Green Deserts, Income, and Accessibility in Brooklyn

Catherine Gladbach

Map Goal

Parks play an essential role in promoting the well-being of communities, by serving as important spaces for activities, social interactions, and the ecology of an area, supporting the overall health and quality of life for residents. My project uses the case study of Brooklyn, NY, to ask these necessary questions: 

  • Is there equitable access to parks in Brooklyn neighborhoods via public transit

  • Are there “green deserts” in Brooklyn? 

  • Does the amount of income in an area affect the placement of parks? 

My findings suggest that there is a direct correlation between neighborhood income and the placement of parks, suggesting that we need new environmental justice policies designed to compensate for this imbalance. 

As defined in the map layer, created with data from the NYC Department of Parks and Recreation, a park is an area that the NYC Department of Parks and Recreation has set aside for public use, including playgrounds, green space, and recreational areas such as baseball/softball fields, basketball courts, tennis courts, and volleyball courts. A study by the Trust for Public Land states that NYC parks total nearly 50,000 acres, or 14% of the city’s landmass, and “that residents visit 527 million times per year” (Trust for Public Land, 2022). These natural spaces offer a refuge from the hustle and bustle of city life and offer a serene environment for relaxation, exercise, and recreation. 

Parks provide recreational value to adults and kids at an economic worth estimated at $9.1 million annually (Trust for Public Land, 2022). They contribute significantly to physical and mental health, promoting active lifestyles and reducing stress, saving an estimated $1.14 billion in health care costs (Trust for Public Land, 2022). Tourists are attracted to parks for their natural beauty, recreational opportunities, and cultural significance, spending an estimated $17.9 billion in a typical year to “participate in outdoor activities” (Trust for Public Land, 2022). Residents also want to live near parks, which contribute over $15.2 billion in increased property value that translate[s] to at least $101 million in annual property tax revenues for homes within 500 feet of parks” (Trust for Public Land, 2022). Therefore, parks not only provide relaxation and recreation, but also produce economic benefits to communities, because it raises property values of homes and overall amenities. 

Parks are crucial to biodiversity conservation, as they provide habitats for various plant and animal species. Additionally, parks contribute to environmental sustainability by absorbing carbon dioxide, improving air quality, and absorbing storm runoff. In all five boroughs, parks have saved up to $2.43 billion in stormwater treatment costs through runoff absorbed by green infrastructure and have reduced “ground-level ozone and fine particulate matter in the atmosphere, avoiding $26.5 million in health care costs each year” (Trust for Public Land, 2022). Green spaces are also used to mitigate the urban heat island effect, which occurs when cities replace natural land cover with pavement and other surfaces that absorb and retain heat (Environmental Protection Agency, n.d.). This decreases heat-related illnesses and mortality, energy usage, and pollution levels, challenges which are especially present in low-income and communities of color. A recent study showed that 94% of previously redlined areas are exposed to higher temperatures as opposed to higher income, non-redlined communities (Hoffman et al., 2020). 

With these benefits to communities and the ecosystem, the inequality of park access is alarming. The different incomes in neighborhoods often play a large role in determining the locations of parks, creating unequal access to green spaces. Many urban areas have more parks in wealthier neighborhoods, while lower-income communities have fewer green spaces but also have the greatest need due to the heat island effect, health disparities, and lack of public space. Across the United States, “low-income neighborhoods […] average 42 percent less park acreage per person than high-income neighborhoods” (Hwang et al., 2021). The uneven placement of parks can have major effects on the overall health disparities of residents, as those in higher-income areas benefit from the physical and mental health advantages stemming from proximity to parks. Meanwhile, residents of economically disadvantaged areas may face challenges in accessing these benefits, which contributes to a cycle of health and social inequalities. However, if residents are given the opportunity to take public transit or, better yet, to walk 10 minutes to parks, some of these effects can be mitigated. Addressing these income-based disparities in park placement is vital to ensuring the same access across all incomes, so everyone can receive these benefits. 

