with successive administrations, improvements didn't continue ("Bogotá, Colombia, Backslides After a Comeback," NYT, 2011).  From the article:

To some degree, TransMilenio has become a victim of its own popularity: it is now hobbled by long waiting lines, overcrowded buses and delays in building new routes. But it has also been transformed into a setting for armed robberies and violent protests. Óscar Naranjo, the director of Colombia’s national police, announced in February that a force of 350 police officers would patrol TransMilenio in efforts to combat crime on the system.

Again DC has a great example as c. 2000 it was national best practice in terms of improving streetscapes in commercial districts, significantly boosting success of those areas.  Around 2006 it "repaired" Thomas Circle, which decades before had been cut through with more road travel lanes.  They remade it into a full park circle.

But by then, other cities, especially San Francisco (Sustainable Mobility and Climate Action Strategy) and New York City (World Class Streets: Remaking New York City's Public Realm) began to outspan DC in terms of improving public spaces.  DC remained static, still doing good stuff but without added verve, while those other communities took a dynamic approach and continued to improve and innovate in big hairy audacious ways.

Streetscape improvements in New York City.  New York Times graphic.  Click on the graphic for a larger image.

Restaurant parklet for Ruby Wine and Alimentari Aurora.  Created by students in an architectural studio at the California College of the Arts.

Note however in some quarters, SF's parklet program, which replaces parking spaces with public and private (restaurant) patio like spaces, parklets being the foundation of the expansion of public space initiatives in SF, and was expanded during covid, appears to be backsliding too ("The end of San Francisco’s parklet era is upon us," San Francisco Chronicle).  From the article:

Parklets that were erected in 2020 under that year’s regulations, often to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars, have been subject to ever-evolving rules in the years since: at least three times, according to one owner I spoke to. Parklet operators face steep fines for noncompliance even if their parklets used to be permitted.

In 2021, after the city gave parklet owners just two weeks to comply with expanded regulations, Supervisor Aaron Peskin told the Chronicle, “It’s the most uncoordinated, messed-up, insulting display of government incompetence.” To grant business owners a reprieve, the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved an ordinance delaying parklet fines until April 1, 2023, and mandating that permit reviews by city departments take no more than 30 days. Mayor London Breed then granted an extension for parklet fixes to coincide with that date.

But now the chickens are coming home to roost once again. Case in point: Ruby Wine and Alimentari Aurora, the Italian deli next door, are crowdfunding for the $30,000 it’ll take to completely overhaul their joint parklet to meet the city’s new regulations. Despite making modifications and paying to apply for a minor encroachment permit that might allow for a bench on the sidewalk, Alimentari Aurora owner Dario Barbone says his applications have all been rejected. Even Supervisor Shamann Walton’s office, which agreed to assist Barbone with expediting the permit process, has had no luck in getting any response from city departments.

Similarly with plans, I argue that the finished plans are a beginning, not an endpoint, but that they need to somehow be dynamic as circumstances change over time.

Another DC example is development on the site of the Takoma Metrorail station ("The Takoma Metro Development Proposal and its illustration of gaps in planning and participation processes," 2014).  This has been going on since 2000, and finally a better project, albeit ugly as sin, is going forward.  

The city did a plan for the area around 2002.  My line was that it was a plan based on the late 1990s, and when DC resurged beginning with the election of Anthony Williams in 1998, the recommendations were out of date.  But residents used that plan as a basis for their opposition--with a plan that was based on circumstances that were 15 years old!

Adaptive Management is a six step process:

• Identify the problem
• Design
• Implement 
• Monitor
• Evaluate
• Adjust

But I'm going to call this adaptive management based on a presentation board I saw at Glen Canyon dam.  From the website:

The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program was developed to provide an organization and process for cooperative integration of dam operations, downstream resource protection and management, and monitoring and research information, as well as to improve the values for which the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area and Grand Canyon National Park were established. 

Adaptive management is a dynamic process where people of many talents and disciplines come together to make the right decision in the best interests of the resources.

I will say that adaptive management is a lot like my old "Action Planning" approach, which uses the design method, which is similarly iterative and dates back to 2008 and my observation of best practice then.  

Action Planning is a framework with five inter-connected components:

1. Design Method rather than Rational Planning
2. Social Marketing
3. Integrated Program Delivery System
4. Packaged through Branding & Identity Systems
5. Civic Engagement & Democracy at the foundation = citizen at the center

I also used that model when creating the Western Baltimore County Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Plan back in 2010  ("Best practice bicycle planning for suburban settings using the "action planning" method").

The Design Method

The updated list.

1. A commitment to the development and production of a broad, comprehensive, visionary, and detailed revitalization plan/s (Bilbao, Hamburg, Liverpool);
2. the creation of innovative and successful implementation organizations, with representatives from the public sector and private firms, to carry out the program. Typically, the organizations have some distance from the local government so that the plan and program aren't subject to the vicissitudes of changing political administrations, parties and representatives (Bilbao, Hamburg, Liverpool, Helsinki);
3. strong accountability mechanisms that ensure that the critical distance provided by semi-independent implementation organizations isn't taken advantage of in terms of deleterious actions (for example Dublin's Temple Bar Cultural Trust was amazingly successful but over time became somewhat disconnected from local government and spent money somewhat injudiciously, even though they generated their own revenues--this came to a head during the economic downturn and the organization was widely criticized; in response the City Council decided to fold the TBCT and incorporate it into the city government structure, which may have negative ramifications for continued program effectiveness as its revenues get siphoned off and political priorities of elected officials shift elsewhere);
4. funding to realize the plan, usually a combination of local, regional, state, and national sources, and in Europe, "structural adjustment" and other programmatic funding from the European Regional Development Fund and related programs is also available (Hamburg, as a city-state, has extra-normal access to funds beyond what may normally be available to the average city);
5. integrated branding and marketing programs to support the realization of the plan (Hamburg, Vienna, Liverpool, Bilbao, Dublin);
6. flexibility and a willingness to take advantage of serendipitous events and opportunities and integrate new projects into the overall planning and implementation framework (examples include Bilbao's "acquisition" of a branch of the Guggenheim Museum and the creation of a light rail system to complement its new subway system, Liverpool City Council's agreement with a developer to create the Liverpool One mixed use retail, office, and residential development in parallel to the regeneration plan and the hosting of the Capital of Culture program in 2008, and how multifaceted arts centers were developed in otherwise vacated properties rented out cheaply by their owners in Dublin, Helsinki, and Marseille).
7. commitment and time.  Revitalization is a forever process that takes a long time to begin to see results.  It needs to continue beyond the vicissitudes of changing political administrations.
8. adaptive management. Visionary revitalization requires continuous process improvement.  Other ways to think about it are using the design method or adaptive management instead of remaining static.  Programs can always be improved and should be.