Recreation

Nearly all popular natural resource-based recreation activities in the Delaware Valley require and are enhanced by protected open space. Accordingly, this project identifies and ranks unprotected open space areas for their potential recreational value. To facilitate this process, advice was sought from open space planners in Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Philadelphia counties; the Natural Lands Trust; Brandywine Conservancy; Heritage Conservancy; and two private consultants active in greenway, park, and trail planning.

Background

Defining Recreational Open Space

For this project, recreational open space is defined as those open space areas that can support passive or natural resource-based recreation activities. These types of activities include walking, hiking, running, biking, horseback riding, cross-country skiing, fishing, hunting, camping, picnicking, canoeing, wildlife viewing, environmental education and general enjoyment of the outdoors. These types of activities require natural, undeveloped lands with public access. They are enhanced by the presence of such natural features as lakes and streams, forests, wetlands, topographic variation, scenic vistas, and unique geological features. Natural resource-based recreation activities have minimal impact on the land and are for the most part compatible with the conservation of ecological resources. Generally, natural resource-based recreation does not require extensive infrastructure: small trailhead parking areas, narrow dirt or earthen trails, non-motorized boat launches and limited signage are supportive of most passive recreational activities. Other limited infrastructure such as basic campgrounds, picnic areas, and environmental education centers can also be sited in natural areas to encourage the use, enjoyment and appreciation of these outstanding lands.

This project does not address facilities required for active recreation such as ball fields, tennis courts, swimming pools, playgrounds, etc. While these facilities can be sited in larger parks and proximate to natural resource areas, they do not need to be located near natural resource areas. In addition, construction of such facilities requires significant disturbance of natural vegetation. Furthermore, most active recreation facilities are sited in smaller community or municipal parks, and the need for space to site these facilities should be addressed at the local, rather than the regional scale.

Protected Lands Inventory

To begin prioritizing recreational open space, DVRPC compiled an inventory of existing recreational open space resources and created base maps for the region. Included in these maps were:

• Federal, state, county, and municipal lands. Many of these lands are classified specifically as "parks," but they also include state game lands, state forests, historical sites, lands held for watershed protection, wildlife refuges, nature preserves, and other types of public lands.⁸
• Privately owned lands permanently protected from development. This "protected private open space" consists of land trust-owned and -eased lands and farmland eased through public and private funding. Although these lands are typically not publicly accessible, they protect scenic landscapes and preserve natural habitats that enhance outdoor recreation experiences.
• Existing trails and potential trail rights-of-way .
• Public facilities and places where passive recreational activities occur.
• Regionally significant historical sites and landmarks, natural features, arboretums, nature preserves, and wildlife refuges.

Identifying Recreational Open Space

Rather than prioritize all lands within the region for their recreational value, DVRPC chose to first identify a subset of lands that are particularly valuable for recreation. Based on comments from the advisory group and County outreach meetings, DVRPC identified three guiding policies for identifying recreational open space lands: 1) expand existing regional parks; 2) connect parks and other open space nodes with greenways; and 3) protect environmentally sensitive linear open space corridors including stream valleys, floodplains and ridgelines. Notably, all three of these goals can be mutually synergistic, i.e., preserving lands along a stream corridor between two existing parks simultaneously links and expands those two parks, while protecting environmentally sensitive wetlands and floodplains. In addition, linear and connected open space is particularly conducive to trail-based passive recreational activities such as walking, running, and biking.

The three policies identified above were essentially the same as those used to create DVRPC's 2030 Greenspace Network. The Greenspace Network is a vision of protected natural open space areas, created for Destination 2030, DVRPC's long-range plan. See Map 4: 2030 Greenspace Network. Although the Greenspace Network was delineated first with the goal of protecting and linking key ecological resources, its interconnected character, emphasis on protecting undeveloped lands in their natural state, and inclusion of nearly all significant existing regional-scale parks, makes it ideal to support future opportunities for natural resource-based recreation. As a result, DVRPC chose to use the network as the basis for the recreational component of this project. The following section describes the Greenspace Network in more detail.

