A city should have a regional park that is bigger outside the city for recreational activities. However, even this area can be said to be inadequate unless the tracks’ locations have a clear plan, and meet their needs. They should also be exceptionally well managed and developed.Recreational standards have been there for a long time, in 1914 landscape architect Charles Downing Lay made an estimation for a park of 100,000 people. A reservation should be 700 acres, while a city park should be up to 400 acres and ten neighborhood parks every 250 acres. He also estimated that there should be fifty playgrounds located at the neighborhoods and 50 garden and squares. This meant that 1500 acres of land ought to be set aside for recreational purposes in every city that has a population of 100,000 people (Hopper, 57). In 1940, some cities were able to meet the requirement of one-acre park per 100 people. Since this period, there has been a tense relationship between cities, parks and recreation areas. There has been a reduced expansion of recreation areas due to population growth. Suburbs that have come up near the central city have increased the population of this city, but parks areas have lagged behind. There have been no new parks and recreational areas added. Many suburbs near central city rely on old parks of central parks.There are suggestions that this rule should be modified especially for areas that are densely populated. In addition, several cities are economically unable to achieve such high standards. In a report prepared in 1959, it was suggested that one acre per 200 populations is more reasonable and attainable for cities with more than half a million population. In regard to cities with a population of over a million, it was suggested one care per 300 people is reasonable. Many cities had recognized the recreational standard of one acre per 100 populations.