Natural Play Spaces by Mark Fleming

DEVELOPING PLAY AREAS THAT RECONNECT CHILDREN TO THE NATURAL WORLD

DEVELOPING PLAY AREAS THAT RECONNECT CHILDREN TO THE NATURAL WORLD By

In Gratitude to

Mark Fleming

Laurie Johnson Oscar Blazquez

A Master’s Report Submitted to the Faculty of the

Beth Darnell

COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTERS OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 7

Abstract 8

The risk adverse society 18

Context and significance 8

Adult’s attitudes towards children outdoors 18

Study site 9

Reduction in ranging 19

Research question 9

Goals 9

Methods 10

Planning for natural play 19

Natural features of children’s outdoor play spaces

LITERATURE REVIEW 11

Outdoor play policy strategies 20

Children’s Natures 14

Parks and natural playgrounds 21

The play instinct 14

School grounds 22

The nature instinct 14

The street 22

Children’s biological drives 15

Access to the countyside 23

Play provision 23

The complexity of the relationship between the child and nature

Instinctive environmental exploration 16

The value of natural space for restoration and well being

The State of Play: Children’s Access to Natural Play Spaces

Supporting Children’s Opportunities to Play in Natural Spaces

19 20

Summary 24

RESULTS 27

Where children choose to play 16

Site assessment tool for play in nature 28

The utility of natural space for play 16

Case reviews and assessments 30

The Values and Benefits of Children’s Play in Natural Settings

Children’s response to nature through play 17

Site analysis 37

DESIGN APPLICATION 49 Design concepts 50 Schematic design 51 Focus areas 41 Plants for play 63 CONCLUSIONS 69 Recommended course of action 71

INTRODUCTION

Future research 71

Abstract

Limitations 71 LITERATURE CITED 73 IMAGES CITED 78

Context and Significance

Study Site

Research Question

Methods Terminology

ABSTRACT Study Site In the last 30 years children’s experience and understanding of nature has changed in a significant manner. While urban sprawl has pushed nature further away from our living spaces, indoor entertainment options have exploded and steadily sharpened their ability hold the attention of young audiences. Youth today may know more about global threats to the environment but their contact and immersion into nature has been greatly diminished. Gone are the days of easy access to woods, fields, creeks and dirt paths for many children. This trend suggests a concern for our society’s ability to sustain positive environmental reforms. Much has been researched and written about how this trend might be reversed: and how unstructured play, in naturalistic surroundings, during the formative years, can play a key role in developing environmentally sensitive adults. This research investigates the strategies seen as effectively mitigating this trend by assessing a site in serious need of nature play development; presenting general guidelines for all such development; and providing a schematic design for a specific site. Context and Significance Research over many decades and throughout many parts of the world has shown that children have an inherent sensitivity to the natural world. While this sensitivity is clearly biological in origin, its expression is unique to the individual, his or her genes, and the natural world situations they are exposed to. Play is a biological drive in children. It is their primary mechanism for encountering and exploring their immediate environment. Children are expert in playing instinctually with natural elements. Through play they fulfill their desire to associate with nature and conversely, natural environments prove to be optimal settings for children to engage in and actualize their need to play. Natural settings can offer diverse value and benefits to children at play by supporting a wide range of play behaviors within settings that are dynamic and flexible. Playing in natural spaces can offer more possibilities for children to have control and mastery over construction of special spaces, for the collection and use of loose parts, for different ways of moving, and for risk taking. Accessing a natural area in a playful manner supports the development of a sense of place and attachment to nature (Lester et al. 2007). Allowing a child to do this builds a sense of self and connection and interdependence with ecological worlds. Playful, experimental contact with nature correlates with positive, sensitive environmental behavior later in life (Wells and Lekies 2006, 1-24). 8

The site chosen to demonstrate the theories and applications related to unstructured free play in naturalistic settings is located in Tucson, Arizona. The Arroyo Chico and its tributaries is a major drainage network running through central Tucson and is targeted for multi-use development. It is a half-mile section of the Arroyo Chico chosen because of its history of play, its future as a lush, naturalistic desert landscape and the cultural, economic and political environment that surrounds and shapes it for the future. I discovered the general area for my report through the analysis and subsequent intersection of four stress maps produced with GIS software using digitized data layers provided by the Pima County Association of Governments. These stress maps are a measure of need and dependency that is derived by Pima County through annual sample data taken by the US Census Bureau. These maps revel indicators of housing and family needs that could be addressed by Community Development Block Grant programs. The variables used to determine stress reflect family and housing conditions and relate to economic status, shelter costs and conditions and possible social dependency such as youth, old age and disability. Twenty seven variables were used to determine stress and each variable contributes equally to the overall score. Only population and housing variables were used – other highly relevant matters such as nutritional status, health status, recidivism and crime were not included in the approach. Research Question How can a section of the Arroyo Chico Wash be developed into a natural play area for the surrounding neighborhoods and schools so that existing play usages are retained and/or reintegrated following the site’s conversion into a series of three storm water retention basins? Goals 1) Provide universal design guidelines for unstructured natural play in naturalistic settings. • Objective: Proven natural features should be provided which foster free play and promote urban wildlife habitat.

2) Provide a design that builds upon the strengths of the site and can be easily re-integrated after conversion. • Objective: Address the current uses for play, the need for additional affordances and make a contribution in support of urban native wildlife. • Objective: Address the future changes that may be made to the site and how play components may be reintegrated. 3) Design using desert plants with regional emphasis • Objective: Use plants known for their play value. • Objective: Use plants known for native wildlife enhancement.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Methods and End Products 1) Literature review: the review involved an exploration of existing literature related to free-play in naturalistic settings, children and nature literature, childhood development and play, and environmental psychology. Also reviewed was literature on playground design and plants for play areas. A review of the literature on urban wildlife enhancement was done as interaction with plants and animals is essential for children using natural play areas. 2) Site Assessment: The site is currently supporting free-play, therefore the design will build upon an understanding and legitimizing of the current uses. Using the site assessment tool that comes out of the literature review, site visits documented current uses. GIS stress mapping was done in order to locate a site for development. 3) Assessment of the plans for the Arroyo Chico Retention Basins and evaluation of their potential for free-play. These plans are construction drawings provided by the Pima County Flood Control District and represent a true picture of the site to be built. I will use the assessment tool to evaluate the planning and make recommendations for possible modification. 4) Case reviews: The choice of natural play areas to be reviewed was influenced by the key issues coming out of the literature review: The Reedy Creek Nature Explorer Zone, “Playscape,” Cincinnati Nature Center, and the Dodge Nature Preschool. 5) Final master plan: A new vision for the landscape and its amenities, post basin construction, in which free-play is allowed to continue within various naturalistic settings. 6) Focus areas: specific designs for smaller areas of the site including the Primitive Structures area, Thicket as Refuge, City of Rocks, Gaps and Tunnels, BMX Course, Dog Park and Frisbee Golf Course. 7) Develop plant palettes specific for play and habitat enhancement.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Children’s Natures

Supporting Children’s Opportunities to Play in Natural Spaces

The play instinct

Planning for natural play

Children’s Biological Drives

Natural features of children’s outdoor play spaces

The nature instinct

Outdoor play policy strategies

The complexity of the relationship between the child and nature

Parks and natural playgrounds

Instinctive environmental exploration

School grounds The street

Where children chose to play

The utility of natural space for play

Children’s response to nature through play

The value of natural space for restoration and well being

The Values and Benefits of Children’s Play in Natural Settings

Access to the county side

Play provision Summary

The State of Play: Children’s Access to Natural Play Spaces

The risk adverse society

Adult’s attitudes towards children outdoors

Reduction in ranging

LITERATURE REVIEW Children’s Natures

learned rules for survival and that nature gives meaning to our lives (Wilson 1984). Children have a natural affinity for nature and are drawn to the earth, sand, water, plants and animals and require the opportunity to have unhindered contact with the environment (Moore and Wong 1997). The biological drive and instinctual drive to play combined with biophila and children’s affinity for nature clearly point out the threat that urbanization poses and the critical need for both natural spaces and unmediated time for children to interact with natural elements in those spaces.