2030 Greenspace Network

The Greenspace Network is based on the principles of protecting and linking naturally-vegetated open spaces. The network encompasses both existing regional parks and large contiguous undeveloped natural resource areas. These features are connected through a system of open spaces that primarily follow wooded stream valleys and ridgelines. Where gaps exist in the network, wooded, vacant, agricultural and recreational lands were identified to bridge the gaps and create a fully connected network. The width and shape of each corridor within the network varies according to its underlying land use. While the network currently contains protected lands, unprotected natural lands, and a variety of other undeveloped lands (and some developed lands), the long-term vision is to sew these features into a single unified entity of protected natural open space, or "greenspace."

The Greenspace Network places a high priority on connecting open spaces. There are no gaps or discontinuities within the network and the entire network is accessible from any point within the network. Such true connectedness enhances the Greenspace Network's ecological and recreational capacity and creates a regional backbone of greenspace that can simultaneously ameliorate the impacts of sprawl, protect critical natural resources, and improve the quality of life in the region's communities.

Ranking Recreational Open Space

To prioritize the 2030 Greenspace Network for recreation, the network was broken down into a mesh of 30-by-30-meter cells. Each cell was assigned a final numerical score based on the following six criteria: 1) proximity to parks; 2) proximity to private protected open space; 3) population served; 4) proximity to colleges and universities; 5) proximity to gateway communities and 6) location within a Conservation Focus Area. Following is a description of how each of these criteria was applied and weighted:

1. Proximity to Parks by Size: Each cell within the region receives points based on proximity to parks by size on a sliding scale. For example, cells within ½ mile of parks larger than 500 acres receive 70 points, cells between ½ and 1 mile from the same park score 60 points, cells between 1 and 2 miles score 50 points, and so on. The full range of point assignments relative to park size and proximity is as follows:
   
   

   Park Size < 2 acres < 2 acres 2 - 4 acres 2 - 4 acres 2 - 4 acres 4 - 8 acres 4 - 8 acres 4 - 8 acres 8 - 15 acres 8 - 15 acres 8 - 15 acres 8 - 15 acres 15 - 25 acres 15 - 25 acres 15 - 25 acres 15 - 25 acres 25 - 50 acres 25 - 50 acres 25 - 50 acres 25 - 50 acres 25 - 50 acres 50 - 100 acres 50 - 100 acres 50 - 100 acres 50 - 100 acres 50 - 100 acres 100 - 500 acres 100 - 500 acres 100 - 500 acres 100 - 500 acres 100 - 500 acres 100 - 500 acres > 500 acres > 500 acres > 500 acres > 500 acres > 500 acres > 500 acres > 500 acres

   Distance 0 - ½ mile ½ - 1 mile 0 - ½ mile ½ - 1 mile 1 - 2 miles 0 - ½ mile ½ - 1 mile 1 - 2 miles 0 - ½ mile ½ - 1 mile 1 - 2 miles 2 - 3 miles 0 - ½ mile ½ - 1 mile 1 - 2 miles 2 - 3 miles 0 - ½ mile ½ - 1 mile 1 - 2 miles 2 - 3 miles 3 - 4 miles 0 - ½ mile ½ - 1 mile 1 - 2 miles 2 - 3 miles 3 - 4 miles 0 - ½ mile ½ - 1 mile 1 - 2 miles 2 - 3 miles 3 - 4 miles 4 - 5 miles 0 - ½ mile ½ - 1 mile 1 - 2 miles 2 - 3 miles 3 - 4 miles 4 - 5 miles 5 - 6 miles

   Points 10 5 10 5 2 15 10 5 15 10 5 2 20 15 10 5 25 20 15 10 5 30 25 20 15 10 40 35 30 25 20 15 70 60 50 40 30 20 10

   
   
   Points assigned for each park size category were summed across the region and the values were assigned to the cells within the Greenspace Network. The final point totals were classified into 10 quantiles (classes of equal number of cells), and each quantile was assigned a value between 1 and 10, with 10 representing the highest score.
   
