To provide welcoming entrances for all users.
Disagreement with Principle 5
Summary of reasons for disagreeing with this principle
Base: Respondents who disagree (19*)
*Caution should be taken interpreting these results due to small base numbers. Showing responses from 4% of the total sample
- Feeling it should not be a spending priority/ money should be put into the park itself rather than the entrance
- Uncertainty about what is meant by a ‘welcoming entrance’
- Feeling most parks and open spaces do not actually have ‘entrances’ so this is not relevant to most of these areas
- Not feeling that everyone should be welcomed into parks e.g. those on illegal bikes or e-scooters
- Feeling that focusing on ‘welcoming entrances’ is overthinking the concept of accessibility
Key quotes from respondents
“Don’t waste money on the entrance. Put it into the park itself. You don’t have to market a park!”
“Other than Ravelin Park most of the outside spaces don’t exactly have ‘entrances’”
“Should not be a spending priority.”
“A park just needs to be accessible. It does not need any fancy entrance structure. We go there for what’s inside the boundary, not how pretty the entrance is.”
“What matters is people can use the space equitably. There is no requirement for wasting money on this topic, it’s a distraction from what is important.”