As defined by the article, “Measuring the Accessibility and Equity of Public Parks: A Case Study Using GIS” written by Sarah Nicholls, “accessibility refers to the ease with which a site or service may be reached or obtained; it can thus be said to measure the relative opportunity for interaction or contact with a given phenomenon such as a park” (2001). In New York City, there is an initiative to ensure 85% of residents live within a ¼ mile walking radius to a green space smaller than 6 acres and a ½ mile walk to one larger than 6 acres (Trust for Public Land, n.d.). However, not all parks are created equal. Larger parks often have a wide array of amenities, such as playgrounds, sports facilities, and recreational spaces, making them great destinations for residents. Unfortunately, disparities often exist, with higher-income neighborhoods having more convenient access to parks than low-income ones. “Low-income communities have 21.2% less park space per person within a 10-minute walk compared to high-income communities” (Trust for Public Land, 2022). 

By making these parks more proximate to public transit, people from outside of the neighborhood can easily access these larger parks without transportation issues. Parks located in easily accessible areas through public transit increase the quality of life not just for local residents, but by providing spaces for recreation, exercise, and social interaction, for everyone to enjoy.  

Even if 99% of residents in a given neighborhood have access to parks, these parks may not meet the community's needs or serve the area's ecology (Trust for Public Land, 2022). And, depending on resources, maintenance can vary based on park size, location, and intended usage. Parks in low-income neighborhoods often lack resources (like fields, rangers, or irrigation) that high-income areas have, demonstrating inequality in more than park aesthetics. In many low-income communities, parks face many challenges, such as lack of funding, maintenance and limited resources. Only 0.58% of the City's budget is allocated towards parks and has remained less than 0.6% since 2001 (Paige, 2023). As a result, these parks suffer from poorly maintained green spaces, outdated or broken recreational equipment, and a lack of amenities. Safety concerns also discourage residents from using these spaces for recreation and social activities.

The contrast in park conditions between low and high-income neighborhoods not only shows the economic disparities but is also reflected in public health outcomes, as these neighborhoods tend to have more health issues due to, in part, limited access to green space. Addressing these disparities will involve recognizing the importance of parks in all communities, regardless of income level, and ensuring everyone has access to high-quality parks that contribute to their well-being.

To address this issue, urban planners and policymakers must prioritize creating parks in low-income areas and extending public transportation lines to ensure that all members of the community, regardless of socio-economic status or physical abilities, can enjoy the benefits that parks offer. However, the gaps in access in New York City were less than that of the national average. Out of the 100 most populated cities in the U.S., New York placed 11th in terms of residents living within a 10-minute walk to parks and public investment (Closson, 2021). 

Using Brooklyn as a case study, my map asks if there is equitable access to parks in neighborhoods via public transit and whether there are “green deserts.” This will help to answer the question: Does the amount of income in an area affect the placement of parks, and are these parks accessible in Brooklyn via public transit?

"Joy comes from places you least expect it. It's usually the simple things, like watching my son play basketball or going through Central Park when the blossoms are blooming." 

– Dave Gahan

Map Layer Overview

NYC Income by Census Tract

A census tract is a small geographic area defined by the United States Census Bureau for the purpose of collecting and organizing census data. Census tracts are usually designed to have a relatively consistent population size, which allows for more accurate and detailed demographic analysis. This layer includes the most recent data published by the American Community Survey about median household income in all five boroughs. It takes into account margins of error. This data layer was last updated on May 6, 2021. 

NYC Parks

Parks are areas of land set aside for public use. These encompass recreational areas, such as basketball and tennis courts, and green space, such as community gardens and triangle/plaza parks. This map layer’s information was taken from the NYC Open Data Portal and displayed using arcGIS. This data layer was last updated on January 23, 2023. 

NYC Subway Stops

Subway stations play a large role in accessibility throughout the city. This data layer provides an accurate GIS representation of where MTA subway stations are placed in the 5 boroughs. These are based off of the General Transit Feed Specification (GTFS) files in 2015. This data layer was last updated on April 14, 2023.