The Play Instinct Play is instinctual for children. We are as hard-wired to engage in play as we are to seek out food, sleep and social ties. Instincts help us survive in the world and the instinct to play is the process of children discovering their place in the world. Through play children get to practice relationships, learn about the world, find their limits, and discover their strengths. And because response to our instincts is flexible, every new play environment, within a new social situation, heightens the child’s ability to respond to an ever more complex world. The instinct to play evolved out of a need to survive and into an acquisition of the skills needed to thrive in a modern world where survival is relatively assured. Through play, a child has safe, complex interactions with his environment which result in an ability to respond appropriately to unpredictable future scenarios (Pellegrini 2009). Children’s Biological Drives Play helps the child immediately by building coping skills and then again in the long term by making them into better adults. Play transcends the mere struggle for survival by taking the child into situations where they thrive and have reason to celebrate. To experience this elevated state is to acquire a life-long motivation to place oneself into favorable conditions. Regular exposure to favorable conditions leads to general well-being, joy and pleasure which empowers the child and teaches them to act on their circumstances in a hopeful manner. The biological drive to play directs the child to engage the world in ways that suit their individual abilities as well as learn about how the world works. Through play children learn the complexities and unlimited potential of the world and that exploration, challenge and even risk have rewards (Lester et al. 2007). “When we see a child playing with a flower, or in the dirt, or skipping or playing tag, we should remind ourselves that what we are looking at is the child-like result of a deep and irresistible urge to interact with and have knowledge of the world and everything in it” (Cobb 1993) The Nature Instinct Until recently humans have had close personal contact to the natural world and as such we have a close affinity to nature. Wilson 14 (1984) says that our affinity for nature is inherent and innate and part of our evolution: That through our link to nature we

The Complexity of the Relationship between Child and Nature It would be wrong to paint the picture of all children reacting to nature in a universal fashion because every natural setting is different and each child brings his or her family and social fabric with them to the play site. The play site itself is different in its physical composition, climate, access, risks, elements and materials: Not the least; all the others who come to play or occupy the site for a host of reasons unrelated to play. And for all the positive effects of nature on the child known, one must also remember that in our instinctual relationship with nature there is, rightly so, a built-in fear of nature. There exists in us both biophilia and biophobia, brought on by the forces of nature and made worse through cultural reinforcement. Our society often has a traditional and romantic view of the child in nature; that of innocence, play, adventure, companionship, healthiness and spatial freedom. This idyllic view should be balanced with the knowledge that there will be insects dismantled, vegetation ravaged, territory claimed, battle lines drawn, soft earth tunneled, paths beaten, individuals shunned, groups segregated and screaming a plenty. “…the romantic view of children and the natural world, the myths and narratives of children’s playful encounter with nature need to be carefully balanced… [our perceptions} say more about the way that we view children rather than any reality of children’s experiences.” (Aitken 2001) Designing in response to a single romanticized childhood experience will result in fixed and predictable features that do not take into consideration the local influences and the distinct ways children live. This is especially true when dealing with an existing site already occupied by local players. Moore (1986) writes: “Each child wove a pattern of personal playtraces through the neighborhood, laced together with the traces of other known and unknown players.” There is a constant shift in patterns according to season, changes in the landscape and changes in social relationships. To design a site with fixed amenities only is to lose sight of the transitory nature of free-play where children routinely seek places away from organization and obvious adult intervention.

Instinctive Environmental Exploration Free play in naturalistic settings involves roaming from place to place. One moment a child may be studying the smallest piece of the environment, lost in thought about an insect, a twig or a shard and the in the next, he or she may be using larger areas as a physical challenge through tree climbing or chasing and skipping. The greater the diversity of the natural area and the man-made enhancement the more satisfying is the play (Fjørtoft 2004, 21-44).

skill challenges (Fjørtoft 2001, 111-117). There are a large number and variety of loose parts available in wilder environments, which encourages more creative, constructive play than in most built environments (Stoecklin and White 11 September 2010, 1-4).

Values and Benefits of Children’s Play in Natural Settings

Frost (1992) says that natural features are important to the playscape and that green structures, loose parts and diversity of topography are his top priorities (Frost 1992). Moore (1986) describes loose parts as harvesting and collecting bits and pieces of the environment that can be used in a variety of ways. Nabham and Trimble (1994) describe the value of trees as going beyond climbing. Trees can become forts, bases, dens and little houses. When fallen, trees become obstacle courses. And when near trees children are also close to animals, insects, fallen leaves, mud, pine cones, and winged seeds. Trees provide the backdrop for play in every conceivable way.

Where Do Children Choose to Play

Children’s Response to Nature through Play

A number of studies show the importance children place on being in natural settings (Jansson 2010, 63-81) (Fjortoft and Sageie 2000, 83-97) (Veitch J et al. 2006, 383-93) (Veitch J, Salmon J, and Ball K 2008, 870-9). Millard and Wheway’s (1997) showed that children in their study gave preference to open green spaces (56%) the street (26%) gardens (23%) play area (21%) friends home (19%) Trees (17%) outside their house (16%) and shops (14%) (Joseph Rowntree Foundation. 1997). Thompson and Philo’s study shows a preference for informal spaces that children have discovered or fashioned for themselves. And within these spaces their preferred play was bicycling, rollerblading, playing in tree houses, dens, parks and generally hanging out with friends (Thomson and Philo 2004, 111-130). Rasmussen and Smidt study children’s perception and use of their environment by giving the cameras and asking them to photograph the outdoor world. They photographed nature playgrounds; pictures of earth mounds and slides, cabins, shacks, dens, swings, old row boats, trees, fallen trees, stone walls, wildflowers, back alleys, animals and common greens. In a similar photographic study Burke’s (2005) showed a large proportion (70%) of children photographed natural materials and the environment. Collectively these studies show that children prefer to play outdoors while seeking a range of different settings. There is clear indication that children have preference for playing in natural settings where they can be active and creative.

The literature supports a universal childhood experience of making special places that is linked to a critical period of childhood development when a child bonds with the natural world. It is necessary for the child to be in the natural environment and engaged in shaping that world for the bond to be complete. This is why creating a den or fort like special place, a home away from home, is so important in the creation of an environmental ethic in future generations (Moore, 1986; Nabham and Trimble, 1994) (Cobb 1993) (Sobel 2008). Sobel describes the qualities of these special places: they are found and constructed by children on their own; they are claimed as their own; they are secret; the occupants feel safe and calm; they are organized and arranged; and the players feel empowered by the special place.

The Utility of Natural Spaces Natural areas have traditionally been a place for children’s play (Fjørtoft 2004, 21-44). There is a lot of potential in natural spaces for children to engage in a range of play types. (Lester et al. 2007). Exploration of natural spaces develops wayfaring skill, provides time away from adults and contributes to physical fitness. Children develop positive attitudes about the areas they explore because they are uninhibited and make their on assessments. Wild areas are dynamic, complex and often disorderly and so they make excellent backdrops for child development. Geologic features, tree roots, fallen trees, low branches, and stream crossings offer exciting motor 16

Fjortoft’s (2001, 2004) research points to the importance of natural spaces for children’s motor skill development. Natural spaces encourage vigorous playful movements over irregular and variable terrain that contains variable and unpredictable surfaces. This movement builds motor skills that are superior to the skills learned on play areas with level terrain, homogenous surfaces and containing highly predictable play equipment. Moore and Wong (1997) observed that a complex landscape, a natural playground, encourages physical movement in all directions. When children are allowed to roam over an area that they consider to be home territory, they develop independence, and interact and learn about their environment, themselves and others. Additionally they acquire spatial knowledge, way finding skill and strategies for problem solving that cannot be formally taught (CORNELL et al. 2001, 219-231). 17

The Value of Nature Space for Restoration and Well-being

Reduction in Ranging

Studies have shown that nearby natural environments have powerful positive effects on children’s cognitive functions (Wells 2000, 775-795). The potential benefits of playful contact with natural space for children with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) has been demonstrated (Taylor, Kuo, and Sullivan 2001, 54-77). Taylor compared the after effects of children playing on paved surfaces to that of green settings and concluded that play in green settings was far more likely to increase focus and attention in activities that followed the play time. Children often seek out and return repeatedly to refuges in natural settings as a way of coping with emotionally negative events (KORPELA, KYTTÄ, and HARTIG 2002, 387-398). Bingley and Milligan’s study showed that childhood experiences of walking in woodlands corresponded to the young adult’s ability to use natural settings for stress relief (Bingley, Amanda and Milligan, Christine 2004, 1-80).

Children’s independent movement over the neighborhood is also in serious decline. Children are now older before they are allowed to range; there is a reduction in the number and quality of sites visited; an increase in parent imposed restrictions; and an increase in professionally supervised activities for children (Gaster 1991, 70-85). While there is an increase in bicycle ownership there is a decrease in parent’s permitting the bicycles to be use by children to roam local areas (Tandy 1999, 154). Supporting Children’s Opportunities to Play in Natural Spaces Many have suggested that change is needed to reverse the loss of children’s access to nature and natural experiences and to balance the overzealous risk aversion of modern parents. But because this change is likely to be slow in coming, interim strategies for new and remodeled play areas can be devised in ways which allow children to play in and around natural spaces. Fortunately awareness, knowledge and enthusiasm for designing such spaces appear to be growing (Gill 2005, 1) (Maudsley and Playwork Partnerships (Great Britain) 2005).

