APPENDIX E - Charrette Summary
Charrette Summary
On September 28th, 2023, Big Basin Redwoods State Park Staff met with Placeworks and Mithun for a design charrette — a focused collaboration session meant to flesh out big ideas, complex details, and overall strategies.
The day began with an open-ended question to get participants voicing their most essential values and aspirations for the park: “It’s 2043: What’s your impression after visiting Big Basin?” The group offered verbal and written answers to the prompt. Responses are captured in the word cloud above, with size of text reflecting frequency.
Reflections on Whole-Park Organizing Concepts
THE CENTRAL VILLAGE
NETWORKED NEIGHBORHOODS
DISPERSED COHORTS
Participants were asked to categorize their feedback on each Park concept by program area represented by stickynote colors, then place their comments under ‘pro’ or ‘con’ columns
Operations / Maintenance Staff Residential Visitor Experience Impacting All Categories
CONS
PROS The “Central Village” concept received the most input. Multiple comments valued collaboration and crossdepartmental communication, as well contained impact to natural resources, limited visitor interaction with operations facilities, and strong sense of staff community. Longer distances for call-outs, as well as possible crowding and choke points were some of the concerns.
“Networked Neighborhoods” received the least amount of input, possibly because it was considered a “middle of the spectrum” concept. The comments were overall positive, highlighting benefits such as a nimble and flexible infrastructure as well as an enhanced visitor experience that engages higher diversity of access and mix of Park experiences.
The “Dispersed Cohorts” concept garnered multiple cross-program benefits notes, mentioning the ability to shift resources if Park areas are compromised, reflecting the value of resilience from the morning prompt. There is also belief that this is the preferred visitor experience. Staffing shortages and difficult communication were concerns, as well as wildfire fuel management.
NarrativeDriven Program Distribution Participants were divided into three groups, each with equal representation of Park departments. Using the three the organizing concepts as possible starting points, each team began with discussion to assemble a narrative describing Park organization and relationships between infrastructure. Each group was then given the same set of blocks representing the three program categories — staff residential, visitorserving facilities, and operations structures. Flags and post-its were used to further describe porgram specifics.
Key Take-Aways Honoring the History
Pre-CZU facility organization was adhoc. What qualities and memories should be brought forward?
Excited for the Future
The opportunity for whole-park planning can yield holistic understanding and impactful experience.
Assembled artifacts from the forest ecosytem at the temporary visitor center.
RESILIENT. SUSTAINABLE. STEWARDED. A common theme throughout the day was to design the park in a way that learns from the vulnerabilities of the past, ensures efficient operation for many years, and prioritizes forest health. Participants often framed decision-making through the lenses of restoration goals, structural impacts on the land, and offering ecologically-senstive visitor interpretation and experience. Park staff understand the important potential for Big Basin to become an example of forwardthinking natural resource management.
A MULTI-PROGRAM HUB AROUND SADDLE MOUNTAIN During the program placement activity, each group assembled a strong centralization of all three program categories at the Saddle Mountain / Norabella / Potter area. More specifically, groups tended to place visitor-serving and operations program on the south side of Highway 236 at Saddle Mountain and Potter, while creating a residential village to the north on the Norabella properties.
SUPPORT FOR A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPOLOGIES The residential fabric of the Park pre-CZU was primarily single-family homes and smaller cabins. After seeing the variety of approaches available, the consensus was that a mixture of housing types offered the right balance of sustainability, equity, and community. Some hesitation to accept
the most-dense example of stacked flats evolved into general support for co-housing models that encouraged neighborhoods of Park staff. There was also support of all home sizes, from family-sized for long-term staff to smaller studio-sized for temporary or younger staff.
POSSIBLE SECONDARY ENTRANCE Park staff cited that, historically, about 60% of visitors approached from the north. The new Park approach focuses welcoming program at the southern Saddle Mountain entrance, forcing visitors to drive through the Park for information, check-in, and other key services. A second entry contact station, possibly at the intersection of Highway 236 and China Grade Road, offers the opportunity to intercept visitors and give essential information for their experience. This contact could be limited — such as a single center-road kiosk — or more involved — such as a shuttle stop, parking area, interpretive structures, trailheads, picnic tables, etc. As such, this area requires further investigation as a possible opportunity site.
NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR VISITOR EXPERIENCE Excitement for a diverse range of visitor experiences permeated throughout the day, particularly during the program-placement activity. Ideas included new trails and hiking experience, multi-modal access strategies, environmental education centers, partnerships with outside organizations, sites for indigenous knowledge sharing, novel forms of teaching about forest health, and strong support for campfire programming.
Charrette Appendix ICE-BREAKER ACTIVITY RESPONSES Great campfire program! Awesome hiking trails Resilient Stewarded Holistic Connection with place, community, and self Fun with family! Resilient Peaceful Functional and flowing Seamless Healthy forest, healthy activities Welcoming Diverse Remote Welcomes all people Disconnected Clean Air A stress-free rejuvinating experience Inclusive Stewarding the forest Well-designed Resilient Honoring history It’s still here Family Intergenerational Ordered Efficient Freedom Keeping endangered species alive Maintained Deep history Tranquil Alive Holisitic design and experience Welcoming Incredible access to the ancient forest A chance for quiet reverence
Making family memories Buildings fit the landscape Contextual History Resiliency
NOTES AND COMMENTS DURING PRESENATION quality design and construction well-sized with space for families good housing is a recruiting tool more permanent residents 2 to 3 bedrooms for families single family homes are most intensive on environment resilient high-quality long-term buildings durable modular can be lower quality how can we be an example? opportunities / compromises will be filtered out to world both historical and forward-looking dispersed visitor experience smaller structures throughout park fractured visitor contact stations is very challenging single place for information and communication previous central check-in hub has worked well each program type can be its own village most residents grouped together in village smaller scale homes dispersed in 10 minutes walk
WHOLE-PARK CONCEPT RESPONSES DISPERSED COHORTS CONCEPT pro
res
dispersed for a presence
pro all proximity to key call-out areas like campgrounds or water plan
pro all more staff presence spread throughout park pro all if an area becomes unusable other areas are less impacted pro res experience
sense of preferred residence
pro
can close individual locations
all
pro res residents
sense of community connection for
pro
vis
dispersed recreational engagement
pro
all
quick call-out response
con vis too many visitor contact stations can cause visitor confusion
con
ops
more fail points
pro all responsive
nimble and topographically
pro
mix of different programs allows
all
flexibility
CENTRAL VILLAGE CONCEPT pro
ops
centralized for convenience
pro
ops
good for operations
pro areas
all
collaboration between program
con
ops
servicability
pro vis less visible infrastructure to affect visitor experience
con
ops
more fire fuel management required
pro
vis
structures means tree removal
pro ops smaller scale maint facilities dispersed throughout the park can prove beneficial to reduce travel time to a central shop but they should have one main facility headquarters
pro
ops
cross-department collaboration
pro
vis
good for first-time visitor orientation
pro
vis
public safety - easily evacuated
pro all dispersed housing in conjunction with centralized works well for emergency call-outs
pro all enhances interdisciplinary communication
pro ops operation
housing by waste-water plant vital to
con
ops
bad communication
con
vis
lack of staffing
pro ops easily overseen, direct communication to operational control
con
res
more utility and footprints
pro
con all fractured visitor experience leads to staff and resource drain
NETWORKED NEIGHBORHOODS CONCEPT pro vis networked
visitor experience should be
pro ops increased presence leads to more frequent observation of management needs pro ops happens
smaller facilities where visitation
pro
vis
access throughout park
pro
ops
good for facilities and operations
pro res serving spaces
separation of residences from visitor
pro
most flexible to different experiences
res
pro vis engagement
diversity of forms of access and
pro
preferred visitor experience
vis
pro res lowest environmental impact with minimal footprint
ops
more efficient
pro res neighborhood
sense of community and
pro
least natural resource impact
all
pro ops all maintenance facility workshops in one area for project work - all tasks completed the dispersed out to park pro res creates sense of community amongst co-workers and families pro vis visitor service efficiencies and reduced confusion con
vis
potential for crowding
con
ops
more driving
con vis congestion
creates a choke point for traffic
con
ops
all eggs in one basket
con
ops
harder to respond across park
con
ops
long commute
con
all
largest single footprint