Local Bus Routes NYC

Bus routes play a large role in accessibility throughout the five boroughs. This data layer provides an accurate GIS representation of MTA bus routes throughout Brooklyn. The data was created from the GTFS data feed provided by the MTA and compiled at the GIS Lab at the Newman Library at Baruch College. This data layer was last updated on February 4, 2020.  

Map Analysis

  • There tends to be a greater number of green spaces in areas of higher income
  • Brownsville and New Lots are outliers as they are low-income neighborhoods that have several green spaces
    • Public transit serves both areas very well 
  • There are larger, more spread out parks in higher income neighborhoods while lower income neighborhoods have smaller, more frequent parks
  • The walking distance to parks tends to be greater in lower-income communities than higher-income communities
  • The parks in higher income neighborhoods are less accessible via public transit than ones in lower income neighborhoods  
  • Larger parks have greater public transit nearby as opposed to smaller, neighborhood parks
  • Larger parks tend to have higher income neighborhoods in the surrounding area 
  • There is an overall trend of larger community parks sited in areas along the Brooklyn waterfront 
  • Neighborhoods on the waterfront overall have higher median incomes than ones in the interior of Brooklyn without access to the water, with the exception of Coney Island
  • There’s a lack of mixed income neighborhoods throughout Brooklyn
  • The distance to a subway station is greater in Sheepshead Bay, Marine Park, and Canarsie as opposed to other neighborhoods
    • These neighborhoods have an average income that is 29% higher than the median income in Brooklyn
  • Small neighborhood parks tend to be less accessible via subway and instead are better served by buses
  • There’s less subway access to higher income neighborhoods than in lower income neighborhoods
    • There are more dead zones in higher income neighborhoods in regard to public transit in general

Site Visits

01 / 06

Red Hook Recreation Park

Founded by the Dutch in 1636, the area was initially named Roode Hoek due to the reddish hue of the soil and the shape of the land. Red Hook remained rural and marshy until the 1840s, when it turned into a shipping hub. The city acquired its first piece of land along the waterfront on October 10, 1913, which would become Red Hook Recreation Park (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.d). The park was officially opened on August 12, 1936, under the leadership of the infamous Robert Moses. The neighborhood continued to thrive until the 1940s, especially with the addition of the newly constructed high-rise public housing complex nearby. However, in the 1950s, Red Hook’s industry declined and the Gowanus Expressway cut off the neighborhood from the rest of Brooklyn. This led to the removal of the trolley service, leading to a significant population drop between 1960 and 1980 and the area becoming less desirable to live in (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.d). In the 1970s, Red Hook’s waterfront started to attract artists to the area. Today, Red Hook still continues to lack subway access but continues to be a thriving neighborhood.  

Red Hook Recreation Park does have a conservancy which protects and advocates for 16 open spaces in Red Hook to “support the interest and well being of members of the Red Hook Recreation Center” (Red Hook Conservancy, n.d.). The neighborhood is broken into three income demographics, which includes income between $118,110 – $168,167, $78,447 – $94,047, and $9,740 – $28,798. This large range of income is due, in part, to the high-rise public housing campus built in 1938 that’s next to the park and artists who continued to move in at the turn of the century. There are many bus stops in the area that the B57 and B61 serve, and the park itself is beautiful and nicely redone. There are lots of places to sit, newly paved sidewalks, trees and greenery, water fountains, a view of the beautiful skyline of lower Manhattan, and multiple ball fields and goals for soccer, which were all open to the public when I went. The park is well maintained, with barely any trash on the sidewalk or fields. However, there is a decent amount of graffiti on the signs for the ballparks, but nothing too overwhelming. There is a lack of tree cover and natural green space because of the fields, but the walkway has a decent amount of trees. This, however, does not defend against the urban heat island effect. The main demographic of the park seems to be residents and athletes from all segments of the Red Hook population who are coming to compete on the fields. There’s a recreation center next to the park with a Citibike docking station. This park doesn’t have a playground associated with it, however, the needs of the community still seem to be met by the space and a playground next to it. There is a publicly accessible playground next to the park with basketball courts and a track that appears in need of a renovation but offers a lot to both kids and adults, including a workout area that is affiliated with the public-housing. 

