MAY 2015

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism in our Nation’s Most Beloved Historic Cities

PASTFORWARD 2014 NOVEMBER 14, 2014 | SAVANNAH, GA

Living with Success Revisited was made possible by the generous support of Historic Savannah Foundation, the City of Savannah, Visit Savannah, the Tourism Leadership Council and the Downtown Neighborhood Association.

Cover photo courtesy of National Trust for Historic Preservation Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism in our Nation’s Most Beloved Historic Cities

In 1995 Historic Annapolis Foundation brought together a group of civic leaders representing some of the most heavily-touristed historic districts in the nation. In these cities, the influx of visitors was bringing welcome economic energy, but the sheer number of tourists was often negatively impacting the historic fabric of the city and diminishing the quality of life of its residents. The findings and recommendations of that convening were published in 1995 and shared more broadly during the 1998 National Preservation Conference in Savannah. Almost two decades later, as part of the 2014 PastForward National Preservation Conference, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Historic Savannah Foundation, the City of Savannah, Visit Savannah, the Tourism Leadership Council and the Downtown Neighborhood Association reconvened this group to consider whether those initial findings and recommendations remained relevant and how contemporary issues could be addressed. Before the summit, a committee convened by the National Trust developed a survey which was sent to 24 people who engage in heritage tourism in some portion of their work. Nineteen responses were received, from locations ranging from Newport, Rhode Island, to New Orleans, Louisiana, and from Santa Barbara, California, to Sitka, Alaska. Most respondents lead local nonprofit organizations, while others are historic commission members or preservation planners. Respondents were asked a number of questions about tourism in their cities, beginning with a question regarding the impact of tourism. Ninety-four percent of the respondents affirmed that the impacts of tourism and how to manage those impacts was a concern for their local city or community. More specifically, respondents listed the following as their top concerns: 1. Inadequate parking 2. Congestion in high tourism areas 3. Loss of neighborhood character and quality of life 4. Loss of resident amenities and services 5. Inappropriate behavior and noise 6. The consequences of short-term rentals

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 2 7. The impact of cruise ships 8. Lack of adequate transportation 9. Decrease in market-rate and workforce housing Many of these issues are not new, but after 20 years there has been an evolution in how the issues play out in our communities. In addition, technological advances have made Airbnb and Uber, for better or worse, part of the tourism equation. Communities are also seeing new modes of tourism and a rising impact of cruise ships in small coastal communities. What has also changed, due perhaps in part to the 1995 report, is the recognition by more cities of the need to budget, plan for and implement tourism management. After reviewing the survey results, summit planners chose the following issues to frame the conversation at the 2014 Tourism Summit: • Parking and transportation; • Congestion in high tourism areas; • The balance between tourist needs and resident amenities and services; and • The need for approaches to tourism management planning. A summary of the complete survey findings and participants can be found at the end of this report.

The summit featured a panel of speakers well-versed in heritage tourism who provided a lively discussion, moderated by Amy Webb, Field Director of the Denver Field Office at the National Trust, and a question-and-answer session for attendees. The panel included the following speakers: • Daniel Carey: president and CEO of Historic Savannah Foundation, • Lisa Craig: chief of historic preservation & executive director, MainStreets Annapolis Partnership, • Kristopher King: executive director of the Preservation Society of Charleston, • Bridget Lidy: Director of the Tourism Management & Ambassadorship Department for the City of Savannah, • Meg Lousteau: executive director of the Vieux Carré Property Owners, Residents and Associates, Inc. in New Orleans, • Bruce MacDougal: executive director of the San Antonio Conservation Society, and • Kitty Robinson: executive director of the Historic Charleston Foundation

An informal poll of the audience included attendees from Savannah, Georgia; St. Augustine, Florida; Beaufort, South Carolina; Newport, Rhode Island; Nantucket, Massachusetts; Sapelo Island, Georgia; Hillsborough and Asheville, North Carolina.

