With this blog being mainly about recreation activities and legislation I thought I'd explore the design of recreation facilities for my last post. The field of landscape architecture was born in the late 1800's by a gentleman named Frederick Law Olmsted. At the time the city of New York City was experiencing a severe case of urban blight and the city commissioners speculated that the cause was a lack of green space and recreation opportunities (The American City). In an effort to combat this a tract of land was purchased in the middle of town and a park design competition was held. Olmsted, having little formal training, entered the competition and hired a draftsman to draw the illustrations he had in his head. Olmsted's design focused heavily on passive recreation, such as reading, sitting, and strolling, incorporating many curvilinear trails and open spaces into the design (Charles Leider, former principle HNTB Design). Ironically, not being a trained landscape architect, the field had yet to be created, Olmsted won the competition and his design became what is now known as Central Park (Charles Leider). This first design of Central Park has become the crown jewel of the landscape architecture as the first design and possible one of the most popular ever.
Since that time the field of landscape architecture has blossomed, covering designs from urban planning, to recreation. Trails and parks are the largest part of the recreation field and firms such as PDG in Tulsa, OK focus on this aspect. I think many of us take for granted the birthplace of parks and trails, and those who create them. I know I did, until I began studying the field of landscape architecture, earning a BLA at Oklahoma State University. Landscape Architects thoroughly enjoy creating recreation opportunities for the public, as we view the design process as a recreation opportunity in itself.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Tobacco in Oklahoma Parks
Gov. Mary Fallin of Oklahoma recently signed into law, legislation that bans all tobacco use in public settings, to include State Parks. While I'm not a smoker and do appreciate the initiative to make public settings and parks a healthier place, I'm not sure how the enforcement would work? Previously in 2007 Oklahoma passed a law that required designated smoking areas in public settings, such as restaurants and bars, and to me this makes more sense; smokers and tobacco users are going to use the product no matter what. Banning tobacco use in parks brings up some issues that I don't think have been considered. On a golf course for instance, how will law enforcement patrol for smokers? The whole point of being on a golf course is to escape the urban lifestyle and enjoy the outdoors for awhile, in my opinion introducing police to a golf course to patrol for smokers not only violates this concept, but also is a waste of taxpayer dollars. I agree with making the public buildings in parks non-smoking, it creates cleaner air and a fresher smell for everyone, but I do think that smokeless tobacco should be allowed as an alternative.
While I disagree with the legislation, (even being a non-tobacco user) Oklahoma State Parks could use this as a grand opportunity to re-brand themselves as the healthy alternative. Parks will not only provide a place of respite now, but also a truly clean environment with pure air. Parks will now be a true escape from the city life of polluted air, and noise, to include tobacco smoke. Maybe Oklahoma will attract a different kind of user now that smokers and tobacco users are no longer welcome. A leisure theory states that less tolerant and less consumptive users will always be replaced by more tolerant and more consumptive users. I think this will be the case with Oklahoma State Parks.
While I disagree with the legislation, (even being a non-tobacco user) Oklahoma State Parks could use this as a grand opportunity to re-brand themselves as the healthy alternative. Parks will not only provide a place of respite now, but also a truly clean environment with pure air. Parks will now be a true escape from the city life of polluted air, and noise, to include tobacco smoke. Maybe Oklahoma will attract a different kind of user now that smokers and tobacco users are no longer welcome. A leisure theory states that less tolerant and less consumptive users will always be replaced by more tolerant and more consumptive users. I think this will be the case with Oklahoma State Parks.
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Weightlifting & Supplements
Continuing on the body building topic from last week, I'd like to explore supplements in weightlifting. I spend a good deal of time up at the gym here at OSU and its obvious who is on the supplements and who is not. It's always boggled my mind why non-athletes feel the need to get that Greek god body. I've done some personal studying on supplements and the majority are not good in any form for you. From talking to trainers and athletes I've found that good old fashioned weightlifting and a diet high in protein and low in fat is the best way to get that great body.