The State of Play: Children’s Access to Natural Play Spaces Risk Adverse Society A number of studies show children are spending less time outdoors; that direct contact with nature is being replaced with an abstract appreciation of nature through nature programming; that routine contact with animals has become a routine contact with things that are inanimate and technical; that community life is becoming isolated individualism; that direct exposure to reality, adventure and challenge are displaced by abstraction and virtual reality; and that slow paced life has become fast paced (Louv 2008) (Nabhan and Trimble 1994) (Aitken 2001). Adult Attitudes Toward Children Outdoors At the heart of this retreat from the outdoors and from contact with nature is the issue of risk, especially adult’s perception of risk for children and fear of getting dirty instilled in children by their parents (Clements 2004, 68-80). In addition children are inhibited from playing outdoors for fear of being shouted at, for being a nuisance and making noise. Adults also limit children’s access to public spaces out of fear that they are dangerous and out of control. The adult desire for safety, order and visibility conflicts with the child’s desire for disorder, cover, loose materials and claim for territory. Adults perceive vacant lots and waste spaces as negatives while children see them opportunities to discover, imagine and have an adventure in a space ungoverned and unplanned by adults. 18

Planning for Natural Play To plan natural play spaces we begin by setting aside our preconceived notions of formal designated play spaces and learn to recognize how important the informal spaces of nature are. We then acknowledge that what children devise for play, for themselves, is different than what adults envision for them. Children need to be able to roam and to have access to a range of activities within multiple spaces, and do so in accordance to their own needs, values and creative potential. And just as essential, children need to be able to access these informal spaces via safe streets that encourage walking and cycling (Chawla 2001). Robin Moore described key factors to natural play areas in his research from 1986 and then confirmed these same factors again in 2000: Streets can be made livable; play-lands can support urban wildlife; the parks and greenways need “roughing up” and the community can populate and animate these areas (Moore 1986) It is important that nature be seen as essential and that immersion in nature not be left to chance, but rather, designed into daily childhood experiences (Moore and Cosco 2000, 1-7). 19

Natural Features of Children’s Outdoor Play Spaces Nature provides children with valuable experiences because children can create their own worlds in natural settings. (Moore and Wong 1997)(Sebba 1991, 395-422)(Moore and Wong 1997)(Fjortoft and Sageie 2000, 83-97)(Kahn and Kellert 2002). Living materials that change and renew themselves are important components within the natural play area. With these materials children’s imaginations are stimulated by playing with parts of vegetation and dirt; engage in problem solving when using the materials to build huts and nests; and engaging large muscles when playing hide-and-go-seek and climbing trees and rocks. Children need play spaces that allow for the development of territory through complex boundaries, surfaces, and textures (SuttonSmith 1990, 3--7). Wheway and Willard (1997) tell us that children, when left to their own devices, like to pass through a variety of spaces, wandering, stopping to play and then nomadically moving on for a new play experience in a new space.(Joseph Rowntree Foundation. 1997) We can compensate the loss of real nature by enhancing these complex spaces with access to vegetation, earth to tunnel in and topography to explore (Nabhan and Trimble 1994). Water is a highly valued addition to the playscape, along with trees, shrubs, flowers and long grasses. Sand is an excellent affordance especially if it can be mixed with water. Urban wildlife in all forms; small mammals, insects, pond creatures and other living things provide valuable experiences. Anything that can be sat in, on, under, leaned on or that provides shade and shelter is a good play amenity. Areas and/or features that offer varying levels, nooks and crannies, and situations that offer both privacy and a view are major contributions to unstructured free play within naturalistic settings. (Stoecklin and White 11 September 2010, 1-4) . Outdoor Play Policy Strategies Because the state of play today is highly restricted and increasingly controlled by adults there is need for policy statements at multiple levels of governmental and private organizations. The number one policy recommendation is to recognize the loss of unstructured free play and to plainly state the need of children to access to public space as members of their community. And to make a priority the expansion of safe, open, accessible green environments (Maudsley and Playwork Partnerships (Great Britain) 2005). Policy needs to shift us away from narrowly defined, often single purpose, play developments. And direct play to a wide range of outdoor spaces offering greater diversity, complexity and richness of childhood unstructured experiences. (Moss, Petrie, and Ebooks Corporation. 2002) Any policy statement should begin with what is known about children’s play and what prevents children from playing naturally 20 within their own local environments. The best new policies will address the places that children use on a daily basis, their territo-

ries, consisting of playgrounds, parks, streets, schools and vacant land “the familiar territories of children’s outdoor play lives” where they can engage nature (Yerkes 1980). Parks and Natural Playgrounds Many believe parks do not provide for playing with natural elements or for care giving involving plants and animals, or for transforming materials and space into children’s own needs (Lester et al. 2007; Chawla 2001; Cowan 2005, 23-28)(Chawla 2006, 359374). But a growing number of playground planners are at work transforming these spaces into more naturalized spaces that integrate gardening, nature areas, constructive play materials, outdoor learning areas and community spaces. When these conversions take place there is a cost savings: natural materials, abundant loose parts, and wisely selected built or purchased equipment realize a cost savings over large multi-tier structures that offer little play value (Frost 2006, 26). Landscape architect Hele Nebelong has experiences in transforming play spaces in Denmark by placing a greater emphasis on nature and less on prefabrication. Nebelong uses nature’s forms to challenge players in ways that build skills associated with negotiating complex physical spaces (Gill 2006). His design of naturalistic play spaces for children challenges the highly ordered and standardized arrangements seen in park playgrounds. The design of new nature play spaces leaves functionality unspecified, replacing order and specific function with unspecific spaces where children invent and create their own versions of activity. The naturalistic design of play space results in a series of somewhat neglected, messy and chaotic action spaces (Blinkert 2004, 99-112). Within public parks and playgrounds risk management is always an issue. Fjortoft and Sageie’s study of how children play within natural playgrounds shows that play areas with the highest security often have the lowest affordances and challenges and that landscapes elements are a viable strategy that brings back affordances for play, relatively safe challenges, accessibility and wear resistance. They conclude that natural landscapes represent potential for play and learning and deserve serious consideration for our parks and playgrounds. (Fjortoft and Sageie 2000, 83-97). The guidebook “Start with the Park” acknowledges the abundance of public green space such as parks and playgrounds and says that we should begin with parks, gardens, tree-lined streets, play areas, sports fields and green corridors to provide a basis for an interconnected series of play spaces within which an amazing diverse and distinctive play experiences can occur. And that the design or renewal of play spaces should be about linking experiences, working where children already play, providing visible and regular 21

trained staff for over-sight, and building relationships with children that facilitate child-centered play and that environmental improvement be preceded by an established regular pattern of children’s play (Cowan 2005, 23-28). School Grounds School grounds are the last bastion for children to play outdoors with any regularity, where children can interact outdoors in a relatively safe environment without adult control. For school grounds to be opened up for use as unstructured free play set in naturalistic surroundings, the neat and aesthetically pleasing sites need to give way to loose-parts to manipulate, long grass to play in and allow players the freedom to change and develop these spaces for their own purposes. Within a given school ground lays the potential for meaningful contact with natural space, within which there is freedom of movement, contact with natural elements, and informal social contact with other children. School grounds can become habitats, meaning that this is where children can live and develop their own sense of place within the school’s grounds. Wilson (2001) identifies the conditions that contribute to positive free-play interaction with the school ground environment (Wilson 2001, 2-7): •

Naturalistic areas in and around the school yard are preserved or created

•

Players are able to easily find seclusion and quiet

•

School grounds are providing children with opportunity for active exploration

•

Activities are available that allow children to change their environment

•

School grounds are diverse and complex environments

•

School grounds provide easy immersion into natural environment

The Street The street is important to natural unstructured play because it allows access to natural areas by foot, children’s main form of transportation. When children walk, then running, jumping, climbing and balancing on structures often follows. But the street also offers other unique forms of free play because the linear, smooth surfaces allow roller-blading, skate boarding and cycling. And under 22 these circumstances, as in all free-play situations, children will form informal peer relationships. The street offers kicking games,

railings, fence vegetation, debris, found objects, stoops, gutters and occasional building materials, making it a rich environ for play. “The street is world as exotic as it is familiar” (Moore 1987, 45-62). Of course low traffic volume is a prerequisite for the streets to be acknowledged as play spaces. Access to the Countryside Access to the countryside, at a scale that feels rural, is integral to the design of play spaces. Access to woodland is essential if den building and rope swings are to be made available. Access to wildlife can only take place if wildlife has a home to live in. Green spaces are a prerequisite to informal play in naturalistic settings. Access can be provided through formal programs and field trips organized by schools and the like, but self-directed, unmediated, free play in naturalistic settings is most likely to occur when land is available and accessible from home and school via the child’s own inclination mechanisms. Play Provisions Adult organized play is often at odds with what children value and choose for themselves with regard to play. But given that children spend considerable time in organized play settings; how can these structure settings be expanded to included environmental play? In other words, if adults are mediating the play then how can children build a relationship with nature through play in natural environments? How can structured play and unstructured play be inclusive? How do we provide children free play within the context of supervised situations? If we define environmental play as an opportunity for children to play freely in and around natural environments and elements then obviously the structured play settings must incorporate or provide access to natural settings and unstructured play time. In addition, care-giving opportunities such as animal husbandry and community gardening are viable nature experiences which simultaneously provide a green environment worthy of adventurous exploration. Elemental play can be added to structured play areas - playing with earth, air, fire, water, minerals, sticks, seed pods, etc. Structured play areas that have the resources for programs and transportation can offer trips to wild places where children can be set free to discover the area and develop their own sense of place to construct or deconstruct as they see fit. Tree climbing, den building, splashing in streams, observing wildlife, stalking the wild, and campfire cooking are possible outcomes. In order to maintain a free play environment, the organization “Play Wales” has established the following principles: •

All adults involved understand the importance of children’s instinctive play so that unadulterated play experiences can

happen even if the situation is not strictly adult-free. • Children who are inordinately fearful of the play setting are guided and supported by trained adult play workers until they are able to find free play on their own. • The play setting should be an open space with a recognizable culture of play that values diversity of play behaviors and where adults are seen as supporters of the process.

Fortunately viable alternatives are available. We only need to allow for them in our thinking, in our designs and in our budgets. All children need access to everyday nature. We must provide routine access to gardens, ponds, and city farms; and to school grounds and play areas that contain natural features and elements, greenery and natural loose parts. All of this needs to be within a context of a varied terrain that is large enough to provide for exploration, territories and secret places. And above all these natural spaces need a great deal of disassociation from adult agendas while still remaining safe. Places where children find or create their own special places.

