This report is a collaboration between Huge; the Municipal Art Society (MAS), a non-profit organization dedicated to improving New York City; and Advocates for Privately Owned Public Space (APOPS). To compile this report Huge conducted user research, stakeholder interviews and location assessments to gain insights into the challenges and needs across Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS) and key stakeholders. The report summarizes the history of POPS, depicts the current landscape, and makes recommendations based on findings.

1. Transforming New York’s
Privately Owned
Public Spaces
with Technology.
Amaani Hamid
Chris Holmes
Chris Michaud
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 1

2. 1
Introduction.
New York City is famous for its public spaces. Diverse public spaces provide refuge from overcrowded can help overcome those challenges. This report is a col-
Residents and tourists retreat to places like Central Park, streets and sidewalks, venues for art and culture, open laboration between Huge, a global digital agency based
McCarren Park or The Highline to find sanctuary from areas for exercise and relaxation, opportunities to be in Brooklyn; the Municipal Art Society (MAS), a non-profit
the hustle and bustle of daily life. These spaces, while closer to nature within an urban environment, and places organization dedicated to improving New York City; and
open and endearing, are enjoyed year-round and can for public discourse and community assembly. Better- Advocates for Privately Owned Public Space (APOPS).
become overcrowded at times, somewhat defeating their conserved public spaces can lead to more connected
To compile this report, Huge conducted user research,
purpose. Recently, a different type of public space has communities, safer neighborhoods, and a better quality
stakeholder interviews, and location assessments to gain
come to the forefront in NYC: the famed Occupy Wall of life.
insights into the challenges and needs across building
Street movement used a privately owned public space,
However, there are many hurdles to overcome in order owners, community advocates, public citizens, and the
Zuccotti Park, as its eventual home base, shedding light
for NYC denizens to fully utilize POPS. Foremost, there is city. The report summarizes the history of POPS, depicts
on a little known treasure in NYC’s landscape.
“
the current landscape, and makes recommendations
The more successfully a city mingles everyday diversity of uses and users in its based on findings.
everyday streets, the more successfully, casually (and economically) its people A definition and history of POPS
thereby enliven and support well-located parks that can thus give back grace
In 1961, The City of New York established a zoning pro-
and delight to their neighborhoods instead of vacuity.” gram that offered private developers additional building
–Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities
space, as long as a certain amount was designated for
a lack of awareness about their existence. Furthermore,
There are, surprisingly, over 500 privately owned public public use. The program has since created 526 POPS
many POPS are in a state of disrepair, have insufficient
spaces, also referred to as POPS, in NYC, but many are in the five boroughs, equal to approximately 3.5 million
amenities, and sometimes exist in inhospitable condi-
unknown and unused by the community. In a city where square feet of public space.1
tions that prevent these spaces from being truly utilized.
over 8 million people live in a densely packed environ-
ment and where well-known public spaces are just as This report discusses the many benefits of POPS, ex-
congested, POPS present an untapped opportunity to amines the aforementioned hurdles that prevent wider 1
Kayden Jerold. Privately Owned Public Spaces
enrich city life. usage of these spaces, and describes how technology (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2000) pg. 44
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 2

