[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
'Ilk ja It, N N 161 IRV Lo T 0c) rLI m > m E-1 v 10 v 0 Q.Ce 0- bm CEL 0 0 lifA TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION PEARCE JOHNSON Chairman, Austin JOE K. FULTON Lubbock JACK R. STONE Wells BOB BURLESON Temple JOHN M. GREEN Beaumont LOUIS H. STUMBERG San Antonio CLAYTON T. GARRISON Executive Director fa It -1k 10 LLJ LC) Cf) C= LAJ 14 cc co E) -:c Cl- LL-j <D CO C/3 ,r Q= -D co <cn E . (D" w => C-,j U CL E o LO 0 'rZ j5 > C- LL: 10, L. r- (D CL -5 c E CD= r- c 0 HdV I 'ILA e7 I A SJ- L I R+ i OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR DOLpm BRISC E STATE CAPITOL 00@RNGR AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 Mr. James G. Watt Director A4 Department of the Interior Bureau of Outdoor Recreation Washington D. C. 20240 R Dear Mr. Watt: Outdoor recreation has long been an important element in the lives of Texans. In this respect, citizens of Texas are fortunate to live in a State endowed with abundant natural resources and blessed with a rich variety of recreational resources. In the future, dependence on these resources will increase as the demand for recreation opportunities continues to grow. AL- The future holds many challenges for Texans. Among these, along with maintaining a viable economy and an agreeable standard of living, is the challenge of insuring that a sufficient quantity of diversified outdoor recreation opportunities is available for present and future generations of Texans. In accomplishing these ambitious goals, the importance of careful planning for the wise use of the State's natural and fiscal resources is a matter of concern for all Texans. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department has recognized its responsibility for assuring that adequate land, water and facilities for recreation are available to every region of the State. The ten volume Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan will serve as a guide for action in providing needed recreation opportunities throughout the State. With the completion of this plan, an important new source of information is available for input into the comprehensive planning process. I am pleased to submit to you this volume of the Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan. * Si e OE Go nor i Pe Gonoofr St te of Texas DB/ic 2 CHANGESTO OUTDOOR RECREATION IN THE URBAN AREAS OF TEXAS, PART 1: AN OVERVIEW Please make the changes listed below and file this change sheet for future reference. For the convenience of users only those changes determined to be of significance in interpreting this volume are listed. ACTIO F igure/ ELM Column Paragraph Line Table CHANGE OTHER @-rom 1 0 3 2 --- 4 --- 1969 1960 3 2 --- 20 --- 32 31 5 1 ... ... Add "Recreation and Transportation Program ... 121" between I.nes9& 10 5 1 ... 20 139 141 7 2 ... 20 4.4 Add page number -84- 7 2 --- 24 - 1975 1970 23 - - --- 1.6 381 391 Miscellaneous, Total for All Urban Areas 25 - - --- 1.7 ... - Add 21.711,678 under Cities for Child's Play 26 - - --- 1.9 --- Add Legend: dots - Towns, lines - Cities, white Metros, black - Total 30 --- - ... 1.12 --- ... Figure 1.12 Legend same as Figure 1.11 43 8 --- 7 2.7 475.356 475,356 45 --- --- 2.3 C-1 Region 18 45 ... - --- 2.3 FT 31 Region 25 54 1 4 2 ... statewide urban household 55 --- ... 3.5 ... --- Change title from "Reference" to "Preference" 59 ... ... 3.7 .02 .01 Surfing 62 --- --- - 3.10 - --- Walking, 0-4 Yrs., is -10.27- 65 --- - . . --- 3.11 128,513 128,518 Walking, Metros, 1990 65 ... --- --- 3.11 21,400 21,408 Tennis, Metros, 1975 65 --- --- --- 3.11 260 268 Tennis, Towns, 1975 66 --- --- --- 3.11 6,831 6,381 Freshwater Boating, Metros, 1980 68 3 ... ... ... --- --- Lines 1. 2, and 3 should follow line 12 71 - --- --- 3.15 1.81 1.22 Freshwater Skiing, Metros, 1990 71 3.15 1.62 1.22 Freshwater Skiing, Towns, 1990 72 3.16 --- --- Title - should read "Projections of Current.. 72 --- --- --- 3.16 48 4.8 2000, Under Total for all Urban Areas 79 2 1 2-4 --- --- --- Should read '. . . The 70-30 ratio is not a proposed TORP guide. line, but assuming the relative levels to be a reasonably. . B1 2 2 17 --- in the 85 1 1 11 --- Table 4.1 Table 4.2 86 2 3 8 ... 1,604 1,064 88 --- --- --- 4.5 241 471 Number of Facility Units Required, Cities Cumulative Column, Combined Walking, Bicycling, ahd Nature Study, 2000 90 1 1 26 - ... --- Delete line 26, add "trails total to 110 miles; and the requirement for football/soccer fields was incremented by bringing the 1975 total to 26 fields. Freshwater boat ramp requirements for the . 92 ... --- ... 4.6 1975 1970 Title line 94 2 3 4 ... --- --- Following "publicly administered", insert "park or recreation area providing opportunities for their residents. There7were 149 publicly-ad.inistered 94 3 3 1 ... this it is 98 3 1 3-5 --- Should read "Unlike resource requirements, there are many aspects of urban outdoor recrituition which could not be easily quantified for analysis. However, the importance of several of . . 108 3 3 14 ... 334 321 112 3 1 22 ... --- --- Change "returning the" to "returning to the" 116 3 3.a. 3&4 ... Delete "and bilieways associated with Federal Aid Highway Act" 140 ... --- ... CA T 4 T-3 Region 27 141 ... ... --- C.2 201-300 201-500 Legend 141 -- - --- C.2. Less than 30 L?ss than 50 Legend 147 1 3 11 . - interate iterate 147 2 2 1 --- interation iteration 147 2 2 5 interations iterations 147 2 2 5 interated itera-ted 147 2 3 10 --- originating originalinhin 149 2 3 1 --- DPNHH 1968 DPNHH1. 18 cs c 149 3 2 3 DPNHH1968 DPNHH1968 cs cs 156 - --- C.8 --- --- Footnote c should have -- sign after the second 1980 and a after the third 1980 158 ... ... ... C.9 17.29 .69 17.25 @ .69 Footnote b 158 ... --- C.9 5.6 .7181 5.6 @3181 Footnote c 172,205 240,276 ... --- ... --- Odessa Midland Footnotes @, line 2 278 2 1 11 --- entern extent 286 ... --- --- --- --- Special Programs for the Aging, add X under State, delete X under Educational Institutions 287 --- --- --- --- --- Economic Development Planning Grants, delete X under Individuals. 290 --- --- --- Economic Development Technical Assistance, add X under state. 296 --- ... ... Topographical Surveys and Mapping Services, delete X under Non-Profit Organizations and Research Organizations, and add X under Private Enterprises and Individuals. 299 3 2 7 --- 34 22 301 --- - F.2 ... 1967-1975 1967-1975' Title line 1. URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION IN TEXAS-A PERSPECTIVE . . . . . . . . . . 14 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Urbanization in Texas, 1836-1960 ....................... 14 Recent Urban Growth Trends in Texas, 1969-1970 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Projected Urban Growth in Texas, 1970-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 16 Urbanization and Outdoor Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 ... . ... . . Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Planning Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Analytical Planning Regions and Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 .. . ......... . .. ....... The Date Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Recreation Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 .......... Recreation Participation . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 t ..... ......... .. Recreation Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 ........... . Recreation Resource Requirements 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S wide Summary of Urban Outdoor Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 tate ................... ... ......... Recreation Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Recreation Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 . . .. .............- Recreation Resource Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Special Concerns and Associated Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 11. URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Suppliers of Urban Recreational Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Federal Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 State Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Counties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 The Private Suppliers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Publicly Administered Urban Recreational Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Historical Trends in the Provision of Publicly Administered Parks . ... . . . . 37 1rable of Conftmts Summary of Public Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 38 Summary of Recreational Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Dispersion of Recreation Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Title Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Dispersion of Opportunities Within the Metropolitan Areas . . . . . . . 44 Letter of Transmittal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Dispersion of Opportunities Among the Cities and Towns . . . . . . . . 46 Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Urban Recreational Opportunity Days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Ill. OUTDOOR RECREATION DEMAND IN THE URBAN AREAS OF TEXAS . . . . . . 49 List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Patterns of Urban Outdoor Recreation Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Legal Authority . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Characteristics of Urban Outdoor Recreation Participation . . . . . . . . . . 51 Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Resident Rates of Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 3 Seasonality of Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Cities Facility Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . ... . 89 Participation by Day of the Week . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Towns. Facility Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . go Activity Preferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Selected Add itional Recreational Facility Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Characteristics of Urban Park Users . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . @54 Statewide Requirements for Sightseeing and Driving for Pleasure . . . . . . . . 91 Features Sought . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Statewide Requirements for Archery, Sport Shooting, and Horseback Riding ..91 Mode of Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 Statewide Requirements for Zoos, Rodeo Arenas, and Cultural Centers . . . . . 92 Distance Traveled from Home to Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Suggested Recreational Resource Requirements for Small Communities . . . . . . . 93 Willingness to Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 56 Recreational Opportunities in Small Texas Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Length of Stay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Recreational Land and Freshwater Requirements for Small Communities . . . . 94 Type of Group . @ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Recreational Facility Requirements for Small Communities . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Cost of Outing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Swimming (Pools) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Socio-Econamic Factors Influencing Participation in Urban Outdoor Recreation . .57 Child's Play (Playground) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Household Size .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 Games and Sports Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Total Household Income . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Basebal I /Softball and Football/Soccer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Race or Ethnic Background . . . . . . . . . ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Tennis and Basketball . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Age of Household Head . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Picnicking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Education of Household Head . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Golf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 97 Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63 Trails Activitie; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Projected Urban Outdoor Recreation Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Other Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Projection Methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Projections of Total Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 V.. SPECIAL CONCERNS AND ASSOCIATED PROBLEMS OF Total Participation for all Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Total Participation by City Size . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 69 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 98 Projections of Resident Participation per Household . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Recreation Resources . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Resident Participation per Household for All Urban Areas, ... . . . . . . 72 Significant Urban Natural Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Resident Participation per Household by City Size . . .. . . . . . . . . . 73 Rivers and Streams and Associated Flood Plains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Lakes and Reservoirs . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 IV. URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . 75 Urban Trails ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . log Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Historic Resources .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Developed Recreational Land and Freshwater Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Outdoor Recreation for the Handicapped and Aged . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Developed Land Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Current Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Statewide Land Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Benefits Derived by the Handicapped from Outdoor Recreation . . . . . . . Metropolitan Areas.Land Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . so Results of the Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey . . . . . . . . 112 Cities Land Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Future Considerations . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Towns Land Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Sources of Municipal Park and Recreation Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Freshwater Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 82 Funding from Local Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Statewide Freshwater Requirements . . . . . . . . . . .... ... . . . . . 83 General Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Metropolitan Areas Freshwater Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Bonds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Cities Freshwater Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . 84 Donations and Gifts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tl 4 Towns Freshwater Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Revenue Producing Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Recreational Facility Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 85 State and Federal Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Statewide Facility Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 State Grant-Beach Cleaning and Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Metropolitan Areas Facility Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. . . . . 88 Federal Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1115 4 Urban Recreation Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Other Activities . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 the Probi in of Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 Suggested Resource Requirements for Small Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . e, . . . . . . . . . Types of Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 APPENDIX D: REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION . .159 Utilizing Existing Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 Joint School-Park Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 120 Federal Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 APPENDIX E: PA *RTIAL LISTING OF STATE AND FEOERAL.PR_0G RAMS 120 APPLICABLE TO OUTDOOR RECREATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . 278 Youth Conservation Corps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State Pr Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act . . . . . . . 120 ograms . . . . . . . . . . 278 Summer Youth Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 Listing of State Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. . . . . . 278 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 Federal Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 Listing of Federal Grant and Credit Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Listing of Federal Technical Assistance and Resource Management Programs . .290 Listing of Federal Research, Information, and Miscellaneous Programs . . . . . . 293 APPENDIX B: REGIO .NAL LISTING OF U_RBAN AREAS Listing of Federal Training Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 BY CITY-SIZE CATEGORY, 1970 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 ,Listing of Metropolitan Areas: Core Cities and Contiguous Urban Areas APPENDIX F: SUMMARY OF LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND (populations 50,000 and Over in 1970) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 PROJECTS A1141) MONIES DISTRIBUTED TO URBAN LOCAL, Listing of Cities (Populations Ranging from 10,000 to 49,999 in 1970) . . . 137 GOVERNMENTS, 1967-1975 . . . . . . 298 Listing of Towns (Populations Ranging from 2,500 to 9,999in 1970) .137 LIST OF FIGURES APPENDIX C: TECHNIQUES OF ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Figure Analytical Planning Regions and Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 1.1 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas in, Texas, 1973 . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 The Data Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Household Demand Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 1.2 Population Distribution in Texas, 1970 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 On-Site Demand Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . * . . . . . . 144 Outdoor Recreation Areas and Facilities Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 1.3 Texas Outdoor Recreation Analytical Planning Regions and Urban Areas . . . 19 Municipal Inventory Update Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 144 Urban Outdoor Recreation Planner's Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 1.4 Total Participation As Conceptualized in the TORP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Estimated 1968 and Projected Urban Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;145 1968 Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 1.5 Total Urban Participation As Conceptualized in the Urban Volume . . . . . . 22 Projected Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 ..Multiple Regression Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 1.6 Number and Percentage of Publicly Administered Urban Parks Which Had Trend Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Designated Outdoor Recreation Facilities in 1971, by City Size, and Total for All Urban Non-Resident Participation Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Urban Areas . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Other Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Facility Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 1.7 Annual Opportunity Days Available in 1971 for Recreational Activities in Urban Additional Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Areas by City Size, and Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Conversion of Resource Requirement to Land Acres . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 Resource Requirements . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 1.8 Projections of Current and Future Resident Participation per Household, 1970, Surface Acres . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 1980, 2000, by City Size, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Swimming Pools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Boat Ramps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 1.9 Total Urban Resident and Non-Redsident Participation Projections, 1970-2000, Trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 By City Size, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 5 1.10 Total Annual Days of Urban Participation, 1970, 1980, 2000, by City Size, Total 3.11 1968 Average Annual Urban Resident Participation Days per Urban Resident for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Household by Race or Ethnic Background, For All Activities . . . . . . .. . . 60 1.11 Urban Recreation Cumulative Developed Land Requirements for Selected 3.12 1968 Average Annual Urban Resident Participation per Urban Resident Activities, 1970, 1980, 20(10, by City Size, Total far All Urban Areas . . . . 30 Household by Age of Household Head, For All Activities . . . . . . . . . . . 61 1.12 Urban Recreation Cumulative Freshwater Requirements for Boating, Boat 3.13 1968 Average Annual Urban Resident Participation per Urban Resident Fishing, and Skiing, 1970,1980, 2000, by City Size, Total for All Urban Areas 30 Household by Education Level of Household Head, For All Activities . . . . 62 1.13 Urban Recreation Cumulative Facility Unit Requirements for Selected Activities, CA Urban City Sizes by Texas Outdoor Recreation Analytical Planning Regions .140 1970, 1980, 2000, by City Size, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.1 Growth Trend s of Publicly-Administered Urban Parks, 1900-1971 . . . . . . 37 C.2 Sampling Dispersion, 1968 Household Demand Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 C.3 Dispersion of Parks Sampled, 1970 On-Site Demand Survey . . . . . . . . . 143 2.2 Proportion of Urban Recreational Land Which Is Developed and Undeveloped, Statewide Total FA Annual Distribution of Land and Water Conservation Funds to Urban Areas by Proportion of Urban Recreational Acreage Which Is Land and Water, City Size, 1967-1975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 Statewide Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 F.2 Total Annual Land and Water Conservation Funds Allocated to Urban Areas, 2.31 Dispersion of Recreational Water Within Urban Areas by City Size and Analytical. 1967-1975 . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . ... . . . . . 300 Planning Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 LIST OF TABLES 2.4 Identification of Towns Which Reported No Parks of Any Type, 1971 _46 Table 1.1 Number of Outdoor Recreation Facility Units Available at Publicly Administered 3.1 Features Sought . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Urban Parks in 1971 by City Size, afid Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . 24 3.2 Mode of Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 2.1 Urban Parkland Acreage, and Water Acreage Within or Adjacent to Urban Flarks, 3.3 Distance Traveled from Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 by City Size, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Willingness to Travel-After Work 2.2 Number and Acreage of Urban Parks, and Urban Population Ratios, by City Size, 3.5 Willingness to Travel-One Day 06ting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Total For All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 3.6 Length of Stay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . @. 57 2.3 Comparison of the Proportional Share of Urban Population by City Size with the Proportional Share of Land and Water Resources by City Size . . . . . . . . 39 3.7 Type of Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 2.4 Number and Percentage of Urban Parks by Type and by City Size . . . . . . 40 3.8 Cost of Outing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 2.5 Number of Acres and Percentage of Acreage for Urban Parks by Type and by City 3.9 1968 Average Annual Urban Resident Participation Days per Urban Resident Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Household by Household Size, For All Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 2.6 Size of Urban Parks by Type and by City Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 3.10 1968 Average Annual Urban Resident Participation Days per Urban Resident 2.7 Number of Facility Units, People per Unit, and Units per Thousand Urban Household by Total Household Income Levels, For All Activities . . . . . . .. 59 Population, by City Size, and Total For All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . 42 6 2.8 Annual Opportunity Days Available in 1971 for Recreational Activities in Urban 3.13 Percent Increase in Total Annual Days of Urban Resident and Non-Resident Areas by City Size, and Total For All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Participation, 1970-1980 and 1980-2000, by City-Size Category, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 2.9 Annual Opportunity Days Available per Thousand Population in 1971 for Recreational Activities in Urban Areas by City Size, 3.14 Rank Order of Total Days of Urban Resident and Non-Resident Participation, and Total For All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 1970, 1980, 2000, by CitV-Size Category, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . 69 3.1 Resident, Non-Resident, and Total Participation in Urban Outdoor Recreation 3.15 Annual Days of Urban Resident Participation per Household, 1970-2000, by Activities by Texans in 1968 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 City-Size Category, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 3.2 Levels of Resident Participation per Household in Urban Outdoor Recreation in 3.16 Projections of Current and Future Resident Participation per Household, Texas in 1968, By Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 1970-2000, by CitV-Size Category, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . 72 3.3 Summary of Participation by Texas Urban Residents in Outdoor Recreation 3.17 Percent Change in Annual Days of Urban Resident Participation per Household, Activities by Seasons, 1968 . . . . ... . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 1970-1980 and 1980-2000, by CitV-Size Category, Total for All Urban Areas 73 3A Summary of Participation by Texas Urban Residents in Urban Outdoor 3.18 Rank Order of Annual Days of Urban Resident Partic ipation per Household, Recreation Activities by Weekdays and Weekends, 1968 . . . . . . . . . . . 54 1970, 1980, 2000, by City-Size Category, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . 74 3.5 Comparison of Urban Activity Participation with Urban Household Activity 4.1 Land Acres Required Per Facility Unit, Statewide Averages . . . . . . . . . . 77 Preferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.2 Urban Recreation Land Requirements for Selected Activities, 1970-2000, by City 3.6 1968 Average Annual Urban Resident Participation Days per Urban Resident Size, Statewide Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Household by Household Size, for Selected Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 4.3 Developed and Open Land Needed To Meet 1971 Urban Recreation Demand As 3.7 1968 Average Annual Urban Resident Participation Days per Urban Resident Estimated by a Sample of Local Urban Planners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Household by Total Household Income Levels, for Selected Activities . . . . 59 4A Urban Recreation Freshwater Requirements for Boating, Boat Fishing, and 3.8 1968 Average Annual Urban Resident Participation Days Per Urban Resident Skiing, 1970-2000, by City Size, Statewide Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Household by Race or Ethnic Background, for Selected Activities . . . . . . 60 4.5 Urban Recreation Facility Unit Requirements for Selected Activities, 1970-2000, 3.9 1968 Average Annual Urban Resident Participation per Urban Resident by City Size, Statewide Totals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Household by Age of Household Head, for Selected Activities . . . . . . . . 61 4.6 Statewide Annual Average Participation Days by Urban Resident Households in 3.10 1968 Average Annual Urban Resident Participation per Urban Resident Archery, Sport Shooting, Horseback Riding 1975-1980, by City Size . . . . 92 Household by Education Level of Household Head, for Selected Activities 62 4.7 General Standards for Archery, Sport Shooting, Horseback Riding . . . . . . 92 3.11 Total Annual Days of Urban Resident and Non-Resident Participation, 1970-2000, by Citv-Size Category, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . 64 4.8 Statewide Annual Average Participation Days by Urban Resident Households in Visiting Zoos and Cultural Centers, Attending Rodeos, 1970, 1975, 1980, by City 3.12 Projections of Current, and Future Resident and Non-Resident Participation, Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 1970-2000, by City-Size Category, Total for All Urban Areas . . . . . . . . . 67 CA Sample Design of Household Demand Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 7 C.2 Sample Design of the On-Site Demand Survey . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 0.9 Regional Comparisons of Urban Resident Participation for Selected Saltwater Urban Outdoor Recreation Activities by City Size, 1970-2000 . . . . . . . 206 C.3 Recreation Facilities Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 DA 0 Regional Comparisons of Urban Incremental Land Resource Requirements per CA Recreation Planner's Survey . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Thousand Population for Selected Urban Outdoor Recreational Facilities by City Size, 1970-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 C.5 Participation in Urban Outdoor Recreation in texas by Out-of -State Residents 145 DA I Regional Comparisons of Urban Incremental Land Resource Requirements per C.6 Urban Facility Standardsior Selected Outdoor Recreation Activities and Facilities 151 Thousand Population for Selected Saltwater Urban Outdoor Recreational Facilities by City Size, 1970-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 C:7 Land Acres Required per Facility Unit, Statewide Averages . . . . . . . . . 152 0.12 Regional Comparisons of Urban Incremental Facility Resource Requirements per C.8 Adaptation of TORP Methodology to Calculate Suggested Resource Thousand Population for Selected Urban Outdoor Recreation Facilities by City Requirements for Small Communities using City Size of 2500 Population and Size, 1970-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242 1980 Projected Participation Rates ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 D.13 Regional Comparisons of Urban Incremental Facility Resource Requirements per C.9 Suggested Resource Requirements for Small Communities . . . . . . . . . . 158 Thousand Population for Selected Saltwater Urban Outdoor Recreation Facilities by City Size, 1970-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277 0.1 Regional Comparisons of Urban Parkland Acreage and Water Acreage Within or Adjacent to Publicly Administered Urban Parks, Metros, 1971 . . . . . . . 160 FA Annual Distribution of Land and Water Conservation Fund Monies to Urban Areas by City Size, 1967-1975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 0.2 Regional Comparisons of Urban Parkland Acreage and Water Acreage Within or Adjacent to Publicly Administered Urban Parks, Cities, 1971 . . . . ... . . 161 F.2 Annual Distribution of Land and Water Conservation Fund Monies and Numbers of Projects to Individual Municipalities, 1967-1975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301 0.3 Regional Comparisons of Urban Parkland Acreage and Water Acreage Within or Adjacent to Publicly Administered Urban Parks, Towns, 1971 . . . . . . . 162 F.3 Annual Distribution of Land and Water Conservation Fund Monies to Urban Areas by Outdoor Recreation Analytical Planning Regions, 1967-1975 . . . 303 0.4 Regional Comparisons of Selected Data for Publicly Administered Urban Parks, Metros, 1971 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 0.5 Regional Comparisons of Selected Data for Publicly Administered Urban Parks, Cities,19711 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 . . . ..... . . ..... ... . . . ... . D.6 Regional Comparisons of Selected Data for Publicly Administered Urban Parks, Towns, 1971 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 .. . .. . . .. D.7 Regional Comparisons of Urban Facility Units Available in 1971 per Thousand n": Population for Selected Publicly Administered Urban Outdoor Recreation . .. ..... .. Facilities by City Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 0.8 Regional Comparisons Of Urban Resident Participation for Selected Urban Outdoor Recreation Activities by City Size, 1970-2000 . . . . . . . . . . . 173 8 of the University of Texas at Austin, and Professor Frederick R. Gehlback of Baylor University for the Acknowledgements data on urban natural areas. Recognition is due a large number of state agencies, University of Texas at Austin Special recognition is due Paul Schlimper, Director, local agencies, institutions, and individuals without Parks Division, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, whose assistance and cooperation this volume would Bureau of Business Research for his administrative direction and support during not have been possible. The following is a list of the various development phases of this volume. contributors to the development of this volume of Computation Center the Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan. Members of the staff of the Comprehensive Planning Population Research Center Branch who contributed substantially to this volume State Agencies include Pat Wiles, who developed the layout, artwork, Private Organizations and other graphic aspects and also supervised and Office of the Governor coordinated printing arrangements, and her assistants, Texas Natural Areas Survey Committee Wally Snell and Shauna Johnson; Steve Puckett who Division of Planning Coordination contributed to the development of data systems and Local Chambers of Commerce the vast amount of programming involved; Jim Riggs Office of Information Service who assisted in narrative development and review and Consultants comment; and special thanks to the staff secretaries Texas Department of Health Resources for typing the many transcripts and the clerical staff Dr. Jared E. Hazleton, University of Texas at Austin, who assisted in compiling data. Texas Department of Mental Health and Retardation Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs Past members of the staff who worked on initial Texas Education Agency drafts of this volume also deserve recognition. Dr. Stanley R. Johnson, University of Missouri Foremost of these is Ron Jones in his organization Texas Health Data Institute at Columbia and guidance during the early formative phases of the Dr. Jack B. Ellis, York University, Ontario, Canada volume. Others include Jim Melton for his Texas Historical Commission contributions in narrative and graphic development; Many of the State Agencies, Regional Councils of George Weiskircher for his efforts in updating supply Texas Rehabilitation Commission Governments, and local planning entities across the information and narrative development; Dick Streety State were most helpful in the development of this for narrative development and data collection; Bill Richardson for supervising the compilation of vast Local Regional Agencies volume by acting in review and comment capacities in addition to aiding in the development of the various amounts of data; Jim Barry for the development of Municipal Governments questionnaires that were employed to obtain basic data systems and programming; and Mike Gibson for data for this study. They also cooperated by data analysis and methodological design in the early Regional Councils of Government providing personnel to help administer certain stages of volume development. questionnaires in the urban areas. In addition, County Governments supplementary data necessary for the development of The preparation of this volume was financed through this volume was provided by many of the local a planning grant from the Land and Water Universities governments. Conservation Fund, administered by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, U.S. Department of the Interior, Texas A&M University Recognition is due Ned Fritz of the Nature and through appropriations from the Texas Conservancy, Texas Chapter, Professor W. Frank Blair Legislature. 9 Section 3 states that in order for other State or local agencies to obtain the benefits of any such programs (under the Land and Water Conservation Act of 1965), the Parks and Wildlife Department shall coordinate its activities with and represent the interests of all ------------ -Ti agencies and political subdivisions of the State of Texas. . having interests in the planning, YIII Vtlullamjok development, acquisition, operation, and Q maintenance of outdoor recreation resources 11, 1: ImIll IN", and facilities." . . . . . . .... --lev General's Opinion No. C-518 issued September 30, 1965, supports the authority that the Department is the proper agency of this State 4111% 1 kip flljw authorized to allocate funding and to carry out the State recreation planning req uirements of the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (Public Law 88-578). tegal Authority The above legislation and related guidelines have been adhered to both with regard to development and implementation of the Texas Outdoor Recreation The development of the Texas Outdoor Recreation the proper departments of the Federal Plan. The various volumes of the Plan are based on a Plan is authorized by Article 6081r, V.T.C.S. Government and with all other departments of careful assessment of what was necessary to fulfill the (Chapter 112, Acts of the 59th Legislature, Regular the State and local governments ... in the provisions and intent of the planning requirements of Session, 1965.) enforcement and administration of the the legislation. Basically, two aspects were identified provisions of this act. . as necessary: (1) a careful determination of the type and quantity of resources necessary to meet the Section 1 of this Act designates the Texas Parks and Section 2 authorizes the Texas Parks and Wildlife State's recreation needs and, (2) assessment of steps Wildlife Department as Department needed to properly utilize resources. ". . the State Agency to cooperate with the ". . Ao prepare, maintain, and keep up-to-date a In summary, the Parks and Wildlife Department Federal Government in the administration of state-wide comprehensive plan for the serves as the primary State Agency authorized to (1) the provisions of any federal assistance development of the outdoor recreation coordinate, develop, and implement the Texas Outdoor programs for the plan'ning, acquisition, resources of the State of Texas; to develop, Recreation Plan for the people of Texas and (2) operation, and development of the outdoor operate, and maintain outdoor areas and regulate the allocation of federal aid from the Land recreation resources of the State. . ." In facilities of the State and to acquire land, and Water Conservation Fund to all political addition, the Parks and Wildlife Department is waters, and interests in land and waters for such subdivisions of the State in accordance with the authorized and directed to cooperate with areas and facilities." priorities set forth in the Plan. 10 In recent years, the demand for outdoor recreation contained many recommendations for action. assume responsibility for the Texas Outdoor opportunities has rapidly increased throughout Texas. Responding to the recommendations in the report, Recreation Plan. In accordance with this direction, Changes in factors such as population, urbanization, Congress and the President began enacting legislation the Department embarked on a continuing course of leisure time, buying power and recreational which expanded the outdoor recreation action designed to provide a strong, viable program to preferences have created a tremendous pressure on responsibilities in several federal agencies, created the guide outdoor recreation development in Texas. public agencies and private entities to provide more Bureau of Outdoor Recreation under the U.S. The first outdoor recreation plan for Texas was outdoor recreational opportunities. Faced with the Department of the Interior, and established the Land published in 1965, and marked the initial effort of increased demand, decision makers and planners in and Water Conservation Fund. the Department to provide a meaningful program and Texas have responded in a commendable manner, guidelines for Texas. Accepted and recognized by recognizing the requirement each of us has for The Land and Water Conservation Fund's intent was federal, state and local agencies, the Plan served to recreation in our everyday lives. to increase outdoor recreation opportunities for the guide outdoor recreation development in the state American people by providing matching grants for and certify Texas eligible to participate in the Land In 1958, an act of the Federal Government, (Public state and local land acquisition and development. In Law 85-478, 72 Stat. 238), created the Outdoor order for state and local governments to receive and Water Conservation Fund from 1965 until 1968. Recreation Resources Review Commission, charging benefits from the Fund, certain eligibility Under the provisions of the Land and Water it with the massive task of recommending courses of requirements had to be satisfied. One of these Conservation Fund Act, each state desiring to action to insure that the necessary outdoor recreation requirements was that each state must develop, participate in the program must update its plan opportunities are provided for the citizens of this maintain, a nd. keep up-to-date a statewide periodically. In 1968, responding to this provision, country now and in the future. The result of the comprehensive outdoor recreation plan. In response and with experience gained in the initial planning Commission's work, a report entitled, Outdoor to this requirement, the 59th Texas Legislature effort, the Department issued an updated plan which Recreation in America, was published in 1962, and directed the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department to extended Texas' eligibility to participate in the funding program until 1972. However, in 1967 the Department and the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, "Volume 11, the Regional Summary, summarizes per- after long and careful considerations, concluded that tinent recreational planning,data relevant to the rural more complete and accurate information and and urban areas of Texas, as provided in detail in techniques were necessary to accomplish a further Volumes III and IV. This volume contains data on refined and major updating of the Plan. The Bureau existing and future resource requirements, as well as agreed with Department proposals to conduct a more data on existing resources with recreation potential, extensive program than had been conducted by any recommendations and priorities for each of the 37 planning regions. state at that time. Extensive statewide data collection efforts were undertaken and sophisticated analytical Volume III, Outdoor Recreation in the Urban Areas techniques developed to further. refine the Plan. of Texas, analyzes outdoor recreation in those areas of Texas with an urban environment. This volume These efforts are realized in the updated 1975 Texas contains specific data on existing recreation Outdoor Recreation Plan which consists of ten opportunities, participation, and existing and future volumes as follows: resource requirements for metropolitan areas, cities, and towns within each of the 37 planning regions. 1. State Summary The volume als o contains suggested recreational ll@ Regional Summary resource requirements for small communities with a Ill. Outdoor Recreation in the Urban Areas of 1069 population from 200 to 2,499 and identifies Texas requirements of the urban areas, rural areas and Gulf areas of special concern and associated problems in IV. Outdoor Recreation in the Rural Areas of Coast region of Texas. Also included is Volume VI the urban areas. Texas which addresses the problems. of resource V. Outdoor Recreation onthe Texas Gulf Coast conservation. Volume IV, Outdoor Recreation in the Rural Areas VI. A Regional Environmental Analysis of Texas, analyzes outdoor recreation in areas having VII. Outdoor Recreation Activities The informational volumes include Volumes VII, a rural environment and in towns with less than 200 VI 11. The Roles of the Public and Private Sectors VII 1, IX and X, which provide information relating to population in Texas. This volume contains specific IX. A Statewide '_ Recreation Information System recreation activities ' roles of the public and private data 'on existing recreation opportunities, X. Techniques of Analysis sectors, and, an information system and planning participation, and existing and future resource methodology. requirements in each of the 37 planning regions. This Although each volume of the Plan presents specific volume also identifies areas of special concern and information regarding various aspects1of'outdoor recre- A brief description of the content of each of these associated problems in rural areas. ation in Texas, the Plan is organized into three parts: ten volumes is presented below to help the user summary volumes, major volumes and volumes of an understand the Plan and more effectively utilize the Volume V, Outdoor Recreation on the Texas Gulf informational nature. The essence of the Plan is con- respective volumes to address particular problems or Coast, analyzes saltwater related outdoor recreation tained in the two summary volumes, the State Sum- needs. in both the urban and rural areas along the Gulf mary and the Regional Summary. All users of the Coast, defined as those seventeen counties contiguous Plan are urged to become familiar with these two Volume 1, -the State Summary', summarizes the major to the Gulf of Mexico or associated bays. This volume volumes. elements of the other nine volumes of the Plan. This contains specific data on each county with respect to volume contains broad i n f o r m a t ion, existing saltwater related recreation opportunities, Major volumes include Volumes Ill, IV and V, which recommendations, and policy statements to guide the participation, and resource requirements, and also contain detailed statewide and regional analysis of the current and future development of outdoor identifies areas of special concern and associated recreation opportunities, participation and resource recreation resources in Texas. problems along the Gulf Coast. 12 Volume V1, A Regional Environmental Analysis, The overall goal of the Texas Outdoor Recreation Adequate data and inform -ation must be focuses on the problems of conserving wildlife and Plan is to provide a framework to guide the allocation available to aid de icision-makers in fully other recreational resou rces for present and,f Iuture of outdoor recreation resources in Texas. Specific understanding the alternatives available and the recreational use in the face of rapid urban and other objectives of the Plan are to: long term effects of decisions affecting outdoor recreation. development. This study focuses on the . 8-county 0 Provide outdoor recreation data and 0 Adequate funds must. be available from all Houston-Galveston Region, with appropriate findings information on a statewide and regional Ibasis to and recommendations projected statewide. levels of government and the private sector to all levels of government and the private sector. insure that necessary recreation opportunities Guide and assist recreational planning entities are provided in a timely manner. Volume Vil, Outdoor Recreation Activities, analyzes in the development sof outdoor recreation plans 0 The various government and private sector participation patterns and examines factors and programs at the state, regional and local entities '.. should coordinate and cooperate if. significantly influencing participation for the most levels.. . the State's problems are to be solved. Better significant of the more than 70 recreational activities *,Provide an official state recreation plan that can coordination and cooperation in data gathering, identified in Texas. Factors such as participation by be used by non-recreational planning entities to analysis, and implementation must be achieved. the time of day, seasons of the year, distances anticipate, identify, accommodate or integrate travelled, expenditures of time and money, ability to the interests and resource needs of recreation, The philosophy of the State of Texas toward participate, and facility preferences are examined. within the scope and objectives of such statewide planning for outdoor recreation should be Volume Vill The Roles of the Public and Private planning endeavors. clearly understood. A plan is not a static document .*'Provide a more effective guide for the but an ongoing process." Various pieces of technical Sectors, compares the roles and influences of public allocation of Land and Water Conservation information are out-of-date by the time they are agencies and private entities in providing recreational Funds and other outdoor recreation resource published; therefore, the document should be used as opportunities for public use. related funding programs in Texas. an aid in decision-making rather than a document Volume IX, A .Statewide Recreation Info .rmation *Strengthen the ability of all levels of containing cookbook decis Iions for every government and the private sector to better. circumstance. Our society is .dynamic and our System, describes the functions of communication, coordinate, plan and provide quality outdoor problems are too specialized and complex to depend coordination, and cooperation with the framework of recreation opportunities for Texans and' their solely on a static document to guide the development the statewide recreational planning process. This visitors now and in the future. of our outdoor recreation resources. Evaluation of volume also examines the data collection instruments 0 Bring about the expansion of efforts to protect projects for compliance with the State Plan will and methodologies used in the past, and presents a-nd conserve those resources that have special consider this reality. alternative s for future updates. scenic, historic, scientific, educational or other Volume X, Techniques of-Analysis, describes the value to outdoor recreation. Upon completion and distribution of the Plar., the method .ology used in the TORP to desermine recrea- 19,Provide general information regarding the planning staff of the Texas Parks and Wildlife -tio.nal! demand, recreation fa Hit @ standards, oppor- characteristics of outdoor recreation in Texas. Department will continue working with various C Y tunities, resource requirements, and recreation prior- The development of this Plan in itself cannot solve government entities and the private sector in efforts ities in Texas. the recreation problems facing Texas. In attaining the to insure that the Plan is kept UPA07date and useful. Plan objectives, there are four major efforts that must With the help of all levels of government and the With this information and frame of reference in mind, be accomplished at all levels of government and the private sector, the people of Texas will continue to it is important to understand the goal and objectives have high quality environments in which to live, work of this Plan, the recreational planning philosophy of private sector: and recreate. The staff of the Texas Parks and the State, and the major efforts necessary in order for Wildlife Department is dedicated to this end and Texas to remain an enjoyable place to live, work and 0 There must be sincere concern on the part of welcomes any constructive suggestions or comments recreate. decision-makers in the public and private pertaining to this effort. sectors to meet this objective. 13 INTRODUCTION The first settlers in Texas, who began to arrive during the early part of the 19th century, found themselves 4. in a wide-open, untamed territory. The land was tt I P E R SP ECT IV [email protected], harsh, as was life itself. The struggle for existence was Id primary, an 0, d providing food and shelter demanded practically all of a man's time and energy. Leisure and recreation were some of life's pleasures that could only be permitted occasionally. Society was typified chiefly by the family unit and its rural character, for the teeming metropolitan areas of today were, at that time, no more than small towns or villages, and most did not even exist. However, these patterns began to ow change, slowly at first, and then more quickly, accelerated by technology, the growth of industry, *1 and several wars. Today, life is easier than it was for previous generations, and society has become a predominantly urban one. Texans have become more isolated from nature as a result, and they now seek to re-discover the outdoors and associate closely with nature in their recreational pursuits. And in recent years, the growth of recreation participation has been Al I tremendous. Along with the growth of recreation is the increased urbanization taking place in Texas, which forms the background for the need for urban outdoor recreation opportunities. N IitA URBANIZATION IN TEXAS, 1836-1960 In 1836, at the time of the Texas Declaration of Independence from Mexico, the population of Texas was estimated at only about 35,000 to 50,000 persons, although by the time of Texas' entrance into the Union nine years later, the population is estimated to have grown to between 125,000 to 150,000. During this period, three of the major metropolitan areas of today were founded-Dallas, Fort Worth, and Houston-while San Antonio, El Paso, and Galveston had already existed for some time. iSources: Texas Almanac and State Industrial Guide, 1974-1975. Photo by Parks and Recreation Department, City of Austin. Urban Texas: Past-Present- Future, A Report Prepared for the Texas Urban Development 14 Commission by Joe B. Harris, Commission Staff. low The Civil War and Reconstruction, transportation and population mark. A fifth major city, El Paso, was not Marked changes continued in the population communication improvements, and immigration far behind with over 75,000. While more urban areas distribution between 1940 and 1960. Houston still served to swell the population enormously during the were coming into existence, others came to be remained in first place with over 900,000 residents, latter half of the 19th century. As the major cities regarded among the major urbanized areas of Texas. and San Antonio and Dallas reached over 500,000, began to attract more residents, the urban areas In this category were Beaumont, Austin, Galveston, but now suburban cities began to appear among the continued to grow, although slowly, during the late Wichita Falls, Laredo, Port Arthur, and Waco, all of state's larger urban places, including such cities as 19th century. In 1850, for example, only 16% of the which exceeded 20,000 people by 1920. The urban Pasadena, Irving, and Arlington. Rapid population population was considered urban and by 1900, this population now comp6sed about 30% of the total, growth began to appear elsewhere across the State. percentage had increased to 17.1% of a total and the absolute increase in urban population There were now 11 cities with populations exceeding population of some 3 million people. By 1900, Texas exceeded the increase in rural population for the first 100,000, 10 cities over 50,000, and 50 cities over ranked sixth in population among all the states, and time ever. 20,000 in population. some urban centers were beginning to achieve quite respectable sizes. San Antonio was the top-ranked By 1960, the total population in Texas amounted to city in population with over 50,000. Not far behind approximately 9.6 million. In 1950, for the first time were Dallas and Houston with over 40,000 each, and Within the next two decades, Texas' population. in history, the urban population exceeded the rural, four other cities exceeded 20,000, including surged ahead to a total of about 6.4 million by 1940, and this trend continued through 1960. Continuing Galveston, Fort Worth, Austin, and Waco. of which nearly half was classified as urban. By 1940, the great movement of people from rural to urban Houston had become the State's largest city with over areas which occurred during and after World War 11, In the 1920's, four cities, San Antonio, Dallas, 400,000, and 14 additional cities had surpassed the the urban population by 1960 made up fully 75 Houston, and Fort Worth, surpassed the 100,000 20,000 mark. percent of the total. 16 RECENT URBAN GROWTH TRENDS IN TEXAS, The trend toward urbanization is expected to The six major metropolitan areas which expressed 1960-1970 continue in the future. The largest gains in total large growth rates from 1960-1970 are also expected population increases are projected to occur in the to increase significantly from 1970 to 2000, With a 1970 population of nearly 11.2 million in metropolitan areas in Texas. This increase may not accounting for almost 87% of the State's total 1970, Texas became the fourth most populous state establish itself in the metropolitan core areas,but population growth. Dallas, Houston, and Fort Worth in the United States. The proportion of this rather the contiguous areas,to be near financial and are projected to more than double in population over population that was urban continued to increase, business opportunities while retaining the fresh air that time, increasing 141%, 120%, and 106% amounting to nearly 80 percent. However, 1970 and open space atmosphere of the rural life. The respectively. Population increases for San Antonio, El marked the emergence of new patterns and trends. proportion-of the State's total population residing in Paso, and Austin for the 1970-2000 projection period Population growth became concentrated in a few of urban areas is expected to be about 80% in the year are projected to be, in order, 68%, 70%, and. 55%. the state's major metropolitan areas (Figure 1.1). Six 2000, the same as in 1970. This relatively constant of the 24 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas percentage figure is explained by the fact that while (SMSA's) accounted for over 90% of'the state's many urban areas are projected to reflect population growth between 1960 and 1970. These six included i n creases others are expected to decline in 2. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, the Houston, Dallas, -San Antonio, Fort Worth, El population. 1972. Paso, and Austin Metropolitan Areas. Examination of the growth of these metropolitan areas reveals that FIGURE 1.1 these population increases resulted from continued central city growth, especially Austin and Houston, as STANDARD METROPOLITAN AMARILLO well as suburban growth. Some idea of this pattern of STATISTICAL AREAS IN TEXAS, 1973 concentrated growth is evident from Figure 1.2. On the other hand, striking pattern changes were evident, FW-ICHIT S6 as more than a third of the cities of 5,000 or more in population lost population from 1960 to 1970, and LUBBOCK three of these exceeded 1100,000in 1960. Many rural A ILENE areas, as well as small to medium-sized cities, lost @T WORTH DALLAS population, as 57% of Texas' 254 counties showed decreases in population for the 1960-1970 period. MIDLAND W cc PROJECTED URBAN GROWTH TRENDS IN SAN ANGELO KILLEEN -2000 TEMPLE TEXAS, 1970 AUSTIN Texas is projected to remain one of the nation's HU @Iun fastest growing states both in absolute population and SAN ANTONIO in percent of population increase. Only California and Florida are expected to exceed Texas in total population growth from 1970-2000. In 1970, Texas SOURCE: Texas Almanac and Industrial Guide: 1972-1973 accounted for about 5.5% of the nation's population. NOTE: Map shows the Killeen-Temple SMSA, which was CO PUS CHRISTI It is estimated that this percentage will increase to designated in 1972, plus all SMSA changes to April, 1973. LAREDO 6.0% by 1980, 6.5% by 1990, and over 7.1% by 20002, when the total population of Texas is JMcALLE -PHARR-EDINBURG I jROWNSVII I r projected to reach 17.8 million (3.5 million rural and M& 14.3 million urban). 16 z 0 49 M- S@ A 5t cli LU Cy CL c@i tn ZE x 10 -.9 z 0 .1 7E Ln a LU En z ul cc < z M < 0 M D cl LL M ID -C c) CL o W CN rw URBANIZATION AND OUTDOOR RECREATION III Mapa The great population surge in the urban areas of Texas, particularly the metropolitan areas, has OMD 001, logo WIN I M. as son t3=3 M is, oil brought prosperity to many, but has also resulted in 1CM RR4 many problems. More people concentrated in fewer areas bring more pressures, traffic congestion, noise, 4 pollution and crime. Mushrooming cities. demand more land, space, and resources, and unfortunately, these are rapidly disappearing in many places. At the same time, however, people are demanding recreation more than ever to relieve the daily pressures of civilization and re-acquaint themselves with nature V and the outdoors for their spiritual, as well as physical, well-being. Recreation can, and does, serve as a kind of safety-valve for society. It can help V@ individuals to overcome frustration and tension, and H it can provide alternatives for those whose lives might ordinarily be led toward crime, drugs, or both. contiguous to the core city/cities), cities3. (population Demand and resource requirements are projected for of 10,000 to 49,999), and towns3': (population of the years 1970, 1975, 1980, 1990, and 2000. General A major solution to providing recreation and 2,500 to 9,999). It deals with outdoor recreation recommendations, recommended responsibilities for overcoming such problems as these is coordinated taking place in these three types of urban areas by meeting future urban recreational land and facility planning. If those concerned with the quality of life Texans (excludes out-of-state visitors). requirements, and priorities for facility development in Texas join together to establish reasonable Complementing this study of urban recreation is for each of the 37 regions are presented in the standards, goals, and criteria for the development of another volume of the TORP titled Outdoor Regional Summary, and in the State Summary for the park, recreational, and open-space, areas, it will be Recreation in the Rural Areas of Texas, which entire State of Texas possible to make our cities more pleasant places to focuses on rural recreation, or recreation taking place live, W ork, and recreate. Thi,s is where all levels of outside of the metros, cities, and towns. This Part 1: An 046rview of Outdoor Recreation in the government, federal, state, and local, as well as delineation was made because of the differing'nature Urban Areas of Texas. is a statewide summary of the private enterprise, must work, together. and characteristics of urban and rural recreation. analysis of urban outdoor recreation in metropolitan Thus, these two volumes together form a complete areas, cities, towns, and these three city-size SCOPE picture of outdoor recreation in Texas. categories combined. Part 2: Metropolitan Areas deals with outdoor recreation in each of the 24 Toward the goal of achieving coordinated planning Urban outdoor recreation is analyzed on a statewide metropolitan areas in Texas located in 22 different for recreation, the Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan basis, on the basis of city size, and analytical planning planning regions. Part 3: Cities examines outdoor (TORP) was developed. This volume, Outdoor region, with all of the cities of the same size within a recreation occurring in the 27 regions having one or Recreation in the Urban Areas of Texas, is one of the particular region combined for purposes of analysis. more cities. Part 4: Towns focuses on urban outdoor ten volumes which comprise the TORP. It focuses on The analysis of the State and of the various city sizes recreation taking place in the towns within all 37 urban outdoor recreation, or recreation taking place examines the supply of recreational areas and regions, since all regions have at least one Or more in the State's metropolitan areas (population Of facilities, recreation opportunities, the demand for towns. 50,000 or greater, according to the 1970 Census, Plus various activities, and the resource requirements for 3. Cities and towns by definition are urbanized areas not all incorporated and unincorporated urbanized areas land, water, and facilities for each of the 37 regions. contiguous to a metropolitan area. 18 z 0 x z z x w 0 Z LLI > LU 0 Z cc U) ZZ z 4 W 0 4 4c m D 0 U) 4 w 0 LLI U >-- -j 0 0 cc mCLx cc 00 T) U)4 z CCX -J LU >_jx I------- LLI C4 ed C4 C4 Z cc ui r Cc. LU us C4) z U) zOR r3Z z z U) LU z z 1 0 t 4 D 0 ccZ 0 J cc 4c 4c 2 m x(a Or U- _3 -j Ouz "I", I*F LL. g X ui I-- z lei 0 zCC0 0 LU CC cc p ----- Lu -i<:3 Ix -jx LU z 0 --- ----- ----- ----------- I I z U)0 It Isle I R z (D uj< cr 0 @d LU 00 40 -j Z Z =! 0w .4 S? z < CC Ca -J 0 CaL < -0 Cw caa 0 z m 0w .0 CO cm z ------------------- 0c 0 'D 0 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES tremendous growth ot participation in various ANALYTICAL PLANNING REGIONS AND recreational activities. Recreational planning for the URBAN AREAS In the past, many outdoor recreation planning efforts urban areas of Texas serves a number of purposes, in Texas have been disjointed and uncoordinated. which include The analysis of outdoor recreation for the Texas Consequently, the primary goal of the Texas Outdoor 0 identifying urban recreational participation Outdoor Recreation Plan is organized on a state and Recreation Plan, as stated in the "Foreword," is to patterns and estimations of current and future regional basis, as was previously explained. While the provide a framework to guide the allocation of urban outdoor recreation participation. Governor's Office has delineated 24 State Planning outdoor recreation resources in Texas. Serving as a 111lidetermining recreational resources and facilities Regions, it was felt that some of these areas were too guide, the TORP will assist decision-makers of all needed to meet the recreational requirements large for realistic outdoor recreation planning. types at every level in coordinating and planning the for the urban areas, determining where they Therefore, a decision was made to subdivide a most efficient use of resources available to meet the should be located, and setting priorities for number of the State Planning Regions into smaller recreational needs in Texas. In consonance to the acquiring, developing, and protecting outdoor units. The resulting breakdown of the State into 37 TORP's overall goal, the primary goal of this volume recreation resources. Outdoor Recreation Analytical Planning Regions, may be stated as providing a framework for guiding *helping ensure that the people of Texas' tax shown on Figure 1.3, retains, for the most part, the the allocatio n of outdoor recreation resources in the dollars spent on urban recreation resources and integrity of the State Planning Regions, but permits urban areas of Texas. To accomplish this goal,three facilities provide the maximum of high quality more detailed analysis where needed. All Outdoor specific objectives have been established for this recreation opportunities possible. Recreation Analytical Planning Regions follow volume. ensuring a continued opportunity for county boundaries, although most are comprised of *Provide data to assist local recreation planners participation in the determination of urban more than a single county. The urban areas within to solve their present and future outdoor recreational programs by private citizens and these regions were then classified into the three recreation problems. local government. city-size categories of metropolitan areas, cities, and OProvide information concerning the outdoor providing a means of coordinating urban towns, which were then analyzed separately within recreation problems in the urban areas to better outdoor recreation with environmental, each region. enable federal and state governmental entities conservation, and other interrelated plans and THE DATA BASE to plan their outdoor recreation programs to programs. meet the needs of our urban areas. Comprehensive outdoor recreation planning requires Serve as a document which can be used to more Recreational planning must be a dynamic process. the collection and analysis of large amounts of data in efficiently allocate money from the Land and Texans' life styles are continually undergoing rapid order to recognize and solve problems. While Water Conservation Fund to local government changes. Economic and political changes; population secondary sources of information can be used in entities. shifts; changes in mores, society, tastes, and many parts of the planning process, it was found that preferences; technological advances, etc.