   Because this criterion embodies the key concepts of expanding existing parks and linking them together, scores are weighted 40% of the whole.
   
   
2. Proximity to Private Open Space: Private open spaces - lands protected through conservation easements or farmland preserved through purchase of development rights programs - do not generally have public access because they are privately owned. However, these spaces are valuable for recreational uses because they enhance scenic value and help to maintain the fabric of natural landscapes.
   
   For this criterion, points were assigned to cells based on a system similar to the one for parks. Private protected open spaces were divided into five categories on the basis of size. For each size category, all cells within the region were grouped into ten quantiles based on their distance away from each private protected open space size category. Each of the quantiles were then assigned points according to size category. The point assignments are as follows:
   
   

   Size Category	Points for Ten Quantiles
   5 - 10 acres	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
   10 - 25 acres	1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
   25 - 50 acres	1, 3, 5, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22
   50 - 100 acres	1, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25, 28, 30
   > 100 acres	1, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40

   
   After assigning scores for each size category, all size categories were summed across the region, applied to the cells in the Greenspace Network, and normalized into 10 quantiles. Because proximity to private open space is much less significant than proximity to public parks for the purpose of recreation, this criterion is weighted 10% of the whole.
   
   
3. Population Served Analysis: The demand for open space for recreation is generally higher in areas with denser populations. For this reason, and because recreational open space is for people, the recreation analysis placed a priority on potential open spaces in areas of higher population density. Each cell within the Greenspace Network was assigned the population density value of its underlying municipality. Cells were then reclassified into 10 quantiles and assigned a value from 1 to 10.
   
   While proximity to population is important for recreational resources, it is important to consider the kind of recreation focused on by this report. Compared to ball fields, playgrounds and neighborhood parks (i.e. active recreation), natural resource-based recreation lands tend to be more regional in character and attract users from a wider area. In addition, the larger land requirements of natural resource-based recreation areas are more easily accommodated by the parts of the region that have less development (and therefore less population density) and more remaining open space. Despite these realities, proximity of population to passive recreation space is important, so these scores are weighted 25% of the whole.
   
   
4. Proximity to Gateway Communities: Gateway communities are places that are intimately linked to outdoor recreation experiences. These communities are, in many ways, defined by their larger natural context. They serve as departure points for recreational activities and act as gathering places upon the conclusion of a day spent in the outdoors. Often, visiting the historic and cultural sites within these communities blends nicely with a natural resource-based recreational experience. Many of these communities are also accessible by rail or other forms of public transit. The success and health of these communities is, to varying degrees, closely linked to their surrounding natural resource-based recreational resources.
   
   Thirty-four gateway communities were identified throughout the region based on stakeholder interviews and the location of the region's major existing natural resource-based recreational nodes. Appendix A contains a list of these communities. Cells were assigned points based on their proximity to each gateway community using the following point scale:
   
   

   a. 0 - 1 mile: b. 1 - 2 miles: c. 2 - 3 miles: d. 3 - 4 miles: e. 4 - 5 miles: f. 5 - 6 miles: g. 6 - 7 miles:

   10 points 8 points 6 points 4 points 3 points 2 points 1 points

   
   Points scored for proximity to each of the 34 gateway communities were summed across the region and applied to the Greenspace Network. The range of points was then classified into quantiles and reclassed, as before, with final scores weighted 15% of the whole.
   
   
5. Proximity to Colleges and Universities: The student population attending the region's colleges and universities is often car-less and a big participant in outdoor recreational activities. Connecting this young, educated population with our region's outdoor recreational open space assets may strengthen their ties to the area, bolster the region's livability index, and lessen the "brain drain." Proximity to colleges and universities was valued based on a system similar to the one used for private protected open space. All cells within the region were assigned a value based on their distance away from the nearest college or university, i.e., if a cell is 1,000 meters from the nearest college, it would receive a value of 1,000 (in this case, the lower the value the higher the priority). These values were then assigned to the Greenspace Network and reclassed into 10 quantiles. Each quantile was reassigned a value from 1 to 10, with 10 representing those lands in the network closest to a college or university.
   