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 3 PARKING AND TRANSPORTATION The discussion of parking and transportation was framed around the survey results and the panelists’ challenges and experiences in their cities. All cities represented at the summit, whether on the panel or in the audience, reported having significant issues accommodating parking. Annapolis, Charleston and Savannah have each addressed this problem in different ways. In Annapolis, the city has created permitted parking zones specifically for residents, and requires proof of residency before a new permit can be authorized. For tourists, the city has built two new parking garages since 1995. The City Council also recently approved a new way-finding plan to help drivers get from the highway to the garages and then, once they’ve parked, to the downtown area by foot. Annapolis has found that providing parking for both locals and out-of-towners, instead of just focusing on one group or the other, offers a better long-term solution. In Charleston, the city has employed a number of strategies to help with parking. A subcommittee of the city’s Tourism Management Advisory Committee was created to focus exclusively on traffic and transportation issues. The city, together with the Historic Charleston Foundation, commissioned traffic expert Gabe Klein to write a report focused on transportation issues. The report suggests replacing the current parking meters with new, technologically advanced ones that take payment via credit card or smart phone. It also recommends locating the visitor’s center farther outside the city’s historic core. The plan is to have tourists park at the visitor’s center, then take a trolley downtown. Kristopher King from the Historic Charleston Foundation said that this is really just a first step. What is needed is a comprehensive traffic and parking study that provides concrete data about current parking availability and future trends. Such a study, he said, would require substantial political buy- in and funding, but would result in data that could show what the city currently has to offer in terms of parking as well as what it needs in the future. Such a study ties in to one of the management strategies first identified at the 1995 summit: gather better data. Charleston has also addressed parking issues by modifying parking ordinances near the College of Charleston. Parking in the predominately residential neighborhood had been limited to two hours, but was often taken up by students. The City changed the parking allowance to one hour, resulting in a decrease in student parking. The city worked with the college to improve off- campus parking and start a shuttle service to ensure that the parking problem was not simply shifted to another neighborhood.

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 4 In Savannah, the public transportation authority has implemented a number of new strategies to address parking and transportation in the downtown. A new transit center opened in 2013 has diverted downtown buses off Broughton Street, a main artery of the city, to the same center where Greyhound buses also arrive and depart. The transit center is located within walking distance of the downtown historic district. The city has also begun operating dedicated express buses between the airport and the transit center, a service which has proven so popular that the hours of operation needed to be increased to accommodate the demand. The transit center is also one of the pick-up locations for a bike share program launched in January 2014. The bike program, however, has spawned new concerns. Tourists in Savannah are not well-versed in the rules governing bike transportation in the city, which calls for the city to do a better job familiarizing visitors and Savannah’s many students with these rules. Savannah’s convention center, which is located across the river from downtown on Hutchinson Island, also provides some parking relief. The center has ample parking away from the city core, and is connected to downtown by a convenient free ferry.

TAKEAWAYS: While parking is an issue in most cities, historic ones often laid out before automobiles existed pose unique challenges. Annapolis, Charleston and Savannah have all taken steps to address their parking issues. These specific actions may not work in all cities, but they do offer specific models that may be adaptable including: 1. Use permits to enforce parking restrictions and accommodate residential needs. 2. Provide satellite parking outside the congested core. 3. Add public transportation options that can move visitors around. 4. Invest in studies and data gathering to inform and prioritize decision making and strategies. 5. Implementing wayfinding programs to direct visitors and residents to parking garages where they can walk or use public transportation to move around the city, and 6. Create bike share programs with information on local rules of the road.

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 5 CONGESTION IN TOURISM AREAS Another over-arching problem that affects many of the cities surveyed is congestion due to a large volume of people in one area. Some 80 percent of those surveyed said that tourism in their city tended to be concentrated in one specific area. The French Quarter in New Orleans, one square mile of space, received nine million visitors in 2013. Tourism to Charleston, an eight-mile square space, has increased 70 percent over the last 20 years. The negative impacts (overcrowding, unruly behavior, potential damage to historic fabric) posed by such numbers can have a devastating effect on an area. Three quarters of those surveyed thought that spreading out tourism attractions would help alleviate the problems associated with large crowds of tourists concentrated in historic areas. San Antonio has seen positive results from expanding its tourism areas; while New Orleans, Charleston, and Savannah have all implemented plans to alleviate overcrowding with varying degrees of success. San Antonio has taken steps to manage crowds on its popular River Walk. City officials worked with city, county and federal agencies to fund an expansion of the walk to both the north and south. The southern expansion focuses on natural beauty, showcasing native plants and the scenic river for kayaking, and provides paths for walking and biking. The northern expansion, also pedestrian and bike friendly, features eight bridges with art themes. The final phase, to be completed in 2015, will connect the downtown to museums, parks and the San Antonio Zoo via lighted bike and walking trails. In addition to expanding the reach of the River Walk, the city also controls crowds by encouraging organizations to hold special events in areas of the city other than the River Walk. After all, Bruce MacDougal, executive director of the San Antonio Conservation Society, often reminds his fellow citizens, not all major public announcements in San Antonio need to be made while standing in front of the Alamo. Savannah, New Orleans and Charleston have also looked for ways to encourage tourists to roam outside the core historic district. For this to be successful, cities must ensure that tourists have things to do in neighborhoods beyond the historic district, as well as ways to get there. In Savannah, visitors are provided information and encouraged to explore the surrounding Chatham County. The city is also promoting historic resources outside the traditional core. For example, new interpretive panels were added to the King-Tisdale Cottage Museum, a historic house museum focused on African-American history located outside of the historic district. A local trolley company has now added the site as a tour stop. Tourists are more likely to visit sites outside of the central core if they are easily accessible. New Orleans developed the “Follow Your NOLA” program,