Washington Park

Washington Park, also known as James J. Byrne, is a large community park in Park Slope. The Parks Department took ownership of the land in 1926, and in 1933, the Board of Aldermen, legislative body, named it after Byrne, a borough president of Brooklyn and Brooklyn Commissioner of Public Works (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.f). The Old Stone House of Gowanus, now used as the restroom and park office, was built in 1934 after its original was demolished in 1897. In 1951, William Alexander Junior High School 51 was built next to the park and, in 1996, the park underwent a remodel, including a full-scale reconstruction of the Old Stone House (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.). The park resides in an area with an average median income between $94,047 - $250,001. There are a few subway and bus stations nearby. These are served by the F, G, R, D, N, W, and the B103.  

Washington Park is appealing with a really well maintained athletic field and areas for baseball/softball. The Old Stone house is a very well used and maintained amenity as many kids use it. There are 5 basketball courts, a handball wall, a pickleball court, and a skate park. Next to this, there’s a dog park and a scenic, paved, walkway with lots of greenery that has a large amount of foot traffic and many trees to provide shade. This, however, is the only natural green space in the park. It’s clearly a community space because of all the socializing occurring in the park, especially during after school hours. The park has a lot of benches in front of the school and a garden space with many other amenities including a public restroom, babies and kids playground, and a Christmas market.

Sunset Park

A portion of Sunset Park was first acquired by the city in 1891, while the neighborhood was becoming a largely Scandinavian community. In 1905, Sunset Park was expanded into what it is today (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.e). Now, the park is visually appealing and clearly well maintained. It resides in the neighborhood of Sunset Park and has some of the best views of Lower Manhattan, New Jersey, and the Statue of Liberty that I have ever seen. It is placed in a neighborhood with an income between $28,798 and $78,447 and majority of the residents are of lower or middle socioeconomic status. The park has a few subway stations and bus stops surrounding it. These are served by the R, N, W, D, B35, B70, and B37. Sunset Park has large grassy areas and many trees to provide cover from the urban heat island effect. It also has a large amount of amenities, including a swimming pool (opened to the public in 1936), fields, pedestrian pathways, a sand volleyball court, a recreation center, a basketball court donated by the New York Liberty and Brooklyn Nets, and a memorial dedicated to the events of September 11th to show the support of a community after such an impactful event (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.e). The park also provides a playground for multiple ages and is beautifully maintained with many kids and people (especially runners and people enjoying the view). The playground and fields seem to be the most popular amenities as there were lots of children and activities in these areas. 

Rappaport Playground

Rappaport Playground, founded on September 25, 1936 and located in the Borough Park neighborhood of Brooklyn, appears to be a well-liked recreational spot in a residential neighborhood with hospitals (Rappaport Playground in Brooklyn, n.d.). The majority of Borough Park residents are Hasidic Jewish and have an income between $28,798 and $64,749. It is served by bus stops consisting of the B11 and B16 with no subway access. Rappaport Playground offers a range of amenities, including basketball and handball courts, a skating rink, a restroom, water fountain, comfortable seating areas, and a vibrant playground. There is a lot of activity in this park as people play basketball, relax, and use the play equipment. Families gather for picnics, creating a wholesome and communal vibe.

Despite the popularity of the basketball court, benches, and playground, the playground equipment shows signs of aging, indicating it may not have been renovated recently. In spite of this, kids in the area use the playground, as there are a lot of families in the neighborhood. Additionally, the building behind the playground had graffiti. This park lacked greenspace, however, it had a lot of trees which provides nice shade during the summer and helps mitigate the urban heat island effect. While the park has a slightly higher amount of litter compared to others, there still appears to be adequate maintenance to ensure that it remains a welcoming and usable space for the community.