But what about those that want immediate results or to lift the "heavy" weights. Many turn to supplements. From the reading I've done(www.livestrong.com, Mayo Clinic Research), testosterone boosters are the quickest way to build muscle and reduce fat levels on the body. Anabolic steroids fall into this category, and players in the MLB have been under heavy accusation for their use. Steroids build muscle fast by releasing testosterone that is locked up in the body. However, side effects occur from this from are as mild as acne to as severe as testicular atrophy and prostate enlargement.
There are pre-workout supplements that are used as well. According to the Mayo Clinic pre-workout supplements such as Lipo-6 aid in fat burning and creating energy by inducing the user with large amounts of caffeine. The results are achieved by artificially raising the heart rate, thereby also raising the user's metabolic level. Serious side effects come from this as well though, such as nervousness, hallucinations and even heart attack. To me when hallucinations and nervousness are side effects, how are these supplements any different from illegal narcotics? So what is the drive behind body builders to make use of these supplements, when for no other reason they want to "look good," especially when the side effects are known? For my body building I'm sticking to the old fashioned diet of fish, chicken and skim milk, I want to be around to see my grandkids.
But what about those that want immediate results or to lift the "heavy" weights. Many turn to supplements. From the reading I've done(www.livestrong.com, Mayo Clinic Research), testosterone boosters are the quickest way to build muscle and reduce fat levels on the body. Anabolic steroids fall into this category, and players in the MLB have been under heavy accusation for their use. Steroids build muscle fast by releasing testosterone that is locked up in the body. However, side effects occur from this from are as mild as acne to as severe as testicular atrophy and prostate enlargement.
There are pre-workout supplements that are used as well. According to the Mayo Clinic pre-workout supplements such as Lipo-6 aid in fat burning and creating energy by inducing the user with large amounts of caffeine. The results are achieved by artificially raising the heart rate, thereby also raising the user's metabolic level. Serious side effects come from this as well though, such as nervousness, hallucinations and even heart attack. To me when hallucinations and nervousness are side effects, how are these supplements any different from illegal narcotics? So what is the drive behind body builders to make use of these supplements, when for no other reason they want to "look good," especially when the side effects are known? For my body building I'm sticking to the old fashioned diet of fish, chicken and skim milk, I want to be around to see my grandkids.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Pitching in Baseball
The American Journal of Sports Medicine released an article in 1995 studying injuries in pitchers, specifically the rotator cuff muscles. It seems that in the quest for faster and faster pitching speeds, the rate of injuries increases also. Currently the average fastball speed ranges from 88-94 mph with a select few being able to break the 100mph barrier, I think we all remember Randy Johnson disintegrating the bird. But how much force does it take to throw the ball that hard? According the study in AJSM 1090 Newtons are generated at the shoulder and 64N-M are generated at the elbow. Excessive tension was noted from the bicep muscle as it put a strain on the elbow joint.
With the introduction of workout supplements I can't help but wonder how much of an increase in injury rate has occurred since the study was conducted in 1995. It seems that athletes are getting bigger and bigger and stronger and stronger. Look at any commercial on t.v. while watching, the athletes resemble the statues of Greek gods. With this increase in muscle mass, so too would an increase in injury rate to joints. Tommy Johns surgery is happening at an ever increasing rate to pitchers and I must ask, why do athletes put themselves through this pain? In all honesty its not a life and death situation if the Rangers don't win the World Series, so why the need for workout supplements and 95mph fastballs?
With the introduction of workout supplements I can't help but wonder how much of an increase in injury rate has occurred since the study was conducted in 1995. It seems that athletes are getting bigger and bigger and stronger and stronger. Look at any commercial on t.v. while watching, the athletes resemble the statues of Greek gods. With this increase in muscle mass, so too would an increase in injury rate to joints. Tommy Johns surgery is happening at an ever increasing rate to pitchers and I must ask, why do athletes put themselves through this pain? In all honesty its not a life and death situation if the Rangers don't win the World Series, so why the need for workout supplements and 95mph fastballs?