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 6 which invites visitors to range beyond the French Quarter. Unfortunately, the program is not as effective as it could be because there is not sufficient public transportation service. The city is also starting a car share program, which may encourage travel outside of the heavily-touristed areas. Charleston’s overcrowding was relieved somewhat when its visitor’s center was relocated north of the main tourist area in the early 1990s. But, as growth has continued, it may be time to move it even farther north.

TAKEAWAYS: The balance of too much or not enough tourism is a delicate one, and as visitation outgrows the primary visitor area, cities must be careful to protect the historic resources that attract tourists in the first place. The most obvious solution is to expand the area of tourist interest. To be successful cities must: 1. Identify, document and promote alternative sites outside of the more popular city center 2. Expand existing attractions or build new ones as appropriate in areas outside the city center. 3. Provide easy and attractive options for moving people from the main attractions to these secondary ones.

BALANCING THE NEEDS OF RESIDENTS AND TOURISTS Many heritage tourists are drawn to a place by its character and its authenticity but these same tourists may give little thought to the fact that this “destination” is also the home to hundreds if not thousands of citizens who live, work and play within it. Tourism is often a lucrative source of city income, including tax revenue generated by short term vacation rentals and other uses. At the same time, most cities cannot afford to lose the taxes and other revenue generated by people and businesses who choose to make this place their home. Importantly, cities cannot allow the business of tourism to overwhelm and diminish the very attractions that made it popular in the first place. Providing for tourists, while at the same time protecting historic resources and ensuring a good quality of life and adequate services to residents becomes a singular balancing act. The cities represented on the panel have found that in order to protect a community’s character, city officials must be willing to say “No”. Both Savannah and Charleston impose regulations specifically designed to maintain the character and livability of residential neighborhoods. Tourism service providers including carriage rides, walking tours and tour buses must adhere to detailed guidelines that govern where, when and how they conduct business. In addition to its tourism industry regulations, Savannah has resisted many things that could have brought more visitors, including cruise ships, double-decker buses and a new baseball stadium close to downtown. By saying no to these ventures, the city has said yes to its residents’ quality of life.

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 7 Perhaps as a consequence of not being responsive to resident needs, the French Quarter of New Orleans has experienced resident flight for 40 years, reports Meg Lousteau. Short-term rentals in the past ten years have only contributed to the problem and, as the number of full-time residents drops, so too has its voting power and ability to effectively advocate for itself. In many cities, money often talks where people do not, and rewards often go to commercial interests at the expense of residential interests. Lousteau believes that the solution for this is to provide incentives to encourage full-time residents to remain.

TAKEAWAYS Balancing the needs of residents and tourists is a struggle for cities, and it cannot be solved overnight. The increase of websites such as VRBO and Airbnb, which allow residents to rent rooms directly to tourists, also leads to fewer full-time residents. There are several ways to take into account the needs for residents including: 1. Allow tourism activity but regulate and enforce it in ways that provide a better quality of life for residents. 2. Incentivize full-time occupancy over rental in order to ensure a voice for residential needs. 3. Remember that there is a tipping point and the loss of residents altogether will surely undermine the integrity of a historic residential neighborhood and the experience of visitors and, ultimately, the tax base.