3. These spaces are intended to provide New York City Despite City Planning’s efforts to improve POPS over Kayden’s study in 2000 found that only 16% of POPS
residents with open spaces where they can retreat from the past 50 years with these amendments, a significant were used as a destination hangout, 21% were used as
the dense, overcrowded urban environment, especially in number of New York City POPS are currently in a state of short-term resting spots, 18% were used as pedestrian
neighborhoods without nearby city parks. disrepair. Professor Jerold Kayden, Director of the Mas- passageways, 4% were under construction and 41%
ter in Urban Planning Degree Program at the Harvard were only marginally useful.5 Sadly, subsequent investi-
Initially, the zoning resolution did not stipulate strong de-
University Graduate School of Design, is a leading expert gations have found that the state of the POPS has not
sign guidelines, basic amenity provisions or a standard
in the field and has conducted extensive research that changed dramatically since Kayden conducted the study
set of rules and regulations regarding usage. Thus, many
found many of the POPS underutilized and inaccessible. 12 years ago.
“first-generation spaces,” which account for one-third
of current POPS, lack the fundamental assets that make
public spaces appealing and practical for public use.2 kayden’s 2000 study on the state of pops
Many of them lack adequate seating, greenery, shade,
signage or accessibility. Further adjustments to the
zoning resolution were made in the 1970’s and 1980’s,
most notably after William H. Whyte’s research on public
spaces, which analyzed human behavior in urban set-
tings.3 In 2007, the New York City Council modified the
text on the standards for the creation and design of
outdoor POPS and followed in 2009 with an addition Under Construction: 4%
to clarify and enhance the previous provisions.4 Both
Marginally Useful: 41%
sets of changes are intended to facilitate higher-quality
design and development of these public spaces in order Short-term Rest Spots: 21%
to make them more inviting to citizens. Destination Hangout: 16%
Pedestrian Passageways: 21%
2
‘Privately Owned Public Spaces’ http://www.
nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/priv/priv.shtml accessed
10/10/12
3
‘Project for Public Spaces’ http://www.pps.
org/reference/wwhyte/ accessed 10/14/12
4
‘Privately Owned Public Spaces’ http://www.
nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/priv/101707_final_ap-
proved_text.pdf accessed 10/1012
Sadly, subsequent investigations have found that the state of the POPS has not
5
Kayden Jerold. Privately Owned Public
Spaces (New York : John Wiley & Sons, 2000)
pg. 51
changed dramatically since Kayden conducted the study twelve years ago.
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 3

4. 2
Methods & research.
The Municipal Art Society (MAS), a non-profit organiza- mediocre. Only 20 POPS were ranked as “inviting.” In Who are the core stakeholders in the POPS system?
tion dedicated to the improvement of New York City, has terms of usage, only 15 POPS had a medium or high (3
Through our research, we identified four core stakehold-
partnered with Kayden to form Advocates for Privately to 5 points) user flow score, while the rest were close to
ers that are intrinsic to the POPS system.
Owned Public Space (APOPS), in order to establish a set empty. More than 30% of these spaces had no signage
of guiding principles for revitalizing POPS, encourage identifying them as a public space. Much of the signage
the creation of new POPS and strengthen the dialogue that did exist in the remaining POPS was hidden and
around public spaces in general. MAS and APOPS col- quite varied in style, size and information.
laborated with Huge, a global digital agency based in
Brooklyn, to explore these issues and investigate how
technology might be able to help improve local POPS.
Huge staffers conducted user and stakeholder research
Huge Research Findings
in order to devise a strategic plan to employ technology
to support APOPS’s mission. Manhattan POPS in Study 70
Huge researchers conducted 15 stakeholder interviews, Uninviting POPS 30
facilitated 20 visitor discussions and collected data
Mediocre POPS 20
from 70 POPS throughout Manhattan. Participants were
asked to rate, on a scale of one to five, each space’s Inviting POPS 20
attractiveness, pedestrian traffic and accessibility. The
team also collected information about each space’s
amenities and POPS-specific signage.
Out of 70 POPS, 30 were found to be uninviting to the
public by being completely barren or limiting public
accessibility, while another 20 spaces were considered
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 4

