ProximitytoParks


 * Connecting People with Nature Indicators**
 * //Parks & Nature Recreation//** :: Natural Area Recreation :: Proximity to Parks
 * //Environmental Education//** :: Environmental Education Centers :: Community Colleges :: State Curriculum
 * //Environmental Choices//** :: Green Buildings :: Transportation Choices :: Waste and Recycling Practices

= = =Proximity to Parks=


 * What is this?**

This measure shows how many people live within a given distance of parks with natural features. For this measure, parks with natural features -- as defined by NC OneMap (see Technical Notes) -- include
 * lands that are managed for conservation and open space
 * with public access.

We report how many people live within a short distance of any park with natural features in the year 2000, the most recent year for which data are available. We also report the number of Triangle residents within a short drive to a large, regional park with natural features.


 * Why is this Important?**

These are important questions to explore in order to determine whether everyone has access to a natural area within a reasonable distance from home. In this study, we chose 0.62 miles (1 kilometer), based on the oft-cited rule of thumb is that Americans will walk about 0.25 miles to reach neighborhood destinations, and 0.5 miles to reach regional destinations, such as a transit hub. Studies show that the closer a park is to residents, the more likely they are to visit and exercise (Giles-Corti 2005). For driving, 6.2 miles (10 kilometers) is 10-30 minute drive, depending on road conditions, which is within the recommended distance range to a community-serving park (Mertes and Hall 1995). Of course, different municipalities will measure parks ‘levels of service’ differently (see //How Parks & Recreation Standards are Measured// ).


 * **//How are Parks & Recreation Standards Measured?//**

Parks and recreation and planning departments use a wide variety of measures for level of service. 'Levels of service' is a term often applied to the provision of public services such as transportation and parks. In the case of parks, any of the following could be used.


 * Acreage of parks per person**: The rule of thumb has traditionally been 1 acre of parkland per 1000 people. This has since been refined to encompass some of the additional refinements that follow (Mertes and Hall 1995).


 * Number and capacity of various facilities per person**: Natural park facilities can include hiking, nature trails, off-street biking trails, boat access points, paddling trails, and wildlife viewing areas (as opposed to recreation facilities such as tennis courts.).


 * Park size**: Parks may range from neighborhood-serving tot lots to national parks. The theory is that everyone should live within a given distance of every type.


 * Demand**: Surveys of needs and demographics can help determine demand for facilities and recreational activities. ||


 * What does this measure show?**

In the year 2000, 53% of the population lives within a radius of 0.62 mile (1 kilometer) of a park with some conservation component (Table 1, Figure 1). In other words, a slim majority can take a 15 minute walk (if the street network is available) to a nature park. Nearly two-thirds of the population lives within 6.2 miles (10 km) of a regional park, or a 10 to 30 minute drive, depending on street conditions.


 * Table 1.** Number and proportion of residents living near parks with natural features.
 * Note: "All parks ** " includes “lands that are managed for conservation and open space” that have ‘yes’ or ‘conditional’ public access. ** "Regional Parks" ** are Jordan Lake, Eno River Parks, Falls Lake, Umstead, NCSU Hill Demonstration Site, and Shearon Harris County Park. Source: Census blocks from 2000 and “Lands Managed for Conservation and Open Space.” shapefiles from [|**http://www.nconemap.com/**] ** . **

**Figure 1.** Proximity to parks with natural features. Census blocks are slightly transparent to reveal the parks shapes. (See larger version: [|Parks_ProximityLarge.jpg])


 * Limitations & Further Research**

The population data used for this analysis is from the 2000 US Census. More recent data will become available once the 2010 census is complete.

The parks lands were drawn from ‘Lands Managed for Conservation and Open Space’ that were open to the public, but this data may not have been complete.

We used a simple straight-line distance from the edge of each park to create the area from which we assumed people could reach the park. We did not consider the actual length of road, sidewalk, or other conveyance to the park, nor did we consider physical obstacles (major highways, rivers, etc). Further analysis could include the conditions of the street network, and measure proximity in terms of actual walking or driving time, rather than a straight-line distance.

When apportioning data from the Census mapping areas to the area within a given distance of a park, we assumed that the population density was the same throughout the Census mapping area.

Examining proximity to parks based on demographic attributes such as race, age, or income might shed light on the accessibility of parks to different users and aid in planning.


 * Author** Amanda Campbell, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill :: 2010 April 6
 * Reviewers** Wally Thurman, NC State University :: Emily Ander, City of Raleigh


 * Technical Notes**

Population data by census block was obtained from the US Census 2000, ([], downloaded January 20, 2010) parks areas were obtained from the “Lands Managed for Conservation and Open Space” shapefile, ([], downloaded January 20, 2010). For this analysis, we included only lands with public access (‘yes’ or ‘conditional’ public access). Two park sizes were assessed at two distances, based on the notion that many people should live a short distance to a small park or any type of park, and that a similar number would live a longer distance to a larger size of park. See [|Distribution_Results.xlsx] for details. The population tally assumes that the census block groups are evenly homogenous in regards to population. The distance to parks does not account for actual street accessibility, connectivity, or driving time. Straight-line buffers are illustrated in this map: [|ProximityBuffers.jpg]


 * //References//**

Giles-Corti, Billie, Melissa H. Broomhall, Matthew Knuiman, Catherine Collins, Kate Douglas, Kevin Ng, Andrea Lange, and Robert J. Donovan. 2005. Increasing walking: How important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open space?//American Journal of Preventive Medicine// 28, (2, Supplement 2) (2): 169-76.

Mertes, James D. //Park, recreation, open space and greenway guidelines//, eds. American Academy for Park and Recreation Administration., James R. Hall and National Recreation and Park Association.[Arlington, Va.?] : National Recreation and Park Association, [1995].


 * Connecting People with Nature Indicators**
 * //Parks & Nature Recreation//** :: Natural Area Recreation :: Proximity to Parks
 * //Environmental Education//** :: Environmental Education Centers :: Community Colleges :: State Curriculum
 * //Environmental Choices//** :: Green Buildings :: Transportation Choices :: Waste and Recycling Practices