Monday, April 2, 2012
Thoughts of a Pilot
As a pilot I like to make sure that I brief myself as thoroughly as possible before each and every flight. Even during my down time I like to read up on aviation statistics and occasionally accident reports to figure out the how and why, as well as do some chair flying and think what I would do in that circumstance. Its a great use of leisure time for myself! Recently I was on the NTSB's website looking at flying statistics and of 472 aviation accidents this past year, 450 of them came from general aviation. This number is phenomenal to me, and somewhat disconcerting as well. As I read through the files of accident reports I noticed that the majority of the accidents were a loss of directional control after flying into instrument conditions.
There are two types of flying conditions, visual(VFR), when the weather is clear, or instrument(IFR), when the weather is poor. Air carriers are required to fly under IFR no matter what the weather is and as a result go through more rigorous training. However, general aviation pilots can stop their training after earning their private license and fly under only VFR conditions. The private license training rubric requires only 3 hours of simulated instrument training, while to earn a rating to fly under IFR, the pilot must log 40 additional instrument training flight hours. The reasoning behind this additional training for IFR is due to the ease of disorientation and loss of situational awareness while flying in the clouds.
Airplanes are sophisticated machines, and the instrumentation in them reflects such. Most general aviation aircraft are equipped with what are known as steam gauges, the round dial gauges. However, some are equipped with glass panels, essentially a computer monitor that tracks your flight path, aircraft attitude and speed all in one easy to read panel. An article in Flying Magazine stated the steep learning curve required to learn to fly glass panel aircraft, but also depicted safer flying from those who learn. The article also shared a story of a pilot, having logged over 700 IFR hours if my memory is correct, flying an unfamiliar glass panel aircraft into IFR conditions and crashing while enroute due to lack of familiarity with the system. The military uses glass panel instrumentation in their initial trainer, the T-6, and boasts an incredibly high safety record, much higher than airlines even.
The airplane that I learned to fly in had steam gauges, and I consider myself a safe pilot and feel that my instrumentation equips me well for the VFR flying that I conduct. However, recently I began flying a C-172XP with a glass panel and have become spoiled with all the gizmos that come along with it. I have had to spend many hours re-learning the instrumentation and switch-ology of the system, to feel confident flying the plane as I did in the plane with steam gauges. I can attest to the difficulty of learning the glass panel as I go through this transitional training. In addition I love the situational awareness increase that comes from the glass panel. Now instead of logging locations on a paper map, I can look directly in front of me and see exactly where I am and know my fuel burn, and remaining flight time. Much as computers have infiltrated our home lives it seems they are creeping into the cockpit as well. But this time around I welcome the computer and its added safety benefits!
There are two types of flying conditions, visual(VFR), when the weather is clear, or instrument(IFR), when the weather is poor. Air carriers are required to fly under IFR no matter what the weather is and as a result go through more rigorous training. However, general aviation pilots can stop their training after earning their private license and fly under only VFR conditions. The private license training rubric requires only 3 hours of simulated instrument training, while to earn a rating to fly under IFR, the pilot must log 40 additional instrument training flight hours. The reasoning behind this additional training for IFR is due to the ease of disorientation and loss of situational awareness while flying in the clouds.
Airplanes are sophisticated machines, and the instrumentation in them reflects such. Most general aviation aircraft are equipped with what are known as steam gauges, the round dial gauges. However, some are equipped with glass panels, essentially a computer monitor that tracks your flight path, aircraft attitude and speed all in one easy to read panel. An article in Flying Magazine stated the steep learning curve required to learn to fly glass panel aircraft, but also depicted safer flying from those who learn. The article also shared a story of a pilot, having logged over 700 IFR hours if my memory is correct, flying an unfamiliar glass panel aircraft into IFR conditions and crashing while enroute due to lack of familiarity with the system. The military uses glass panel instrumentation in their initial trainer, the T-6, and boasts an incredibly high safety record, much higher than airlines even.
