My idea of public parks is that they are areas where people can gather and relax or play sports and games. I wanted to analyze the Infant Park and Bicentenario Park and their effectiveness in creating spaces welcome for activity as well as relaxation and overall usefulness.
Overall, I believe that the Infant Park is more successful in creating a welcoming environment that is welcoming to small children and adults alike. The water spheres were a neat area that kids can both run around in as well as sit down and relax. I even saw a local girl sitting on top of one of the spheres as chaos ensued around her. There is also seating nearby so the adults can closely supervise their kids. Even when walking through I stuck my hand in the water and enjoyed the mist this area was creating on a hot day. The wooden houses are a great example of where kids can go to relax. They are relatively private in the way that the slats have a very thin opening in between them. They are also small enough so that only kids can comfortably occupy them. This acts as almost a sanctuary for the kids from their parents. Finally, the slides in the park are easily enjoyable for people of all ages. Most of the people in our class tried out a slide as well as a parent who was there with their kid. The best part of this playground was that although there are some age restrictions, there were still areas that older kids and parents could enjoy as well.
Park Bicentenario, although a very nice space, was less successful in creating a space that was enjoyable for everyone. There was a lot of occupiable space, but it was mostly flat and difficult to let your imagination run, unlike in the Infant Park. The playground sets in Bicentenario are also very similar to American playgrounds where everything is pretty much scripted. This also conflicts with letting kids imaginations create activities in a space. I also believe the fact that is right next to a street but isn’t completely enclosed is a deterrent to parents to let their kids run around in this park. The Infant Park doesn’t have that problem as it is completely enclosed.
Overall, both parks are enjoyable spaces. I think the Infant Park was more active than Park Bicentenario due to the fact that it is more catered to kids. But I also believe the space is organizes better and more conducive to activity due to how it was designed. The designers knew that not only would kids be coming, the parents would be coming as well and they did a very good job including the parents in the design of the park . Park Bicentenario was less busy because it was very open with little shade. In a hot climate like this, shade is necessary for people to visit a park during the summer. Both parks are successful, I just believe that more can be done to help make Park Bicentenario even more successful.
Water Spheres at Infant Park
Small Wooden Houses at Infant Park
Water Landscape in Park Bicentenario
Highway Immediately next to Park Bicentenario
Small Playground Set in Park Bicentenario
I definitely agree with you that more landscaping efforts for shade can be done at Park Bicentenario. While I enjoyed it more than the Infant Park, it defiantly felt more open and extensive. The beginning of Park Bicentenario was more filled with aspects that were engaging: looking at and feeding the flamingos, work-out equipment, playground equipment, and, of course, Mestizo. However, when you passed the government building, the interesting aspects for any activities seemed to disapate. The Infant Park was packed with options and interesting activities to do. The view of the mountains and Cerro San Cristobal was also comparable to the amazing view of the mountains and Costanera Tower.
Nick, this was an enjoyable post to read. I found your ideas very insightful, and it’s clear that you thought a lot about the two projects and how they related. More specifically, I found your opinions concerning the effectiveness of the two parks especially interesting, and I’d like to share my own opinions on the topic. You mentioned that you believed the Infant Park was more catered toward children, which I agree with because it is specifically designed for this audience, but I think you failed to give credit to Bicentario where it was due. Where you criticize the openness of the park, I see an opportunity for children (and others) to make the park their own and give it their own purpose. The infant park was so confined that it felt harsh and as though it was forcing me to go through it a certain way. Let me know what you think about it, I’d be curious to see what you say.
Belle, I agree that open space is necessary for a large park like Bicentenario, but I feel like there is just too much openness. There is opportunities to make the park your own by creating games, etc. but it is limited by the sheer openness of the landscape. Sure there may be exercise equipment and a few scattered playgrounds, but there is so much more room for improvement and more design opportunities to help shape these games the children would create by adding new obstacles, hiding spots, etc. That is where I think Infant Park is more successful. It is somewhat scripted but not oppressive to where you can’t create and enjoy the space.