How to repurpose a shuffleboard court

[Andrew Garulay, RLA]

There is no demographic user group to start with? There are no adjacent activities?

Thinking small does not mean you can not make observations and make conclusions based upon them, does it? You can choose to look at it as a concrete slab and try to come up with all the possible uses of a concrete slab, but that is only one aspect.

There must be things going on in that park and people using that park. Some of those things are potential conflicts for what might take place on that slab or could complement what goes on at that slab. Maybe the slab is in the way of expansion of adjacent activities.

Another huge aspect, much larger than a concrete slab, is who are the users and/or potential users that are the first that should be considered. Obviously, it is not a shuffleboard demographic, so it is clear that others ignored the demographic in the past. The choice is to follow that path by “thinking small” or using the design process that was taught to you as a landscape architect and blend people, a program, and a site no matter the scale of the individual project.

[Pat S. Rosend]

Well sometimes in the real world we have to just think quickly.

We have no small scale demographics for the site or for the whole county for that matter. We have not been approached by any user groups of interest and we can’t read people’s minds. We don’t have the resources to observe who uses the park (It is one of 417 parks in our system), we don’t even do that for a full master plan.

We are operating under the if you build it they may actaully like concept here.

I am guessing you don’t work with the public much. Your writng comes across as very condecending. Not sure if that is your intention or not.

In the current public environment we make do, repurpose or do without. We don’t always have the luxury of a full blown academic exercise that I was tought as a landscape architect.

[Andrew Garulay, RLA]

It just seems to me that it would not take much to know a little about the demographics just by what part of town it is in if time and budget constraints made further effort out of the question. It is known that the shuffleboard court exists, so either someone has been there or there is a plan showing it. I would expect that other things could be observed on site or on the plan that would indicate other activities that occur around the court. Then “quick thinking” can bring you to a more likely successful conclusion. Your training as a landscape architect should make quick thinking by rote.

I don’t mean to be condescending, but you have asked a landscape architecture discussion forum for input. You are going to get replies, hopefully, that are consistent with our education, experience, and standard practice rather than just a list of things that a concrete pad could get used for. The idea is to help you out by having you not take the same path as the people who put the useless shuffleboard court in the park. They winged it and look where it got them.

It could be used for a landing strip for model airplane enthusiasts, some type of course for people who have remote controlled cars, it could have a shade structure put over it with benches on it, it could be a really good place to install bike racks, platy hopscotch, the concrete could be removed and a garden planted, or horse shoe pits installed, ……. none of it makes sense if it is not going to be used by the people who may want to use the park or if other activity nearby makes it uncomfortable to use in such a way. …….. that is all that I’m saying.

Operating under the “if we build it, they will come” philosophy is what got the shuffleboard court. Why bother with the schooling and all the effort and expense of passing LARE? Just because the rest of the department thinks that way does not mean you have to. I doubt that you’ll get in trouble if you glanced at the people in the neighborhood or made a quick observation of what is around the court and then put two and two together. Hell, no one is going to know what you were thinking, but they will know whether whatever you come up with is successful or not.

[Pat S. Rosend]

Since you don’t know me or my efforts to promote LA. I will just let this one go. Sometimes you just want a small idea, not a big production. You have a different perspective and I hope it works for you.

Are you a sole practitioner or do you work in a professional office?

[Bob Luther]

Andrew… you just came up with three or four good ideas… now they can be explored to see how they fit into the park. Sometimes you need to throw out two dozen ideas to find three that might work for this area. I think this is all this request is trying to accomplish.

[Andrew Garulay, RLA]

Yeah, I migt be taking this too seriously after reading the thousands of posts about how we are not respected and that we are better than anyone else for design solutions from students and unemployed landscape architects. I’m getting brainwashed.

Sorry to be to hard on you and the subject.

I work full time in a multi-purpose role as the only landscape architect in a civil engineering/land surveying firm and do a sole practice on the side as well. Most of my full time work is on civil site plans with some small subdivisions and landscape plans mixed in as well. My own practice is residential and small commercial landscape plans (with no project management because it would interfere with my full timework).

… but I do honestly believe that with minimal effort you can knock this project out of the park by checking out the potential users and adjacent activities.

[Author]

Posts