FORMAL TOURISM PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT: STILL A STRUGGLE One key finding of the 1995 summit was the need for cities to develop a tourism management plan. Some cities have taken this step, but not many. Of those surveyed in 2014, only 26 percent had a stand-alone tourism management plan and those plans had all been put into place before 1995. When asked about their city’s biggest issue, two panelists named the lack of a tourism management plan. Clearly, this is an issue that hasn’t changed much since 1995. Perhaps Charleston, a city on its fourth iteration of a tourism management plan, can set a positive example. Charleston has had a tourism management plan in place since 1978. It was revised in 1994 and 1998, and is currently being revised for the fourth time. A Tourism Management Advisory Committee made up of 30 people from a variety of backgrounds—government officials, representatives from Historic Charleston Foundation and Preservation Society of Charleston, business owners, residents, and people in the tourism industry—is undertaking the most recent revision. The group was given nine months to create a plan and then present it to the city council. Kitty Robinson, Historic Charleston Foundation, says the update was needed because, as tourism continues to grow, its impacts on residents is becoming more pronounced. Indeed, residents have already gone to court to protect what they consider the “livability” of their city.

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 8 An important feature of the Charleston plan is that it has city buy-in because ultimately it is administered by the city. Bridget Lidy, who works for the City of Savannah, agreed that a plan is in the hands of the city, but also emphasized the need for community support for the plan. She outlined the need for data, a recurring theme in the discussion. Lidy encouraged starting with a survey to gauge how residents view tourism; setting a baseline by verifying assumptions, and identifying particular needs and issues that the plan should set out to address. Many communities struggle to find the political wherewithal to enact a tourism management plan. Once they do, they find that monitoring and enforcing the plan to be a time-consuming endeavor. But without such a plan there is no mechanism to collect data, set priorities and make decisions. Indeed, one of the greatest benefits of a plan is the opportunity it offers to mediate conflicts between stakeholders. The plan can help refocus the conversation on the goals and objectives of the project. Panelists affirmed that the alternative to a plan is that the “next new thing” proposed to attract or entertain tourists, quickly becomes the next thing you need to mitigate, often at substantial cost and contention. In the end, success is found in creating a city that is beloved by tourists and residents alike.

CONCLUSION The tourism convenings in 1995 and 2014 demonstrate that the issues inherent to tourism in beloved historic cities are persistent and challenging. But, there is much to learn from the cities who are addressing these issues head-on, piloting new solutions, and working collaboratively with the their municipal governments, tourism industry stakeholders and residents. Others can learn from their experiences. During the meeting in Savannah, a member of the audience from Sapelo Island described her community as being on a “razor’s edge.” It is the last Gullah Geechee community on a barrier island in Georgia, and the community wants to protect its historic resources but also grow tourism. She asked where their community should start. Bridget Lidy encouraged her to look to her neighbors — cities like Savannah — who can share their experiences. In the end, it will be the residents of Sapelo who need to be advocates for their own heritage.

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 9 Heritage Tourism Survey

SURVEY DEMOGRAPHICS

The Tourism Summit Survey included responses from all across the United States: from Sitka, Alaska to St. Augustine, Florida. A majority of participants who responded to the pre-Summit survey were either from local preservation organizations/commissions or from various State Historic Preservation Offices. Regardless of location or organization, an overwhelming majority (95%) of the responders stated that the impact of tourism and how to manage those impacts had created concern in their community.

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 10 TOURISM MANAGEMENT ISSUES Based on the results of the survey, the majority of respondents ranked inadequate parking, general congestion and concern over inappropriate behavior and noise as their main concerns regarding tourism management. The concern of least importance was having inadequate airport or air service.

Rank Tourism Management Issue with the Most Concern 1 Inadequate parking 2 Congestion concerning total volume of people 3 Inappropriate behavior and noise 4 Congestion concerning lack of adequate transportation 5 Loss of neighborhood character and quality of life 6 Loss of resident amenities and services 7 Impact of owner short-term rentals, e.g., Airbnb, VRBO 8 Redevelopment resulting in decrease of market rate and workforce housing 9 Security and vandalism 10 Impact of cruise ships 11 Inadequate airport or air service