-all make much primary data must be collected on existing PLANNING METHODOLOGY projections into the future difficult. Therefore, it facilities, activity participation, preferences, and a becomes necessary for planners to continually review, host of other items for which secondary data is not Planning, simply defined, is a means to accomplish an update, and revise previous plans so that the planning available. In developing the urban portion of the end, or goals, formulated through a systematic process remains effective and responsive. Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan, five extensive consideration of alternatives. These goals may be surveys were conducted: two surveys of recreation accomplished using different methods of planning, demand, two of outdoor recreation resources, and depending upon the problem, the goals, and the one survey of the urban areas' needs and problems. means sought to achieve the goals. Whatever the The following discussion provides a brief explanation These surveys, and a brief description of each,follow. methodology, logical planning greatly improves the and overview of the methods and the main elements chances of making any endeavor a successful one. upon which the urban plan is based. For a more 0 The 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Emphasis on recreational planning in Texas has detailed treatment of these topics, refer to Appendix Household Demand Survey was used to collect increased in recent years to keep pace with the C. recreation participation data from a stratified 20 random sample of 15,125 households 0 The 1971 Urban Planner's Survey was a survey interviewed across the State. This was the most of urban and recreation planners in 355 FIGURE 1.4 important data collection effort undertaken in metropolitan areas, cities, and towns. These TOTAL PARTICIPATION AS CONCEPTUALIZED conjunction with this Plan. The Household planners were asked to identify recreation IN THE TORP Survey obtained information on participation needs, problems, and trends in their respective i n outdoor recreation, socio-economic urban areas and to delineate sections of the TOTAL PARTICIPATION = all Partici- characteristics of recreationists, types and urban area according to the predominant pation occurring within the state of numbers of recreation trips taken, seasonality socio-economic characteristics. Texas of participation, activity preferences, investment in recreation equipment, factors RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES which inhibited participation, and a host of URBAN PAROICIPATION RURALPA IRTICIPATIO other characteristics. Recreation opportunities, or opportunity days, are = varticipation occurring in participation occurring in � The 1970 Texas Outdoor Recreation On-Site the number of activity-days, or days of participation, the urban areas of Texas I the rural areas orf Texan Demand Survey was designed to supplement made available annually by a given number of units of non-resident participation to identify the origin of the information obtained from the Household a specified type of recreational facility. Recreation the participants. Resident participation identifies Survey and to provide detailed information on opportunity days were calculated for each facility participation by an individual in the urban participant households. A total of 7,963 type by multiplying the number of units of each area in which he resides. Non-resident questionnaires were administered to recreating facility, i.e., the "supply," by the facility standard. participation identifies participation by a resident of households or groups representing over 20,000 (See discussion of standards below.) This conversion Texas in an urban area other than his area of persons at 163 urban and rural public and of the supply of facilities into activity days made residence.. Non-resident participation may include private parks or recreation enterprises across possible the comparison of supply with demand, participation by a resident of Texas residing in a rural the State. The On-Site Survey secured detailed which was measured in activity day units, on a area who travels to an urban area to participate in a information on the mix of activities pursued, common basis. When the two are compared, and the recreational activity, or a person residing in an urban expenditures, distance traveled, facility and opportunity days for a given activity exceed the area who travels to another urban area to participate. activity preferences, daily peak use periods, projected days of participation. for that activity, then Resident and non-resident participation were weekday and weekend use, suggestions for site there is a surplus, and consequently, the existing computed for the three city-size categories as improvements, and the number and origins of facilities should be able to satisfy the demand. When illustrated in Figure 1.5. out-of-state users in Texas parks. the days of demand exceed the opportunity days, � The 1969 Outdoor Recreation Facilities then a deficit exists and there is a requirement for Resident, non-resident, and total recreation inventory Survey was used to collect additional facilities to meet the demand. The concept participation in urban areas were determined from information on the supply of parks, recreation of opportunity days thus made possible the survey data for 1968-1969 and projected for the areas, and facilities for outdoor recreation computation of resource requirements by dividing the years 1970, 1975, 1980, 1990, and 2000 for a total throughout the State. It consisted of an deficit activity-days by the standard to obtain of 16 activities by each of the three city-size inventory obtained by on-site inspections of recreation resource requirements in terms of numbers categories for each of the appropriate 37 analytical both rural and urban recreation facilities at of facilities. planning regions. In addition to these .16 activities, 2,604 public and 1,250 private enterprises for a RECREATION PARTICIPATION saltwater fishing, boating, and skiing participation total of 3,854 enterprises all over Texas. were projected for those urban areas, located in one � The 1971 Municipal Inventory Update Survey Participation, as utilized throughout the TORP, refers of the six coastal planning regions, having saltwater was a mailout survey of all the State's to participation occurring in a given type of area, access. Surfing participation projections (the 20th metropolitan areas, cities, and towns, and was either urban (i.e., urban participation) or rural (rural activity for which participation was projected) apply used to update the urban section of the 1969 participation) as shown in Figure 1.4. In this volume, only to metropolitan areas and cities in Region 28, Facilities Inventory Survey. urban participation is divided into resident and the only region in the state having urban areas where surfing participation was recorded. 21 FIGURE 1.5 resulted, the deficit days were divided by the TOTAL URBAN PARTICIPATION AS CONCEPTUALIZED IN THE URBAN VOLUME s.tanclard to convert it to facility resource URBAN PARTICIPATION requirements. A surplus of opportunity days was shown as zero resource requirements. As shown, the resource requirements indicate the number of TOTAL RESID NT TOTAL NON-RESIDEN facilities that should be added to the 1971 supply of PARTICIPATION PARTICIPATION facilities available in each region. REGIONS 1-37 REGIONS 1-37 The urban resource requirements were developed under the assumptions that the facility satisfied the total demand for the activity and that all relevant ROPOLITAN TOWNS-209 METROPOLITAN support facilities should be provided in addition to AS-24 AREAS-24 EGIONS 137 REGIONSC Z2 REGIONSa the major facilities stated in the tables, such as grills tor picnicking. The determination of resource a. Twenty-two analytical planning regions have one or more metropolitan areas. requirements did not consider the availability of b. TwentV-seven analytical planning regions have one or more cities. private recreational facilities, the quality of available c. All thirty-seven analytical planning regions have one_o,r more towns. urban facilities, nor the influence of rural facilities in Th .ree different methodologies were used to project of factors, such as seasonality, peak use periods, and close proximity to urban areas. urban participation. Two methods were'used.to project attitudes and preferences of recreationists. urban resident participation: a multiple-regression STATEWIDE SUMMARY OF URBAN OUTDOOR model and a trend model. It was necessary to use two In addition to recreation facility standards, criteria RECREATION methodologies because survey data was not available were developed to estimate the number of land acres or was too thin to use for multiple regression in some required to develop the various types of facilities. This section presents a synopsis of each of the four regions for some activities. These activities utilized These guidelines, expressed as the statewide average chapters that follow in this volume. The first three the trend model. The third methodology was also a number of land acres required per facility unit, were summaries, opportunities, demand, and resource trending technique used to project non-resident based on recreationists' pref erences and requirements, are very important elements of this participation. general ly-accepted design and construction criteria. volume. As such, they provide the basic categories under which the data of principal interest to users of RECREATION RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS this volume are organized for presentation. In the RECREATION STANDARDS fourth summary, special concerns and associated Urban resource requirements were computed for the problems of urban outdoor recreation, important A recreation standard is the number of opportunity following facilities: square yards of swimming Pools; aspects of urban outdoor recreation which merit days, or participation days, which can be provided by acres of playgrounds; baseball/softball fields; picnic consideration, but which were not quantified for a specific unit of recreation facility or resource per tables; football/soccer fields; holes of golf; tennis analysis, are discussed. year. Facility standards are an accurate, flexible courts; basketball courts; surface acres of freshwater means of converting the existing supply of outdoor lakes; boat ramps (freshwater and saltwater); and RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES recreational facilities and resources into units miles of trails for walking, bicycling, and nature comparable to current and expected future study. Outdoor recreation opportunities in the metropolitan Participation. From these comparisons resource areas, cities, and towns of Texas are provided requirements can be determined. Standards developed Resource requirements for each facility type were primarily by the public sector. Of the 2,742 publicly R MET ARE 22 R MF I in this volume were determined from Household and computed by comparing facility supply in terms of administered parks available in 1971, local municipal On-Site survey data, and the computation of the opportunity days with the total participation agencies operated approximately 97%, with the standards involved careful consideration of a number occurring in a given metro, city, or town. If a deficit remainder operated by federal, state, and county 22 P. in 0 z P. J Z uj N 0 w Ul j C4 00 z ILL. a. LU LU < V P't CA (A co cc z c.) P% 0 -0 LU zo -0 ZCC LLI PC.) cc o 004 w C4 Lo j &OEM-= 0 cc >.0 0 LL D 0 -J x IN % co0 X LU 0 CL U. LLI 10Z CD z P% 0 LU P, co (D co ci fuj uj r% N 0 C, Is L C4 - z0 IN 7 4 7 WLX LU< >. .8 U, N P. Ln LO to cp -, -- - . F, Ln ri LU IL) Lo 0 CL _0 X 0 Lo Ln P. LUD > X ::: co - - X. - tn .,. - ;; :*.: 9 - -: I* g *. - . - Ln X 0 C". LD .:. * C4 (A @ 0 .:.: g - C04 cn In ton 'n - Lo C, 0 Ln M Ln C-4 r, X tie In Ln Ln 0 P, OK IL Ln 0 Ln LL Lu C4 Ln 0 La I p z 00 Cl Lo LO 0 M LU M LU CO) Z LU r, M w z In X cc z U.> r 1 0 0 t z z z z wj Z) M 0 U. ICL 0 0 LU FL > 2 z 0 ILL z < LL 0 0 0 > z 9L ul cn 0 C 0 0 c2:0 c "D w > c C4 0M M LO M 'oR w 00 cu to w c a, MW COL cc -Id 0 - 0Cc 0 r - ct - .- @ Cc 0 -0 " - M 0) CL M M -0 > C M.2 cc C: c CV) w IRt cc C+M' cc c s 0 CL 0 > o cc o > > A-- cc (1) r, CL) (a C.4 M IM L) X0CL :t Lf) ".= r- CU 0 'IT - w r- -0 'a w 0 M -Cu W0 M M - 00 0- C CV) .= "0 M M E cu C 0 M0 CL ' E w-;o c CL 0 =1 CL 4- Cn 0 :3 0 CL C4 C00 - @A, C 0 c 3: = -0 w - C'400- @;w E -o tp o - w .0 0r, "; +@ -C W CL M 0 -Y , - 0 CL cm CL U) -.p w E " ICE = M r cu 4@ M c 0 0 0 0 CL 4) @ M a 0 z> CI) w M 'CI -0 4- 'CDa M = M0 cc 0 W CL 4-. CL 0 E0 r E 0 cc E E c 0 RM -V 0 0 -0 0 mCL @ M > (D cl QC- > C) E M 0 -0 40 -0 a 0 , 3: 0 .0 0 '00 Lo F, cm 0 0 eo 0 U.) 0 E " n w CL 0 0 0C D UOL 0 (u s M - W > M 06 -0 0w o r"L r.@L .4., cu CL 0*- -0m E -4-0 0 CM w +-- o iS Lo E r@ E M , 0 = a) -0w -a -F, E .11 CD C 0 v E +-, N0 41 M E 0-a- Q) w 0 E (U 0 Z E (u 0 cc 4- Co 4- E E -6 M cm 0 cq M3: 0 CN 0 0 0 a c > c V) (D (D (D 'a C00- 0 0 -0 0 CL co0 - CD 4M o - o c > MCL 0 0 cu C (v LO CD 0 _C 0 0 M 0 0 0 o MU'd L6 r OL C'j E m w m C: c 0 (D 0 'a oc 0 75 c > Ln CL 0 > M a > ca -C 0 3 cc C: 3: CD 0E 0 (5 -p Ln 0 r A2 0 z C') _0 -0 - = - t - f- -0 41 CL c 0 0 0 co 00 -C Ce) +1 -0 0 a) w-q- -3: I-R - M - 0 0) w c > c'! U 0 r 0 toE C*) 4- CLr E > * - - M - 4- .Zr In r cu cu (D > 0 4- CM C a COL CLOD0 C) o = a 0 s.8 @o om c a) CN w 10 V; E c .- w 0 :3 v - 0 .2 0 0 4- w M r- "aM-0 CLO WW F, -Qi -, > 2 C w a) cq CU W u r E- o 3: m a) +@ M r@E :E 0 U.) a r- . MC4 C, w (a 0 E w = 0 0 0 0 +1 4@ Ca 0 0 > U- CL -0 -r-M CL 49 3:S > CL In Table 1. 1,the numbers of various types of outdoor numerous than in older neighborhoods. All of the 61 For all urban areas combined, there were recreation facility units available at publicly cities had at least two public parks, while 87% of the 217,293,755 total annual opportunity, days available administered urban parks in 1971 are listed. Looking towns had at least one public park; however, many of in 1971, for all major activities combined (Figure at totals for all urban areas combined, the number of these parks lacked various types of recreational 1.7). Opportunity days represent the amount of tennis courts (1,309) and baseball/softball fields facilities. annual recreation demand that can be satisfied by (1,862) far exceeded the number of basketball courts (609) and football/soccer fields (287). Picnic tables numbered 12,830, compared to 1,733 campsites. Swimming pools were also numerous as reflected by the 281,520 square yards available. Much more saltwater is available for swimming than the 34,200 TABLE 1.1 square yards shown, but it was not included because the criteria for reporting saltwater swimming areas NUMBER OF OUTDOOR RECREATION FACILITY UNITS AVAILABLE was that the areas had to be designated for swimming, AT PUBLICLY ADMINISTERED URBAN PARKS and most areas were not. The availability of facilities IN 1971 BY CITY SIZE, AND TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS which support the water-related activities of boating, fishing, and skiing is directly related to the 'TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS quantities and distribution of surface acres of water a v a i I a b le. Therefore, the quantities of TOTAL TYPE OF FACILITY METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN f reshwater-related recreational facilities would probably increase if more freshwater evenly Tennis Courts 918 223 168 1,309 distributed among the urban areas were available. Basketball Courts 458 82 69 609 Miles of trails reported are not that substantial if the Baseball/Softball Fields 1,203 342 317 1,862 Football/Soccer Fields 210 50 27 287 recent increases in the trails activity participation are Picnic Tables 7,925 2,757 2,148 12,830 considered. By city-size category, metropolitan areas Playgrounds (acres) 1,665 786 658 3,109 had significantly more facilities available than either Swimming, Pools (square yards) .167,145 57,426 56,949 281,520 Swimming, Designated Freshwater (square yards) 346,235 301,401 960,071 1,607,707 cities or towns for most types of facilities. Exceptions Swimming, Designated Saltwater (square yards) 0 24,200 10,000 34,200 were notable for those types of facilities dependent Surface Acres of Freshwater 45,755 2,332 2,654 50,741 on water-related resources, such as designated Boat Ramp Lanes, Freshwater 49 8 39 96 Boat Ramp Lanes, Saltwater 6 1 6 13 saltwater and freshwater swimming areas and Campsites 781 579 373 1,733 saltwater and freshwater fishing piers, barges and Fishing Pi ers/BargOs /Marinas, Freshwater (linear yds) 313 20 604 937 marinas. Cities, compared to towns, had sli'ghtly Fishing Piers/Barges/Marinas, Saltwater (I inear ycls) 24 300 60 384 Golf Course Holes 659 198 207 1,064 larger numbers of facilities for the more Nature Trails (miles) 59.5 17 33.8 110.3 traditional types of facilities, but no distinct patterns Horseback Riding Trails (miles) 24 6.7 27 57.7 were visible for water-related or trails facilities. Bicycle Trails (miles) 50.5 19 27 96.5 Walking (Hiking) Trails (miles) 41.5 15 37.5 94 Total Trails (milesa) 140.5 33.7 41.8 216 The dispersion of recreational opportunities was not Sport Shooting Traps 12 1 3 16 entirely balanced in 1971. Although all of the 24 Sport Shooting Targets 24 35 1 60 Archery Targets 72 31 1 104 metropolitan areas had recreational resources, Amphitheatre Seats 6,940 7,950 1,445 16,335 individual socio-economic subsections within many of Botanical Gardens (acres) 499 9.3 19.3 527.6 the metropolitan areas lacked public outdoor Zoos (acres) 329 9 6 344 recreational opportunities, and opportunities in areas Community/Recreation Centers 237 58 71 366 of rapid urban expansion generally were less a. Eliminates double counting of multi-use trails in obtaining the totals figures. 24 existing recreation facilities. The metropolitan areas FIGURE 1.7 had substantially more annual opportunity days ANNUAL OPPORTUNITY DAYS AVAILABLE IN 1971 FOR RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES available than did the cities or towns. However, when IN URBAN AREAS BY CITY SIZE, AND TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS differences in population were taken into account, the metros had fewer opportunity days per thousand TYPE OF population than did the cities for all facilities except ACTIVITY/FACILITY X.: X 85,879,907 freshwater lakes and freshwater boat ramps. CHILDS PLAY/ 45,992,295 Compared to towns on an annual opportunity days playgrounds per thousand population basis, metros had fewer 42,233,000 opportunity days than towns for all facilities, SWIMMING/ 25,076,750 excluding football/soccer fields and basketball courts. pools 0 Cities and towns were more similar in annual 25,703,048 opportunity days available per thousand population, BASEBALUSOFTBALL/ 6,606,212 with days available in towns exceeding days available fields 868 in cities for 7 of the 12 facilities computed. BOATING, BOAT FISHING 23,263,358 Combining annual opportunity days available per SKIING-FRESHWATER/ 19,086,825 thousand population for all 12 types of facilities freshwater lakes 34 produced the following: metros, 20,591 days; cities, 21,836,660 PICNIC KING/tables 13,488,350 39,501 days; towns, 40,572 days; and the average for 4 the three city sizes combined was 25,384 days. 3,655,896 0 10 io Yo 4b @0 60 7b 8'0 gb ANNUAL OPPORTUNITY DAYS AVAILABLE (1,000,000's) RECREATION DEMAND ........... ....... ... ::*..,.:::::..:..-::*.*.::::::0:::::::::::15,356,155 X X .... . ..... Estimates for the year 1968 indicate that 326 million BASKETBALL/ 4,028,110 cou rts 721,190 activity days were spent in pursuit of a variety of 606,855 recreation activities in the urban areas of Texas. Of 4,306,008 this total, resident demand accounted for 285 million GOLF/courses 2,666,973 801,306 days (87%), while non-resident demand totaled 41 37,729 3,526.4" million days (13%). The proportion of urban TENNIS/courts 2,4-73,UUZ participation attributed to non-residents was 62 generally higher for saltwater fishing, boating, and 2,073,288 FOOTBALL/SOCCER/fields :_X:.-`.q'..J skiing than for non-saltwater associated activities. 1,517,040 LEGEND Almost 54% of all urban resident households 1,678,411 TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS ...........: participated at least once in 1968 in at least one of TRAILS/trails 1,053,768 METROPOLITAN AREAS CITIES the major activities. Not surprisingly, participation @TOWNS 1,294,656 was heaviest in the simpler activities such as driving BOAT BOAT FISHING 0,814 and walking for pleasure, although urban residents SKIING-FRESHWATER/ 8 indicated a preference for activities such as fishing boat ramps 525,954 .. . ..... ... 8,613,900 8,542,35 ............ 1 4720968 4,375, 972,799 3,203,7 4,692,41 3,655,89( and games and sports. Over half of all urban BOAT, BOAT FISHING 18 SKIING-SALTWATER/ participation occurred during the summer, and for boat ramps most activities participation was heavier on weekends .5 1.,5 2'.5 21 35 4 475 5-.5 than on weekdays. From surveys conducted at urban ANNUAL OPPORTUNITY DAYS AVAILABLE (1,000,000's) 25 FIGURE 1.8 parks, it was found that, in general, distance traveled PROJECTIONS OF CURRENT AND FUTURE RESIDENT PARTICIPATION tended to reduce the probability of park usage. Most PER HOUSEHOLD, 1970,1980, gooo, BY CITY SIZE, urban park users arrived with friends or other members of the household, and stayed about three TOTAL FORALL URBAN AREAS and one-half hours. The vast majority of urban park PROJECTION users relied heavily on the automobile for YEAR ............. -57" transportation to the parks. 2000 ..7 359 387 Also, it was found that certain socio-economic factors ff2-59 influence participation levels. For example, 200 1980 household participation tends to increase with 150 increases in the number of household members, with 117 48 increased household incomes, and with more 1970 122 education, Increases in age tend to act as a constraint 1102 to participation in rigorous activities such as 104 swimming and football. Anglo households tend to 0 100 200 300 400 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAYS OF PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD participate more than Blacks or Mexican-Americans in activities such as golf, tennis, boating, and skiing, LEGEND while Mexican-American and Black households have a TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS stronger inclination'than Anglo households for team METROPOLITAN AREAS sports such as baseball/softball, footbal I /soccer, and CITIES basketball. Also, it was found that levels of TOWNS participation are affected by levels of opportunity. FIGURE 1.9 Generally, additional units of opportunity tend to TOTAL URBAN RESIDENT AND NON-RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PROJECTIONS, encourage more people to participate, or to 1970-2000, BY CITY SIZE, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS participate more often. PROJECTION YEAR In terms of participation per household, the statewide average annual days of resident participation was 1970 '277.2 projected to be 117 days in 1970, 152 days by 1975, 357.1@ 188 days by 1980, 268 days by 1990, and 359 days by the year 2000. Comparisons of city-size categories 1975 - - 1.2 (IN MILLIONS OF ANNUAL DAYS) depicted projected average annual days of resident 505.0 participation in metropwitan areas as exceeding 62.3 projected rates for both cities and towns for all 1980 69.4 556.0 projection years. Projected rates for cities and towns 687.7 reflected only minor variations. Figure 1.8 illustrates these comparisons graphically for the years 1970, 1990 965.1 1980, and 2000. 117 1,162.6 122 Considering population growth in conjunction with 2000 1,606.0 participation per household, total participation for all 1,801.2 three city sizes combined was projected to be over 0 660 Idw -Ieoo- 2000 26 :C e 'pauiqwoo sumol pue 'OlIeJ L sall!D 01 seam uel!lodoilow jo oilei uoileindod OL6L aqj Aq peouanqui si sazis AI!3 aajql aql Buijedwoo Aq umoqs nuoiall!p mieweip siqjL -pouiqwoc) sumoi pue somo qioq u i ue4i'jeaA uo!139(ojd qoea jol seaAe uel!lodoilow aqj ui jaqBiq aq ol poloafoid sem @A= Aj!Alj3e jenp!A1 oea ui umiedioilied 'uoildeoxe Pul Ll inoql!M 'ainseeld jol BuIA11p pue BuiNoiuoid oNq a, SGIIIA1131? jeuoq!pejj ajow at4l jo awos pue Sall!All3e Jolemiles Oqj J01 Jollews IeLjmqwOs Sem aseajoul 10 alej a4l aj!qm'Buiijs jolemqsajl pue Isiuual 'BuiloA3iq 'Apnis ainieu jol jsaq6iq sem aseejoui jo am -sap . . . . . . . . aq_L e3ap maj Ixou aLp 6uijnp sAep uoiledi3ilied leim ui aseajoui ue mot4s m paioadxa sem 0 L - L amBij 1W ui palsil AI!Alloe AjaA3 Aq uoiledi3ilied jo sAep jenuue jejol aqj smOL1s OL*L ajn6i_A 11 -'-1 Ail oL41 jo %8) OOOZ jeoA all All Aq sAep 1-101111111 L'GCL 01 PUB 0elOl 041 10 %6) 086L Aq sAep uo.ill!w C-Zq ol aseajoui oi pmeloid ajam pol3ales CL jol speau puel Lli!m alqel!eAe PUej uew Aq padol@Aap pue '(uoiledioilted jejol jo %LL Inoqe) ML ui sAep pedo[aAap jo Alddns siqi 6upedwoo 'LL6L ui sajoe aq Al!ssooeu jo jsnw suoiielndod ueqjn ol alq!sse3oe UOl11!UJ L-0t, ajam suoilooloid 'sumol jo:j pouiqwoo LZ9,EI7 Palelol PUel POdOjOA9p jo Ajddns jeuoilemaj Appeaj sa3lel JOIBML4SOJI 'JOAOMOLI 'SeXa_L Ul -sojewilsa sez.is AI!3 aajqi ile u! 6uijjnooo uoiledioilied jejol 9t4_L 'sasodind jeumieanai jol soomosaj joiem juawaiinbei aoinosaj ueqjn jol poij!luenb sawnOSOA all jo a6elunjad e se jeaA qoea AliqOils paseahop pUe puel jo siunowe jo6jej Alleauelsqns peou jpm leinjeu jo sadAl lediomid cimi aqi oje inem pue Pue-1 inq jeoA uoiloaloid qoea paseanui azis*A4!o aqi jol sumoi pue 'saii!z) 'seaje uuj!jodojjow sexa_L 'OOOZ ol uoilediowed jejol 'OOOZ jeaA aqj qBnoiql OM OL6L wojj poijad jeaA-Aljiql aqi JOAO sail!unlioddo SJLN3W3mnD3H 3ob=M N011V3H33H tu jj - - !3 se ujolled owes oqi pamollol summ ui 0 sell asoql J01 spuewap polewilso aql pue sall!unlioddo inocio ol pajoefoid uoiledl3lljed jelojL *OOOZ jeoA aql jeuoileanai jo Alddns paliodai at4j uo poseq '%OL ueqj ssal jo snuejog!p awos Ljjjm'jueoij!u6ls ui (sAep 1-10110111 9'69L) %6 uel4l ssO1 01 OL6L ui (sAep jel.41 IOU OJOM SGII!All3e sno[JeA aqi jol summ pue uoill!w 8,0t,) uoiledioilled jejol qqj 10 %LL JOAO -pajinbai samwenb. soil!o ui Buinnooo uOlledmilied jejol ui so3uojajj!p AjjqBijs wojj p@Buej sail!o aqi ui incioci m pol3oloid all azijewwns siumajinbei aoinosaj ueqjn P91391OJd jeaA uoijoefoid q3ea jol summ ui imaiB uoilediopied 'OOOZ jeaA aqj Aq (sALp uoill!w gog'L) jo sluawssesse Buimollol aL4_L -uouindod ot4j 10 aq ol pol3oloid sem Bumis JaleAnjes pue 'Buileoq %178 01 Pue '086L Aq (sAep uoill!w 999) %L13 01 sluaw6as lle ol alqel!eAe sail!unlioddo aLp aziwixew jalemiles pue jojemqml '61-1114sil JOlemlles Pue 'OL6L ui jejol aL41 jo (sAep uO!11!UJ Z'LLZ) %8L UJOJJ ol Alluaioigns pasiadsip aq osle Ism AeLp 'pgp!AOjd jolemqsajl 'ApnIs ainieu 'JoDoos/jjeqjooj 'Buiwwims Bui6uej 'seaje unqodoilaw ul inooo ol pol3ofoid aq soa!j!3ej pue 'jaiem 'puel jeuoileanai alenbape ui uoilediciped 'soa!3 ol pajedwoo . ainseald sem umiedulied jejol jo o6eluawad IseleajB Ism Aluo ION jeumie9jDai snoiawnu JOI BUlAlJp pUe '6uioaslq6is 'Builins '6uiiNs jolemi4saij at4jL -OOOZ jeaA ot4l Aq sAep uoill!q 1081 JOAO jo si!nsind jiat4i ui sluedi3ilAed Aq popuewop 'BuiloAoiq '6uijjem'jjeqj@)jseq 'siuuol 'jjoB 'BU113luc)id ot pue '066L Aq sAep uoill!q E:9t'L isowle 01 '086L saij!j!oej jeuoileanoi jo sadAl sno1JeA 8141 eje '11eqijos/11eqoseq 'Aeld S,PI!LI3 10 SGII!Ailoe aqj Aq sAep uoill!w 889 lsowle 01 'gM Aq sAep uo1jj!W Seaje ueqjn aqj ui sea!unijoddo uouaim joopino jol je@A uoilciefoid AjOAO JOI SUMOI Ul uOlledimind gog Ol aseanui ol powafto som puewep leioj_ alenbape BUIP!Aoid oi leiluassa sluawaiinbai jat.4io paeoxe ol poloofoid sem sail!3 ui uoiled'311'ed '(61 ajn6i=l 99S) OL6L ui sAep AI!A[13e uOl11!UJ LSE GO Projection Year Projection Year Projection Year Projection Year 980 2000 9 9 2 9 2 2 z X X X 0 X. X. to X. X I to aa X X X X X to to X. to In 0 n a :;M0 Z 0 C Z.Ml> 01 0 > C: 0 m coil r > 0 -n Z Z )l -,h 0 ,C M > > Z > r d M C > > z z > rn W > %J U) Projection Year Projection Year Projection Year Projection Year 9 Ca 19 1980 2 1 9 0 1980 2000 CO 0 0 z 0 z X X X. x X I X. X. in C) X. Ca X, X. X. X: Q to X. .o, , 8 C4 R X. X n-N o z z X 4@ a o X. 17 X. X. LU j:j: "@2 cc X D oo 086L I OM '--A -A U-4--!-ld I-A --!-!-ld -A U-R-f-d N! X X. X. X.. X It X. X. X X X. X. X Xe X. X X, nnoz OLM os BL X z > u oooz oL6L W Fa I -A --4- 1-M -A --!0-1-d I-A 1061@10'd e.,k u-!-!-d activities (Figure 1.11) produced a developed land facilities, open land needed in addition to the greatest for all projection years, comprising 51% of requirement of 26,715 additional acres in 1970. By required developed land could be estimated to reach the total requirement in 1970 and increasing each 1975 the need for developed land increased to 80,736 acres by the year 2000 in order to maintain projection year to almost 73% in the year 2000. Even approximately 42,008 additional acres. Developed the current 70-30 ratio in the three major city-size though the cumulative freshwater requirement for land requirements for the 13 activities totaled 61,827 urban areas. cities and towns increased through the year 2000, acres by 1980, 116,346 acres by 1990, and 188,384 freshwater requirements for cities decreased slightly acres by the year 2000. In the year 2000, Surface acres of freshwater lakes or reservoirs from approximately 15% of the total freshwater requirements for these 13 activities combined available for recreational purposes varied considerably requirements in 1970 to about 13% in the year 2000, represent an overall increase of about 332% over the among the urban areas across the State. Six of the 24 while freshwater requirements in the towns declined 1971 supply of developed land. Metropolitan area metropolitan areas reported no surface acres of from 33% of the total in 1970 to 14% in the year requirements comprised the largest totals in each freshwater, compared to 11 of the 27 regions with 2000. Urban recreation cumulative freshwater projection year, averaging about 87% of the total cities reporting that no cities within these 11 regions requirements are illustrated graphically in Figure 1.12 requirement for metros, cities, and towns. The cities had any freshwater lakes, and 17 of the 37 regions for the projection years 1970, 1980, and 2000 for the requirements over the thirty-year period was only with towns reporting that no towns within these 17 three city-size categories and statewide totals. slightly larger than the towns requirements; both regions had any freshwater available for recreational averaged between 6% and 7.5% of the total in each uses. Comparing estimated demands for boating, boat If one set of data in this volume were to be singled projection year. fishing, and skiing with the 50,471 surface acres out as the data most important to those who will use available in 1971 within the metros, cities, and towns this document, it would be recreational facility In comparing developed land available with open land showed additional cumulative requirements of 5,747 requirement projections. Comparing estimated available in 1971, a ratio of 70% developed land to acres in 1970, 9,394 acres by 1975, 15,280 acres by demand with opportunities available in 1971 yielded 30% undeveloped or open land was determined. Since 1980, 30,605 acres by 1990, and 54,164 acres by the increases in cumulative facility requirements for all of urban land resource requirement estimates reflect the year 2000. Of the three city-size categories, the 13 selected activities for which requirements were needs for land actually developed with recreational metropolitan area freshwater requirements were projected for each projection year, 1970-2000. FIGURE 1.11 FIGURE 1.12 URBAN RECREATION CUMULATIVE DEVELOPED LAND REQUIREMENTS URBAN RECREATION CUMULATIVE FRESHWATER REQUIREMENTS FOR SELECTED ACTIVITIES, 1970,1980,2000, BY CITY SIZE, FOR BOATING, BOAT . FIS-H I N G, AN D S K I I N G, 1970,1980, 2000, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS BY CITY SIZE, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS . ...... 54,164 188,M4 liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiillilliligillillI 164,198 80 39,248 4 3,536 Lu 39 > 50 > 15,280 61,8 LEGEND 2 -_ Z a 9,6 0 63,002 LN AREAS - ::TOTAL FOR ALL URBA METROPOLITAN AREAS 3,4 LU Lu 5 CITIES 5,747 0 0 0 X TOWNS cc 955 CL @2,833 2? 1,902 0 3536 7,11 Ig5o 7, . ........... %: 63 4,183 2219 6 @7 15 18:2 @22 2 f3.t7-4 r% 1 02 88 1,980 id 40 160 0 60 60 166 lk A 0 9 lb f5 io ii, 3b A 4. 45 50 55 CUMULATIVE DEVELOPED LAND REQUIREME14TS CUMULATIVE FRESHWATER REQUIREMENTS (in 1,000'sof surface acres) 30 Different units of measurements are required to consideration in the planning of outdoor recreation estimate facility requirements for different types of opportunities. Perhaps the most important of these re creational facilities; therefore, direct comparisons non-quantifiable elements are: urban resources which of the various units cannot be made. Those facility offer potential for recreational use, recreation for the needs occurring in the most substantial quantities disadvantaged, sources of funding, and recreational over the thirty-year projection period are apparent, programs. however (see Figure 1.13). Cumulative facility requirements for all urban areas combined were most The conservation of natural areas located in urban substantial for swimming pools, tennis courts, picnic environments is impprtant not only for ecological ta bles, golf cou rses, combined trails, and reasons but also because demand is increasing rapidly football/soccer fields in 1970. in activities most suited to natural areas. Although there are many natural areas in the urban areas of Requirements for each of these activities continued Texas, these natural areas are rapidly being lost to to increase heavily through the year 2000. By 1980, industrial, commerical, and other urban land uses. cumulative requirements for basketball courts (840 Rivers, streams, and flood plains also can play an courts) and freshwater boat ramps (320 ramps) were important role by providing low-intensity recreational also significant compared to other facility needs. By uses such as linear parks, picnic areas, and greenbelts. the year 2000 the cumulative requirement for Another type of resource which offers potential is basketball is projected to increase to 3,365 courts. Of water. Providing sufficient recreational water in urban the three types of trails activities (walking, bicycling, areas is not always easy, however, due to certain and nature study), cumulative requirements for miles environmental constraints such as topography and of trails were greatest in all projection years for climate, and because recreational use of water walking, ranging from 68% of the total in 1970 to competes with other uses such as flood control as 51% in the year 2000. well as industrial and municipal water supply. The rapid upsurge in environmental awareness has Of the three city-size categories, metropolitan area generated a rapidly increasing demand for bicycling, facility requirements far exceeded requirements for walking, and hiking. . Various resources such as either cities or towns in each projection year. Thi .s is pipeline, utility and abandoned rights-of-way offer explained primarily due to the large population potential as urban trails. Finally, historical sites masses residing in the metropolitan areas, should be viewed as offering recreational potential for approximately 75% of the total in 1970 for the three urban residents, The task of preserving historical city sizes combined, compared to 13% and 12% for places is made difficult, however, because of 0 cities and towns, respectively. These population ratios inadequate funding for agencies concerned with are likely to remain comparable through the year 2000. historical preservation, and the fact that historical places tend to be located in urban areas of decline. SPECIAL CONCERNS AND ASSOCIATED PROBLEMS Another special concern is recreation for the handicapped and aged. It has been estimated that Not all elements of urban outdoor recreation can be 4.1% of the population of Texas is handicapped, easily quantified and converted to resource while 8% of the population is above the age of 65. requirements. Yet the im-portance of several of these Moreover, results of the Household Demand Survey elements is undisputed, and merits special showed that 23.1 % of the sampled households had at 31 Projection Year Projection Yea, Projection Year Projection Year 1 1980 2000 :2 1970 1980 1970 1 J 2000 0 1 2 > 14 z z C, X X. X X b ol. Xto X X X CD Projection Year Projection Yea, Projection Yea, z 1 1980 2000 1 1970 2000 M 1 2 T 8 m to 0 la > X to X X X. J 0 m C X C w la" ..J > X. 00 Ni 0 -n 1 0 C > 04n, ;-n 0 Z Z Projection Yea, Projeclion Year Projection Yea, > 1970 1980 20W 1970 1 2000 1970 1980 2 0 C 7 > < m q Z z to > LA m N 0 X. 0 m Z3 Projection Yea, Pro@pctior,Veair Projection Year Projection Yea, 1970 1980 2000 z > 1970 1980 2000 3. 1970 1980 2000 0 1970 1980 2 > C 0. 0 m M 8 C 0 00 Ix 0 T x z z X z 0 z or 0 z z z z C C, C Some of the most important of these resources feast one individual who could not participate in I include natural resources, fiscal resources, and human recreational activities due to poor health. Recent resources. All of these resources are extremely studies have pointed out the importance of physical, important to the citizens of Texas, not only in social, and educational benefits derived from providing recreational opportunities, but also for participation, noting that the disadvantaged can make numerous other worthwhile uses; therefore, the enormous gains as a result of sound recreational programs. Any number of modifications can be made competition for each will be intense and justifications to facilitate recreational participation by the aged and for their commitments demanding. The potential uses the handicapped. Obstacles such as ditches, curbs, of all types of resources are largely determined by the lack of park benches, and inaccessible restroom quantities available. Use of natural' resources to provide rewarding recreational experiences is also facilities are just a few of the many hindrances which could be removed, Also, passive outdoor activities affected by the quality of the resource. To insure that such as croquet, shuffleboard, sightseeing tours, and decision-makers may creatively commit available Z bird watching can provide enjoyable opportunities for resources in a balance that will best serve all of the the elderly and handicapped. needs of the people of Texas begins with comprehensive planning efforts at the state level and continues to all levels of local governments, as well as to private industries and private citizens. Still another special comern, especially to Through these planning efforts the needs of the municipalities, is the sources of funding for Finally, a substantial portion of the need for urban people should be identified. recreational acquisition, ngaintenance, and outdoor recreation opportunities could be. met development. Basically, there are two broad through year-round recreation programs which make This volume serves to analyze urban outdoor categories of funding programs: local sources and maximum use of existing resources. During certain recreation and provide estimates of the recreational state or federal grants. Among the more common periods of the day, the week, or the year, many needs projected to occur in the urban areas of Texas local sources are general appropriations, general facilities such as school grounds, baseball or football through the year 2000. While the quantifications of revenue and general obligation bonds, donations and fields are very lightly used or even lie idle. These urban recreational needs across the State accomplish gifts, and revenue produced by collecting fees for use facilities could provide space for any number of one very important aspect of recreational planning, of certain types of recreational facilities. Among the recreation programs such as arts and crafts, games and other important aspects of urban recreation must more common state and federal programs which sports, nature activities, and social events. In the subsequently receive the proper emphasis if a viable provide matching grants for recreation are : the increasing congestion and sprawl of urban and enduring recreation system is to be provided that State Beach Cleaning and Maintenance Program environment, people need to have constructive will meet current recreational needs while also administered by the Texas Parks and Wildlife activities and a variety of recreational pursuits, a assuring that future generations will have ample Department, the Federal Housing and Community release from urban tensions, and an opportunity to recreational opportunities of their choice. Some of Develop.ment Act, the Federal Surplus Property Act, join together in classes, teams, or. cultural exchanges. these aspects which merit consideration are the the Federal Aid Highway Act, and the Land and Toward these objectives, urban recreation programs conservation of natural areas and greenbelts, the Water Conservation Fund. In general, metro areas rely can provide considerable assistance. recreational needs of the handicapped and aged, the heavily on bond programs, supplemented by federal means of financing recreational areas and facilities, grants, while many cities and towns rely more on Projected increases in urban outdoor recreation and the development of recreational programs that general appropriations and other local sources. demand in Texas have been shown to be significant will insure that maximum benefits are derived by Although there are a number of fund sources through the year 2000. To satisfy these expected recreationists from the opportunities provided. Each available to municipalities, funding levels need to be increases will in turn produce greater demands on the aspect of recreational planning requires the combined increased if current and future recreational resource different types of resources which must be combined efforts of all levels of government and the private requirements are to be met. to produce high quality recreational opportunities. sector to achieve the maximum success possible in providing recreational opportunities. 33 INTRODUCTION 1 Ct_@) 11 D Q As noted in Chapter 1, a rigorous methodology is required in order for the planning process to reveal with accuracy the major problems, deficits, and fw, imbalances which may exist in the availability and accessibility of outdoor recreation opportunities in the urban areas of Texas. An essential component in th is methodology is an enumeration of existing urban parks, their lands and water, and the various facilities available within these parks. Once enumerated, these A existing opportunities may be compared with existing and future estimates of recreation demand, in order to make possible the identification of resource J requirements. Once developed, resource requirements Jorm the basis for establishing priorities, which identify those urban areas where the need for additional recreation land, water, and facilities is most urgent. The purpose of this chapter is to summarize some of the basic characteristics of outdoor recreation opportunities in the metropolitan areas, cities, and towns. The major source of data for this chapter is the 1971 Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, Recreation Areas, and Facilities. The chapter is segmented into three main parts: (1) a summary of the governmental agencies' role in supplying urban r, outdoor recreation opportunities and a brief explanation of the role of the private suppliers in providing urban opportunities; (2) a summary of the quantity and dispersion of recreation resources and facilities, by type, within the metropolitan areas, and among the cities and towns of Texas; and (3) a summary of the recreation opportunity days provided by the resources and facilities in the three city-size categories which reflect the amount of recreation participation that can be satisfied in the urban areas. Photo by Melanie Shearer, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 34 SUPPLIERS OF URBAN RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES Urban outdoor recreation opportunities were provided by both the public and private sectors in 1971. The public sector is characterized by federal, state, municipal, nd county governments. The a V1 pdvate sector is characterized by a variety of N profit-oriented enterprises and non-profit organizations. Overall, the public sector is the major supplier of opportunities for the types of urban outdoor recreation activities dealt with in this volume. Of the Ell ............ various agencies composing the public sector, the municipal governments are, by far, the largest providers of urban recreation opportunities, followed by county governments. State and federal agencies STATE AGENCIES municipalities which had a 1970 population of at play a minimal recreation role in supplying least 2,500 or larger. Of this total, 31% were district recreational opportunities to the urban'areas. A brief As in the case of federal agencies, the vast majority of parks, 42% were community parks, 21% were summary of the involvement in the urban areas by parks administered by Texas State agencies were specialty parks, and 6% were open land parks.1 These both the public and Private sectors is. presented located in rural areas. The only state agency providing 82 parks provided a combined total of 6,830 acres. In below. urban outdoor recreation opportunities was the Texas addition to providing parks in urban areas, county Parks and Wildife Department (TPWD) which governments also provided numerous rural parks. FEDERAL AGENCIES operated five state parks in urban areas. The largest of Many of these rural parks are close enough to the five urban parks was MacKenzie State Park, a population centers to serve urban residents in meeting Virtually all federal involvement in the provision of 542-acre resource located in, and leased to, Lubbock. their recreational needs. outdoor recreation opportunities in Texas is directed Other TPWD parks included Eisenhower Birthplace toward rural areas. In urban areas the only park State Historic Site, a three-acre park in Denison; San MUNICIPALITIES operated entirely by a federal agency was H Ioliday Jose Mission, a sixteen-acre historical park in San Park on Benbrook Reservoir in the Fort Worth Antonio; Port Isabel Lighthouse State Park, a By far the largest provider of urban public parks was Metropolitan Area. This 486 acre park was operated one-half-acre in Port Isabel; and Queen Isabela State the municipal governments. Of the 2,742 by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The Park, a six acre undeveloped park also located in Port publicly-administered urban parks in Texas, only other federal involvement was with Dutch Isabel. Neither the Texas Forest Service, nor any of approximately 2,653 (97%) were reported as being Branch Park (560 acres), also located on Benbrook -the Texas River Authorities administered any operated by local municipal governments in 1971. Of Reservoir; however, the Corps of Engineers shared recreational resources in the urbarf areas of Texas in this total, 281 (111%) were district parks, 1,328 (50%) administrative responsibility for this park with- the 1971. were community parks, 494 (19%) were speciality municipality of Benbrook. No recreational resources parks, and 550 (21%) were open land parks.2 A were provided in urban areas by other. federal COUNTI ES agencies such as the National Park Service, United 1. For a formal definition of district parks, community parks, specialty parks, and open land parks, the reader is States Forest Service, United States Fish and Wildlife County governments provide the second largest referred to the glossary in the appendix of this volume. Service, Bureau of Land Management, or Bureau of number of urban parks in Texas. In 1971, there were Reclamation. 82 county-administered parks that were within 2. See note 1 above. 35 Private suppliers provided only about six percent of @7, the total urban parks and about eight percent of the total urban parkland acreage open to the general public. Many types of recreational opportunities provided by private suppliers support types of activities for which no resource requirements were developed for the Urban Volume. Examples are sport shooting, regional amusement centers (Six Flags Over Texas, Astro World, etc.), camping, racing, a ttending drive-in movies, etc. Participation by an urban resident in an activity was included in the Urban Volume only if the recreationist took a trip to participate in the activity. For example, participation by a person swimming in his apartment/house pool was not comparison of these statistics with comparable courses to country clubs and from regional recorded. This means that much of the statistics for urban parks administered by federal, amusement centers to apartment house swimming participation occurring at private facilities is state, and county agencies suggests that local pools and tennis courts. not included in the Urban Volume. Therefore, municipal efforts tended to be directed toward the recreation opportunities supporting this community and open land parks, while federal, state, The private suppliers' impact on the provision of type of participation were also excluded to and county efforts to provide urban recreational urban outdoor recreation opportunities was make participation projections more resources tended to be oriented more in the direction determined by analyzing both urban inventory data comparable with opportunities in computing of large, expansive district parks which were, in many and urban outdoor recreation demand estimates. resource requirements. cases, highly developed. It should be noted that many Based on the results of this analysis, the decision was Problems encountered in the inventory of municipalities also administered parks situated in made to exclude considerations of urban recreation privately-supplied urban recreation rural areas. Because of their location, these rural opportunities provided by private suppliers in the opportunities open to the general public made parks provide urban residents with amenities estimates of supply, demand, and resource it impractical to analyze the data and include normally not found in urban parks. requirements for the Urban Volume. Major findings the results in the Urban Volume. In a few cases supporting this decision are as follows: the data requested were not received, or if THE PRIVATE SUPPLIERS received were proven to be highly inaccurate. A large portion of the urban recreation opportunities Unfortunately, the few urban areas failing into For purposes of developing the TORP, outdoor provided by the private suppliers are not these two types of respondent categories recreation opportunities provided by the private available to . the general public. These accounted for a substantial portion of the total suppliers are considered those opportunities provided opportunities, such as golf courses, tennis opportunities available. The magnitude of collection efforts for this type inventory data by recreation enterprises owned and/or administered courts, and swimming pools at country clubs, by privaIte entrepreneurs, corporations, organizations, are available only to a select clientele (members necessitates heavy reliance on respondents who institutions, and other non-public entities. Private of a private country club, residents of an voluntarily use their time, resources, and suppliers of urban outdoor recreation opportunities apartment, complex, etc.). Only those, personnel to provide the information requested. cover a wide range of different types of entities. The opportunities available to the general public When the data are inaccurate, incomplete, or are not provided, accurate analysis becomes types of recreation opportunities provided by these were included in resource requirement impractical. entities are also varied, ranging from minature golf calculAions in the Urban Volume. 36 16 -S 7@ -C CL to 04) CC .... ........ . .......... CL E co CL C 0 -CJ cr. 0 i0i uj 0 c X 0 E > LO CL 0 w P- Ul a E a 04 z w w cc . . . . ....... (a w E LU . . . . . . . . . . . . . CL IV .1 20 E EE CL cz uj C: -C 2 to -0 z cr CC Z Z-t cc 4@ 67 CL C3 z "0 > > 0 uj CL OL Q 0) LU a. 0 2 cu to OL > OL cli ri E -0 E E & m C 0 pu bi icly -administered urban parks and the number of TABLE 2.1 land acres within these parks. The large increase in the quantity of recreational URBAN PARKLAND ACREAGE, AND WATER ACREAGE WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO URBAN PARKS, BY CITY SIZE, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS opportunities reflects not only the increase in popularity of outdoor recreation activities; it also TOTAL FOR ALL METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN AREAS represents significant actions taken by the public sector during the past several decades to meet this Developed Land 31,381 7,059 5,181 43,621 increase in demand. Since 1960, the number of parks Undeveloped Land 12,857 3,718 2,328 18,903 Total Recreational Land 44,238 10,777 7,509 62,524 has increased 111 %, from 1,300 to 2,742, while the Water Acreage Within Or number of land acres available has increased 85%, Adjacent to Urban Parks 24,142 522 24,152 48,816 from 33,848 to 62,524 acres. Between 1960 and 1970, the total urban population increased about Total Land and Water Acreage 68,380 11,299 31,661 111,340 21 %, from 7,094,522 to 8,556,407. However, despite Source: The Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, Recreation Areas, and Facilities the fact that the quantity of urban recreation resources has been increasing more rapidly than the urban population, urban opportunities generally were FIGURE 2.2 inadequate to fulfill recreation demand in 1971. Projected increases in demand portend a significant magnification of these inadequacies over the next PROPORTION OF URBAN PROPORTION OF URBAN several decades, if substantial quantities of additional RECREATIONAL LAND WHICH IS RECREATIONAL ACREAGE WHICH IS opportunities are not provided. DEVELOPED AND UNDEVELOPED, LAND AND WATER, STATEWIDE TOTAL STATEWIDE TOTAL SUMMARY OF PUBLIC PARKS In 1971 there was a reported 62,524 acres of publicly-administered recreational land, dispersed among 2,742 urban parks in Texas. Of the total land acreage, 70% (43,621 acres) was developed with ..... ...... ......... ... .... ....... ........... facilities, while 30% (18,903 acres) was available as open land or land held for future development. In addition to the 62,524 land acres, there was a total of 48,816 surface acres of freshwater located within or adjacent to these urban parks, for a combined total of 111,340 acres of recreational land and water associated with publicly-administered parks. On a statewide basis there were .320 parks and 7.307 acres of park land per thousand urban population. Or stated another way, there were 3,120 people who ElDeveloped Land E]Total Urban Recreational Land shared each park, while there were 137 people who EMUndeveloped Land M Water Adjacent to or Within Urban shared each acre of park land. Figure 2.2, and Tables I Parks 2.1 and 2.2 express these general relationships. Source: The Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, Recreation Areas, and Facilities. 38 TABLE 2.2 As indicated in Chapter -1, urban recreation was segmented into three city-size categories: NUMBER AND ACREAGE OF URBAN PARKS, AND URBAN POPULATION metropolitan areas, cities, and towns. Tables 2.1, 2.2, RATIOS, BY CITY SIZE, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS and 2.3 show the distribution of recreational land and water resources on the basis of city-size category. TOTAL FOR ALL Although metro areas accounted for most of the METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN AREAS developed land, undeveloped land, and water (as Number of Parks 1,717 515 510 2,742 shown in Table 2. 1), and most of the parks (as shown Parks Per Thousand Populationa .267 .465 .511 .320 in Table 2.2), metros as a whole had fewer resources People Per Parkb 3,754 2,154 1,981 3,120 than either cities or towns when the three city-size Total Recreational Land Acreage in Urban Parks 44,238 10,777 7,509 62,524 categories are evaluated for differences in population Developed Acres Per Thousand (Tables 2.2 and 2.3). In comparison to the other two Population 4.869 6.397 5.141 5.098 city-size categories, metros had fewer parks per Undeveloped Acres Per Thousand Population 1.995 3.370 2.310 2.209 thousand population as well as fewer developed and Developed and Undeveloped Acres undeveloped acres per thousand population. The Per Thousand Population 6.864 9.767 7A50 7307 relatively low number of undeveloped acres per People Per Acre of Parkland 146 103 135 137 thousand population is especially significant, since it Source: The Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, Recreation Areas, and Facilities. suggests that the metros had comparatively less potential for further development of existing park a. Parks per thousand population was calculated by dividing the total number of parks for the given city-size category or lands. the state by the total population, in thousands, of the given city-size category or the state. b. People per park was calculated by dividing the population of a given city-size category or the state by the number of parks in. the given city-size category or the state. The proportional share of population by city-size category is compared with the proportional share 6f TABLE 2.3 land and water resources by city-size category in COMPARISON OF THE PROPORTIONAL SHARE OF URBAN POPULATION BY CITY SIZE WITH THE Table 2.3. About three-fourths (75%) of all urban PROPORTIONAL SHARE OF LAND AND WATER RESOURCES BY CITY SIZE residents lived in the metros in 1970; yet, metros accounted for only about 63% of the number of TOTAL urban parks, 72% of all developed land, 68% of all METROS CITIES TOWNS PERCENT undeveloped land, and almost 50% of all water Percent of Urban Population 75.3 12.9 11.8 100 acreage within or adjacent to urban parks. (1970) Conversely, cities and towns tended to have a higher Percent of All Urban Parks 62.6 18,8 18.6 100 proportion of resources than their respective Percent of All Urban Recreational 71.9 16.2 11.9 100 populations would predict. The major exception was Developed Land water resources; nearly all of the water located within Percent of All Urban Recreational 68.0 19.7 12.3 100 or adjacent to parks was located within or adjacent to Undeveloped Land Percent of All Urban Recreational 70.8 17.2 12.0 100 metro and town parks (about 50% and 49%, Land (Developed and Undeveloped) I respectively). Cities as a whole had only 1% of the Percent of all Water Acreage 49.5 1.1 49.4 100 water acreage within or adjacent to urban parks. It is Within or Adjacent to Urban Parks Percent of All Urban Recreational 61.4 10.2 28.4 100 important to understand that many of the cities and Land and Water towns and some of the metros had no water within or adjacent to urban parks. Of the 24 metropolitan Source: The Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, Recreation Areas, and Facilities areas, 6 reported no water acreage within or adjacent 39 to urban parks in 1971. Of the 27 regions having TABLE 2.4 cities, 9 regions had no water within or adjacent to city parks. All 37 regions had towns; however, over NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF URBAN PARKS BY TYPE AND BY CITY SIZE half of these regions (20) had no water within or adjacent to parks in the towns. This data should be S_ IMETROS CITIES TOWNS AREA viewed with the fact in mind that all metros and cities had at least one or more parks and only 1 region had rD-,.strlct _Nirks 197 @58 64, (11.5%) towns which had no parks located in any of the '(11.3%) (16;6%) towns of that region. The inadequate distribution of ,Co ni@y Parks 930 206," @234 113641 water within or adjacent to parks is further amplified "(64.2%) 438.8%) (45.9%) .. . ........ . .. by the following information: 93% (22,501 of 24,142 ---- - acres) of the total acreage in the metros was found in 255 130 129 (14.8%) (25.2%). (25 @3%1 4 metropolitan areas; 53% (277 of 522 acres) of the total acreage in cities occurred in 2 regions; 96% Op n Land 127 65, (19.5%) (24.7%) (18.2%) (20.2i)l (23,284 of 24,152 acres) of the total acreage in towns . ..... .. ....... . . .... ... was located in the town of Lewisville in Region 12; FT-ot-ai Wurnber -of,P-arks and for all urban areas combined, 83% (40,604 of 1100.0%) (100.0%) (100.0%) (100.0%)1 '48,816 acres) occurred in only 3 regions. a_Nu-mb_e_rof_P_arks__ 8 2 Accordingly, these data should be interpreted with - - -- ------ caution since they are aggregated in order to provide, Source: The Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, Recreation Areas, and Facilities a statewide overview. A further distinction -is made by classifying urban parks by type. It should be apparent that a one block Table 2.4 presents a frequency distribution of urban Table 2.5 shows,the distribution of urban parks by tract of land with a few facilities for children may not parks by type for each city-size category and the total type. Given the definiti o:n of the four types of parks, necessarily compare to an extensive regional type for all urban areas. Of the 2,742 urban parks almost half (47.0%) of-all urban park acreage were park with water and facilities for a variety of statewide, 309 (11.3%) were classified as district; classified as "district." Community parks accounted activities serving all age groups. Accordingly, four 1,364 (49.7%) were classified as community; 514 for 21.5% of the land acreage; special parks types of urban parks were identified: district, (18.8%) were classified as speciality; and 555 (20.2%) accounted for 16.9%; and open (and parks accounted community, speciality, and open land. District parks were classified as open land parks. About four-fifths for 14.6% of all urban park acreage. Very little are larger than twenty acres and contain facilities for (79.9%) of all urban parks had facilities for at least difference existed among the three city-size categories two or more major activities; community parks one major urban activity (district, community, and in terms of the percentage of acreage distribution by provide facilities for two or more major activities, but speciality types combined); about three-fifths type. are smaller than twenty acres; speciality parks provide (61.0%) had facilities -for more than one major facilities for only one major activity; and open land activity (district and community types combined). Of The average size of urban parks is itemized by type of parks are those which have no facilities.3 Although the three city-size categories, the towns had the park -and city-size category in Table 2.6. The average the classifying of parks according to "type" is not a largest number of parks, with facilities for at least one size for an urban park, all city sizes combined, in prerequisite for calculating resource requirements, the major activity (81.8%), while the cities had the Texas in 1971 was 23 acres. District parks averaged distinction is useful in identifying parks which have smallest number (75.3%). Conversely, the towns had 95 acres, community parks 10 acres speciality parks facilities, as opposed to parks which are "open land" comparatively fewer open land parks than the other 21 acres, and open land parks 16 acres. There was a and contain no facilities. two city-size categories, while the cities had more. On definite tendency for park size to show a positive 3. See glossary for the distinction between open land parks the average, there were 72 parks per metro, 8 parks correlation with the size of urban area. Metro parks and undeveloped lands. per city, and 2 parks per town. averaged 26 acres, city parks averaged 21 acres, and 40 13 tf c co 0) d) Tl 0 -t3 -0 w -j a) 0 M N @g @c = 1, 4) u ca a -D 0 Cl. :3 0 4 VA J En w E x m cc G - >@ 9 - 4 @qo "F @- ."W w c - i6 - 4@ 1-,- fp m Je -0 'D M " = I-- , 0 t - W m @;"-C,4 Ij f'_CC! Im C6 cc M .- CL x - @'?i p i , @4,, Cc tj f,y 0 F'W,5 --'@j @ I, W +1 w CL rjo!@Zi c LD c w E w 3: "A +0 Co -C -C 0 4 W CD .- - 0) 4 a) 0 3: "14 CL tV P P-,@ E E r 0 m 0 M CL 5W r c > n,Iid *d@ g m Ile r r " = %- g'@, tvld E o PQ-201"A i@ 4&-, WN, 4 Q .14 +, 0 0 r- CL r G, +, VII -0 m 3: w - *- a =(D :"3 = w a m c m 0 0 0 4@ M Lu -0 < > 41 E w m r_ - -@2 @!, Cc M 0 cm & m CL cn E 0 0 D 'D -0 w c 0 cm cu -0 o (D 8 ED Cc Q) +, .0 C ..r, cc 0) 0) a) a) M .0 r Vy,"O@ 0 2 - I :E 4- L) 4- LL Lc) 0 0 0 gn 0 2 r c E 0 P (U 0 -0 n A@W - -.- @/ `@- --, - - 72 A 0 m cm m 0 T, 0 LO c -0 C z cm m fr, 0 CM > .0 '0 %P E W44 c @p le r1o UJ 6,4 v;Pf E a 0 C.) +, +3 0 ca -0 iff 0 S A 311 cc U LW U) CL CL 23L -TE P R 49 C). r- 1_ jg@,e LU 2-@-';l -V > ca x 0 .j .J Z Lq Qo-o,, A << v -.Qj h., LU 5 C4, @foj @,`:-1, 1 , pI @ xJ !@ , ,1,, ,: @,,74'95 -,"@7", i: z 0 LL z 0 -.-E E cc C4; -SA p -,.@ - -4 w E I I US - - 4f ca 'A U. 102 E 0 LL 0 uj E Lu m E LU 0 0 uj N CL w cr CO) Lo 'o 'ca o 0 co R g 0 0 > 2 C64 w E LL 0 'A 0 L) 0 0 0 0@ LU to co E t-on o :3 @Iva, CL4 M, < (A 0 tm a) _,Ej 'ID 14) C] i, z F 0" -1 f"Q < C14 Lo . !'CD @IL LU LU 1@ a 1. 