5. 3
Current interaction
between POPS stakeholders.
Communication between the main stakeholders in POPS Often, owners would like to update their spaces but they
is lacking, and in many cases non-existent. Given the aren’t quite sure what exactly to do or where to begin.
limited incentives and resources dedicated to POPS The information related to this process is housed deep
by the City and property owners, the existing interac- within the NYC.gov website and is difficult to find.
tion between government, owners and users is mostly
facilitated by advocacy organizations, such as business Owner & Advocate Relationship
improvement districts (BIDs), community boards and The advocate group consists of multiple organizations,
non-profit organizations. like MAS, whose missions revolve around the empow-
erment and support of New York City residents and
City Government & Owner Relationship
enterprises. The dotted double arrow above represents
The main line of communication that exists between a weak relationship between some owners and some
stakeholders is from the Department of City Planning to advocates. Owners may approach organizations like
private owners. This occurs when City Planning informs APOPS for advice on their POPS and inversely, APOPS
owners of the rules and guidelines for their particular may facilitate a dialogue and assist enthusiastic owners
POPS and the overall POPS program. After that, when with the process of improving the space. BIDs repre-
owners wish to update their spaces—even just to add sent the interests of companies within their designated
an extra tree—they must secure approval from City neighborhoods, so they have an excellent opportunity
Planning first. Furthermore, owners of spaces that were to broker collaborations between these businesses and
built before the 2007 amendment find it difficult to make POPS owners. Many owners view their POPS spaces
adjustments without revealing a longer list of mainte- as lacking an essential return on investment and would
nance updates required by City Planning. The process ideally like to rent out part of the space to vendors. An supported a zoning amendment that would allow tables
of obtaining approval could take months and eventu- example of this partnership can be seen in the Financial Dis- and chairs to be set up in the 17 empty arcades along
ally ends with owners being forced to add features they trict, where the Downtown Alliance and Community Board 1 Water Street, between Fulton and Whitehall Streets.
hadn’t intended, despite a lack of budget to fund them.
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 5

6. lower manhattan
arcades modification
text amendment 6
1/2011
Initially, these covered arcades, “continuous covered of buildings and neighborhoods. They do this mostly
spaces fronting on and open to a street,”8 were built for through their websites, publications or media outreach.
the purpose of providing pedestrians with protection No simple, centralized method of disseminating this
from severe weather and overcrowded sidewalks, and information currently exists.
they were prohibited from including any sort of furni-
Advocates, such as Community Boards, also act as
ture or sit down café, so people could pass through the
intermediaries between users and the city government,
space easily. In 2011, New York City Government, with
by communicating the public’s concerns to local
the help of the Downtown Alliance, City Planning and
politicians. The main role of Community Boards is to
Community Board 1, adopted an amendment that would
address important grievances from community residents
allow owners to put chairs and rent out their arcade
and bring them to the attention of City Government.
space to cafes, as long as 40% of the furniture was
There are 59 community boards throughout New York
available for public use.9 The Downtown Alliance also
City, with up to 50 members in each board. Each board
assisted owners and local businesses by providing the
is overseen by a District Manager in charge of improving
resources to find furniture for these arcades.
the services provided by the City government to his or
her neighborhood.10
Advocate & User Relationship
6
‘City Land’ http://www.citylandnyc.org/ 9
‘City Land’ http://www.citylandnyc.org/
The relationship between users and advocates is similar public-cafes-ok%E2%80%99d-in-water- public-cafes-ok%E2%80%99d-in-water-
street-corridor-arcades/#more-2469 ac- street-corridor-arcades/#more-2469
to the one between owners and advocates. Occasion- cessed 10/10/12 http://www.citylandnyc.
‘NYC Mayors Community Affairs Unit’
10
org/public-cafes-ok%E2%80%99d-in-
http://www.nyc.gov/html/cau/html/cb/
ally, advocates will inform users about matters related to water-street-corridor-arcades/#more-2469
about.shtml http://www.nyc.gov/html/cau/
Kayden Jerold. Privately Owned Public html/cb/about.shtml
New York City, from legalities to the historical importance
8
Spaces (New York: John Wiley & Sons,
2000), 26.
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 6

7. Current POPS Relationship Ecosystem:
As shown in the chart below, the only strong relationship
exists between the government and the owners.
Meanwhile, advocates are only connected to the other The City of New York
stakeholders—owners, government and users—via has granted more than
weak ties. There is no interaction at all on this subject
20 million
between users and owners or between users and city
government.
square feet
of floor area bonuses
and other concessions
to private developers
in return for their provision of
503
public spaces.
–Jerold S. Kayden
Privately Owned Public Spaces11
Kayden Jerold. Privately Owned Public Spaces
11
(New York: John Wiley & Sons, :2000) pg. 43
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 7