• The provision of play should provide children with a field of free action where children can discover independently and make use of all that has been provided. Summary It may be concluded that children are predisposed to play and have a preference for natural areas, and that when left to their own devices, child’s play is different from what adults perceive it to be; and that freely chosen play spaces differ from what is usually provided by adults. Given opportunity and space children will seek out the most diverse and dynamic play environments. Natural environments provide diverse and dynamic play as few urban settings can. Children’s drive to play in naturalistic settings has a positive effect on their physical health and mental states. Access to natural play areas can ensure a continued connection and affinity for the natural world in future generations. Freely chosen play behaviors in natural settings is restorative, helps establish stable responses to emotional feelings, and teaches the child that they can build their own world: giving them a sense of mastery and the confidence to act on opportunity. In nature, children acquire the ability to perceive patterns, recognize order and perceive organization, all of which are necessary for the development of an aesthetic sense, and the ability to become a creative adult. Children’s access to the natural world is in decline, and so viable alternatives are critically needed. Children must be compensated from being cut off from the natural world by providing them with rich and rewarding naturalistic play settings which offer the freedom to roam and the opportunity to improvise. The changing nature of children’s lives may lead to an alienation from nature and result in decreased environmental ethics, activism and stewardship. 24

RESULTS

Site Assessment Tool

Case Reviews

Site Analysis and Assessment

SITE ASSESSMENT TOOL FOR PLAY Simply designating an area for play does not guarantee that children will use it as we intend them to. So what values and functions determine the unstructured free play potential of a given naturalistic site? Conversely, what values and functions are missing and can be designed or programmed into a site thus enhancing its value for unstructured free play? (Lester et al. 2007) Out of the literature review came the following assessment questions: 1.

Within the site, are there multiple diverse spaces where young people can roam within a living environment? (Chatterjee 2005, 1-26)

Are there multiple areas within the site that are clearly un-programmed by adults; spaces where children can roam according to their own values, needs and creative potential? (Chawla 2001)

Are the features of the site such that children can form territories and boundaries?

Is there opportunity for seclusion and privacy?

Does the terrain have topographic differentiations; slopes, hills, holes, promontories? (Moore 1986)

Are there unofficial hidden paths connecting spaces and providing general access that adults would not think of using, such as squeeze through gaps, and crawl under spaces, (Moore 1986)

Are there pedestrian networks and streets associated with the sight that offer safe access by foot or by bicycle and are also safe and appropriate for street play? (Moore and Cosco 2000, 1-7)

Is there access to both formal public space and community space? (Worpole 2005)

Are there living, ever changing, and self-renewing natural materials; vegetation parts, sticks and dirt? (Moore 1989, 83-120)

10.

Does the site provide water with living creatures as well as natural materials such as sand, leaves, straw, logs, stumps, sticks 28 and boulders?

11.

Are children found on site? (Gill 2005, 1)

12.

Are there opportunities for care-giving to plants and animals? (Frost 2006, 26)

13.

Are there opportunities for hand crafts? (Manzo 2003, 47-62)

14. Is the site attractive to wildlife? (Gill 2005, 1) 15.

Is there play equipment available and is it made from naturalistic materials? (White and Stoecklin 1998, ?-?)

16.

Are materials available for the construction of huts, dens and/or bush houses? (KjĂ¸rholt 2003, 261-279)

The assessment tool allows designed play sites to be described and evaluated by their general attributes. The tool can raise awareness as to the natural play value of undesignated spaces, or to their potential for natural play. The assessment tool can also be used as a check list for designing new play spaces.

Case Review

Assessment: Reedy Creek Nature Explore Zone

Reedy Creek Nature Explore Zone, Reedy Creek Nature Center, Mecklenburg County Park and Recreation Department,

The Nature Explore Zone has positive responses to 5 of the 16 assessment questions:

Charlotte, North Carolina

1. There are multiple diverse spaces for roaming within a living environment (Figure 2). 2. There are site features with which children can form territories and boundaries.

Reedy Creek Nature Preserve protects 737 acres of natural, forested habitat within Reedy Creek Park. Reedy Creek Nature Center is over 1 mile from the entrance of Reedy Creek Park. Reedy Creek Nature Explore Zone is a 5000 sq. ft. play area associated with the Nature Center. The Nature Explore Zone (Figure 1) is an outdoor adventure space designed to enhance nature play and exploration, while reconnecting children with the beauty and wonder of nature. The goal of the Nature Explorer Zone is to reconnect children with nature by creating positive bonds between them and the natural environment. Staff had become concerned over recent studies showing that children today have become disconnected from nature and spend less time outdoors and that this â&#x20AC;&#x153;naturedeficitâ&#x20AC;? plays a role in childhood obesity, a fear and dislike of nature, and an increased in the use of behavior-regulating medication. Figure1: The Nature Explore Zone concept plan 30

3. Through vegetation and structures the site provides opportunity for seclusion and privacy. 4. There is access to formal public space and community space because of its association with the nature center. 5. Native plantings and the larger surrounding preserve make the site attractive to wildlife (Figure 3 and 4). Mecklenburg County Park & Recreation Reedy Creek District Park - 2900 Rocky River Rd

To District Park

ict of Distr see map

Park

Figure 2: Reedy Creek has diverse spaces for roaming Reedy Creek Nature Center w/ restroom

Robinson Rockhouse

The

Pla

Historical Site

Streets

Streams

.15

Access Trail-Concrete

Parking/Roads .15

Waterbodies . 30 Mi l es

Access Trail-Packed Gravel Robinson Rockhouse Trail Big Oak Trail

Umbrella Tree Trail

Dragonfly Pond Trail Sassafras Trail

Sierra Loop Trail

South Fork Trail

Figure 3: Living environments attractive to wildlife

Park Property

Parking Lot Islands

August 4, 2003 / Mecklenburg Co. Park & Recreation GIS

Figure 4: Reedy Creek Nature Explore Zone is surrounded by a accessible nature preserve

Case Review

Assessment: Cincinnati Nature Centerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Playscape

Cincinnati Nature Center, Rowe Woods â&#x20AC;&#x153;Playscapeâ&#x20AC;? Milford Ohio

The Nature Explore Zone has positive responses to 8 of the 16 assessment questions:

Playscape (Figure 5) is a 2.75 acre natural play area with a natural protective border. This border ensures that the children stay in the enclosed area allowing the parents to feel comfortable letting their children play uninhibited. The Playscape fence is made of natural materials and designed to feel like part of the landscape and not like an enclosure. In the focus groups conducted by designer Robin Moore, the children overwhelmingly expressed a desire to play in water. The water feature was designed to ensure safety and maximum accessibility. The water feature is important to the Cincinnati Nature Center because of their commitment to protecting the biodiversity of the existing streams and ponds from the thousands of visitors they receive annually. Giving children a space to engage nature without destroying pristine habitat is an invaluable experience. The water feature is a critical center of activity and play in the CNC Playscape.

1. There are multiple diverse spaces for roaming within a living environment (Figure 8). 2. Half of the site will be left natural so there are significant spaces that are clearly unprogrammed by adults. 3. There are site features with which children can form territories and boundaries. 4. There is opportunity for seclusion and privacy. 5. There is access to both formal public space and community space. 6. The site does provide water and natural materials such as sand, leaves, straw, logs, stumps, sticks and boulders.

Figure 7: Hut building

7. The site is attractive to wildlife. 8. Materials are available for the construction of huts, dens and/or bush houses (Figure 7).

Landscaping is integral to the natural playscape. The CNC Playscape has a variety of habitats and landscapes, including woods, fields and a stream. The CNC is committed to preserving native plants and grasses and will so has created paths to help guide the children from one habitat to the next. The paths inside the CNC Natural Playscape are designed to accommodate children with a variety of disabilities. Approximately 50% of the 2.75 acres of Natural Playscape is landscaped. A toddler play area is designed to safely accommodate the needs of children ages 1 to 3 and their parents. It has distinct landscaping and protective bordering.

Figure 5: Playscape concept plan

Figure 6: A living fence defines the play area

Figure 8: Water play is available and provides a living environment

Case Review

Assessment: Dodge Nature Preschool, St. Paul Minnesota

Thomas Irvine Dodge Nature Center, Dodge Nature Preschool, St. Paul Minnesota

The Dodge Nature Preschool has positive responses to 13 of the 16 assessment questions. 1. Multiple diverse spaces where children can roam within a living environment (Figure 11).

Mission: The Dodge Nature Preschool’s mission is to bring the natural world into the lives of young children and meet children’s developmental needs while initiating them into a lifelong, meaningful relationship with the natural world.

2. Areas within the site are clearly un-programmed by adults. 3. Children can form territories and boundaries.

Situated on a 320-acre area Environmental Educational Preserve containing prairies, forests, lakes and wetlands and the school’s facilities, the Dodge Nature Preschool occupies 110-acres that include a 40 acre model farm.

4. There are opportunities for seclusion and privacy. 5. The terrain has topographic differentiations (Figure 14). 6. There is access to both formal public space and community space.

With their teachers and classmates, children discover the wonders of nature and play on the farm where barnyard animals provide stimulating opportunities for learning and growth. Programs on beekeeping, honey making, maple syruping, as well as tasting apples picked right off the tree, encourage children to explore how their lives are part of the world of nature. The Dodge Nature Preschool uses the inherent wonder, complexity and beauty of the natural world as a catalyst for a child’s growth and development. Each classroom has a door to the outside leading to climbing structures, swings, a sledding hill, a log cabin, vegetable and flower gardens. Playground gates lead to the Dodge Nature Center grounds (Figure 10).