0 X- ;a) LU CL. st * ;4 e 0 Co (Dj A cv C14 CCL C11 0j (a R cr. > 'A v lcl@o 'U) CD a - v ,`<-,@f m 0 US LU j > E +, CL .0 ca CD a) > (DC '0 m cc r, (D ,A. 0 0 ca > 0 LU < P4-R, I, @ " - @: E CL CL C ui z 0 P U, C 89, Tw-0 CN o tj CL C@ U. 0 co '0 co -0 CO w X z 0 -C E o Lo 0 0 v t! 7j C CL < W lk-1v 2 40- x (D LU LL m 4) @d,@Y, V N> C X-1 0 U0c cl E Q) X" cc 0 (D CL a) cc *a (D CL +- CL 0 CD -0 @w o 0 o z 4 0 (D (D OL - CL CL tm 0 mu 'on E c 0 C > -0 ch w A q@ -@ @ Z a < E LO CIS M -0 -0 r CL 4@ w 0 LU m w > +, 0 c w CL cc 6A -0 0 - C cc caN Cj 0 4@ 10 x m Z'r, .2 CL LU m r-aC LL :3 4--= 0 E m cu 'D ca .2 m CD a CL C%j SO C > . m CL .0 CL LL m @:0 0 C 0 0CLo4) o C-L m ; -i < m 0 m >- 0 m CL +' 4- 0 4- cc C E CO +1 C CL 0 0 C). M < Co :3 r _C o o (D .0 C', 0 cc w(2) a) :3 m > cc E 0 4d z c mE-" E cc) 0 C m < 0 r- mr- 10 0 -1' 4@ tmPCL 0 w TABLE 2.7 NUMBER OF FACILITY UNITS, PEOPLE PER UNIT, AND UNITS PER THOUSAND URBAN POPULATION, BY CITY SIZE, AND TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS PEOPLE PER UNITa UNITS PER THOUSAND POPULATIONb TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TYPE OF FACILITY METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN GAMES AND-SPORTS Parks 967 241 248 1,456 6,665 4,579 4,064 5,878 .15 .22 .25 .17 Tennis Courts 918 223 168 1,309 7,021 4,948 5,999 6,537 .14 .20 .17 .15 Basketball Courts 458 82 69 609 14,072 13,456 14,607 14,050 .07 .07 .07 .07 Baseball/Softball Fields 1,203 342 317 1,862 5,358 3,226 3,179 4,595 .19 .31 .31 ..22 Football/Soccer Fields 210 50 27 287 30,691 22,069 37,329 29,813 .03 .05 .03 .03 PICNICKING: Parks 804 227 240 1,271 8,016 4,861 4,199 6,732 .12 .21 .24 .15 Tables 7,925 2,757 2,148 12,830 813 400 469 667 1.23 2.50 2.12 1.50 .PLAYGROUNDS: Parks 1,102 281 265 1,648 5,849 3,927 3,803 5,192 .17 .25 .26 .19 Acres Developed 1,665 786 658 3,109 3A71 1,404 1,532 2,752 .26 .71 .64 .36 SWIMMING: Parks 326 90 115 531 19,770 12,260 8,764 16,114 .05 .08 .11 .06 Pools (Square Yards) 167,145 57,426 56,949 281,520 39 19 18 30 25.95 52.02 57.76 32.90 Designated Freshwater (Square Yards) 346,235 301,401 960,071 1,607,707 19 4 1 5 52.24 241.47 949.67 187.90 Designated Saltwater (Square Yards) 0 24,200 10,000 34,200 N/A 46 101 250 N/A 136.50 76.21 14.89 BOATING, BOAT FISHING, SKIING: Surface Acres of Freshwater 45,755 2,332 2,654 50,741 141 473 380 169 7.10. 2.11 2.63 5.93 BOATING: Parks 41 9 12 62 157,198 122,603 83,989 138,007 .01 .01 .01 .01 Ramp Lanes - Freshwater 49 8 39 96 131,533 137,928 25,843 89,129 .01 .01 .04 .01 Ramp Lanes - Saltwater 6 1 6 13 1,074,185 1,103,425 167,978 658,185 .01 .05 .01 CAMPING: Parks 14 14 30 58 460,365 78,816 33,596 147,524 .01 .02 ..01 Campsites 781 579 373 1,733. 8,252 1,906 2,702 4,937 .12 .52 .35 .20 FISHING: Parks 87 25 21 133 74,082 44,137 47,994 64,334 .01 .02 .02 .02 Pied Barge/Ma fina-F resh water 313 20 604 937 20,591 55,171 1,669 9,132 .05 .02 .59 .11 (Yd.) Pier/Barge/Marina-Saitwater 24 300 60 384 268,546 3,678 16,798 22,282 .01 1.169 .46 .17 (Yd.) GOLFING: 17J Courses 38 16 22 76 169,608 68,964 45,812 112,584 .01 .01 .02 .01 Holes 659 198 207 1,064 9,780 5,573 4,869 8,042 .10 .18 .21 .12 42 TABLE 2.7 (Continued) TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS PEOPLE PER UNITa UNITS PER THOUSAND POPULATIONb TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TYPE OF FACILITY METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN TRAILS: Parks 42 19 16 77 153,455 58,075 62,992 111,122 .01 .02 .02 .01 Nature (Mi.) 59.5 17 33.8 110.3 108,321 64,907 29,819 77,574 .01 .02 .03 .01 Horseback (Mi.) 24 6.7 27 57.7 268,546 164,690 37,329 148,291 .01 .01 .01 Bicycle (Mi.) 50.5 19 27 96.5 127,626 58,075 37,329 88,667 .01 .02 .03 .01 Walking (Hiking) (Mi.)c 41.5 15 37.5 94 155,304 73,562 26,877 91,026 .01 .01 .04 .01 Total Trails (Mi.) 140.5 33.7 41.8 216 45A73 32,743 24,112 39,613 .02 .03 .04 .03 SPORTSHOOTING: Parks 11 5 2 18 585,919 220,685 503,935 475.356 Shooting Traps 12 1 3 16 537,093 1,103,425 335,957 534,775 Shooting Targets 24 .35 1 60 268,546 31,5261,007,870 142,607 .03 .01 Archery Targets 72 31 1 104 89,515 35,594 1,007,870 82,273 .01 .03 .01 MISCELLANEOUS: Parks 251 67 73 391 25,678 16,469 13,806 21,883 .04 .06 .07 .05 Amphitheatre Seats 6,940 7,950 1,445 16,335 929 139 697 524 1.08 7.11 1.43 1.91 Botanical Gardens (Acres) 499 9.3 19.3 527.6 12,916 118,648 52,221 16,218 .08 .01 .02 .06 Zoos (Acres) 329 @9 6 344 19,590 122,603 167,978 24,873 .05 .01 .01 .04 Community/Recreation Centers 237 58 71 366 27,195 19,025 14,195 23,378 .04 .05 .07 .04 Source: The Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, Recreation Areas and Facilities Note: The number of parks enumerate the number of publicly-administered parks which had one or more types of the facilities listed immediately below the word parks in the "rype of Facility" column. For example, under "Games and Sports," there were 967 urban parks in metro areas which had either tennis courts, basketball courts, baseball/softball fields, or football/soccer fields, or any combination of these facilities. acres of freshwater located within urban areas, which Indicates figures rounded to less than .01. is relevant to the computation of resource a. People per unit was calculated by dividing the population of a city-size category, or statewide urban population, as requirements for water-based activities (presented in appropriate, by the number of facility units in that city-size category, or in the combined urban areas of the state. b. Units per thousand was calculated by dividing the total number of units for the given city size or statewide total by the the "Summary of Recreational Facilities" and total population, in thousands, for the given city size or statewide total. As an example, Table 2.7 shows that statewide "Urban Recreational Opportunity Days" sections of there were 12,830 picnic tables in urban parks. This figure was then divided by the 1970 statewide urban population this chapter, and was also used in calculating resource expressed in thousands, 8,556.407. The result of this computation is 1.50 picnic tables per thousand urban population, and this number appears in the last column of Table 2.7. requirements in Chapter 4). C. Since some trails were multi-use, the mileage for these trails appears repetitiously when trail mileage is listed by type of trail. Consequently, the sum of the mileage for nature trails, horseback trails, bicycle trails, and walking (hiking) trails is Table 2.7 also provides an enumeration of facilities larger than the total miles of trail since double counting was eliminated in obtaining a totals figure. The total miles of trail does include those trails which were designated only for horseback riding; however, horseback riding trails were based on population ratios which allow the excluded from facility requirement calculations in Chapter 4 since horseback riding is an activity normally not assessment of the frequency or infrequency with compatible with walking, bicycling, and nature study. which different types of facilities were provided, given the extent of potential users. These two ratios are inversely proportional; that is, a large number of basketball courts, on the basis of "units per instance was the metro average for facility units the people per unit implies a small number of units per thousand." Of the three city-size categories, metro highest of the three city-size categories, considering thousand population. Considering the facility types areas averages ranked last for seven of the major the types of facilities for which urban resource f or which urban resource requirements were facility types: tennis courts, baseball/softball fields, requirements were calculated. Generally, cities tended calculated, metro areas as a whole were below the picnic tables, playground acres, square yards of to have more facilities per capita than either the state average for all types of facilities except swimming pool, holes of golf, and miles of trail. In no metros or towns. 43 Generally, high density core areas of the metros (made up largely of low-income Anglos, Blacks, and ... . ....... Mexican-Americans) tended to have a relatively large ... ....... . number of small parks. In many instances, these parks .............. were of the specialty or community type, and offered N facilities typically for child's play, games and sports, ............ 0 r picnicking. In other instances, parks had no f ilities at all, but served as open land type ac . . . . .... . ... ..... ... . . . . resources. Lower density, outlying areas of the @Z metros (made up largely of middle and high-income .......... . Anglos) tended to have a relatively small number of parKS, but parks tended to be larger in acreage, and .......... . contained facilities for a variety of activities. District RIV parks appeared to be more frequent in outlying areas than in the core area of the metros. Also, in some of the metros it was evident that the ability to establish parks in areas of rapid urban expansion had lagged behind the actual pace of growth. As metropolitan areas continue to expand, it is anticipated that parks which were situated in nearby rural areas will become urban parks as a result of urban land use chme6t. Some of the metros had no surface encroa acres of freshwater lakes available; others had lakes which were situated on the fringe of the metro and .... . . .... . .. ..... . thus not immediately accessible to residents in the A' metro's core area. Some of the contiguous urban . . . . . . . . . . . . areas of the larger metros had been completely mm . .. ....... surrounded by the principal municipality of the metro. Since some of these contiguous urban areas DISPERSION OF RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES DISPERSION OF OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN THIE had few or in some cases no parks, they apparently METROPOLITAN AREAS had to rely on the metro's principal (core) municipality for outdoor recreational opportunities. As mentioned at the beginning of this Chapter, the The Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, provision of outdoor recreation opportunities has two Recreation Areas, and Facilities enumerated the The dispersion of recreational water, an important major components: availability and accessibility. quantity of resources available in order to determine resource in providing adequate recreational Thus far, this Chapter has focussed on availability, on resource requirement 's for each metropolitan area as a opportunities, among the various metropolitan areas a statewide and city-size basis. Accessibility is a whole. Also, to identify spatial imbalances which may ( Fi .gure 2.3 - ) merits specific notations. Of the total function of several factors; one of the most important have existed within the metro, a separate analysis 45,755 acre-s of recreational water reported within is the proximity of resources to population. This focussed on the dispersion of parks and the the metropolitan areas in 1971, almost 77% (35,132 ,section of Chapter 2 presents a general overview Of recreational facilities within these parks, particularly acres) occurred in only 4 metros, and 96% (43,947 the dispersion of recreation resources within the as they were dispersed among different income-ethnic acres) occurred in 7 metros. Six of the. 24 metropolitan areas and among the cities and towns Of background subsections, urban growth areas, and metropolitan areas reported no recreational water Texas. potential growth areas of the metro. available. 44 04 No Aments W* (D OD OD C-i cli 7 oF- 7tt 2 @- CU (9) L no P"n Fm- FOL U z F@ c*j 71 S C-i r- OJIM 0 VC!, E cli C%j ir -1 7 C@ CL o a; cc 0 a m E z .0 0 LU 4- 0 Lu Z u a) c') Z cc 0 LLI z 0 0 UJ z z 0 CA U- z LAJ 4@ 0- LLI UJ CD M- w LLI z x 0 CO) C) z 0 > > r 0 Z @ 0 CL LU LU Z 'A CL cn 4@ 0 0 o 0 Ca CL @01 z DISPERSION OF OPPORTUNITIES AMONG THE FIGURE 2.4 CITIES AND TOWNS IDENTIFICATION OF TOWNS WHICH REPORTED A slightly different approach was taken in the NO PARKS OF ANY TYPE, 1971 analysis of recreation resource dispersion for cities and towns, since these urban areas normally are separated spatially, sometimes by distances of many miles. In order to identify spatial imbalances which may have existed within an Analytical Planning Region, a separate analysis focussed on the dispersion of resources among the cities/towns for a given COMANCHE WYLIE KAUFMAN AOCKWA" ME HE1W BOSTON region. This approach allowed the identification of AZLE specific cities/towns which had few resources relative to other cities/towns within the region. Because of WILL .9PONT the large number of cities and towns statewide, no ABERNATHY spatial analysis were conducted within each of these JEFFERSON urban areas. To have done so would have been beyond the scope of the Texas Outdoor Recreation sic Plan, which concentrates at the state and regional CENTER SAN AUOUSTIK level. Local planners can more appropriately assess TEAGUE the dispersion of resources within specific cities and WOOOVILIg towns, using the metro spatial analysis approach as a NA.VA"TA model. TOMBALL CWIST ORANGE All of the sixty-one cities had at least two parks. As IN"r11 CITY. shown in Table 2.4, the average number of parks per city was eight, with one city having as many as MISSOURI CITY twenty-nine parks. All of the cities had at least one OZONA WKO:TAFFORD '. G&UMNIA park which contained at least one type of recreation facility (that is, a district, community or specialty. PRAIRIE VIEW park). On the other hand, twenty-four of the cities MALI had no open land parks in 1971. Open land parks are LIVE OAK useful in maintaining a balanced and aesthetically pleasing urban environment, and they also provide a clue as to the potential for further development of EDCOUCH existing park land. Because towns have fewer residents than do cities, it is not surprising to find that the number of parks per Source: The Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, town generally was less than for the cities. Table 2.4 Recreation Areas, and Facilities shows that the average number per town in 1971 was two. Twenty-eight of the 209 towns had no parks of 46 TABLE 2.8 ANNUAL OPPORTUNITY DAYS AVAILABLE IN 1971 FOR RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES IN URBAN AREAS BY CITY SIZE, AND TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS ANNUAL OPPORTUNITY DAYS AVAILABLE TYPE OF UNIT OF TOTAL FOR TYPE OF ACTIVITY FACILITY MEASUREMENT METROS CITIES TOWNS ALL URBAN AREAS Swimming swimming pools square yard 25,076,750 8,613,900 8,542,350 42,233,000 Child's Play playgrounds acre 45,992,295 21,711,678 18,175,934 85,879,907 Baseball/Softball fields field 16,606,212 4,720,968 4,375,868, 25,703,048 Picnicking tables table 13,488,350 4,692,414 3,655,896 21,836,660 Football/Soccer fields field 1,517,040 361,200 195,048 2,073,288 Golf courses hole 2,666,973 802,306 837,729 4,306,008 Tennis courts court, double 2,473,092 600,762 452,592 3,526,446 Basketball courts court, full 4,028,110 721,190 606,855 5,356,155 Boating, Boat Fishing, Skiing-Freshwater freshwater lakes surface acre 19,086,825 972,799 3,203,734 23,263,358 Boating, Boat Fishing Skii ng- Freshwater boat ramps ramp (2 lanes/ramp) 660,814 107,888 525,954 1,294,656 Boating, Boat Fishing, Skiing-Saltwater boat ramps ramp (2 lanes/ramp) 65,916 10,986 65,916 142,818 Trails Activitiesa trails mile 1,053,768 270,848 353,795 1,678,411 TOTAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL TYPES OF ACTIVITIES 132,716,145 43,585,939 40,991,671 217,293,755 Source: The Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, Recreation Areas, and Facilities a. Includes bicycling, walking, (hiking), and nature study. any kind. These towns are identified in Figure 2.4. Of even more unevenly distributed. Almost 76% (2,014 Conversion to opportunity days M necessary to make the towns which had parks, all but seven had at least acres) of the total recreational water located within possible a valid comparison with present and future one park which contained at least a minimal number the towns was located in two regions. Over half of the demand estimates (expressed as participation days), of facilities. However, less than fifteen percent of the 37 regions, 20 of 37 regions, had no recreational thus leading to a determination of resource towns had open land parks. Because of their relatively water located in towns. These facts concerning the requirements, a major step in the recreational small population size and proximity to agricultural distribution of recreational water emphasize the planning process. and other rural lands, the provision of open land importance of analyzing resource distribution parks may be relatively less important for the towns resources in conjunction with total resources Opportunity days are defined as estimations of the than for the cities and metros. available. number of recreation participation days satisfactorily URBAN RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITY DAYS provided by one unit of a selected recreation facility The dispersion of recreational water among the per year. The number of opportunity days is cities/towns was concentrated in some regions and The previous sections have identified the overall determined by multiplying the number of facility totally lacking in other regions for each of these two quantity and dispersion of recreational opportunities units by the appropriate facility standard. The result city sizes ( Figure 2.3 ). Of the total 2,332 surface within the state of Texas and among the three reflects the amount of recreation participation that acres of water within cities, about 82% (1,913 acres) city-size categories. Once these quantities have been can be satisfied by the facilities. For a more detailed was concentrated in 3 regions. Eleven of the 27 determined, it is then necessary to convert them to explanation of the relationship between opportunities regions having cities reported no recreational water opportunity days by means of the TORP urban available and demand, the reader is referred to available. Recreational water among the towns was standards, which actually serves as conversion factors. Appendix C of this volume. Table 2.8 expresses the 47 total number of annual opportunity 0- -, available for A more meaningful comparison between the three and freshwater boat ramps, metro ratios were lower urban activities, and is itemized on the basis of city-size categories is made possible by neutralizing than comparable ratios for the cities and towns. city-size category. In 1971, there were an estimated the-effect of differences in population. Accordingly, Moreover, for all types of designated facilities, except 217,293,755 annual opportunity days available in the data in Table 2.9 were obtained by dividing the surface acres of freshwater lakes, the metro ratios urban areas of Texas for all the selected facilities number of opportunity days available (as shown i in were below the statewide average. A comparison listed in Table 2.8. For nearly all activity types, the Table 2.8) by appropriate population figures. Table between cities and towns shows that towns had metros had substantially more opportunity days 2-9 shows that for the urban areas in 1971, there available than did the cities or towns. This is@to be were 25,384 annual days available per thousand proportionally more opportunity days available than expected, however, since metro areas have more parks population for all activities combined. Also, it is again did the cities for water-related recreation facilities,, and by definition, larger populati 'ons. Thus, metros quite evident that in 1971 the metros were less well (surface acres of freshwater lakes, freshwater and are more likely to have a larger number of facility supplied on a per capita basis than either the cities or saltwater boat ramps) baseball/softball fields, golf units than either cities or towns. The only exception towns for most types of facilities. There was no type courses, and trail facilities. A major conclusion to be to this general tendency was saltwater boat ramps, for of designated facility for which the metro ratio was drawn from Table 2.9 is that, in general, the number which the number of opportunity days available in the highest of the three city sizes. In fact, for all of opportunity days available on a per thousa .nd metro areas equaled the number of opportunity days types of facilities except football/soccer fields, population basis tenos to be inversely proportional to available in towns. basketball courts, surface acres of freshwater lakes, the povulation of urban areas. TABLE 2.9 ANNUAL OPPORTUNITY DAYS AVAILABLE PER THOUSAND POPULATION IN 1971 FOR RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES IN URBAN AREAS BY CITY SIZE, AND TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS TYPE OF TOTAL FOR TYPE OF ACTIVITY FACILITY METROS CITIES TOWNS ALL URBAN- AREAS Swimming swimming pools 3,890 7,807 8,386 4,925 Child's Play playgrounds 7,136 19,677 18,034 10,037 Baseball/Softball fields 2,577 4,278 4,342 3,004 Picnicking tables 2,093 4,253 3,627 2,552 Football/Soccer fields 235 327 194 242 Golf cou rses 414 726 831 503 Tennis courts 384 544 449 412 Basketball courts 625 654 602 626 Boating, Boat Fishing, Skiing-Freshwater freshwater lakes 2,961 882 3,179 2,719 Boating, Boat Fishing, Skiing-Freshwater boat ramps 203 98 522 151 Boating, Boat Fishing, Skiing-Saltwater boat ramps 10 10 65 17 Trails Activitiesa trai Is 163 245 351 196 ALL ACTIVITIES 20,591 39,501 40,572 25,384 Source: The Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of Parks, Recreation Areas, and Facilities a. Includes bicycling, walking (hiking), and nature study. 48 _71 INTRODUCTION OU'TD(50R R@EqBEA I'V One of the most important steps in planning for the provision of adequate urban outdoor recreation opportunities involves the development of reasonably accurate estimates of present and future demands for these opportunities. While a knowledge of the recreational supply discussed in the preceding chapter .4@ A may be useful for certain planning purposes, the value of this gnificance kno'wledge assumes much greater si in the recreational planning process when it is compared with estimates of demand. Whereas the ii concept of supply is resource oriented, the concept of S demand is people oriented. Generally, recreational demand refers to the propensity or tendency of people to participate in outdoor recreational activities. Participation may be expressed in a variety of ways, such as the' number of annual days of participation, the frqquency of participation per -it household, location of participation, the amount of Therefore, it is time and money expended, and so on. Wk important to determine the existing patterns of urban par icip t* ' ation and to identify those factors which tend JW to influence those patterns, prior to the development of urban participation projections. IWO' f To assist in identifying and understanding the present patterns of urban recreation demand, two major J surveys were conducted. The first such survey was the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey, which involved personal interviews with 15,000 Texas households. Over 13,000 of these households resided in urban areas. The second survey was the 1970 Texas Outdoor Recreation On-Site 0 Demand Survey. The urban portion of this survey interviews with involved over 1,700 personal 1 recreationists while they were actually participating in a sample of 38 urban parks and recreation areas geographically dispersed within six metropolitan areas. - --------- Phat6 by Melanie Shearer, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 49 only 2% were from other states) Therefore, participation in the urban recreation activitiescan be attributed either to residents residing within a particular urban area, or to Texans living outside the urban area. Based on these findings, two distinct types of urban participation were distinguished for planning purposes: Type 1: An individual participates in an outdoor recreation activity, utilizing facilities or resources located in the metropolitan area, city, o r town i n which he resides = Resident Participation. Type 2: A resident of Texas participates in an outdoor recreation activity, utilizing facilities or resources located in a metropolitan area, city, or town in which From the information obtained in these surveys, a The purpose of this chapter is to summarize some of he does not reside = Non-Resident large quantity of detailed data on the patterns of the basic findings relevant to recreation participation Participation. urban recreation was made available for the first time in the urban areas of Texas. The chapter is segmented in Texas for planning purposes. The surveys also into three major parts: patterns of urban outdoor These two major sources of urba .n recreation demand provided the basic data necessary for projecting recreation participation, factors influencing future recreation demands. participaItion, and projections of urban outdoor provide the basis for evaluating the total recreation recreation participation for the years 1970, 1975, demands for recreation opportunities in the urban 1980, 1990, and 2000. areas. The consideration of non-resident demand is of particular *significance since the failure to consider The three detailed parts to this volume, consisting of PATTERNS OF URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION this segment of demand in planning for recreation Part 2: Metropolitan Areas, Part 3: Cities, and Part 4: PARTICIPATION opportunities could result in the provision of Towns, present projections of activity participation inadequate recreation resources for certain recreation by Analytical Planning Region, and by type of It was estimated that total participation for selected activities. participant (resi 'dent or non-resident). These are the outdoor recreation activities in the urban areas of types of demand information considered to be most Texas (including spectator and active participation) A further breakdown of urban participation revealed relevant to users of this volume. Other types of totalled 326 million days in 1968. Of this total, an additional finding. Of the 326 million demand data, such as seasonality, mode of travel, resident participation accounted for 285 million days participation days that occurred in the urban areas in length of stay, distance traveled, and other behavioral (87%) while non-residents accounted for 41 million 1968, 43 million (13%) were classified as spectator characteristics are very important; however, to have days (13%). days. The activities of base bal I /softball, analyzed'in detail each of these many factors for each f ootball/soccer, and basketball accounted for of the three city size *urban areas at. a regional level Virtually all p I articipati.on in the urban areas was approximately two-thirds of the total spectator days. would have been impractical, owing to the nature of accounted for by Texans. Participation by It was also found that spectator participation the data and the scope of this volume . Therefore, out-of-state tourists was determined to be accounted for a higher percentage of total these behavorial patterns are not discussed in the insignificant with respect to the activities dealt with participation by non-residents than for residents, detailed parts, but are discussed in this chapter in this volume. Of the 1,707 individuals and/or 1. Source: 1970 Texas Outdoor Recreation On-Site because of their significance. groups of recreationists interviewed in urban parks, Demand Survey 50 indicating that attending sporting events is one of the urban areas generally originated from within the A comparison between resident and non-resident reasons for travel to urban places. While it is beyond region in which the urban areas are located. participation by activity shows significant differences. the scope of this volume to dwell in depth on this For example, the top five activities, based on resident aspect of urban recreation, planning at the local level Table 3.1 also itemizes total participation by activity. participation, were swimming, walking, bicycling, should consider spectators in providing recreation F-o r resident and non-resident p . articipation pleasure' driving, and child's play. Together, these five facilities, particularly support facilities such as combined, swimming had the largest number of days activities accounted for 72.8% of the total ..resident bleachers, rest rooms, parking, etc. with nearly 47 million. Based on total participation, participation. However, these same five activities the second most popular activity was walking, accounted for only 27.3% of the total non-resident Given these broad breakdowns of urban outdoor followed by bicycling, driving for pleasure, and participation. Most of the total non-resident recreation .demand, the remainder of this section child's play. These five activities accounted for almost participation was attributed to sightseeing, swimming, delves into the more detailed characteristics of urban two-thirds (67%) of the total participation which fishing, picnicking, driving for pleasure, and boating. outdoor recreation participation. These topics include occurred in urban areas. participation by residents and non-residents, household rates of participation, seasonality of TABLE 3.1 participation, participation by days of the week, and RESIDENT, NON-RESIDENT, AND TOTAL PARTICIPATION IN URBAN OUTDOOR preferences ' for urban activities. Following these RECR -EATION ACTIVITIES BY TEXANS IN 1968 discussions additional information from the (Millions of Recreation Days) Household Demand Survey is used to describe the behavioral patterns of urban park users. These patterns include the features sought in urban parks, Resident Non-Resident Total Activity8 Participation Rank Participation Rank Participation Rank modes of travel to parks, distances traveled, - -------------- ---------- ----------- ----------- ------- willingness to travel, length of stay, type of recreation Swimming 40.7 1 6.1 2 46.8 1 group, and cost of outing. Child's Play 29.4 5 .7 7 30.1 5 Baseball 7.7 7 .2 12 7.9 9 Picnicking 12.9 6 3.7 4 16.6 6 CHARACTERISTICS OF URBAN OUTDOOR Football 2.9, 12 .1 13 3.0 12 Golf 7.3 8 .5 9 7.8 10 RECREATION PARTICIPATION Tennis 4.1 11 .1 13 4.2 1.1 Basketball 1.9 13 - 0 1.9 14 As mentioned earlier in this chapter, recreation Walking 38.3 2 .6 8 38.9 2 Bicycling 37.5 3 0 37.5 3 participation in urban areas totalled 326 million days Nature Study .8 15 .1 13 .9 15 in 1968, of which about 43 million days were Fishing 4.7 10 4.6 3 9.3 8 attributed to sp ectators. Therefore, considering only Boating 1.5 14 1.5 6 3.0 12 Skiing .5 16 .3 11 .8 16 active participation, it was estimated that there were Surf ing .2 17 .5 9 .7 17 283 million days in 1968. Of this total, 247 million Sightseeing 6.3 9 7.9 1 14.2 .7 days (87%) were accounted for by residents of urban Driving for Pleasure 33.9 4b 2.4 5b 36.3 4 areas, with the remaining 36 million days (13%) Other Activities 16A NR 6.6 NR 211 NR.b ------------ --------------------------------------- --------------------------- attributed to non-residents (see Table 3.1). Further ALL ACTIVITIES 247.0 282.9 investigation of the origins of these non-resident recreationists indicated that over 90% of their Source: Estimated from the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. participation originated from within 30 miles of the urban areas in which the recreationists were Notes: Dashes indicate that participation is less than 50,000 days. Zeros indicate that the activity was not ranked due .participating. This finding indicated that for planning to insignificant participation days recorded. purposes, non-resident participation occurring in a. Participation includes only participation by active participants; spectator participation was excluded. b. Note ranked due to "Other Activities" category including several activities. 51 RESIDENT RATES OF PARTICIPATION This potential is even more apparent for individual variations affect the patterns of. participation in Table 3.2 shows average household participation rates activities. A higher proportion of urban households outdoor recreation activities in the urban. areas. Fifty of urban residents for the seventeen major urban participated in picnicking than in any other listed percent of all particiaption occurred during the outdoor recreation activities for the metropolitan activity. Yet, even for-this activity only 14.9% of all months June, July, and August. By far the activity areas, cities, and towns. As indicated in the table, urban households participated in an urban area, while with the highest proportion of participation during slightly over half (53.9%) of all urban households 85.1% of all urban households did not engage in the summer was swimming with 87%. Of the activities participated in at least one outdoor recreation -picnicking in urban areas at.all. Jisted in Table 3.3, all except archery had higher activity in an urban area during 1968. Conversely, participation levels during the summer than any other slightly less than half (46.1%) of all urban households SEASONALITY OF PARTICIPATION season-For all activities combined, only 10% of all did not participate at all in urban areas. This 46.1% is participation occurred during winter months. significant because it indicates the potential for In planning to meet current and future demands for Participation in some activities such as walking for increases in urban participation. In future years, urban outdoor recreation opportunities, it is pleasure, sightseeing, a *nd sport shooting tended to persons who for one reason or another did not important to know when participation can be remain relatively stable throughout the year. participate in urban areas in 1968 may begin to do so. expected to occur. As indicated in Table 3.3, seasonal- TABLE 3.2 LEVELS OF RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD IN URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION IN TEXAS IN 1968, BY ACTIVITY Percent of All Urban Average Annual Days Average Annual Days of Households Participating of Participation Participation Per Activitya In Each Activity Rank Per Household Rank Participating Household Rank Swimming 13A 2 16 1 121 4 Child's Play 12.6 3 12 5 93 6 Baseball/Softball 3.8 10 3 7 81 8 Picnicking 14.9 1 5 6 35 16 Football/Soccer 2.5 12 1 12 46 14 Golf 6.0 7 3 7 49 13 Tennis 2.8 11 2 9 59 Basketball .8 14 1 12 93 6 Walking 8.2 6 15 2 186 2 Bicycling 4.5 8 15 2 335 1 Nature Study .7 15 --- 15 50 12 Fishing 4.5 8 2 9 42 15 Boating 1.0 13 1 12 60 10 Skiing .3 16 --- 15 76 9 Surfing .1 17 --- 15 162 3 Sightseeing 8.6 5 2 9 29 17 Driving for Pleasure 12.4 4 13 4 109 5 ALL ACTIVITIESb 53.9 98 183 Source: Estimated from the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. Note: Dashes indicate that participation is less than one-half day. a. Participation includes only participation by active participants; spectator participation was excluded. b. Includes a category of miscellaneous activities titled "Other Activities." 52 TABLE 3.3 SUMMARY OF PARTICIPATION BY TEXAS URBAN RESIDENTS IN OUTDOOR RECREATION ACTIVITIES BY SEASONS, 1968 FALL ANNUALTOTAL WINTER SPRING SUMMER Thousands Percent of Thousands Percent of Thousands Percent of Thousands Percent of Thousands Total Activitya of Days Annual Total of Days Annual Total of Days Annual Total of Days Annual Total of Days Percent Archery 25' 27 18 19 11 12 39 42 93 100 Sport Shooting 88 23 91 24 100 27 97 26 376 100 Boating 97 6 302 19 629 59 252, 16 1,580 100 Camping 22 17 13 10 70 54 24 19 129 100 Child's Play 3,265 10 5,857 18 17,222 54 5,574 78 31,918 100 Driving for Pleasure 9,412 12 21,312 28 29,600 39 15,466 20 75,790 100 Fishing 663 14 1,084 22 1,882 39 1,199 25 4,828 100 Games and Sports 3,153 12 6,230 23 11,936 44 5,517 21 26,936 100 788 18 1,155 27 1,432 33 956 22 4,331 100 Horseback Riding Rodeo 2 25 4 50 2 25 8 100 Racing 27 5 68 14 353 70 55 11 503 100 Regional Amusement Center 4 739 22 1,819 54 809 24 3,371 100 Sightseeing 1,310 20 1,469 23 2,179 34 1,516 23 6,474 100 Picnicking 732 5 2,608 20 7,382 55 2,644 20 13,366 100 Skiing 25'. 5 64 14 297 66 66 15 452 100 Surfing 1 26 12 150 69 46 18 217 100 Swimming 214 1 2,947 7 37,494 87 2,263 5 42,918 100 Walking for Pleasure 4,782 12 11,946 29 16,005 39 8,368 20 41,101 100 Hiking 71 18 118 31 123 32 73 19 385 100 Nature Study 100 11 255 28 378 42 162 18 895 100 TOTAL FOR ALL ACTIVITIES 24,779 10 56,304 22 129,366 50 45,122 18 255,571 100 Source: Estimated from the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreational Household Demand Survey. Notes: Dashes indicate that participation is less than 500 days. Astericks indicate less than one-half percent of total annual days. a. Participation includes only participation by active participants; spectator participation was excluded. Seasonal variations in the participation patterns of the advent of cooler. weather and the closing of most urban recreationists participated in fourteen of the .urban outdoor recreation indicate that changes in pools to coincide. with the beginning of a new school twenty activities more on weekends than on season affect many aspects of park and recreation year when youths, who account for the majority of weekdays. The six activities that deviated from this area administration and programming. Participation swimming participation, return to classes. pattern were archery, child's play, games and sports in.most activities varies cyclically, apparen .tly closely ..(tennis, golf, base bal lAoftball, basketball, etc.), associated with climatic conditions. However, these PARTICIPATION BY DAY OF THE WEEK Swimming, walking for pleasure, and nature study. changes are also due in part to sociological and institutional factors (Le., vacations, school year, etc.). Another aspect of participation which was found to For those activities that require additional time in For example, swimming declines sharply in the fall have significant urban planning implications is the preparing for the outing, traveling to the urban and winter months which can be attributed to many amount of participation which occurs on weekends as recreation area, or where the duration of factors, but two of the most prominent factors are opposed to weekdays. As indicated in Table 3.4, participation was relatively long, a tendency toward 53 weekend as opposed to weekday participation was TABLE 3A identified. Activities falling into this category included boating, camping, attending rodeos, SUMMARY OF PARTICIPATION BY TEXAS URBAN RESIDENTS IN URBAN OUTDOOR sightseeing, and picnicking. RECREATION ACTIVITIES BY WEEKDAYS AND WEEKENDS, 1968 For all activities combined, participation was split Weekdays Weekends evenly between weekdays and weekends. However, a considering the fact that there are five weekdays as Activity Thousands of Days Percent Thousands of Days Percent opposed to only two weekend days on which Archery 68 73 25 27 participation may take place, it is clear that use Sport Shooting 149 40 227 60 Boating 504 32 1,076 68 intensity of urban parks and recreation areas on Camping 20 16 109 84 weekends is substantially higher than on weekdays6 Child's Play 16,725 .52 15,193 48 Based on an average of all activities, 10% of total Driving for Pleasure 34,974 46 40,816 54 weekly participation could be expected on a given Fishing 2,001 41 2,827 59 Games and Sports 13,817 51 13,019 49 weekday whereas 25% would be expected on a Horseback Riding 1,827 42 2,504 58 weekend day. For some activities, this relationship is Rodeo 2 25 6 75 Racing 192 38 311 62 even more marked. For example, over five times as Regional Amusement Center 1,326 39 2,045 61 much picnicking took place on an average weekend Sightseeing 1,907 29 4,567 71 day as opposed to a weekday. Picnicking 4,363 33 9,003 67 Skiing 160 35 292 65 Surfing 108 50 109 50 ACTIVITY PREFERENCES Swimming 25,436 59 17,482 41 Walking for Pleasure 23,514 57 17,587 43 Hiking 159 41 226 59 Recreationist's preferences should be considered in Nature Study 513 57 382 43 recreational planning if the most efficient practical utilization of parks and facilities is to be achieved. TOTAL FOR ALL ACTIVITIES 127,765 50 127,806 50 Each individual's preferences cannot be taken into account in a plan such as the TORP. Instead, surveys Source: Estimated from the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. were designed and conducted to assist in determining a. Participation includes only participation by active participants; spectator participation was excluded. how best to satisfy the greatest number of recreationist's participating in Texas. As indicated by the rankings of the 12 activities in play, skiing, and surfing), all but swimming, child's substituting activities such as driving and walking for Table 3.5, statewide activity preferences do not play, and surfing had a higher preference ranking than pleasure for activities in which they would prefer to necessarily reflect what people were actually doing participation ranking. This suggest that persons would participate, but for some reason did not. for recreation in urban areas. It is quite obvious that participate more frequently in activities such as games participation was highest in activities which are and sports, fishing, picnicking, and boating if given relatively simple and which require. few or not the opportunity. For example, fishing ranked second CHARACTERISTICS OF URBAN PARK USERS specialized facilities. Of the types of activities which in preference but eighth in particip6tion. As pointed do require some degree of a specialized skill or out in the previous chapter on opportunities, only 5% In the previous sections of this chapter, Household facilities suited for recreational purposes (games and of all urban parks had facilities available for fishing. Demand Survey data have been used to establish the sports, fishing, swimming, picnicking. boating, child's Table 3.5 seems to imply that urban residents were general patterns of total outdoor recreation in the 54 TABLE 3.5 picnicking or swimming were interviewed in this study. The age criterion is reflected in the data, COMPAR ISON OF URBAN ACTIVITY PARTICIPATION particularly with respect to mode of travel. The WITH URBAN HOUSEHOLD ACTIVITY REFERENCES anIalysis covers the following characteristics of urban Bank Order of Urban Rank Order of: Urban park users: features sought, mode of travel, distance outdoor Recreation Activity Household Activity traveled from-home, willingness to travel, length of Rank Participationa Preferencesb stay, type of group, and total monetary cost of the outing. 1 Driving for Pleasurec Games and Sportsd FEATURES SOUGHT 2 Swimming Fishing 3 Walking for Pleasure Swimming From a list of seven features, respondents were asked 4 Child's Play Picnicking to'rank order three of the features which were most 5 Games and Sportsd Driving for Pleasurec ghtseeing 6 Picnicking Si, rnportant to them in selecting an urban outdoor 7 Sightseeing Boating recreation site. The results, as presented in Figure 3.1, 8 Fishing Child's Play show relatively little difference between the two 9 Boating Wal king for Pleasure types of parks. For both types, the quality of 10 Nature Study Skiing 11 Skiing Nature Study man-made facilities was judged to be the single most 12 Surf ing Surfing importa Int factor. There appeared to be a slight tendency for community park users to place more emphasis than district park users on activities, Source: Estimated from the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. f ac i I ities, and the opportunity to socialize. Conversely, district park users tended to place slightly a. Participation includes only participation by active participants; spectator participation was excluded. more emphasis on atmosphere and scenery, b. Includes first, second, and third activity choices combined for all urban households interviewed in the Household Demand Survey. FIGURE 3.1 c. Includes driving for pleasure, bicycling, riding, and flying. orts activities. FEATURES SOUGHT8 d. includes baseball/softball, football /soccer, basketball, golf, tennis, and other games and sP % Community Park Users urban areas. These data were obtained from a data for explicit park and facilities planning purposes. 24 District Park Users 20 stratified random sample of the statewide population. Accordingly, the next several pages present to - 0443 information obtained from the 1970 Urban On-Site 15- KA AiM vity V-3 M Alto presented were data which reflected acti participation which may occur at settings other than Survey, conducted at thirty-eight parks located in six 17 urban areas. The parks were categorized into two rLn parks, while other activities are highly dependent on .4% 1P d@ P \I- types: community parks and district parks. The the availability of specific facilities (such as swimming 10@ 0 0. 1.2 0_ p Qt poolsj picnic tables, playground facilities, etc.) which former serve nearby households or small groups of 0 4 4 4 ;o "V ir" Q people who are generally united by some common 91. 0", /-;q-- are generally found in parks. 1, 0 , & bond such as a school or church in the neighborhood. Due to the major importance of such facilities and District parks, on the other hand, have a much the implications inferred from the household data broader appeal, . with users originating fro m all facilities, a more sections of the urban area and to a lesser extent from Source: 1970 On-Site Demand Survey. with regard to needs for such a. For each type of park, percentages were determined detailed examination of urban recreationists' the region surrounding the urban area. These parks by adding the total number of points for each feature responses taken while they were actually participating owe their appeal to their larger size and greater (on the basis of three points for most important feature, two points for second most important feature, in an outdoor recreation activity in an urban park is variety of facilities. It should be mentioned that only and one point for third most important feature), and made in this section in order to provide more detailed Iindividuals of fifteen years or older who were dividing by the total number of points. 55 (a -0 0 0 00 C1+ 0 'a 0 0 '0 0 CD a) 0 0 --h= W -'h CD -h 00 m CA 0 m 10 CD CD CD :r 0 0 Er cD ;r 3 Cc C) CD CD CD CD C CL (D > CD 7A' Cl- n=r m CD 'k m to 0 C) C) =r 0) C C: CD CD 0 CO 0CD cD CD -- 0 z 0 0 0 0 0 3 3q '0 --h -0 a) n p II a) 0 == m M Cc - 0 ra. 3 @* CL CD ID CI) -n 31 CD 77 m a) a) =r 0 W 0 3 < M < g a. m mm 0 0 w 0, 1CL m -0 '0 CD 0 CD < CD 77 CL w Cl- CD 0,) 3 CD. > r > --j0 '+ Tr =r < 030 cr 0- w CL < CCD CD 0 @ m 0 CO m CD 0 -n CD CD 0 rn m C.) CWD r- S I --h E-' M m I m r0 1 a @ C) a- 0 C'D w 0 0) CD 77 'a 3 0 C 0 < 0 co C.) CL 0 W 0 :3 m , -0 00 > Rr 0 F@ -n -n 3- 1 '+ - D 0 CL CL C341 00 m a CD ;rW a 0 0 CL 3 On 3 0 0 3 3 'a ;r CP < U2- 03 F. .< CL) C@D m 0) 0* CD CL 0< 0) CD :3 77M CD r+ < a) CD 3 R.0 0 a < 0 CD :3 00 0 ':3 CD CID Cr 13 m 0 CD COD 0 0 1 CO CD 0 77' 0 3= x (9 C 0 3 CD 0 0 C m CD 00 a) 0 a -V 0 CD 0 < Cn > > CD 0 CCD CD < 3E " " -0 M 0 Cr- m 0) !=@ CD CD. = 0 =a- 0) < 0 0 0 3 A 0a) CDM Q 0CD C T 3 CD z CD 0 'am 0 < =r 0 0 W 0 D -0 CD I I 0 0 0 0 1 CD 5 CD to = .8 F M 0 r- :3 < CD CL CD 'a r- 3 CD 0 C 0 "+ I - cc F r I = - * CD CD '+ --h M z V Om 1-3 Blocks CL 0 CD 3 1 2 = 1+ CL '0+ C) 0 0 z rA M CD z w o CD 0 4-6 Blocks CD C" ff+ 3 m 0 to -4 < M =. - C 0 4 < q+ < CD I 'o x CD 0 3 0) 0- - 0 I.R @ * '> 0.) < - ::@ CD I = ---1 0 m -110 7-12 Blocks =r 0 z rn 0 Cr CD M Ln CD CD 0 0 0 r -4 CD cL w I o 1-3 Miles -n CD CD CD CL a 4 CL C , + m * . 1 ---1 a) CD z 0 0 0 m m -Ow 0 CD --h0 rA 0 3 #1 11 -0 (.' 0 > PI) P C 4@- CD Z 4-6 Miles rn :0 < CD C" cD 4,0+ =r < CL (n w 0 CD Cn rm 03 - 0 0 z CL m M. 4 - ILO CD 4D @@.o Ca z 00 m 0 CD a) 0- r- m 7-9 Miles ;-,7 0 a) C 1+ 1 * 10. 0 0 0 0 CL :3 CD =r B < 0 CD -n M 0 M CD 0 CP cD CD CD 0 '+ 10-15 Miles 0) 0 CO C 0 a 0 0 M 0 CL 0 t+ ..I a) 0 CD = CD I I @!i 16-25 Mil a- 0 m :3 3 t17+ w c') le of Pr x CD CD D - W' 'w I = 0 0 1+ w CD CD m -n a, < 0 0 26-75 Miles CWD * ?@Z- 0 M 0 -n < ;a 0C CD '0 a) 3 2: o CO 0 C-D I.Ra-0 rn M ICA m 0 w 0 1 0 3 0 Cn (D CD I r CL 75 Miles 0. 0 a 0 0 CD ID 0 < CL 0 < zw 0 0 mS+ 0 c,) cn A 0 O'm z ;7 CD m cc to ID w 5 a I I (D --. :@ * 0- F' r m 0 -0 0 *0 0 m 1-3 Blocks CD m mC 'a M 0 CL (n I - =2L - 0 z 0 0 0 1 w C- 0 C C+. M w a z -6 Blocks:::.,, Z C) D 0C 0 0 VO 4 m z 30 0 0 :3 -n r x m X . I 3 M CD x CD 0- C 0 -le M > 7-12 Blocks C) CD = 0 -1@@ a- 0) -u - -"-0 S- z Z-4 C om CD I -, % -;r 3m -I -< CL 0 --1 M 0 C 0 = -3 0 M 3 0 CD 3 W i I Miles d' o 3a OD mm CD 3 X 0 -- CD 5 Ui r+ C a) > M .41 m- SO a, 3 EL w:3 qEr cD 'A ra A. P Z' 4-6 Miles -Xx 3 a' , b > CD 2: cc m 0 =r 0 0, 0 3 -0 CD CD < 7-9 Miles 0 0-0 m m 5' < 0 r Ln w C., Ct z 0. CD0 =r 10-15 Miles m > 3 CD 10-15 Miles s 1@6 -? 5 Milet 26-75 Miles 7 Mile @5 s 0A 09 in CD W > > m m C CL -0 z 16-25 Miles < 0 0 0 0 CD -- 0 'a :r =r 0 0 00 Cm fo CD m CO Cx 0- 40 0 ;a r 3 0 :3 CD 0- 0 0 0 :3 X. m m = 3 11--0 "R m m m m C U) "m CA '+ M E ;K C 1)75 Miles La: 0 :3 < CD C m U3 m LENGTH OF STAY FIGURE 3.6 park usage. On the other hand, respondents did LENGTH OF STAY indicate that they would be willing to travel farther if The average length of stay at an urban park was they had leisure periods of greater duration. Thus, an approximately three and one-hal If hours..This figure eo - Community Park Users extra hour after work each evening is less likely to varied only sl ightly when comparison is made by type 41 WDIstrict Park Users significantly increase the distance recreationist would of park. Virtually all park users spent at least one 40- 30 be willing to travel than a three-day weekend. Not hout in the park. On the other hand, very few stayed so - sur rising , i i ar s ave grea er ra ing power more than six hours (Figure 3.6). 19 than community parks, evidently because district 20 - parks are larger and usually have a wider variety of TYPE OF GROUP 10- facilities. The majority of users arrive with friends-or 6 other members of the household, and stay about The survey showed some differences in the 0% three and one-half hours. Most park users, especially 1 4 district park users, still rely heavily on the auto for composition of users (Figure 3.7). Households 0 comprised over one-third of the respondents in 0 411 transportation, although data have suggested that district parks, but only about one-fourth o 'f' the FIGURE 3.7 reliance on the auto can be reduced significantly if respondents in community parks. Community parks community parks are provided in sufficient number had a higher proportion of individuals who came TYPE OF GROUP and located in relation to the population, so as to alone than did district parks. Organized groups of '@6 - Community Park Users encourage walking or bicycling. recreationists participating as a unit represented a 40- 00istrict Pork Users very small percentage of respondents for both types 30- 25 30 SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS INFLUENCING of parks. 20- 2 23 PARTICIPATION IN URBAN OUTDOOR 4 3 RECREATION 12 10 10 COST OF OUTING By analyzing the socio-economic characteristics of 2 Recreationists were asked to estimate the total recreationists (determined from 1968 Household monetary .cost of their outing and the results are 0 Demand Survey Data),- some very definitive presented in Figure 3.8. Not surprisingly, relationships can be established relating recreationists to the activities they pursue. Decisions can then be recreationists spent more money on trips to district made based on information related to the people to parks than to community parks. The median FIGURE 3.8 be served. Acquisition, development, programs, and expenditure on trips to community parks was COST OF OUTING approximately $.48, compared to $1.46 for district % administration and operation are enhanced through parks. Interestingly, 18% of the respondents at 40- Community Park Users knowledge of the public and their generalized community par Iks spent no money at all. Evidently, 913istrict Park Users characteristics. This section discusses briefly the 50- effect which five selected variables have in influencing these persons lived close enough to the park that a 21 the general tendency to participate and the intensity vehicle was not necessary. Somewhat surprising to - Is of participation. Each of the following five tables perhaps is - the evidence which shows that almost 10- X relates a given socio-economic variable to: (1) the one-fourth of the respondents at district parks spent 4 2 average annual days of participation per household, over $5.00. 'k .0 _J .0 @4 0;5 0 @'o .0 .0 0 summed for all activities, (2) the percent of all S/ '00 11@ ell 00 households in which at least one person participated in summarizing the behavioral patterns of urban park '00 '00 .0 .0 in at least one of the selected activities, and (3) 0 0 users, it was found that, in general, increases in annual days of participation per household for each distances to parks tends to reduce the probability of of the selected activities. Source: 19700n-Site Demand Survey. 57 TABLE 3.6 HOUSEHOLD SIZE 1968 AVERAGE ANNUAL URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION DAYS PER URBAN RESIDENT Figure 3.9 and Table 3.6 suggest that this variable is a HOUSEHOLD BY HOUSEHOLD SIZE, FOR SELECTED ACTIVITIES significant factor in affecting urban outdoor recreation participation. As the number of household ACTIVITya 1 2 3 4 5-7 8+ members increases, thus increasing the number of Swimming .49 1.25 5.46 21.16 33.45 66.03 potential recreationists, the probability and intensity Child's Play .23 .12 3.81 12.62 24.13 66.04 of participation by a household increases. This Baseball .02 .30 1.14 2.63 6.60 16.20 generalization applies to most activities, although Picnicking .43 1.20 3.12 6.77 8.68 19.10 Football .02 .24 .62 1.14 2.18 5.22 there are exceptions, such as golf and tennis. Golf .13 2.06 3.86 4.88 2.80 1.53 Tennis .10 .46 2.55 2.57 2.23 .51 Basketball .13 .54 1.34 1.31 1.65 Walking 15.09 18.78 14.09 15.01 12.02 22.54 Bicycling .23 1.17 4.31 20.03 36.22 35.57 Nature Study .16 .74 .14 .16 .21 Fishing .66 .91 1.11 2.31 3.18 3.11 Boating .04 .24 .50 .89 .87 1.38 Skiing ;01 .12 .06 .37 .28 --- Surfing - .07 .23 Sightseeing 1.27 1.54 2.19 2.74 2.91 7.12 Dr. for Pleas. 4.15 8.76 12.26 17.21 18.97 24.11 Source: Estimated from the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. Note: Dashes indicate insufficient observations to compute an average. a. Includes only active participation. Also, see -footnote b, Figure 3.9. FIGURE 3.9 1968 AVERAGE ANNUAL URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION DAYS PER URBAN RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD BY HOUSEHOLD SIZE, FOR ALL ACTIVITIES 2 1 170 12, Average Annual Urban Resident Days of Participationa Per - Urban Resident Household (Summed for all activitiesb) X, 60 Source: 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand 40 Survey. X, 2 XX a . includes only active participation. b. Exceeds the number of activities listed in Table 3.6; Number of Persons in Urban Resident Household ......... 1 2 3 1 4 15-7-18+ therefore, Figure 3.9 was not calculated from data in Percent of All Urban Resident Households'in. Which at Least One Table 3.6. Person Particioated in at Least One Activity 34 39 56162165166 58 FIGURE 3.10 1968 AVERAGE ANNUAL URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION DAYS PER URBAN RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD BY TOTAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME LEVELS, FOR ALL ACTIVITIES 147 13 0 Average Annual Urban Resident Days.of Source: 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Participation3 Per Urban Resident 99 Survey. Household (Summed for All Ac tivitiesb) 66 X.X X-X-X-X-X-X- X a. Includes only active participation. X- . ........ .. b. Exceeds the number of activities listed in Table 3.7; therefore, Figure 310 was not calculated from data in 0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 Table 3.7. Urban Resident Household Income Levels ............... to to to + Percent Of All Urban Resident Households In Which At Least 1 15-099 1 1%922 1 All-999 1 One Person Participated In At Least One Activity 48 57 57 58 TABLE 3.7 1968 AVERAGE ANNUAL URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION DAYS PER URBAN RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD BY TOTAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME LEVELS, FOR SELECTED ACTIVITIES Less than $5,000- $10,000- $15,000 ACTIVITY8 $5,000 $9,999 $14,999 and over Swimming 9.90 14.92 21.59 31.07 TOTAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME Child's Play 9.28 13.37 12.65 8.04 Baseball 1.51 3.05 5.75 3.27 Figur@ 3.10 and Table 3.7 indicate that, in general, Picnicking 4.13 5.77 4.02 6.24 Football .99 1.00 .97 2.21 participation rises as household income rises. This Golf .71 1.89 5.28 11.27 trend is most applicable in lower income brackets. Tennis .22 1.47 2.61 5.87 Basketball .43 .55 1.69 1.02 Households with an income of less than $5,000 per Walking 14.16 14.11 15.20 28.35 year tend to participate much less frequently than Bicycling 6.25 12.94 30.83 24.52 those in higher income groups. However, as incomes Nature Study .22 .43 .25 .38 increase above $5,000, the attendant increase in Fishing 1.14 2.49 1.68 1.60 Boating .26 .65 .73 1.30 recreational participation is much less dramatic and Skiing .11 .35 .33 somewhat less predictable. Rates for aptivities such as Surfing .02 --- .10 .53 Sightseeing 2.74 2.53 1.52 1.91 swimming, golf, and tennis continue to increase Dr. for Pleas. 11.22 16.84 12.46 9.15 substantially; rates for other activities, such as 6 .... ........ . ex-x .. . ..... . ............... basebal I /softball, picnicking, and bicycling display Source: Estimated from the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. variations in this trend; while rates for children's play Note: Dashes indicate insufficient observations to compute an average. and fishing actually show consistent decreases with increases in income, for levels above $5,000.. a. Includes only active participation. Also, see footnote b, Figure 3.10. 59 FIGURE 3.11 1968 AVERAGE ANNUAL URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION DAYS PER URBAN RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD BY RACE OR ETHNIC BACKGROUND, FOR ALL ACTIVITIES Average Annual Days of Urban Resident 116 91 Source: 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Participationa Per Urban Resident Householdl Survey. b) (Summed for All Activities X .. ......... ....... X ......... :*X- a. includes only active participation. % X: X: b. Exceeds the number of activities listed in Table 3.8; therefore, Figure 3.11 was not calculated from data in Urban Resident Race or Ethnic Background ............. ANGLO MEX-AM BLACK Table 3.8. Percent of All Urban Resident Households In Which At Least One Person Participated In At Le@st One Activity ......... 51 63 51 TABLE 3.8 1968 AVERAGE ANNUAL URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION DAYS PER URBAN RESID@NT kOOSEHOLD BY RACE OR ETHNIC BACKGROUND, FOR SELECTED ACTIVITIES Mexican- ACTIVITya Anglos Americans Blacks Swimming 14.75 19.20 15.78 Child's Play 8.48 19.01 18.05 Basebal 1 2.48 4.92 3.31 Picnicking 3.81 10.91 3.95 RACE OR ETHNIC BACKGROUND Football .79 2.52 1.17 Golf 3.59 1.20 .32 As with the previous two factors race or ethnic Tennis 2.00 .43 .47 Basketball .42 .51 2.83 background appears to affect the tendency to Walking 17.06 11.66 11.54 participate i 'n urban outdoor recreation. Figure 3.11 Bicycling 15.16 10.68 14.83 shows that 63% of all Mexican -American households Nature Study .32 .15 .51 Fishing 1.76 1.60 2.11 participated in at least one of the activities; this Boating, .75 .16 .06 compares with 51% each for Anglos and for Black Skiing .23 .01 .03 households. A comparison by activities (Table 3.8) Surfing .09 Sightseeing 1.98 5.16 1.43 suggests that Anglo households have a greater affinity Dr. for Pleas. 12.23 20.58 11.38 than the other two races for "high income" activities such as golf, tennis, boating, and skiing. .11 A b 1.6 Mexican-American and Black households have a Source: Estimated from the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. stronger inclination than Anglo households to participate in team sports such as baseball /softball, Note: Dashes indicate insufficient observations to compute an average. footbal I /soccer, and basketball. a. Includes only active participation. Also, see footnote b, Figure 3.11. 60 FIGURE 3.12 AGE OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD 1968 AVERAGE ANNUAL URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER URBAN RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD, FOR ALL ACTIVITIES Age of household head has a predictable impact on 141 participation. As shown in Figure 3.12 and Table 3.9 ...... households headed by older persons are less likely to Average Anhual Urban Resident Days go 98 of Participationa Per Urban Resident . .... i iesb participate in urban outdoor recreation, and Household (Summed for All-Activities 49 . ..... ... . participate less intensively than households headed by X individuals. As might be expected, younger ....... . participation in the more strenuous activities such as Z - swimming, baseball/softball, f ootbal I /soccer, etc. Age of Urban Resident Household Head ........................ . 15-24125-34,35-44,45-54155-641 65+ tends to be quite sensitive to age. On the other hand, Percent Of All Urban Resident Households In Which At Least 60 66 60 54 45 36 participation in activities such as walking, nature One Person Participate In At Least One Activity ................. study, and sightseeing appears - to be relatively Source: 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand unaffected by the age of the head of-the household. Survey. a. Includes only active participation. b. Exceeds the number of activities listed in Table 19; therefore, Figure 3.12 was not calculated from data in Table 3.9 TABLE 3.9 1968 AVERAGE ANNUAL URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER URBA N RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD, FOR SELECTED ACTIVITIES ACTIVITY a 1&24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Swimming 9.55 19.68 33.97 17.27 3.95 .63 Child's Play 11.59 26.68 17.33 7.28 3.69 -.64 Baseball .72 2.64 5.73 5.47 1.35 .33 Picnicking 5.23 9.38 8.08 3.61 1.72 1.14 Football .30 1.13 2.65 .82 .73 .49 Golf 3.14 1.85 3.76 4.86 2.41 .73 Tennis 1.91 2.01 2.53 1.74 1.20 .19 Basketball .19 .38 1.19 .58 1.83 .04 Walking 14.11 16.23 13.45 13.59 12.59 21.56 Bicycling 1.43 24.03 31.36 12.70 3.23 1.02 Nature Study '53 .08 is .20 .74 .45 Fishing 1.43 1.98 2.11 2.83 1.37 .64 Boating .45 1.01 .56 1.03 .28 .03 Skiing .77 .11 .19 .40 --- .01 Surfing --- .07 .05 .21 - Sightseeing 1.31 3.10 2.81 1.73 2.68 1.49 Driving for Pleasure aO.45 21.31- 12.99- -11.2-3 9.61- 1.40 Source: Estimated from the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. Note: Dashes indicate insufficient observations to compute an average. 38 a. Includes only active participation. Also, see footnote b, Figure 3.12. 61 FIGURE 3.13 EDUCATION OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD 1968 AVERAGE ANNUAL URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER URBAN RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD BY EDUCATION LEVEL OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD, FOR ALL ACTIVITIES 154 Generally, as the level of education increases, the 146 ....... ..... probability and intensity of participation increases Average Annual Urban Resident Days 108 10 9 also (Figure 3.13 and Table 3.10). However, the of Participationa Per Urban Resident 94 .XX Household (Summed for All Activitiesb) . . .... n the relationship 69 relationship is less dramatic tha T.-U= participation and other socio-economic between -X X factors. There is an obvious tendency for persons ....... X. x ... - :X X:: with over 16 years of education (equivalent to a .-K.. Education Level of Urban Resident Household Head ......... 0-4 5-6 7-9 110-11 12 13-15 16 17+ college degree) to participate more frequently in Percent Of All Urban Resident Households In Which At Least nearly all activities than persons with less than ten One Person Participated In At Least one Activity ........... 47 1 47 47 52 54 57 64 57 years of education. For the intervening years, Source: 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. however, the relationship between the two factors is a. Includes only active participation. much more subtle. b. Exceeds the number of activities listed in Table 3.10; therefore, Figure 3.13 was not calculated from Table 3.10. TABLE 3.10 1968 AVERAGE ANNUAL URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER URBAN RESIDENT HOUSEHOLD BY EDUCATION LEVEL OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD, FOR SELECTED ACTIVITIES 0-4 5-6 7-9 10-11 12 13-15 16 17+ ACTIVITya Years Years Years Years Years Years Years Years Swimming 9.30 7.68 9.22 13.31 16.98 15.94 33.72 27.68 Child's Play 14.20 6.62 9.44 16.18 9.64 9.38 15.80 12.85 Baseball 3.52 .99 1.44 4.42. 3.78 1.86 3.95 4.06 Picnicking 4.20 4.26 3.44 7.26 4.51 4.44 9.51 2.74 Football .82 1.11 .89 1.32 1.20 .75 1.14 2.02 Golf .16 .55 .55 1.34 2.43 6.25 6.75 6.14 Tennis .24 .15 .39 .52 1.06 3.02 4.34 5.32 Basketball .11 .46 .40 .75 .62 .35 3.78 .67 Walking 1017 7.31 12.11 16.72 12.33 16.60 21.52 4o.34 Bicycling 8.30 5.74 7.92 13.79 13.14 22.19 21.20 27.09 Nature Study .01 .04 .50 .03 .18 .63 .76 .39 Fishing 1.26 1.11 1.57 2.30 1.76 2.32 1.11 2.03 Boating .14 .03 .37 .33 .48 1.06. 1.57 .78 Skiing -- -- .04 .03 .06 .65 .20 .42 Surfing -- --- --- --- .08 .01 .18 46 Sightseeing 2.95 2.90 2.69 2.42 2.18 2.33 1.63 1.99 Dr. for Pleas. 9.13 10.21 10.29 19.90 15.50 13.42 11.56 10.47 Source: Estimated from the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. Note: Dashes indicate insufficient observations to compute an average. a. Includes only active participation. Also, see footnote b, Figure 3.13. 