.gif)
A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem of the United States
MENU
Aspects of Recreational Planning
Present Public Outdoor Recreational Facilities
A Park and Recreational Land Plan
|
A Study of the Park and Recreation Problem of the United States
|
|
Chapter II: Aspects of Recreational Planning (continued)
RECREATIONAL AREA PLANNING
Any area devoted to recreational use of any type may be said to have been wisely selected for its purpose when selection has been determined by the logical relating of needs, on the one hand, to the capacity of the area to supply them at reasonable cost, on the other. Admittedly, in the case of an area selected because of its possession of exceptional inspirational qualities, "need" is the great imponderable, and a decision as to selection may often have to be based on some such determination as this:
Here is an area possessing qualities so inspiring, so satisfying to the human spirit, that we are justified in acquiring it and protecting its inherent values, even though it may not be visited by the thousands—perhaps could not be without destroying the very qualities that make it worth public possession. We shall do this in the profound belief that the return to the individual visitor, and to society as a whole, provided by such an area as this, will be sufficient to justify our acquiring it for the benefit of those sensitive and appreciative persons who will seek it out.
It is apparent that selection, on the bases indicated above, cannot be satisfactorily consummated without at least a careful advance reconnaissance, for the purpose of appraising existing values and possibilities for development inherent in the area, visualizing the principal elements of the ultimate development and formulating estimates of the cost, both of installing and maintaining them. It is depressing to reflect upon the great sums of money that have been required to supply necessary facilities in certain areas, and the other considerable sums which will, henceforth, be required to operate and maintain them, because of failure to give them proper study in advance of acquisition.
Abundant and safe water, and adequate sewage disposal facilities of course, essentials in any park—are basically so necessary that it is doubtful if any other development should be initiated until there is absolute assurance of them. Frequently costs on these two items are many times the expected amount, and the fact is discovered only after lands have been acquired and a program of development undertaken. Geological examination and a study of well drilling records in the vicinity will almost invariably indicate the probable depth at which water may be obtained. Similar examination of soils will also indicate the nature of the problem of sewage disposal and its approximate cost.
As any park planner knows, road construction is a heavy item of cost in almost all parks of any extent. Certainly, before an area is acquired and a general development program is undertaken, the approximate cost of required road construction should be ascertained. Yet, to do this, the essential features of the development, the items to comprise the development program, and the approximate location of the principal facilities must be determined with a reasonable degree of certainty, since the location and extent and character of the road system is largely based upon these.
In connection with any program of development, advance planning of an area, if it is to be adequate, must look beyond the development stage to the time when operations must be carried on. A gift of land is no gift at all, and low-cost land no bargain, if development or operation and maintenance entail unduly high costs. Operation and maintenance costs are of particular importance since they constitute a burden that must be borne "from now on."
Perhaps an example will help to indicate what is meant and how important fairly detailed advance study is.
Let us assume that one of the main factors in a preliminary decision to acquire an area is the presence of a good stream, of which a part of the course is through a basin where an artificial lake or pond is expected to become one of the principal features of the prospective development. Superficial examination indicates that the site is good. Yet before it is possible to be sure the site is actually a feasible one or that a lake can be created without inordinate expense, or that, if created, it will adequately serve the purpose or purposes of its construction, a good deal of study is necessary. Since creation of an artificial body of water, even under favorable conditions, is frequently a major item of expense in a general park development program, that study is also, in the long run, an important economy.
There are three main factors which will largely determine the cost of the dam itself. The first of these is the subsurface condition at the prospective dam site, to be determined by the digging of test pits on the site or the boring of cores, to determine the depth to bedrock, and the character of both the material above bedrock and the bedrock itself. Often the depth is such as to require a much greater amount of excavation than was anticipated. Occasionally the bedrock will be found to be of porous nature or so badly disturbed or broken, or to contain downward tilted, pervious bedding planes which either make the site unsuitable or require expensive grouting.
Again, in several instances encountered in Civilian Conservation Corps construction, for example, a nose of rock at the dam site appeared to be ideal for excavation of the spillway, though later borings showed that the character of the rock was such as to require a concrete lining.
The second factor is the occurrence and availability of construction materials. If these are near at hand, easy to excavate and transport, the situation in this respect is fortunate. If these favorable conditions do not exist, the cost of placing the material at the site or in the dam may be multiplied many times by a long haul, difficulties of excavation, road construction to the point of excavation, the necessity of screening the material, et cetera.
Figure 22. (click on image for an enlargement in a new window)
The third factor is the volume of maximum flow in the stream to be impounded. In some cases this may be determined from stream gauging records, but on many streams such records do not exist. In such cases, the maximum flow is determinable only by ascertaining the extent, topography, and cover of the watershed and a study of rainfall records for the vicinity. In its connection with prospective costs of construction, this item is important, since it determines the size and character of the spillway which, in cases where flood volume is large, is a costly element in the construction task.
Assuming, however, that the construction of the proposed dam involves no great difficulties and no unreasonably high costs for materials, only one part of the study has been made. What remains to be done is fully as important. In addition:
1. It should certainly be determined, on the basis of accurate flow records if possible, that the supply of water will be ample not only to fill the lake, but to keep it filled.