Figure 9: School brochure cover

Figure 13: Renewable natural materials

7. There are living self-renewing natural materials such as vegetation parts, sticks and dirt (Figure 13). 8. The site does provide water with living creatures (Figure 16). 9. There are opportunities for care-giving to plants and animals (Figure 12). 10. There are opportunities for hand crafts. 11. The site is attractive to wildlife.

Figure 14: Topographic differentiations

12. Play equipment made from natural materials is available (Figure 15). 13. Materials are available for the construction of huts and dens

Figure 10: Dodge preschool provides ever increasing layers of access to the natural world

Figure 11: Diverse spaces for roaming

Figure 12: Care-giving opportunities

Figure 15: Natural slide

Figure 16: Water with living creatures

The Park Avenue Retention Basins Site Analysis and Assessment

Site Assessment and Analysis

Current Uses: Park Ave Retention Basins:

Park Avenue Retention Basins Project, Tucson Arizona • Observations show that the community surrounding the site uses this section of the Arroyo Chico Wash for:

The site chosen to demonstrate the theories and applications related to nature play in naturalistic settings is located in Tucson,

• Walking

Arizona. It is a half-mile section of the Arroyo Chico chosen because of its history of play, its future as a lush, naturalistic desert landscape and the cultural, economic and political environment that surrounds and shapes it for the future (Figure 17). I discovered the general area for my report through the analysis and subsequent intersection of four stress maps produce with GIS software using digitized data layers provided by the Pima County Association of Governments. The Arroyo Chico and its tributaries is a major drainage network running through central Tucson and is targeted for multi-use development.

• Dog walking • Frisbee golf (Figure 18) • Birding

Figure 18: Frisbee golf

Figure 21: Unofficial trails

Figure 19: Rock stacking

Figure 22: Collecting natural materials

• Children using the wash were observed : • Playing in secluded areas (Figure 23) • Building forts • Collecting natural materials (Figure 22) • Stacking rock • Building bicycle motocross tracks (Figure 20) • Exploring the site on many of its unofficial trails (Figure 21)

Figure 17: The site for a natural play area

Figure 20: Ad hoc BMX course

Figure 23: Playing in secluded areas

Assessment for Play: Park Avenue Retention Basins

Three Basins

The Park Avenue Retention Basins have positive responses to 8 of the 16 assessment questions. 1. There are multiple diverse spaces where children can roam within a living environment (Figure 27). 2. Areas within the site are clearly unprogrammed by adults. 3. Children can form territories and boundaries (Figure 25). 4. There are opportunities for seclusion and privacy. 5. The terrain has topographic differentiations (Figure 26). 6. There are living self-renewing natural materials such as vegetation parts, sticks and dirt. 7. The site is attractive to wildlife. 8. Materials are available for the construction of huts, dens and/or bush houses. Figure 26: Topographic differentiations

Figure 24: The wash brings period water to the site

Figure 25: Children establish boundaries and territories

Figure 27: Multiple diverse spaces to roam

Construction of the three retention basins is compatible with the goals of a natural play area. Pima County Regional Flood Control District calls for riparian restoration and preservation; naturalistic desert landscaping and public recreational access; all of which lend themselves to nature play. The goals for the basin complex are to provide flood control benefits as well as ecosystem restoration/enhancement, recreation and other benefits. The project will provide environmental restoration of desert habitat and riparian ecosystem within the Park Avenue Basins. Revegetation of Basins 1, 2 and 3 will include a combination of na- Figure 28: The location of the retention basins and the range of flooding before and after basin construction tive riparian and upland species, as well as turf areas for use by residents of the local neighborhoods (Figure 28).

Neighborhoods: The general area is appropriate for such a recreational opportunity: It is very urban and grid-locked and surrounded by many socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods and schools, and has very few parks. Visits to this site revealed three pertinent facts: 1) the site is naturalistic (Figure 31); 2) it is already being used by children for unstructured free-play (Figure 30); and 3) the site is about to undergo a massive upheaval due to the construction of three storm water retention basins of such magnitude as to be able to take Tucson’s entire downtown out of the 100 year flood zone, clearing the way for several urban renewal projects Figure 28 pg 41). After construction, what was already a lush, natural desert setting, will become even more so when the basins routinely collect rain water and allow it to percolate to the water table.

Schools: My proposal for a natural play area within the Park Avenue Retention Basins (PARB) has the potential to serve not only a number of neighborhoods but also five schools (Figure 33) that are within a one mile radius. These schools, either separately or working in cooperation, could provide program, such as care giving or crafts making and oversight the of the new facility. This can be one way of meeting the assessment guideline for “access to both formal public space and community space.” 1. Hughes Elementary School 2. Miles Exploratory Learning Center 3. Safford Elementary School 4. Highland Free School (elementary)

Figure 30: The site is already in use for play

5. Borton Magnet Primary School

The residential nature of the site (Figure 29 and 32) and its density of neighborhood associations meets the assessment tool guideline for “pedestrian networks and streets that offer safe access by foot or by bicycle.”

Figure 31: The site is naturalistic

Fig. 29

Figure 32: The residential nature of the site

Figure 33: Elementary schools ring the site

Bicycle Access: The Site Assessment tool asks: â&#x20AC;&#x153;Are there pedestrian networks and streets associated with the site that offer safe

access by foot or by bicycle and are also safe and appropriate for street play?â&#x20AC;? This map and the map on the following page show how the PARB site is surrounded by streets that provide both good child access and are good for street play and the design section will address further improvement to these roads. Each of the five schools mentioned previously are linked to the proposed site by existing bicycle routes although the two schools south of Aviation Parkway (HWY 210) will have to negotiate a convoluted access under that highway. The routes shown were designated by the Tucson Metro Bike Map (Figure 34) a publication of the Tucson Department of Transportation (09/15/09).

Figure 34: A myriad of bicycle routes provide children with independent access to the site

Traffic: Traffic in and around the site falls in the low to medium low volumes. None of the streets surrounding the site are rated

medium high, high or highest in traffic volume. With the exception of Highland Avenue, which traverses the site, all residential streets detour around the site. This creates a traffic calming effect. Only people living or working in the immediate area would have reason to use the streets. This produces a quiet setting for accessing the proposed play site by walking or riding a bicycle and a relatively safe setting for street play (Figure 35).

Figure 35: Dense residential development and the fact that the park is an obstacle to through traffic keeps traffic levels reasonable low and enhances pedestrian and bicycle safety

Playgrounds: Currently the area has playgrounds at Ironhorse Park Playground, Little Sprouts Daycare Center, Miles Elemen-

tary, Project More High School, San Antonio Park Playground, Cherry Field Basin and Highland Free School Playground (Figure 36). Only Ironhorse Park and the San Antonio Park Playground offer public access from the neighborhoods. Both offer vegetation and contact with soil and natural materials but are small in comparison to PARB; so they are not providing the ability to roam and explore or establish territory, nor do they provide seclusion or harvestable natural materials.

Terrain: Figure 37 shows the current terrain where storm water runs rapidly through a narrow wash. Figure 38 shows the terrain

to be built (three retention basins) by the Pima County Flood Control District. This new configuration disperses storm water slowly into basins. The basins allow time for storm water to percolate into the ground. The increased moisture content of the basin configuration provides the opportunity for environmental restoration of degraded riparian ecosystem, preservation of some of the existing riparian native habitat, and recreational improvements for the neighboring communities.

Figure 37: The narrow and deep wash prior to basin construction

Fig. 36

Figure 38: Post construction configuration where broad and relatively shallow basins lessen the impact of storm water, promote water retention, percolation which enhances plant growth

DESIGN APPLICATION

Design Concepts

Final Schematic Design

Focus Areas

Design Concepts:

Final Schematic Design Fig. 39

Enhance play by:

• Providing loose materials such as sand, leaves, straw, logs, stumps, sticks and boulders • Making building materials available for huts and dens

Bike Path The Ravines

• Having care giving opportunities involving plants and animals • Maintaining community connection • Providing safe and attractive access to the site for pedestrians and cyclist

Clubhouse

• Re-establishing the bicycle motocross track • Having craft making opportunities

Loose Materials Depot

Restore a natural desert landscape to the retention basins that:

Hill Slide

• Has abundant space that is clearly unprogrammed by adults BMX Course

• Leaves ample space for future user designed enhancements

Boulder Field

Caves

• Provides sources of living and renewable natural materials • Has terrain with topographic differentiations • Is attractive to wildlife

Community Garden

• Providing multiple and diverse spaces that encourages exploration • Offering opportunity for seclusion and privacy

Park Ave Detention Basin Complex:

• Provide shade

Rendering of PARB showing the three basins (B1, B2, B3) as heavily revegetated site using native plants and recreational access by both pedestrians, bicycles and automobile

Bush House Tunnels 51 51

Basin 1: The Ravines

Basin 1: The Ravine Basin development provides abundant terrain with topographic differentiations. The topography divides the area into multiple diverse spaces (Figure 40). These spaces encourage exploration and provide natural boundaries for territories to be formed (Figure 41). When left to their own devices, children like to pass through a variety of spaces, wandering, stopping to play and then nomadically moving on for a new play experience in a new space.