The airplane that I learned to fly in had steam gauges, and I consider myself a safe pilot and feel that my instrumentation equips me well for the VFR flying that I conduct. However, recently I began flying a C-172XP with a glass panel and have become spoiled with all the gizmos that come along with it. I have had to spend many hours re-learning the instrumentation and switch-ology of the system, to feel confident flying the plane as I did in the plane with steam gauges. I can attest to the difficulty of learning the glass panel as I go through this transitional training. In addition I love the situational awareness increase that comes from the glass panel. Now instead of logging locations on a paper map, I can look directly in front of me and see exactly where I am and know my fuel burn, and remaining flight time. Much as computers have infiltrated our home lives it seems they are creeping into the cockpit as well. But this time around I welcome the computer and its added safety benefits!
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Get Out and Walk
Recently, as part of health initiative by Kansas State University, I entered the Walk Kansas competition with my brother and his fiance who is an extension agent for K-State in Cherokee County. Apparently the state of Kansas has joined the national effort to fight obesity, and in Cherokee County alone 15 teams have entered the competition; currently our team, Orange Power, is in 5th place after week 1; logging 158 miles. Just to put it in perspective the leading team logged 303 miles in the first week. By competition guidelines every 15 minutes of exercise equates to 1 "Walk Kansas Mile," with team Orange Power logging 2370 minutes of exercise this past week. Each team consists of 6 members, to complete the walk around Kansas (as we are doing) 360 minutes of exercise per week, per person is required; we averaged 395 minutes/person.
I bring this topic up to point out that there are more modes of transportation to get around a state than just a car. This competition focuses mainly on foot travel as well as bicycle transportation, and teams have 8 weeks to complete 1 lap around the state. The Walk Kansas competition is just one of many initiatives to motivate people to get out of their car and walk. Obesity is on the rise in America, with the rate doubling over the past 30 years. Municipal planners have joined the fight against obesity movement as well, but in a more subdued manner through New Urbanism. New Urbanism is a form of planning that promotes mixed use and walkabiltiy, by increasing density and creating walkable streets (www.newurbanism.org). The mixed use aspect is acheived through placing retail centers on lower floors of buildings and developing residences on the upper floors. This not only reduces the need for a car, but also encourages people to walk. Typically a New Urbanism development focuses its core to be quite dense, with many shops, parks and residences placed in a small space; sometimes less than a quarter mile (www.newurbanism.org). In fact that quarter mile distance is a recommended planning standard for New Urbanism, as it is an average ten minute walk for most people. Past studies have shown that most people are willing to abandon their car and walk a quarter mile to shop, eat, or even walk for leisure, thus the accepted standard.
Boarnet, Joh, Siembab, Fulton, & Nguyen (2011), conducted a study in Los Angeles, CA to study the effects of urban planning on mode of transportation. The study found that as density of retail businesses increase, so too did the rate of pedestrian travel with some patrons reporting five times as many trips by foot as by car (Boarnet et al. 2011, pp. 138,145). While some patrons did drive in, the net result is an increase in walking which is necessary to fight the war against obesity. However, with planning being a historically governmental responsibility, I must ask, is so too the war on obesity...or is the Kansas model a better one, letting private citizens participate in the obesity war on their own merit?
I bring this topic up to point out that there are more modes of transportation to get around a state than just a car. This competition focuses mainly on foot travel as well as bicycle transportation, and teams have 8 weeks to complete 1 lap around the state. The Walk Kansas competition is just one of many initiatives to motivate people to get out of their car and walk. Obesity is on the rise in America, with the rate doubling over the past 30 years. Municipal planners have joined the fight against obesity movement as well, but in a more subdued manner through New Urbanism. New Urbanism is a form of planning that promotes mixed use and walkabiltiy, by increasing density and creating walkable streets (www.newurbanism.org). The mixed use aspect is acheived through placing retail centers on lower floors of buildings and developing residences on the upper floors. This not only reduces the need for a car, but also encourages people to walk. Typically a New Urbanism development focuses its core to be quite dense, with many shops, parks and residences placed in a small space; sometimes less than a quarter mile (www.newurbanism.org). In fact that quarter mile distance is a recommended planning standard for New Urbanism, as it is an average ten minute walk for most people. Past studies have shown that most people are willing to abandon their car and walk a quarter mile to shop, eat, or even walk for leisure, thus the accepted standard.