62 In conclusion, household size, household income, and education of household head generally show a PROJECTION METHODOLOGIES positive correlation with participation; that is, as the values of these variables increase, the probability and As previously indicated, urban participation was intensity of participation also increase. Age of categorized into two major types for analytical household head shows a positive correlation up purposes. These types were defined as resident through the 35-44 year age bracket and then a participation and non-resident participation. In negative correlation through the remaining years, i.e., developing projections of urban recreation as age increases, the tendency to participate and the participation three projection models were developed frequency of participation both decline. In terms of and implemented. Two of these models, the multiple race or ethnic background, Mex ica n -American regression model and trend model, were used in households are more likely to participate than Anglo developing projections of resident participation. The or Black households, and also show a higher third model, a participation-population correlation frequency of participation for many, though by no increases in demand are effective recreation model, was used to project non-resident participation. means all, urban activities. programming, promotion of regional events, The primary data source for developing these models improved park facilities, better maintenance and was the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household AVAILABILITY operation of existing parks, etc. Demand Survey. While the socio-economic characteristics just PROJECTED URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION The multiple -regression model was used to develop discussed are among the most important factors PARTICIPATION resident participation projections for nine activities. influencing participation, it is evident that there are These include swimming, child's play, any number of other factors which, to varying As previously discussed, prior to undertaking the task baseball/softball, picnicking, football/soccer, golf, degrees, also influence the amount and type of of developing projections it was considered important tennis, sightseeing, and driving for pleasure. The basic participation. One such factor is the availability of to determine the existing patterns of urban methodology comprised a four step. procedure. First, opportunities foe recreational pursuits. For example, participation and identify those factors that tend to data from the Household Demand Survey were used, if a recreational lake is constructed in an urban area affect participation. Having identified those factors, to compute a set of forecasting equations relating which previously did not have a lake with-in a the next step in the planning process was to utilize average days of participation per household for each reasonable distance, participation in fishing, boating, this information in developing projections of future of the activities to the average socio-economic and other water-based activities very likely will recreation participation. This section presents characteristics of households in the urban area and increase. Therefore, to meet future expected demand, projections of participation in the twenty outdoor the availability of facilities within the area. Second, a more recreation opportunities must be provided. recreation activities considered significant in the. basic set of projection data was constructed for all However, in providing more opportunities, these metropolitan areas, cities, and towns of Texas. The urban areas, containing estimates of the average .opportunities will be, to some extent, encouraging projections cover the thirty-year period from socio-economic and demographic characteristics in more demand. Therefore, the accommodation of 1970-2000. In interpreting these projections, it each area for the years 1970, 1975, 1980, 1990, and future cle .mand implies that increases in demand should be kept in mind that, as a rule, projections are 2000. Third, the forecasting equations for each brought about by increased levels of opportunity generally more reliable for short periods than for long activity were then applied to the projection data for must be anticipated and projected. Toward this periods of time. Thus, the projections shown for the each urban area in order to obtain estimates of objective, the TORP made use of an iteration years 1970, 1975, and 1980 are considered to be less average participation per household. Finally, the technique which projected increases in supply levels, subject to error than those for 1990 and 2000. In average number of days of participation ' per for certain activities, to determine the effects of these sequential order of presentation, a brief summary of 'household for all activities was then multiplied by the increases on demand projections. This technique is the projection methodologies is presented first, estimated number of households within each urban explained in detail in the volume Techniques of followed by projections of total participation, and area for each time period 'to arrive at the projected Analysis. Other factors which may also cause projections of resident participation per household. days of participation for the area. 63 A trend model was used to project resident The "participation-population" type model used to -region in which the urban area was located. More participation for the remaining 11 activities. These estimate non-resident participation first determined detailed information on the development of these activities included basketball, walking, bicycling, the 1968 estimate of annual days of non-resident models is, presented in Appendix C. nature study, fresh and saltwater fishing, fresh and participation taking place within a given city size of a saltwater boating, fresh and saltwater skiing, and region and then projected that participation at the surfing. The methodology utilized initially established same growth rate as the population of that region. In PROJECTIONS OF TOTAL PARTICIPATION the 1968 annual household rate of participation for developing this model, two major underlying each activity for each city-size category. Then, the assumptions were made. First, it was assumed that Based upon these methodologies, total annual days of household rates were projected into the future by non-resident participation going to the urban area resident, non-resident, and combined resident and using trend information for the 1963-1968 period. originated within the region 'in which the urban area non-resident participation were projected for twenty The final step was to multiply the population was located. Second, it was assumed that the activities. The projections were calculated for 1970, projections, in terms of households, by the projected magnitude and changes in the magnitude of 1975, 1980, 1990, and the year 2000, and are rates of participation to obtain projections of total non-resident partici Ipation was related directly to the itemized on the basis of city size. The results are resident participation for the specified years. -changes in the total population residing within the presented in Table 3.11. TABLE 3.11 TOTAL ANNUAL DAYS OF URBAN RESIDENT AND NON-RESIDENT PARTICIPATION, 1970-2000, BY CITY-SIZE CATEGORY, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS THOUSAND'S OF ANNUAL ACTIVITY DAYS TOTAL FOR ALL ACTIVITY YEAR METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN AREAS Total __T -Total Total Total I otal Non- Resident and, 1 Total Total To@al Total Non- Resident and r. al Total Non- Resident and I - I Resident [Resident Resident Non-Resident Resident Resident Non-Resident i Resident Resident Non-Residenj 1 Resident Non-Resident Non-Resident. 5 157 4,897 6 1361-1; .1 1.dt4 f 49 664 6,912 5, 7 6,643 1975 84,850 5,407 1 89 9: 109,350 '1 8,714 720 9,434 8,470 1,1 6591 1102,034 7,316 1980 123,106 091 128,997 1 112,019 770 12,789 Swirnmingi 111,862 1,286 13,148 @'146 987 7,947 154,934 1990 242,450 6,899 249,349 1 120,894 880 21,774 j,22,143 1,512 23,655 12851 487 9,291 294778 200 15,609 7,908 .423,517 1 -,36,573 983 37,556 H@8,551 1,715 40,266 Z0:733 10,606 501:339 ---------- - ------ - ------- 197 28,843 664 29,507 2,263 161 2,424 [1,961--_ 83 2,0741 33,097 908 34,005 1 1975 41,175 741 41916 2434 170 2,604 11 2,121 92 2,213 1 45,730 1,003 46,733 1 -Child's 1980 57,420 814 58:234 2:647 183 2,830 2,272 97 2,3691 62,339 1,094 63,433 Play 1990 103,732 979 104711 3,024 203 3,227 2,588 112 2,700 1 09,344 1,294 110,638 2000 165,998 1 121 'i,19 3,497 229 3,726 126 3 W9 " :T?,418 1,476 173,914 -------- ---- __J J 197 5,706 483 E", 1,065 84 1,149 918 121 1,039 7,689 688 8,377 1 1975 7,410 566 _1 1,355 93 1,448 1,156 134 1210 9,921 793 10,714 9 Baseball/ 1980 9,375 649 10,024 1,713 98 1,811 1,449 144 1:593 12,537@ 891 13,428 Softball 1990 14,210 845 15,055 1 2525 113 2,638 2,170 170 2,340 18,905 1,128 20, 033 ,685 124 1,326 27.803 2000 19,114 1,009 20,723_1 -5, 3,078 193 3,271 26,477 - - ---------------- - -- - ---- ------------- .. .... --- ------ --------- ---- _,_ - ------ 1970 11,726 2,828 14,554 1,695 565 2,260 1,144 588 1,732 14,565 3,981 18,646 1975 13,138 3,135 16,273 1,907 609 2,516 1,265 644 1,909 16,310 4,388 20,698 Picnicking 1980 14,762 3,439 18,201 2,161 653 2,814 1,407 703 2,11 0 18,330 4,795 23,125 1990 18,063 4,069 22,132 2,683 745 3,428 1,720 826 2,546 22,466 5,640 28,106 2000 21,267 4,676 __25tg4 3,379 835 1A 2,128 940 3,068 26.774 6,451 33,225 64 LO UM') (con) AD (D 10 'CO, P, 'o 'd cc f7L - PZ c - m @41 T, C4 dWi,, Z ul Ld z 06 d Cq 14 N m Lun) af), Cn _j ui 0 m w (0 0 U) Rr 00-co a! LO, 00 06 10.1 1 CO" CC F4 - - " F a: W 04 CN T@1@ 7A U. _j ca I.. CC "x, WA OD Y,V, UW7 401, 0-mg,101W gm O"M AO,40@,C@, ;Z4 WV"w I CD "ij I - a - W ", , c 0 _99-@ " I C! P@ V@O C.) C') v tf@, LO C., @,N L 77- E M ur;Z-71 771*10, C-4m tF @-I, (10 P, AWCO U) U) 41,0040, C.) r. F.-@, ii @sg MCI W;z D-Z,4, @_"AnIto cs cq, PM1'1';_@t1,5fz,__ '11, V@ ',F! rT cc Lj r. @v % 4 Nf YPT 0 qr, to C,),? Lo N (N 41) It r. -X, OZI O;rt A-4 c C4 w K"CO114 0 1VS_"W_ Pcl,' Fro, 1201, 'm Cr-O C& N C4 0 r. 00"0" CIJ@OD go, 7@4! ` 2 ag LO Lo 0 -10 CO 80:81 Lf) M N c 0, 1_4 C 04 CDI, Ryjq@@ 7 j f;ivz r we %x M or- &@,rp 0 w 2 @,,Vt J IV`, A LL co 0 CO Lo C,4, " I LU I c , - I %f 0 LIO C', ico C'4,V C, r 'A"621", V, VA U, V4, Vlc,z, AfP cn D@ 17 ;q C14 C1 CID v Ni C,4 m 00') @-`U(011 ;N N V7@-l L __11 2 777-g774 00 't m to Ln v 6"00 @c @0, 0 MIST% 00@ 8 1 wrl -I .1t4 Jc 41 0100 r.Aai@@-, m LO i, * 0 co *`00' C13 !2IA-1ral, @ rf" @r Lr) to ;00 C.4 m to .01 N.-M-vAn-U); t-:" _,CN C@ r' Ln @0@0 (;M V J C 4) 'R zN1, f,@ 01 cc Z; Y"i --i-,,,."@-, A 4 i6jPT ,"i K", .0 0 w LO r-@ Ln! t 00 VZA @rs @00 a) Ct Ci Lq@ .tr. Lf?,a LU c?, 0 CC 8. m Lf), 06 i@ LO in to 0 v V, OM 1010 - rl- o, t coo Lto),& 711 C12- co r, 1@ _U). 4 @qo 0 c! - I.,1- I I q - k il 's 'g, C, " , , , '& C w 'o, @001 I to go 4) m V U.). @o cc 'n CF im (66 r- c .+@ - - c) C004 _(C'O'j 0 co 'D, (N C14 to N I R c L__J Lr) 0 1 ____ Is-@--i io Ln a -0-0-1 ic 0- 01 ID 01 8 4a 0- @C, U) 00 1 O's 1PN ru-,, 000,803) 0011 01,10 00 i(r,,, 9 10; rm, c 0 0 r, (r., 56501 @0) c) 0) 0 -0 10) G; M 110- L LU I I CP RN I 1@? 0) Cl) LLI F CIR-11 00 _j > c 0 U_ LL L_2@_ V CO) -n 0 7r i I 0. > to to co :5 m to Fg Fg '0 0 (0 M 0 to 0 to I w W -1 4 'a > is w- co 1' , '.. 1 1 ., 8 R -g E@@ !o 0 om L CD 0 @j M w 0' 0 j f@? CD OD tj @j @j 00 01 w F. 8 z !s 8 co ca 0 0 m to N) Ic co 0 CK, @g - 0 m M M 09, W S w 2 00, 0 CL CL ZN ca w U@, .4' -0 '0 b -,j 0 -4 bl -0 K) . . . I 2 owl [email protected] b) In 'W '0 1014 CD -4 CO C) 14 K) I..-- N4 -4 0 W 4 'S fj O.Pb W Cj Cj 100 o" W-4 0 tL - CD w eL @j al J m 0 Ul 'i J 00 @j -4 CW 00 -4 0 ml z m '00 M FQ 0 L w > z z c V > co w w IJ IJ 00 ;W"" U1, @14 0 02 CWO CIA (114) w K) m si a (D fA -CL - w Zi Z co co C, I , to w 00 w 2 C-4; w so m, cjww 8 0 00 Z10 . . . . .. w co M K) tj C4 al 0 00 co 10 00 -4 @j 0 CA W! t) fj 0,40, w m 0 N) C4 li, 0 00,04 . . . . . M @4 4 ton W, .9 23 "p, I @4 0 00 0 z m -4 U3 m o Cob P.@j Ln 1 it io j j i ---r - - "Y - 00' i " t@ -@ 9 A@ 1 co w 00 (n w j -0 -OD -C4 wco 1 03 o o j @co w --j Q co im (n 4. w w W li J: CID 0 ha j IQ K) 00 co co 5 @ji CD N) @4 fQ CO -4 t,.) to 0 j Ij W @j c 0 w > IJ -4 4 .4 W lw N) W W t,) fj - - - - --- z -n OB si O@ M CD -4 ;q co > 0 w o co '01 2; w w 0, 0-0 Sw z co 00 CA t8 T, -I 01 m m > )> 0 t-3 K) 42 sn p co -i p U1, -C, Z in -4. ta IQ Z i w 0 Eii TO" rlj -.1 co N o C'S 'A FBI --1 -, ; W 0) 1 TOTAL PARTICIPATION FOR ALL URBAN AR EAS Statewide, demand for all outdoor recreation activities in the urban areas was projected to .....- approximately 357 million participation days in 1970, as shown in Table 3.12. Demand was expected to increase to 50 5 million days by 1975, to almost 688 million days by 1980, to over one billion days by v: 1990, and to over 1.8 billion days by the year 2000. This trend represents a 92% increase from 1970 to 1980, a 69% increase from 1980 to 1990, and a 56% .............. increase from 1990 to the year 2000. Although the shows that for all urban areas combined resident 11% of the total. By the year 2000, the non-resident rate of increase slows. somewhat in later years, the participation was expected to increase from 319 component is projected -to be about 3%. The rate of increase in total number of days from 1970 to the million days in 1970 to about 1.74 billion days by increase projected for non-resident participation was year 2000 amounts to almost one and one-half billion the year 2000. This represents a 445% increase. lower than the rate for resident participation. At days.. Conversely, non-resident participation was projected. present, 90% of the non-resident participation to increase from 38 million days in 1970 to over 61 originates within thirty miles of the urban place of Projections of total annual days of participation in million days by the year 2000 (a 61% increase). Or to destination. This consists mainly of residents of the urban areas were segmented into two components: state this another way, in 1970 the non-resident smaller urban areas traveling to the larger urban areas resident and non-resident participation. Table 3.12 component of demand was estimated to be about to enjoy their facilities. TABLE 3.12 PROJECTIONS OF CURRENT AND FUTURE RESIDENT AND NON-RESIDENT PARTICIPATION, 1970-2000, BY CITY-SIZE CATEGORY, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS (MILLIONS OF ANNUAL DAYS) METROS CITIES TOWNS TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS Non- Combined Resident Non- Combined Resident Non- Combined Resident Non- Combined Resident Resident Resident and Non-Resident Resident Resident and Non-Resident Resident Resident and Non-Resident Resident Resident and Non-Resident 1970 250 27.2 277.2 37 3.8 40.8 33 7.1 40.1 319 381 357.1 1975 371 30.2 401.2 49 4.1 53.1 42 7.8 49.8 463 42.0 505.0 1980 523 33.0 65 4.4 69.4 54 8.3 62.3 641 45.7 687.7 1990 925 39.1 964.1 101 4.9 105.9 84 9.5 93.5 1,109 53.6 1,162.6 2000 1,461. 45.0 1,506.0 154 5.5 159.5 125 10.7 135.7 1,'740 61.2 1,801.2 Source: Adapted from Table 3.11. 67 The increase in urban participation also is shown relatively small increases projected for saltwater appears to be common for some of the traditional clearly in Table 3.13 which itemizes the increase by recreational activities may be due to the nature of the activities such as driving for pleasure, picnicking, and activity. For all urban areas combined, the number of supply of saltwater. No additional supply can be f ootbal I /soccer, and some of the saltwater activities, participation days for every activity was expected to made available to induce potential demand. Table combined, swimming had the largest number of increase, not only from 1970 to 1980, but from 1980 3.13 also shows that for nearly all activities, resident participation days in 1970, and was projected to have to 2000 as well. The largest proportional increases participation was expected to increase at a faster rate the largest number through the year 2000. For 1970, were projected for nature study, bicycling, basketball, than non-resident participation both from 1970 to driving for pleasure was second, followed ' by freshwater boating, tennis, freshwater skiing, and 1980, and from 1980 to the year 2000, when bicycling, walking for pleasure, and child's play. Over swimming. Activities for which participation was comparison is made for all urban areas combined. the next several time periods driving for pleasure, projected to increase at a somewhat slower rate were while ' still expected to increase a total number of picnicking, f ootba 11 /soccer, and some of the saltwater In terms of the activities which are engaged in most participation days, shows a decline in significance ,activities such as fishing, boating, and skiing. The frequently, Table 3.14 shows that, for all urban areas relative to other activities. This decline in ranking TABLE 3.13 PERCENT INCREASE IN TOTAL ANNUAL DAYS OF URBAN RESIDENT AND NON-RESIDENT PARTICIPATION, 1970-1980 and 1980-2000, BY CITY-SIZE CATEGORY, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS METROS CITIES TOWNS TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS Combined Resident Combined Resident Combined Resident Combined Resident And Non-Resident and Non-Resident and Non-Resident Resident Non Resident and Non Resident Activity 1970-1980 1980-2000 1970-1980 1980-2000 1970-1980 1980-2000 1970-1980 1980-2000 1970-1980 1980-2000 1970-1980 1980-2000 Swimming ill 228 85 194 86 206 115 234 20 33 107 224- Child's Play 97 187 17 32 14 30 88 177 20 35 87 174 Baseball /Softball 62 107 58 110 53 105 163 110 30 49 60 107 Picnicking 25 43 25 50 22 45 26 46 20 35 25 44 Football/Soccer 25 43 18 32 15 31 24 40 23 42 24 41 Golf 97 179 83 168 20 34 99 183 22 39 95 178 Tennis 141 170 49 147 37 124 136 169 40 62 136 169 Basketball 177 203 243 219 95 129 184 204 21 37 176 200 Walking 102 147 93 129 80 133 101 146 28 34 99 144 Bicycling 184 205 161 196 138 168 177 202 50 39 177 202 Nature Study 350 264 202 218 211 343 264 21 37 322 260 Freshwater Fishing 36 63 41 82 27 54 41 74 16 27 34 63 Saltwater Fishing 21 35 35 76 14 24 38 68 14 24 20 52 Freshwater Boating 201 212 127 174 72 118 201 211 11 is 166 196 Saltwater Boating 24 37 27 50 14 22 33 51 16 26 22 36 Freshwater Skiing 136 178 132 170 116 156 144 181 16 28 133 175 Saltwater Skiing 16 27 15 37 13 22 28 49 14 24 16 27 Surfing 62 60 26 24 + + 91 69 18 31 57 55 Sightseeing 29 51 37 98 28 60 43 87 22 37 30 56 Driving for Pleasure 30 48 28 51 22 43 28 49 20 34 28 48 Source: Adapted from Table 3.11. Note: + Surfing participation figures apply to metros and cities in Region 28, the only region in the state having urban areas where surfing participation was recorded. 68 TABLE 3.14 RANK ORDER OF TOTAL DAYS OF URBAN RESIDENT AND NON-RESIDENT PARTICIPATION 1970,1980,2000, BY CITY-SIZE CATEGORY, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS METROS CITIES TOWNS TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS Combined Resident Combined Resident Combined Resident Combined Resident. and Non-Resident and Non-Resident and Non-Resident Resident Non-Resident and Non-Resident Activity 1970 1980 2000 1970 1980 2000 1970 1980 2000 1970 1980 2000 1970 1980 2000 1970 1980 2000 Swimming 1 1 1 2 3 2 .2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 Child's Play 4 4 4 6 5 9 5 6 9 5 5 4 10 '10 10 5 5 4 Baseball /Softbaf 1 10 10 12 8 a 8 10 7 9 9 11 11 11 11 10 10 11 11 Picnicking 6 8 9 5 6 6 7 7 10 6 8 10 3 3 3 6 7 10 Football/Soccer 12 15 15 14 15 17 13 13 15 .13 15 16 7 7 7 13 16 16 Golf 9 9 7 9 9 7 11 11 8 8 7 7 12 12 12 9 9 7 Tennis 8 6 5 12 13 13 76 is 17 7 6 6 19 19 19 a 6 6 Basketball 13 11 8 15 10 10 15 14 13 12 10 8 16 16 16 14 11 9 Walking 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 9 9 8 4 3 3 Bicycling 2 2 2 3 2 1 3 3 2 2 2 2 20 20 20 3 2 2 Nature Study 16 12 10 18 17 16 17 16 14 15 13 9 17 17 17 17 14 12 Freshwater Fishing 11 15 14 10 11 12 6 5 5 11 4 14 6 6 6 11 12 14 Saltwater Fishing 14 16 17 11 14 14 8 9 11 16 17 17 4 4 4 12 15 15 Freshwater Boating 15 13 13 13 12 11 12 12 12 14 12 12 13 13 13 15 13 13 Saltwater Boating 17 is is 16 is 18 14 14 18 18 is is 8 8 9 16 18 is Freshwater Skiing 18 17 16 17 16 15 18 17 16 17 16 15 18 18 18 18 17 17 Saltwater Skiing 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 19 19 20 20 20 15 15 15 20 20 20 Surfing 19 19 19 19 19 19 + + + 19 19 19 14 14 14 19 19 19 Sightseeing 7 7 11 7 7 5 9 a 6 10 11 13 1 1 1 7 a a Driving for Pleasure 5 5 6 1 1 3 1 2 3 3 4 5 5 5 5 2 4 5 Source: Adapted from Table 3.11. Note: + Surfing participation figures apply to metros and cities in Region 28, the only region in the state having urban areas where surfing participation was recorded. In terms of the resident and non-resident components participation days were: first, sightseeing; second, metropolitan areas are expected to have an of demand, Table 3.14 shows some very significant swimming; third, picnicking; fourth, saltwater fishing; i ncreasingly lar.ger proportion of total urban ,differences. For all urban areas combined, the five and fifth, driving for pleasure. participation. By 1980, the metros are expected to activities which had the largest number of resident account for almost 81 % of the urban demand, while participation days in 1970 were: first, swimming; TOTAL PARTICIPATION BY CITY SIZE the cities are expected to account for 10%, and the second, bicycling; third, driving for pleasure; fourth, towns 9%. By the year 2000, 1.51 billion of the 1.80 walking; and fifth, child's play. The rank order for Table 3.12 shows that of the 357.1 million total billion urban participation days (83.6%) are expected the same five activities for non-resident participation participation days in 1970, 277.2 million days to be attributed to metropolitan areas. in 1970 were: swimming, second; bicycling, (almost 78%) we.re accounted for by the metropolitan twentieth; driving for pleasure, fifth; walking, ninth; areas. In 1970, the cities accounted for 40.8 million and child's play, tenth. In 1970, the five activities days (about 11%), while the.towns accounted for Most of the participation days in the metropolitan which had the larest number of non-resident. 40.1 . million days (also about I I %). In the future the areas, cities, and towns are accounted for by 69 residents. The non-resident element of demand was reasons why total participation has been projected to household Is. this section presents projections of relatively small (in 1970, about 10% in the metros, increase so rapidly over the next several decades, it is annual days of resident participation per household 9% in cities, and about 18% in towns). By the year important to determine the source of this increase, for the urban areas of Texas. Projections have been 2000, the proportion of demand attributed to particularly for the resident corhponent. There are calculated for twenty activities, for the projection non-residents is expected to be approximately 3% for two ways in which the number of resident years of 1970, 1975, 1980, 1990, and 2000, and have the metros and cities, and about 8% for the towns. participation days for an activity can fluctuate: (1) been itemized on the basis of city size. The results are changes in average number of participation days per presented in Table 3.15. household, and (2) changes in the total number of Analysis of Table 3.13 shows that for all three city sizes, participation was expected to increase for all of the twenty listed activities, both from 1970 to 1980, and from 1980 to 2000. For the period 1970 to 1980, participation increases were expected. to be TABLE 3.15 larger in the metros than in the cities or towns, for most activities. Similarly, the cities tended to have a higher proportional increase in participation than the ANNUAL DAYS OF URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD, 1970-2000 towns, for most activities, for the period 1970 to BY CITY-SIZE CATEGORY, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS 1980. For the period 1980 to 2000, the metros were projected to have the largest proportional increases of AVERAGE PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD the three city sizes for about half of the listed TOTAL FOR ALL activities. ACTIVITY YEAR METROS CITIES TOWNS GFIBAN AREAS 1970 27.41 17.23 18.98 25.08 Based on total participation by activity, Table 3.14 1975 36.52 22.14 25.07 33.40 shows relatively minimal differences in activity ranks Swimming 1980 47.17 27.87 32.56 43.16 between the three city sizes. Of the five activities 1990 75.28 41.80 52.90 68.96 2000 110.14 62.39 79.75 101.33 which had the largest number of participation days in metropolitan areas for 1970, all but child's play were 1970 14.08 6.24 6.32 12.14 among the top five activities for both cities and for 1975 17.72 6.18 6.28 14.97 Child's Play 1980 22.00 6.14 6.24 18.31 towns. With the exception of minor rank order 1990 32.20 6.05 6.18 26AI differences among the city sizes for the top five 2000 43.99 5.97 6.09 35.60 activities, the only substantial difference was in the 1970 2.78 2.94 2.91 2.82 activity of driving for pleasure, which was ranked 1975 3.19 3.44 3.42 3.25 substantially higher for the cities and towns than for Baseball/Softball 1980 3.59 3.97 3.98 3.68 the metros. 1990 4.41 5.05 5.18 4.57 2000 5.22 6.29 6.37 5.47 PROJECTIONS OF RESIDENT PARTICIPATION 1970 5.72 4.67 3.63 5.34 PER HOUSEHOLD 1975 5.66 4.84 3.74 5.34 Picnicking 1980 5.66 5.01 3.86 5.38 1990 5.61 5.37 4.11 5.43 As discussed in the previous section, the resident 2000 5.64 5.76 4.40 5.53 component of demand accounted for almost 90% of 1970 1.43 .67 .60 1.24 total urban demand in 1970, while the non-resident 1975 1.42 .69 .58 1.23 component accounted for about 10%. Therefore, in Football/Soccer 1980 1A1 .68 .57 1.23 order to provide an understanding of some of the 1990 1.39 .67 .56 1.22 2000 1.38 .66 .54 1.21 70 TABLE 3.15 (Continued) AVERAGE PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD AVERAGE PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD TOTAL FOR ALL TOTAL FOR ALL ACTIVITY YEAR METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN AREAS ACTIVITY YEAR METROS CITIES TOWNS URBAN AREAS 1970 3.92 2.11 1.64 3.41 1970 .88 87 1.34 .93 1975 4.98 2.70 2.16 4.37 1975 1.60 1.36 1.84 1.59 Golf 1980 6.16 3.38 2.77 5.44 Freshwater Boating 1980 2.31 1.81 2.33 2.25 1990 8.96 4.86 4.27 7.99 1990 3.74 2.82 3.29 3.58 2000 12.07 6.90 6.02 10.84 2000 5.17 3.79 4.29 4.91 1970 6.06 1.35 .72 4.82 1970 .84 1.98 .86 .93 1975 9.21 1.50 .79 7.28 1975 .84 1.99 .83 .93 Tennis 1980 11.49 1.68 .85 9.11 Saltwater Boating 1980 .84 2.00 .85 .94 1990 16.07 2.20 1.06 12.88 1990 .84 2.00 .86 .94 2000 21.46 3.06 1 A3 17.24 2000 .84 2.00 .85 .95 1970 1.60 .80 .83 1.41 1970 .42 .42 .42 .42 1975 2.59 1.59 1.14 2.30 1975 .62 .62 .64 .62 Basketball 1980 3.57 2.41 1.49 3.20 Freshwater Skiing 1980 .82 .82 .82 .82 1990 5.52 4.06 2.30 5.02 1990 1.81 1.22 1.62 1.22 2000 7.53 5.74 2.69 6.83 2000 1.81 1.62 1.62 1.62 1970 18.21 13.71 1.3.67 17.09 1970 .05 .05 .03 .04 1975 23.09 18.35 17.86 21.90 1975 .04 .04 .05 .04 Walking 1980 29.20 22.39 21.45 27.51 Saltwater Skiing 1980 .04 .04 .05 .04 1990 39.89 30.41 29.82 37.73 1990 .04 .04 .04 .04 2000 50.31 37.81 37.95 47.56 .2000 .04 .04 .05 .134 1970 20.30 15.45 14.08 18.94 1970 .33 1.45 + .40 1975 32.77 24.62 21.18 30.44 + 1975 .45 1.40. + .51 Bicycling 1980 45.25 33.86 28.95 42.06 Surfing 1980 .54 1.32 + .58 1990 68.44 52.85 44.36 64.12 1990 .64 7.14 + .66 2000 95.49 73.79 59.81 89.31 2000 .66 .96 + .66 1970 .72 .22 .39 .62 1970 2.25 2.09 2.60 2.27 1975 1.67 .41 .61 1.39 1975 2.34 2.50 2.92 2.42 Nature Study 1980 2.64 .60 .85 2.19 Sightseeing 1080 2.50 2.84 3.07 2.61 1990 4.63 .97 1.45, 3.87 1990 2.70 3.89 3.52 2.93 2000 6.70 1.45 2,16 5.61 2000 3.01 5.43 4.24 3.42 1970 1.80 1.51 2.81 1.88 1970 13.38 30.63 32.56 17.89 1975 1.88 1.73 3.08 2.00 1975 13.52 31.94 33.50 18.10 Freshwater Fishing 1980 1.97 1.94 3.36 2.11 Driving for Pleasure 1980 13.67 33.21 34.35 18.35 1990 2.13 2.39 3.89 2.34 1990 13.86 35.11 .35.70 18.63 2000 2.30 2.83 4.45 2.58 2000 14.10 37.02 37.21 19.18 1970 1.81 2.94 .29 1.83 1975 1.79 3.34 .62 1.86 Saltwater Fishing 1980 1.78 3.74 .99 1.91 Note: + Surfing participation figures apply to metros and cities in Region 28, the 1990 1.77 4.54 1.75 2.02 only region in the state having urban areas where resident surfing 2006 1.78 5.33 2.56 2.15 participation was recorded. 71 RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD participation rates are expected to continue to more leisure time, and/or a larger disposable income, FOR ALL URBAN AREAS increase. such @s freshwater boating and skiing. As indicated in Table 3.16, the statewide average Table 3.18 shows the rank order of the twenty annual days of resident participation per urban This rapid increase in resident participation per activities on the basis of participation per household, household was projected to be 117 days in 1970. This household also is shown clearly in Table 3.17 which for 1970, 1980, and 2000. For all urban areas was projected to increase to 152 days in 1975, to 188 itemizes the increase by activity. For all urban areas combined, swimming had the highest rate in 1970, days in 1980, to 268 days in 1990, and to 359 days combined, nearly all activities were expected to show and projections indicate that it will continue to have by the year 2000. It should be noted that while the an increase in participation per household from 1970 the highest rate through the duration of the planning average number of participation days was expected to through the year 2000. For - football/soccer and period. On a per household basis, bicycling was increase substantially for the next several decades, the saltwater skiing, participation rates were expected to second, and driving for pleasure was third, in 1970. rate of increase was projected to decline. Thus, by remain relatively stable, or perhaps show a very slight The rankings in Table 3.18 suggest that some of the 1980, average annual participation per household was decline. Generally, activities for which participation more traditional activities such as picnicking, expected to be 61% higher than in 1970; by 1990, per household was expected to increase the fastest sightseeing, and driving for pleasure were expected to 43% higher than in 1980; and by the year 2000, 34% were those which are associated with the decline in significance relative to other activities, higher than in 1990. Although this suggests that at contemporary trend toward environmental awareness, while golf, basketball, nature study, and freshwater some future date, household participation rates may such as nature study and bicycling, and activities for boating were among the activities expected to stabilize; nevertheless, within the.foreseeable future, which participation requires some degree of skill, increase in relative significance. TABLE 3.16 PROJECTIONS CURRENT AND FUTURE RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD, 1970-2000, BY CITY-SIZE CATEGORY, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS METROS CITIES TOWNS TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS Average Annual Average Annual Average Annual Average Annual Number of Days of Number of Days of Number of Daysof Number of Days at Households Participation Households Participation Households Participation Households Participation Million) Per Household (Million) Per Household Million) Per Household (Million) Per Households 1970 2.0 122 .4 102 .3 104 2.7 117 1975 2.3 160 .4 126 .3 125 3.1 152 1980 2.6 200 .4 150 .4 148 3.4 188 1990 3.2 287 .5 201 .4 200 4.1 268 2000 3.8 387 .6 268 .5 259 08 359 Source: Adapted from Table 3.15. 72 TABLE 3.17 PERCENT CHANGE IN ANNUAL DAYS OF URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD, 1970-1980 AND 1980-2000i BY CITY-SIZE CATEGORY, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS METROS CITIES TOWNS TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS Activity 1970-1980 1980-2000 1970-1980 1980-2000 1970-1980 1980-2000 1970-1980 1980-2000 Swimming 72 134 62 124 72 145 72 135 Child's Play 56 100 .2 -3 -1 -2 51 94 Baseball /Softball 29 45 35 58 37 60 30 49 Picnicking -1 0 7 15 6 14 1 3 Football/Soccer -1 -2 1 -3 -5 -5 -1 -2 Golf 57 96 60 104 69 10 60 99 Tennis 90 87 24 82 18 68 89 89 Basketball 123 ill 201 138 80 81 127 113 Walking 60 72 63 69 57 77 61 73 Bicycling 123' ill 119 118 106 107- 122 112 Nature Study 267 154 173 142 118 154 253 156 Freshwater Fishing 9 17 28 46 20 32 12 22 Saltwater Fishing -2 0 27 43 241 159 4 13 Freshwater Boating 163 124 108 109 74 83 142 118 Saltwater Boating 0 0 1 0 -1 0 1 1 Freshwater Skiing 95 121 95 98 95 98 95 98 Saltwater Skiing -20 0 -20 0 67 0 0 0 Surfing 64 22 -9 -27 + + 45 14 Sightseeing 11 20 36 91 18 38 15 31 Driving for pleasure 2 3 8 11 5 8 3 5 Source: Adapted from Table 3.15. Note: +Surfing participation figures apply to metros and cities in Region 28, the only region in the state having urban areas where resident surfing participation was recorded. RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD household for the metropolitan areas from 1970 t6 show the largest increases in household participation BY CITY SIZE 2000. This compares with a 163% increase for cities rates over the next several years. For cities, the largest and a 149% increase for the towns. When these increases are expected to be in the activities of An analysis of Table 3.16 shows rather significant increases in household participation rates are basketball, nature study, bicycling, freshwater differences in projected household participation rates combined with increases in the number of households boating, and freshwater skiing. For towns, the for the three city sizes. It has been estimated that in (Table 3.16), the result amounts to very substantial increases are expected to be largest for saltwater 1970, household rates av eraged 122 days in increases in the total number of participation days. fishing, nature study, swimming, bicycling, and golf. metropolitan areas, 102 days in cities, and 104 days in towns. Household rates are expected to increase These increases in household participation are shown Table 3.18 compares the three city-size categories in substantially for all three city sizes during the next by activity in Table 3.17. For the metropolitan areas, terms of frequency of participation per household. several decades. Projections indicate a 217% increase the activities of nature study, freshwater boating, The activities of swimming, child's play, walking, in the average number of participation days per basketball, bicycling, and swimming are expected to bicycling, and driving for pleasure generally showed 73 the highest participation rates for all three city sizes. There was a tendency for driving for pleasure to rank lower in the metropolitan areas than in the cities or towns. The trend over the next several years is expected to be toward decreasing emphasis in some of the traditional activities such as driving for pleasure, sightseeing, picnicking, and f ootbal I /soccer, with increasing emphasis in activities such as nature study, freshwater boating, golf, and tennis. TABLE 3.18 RANK ORDER OF ANNUAL DAYS OF URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION PER HOUSEHOLD 1970,1980,2000, BY CITY-SIZE CATEGORY, TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS METROS CITIES TOWNS TOTAL FOR ALL URBAN AREAS Activity 1970 1980 2000 1970 1980 2000 1970 1900 2000 1970 1980 2000 Swimming 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 Child's Play 4 4 4 5 5 7 5 5 6 5 5 4 Baseball /Softball 9 11 11 7 7 6 7 6 5 9 9 11 Picnicking 7 8 10 6 6 a 6 7 9 6 8 10 Football/Soccer 14 16 17 17 18 19 15 18 18 14 16 17 Golf 8 7 7 9 9 5 10 10 7 8 7 7 Tennis 6 6 5 14 15 13 14 14 16 7 6 6 Basketball, 13 10 8 16 11 9 13 12 12 13 10 8 Walking 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 Bicycling 2 2 2 3 1 1 3 3 2 2 2 2 Nature Study 17 11 9 19 19 17 17 14 14 17 13 9 Freshwater Fishing 12 14 14 12 13 14 8 8 8 11 14 14 Saltwater Fishing 11 15 16 7 8 11 18 13 13 12 15 15 Freshwater Boating 15 13 12 15 14 12 11 11 10 15 12 12 Saltwater Boating 16 17 18 11 12 15 12 14 17 15 17 18 Freshwater Skiing 18 15 18 17 16 16 1! 15 18 18 16 Saltwater Skiing 20 20, 20 20 20 20 19 19 19 20 20 20 Surfing 19 19 19 13 16 18 + + + 19 19 19 Sightseeing 10 12 13 10 10 10 9 9 11 10 11 13 Driving for Pleasure 5 5 6 1 2 4 1 1 4 3 4 5 Source: Adapted from Table 3.15. Note: + Surfing participation figures apply to metros and cities in Region 28, the only region in the state having urban areas where resident surfing participation was recorded. 74 V > 0) (D0(1) C IM W Q) 4) c d) W ta tA - In cc " = 0 0 W - C 0 0 c th 4@ - @o C Q 0 mc cc C 4@ > c a c 0 N41 a)w 10 o x 72 0 r E 'v c ", .- I a m o tj r E m M M 41 M OL M - 0 OL to 'r c ;@ 10 "0 m 0 c 0 4) 0 M c CL LL 0- C 0 n CC M E w C 41 0 Er N 0 0 0 CL" 4- W C rr 0 Q E a a OL 0 0 0 0 c o o 0 CL m 0 C c: o ID w 0 > r a 4@ r- OL 0 tu 0F- 4- -T E z r- - E 0 'r_ N JS tm 'r, & 0 0 4- > @: -M 0 C CLC c 0 c 0 o X > CM 0 0 r a E 0 IS 0 OL -0 C 0 - x i a o w E E 0 CL M- w 4) 0 0 0 4- -0 *Ew w M c o C c > M a -0 0 0 0 C n 0 Im - a !@ :E T la -a. 'X"c w , - 0 > tu .C 0 E > E 0 .0 E 0 w -op EEcit RL =m 0" Mr- .0- 4@ C ' w w w w 0 C M 41 W t3 > > C E r- IG CL 'M CL 42 E > < 0 ID 0 c00 E - 'A tnu o Uo cr 4u co @-.o CL Z) 0 0 0 0 0 C w OIL M , C 2 E M 0 Vi 0 CL m C c CZ x E 0 'Ac -o E > (D C w Si .20 c c 4' E r- 4' C. ,, 8 w p E w w W CL W m > 3: E o > tA w 0 t L x w CL 0 0 a) CL w cr a > W 4) cr 0. d, E r W a OL cr z CL 0 W C.L 41 G CWL E, m z cr cc IE 4f LU LU LU AM, cn 20 Aoki, ui 4 - cc I ' ul t 7W @ ttm cc tJ A& '775@ dt, because the methodology utilized to calculate the Responses to the Texas Outdoor Recreation Urban as to how much impact 'on these two major resources data is much more generalized, due to limitations of. Planner's Survey, completed February 1972, are used the overall needs for increasing numbers of urban available data, than the methodology used in the in a limi ted manner in this chapter to provide a recreation facilities will have statewide, and in more detailed analyses of land, water, and facility certain measure of TORP data support and additional metropolitan areas, cities, and-towns. requirements presented in the first two sections. enhancement of the urban recreation overview, while Although treated differently, the nature of the data emphasizing the importance of providing the r@quirecl DEVELOPED LAND REQUIREMENTS in these two latter sections should assist local recreational resources estimated in the TORP. planners in making a more complete analysis of the Indicating local planners' opinions and informed A major factor affecting the recreation environment resource requirements for their area. judgements regarding a wide spectrum of -park, of Texas' urban areas is the physical and legal access recreation, and open land related questions, urban to recreational opportunities by urban residents. The first of these sections presents data for metros, planners' data amplify aspects . of the need for Providing adequate recreational opportunities means cities, towns, and total urban areas combined for additional open land to supoort , the required assuring that a sufficient quantity of diverse archery, sport shooting, horseback riding, attending facilities, to support the estimat'es; of land, water, and recreational resources is available and suitably rodeos, visiting zoos, and visiting cultural centers. The facilities specified in this volume,. and to provide final major section in this chapter provides suggested insights into opinions of local park and recreation distributed among all socio-economic segments of the resource requirements for those communities with planners. populace. Often mentioned in the detailed parts of populations numbering from 201 to 2,499 persons this volume, this factor established general guidelines called "small communities" in the TORP. Average DEVELOPED RECREATIONAL LAND that were implemented in analyizing urban developed participation rates for selected recreational activities AND ]FRESHWATER REQUIREMENTS recreational land patterns and in assessing facility projected to the year 1980 for an urban area with a requirements. However, the land requirements population of 2,500, and statewide urban facility Although facility requirement data is considered to described below emphasize only the quantities of standards served as the basis for determining be the most important data presented in this chapter, developed land acres needed to support the required suggested resource requirements for small an initial discussion of land requirements followed by recreation facilities, based solely on numerical facility communities. water requirement estimates provides certain insights deficits calcualted by comparing numbers of opportunities avaialble with numerical estimates of current and future recreational demand. Inadequate ox. dispersion of existing parks within an urban area may OKI- ox;$ cause estimated land requirements for that urban area -INK$1K -.:K:'.:X*K-i ...... . . . . ... ............... AT% to exceed land requirements specified in this volume, since the actual requirement figures were calculated without being affected by existing park dispersion. Furthermore, many urban areas are rapidly expanding r X::%1.;.1-.1.;: XX without supplying recreational opportunities in the K% IMF, growth areas. While the estimated requirement figures 0. do not include spatial distribution allowances, Part 2: Metropolitan Areas, Part 3: Cities, and Part 4: Towns, the detailed parts of this volume, deal more directly with this concept. The land figures show acreage requirements only for selected facilities, not for the full range of facilities required to support all recreational activities of statewide significance occurring in Texas. Additional 76 lands may also be needed to support other developed land total of 1.317 acres required. Adding As shown in Table 4.2, the urban land requirements recreational activities important at the local level, all of the swimming requirements for each individual in 1970 were largely made up of the three activities though not significant statewide. Over seventy urban area yields the statewide estimate. which require the most developed land area per unit different outdoor recreational activities pursued by (see Table 4.1)-golf course holes (64% of the total Texans were identified in the Texas Outdoor STATEWIDE LAND REQUIREMENTS land requirements for urban areas) require Recreation Household Demand Survey. Participation approximately 10 acres per hole, combined trails in some of these activities occurs primarily in rural The data presented in Table 4.2 indicate the land activities (22% of total land requirement) require 8 areas, i.e., hunting, camping, etc., but participation in acreages estimated to be required to meet projected acres per mile of trail, and football/soccer fields (6% a su bstantial number also occurs in urban recreational demands in each of the five projection of the statewide land requirements) require 3.8 acres environments. Therefore, the following requirements years. Total urban land, requirement figures (the two per field. The picnicking and tennis land requirements describe the activities most significant in the urban right-most columns) are presented in terms of of 715 acres and 497 acres comprised about 3% and areas, on a statewide basis, that were quantifiable cumulative and incremental statewide totals by 2% of the total urban land requirement, respectively. utilizing the TORP methodologies. activity and for al I activities combined. While swimming facility unit needs were the most numerous (discussed in a later section), the land In calculating developed land requirements for In 1970 an additional 26,715 acres of developed land requirements for swimming pool areas amounted to selected f 'acilities, a variety of sources were consulted was needed in Texas'urban areas above the supply of only 305 acres, or 1% of the total urban land to determine the factors used to convert facility 43,621 developed acres existing in 1971. By 1975 the requirement. requirements to developed land acreage requirements. cumulative total land requirement, not including any The National Recreation and Parks. Association's considerations for complementary and other In the. remaining projection years, golf courses (NURPA) publication, National Park Recreation and necessary open land, increased 96% to 42,008 acres continued to dominate the land requirement totals, Open Space Standards, June 1971, provided baseline over the 1971 supply. The cumulative totals for the comprising slightly over 64% of the total land land area figures for applicable facilities. Statewide remaining horizon years-1980, 1990, and 2000-rose requirements. Combined trails requirements recreational On-Site Demand (and preference) data, to 61,827 acres, 116,346 acres, and 188,384 acres, continued throughout to require the second largest experience in local planning assistance, and respectively. experience gained in administering the program for TABLE 4.1 Land and Water Conservation Fund grants-in-aid were used to modify the NRPA figures, thereby reflecting LAND ACRES REQUIRED PER FACILITY UNIT, STATEWIDE AVERAGES the average developed land acreage needed to develop facilities in Texas. Table 4.1 shows the land space in FACILITY acres per unit required for developed facility areas, as ACTIVITY UNIT OF MEASUREMENT ACRES PER UNIT prepared for this volume, presented by selected recreational activity and selected type of facility unit. Swimming (Pools) square yard .001317 Child's Play (Playground) acre 1 These figures were simply multiplied by the numbers Baseball /Softball field 3 of facility units required by each projection year to Picnicking table .25 obtain a general estimate of the land area required by Football/Soccer field 3.8 Golf hole 10 activity; then all individual activity land requirements Tennis court, doubles .13 were totaled to provide overall land requirement Basketball court, full .2 estimates for the urban areas. For example, in a given Boating, Boat Fishing, Skiing, Freshwater ramp (with 2 lanes) 1.2 Boating, Boat Fishing, Skiing, Saltwater ramp (with 2 lanes) 1.2 projection year and a selected urban area, if a Walking mile 8 requirement for 1,000 square yards of additional Bicycling mile 8 swimming pool area was estimated, developed land Nature Study mile 8 required was estimated by multiplying 1,000 square Combined Trails mile 8 yards times .001317 acres per unit,'resulting in a 77 TABLE 4.2 URBAN RECREATION LAND REQUIREMENTS FOR SELECTED ACTIVITIES, 1970-2000, BY CITY SIZE, STATEWIDE TOTALS NUMBER OF LAND ACRES REQUIRED ACTIVITY (facility type) METROS CITIES TOWNS TOTAL URBAN AREAS TOTAL ALL YEAR CUM"&I&.L. _QMLATIVE INCREMENTAL INCREMENTAL ACTIVITIES 1970 22,833 22,833 1,902 1,902 1,980 1,980 26,715 26,715 1975 36,375 13,542 2,847 945 2,786 806 42,008 15,293 1980 53,902 17,527 4,183 1,336 3,742 956 61,827 19,819 1990 102,115 48,213 7,718 3,535 6,153 2,771 116,346 54,519 2000 164,198 62,083 13,536 5,818 10,650 4,137 188.384 72.038 1970 276 276 12 12 17 17 305 305 Swimming 1975 489 213 23 11 30 13 542 237 (pools) 1980 776 287 42 19 51 21 869 327 1990 1,697 921 98 56 126 75 1,921 1,052 2000 3,039 11342 216 118 252 126 3,507 11586 1970 98 98 0 0 2 2 100 100 Child's Play 1975 267 169 0 0 3 1 270 170 (playgrounds) 1980 781 514 1 1 3 0 785 515 1990 2,342 1,561 4 3 4 1 2,350 1,565 2000 4,535 2,193 @9 5 8 4 4,552 2,202 1970 201 201 12 12 15 15 228 228 Basebal 1 1975 300 99 24 12 27 .12 351 123 Softbal 1 1980 411 ill 39 15 48 21 498 147 (fields) 1990 792 381 93 54 114 66 999 501 2000 1,734 942 198 105 243 129 2,175 1.176 1970 641 641 27 27 47 47 715 715 Picnicking 1975 80 176 51 24 62 15 930 215 (tables) 1980 1,017 200 78 27 83 21 1,178 248 1990 1,528 511 151 73 138 55 1,817 639 2000 2,059 531 239 88 204 66 2,502 685 1970 1,436 1,436 87 87 205 205 1,728 1,728 Football/ 1975 1,683 247 99 11 224 19 2,006 277 Soccer 1980 1,953 270 106 7 258 34 2,317 311 (fields) 1990 2,531 578 148 42 304 46 2,983 666 2000 3,044 513 179 31 365 61 3,588 605 1970 14,680 14,680 1,200 1,200 1,120 1,120 17,000 -17,000 Golf 1975 23,450 8,770 1,720 520 1,600 480 26,770 9,770 (cou rses) 1980 34,680 11,230 2A80 760 2,190 570 39,350 12,580 1990 66,540 31,860 4,770 2,290 3,920 .1,730 75,230 35,880 9nnn 107 Agn 41 ASO 9979 3-900 6-430 2-9;10 123@090 47-R60 1970 494 494 2 0 0 497 49-7 Tennis 1975 927 433 6 4 1 1 934 438 (cou rts. 1980 1,342 415 11 5 3 2 1,356 422 double) 1990 2,394 1,052 29 18 8 5 2,431 1,075 2000 3.805 1,411 60 31 20 12 3,885 1,454 CV- 1'902 @22 '833 -- @27 3 @@4 1970 31 31 1 1 3 3 34 34 Basketball 1975 73 42 4 4 6 3 83 49 (courts, fu I 1) 1980 145 72 13 9 10 4 168 85 1990 334 189 34 21 20 10 388 220 2000 576 242 65 31 32 12 613 285 78 TABLE 4.2 (Continued) NUMBER OF LAND ACRES REQUIRED ACTIVITY (facility type) METROS CITIES TOWNS TOTAL URBAN AREAS YEAR CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL CUMWLATVE INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL F FreshWdLt!l 1970 107 107 17 17 30 30 154 154 Boating, Boat 1975 188 81 28 11 42 12 258 104 Fishing, and 1980 290 102 41 13 53 11 384 126 Skiing 1990 542 252 73 32 82 29 697 313 .(boat ramps) 2000 852 310 113 40 110 28 1,075 378 ter 1970 53 53 8 8 29 29 90 90 Boating, Boat 1975 61 8 12 4 2 104 14 Fishing, and 1980 67 6 12 0 35 4 114 10 Skiing 1990 79 12 14 2 37 2 130 16 (boat ramps) 2000 92 13 19 5 42 5 153 23 1970 3,248 3,248 368 368 344 344 3,960 3,960 Walking 1975 4,880 1,632 576 208 504 160 5,960 2,000 (trails) 1980 7,080 2,200 816 240 656 152 8,552 2,592 1990 12,400 5,320 1,344 528 1,016 360 14,760 6,208 2000 18,504 61104 1,976 632 1,728 712 22,208 7,448 1970 1,320 1,320 160 160 152 152 1,632 1,632 Bicycling 1975 2,560 1,240 288 128 232 80 3,080 1,448 (trails) 1980 4,096 1,536 512 224 320 88 4,928 1,848 1990 8,176 4,080 880 368 664 344 9,720 4,792 2000 13.224 5,048 1.624 744 1,056 392 15,904 6,184 1970 248 248 8 8 16 16 272 272 Nature Study 1975 680 432 16 8 24 8 720 448 (trails) 1980 1,264 584 32 16 32 8 1,328 608 1990 2,760 1,496 so 48 80 48 2,9.20 1,592 2000 4,744 1984 168 88 160 80 5,072 2,152 5,864 Combined Walking, 1970 4,816 4,816 536 536 512 512 5,864 Bicycling, and 1975 8,120 3,304 890 344 760 248 9,760 3,896 Nature Study 1980 12,440 4,320 1,360 480 1,008 248 14,808 5,048 (trails) 1990 23,336 10,896 2,304 944 1,760 '752 27,400 12,592 J 2000 36,472 1 13,136 1 3,768 1,464 2,944 1,18 12 43,184 15,784 amount oIf land, approximately 23% of the total land which accounted for approximately 15% of the majority of responding urban planners held the requir'ements. The third ranked activity in 1975, statewide urban acreage total. The 70-30 ratio is not opinion that their urban areas' most pressing need 1.980, and 1990 for land required was footbal I /soccer, proposed TORP guideline but assuming the relative was for additional facilities. In order to provide those comprising 5%, 4%, and 3% of the total land levels to be reasonably desirable combination of facilities, lands already devoted to recreational use requirements in each of those planning years, developed to undeveloped land, it provides a would have to be further developed, or additional respectively. By the year 2000 the need for additional Potentially useful planning figure for use in land would have to be acquired for development. playground areas ranked third in percent of the comparing urban planners' responses in the following Since much of the existing land was already statewide total. assessment. developed, a large proportion of the respondents indicated pressing needs for more land. A comparison The statewide perspective on urban outdoor Analysis of the Texas Outdoor Recreation Urban of the responses for additional land to be developed recreational opportunities (Chapter 2) showed that Planner's Survey identified what urban recreation vs. additional land for complementary or separate public land devoted to recreation in Texas' urban planners considered their respective urban areas most open land yielded a ratio of 3 to 1, respectively. This areas in 1971 closely followed a 70% to 30% ratio of pressing requirements with regard to developed indicated that existing lands in most cases were developed land to undeveloped land. This comparison facilities, acquiring lands for development, and develped to capacity and that the existing lands' C a B c T re i a 'h V tV n'g T a t Y 'p te B r 0 e ina. d a g. f'fin t Fh Sk_ig (boat r. mps Sal t-ater Bti ng, Boa F.hing, and Skiing oat ramps b includes open land parks (i.e., parks with no facilities) acquiring complementary or separate open land. The abilities to accommodate the more active 79 recreationists were becoming increasingly burdened minimal open land to complement the required in developments. The response was overwhelmingly in with pressure from such factors as population facilities. This means that, given the statewide urban favor of providing either parks or open space in expansion and urban growth. Thus, to maintain the land requirement for the year 2000 is estimated at developments-86% of the respondents said yes, while present ratio of 70% developed land to 30% open 188,384 acres, another 80,736 acres may be needed 8% said no, and 6% did not respond to the question. land, urban areas would have to acquire considerably for open land, b ringing the potential statewide total Since action of this type might benefit all concerned, more land for both types of use. Where suitable land urban land requirement to 269,120 acres. Many it appears to be a partial solution particularly in high is available and practical in terms of cost, location, urban parks in the state are not developed to the 76% cost areas where the public sector suppliers cannot and feasibility for development, acquisition is level and some of these parks could be further afford to provide recreational opportunities. certainly the p referable option to further developed, although limitations in topography, soils, development of already overused resources. Adding user preferences, etc., often prevent further METROPOLITAN AREAS LAND REQUIREMENTS land to urban recreation holdings increases future development of others. options for development and may allow urban areas Table 2.1 in Chapter 2 indicated that there were to maintain favorable ratios of adequately dispersed In providing the required land area, particular 31,381 developed land acres available for ' urban facilities and open land at less cost to taxpayers in the emphasis should be accorded each urban area, or recreation in metropolitan -areas in 1971. Table 4.2 future. portion of an urban area, which currently lacks shows that in 1970 the 24 metropolitan areas in the The case for complementary open land was opportunities. Areas which are growing or those State required an additional 22,833 developed acres strengthened by responses to two other questions in which are expected to grow most rapidly, need over the 1971 recreational supply. This metro the Urban Planner's Survey. Responding to specific additional attention. On this point, responding requirement represents 86% of the 1970 total land queries, planners first indicated the additional planners in the. Urban Planner's Survey expressed requirement shown for the three major city sizes. number of developed acres they thought necessary to their opinions, with regard to whether subdivision Between 1970 and 1975 the metros requirement meet current demand in their urban areas, and then developers should set aside park or open space areas increased 13,542 acres, bringing the cumulative 1975 they enumerated additional acreages needed to meet TABLE 4.3 current demand for recreational open space. A statewide. overview of these responses is provided in DEVELOPED AND OPEN LAND NEEDED TO MEET 1971 URBAN RECREATION DEMAND Table 4.3. The total number of respondents represented 48% of' the urban areas with 2,500 AS ESTIMATED BY A SAMPLE OF LOCAL URBAN PLANNERS population or greater, based on 1970 U.S. Census figures. In order to meet current (late 1971 ) demand NO.ACTUAL NO. POTENTIAL DEVELOPED OPEN SPAC 'E the responding urban planners indicated a need for RESPONSES RESPONSES LAND NEEDS NEEDS TOTAL 20,548 acres of developed land and 15,226 acres of METROS 22 24 12,720 acresa 7,865 acresa 20,585 acresa open land. These figures constitute a ratio of 57% to PLANNERS 43%, respectively, pointing out that when assessing CITI ES 34 61 3,305 acres 2,697 acres 6,002 acres the most pressing needs, open land is a secondary PLANNERS I consideration, but when meeting general urban needs, TOWNS 86 209 4,523 acres 4,664 acres 9,187 acres open land receives considerably more attention. The PLANNERS urban planners reflected urban area needs in their - responses, and, insofar as these corroborating data TOTAL 142 295 20,548 acres 15,226 acres 35,774 acres are available regarding open land, and again assuming the. previously determined 70% to 30% ratio to be reasonable, it appears that the statewide cumulative urban land requirements might necessarily be Source: Texas Outdoor Recreation Urban Planners Survey (completed February, 1972). incremented by at least an additional 30% to provide a. includes land area needs responses from contiguous urban areas. 80 requirement to 36,375 acres. 'The metro areas in metropolitan areas may be found in Appendix D. An football/soccer fields reversed third and fourth Texas have been projected to grow substantially in overview of the most prominent recreational land positions, showing a marked increase in the need for population and size during the'last quarter of the heeds of the State's cities follows. additional picnic tables. The ranking five activities in century, contributing to an accelerating requirement the year 2000 for cities generated a total requirement for additional recreation opportunities. -total CITIES LAND REQUIREMENTS of 13,270 acres, 98% of the statewide cities total. cumulative metro land requirements by 1980 Football/soccer field requirements decreased to sixth, increased to 53,902 acres, or 172% over the 1971 The 1970 U.S. Census indicated 61 -urban areas in swimming area needs moved up to fourth, and supply. Another large increase from 1980 to 1990 Texas with populations ranging from. 10,000 to -baseball/softball field requirements became fifth. brings the 1990 cumulative requirement to 102,115 49,999 persons. The publicy administered parks in These quantitative estimates reflect the needs of all acres, and a requirement increase of 62,083 acres those cities comprised a developed land total of 7,059 cities aggregated on an analytical planning region between 1990 and the year 2000 generates a total of acres. As indicated in Table 4.2, these cities required basis and do not account for deficits among cities 164,198 additional acres of developed land needed in an estimated a dditonal 1,902 acres in 197b above the within each region, i.e., where one or a few cities in a the metropolitan areas, above the 1971 supply. developed land supply reported in 1971. These given analytical region may have concentrations of Requirements for each projection year represent additional areas represented 7% of the urban resources and others may have none. Developed land general quantitative estimates and do not account for total required for the three major city sizes. The 1975 requirements are presented for cities by planning a lack of opportunities in growth areas or for incremental requirement increased the cumulative region in Appendix D. An overview ,of recreational inadequate dispersion of recreational land areas 1975 requirement to 2,847 acres. Although the land requirements for Texas towns follows. among different socio-economic subsections within individual cities varied considerably in estimated the metro areas. population trends, many are expecting high rates of growth and only a few anticipated significant declines TOWNS LAND REQUIREMENTS The metropolitan area land requirements dominate through the year 2000. Overall, the cities' the total urban area needs in every projection year. populations in 2000 are projected to m .ore than The publicly administered parks reported in Towns in The.facility types which ranked in the top five for double in 1970 cities' populations. These 1971 comprised a total of 5,181 developed land ,statewide developed land resource requirements are expectiations emphasize the need to insure adequate acres. Table 4.2 presents towns land requirements the same for metros, with the metro percentages developed recreational resources, the requirements data for the 209 urban areas in Texas, with 1970 generally comparable to statewide proportions for all for which are projected to expand 59% over 1971 populations numbering from 2,500 to 9,999 persons. activities. Golf facilities required almost two-thirds of supply by 1980 (to 4,183 acres), 109% by 1990 (to The towns requirements in 1970 closely paralleled the total metro land needed; combined trails 7,718 acres), and 192% by the year 2000 (to 13,536 the cities fequirements with 1,980 acres needed above requirements vary from 21% to 23% of the metro acres). the reported 1971 supply. Of the total land total; football/soccer fields generally varied from requirements for the three major city sizes in 1970, about 6% down to 2% over. all projection The cities land requirements were particularly the towns portion represented over 7%, slightly larger years-ranking third in most land needed from 1970 sensitive to variations in the different facility than the cities requirement. By 1975, an additional through 1990, and dropping to fifth in the year 2000; requirements over the thirty-year projection period. 806 developed acres were estimated to be required. tennis ranked fifth in 1970 with 2.2% and rose to The 1970 and 1975 land requirements were needed Estimates of the towns populations vary considerably fourth with about 2.4% of the total in each remaining primarily to support additional golf course holes over the 1970-2000 time period, but these projection year. Land requirements for picnicking combined trails, football/soccer fields, picnic tables, populations combined are projected to increase 48% accounted for slightly over 2% in 1970, 2.3% in 1975, and freshwater boat ramps. Combined, these facilities over the 1970 population. This added pressure, 2% in 1980, and was surpassed in 1990 as the fifth accounted for 97% of the total 1970 cities land among other factors, will bring about further ranked activity by child's play (playgrounds). Child's requirements and 98% for 1975. The 1980 land cumulative towns requirements of 3,742 developed play in the year 2000 became much more prominent requirements were most influenced by the same, top acres by 1980 (an increase of 72% over the 1971 in the overall needs ranking, increasing to third four activities, but swimming pool requirements supply), 6,513 acres by 1990 (a 126% increase over ov.erall with about 3%. of the metro requirement. became the fifth most prominent by one acre more 1971 supply), and 10,650 acres by the year 2000 (a Developed land requirements' for each of the 24 than freshwater boat ramps. In 1990, picnicking and 206% increase over the 1971 supply). 81 . ............ ............ X qV ........... In general, requirements for seven types of facilities A numbee of factors were incorporated in the analysis water skiing, portions of the lake near the bank were comprised,99% of the towns land requirements in all of urban freshwater surface acre requirements, some too shallow to support these activities, there was too projection years. For 1970, 1975, and 1980 the golf of which are important in gaining a useful perspective much debris to allow water skiing or boating, or the facilities, combined trails, - footbal I /soccer. 'fields; on the discussions in this section. One factor which lake was too open to provide a high use intensity of picnic tables, and freshwater boat ramp requirements was emphasized was that to be useable for public quality fishing. Surface acre resource requirements accounted for the major, portion of the total, with recreation purposes, water resources must be were first computed assuming all acreage was suitable swimming pool and baseball/softball field physically and legally accessible to the public and to support the three water-related activities. These requirements rounding out the 99%. The.qu anti tativ6 must be suitable-in terms of surface area, depth, and figures, were then expanded using a statewide estimates of the towns developed land requirements absence of physical hazards-for. recreationists to use suitability adjustment factor for all types of urban reflect the needs of all towns aggregated by analytical them safely@ Freshwater supply figures were adjusted areas, so'that the resource requirements printed in the planning region and do not account for deficits as. considered appropriate for the activities boating, tables are figures which have been adjusted to among the towns of any given analytical region, i.e., boat fishing, and skiing, and the demand data used to compensate for portions of the lakes that would be where one or a few towns in a region may have estimate surface acres requirements reflect only unsuitable to support the activities. Although conc@ntrations of resources and others may have. combined participation for these three activities. freshwater requirements discussed in this chapter hone. Developed land requirements for, towns by Concerning availability, it was assumed that all refer to the water-related activities of freshwater planning regio .n are presented in Appendix D. freshwater lake surface acreage reported within the boating boat fishing, and skiing, another activity, urban areas was available for the activities of boating, swimming. also requires consideration. Additional FRESHWATER REQUIREMENTS boat fishing and skiing. This astumpton was made swimming needs could be partially met by designating, due to the limited data available concerning the swimming areas at existing freshwater resources and A wide+ variety of water resources may be. found in availabi.lity of lakes for participation in the by designating specific areas intended for swimming Texas' urban areas; but the quantities and quality of water-related activities. Exceptions to this assumption when planning for new freshwater resources. Another water available for recreational purposes,. vary are caused by restrictions limiting participation, such factor in computing freshwater surface acre considerably among the urban areas. Some areas with as the lake serving as a municipal water supply or the requirements was that all boating, skiing, and boat resources of suitable'quality to support the activities lake not being. accessible for use due to lhck of boat fishing were assumed to take place on a lake or of boating, skiing, and boat fishing do not.have an launchin .g- facilities or roads. Concerning suitability, reservoir, either public or private. Rivers and streams adequate quantity to meet the recreational needs of adjustments were made which took into account were not considered because of the problems involved their residents. Some urban areas have no those portions of freshwater lakes that would not in trying to- quantify the opportunity'days provided recreational water resources of any type, and, as a permit boating, boat fishing, and skiing. Water'may by them. However, it is recognized that river or result, their residents Must travel, in some cases, be unsuitable to support these activities for reasons stream participation could be substituted for lake considerable distance to have water-related such as: the size of the lake was too small to: participation, depending upon the preferences of recreational experiences. accommodate participation in an activity such as local residents, the adequacy and quality of streams 82 for recreation, etc. Another factor considered in the even though water resources are available, th e 3,647 acres, bringing the cumulative 1975 urban analysis was that in developing surface acres of requirement may result from public inaccessibility or requirements to 9,394 acres, an increase of 19% over freshwater in urban areas,. consideration should be exclusion of public recreational use, rather than an the 1971 supply. By 1980 freshwater requirements given to the proximity of recreational water located inadequate amount of water in the urban area. will more than double the 1970 estimates. The in rural areas. In some planning regions the supply of additional 5,886 surface acres needed between 1975 freshwater lakes in the rural area's provides a surplus The following dis6usslohs summarzie the need 'for and 1980 increment the total for the 1970-1980 of opportunity days. If these are located in close additional freshwater -res .ources to meet selected decade to 15,280 surface acres, an increase over the proximity to urban areas, rural lakes might be used to urban water-related recreational requirements. As in 1971 supply of 30% for the ten-year span and 12% meet some of the demands for. urban recreational the previous sections data is presented for all city for the latter five years. Between 1980 and 1990 Water. It should be recognized that the development sizes combined, followed by a discussion of statewide another doubling of the overall requirement is of freshwater lakes Within many u "rban areas is not data organized by the city-size categories of metros, projected to occur, bringing the total requirement up feasible. This is due to many factors, some of the cities, and towns, respectively. another 15,325 surface acres to 30,605. Statewide, most limiting are the high cost of urban lands needed this figure appears very large, but considering the for lake construction, climatic conditions (extremely STATEWIDE FRESHWATER REQUIREMENTS number of urban areas which need recreational water, high.evaporation rates and lowannual rainfall rates), the quantity effectively becomes attainable in many and poor soil conditions (soil too permeable to retain There were 50,741 surface acres of freshwater small segments. An additional 23,559 surface acres water). reported within the urban areas in 1971. As the will be needed as an incremental requirement estimates in Table 4.4 indicate, the urban areas in between 1990 and the year 2000. The cumulative The multi-faceted problem of providing adequate 1970 required an additional 5,747 acres of freshwater requirement for the year 2000 of 54,164 surface urban water-based recreational opportunities is surface area to support urban recreational needs for acres represents a 107% increase over the 1971 compounded by a variety of.other factors, not the boating, skiing, and boat fishing. By 1975 that supply. Discussions of statewide freshwater least of which are physical and legal inaccessibility Of requirement is expected to grow by an additional requirements for metros, cities, and towns follow. existing resources. The construction of new water impoundments requires long lead-times to determine the administering agency, or agencies, to coordinate, plan, and gain approval from all appropriate entities, and to secure requisite funding. When new water impoundments are developed, - much time elapses from initiation to construction. Broadly speaking decisions to build'.new reservoirs in urban areas are based on 6 variable number of water needs of each municipality, to include water needed for a municipal water supply, irrigation, hydroelectric power, and industrial uses. Con.servation and flood control are other benefits which may be derived from. a constructing a new reservoir. Most often combination of these uses and benefits is necessary to justify providing additional water resources. Where recreation planning efforts reveal requirements for freshwater for recreational purposes, this need adds further justification to the projects. Where all other municipal needs have been accommodated and recreational freshwater resources are still required, 83 TABLE 4.4 'URSAN,RECREATION 00 S'HWATER 0OUIREMENTS'fiF-014 BOATING BOAT FISHING, AND SKIING, -T Y- CITY V ZE, kwll)E',@ ALS 119*2000, 0 STATI 0 NUMBER OF SURFACE ACRES REQUIRED @17 T 777-77. CITIES- ow S -AL@ mETRO9` CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE'@ NCREmEmTAL 'CUMULATIVE INCREMENTA YEAR', L@ CPMUL 1970 2,91W 2,955' 883 883 119091- 1 1,909 6,147' _5 747 2,402 570 2,584 675 9,394 3 11976, 6,357 1,453 1- 816 15,280 19 9,661 4,304'@ 2,219 766 3,400 5286" so ''? , @, ": 1990, 20,902 4,306 2,147 5,337 1,937 30,605 15;325' ",--.39,248 18,346-- 7,180 2,814 7,736 2,399 54,164 METROPOLITAN AREAS FRESHWATER 2,332 surface acres although 11 of the 27 regions TOWNS! F R ESHWATER REQUIREMENTS REQUIREMENTS with cities reported that the cities of those regions had no freshwater lakes. Table 4A shows that the Texas towns in 1970 needed an additional 1,909 Table 4.4 also presents cumu .lative and incremental cities required an additional 883 surface acres in surface acres over the reported 1971 supply of 2,654 surface acres of water required for metropolitan 1970. An incremental requirement of 570 surface surface acres, as indicated in Table 4.4. There were no freshwater lakes reported for any of the towns in 17 areas. The metro areas in 1971 had.. 45,755 surface acres over the next five years brought the 1975 regions. By 1975, the cumulative freshwater acres of freshwater on a statewide basis, although 6 cumulative estimate to 1,453 surface acres. From requirement total grew to 2,584 surface acres, metros reportedly had no freshwater surface acreage. 