Figure 40: Topographic differentiations

Figure 42: A secret place awaits discovery

A small draw off the main drainage serves as both a secret place and a exit to the bike path (Figure 42 and 43). Once discovered it becomes a landmark and personal entry point to the ravines. The Ravines fulfills the following design concepts: â&#x20AC;˘ Terrain with topographic differentiations â&#x20AC;˘ Multiple and diverse spaces that encourage exploration

Figure 41: Natural boundaries are good for forming territories

â&#x20AC;˘ Provides opportunity for seclusion and privacy

Figure 43: Opportunity for seclusion and privacy

Basin 1: The Clubhouse

Basin 1: The Ravines

Figure 44: Desert plants will surround culverts and make bush houses

Concrete culverts (Figure 44) provide permanent dens around which vegetation grows but can never overwhelm. The culverts provide climbing access to the plateau above with its multiple lookout points (Figure 45). Seclusion spots with views out at the surroundings are highly valued play spaces. The Ravines offers children hidden paths which connect spaces and provide access that adults would not think of using; areas that are clearly un-programmed by adults where children can roam according to their own needs and values.

Figure 45: Secluded lookouts are highly valued play spaces

Figure 46: The clubhouse and formal play area attracts users who would otherwise not access a wild play area

The Clubhouse (Figure 46) helps to reconnect the community to the site after basin construction while providing care giving experiences (Figure 47) craft making and acts as a introduction the the wilder areas of the project. It is also a base for area wide care of the land through planting, cleaning trail building and erosion control work. While the Clubhouse is not a naturalistic setting, it can provide an introduction to the area for children who otherwise might not explore a â&#x20AC;&#x153;wildâ&#x20AC;? area. Enhancements like these instill a sense of community and security.

Figure 47: Care giving experiences connect child to the natural world

Basin 1: The Caves

Basin 1: Loose Materials Depot The depot (Figure 48) acts as a source of loose natural materials such as sand, leaves, straw, logs, stumps, sticks and rocks. These building materials could be used for huts and dens. Loose materials are open-ended and their use is entirely up to the imagination of the players: This stimulates the imagination. Loose materials can lead children to hours of absorption into their own worlds. Loose materials are not age specific. The stocking of loose materials is managed through the clubhouse to insure appropriateness and safety. Children are allowed to transport materials to other parts of the park at will and loose materials may be gather from the surrounding land and transported to the depot.

Two weirs will connect the three basins when construction is complete. These offer a wonderful, adventurous and secretive connection for children roaming the site. Being approximately 8â&#x20AC;&#x2122; underground and providing deep shade, there is a decided cooling effect for players escaping the summer heat. Having a cave-like rock entry (Figure 49) adds to the feeling of adventure and intrigue. Climbing holds bolted to the sides and the six foot high roof invite play and may bring the local climbing community into oversee events. The caves add seclusion and privacy as well as diversity of experience.

Wheelbarrows, carts, baskets, buckets with handles and cloth bags can available or brought to the site for use as transporters of loose materials. Child sized garden tools, big metal pots and ladles, garden sieves, gloves, brooms, dustpans and brushes will get used without prompting. The addition of water would add much to the play but requires greater management.

Figure 48: The Loose Materials Depot is a source of natural materials for creative play

Figure 49: A weir turns into a cave for exploring, climbing and access to the next basin

Basin 2: The Community Garden

Basin 2: Hill Slide / Dirt Hills / BMX Course

A Community Garden (Figure 50) connects the community to the site after basin construction while providing care giving experiences for young and old alike. The Community Garden is not a naturalistic setting but it can provide an attraction and an introduction to the area for children who otherwise might not explore a â&#x20AC;&#x153;wildâ&#x20AC;? area. All community building enhancements instill a sense of community and security making it more likely for parents to send their children there to play. Like the Clubhouse, the garden provides additional care-giving experiences which are considered essential for developing empathy for nature in the formative years. In addition to growing food and introducing young people to the joys of eating what they grow, the garden can produce native plants for revegetation and erosion control throughout the park. Both the Clubhouse and the Garden give children experiences of everyday nature; real and direct small scale experiences of the living world around them. The garden teaches responsibility and builds the foundation of attitudes and interests that can last a lifetime. The garden offers abundant opportunity for obesity fighting activity through digging, planting and cultivating. The garden as a play area offers a softer, more attractive experience than that of traditional playgrounds.

Figure 50: The Community Garden

The three features in this section of the park, hill sliding on cardboard or in crates, the newly relocated BMX course, and the dirt hills are all composed of exposed soil. Earth is a special substance that is fascinating to young investigators. It looks and behaves differently from sand and can hold various forms of life. When dry it is hard and crumbly and when wet it can be molded and is fragrant. Mud itself is endlessly entertaining when allowed to be. Children can stand in the dirt piles to dig, tunnel and build. The sides of the basin and the dirt hills are perfect for sliding down. The BMX hill jumping course is hand made from dirt and water as it was prior to construction. The BMX course brings back a special faction of the community that had a strong presence prior to construction (right).

Figure 51: Hill slide, dirt hills and the BMX course

Basin 3: Bush House Tunnels Bush Houses are child size spaces inside living plants. They are either naturally occurring or carved out intentionally as secret spaces for play and refuge. This play feature is an intentional arrangement of a series of bush houses connected by bush tunnels (Figure 52). It is intended to reintroduce the bush house concept lost to generations never having been exposed. It is placed in the open to make it less intimidating to new users. It is intended to inspire the exploration and development of similar ad hoc bush houses throughout the park. Bush houses give a direct experience of nature as being nurturing to the child. Children building or finding and occupying forts, dens and bush houses is a universal childhood experience. Within these primitive structures children find stress relief, role play, daydream and experience an emotional territory all their own and apart from the family. They develop a sense of self and a connection to the natural world. Out of the experience of small personal worlds in our childhood comes affinity for nature, artistic expression, religious experience, and adult desire to create new worlds through the built environment.

Figure 52: Bush House Tunnels

Basin 3: The Boulder Field A unique area created from either real boulders or artificial rock and it is built at a childâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s scale. This arrangement (Figure 53) functions as a landmark for orientation; a meet-up site for social interaction, a territory to lay claim to and defend, look-out points and climbing opportunities. The boulders are arranged to encourage jumping from one to another. While climbing affordances present the appearance of risk there are substrates that can mitigate that risk. While there is risk, there is also is much to gained by movement over irregular abd unpredictable surfaces. These kinds of movement teach flexibility, agility, moving at the right speed, timing, distance judgement, spatial sens, balance. Children require movement over complex space in order to develop their mentally in regards to motor planning and motor skill. This is developed early in their lives and it is why they are so driven to be active in everything they do. Climbing activity builds coordination of the two sides of the body which intern builds connections across the two hemispheres of the brain. The irregularity of boulder climbing offers motor skill development that predictable, manufactured climbing frames do not (White 2008).

Figure 53: The Boulder Field

PLANTS FOR PLAY Enclosures

Sense of Place

Harvestable Props

Plants for Wildlife

Plants for Play: Enclosure

Plants for Play

Play spaces can be better defined through the arrangement of the plants because plants have more boundary depth than plain fencing. Plantings can define the size, shape and sequence of play spaces and highly variable spatial and textual plantings add to the complexity and subtlety of games and social interactions. Plants have more boundary depth than plain fencing and therefore more spatial variety. Spatial variety is further enhanced by plant diversity and plant diversity also increases textual diversity. Plant enclosed spaces make for better chase and hide-and-go-seek games. They make territory claims, refuge and hideouts more possible (Moore 2007) .

The plants throughout the park are essential to its use as a natural play area. Plants in a natural play area fulfill all the standard landscape functions; that of aesthetic and emotional appeal, sight line control, screening, wind break, division of space, erosion control, climate moderation, sound moderation, storm water management, wildlife enhancement and dust control. But these same plantings, if selected with play in mind, can contribute more directly to the goal of inspiring natural play throughout the site. Giving weight to certain categories of plants can tip the scales toward a more rewarding experience of play for the users and for support programs based out of the clubhouse and the community garden (Moore 2007). The following sections represent categories of plants known to enhance the play value of landscaped areas. The specific plants named are suggestions for this site and the Tucson Basin in general and are based on references for the area.

Examples: Jojoba is a large rounded evergreen shrub up to 6â&#x20AC;&#x2122; high and 10â&#x20AC;&#x2122; wide so even one or two can create a division of space (Simmondsia chinensis). Western Soapberry planted on 4â&#x20AC;&#x2122; centers will create an easily accessible thicket or grove with over head cover and views out to the surrounding lands (Sapindus saponaria). Palo Blanco is small, tough desert tree with willowy form and strikingly white peeling bark that can be closely spaced to form a thicket or grove (Acacia willardiana).

Figure 54: Thickets offer a unique and distinct experience of being surrounded by plants, and being immersed in a micro-climate while still having a view of the surrounding terrain and other players.

Fourwinged Saltbush is a semi-evergreen, large and variable shrub that can reach a height of eight feet and sprawl along the ground forming mounded shapes that can be penetrated by players (Atriplex canescens). Hopseed Bush is a dark green, evergreen, shrub of variable shape and size and is an interesting contrast to the more abundant gray-green desert shrubs (Dodonaea viscosa). Desert Broom is a bright green and fast growing evergreen shrub that soft and has a refreshing look that invites closer inspection and is easily penetrated by players (Baccharis sarothroides). Figure 53: Plants for Play

Desert Willow is a small tree with orchid-like flowers useful in forming thickets (Chilopsis linearis).

Figure 55:Trees and shrubs divide the space into territories where space is fluid and dynamic for multiple play functions. Plants recommended for use in enclosures and thickets can be found in the plant index.