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 11 IMPACT OF TOURISM When asked how they felt their city had been impacted by tourism, 32% of responders stated that the city is getting worse while 68% stated that the city is getting better. Respondents were also asked about how tourism had affected their city’s infrastructure and whether the impact was positive. Overall, the respondents stated that the most positive impact had been the increase in recreation options due to tourism while the most negative impact was the increased pricing. Impact�of�Tourism

Land use, i.e., development8

Pricing of any of the below 7 items as it impacts residents

Shopping options6

Positive Recreation options5 Negative

Dining options4

Segway tours, etc.3

Transportation for hire 2 including taxis, other transport

Public transportation including 1 subways, buses

0 5 10 15 20

Number of ResponsesNumber�of�Responders

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 12 TOURISM ORDINANCES When asked whether or not their city had any ordinance(s) regulating tourism issues, 68% of responders indicated “yes”.

Do your city ordinances Response cover the following? percent Transportation 100% No Hotels 76.9% 31.6% Tour guides 84.6% Yes Other vendor licensing or 84.6% permits 68.4% Retail or franchise 69.2% opportunities Other 30.8%

Driving issue that led to the creation of the ordinance Tour buses and horse carriages Number of vendors Cap on number of pedicabs, trolleys and excursions Land development regulations Restrictions including setbacks, traffic, etc. Multiple responses over time (ad hoc) based on increased tourism Protection of the historic fabric and heritage landscape Carriages, increased visitation, pedicabs, parking

A majority of responders stated that their local City Councils or City Commissions were the legislative driving force behind the ordinances. When asked if the tourism ordinance was regularly updated, 85% of responders indicated “yes”. Responders were also asked to rate their city tourism ordinance on a scale from not effective to highly effective:

Answer options Not Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Highly effective ineffective effective effective Consistently 1 1 1 7 3 enforced Regularly keeping 1 1 1 9 0 pace with community needs

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 13 TOURISM MANAGEMENT PLAN When asked whether or not their city had a stand-alone management plan (as opposed to a promotion or development plan), nearly 74% of responders indicated “no”.

Does your tourism management plan Response cover any of the following? percent Yes Advisory group to oversee the plan 60.0% 26.3% Transportation including buses, 60.0% pedestrian zones Tour guides includingYes licensing and how 60.0% they operate No Other (visitor orientation, special events) 40.0% 73.7% No Hotels including design, size, location, 20.0% parking, traffic

Driving issue that led to the creation of the management plan Tour buses and horse carriages in residential neighborhoods Tourists trespassing and not respecting private property Outdate information Increased visitation

A majority of responders stated that the main groups involved in the plan implementations were the City governments, Convention and Visitors Bureaus or the local Non-profits. When asked if the tourism plan was regularly updated, 60% of responders indicated “yes”. Responders were also asked if their city’s tourism management plan was adequately communicated to the residents – when asked, 73% of responders stated “no”.

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 14 TOURISM TAX When asked if their cities levy a hotel/lodging or other tourism-related taxes, over 95% of responders answered “yes”.

Reported range of tax If yes, what is the tax levied on? percentages Nightly lodging, includes occupancy 93.3% amongst responders: taxes Restaurant, food only 40.0% Liquor tax (consumed at restaurants, 20.0% 1% 16.75% bars, etc.) Other (parking, additional costs, etc.) 13.3% Added to ticket prices of tourism sites 0.0%

Reported range of dollars collected by the tourism tax: $281,700 $183 million in FY13

Who or what does the tax benefit? When asked who controls or Convention and Tourism Bureau 56.3% directs where the tax is spent, Marketing of city as destination 50.0% a majority of responders Tourism infrastructure improvements 43.8% Historic sites or buildings 37.5% indicated that the tax was Non-profit organizations 37.5% controlled by their local City Don’t know how tax is used 31.3% Council. Future tourism sites to be developed 25.0% (excludes historic) Other 25.0%

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 15 TOURISM BUREAU When asked if their cities had a Convention and Tourism Association or Bureau, 89% of responders answered “yes”.

No 10.5% Of the 89%, who responded that they did have a tourism bureau, 88% responded that the bureau regularly collects data on tourism.

Yes 89.5%

If yes, how is it made available? Response percent On demand 61.5% Online, always accessible 46.2% Regularly scheduled reporting 53.8% Special report through the local government 15.4% Distributed through media outlets 15.4% Other 0.0%

For those who did not have a Bureau or a Bureau that did not collect data, responders were asked if there was another entity that did. Answers included other visitor services and state tourism departments.