1975 the cities requirements almost doubled by each representing 28% of the statewide urban requirement In 1970 the 24 metropolitan areas required an of the remaining planning horizon years. By 1980 an for 1975. Projections of freshwater requirements ,additional 2,955 surface acres above the existing addit.ional 766 surface acres increased the cumulative indicate that by 1980 the towns will require a supply of 45,755 surface acres. That requirement requirement to 2,219 surface acres, a 95% increase . cumulative total of 3,400 additional surface acres, increased between 1970 and 1975 to a cumulative over the 1971 supply. In the following ten years the and by 1990 that cumulative total will increase to 1975 requirement of 5,357 surface acres. Incremental cumulative requirement jumped to 4,366 surface 5,337 surface acres. increases of 4,304, 11,241, and 18,346 surface acres acres. From 1990 to the year 2000 the cities are increased the cumulative totals to 9,661 surface acres 'expected to need an additional 2,814 surface acres, An average of 37 additional surface acres will be by 1980, to 20,902 surface acres by 1990, and to. bIringing the cumulative total to 7,180 surface acres required per town by the year 2000. Not all towns 39,248 surface acres by the year 2000, respectively. over the 1971 supply. While comprising a relatively will need additional water resources, thus the This represents an 86% increase by the year 2000 small portion of the statewide requirement (13%) for cumulative total for water resources for the year over the 1971 supply. The metropolitan areas were the year 2000, these needs are substantial when 2000-7,736 surface acres over the 1971 estimated to have the largest requirement of all city considering the number of cities amounted to only 61 supply -em phasi zes that the towns which need water sizes for additional freshwater in each projection areas. This indicates tKat on the average 118 surface will need considerably more than the average year. acres Will be needed for each city. Since some cities requirement would imply. are known to have sufficient resources through the year 2000, other cities must obviously have much CITIES FRESHWATER. REQUIREMENTS larger needs than the average Iindicated. The towns in Recreational water requirements have been shown to Texas needed freshwater in much the same increase in every year for each city size. Recreational The cities, compared to the metropolitan areas and facilities requirements were found to exhibit the same towns, I had the lowest freshwater acreage increments as the cities. A general overview of the general trends. The next major section presents the requirements. In 1971 cities reportedly had a total of towns requirements is presented next. estimated requirements for recreational facilities. 84 RECREATIONAL FACILITY REQUIREMENTS playground acres, baseball/softball fields, picnic A number of considerations were taken into account tables, doubles tennis courts, full basketball courts, in estimating urban recreational facilities A previous section of this chapter presented freshwater two-lane boat ramps, and saltwater requirements. An understanding of these recr-eational developed land requirements based on two-lane boat ramps are also important because of considerations is pertinent to a more complete the space necessary to provide the facilities discussed the opportunities they provide. Therefore, no interpretation of the requirements presented. Points below. Over 90% of the statewide developed land assumption of relative importance among the most appropriate to the interpretation of the requirement delineated earlier for the years 1970 different selected facility types could be considered requirements are listed below. through 200 arises from the need for three major valid if the amount of developed land required were 0 types of recreational facilities-golf courses (10 acres the only criterion for comparison. Also important is 0 Resource requirements were not computed for per hole required), combined walking, bicycling, and the amount of demand each unit of a given facility is the activities*of surfing, sightseeing, and driving nature study trails (8 acres of area for eac .h mile of capable of satisfying. On this basis, completely for pleasure because of the difficulties involved different rankings of requirements are apparent. in quantifying the facilities which satisfy the -trail required), and football/soccer fields (3.8 acres Thus, in terms of satisfying urban demand, it is demand -for these activities. for each field required). As indicated in Table 4.1, important that the required facilities are provided on those three facility types dominate the urban either existing undeveloped land or acquired lands as 0 In a few. instances, participation occurring in statewide developed land requirement estimates. appropriate to each local situation. To produce an the urban areas of a region for some activities However, this does not necessarily imply that those activities are the most important in terms of meeting adequate dispersion of facilities among different may decline from one year to the next. Where socio-econornic subsections within the urban areas this occurred, the resource requirements for the needs of urban recreationists; on a statewide basis. that activity were left at the previous highest Requirements for square yards of swimming pools, and among different urban areas, facility requirements may be higher, in some cases, than the level, to avoid appearing to advocate what requirement estimates presented in this section would amount to removing facilities to meet a specify. lessened demand. Facility needs established by resource requirements 0 Designated freshwater and saltwater swimming do not imply that all of these facilities should be areas may be substituted for swimming pool provided by local parks and recreation departments. resource requirements. However, in so doing, Recreation resources are also supplied by other total . swimming participation should be entities, such as governmental agencies, private considered. Swimming facility requirements concerns and school systems. A wide range of were adjusted to reflect only deficit facilities, from tot lots, baseball/softball fields, tennis opportunities for swimming pools., Further, and basketball courts, to huge stadiums housing substitutions should be made only if it is football and track fields, have been constructed by certain that swimmers would be satisfied with the substitution. school systems ranging in levels from pre-elementary through university. While some schools permit public -school hours and o use of these facilities during non n A criterion of two lanes per boat ramp was weekends and holidays, many remain closed to the adopted for the purposes of this volume, since general public. The quantities of these facilities are it was found that, statewide, the average substantial in number and could satisfy some of the amounted to approximately two lanes per resource requirements if made available to the public. ramp. The term"ramp," as opposed to "lane," Facilities provided by private or quasi-public concerns is the more commonly used term when are also varied and, in some cases, extensive. Included referring to the means to launch boats. are facilities such as golf courses, baseball/softball fields, tennis courts, and swimming pools. For more 0 If the proper dispersion of freshwater lakes and information on the roles of the public and private boat ramp facilities are to be obtained in those sector in outdoor recreation in Texas the reader is regions having more than one urban area, the referred to the State Summary and the Roles of the resource requirements estimates for boat ramps Public and Private Sectors volume of the TORP. may have to be exceeded. For example, the 85 boat ramp resource - requirements may show In computing resource requirements for trails, projected increases in tennis popularity in the that only one ramp is needed through the year horseback riding trails were included in-the five-year period between 1970 and 1975 added an 2000. If the region has several widely dispersed supply figures to compute opportunity. days incremental requirement of 3,364 courts, raising the urban areas obviously, one ramp would not only if the trails were designed for multiple use. cumulative tennis total requirement to 7,184 courts. provide reasonable access. Planning should Trails designated for horseback riding only were Other significant requirement increases were noted insure that each separate lake has boat ramp not included. for golf course holes (an additional 977 holes access provided. needed), combined trails (487 additional miles), An overview of the selected statewide facility basketball courts (249 additional courts over the 609 In the computation of resource requirements requirements is presented first in this section, then a available in 1971 ), and freshwater boat ramps (an for boat ramps, participation totals for boating, closer appraisal is made of the facility requirements additional 87 two-lane ramps required over the 96 water skiing, and boat fishing were adjusted by city size. lanes available in 1971). The cumulative 1980 downward to consider only the estimated requirements for six activities were substantially more proportion of participation wherein a boat STATEWIDE FACILITY REQUIREMENTS than their 1971 level of supply-tennis court needs ramp was used. Many recreationists using boats increased by 797% over 1971, golf needs by 370%, leave their boats in the water until the next The most prominent facility unit requirements in swimming pool needs by 235%, basketball court time they are used, or may not use- a ramp at 1970 (shown in Table 4.5) were found to be square needs by 138%, playground needs by 25%, and all. The, factor used to adjust participation yards of swimming pools, tennis courts, picnic tables, baseball/softball field requirements increased 9% over downward was based on data on the use of number of golf course holes, miles of combined trails, 1971 supply. boating facilities from the 1968 Household and football/soccer fields. As indicated in Table 2.7 Demand Survey. in Chapter 2, there were 281,520 square yards of Statewide cumulative requirements for 1990 showed swimming pools, 1,309 tennis courts, 12,830 picnic estimates for the ten-year span for most activities had In calculating resource requirements for the tables, 1,604 golf course holes, '216 miles of grown by at least 50% over the 1980 estimates, and different types of trails, participation data were combined trails, and 287 football/soccer fields for .(some activities over 100%. Those facilities for adjusted downward in order to consider only reported to be available to the general public in 1971. which requirement increases over their respective trails participation taking place at public 1971 supply level were most prominent were recreation areas. While this is a different Based on tabulation of urban planners' responses in combined trails, tennis courts, freshwater boat ramps, treatment than that of other types of facilities, the Texas Outdoor Recreation Urban Planner's golf course holes, swimming pools, basketball courts, it was necessary because it was found that a Survey, playgrounds (3,100 acres available in 1971), playgrounds, and baseball/softball fields. substantial amount of participation in these picnic tables, baseball /softbal I fields (1,862 available activities takes place at other than designated in 1971), tennis courts, and swimming pools were the Over the entire thirty-year span from 1970 to the recreation places, such as streets and sidewalks. facilities most often mentioned as being needed in the year 2000, recreational facility requirements were For walking, bicycling, and nature study, it was different socio-economic subsections of the urban projected to increase for all selected activities in all determined from 1968 Household Demand areas. The responses were similar for all city sizes, i.e., projection years. Increases in the popularity of Survey data that 10.5%, 4.0%, and 20.1% of the same five facility types were mentioned most certain activities, the general increases in the urban participation in the three activities, often by planners from metros, cities, and towns. In population statewide, expected changes in respectively, occurs at parks and recreation the interest of providing a better distribution, socio-economic characteristics of the population, and areas. estimates of facility requirements for these five many other factors contribute to the need for facilities and others as well, may be somewhat additional recreational facilities in the urban areas of 0 The sum of the individual resource conservative as specified in this section. Texas. By the year 2000, combined trails', tennis requirements for the different types of trails courts, freshwater boat ramps, and golf course holes may not agree exactly with the combined total By 1975 the TORP estimates of swimming pool requirements indicated large increases of 2,499%, due to rounding. Here, the combined resource requirements increased almost two fold from 231,579 2,283%, 1,867%, and 11157% over 1971 supply, requirement was broken into resource square yards'needed in 1970 to 412,088 square yards. respectively. The swimming pools requirement grew requirements for the individual types of trails Cumulative playground requirements increased from an incremental 1,204, 192 square yards from 1990 to on the basis of participation because the trails 100 acres in 1970 to 270 acres in 1975. An additional the year 2000 for a cumulative additional need of standard combines the activities of walking 861 picnic tables brought the 1975 cumulative 2,662,662 square yards over 1971 supply; basketball (hiking), bicycling, and nature study. picnicking requirements to 3,721 tables. Large court requirements increased to 3,365 courts, 86 TABLE 4.5 URBAN RECREATION FACILITY UNIT REQUIREMENTS FOR SELECTED ACTIVITIES 1970-2000, BY CITY SIZE, STATEWIDE TOTALS NUMBER OF FACILITY UNITS REQUIRED -FACILITY METROS CITIES TOWNS TOTAL URBANAREAS ACTIVITY UNIT OF MEASURE YEAR CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL .1970 209,786 209,786 9,128 9,128 .12,665. 12,665 231,579 231,579 Swimming 1975 371,554 161,768 17,733 8,605 22,801 10,136 412,088 180,509 (Pools) Square Yard 1980 589,457 217,903 32,001 14,268 38,712 15,911 660,1,70 248,082 1990 .1,288,325 698,868 74,475 42,747 95,670 56,958 1,458,470 798,300 2000 2,307,299 1,018,974 164,153 89,678 191,210 95,540 2,662,662 1,204,192 1970 98 99 0 0 2 2, 100 100 Child's Play 1975 267. 169 0 0 .3 1 270 170 (Playgrounds) Acre 1980 781 514 1 1 3 0 M 515 1990 2,342 1,561 4 3 4 1 2,350 1,565- 2000 4,535, 2,193 9 5 8 4 4,552 2,202 1970 67 67 4 4 5 5 76 76 Baseball/ 1975 100 33 8 4 9 4 117 41 Softball Field 1980 137 37 13 5 16 7 166 988 1990 264 127 31 18 38 22 333 167 2000 578 314 66 35 81 43 725 392 1970 2,565 2,565 108 108 187 187 2,860- 2,860 1975 3,269 704 204 96 248 61 3,721 861 Picnicking Table 1980 4,067 798 312 108 330 82 4,709 988 1990 6,112 2,045 604 292 552 222 .7,268 2,559 2000 8,237 2,125 955 351 816 264 10,008 2,740 Football/ 1970 378 378 23 23 .54 54 455 455 Soccer Field 1975 443 65 3 '59 5 528 73 1980 514 71 28 2 68 9 610 82 1990 666 152 39 11 80 12 785 175 2000 801 135 47 96, 16 944 159 1970 1,468 .1,468 120 120 112 112 1,700 1,700 1975 2,345 877 172 52 160, 48 2,677 977 Golf Hole 1980 3,468 1,123 248 76 219 59 3,935 1,258 1990 6,6 54 3,186 477 229 392 173 7,523 3,588 2000 10,799 4,145 867 390 .643 251 12,309 4,786 1970 3,803 3,803 16 16 1 1 3,820 3,820 1975 7,131 3,328 43 27 10 9 7,184 3,364 Tennis Court 1980 10,321 3,190 87 44 22 12 10,430 3,246 (doubles) 1990 18,412 8,091 226 139 64 42 18,702 8,272 2000 29,267 10,855 463 237 155 91 29,885 11,183 1970 154 154 4 4 13 13 171 171 1975 366 212 22 18 32 19 420 249 Basketball Cou rt 1980 727 361 63 41 50 18 840 420 (full) 1990 1,672 945 170 107 98 48 1,940 1,100 1 2000 2,879 1,207 1 327 157 1 159 61 1 3,365 1,425 87 TABLE 4.5 (Continued) NUMBER OF FACILITY UNITS REQUIRED FACILITY METROS CITIES TOWNS TOTAL URBAN AREAS ACTIVITY UNIT OF MEAgUREI-YEAR [CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL ATIVE INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL CUMULATIVE INCREMENTAL Freshwater I-, -_ 1970 89 89 ICUMUL 14 14 25 25 1 128 128 Boating, Fishing, Ramp 1975 157 68 23 9 35 10 215 87 and Skiing (2.0 lanes/ramP) 1980 242 85 34 11 44 9 320 105 1990 452 210 61 27 68 24 581 261 2000 710 258 94 33 92 24 8W 315 Saltwater 1970 44 44 7 7 24 24 75 75 Boating, Fishing, Ramp 1975 51 7 10 3 26 2 87 12 and Skiing (2.0 lanes/ramp) 1980 56 5 10 0 29 3 95 8 1990 66 10 12 2 31 2 1D9 14 2000 77 11 16 4 35 4 128 19 1970 406 406 46 46 43 43 495 495 Mile 1975 610 204 72 26 63 20 745 250 Walking Of 1980 885 275 102 30 82 19 1,069 324 Trail 1990 1,550 665 168 66 127 45 1,845 776 2000 2,313 763 247 79 216 89 2,776 931 1970 165 165 20 20 19 19 204 204 Mile 1975 320 155 36 16 .29 10 385 181 Bicycling Of 1980 512 192 64 28 40 11 616 231 Trail 1990 1,022 510 110 46 83 43 1,215 599 2000 1,653 631 203 93 132 49 1,988 773 1970 31 31 1 1 2 2 34 34 Mile 1975 85 54 2 1 3 1 90 56 Nature Study of 1980 158 73 4 2 4 1 166 76 Trail 1990 345 187 10 6 10 6 365 199 2000 593 248 21 11 20 10 634 269 Combined Walking Mile 1970 602 602 67 67 64 64 733 733 Bicycling, and of 1975 1,015 413 110 43 95 31 1,220 487 Nature Study Trail 1980 1,555 540 170 60 126 31 1,851 631 1990 2,917 1,362 288 118 220 94 3,425 1,574 1 2000 1 4,559 1,642 1 241 183 1 368 148 1 5,398 1,973 statewide; the year 2000 playground needs totaled the 1970 requirements. Since the facility metro s were most deficient in swimming pools, tennis 4,552 playground acres, 146% over the 1971 supply; requirements did vary by the different city sizes, the courts, picnic tables, golf course holes, and miles of and, a required increase of 392 baseball/softball fields most prominent requirements of metropolitan areas, combined trails. By far the greater part-well over in the final plan horizon period raised that thirty-year cities, and towns are discussed below. 50%-of the statewide requirement was the result of total to 725 fields. metro areas needs. This was true for all facility types METROPOLITAN AREAS FACILITY in all projection years. All metro areas combined Increases of these magnitudes imply very significant REQUIREMENTS comprised 167,145 square yards of swimming pools, changes in the overall needs for all types of 918 tennis courts, 7,925 picnic tables, 659 golf recreational facilities. Although the remaining facility Table 4.5 also . presents recreational facility course holes, and 140.5 miles of combined trails IN types did not show increases in requirments as large requirements for the metropolitan areas by activity available to the public in 1971. as those mentioned above, all but one-saltwater boat and by number of units required in each time period. Metro areas planners in the Texas Outdoor ramps (13 lanes available in 1971)-at least doubled A cursory examination reveals that for 1970 the Recreation Urban Planner's Survey mentioned 88 playgrounds 1,665 acres available in 1971), picnic tables, baseball/softball fields (1,203 fields avaialble in 1971), tennis courts, and swimming pools most often when describing facility needs for different socio-economic subsections. Golf courses were also frequently mentioned. Facility requirements specified for those activities may be conservative when considering the needs of different socio-economic subsections in additon to the quantitative estimates of requirements. Prior to this point, only combined trails have been mentioned specifically when addressing estimated facility requirements for trails; however, as showrf in Table 4.5 a significant percentage (over 67% in 1970) of the combined trails requirement reflects the need for walking trails. Responding to the question, "Should subdivision developers provide sidewalks in developments?", metro areas planners answered 88% affirmative and 12% negative. Facility requirements for 1975 in general maintained relative numerkal rankings for the most deficient types mentioned for 1970. Projected swimming pool ON requirernents increased incrementally by 161,768 During the ten-year period from 1980 to 1990, square yards to 371,554 additional square yards. incremental requirements more than doubled the CITIES FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Tennis court needs grew by an additional 3,328 previous 1980 estimates for all activities. Additional courts, bringing the 1975 cumulative requirement to golf hole requirements brought the cumulative total 7,131 courts. An additional 704 picnic tables brought to 6,654 units required, larger than the cumulative The five most prominent recreational facility that 1975 total to 3,269 tables. The additionally picnic table total (6,1112 tables), indicating that golf requirements, in terms of units as presented in Table required 877 holes of golf raised the golf hole total to moved up one place in the top five ranking activities 4.5, in Texas cities in 1970 were for square yards of 2,345 holes in 1975. Combined trails were on the basis of facility units required. Otherwise, the swimming pools (9,128 square yards), golf course incremented by 413 miles to a cumulative total of top five ranking facility types remained in the same holes (120 holes), picnic tables (108 tables), 1,015 miles. Substantial requirement increases were relative positions. combined trails facilities (67 miles), and also noted for playgrounds (up 16% over 1971) and football/soccer fields (23 fields). According to Table basketball courts (up 80%). Metropolitan area requirements in the year 2000 are 2.7 in Chapter 2, there were 57,426 square yards of expected to be very large. The five activities swimming. pools, 198 golf course holes, 2,757 picnic The 1980 requirements ranked relatively the same for indicating the largest numerical facility unit deficits tables, 33.7 miles of combined trails, and 50 the five facility types previously shown to be most are,swimming, tennis, golf, picnicking, and combined football/soccer fields available in cities in 1971. deficient in the number of facility units required. All trails activities, in that order. Requirement estimates Planners from the cities responding to the Urban five showed I arge incremental requirements. for playground areas and basketball courts were also P1 anner's Survey, completed February 1972, Additionally, playground requirements almost tripled s t r o n g I y a p p a r e n -t . A I I o t h e r mentioned picnic tables, playgrounds (786 acres to 781 acres and basketball court needs increased activities-baseball/softball, football/soccer, and available in 1971), baseball/softball fields (342 159% over supply to a cumulative requirement of 727 freshwater and saltwater boating, skiing and boat available in 1971 ), tennis courts (223 available in additional courts in the five-year span. (There were fishing-were projected at least to double the 1970 1971), and swimming Pools most when referring to 458 basketball courts available to metro residents in requirement. The following discussion presents an the needs among the socio-economic subsections of 1971). overview of the cities facility requirements. the cities. 89 Over the five-year period from 1970 to 1975 TORP comparatively large increments over the 1990 needs. baseball/softball fields, tennis courts, and swimming requirements for all facility types except playgrounds In general the facility requiremetris remained in the Pools most often as needed among the were projected to increase, with tennis courts same relative numerical ranking with much larger socio-economic subsections of their towns. replacing football fields as the fifth most numerically deficiencies n oted for all activities except deficient facility type. The cities generally appeared playgrounds and saltwater boat ramps. Within the By 1975 the towns situation altered only slightly to have sufficient playground areas throughout the combined trail requirements, the requirements for with increases in requirements indicated for all of the nature study trails remained fairly small throughout thirty-year plan span from 1970 to the year 2000, the thirty-year span. Bicycle trail requirements selected activities. The most pronounced increases having zero requirements in 1970 and 1975 and increased at the most accelerated pace, while the were for additional swimming pools, picnic tables, accumulating only very small incremental golf course holes, and miles of combined trails. requirements in each horizon year after 1980 for a numerical requirements for walking trails were the total of 9 acres statewide. Relatively small largest. Cities' urban planners, answering the question The 1980 requirements showed small increases for all requirements were also noted for saltwater boat "Shou Id developers provide sidewalks in facilities except playgrounds for which no increase ramps (only 1 lane available in 1971), starting with a developments?", in the Texas Outdoor Recreation was indicated. The second half of the decade was requirement for 7 two-lane ramps in 1970 and gaining Urban Planner's Survey, 83% responded affirmative, comparable to the first in that the most prominent, increments of 3, 0, 2, and 4 two-lane ramps in the 10% negative, and 7% did not respond. This indicates but similar, increments were for the same facility, remaining projection years for a thirty-year total of that the majority of the responding urban recreation types as the 1975 requirements. sixteen additional two-lane ramps. Regarding those planners from cities held the opinion that developers facility types indicating the largest numerical should provide sidewalks in subdivisions to enhance requirement in 1975; swimming pool requirements recreational benefits to be derived from pleasure increased 31 % over the 1971 supply to 17,733 square walking. Requirements for the cities and the towns ,yards; the picnic table requirements increase 96 tables were very much the same in terms of the trend for to a cumulative requirement total of 204 tables; 52 general increases in requirements and the same additional golf course holes brought the 1975 activities influencing the overall requirements. An cumulative golf total to 172 holes; an' incremental overview of the towns' requirements follows. increase of 43 additional miles brought the combined TOWNS FACILITY REQUIREMENTS trails total to 110 miles; and the requirements for the same period increased 575% over the 1971 supply, In 1970, the 209 towns in Texas needed additional basketball court requirements increased 27%, tennis facilities for each of the selected recreational court requirements were up 19%, and the acti vities. Some requirements (shown in Table 4.5) requirement for baseball/softball fields doubled from were more pronounced; i.e., for more swimming 4 to 8. Requirements for 1980 indicated similar pools (12,665 square yards needed); picnic tables percentage increments for most activities. (187 required); golf course holes (112 needed); miles of combined walking, bicycling, and nature study By 1990 facility requirements for the cities had in trails (64 miles total); and football/soccer fields (54 most instances doubled the 1970 requirements. The required), than for playgrounds (only 2 acres required five facility types with the largest deficit numbers of statewide), baseball/softball fields (total of 5 units were the same as 1975-swimming pools, picnic required), and tennis courts (only 1 needed). The tables, golf holes, combined trails, and tennis courts. survey of 1971 supply showed that 56,949 square 111MI)i `11 The need for additional basketball courts became yards of swimming pools, 2,148 picnic tables, 207 "Old more prominent with an increase of 107 additional golf course holes, 41.8 miles of combined trails, 27 courts bringing that cumulative total up to 170 football/soccer fields, 658 acres of playgrounds, 317 additional courts. An increase of 27 two-lane ramps baseball/softball fields, and 168 tennis courts were raised the freshwater boat ramp requirement to 61. available to the public in the State's towns. 11 In the remaining decade of the thirty-year period, the Towns planners responding to the Urban Planner's cities requirements are projected to increase by Survey, mentioned playgrounds, picnic tables, Mal= 90 Between 1990 and the year 2000 the towns major urban recreation activities having statewide .. . ............. significance in terms of participation. Sightseeing and requirements are expected to continue to grow at an ..... .... . driving for pleasure were excluded, however, even accelerated pace. The most numerous deficiencies repeated the 1990 pattern, with the largest though statewide participation ranks high compared cumulative requirements indicated for swimming to other activities. Resource requirements for these pools (191,210 square yards or about 915 square two activities were not estimated because data ...... . . . . available for the urban areas was inadequate to yards per town), picnic tables (816 tables-an average ..... of approximately 3.9 per town), golf course holes quantify resources needed, on a statewide basis, to (643 holes), combined trails (368 miles), and support these. activities. Although definite resource basketball courts (159 courts). In addition, the tennis needs exist across the State for these two activities, court, football/soccer field, freshwater boat ramp, meeting these needs depends on the availability of areas with suitable attraction and quality to satisfy and baseball/softball field requirements were all substantial. the recreationist, and the physical and legal access to these areas. Physical access may be a simple matter of Generally, the towns and cities requirements were ... providing signs and other information directing similar both in numbers of facility units required for recreationists through scenic areas on existing the selected activities and in percentages of the highway networks, a task of formidable proportions statewide total. The facility requirements previously already substantially completed for rural sightseeing discussed represent quantified needs by the time and pleasure driving with the development of the periods for those selected activities of statewide major Texas Travel Trails by the Texas Department importance. In addition to those activities, there is a of Highways and Public Transportation. In the urban number of other activities which should be 'ding sightseeing and driving for pleasure areas, provi considered in providing additional urban outdoor needs may be aided by local efforts to identify, recreational opportunities in Texas. Some of these locate, and disseminate information regarding special hfj,,@ :;wJNh1H�S)N activities are discussed in the following section. points of scenic, architectural, geological, historical, SELECTED ADDITIONAL RECREATIONAL and cultural interest. Roads, streets, or in-city highways which provide access to unusual or FACILITY REQUIREMENTS The succeeding ten-year period between 1980 and exceptional attractions should also be identified. 1990 will be very significant insofar as the increasing- This section presents information that may assist Overall, it was determined that many aspects of facility requirements trend indicated a substantial local planners in calculating resource requirements for planning for the provision of sightseeing and driving acceleration for most selected activities. The the activities of sightseeing, driving for pleasure, for pleasure opportunities should be undertaken at 00, archery, sport shooting, horseback riding, and visiting the local, level where in-depth evaluations of the additional 56,968 square yards of swimming p requirements for the ten-year period more than zoos and cultural centers and attending rodeos. The requirements for additional opportunities can be doubled the previous cumulative requirement methodology used to compute resource requirements more accurately conducted. bringing that total to 95,670 additional square yards. is presented in Appendix C. The discussions that Picnic table requirements were up 222 tables over follow group the activities having similar STATEWIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR ARCHERY, 1980 to a new cumulative requirement of 552 characteristics. Reasons for excluding resource additional tables. The need for additional golf course requirements in this volume for these activities are SPORT SHOOTING, AND HORSEBACK RIDING holes expanded by an increment of 173 holes, raising peculiar to each set of activities as grouped, and, to 392 holes. Another 94 therefore, are presented in each discussion as In addition to the development of recreation areas the cumulative total suitable for driving and sightseeing, there are a incremental miles of trail raised the 1990 cumulative appropriate. number of other outdoor recreation activities for total to 220 additional miles. The basketball court which recreation opportunities should be made requirements exceeded the need for football/soccer STATEWIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR available in the urban areas. However, the decision to fields over the ten-year period. Growing by 48 courts, SIGHTSEEING AND DRIVING FOR PLEASURE provide these facilities, as well as the quantities to be the cumulative 98 court total was larger than the The selected facilities for which land, freshwater, and provided, should also be made on a local rather than a football field total by 18 units. facility requirements have been calculated represent statewide basis. This is primarily because 91 participation in the activities tends to vary TABLE 4.6 considerably across the State, apparently caused by differences in availability of resources and the interests of recreationists within the various urban STATEWIDE ANNUAL AVERAGE PARTICIPATION DAYS BY URBAN RESIDENT HOUSEHOLDS IN locales. The heterogeneous nature of the facilities ARCHERY, SPORT SHOOTING, HORSEBACK RIDING, 1975-1980, BY CITY SIZE indicates that planning, to be effective, should be conducted where recreational interests are strong PARTICIPATION DAYS PER YEAR PER HOUSEHOLD enough to support the development of facilities. In Table 4.6, data are presented which provide a ACTIVITY YEAR METROS CITIES TOWNS perspective regarding the aver'age rates of participation by urban households by city size for 1970 .3 .03 archery ranges, sport shooting facilities (for Archery 1975 .8 .1 trap/skeet), and horseback riding trails. Estimates of 1980 1.4 .1 --- general standards for these activities are presented in 1970 .2 .1 Table 4.7. Sport Shooting 1975 .3 .2 1980 .5 .3 --- The participation information may be used by local 1970 1.7 2.1, .9 planners in conjunction with population estimates of Horseback Riding 1975 2.4 5.3 2.2 local areas to determine potential demands for these 1980 3.1 8.5 3.4 activities. Then by comparing local supplies of facilities with the potential demands for these activities, facility requirements may be determined. Source: Estimates developed from data collected in the 1968 Texas Outdoor In cases where a local entity has participation data Recreation Household Demand Survey. that suggest higher levels of local interest (as opposed to the statewide rates shown in Table 4.6), then it Note: Dashes indicate insufficient data to develop projections. may be used as a substitute for these statewide averages in determining local resource requirements. STATEWIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR ZOOS, RODEO ARENAS, AND CULTURAL CENTERS TABLE 4.7 As was found to be the case with horseback riding, GENERAL STANDARDS FOR ARCHERY, SPORT SHOOTING, HORSEBACK RIDING archery, and sport shooting, participation in the activities of visiting zoos, cultural centers, and FACILITY OPPORTUNITY DAYS PROVIDED PER UNIT OF FACILITY attending rodeos varies significantly from region to region and within the three city-size categories. This Archery Ranges 7,279 per acre variation was also attributed to the different interests Sport Shooting (traps) 4,696 per acre in the activities throughout the State and the Horseback Riding 7,741 per mile diversity of facilities available to support the activities. These characteristics made the estimation of demand and resource requirements more suited to local planning. The more detailed calculations of participation and facilities, possible at local levels, should result in more accurate decisions as to whether 92 TABLE 4.8 methodologies utilized to compute requirements for metropolitan areas, cities, and towns on a regional STATEWIDE ANNUAL AVERAGE PARTICIPATION DAYS basis. Inclusion of small communities in the regional BY URBAN RESIDENT HOUSEHOLDS IN VISITING analyses would have shown that the majority of these ZOOS AND CULTURAL CENTERS, ATTENDING RODEOS, 1970,.1975,1980, BY CITY SIZE communities would not require any recreational facilities, a situation not actually the case. PARTICIPATION DAYS PER YEAR PER HOUSEHOLD The reader should be aware of the following facts while assessing this section. ACTIVITY YEAR METROS CITIES TOWNS 1970 2.5' .6 .6 Small communities are defined as those urban Visiting 1975 2.8 1.0 .6 areas in the State whose populations are from ZOOS 1980 3.2 1.4 .5 201-2,499 persons. The lower limit of 201 Visiting 1970 .1 --- .3 persons represents the minimum population an Cultural 1975 .7 area can have to incorporate and form a Centers 1980 --- ... 1.1 municipal corporation, by State law. Once a community incorporates, a legal political 1970 .2 .2 .1 subdivision of the State is formed, making the Attending 1975 .3 .2 - community eligible to participate in various Rodeos 1980 .4 .3 federal and state programs, adopt ordinances, and other such matters. Source: Estimates developed from data collected in the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation Household 0 Obviously, the contrasts between communities Demand Survey. of 201 persons and 2,499 persons can be Note: Dashes indicate insufficient data to develop projections. considerable. Thus a community of 201 may not require the same amounts of recreational or not facilities should be provided, and in wha t communities should also have the opportunity to resources as the larger communities. quaniities. To assist in such evaluations, Table 4.8 pursue recreational activities. A general discussion of provides statewide projections of average resident the recreational opportunities that should be available The general methodology used throughout the household rates of participation by city-size category within Texas' small communities is presented in the TORP to calculate resource requirements was for 1970, 1975, and 1980. These figures may be used following section. also implemented in this section, excluding in conjunction with population estimates of local considerations for existing opportunities areas to determine potential demands for these SUGGESTED RECREATIONAL RESOURCE (supply levels); however, the suggested facility activities. Planners should also estimate non-resident REQUIREMENTS FOR SMALL COMMUNITIES levels were rounded to the next higher facility demand and determine its impact on the projected unit in several cases (i.e., land and water areas, facility requirements. While the diverse characteristics Every community, regardless of size, should have and golf course holes), increased in other cases of the facilities supporting these activities prevented certain basic park and recreation facilities. Needs to reach reasonable construction units (i.e., for the development of urban facility standards, local must be recognized and deficits eliminated by swimming pools), and combined in the case of planners may develop these standards for the specific planning and developing the facilities necessary to games and s ports (i.e., f ootbal I /soccer, type of facility they are evaluating for development. adequately serve the community's population. Small tennis/basketball, baseball/softball), and for communities are treated in the TORP as a separate various types of trails. These adjustments were To this point, the primary emphasis of this volume category of urban areas for many reasons, the necessary to provide suggested resource has been on urban places with 1970 populations of primary of which is that the recreational patterns of requirements that are feasible for the small greater than 2,500 persons. However, there were people residing in most small communities were communities to implement. estimated to be 9185 small communities in Texas with found to be of a magnitude that normally would not populations ranging from 201 to 2,499 persons in require a whole unit of a recreational facility for Local demand should be analyzed carefully in 1968. The residents of, and visitors to, these some activities, if computed using the same TORP conjunction with the local financial situation in 93 each community. Facilities developed should be citizens should be organized in each community to facilities. Playgrounds were found in 77 parks. A total economical, easily maintained, and durable to analyze the local resource needs and to provide of 38 parks, or 25.5% of all parks, had some form of ensure that the community's fiscal resources for positive direction in local planning efforts. swimming f acilities, either pools, designated recreation are expended optimally. freshwater swimming areas, or designated saltwater In presenting a general overview of the small swimming areas. Three parks had boat ramps with a Major questions small communities should ask communities recreational resource situation, the first total of 14 boat lanes. There were 6 recreation themselves in determining their facility needs part of this section summarizes the recreation centers, no trails, sport shooting facilities, archery are: What do we have? What help is available? Opportunities and then addresses the major questions, ranges, or zoos. What is our responsibility to the region? Are we mentioned above, that each community should meeting our responsibility as one of several consider in assessing how to provide adequate This general perspective for recreation resources in entities who provide outdoor recreation recreational opportunities foe local residents and small communities indicates that many of them are opportunities? visitors. The next part of the section discusses general lacking public recreational facilities. To permit better land and water requirements and the final part assessments at local levels, and correct where 0 Schools in many small communities, have focuses on selected facility requirements. desirable and necessary, the following material certain types of recreation resources. By Presents suggested guidelines for the provision of arranging for public use when school programs RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES IN. SMALL recreational land, water, and facilities for an average do not conflict, substantial savings might result. TEXAS COMMUNITIES community of 2,500 people. School-park cooperatives often can be established to the mutual benefit of the In 1969, the Texas Outdoor Recreation Inventory of RECREATIONAL LAND AND FRESHWATER different administrations, and for the Parks, Recreation Areas, and Recreation Facilities REQUIREMENTS FOR SMALL COMMUNITIES recreational benefit of the entire community. indicated that 122 of the 985,small communities in Texas had some type of pub[ icly-adm,inistered parks Generally this suggested that communities of 2,500 0 Urban areas larger than 2,500 in population and recreation areas in the 122 small communities population set aside 25 acres as park and recreation may assume the requirements suggested in this (statewide total population in those small areas. This 25 acres should possibly consist of both section for small communities to be general communities was 169,669), an average of 1.2 parks open land areas and areas developed with facilities. guidelines for the amounts of facilities that Per community. These parks totalled 2,562 acres for Open park land adjacent to or combined with park should be available if justified by local an average per park of 17.2 acres. Slightly more than facilities is desirable for providing a measure of demands. Local recreation interests and/or half of the land (55%) was developed with facilities. aesthetic quality to the park and recreation areas. In participation rates analyses may indicate that A total of 25,425 surface, acres of water was reported addition, a community of 2,500 should also consider larger quantities of resources are more within or adjacent to public parks. Since most of the utilizing any water resource nearby to support appropriate. water was located in only one small community, an water-related recreational activities, where such a average for the 122 small communitie's would not be resource is available, or developing water resources if The suggested resource requirements discussed below representative, practical. The average demand for boating and fishing indicate projected requirements for the year 1980. On the surface, the resource situation of these small for a community of 2,500 justifies (in terms of These requirements are based upon an analysis of communities appeared to be good. However, the demand) 8 acres of recreational water; however, statewide average participation rates for a small majority of the recreation areas and facilities available water bodies are usually more practical in larger sizes. community with a population of 2,500. Small were located in only a very few of the 122 small For example, it may be more practical to construct communities vary in many ways-in size, location, communities. Facilities, for example, were distributed one large body of water centrally located to serve available resources, economic situation, population, among the 149 existing parks as follows: Seventy-one several small communities (or other size urban areas) and in the age composition of the citizenry. Each parks had games and sports facilities, 33 had tennis than to construct several smaller bodies. community must therefore analyze its particular courts, 11 had basketball courts, and 1 park had a RECREATIONAL FACILITY REQUIREMENTS situation and determine the types of recreation football/soccer field. There were 80 baseball/softball FOR SMALL COMMUNITIES facilities required, based at least partially on whether fields. Six parks had golf facilities. Picnic tables the community is young and fast-growing, consists of generally had the widest distribution of all facilities, a large proportion of older citizens, or possibly has a occurring in 85 parks and averaging four single units A community of 2,500 or less population should be declining population. Committees of interested and two group units per park with picnicking able to adequately support the following facilities if 94 due consideration is given to the various statements SWIMMING (POO LS) change and the communities' age-composition can be regarding limitations. Some of the statements include excellent indicators of future requirements. Many facility units rounded up to the next whole or An analysis of small community resident and factors of local participation should be analyzed in practical unit. For example, if analysis of non-resident participation in swimming indicates, in advance to properly plan the correct pool type, size, participation rates indicated that only one-half of the general, the need for a swimming pool in each and location to best serve the local need. Support demand necessary to justify a games and sports field community. Statewide average participation rates facilities usually include an appropriate filtering was present, the suggested number was rounded to show that a community of 2,500 or less population system, lighting, and other essential utilities. one field. Under-utilization may be expected for most should have 184 square yards of swimming pool area. Additional support facilities could include a 'facilities during non-peak seasons of the year. Where However, a pool this small may not be practical or bathhouse, restrooms, parking area, fencing, and practical, flexibility in the use of facilities-e.g., economical. Local circumstances could warrant the concession area. It should be recognized that the multi-ues-can reduce the number of facilities that construction of a larger pooll. initial construction costs of a pool and related support facilities constitute a major expense item. otherwise would have to be purchased as well as the Since swimming pools must normally be constructed Proper maintenance of a pool after construction is additional lands to be acquired and/or developed to in somewhat larger units than most other facility also more expensive than the maintenance of many support these additional facilities. types, and cannot readily be expanded in small other types of recreational facilities. segments, communities must look ahead to the pool Among the factors that should be considered in requirements of future years. Projected population CHILD'S PLAY (PLAYGROUND) planning and developing facilities for small community park and recreation areas are: 1) the Statewide average participation figures for child's extent of potential facility use coming from outside play in small communities indicate a resource the community should be estimated. This use may requirement of approximately one-quarter acre include recreationists from rural areas and developed with playground facilities. surrounding urban areas, or travellers when the community is easily accessible by major highway It should be understood that one of the most routes; 2) facilities for several of the games and sports -important factors in providing a playground area is activities may already be provided in sufficient not necessarily the extent of the acreage, but the numbers by local school districts. With number and type of units of play equipment placed communication, coordination and cooperation these within the area. A playground of only one-quarter facilities might be effectively used to meet a portion acre is already fairly compact in size, thus equipment of local needs; and 3) certain types of should be selected with care to avoid overcrowded or privately-operated existing facilities, such as golf dangerous conditions. Some of the newer, more courses, swimming pools, or campsites may be open innovative units might be considered rather than the to the public. These resources should be identified typical swing-slide-seesaw-merry-go-round units, with and utilization analyzed to avoid costly duplication thought given to providing something for each of the of facilities on the part of the community. various age groups which may be using the Recreational facilities should not be provided using playground. The most common and useful support tax dollars if adequate recreational opportunities are facilities for a playground are rest benches for already available to the general public. supervisors and, parents. Playground areas might be In some cases, facilities such as swimming poo IIs are 11))1mimull, gmasiv, located near or adjacent to. elementary schools or in the principal park in the community. If some more efficiently developed in larger units than the residents of the community must walk considerable specified requirement indicates; thus, they may not distances to reach a playground, locations may be be utilized at full capacity initially in certain IN@@MOII Jo preferable to provide reasonable access by the entire communities. Lighting is suggested for most types of 1h)JJ)01111 81111 AONA community. Two small playgrounds located close to facilities to increase potential user time if it is within '110) 41 potential users may better serve the community than the rneans of the community, and the additional costs one larger playground that is not accessible to the are justified by increases in public utilization. majority of the local citizens. 95 GAMES AND SPORTS FACILITIES liming or cutting in the grassed area. If goal posts are side, and one for tennis on the other side. This type necessary, i.e., for league competition, inexpensive, court permits both basketball and tennis play Games and sports facility requirements are discussed removable posts could be mounted into permanent simultaneously. Though more expensive than the below in the following order: requirements for slots in the ground. Adequate safety measures should smaller court discussed above, it is less expensive than baseball /sof tbal I fields and football/soccer fields are be taken to protect recreationists from goal post two courts constructed separately. combined and presented as the initial section hazards. followed by tennis court and basketball court Optional support facilities include lighting, rest requirements combined in the subsequent section. The same support facilities provided for benches, spectator areas, practice tennis backstop, baseball/softball could be utilized for organized and fences. Both types of slabs could also serve the Baseball/Softball and Football/Soccer football/soccer play, especially if items such as player community needs for other activities, such as benches and bleachers are portable. A sports field or volleyball, badmitton, shuffleboard, outdoor dances, Again, the participation figures for small communities this type could also serve the needs of other and arts and crafts programs. indicate that only in instances of unusually heavy community activities such as track and field events, kite flying, frisbee throwing, and special holiday PICNICKING local demand could a community of 2,500 or less events or displays, when not 1 n use for population adequately support one field for each of baseball/softball or football/soccer activities. Resident and non-resident participation figures for the various field sports activities. However, every small communities of less than 2,500 population community should have an open field area within its Tennis and Basketball indicate an average statewide resource requirement of park and recreation acreage; an inexpensive backstop three single-family tables per community. However, it could be appropriately placed in this field for Participation figures for tennis and basketball indicate should be noted that above average participation unorganized baseball/softball play. that only in instances of unusually heavy local either by residents or non-resident could necessitate demand could a community of 2,500 or less justify, the need for more tables. Above average utilization When a community, regardless of size, hosts or in terms of demand, both a public basketball court often occurs, for example, where the community is expects to host games in organized league play, one and a separate public tennis court. However ' to on a major travel route, in a resort area, in proximity baseball/softball field, of dimensions appropriate to provide facilities for both of these activities, the most to a major city, or where single and multi-family accommodate both activities, equipped with a practical and most economical alternative would be gatherings, large family reunions, or homecomings are sufficient backstop and bases, should be provided. the construction of a unit often referred to as an frequent, popular occasions. These communities may When activity interest is generated so as to have more all-purpose or multi-purpose court, or multi-purpose require several more tables in various combinations of than twelve teams fielded in league competition, two play slab. single and group types. At least one large group unit fields could be justified. A possible alternative to a is suggested (equivalent to three single-family tables second field may be the installation of lighting at one This court or slab should be of concrete or similar. or more) in addition to the three single tables for field, especially if suitable acreage for an additional construction, and of sufficient width and length to 'each community if above average utilization is field is not readily available or economically feasible. accommodate regulation marking for a "full-court" expected. Optional support facilities could include spectator basketball court as well as a "doubles" tennis court. bleachers, outfield and base-line fencing, player However, only one activity can be played at one time benches, I i g h t i n g , p a r k i n g a r e a , on this type of facility. This presents administrative Local demand should dictate whether the picnic units equipment/maintenance storage building, concession problems because conflicts may arise over the use of are constructed as single-family tables or several stand, and restrooms. the facility. Tennis and basketball enthusiasts will tables combined together as a group unit. Support have conflicts since only one group can play at a facilities such as barbecue units, trash receptacles, and In order to accommodate baseball and/or softball and time. These conflicts require mord, detailed a parking area should be provided. Optional support football and/or soccer, a separate field would not administrative procedures, which generally cause facilities include a covered shelter (normally for a necessarily be required, even for league competition if more expense; or, if managed by volunteers, require group area), water supply, and restrooms. outfield and infield fences are not permanent and more time to supervise properly. Undeveloped land adjacent to picnic areas ia also lighting does not interfere. Seasonal conflicts may be desirable f or providing a pleasant, relaxing solved by proper scheduling of play. The outfield Use-conflicts may be minimized through the atmosphere, an amenity sought by most picnickers.-A portion of the baseball/softball field could be construction of a slab large enough to accommodate major factor in locating picnicking facilities in Texas outlined to football/soccer dimensions, by either separately marked courts, one for basketball on one is the availability of shade. It is a commonly known 96 fact among recreation planners in Texas that picnic tables located in shaded areas can be expected to receive heavier utilization than tables located in the . . .. ........... the peak picnicking season in sun. This is because and Texas occurs during the summer months, picnickers seek relief from the heat by using naturally or artificially shaded picnic areas. GO LF A study of the resident an&non-resident golfing participation at small community courses inclic ates that most small communities cannot justify the construction of a regulation golf course. However, circumstances may exist in certain communities that . ... .. could cause an unusually heavy local demand for golf. In such instances, the local municipal administrators Typical support facilities include a parking area, .3he trail location and a 'ctual trail length should be must carefully analyze the participation and demand clubhouse with restroom facilities, pro shop with golf determined in most instances, by the activeness of the situation before undertaking the development of a equipment and repair facilities, maintenance building, local resource. A good natural setting for a trail, for, golf course, an expensive facility requiring extensive weather shelters, cart trails, and irrigation system. In example, might be along an undeveloped stream acreage and large fiscal outlays for construction in all instances, the expense of course construction valle.y. Where practical, locations should be selected relation to other types of facilities, as well as should be kept as low as possible while still p iroviding which provide convenient access form residential requiring expensive maintenance costs after a satisfactory facility. Use of volunteer help in coUrse areas, while safely connecting these areas to the construction.. However, golf courses that are construction and maintenance is an excellent method school, park, and/or downtown area of the adequately operated and used can become revenue which can be employed both to generate 'local community. producing f aci I ities. Examples of unusual interest and to conserve funds. In addition to the above resource requirements for circumstances might be: where small communities are trails within park and recreation areas, each located in proximity to a large urban area; along community should consider providing suitable -areas heavily travelled tourist routes; in a prominent resort TRAILS ACTIVITIES to satisfy that portion of the participation in trails area; or when the community is a county seat or a activities that occurs outside parks. Designating parts community which serves'as the main center of Studies indicate that in the urban areas of Texas only of certain stree .ts as bike ways and providing activity for an entire county, or surrounding counties. about 10% of the walking for pleasure, 4% of the sidewalks in residential"and school areas would be Another example of unusual circumstances may bicycling, and 20% of the hiking and nature study two methods of providing for a portion of the trails occur where there is heavy local activity interest, actually occur in parks. This information along with activity participat .ion which does not take place in most often generated by an active golf association or the statewide average participation rates for the trails parks. gold instruction program. activities indicate resource requirements of about.3 miles of developed trail for communities of 2,500 or OTHER FACILITIES In some instances, if locational, operational, and less population. maintenance problems can be resolved, a combined Additional types of facilities such as effort between two or more communities may It should be noted that a trail of three-tenths of a community/recreation centers, archery and shooting produce the participation and financial support mile in length may in some instances, be an ranges, camping, boating, and 'fishing facilities may necessary to provide a golf course. In any situation, a also be needed based on local interest, demand, and minimum of 9 holes is needed if a course is to be used impractical unit, both for construction purposes and the existence of local resources. For example, a small for regulation play, although consideration should for utilization by residents. Therefore, a minimum of community located adjacent to a good fishing stream also be given to the smaller "executive" type course, 5 or 1 mile of designated or developed trail might be or freshwater lake may generate the demand for or a par-3 course. more desirable to construct and to use. boating, fishing, and camping facilities. 97 INTRODUCTION Resource requirements were presented for selected outdoor recreation activities in the previous chapter. owever, there are several aspects of urban outdoor recreation which could not be quantified for analysis PROBLEMS OF 13' Womeam based on existing data. The importance of several of 4, these aspects to urban outdoor recreation in Texas merit their full consideration in providing needed urban recreation opportunities to meet current and r future recreation demands for these opportunities. Discussed in this chapter are some of the major types of recreation resources with potential for providing urban recreation opportunities (significant urban natural areas; rivers, streams, and flood plains; lakes and reservoirs; urban trails; and historic resources), the special recreational needs of the handicapped and aged, sources of municipal park and recreation r financing, and urban recreation programs which are important in providing leadership that will insure the types of programs desired by local citizenry are made 3 available and that maximum utilization of existing and potential recreation resources is maintained in order to provide adequate recreation opportunities to the urban- residents of Texas. Topics other than those discussed in this chapter may be of equal importance to any given urban area. In fact, the special concerns and associated problems most important to a particular urban area may be of a specialized nature and, as a result, may not have been included here. It is certainly recognized that the importance of many concerns and problems related to urban outdoor recreation could easily justify their inclusion as a separate topic, such as maintenance problems, recruitment of parks personnel, etc. RECREATION RESOURCES AW1d E ljt@ Ca "JAW The variety of resources found in Texas offer@ an excellent base for providing outdoor recreation opportunities. To insure that sufficient quantities of Photo by Governor's committee on Aging. 98 66 -ams leinieu iiaLli ui pouielai p sanIBA jUe3lj!UBlS uo saBuiq 'aininj jo wasaid jaqlaLim 'sasodind BUIAeLl Se8Je Sl? POIBUBISOP SeWe OSOql 01 SUOIJeJOIle jeuoileanai jol asn 1equalod jiaql jo aouejnsse OZIWIUIW 01 BAIJIS 'SjSlUOlje9J39J 10 S93U9J8j9jd all pue V41jerlb pue A4!luianb ui aliuil gie sleilualod Ot4l OlePOwWO03e 01 SI-10118 ul 'SJOuueld *Olels leinieu jouOlleanai lueolpUBIS 6UIAeq SODinosai jo sadAl ajow e ut pouielej aje qoiL4m sem ui Buijwumd weim 'ssojpjeBa8 -sasn jeuotieenal Jol swealls pue Ul sisajam buiseenui UMOqS OALq sja>13iuoid SJOAIJ jo asn aininj aqj ainsui p1nom ieqi spiepueis 'eldwexe ioj *saBueq3 julawpuBis auofijapun Allienb iolem t46!q Butqsilqelsa se q3ns 'u9jej paieuiwile aq Aew swalqojd OAeq SOll!A1139 JeUOII!PeJl OJOW aqi ui aledmajed ol aje suoil3e j9doid j! s9ij!unj3oddO OPIA03d q3iqm saoinosai @o sadAi aq-1 ui jaqio -sasn ueqin iaq-jo jo jeuoileanaA jol joqlaqm '(spuel Apeinowed) saoinosai weino jol spuewap saouaialaid 'jaqijnj 'maj e Aluo aweu oi 'Buieesiq6is pue 'Apnis ainjeu 'BuillLi 'Buillem 'Butaoue3 OR aqj 8181aJ93312 10 1,1121MEW 111m q3iqm 'seaje ueqin 941 saldwex3 's jo Al!jofew aqi jol poi3edxa aia saseajoui uoiielndod e9je leinjeu jeou jo seaje leinjeu oi palms ajow saajmpe lemiemaj asoqj ui Buisesnui st panuguco -aseanap Aew 'ualvi si uoll3e i9doid -pajago Al!uojas pue Aineaq eqj Aq seeie j! 