They make seating uncomfortable (or don’t have any), don’t put up signs identifying public space, or just make public spaces so uninviting that the public has no reason to use them. Some developers see the public space as an asset to their development, while for others it’s an intrusion. However, there may be no qualitative controls after the variance is granted. For example, you get a zoning variance for more floors if you have a public plaza outside or public passage inside the building. New York, San Francisco, and other cities reward private developers that incorporate public spaces into their projects (known as privately-owned public spaces). How effective are we? Is it clear to those who benefit from our incentives what we really want? (Is it clear to us?!) And what's the public good that comes from our incentives? Typically government creates incentives for what we want the incented – whether private or public sector – to do. Now and then (particularly in election years), we have a public conversation about what government’s role in the private and local realm should be. My day job is in state government, in a program that provides development incentives to local government and the private sector.

All hail the Knights Who Say Ni, possibly the first stakeholders in a privately-owned public space project. a herring!”įrom, of course, Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Then, you must cut down the mightiest tree in the forest.

a shrubbery! Then, when you have found the shrubbery, you must place it here, beside this shrubbery, only slightly higher so you get a two-layer effect with a little path running down the middle.

We are now the knights who say