NATIONAL COLLEGE OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 6
SITE DEVELOPING, PLANNING, AND LANDSCAPING

RESEARCH PAPER # 1
PARK REDEVELOPMENT

Submitted by:

Almira Kelly C. Llaneta

Bs-Arch 32m1

Submitted to:

Arch. Leen Abigail Padel

Types and Components of Park:

Urban Parks

An urban park is a type of park in cities and other incorporated places that
offer recreation and green space to locals and visitors to the city or town. The
design, operation, and maintenance are usually done by government agencies,
typically on the local level. However, sometimes the government will contract the
responsibility to a park conservancy, friends of a group, or a private sector
company. Standard features of municipal parks include playgrounds, gardens,
hiking, fitness trails, and other natural features. Park advocates show their support by
insisting that having parks near urban residents – preferably within a 10-minute walk,
provides multiple benefits.

National Parks

A national park is a natural park developed and preserved by the federal

government for conservation purposes. A sovereign state frequently proclaims or
possesses a reserve of natural, semi-natural, or developed territory.
Town Square Parks

A town square park is a public park typically situated in the center of a town.
However, it does not have to be a geometric square. It is a place for community
gatherings and sometimes contains memorials or sculptures of people who
dedicated their lives to a cause.

State Parks

State parks house protected areas governed at the sub-national level within
nations that employ the state as a political unit. State parks are under the
administrative governance of each US state, including the Mexican states and Brazil.
Active Parks

An active park provides leisure activities resembling urban characteristics and requires
extensive construction. They often cater to cooperative activities and include facilities like
playgrounds, ball fields, swimming pools, gymnasiums, and skate parks.

Passive Parks

Passive recreation, often known as low-intensity recreation, highlights a park’s

open space and provides for the preservation of the natural environment. It is
typically associated with low-level development, such as rustic picnic places, seats,
and footpaths.
Amusement Parks

An amusement park is a park with diverse attractions, such as rides and

games, as well as other entertainment events.

Pocket Parks

A pocket park, usually called a mini-park, is a tiny park open to the public.
While pocket parks vary significantly in terms of location, components, and
applications, the typical distinguishing feature of a pocket park is its modest size. A
pocket park typically takes up one to three municipal lots and is less than one acre
in size.
Water Parks

A water park shares characteristics with amusement parks and includes water
play areas such as water slides, swimming pools, water playgrounds, splash pads,
lazy rivers, and places for floating, bathing, swimming, and other barefoot games. A
wave pool or Flow Rider may also be present in modern water parks to replicate an
artificial surfing or body boarding experience.

Linear Parks

A linear park is a park that is much longer than it is wide. They resemble strips
of public property that run beside canals, rivers, streams, defense walls, power lines,
motorways, or shorelines. Examples of linear parks range from animal corridors to
river ways to paths, encapsulating the term in its fullest definition.
PROCESSES OF DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS AND REDEVELOPMENT:

Parks provide a safe place for communities to connect, enjoy the outdoors
and be active. Local park and recreation professionals are experts in planning,
designing, building and maintaining these vital places in our communities.

Much has changed since NRPA published its Park, Recreation, Open Space
and Greenway Guidelines in 1996. In those simpler times, park and recreation
agencies focused on things, like playgrounds, ball fields, boat ramps and youth
athletics. Now they’re also involved in socioeconomic and environmental issues,
such as the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, wildfires, urbanization, social equity
and services, habitat restoration and economic development.

In recognition of these increased complexities, there are no longer any

nationally accepted standards for parks and recreation planning. Each community
must determine its own standards, level-of-service (LOS) metrics, and long-range
vision for its parks and recreation system based on community issues, values, needs,
priorities and available resources. Even NRPA’s 1996 guidelines recognized that “a
standard for parks and recreation cannot be universal, nor can one city be
compared with another even though they are similar in many respects.” Therefore,
it’s time for a new approach to parks and recreation system planning; one that not
only addresses traditional park and recreation challenges, but also is robust and
comprehensive enough to address these broader community-wide issues.