'swalqojd jot4jo ol!qm 'aseanui ol paioadxa eje puewa(] (Z leinleu anbiun ol pol3eille we ajdOad TOWsuglul sawnosai ase jo asn aqj Buguojjuo3 swalqojd awoS 141. seq aleis leinieu jiaql ui sem asaqi Aq pajoijo sl!;auaq aqi ut Isamut s,oilqnd eqj 'Allewapputo3 le3isAqd pue 3iwouo3a ue qioq wojj jou Alqeqojd 'pue 'AlsnoeuellnwiS *se9je leinieu leoil3eidwi aq pinom e9je ueqjn ue ui paleool eaje w p ejeme A16uiseaioui olui sluawt4oeoj3ua p!del s,uL leinieu 10 imp e 93eldei oi '91dwexe jo.1 'Isol eje OW03aq seq oilqnd jejau96 aL41 sieeA iuaoaj Aaql 93uo le3ii3eidwi sawo3aq sesodind jeuoileajoei Ul (L :Oie juejlodwt@QJOW at4l 10 OAA_L AUeW jol luaLueoeldej mil ainiou e L13ns jo On sa3inosai ol palnq!jlle aq Aew aouaialaid 3ilqnd ui e6ueqz) siq_L asaLp jo lsoVy -saoinosai jewamooi qjqenjeA *sosn jeuoileamai iol alqe1jeAe saDinosai eqi ajew 811RUW18 AO 93npaA Auew sioefoid iat4jo asaql oi pajinbei Lunwiuiw eqj ol poonpoi aq suoimaile 'pedolaAap UOLIM 'slooloid papaou pue al!qAAt4ijom gie esaqi let4i 10 " P'alalleun uiewai sme leinjeu tPILIM 10 Auew 'sasn ueqjn jot4lo Ljj!m uoiiqadwo3 let4l 6UIPUBWOP We SISMOlleg.139IJ alels leinieu ioajip ui aie soomosai esaql leqi si . juiod jaqlouV jeau 10 ouils!id liat4l ui SooAnOSGJ JeUOlleaA381 Ulej,103 OAJBS,9Jd oi . oilqnd jejouO aql 6uowe saouejejoid -51!ejl ueqjn JO SJIOAAGSE)A pue sojej jo uoii3nilsuoo 6uiSe8J3UI M04S OAel4 saipnis lueoeH -sluawdolaAgp ENI 101 alqel!ns seaje pue 'saoinosai o1JOTslt4 pue SIUGWOAoidwi opew-uew Aq poisile uallo sem 'sweeils pue SJE)AIJ 'seen joinleu aie 'suoiionpai saoinosai jeuoileai o9i jo alels jeAnjeu ot4j 'Ised ai4l ul jaqijnl 6uioel Allenuiluoo pue 'Ai!lenb jo Al!luenb J941!9 U! poonpai Apeoile so3inosai jo saidwex3 sv3uv ivunIVN Nvaun INV31AINDIS 'saii!unlioddo uoileanaA joopino ap!Aoid oi papaau sao inosai jo sodAj uieljao jo Al!l!qel!L'Ae 8141 peonpaj Ajje3ijsoAp seq seaje ueqjn jo juawdolgAOP OSUOP gq_L -seaje ueqjn ui saoinosai inem uo pooeld spuewap AA294 8t4l pue pedolOAOP We seeie puel ueqjn qoit4/'A oi Ai!suaiui aLli wojj sllnsai U01jelpli S1t4-L -pal! wil 'sasodind leuoileajoai leqmawos aje sismoileamoi ueqjn jol seil!unlioddo jol saoinosai palooles jo uOllea 041 Bull J38J Gp!Aojd ol leilunod 0 Ll I 6UlAeq uOiJU03 asn -pazileei aq isnw spej swelqojd paieposse pue suiaouoo Imads oziseqdwa saoinosai leql si joel auo 01 sidwoue oje soidol 6uimoliol aqj ui suoissn3si(] 18JOABS 'SPOOU JeUOIIeOJ30J aininj pue juaiina laaw -aininj jeou aqi ui pue Alluesaid UOA16 SUOljl?J8p!SU03 ol elqel!eAe aje soomosai Ai!lenb jo sodAl uieliao Texas is fortunate to have many significant natural The first step necessary to protect the unique and which they felt should be afforded special attention. areas located in urban areas across the State. If proper significant natural areas in Texas is to identify them, Through such efforts and groups as this, other unique conservation practices are applied to protect these so that they can be given due consideration by areas have been conserved for future generations. areas, they have the potential to provide additional planners and decision makers. With the natural areas recreational opportunities, now and in the future. thus identified, they can be taken into account when These thirty areas, ranked below in order of priority, However, significant natural areas are particularly planning developments, construction, highways, are by no means the only areas that are unique or vulnerable in urban areas to rapid urban development. parks, recreation areas, etc., with a view toward their worthy of special consideration, but are simply the Often, these areas are highly sought for development significant recreation values. thirty areas reported of highest priority throughout of residential neighborhoods because they are natural the urban areas of Texas. Certainly, there are areas and as such provide amenities homeowners Fortunately, a group of over 100 concerned numerous other natural areas of importance to local desire. Other types of developments may seek sites in conservationists throughout the State has conducted, areas which should be given prompt attention. In the area due to other reasons, such as an industrial on their own initiative, a survey to identify the addition to the priority and name of the area, a concern searching for a site having an adequate water significant natural areas in Texas. The study was description of the area and its location are given. supply, which in many -cases can be a significant called the Texas Natural Areas Survey and resulted in urban natural area. The problem which arises is how a Publication entitled The Natural Areas of Texas.11 it to insure that adequate amounts of these unique provided a detailed listiog of significant natural areas natural areas are preserved to accommodate the in the State. Members of the executive committee of 1 . Survey by the Nature Conservancy, Texas Chapter, titled "Texas Natural Areas Survey" present and future recreational needs of the people of the survey provided a list of thirty of the most and published under the title The Natural Areas Texas. significant urban natural areas, in order of priority, of Texas. County or Priority City of Location Counties of Rank Area Name Description or Nearest City Location Armand's Bayou The area extends more than four miles northward Pasadena Harris from Clear Lake and Mud Lake in southeast Harris County, including all the woodlands and a thousand foot strip of prairie in a zone one- half mile wide. It is the best preserved coastal bayou. It contains three distinct plant zones- Gulf Coast Prairie, Southern Evergreen Forest, and Coastal Marsh. It has a wide variety of plant species and an interesting combination of. birds. Part of it is in the city of Pasadena. 2 Balcones Escarpment Is two miles west of Waco in the city of Woodway. Waco McLennan This area possesses large exposures of five different types of rock formation. It has fossils from prehistoric times as well as virgin woodlands in small stands. It is the nesting place of the black-capped vireo (which is listed as a rare and endangered spe@cies). In addition, many animal species reach their eastern and western limits along the escarpment in this region of Texas. The tract contains 200 acres which should be corTsiderecL 100 County or Priority City of Location Counties of Rank Area Name Description or Nearest City Location 3' Bachman Creek Includes the stretch from Bachman Lake eastward Dallas Dallas to a point north of Northwest Highway in the city of Dallas. It serves as a nesting area as well as migratory habitat for many bird species, including wood duck, many wild animals, including fox, and many plants, including giant oaks and some ferns and arums not found elsewhere in North Central Texas. The area of interest consists of 600 acres and is owned in part by the city of Dallas and in part by individuals. 4 Live Oak Peninsula Contains about 600 acres on the west side of Fulton Refugio Aransas Bay just east of where State Highway 35 crosses Copano Bay in Refugio County. It is a breeding and spawning ground for many fish species. In addition, numerous shore birds-utilize the area for breeding and feeding purposes@. The area under consideration is just north of the city I imits of Fulton. 5 The San Marcos River Extends from the San Marcos Springs to the con- San Marcos Hays fluence with the Blanco River in Hays County. This is the only habitat for the San Marcos Dwarf Salamander as well as the Texas Wild Rice. In addition it is one of the few remaining habitats in the State for aquatic moss. The area under consideration is approximately five lineal miles and is in private ownership. 6 Prairie, Chicken Habitat Is in Galveston County, east and north of Dickinson Galveston Dickinson from the city I imits to Southern Pacific Railroad, Clear Lake Shores and League City all of which are about two miles from the Dickinson city limits is an arc about six miles long. The area provides habitat for Attwater's prairie chicken, which is rapidly becoming an extinct species. 101 County or Priority City of Location Counties of Rank Area Name Description or Nearest City Location 7 Upper White Rock Creek Is located in the northern part of Dallas County Dallas Dallas in Dallas County from White Rock Lake to Collin County line. This Is a beautifully wooded creek bottom with 100-foot red oaks and a wide variety of birds. It is an arm of the proposed Dallas green belt system. The area being considered is a zone 100 yards to a mile wide and approximately 20 linear miles. It is owned by private interests and by the city of Dallas. 8 Upper White Rock Creek Includes White Rock Creek between State Highway 121 Dallas Collin in Collin County and the southern boundary of Collin County. The total length of the creek being considered is approximately four miles. It is presently under consideration as a Dallas green belt area. The creek is a free running stream with occasional chalk bluffs bordered by tall oaks and cotton- woods. 9 Upper Buffalo Bayou Is an area south of Highway 90 and east of FM 1960 Houston Harris in Harris County. It is the bottomland of the Addicks Barker Reservoir and consists of a wooded area along a f I owi ng bayou. The area is a ref uge for many birds and small animals. It is approxi- mately 600 acres and within the city limits of Houston. 10 Pine Island Bayou Includes a stretch along the north boundary of Beaumont Jefferson Beaumont and consists of the south side of Pine Island Bayou, from Highway 105 on the west to the Neches River on the east. The area averages approximately one-half mile wide and is a beautiful running stream with numerous cypress swamps as well as pine and hardwood stands. It is part of the Big Thicket and still mostly primitive. The area com- prises approximately eleven square miles and is still in private ownership except the streambed. 102 County or Priority City of Location Counties of Rank Area Name Description or Nearest City Location 11 Lower Barton Creek Consists of the area in Austin above Zilker Park Austin Travis to just above Campbell's Hole, including about a 100-yard strip on either side of the creek. This area is in the heart of the city and possesses an excellent spring-fed creek with an abundance of flora. The land is presently privately owned and consists of about 50 acres. 12 Coma[ Springs and River Is located in Landa Park in New Braunfels. This New Braunfels Comal area is approximately 100 acres in size and is partially city owned. Unique characteristics of the site include clear springs and rapids which provide excellent swimming as well as a signifi- cant population of fish species for nature study' 13 West Fork Bottoms Is located in Tarrant County, due west of the Fort Worth Tarrant Fort Worth downtown area. It is bounded on the north by White Settlement Road, on the south by Imperial Avenue, on the east by Rivercrest Country Club, and on the west by the West Fork on the Trinity River. The tract provides a @arge open space approximately 400 acres in size with pecan, red oak and basket oak trees, and an undulating river which flows through the area. At the current time the tract is privately owned. 14 Clear Fork Bottoms Is located in the southwest part of Fort Worth, Fort Worth Tarrant south of the Texas ana Pacific Railroad, east of the General Dynamics Recreation Area, and west of Hulan Boulevard. The area can be described as a bottomland with huge pecan, oak and elm trees. The tract totals 200 acres in size and is privately owned. 15 Big Bird Bottoms Are bottornlands on the Upper Trinity, in the south- Dallas Dallas east quadrant of Dallas County, partly in the city of Dallas, comprising a zone up to one-half mile wide along both sides of the Trinity River from 103 County or Priority City of Location Counties of Rank Area Name Description or Nearest City Location its confluence with White Rock Creek south to the Ellis County line, encompassing eight square miles. The area is comprised of wetlands and streambottom forest, containing an amazing variety of birds and other wildlife-masked duck (far from usual habitat), mottled duck nesting (far from usual nesting territory), green-winged teal (resi- dent), wood stork, white tailed hawk, caracara (far from usual range), prothonotary and parula warblers nesting (west of usual range), violet-green swallow, and other birds. The area includes thin strips from the Dallas Hunting and Fishing club, the Lancaster Club, the Fin and Feather Club, and is mainly owned by private individuals. 16 Franklin Mountains Area Is located in El Paso County, immediately north of El Paso El Paso U.S. Route 180 west of Fort Bliss and the Logan Heights section in the city of El Paso. The area has important historical and ecological significance. It is approximately 15 square miles in size, and is owned by the city. 17 Beaumont Pines Is sometimes called The Old Beaumont Pines Area. Beaumont Jefferson It is located in the city of Beaumont between the north side of Lucas Drive and the south boundary of the Beaumont Country Club. The area is char- acteristic of the prolific East Texas region in that it contains an abundance of trees and plants. It provides a cross-section of the undergrowth commonly found in East Texas. This natural area totals approximately 100 acres in size and is owned by heirs of an estate. 18 Lower Sabine Cypress Is located east to northeast of the city of Orange Orange Swamp Orange, Texas; along the Louisiana border and the west side of the Sabine River and estends northward from the Naval Mothball Fleet to the county line. It is approximately 2,600 acres in size and varies from 100 feet to two miles in width. The locale is 104 County or Priority City of Location Counties of Rank Area Name Description or Nearest City Location characterized by large cypress swamps and brackish marshes. In addition to its scenic beauty the area also provides a habitat for numerous species of birds At the present time the tract is privately owned. 19 Banks of Oso Creek Is approximately 12 land miles in length and is Corpus Christi San Patricio that portion of the creek from Cayo del Oso to Cuddihy Field, southwest of the Corpus Christi city limits. The site is good for wildlife and waterbirds (it is here that European Ruff was sighted) and has possible historic significance in that it is believed to contain some burial sites of the Karankawa Indians. At the present time the area is privately owned. 20 Bull Creek Is located from Oak Road Community near the Austin Travis north central boundary of Travis County, down- stream to the Colorado River with a zone width of one-half mile wide, within the Austin city limits. The tract 'contains spring-fed streams and wooded bottomlands, including limestone bluffs and moist meadows. The area of interest is approximately 500 acres in size. 21 Woodville Beech Woods Is located within the city limits of Woodville, Woodville Tyler Texas, about 200 yards north of U.S. Highway 190 and about 11/2 miles west of the county courthouse. The area is approximately ten acres in size and is heavily forested with beech, magnolia and loblolly pine. It contains a small creek bordered with acquatic plants and wildflowers. The area is privately owned. 22 Kell Canyon Is located in Bell County one-half mile north of Belton Bell Highway 36 and one-half mile east of the Leon River, on Stampede Creek near Upper Belton Lake. It is described as a beautiful, sheltered canyon and has several interesting features. The site is historically significant in that it was a known crossing of the Chisholm Trail and bas 105 County or Priority City of Location Counties of Rank Area Name Description or Nearest City Location several Indian campsites within a half mile radius of the area. Wildlife is abundant and there is also a great variety of plants. Ownership of the 150 acre site includes both private and Corps of Engineers holdings. 23 Wendland Canyon Is located in Bell County near the southwestern Temple Bell corner of the city of Temple and adjoins Bird's Creek within the Temple city limits. The site is a very deep, narrow canyon with numerous springs. It possesses an abundance of lush plant growth and provides an excellent habitat for many species of wildlife. The area may have some historical sig- nificance since it is believed that a big Indian camp and burial ground was there at one time. At the present time the tract is privately owned and encompasses approximately 150 acres. 24 Temple Mini-Prairie Is located about one mile north from the Temple Temple Bell city limits, between Interstate 35 and the M K & T Railroad. The terrain can be described as open grassland on general rolling high ground over- looking the surrounding communities. The area was a site of an old farm and provides a unique cross section of the grasslands found in the Central Texas blackland. Since the open grassland has not been grazed, fertilized or treated with herbicides in over forty years it provides an excellent site for nature study. The tract contains approximately three acres of this grassland area. 25 Brownsville Whitewing Is located just inside the city limits of Browns- Brownsville Cameron Dove Habitat ville on FM 802 around 1% miles east of U.S. 83. Approximately 45 acres in size, the tract provides good representation of the South Texas Brush land. The mesquite trees provide good habitat for the whitewing dove. Much of the good whitewing dove habitat in South Texas is being cleared. 106 County or Priority City of Location Counties of Rank Area Name Description or Nearest City Location 26 San Antonio Springs Is divided into two parts within San Antonio, one San Antonio Bexar on the San Antonio River Channel which is located from Probant Street to Nueva Street and the other on the San Antonio River in Brackenridge Park. Both areas are of great scenic beauty and have huge pecan and I ive oak trees along the shores. The San Antonio River Channel area from Probant to Nueva Streets is a narrow strip not over 100 ioot wide and approximately two miles long. It is privately owned. The San Antonio River area through Brackenridge Park borders park land on both sides and is approximately two miles long. This area is owned by the city. 27 Bird Flats Are located at the eastern edge of the corporate Morgan's Point Chambers limits of Morgan's Point on San Jacinto Bay. The site of interest can be described as a significant salt marsh and tidal flat area which is frequented by various species of shore birds as well as nesting birds. 28 Wilson Creek Bottom Is located from slightly northwest of U.S. 75 to McKinney Collin one mile south of State Highway 24 in Collin County. The site provides bottom land timber with some significant fossil outcrops and mineral deposits. It also serves as a wildlife sanctuary. It totals 600 acres and is privately owned. 29 Trinity Bottoms Is located along the West Fork of the Trinity River Fort Worth Tarrant from North Haltom Road eastward to Highway 820. This open space area which totals more than 500 acres provides hardwood bottom land and is rich in bird life. The area is owned by private citizens as wel I as the city of Fort Worth. 30 Ezell's Cave Is located on Brown Street in the city of San San Marcos Hays Marcos. It has been designated as a national landmark. The cave contains an underground lake which is part of the Edwards underground water system and the only remaining accessible location for the Texas blind salamander as well as many unique cave dwelling invertebrates. The area is about one city block, or two acies, in size and is privately owned. 107 RIVERS STREAMS AND ASSOCIATED FLOOD and streams and their associated flood plains, is the PLAINS National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended The potential for recreation in many of the state's by the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, which urban waterways merits full consideration with makes federally, subsidized insurance monies available respect to satisfying the demands for urban outdoor to municipalities or areas where appropriate land use recreation opportunities. Rivers, streams and their controls are implemented to restrict further associated flood plains, although frequently thought developments in flood-prone areas.2 As of July, of in terms of rural recreation, can play an important 1974, there were reported to be 210 communities in role in providing urban recreation opportunities as Texas participating in this program with over 37,000 well. Flood plains are those lands immediately flood insurance policies in effect. Over $700 million adjacent to rivers and streams that may be subject to canoeing , kayaking, and rafting in natural settings in existing commerical, industrial and residential periodic inundation or flooding. Consequently, these within or adjacent to urban areas. The urban developments were estimated to be protected as a lands are often incompatible 'with certain types of waterways and access points could be integrated into result. This financial protection offers some relief to uses. Incompatible development on these lands, such longer distance waterways, and eventually could current problems facing the developments already as residential and industrial development, has the become components of a statewide system of wild, existing in flood-prone areas and, by requiring land potential for the loss of life and property. Additional scenic-and recreational waterways. use controls, restricts further developments in problems associated with incompatible development . . . flood-prone areas in an attempt to prevent similar include reduction in water quality due to pollution Examples of the utilization of urban waterways and problems from increasing in the future. from urban runoff and waste disposal, and increased associated flood plains for recreational purposes are aggravation of existing flooding problems. However, appearing in many of Texas' urban areas. Downtown A more detailed treatment of this subject may be recreational uses of rivers and streams and theirflood sections in many urban areas have become found in the TORP volume titled Regional plains have long been considered as one of several considerably more attractive as a result of the. Environmental Analysis. compatible uses. In urban areas these lands in many acquisition and recreational development of urban cases can provide excellent resources for compatible waterways and their associated flood plains.,In several LAKES AND RESERVOIRS low-intensity recreational uses such as greenbelts, cases, these areas have not only served as pleasant linear parks, trails, picnic areas, nature study areas, places to visit in the downtown area, but they have The importance of all forms of water resources to etc. Urban rivers and streams can provide valuable created an economic stimulus as well, such as the San outdoor recreation cannot be overstated. This is recreation opportunities, which are currently more Antonio River Walk. Examples of actions are many. particularly the case with lakes and reservoirs. commonly available in rural areas, such as canoeing, One, in Austin, illustrates the novel methods which Consequently, the availability of lakes and reservoirs kayaking, rafting, and fishing. The implementation of are being tried. A city ordinance enacted in 1974 is with respect to recreation in the urban areas of Texas existing concepts in developing linear parks along directed toward protecting that city's waterways by is a matter of special concern that merits full rivers and streams offers opportunities. to solve regulating development of property adjacent to or consideration by all entities involved in water recreational needs and other urban problems. For crossed by waterways. Examples of the utilization of resources development. As was indicated previously, example, a linea@ park along a river or stream flood urban waterways shows that rivers and streams still in 1970-it was estimated that a requirement existed plain could complement existing transportation possessing good water quality and free of adverse for some 5,700.surface acres of water for recreation systems (i.e., provide walking arld bicycling routes) development should be protected, while rivers and in Texas' urban areas with populations in excess of by.providing a safe and attractive means of intracity streams a I ready subjected to pollution, and 2,500. By 2000, it is projected that this requirement travel while also serving as a recreational resource incompatible developments require projects of a will increase to approximately 163,000 surface acres, offering a place for picnicking, nature study, walking, different nature if acceptable uses of these resources an increase of 334 percent above the existing and other activities. This type linear park utilization are to be regained. helps alleviate traffic congestion while providing needed recreation opportunities. Furthermore, urban Significant recent legislative action, which offers new 2S. 1495, H. R. 6524,'93rd Congress, Ist Session, (1973) waterways can provide recreational opportunities for stimulus for additional considerations of urban rivers 1018 .available surface acres. However, there are some Water. Limited public access to lakes and other water Historically, trail development in Texas has been serious obstacles to satisfying requirements for urban resources is. due to the non-availability or inadequate minimal compared to the development of other types lake' and reservoir recreation opportunities, the recreation development of, public lands adjacent to of recreational resources. Trail development has been foremost, of which is feasibility. A river or stream these resources.. This is a more significant problem in slow because, in the past, recreationists demanded with adequate drainage should be available to serve as rural areas, but it also prevents the full utilization of facilities for the more traditional urban outdoor a water source to fill the reservoir. Suitable land is urban resources in providing recreation opportunities. recreation activities such as football, baseball, also needed for reservoir construction. In many urban swimming, picnicking, etc. Because they received areas,, the high cost of land prohibits reservoir There are many alternative solutions to these specific little public direction to provide trails and related development. Land may be too flat, too permeable to problems in providing additional, water oriented facilities, individual entities responsible for providing retain water, oe unsuitable for reservoir construction recreation opportunities for urban residents. One outdoor- recreational facilities generally considered for other reasons. In many parts of.Texas, water is a alternative solution to the estimated need for urban trail activities as low priority. As a result, the few very scarce resource. Residents of Amarillo and the surface acres is to promote increased use of rural existing trails that were established were dependent Panhandle cities and towns, for exa M'ple, rely heavily lakes and reservoirs. Rural lakes and reservoirs in entirely upon the willingness of a particular entity or on rural water resources such as Lake Meredith for close proximity to urban areas can serve urban agency to do so and usually took the form of short recreation. In El Paso, residents must travel to New demands as well as rural. However, the potential of walking and nature tra .ils. Mexico, or some, other distant area, to find these water resources falls sharply as the distance recreational water. from the urban areas increases, particularly in view of Only receintly have most public recreation agencies continuing rising fuel costs. Examples of such lakes begun to give deliberate consideration to trail Also complicating the problems of providing urban and their associated urban areas are Lake Ray development. This increased consideration was lakes and reservoirs for recreational use is the fact H u b b a r d - D a I I a s ( R e g i o n 1.1 Lake primarily brought about by the growing popularity of that the provision of recreational water is nearly Houston-Houston (Region 25), and Lake trails to . recreationists .of all ages and physical types, always inextricably tied to a series of other water Austin-Austin (Region 23). In some instances, rural an increased awareness on the part of key requirements and benef its, such as irrigation, lakes can become surrounded by urban growth so decision-makers concerning recreationist's preferences municipal ,water supply, flood control, etc. that they eventually become urban lakes themselves. for trails, and the fact that trails properly located and Recreation benefits frequently contribute only a very Another means (if providing additional urban de signed can pro .vide alternate means of minor portion of the total benefits that may accrue recreational water is to assure that existing lakes and transportation in urban areas io the automobile. from a proposed reservoir project as dictated by reservoirs are of sufficient water quality for human federal and/or state legislation or policy. Generally, use. While this may. be a formidable, as well as Many reso urces .can be identified for potential trail decisions to provide additional water supplies have expensive, task, with perseverance and public development on land in the urban areas not otherwise far-reaching ramifications for the residents and support, it can be, and has been done. Finally, the considered as having potential for recreational usage. economy of the area, and perhaps of even the entire construction of additional facilities can improve For example, pipeline, utility and abandoned railroad state. These ramifications sometimes cause water existing or create new access points on lakes and rights-of-way, flood plains, and drainage systems all impoundment projects to be highly controversial. reservoirs, thus enlarging and enhancing the have potential for trail development. Numerous Consequently, decisions to provide more reservoir recreational opportunities provided by the water studies in various states have -been undertaken surface water in a given region will likely be resources. Boat ramps, for instance, provide public concerning the feasibility - and - desirability of determined by considerations other than recreation, access for boating, fishing, and skiing, as can rest establishing trails along exisiting linear corridors. unless. recreational benefits of reservoirs are given stops, campsites, picnic areas, roads, etc. higher values in the future. URBAN TRAILS The consensus of these studies is that many linear Potential recreational opportunities provided . by corridors are resources which may be utilized to existing lakes and r.eservoirs have been lost in some Increased development of trails in the urban areas of construct excellent trails. These corridors often times cases due to poor water quality. Another problem is Texas is a matter of concern with respect to providing pass through areas of scenic quality, and the grades limited, or non-existent, access to urban recreation additional urban recreation opportunities. and slopes are generally favorable for trail 109 smaller in terms of remaining areas, sites, and objects historic sit es, currently unclesignated, are often which reflect our cultural heritage. This is particularly unprotected by law and physical restraints and are important for urban ar.eas. Often, in our subject to public vandalism and degradation. preoccupation with growth and expansion, we tend Historical and archaeological resources, properly to forget how we arrived at our existing state. The preservation of archaeological and historic resources protected and respectfully used, could become some can rekindle an understanding and appreciation of the of the State's most treasured resources. This is of past and lend stability to our rapidly changing world. particular importance to the urban areas of Texas since certain historicak resources are potentially recreational resources and may provide recreation opportunities and thus help meet some of the Towards the goal of historic preservation in Texas, an. resource requirements estimated for the present and inventory a nd assessment of the known future. archaeological and historic sites has been partially completed through the efforts of the Texas Historical OUTDOOR RECREATION FOR THE Commission under the sanction of the National Park HANDICAPPED AND AGED Service. . Sites of historical importance which have been identified include a variety of resources, such as In order to provide a fully comprehensive view of the structures and sites of historic events or acts by urban outdoor recreation requirements of the state, development. Most existing rights-of-way, canals and historic persons, structures of architectural the special requiremeks for recreation opportunities levees are kept free of vegetation, which reduces importance, 'graves, cemeteries, historic trails, and by the state's handicapped and aged persons was construction expenses, and trails activities generally historic trees'. This inventory, along with thd Texas determined to be an area of concern that warranted do not interfere with primary activities for which Historical Preservation Plan, has been initiated in specific attention. The handicapped include men, most rights-of-way are established. One outstanding order that planning for preservation can safeguard women, and children who are afflicted with varying example of,trail development utilizing linear corridors Texas' historical heritage. degrees of physical, mental, or emotional disabilities. exists in Texas. This is the 2.5 mild Cargill Long Park A recent U. S. National Health Survey estimates that Trail in. Longview, which was constructed on an However, realization of the recommendations currently 22.2 million Americans are limited in their abandoned railroad and pipeline right-of-way. The presented in the Texas Historical Preservation Plan is activities because of chronic disease or im'pairment. trail is now a National RecreationTrail. hampered by several factors. One in particular is the By comparison, information provided by the Policy small amount of funding available from the federal Board on Statewide Planning for Vocational Although many municipalities have incorporated level through the National Park Service's Office of Rehabilitation Services reveals that approximately 4.1 trails.within their recreational programs, municipal Archaeological and Historical Preservation. In percent of the total population of Texas is parks represent a large resource base upon which addition, historic buildings of merit are often found, handicapped in singular or multiple disabilities * 3 additional trails may be developed. Several ironically, in areas of urban decline, often unknown Disabilities included in this figure are listed as metropolitan areas such as Austin, Houston, Fort to local decision .makers and of limited apparent value follows: the deaf, hard of hearing, blind, partially Worth, Dallas, and San Antonio have realized this to investors. Continued degradation in these areas can seeing, and the crippled or otherwise impaired in potential and have established, or plan to establish, be expected if the r@sou rcqs to improve the economic mind, body, or limb. However, this overall percentage trails within their parks. aspects of the surroundings, i.e., re-evaluation of tax is expected to be conservative since the figure bases, conversion to business uses, tourism, etc., are HISTORIC RESOURCES not thoroughly evalu .ated. There are currently no tax reliefs for historic structures in Texas and scarce 3Policy Board on Statewide Planning for Vocati 'onal Rehabili. Texas, replete with the evidence of thousands of monies for preservation and high land costs present @ation Services, Vocational Rehabilitation in Texas, (Austin, years of prehistoric and historic changes, is becoming further discouragement. Finally, archaeologicil'-and June 1968) p. 286. 110 -01-61. 't Ajeuer 8AII30113- jaLjjOuV -sexa_L ui paBe a4l jO4 swei6oid doj8A9P '09 'd "Piqlt, pue alowojd oi poliom Allenuiluots seq t43iqm I t t *ON 11!13 mues'uoisses jejn6aw-ajmejsi6,q-j ism:1-Mmsc, 'Bui6V UO 0014!LUWOD S,JOUJGAOE) 9ql 10 IUOW14SIlqelsa 9ql. JOI Pap!AOjd 041 '93uelsui joj 'swalqojd jeqlo olui deljaAo Aew a>lei dIaLl ueo sweiBoid leumlemaj POOE) 'Al!l!qesip 996t us 13V S,Uec)IJGWV JOPIO POBBlUeApeSt aqi 'uoil!ppe ul 'puilq gql 01 S031AJOS WIS ap!AOjd p Allnuaw jo Alle3isAqd aq oi uosiod e asneo qoiqm siowel aqj jo AueVy quaixg awos o jo iinsai e se.1sol ua:40 oje qoiqm aouap!juoo-jj9s dlaq ol ainjelsiBa-1 sexa-L 941 ul Sll!q ateledas ZL pue Mq!quis leuOilowe Buiu!eBaj us osle inq jo jumloeue pu Ie uoiionpojzui 941 peouan1jui jolel 01 S9111AIJOe leumlemaj us aBeBua oi Al!l!qe s,uosiad 'ssauig jo modpums ai4i wojj Aluo iou 'swei6oid 43lqM 'puilq aqi jo uoiiei!l!qeqaj 941 jol alqel!eAe aqi iopisaj Aew sadAl 4ioq ieqi us jepwis si linsai IleIGA0 aqj Isaij!pqesip jo sadAl omi asaqj uaamlaq u0iiemaj punos jo ilnsai e se suieB snopuawall SaDIAJOS uo Apnis e pololdwoo 1!3unoo 0AljejSl6a-j sa3uaiallp alqeij!iuap! aie aja4l qBnot4ilv -jejuaw !gNeW Ue3 P86ejUeAPBSIP aql leql Builou 'SGII!AIIDe sexal 9141 9961 us OsIV 'SG'OuaBe jeUOIIe3OA msALjd 'sodAl 31Seq OMI 01 BUIP-1033e padnojB leuotleemaj ui uoiiedioiijed WOJI P8AIJaP sipuaq mis oi alqei!eAB spunj isnil Aj!jn30S lel30S apew PUB la JeUOIIB3npa PUB 'jel30S 'jeoisA4d all jo a3 .ueliodwi PUB WeJ6OJd uoilel!l!qeqaH leuoiieooA 041 popuedxo '3q Aew saij!j!qesi(] 'pazIuBom aq p1noqs S13el Ulel.193 alels aqj uiql!m paBBIULIAPeSIP, aqi jo swalqojd 041 ino paluiod setpnis asat4j_ -padde3ipueLl uoilelsiBel leJOP81 996L ui 'AlielpiS puilq aL41 01 Gt4l 10 aPnj .!u&ew aqi puelsiopun 01 Japjo ul at4l al alqel!eAe swei6oid uielm jo sl!lauaq POMOIA8.1 S801A.18S 10 Apnis e pajoldwocs an6ea-I LjojeasaH sexaj_ iuawindaCl qijuaH ajelS 9t4l ql!M UO1jeUIPJOO3 Ul al-11 V96L ul -padde3lpUeq 91.11 10 uoijei!jjqeL4aj aLli 'P86elUeAPESIP 'aini!isul ele(I t4lleaH sex9l a4l PUB -uoljei!j!qeqoH us pape 'polqesip AlleoisAqd AlaiMas aqj jo wowleea OLII Se ol palialej aq osle Aew paBe pue padde31pueq leuoileoOA 101 Buluueld. aP!mglglS 'Bu'BV uO lol spunj aieiS us ooo'(38$ P9NJ9UJJe9 Lj31l4m aqj 'joijeoiaq luoseei sp4l jo=l -aiels aLli jo. 8011!WWOO S,JOUJGAOq %uiuueld uoilepielaU jejuaIN lpq suoqejjdojddV L96L 041 se 4ons 'suOlj3e JU030LI spaqu UOlje8J30J 941 JOI BUIP!Aoid UaqM U01leJaP!SU03 uo aajj!wwoZ) AioslAP'V S,IOUJGAOE) aqj se q3ns -sail!lpel UO1je9J3GJ Jo Al!j!q!SSG03B 0141 aAoJdwl ow uaMej aq p1not4s uazilp joluas aLli 'uaqt saa!jua aleis Aq poi3npuo3 saipnis iuaoaH 'uoiwaile 01 PGAIJIS GAeq PUB 'paBelueApesip aqi jo swolqoid 'Alu.miao -swelqojd 1jeaq jo .w pqije qi!m suosiad alqeiap!sUO3 sipaw paBelUeAPBSIP PUB 'PDPJBjqj aqj 10 uoij!uBoo9j poseajoui Ue UAA04S gAeq swei6oid .1. Allejuaw 'Oalqesip Ajje3lsAqd aqj jol sail!1!3el PUB 931AJOS 31lqnd OupAoid lo Al!l!q!suodsai aql ql!m paBe jol snonuojis ooi aq AeW SGII!A113B U01leaJ30A 'sea.se 'swe.sBoid lempajow jo luawqsi-lqelsa 94.L paBjeq3 sapuaft je30j pue @leis Ilejapal Alluaiino Joopino awoS 'Allepos ssGJBOjj9j ol A3UapUal 3iseq e wojl se Ilam se u0imollalap jE31sALjd NOIJLDV.LN3uunD pue jejuaw jo juiodpuels aqi wojj Ai!l!q esip jolln.s N0lIV3H33Huooaino wom:i UqjjO p96e al4_L V'UOIII!W L'L JaAO 10 uoiielndod paBe, a3ddV3iaNVH 3HI As a3AIE13C] S11:13N38 -soilipel ue alewilso SL6L jol suoil3efoid al!t4m (uoileindod pue seoie uoiieajoaj ueqjn Bui6euew pue 'Buip!Aoid jejol aL41 jo juniod lqBia) 000'006 P8PGQ0xa 896L -sexe I '6utu6isap .'Bumueld us suosiad paddeo,puuq us sexa_L us suosiad paBe 10 jaqwnu. aLR 'saowaS Us S83IAJ;DS PUB sweiBoid uoaejjj!qeLjaj IBUOlle3OA Allejuaw Jo Alle3isALId jo spaau pue 'sail!l!qe uoiiei!j!qeLja8 IBuOlle3OA JOf Buluueld aP!malelS all jo uoisuedxa 'swalqojd lepads at4i oi UDAiB aq plnoqs uoiiejap1suoo. uo pjeog A3110d gql 01 BuIPJO33e PUB UO!jejndod ino oql oz ApeaA painqpwoo OAeq SIUGAa aSal4l JIV ,suazll!o Jqt4lO se Ilam 'GJOJBJaLl-L -SUOIJBI!Liull lelougull Jo leD.IsAL4d jo uoiliod olqezis e si siq_L 'JOAO .PUB 96e jo sjeaA 99 se 'paddempueLl A 9 Aq P8lUaAajd AIIBUJJOU OlOqM IU9UJ9Aojdwj-jjas suosAad Ile sapnioui uoileindod paBe aq_L deoipueq jo jjecsisA4d aLli 10 spoau 941 1!1 IHM aleis aqi us saiiqpej pue sBuipl!nq jo mionjisuoo jol saii!unijoddo suosiad paddeopueLl jollo ueD adAl awos Aq pamedwoooe ua:4o si BuiBe 10 ssoooid nuis uoilejap!suoo olui ualm aq osle isnw 0141 le4l Buijnsse ui pe ll!m t43iqm suolle3illoads seale ueqin at4i ut paqSllqelSa Sa3lA38S PUB SW81601d as-11 le3!sAt4d s,uazil!o paBe aqi 'pOmUeApesip laaw ol spiepuels BuIppnq wnwiuiw aDjolue uoilemaj joopino oilqnd -olqel!eAe oje saii!unlioddo uOllel!wll Allejugua Jo Alls'aiskId a4l 01 UOli!PPe ul oi uoissiwwoo Butppg ajejS aqi samoqlne OM weliao j! de3ipueLl siq OW0319AO oi paAoldwa ui sainielS I!Alo P91elOuuV s,uOuJaA '68L9 al3llJV aq Am JeLlI S-9AlJp leuosiad pue soilspajoeiet4o -sawmas Imads 9AM91 IOU op oqm sean I Ieinj jo L L t 'ON WS GieuaS -sexa_L us swe16oid uotiej!jjqeqqj ILnp!AIPUI umo. siq se.q Uosiad P86elUeApeSIP 1.13ea jeUOIje3OA jo Apnjs ap!AAalels 8AISU0t4ojdwoc) 'SODIAAOS GAIjBj!j!qBLj9J jo aBelueApe alel ol 'ALI!I!qe sawo%4 ui suosiod polqesip jo Jaqwnu aqi jol juno33e e paialdwocs (8960 Allua38.l L131qm '996L S[Lj sj3pisa.i Lpiqm 'awo3ul jo @pej e woll jagns snLil IOU soop pue suoilnl!lsui PUB swei6oid GAllel!j!qe4fqj pue alqeAoldwoun Alle3iuojqo aq osle Aew uosied us paddeoipueq jo Ul S93IAJ9S -uoilel!l!qeqoH leu0lle3OA JOI Buiuueld pallolue ajo oL4m aldood ap!malels at4l 10 juawLIS11clelsa all, sem Uatinqp-luoo palclestp Alletuaw at4i jo 'palqestp Alleptskid aqVpaBe jaqwnu 0141 uo pqSeq qjqM 14014M SOIBLUIlsa slua.saidej .the emphasis away from what an individual cannot do RESULTS OF THE OUTDOOR RECREATION range, $5,000 to $10,000 per year, had a total of and place it on what he can accomplish. It was also HOUSEHOLD DEMAND SURVEY 25.6 percent who indicated they had one or more found that recreation gives the disabled a chance to disabled persons in their household. The sample of come into close contact with people, the outdoors, The outdoor recreation household demand survey households in income groups between $10,000 and and a wholesome environment. Activities such as was also designed to provide information concerning $20,000 per year had 10.5 percent who indicated bowling, swimming, sand-lot baseball and football, the influence of health and disabilities on urban they had a disabled person in their household, while hiking, horseback riding, boating, canoeing, fishing, outdoor recreation participation throughout Texas. income groups exceeding $20,000 per year range court games, square dancing, socials, picnicking, and When urban respondents were asked if any member were represented by only 1.8 percent of the parties are a few which were noted that can be made of the household was prevented from participating in respondents. Generally, higher income groups hacl@the available to mentally or physically handicapped in an outdoor recreation activities because of general health lowest incidence of disabilities while lower income urban environment through programmed recreation. most of the last year, 23.1 percent of the total urban groups had the highest incidence of disabled persons. The studies revealed that currently there are programs household populatio .n sampled (3,015 households out The high incidence of disabled persons occurring in available which provide recreational activities while of 13,064 households) answered "yes". When asked if households in the lower income groups may identify, providing a break from the difficult task involved in any member of the household had a disability that though not prove, several relationships concerning any rehabilitative process, yet there are still many kept them from engaging in outdoor recreation most these people's means to participate in outdoor disadvantaged persons who do not receive the full of the last year, 9.3 percent of the total sample recreation activities. One, people in lower income benefit of the state's recreation resources. The (1,221 households out of 13,064 households) levels who become disabled would be less likely to physical limitation of their handicap, architectural indicated a response of "yes". provide their own means to receive the proper barriers, the lack of adequate accessibility to medical attention needed to partially alleviate or recreation resources, or the time lag in adjustment of correct the disability. (recognizing today's high programs by the recreation profession may have A more detailed analysis of these two questions by medical costs), thus preventing these people from detracted from their opportunity. racial or ethnic characteristics produced the following returning the types and intensities of participation results.- Of the urban households sampled who enjoyed by those not disabled. Two, people in lower A case in point can be cited from the results of a answered "yes" to the question concerning health income levels are less likely to be aware of the types mental retardation planning study in 1966 by the limitations which restricted general participation in of medical knowledge, and less likely to receive the Child Welfare Division of the Department of Public outdoor recreation activities for most of the previous types of medical attention, that would reduce the Welfare.6 Results from a survey of recreational year, 75.5 percent of the households were Anglos, frequency of disabilities. Three, the reduced financial facilities and programs in 60 cities revealed existing 12.2 percent were Mexican-Americans, and 12.3 means of disabled persons residing in households of recreation programs for the mentally disabled met percent were Blacks. Households who indicated they lower incomes limits the abil.ity of these households only one-fifth of the current needs. When one views had at least one person in their household with a to provide the resources required for the disabled this ratio with respect to the present proportion of disability which in turn restricted the disabled person to engage in outdoor recreational pursuits. facilities available in all the metros, cities, and towns person's ability to engage in outdoor recreation Resources which are limited that may prevent in Texas, the above mentioned ratio of needs is likely activities, were 77.0 percent Anglos, 9.7 percent disabled persons from participating in outdoor to be a conservative one at best. Although much Mexican-Ameri cans, and 13.3 percent Blacks. When recreation activities cover a wide range, such as progress has been achieved within the last decade levels of income were compared, it was found that a gasoline needed to travel to a more distant park concerning rehabilitation for the disadvantaged, it is sizable portion (62.1 percent) of the households who having outdoor recreation facilities or fees to join clear that much more is needed, especially in the area indicated there was a disabled member within their some type Iof private organization which provides of recreational programs. family had a total annual income of less than $5,000. specialized facilities allowing the disabled to Of this particular income group, comparison by participate in outdoor recreation activities. Resources 6Governor's Advisory Committee on Mental Retardation ethnic background revealed that Black households may be limited by the household's increased medical Planning and the Governor's Interagency Committee on had the highest percentage of disabled persons in this costs incurred by having a member of the household Mental Retardation Planning, The Texas Plan to Combat group, while Mexican-American households were disabled. Other interrelationships of the three points Mental Retardation, (Austin, June 1966) p. 2. second, and Anglos ranked third. The next income made above may also be surmised which would 112 amplify the problems confronting a disabled person's the blind, are also needed in urban parks. programs, supplemented by federal grants for a large ability to participate in outdoor recreation. Audio-interpretive recordings can also provide blind portion of their acquisition and development visitors with historical or natural descriptions. Steps programs, with many areas reporting 90 percent or .FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS which provide access to buildings or parks could be better of their anticipated total funding from these replaced with sloped walkways designed with two principal sources. Today, modern medical treatments, prosthetic handrails in order to increase accessibility for the appliances, and self-help devices enable people with handicapped. These are just a few of the many Many of the cities and towns will rely more on physical limitations to live productive and meaningful alternatives which need to be considered in order to general appropriations and other local sources, such lives. In general, disabled people are finding more and eliminate barriers to the handicapped and make as gifts. One possible explanation for this may be a more that they can enjoy basic outdoor recreation public facilities more accessible to them. general lack of knowledge of available federal grants experiences just as the non-disabled, given the in the small municipalities, coupled with the inability opportunity. Modifications in facility design, public The disadvantaged, whether physically handicapped to obtain passage of a bond issue. This is not meant concern, and progressive. recreational programs have or aged, are pbople having' basic needs and desires for to imply that this situation exists in all cities and helped and can continue to make public parks more recreation in the out-of-doors; experiences that will towns, as many have made use of federal grant or aqcessible and useful for disadvantaged persons as enhance their lives. These opportunities, desired by bond sources of revenue. wel I as others. However, it is important to note that all, have been slow in coming to the disadvantaged, the greatest concentrations of problems of the partially due to the slowness of the recreation Municipalities utilize many different sources of disadvanta .ged now lie within the more populated profession to adjust programs and facilities toward funding as means of financing their park and urban areas. Consequently it is of special concern that meeting their neeAs and providing them recreation acquisitions, facilities development, and particular attention be given to these areas for current opportunities. Responsibility must be taken for recreation programs. Fund sources may be . grouped and future development of outdoor recreation planning, action, and support of recreational according to two categories, those derived from local facilities. programs and services for the disadvantaged and sources and those available through state and federal expanded efforts toward this end will be necessary in grants. Among the more common local sources are Adequate consideration given to new proposals order to adequately meet current and future needs. gener Ial appropriations, bonds (both general revenue concerning outdoor recreation facilities for the aged SOURCES OF MUNICIPAL PARK AND and general obligation), donations and gifts of both and the handicapped will become, increasingly money and real property, and revenues produced by important in the future. Easily accessible walkways RECREATION FINANCING collecting fees for the use of certain types of need to be provided to shorelines, fishing piers, or facilities. State and federal grants available to boat docks so that handicapped and aged persons can The most recent Acquisition and Development municipalities are too numerous to present in total in get to the water and enjoy recreation activities. Survey, a survey conducted by the Texas Parks and this chapter (See Appendix E of this volume for a Obstacles in playground or picnic areas such as Wildlife Department in 1972 providing information more detailed listing.); therefore, those discussed are ditches, curbs, lack of park benches, and inaccessible 'concerning the acquisition of land and development limited to the grants most commonly used by the restroom facilities show little thought or planning for of facilities proposed by governmental entities in municipalities. disadvantage persons. In regard to recreational needs Texas over the next five year period, revealed several of the aged, passive outdoor activities such as interesting facts on sources of funding anticipated to One rather uniquely funded program in terms of croquet, shuffleboard, sightseeing tours, bird be used by municipalities. The leading source of funding sources is the Capital Improvements Program. watching, picnicking, and others can provide financing in terms of total dollar amounts was Various combinations of the funding sources available enjoyable -pasttimes for the elderly. In addition, expected to be bonds, followed by federal grants and to municipalities are utilized to include general indoor activities such as card games, dancing, bingo, then general appropriations. Some differences do appropriations, bond programs, state grants, and table tennis, pool, and others*can be made available exist, however, in the most common source of federal grants. This is.. due to the Capital Improvement to the aged or handicapped by the development of financing expected to be utilized by the various Program's design to provide new ph .ysical facilities or central recreation 'services or community centers. city-size categories. The metropolitan areas in many improvements to existing facilities. Specific facilities Braille nature trails, which are self-guiding trails for instances will rely heavily on extensive bond or improvements to be accomplished in the 113 ........... .... ss. .......... immediate future are outlined.in guidelines provided by the municipalities' Comprehensive Development Plan. Many capital improvements involve staggering + ......- amounts of funds (CIP's of some larger mefros may request in excess of $100 million over a five year . .. ... period.), and financing these improvements on a pay-as-you-go basis is usually difficult; therefore, the aw, various funding sources are necessitated. Financing parks and recreation areas and facilities usually L2 requires only a small portion of the capital needed for a Capital Improvements Program since categories financed under the CIP cover a wide range. is FUNDING FROM LOCAL SOURCES GENERAL APPROPRIATIONS facilities which generate substantial amounts of revenue. Examples of such facility types would be The financing of parks and recreation programs or Generally, most municipalities that are involved in swimming pools, golf courses, tennis complexes, etc. projects may not involve as many sources as an entire providing park and recreation areas and facilities Capital Improvements Program, especially those annually appropriate a portion of their tax revenues Among the obstacles to passing a bond issue that sponsored individually by local municipalities. For for conducting their park and recreation functions for must be considered by the municipality are the example, the acquisition and development of a small the following fiscal year. Due consideration should be timing of the election, the location of the bond issue urban park may be best suited for financing from one given by municipal officials to the park and on the ballot, the wording of the issue, education of or two sources. Sources available may come from recreation needs of the city in relation to the needs of the voters as to what they will receive for their tax revenues@ specifically designated to finance parks and other municipal departments. A substantial portion increase, and pressure by opposing special interest recreation projects. Parks and recreation programs of the appropriations designated for parks and groups. and projects financed as either part of an entire CIP recreation are generally spent on necessary operation or individually must be fully justified to convince and maintenance programs, leaving only limited funds DONATIONS AND GIFTS de6ision-makers that tax dollars are wisely utilized on available for major acquisition and development. needed projects. Regardless of the source of funding, Improvements in the park system can be financed the burden is , placed upon those requesting the through a trust fund, which is continuously rebuilt financing for park and recreation programs and BONDS through contributions from . local citizens and projects to thoroughly research and plan. their businesses. Essential for beginning a trust fund is the proposals to insure that justifications presented Two types of bonds are utilized by municipalities for establishment of a separate board, independent of, adequately compete with justifications used for other financing major acquisitions and developments: 1) politics and free to solicit funds for capital urban projects in competition, for available funds. General ' obligation bonds, probably the most improvements. Many people do not like to donate Justifying parks and recreation programs has common type of long-term financing, can finance the money to a government organization, but will characteristically been much less than an easy.task for construction of capital improvements and the contribute cash or real property to a trust fund. most urban recreational planners. While the following acquisition of land in instances where no direct Federal income tax laws provide many incentives for briefly outlines financing available from local sources, revenue will be contributed to the municipality as a donations of this nature. A donor will usually give a it is stressed that all sources, and the amounts result of the improvements. This method of financing gift if he has money available, if there are no heirs, if available from these sources, are subject to change. helps assure that future residents within an area share there is a desire to leave the money within the This is particularly true today in view of the strains in the cost of providing facilities for their own use. 2) community, and if he is asked. He will give to a placed on many municipal budgets and taxpayers General revenue bonds, a comparative innovation in recreation system in which he has confidence, one themselves. the field of recreation financing, are used to finance that has a master plan and one that has enthusiasm. 114 REVENUE PRODUCING FACILITIES amount expended by qualified city and county 7. Have not less than $20,000 budgeted for the An important . methIod of partial financing of park and governments for the purpose of cleaning and purpose of cleaning and maintaining public recreation services is through the use of maintaining saltwater beaches on the Gulf of Mexico beaches within its jurisdiction for the state revenu .e-producing facilities. The importance of (not on saltwater bays) which are subject to the fiscal year for which state assistance is sought; charging fees must be determined by its effect on access rights of the public. participation, the attitude of participants and the 8. Have budgeted for the current state fiscal year quality and amount of service possible as a result of Among the requirements that must be met by a city an amount not less than the total funds charging fees. Not all municipal park and recreation or county in order to receive financial assistance are: expended by the city @qr county for the purpose services should be financially self-supporting, of cleaning its public beaches during the state basically only those which provide a special service or 1. It must be a home rule city of 60,000 (latest fiscal year ending August 31, 1969. serve certain select groups. U. S. Census) or a county bordering on the Gulf of Mexico; FEDERAL GRANTS STATE AND FEDERAL GRANT .S 2. Have public beaches within its boundaries; One of the most pressing problems facing urban parks 1 . Housing .and Community Development Act. and recreation personnel today is the complex task of 3. Provide for the administration of .the public This program, enacted in 1974, replaced the keeping abreast of programs and sources of aid beaches of the city or county by a beach park "Legacy of Parks" program, which in turn outside of local channels which may be utilized in board of trustees, which has adequate authority replaced three former grant programs, including their short- and long-range efforts to satisfy to administer an effective program for keeping the Open Space, Urban Beautification, and recreational heeds. Although many municipalities the public beaches within its jurisdiction clean,- Historic Preservation Programs. The primary take advantage of various federal and state programs purpose o f the Community Development that provide matching grants for various aspects of 4. Provide for the receipt by the city or county Program is the development of viable urban outdoor recreation, others do not, and many sources treasurer, or other appropriate official, of III communities, including decent housing, a of aid are not used to their potential. A more funds paid to the city or county under this suitable living environment, and expanding comprehen 'sive listing of state and federal programs program; economic opportunities, principally for persons available in Texas has been compiled in Appendix E of low and moderate incomes. Program to this volume. It is hoped that readers will review the 5. Charge no entrance fees to public beaches objectives that pertain to recreation include: listings and seek additional information on how to under the jurisdiction of the city or county; apply for the types of assistance that may be utilized ...... a more rational utilization of land to solve their particular problem. Following are 6. Provide for the establishment, maintenance and and other natural resources and the better descriptions of some of the more commonly used administration of at least one beach Ipark by the arrangement of residential, commercial, types of state and federal grants available to the city or county which meets the following industrial, recreational, and other needed municipalities for financing the acquisition and minimum requirements of size and facilities; (a) activity centers;" and , ". . . the development of park and recreation areas. Although be of sufficient size to accommodate public use restoration and preservation of properties only one state grant is listed, additional financial and enjoyment of the section of public beach of special value for historic, architectural, assistance may be made available through various that the park is intended to serve; (b) have or aesthetic reasons." programs which are listed Appendix E. adequate sanitation facilities to accommodate STATE GRANT-BEACH CLEANING AND the average heavy use period of the park; (c) The Act provided for a national $8.6 billion MAINTENANCE have adequate off beach . parking to block grant community development program accommodate the number of visitors which that will give localities greater control over how This program, administered by the Parks and W ildlife could utilize the park during the average heavy the money is to be spent, within a broad set of Department, provides for state financial assistance in use day; (d) have adequate access to such park guidelines. Programs that may qualify are land the form of reimbursements up to two-thirds of the from the nearest main arterial highway; acquisitions, public works, code enforcement, 115 slum clearance, . remodeling for the The federal government owns more than 761 federal government if it is not developed as a handicapped, relocation, disposition of million acres of land-one-third of the entire park and maintained in accordance with the acquired properties, improvements in public land mass of the United States; This acreage, terms of the deed. services and facilities, payment of the divided into more than 20,000 parcels, is non-federal share of Community Development scattered throughout the 50 states.'Studies have 3. Federal Aid Highway Act. This law, passed in Grant-in-Aid Programs, urban re-development, revealed that thousands of the most valuable of 1973, authorized two types of funding for and preparation of a comprehensive community these acres lie under-utilized. Many of the acres bikeways and pedestrian paths. development plan. are restricted or fenced off-their use and a. Pedestrian facilities and bikeways enjoyment denied to the American people who associated with Federal Aid Highway Act The Act specifically states that grant assistance own them. Recent White House and bikeways associated with Federal Aid for a community development program is Administrations feel these lands should be Highway Act projects. As long as available for the acquisition of real property treated as a precious resource belonging to all construction of these facilities is which is "appropriate" for "rehabilitation or the people and should be used to serve the considered an incidental feature to a conservation activities." These include highest possible public good. larger highway program and is contained preservation or restoration of historic sites, within the normal right-of-way, there is beautification of urban land, conservation of All real property held by the federal no limit set on the amount of funds that open spaces, natural resources, scenic iareas, and government which is deemed excess to the may be expended. the provision of recreational opportunities. needs of a particular department is reviewed by Also eligible for grant assistance is the the Generpl Services Administration. If it is acquisition, construction, reconstruction or determined . that the federal agency does not b. Pedestrian facilities and bikeways not installation of neighborhood facilities, senior require the property to carry out its functions, associated with Federal Aid Highway Act centers, historic properties, pedestrian malls the General Services Administration declares it projects. Up to $2 million in federal and and walkways, parks, playgrounds, and surplus to the needs of the federal gov .ernment. highway funds . may be spent by recreational facilities. Notices of availability are transmitted to individual states on a 70-30 percent appropriate state and local governments by the matching basis. This $2 million is a part For an applicant to qualify for the program, a General Services Administration and the Bureau of Texas federal aid and must be matched number of requirements must be met, including of Outdoor Recreation when such a parcel has 30 percent by the state. It is up to that the community set forth a three-year been determined suitable for public or individual states to make a determination community development plan, which identifies recreation uses. Recreation receives the highest as to whether or not to expend these funds on bikeways and pedestrian paths community development. needs, develops a priority in the Federal Property Management or to spend it on highway development. strategy for meeting those needs, and specifies Program. Local political subdivisions may not both short-and long-term community apply directly to the Federal Highway development objectives. Any local government may make application to Administration, but must work through the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation for surplus the Texas Highway Department. 