2. It should be determined that periods of high water, when the crest nears the top of the spillway, will not result in overflow on and damage to private property, or to proposed developments along its shores within the park.
3. If the lake is to be used for bathing, it is vitally important that sanitary conditions on the watershed which might affect its present or future use be carefully ascertained.
4. Since erosion upstream, within or without the park, will directly affect both the ultimate character of the lake basin and its usability at some or all periods, it is necessary that erosion factors be studied, and the means and cost of control determined in cases where these are of significance.
5. If the lake is to be used for bathing, it is important to determine both the availability of beach site and the approximate cost of providing it.
6. If the lake is to be used for fishing, it is important to ascertain in advance how good a fishing lake it will be and at what level it can be expected to be most productive.
7. It is important to determine all the uses to which the lake is to be put; how, and at what cost they can be provided; and how the lake, once it is filled, may affect other proposed or desired developments.
Let us acknowledge at the outset that every park constitutes an individual problem in planning, and that no plans for one park may be superimposed on another. Granting this, however, certain facilities are required in every park, others are common to many, and there are some general principles which must apply to virtually every park plan if the result is to be efficient and economical.
As already indicated, every park requires a sufficiency of safe water and adequate and safe sewage-disposal facilities. Every one is certain also to require a certain amount of road. Every one of any size must have also the facilities for maintenance truck and equipment sheds, repair shop, storehouse, etc., and should have a residence at least for the custodian. Beyond these essential facilities there are, of course, a great number of others that will be determined by public demand or need and by the capability of the area to provide them at reasonable cost.
There appears to be almost universal agreement among thoughtful planners that wherever possible there should be a single vehicle entrance. Such entrances should be kept to a minimum, if for no other reason than that a multiplicity of entrances means also a multiplicity of road mileage to build and maintain. Limiting the number of entrances to one or two undoubtedly is an important aid to control of use.
Whether Indiana originated the idea or not, it seems to have pioneered in formulating and utilizing the principle of what they have long called the Service Area, a term used to describe the grouping, in fairly close but not crowded proximity, of all those facilities which are provided for intensive use, such as hotel, cottages, restaurants or lunch rooms, the park store, picnicking, camping, and bathing. Purely from an administrative stand point such an arrangement is desirable, in that distances traveled for patrol or maintenance purposes are cut down, with a reduction in time and travel cost, and mileage of service roads to build and keep in repair is kept low. Likewise, the original cost and cost of maintenance of utilities—water, sewage disposal, electric lines—is lower than if facilities are unnecessarily scattered and separated. In addition, "the defined service area, serving as it does a place of congregation and redistribution, handles large numbers with comparative ease. From it radiate trails through woods and by shores. It serves, so to speak, as a filter. But above all, it saves the landscape from ruin."5
5 Ninth Annual Report, Indiana Department of Conservation, 1927.
Such an arrangement of facilities excludes no one from enjoyment of solitude or of any of the natural loveliness that a park may possess. Those who wish these things may find them—usually at a mighty short distance from the "service area," since man is a gregarious animal and only a few of him are inclined to stray from others of his kind.
Selection of a "service area" site involves a number of factors. Preferably it should be definitely removed from the entrance. By this means its surroundings may be completely controlled and establishment of parasite enterprises on adjacent private property at least discouraged, if not prevented. Since its development and use necessitate a considerable modification of the landscape, it should be placed, if possible, where the landscape values to be disturbed are low, and the site should be sufficiently spacious so that if expansion proves necessary it can be provided without having to go to an entirely new site.
In determining a location for the utility area, the same consideration for landscape values should govern. And since, at best, such a group of structures and their appurtenances such as piles of building material, for example offer no particular attraction to the eye, it is desirable to conceal the whole thing as much as possible. It should be definitely separated from but reasonably convenient to the service area, or to one of them, if more than one has to be provided.
Selection of a location for the custodian's residence has been a fruitful source of discussion and argument. One person will advocate a site close to the park entrance; another would put it adjoining a service area; another would integrate it with the utility area; another would isolate it completely from all other development. Decision must, in the last analysis, depend largely upon the conditions of any particular park. It is desirable, however, so to locate it that the family of the custodian may have some degree of privacy, of separation from crowds; and to assure that, the park office should be located elsewhere than in the residence.
The following miscellaneous conclusions or admonitions with regard to planning are based upon observation of a very large number of park plans and developed parks, in which, at one place or another, every conceivable planning error has been made.
In the lay-out of both picnicking and camping facilities, endeavor to supply a fairly well-defined area for each picnic group or camping party, but seek the golden mean between crowding and complete isolation. Too crowded a condition tends only to duplicate city conditions from which presumably the park visitor wishes to escape. Too scattered an arrangement imposes wear, and consequent modification, on a needlessly large amount of landscape; it likewise entails additional installation and maintenance costs for water lines and either additional sanitary facilities or unsatisfactory sanitation. The same considerations should govern the lay-out of cabin groups. Many of these have been constructed with a liberality of spacing that apparently contemplates occupancy by habitually noisy persons an assumption not warranted by actual experience in any well-operated park.