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 16 GENERAL TOURISM The survey also collected basic data on local tourism

(Yearly) Range of overnight visitors Average overnight as reported by responders: length of stay:

200,000 31 million 2.79 nights Visitors Visitors

(Yearly) Range of day trip visitors as reported by responders: 300,000 5.7 million Visitors Visitors

Reported Peak Months of Tourism: 9

N

u 8 m 7 b e r 6 o f 5 r e 4 s p

o 3 n s 2 e s 1 0

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 17 When asked if their city tracked the purpose of travel, 56% of responders indi- cated “yes” while 44% of responders indicated they did not know.

The largest numbers of visitors to our city come from:

200�miles�or�less,� 21.4% one�day�drive 200� 800�miles 50.0% Over�800�miles 14.3% International 14.3% Information� � Unavailable

Rank of largest revenue sources as reported by responders:

Rank Largest revenue source from all city visitors 1 Hotel/motel revenue 2 Dining 3 Shopping 4 Historic attractions 5 Museums 6 Other 7 Cultural events including performance venues

Rank of most to least important reasons given for traveling to your city:

Rank Most Important reasons for travel to your city 1 Leisure/vacation 2 Historic ambience 3 Business 4 Shopping 5 Natural resources 6 Cultural attractions, i.e., theater 7 Visiting friends or family 8 Educational resources, i.e., museums including zoos, aquariums, planetariums, etc. 9 Recreational/sporting/exercise opportunities 10 Other

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 18 CRUISE SHIP TRAFFIC When asked if their city attracted cruise ship traffic,69% of responders stated “yes”.

If yes, which agency or agencies have oversight jurisdiction?

20.0% Port�Authority

50.0% City�Government� 30.0% Office Other

Is the oversight effective for the following reasons?

10

N 9 u m 8 b e 7 r o 6 f r e 5 Effective s p o 4 n s

e 3 s 2 Not Effective 1 0 Scheduling so as not to Monitoring cruise generated overwhelm the city with too tours so as to spread out the many cruise ships at one time impact of city resources

Additional oversight concerns include port of embarkation and cruise ship size concerns.

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 19 TRANSPORTATION When asked how transportation services in their cities had been affected by tourism, responders were asked to agree or disagree with the following state- ments:

Our city adequately increases transportation for special events

Our city has adequate parking to serve tourists and residents

Our city is able to anticipate next trends in transportation and adjust accordingly

Our city is able to adequately respond to increased transportation usage

Our city is able to adequately Disagree oversee and regulate both public and for hire transportation

Agree Tourism has been responsible for new transportation

Our city’s transportation plan did not adequately take into account tourism impact

Tourists using our transportation system have meant decreased use on the part of the residents

Increased tourism has led to positive changes in public transportation

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 � � Number of Responses

Living with Success Revisited: Summit on Heritage Tourism 20 TOURISM REGULATION AND MANAGEMENT When asked if their communities were lacking tools to reach excellence in their tourism management, 60% of responders replied “yes”. The responders also provided several examples of what tools would aid them the most in improving their management.

Additional tools that would aid in tourism management More funding A stronger plan that is free from politics and not driven by the tourism industry Promoting unique historic architecture and history Investment in the downtown area as well as promoting local business Comprehensive destination master plan; effective communication to citizens on the benefits of tourism, particularly increased quality of life via residential amenities A management plan and continued, consistent enforcement Technology like smart parking meters, a 311 phone #, way finding apps

Responders were also asked about whether or not their cities used any specific tools to regulate tourism.

Has your city used any of the following to Response rate effectively regulate tourism? Regulations 81.8% Enforcement 81.8% Communication or promotion of the plan to the public 63.6% Planning 63.6% Community incentives or involvement 54.5% Other 9.1%

FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Preservation Leadership Forum National Trust for Historic Preservation The Watergate Office Building 2600 Virginia Avenue NW Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20037 P 202.588.6000 | [email protected] | preservationnation.org/forum

The National Trust for Historic Preservation works to save America’s historic places for the next generation. We take direct, on-the-ground action when historic buildings and sites are threatened. Our work helps build vibrant, sustainable communities. We advocate with governments to save America’s heritage. We strive to create a cultural legacy that is as diverse as the nation itself so that all of us can take pride in our part of the American story.