Plants for Play: Sense of Place

Plants for Play: Harvestable Play Props Vegetation throughout the site can supply a wide range of harvestable play props. A valuable aspect of plants in play areas is the wide variety of play props that naturally drop or can be harvested without harm to the plant. Cones, seeds, pods leaves and flowers provide hours of creative recreation when mixed with children’s imaginations (Moore 2007).

Certain plants and plant arrangements create a sense of identity and provide landmarks within children’s environments. Landmarks can orient the child during play as well as draw players through the site from play area to play area. Distinctive environments help build positive memories of experiences on site for both young and old. Everyone is pleased with encountering architectural plants, flowering shrubs, fall color, and flowering perennials. And the more distinctive and attractive the space the more the community will value it (Moore 2007).

Examples:

Screwbean Mesquite offers fascinating spiral seed pods clusters (Prosopis pubescens).

Saguaro for its iconic presence and architecture (Carnegiea gigantea).

Arizona Cypress has interesting cones to collect (Cupressus arizonica).

Santa Rita prickly pear for flowering at the child’s level, its purple colored pads and iconic form (Opuntia violaceae santa-rita).

Arizona native cotton provides cotton bolls and the story of cotton (Gossypium thurberi).

Ocotillo presenting spikey canes, leaves bursting forth after summer rains and brilliant red flowers (Fouquieria splendends). Octopus Agave for its massive but harmless, armlike leaves and having gigantic flowers stocks set with thousands of “pups” (Agave vilmoriniana).

Figure 57: Vegetation can supply harvestable play props

Arrowweed’s rapidly growing stems can provide basket weaving and building material (Pulchea sericia). Devils claw makes strangely shaped woody seed pods that have fascinated all who encounter it (Proboscidea altheaefolia).

Figure.. 56: Iconic, architectural plants create sense of place

Banana Yucca an outstanding specimum plant with edible fruit that look like bananas (Yucca baccata). Blue Palo Verde having powder blue bark, low spreading branches and intense golden spring flowers (Parkinsonia florida). Aligator Juniper with strikingly checked bark-like alligator hide. A handsome accent or specimen tree (Juniperus deppeana).

Figure 58: Fast growing thicket forming plants can be harvested to make primitive play structures

Arizona ash drops many helicopter-like seed pods (Fraxinus velutina). 66

Desert marigold is a consistent source for wild bouquets (Baileya multiradiata).

Plants for Play: Wildlife Enhancements

It is important for children to interact with wildlife for educational purposes, and to instill a sense of wonder about nature that can result in empathy for the natural world. Plants supply wildlife with food, shelter and nesting sites. They provide browse, fruits, nuts and leaves that attract birds mammals and insects and amphibians. (Moore 2007).

CONCLUSIONS Conclusions Examples:

Recommendations

Desert Hackberry is a large dense shrub, excellent for screening while supply nesting sites and berries for many birds (Celtis pallida).

Deergrass attracts birds by providing seed, cover and nesting materials (Muhlenbergia rigens).

Potential Partnerships

Authors Comments

Future Research

Limitations

Chuparosa attracts hummingbirds with its red trumpet-shaped flowers appearing year round Justicia californica). Wolfberry is a large dense shrub providing excellent cover, nesting, and berries for birds and the flowers attract hummingbirds with their nectar (Lycium species). Brittle Bush is a small native shrub that flowers heavilyand produces abundantseed seeds which are a favorite for the birds (Encelia farinosa).

Figure 59: The right plants ensure children come in contact with wildlife

Bee Bush is a light, airy, large and fragrant shrub whose flowers attract butterflies and whose seed attracts birds (Aloysia gratissima).

Conclusions:

are now viewed as compatible with recreation. It is clear to me that the the need for children to have access to unstructured free play in naturalistic environments is completely compatible with green infrastructure developments.

The Park Avenue Retention Basin project as planned has a high potential to be used by neighborhood children for the following reasons: All three basins provide, both individually and collectively, the most four most essential ingredients for free play in naturalistic settings; space, varied terrain, water, a living environment composed of plants and animals and access.

The Assessment Tool can serve as:

Space: All of the original space is intact and remains as congruent as before the build out and has even greater accessibility due to the bicycle paths. The abundance of undeveloped space ensures that there are multiple and diverse spaces that encourage exploration, and provide opportunity for seclusion and privacy.

2. The evaluation of a designated play space to assess its value as regards nature play.

1. A preliminary evaluation of a given area to suggest its potential for nature play. 3. Design guidelines for new naturalistic free-play spaces.

The terrain, vegetation and the caves give abundant opportunity for seclusion and privacy. It is recommended that this report have two uses:

Terrain: Between the preservation of the ravines in Basin 3 and the addition of topography in basin 1 and 2, the site is now more topographically complex than before basin construction.

1. An introduction to the neighborhoods surrounding the site and the Pima County Flood Control District, as to possible further re-development after construction of the Park Avenue Retention Basins.

Vegetation: The desert adapted landscape plantings ensure success of the landscape. In addition the new basin topography creates a water harvesting situation that further ensures planting success and desert lushness.

2. Guidelines for anyone considering a natural play development in their neighborhood regardless of the location. Although the plant list is specific to the Tucson Basin, the concepts that lead to their selection are broadly applicable.

Attracting Wildlife: The plant selection, the increased moisture and the complexity of plants greatly enhance the ability of the site to attract wildlife and enhance the sites play value. Loose materials: The need for loose materials for play is address both through management of the Loose Materials Depot and through the harvesting of on site plant parts.

Future research is needed to determine: 1. What constitutes a naturalistic setting; what is the minimum size, topographic roughness and complexity of the plants and animals needed to facilitate the unstructured play.

Care Giving: Both the Community Garden and the Clubhouse provided opportunity for care giving of plants and animals within their own context and throughout the site. The Clubhouse and the Community has the potential to provide crafts programs using on site materials.

2. What is the risk associated with the settings in comparison to the risk known to exist in designed play areas. 3. What aspects of this idealized situation are transferable to the playgrounds, schoolyards and city parks.

Access: Both bicycle and pedestrian access is enhanced through the addition of paths. The underground connection provided by the Caves increases the off-road access between basins. The removal of a one block section of E Winsett St reduces drivethrough traffic. The remaining streets retain the low volume traffic levels enjoyed prior to construction. Community: Bringing back the ad hoc BMX course that was displaced by construction re-establishes the strongest piece of community presence. This course, in combination with the new Community Garden and the Clubhouse, creates a strong sense of community and safety. Green Infrastructure: Is rapidly becoming the norm in our urban environment for many excellent reasons. And these situations

4. What the risk is of giving into our fears and continuing to design flat, open and simplistic players.

Limitations: The assessment tool that comes out of this report is untested. While it is based on an extensive literature review, and the literature used is authoritative, carrying the weight of leading experts in the field of play, nature play and childhood development, no such assessment tool has ever been proposed by experts in the field. 71

Potential partners in the future development of play:

References

• Be Outdoors Arizona: http://www.beoutdoorsarizona.org/. A mission to encourage continuous nature-centered outdoor experiences that enrich the lives of children.

Aitken, Stuart C. 2001. Geographies of young people : The morally contested spaces of identity. London; New York: Routledge.

• The Children & Nature Network: http://childrenandnature.ning.com/. Children & Nature Network was created to encourage and support people and organizations working worldwide to reconnect children with nature. • Green Hearts: http://www.greenheartsinc.org/. Dedicated to restoring and strengthening the bonds between children and nature, and believing that frequent, unstructured childhood play in natural settings is a crucial stage in the development of life-long conservation values: and thus helps lead to adult conservation behaviors. • Natural Learning Initiative: http://www.naturalearning.org/. The purpose of the Natural Learning Initiative is to promote the importance of the natural environment in the daily experience of all children, through environmental design, action research, education, and dissemination of information.

Bingley, Amanda and Milligan, Christine. 2004. Climbing trees and building dens: Mental health and well-being in young adults and the long term effects of childhood play experiences. United Kingdom: Institute for Health Research, Langley University, 1. Blinkert, B. 2004. Quality of the city for children: Chaos and order. Children,Youth and Environment 14 (2) (NA): 99-112. Chawla, Louise. 2006. Research methods to investigate significant life experiences: Review and recommendations. Environmental Education Research 12 (3-4): 359-74.

• WildZones: http://www.wild-zone.net/www.wild-zone.net/Home.html. Wild Zones and Create-with-Nature Zones are places where adults, children and adolescents can co-create a new form of public space that is dedicated to creativity and play in nature. They differ from parks and play areas because they offer opportunities to interact with the environment rather than leaving it untouched

Chawla, Louise. 2001. Growing up in an urbanizing world. London: Earthscan.

• Children in Nature Collaborative: http://www.cincbayarea.org/. The Children in Nature Collaborative is part of a network of regional movements across the country focused on helping people create healthier lives and more vibrant communities through restoring their relationship with nature and each other.

Clements, Rhonda. 2004. An investigation of the status of outdoor play. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood 5 (1) (NA): 6880.

• Children, Youth and Environment: http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye/ The world’s leading publication for the latest news on children, youth and their environments.

Cobb, Edith,. 1993. The ecology of imagination in childhood. Dallas, Tex.: Spring Publications.

• Hooked on Nature: http://www.hookedonnature.org/. A mission to provide resources, workshops and training that inspire and empower people to develop joyful, lifelong relationships with each other and nature.

