Decided to use this thread as Green Spaces / Pocket Parks have been mentioned. Please split it if you think it should be.
Someone replied to a post stating that the OP should re-nominate as a “Pocket Park” instead of the “Decorative Mining Cart Planter”.
I only saw it as a bit of land left over when they built the road junction so they put grass seed on, maybe planted a tree and over the years added the planter.
Just wandering what the minimum people would class as a “Pocket Park”?
I am UK based so UK opinions would be great but happy to hear what other parts of the world think.
It is very hard to reply to something like this in general without seeing a photo. That sounds like just a bit of landscaping, not a place inviting you to come there. The mini parks I have submitted and had accepted have a bit of lawn, a bench or two, and some hardscape defining the place. I don’t know how to set a minimum.
This is the post that got me thinking. I didn’t want to post there and hijack the thread of a 1st time poster. Neither did I want a “You’re right, the’re wrong” answer.
I have only ever heard the term “Pocket Park” when that is what it was built as. The local town demolished a store that had been empty for several years and built a “pocket park”.
I saw this as originally being left over space when they built the roads that has since been “beautified”.
I am happy if the consensus is that it should be accepted as a Pocket Park, just trying to build my wayfaring knowledge. Every day’s a school day
The reason I mentioned nominating it as a pocket park over just the decorative cart is that decorations and landscaping can be hard to get approved, and many times, hard to get passed ML. It looks like a pocket park, which they do have in some areas of France, and I’ve seen others there nominate them as such and get approved.
Yes, it could be seen as open space, but it also has benches, so that says that people may stop here and meet up from time to time in the neighborhood, do a little socialization. Even though the cart may be permanent, trying to convince others that it meets the 3 main criteria is going to be a tough sell, especially since it is planted with flowers in it currently, making it more part of the landscaping than an old cart with some historical background to it.
Sometimes it’s best to take a look at the bigger picture (figuratively and literally) with rejected nominations, and think if there is something else there that could work better. That’s what I did in the case, as I saw the benches and thought nominating it as a pocket park would have better odds of approval over something that’s most likely decorative.
These have official recognition as park areas so should be findable with web reference.
There are probably similar schemes throughout the world.
This article is more up to date with some examples
@SlimboyFat71 i know exactly the sort of space you are thinking of.
Often there is nothing but sometimes there is a single bench. It’s not a pocket park
The top picture is simply grass not a suitable space to do much
The second has the table tennis and plants but nowhere to sit ( there was originally )
Maybe more examples?
Sorry to piggyback. I didn’t want to open a new topic when we have one .
Do we have new guidance on Pocket Parks? I’m trying to understand the ever changing criteria on whether Pocket Parks are acceptable or not. The UK guidance shown is for establishing new pocket parks not for the ones that have existed for centuries.
I am guessing that depends on what exist at that pocket park. If the pocket park have at least bench or art, we can do some thing about it. But if its barren, i doubt it will pass
At the moment, I’ve not heard of a single Pocket Park passing without going through appeal. Even with benches and signs showing that it’s a Pocket Park. So would love some clarification.
I think that also depends on that particular nomination. I doubt staff will issue blanket statement about it. The issue have been raised and no statement so far.
This is a large pocket park with a bench near me. It was approved as a pocket park on appeal. However, has been recently removed saying it doesn’t meet criteria. It has local authority signs on it saying please no balls games because the kids used to play balls games on it. But it is still widely used as a park.
No. I went thru the website direct appeal. So was emailed this information directly by the Wayfarer staff dealing with the issue. There are reasons that I cannot air in a public forum for why I went that route.
Anyway it seems like big park imho. It looks like good place to socialize or exercise. I only look into your screenshot, but personally i would resubmit it. Staff might not approve it based on limited information but i guess your local community will approve it
