Management

Recognizing a need for community discussion about how to effectively oversee Union Station’s public spaces, the Workshop facilitators included management as one of the four focus areas of the event. A team of four Advanced Planning Studio students collaborated to create a Workshop session to show how management styles and structures overlap with intended uses of the space. The Workshop would also elicit ideas from participants about appropriate and sustainable management plans.

The student group found management issues surrounding DUS had hardly been previously discussed with the community on any substantial level, perhaps because it has been complex topic that is commonly outside the realm of public decision-making. The student group decided integrating a management station in our public workshop was prudent because we see management as an integral component of responsible plan-making. By understanding more about how the public would like DUS public spaces to be governed and managed, the student groups develop a greater understanding of what effective plans should include.

Workshop process

Recognizing that the concept of public space management is more abstract than the direct design or use of public space, and acknowledging the short timeframe of our workshop session (25 minutes each for four groups), we decided to contrast four types of public space management, to provide an initial structure for discussion and case study illustrations:

•  Public-private partnership (exemplified by Denver’s Stapleton redevelopment)
•  For-profit corporation (exemplified by Flatirons Mall in Broomfield)
•  Private non-profit organization (exemplified by Bryant Park in New York City)
•  Public non-profit corporation (exemplified by Pike Place Market in Seattle)

Participants expressed their interest in each type of management by first filling out a quiz we provided and tallying their answers, which corresponded to each management structure. We then facilitated a discussion during which we expected participants to combine these choices offered and potentially develop a new plaza management model.

For the majority of the four individual sessions, participants engaged in an insightful discussion of management styles and how they could be applied to the DUS plaza. Conversation about the four management types progressed relatively organically, with our group members asking follow-up questions. Participants discussed the reasons they chose one particular management style over another judging from their conclusions that their test “results” provided. We took notes on flip chart paper throughout the discussion and at the conclusion of the evening had felt we had uncovered some definite preconceptions, and had gained a better feeling for the public’s expectations.

Workshop participants in each of the four rotations struggled to identify one best management structure for DUS’s public spaces. Of those who had a strong opinion about management, most expressed interest in a public-private partnership or public non-profit corporation, which would allow for both public oversight and investment by private companies. Participants discussed the need to have businesses and cultural facilities on the plaza, to activate it and inspire investment and upkeep, as well as the need to make it “distinctly Denver” and maintain it as a cherished landscape. Concerns about relying on taxpayers’ money or the City of Denver to manage the plaza emerged in the discussions, along with equal concerns about losing sight of the “public good” by entrusting DUS’s public landscape to private developers.

Results

Throughout the four workshop sessions on management, group discussions revolved loosely around three overriding issues: uses, control and cost. Given their priorities and interests, most participants thought it best to include some form of private business to draw people into the space, as well as some form of public oversight to ensure the preservation of non-commercial, community-based uses. Participants generally felt a strictly public entity would struggle to attract people to the plaza and may not be able to feasibly maintain the public spaces at an acceptable standard. A completely private management option was, by and large, unpopular because it would risk loss of public oversight around a cherished Denver landmark.

Participants preferred a balanced public-private partnership because it offered a way of enlivening the plaza, creating unique character for the space, and allowing the community to influence activity independent of the surrounding uses. This management option would be the only option sufficient enough to provide the high level of programming needed for the plaza area to make it both interactive and diverse enough for the 200,000 commuters that will eventually pass though the station. As one participant said, “[DUS] is Denver’s. The community has to feel like it’s theirs.”

Some of the participation groups also discussed the important relationship between management of the historic building, the proposed buildings, and the plaza. Several participants observed that there may be some difficulty in managing the plaza independently of the surrounding buildings and the spaces created by them. Moreover, some participants found it difficult to even discuss possible management structures without considering the management options for the surrounding area, which are controlled by the project developer, RTD and the other DUS project partners.

Overall, each of the four group rotations provided the student group with new ideas about how management could affect the use and the character of the plaza. The group did encounter some challenges, including trying to engage local professionals, government representatives and laypersons in the same dialogue, but the session provided some great insights into how the DUS public spaces could become attractive, active and community-centered.

Click here for the individual pdf report of the management section.