Waterfront Parks - Some ideas

Project for Public Spaces is a US-based organization that devotes itself wholly to the study of public space across North America, and offers tips and suggestions on how to maximize the best use of this valuable resource. I am a member of this group. The following is an exerpt from an e-mail I received on the issue of car parking within urban parks:

U.S city parks have given over large swaths of green to automobile storage, but not every park is held hostage by the automobile. Cities are finding ways to increase access while relieving pressure to provide parking in parks.

Urban park advocates struggle mightily to create new green space through a precious parcel here and an irreplaceable acre there. But a large swath of existing parkland is given over to the prosaic task of automobile storage, complete with its side impacts - impermeable surface, water runoff and erosion, oil and gas drippings, heat island effect, displacement of trees and meadows, loss of playing area.

A study by the Center for City Park Excellence of 70 major city parks in the U.S. reveals that, collectively, they devote a total of 529 acres to the very technology that many people seek to escape when they head into their local patch of nature. In Chicago, which recently spent $475 million to create 24-acre Millennium Park, almost twice that much land - 46 acres - is given over to auto storage within nearby Lincoln Park.

Download the full report from TPL here.

(http://www.tpl.org/content_documents/Pavement%20in%20the%20Park.pdf)

Flipping through al of the resources on waterfront development on the internet, on PPS, in planing journals and in my own experience have led me to come up with my own preliminary thoughts on the issue of waterfronts:

How to Make a Bad Waterfront:

At all costs, do this:

• Single-use developments (large arenas, hotels, convention centres)
  
• Domination by cars (parking lots)
• Too much passive space (nothing to do but sit and stare)
  
• Private control / restricted access
• Lack of destinations (no centre of activity, no places to be)
  
• Lack of focus
  
• Process driven by development, not the community
• Make the park the destination – full stop.

How to Make a Great Waterfront:

• Make public goals the primary objective
• Create multiple destinations
• Connect the destinations
• Optimize public access
• Fit private development into the vision
• Use parks to connect – not as destinations in themselves
• Design buildings to engage public space
• Make single-use buildings into multi-purpose ones
• Limit cars! Make walking, cycling easy
• Don’t allow an empty waterfront! Encourage year-round 24/7 activities

Applying this to Riverside Park in my town of Kamloops, my thoughts on what we could do are as follows:

• Create a public vision for Riverside Park
• Create a year-round destination plan (skating rink, coffee shop, dog park, indoor market, art gallery, hotel, restaurants etc. where, when & how they fit)
• Make the plan & vision LAW (Riverside Park Plan, Kamplan, Development Permit etc.)
• Link the destination sites (upgrade paths etc.)
• Fix single-purpose destinations – turn them into year-round spaces (Arena, Bandstand, Pioneer Park etc.)
• Get rid of things that don’t work (parking lots!)
• Build nice things that fit the public vision (Public and Private)

In my thoughts, there is room for a hotel and convention centre project associated with the park - IF - it offers some significant benefits to public space, is multi-purpose, and enhances the park as a public space by INCREASING public access and amenity. If we can link into the Arena and enhance its year-round appeal, and create more year-round variety of activity happening there, all the better. What doesn't work for me though is allowing the parking lot to remain as it is - it seems like such a waste of public space, given the plethora of parking options in the area. Maybe the City can look into making the arena area into a special development permit area, and fix the terms and conditions under which development can happen.

Kamloops needs a downtown Dog Park

Being a dog owner, a good, centrally located dog park is a matter of high importance to me. A good dog park provides a safe and secure place to bring your dog to, where he/she can play safely, learn to get along and behave around other dogs, and have a smashing good time.

A good dog park doesn't just stop with dog-joy though - it's a great social opportunity for their owners as well! We already know, through many studies, that dog owners walk more often in their communities, weigh less, and live healthier lives. A good dog park allows a dog owner to add "better socialized" into the mix for themselves, as owners chat on the merits of their pets, and enjoy having a great time playing with and watching their furry friends. the BEST dog parks are just right around the corner, within walking distance, and close to the centre of liveliness, coffee shops and other fun things for owners (and dogs) to see and do. Play dates can be arranged, social "bumping" can occur. ("Oh hi, nice dog! Do you come here often?" etc.)

Google Street Maps is a really neat tool to look at dog parks close up. So far, I've only found one, but I'm sure there are plenty more.

link

Why do I care?

My community, Kamloops, has two dog parks. One is located far up in a hillside suburban sprawl area. It is very difficult to walk to, and is in a low-density neighbourhood. It is also hidden from the road, so there is no certainty that there would be any dogs to play with should you choose to travel to that point. And if you do, there is nothing else around to enjoy. It is a single-purpose, single-destination dog park that is ill-used.

Our other dog park is far out on the edge of town, by the airport. It takes a god 20 minutes to drive to this spot, as again, it is not located alongside any bike trails or pedestrian routes, and is even cut off from the surrounding neighbourhood by train tracks and industrial yards. However, it is highly visible, and is jam-packed with dogs, and dog owners, at nearly all hours of the day.

