Table 3. Park Facilities Missed by Relying on 1 Data Source, by Study Areaa .
| Parks with Each Facility | Park Facilities Missed if Relying on Municipal/County Data Onlyb
|
Park Facilities Missed if Relying on Commercial Data Onlyb
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| North Carolina (n = 32) na (%) | Maryland (n = 65) na (%) | New York (n = 50) na (%) | North Carolina (n = 119) na (%) | Maryland (n = 187) na (%) | New York (n = 640) na (%) | |
| Outdoors | ||||||
| Baseball or softball fields | 12 (37.5) | 30 (46.2) | 14 (28.0) | 34 (28.6) | 72 (38.9) | 105 (16.4) |
| Basketball hoops | 5 (15.6) | 26 (40.0) | 17 (34.0) | 25 (21.0) | 84 (44.9) | 391 (61.2) |
| Bocce ball courts | 0 | 0 | 1 (2.0) | 0 | 1 (0.5) | 15 (2.3) |
| Cricket fields | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 (0.3) |
| General purpose fields | 2 (6.3) | 23 (35.4) | 5 (10.0) | 7 (5.9) | 60 (32.1) | 19 (3.0) |
| Golf holes | 1 (3.1) | 0 | 1 (2.0) | 7 (5.9) | 3 (1.6) | 4 (0.6) |
| Football fields | 0 | 1 (1.5) | 1 (2.0) | 3 (2.5) | 0 | 14 (2.2) |
| Skate park | 0 | 1 (1.5) | 1 (2.0) | 4 (3.4) | 2 (1.1) | 5 (0.2) |
| Soccer fields | 1 (3.1) | 0 (0.0) | 0 | 11 (9.2) | 2 (1.1) | 13 (2.0) |
| Swimming pools | 3 (9.4) | 2 (3.1) | 2 (4.0) | 7 (5.9) | 9 (4.8) | 23 (3.6) |
| Tennis courts | 7 (21.9) | 14 (21.5) | 4 (8.0) | 17 (14.3) | 32 (17.1) | 33 (5.2) |
| Tracks | 0 | 0 | 1 (2.0) | 0 | 0 | 12 (1.9) |
| Volleyball courts | 9.4 | 4 (6.2) | 0 | 9 (7.6) | 9 (4.8) | 32 (5.0) |
| Outdoors or indoors | ||||||
| Racquetball, handball, or squash courts | 1 (3.1) | 0 | 5 (10.0) | 0 | 1 (0.5) | 394 (61.6) |
| Indoors | ||||||
| General purpose fields | 0 | 0 | 1 (2.0) | 0 | 2 (1.1) | 0 |
| Swimming pools | 1 (3.1) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 (1.1) |
a
Parks missed when relying only on commercial data or only on municipal/county data. The numbers given in this table for “parks missed when relying only on municipal/county data” (32, North Carolina; 65, Maryland; and 50, New York) are lower numbers than those shown in Table 1 (60, 120, 80, respectively). The difference is because some parks in the municipal and county data did not meet the study’s park definition.
b
Number and percentage of facilities in missed parks.