Helping “Mad Poopers” with User-Centered Design
Have you heard of “The Mad Pooper?” Last month, news was quickly spreading about the mysterious jogger who was continuously defecating in a neighborhood in Colorado Springs. It was comical to say the least, especially when friends and family kept asking me if I was the mysterious super pooper. For the record — I am not “The Mad Pooper.” I will also leave the disturbing details about why I was being teased about this to myself…
While the news story was entertaining, my new design thinking led me to a deeper level of contemplation. Why is this girl pooping in the neighborhood? Are there bathrooms nearby? Are they easy to find? Are there signs? Or is this girl just trying to cause a sh!tstorm? I’m going to assume the former because taking a revenge poop in someone’s yard is only appropriate for dogs.
Although the identity of “The Mad Pooper” remains a mystery, I dedicate this blog post to her. This past week in class, our professor asked us to observe the flow and interaction of people in a public location, and discuss the pros and cons of the design. By playing Harriet the Spy, I’ll demonstrate how taking a user-centered design approach can positively effect and shape user behavior (and help stop public defecation).
The Space
I chose to observe Rocky Mountain Lake Park. It is quietly nestled in the suburbs of Denver with the scenic Rocky Mountains in the background. I included a high-level map below depicting how the park is laid out. It includes football, softball and baseball fields, a playground, a horseshoe pit, and tennis courts. In addition, there is a paved loop around the lake for joggers, walkers, and bikers.
Playing Harriet the Spy
This past week, I visited the park on three separate occasions to observe interactions of people in the morning, afternoon, and evening. I found that at any given time there were always people running or walking around the lake, especially with their dogs. On the weekends and after school, the playground was usually filled with children playing while their parents were watching on nearby benches. There were larger groups using the grills in the picnic area, while other people enjoyed their solitude fishing or relaxing in hammocks. Here are some pictures from my excursions.
Design Pros and Cons
The intent of space was obvious. Rocky Mountain Lake Park was designed to cater to families, active lifestyles, and relaxation. They have many favorable reviews online, including the ones below.
While Rocky Mountain Lake Park has many positive reviews, the design of the park could also be improved upon. Here are some design pros and cons.
Pros
1) Rocky Mountain Lake Loop: The loop was my favorite part of the park. It is well maintained and is wide enough to support bidirectional flow of runners, walkers, bikers, and four-legged companions. In addition, the lake loop has numerous benches along the way.
2) Spaces for Both Large Groups and Individuals: The park has a large designated picnic area outfitted with picnic tables and grills. I witnessed a large anniversary party being held there over the weekend. The park is also well-designed to meet the needs of individuals looking for some relaxation. There are many secluded areas of the park with benches so people can avoid the commotion of the playground and various sporting games.
3) Bathrooms: The park has bathrooms, which our “Mad Pooper” would appreciate. The bathrooms are large buildings and would be extremely hard to miss.
Cons
1) Accessibility: The neighborhood inaccessibility to the park was the biggest design fail. It is very dangerous because there are no pedestrian crosswalks. People often park on the neighborhood side streets and play frogger trying to cross the street. I felt extremely bad for the mothers trying to cross the street with their babies. In addition, the surrounding neighborhood sidewalks are in atrocious shape. I watched runners trip while leaving the park and strollers get stuck.
2) Park Signs: The park features standard rules and regulations signs; however, there are no signs about the layout of the park itself. For instance, I did not know that the loop around the lake was a mile long until I looked it up online. Additionally, I had no idea there were five designated football fields.
3) Outdoor Fitness Equipment: There was one lonely set of pull-up bars along the loop. I have visited the park on several different occasions outside of playing Harriet the Spy, and I have yet to see one person use those bars (with the exception of myself).
Recommendations
Based on the cons and design fails above, here are my recommendations.
1) Accessibility: I am not sure where the responsibility lies for this recommendation, but the surrounding area of the park needs to be better maintained. Most people walk, run, or bike to the park. When people do drive, the parking lots are quickly filled so they are forced to park in the surrounding neighborhoods. The sidewalks need to be fixed to allow safe entry. In addition, I would highly recommend crosswalks to protect pedestrians, drivers, and the abundant amount of geese.
2) Park Signs: I recommend installing large maps near the three entrances of the park depicting the layout. I watched a couple people struggle to find the picnic area for the anniversary party I previously mentioned. There should also be individual signs identifying the various sporting fields.
3) Outdoor Fitness Equipment: To encourage use of the pull-up bars, I recommend installing additional outdoor fitness equipment along the Rocky Mountain Lake Loop. The other day, I watched a man run along the loop and stop periodically at benches and picnic tables to do his own makeshift workout. Since the loop is exactly a mile along, I recommend installing equipment at each ¼ mile. I would call it the Rocky Mountain Lake Loop Challenge and include it on the aforementioned park map.
While my recommendations won’t help the “Mad Pooper,” I firmly believe they would help ensure the safety of park visitors and encourage optimal use of the park.