First, we need to broaden our perspective of parks and recreation systems, in

order to respond to societal shifts and expectations in a meaningful way. Parks and
recreation facilities should no longer be regarded as isolated, but rather as elements
of a larger, interconnected public realm that also includes streets, museums,
libraries, stormwater systems, utility corridors and other civic infrastructure. Alternative
dimensions of parks and recreation systems, such as equity and climate change,
should be considered from the onset of the planning process. And, each site or
corridor within the system should be planned as high-performance public spaces
(HPPSs) that generate multiple economic, social and environmental benefits. This
broader perspective encourages park and recreation agencies to transcend their
silos — and leverage their resources — to plan and collaborate with other public
and private agencies to meet as many of the community’s needs as possible. As a
result, parks and recreation systems can be repositioned as essential frameworks for
achieving community sustainability, resiliency and livability.

Second, we need to replace the traditional linear, narrowly defined parks

and recreation system master planning (PRSMP) process with a cyclical, open-
ended process that is constantly updated and integrated with other foundational
public realm plans, such as long-range transportation plans, stormwater master
plans, habitat conservation plans and future land-use plans. Such an ongoing,
collaborative planning process can lead to the development of an integrated
public realm that can generate far more benefits for a community than the
traditional siloed parks and recreation system. This proposed new approach,
illustrated in Figure 1, differs from the traditional approach in several ways.
Project Initiation, Planning and Dimensions

A noteworthy difference between the traditional PRSMP and the proposed

new approach is the amount of time and thought given to the initiation and
planning phase of the project, including the development of a project charter,
project plan and a readiness audit. Careful and thoughtful planning is critical to
identifying opportunities to generate greater resiliency and sustainability benefits for
the community, as well as building the credibility and support needed to implement
key recommendations. The eventual success or failure of many plans can be traced
to the amount of time spent initiating and planning the process. Once a PRSMP
process begins, it is very difficult to change its scope, budget and deliverables
midstream.

A key component of the initiation phase is the identification of the desired,

alternative “dimensions” of parks and recreation planning to be addressed during
the process, as listed in Figure 2. Identification of these dimensions during the
initiation phase has direct implications for the makeup of the project team, the
scope of work, the areas of focus and the eventual success of the project.
Decision-Making Framework
Another feature of the new PRSMP approach is a more thoughtful and nuanced
“decision-making framework” to replace absolute standards and classifications,
providing parks and recreation agencies with the freedom and flexibility to respond
to community issues and needs. Such a framework may include: the agency’s
mission and vision; agency and community values; guiding principles; residents’
needs and priorities; community context; desired experiences; and service-delivery
models. Collectively, these components encourage thoughtful, context-based
solutions rather than pre-conceived standards.

Feedback and Consensus Building

The new approach provides numerous opportunities throughout the planning
process to pause, present and discuss interim findings; determine if additional lines of
inquiry are needed; and build consensus with key stakeholders and decision-

makers regarding the direction of the process. Typical formats (online or in-person)
often include staff review meetings, stakeholder focus group meetings, advisory
committee presentations, and one-on-one briefings and workshops with elected
officials. Such feedback loops are critical for eventual approval, adoption and
implementation of the master plan.

Evaluation of Existing Conditions

While the traditional approach to evaluating existing conditions focuses solely on
parks and recreation facilities, the new approach also emphasizes the evaluation of
the specific dimensions identified in the initiation phase. Each topic requires an in-
depth analysis of existing conditions and issues, and their implications of the parks
and recreation system. For example, research and discussions with the public works
or engineering department may reveal new information, such as the need for
additional stormwater treatment or floodwater storage in certain areas of the
community or the opportunity to meet recreation needs and stormwater needs on
the same site. Investigation into crime rates and safety issues could identify hot spots
that might benefit from additional security, nighttime recreation programs, or design
modifications in accordance with guidelines for crime prevention through
environmental design (CPTED). Parking and transportation issues could be
investigated to determine the potential role of parks in providing trail connections,
bike-share stations, overflow parking, transit stops or other multimodal transportation
solutions. What’s more, discussions regarding housing and economic development
could detect opportunities for parks and green spaces to stabilize neighborhoods,
improve property values and catalyze redevelopment.