   
6. Conservation Focus Areas: Conservation Focus Areas are areas defined by DVRPC for Destination. These are areas characterized by large concentrations of undeveloped land, common landscape traits and an existing geographic identity. For example, the "Big Woods" region of north-central Chester County is a well-known focus area. Conservation Focus Areas are also places where governmental and non-profit conservation entities desire to focus the bulk of their open space preservation efforts. The Conservation Focus Areas are displayed on Map 5: 2030 Conservation Focus Areas.
   
   Following the weighting and summation of all five components above, a 50% boost was given to cells within the Delaware and Schuylkill River Conservation Focus Areas, and a 20% boost was given to cells within all other focus areas. The larger boost was given to the Delaware and Schuylkill focus areas because of their importance as regional recreational spines.

Putting It All Together

After weighting and combining all the elements and applying the Conservation Focus Area Boost, each cell received its final score, ranging from a low of 13.2 to a high of 141 points. Next, a mask was applied to remove all protected lands, areas of open water, and developed lands. For the recreation model, it was important to remove protected lands before reclassing, due to the heavy emphasis placed on proximity to parks in the analysis. If parks were not removed, the model would identify lands that are already protected as the region's highest recreation priorities.⁹ The remaining cells were classified into 10 quantiles based on their final scores and reassigned a value from 1 to 10. The final results are displayed on Map 6: Recreational Open Space Priorities. Cells receiving a score of 10 represent the highest recreational priorities in the region. Although removed from the analysis, protected lands and open water are shown on the map in red.

The entire Pennsylvania Greenspace Network totals 357,500 acres. Of this, 103,100 acres are already protected, and 20,000 acres are open water. An additional 71,600 acres of the network are already developed, leaving 162,800 acres undeveloped and unprotected.¹⁰ Since the undeveloped and unprotected portions of the network were classed into 10 quantiles, approximately 16,000 acres fall into each class.

The priorities that emerge from the recreational map reflect the weightings of the individual components of the model. Lands close to existing parks, especially large ones, tend to be valued highly, as do lands in the more densely populated core of the region. Both the Schuylkill River and Delaware River valleys are valued highly because of the large focus area boost they received. In addition, lands adjacent to the Wissahickon, Neshaminy and Perkiomen creeks, which flow through long stretches of the region, emerge as high priorities. While not as lengthy, the Ridley, Crum and Chester creek greenways in Delaware County are also high priorities. The Big Woods region of Chester County is a large priority area, as are the lands adjacent to the Green Lane Reservoir and those to the southwest of Nockamixon State Park.

Significantly, all lands within the Greenspace Network are valuable for natural resource-based recreation due to their naturally-vegetated state, interconnectedness, scenic qualities and linear character. In other words, the prioritization model is designed to show relative value between lands within the Greenspace Network, but all lands within the network have high passive recreation value compared to lands outside the network. Indeed, that is why DVRPC chose to run the model only on the Greenspace Network, as opposed to all lands within the region. Therefore, all cells within the network will receive a scoring boost when combined with the ecological and agricultural components of this model. Cell scores will be boosted by grouping them into five quantiles, as opposed to ten, and assigning the five quantiles values 6 through 10.

⁸ Municipally-owned land is often utilized for active recreation facilities. However, a significant amount of municipally-owned acreage also protects natural resources. Because these differences are not distinguished in the data, DVRPC included all municipally-owned land in its inventory of protected open space for this project.
⁹ Lands less than 25 acres in size were not removed because this would have only a negligible effect on the final results. In addition, for display purposes, these lands would appear exceedingly small at the regional scale in a rasterized format.
¹⁰Some developed lands within the network represent unique opportunities for reclaiming natural open space. For example, some counties and local communities are working to reclaim naturally functioning floodplains by negotiating voluntary buyouts with landowners who own property in floodplains. In other instances, brownfield sites or derelict commercial properties, when located in riparian areas, may present desirable opportunities for restoring open space. Many of these properties are, in fact, located near the region's rivers and streams.