Boarnet, Joh, Siembab, Fulton, & Nguyen (2011), conducted a study in Los Angeles, CA to study the effects of urban planning on mode of transportation. The study found that as density of retail businesses increase, so too did the rate of pedestrian travel with some patrons reporting five times as many trips by foot as by car (Boarnet et al. 2011, pp. 138,145). While some patrons did drive in, the net result is an increase in walking which is necessary to fight the war against obesity. However, with planning being a historically governmental responsibility, I must ask, is so too the war on obesity...or is the Kansas model a better one, letting private citizens participate in the obesity war on their own merit?
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Design and Social Structure
As part of a project for a Research Methods class that I am currently taking, we are required to compile a literature review for the beginning of our thesis. While I was browsing through some articles I stumbled across one that really peaked my interest. The article was produced by Harvard School of Public Health and in it the researchers studied if social disorder and the resulting lack of safety determine the physical activity level of the neighborhood in question. The "social disorder" as they termed it included activities as innocent at loitering all the way up to the "purple leisure" activities such as alcohol consumption and even prostitution (Molnar, Gortmaker, Bull, & Buka, 2004).
The population the researchers studied was located in similar neighborhoods and city blocks in Chicago, and included roughly 9000 adults that were surveyed. In addition, observation measures were taken to analyze the number of adults supervising children play, where children play as well as the presence of illicit activities. Observations of gang markings and graffiti were also taken into account and even the number of what appeared to be abandoned cars on the street were analyzed to study what the researches determined to be the "social structure" of the neighborhood (Molnar, Gortmaker, Bull, & Buka, 2004).
Youth's were then studied to determine their level of recreational activity, this being achieved through a self report. As can be expected youth's in higher SES neighborhoods were reported to participate in more recreational activities than those in lower SES neighborhoods. In addition, those whose BMI was in the recommend range also reported higher levels or recreation participation. The study found that increasing the safety of the neighborhood in turn raised the level of recreation by 49 minutes per week, and neighborhoods with lower safety levels saw a decrease in recreation levels by 29 minutes per week(Molnar, Gortmaker, Bull, & Buka, 2004). This is quite a disparity. However, I am not surprised by these results. Being a Landscape Architect, we are constantly drilled that the construct of the space designed will determine the users attracted. So I can't help but wonder, is the failing social structure of these neighborhoods a product of poor design, or citizens just down on their luck?
The population the researchers studied was located in similar neighborhoods and city blocks in Chicago, and included roughly 9000 adults that were surveyed. In addition, observation measures were taken to analyze the number of adults supervising children play, where children play as well as the presence of illicit activities. Observations of gang markings and graffiti were also taken into account and even the number of what appeared to be abandoned cars on the street were analyzed to study what the researches determined to be the "social structure" of the neighborhood (Molnar, Gortmaker, Bull, & Buka, 2004).
Youth's were then studied to determine their level of recreational activity, this being achieved through a self report. As can be expected youth's in higher SES neighborhoods were reported to participate in more recreational activities than those in lower SES neighborhoods. In addition, those whose BMI was in the recommend range also reported higher levels or recreation participation. The study found that increasing the safety of the neighborhood in turn raised the level of recreation by 49 minutes per week, and neighborhoods with lower safety levels saw a decrease in recreation levels by 29 minutes per week(Molnar, Gortmaker, Bull, & Buka, 2004). This is quite a disparity. However, I am not surprised by these results. Being a Landscape Architect, we are constantly drilled that the construct of the space designed will determine the users attracted. So I can't help but wonder, is the failing social structure of these neighborhoods a product of poor design, or citizens just down on their luck?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)