It is not necessary to construct a road to every beauty spot in a park. The American motorist can hardly be said to lack opportunity to view natural loveliness; some of the best of it should be left for enjoyment in quiet and even in solitude. Where it is desired to bring a road close to a charming waterfall or a pond or some other attractive and unspoiled feature, it surely should be kept out of the picture as much as possible.
Provision in parks for the man or woman on foot should recognize both the hiker, who counts his coverage of ground in miles, and the stroller, who is either physically incapable of covering long distances on foot or simply not inclined to undertake such activity. This dual type of pedestrian activity indicates carefully graded paths, preferably providing short circle trips of half a mile to a mile or more, in the vicinity of concentration points, and actual trails which by leading to worth-while objectives, offer something more than the means of walking for its own sake.
If the area is characterized by genuine natural charm and beauty, every development, whatever its character or purpose, should be subordinated to preservation of those qualities.
If parents who come with their children are to find some relief from their daily cares, every recreation area, whatever its character, should contain a play place for the children where they can find their own amusements enjoyably and safely, even though it means provision of playground apparatus.
What kind of activities shall be provided in any park? How far shall we go in providing tennis courts, playfields, baseball diamonds, golf courses, etc.? How warm have been the arguments, at meetings and conferences, over these questions! And, usually, how inconclusive.
The answer here given is believed to be a reasonable one. Let us base it on any area that possesses real grandeur and beauty, that contains natural features that should be kept unspoiled, unmodified, in all their natural charm. Let us assume that it is big enough amply to justify the visitor in staying in it a week, or two weeks, or a month, and finding in it a constant succession of thrills and surprises.
We all agree that man does not live by bread alone. Neither does he, except in the rarest instances, live long on bread and scenery alone. Even though the individual knows and loves the out-of-doors and possesses a deep understanding of nature and her processes, he is a rare individual who does not wish, over a period of a week or more, mostly spent in direct enjoyment of the natural out-of-doors, to engage in other activities. There appears to be nothing wrong in principle to providing the means therefor a fairly diverse choice of other means of passing the time enjoyably, and the wisdom of this appears to be widely recognized. Assuming that prospective use will justify the cost, then it would appear that installation of such facilities should be governed by these considerations:
1. That it does not involve destruction or serious modification of or close encroachment upon significant or rare scenic, historic, or scientific features—those things which constitute the park's raison d'être.
2. That such development shall supplement, and be subordinate to the primary purpose or purposes of the area.
3. That it can be adequately maintained.
If the first of these three points is accepted, there seems to be no reason to suppose that the wisdom of the second and third will be seriously questioned. As a matter of fact, Point No. 1 is a sharply restrictive one which, if applied universally, would possibly result in elimination of many such recreational facilities now established or would have excluded them from establishment originally. In application, sharp differences of opinion might well arise as to how serious any prospective modification might be or how close an artificial development of any kind should be permitted to come to an area or feature of exceptional or distinctive quality. That is a matter for individual solution in which it can only be urged that every effect of modification or encroachment, as concerns both sight and sound, be determined and evaluated as carefully as possible in advance.
Taking the whole field of park development, there is probably considerable overemphasis on substantiality, permanence of park structures. Though many potential mistakes of location and of individual design may be obviated by care in planning, even the most conscientious planning will not wholly eliminate them, especially in development of new areas. In many instances, it would be decidedly wise to provide structures of limited life. Thus if their design proves inadequate or their location not the best, mistakes of design and location may be corrected within a reasonable time without requiring the razing of structures built for very long life, as many structures have been built in the past, to the subsequent regret of those who have had to maintain and operate the areas in which they are located.
In its essence, adequate park planning involves these basic requirements:
1. Reconnaissance in advance of acquisition.
2. Determination of the logical and economical relationship among the several items of development which appear to be required or desirable.
3. Modification of natural environment only when it is certain that values resulting will fully balance the losses.
The Master Plan. In competent master planning lies the first key to ultimate success in operation and utilization of any area, small or great. It simply represents an attempt to determine how prospective use of an area shall be provided for most effectively, at the same time safeguarding natural or historic features and making possible operation, maintenance and protection at the minimum of year-after-year cost. Like any plan based upon predictions which cannot possibly be exact, it must be flexible, subject to modification as experience or considered afterthought or changed conditions indicate change to be desirable and wise. As a guide to orderly development, its value and importance are inestimable. It seems worth while to stress again the vital necessity of relating this plan, and the layout plans which ultimately become a part of it, and which indicate in more detail the location of individual developmental features, to practical considerations of operation and maintenance. How is it going to work? What is it going to cost to make it work? These are the pointed questions which must be wisely answered if it is to be anything more than a pretty picture on paper and an endless and unnecessary drain on public funds, with which neither the user nor the administrator will be satisfied.
NEXT >>>
Top
Last Modified: Mon, Aug 9 2004 10:00:00 pm PDT
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/park_recreation/chap2c.htm
.gif){kind=small}