Kaiseizan Park Park-PFI — The Design Philosophy Behind a 500-Point Scoring Rubric and a 19-Year Revenue Model

Among Park-PFI (Public Solicitation Management System) projects in Japan, the Kaiseizan Park project in Koriyama City, Fukushima Prefecture, stands out for the sophistication of its evaluation criteria design. A 500-point rubric supplemented by up to 8 incentive bonus points for sounding participation is exceptional even by national standards.

This article analyzes the rubric's design philosophy, the 3-phase sounding structure, the 19-year revenue model, and the 5-company JV consortium, providing a reference point for municipalities designing their own evaluation frameworks.

Koriyama City is a core city of approximately 330,000 residents, and Kaiseizan Park is an urban park at the city center with over 130 years of history. While the total park area is approximately 30.3ha, the Park-PFI project covers the western area of approximately 12.89ha, including three adjacent neighborhood parks.

Why Three Phases?

The Kaiseizan Park sounding was not a mere "market survey." Each of the three phases had a clearly defined purpose and incentive structure, creating a framework for progressively deepening dialogue with private operators. The approximately four-year preparation period from initial review (March 2020) to opening (April 2024) reflects this careful dialogue process.

Phase 1: Trial Sounding (October 2020)

A social experiment format provided opportunities for private operators to actually set up shops and host events in the park. Businesses and NPOs that participated during the one-month period (9:00–21:00) with waived usage fees received 5 bonus points in the subsequent tender evaluation.

The significance of this incentive design is substantial. While 5 points represents only 1% of the 500-point evaluation, the essence of the bonus is its function as a "catalyst to attract serious operators early." Participants in the trial gained firsthand knowledge of the park's realities — visitor flow patterns, time-of-day occupancy, surrounding commercial environment. Proposals built on this experience differ fundamentally in specificity and persuasiveness from those based solely on desk research.

Phase 2: Pre-Sounding (September 2021)

This phase aimed to capture private-sector needs and intentions during the feasibility study stage. Opinions were collected broadly via email inquiry format, and the analysis of private-sector concerns and proposal possibilities informed the design of Phase 3's public solicitation guidelines.

Pre-sounding served the practical function of "obtaining feedback on tender conditions." By identifying points where private operators felt the conditions made participation difficult, and reflecting these in the tender requirements, the risk of "publishing a tender with zero applicants" was reduced.

Phase 3: Market Sounding (January 2022)

Conducted just before finalizing the public solicitation guidelines. Final feedback on the project scheme was obtained, and conditions were adjusted to facilitate private-sector entry. Participants received 3 bonus points in the tender evaluation.

The incentive structure across the three phases reveals the following design logic:

For detailed guidance on sounding (market survey) design methodology, see Sounding Design Template.

Scoring Allocation Is a Statement of Municipal Intent

A tender evaluation rubric is a declaration of what the municipality values. The Kaiseizan Park 500-point rubric prioritizes project stability and park public benefit while preserving space for private-sector creativity — a balanced design.

Scoring Structure

Three Distinctive Features of the Scoring Design

1. Heaviest Weight on Project Overview (120 points = 24%)

Placing the highest point allocation on Project Overview signals that Park-PFI is not "a facility construction project" but "a long-term park management enterprise." Over a 19-year project period, the quality of the overall vision and its sustainability matter more than the merits of any individual facility design.

2. Revenue Sharing Embedded Within Cost Reduction (40 of 70 Points)

Within the 70-point Cost Reduction category, the allocation of 40 points to "revenue sharing" deserves attention. Park-PFI is not simply a system for attracting revenue-generating facilities — the institutional core requires that private revenues be returned to park maintenance and development. This scoring explicitly translates that principle into evaluation criteria.

The 40 points for revenue sharing represent 57% of the Cost Reduction category and 8% of the total 500 points. This functions as a filter to exclude "projects that only benefit the private operator" and select "projects that give back to the park."

3. Modest Allocation for Added Value (30 points = 6%)

Allocating only 30 points to Added Value proposals may appear to undervalue private creativity, but the reality is the opposite. Dedicating 470 of 500 points to evaluating "what must be done" while reserving 30 points for "proposals beyond the baseline" prioritizes fulfillment of core requirements while maintaining room for differentiation.

Minimum Threshold Criteria

Total scores across all committee members must reach 60% or more of the maximum, and "Project Overview," "Problem-Solving (Designated Park Facilities)," and "Management & Operations" must each individually reach 60% or more. This minimum threshold functions as a safety valve to exclude proposals with extremely weak performance in any critical area.

