U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Greensboro, Winston-Salem, High Point
 [Register]
Greensboro, Winston-Salem, High Point The Triad Area
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-20-2015, 05:38 AM
 
Location: Greensboro, NC USA
4,580 posts, read 4,401,372 times
Reputation: 1488

Advertisements

The Gate City ranks 44th as the 68th largest city in the country when it comes to parks and playgrounds. Greensboro tops Charlotte in the rankings.

Greensboro places 44th in park index - News-Record.com: News
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-20-2015, 09:25 AM
 
7,278 posts, read 13,526,501 times
Reputation: 3610
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsoboi78 View Post
The Gate City ranks 44th as the 68th largest city in the country when it comes to parks and playgrounds. Greensboro tops Charlotte in the rankings.

Greensboro places 44th in park index - News-Record.com: News
Charlotte is also darn-near dead-last (#74 out of 75). I think it's more noteworthy that GSO topped Atlanta, Dallas, LA, San Antonio, Louisville, and lots of other cities. Still a good ways to go, though. I find it interesting that Minneapolis and St. Paul are #1 and #2 on the list when they can only enjoy fully those parks for half the year! I guess you grow to appreciate the outdoors a little more when the weather's not always on your side.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2015, 11:25 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis
2,532 posts, read 2,497,604 times
Reputation: 4250
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaBredChicagoan View Post
Charlotte is also darn-near dead-last (#74 out of 75). I think it's more noteworthy that GSO topped Atlanta, Dallas, LA, San Antonio, Louisville, and lots of other cities. Still a good ways to go, though. I find it interesting that Minneapolis and St. Paul are #1 and #2 on the list when they can only enjoy fully those parks for half the year! I guess you grow to appreciate the outdoors a little more when the weather's not always on your side.
Are you serious!

The parks around here are busy year round. Lakes that provide swimming, boating, and fishing during the warm months; become the sites for ice skating, hockey, and ice fishing in winter. Hiking trails are adapted to cross country skiing and snowshoeing. The hills are used for tobogganing and sledding. Even the massive system of bicycle trails sees an astonishing amount of use in the colder months.

I guess some stereotypes just never die!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2015, 11:39 AM
 
7,278 posts, read 13,526,501 times
Reputation: 3610
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogead View Post
Are you serious!

The parks around here are busy year round. Lakes that provide swimming, boating, and fishing during the warm months; become the sites for ice skating, hockey, and ice fishing in winter. Hiking trails are adapted to cross country skiing and snowshoeing. The hills are used for tobogganing and sledding. Even the massive system of bicycle trails sees an astonishing amount of use in the colder months.

I guess some stereotypes just never die!
You're totally right. There are plenty of outdoor activities year round in places where the residents are willing to brave the chill. In some ways your point is similar to mine, though. Some cities and states prioritize outdoor recreation in a way that others squander it, and the relationship you'd expect to see between weather and recreation (milder weather = more parks and activity) isn't always what we find.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2015, 01:34 PM
 
6,611 posts, read 6,926,424 times
Reputation: 4077
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaBredChicagoan View Post
Charlotte is also darn-near dead-last (#74 out of 75). I think it's more noteworthy that GSO topped Atlanta, Dallas, LA, San Antonio, Louisville, and lots of other cities. Still a good ways to go, though. I find it interesting that Minneapolis and St. Paul are #1 and #2 on the list when they can only enjoy fully those parks for half the year! I guess you grow to appreciate the outdoors a little more when the weather's not always on your side.
This makes it all seem less credible. I'm not sure how GSO topped those cities, but there is something screwy going on there. Having lived in both GSO and Atlanta, the parks in GSO are definitely not better. Louisville has a large system of Olmstead parks that are better than anything I've found in GSO, and Atlanta's Piedmont Park blows anything in GSO out of the water.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2015, 04:58 PM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
11,810 posts, read 18,802,129 times
Reputation: 11136
[quote=gsoboi78;39687726]The Gate City ranks 44th as the 68th largest city in the country when it comes to parks and playgrounds. Greensboro tops Charlotte in the rankings.

Greensboro places 44th in park index - News-Record.com: News[/QUOTE

Clearly the story wouldn't have been as "feel good" for Greensboro if they compared their score to Raleigh instead of Charlotte. While Charlotte came in tied for last, Raleigh tied for 24th.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2015, 10:46 AM
 
7,278 posts, read 13,526,501 times
Reputation: 3610
Note that the study didn't take into consideration the more intangible factors like aesthetics or history. They considered acreage (median park size and % of city area covered by parks), facilities and investment (per capita spending on parks and facilities as calculated using the number of a list of diverse types of amenities... basketball goals, dog parks, playgrounds, senior centers, etc.), and access (% of population living within 10 minute walk of public park).

So it's not really about "better" parks so much as more parks and more access to parks.

ParkScore
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2015, 10:52 AM
 
6,611 posts, read 6,926,424 times
Reputation: 4077
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaBredChicagoan View Post
Note that the study didn't take into consideration the more intangible factors like aesthetics or history. They considered acreage (median park size and % of city area covered by parks), facilities and investment (per capita spending on parks and facilities as calculated using the number of a list of diverse types of amenities... basketball goals, dog parks, playgrounds, senior centers, etc.), and access (% of population living within 10 minute walk of public park).

So it's not really about "better" parks so much as more parks and more access to parks.

ParkScore
That's what takes the credibility away from something like this...quality of parks is much more important than quantity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2015, 11:27 AM
 
7,278 posts, read 13,526,501 times
Reputation: 3610
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeTarheel View Post
That's what takes the credibility away from something like this...quality of parks is much more important than quantity.
I don't agree. I think maybe quality is AS important. Maybe even a LITTLE more important. But certainly not MUCH more important. I'm a big believer in parks and other shared public spaces, and I think that when cities only have relatively few parks that are hard to get to for many, they aren't really serving their full purpose. I'd rather see many, easily accessible parks that are tidy and well-designed but nothing spectacular than a few Taj Mahal parks that most people have to drive to, often across town.

It's a matter of preference, not an issue of credibility.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2015, 03:33 PM
 
6,611 posts, read 6,926,424 times
Reputation: 4077
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaBredChicagoan View Post
I don't agree. I think maybe quality is AS important. Maybe even a LITTLE more important. But certainly not MUCH more important. I'm a big believer in parks and other shared public spaces, and I think that when cities only have relatively few parks that are hard to get to for many, they aren't really serving their full purpose. I'd rather see many, easily accessible parks that are tidy and well-designed but nothing spectacular than a few Taj Mahal parks that most people have to drive to, often across town.

It's a matter of preference, not an issue of credibility.
A city being ranked below GSO doesn't mean that "there are relatively few parks that are hard to get to for many". Having an extra acre of parkland isn't nearly as important as the quality of the parks...of course that's just my opinion.

The other cities mentioned earlier DO have easily accessible parks that are tidy and well designed, and they aren't across town for most people. That's what I have a problem with here - implying that this is the case when it definitely isn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Greensboro, Winston-Salem, High Point
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top