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.
Usually when people think about park systems, they generally in regards to city/town, state or national parks. However, how prevalent are County park systems where you are? How extensive are they in terms of amenities? This came to mind due to just being at a county park in this system: https://www.onondagacountyparks.com/parks/
We have some great county parks in Nassau & Suffolk but in order to enjoy to fully enjoy them you need to be a resident, which can be annoying, or pay non-resident fee.
If I want to camp in Suffolk County parks, I can't b/c I am not a Suffolk County resident. However state parks are not a problem … both are very beautiful park systems though.
I love nature. I do also wish more parks were dog friendly.
Orange County, California - OC Parks
OC Parks encompasses regional, wilderness and historical facilities, as well as coastal areas throughout the County of Orange in California. Featuring 60,000 acres of parkland, open space and shoreline, Orange County’s award-winning parks and programs are enjoyed by millions of residents and visitors each year, in ways as diverse as the parks themselves.
I've been to 15 of those parks (some extensively and repeatedly) and all the beaches. They are wonderful. Most of the parks are not strong on "amenities," however...they are oases of nature in a very urbanized county.
Boston was maybe first out of the gate with its Metropolitan Park Commission which acquired thousands of acres in the metropolitan area and built connecting parkways in the 1890s. The park commission, later the Metropolitan District Commission, ran the parks and the parkways until the commission was dissolved under Gov. Mitt Romney, not that long ago, and incorporated into the state park system. This was not a county park system strictly speaking but metropolitan in scope, covering several municipalities and three or four counties. There is no county govt now in Mass or any other New England state so it's either state parks and reservations or town/city parks.
Shoutout to the Cook County Forest Preserve in the Chicago area.
In Denver, it's the county parks that are more well known than the city ones. Places like Red Rocks or Mt. Falcon are what visitors would associate with Denver. Also, it's because there's such a big amount of public land in the counties along the front range that the city itself can maintain this outdoorsey vibe while having very limited parkspace, as Denver is one of the most paved over cities in the US.
It's also an interesting place in that there's basically no parks or open space to the east of Denver for a very long distance, so on one side there's an has an incredible amount of options while the other side has 0. Eastern CO isn't the prettiest, but if there wasn't the Rockies next door, there would be more open space.
Neither Red Rocks nor Mount Falcon is in Denver. The latter is not even a property of City and County of Denver, though it may be jointly run with the “native” county.
Denver has NO mountains at all, though it has views of them. Denver benefits from several counties along the Front Range long ago having established taxes to fund purchase of land dedicated to preserving the mountain backdrop and providing public recreation sites. In the case of Jefferson County, it was a very far-sighted group of Evergreen residents who began pushing to set aside such funds. They went from worrying that parks would not be used much to the exact opposite, between the 1970s and the early 1990s. Yes, our tax dollars were well applied, and it is a shame that Denver did not set aside more parklands in the city, because the hordes that moved there complain about not having enough open space. It got developed.
Aurora Reservoir has a nice trail around the reservoir (about 8 to 9 miles around), and that is definitely east of Denver, as are Aurora’s other natural areas open to the public.
You must be very new to metro Denver. Places AROUND Denver do have lots of nice open space with natural features (as distinct from playgrounds and ball fields).
The cities here operate parks of varying sizes and quality. One of the cities operates a 3500 acre park. There are quite a few neighborhood pocket parks.
The parks that I thought were in the county are actually administered by the cities.
The cities here operate parks of varying sizes and quality. One of the cities operates a 3500 acre park. There are quite a few neighborhood pocket parks.
The parks that I thought were in the county are actually administered by the cities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas
South Carolina has some nice county parks with beach areas.
Are they mainly rural counties? That might explain why they lack county park systems.
The reason I ask is because I was under the impression that since the County is the main local government in the South (outside the cities), I would think that many of them would have county parks. Sort of like ClemVegas shows.
Los Angeles county maintains 181 parks, and over 550 miles of trails. These parks and trails spans across areas of the Pacific ocean, Mojave desert, forests high in the
9 mountain ranges across Los Angeles county.
Neither Red Rocks nor Mount Falcon is in Denver. The latter is not even a property of City and County of Denver, though it may be jointly run with the “native” county.
Denver has NO mountains at all, though it has views of them. Denver benefits from several counties along the Front Range long ago having established taxes to fund purchase of land dedicated to preserving the mountain backdrop and providing public recreation sites. In the case of Jefferson County, it was a very far-sighted group of Evergreen residents who began pushing to set aside such funds. They went from worrying that parks would not be used much to the exact opposite, between the 1970s and the early 1990s. Yes, our tax dollars were well applied, and it is a shame that Denver did not set aside more parklands in the city, because the hordes that moved there complain about not having enough open space. It got developed.
Aurora Reservoir has a nice trail around the reservoir (about 8 to 9 miles around), and that is definitely east of Denver, as are Aurora’s other natural areas open to the public.
You must be very new to metro Denver. Places AROUND Denver do have lots of nice open space with natural features (as distinct from playgrounds and ball fields).
Correct, all those trails are in Jeff. Co, but you and I are saying the same thing, that the city of Denver (which is it's own rather small county) essentially piggy backs off the counties surrounding it to the west for it's parks / open space, which has in essence curtailed the effort of the city to expand it's own park system. The main parks of Denver are legacies of 120 years ago, back when parking lots were for horses, and were impressive at the time, but today are incredibly overcrowded.
In the early days of CO, people viewed irrigation as a means to turn the barren plains into a green paradise, and these parks were a legacy of that thought. But when the Depression hit and automobile growth came quickly after that, the attitude shifted towards driving to green space and developing the city space as water had to be obtained from the other side of the mountains and became increasingly precious.
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.
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.