What we are missing is a central dog park, located in the highest-density area, the downtown residential district. We need a dog park that is integrated with the existing public park amenities, that is alongside the pedestrian trail network, that is within walking distance of a coffee shop or ice cream parlour so you can have something to enjoy while playing with your friend. We need a dog park that promotes walking, and fits in with a healthy walking lifestyle, not one that requires you to drive.

My thoughts on design criteria for a dog park are therefore as follows:

1. Must be located in a central, visible location near other activities
2. Of sufficient size to allow some separation between dogs, and let them get up a bit of running speed
3. Adjacent to a significant pedestrian/cycling trail system
4. Fenced and secure facility with chambered entry gates
5. Landscaped with grass or gravel (non-muddy surface)
6. Entryways/high-use areas should be paved/bricked to prevent erosion
7. Water fountains (human and dog sized) provided
8. Park furniture - including benches, picnic tables, rocks etc.

A good, well-designed dog park can be a valuable amenity in a walkable neighbourhood - providing a great social space, visual entertainment for dog owners and other park users alike, and reducing conflict between dogs and other park activities by providing a dedicated space.

These are thoughts on some criteria. Do you know of good dog parks in your cities that you're proud of, and support a walkable environment? Do you have criteria yourself that you can add?

Copyright Issue Resolved

This matter has been tentatively resolved.

Massive, hexagonal feature found on Saturn

JPL.NASA.GOV: News Releases

This is extremely weird! Is this a result of magnetic field lines, torn by the charged atmosphere of the planet into this odd shape? Is it the odd creation of another lifeform - art on a grand scale?

Operation Bite: April 6 sneak attack by US forces against Iran planned, Russian military sources warn

Operation Bite: April 6 sneak attack by US forces against Iran planned, Russian military sources warn:

"Ivashov noted that it was not to be excluded that the Pentagon would use smaller tactical nuclear weapons against targets of the Iranian nuclear industry. These attacks could paralyze everyday life, create panic in the population, and generally produce an atmosphere of chaos and uncertainty all over Iran, Ivashov told RIA-Novosti. “This will unleash a struggle for power inside Iran, and then there will be a peace delegation sent in to install a pro-American government in Teheran,” Ivashov continued. One of the US goals was, in his estimation, to burnish the image of the current Republican administration, which would now be able to boast that they had wiped out the Iranian nuclear program. "

This is insane. If this is even slightly true, and the US is planning on much more than aggressive posturing, then we are looking at the full-out beginning of World War III. That someone even thinks that an attack on Iran would further burnish American credibility - that tactical nuclear warhead use in Iran could ever be seen as justifiable, that the Iranian people would really rise up and celebrate America for nuking their country and inflicting massive loss of life is insane.

That this is even slightly credible points to how astonishing the Bush administration has been. That we can even think "Maybe..." about a report like this says volumes about the level of fear and distrust this administration had engendered around the world. After all, the idea that the people of Iran would rise up and install a pro-American regime is right up there with the idea that US Soldiers would be welcomed as liberators in Iraq. It was crazy then, it's absolutely terrifying now.

Podcasting growth slower than expected: study

Podcasting growth slower than expected: study

I wonder if this might have something to do with wmp11's rather shocking continued refusal to play nice with podcasts. I consider myself an advanced user, yet I'm sick to death of the silly hoops I need to jump through just to get podcasts properly and automatically linking from wmp11 to my samsung z5. I download using juice, run a shell script command to properly change the genre to a wmp11 readable format, then set up autoplaylists, because juice and wmp11 don't always play nice with updating the regular playlists. All in all, it's an irritating process to what, in itunes, is practically a 1-click solution. It's enough to make me regret buying a wmp-based media player. I'll be picking up an ipod for sure for my girlfriend, unless someone over there gets their heads out of their collective asses.

JohnKerry.com - Press Releases

Wow, this is interesting. A real switch by the Democrats to go fully on the offensive! The accompanying video of the press conference is some of the most refreshing commentary yet heard.

JohnKerry.com - Press Releases: "Statement of John Kerry Responding to Republican Distortions, Pathetic Tony Snow Diversions and Distractions

Washington – Senator John Kerry issued the following statement in response to White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, assorted right wing nut-jobs, and right wing talk show hosts desperately distorting Kerry’s comments about President Bush to divert attention from their disastrous record:

“If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there, they're crazy. This is the classic G.O.P. playbook. I’m sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did.

I’m not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today will take a break from belittling Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s disease to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq. It disgusts me that these Republican hacks, who have never worn the uniform of our country lie and distort so blatantly and carelessly about those who have.

The people who owe our troops an apology are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney who misled America into war and have given us a Katrina foreign policy that has betrayed our ideals, killed and maimed our soldiers, and widened the terrorist threat instead of defeating it. These Republicans are afraid to debate veterans who live and breathe the concerns of our troops, not the empty slogans of an Administration that sent our brave troops to war without body armor.

Bottom line, these Republicans want to debate straw men because they’re afraid to debate real men. And this time it won’t work because we’re going to stay in their face with the truth and deny them even a sliver of light for their distortions. No Democrat will be bullied by an administration that has a cut and run policy in Afghanistan and a stand still and lose strategy in Iraq.”"