Explaining urban planning park principlesfrom @shwinnabegobrand

Transcript

No I'm out to dinner the other night, and this topic of parks and urban spaces comes up. And we're kind of talking about why this, like, one park sucks. And I was like, hey, there's actually rules to what makes good parks versus bad parks. And I told them and they're like, wow, that's really interesting. And as someone is who loves a good park, I will tell you too. Now the tenants of what makes a good versus bad park can be understood from this phenomenal good. And there's two main things that allow for a good park. Worst is good borders. And one of the things that Jane says is that the borders of a park, what surrounds it better the worst. Because when you have a diversity of activity, you have residential buildings, you have dorm rooms, You've got delis and restaurants. A handful of office buildings. That diversity of activity draws in a variety of different people at all points and times of the day. Which means as a result, you just have tons of different people and ages walking through this park all day. So a good park is almost a byproduct of what surrounds the rank, number one. Number two, a good park cannot be single yes, meaning tier has to be a number of different reasons why people are drawn to this park. Washington Square Rank, for example, they've got a playground, so they bring parents and children. They've got a nice fountain that you can kinda sit and hang out, bunch of places to sit, lawns that you can lay on, bunch of little vendors you can buy stuff from. You can even get your ass whipped in best. Where some other parks, they might just have a playground, a single use activity that only draws in one type of person. So borders and a diversity of activity, any diversity of use cases make for a good park. And if you like this, you probably won't find any other content on my page about this.