The idea of inclusive playspaces is catching on. More design thought is being given to making them more welcoming and accessible for everyone. And it’s not just about children with diverse needs: parents and caregivers require design thought too. A case study from Auckland, New Zealand is a good example of how to create playspaces. So, let’s play together!
An article in the Journal of Public Space explains the project in detail. The project began with a review of the existing facilities and how to achieve the outcomes within budget constraints. The park was also a popular fishing spot so this also had to be considered in the planning.
Locating the playground, car park and toilet together enables families to stay and play for longer.
The aerial view shows the separation of the toilet (L) from the existing play area (R).
The co-design process
The Manurewa Local Board contacted multiple organisations to invite them to participate in the co-design process. The co-design process was driven and guided by a project team, which consisted of a landscape architect and a project manager.
There was concern that using a co-design method would take the project over budget and require bespoke playground equipment. These assumptions proved not to be the case. Indeed, the learning from the process will be with the participants for all future projects.
Two draft concept plans were created and three outcome measures were set. These were:
- Accessibility and inclusiveness
- Overall connection
- Increased utilisation
The article goes into detail about the play features and equipment and the adult and child change facilities. Bilingual signage in the park shows pride in the area’s strong Māori identity. Co-design methods might take a little longer but the pay-off is worth it. It’s worth doing for the great learning experience for all involved.
The title of the article is, Te Pua Keith Park – Nau mai, Haere mai Let’s Play Together. The article has many photos that highlight the key areas of the playspace. There’s a useful reference list as well.
There is also a magazine article that shows photos of the many park elements and features.
From the abstract
Play equipment included vestibular, visual, and auditory pieces as well as a customised 2m high wheelchair accessible play tower. Caregivers could play with their children through smooth and step-free surfaces and an adult and child swing.
Communication boards were collaboratively designed with visual images representing various features of the playground. QR codes linking to online videos with New Zealand Sign Language were also provided.
The toilet facilities were crucial for many families, including those with bigger children or teens. Keith Park worked with a leading toilet manufacturer to co-design a bespoke double toilet block with enhanced accessibility features including an adult-sized change table.
Every aspect of the park was carefully selected and designed including fencing, furniture, plants and colours. Colour was used to guide children with low vision and created a play circuit to assist neurodiverse children. The playground welcomes all to play, which is a core tenet of child development, socialisation and participation.
Editor’s comment. If we keep using the term “all-abilities” it will always be considered “for disability” and not a regular playspace for evrone. This quote from the article is a case in point: Consequently, we should just use the term “inclusive” and drop “all-abilities” from our vocabulary to prevent the notions of being “special” in some way. Otherwise it isn’t inclusive thinking.
Playgrounds for all children
Inclusive play spaces are receiving more attention, but which equipment and design features are most suitable? Research in the US throws some light on this topic. Children, parents, teachers, landscape designers and equipment manufacturers all have a stake in the outcome. This means there are often gaps between what is required, what is available and what gets implemented.
Building Playgrounds for Children of All Abilities looks at legal requirements and provides some useful recommendations. You will need institutional access for a free read. Or you can access the paper via ResearchGate and ask for a free copy.
From the abstract
Schools and communities typically design and build playgrounds with little knowledge that the selected playground equipment meets the needs of children, caregivers, and teachers. In this article, the various categories of playgrounds are discussed and analyzed.
The focus of this discussion includes an overview of the legal requirements and guidelines for school and community playgrounds, a description of prior research highlighting the inadequacies in currently available playgrounds, and an explanation of the trends in playground design over the years.
We relate these topics to the need for universally designed playgrounds and a deeper commitment to designing playgrounds and play equipment that meets the needs of all children, their teachers, and their families.
By discussing practical examples and research findings to illustrate the gap between playground manufacturers and their play equipment and playground consumers, this paper serves as a meaningful resource for teachers and other stakeholders so they have the knowledge to advocate for their students with disabilities in playground endeavors. Taking recent research findings into account, we provide a vision for playground policy change.
Inclusive playspaces: An evaluation tool
Inclusive playspaces for all the family often means moving away from a “design by the catalogue” approach. Some manufacturers of ready-made “plonk-down” equipment are recognising this change. But an inclusive playspace is much more than the equipment. So, how will you know if the design is inclusive and accessible? An evaluation tool for inclusive playspace designers is therefore welcome.
From the UK comes the Play Parks Evaluation Tool. Accessibility is often evaluated independently from the play experience. The tool overcomes this by integrating inclusive design and the value of play. The following factors underpin the tool:
Accessibility: non-play aspects (parking, pathways, seating); through the objective evaluation of provision.
Usability: play equipment design supporting use by individuals with differing levels of ability, encompassing Universal Design and focusing on an individual’s subjective evaluation of their experience.
Inclusion: environments that can be used by as many individuals as possible on as many occasions as possible.
Play types: physical, imaginative, or cognitive play, plus sensations including speed, rotation, and tactile experiences.
The article about the development of the tool covers the issues in depth. The tool consists of an infographic depicting a wheel with 16 spokes, one for each aspect of play. The aim is to fill in as many spokes as possible on any given site. It’s about moving from a position of viewing ‘general’ and ‘special’ features separately to a holistic approach. The tool is useful for developing new and existing sites.
The title of the article is, Developing an integrated approach to the evaluation of outdoor play settings: rethinking the position of play value.
From the abstract
Local play parks are key spaces for children. They provide opportunities for physical activity, socialisation and a connection with their local community. Their design influences their use; extending beyond accessibility and installation of equipment.
This paper reports on the development of an evaluation tool, which supports the review and development processes linked to play parks. The Play Park Evaluation Tool (PPET), considers key areas contributing to the accessibility and usability of play parks.
Aspects evaluated include non-play features such as surface finish and seating, recognising their relevance in creating accessible, usable spaces for play. This alongside assessment of installed play equipment to evaluate the breadth of play options available and how these meet the needs of children and young people with varying abilities or needs.
The paper describes PPET’s creation, the revision process undertaken, and its subsequent use across three stages of a play park’s development. Key to achieving facilities with high play value is the provision of a varied play experience.