IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2019i1p121-d300876.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Park Visitors Survey Tells Us: Comparing Three Elevated Parks—The High Line, 606, and High Bridge

Author

Listed:
  • Jisoo Sim

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Architecture and Urban Studies, Virginia Tech., Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA)

  • Cermetrius Lynell Bohannon

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Architecture and Urban Studies, Virginia Tech., Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA)

  • Patrick Miller

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Architecture and Urban Studies, Virginia Tech., Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA)

Abstract

Many cities have replaced abandoned transportation infrastructure with an elevated park to gain increased economic benefits by developing old fabric. By following this trend, most studies to this point have only focused on the economic rewards from the replacement rather than its uses in the real world. This study aims to understand how park visitors use elevated parks through a park visitors’ survey. The authors selected three representative elevated parks—the High Line in New York City, the 606 in Chicago, and the High Bridge in Farmville—for the study and asked visitors about their activities, perceived benefits, and satisfaction. Results indicate that the 606, a mixed-use elevated park, allows visitors to engage in high-intensity activity, the High Line as an elevated urban park provides visitors public arts and gardens, and the High Bridge as an elevated green park provided visitors with a connection to unique natural scenery. This study, as the first to compare three different elevated parks, contributes to an understanding of who uses elevated parks and how they use elevated parks.

Suggested Citation

  • Jisoo Sim & Cermetrius Lynell Bohannon & Patrick Miller, 2019. "What Park Visitors Survey Tells Us: Comparing Three Elevated Parks—The High Line, 606, and High Bridge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:121-:d:300876
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/121/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/121/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jaewoo Lee & Keemin Sohn, 2014. "Identifying the Impact on Land Prices of Replacing At-grade or Elevated Railways with Underground Subways in the Seoul Metropolitan Area," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(1), pages 44-62, January.
    2. Chang Deok Kang & Robert Cervero, 2009. "From Elevated Freeway to Urban Greenway: Land Value Impacts of the CGC Project in Seoul, Korea," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 46(13), pages 2771-2794, December.
    3. Kenworthy, Jeffrey R. & Laube, Felix B., 1999. "Patterns of automobile dependence in cities: an international overview of key physical and economic dimensions with some implications for urban policy," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 691-723.
    4. Bo Yang & Shujuan Li & Chris Binder, 2016. "A research frontier in landscape architecture: landscape performance and assessment of social benefits," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 314-329, April.
    5. Sean Burkholder, 2012. "The New Ecology of Vacancy: Rethinking Land Use in Shrinking Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-19, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eunjoung Lee & Gunwoo Kim, 2023. "Green Space Ecosystem Services and Value Evaluation of Three-Dimensional Roads for Sustainable Cities," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-20, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mindell, Jennifer S. & Anciaes, Paulo R. & Dhanani, Ashley & Stockton, Jemima & Jones, Peter & Haklay, Muki & Groce, Nora & Scholes, Shaun & Vaughan, Laura, 2017. "Using triangulation to assess a suite of tools to measure community severance," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 119-129.
    2. Gössling, Stefan, 2016. "Urban transport justice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-9.
    3. Guanyu Chen & Jacky Bowring & Shannon Davis, 2023. "Exploring the Terminology, Definitions, and Forms of Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE) in Landscape Architecture," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-41, April.
    4. Souche, Stéphanie, 2009. "Un exemple d’estimation de la demande de transport urbain," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Editions NecPlus, vol. 2009(04), pages 759-779, December.
    5. David Bogataj & Marija Bogataj & Samo Drobne, 2020. "Sustainability of an Activity Node in Global Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-23, October.
    6. Elena Koncheva & Nikolay Zalesskiy, 2016. "Spatial Development of the Largest Russian Cities During the Post-Soviet Period: Orienting Towards Transit or Maintaining Soviet Trends," HSE Working papers WP BRP 04/URB/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    7. Brantley Liddle, 2017. "Accounting for Nonlinearity, Asymmetry, Heterogeneity, and Cross-Sectional Dependence in Energy Modeling: US State-Level Panel Analysis," Economies, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-11, August.
    8. Yves Crozet & Iragaël Joly, 2004. "Travel Time Budgets: Facing the paradoxical management of the "scarcest good" [Budgets temps de transport : les sociétés tertiaires confrontées à la gestion paradoxale du " bien le p," Post-Print halshs-00068933, HAL.
    9. Schwanen, Tim & Dijst, Martin, 2002. "Travel-time ratios for visits to the workplace: the relationship between commuting time and work duration," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 573-592, August.
    10. Bereitschaft, Bradley, 2020. "Gentrification and the evolution of commuting behavior within America's urban cores, 2000–2015," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    11. Gunwoo Kim & Patrick Miller & David Nowak, 2016. "The Value of Green Infrastructure on Vacant and Residential Land in Roanoke, Virginia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-15, March.
    12. Kenworthy, Jeff, 2002. "Traffic 2042--a more global perspective," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 11-15, January.
    13. Mulalic, Ismir & Rouwendal, Jan, 2020. "Does improving public transport decrease car ownership? Evidence from a residential sorting model for the Copenhagen metropolitan area," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    14. Wiersma, J.K., 2020. "Commuting patterns and car dependency in urban regions," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    15. Geoff Boeing, 2020. "Planarity and street network representation in urban form analysis," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(5), pages 855-869, June.
    16. Farber, Steven & Páez, Antonio, 2009. "My car, my friends, and me: a preliminary analysis of automobility and social activity participation," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 216-225.
    17. Cao, Xinyu, 2006. "The Causal Relationship between the Built Environment and Personal Travel Choice: Evidence from Northern California," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt07q5p340, University of California Transportation Center.
    18. Guillaume POUYANNE & Laëtitia GUILHOT & André MEUNIÉ, 2018. "L'usage de l'automobile et la structure spatiale en Chine : le modèle de ville compacte en question," Region et Developpement, Region et Developpement, LEAD, Universite du Sud - Toulon Var, vol. 48, pages 105-120.
    19. Lo, Hong K & Tang, Siman & Wang, David Z.W., 2008. "Managing the Accessibility on Mass Public Transit: the Case of Hong Kong," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 1(2), pages 23-49.
    20. Virág, Doris & Wiedenhofer, Dominik & Baumgart, André & Matej, Sarah & Krausmann, Fridolin & Min, Jihoon & Rao, Narasimha D. & Haberl, Helmut, 2022. "How much infrastructure is required to support decent mobility for all? An exploratory assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:121-:d:300876. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.