The Meaning of 19 Years and ¥1.44 Billion

The Kaiseizan Park revenue model comprises a designated management fee of ¥1.44 billion (approx. ¥75.87M/year) and development costs of approximately ¥700 million. While the municipal fiscal burden is not insignificant, usage fee income from private revenue facilities and private-sector development cost contributions provide offsetting effects compared to pre-Park-PFI maintenance costs.

The development cost burden ratio of "municipality max 90% / private min 10%" is significant. While not fully private investment, requiring a minimum 10% self-funding from the private sector ensures operator commitment.

The annual designated management fee of approximately ¥75.87 million, calculated against the 12.89ha project area, works out to approximately ¥5.89 million per hectare per year. This level is not excessive compared to standard Designated Manager System fees, and when revenue sharing income from commercial facilities is factored in, the municipality's effective burden is reduced.

The Significance of a 19-Year Project Period

The maximum Park-PFI facility installation permit period is 20 years, making Kaiseizan Park's 19 years nearly the upper limit. The extended project period produces three effects:

1. Private investment recovery: When the private sector invests in facility development, sufficient time for return on investment is necessary. Short periods discourage private investment
2. Integrated maintenance: Having the developer maintain facilities long-term supports quality preservation
3. Regional integration: Operators have adequate time to establish roots in the community and build relationships with local stakeholders

'Major Firm × Local' Is Not Coincidental

The 5-company Daiwa Lease Group JV consortium is a functional design that achieves both nationwide PPP/PFI expertise and regional commitment. The inclusion of 3 local companies is not a "community contribution alibi" but a strategic decision to enhance project quality.

Functional Roles and Consortium Design Principles

Daiwa Lease as Lead Entity

Daiwa Lease is the Daiwa House Group's PPP/PFI specialist with a nationwide track record in park and public facility development and management. As lead entity, it handles overall risk management, financial institution coordination, and serves as the interface with the client (Koriyama City). Having a major firm with national expertise and creditworthiness as lead provides assurance to the municipality.

Strategic Value of the Three Local Companies

• a.ru.ku Publishing: A web media company based in Koriyama City. It brings the regional content expertise — what resonates with local residents, what events attract visitors — that a major firm alone cannot see
• Hakko Construction: A local civil engineering firm. Having local companies handle construction work ensures that expenditure circulates within the regional economy. Rapid response for maintenance and repairs over the nearly 20-year project period is also expected
• Sakura Engineering: A local design and surveying firm. Local knowledge of the park's topography, soil conditions, and surrounding environment enhances technical precision

The evaluation rubric's "employment considerations (10 points)" also demonstrates that local employment creation is explicitly assessed.

Revenue Facility Composition

Facilities opened at the April 2024 renewal include five shops — café, gardening goods, bakery, ramen, and others — plus a multipurpose space. Leveraging the approximately 1.4 million annual visitor base, the development centers on dining-oriented vibrancy facilities.

The facility composition reflects a "daily-use" business model. Rather than tourist-oriented extraordinary experiences, the design centers on cafés and bakeries that residents use routinely, promoting repeat visits and stabilizing revenue.

Applying the Scoring Design

Creating a 500-point rubric of this precision is possible only when a municipality of sufficient scale invests significant time and resources. However, the structural principles — prioritizing project overview, explicitly including revenue sharing as an evaluation criterion — can be applied even in simplified 100-point rubrics.

Phased Sounding Design

Fully replicating a 3-phase sounding was not straightforward even for Kaiseizan Park, which required four years of preparation. However, at minimum, the "trial" element — providing opportunities for operators to actually conduct business in the park — is implementable regardless of scale and delivers the greatest impact.

Consortium Design Guidelines

Requiring major-local JVs can be mandated in tender conditions, but the Kaiseizan Park case demonstrates that scoring design can achieve the same outcome through incentive alignment. Including "employment considerations" and "regional collaboration" in the scoring naturally motivates operators to incorporate local companies into their consortiums.

---

The Kaiseizan Park case clearly demonstrates that in Park-PFI institutional design, "evaluation criteria design" determines project quality. Adopting the system itself is merely the starting line — how the three levers of rubric design, sounding structuring, and consortium guidance are operated separates success from failure.

Park-PFI Evaluation Criteria Design Methods

Practical guide to rubric structure design and review processes

Sounding Design and Implementation Procedures

3-phase sounding design methodology and practical guide for municipal officials

References

Kaiseizan Park Park-PFI Project (2022)

Our company-led corporate group selected as designated operator for the Kaiseizan Park Park-PFI project (2022)

Kaiseizan Park Park-PFI Project Case Study (2024)

How will Park-PFI/PFI projects transform the Koriyama Kaiseizan area? (2024)