Preliminary Implementation Framework

The purpose of the preliminary implementation framework (PIF) is to initiate
implementation discussions as early in the process as possible; traditional processes
often leave implementation discussions for last, which can doom the project to
failure. The PIF is particularly important for plans that address numerous dimensions,
such as transportation, stormwater and social services, which will be implemented
by agencies other than a parks and recreation or planning department. In addition
to traditional forms of implementation — such as capital improvements, additional
staffing, new programs and increased maintenance — the PIF may include updates
to comprehensive plans or land development regulations; partnerships with other
agencies, businesses or nonprofit organizations; changes to staffing or organizational
structure; refocused delivery of programs and services in response to the agency’s
mission or residents’ priorities; and changes to maintenance and operations
procedures. Accreditation by the Commission for Accreditation of Parks and
Recreation Agencies (CAPRA) is another form of implementation.

Needs Assessment Process

The new approach proposes a more rigorous, scientific methodology than that used
by many communities. Needs assessments are often scrutinized by the public,
stakeholders and elected officials; parks planners need to be able to defend their
methodology, data collection process and findings. If done correctly, a needs
assessment is a type of applied social research that involves developing a research
design, gathering and analyzing the data collected from various sources, and using
the results to inform policy and program development. In our practice, we use a
mixed-methods, triangulated approach that compares the findings from
quantitative, qualitative, and secondary research techniques and data to identify
top priorities. As with the evaluation of existing conditions, the needs assessment
process should solicit public input regarding the entire public realm, as well as
community-wide resiliency and sustainability needs.
Level-of-Service Standards
The 1996 Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines state that “we
must realize an open space standard is not so much an exemplary measure to be
used in some form of comparison or judgement of adequacy or accomplishment,
but is an expression of a community consensus of what constitutes an acceptable
level of service.” Therefore, the new approach encourages public agencies to revisit
their core values, principles and goals; and to develop LOS metrics that effectively
reflect their aspirations. In addition to the traditional park metrics of acreage, access
and facilities, for example, some communities may also wish to establish new metrics
related to resiliency and sustainability as outlined in Figure 3.
Scope and Limitation of Park Redevelopment:

The guidelines below are for general purposes only. Actual acquisition and/or
development of a park site will depend on several factors. These must be
considered in connection with classification and guidelines when making planning
decisions. These can include any community-based goals or needs for a given area,
usually defined through a community process, or site-specific context such
as topography, sensitive areas, access, zoning regulations, etc. that may limit the
use of a given site. “Park property donations and park construction for new land and
housing developments are also negotiated with city officials and are included in a
development agreement.” Depending on the scope of the project, it can either be
a straightforward process or be complex and full of intricacies.

In the 21st century, our parks and green spaces are how we are still able to
connect, on a primal level, to the purity of nature. Parks have public health,
preservation and conservation implications — from providing places for physical
activity and offering safe spaces for children to play, to helping to lower crime rates.
And, their aesthetic value is also a source of civic pride. In short — as we all know —
our parks are vital to our communities.

Getting started
while there are certain common starting points for everyone, the route to get from
idea to park is unique for each project.

“Typically, a park project gets started through a demonstrated need from surveys of
community members, and other public input that is incorporated into the city’s
Comprehensive Plan and the Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) Plan,”
explains Mark Harrison, landscape architect with the Parks Planning and capital
development manager for the city of Everett, Washington, Parks & Community
Services Department. “Park property donations and park construction for new land
and housing developments are also negotiated with city officials and are included
in a development agreement.”