8. 4
Supporting advocacy
with technology.
Establishing a dynamic, seamless digital platform can APOPS can reposition itself as a non-profit brand that
Huge has developed a framework
improve the POPS relationship ecosystem. By strength- provides valuable services and establish its identity
for a centralized digital platform to
ening the existing relationships, digital can also create with a new logo, destination website, spokesperson for
improve the following areas for these
indirect relationships between users and owners and, appearances and media opportunities, and an advisory
core stakeholders:
eventually, between users and the city government. board made up of influential community members. Once
1. Communication stream. Below are some examples of digital tools that can aid in the APOPs brand has been established, it can facilitate
improving the POPS system and relationships between public engagement through several digital channels.
2. Incentives to better maintain, regulate & update POPS. stakeholders. These resources should be made available
via an extensive new POPS website that would serve as
3. Information accessibility. a portal to any necessary digital materials.
Lack of public engagement can also be attributed to
4. Unified POPS identity and public awareness.
the absence of a larger POPS “brand” identity, lack of
awareness and failure to provide the public with the
proper platform for engagement. Non-profit organiza-
tions have traditionally been wary of talk about branding
but most have come to realize how important it is to
achieving their goals. For example, Amnesty Interna-
tional spent five years establishing its global brand.
“
It would be so great if New Yorkers knew these spaces existed, that they were
available to them for use. If there was a responbility on the part of the owner to
welcome them into that space.”
–Alyson Navarro, Huge
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 8

9. city Government & Owner for different amenities and uses, such as greenery, lunch be solved with a robust resource library that contains an
Relationship Improvements break or scenic view. A POPS Awards program that easy search mechanism and a specific filter scheme. If
bestows annual honors upon these best-in-class POPS users could filter their searches by attributes like type
® Resource library with robust search and filters
would be a fantastic publicity opportunity for the spaces of space, location, size, desired amenities and intended
® Tips and ideas for updating a space
and their owners, thus achieving two goals—awareness use, it would allow owners to efficiently find the informa-
® Directory of local developers, architects,
of POPS and owner incentives. tion they need.
landscapers and designers
® Rules and regulations for various types of POPS One of the reasons owners are hesitant to undertake the Owners could choose to Adopt a Space as Lincoln Cen-
® Furniture ideas and options task of updating their POPS is the lack of knowledge on ter did with the The David Rubenstein Atrium. The atrium
® Guidelines for maintaining POPS how to begin. Each type of space (arcade, plaza, circula- was first constructed as The Harmony Atrium but was
® Adopt a Space program tion or destination) has its own set of allowances and “adopted” in 2009 by The Lincoln Center due to neglect
® ROI calculator application specific restrictions, in terms of size, location, neigh- and poor usage. Now, the Rubenstein Atrium serves
borhood-specific zoning laws and more. Materials that as Lincoln Center’s “front porch,” providing free weekly
Over time, the amount of rent earned from the additional
explain these details are located on the NYC.gov website performances, free WiFi, ample sitting area and a small
square-footage provided to developers and owners
but, again, they’re very difficult to find. Owners lack easy food vendor.12
when they agreed to participate in the POPS program
access to information about inexpensive developers,
becomes negligible. That additional revenue stream Making it easier for owners to maintain their POPS also
architects or designers with public space experience,
ceases to be connected to the public space, becom- benefits the government because a more success-
or where they can purchase cheap and sturdy furniture
ing integrated into the overall revenue made by owners. ful POPS program would encourage more owners to
for both indoor and outdoor use. This challenge could
Many owners find the amount of time and money it takes opt into the program to create them. Plus, the revenue
to preserve or renovate a space actually creates a nega- earned by owners from their POPS is funneled back to
tive return on investment. In fact, owners have no knowl- the government through taxes.
edge of how much ROI (both tangible and intangible) a
decent public space can bring to them. Unfortunately,
there is no existing method of determining how much
rent money, publicity or community goodwill that owners
can garner as a result of a well-maintained POPS.
The envisioned solution would include the development
of an online ROI Calculator application that would deter-
mine user traffic, benefits to the public and the owners,
and monetary ROI for particular spaces. The data col-
lected by the ROI Calculator could also provide evidence
that the positive gains from a well-maintained POPS are
worth the cost and effort. The city government could
‘Lincoln Center’ http://aboutlincolncenter.
12
use these analytics to determine which POPS are best org/pdfs/transforming/factsheet-atrium.pdf
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 9

