POOR DESIGN/POOR LOCATION

Poor design and poor location can work in tandem with poor maintenance
and a lack of programming in discouraging people from using a park, and it's
effects can have several different consequences:

* Bad design can exacerbate maintenance challenges. The design of
a park must take into account the realities of maintenance requirements.
For example, if a park incorporates flower beds, there must be adequate
time and money allotted to the upkeep of those beds. If a playground is
vulnerable to graffiti, then the equipment should be constructed from materials from
which graffiti can be scrubbed or taken off.

* Bad design can make a park less attractive, accessible, and useable for people. The types of facilities incorporated into a space should attempt to reflect the needs and demands of the potential users. These needs and demands may depend on the average age, ethnicity, and cultural background of the population the park is targeted to serve, as well as the presence (or lack) of
other recreational spaces and public facilities in the area. Moreover, the layout of various facilities and overall design is also extremely significant. Diversity or intricacy in the physical environment can bolster the appeal of a park and increase the number of ways it is used. As Toronto Parks and Recreation suggests, a park should offer a varied environment with a mix of colors, textures, and uses to make it interesting to people. Jane Jacobs (who devoted a chapter of her renowned work, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, to urban parks) corroborates this by stating that "if every place looks like every other place in the park, and also feels like every other place when you try it, the park affords little stimulation to all the different uses and moods [which characterize why people come to a park]". Park layout should also allow people to easily and intuitively find their way around, and access/entrance points should be numerous and well placed in relation to the surrounding environment.

* Bad design can decrease park users' feelings of safety and security. The following list catalogues the general characteristics that can affect people's opinions of a park's general safety, as well as the features that support these characteristics:

- Accessibility of physical environment - This refers to how easy it is to enter, exit, and move around a park. The features that influence accessibility include:
o Access points - are entrances and exits well placed and easy to find?
o Park layout - is the layout of the park easily understood and navigated? Are there any areas that are physically isolated?
o Vegetation - does existing vegetation impede movement through the park?

- Ease of observation/visual accessibility - This is related to physical accessibility, but is more concerned with how well users can see into and around a park. The features that contribute to this are:
o Park layout - does the layout of the park lend itself to informal surveillance and observation?
o Lighting - is there adequate lighting for night-time observation?
o Vegetation - does vegetation impede visual access to certain areas?

- Formal Surveillance/Access to Help - This concerns whether there are resources specifically designed to discourage crime and promote feelings of safety. Such resources may include:
o Presence of park staff or security personnel - do staff and/or police patrol the park area?
o Telephones - are there telephones accessible to users in the case of an emergency?

* Poor location - Even a beautiful park with numerous facilities can remain empty and unused if it is badly situated. Parks feed off and react to their immediate surroundings, and if those surroundings do not provide a source of potential users, then the parks may not be able to live up to their potential worth. Jane Jacobs laments, "Why are there so often no people where the parks are and no parks where the people are?" She states that an important factor for the success of a park is its location in an area of mixed uses. A variety of residential and commercial areas around the park can provide a steady stream of many different users who visit the park at all times of the day. In other words, in a good location, a park "possesses an intricate sequence of uses and users." It is easy to conceptualize how locational factors can impact crime and perceptions of safety. Constant use, as well as 'informal surveillance' by people who casually walk by or through a park can do a lot for controlling crime and ensuring people's feelings of safety.

Resources/Links:

Jerry Belan, "Safety and Security in High Park, Toronto - A Case Study," Landscape Architectural Review July 1991.
Diana Chapin. "Making Green Spaces Safer Places - Experiences in New York City." Landscape Architectural Review July 1991.
Jo-Ann Egan. "Breaking Through the Myth of Public Safety - The role of user studies in park design." Landscape Architectural Review July 1991.

Jane Jacobs. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York, 1961.

Planning and designing safer parks:
http://pps.org/topics/parkuse/toronto_safety_2.adp
http://pps.org/topics/parkuse/toronto_safety_3.adp