Kolbert Playground

Kolbert Playground, located in Midwood, was acquired by the City of New York in August 1936, and officially opened to the public in June 1937 (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.a). In 1995, a $800,000 renovation, funded by City Council Member Anthony D. Weiner, provided the park with modern play equipment, a new swing area, basketball and handball courts, and improved infrastructure (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.a). It resides in a census tract with an average median income between $41,446 and $64,749 which is lower to middle class. However, there’s a census tract close to the park with an income of $96,875. There’s a subway station that is served by the Q and a few bus stops that are served by the B9. 

Kolbert Playground has a great amount of amenities, including two basketball courts, handball courts, playgrounds, a track, a field, a lot of benches, a workout area, water fountain, and a bathroom. It is clearly used by the local community and is an important community space for the residential neighborhood surrounding the park. It is proximate to a school which brings a number of children. One section of the playground is redone, while the other needs to be repainted. There are a lot of maintenance workers, so there is no trash in the park. There are numerous trees that add aesthetic appeal and shade that shields against the urban heat island effect.

Maria Hernandez Park

Acquired from the Barnums and other landowners in the early 1890s, the City of Brooklyn used the space as a showcase park, because of its extensive landscaping and construction (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.b). Originally called Bushwick Park, it quickly became a favored area for community gatherings, hosting events like Fourth of July and Labor Day celebrations, croquet matches, dances, and baseball games.

In the late 1930s, the playground saw enhancements with the installation of new slides, a sand pit, swing sets, and a softball field complete with bleachers. Further improvements in the early 1970s introduced additional basketball courts and upgraded infrastructure. In 1989, the park was renamed Maria Hernandez after a Bushwick resident who died while advocating to get rid of drugs in the neighborhood. By the early 1990s, “the park had fallen into a state of disrepair” and in 1994, a cleanup occurred which took five days (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.b). In 2007, the park's playground and basketball courts underwent a renovation. This project also introduced new exercise equipment and a plaza featuring a stage, centered around a vibrant mosaic portraying a green parrot by the artist Camila Gelpi. The year 2012 marked the completion of the dog park, and, in 2021, NYC Parks replaced the blacktop softball fields with a synthetic turf field and updated workout area (New York City Department of Parks & Recreation, n.d.b).

This park is in a neighborhood with a median income between $52,868 and $94,047 and sits at the center point of a few different sections of Bushwick. The park is accessible by both subways and buses. The neighborhood is served by the L, M, B38, and B60. Evidently used as a community space, this park always has activity. People are engaged in various activities—running, walking, conversing, and enjoying the playground or numerous athletic areas. This park has basketball and volleyball courts, handball courts, an open field, a well-equipped workout area, a skate park, a stage, benches, water fountains, large grassy areas, trees, numerous walkways, a playground, and a bathroom.

Since the park is situated in a residential neighborhood, the park becomes a gathering spot for kids after school who are playing basketball, soccer, or having conversations on benches. The park is well maintained and has both old and new elements which can be shown by the playground area. This park includes art and a large number of pathways, more than I have ever seen in a park. There’s also stencils on the floor that say “No more taxes, no more wars!” Altogether, the park's upkeep and its evident role as a community space contribute to its overall appeal.

Conclusion

In conclusion, from my research and map analysis, there is a correlation between where parks are placed and the income level in an area. However, transportation has less of an obvious association, as buses and the subway run throughout Brooklyn, but parks in higher income neighborhoods are less accessible by public transit. This suggests that park equity might be served through the creation of more, and better maintained, parks in lower income neighborhoods, to increase accessibility on foot and by wheelchair and bike, and increased transit access in higher income neighborhoods for those with fewer resources to access parks in wealthier neighborhoods.