10. The APOPS website should also include an online press- Advocate & User Relationship Improvements
room that provides information, media coverage, social
® Social Media
media profile links, a high-resolution logo, contact infor-
® Facebook
mation for major players both inside and outside of the
® Twitter
APOPS organization, press releases and any advertising
® foursquare
collateral. This toolkit will keep the most relevant and
® Instagram
trending stories related to POPS in one place that is easy
to access and view. ® Empty Space for use
® About this Space
APOPS could also display profile pages for various
® Map & Location Finder with Filters
POPS on the site, to give owners the chance to show
® Schedule of Events
them off and attract visitors. They could allow owners to
® Rate a Space
claim ownership of their POPS profile page and update
it whenever they have new information or photos, similar
® Report a Prblem
to the way that business owners can claim and update ® Suggestions
their pages on Yelp or foursquare. If owners have empty
Owner & Advocate Relationship Improvements Public engagement with POPS is fundamental to APOPS
spaces they would like to offer to artisans to display
mission. Yet, out of the four core groups invested in
® POPS case studies their exhibits, digital installations or performing arts, they
POPS, the users are the least involved and aware of the
® Nearby vendor and local business guide for could post this on their POPS profile page to attract
potential partnerships POPS system. Even though these spaces are ultimately
proposals from possible partners.
built for the improvement of resident livability, very few
® Press kit
user needs are actually taken into account when devel-
® Affiliated programs
oping these spaces. The majority of the New York City
® Marketplace to rent/lend empty POPS space
public is not aware that POPS exist.
Ideally, APOPS would be in charge of maintaining the
centralized POPS digital platform and ecosystem. Advo-
cate organizations like APOPS would provide the con-
tent and assume responsibility for maintaining the digital privately owned public spaces, classified total: 503
environment, including the development of POPS case
studies that could be updated quarterly or annually. The
cases would showcase the best POPS and inspire other
POPS owners by demonstrating the opportunities for their
spaces. Much of the data used in these case studies
could be collected via the ROI Calculator tool, while local
DE
E
E
A
G
ON
A
IA
R
A
DE
A
AC
RS
AZ
IN
AZ
HE
business improvement districts could provide insight
AZ
AZ
ER
CA
TI
CA
EN
SP
OU
PL
PL
OT
PL
PL
LL
EC
AR
AR
ID
NC
GA
AN
L
N
NN
ED
IA
W
BA
K
CO
into neighborhood schools, vendors and businesses that
RI
AT
CO
OC
NT
K
K
UR
OC
ST
AL
EV
R
BL
DE
K
AI
DE
BL
W
OC
EL
SI
H
DE
EN
PE
BL
UG
RE
H
are willing to collaborate on kiosks, cafes, events or other
SI
UG
OP
RO
D
H
RE
RO
UG
TH
VE
TH
affiliated programs that would earn revenue. RO
CO
TH
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 10