2. Federal Surplus Property Act. Under the terms federal real property which is needed for public of Public Law 91-485, enacted by Congress in park and recreation use. Upon receiving an 4. Land and Water Conservation Fund. The Land 1970, the Secretary of the Interior is acceptable application, the Bureau may request a.nd Water Conservation Fund was authorized authorized to convey to states and their assignment of the property from the General by Public Law 88-578 of 1965. It has probably political subdivisions certain surplus federal real Services Administration. Before a transaction been the greatest single impetus to outdoor property for public park and recreation can be completed, the interested recipient must recreation of any program yet devised, and is purposes. Title to such areas may be transferred prepare a comprehensive park plan for federal still as surning an ever-increasing importance. As at a discount of up to 100 percent of their fair approval. The law provides that the conveyance originally established, the Fund was supported market value. is in perpetuity, but the property reverts to the by entrance and user fees charged at designated 116 federal recreation areas, proceeds from the sale use, and assume responsibility for continuing URBAN RECREATION PROGRAMS of surplus federal real property, and a federal operation and maintgnance. Facility tax on motorboat fuel. In 1968, Congress discrimination on the basis of race, color, or The Ipurpose of public recreation programs is to serve supplemented those funds with revenues from national origin is strictly prohibited. A detailed people of all ages throughout the year with a variety the General Fund, or Outer Continental Shelf breakdown of Land and Water Conservation* of opportunities through the use of recreation areas mineral lease receipts. These funds are Fund expenditures in Texas may be found. in and facilities, leadership abilities, and special guidance distributed to the states and local governments Appendix F. or assistance service for individuals and groups. through the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. 5. State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act. This Act, In order for a state and its political subdivisions more commonly known as "revenue sharing," Programs include the means by which a recreation to receive acquisition or development grants was passed. in 197@. It provides for the return department or other entity works to achieve its purpose. Recreation programs may be defined as all from the fund, the state must develop a of federal funds to state and local governments services and activities which satisfy the recreational comprehensive statewide outdoor recreation for their needs with only general guidelines needs and interests of the people within the plan, and update and refine this plan on a directing the use of the money. The Act community. Objectives of programs can be: continuing basis. In addition to serving as a appropriates. from the general fund of the guide for federal grant assistance, the plan United States Treasury a total of $30.2 billion 1 . Character development serves as a guide for acquiring, developing and over five calendar years beginning in 1972. protecting significant outdoor recreation These funds are to be allocated on the basis of 2. Community stability resources within the state, including federal, two-thirds to local governments and one-third state, local and private recreation resources; it to state governments. State governments may 3. Emotional and physical health assures a continuing and focused opportunity use the funds as they wish. Local governments 4. Development of skills for local units of government and private may use the funds for "priority expenditures," citizens to take part in the state's outdoor including recreation, environmental protection, 5. Social living recreation and environmental quality planning public safety, public transportation, health, 6. Widening interests programs; and it provides a practical tool for social services for the poor or aged, libraries, coordinating all outdoor recreation and f i nancial administration, and capital There was a time when a park and recreation program environmental conservation programs. expenditures authorized by law. The funds may meant a Sunday concern, sand-lot baseball or a game not be used to match other federal grant at the horseshoe pit. Programs of these types still Assistance is provided for acquisition and programs. exist, but today's park and recreation leaders are development projects in highly populated urban required to foresee and meet the more sophisticated areas as well as in rural areas. Eligible Although a number of grant funds are available to the and changing recreation requirements of urban development projects may vary in type from municipalities, it is apparent that if their current and populations. Such requirements vary as do the bicycle paths to hiking trails, from roadside anticipated resource requirements are to be met, interests of the people.- Consequently, each urban picnic stops to swimming pool complexes, and levels of existing funds available should be increased area is faced with common, yet uniquely individual from inner city mini-parks to marinas. and new sources of funding must be provided. Some problems. possibilities include an increase in the total amount of Grants are made on a 50-50 matching basis with National Level Land and Water Conservation Funds, Many recreation programs are felt to lag behind the the federal share based on allowable project for which there are currently proposals in Congress, needs of the urban areas. No "standards" exist with cost. To qualify for fund assistance, each and creation of a state fund, supplementing the Land which to measure programs. Standards are difficult to acquisition or development project must be in and Water Conservation Fund. Maximum utilization establish due to changing social and economic accord with the state plan. The local of monies currently available for programs, patterns of American life, a lack of park and government agency must agree to permanently equipment, and maintenance can also provide some recreation areas and facilities, a lack of adequate dedicate projects to public outdoor recreation relief to the financial problems. financial support to assist in expanding programs, and 117 a lack of sufficient leadership to offer the full scope Problems of trained leadership can often be solved by school or college students may be hired as playground' of program services. These factors hinder exact or cooperating with a nearby college or university leaders, instructors, lifeguards, umpires, maintenance precise measurements with which to judge program through in-service and internship training programs personnel, etc. needs. However, municipal park and recreation for municipal staff and students in the recreation departments are charged with the responsibility Of fields. Annual spring leadership institutes can be held Following are examples of how two cities helped meeting the needs and desires of all citizens, varying to train interested high school students in the field of solve their leadership problems: from objectives directing that every child should have recreation. Volunteers can be recruited among a chance to play, to those directing that every vacationing students, Job Corps participants, through 1. In Placentia, California, a Volunteen Program, resident, 'both young and old, should have an school work-study programs and civic organizations. designed for young people between 13 and 18 opportunity to make the best of his leisure time, etc. years of age, provided leadership training for Therefore, recreation leaders must offer programs for In some small urban area adequate leadership may be those interested in careers in physical education the senior citizen, all ethnic groups, preschool difficult to find. One solution might be the hiring of or recreation. Upon successful completion of children, teenagers, families as a group, . aInd the -the school athletic director or his assistant to minimum course standards, each Volunteen handicapped. They must work with governmental coordinate the summer recreation program. High received a $100 scholarship and a letter of agencies on all levels-municipal, state, and recommendation. A large percentaile of the ....... . Volunteens were subsequently selected for federal-private foundations, corporations, and M, community organizations. permanent staff positions in the recreation department. M .. ..... F . .......... -2" Park and recreation programs are more important today than ever before. In our growing congestion :2. Each year teenagers in Boulder, Colorado, play @K- and urban sprawl, people need to have constructive a vital part in the park and recreation program activities and a variety of recreational pursuits a ..... through a trio of youth leadership ........... release from everyday tensions and pressures, an organizations: Rangers, PALs (Playground opportunity to join together in classes, teams, or Assistant Leaders) and WSAs (Water Safety 9). The Rangers, a group of 100 boys ages cultural exchanges. To this end, recreation programs ....... .... can provide immeasurable assistance in providing 14-17, were employed to perform various work urban recreation opportunities. The following assignments in the city and mountain parks including building and maintaining trails, narratives discuss some of the key issues that have been found nationally to directly offset urban cutting wood, constructing bridges, installing programs. water systems and maintaining other municipal facilities. Each boy worked a four-hour day THE PROBLEM OF LEADERSHIP under the supervision of Assistant Senior Rangers and Senior Rangers. Leadership is most important to any successful program. In addition to the necessary expertise, the @&N& The Water Safety Aides are young boys and municipal recreation staff must have the ability to girls, who assist the Water Safety Instructors in reach out to the community; they must understand teaching swimming lessons to elementary the needs and problems of the handicapped, the poor, 210 school-aged children under the Learn-to-Swim the elderly; and they must be flexible in providing @Z: Program at the municipal pools. The Playground Assistant Leaders are young boys services. Leaders must be able to communicate with and coordinate the efforts of volunteers. The and girls who assist the Playground Leaders in development of good leadership usually depends on all phases of conducting playground activities an agency's staff recruitment and training program. for elementary school children. 118 The PAL and WSA positions are entirely C. Music Camp the day, week or year. The following discussion is volunteer while the Rangers receive a small d. Nature Camp designed to probe some of the possible alternatives financial compensation. Each year the city's e. Sports Camp for increasing facility utilization by the addition of teenagers compete for inclusion in these activities, programs, and events during non-peak use programs. They like the opportunity of 3. Fine and Performing Arts periods. assuming leadership responsibility in a field a. Dance which they enjoy, gaining experience which b. Drama Most normal utilization of a playfield is for organized quali fies them for consideration as paid leaders. C. Music sports or sand-lot and free play. Due to the Many enjoyable fringe benefits are made d. Rhythms seasonality of sports such as baseball and football, the available to the youth, such as swim passes, playfield, in many instances, remains idle for long swimming parties, dances and other socials, a 4. Games and Sports periods of time. During these periods, programs such recognition banquet, a certificate for a. Individual Sports as arts and crafts exhibits, carnivals, pet shows, community service, all in addition to preference b. Informal Games and Sports special holiday events, parades, archery, kite flying, for future supervisory summer positions and for C. Low Organized Games model airplane flying, golf instruction, bicycle permanent employment. d. Team Sports safety/races, astronomy, outdoor classes, traveling zoo, etc. could be initiated by the recreation TYPES OF PROGRAMS 5. Nature Activities department, providing better utilization of existing Often, a lack of pro.grams on the part of local a. Nature Study areas more of the year. government can be traced to a lack of information b. Outdoor Crafts regarding programs that have been successful and C. Trips and Outings The play court or slab can also serve many purposes. worthwhile in other areas. In many cases programs of Dance instruction, calisthenics, puppet shows, one kind work as well in one area as another. Six 6. Social Events wrestling, shuffleboard, boxing, gymnastics, arts and a. Carnivals crafts classes, and many more activities or events that principal groupings of various types of recreation programs that have been proven to be successful in b. Clubs could utilize an outdoor concrete surface would help many urban areas are listed below. Each of these C. Dances to fulfill increasing recreation demands through the groups is then divided into several of the possible or d. Exhibits expanded use of existing facilities. most prominent sub-types. This list is not intended to e. Holiday Events be all inclusive since an unlimited variety of possible f. Movies The normal swimming season in most portions of programs exist within each type or sub-type. The g. Parties Texas is three months, extending several months existence of these programs depends on the interests longer in some portions of the State. Many and demands of the residents, along with the Many urban areas of Texas have program activities of opportunities exist for extended use of these availability of qualif .ied leadership. this type, but many do not. Increasingly, the need for expensive pool facilities for activities other than, programs will be realized and become more valuable swimming. Among the possibilities are bait and fly 1. Arts and Crafts and essential to the provision of urban recreation casting classes, fishing instruction/derby, scuba and a. Ceramics and Pottery opportunities. skin diving instruction, boat safety, canoeing and b. Painting and Drawing kayak instructions, water polo, combined swimming C. Papercraft UTILIZING EXISTING FACILITIES and pool-side parties, etc. d. Sculpting e. Stitchery In these days of rising costs for acquisition and In like manner other facilities such as the playground, development, park and recreation administrators picnic area, trails, golf course, and 2. Camps must attempt to fully utilize existing facilities by community/recreation center could be utilized to a a. Art Camp expanding their recreation program offerings. Many greater extent through careful planning and b. Day Camp facilities are under-utilized during certain portions of scheduling with the range of activities, programs and 119 events limited only by the imagination of the stating how the facilities and programs will be jointly YOUTH CONSERVATION CORPS recreation staff. Often, the added use of facilities can operated between the school district(s) and parks be provided at very low costs, with a much better department. The Youth Conservation Corps is a program resulting balanced program offering significantly improved from a joint agreement between the Secretaries of provisions or urban recreation opportunities. Problems of cost and administration have been solved Agriculture and the Interior which receives via agreements that allow the schools to make appropriated annual monies from a permanent fund JOINT SCHOOL-PARK USAGE provisions for the use of gymnasiums, swimming authorized by Congress.. The program is designed to pools, auditoriums, classrooms and athletic facilities, allow teenagers from ages 15 through 18 to have the In recent years many municipalities have entered into while the parks and recreation department assumes opportunity for summer employment, and is open to joint agreements with schools whereby school responsibility for providing instructors, upkeep of the persons of all socio-economic backgrounds. Last year, facilities can . be provided and used for park and facilities while in use, and other arrangements. the nationwide allocation for this program amounted recreation purposes. However, local officials Auditoriums, libraries, classrooms, special study to 10 million dollars, and can provide funds to local responsible for the development of school facilities rooms such as shops, music and art rooms, cafeterias points on a 50-50 matching basis. Generally, must recognize that the schools need not just serve an and home economics facilities present special information regarding this program can be obtained educational function, but can also provide civic, problems and are made available in fewer instances, from the Texas Department of Community Affairs, social, recreational and cultural centers for the but if extended use does not interfere with school Office of Youth Opportunity. community. Likewise, parks and recreation instruction and the school's extracurricular program, departments must recognize that the schools have cooperation can be excellent. JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINaUENCY purposes other than recreation. If the goals are to PREVENTION ACT avoid duplication of facilities, cooperative Cooperative planning efforts between the school and arrangements ran and have been initiated which community officials in acquiring sites and in This law authorizes three-year matching grants to provide more efficient and effective service for the designing schools for -combined use has proven highly state and local governments for the purpose of public tax dollar. desirable. New school buildings can be planned so that the portion * of the building that is to be used by developing innovative programs for the prevention It is commonly recognized that cooperation between the community can be separated from the remainder and treatment of juvenile delinquency. Since use of officials of the parks and recreation department and of the structure, thereby offering better advantages the program could r 'esult in substantial funding of the school district in the planning, acquisition and for joint school -recreational arrangements. park and recreation programs (the act specifically development of school-park sites within the cites recreation as a means of preventing juvenile community results in economies in expenditures, FEDERAL PROGRAMS delinquency), this program could prove highly reduces maintenance time and cost and increases the beneficial for urban areas in Texas. However, in order effectiveness of use. Portions of the school grounds There are a number of federal programs currently in for states to receive grants, they must- submit and buildings can serve many community needs and existence which deal with outdoor recreation. comprehensive juvenile justice plans, which are indoor recreation requirements, while portions of the However, these programs sometimes change rapidly, prepared by the State Planning Agencies of the Law park areas can provide facilities for school and from year to year certain programs may be Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) of recreational and educational programs, as well as modified, eliminated, or new ones added. In addition, the Justice Department. Funding of recreation other community needs. appropriations from the Congress and the President programs will then depend on the priorities of the may not always be forthcoming. Notwithstanding planning agencies. The Texas Criminal Justice Council One initial step toward the joint utilization of these problems, a brief description of a few of tHe can provide more information regarding the program. school-park facilities and programs which have proven important federal programs, providing assistance effective in the State is the establishment of a other than capital improvements as they exist at the SUMMER YOUTH PROGRAM committee (including members of the school board, present time, is presented below. For a more the parks and recreation board and other municipal complete list of federal and state programs and Provision for the Summer* Youth Program is part of officials, which draws up contracts or agreements grants, see Appendix E. legislation establishing the Comprehensive 120 Employment and Training Act of 1973 (CETA). The of programs should include planning which provides Creative use of leisure time is a major challenge, program is. similar to, and succeeds, the popular recreation opportunities which will: especially with the trends toward shorter work weeks, Summer Recreation Support Program (RSP), which 1 be accessible to all age groups, all economic and earlier retirement and year-round schools. 'Program no longer exists. The purpose of the Summer Youth racial groups, all creeds and both sexes. emphasis and funds need to be expanded and adapted Program under the auspices of the Federal to these trends. Since recreation is a responsibility of .Department of Labor, is to provide summer 2. be related to the varying physical, mental, all entities, both public and private, government is employment and work training experience for rural social and emotional characteristics of obligated to assist in meeting these needs. F ' ulfilling and urban -disadvantaged youtli, ages 16-22. The individuals. that responsibility will mean providing adequate CETA legislation specifically states that the program recreation opportunities for all Texans, particularly must include jobs in recreation and related programs- 3. provide an opportunity for participation at those who lack the mobility and funds to use existing The program is administered by prime sponsors, various levels of proficiency. resources. which are local governmental units. Further information. can be gained from the Texas 4. involve consideration of diversified interests Federal recreation lands and facilities are not always Department of Community Affairs, Manpower and include a wide variety of activities from suited to everyone's needs, particularly the urban Services Division. athletic to cultural. poor or disadvantaged, and the elderly who cannot always take advantage of recreation opportunities at RECREATION AND TRANSPORTATION 5. enlist community resources that can provide national parks, forests and reservoirs outside the PROGRAM variety and enrichment to the program. urban areas. Much of the need for recreation opportunities for these groups could be met through The Recreation and Transportation Program, under 6. be continuously evaluated and measured. year-round recreation programs that make maximum the direction of the Federal Department of Labor, is utilization of existing lands and facilities. Peak designed to provide more recreation opportunities for Survival of a park and recreation program in a periods exist when various facilities are utilized to disadvantaged youth. It is administered similarly to municipality has been demonstrated to be sucbessful capacity. However, for several hours of the day, the Summer Youth Program, i.e., . with prime only through the cooperation of many individuals several days of the week, or even months of the year, sponsors, etc. Under the program money may be and organizations, through a well-informed public, many facilities are very lightly used or even lie idle. spent for equipment and transportation necessary for and a willingness to try a program. Key factors Additional recreational opportunities for a wide recreation, but not for capital improvements, such as include measures which insure that people be made variety of activities can be provided by more fully swimming pools or playground equipment. The aware of the programs offered. This may be utilizing existing facilities. transportation portion of the program is to include accomplished by distributing leaflets or brochures in such things as transporting disadvantaged children to schools, banks and stores; by providing Many local governments are handicapped by playgrounds, ball games, etc. Further information can announcements in newspapers and over local radio insufficient funds to provide the recreational be obtained from the Texas Department of and TV stations. programs. Certain federal programs, such as the Community Affairs, Manpower Services Division. Youth Conservation Corps, the Juvenile Justice and Program suggestions should always be encouraged. If Delinquency Prevention Program, etc. may be of residents want a new class of instruction, or a new some help. However, the effectiveness of many such SUMMARY activity that is not offered within the program, the programs are only available if applied for, and may municipal government should be aware of this. Only not receive funds to carry out their purpose unless A set of statewide standards for recreation programs through citizen involvement will the programs be able local governments make use of their benefits. As cannot be established due to the wide variety of to flex with the needs and desires of the community. more recreation programs of the type which can possible programs and the varying demands of a given Programs should be evaluated at the close of each provide financial assistance are designed and community. However, certain general criteria, if session, attendance and participation f igu res implemented, a great deal of emphasis must remain followed, will assist the community in developing analyzed, and where possible, public opinion surveys on good leadership and innovation in providing worthwhile programs. Consideration for the provision made periodically. recreation programs. 121 122 0 CM I : 0 6 a 0 CL a- 4 - Appendix A Appendix A: Glossary Access; area, recreation area, and/or park-the opportunity or means of approaching a given geographic area, a Introduction recreation area, and/or park or other recreation destination via existing transportation routes. In a The terms in this glossary relate most closely to the analysis sense refers to the physical and legal availability, the of outdoor recreation in the urban areas of Texas. Glossaries reputation, and/or the quality of the routes and the in other volumes of the Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan may recreation area or park. In another sense refers to have more or fewer words described, as applicable. available modes of transportation providing conveyance to the recreation destination. In developing the Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan (TORP), unconventional or specialized meanings have sometimes been Access, facility-refers to route availability, reputation (i.e.; assigned to familiar words. This was done in order to make do people know route exists; are there signs; etc.), and the analysis of large amounts of data more readable and quality from park entrance to recreational facility useful to the general public. For this reason, the following destination (i.e., can people get to the facility from glossary has been prepared so that the public, as well as other the park entrance; do they have to walk long planners, . might acquaint themselves with the meanings, distances; is there parking nearby; etc.) translations, or uses of these terms in the TORP. Access, fishing-Fishing access refers to physical and legal To facilitate more efficient communication and common availability of fishing facilities, including the understanding, several attempts have been made to recreationists' opportunity to reach fishing water-Le., standardize terms and concepts used in recreation research is there a boat ramp available, can the recreationist get and planning. The definitions of terms offered here do not to the witers edge, etc. necessarily imply that other definitions are unacceptable. However, these definitions are of particular significance as Access, private@(Also, see: Access, public) No legal public they are found in the official document that is to guide access. Area is open to owner(s) of the area, and only recreation development in the State of Texas. If the words those other persons that the owner(s) allow(s) to use prove useful enough, their use should become standardized the property. In other words, use by the general public throughout the State. is controlled by the property owner. Any questions or comments regarding the clarity or accuracy Access, public-the opportunity or means for the general of these terms and their uses should be sent to: public to approach and use a recreation destination. Comprehensive Planning Branch, Texas Parks and Wildlife (As considered in the TORP, public access means, in Department, John H. Reagan Building, Austin, Texas, 78701. effect, a park, or recreation a@ea, is open to the public 124 either for a fee or for free.) The recreation Activity, secondary -(Also, see: Activity Package) A a given region, these were expressed in the "aggregate" dest i nation -either park or recreation area-may be secondary activity is a recreational activity which as wel I. publicly or privately administered and/or owned, but results from a variety of conditions. There must be a the general public must be allowed to use the resource. .1 primary" activity, then secondary activities evolve Amphitheatre Seats-refers to outdoor theatre seating The facilities available at a given park or recreation from preplanning, from pursuit by members of the capacities only. Seating capacity was estimated if area are called the facilities mix. Correspondingly, but household or group who are not as enthusiastic for the individual seats were. not designated (ie,, if there were not necessarily, the facilities mix determines the primary activity as others, from a selection from only benches). activities package for a given park. alternative activities, from recreationists tiring of the primary activity, from a lack of opportunity for the Analytical Regions (Same as the 37 Texas Outdoor Accessibility-refers to the ease with which recreationists primary activity, or from overcrowding of the primary Recreation Analytical Planning Regions for TORP) may use recreation resources. Among the factors facility. Territorial delineations among the political which may influence accessibility are land ownership subdivisions (i.e., groups of counties) within the State transportation facilities, the proximity of recreation Activity DaV-(Participation Day)-a unit of measurement based on a combination of factors which allows state resources to urban centers, user fees, and signs and used to describe participation in recreational activities. recreation planners to apply recreational demand and information which identify the recreation resources One day of participation was recorded in the TORP supply data to recreation problems at the regional for the recreationist. surveys it any part of a day was devoted to a selected level. Counties were aggregated for regional analysis recreational activity. If the same members from the based primarily on the initially established Governor's Accessible Shoreline-that water frontage, e.g., either on the same household or group participated in the same Planning Regions. Certain of those regions were Gulf, on a bay, a lake, river, stream, reservoir, etc., activity twice in the same day at two different parks subdivided to provide the capability to analyze data at which presents recreational opportunities for the or recreation areas, it would be recorded as two days a more local level. public via existing modes and routes of transportation. for each participating member. Participation by the same household or group in the same activity several Analytical Subsections-portions of an urban area delineated Acquisition-receiving control of a land and/or water times during the same day at the same one location by local urban or recreation planners in the Texas resource by a variety of means for purposes of altering would be recorded as one day for each member. Outdoor Recreation Urban Planners Survey. the present use of the resource to recreational. Means Delineations were based on the combined, of acquiring vary from outright purchase (fee simple) Activity Package-activity "packages" are those sets of predominant income and ethnic background uses recreational activities which were generally shown to of title or deed to receiving as a gift. Recreational characteristics of the urban areas of the State. For may vary from strict preservation-no development; to be closely related. Recreationists have, as a general example, middle-income Anglo subsection. high-intensity uses-completely developed areas for rule, different preferences and capacities to pursue the Breakdowns of the income levels were based on total many activities. activities of their choice. Most parks provide facilities annual (average) household income as follows: for two or more activities. One activity is usually the Low-up to $5,000; Middle-$5,000 to $15,000; Action Programs-significant outdoor recreation related primary activity, or the reason for going; and, an High-greater than $15,000. The three ethnic actions which the State proposes to initiate or activity which might also be pursued within the same backgrounds which characterize most Texas continue during the period of plan use. park is called a secondary activity. For example, the munici pal iti es-Angl o , Black, and primary activity might be picnicking, while on the Mexican-American-were- selected as the other Active Recreation-See: Recreation, active outing recreationists might also pursue such secondary delineation criteria. activities as swimming, baseball, horseback riding, Activities, recreationall-a wide array of individual pursuits nature study, boating, etc. Analytical Techniques-(Also, see volume of TORP titled which tend to refresh or relax, entertain or amuse, and Aggregate Analysis-The process of combining an analysis of Techniques of Analysis) The various scientific or invigorate or recharge the mind and body, and which supply, participation, and/or resource requirements empirical and recreation planning methodologies used tend to release the tensions or frustrations created by for particular geographic delineations, i.e., analysis of to synthesize and analyze pertinent data from the day-to-day interactions. an entire metropolitan area including contiguous surveys conducted to support state-wide recreation municipalities, a group of cities excluding those planning in Texas. Activities, saltwater associated -recreational activities. which contiguous to metro areas, or a group of towns occur in or near saltwater areas to include Gulf and excluding those contiguous to a metro in each of the Archeological Site/Area-those archeological, historical, and bay areas along the Texas Gulf Coast. 37. analytical regions. In the volume of the TORP cultural resources present in areas, districts, sites, titled Outdoor Recreation in the Urban Areas of buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity Activities, spectator-applies only to observance of organized Texas-when analyzing a metropolitan area-aggregate of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, activities. analysis implies that the data used to determine feeling, and association, and are identified as being resource requirements related not only to the metro important in prehistory and/or history. Activity, primary-l[Also, see: Activity Package) This activity core, but to all immediately adjacent, contiguous, and provided the major reason for going to a park, the surrounded smaller municipalities. When analyzing the Archery-Ml6a, see: Sport Shooting) A recreational activity major reason for stopping while on a trip, and/or the .1 cities" within a given analytical region the data were involving the use of bow and arrow equipment for major, impetus for participation. The "primary" combined, for all cities in that region such that supply, competitive or non-competitive, non-school and activity might vary from recreationist to recreationist, participation, and resource requirements for the region non -professional target shooting as well as for other while often the primary is the same for all members of were expressed as if there was only one city in that unspecified uses. Participation normally occurred at a group. given region. Likewise, when analyzing the "towns" of either a practice range or empty field. Hunting with a 125 bow was counted in the TORP as hunting more expedient use of resources. This type of course Single Unit Campsites, participation. would often be found in parks and recreation areas. Tent Sites-normally consists of an area which has been leveled and includes one or more facilities; such Archery Targets-See: Sport Shooting Bicycling-A recreational activity which involves riding a as table, grill, trash can, and/or water. The site is two-wheel unmotorized vehicle for Pleasure. The normally used by campers using tents or other similar activity could include use of designated trails or paths. portable materials for shelter. Available Surface Acres of Bay-approximate total surface Does not include going to and from school or to and Trailer, Mobile Camper, and Pickup Camper acres of bays located in or near counties in the coastal from work unless the destination was incidental to the Site-normally a designated site having a similar region which are available for the water related reason for using the bicycle. activities of boating, fishing, or water skiing. complement of amenities as tent sites used by persons Boat Fishing-A recreational activity which involves fishing with travel trailers (includes tent foldout trailers) motorized or self -powered fixed construction camping Barge, fishing-a floating structure usually attached to the while using a boat to gain access to fishing waters vehicles, and pickup campers, or any site having a shore and usually providing access to more desirable which may not be available from shore. fishing water than is available from the shore. sewer connection. Boat Ramp-An area for launching and retrieving boats; Screened Shelter-this type campsite is a permanent or Baseball-a recreational activity generally involving generally, a sloping road-like structure constructed of semi-permanent structure consisting or a roof and two competition between two teams in a wide variety of asphalt, concrete, gravel, or dirt leading down into the or more screened walls, the remainder of which is fully types of baseball activity involving for example, from water. enclosed (with fewer than two screens, the structure sandlot to little league participation (usually requiring would be a cabin and was not included); the height of a field, bats, bal'Is, gloves, etc.); but, organized school, Boat Ramp, Iane-a subdivision of a boat ramp; one lane the screens may vary, however. Most of these shelters semi-professional, or professional games were not providing access for one boat at a time. A ramp will are insect resistant and provide some degree of privacy included in the TORP. Participation could have taken most often have one, two, three, or four lanes. If the for a single family or single group of campers. place in the street, at a school baseball diamond after ramp is not physically partitioned by curbs or other school, at park facilities, or at some other resource barriers, number of lanes was determined by Group Campsites: with or without sport facilities. estimating number of boats which could be launched This type would appear as a cluster of single unit or retrieved safely, side-by-side, at one time on the campsites in one location. They can be used for tent Baseball/Softball Fields-fields with facilities for baseball same ramp. or trailer camping. and/or softball play. Boating-A recreational activity involving riding around in a Group Screened Shelters-these are also permanent or Basketball-A recreational activity which normally involves boat as an objective in itself. Fishing from a boat, semi-permanent structures designed to accommodate two opposing teams of five members each which pass, pull.ing a skier, or using a boat for transportation two or more families or groups of campers. The throw, or bounce (i.e., dribble) a ball toward the would not be accepted as boating participation unless definition of screened shelters applies otherwise. opponents goal at indoor or outdoor facilities, i.e., the respondents specifically stated that they were gymnasium, vacant lot, standard court, etc. City parks riding around in the boat for recreational purposes. Capacity-The environmenta 1, physical, biological, and school gyms or playgrounds were prime areas for Types of boats included canoes, kayaks, houseboats psychological, social, and cultural limitations of a participation. Any number could play and there were various motorboats, paddleboats, rowboats, sailboats: given resource or set of resources. (For example, some no restrictions on rules. Indoor participation was yachts, etc. types of limitations are size, space, interfacility eliminated from the projections of recreation demand. distances, perceptions'of crowding, carrying ability of Botanical Gardens-areas devoted to specific collections or the soils, flora, and fauna, etc.) The carrying ability of Basketball Courts-an area designed, constructed, and/or used arrangements of endangered, indigenous, ornamental, a given resource. For purposes of the TORP, most for recreational basketball participation. Full-court or otherwise extraordinary plant materials used for references to capacity relate to seating capacity or the basketball courts were enumerated for recreation scientific study, exhibition, interpretation, education, maximum number of persons a theatre or rodeo arena resource inventory purposes of the TORP. landscape enhancement, etc. can seat; however, in another context the word has been used to describe the limiting point for resource Bicycle Route-A course designated on existing streets, Camping-A recreational activity involving any overnight stay use beyond which degradation of the resource begins roadways, and/or highways which has been specifically on the premises of a public or private recreation and from which the resource cannot recover naturally. allocated for bicycle traffic or which has special traffic enterprise regardless of type of camping shelter used. If use levels are maintained above capacity eventual control signs which mark the route indicating to For example, a recreationist who spent the night in his destruction of the resource occurs. others that bicyclers may be in traffic ahead. This type car, in a tent, in a recreational vehicle, etc., at a of course would most often be found in an urban area, designated campsite would be considered a camper. Children's Play-primarily unorganized play at a field, park, but not within a park. On the other hand, those staying at motels were not playground, or unclesignated area not at a private considered campers. residence lawn or yard. Organized play might occur at Bicycle Trail-A course which has been specifically designed a club or neighborhood outing with supervised games and constructed primarily for recreational bicycling. Campsites-refers to any space designated and used as a for children. Adults, such as parents, watching the The course may be designed on an existing roadway, camping area excepting sites used primarily for children were not recorded unless actualbi but generally the trails are off-road except for short picnicking. There are many types of camping sites, the participating. Types of play included swinging, sliding, stretches for crossing traffic, in rough terrain, or for following are the most common in Texas: riding merry-go-rounds, arts, crafts, free play, etc. 126 Cities-(Also, see: Urban Area; Metro Area; and, Towns) Any for all Texans, our out-of-state and our out-of-country Demand Models, recreation- mathematical formulae used in urban area with 6 population of 10,000 to 49,999 visitors. explaining or projecting demand for selected persons and which is not a part of or contiguous to a recreational activities. Detailed discussions of the metropolitan area. Coordination- (Also, see: Statewide Recreation Information several models utilized in the TORP are presented in System, Communication, and Cooperation) Describes the volume Techniques of Analysis along with City Park-See: Urban Park an integral function of the statewide recreation discussions of the assumption and limitations on planning process. By coordinating information, which they .are based. Communication- (Also, see: Statewide Recreation actions, plans, laws, and the desires of the public; Information System; Cooperation; and Coordination) Texans from all levels of government, the private Designated-[ ndicates the acceptable recreational uses of a For purposes o If the TORP, this word describes a vital sector, and. individual citizens will be aware of the given resource by signs or markings describing component necessary in the implementation of the status, actions, and needs ior requirements) for direction, area, and purpose. However, physical statewide recreation planning process. Communicating providing adequate recreational opportunities for barriers such as cables, buoys, ropes, fences, etc., are timely information among the. entities providing Texas' recreationists, thus eliminating costly often used. recreational opportunities, technical, and/or financial duplications of efforts. support; among other decision-makers and planners; and among the general public regarding recreation Councils of Govern ments- Refers to those organizations Designated Freshwater Swimming Area-Square yards of problems, solutions, and actions, provides more established under Article 1011m, V.A.C.S., as freshwater specifically marked for swimming by signs, efficient, expedient, and long lasting solutions to the Regional Planning Commissions. Regional councils are roping, fencing, buoys, or any other physical features identified recreation related problems. voluntary associations of local governments composed that may be used to delineate the swimming area. of at least two-thirds voting majority of local elected Swimming pools are not included. Community Park-(Also, see: Urban Park) *An urban park officials. These organizations are primarily engaged in with less than 20 acres of developed land and regional planning and the . promotion of Designated Saltwater Swimming Area-Square yards of containing facilities for two or more of the following i ntergoveen mental cooperation among member local saltwater specifically 'marked off by buoys, signs, activities: games and sports, picnicking, playground, or governments. In Texas, regional councils are referred roping, groins, jetties, etc., to establish a restricted swimming. See Games and Sports. to variously as "regional councils," "planning swimming area. Includes only saltwater swimming councils ... .. councils of governments or COGs," areas located on a bay or on the Gulf. Usually these Community Recreation Center-A building or structure "development councils," and "associations of areas are measured in terms of square yards. providing indoor recreation facilities for all age groups., governments." Designated Swimming Area-Square yards of water Comprehensive Planning-See: Planning, Comprehensive Cultural Site/Area-See: Archeological Site/Area specifically marked off for control by signs, roping, Conservation -The wise use of resources. In this plan the Data-(Also, see: Information) The sets of quantitative and etc., to establish a restricted swimming area. major focus is on conservation of recreation resources qualitative information required to provide support by achieving sound , environmentally sensitive, for well-informed and statistically significant analysis Developed Land-(With Recreation -R elated Facilities) Land citizen-formulated recreation goals via actions of the recreational supply, demand, trends, patterns, areas, measured in. acres, in parks where facilities are implemented through the comprehensive recreation and other recreation related factors in Texas. specifically developed for recreational activities. This planning process. does not -include areas adjacent to nature or other Date Base-(Also, see: Data) The foundation of information trails in a natural setting unless developed for various Contiguous Area-Those incorporated cities and towns which on which the Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan is activities. This does not include open areas unless they for purposes of analysis in the TORP were considered establish. are specifically designed to provide free play, access to integral areas immediately adjacent to, surrounded by, other areas, or activity of the outdoor sports and or otherwise connected to the metropolitan core area. Demand-A schedule of the quantities of a particular good or games variety. (Excludes water acreage.) (For example, Irving was considered part of the Dallas service that would be purchased in a specified period metro area.) of time at all alternative prices, holding all other Development-The modification of land resources by the factors (such as income, population, consumers tastes, influences of man. Residential, commercial, industrial, Contiguous to Bay or Gulf-On, adjacent, or near (accessible) and preferences, etc.) constant. More detailed agricultural, recreational, or other types of structural the Texas Gulf Coast or bay water shorelines. discussions of recreation demand can be found in the activities influence, or change, the natural landscape to volume Techniques of Analysis. satisfy human needs or wants. Cooperation- (Also, see: Statewide Recreation Information .System, Communication, and Coordination) Describes Demand, Outdoor Recreation- (Also, see: Demand) A District Park-(Also, see: Urban Park) An urban park with 20 a necessary ingredient for efficient and effective schedule of the quantities of outdoor resources and/or acres or more of developed land containing facilities implementation of the statewide recreation plan. By facilities that would be utilized fin terms of for two or more of the following activities: games and acting in a cooperative manner, recreation planners, participation days, occasions, visits, trips, etc.) over sports, picnicking, playground (children's play), or decision makers, lawmakers, and citizens can some period of time (i.e., an hour, a day, a year) at all swimming. participate in the planning process and thereby alternative costs of participation, holding all other provide solutions to the recreation problems facing factors (such as income, population, consumers' tastes Driving for Pleasure-(Also, see: Sightseeing) A recreational Texas in providing adequate recreational opportunities and preferences, etc.) constant. activity consisting of driving or riding with no specific 127 destination in mind, this being the principal secondary function; and those which provide only acceptable TORP survey responses, but school or distinction between driving and'sightseeing. Includes. technical or financial assistance to other entities professional, games were excluded from consideration. use of designated roads and trails primarily in a car but providing opportunities. Persons watching these games would be considered use of motorcycles or airplanes was also recorded. football spectators. Could begin immediately upon leaving the Fee Simple Ownership-The complete ownership of land with recreationist's residence. exclusive and unrestricted rights of disposition, Football/Soccer Fields-Facilities designed and designated excluding only those rights retained by the (marked or provided) for football and/or soccer play. EcologV-The study of interrelationships among living government for exercise of its taxation, eminent Did not have to be used exclusively for those sports to organisms and between the organisms and their living domain, and police powers. be considered in TORP, just so the field would environment. This includes the study of human accommodate organized events. populations and their interrelations with regard for Fishing-A recreational activity involving the taking of fish physical environment, demographic and cultural from the Gulf, a bay, a lake, pond, tank, river or characteristics. stream, in a public or private area. Types include Freshwater Swimming Area-(Also, see: Designated fishing with bow, gig (flounder, frogs), pole, rod and Swimming Areas) Water areas, both designated and Environment-The aggregate surrounding conditions within real, seine, trotline, spear, or fly rod; from a bank or a undesignated, generally f66nd on rivers, streams, which organisms, or groups or organisms, exist and chartered boat, etc. Excludes commercial fishing. creeks, lakes, reservoirs, which are used predominantly function. by swimming recreationists. Excludes consideration Of Fishing JSport Fishing)-See: Fishing swimming pools. Environment, recreational-The surrounding external conditions within which -persons or groups of persons Fishing Barge-See: Barge, fishing Games and Sports-Any of a variety of the more common recreate. The recreation environment 'includes such recreational activities, normally competitive, which influential factors as sights, sounds, smells, social and Fishing Barge/Marina (Longth)-A measurement of total require facilities of the courts, fields, or nets varieties. cultural factors, availability of recreational resources, fishing access enumerated in linear yards around the Some examples are: tennis, volleyball, football, the weather, the availability of transportation, and exterior and interior of a barge or marina. baseball, basketball, etc. many others. Fishing Barges/Marinas-A barge or marina is a floating Games and Sports Facilities-As enumerated in the TORP, Facilities, private-those facilities owned and/or administered structure often attached to the shore providing access fields or courts associated with a particular game or by private entrepeneurs, corporations, and other to fishing water. sport on which regulation or league games can be non-public enterprises, most often operated to make a played. profit. Fishing Jetties-A jetty is a type of wall built into the water to restrain currents or for protection of a harbor or Geological Features-Those extraordinary physical or Facilities, public-those facilities owned and/or administered pier but used by recreationists primarily for fishing. physiographical attributes of an area (i.e., mountains, by public agencies. To differentiate between a pier and a.jetty, a pier is caverns, plains, faults, river basins, etc.) which supported above the water and a jetty is built to divide presently or potentially could provide recreational Facilities, support (support units) -Equipment and/or the water. The circumference and/or length in linear resources. resources which can be identified with a particular yards from the access point of the jetty around the ,activity and/or activi 'ties. Developments which are not last yard of area where recreationists may fish has Goals-(Also, see: Objectives) Short range or-long range aims, absolutely necessary for any particular recreational been measured to give planners an indication of the achievements, or objectives established during the activity. For example, bleachers, water fountains, amount of access provided by jetties. recreation planning process. In other words, the lockers, parking, bath houses, maintenance building, interim and ultimate steps along the schedule toward lighting, etc. Fishing Pier-(Also, see: Fishing Jetties) A platform which achieving adequate recreational opportunities for all. extends over the water and provides access to fishing water. Golf-A recreational activity involving play at regular courses Facility Mix-(Also, see: Activity Package) The grouping of with nine or more holes, par three, or miniature facilities types in a particular park or recreation area. Fishing Pier (Longth)-A measurement of length in linear courses, and at driving ranges. Recreational yards along the edge of a pier, considering only the participation can occur any place facilities are Facility Requ irements- (Also, see: Resource Requirements) portion that is actually over water suitable for fishing. available, but not as a school activity or professional Quantitative estimates of the units of selected Both sides of any pier wide enough to allow fishing contest. recreational facilities expected to be needed to meet from both sides were enumerated. Circumferential current and future demands. length around "T" head piers was also evaluated. Golf Course (Holes of)-(Also, see: Golf) A golf course provides facilities to support golf activities. Only par Federal Agencies-Govern mental entities under the direct Foothall-A body contact sport or game played with a ball. three and regular courses were enumerated for auspices of the United States of America. As they are Touch, tackle, flag, and other common American purposes of the TORP. The number of holes available related to recreation (TORP) federal agencies are variations played for recreation were included in to the general public was considered. Since the divided into three categories: those which provide TORP surveys, As few as two persons on each side or numbers of holes vary (i.e., some regular courses may opportunities for recreation as a primary function; as many as eleven was acceptable for indicating have only nine holes, while others may have 18, 27, those which provide opportunities for recreation as.a participation. Organized leagues were included in 36, or more) In'many cases, the number of holes was 128 selected as the unit of measurement and comparison horses abreast and has some overhead clearance Land, rural recreation- Recreation land located in a country for golf activities (ie., the common denominator). By (approximately 15 feet) provided. Not included were atmosphere usually located outside of urban areas or determining the number of holes needed, planners riding arenas, race tracks (unless part of trail), etc. in small rural towns of less than 200 in population. may then determine, based on local resources and analysis, what the most appropriate number of holes Household-The unit of people residing in a particular Land, urban recreation- Recreation land within or adjacent would be to provide for a given situation. Country residence whether they are a group of single, unrelated to urban areas, usually within city limits with the clubs and other private courses open only to members individuals; a traditional family; or members of two exception of those areas within the urban area that are were excluded. families related or unrelated. sparsely developed. Grants-in-Aid-Financiat assistance in the form of grants Houston-Galveston Region -General ly referred to as the Land and Water Cons orvation Fund-The Land and Water made by the federal and/or state governments to 6 political region coinciding with the original Conservation Fund Act 'of 1965 (Public Law 88-578) local government to assist in a public project. eight-county jurisdiction of the Houston -Galveston established a fund to increase outdoor recreation Regarding recreation, grants are normally made on a Area Council of Governments. The region included opportunities for the American people. The program matching basis (e.g., 50 percent of cost might be paid Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bond, Galveston, Harris, provides for (1) acquisition of lands for federally by each entity-grantor and grantee). Liberty, Montgomery, and Waller Counties. administered recreation areas; and (2) matching grants for state recreation planning and state as well as local Greenbelts-Commonly, linear areas along river and stream Hunting@A recreational activity which is typically land acquisition and development. The fund is basins or transportation corridors which are often left characterized by the taking of wild game for personal administered by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation of "green" or in a minimally developed state. consumption. Usually involves preparation of some the Department of the Interior at the federal level and kind, pursuit, and killing of the animal(s). -included the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department at the state Group Campsite-See: Campsites the use of bow, dog (to tree or locate game), handgun, level. In order for Texas to receive grants from the rifle, shotgun, and other weapons in the pursuit of fund, the State, must develop a statewide Group Screened Shelters-See:, Campsites deer and other big game, dove, goose and/or duck, comprehensive outdoor recreation plan (i.e., the Texas quail, turkey, squirrel, varmints, and other game. Outdoor Recreation Plan), and update and refine this Handicapped-A person with some mental or physical plan on a continuing basis. disadvantage which might prevent or.deter utilization Implementation-An essential step or element in the planning of recreation facilities or resources. process during which the recommendations of a plan Land Use-A general term, referring to the uses that land are carried out. Regarding the TORP, implementation resources are put to. For example, some lands are used Hiking-A recreational activity which depends on the is a complete, integrated, and on-going process because to support industry, others support commercial, recreationists' determination that the activity is a hike provision of adequate recreational opportunities agricultural, recreational uses, etc. In other words, instead of a walk. Usually involves a specific statewide cannot be an "overnite," or short-range, step land use is how man exercises his stewardship over destination, preparation of some kind, vigorous in the planning process because of the paucity of lands and waters in his domain-what is done to and physical exertion, and is often of greater distance than immediately available resources, physical and with the land. associated with walking for pleasure.- financial. Legal Authority-Senate Bill 165, Acts of the 59th Texas Hiking/Walking for Pleasure/Nature Study Trail-A Information System-See: Statewide Recreation Information Legislature, Regular Session 1965, authorized the designated trail measured in linear miles, for the System Parks and Wildlife Department as the primary state primary purpose of walking and/or hiking and/or office to (1) develop outdoor recreation in Texas nature study. Interpretive Facilities-Normally, a building, or site, or area including the preparation and maintenance of a comprising artifacts or surroundings of an era which statewide comprehensive outdoor recreation plan and Historic Site/Area-See: Archeological Site/Area have been arranged or analyzed to tell a story in an to (2) iegulate the 'allocation of federal aid from the interesting, educational, or otherwise "interpreted" Land and Water Fund to all political subdivisions in Horseback Riding7-A recreational activity involving riding a fashion. Interpretive facilities can include any the State in accordance with the Texas Outdoor horse for pleasure. Includes equestrian pursuits such as resource-amphitheatres, trails, open land, natural Recreation Plan. trail riding and open land riding. Does not include areas, flora, fauna, puppets, loud speakers, etc., which rodoo or racing pursuits or when professional or can be used to "tell the story," whatever the story Level of Government- Refers, to the organization of school, activities are involved. Also does not include happens to be. (Regarding recreation the "story" is government into federal,. state, regional, and local range riding as a part of an occupation such as usually based on historical, cultural, archeological, governments. ranching. natural, or other aspects of the area.) Linear Parks.-See: Parks, linear; and Greenbelts. Horseback Riding Area-A recreational space devoted to Jetty(s)-A barrier usually constructed of concrete a nd Local Agencies-For purposes of the TORP, local agencies are riding horses. This type of area was typically measured boulders extending from the shoreline out into the either@county or municipal political subdivisions of the in acres devoted to the activity. water. The primary purpose of the jetty is usually to State. protect shipping channels from erosion, siltation and rough water; however, it also may provide access to Marina(s)-A floating structure usually attached to the shore Horseback Riding Trail-A trail devoted to equestrian riding. more desirable fishing water than which is available and usually providing access to more desirable fishing Generally this trail can accommodate two or more from the shore. water than is available from the.shore. Marinas also 1.29 often provide boat stalls; gasoline; concessions for Recreational nature study can be done individually or Opportunity Days, surplus-A surplus of opportunity days .fishing, boating, skiing, and swimrining recreationists; in a group, organized or unorganized. resulted when the supply of facilities, expressed in and other amenities. opportunity days, exceeded the estimated demand, Needs-See: Requirements expressed in participation days, for the selected Metropolitan Area7(Also, See: Cities and ToWns)Any of the activity during the selected time period. 