Abstract

The revised Urban Park regulations newly adopt Theme Parks in order to enhance richness and diversities of urban services to communities. However, the regulations ambiguously define the main facilities and service programs of the theme parks. And there have been increasing concerns about confusions in terms of the main facilities and service programs of the theme parks among landscape designers/planners, local governments and relevant field of areas. Misunderstanding on the facilities and service programs of the theme parks may lead to ruin the purposes of the new urban park regulations. In the lights of these, this paper tries to reach a consensus for main facilities and service programs of two theme parks including athletic park and waterfront park, based on measured potential users' preferences with a conjoint choice model. For waterfront parks, potential users show low preferences or negative responses to facilities which are perceived as un-environment friendly. They also show high preferences on ecological areas sitting near to streams. For athletic parks, potential users show demand to introduce something different facilities and atmosphere from existing athletic parks. The demands are particularly high for children's play ground facilities and service facilities. This study also show some methodological examples to compute the carrying capacity with two hypothetical alternatives. This approach might be beneficial for local governments which are wish to alternate the park size on the basis of local conditions such as their financial conditions and land availability.

Keywords

• Waterfront Park Athletic Park;
• Conjoint Choice Model