Cornell, Edward, Dianne Hadley, Treena Sterling, Melanie Chan, And Patricia Boechler. 2001. Adventure As A Stimulus For Cognitive Development. Journal of Environmental Psychology 21 (3): 219-31. Cowan, R. Hill,D. 2005. Start with the park. United Kingdom: Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, 14.

Fjortoft, I., and J. Sageie. 2000. The natural environment as a playground for children. Landscape and Urban Planning 48 (1-2):

83-97. Fjørtoft, Ingunn. 2004. Landscape as playscape: The effects of natural environments on children’s play and motor development. Children,Youth and Environment 14 (2) (NA): 21-44. ———. 2001. The natural environment as a playground for children: The impact of outdoor play activities in pre-primary school children. Early Childhood Education Journal 29 (2): 111-7. Frost, Joe L. The dissolution of children’s outdoor play. Internet: Common Good: Restoring Common Sense to America, 2006. Frost, Joe L. 1992. Play and playscapes. Albany, N.Y.: Delmar Publishers. Gaster, Sanford. 1991. Urban children’s access to their neighborhood: Changes over three generations. Environment and Behavior 23 (NA): 70-85. Gill, Tom. Let our children roam free. in The Ecologist [database online]. London, UK, 2005 [cited September 5 2010]. Available from http://www.theecologist.org/search.php?q=let+our+children+roam+free&offset=0&submit=Go (accessed 9/17/10). Jansson, Marit. 2010. Attractive playgrounds: Some factors affecting user interest and visiting patterns. Landscape Research 35 (1): 63-81. Joseph Rowntree Foundation. 1997. Facilitating play on housing estates.Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Kahn, Peter H., and Stephen R. Kellert. 2002. Children and nature : Psychological, sociocultural, and evolutionary investigations. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 74

Korpela, Kalevi, Marketta Kyttä, And Terry Hartig. 2002. Restorative Experience, Self-Regulation, And Children’s Place Preferences. Journal of Environmental Psychology 22 (4): 387-98. Lester, Stuart, Martin Maudsley, Play England (Project), and National Children’s Bureau. 2007. Play, naturally : A review of children’s natural play. London: Play England, National Children’s Bureau. Louv, Richard. 2008. Last child in the woods : Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Updat a Expa ed. Chapel Hill, N.C.: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill. Maudsley, Martin, and Playwork Partnerships (Great Britain). 2005. Playing on the wildside : The essential resource for people wishing to enable opportunities for children to play freely in and around natural outdoor environments. Cheltenham: Playwork Partnerships. Moore, Robin C. 1987. Streets as playgrounds. In , ed. Anne Vernez Moudon. 1st ed., 45-62. New York: Van Nostran Reinhold. ———. 1986. Childhood’s domain : Play and place in child development. London; Dover, N.H.: Croom Helm. Moore, Robin C., and Nilda G. Cosco. 2000. Developing an earth-bound culture through design of childhood habitats. Paper presented at International Conference on People. Land and Sustainability, University of Nottingham, Faculty of Social Sciences. Moore, Robin C., and Herbert H. Wong. 1997. Natural learning : The life history of an environmental schoolyard : Creating environments for rediscovering nature’s way of teaching. Berkeley, Calif.: MIG Communications. Moss, Peter, Petrie, Pat and Ebooks Corporation. From children’s services to children’s spaces : Public policy, children and childhood. in RoutledgeFalmer [database online]. Hoboken, 2002. 75

Nabhan, Gary Paul, and Stephen Trimble . 1994. The geography of childhood : Why children need wild places. Boston: Beacon Press.

Veitch J, Bagley S, Ball K, and Salmon J. 2006. Where do children usually play? A qualitative study of parents’ perceptions of influences on children’s active free-play. Health & Place 12 (4): 383-93.

Pellegrini, Anthony D. 2009. The role of play in human development. New York: Oxford University Press.

Veitch J, Salmon J, and Ball K. 2008. Children’s active free play in local neighborhoods: A behavioral mapping study. Health Education Research 23 (5): 870-9.

Sebba, Rachel. 1991. The landscapes of childhood : The reflection of childhood’s environment in adult memories and in children’s attitudes. Environment and Behavior 23 (4): 395-422. Sobel, David. 2008. Childhood and nature : Design principles for educators. Portland, Me.: Stenhouse Publishers. Stoecklin, Vicki L., and White, Randy. Children’s outdoor play and learning environment; returning to nature. in White Hutchinson Leisure and Learning Group [database online]. Kansas City, Missouri, 11 September 2010 [cited September 17 2010]. Available from http://www.whitehutchinson.com/children/articles/outdoor.shtml.

Wells, Nancy M. 2000. At home with nature: Effects of “greenness” on children’s cognitive functioning. Environment & Behavior 32 (6): 775-95. Wells, Nancy M., and Kristi S. Lekies. 2006. Nature and the life course: Pathways from childhood nature experiences to adult environmentalism. Children, Youth and Environments 16 (1) (NA): 1-24. Wilson, Robert. 2001. A sense of place. Environmental Education Newsletter. NA.

Sutton-Smith, Brian. 1990. School playground as festival. Children’s Environments Quarterly 7 (2): 3--7.

Wilson, Edward O. 1984. Biophilia. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Tandy, C. A. 1999. Children’s diminishing play space: A study of inter-generational change in children’s use of their neighbourhoods. Australian Geographical Studies 37 (2): 154.

Yerkes, Rita M. 1980. The effects of creative-adventure playground participation on the development of visual-motor integration of young children.

Taylor, Andrea Faber, Frances E. Kuo, and William C. Sullivan. 2001. Coping with ADD: The surprising connection to green play settings. Environment and Behavior 33 (1): 54-77. Thomson, Joanne, and Chris Philo. 2004. Playful spaces? a social geography of children’s play in Livingston, Scotland. Children’s Geographies 2 (1): 111-30.

Image References

Figure 29: Author’s use of data layers from Pima County Geographic Information Systems Library; http://gis.pima.gov/data/

Figure 1: Reedy Creek Concept Plan from Mecklenburg County Park and Recreation; http://www.charmeck.org/mecklenburg/county/parkandrec/insidethedepartment/divisions/stewardshipservices/naturepreserves/pages/natureexplorezone.aspx

Figure 30 through 32: Author’s own photos of the site prior to basin construction

Figure 2: Reedy Creek Concept Plan from Mecklenburg County Park and Recreation; http://cmsauthor.co.mecklenburg.nc.us/NR/ rdonlyres/epo7kvbbauk6bgus7ecykqefmm247tqqum3xmfyxcu2d7yz7jlilhn4cnifqfkb56emn62gns6exlcghtjklu33tvsh/ReedyCreekBColor.pdf

Figure 34: Author’s use of data layers from Pima County Geographic Information Systems Library; http://gis.pima.gov/data/

Figure 3: Reedy Creek Concept Plan from Mecklenburg County Park and Recreation; http://cmsauthor.co.mecklenburg.nc.us/NR/ rdonlyres/epo7kvbbauk6bgus7ecykqefmm247tqqum3xmfyxcu2d7yz7jlilhn4cnifqfkb56emn62gns6exlcghtjklu33tvsh/ReedyCreekBColor.pdf

Figure 36: Author’s use of Google Maps; http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl

Figure 4: Reedy Creek Concept Plan from Mecklenburg County Park and Recreation; http://www.charmeck.org/mecklenburg/county/parkandrec/insidethedepartment/divisions/stewardshipservices/naturepreserves/pages/natureexplorezone.aspx Figure 5: CNC Master Plan 20scale Proposed Design Labels; http://www.cincynature.org/sites/default/files/CNC%20MasterPlan20scaleProposedDesignLabels11x17.pdf

Figure 33: Author’s use of Google Maps; http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl Figure 35: Author’s use of data layers from Pima County Geographic Information Systems Library; http://gis.pima.gov/data/ Figure 37 and 38: Author’s rendering Figure 39: Final Schematic Design; author’s rendering Figure 40 and 41: Author’s rendering Figure 42 and 43: Author’s rendering Figure 44 and 45: Author’s rendering

Figure 6: Living Willow Fence; http://bt-thecraftygardener.blogspot.com/2010/01/from-frost-to-snow-will-it-ever-go.html

Figure 46 and 47: Author’s rendering

Figure 7: Stick Tee Pee; http://www.cincynature.org/playscape.html

Figure 48: Author’s rendering

Figure 8: Kids in Water Feature; http://www.cincynature.org/playscape.html

Figure 49: Author’s rendering

Figure 9: Dodge Nature Preschool brochure; http://www.dodgenaturecenter.org/attachments/Dodge%20Nature%20Preschool%20 Brochure.pdf

Figure 50: Author’s rendering

Figure 10: Author’s diagram

Figure 52: Author’s rendering

Figure 11 through 16: Dodge Nature Preschool photo album; http://www.dodgenaturecenter.org/Preschool/Photo-Album/ Figure 17: Author’s use of aerial photo and data layers from Pima County Geographic Information Systems Library; http://gis.pima. gov/data/ Figure 18 through 23: Author’s own photos of the site prior to basin construction

Figure 53: Author’s rendering Figure 54 and 55: Author’s rendering Figure 56: Author’s rendering Figure 57 and 58: Author’s rendering

Figure 24 through 27; Author’s own photos of the site prior to basin construction Figure 28: Pima County Flood Control District, Arroyo Chico Multi-use Project; http://rfcd.pima.gov/projects/arroyochico/

Figure 51: Author’s rendering

Figure 59: Author’s rendering