The number of parks appears to be greater in higher income neighborhoods than low income neighborhoods, demonstrating disparities in access to green spaces. This raises concern in access to parks, which suggests residents of higher income neighborhoods are more likely to enjoy the benefits that parks have to offer, such as leisure, physical activity, and social interaction. In contrast, residents with lower socioeconomic status face barriers to accessing these benefits. This discrepancy reflects an inequality in park access in neighborhoods and the importance of advocating for making green spaces accessible to everyone, regardless of income. 

From my site visits, I found a common challenge facing parks that I visited, and that is a lack of maintenance, especially in lower income neighborhoods. Parks in higher income neighborhoods are better maintained, as opposed to ones in disadvantaged neighborhoods where you see more litter or the playground equipment needs attention. This demonstrates the need for increased maintenance of parks in neighborhoods of lower socioeconomic status. In the meantime, transportation should be a common amenity to provide residents with the opportunity of accessing another park. 

Public transit had less of an obvious correlation. There seems to be less public transit to access parks because of fewer subway stations and bus routes in higher income neighborhoods as opposed to ones in lower income neighborhoods in Brooklyn. This may be, in part, due to the fact that these neighborhoods, such as Sheepshead Bay, Marine Park, and Canarsie, tend to be on the outskirts of Brooklyn where there’s more car usage because of the lack of public transit accessible. This, however, leads to a positive feedback loop in which more parks are necessary to compensate for the gas emitted into the environment. Public transit needs to be extended to ensure people are given equitable options to access different areas.       

There were individual trends for bigger parks such as Prospect Park and Sunset Park. The income in the neighborhoods surrounding these parks were higher, which demonstrates that parks may bring in economic benefit to a community through increasing property value, drawing tourists, recreational value, and by making the land, and therefore the neighborhood, more desirable. The transit access to these parks was much better than any of the neighborhood parks I visited. Most of these had subway stations and bus stops within walking distance and were close to parks smaller than one acre. 

To address these issues and promote park equity, there should be a multi step approach. First, urban planning policies should be revised to be more mindful of these inequalities by ensuring parks are evenly distributed and maintained regardless of socio-economic status. This goal can be met by greater collaboration between local government, community organizations and community members to ensure the needs of the area are being met.

Community engagement programs can be established to share information with the community about the benefits of parks and to encourage residents to participate in the planning processes of parks. This enables everyone, from all different backgrounds, to have a say in how parks are designed resulting in green spaces that meet the needs of a diverse community. This would be reflected in its various amenities and programming. 

Considering the benefits that parks give to communities, there should be a considerable increase in the allocation of funding from the city’s budget to the Parks Department. This, in the long run, could decrease the money being spent on public health issues because parks provide spaces for activity, relief from the heat, air pollution, and promotes the overall wellbeing of a community. The government pays more upfront but mitigates the cost in the long run. In addition, financial incentives could be given to the private sector to invest money in parks, especially ones in low income neighborhoods to decrease the access gap.  

References

Photo credit:

Background research:

Map layers:

  • Local Bus Routes NYC
  • NYC Income by Census Tract (2015-2019) 
  • NYC Parks
  • NYC_SubwayStops

Special thanks to Maria Avila-Franklin, Senior Policy Advisor, NYC Public Realm, Christopher Syrett, Team Leader for Brooklyn, NYC Department of Parks and Recreation, Claudia Cereceda, Chief of Staff, NYC Department of Parks and Recreation, David Weissglass, Team Leader for Brooklyn, NYC Department of City Planning, Matthew Crosswell, GIS Team Leader, NYC Department of City Planning, Antonios Michelakis, City Planner, NYC Department of Parks and Recreation, Jose Lopez, Deputy Director of Parklands, NYC Department of Parks and Recreation, Tely Renata, Staff Analyst, NYC Department of Parks and Recreation, Suzette Harper, Executive Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner of Environment and Planning, NYC Department of Parks and Recreation, Rosemary Sheehan, Executive Assistant, NYC Commissioner’s Office, Tanya Gallo, Co-Director of Living City Project, Andrew Meyers, Co-Director of Living City Project, and Nico Rubin, Program Associate.