11. In addition to its website, APOPS should create a small, ® Browse foursquare check-ins, Tweets, and Facebook/
dedicated team to develop, monitor and maintain a Instagram photos of the space
dynamic presence on various social media platforms, ® Schedule of upcoming events
such as Facebook, Twitter, foursquare, Instagram and/
or Pinterest. Manhattan’s Bryant Park is a great example Users could use this application while on-the-go, to
of a similar organization that uses social media well, as find a nearby POPS with the features they desire at the
it has profiles on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Flickr and time. For example, if a person is looking for an outdoor
YouTube, plus a blog. Like Bryant Park, APOPS team space to relax and grab a snack, a quiet space to read,
members would be constantly responding to users, or somewhere to sit and admire the view, the app would
producing and disseminating content, broadcasting provide directions to the closest ideal locale. By making
news, generating conversation and positioning APOPS users’ lives easier, the app would make it more likely that
as an active thought leader in the field, in order to current POPS users would visit more often and tell oth-
sustain and grow followers. The High Line has a multi- ers, thus increasing usage via word-of-mouth.
platform social media communications strategy and
Owner & User Relationship Improvements
its Facebook page has more than 58,000 fans, as a
result of its frequent updates with beautiful photos and Feedback and ratings on POPS provided by users in a
information about the park. public forum—via the mobile app or website—would
also create an indirect relationship between users
A smartphone application or mobile website that rewards
and owners, through that feedback channel. Positive
people for using it inside and outside the spaces would
feedback from visitors would help demonstrate the
also be beneficial. The application could allow users to:
community goodwill benefits to owners, while negative
® GPS-enabled POPS location finder with robust feedback could inspire the owners to invest in making
search and filters improvements. Content provided by owners and
® See information about the space designed to inform users about events or empty spaces
® Owner contact information for use, for example, would establish a reciprocated
® Hours of operation online relationship.
® Amenities
® Visitor rules and regulations
® History
® Designer and architect Information
® Read and submit reviews/comments
® Report a problem
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 11

12. 5
Conclusion.
Incentives for each type of stakeholder would also be Out of all the New York City residents Huge approached likely to use his or her smartphone. These specific cases
enhanced through the use of a digital system, seam- during the study, not a single one knew what privately of context will help identify what parts of the ecosystem
lessly integrated across all platforms. A website for owned public spaces were. Awareness about POPS is need to be optimized for different platforms.
POPS that is tailored to various use cases (owners, the first step in producing an engaged user group. This
Given how much NYC residents need and use appealing
BIDs, community boards, publics, architects, designers) includes creating an identity the public can relate to and
open spaces, it is a shame to let available resources like
will be more efficient and effective in appealing to the engage with beyond the physical limitations of the spac-
POPS go to waste. Well-designed, diverse open spaces
desired users. If digital can help reduce the amount of es. Even if all the proper digital tools are built, no one will
are precious and essential to the improvement of overall
time owners spend trying to renovate their POPS, they use them unless they are launched in an identifiable and
city livability. Technology can facilitate communication
may be more willing to go through that process. Linking unique manner. An awareness campaign for POPS has
between owners, city government, advocates and users,
relevant vendors, artists, owners and organizations to to constantly connect with the rest of the POPS digital
as well as provide information and incentives that will en-
one another for collaborative opportunities can decrease ecosystem, including:
gage the various stakeholders in improving POPS.
the amount of money spent by one company and facili-
® Website
that makes it easy for stakeholders to
tate ways to reinvent these spaces to make them more
communicate and find necessary information
engaging, current and exciting for all parties involved.
“
® Optimized mobile website or app for users on-the-go
It is not just the number of people and within the spaces
using them, but the larger number ® Updated, contemporized logo and signage
® Fully
developed and frequently-updated social
who pass by and enjoy them media presence
vicariously, or even the larger number
who feel better about the city center It is imperative that context of usage for each stake-
holder group is explored when developing this digital
for knowledge of them. For a city,
ecosystem. For example, a property owner is more likely
such places are priceless, whatever to go to a laptop or desktop to search for a landscaper,
the cost.” whereas a user looking for a place to eat lunch is more
–William H. Whyte, ‘Project for Public Spaces’
Huge Whitepaper October 2012 12