Depending on the scope of the project, it can either be a straightforward process or

be complex and full of intricacies. Most new projects begin with the community
members who usually are the first ones to recognize the need and desire for a new
park. From there, a project can go any number of directions.
“It really does depend on how big the project is going to be,” says Bill Lambrecht,
superintendent of Parks and Planning for the city of Wilmette, Illinois. “For a new site,
typically, we are approached by residents asking us to acquire [property]. For
example, the suburb we work in is virtually all residential and there is very little open
space left. When a parcel becomes available, residents usually ask us to keep it
open as opposed to it being developed for single or multifamily dwellings.”

It is at this point that funding starts to play a part. Nothing can be done — no matter
how altruistic the endeavor — without the funds to pay for the land. Here, those
involved in the project can begin to employ some creativity. There are traditional
funding methods and then there is the option of finding partnerships with local, like-
minded organizations, such as the YMCA or local school and library districts.

“Our two most common ways of obtaining parkland is through purchase or as a

dedication in satisfaction of parkland dedication requirements through the city’s
development process,” explains Jenny Baker, Parks, Planning & Development
manager with the city of McKinney, Texas. “Funding depends on the size of the park
and may take several budget years. Once we hire a consultant to design the park,
we hold public input meetings to find out the needs and wants of the park users and
adjacent residents and specific user groups.”

Defining Small Park Districts

How do you define a small park district? Is a district’s designation based upon
population served? Budget? Staff size? I would suggest it is all of these. Smaller park
districts tend to have very limited staff, sometimes with only one to two full-time
recreation staff. This number may or may not include the executive director. This
limitation is similarly reflected in the number of park staff, with typically one full-time
staff member supported by seasonal staff. Taxes can also define small districts, with
taxes barely covering the cost of utilities, let alone staffing.

Strategic Planning Solutions

Small park districts must be strategic in their planning. With limited resources, capital
purchases must address technology advancements as well as make a community
impact. Staff at small park districts must wear many different hats — it is not out of
the norm for the executive director to be involved in tasks such as programming to
ensure new initiatives are implemented effectively. This includes assisting the building
and grounds departments when they need extra help, often during larger family
events such as holiday event set-up, and other community activities.

Utilizing Creative Marketing

There are several out-of-the-box ways small districts can be creative in their
marketing. For many, seasonal brochures are their strongest marketing tools. Beyond
that, what can you do? Work with your local schools to see if they can pass out flyers
to students and their families. For some, this may be old school thinking, but many
parents rarely look at the virtual backpack, so this can still be an effective way to
reach a larger audience. Does your local community college have a television
studio? If so, they may be willing to partner with your agency to create short
promotional videos that can be consumed quickly via social media. Facebook is
great for reaching parents, but what is the most effective way to reach teens? You
could meet with the student council at your local high school or junior high school
and ask them to help promote your teen-focused events.

Everyone on your team should take part in your agency’s marketing efforts and be
constantly working various angles to promote your programs. In small communities,
competition with travel teams, school programs, video games and other activities
can be tough. We can’t just roll over and say, “There are too many activities to
compete with.” We need to keep pushing to drive numbers.

Maintaining Staff Morale

Most people who work in the field of parks and recreation do so because they
believe in the mission and feel that they are making a difference. A strong sense of
desire to positively impact the community needs to be in the staff’s heart. The idea
of impacting someone’s life is what drives them. However, the staff at a small district
can easily get frustrated by wearing many hats, seeing program ideas disintegrate
and by working with limited technology and resources to start or maintain
programming. And, due to budget limits, staff typically are not paid what they feel
they should be. Staff training and development is critical, yet difficult to do with
limited budgets. One solution is to find affordable training through your local
chamber, library or other online resources.
Working at a small park district has its challenges, but it can be very rewarding. Staff
work closely with each other and become a strong team. They become “the park
guys and gals,” and are recognized by the community for their efforts. Small
communities are typically very appreciative of the efforts of their park personnel,
which in turn makes park and recreation staff feel that they are making a difference
as they get to know the families and participants they serve. Navigating the
challenges of a small park district is well worth it when staff is able to experience the
impact they make on their communities.

Michael McCann, MS, is the Executive Director of Sandwich Park District.