247exas urban areas in'1910.with a population of Non- Recreationists-Those persons in Texas who because of 50,000 or more, plus all incorporated and some lack of opportunity, handicap, choice, or other reason Out-of-State Visitors-(Also, see: Residents, Out-of-Statel uncorporated urbanized areas contiguous to the core did not participate in outdoor recreational activities. Recreationists who reside outside Texas, but city area; for example, San. Antohio@ plus Alamo participate in recreational activities while visiting the Heights, Castle Hills,, Terrell Hills,, etc. Municipal Objective- (Also, see: Goals) Those essential steps in the State. populations over 2,500 persons that weire close to but recreation planning process which have to be achieved Outdoor Recreation- (Also, see: Activities, recreation) not part of the contiguously developed metropolitan to accomplish the short and long range goals of the area were considered under the city or town category. process, i.e., the solutions to recreation problems in Recreational activities which are participated in the State. Objectives and goals are semantically outside buildings or completely enclosed shelters. Models, demand-See; Demand Models equivalent, or synonymous, terms as defined in most Excludes indoor recreation. dictionaries; however, in recreation planning objectives Multi-Use Courts-Courts for a selected number,of games or must be reached to achieve goals. An objective, for Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission-in sports activities on which regulation or league games example, might be to provide a certain number of 1958, Public Law 85-478, 72 Stat. 238, Created the can be played at different times. IFor example, picnic tables to meet 1980 needs in a certain analytical Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, basketball or volleyball can be pl .ayad on the same planning region. By providing part of those picnic charging it with the massive task of recommending court that might at another time have tennis matches. tables by 1975, a part of an identified problem will courses of action to insure that the necessary outdoor have been solved, or part of a (1980) goal achieved. recreation opportunities are provided for each citizen Multi-Use Trail-A trail measured in miles, designated for Another type of equally essential objective would be of this country now and in the future. The results of two or more co;@binecl or associated activities such as to achieve a state funding program to support land and the Commission's work, Outdoor Recreation in walking, hiking, and nature study., water acquisition and recreational developments at the America, were published in 1962, in twenty-seven regional or local level in order to pursue the ultimate volumes containing many recommendations for goal of providing adequate opportunities statewide. action. Responding to the recommendations in the Museums-Organized and permanent non-profit institutions, report, Congress and the President began enacting essentially educational or aesthetic in purpose, which exhibit objects with intrinsic value to science, history, Open Land Park-(Also, see: Urban Park) An urban park in legislation which created the Land and Water art, or culture, and which are open to the public. which no conventional outdoor recreational facilities Conservation Fund, the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation have been developed. However, the acreage may be under the United States Department of the Interior, Natural Area (potential recreation erea)-An area noted for landscaped or maintained. and which broadened outdoor recreation its extraordinary characteristics and natural qualities. responsibilities in several federal agencies. Open Space-(Also, see: Recreation and Open Space Plans) Park-Areas of land and/or water which have been set aside Nature and/or Interpretive Trail-Nature trails are routed Land area free or relatively free of man-made by public or private entities for the recreational uses through essentially natural environments for the structures and where water bodies, land forms, or of present or future generations. purposes of providing access for witnessing, studying, vegetation predominate. feeling,-or appreciating natural features of the area. Parkland, developed-See: Developed Land Interpretive trails are those courses which seek to Open Space, Recreational-Open space which is devoted to reveal meanings, insights, or relationships in the recreational activities that do not require developed Parks, linear-Refers to parks and recreation areas, so natural environment by means of signs, objects, or facilities and are compatible with conserving open designated, normally occurring along some natural or other interpretive media to enhance appreciation of space for designed purposes... man-made features such as river, creek, and stream nature. basins or along highway or railroad rights-of-way, etc. Opportunity Days-(Also, see: Activity Day) An estimation The park normally is much longer than it is wide, Nature Center-Normally a man-made structure housing of the number of recreational activity days which gives it a "linear" physical characteristic. organic and/or material exhibits of flora and/or fauna satisfactorily provided by one unit (or the sum of utilized most often in an educational way to centralize opportunity days for any number of units) of a Parks and Recreation Department-An officially recognized aspects of nature which many persons may have selected recreation facility per year within a selected entity of a federal, state, regional, or local government neither the means nor expertise to locate and geographic area of the State. For further discussions of agency which has been given the primary appreciate in a native setting. Zoos, botanical gardens, opportunity days refer to the volume Techniques of responsibility for providing and maintaining recreation aquaria, and wildlife exhibits are but a few examples. Analysis. land and facilities areas within its jurisdictional boundaries. Nature Study-This recreational activity normally includes a Opportunity Days, deficit-A deficit of opportunity days specific destination and/or purpose that includes results when the supply of facilities, expressed in Participant- (Also, see: Recreation, active; Recreation, studying flora and/or fauna in a natural environment, opportunity days, was less than the estimated demand, passive; and Spectator) An individual. who actively such as bird watching at Aransas National Wildlife expressed in participation days, for the selected engages in a recreation activity. Participation could Refuge, beach combing, or rock hunting, etc. activity during the selected time period. occur indoors or outdoors but not in the participants' 130 back yard or as a school activity. However, Pier-See: Fishing Pier Plinking-Shooting at, generally with a firearm, tin cans or participants could use school facilities after school similar targets. hours. Organized participation such as club or church Plan-(Also, see: Planning Process) There are many types of related was included. plans most of which have similar characteristics. In Pool-A man-made structure (usually concrete) which general, a plan constitutes the end product of the contains water, measured in square yards, and is used Participation Day-See: Activity Day planning process, which could be represented by a for swimming. Also, an indoor recreational activity scheme, an approach, a schedule, a guide, a method, a played on a table, but not considered in the TORP. Peak Use Season-The two, three, or four month period technique, a program, or other pre-conceived way of during which an activity or a park receives the highest influencing things or events in the future. Most plans Preservation-The process of protecting a site or an area from monthly totals of total annual participation. describe a process by which objectives and goals stated damage, deterioration, development, or use in order to Normally, heaviest participation for most activities is in the plan may be achieved or accomplished. maintain, in an unaltered state, the characteristics during the summer months. (However, for hunting in which make it valuable (i.e., saving it for future use). Texas most activity occurs in the fall and winter Planning, Comprehensive-A specific type of planning process months as does camping along the Gulf Coast and in that involves development, maintenance, review, South Texas.) evaluation, coordination, and updating of a single Private Entrepreneur/Enterprise-A private citizen or business on-going plan, or coordinates two or more plans, in utilizing resources, usually in a monetarily gainful Picnic, Group table unit-A large picnicking table unit for use relation to established (specified) objectives and/or manner, to provide recreational opportunities for by large groups of people (measured in numbers of goals. With respect to the TORP, emphasis is placed on public consumption. single tables it represents); e.g., family reunions, providing the information and planning expertise church groups, etc. The unit may include a central necessary to relate the TORP objectives and goals with Private Supply, Private Recreation- (Also see: Private Supply, facility for serving food and may also provide some other types of plans such as The Texas Water Plan and rec reat !on) -privately owned resources which are not type shelter from the weather. To estimate single table regional transportation, waste disposal, or other plans made available to the general public, but are equivalents, one needs only to determine the length or (at any level of government) to more effectively guide restrictively used by private individuals, groups, area of one group table; divide by length or area of the provision of outdoor recreation opportunities in organizations, etc., for recreational purposes. any single table unit, then multiply this result times Texas. Examples include backyard swimming pools and the number of group units in the park (e.g., if a park tennis courts, county club facilities, homeowners' or has five group units of the same approximate size, one Planning Horizon- Recreational resource requirements for restricted subdivision facilities, sportsman's clubs, of which is 36 feet long, and assuming one single table selected activities were estimated in the TORP for five hotel/motel swimming pools, yacht clubs, and many unit is six feet long, then the single table equivalent different years-1970, 1975, 1980, 1990, and 2000. others. number is arrived at by dividing 36' by 6' (36 divided Those planning years have been variously called by 6) and result is 6 single units per group unit. Total planning horizons, projection years, target dates, etc. single table equivalents is determined by multiplying Private Supply, Recreation- Privately owned recreational implying that those are the years that the plan is the original five group units by six single table generally "aimed" at and the estimated resource resources and facilities made available to the general equivalents (5 x 6) the result of which is 30 total requirements represent the goals for those years. public generally, but not always, for a fee. equivalent units.) Planning Process-A planning process normally comprises a Programs, administrative-Any prearranged policy and phased series of actions or approaches directed toward manpower managing methodology or plan for Picnic, Single table units-A table unit designed to solving an identified problem(s). By stating objectives effectively administering the park and money accommodate one or two picnicking families and and goals to be achieved, and a methodology or resources made available for recreational purposes. normally includes. provisions in the area for trash cans, schedule for attainment, a plan is specified. In the drinking water, and possibly lighting for night use. TORP, the planning process is an on-going, dynamic Programs, budgeting-Plans for managing the accounting of Generally this type of unit is from six to eight feet in set of approaches directed toward solving the funds, the capital investments, payments, operations, length and three to four feet in width. recognized recreational problems in Texas. Since depreciations, etc., associated with recreational recreational patterns change over time, the static resources. Picnicking-A recreational activity involving one or more portions of the process; i.e., the documents; must be people on an outing or at a social gathering where the updated periodically to keep the process continually Programs, Comprehensive Planning-(Also, see: Planning eating of food is usually the main activity. Only viable. In Texas recreational planning, the planning Process) Means or methods by which comprehensive recreationists using facilities less than or equal to one process integrates a statewide recreation information planning goals are achieved. day could qualify as picnickers. system for the purposes of improving and maintaining communication, cooperation, and coordination within Programs, implementation-Means, methods, and/or Picnicking Area/Site- Refers to all space (measured in acres) the phases of the planning process (ie., step to step) schedules put into action for accomplishing objectives designated and used as picnicking areas excepting sites and among the responsible entities in the State. or short and long range goals. used primarily for camping. The activities picnicking and camping sometimes overlap, therefore, special Programs, interpretive- (Also, see: Interpretive Facilities) designation is needed to eliminate double counting Playgrou nd- (Also, see: Children's Play) Developed land acres Planned guidelines or schedules for managing and and get as complete a view of each activity as possible with apparatus such as merry-go-rounds, swings, jungle utilizing interpretive facilities and personnel associated by primary allocation of space. gyms, see-saws, etc. with recreational resources. C &;vl 2. R nn 131 Programs, maintenance and operation-Planned schedules or Recommended Responsibilities-State recommendations Recreational Activities-See: Activities, Recreational guidelines for managing park operations, the care of pertaining to the planning and prQvision of additional facilities and grounds, operational person nel, outdoor recreation opportunities various levels and Regional Amusements or Attractions- Recreati ona I resources maintenance personnel, and maintenance and agencies of government and the private sector should or events with greater than local appeal. Generally operations equipment. undertake, recognize, exercise, and signify in these resources are considered to be of such quality accomplishing their respective responsibilities in Texas that recreationists will travel lengthy distances to Programs, recreation -Plan ned or prearranged scheduling for from 1975-1980. utilize. Examples of such attractions might be the the actual uses that recreational resources will be put Sonoran or Longhorn Caverns, the Astrodome, Six to. For example, many urban and rural communities Recreation, active-(Also, see: Recreation, passive; Flags, Searama, etc. have "Learn-to-Swim" programs, while others program Participant; and Spectator) That portion of (i.e., determine) the use of games and sports areas such recreational participation which is accounted for by Regional Park-An area designated as a park having as baseball fields and tennis courts, and still others persons who physically exert themselves, often significance or appeal of greater than a local nature. may have cultural events scheduled. Many strenuously, while participating in the activity. Most municipalities schedule the use of all facilities so that often the activities where a distinction was made Requirements, cumulative-A running total of all incremental as many liersons as practical get to utilize the between active and passive recreation were games and requirements up to and including the time period resources. sports where fields and courts were required for active being considered. In the example shown in the participation; whereas, a seating capacity or number of following definition for 1970, the cumulative Public Supply, Recreation- (Also, see: Private Supply, seats were required for spectators. Active recreation requirements would be 10; for 1975, 17; for 1980, 22; Recreation) Recreational resources made available to excluded spectator involvement. for 1990, 27;'and for 2000, 30. the general public by governmental entities. Recreation, passive-(Also, see: Recreation, active) Requirements, incremental (additions)-The number of units Quality-That characteristic which describes the relative value Participation in activities accounted for by needed within a specified time period, assuming that or condition of recreational resources and facilities in recreationists Who are more sedentary in their pursuits the units of facilities needed for previous time periods terms of repair state, maintenance of area and and who often watch others actively participate, i.e., have been provided. For example, if incremental grounds, condition of water, etc. spectators, or this type is accounted for by those who requirements are cited as being 10 picnic tables in would observe, hear, feel, or sense in some way rather 1970, 7 by 1975, 5 by 1980, 5 by 1990, and 3 by than consume or use the resource. This type of 2000, this can be interpreted as: Quantity-The magnitude in terms of areal and numerical activity usually requires little physical exertion on the measurements of individual types of recreational part of the recreationist; however, some passive Example: resources and facilities in discrete units (ie., the pursuits are especially strenuous, such as bird 1. 1970-10 tables are needed in addition to the number of picnic tables, the number of surface acres watching, wildlife photography, etc. existing facilities. of water, the number of acres of land, etc.) 2. 1975-7 additional tables will be needed if 1970 Recreationj rural-Outdoor recreation participation occurring resource requirements are satisfied. in a country atmosphere and/or in communities of less 3. 1980-5 additional tables will be needed if 1975 Quasi-public- Used to indicate a level of administration than 200 in population. resource requirements are satisfied. which is neither public nor private but in-between 4. 1990-5 additional tables will be needed if 1980 having characteristics of both. Usually the level Of Recreation, urban-Outdoor recreation participation resource requirements are satisfied. administration has no governmental responsibilities occurring in urbanized areas with populations of 200 5. 2000-3 additional tables will be needed if 1990 and is usually considered a non-profit organization. people or more. resource requirements are satisfied. Considered in TORP in the capacity of a resource manager that open its resources to a limited segment Recreation and Open Space Plans-Those planning Requirements, resource-Those resource and facility of the public (eg., boy or girt scouts, church camps, instruments (or tools) generated by regional planning development goals specified in the TORP as needed in private summer camps, etc.) entities (Councils of Governments and Regional a specified planning horizon year. The Planning Commissions) for purposes of assessing accomplishment of these specified requirements Questionnaire-An instrument utilized to solicit or collect regional recreation and open space resources in order implies fulfillment of estimated demands for the information. Several types have been used for the to provide these amenities in adequate quantities and selected geographic area or for the state as a whole, TORP. For a detailed discussion see the volume titled qualities for regional needs. based on the methodology utilized in the TORP. A Statewide Recreation Information System. Recreation Area-(Also, see: Park) A land and/or water area Residents, out-of -state- Person or persons residing outside of Racing-A recreational activity involving active or spectator so named or otherwise designated which is set aside participation in auto, horse, motorcycle, dog, boat, for recreational Purposes and which has characteristics Texas but using recreational facilities within the State. and other categorical kinds of competition among two indistinguishable in most cases from parks. In other Residents, rural-Persons living in places of less than 200 in words, parks and recreation areas are generally or more competitors. considered to be synonymous. However, when a population. Ramps and Lanes,-See: Boat Ramps recreation area is considered to be a large geographical .area designated for recreation, such as the Lake Residents, urban-Persons living in metropolitan areas, cities, Recommendations-Suggestions for action. Meredith National Recreation Areal there may be towns, and communities of 200 or more in several "Parks" or "recreation areas" within the area. population. 132 Residents and Non-Residents-Texans who by virtue of the Additionally, in some cases in Texas, there are Sport Shooting Facilities-All skeet (trap) apparatus, rifle and location of their residences have been categorized with ancillary facilities for waste treatment and disposal. pistol targets, and archery targets. respect to urban areas. For any selected urban area there are residents and non-residents. 'Resident-person Seating Capacity-See:. Capacity Trap and Skeet: Number of traps-An enumeration of or persons living in the respective urban area or group target throwing units counted to give an indication of o f urban areas under consideration. Sigh tseeing- (Also, see: Driving for Pleasure) Driving, riding, how widespread or prevalent they are in Texas and Non-Resident-person or persons not living in the or walking to a particular destination or area for the how important they are to the activity of sport specified urban area but using recreational facilities purpose of viewing natural or man-made attractions. shooting overall. within that urban area or group of, urban areas. Means of conveyance could include walking, Excludes recreationists from out-of-state origins. motorcycle, car, bus, train, boat, airplane, horse etc. Rifle and Pistol: Number of targets-An enumeration Resource Requirements-See: Requirements, resource of fixed or mobile target units (comprised by Single Unit Campsites-See: Campsites designated sport shooting facilities) giving an Resources, land-The land and all other associated natural indication of how widespread or prevalent they are in resources which lie ready for utilization. Skiing-A recreational activity that involves the participant Texas and how important they are to the activity of moving freely or being pulled over some supporting sport shooting overall. Resources, natural-Actual and potential form of wealth or medium, i.e., water, snow, or sand; on runners of raw materials supplied by nature and used to satisfy wood, fiberglass, plastic or metal attached to the feet. Archery: Number of targets-An enumeration of fixed various human needs and wants. Water skiing was the primary type; however, snow and or mobile target units (comprised by designated sport sand (as in Monahans State Park) were evaluated and shooting facilities) giving an indication of how Resources, recreation-The natural and cultural surroundings included. widespread or prevalent they are in Texas and how that provide the basis for and contribute to enjoyable important they are to the activity of sport shooting recreation experiences. Recreational resources are a Small Community-Municipalities which had between 200 overall. part of our larger store of natural resources. Used and 2,499 population in the 1970 census; and which synonymously with land, facilities and/or water were not contiguous to a metropolitan area. available for recreational use. Soccer-A variation of football in which a "soccer ball" is Standard@(Also, see: Opportunity Days) Standards are of Rifle and Pistol-See: Sport Shooting kicked, bumped, butted, or otherwise (excepting the many varied types when related to recreation. In the use of a players hands or forearms) propelled toward TORP, a standard is the average number of outdoor recreation opportunities, measured in participation Rifle Targets-See: Sport Shooting an opponents goal. The goal keeper for each side is days, which can be provided by one unit of a specified allowed to touch or strike with the forearms or hands. outdoor recreation facility per unit of time, given the Rodeo-A recreational activity that includes both active and Officially referred to in the United States as current participation patterns and preferences of spectator participation. School and professional rodeo "association football." outdoor recreationists. participants were excluded. Spatial Distribution-The geographic distribution of the types Standards, facilities-See: Standard Rodeo, Number of Arenas and Seats-The number of arenas and numbers of recreation areas and facilities in in all parks and the total approximate seating capacity. relation to the user, populations in an individual State Actions-Those approa has or programs utilized urbanized area, among the urban areas of an analytical c Rural Area-Areas located outside urbanized areas where region or in the rural areas of a region, etc. (implemented) by state agencies in general and the there are no residential areas adjacent and in Texas Parksand Wildlife Department in particular, for essentially an undeveloped or non-urban environment. Specialty Park-(Also, see: Urban Park; and Games and solving recreation problems in the State. May possibly occur within a city's corporate limits; Sports) An urban park containing facilities for only however, there must be very sparse, if any, one of the four major urban activities: games and State Agencies- Institutions of the Texas government. As development, and again the environment or adjacent sports, any one of which would qualify; picnicking; they are related to recreation, state agencies are land uses must be rural in nature. children's play, i.e., playgrounds; or swimming. The categorized by their levels of influence on the amount of acreage was not a factor and any number of provision of recreational opportunities as a function of Rural Environments-(Also, see: Environment) Those areas units for the facility type could be present. the agency. An agency may have recreation as a which are typified by country or countryside settings primary or secondary function, or the agency' may and surroundings and which are away from the Spectator- (Also, see: Participant) An individual who provide technical or financial assistance to those state residential, commerical, industrial, and other engaged in the observance of an organized activity. agencies and political subdivisions which do provide developments of man. Those environments generally recreational opportunities. outside municipal limits and away from residential Sport Shooting-A recreational activity in which the subdivisions. recreationists use equipment such as rifles, shotguns ; Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans bows and arrows, slingshots, etc., to shoot a (SCORP)-(Also, See: Land and Water Conservation Sanitary Facilities-Normally, restrooms, with all showers, inanimate objects such as targets. Included plinking Fund) Each state which chooses to participate in, the water cl osets'(toi lets), wash basins, trash cans, etc., are and/or target shooting, field; skeet and/or trap, Land and Water Conservation Fund program must considered as sanitary facilities. -However, these competitive or non-competitive; target, competitive; develop 1 SCORP. The SCORP for Texas is titled the facilities can be reduced to only chemical toilets. and other miscellaneous kinds of shooting. Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan. 133 Statewide Recreation Information System (SRIS)-(Also, Swimming, Area-See: Designated Swimming Area Toilets-enumerated to indicate the occurrence of sanitary See: Planning Process) A @statewide facilities. intercommunication network which is an integral part Swimming, Designated Area-See: Designated Swimming of the recreation planning process in Texas and is used Area Total Land Acres-The sum of recreation land acres to transfer, or exchange, recreational information. As developed with facilities plus undeveloped land acres a coordinating tool, it is conceptually envisioned as Swimming Facilities, Designated-See: Designated Swimming devoted to recreation. the link between involved entities and the phases or Area steps of the planning process. Via the SRIS, Towns-Any urbanized area of 2,500 to 9,999 population information is collected, edited, stored, analyzed, Swimming Pools Itotal square yards)-An enumeration of the which was not within or contiguous to a metropolitan synthesized, documented, and disseminated for total number of square yards of all publicly available area in the 1970 census. purposes of determining and monitoring the status of outdoor pools. Includes only water surface area. recreational opportunities versus recreational demand. Includes wading pools. Excludes pool side walking Trail-Any path, passage, route, etc., specifically designated (Further discussions are provided in the volume A surface, buildings, and grounds. for trail activities' e.g., nature study and/or Statewide Recreation Information"Sysiem.) appreciation, hiking, walking for pleasure, bicycling, Target .s-Sea: Sport Shooting horseback riding, multi-use, etc. Measured in linear Supply-A schedule of the quantities of a particular good or miles in the TORP. service that would be made available for purchase in a Technical Assistance-Providing advise or expertise,, (i.e., Trail Activities- Recreational pursuits which involve walking, specified period of time at all alternative prices, manpower and often machines and operators) not hiking, or riding on a trail or route. holding all other factors (such as income, population, normally available to the recipient through the consumers' tastes and preferences, etc.) constant. recipient's organizational structure. Many of the Trailer and Pickup Camper Site-Sea: Campsites exacting skills of the recreation planning and design Supply, outdoor recreation-(Also, -see: Supply) A schedule experts cannot be feasibly utilized on a long term basis Trails, Bicycle Route (Designated) -See: Bicycle Route of the quantities of outdoor resources and/or facilities by local entities and thus must be provided by a more that would be made available for use (in terms of centralized entity available to those with limited Trails, Bicycle Trail (Designated) -See: Bicycle Trail opportunity days, numbers and/or areal quantities, resources. units, etc.) over some period of time at all alternative Trails, Handicapped (designated or adapted fod-Any trails costs (of utilization or purchase) to the consumer, Techniques of Analysis-See: Analytical Techniques. Also, having special adaptations for handicapped persons or holding all other factors (such as income, population, see volume of TORP titled, Techniques of Analysis. those trails constructed for their use. consumer's tastes and preferences, etc.) constant. Also, -a generic term referring to the number and areal Tennis-A recreational activity (a game or sport) involving Trails, Horseback Riding (designated) -The length of trails quantity of opportunities made available for the the use of rackets, balls, a net, and a court on which devoted to equestrian riding. Generally, these trails outdoor recreational purposes of the general public. two recreationists compete in singles, or two pairs of can accommodate two or more horses abreast and recreationist compete in doubles matches. The have some overhead clearance (approximately 15 feet) Surface Acres-(Also, see: Units) Units of measurement matches involve hitting a ball back and forth across a provided. Riding arenas, race tracks (unless part of ascribed to water resources. net stretched and bisecting the length of a rectangular trail), etc., were excluded. court. Also involves strenuous physical exertion. Tennis played on a home or private court, (i.e., not Trails, Miles of -See: Trails Facilities Surfing-A recreational activity in which the recreationist publicly available), at school as a school curriculum rides the crests of waves toward shore usually on a activity, or as a professional match was not included. Trails, Multi-Use-a trail that was designated specifically for board used for support, but "body surfing" is Tennis played using school facilities after school hours combined trails activities such as walking, hiking, and included. was considered. nature study. Surplus Opportunity Days-See: Opportunity Days, surplus Tennis Courts, Number of-(Also see: Unit) An enumeration Trails, Nature and/or Interpretive (designated) -See: Nature of courts on which official, standard, regular, or and/or Interpretive Trails Swimming-A recreational activity in which the recreationists organized doubles matches can be played. Trails, Walking for Pleasure/Hiking-All trails Iwhich were float on or move in, through, or across a. body of Tent Site-See: Campsites designated as walking and/or hiking trails and on water. Participation, as considered in the TORP, could which the primary use is by walking and/or hiking occur indoors or outdoors but not in the household's Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan (TORP)-(Also, see: Planning enthusiasts. Hiking trails are generally longer and backyard or as a school activity. However, school Process) The ongoing recreation planning process in require more strenuous physical exertion than facilities could be used after school hours. Types of and for the State of Texas, periodically updated and walking. swimming include from scuba and skin diving to a subsequently documented for the purpose of guiding child splashing in the shallow end, at a lake, pond, the provision of adequate recreational opportunities to Trails Facilities (Length in Miles; Only Designated Trails were tank, river, ocean, pool, or drainage ditch. Indoor support the recreational activities of all Texans and included)-total number and total miles of designated swimming was not usecl@ in calculations of their visitors from other states and countries. Also, the trails in a park, The total number of trails for all types requirements in the TORP. title of the statewide recreation planning documents. and the sum of their lengths in miles. 134 Trap and Skeet-See: Sport Shooting Units, by activity and/or facility type-in order to effectively Wading Pool-Normally, a shallow pool that is two feet or inventory recreational resources, typically the major less in depth and is not part of a larger pool. Traps, Number of-See: Sport Shooting facility required to support a given activity was enumerated or measured by the lowest common Walking for Pleasure-A recreational activity involving Trends-The ways, directions, or tendencies recreational measurement normally assigned to the facility type. In traversing or moving over, through, or by an area on patterns or influencing factors in Texas appear to be the TORP recreational supply, demand, and resource foot for the pleasure or enjoyment of the pursuit changing or developing over time, given past and requirements for selected activities are expressed in existing circumstances. comparable units. Numbers and areal quantities Of itself. This could include use of designated trails or existing resources (and/or facilities) were considered paths. This is one of the few activities which could Trips, combined weekday and weekend-Trips occurring on the major supply and/or opportunity indicators. begin immediately upon leaving the house. one or more days of the week, i.e., Monday through Water; lake, reservoir, pond, tank-inland bodies of water. Friday, plus Saturday and/or Sunday. Units Per Thousand-Ratio of resource units to a selected population; determined by dividing the number of Water, fresh-Bodies and courses of water before reaching Trips, weekday-Trips occurring anytime during Monday units by the selected population (in 000's). saltwater. through Friday. Urban-Within municipal limits of a metropolitan area, city, Water, river or stream- Inland water courses. Trips, weekend-Trips occurring anytime during Saturday town, or small community (population over 200) and/or Sunday. unless located in a sparsely developed environment. Water, suitable (for recreation purposes)-That portion of the water bodies in the State which can support three Undesignated-Those resources which are used for Urban Growth Areas Sections and general directions (of selected water-related recreational activities. As used recreational purposes but have no official designation. metropolitan areas) that were experiencing rapid in the TORP, suitable water was considered that development, or those sections projected by local portion of freshwater lakes and reservoirs suitable to Undeveloped Land-The total number of land acres in parks urban/recreation planners to grow most significantly support the activities of boating, skiing, and boat that do not comprise recreational facilities constructed from 1971. Areas around a metro area which are fishing. Unsuitable waters for the three activities were by man. changing most rapidly from rural to urban land uses. considered those which were too shallow, too small in Unit-The numerical designation assigned to recreational Urban Park-A p ark within or adjacent to municipal limits area, had excessive debris, or were otherwise unsafe. facilities by type and resources by area to enable excepting those parks in rural environments. For Water, surface acres-The units assigned to recreational water recreation planners to assess the quantities of available example, no residential areas adjacent and which are to enumerate freshwater resources for purposes of the recreational opportunities. The following are units essentially in a countryside environment. Most parks TORP. enumerated in the TORP by type of facility: within city limits will, therefore, be urban and most Ipar.ks outside city limits will be rural, but not always. Water, within-That water wholly contained within parks and Use Intensity-An average measurement or estimation by recreation areas boundaries. 'Type Resource Unit park superintendents of how heavily (percent full) a Water Adjacent-That water at which a park or recreation Archery Target park and/or its facilities are being used during a typical area can provide public recreational access, i.e., by peak use week (Monday through Sunday). Measured Baseball. Field during the peak use season, gives an indication of the means of water frontage, public boat ramps, etc. Basketball Court park capacity to attract and support recreationists. Boat Ramp Lane Water Length in Miles Adjacent to or Within-Parks which Camping Campsite Also, can give an indication of overcrowding or have continually running water from a river or stream Fishing Pier Linear Yard insufficient facilities. Weekday use intensity is a within the park boundaries, length in statute miles (for Football Field measurement of participation on the five weekdays the length within the park) was specified. If a park was Games and Sports Gourt/Field/Hole Monday through Friday. Weekend use intensity is a adjacent to a river or stream, only the length to which Golf Hole measurement of participation on Saturdays and the park was adjacent to and not the entire length of Land Acre Sundays. the river or stream was specified. Picnicking Table Playground Acre Volleyball- Recreat io nal activity normally considered a gam Water within or adjacent-The total surface acres of all lakes, River Linear Mile 8 ponds, or tanks within or adjacent to the boundaries requiring a net (suspended at a given height) and a Sport Shooting Target or Trap court over which two opponent teams, normally six of parks. Swimming pools were not included. Water Stream Linear Mile persons per team, attempt to maintain a ball in flight adjacent to refers to any water which may be located Swimming Pool Square Yard over the net by bouncing the ball with* head or hands on the park boundary and is accessible from the park. Tennis Court from person to person for a limited number to times Water within refers to any water which is either Trail Linear Mile on each side of the net until the ball touches the impounded in or running through the park. Volleyball Court ground. A point is lost if ball touches ground inside a Water Surface Acre Zoos, Acres of-Areas including only those acres with zoo Other Number team's portion of court. facilities. 135 Richland Hills Forest Hills pendix 8 River Oaks Benbrook Lake Worth Village Sansom Park Village Westworth Village Kennedale Saginaw Pantego Edgecliff Village Dalworthington Hills Westover Hills Region 11 Dallas Irving Garland Mesquite Grand Prairie Richardson Farmers Branch University Park Duncanville Carrollton Lancaster Balch Springs Appendix B Highland Park REGIONAL LISTING OF URBAN AREAS Kleberg BY CITY-SIZE CATEGORIES, 1970 Seagoville Cockrell Hill LISTING OF METROPOLITAN AREAS: CORE CITIES Hutchins AND CONTIGUOUS URBAN AREAS 1POPULATIONS 50,000 AND OVER IN 1970) Region 12 Sherman-Denison Planning Region Core City Contiguous Areas Region 13 Texarkana Region 1 Amarillo Region 14 Tyler Region 4 Lubbock Region 16 San Antonio Alamo Heights Castle Hills Region 5 Wichita Falls Terrell Hills Windcrest Region 7 Abilene Kirby Balcones Heights Region 10 Fort Worth Olmos Park Leon Valley Arlington Haltom City Region 17 San Angelo Hurst Ap North Richland Hills Region 18 Midland White Settlement Bedford Region 18 Odessa 136 LISTINGS OF CITIES (POPULATIONS RANGING FROM 10,000 TO 49,999 IN 1970) Region 20 Waco Bellmead Woodway Planning Region Cities Region 15 Lufkin Robinson Nacogdoches Lacy-Lakeview Region 1 Hereford Beverly Hills Region 2 Pampa Region 18 Pecos Northcrest Borger Region 19 Killeen Temple Region 21 Bryan-College Station Region 3 Plainview Copperas Cove Levelland Region 23 Austin Westlake Hills Region 5 Vernon Region 23 San Marcos Rollingwood Sunset Valley Region 6 Big Spring Region 24 Victoria Lamesa Rosenburg Region 25 Houston Pasadena Port Lavaca Bellaire Region 7 Sweetwater Region 25 Baytown West University Place Snyder Region 26 Huntsville Deer Park Region 8 Brownwood Conroe South Houston Region 9 Corsicana Region 27 Orange Galena Park Mineral Wells Jacinto City Cleburne Region 28 Lake Jackson La Porte Waxahachie Dickinson Nassau Bay Weatherford Freeport Bunker Hill Village Ennis Bay City Hunters Creek Village League City Region 10 Euless Alvin Seabrook Hedwig Village Region 12 Denton Region 31 Seguin Spring Valley Greenville Region 32 Alice Piney Point Village Piano Beeville Lomax Village McKinney Terrell Region 33 Kingsville Region 27 Beaumont-Port Arthur Groves Gainesville Robstown Nederland Region 13 Paris Region 3 -4- Weslaco Port Neches Sulphur Springs Pear Ridge Region 36 Del Rio Lakeview Region 14 Longview Eagle Pass Griffing Park Marshall Region 37 New Braunfels Palestine Kerrville Region 28 Galveston-Texas City La Marque Henderson Uvalde Region 29 El Paso LISTING OF TOWNS (POPULATIONS RANGING FROM 2,500 TO 9,999 IN 1970) Region 33 Corpus Christi Planning Region Towns Region 1 Dumas Memphis Region 34 Brownsville-Harlingen- Rio Hondo Canyon Wellington San Benito Dalhart Shamrock Tulia Phillips Region 34 McAllen-Edinburg-Pharr Mission Dimmitt San Juan Friona Region 3 Brownfield Littlefield Region 35 Laredo Region 2 Perryton Muleshoe Spearman Denver City 137 Morton. Bridgeport Teague Region 29 Fabens Abernathy Decatur Clifton Region 4 Slaton Rockwall Region 30 Alpine Floyda Ida Whitesboro Region 21 Brenham Marfa Post Wylie Navasota Tahoka Region 13 Mount Pleasant Hearne Region 31 Lockhart Madisonville Gonzales Region 5 Burkburnett Atlanta Pleasanton Graham New Boston Region 22 Silsbee Luling Iowa Park Clarksville Crockett Kenedy Childress Daingerfield Livingston Schertz Bowie Hooks Woodville Elgin Quanah Trinity Floresville Bastrop Electra Region 14 Jacksonville Region 23 Taylor La Grange Olney Athens Georgetown Poteet Jacksboro Kilgore Burnet Smithville Seymour Gladewater Round Rock Karnes City Henrietta Carthage Llano Giddings Nocona Rusk Region 6 Andrews Gilmer Region 24 El Campo Region 32 Falfurrias Mineola Wharton San Diego Seminole Pittsburg Cuero Premont Winnsboro Richmond Freer Region 7 Colorado City Jefferson Yoakum Stamford Wills Point Edna Region 33 Portland Ballinger Haskell Missouri City Aransas Pass Region 15 Jasper Prairie View Sinton Hamlin Center Eagle Lake Mathis Winters Diboll Anson San Augustine Columbus Refugio Sugar Land Rockport Stafford Ingleside Region 8 Breckenridge Region 16 Universal City Hallettsville Bishop Coleman Live Oak Sealy Taft Cisco Comanche Region 17 Brady Region 25 Humble South San Pedro Eastland Ozona Katy Region 34 Mercedes Ranger San Saba Barrett Raymondville Tomball Donna Region 9 Stephenville Region 18 Monahans Elsa Burleson Fort-Stockton Region 26 Cleveland Alamo Dublin Kermit Liberty Port Isabel Crane Dayton Edcouch Region 10 Grapevine McCamey La Feria Everman Azle Region 19 Belton Region 27 Vidor Region 35 Rio Grande City Mansfield Lampasas Bridge City Hebbronville Colleyville Cameron West Orange 6owley Gatesville Region 36 Crystal City Rockdale Region 28 Angleton Pearsall Region 11 De Soto Harker Heights Pearland Carrizo Springs Cedar Hill Hamilton Clute Cotulla Friendswood Region 12 Commerce Region 20 Hillsboro Hitchcock Region 37 Hondo Lewisville Marlin Palacios Fredericksburg Bonham Mexia West Columbia Devine Kaufman McGregor Sweeney Junction =mow 138 a majority of cases, and permits more detailed geographical analyses where needed. The regions are delineated by county boundaries, and they closely approximate natural and demographic boundaries. This partitioningof the State should enable planners and decision-makers at the regional and municipal iz levels to analyze the potential effects of their 0 proposed actions and to assist them in making sound, decisions. Although most regions are combinations of several counties, five of the regions comprise only a; single county. Major metropolitan areas such ac Houston (Harris County), Dallas (Dallas County),: Fort Worth (Tarrant County), San Antonio (Bexar; County), and El Paso (El Paso County) have been given regional status in order to analyze in more detail th ese population core areas and their contiguous surroundings because of the large population residing in these areas and the significant impacts the residents have on total recreation occurring throughout the State. Appendix C The urban areas of the State, based on 1970 Census population data, were classified into three city-size TECHNIQUES OF ANALYSIS ANALYTICAL PLANNING REGIONS AND categories, which were then analyzed separately for URBAN AREAS the appropriate regions. These categories were: This appendix provides explanations of the planning Since Texas is so demographically, geologically, and 1. Metropolitan Areas-the core city or cities methodology and elements of the urban plan. Its geographically dissimilar among the different sections having populations of 50,000 or more, purpose is to provide the interested user or reader a of the State, and since the resources vary within the according to 1970 population figures, plus all fuller, more technical treatment of the different sections, the State was divided into 37 i ncorporated, and some unincorporated, methodological explanations offered in brief form Outdoor Recreation Analytical Planning regions for u.rbanized areas contiguous to the core throughout the text. Detail as offered in this the purposes of defining recreation problems in the city/cities. Data is organized for each metro appendix gives the reader a deeper,,more thorough TORP to the finest degree p .ractical and allowing area by Analytical Planning Region. The 24 understanding of the large amounts of data presented. metro areas are located in 22 different planning ; more efficient analyses of the large amounts of data It also alerts the reader to the complex process collected. While the Governor's Office has delineated. regions, with Regions 18 and 34 having two utilized to produce the data. Those who seek even 24 State Planning Regions, it was felt that some of metros each, Midland and Odessa in Region 18 more detailed, technical background information these areas were too large for realistic outdoor and -Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito and should refer to another volume in this plan, titled recreation planning. Therefore, a decision was made McAllen- Edi nbu rg-Pharr in Region 34. Techniques of Analysis. For the reader's convenience, to subdivide a number of the State Planning Regions 2. Cities-the 61 urban areas of the State with some of the planning methods and data are briefly into smaller units. The resulting breakdown of the populations ranging from 10,000 to 49,999, explained in the "Introduction" to each of the State into 37 Outdoor Recreation Planning Regions and which are not part of or contiguous to a detailed parts of the Urban Volume, Metros, Cities, retains the integrity of the State Planning Regions in metropolitan area. Twenty-seven Analytical and Towns. Planning Regions have one or more cities. 139 Z o --i C-) E G CD > 0 CD z 0 CD c z ,- 0 m 3 0 co SL ;, G) c > 0. U" z z 00 0 > 0 0 --j N CD CD a- T) CD 0 > z M N 0 m m cn La CD z m Go CD > 0 J CD 0 m 0 m C)zx > 3 > U z En CD Cl) I <D 3 CD I 0 -40 k:o- ji -0 (A -10 L -LF IGAN - 140 CA CA "'Lax k.5) Z CA -4 0 x -40C I I I I N) -40C -40 x I I I I I I CF)N 10 00 CF) -4 0 K .@L L 3. Towns-the 209 urban areas in Texas with populations ranging from 2,500 to 9,999 and FIGURE C.2 which are not part of or contiguous to a metropolitan area. All 37 Analytical Planning 0 SAMPLING DISPERSION Region Is have one or more towns. 0 0 .1968 Household Demand Survey 000 Incorporated places of populations 200 to 2,499 are 0 referred to as small communities. These are not 1:1 analyzed quantitatively on a regional basis in this 0 volume because of a lack of data on such places, and the large number of them (985) would require 0 0 analysis that exceeds the scope of this volume. 0 0 A complete lising of the urban areas in Texas by 0 El 0 0 000 0 000 CP 0 analytical region may be found in Appendix B. Figure 0 00 C.1 depicts the 37 Analytical Planning Regions and 0 00 0 the types and number of city sizes located in each El 0 000 0 0 region. 0 11 0 0 El THE DATA BASE 0 1:1 0 0 Insufficient resources, both physical and monetary, is 0 00000 0 0 one of the most common of the many problems 0 0 0 0 associated with planning. A review of other state 0 0 0 plans indicates that in many cases there were either. El 0 00 0 0 0 shortages of people to develop a good outdoor 0 0 recreation plan (i.e., one that can be effectively 0 0 00 0 00 implemented and serve as a guide to development) or, if the people were available, there were insufficient 0 funds for detailed data collection and analysis. 0 0 0 0 Likewise, no adequate statewide data was available 0 for guidance and planning in Texas. 0 Recognizing this problem, the Texas Parks and 0 -IEl Wildlife Department, by communication and LEGEND 0 0 coordinating with many other responsible entities in 0 the State, and by receiving monetary support from Number of Households Interviewed the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation of the Department on 0 of the Interior and the Texas Legislature, designed 1000 0 0 NO and conducted a program of data collection on a F] 201-300 statewide basis which revealed the indications of o 101-200 present and anticipated needs for recreation 0 51-100 opportunities. 0 Less than 30 141 TABLE CA SAMPLE DESIGN OF actual interviews required an average of 45 minutes to Complete information on the socio-economic HOUSEHOLD DEMAND SURVEY complete, while a few lasted much longer. Table C.1 characteristics of each household, including family gives the number of questionnaires taken within each size, race, income and education, occupation, and age City Size No. of Interviews sampling strata. Figure C.2 depicts the sampling of the head of household, was obtained. Participation density and dispersion across the State. was categorized by the type of trip, in-town, Major Citiesa 3,992 out-of-town, or vacation, and according to the Over 100,000 4,702 The survey was divided into two phases of 7,500 destination, urban or rural. In addition, information 10,000-99,999 3,483 2,500-9,999 895 questionnaires each. Phase I collected information for concerning recreational destinations, activity 200-2,499 571 activities participated in during the time period from preferences, investment in recreation equipment, Rural 1,482 October 1, 1968 through March 31, 1969. Phase 11 factors which inhibited participation, and a host of solicited information on activities participated in other characteristics were obtained. TOTAL 15,125 - during the time period from April 1 through a. Includes Houston, Dallas, Fort Worth, and San Antonio. September 30, 1969. The two phases taken together For purposes of the analysis of urban outdoor . represented on full year's participation. The decision recreation, data on all trips with an urban destination In developing the urban portion of the Texas to divide the interviews into two phases was based on were utilized. Of the 15,000 households ' included in Outdoor Recreation Plan, five surveys were the belief that the persons questioned would have the survey, approximately 13,000 resided in the conducted: two surveys of recreation demand, two of difficulty in 'recalling in detail participation which urban areas of the State. outdoor recreations resources, and one survey of the occurred more than six months prior to the date of cities' needs and problems. These included the the interview. However, data was obtained from both The scope of the Household Demand Survey and the 1968-1969 Texas Household Demand Survey, the phases on any vacations taken within the past year, amount of information collected on each household, 1970 On-Site Demand Survey, the 1969 Outdoor on the premise that people would be able to combined to provide the most comprehensive body Recreational Facilities Inventory Survey, the 1971 remember the details of their vacations longer than of data on the outdoor recreation characteristics of Municipal Inventory Update Survey, and the 1971 they remembered weekend outings and similar brief the general population available anywhere in the Urban Planner's Survey. excursions. nation. HOUSEHOLD DEMAND SURVEY TABLE C.2. The most important data collection effort undertaken SAMPLE DESIGN OF THE ON-SITE DEMAND SURVEY in conjunction with this Plan was the Texas Outdoor Recreation Household Demand Survey. This study Number of Number of was designed to determine the magnitude and nature Type of Authority Parks Sampled I nterviews of participation in outdoor recreation in Texas. Public Recreation Areas Information on participation in outdoor recreation National Parks 3 462 was obtained for over 70 activities and detailed U.S. Forest Service Parks 5 418 information for 21 major activities. Interviews were Corps Parks 14 1,366 State Parks 18 2,238 taken by members of professional market research County Parks 12 1,018 firms under contract to the Texas Parks and Wildlife City Parks 38 1,707 Department. Twenty-two interviewing teams Public Total 90 7,209 comprised of 200 interviewers were involved in the Study. Before the actual survey was conducted, Private Recreation Areas questionnaires were submitted to federal, state, and Private Total 73 754 local planners for their review and comments and to a selected group of households for pre-testing. The All Recreation Areas-TOTAL 163 7,963 142 CL 0 z cc CL 0 U. cri r tu L z w r LU LU 4) CL CD LLI 0 cc 00 CL -i LL &L 2 >. (D 0 Cl < 0 a o .-0 LU 0 0 o 0 CC 0. E 0 0 C3 0 0 D U. CD 0 o 0 0 0 z 0 r4 C@ 0 00 0 W- 0 ui 9L 0 o 0 0 0 00 0 00 000 0 0 0< 0 0 00 0 000 < 0 00 0 0 0 -0 0 0 ON-SITE DEMAND SURVEY The On-Site Survey was designed to secure detailed inquire of each entrepreneur or supervisor if there information on the mix of activities pursued, were any additional recreational enterprises in the In order to supplement the information obtained expenditures, distances travelled, facility and activity area. from the Household Demand Survey and to provide preferences, daily peak-use periods, weekday use as detailed information on participant households, an related to weekend use, and specific suggestions The inventory questionnaire was developed with the On-Site Recreation Demand Survey was conducted about site improvements. It was decided that this aid of federal, state, and local experts in the field of during the summer of 1970 in cooperation with type of information would be most accurate if outdoor recreation. The questionnaire was presented federal, state, county, and municipal agencies, and obtained at the time of participation rather than from and field work was conducted by 15 college students selected private enterprises. A total of 7,963 a survey at a later date. The On-Site Survey was also trained in the field of parks and recreation along with recreationists were interviewed at 163 parks across utilized to provide information on the number of staff members from four Councils of Government the State. Figure C.3 shows the dispersion of parks out-of-state users in Texas parks. through a cooperative effort with the Texas Parks and sampled by type of park. The number of interviews Wildlife Department., In gathering the data, the taken at different types of recreation areas is given in A separate section of each questionnaire was devoted enumerators travelled approximately 100,000 miles Table C.2. to obtaining information required for the and visited 3,854 parks. The following table lists the development of standards for selected activities. number of parks. enumerated on the basis of the Sixteen enumerators were employed to administer Standards are an indication of the amount of administering agency: the Survey, under the direction of three field Participation a facility can accommodate annually. TABLE C.3 supervisors. Both interviewers and supervisors were An attempt was made to measure user tolerances to college students who were engaged in recreational varying degrees of crowdedness. Confidence intervals RECREATION FACILITIES INVENTORY curriculums. Many had prior experience working on were obtained denoting the optimum space allocation the recreation facility inventory of the previous per recreationist. This information was then utilized No. of Parks summer. After an extensive training session which in developing the standards used in translating supply Administering Agency I riventoried included trial interviews, the interviewers were sent to into recreational opportunity days. Bureau of Reclamation I specific parks located throughout the State. The sites U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1 were chosen to be representative of all types of public Corps of Engineers 192 OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS AND National Park Service 8 agencies and private enterprises providing recreation FACILITIES INVENTORY U.S. Forest Service 28 opportunities in the State.The enumerators spent one Texas Parks & Wildlife Department 75 week at a time at each park and returned to the park Texas Forest Service 4 The Household Demand Survey and the On-Site River Authority 16 every four weeks, for a total of three weeks at each Survey provide data on the demand for outdoor County Parks 194 park, The interviewers' itinerary was also designed so recreation. Of equal importance to the recreation City Parks 2,085 that a proportionate number of weekdays and planning is the supply of facilities for outdoor Total Public 2,604 weekends were included. recreation. In order to determine the extent and Total Private 1,250 nature of outdoor recreation resources currently The Survey was broken out by activity with separate available in Texas an inventory of recreation TOTAL 3,854 questionnaires in urban areas for picnicking and resources throughout the State was conducted in swimming, and in rural areas for camping and 1969. It was obtained by on-site inspections of parks picnicking while boating and fishing were on the same and recreation facilities in both urban and rural areas, MUNICIPAL INVENTORY UPDATE SURVEY questionnaire. The interviewers were instructed to of both publicly and privately-administered facilities. follow a sample design procedure based upon the All sizes of parks were inventoried, provided they The Municipal Inventory Update Survey was a total number of recreationists in the activity area and supplied some form of outdoor recreation and were mailout survey conducted during the' latter part of the number of questionnaires required for any given open to the general public. To insure that the 1971. Its purpose was to update the urban portion of day. inventory was complete, enumerators were asked to the Outdoor Recreation Areas and Facilities 144 Inventory Survey. Approximately a 75% return was TABLE C.5 realized from the municipalities surveyed. PARTICIPATION IN URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION IN TEXAS BY OUT-OF-STATE RESIDENTS URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION PLANNER'S SURVEY CITY PARK OUT-OF-sTATE RESIDENTS I.N-STATE RESIDENTS INTERVIEWED INTERVIEWED The data obtained from the Household Demand and On-Site Surveys provided useful information for the CITY PARK LOCATION NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT development of the Texas Outdoor Recreation Plan. Austin 2 .6 342 99.4 However, in addition to the understanding that comes Corpus Christi 9 3.1 283 96.9 from the analysis of raw data, the planner also needs Houston 8 2.6 303 97.4 to have a picture of the human element, the "feel" of Midland 2 1.8 109 97.2 San Antonio 9 2.7 330 97.3 a city. This cannot always be quantified but does Tyler 2 .7 281 99.3 exist nevertheless and should profoundly affect urban Total 32 1.9 1,648 98.1 outdoor recreation planning. To isolate this essential individuality of each of the cities studied, an additional survey was conducted involving city parks Source: 1970 Texas Outdoor Recreation On-Site Demand Survey. departments,or when non-existent, other city entities responsible for providing recreation opportunities. The number of questionnaires returned by city size is .presented in the following table: facilities for each of these sections. After needs were ESTIMATED 1968 AND PROJECTED URBAN enumerated for each section of the city, planners PARTICIPATION TABLE CA were asked to draw up a priority list comparing needs throughout the city. 1968 PARTICIPATION RECREATION PLANNER'S SURVEY The second part of the questionnaire was general in 1968 participation data was determined from City Size No. of Questionnaires scope and subjective in nature. Park planners were Household Survey participation data. Sample a, provided an opportunity to express their opinions on participation data from the survey was multiplied by Metro 94 Cities 61 such issues as needed recreational legislation, and a series of expansion factors to reflect estimated Towns 200 improvement of the coordination between all levels participation by the entire population. of a metro, TOTAL 355 of government. They were also asked to provide City, or town. These expansion factors are simply the descriptive information on recreational programs in ratio of the population to the number of people their city, operational and managerial problems, and sampled for a given city size for each of the 37 a. Includes communities contiguous to metropolitan areas. recreational trends that they detected on the basis of analytical planning regions. These ratios, or expansion their own city's experience. factors, multiplied times the number of sample days The questionnaire was divided into two parts,'The of participation for a given activity for a certain city first part asked planners to identify the urban The Planner's Survey provided extremely useful size give the number of days of participation for that outdoor recreation needs for their communities. Prior information which supplemented the data obtained activity by all the residents of that city size. to listing the land and facilities needs for their cities, from other sources. Each city was given an planners were asked to delineate sections of their city opportunity to contribute a direct input to the plan PROJECTED PARTICIPATION according to predominant race and income developed for their region. It also increased the characteristics. Thdy were then requested to list the Department's awareness of the problems and needs Recreation participation in the urban areas was current needs for developed land, open space, and confronting Texas' cities. projected for the years 1970, 1975, 1980, 1990, and 145 urban activities were computed for each city within Where: 2000 by each of the three city-size categories for all the th ree city-size categories, Then, multiple Yij the average number of days per of the 37 Analytical Planning Regions for a total of regression analysis was used to develop forecasting household of activity i participated in by 20 major activities. equations for each city-size category, relating individuals in urban place variations in household participation rates to k constant. Projected participation for the urban activities is socio-economic characteristics and the availability of Y1j percent Anglo population in urban place categorized into resident and non-resident, and outdoor recreational facilities. "ill. includes only participation which occurred while the y2j percent Mexican-American population in participant was on a trip. Participation occurring at SOcio-economic factors analyzed by multiple urban place "j". ,the participant's home was not included. Resident regression techniques were race, or ethnic y3j percent Black population in urban place participation occurs when a resident of an urban background, expressed as the percentage of Anglo, "ill. place participates in an outdoor recreation acitivitV in Mexican-American, and Black households, average y4j average family size in urban place "j". the urban place in which he resides. Non-resident household income, average age of the head of the y5j = average age of the head of household in participation occurs when a resident (of Texas) household, and average family size. Other factors urban place "j". participates in an outdoor recreation activity in an were analyzed as well, including occupation, sex, y6i = average household income in urban place urban place in which he does not reside. Participation education, and city size. However, the analysis . "Ill. by out-of-state residents in the activities considered in revealed that these variables did not significantly y7j = availability of facilities for activity "i" in this volume were found to be insignificant with the improve the predictive capability of the projections urban place "j". possible exception of regional amusement centers, i9quations, and they were, thus, omitted from the B coefficients indicating the. importance of such as Six Flags Over Texas. As indicated in Table final set of equations. each of the independent variables. C.5, of the 1,707 individuals and/or groups of recreationists interviewed in a sample of 38 urban An important factor affecting participation is the It should be pointed out that the coefficients of this parks within six metropolitan areas, only 1.9 percent availability of recreational facilities. In developing the equation are elasticities, i.e., each coeff icient were out-of-state residents. For this reason, multiple regression model, it was found that the total indicates the percent change in participation out-of-state participation was not considered in the area devoted to an activity and the total number of associated with a one percent change in the relevant development of urban participation projections. facilities for a giv 'an activity were the best indicators independent variable, of availability -@in terms of,-their relation to In general, the procedure used to project This section explains the various methodologies used participation. These indicators were tested in terms of participation per household was to construct a basic to project urban participation. Two projection total area and.f@cilities and on @a per capita basis, and set of projection data representing estimates of the models were utilized to project urban resident it was found that the total availability was more average values of the independent socio-economic participation: a multiple-regression model and a trend strongly related to participation than per capita variables and the availability of facilities variable, for model. A third methodology, also a trending availability. each urban place for each period, 1970, 1975, 1980, technique, was utilized to project non-resident 1990, and 2000. participation. The approach employed to project demand used aver-age days of participation per household for each The construction of the basic forecasting data set for urban place as the dependent variable and the average projecting participation involved the location of data MULTIPLE REGRESSION MODEL values of the set of household socio-economic traits sources for the expected values of each of the and availability for each urban place as independent independent variables. For the socio-economic The Multiple Regression Model was utilized to project variables. A general form of the forecasting equations variables, the average values of income, age, racial participation for a total of nine activities, swimming, employed to project urban outdoor recreation composition, family size, and population on a basebal I /sof tball, tennis, golf, football /soccer, demand can be written as follows: regional and city-size basis were' needed for the years, sightseeing, picnicking, child's play, and driving for 1970, 1975, 1980, 1990, and 2000. The secondary pleasure. Using data from the Household Survey, Y- k X 131 X132 X133 X134 XB5 X136 XB7 sources of information utilized in assembling the average household participation rates for the various 11 Ij 2i 3j 4j 5i 6j 7j socio-economic data set were as follows: 146 1. U. S. Census of Population: 1950-Texas. participation in the particular activity. Thus, it is 2. U. S. Census of Population: 1960-Texas. necessary to provide an adequate number of facilities t the projection year (1970, 1975, 1980,' 3. U. S. Census of Population: 1970-Texas. for the activity to determine its actual demand. By 1990, or 2000). 4. Statistical Profile of the Spanish Surname doing so, participation can be established for those Population of Texas by Harley L. Browning and people who are now non-part ici pants due to the lack i the region of residence. S. Dale McLemore. of facilities as well as those participating at relatively t 5. Total Personal Income Estimates for Texas low rates. NHH i= the total. number of households residing Counties Office of Business Economics, U. S. in the selected city size of region "i" at Department of Commerce. The program developed for the interation of supply "t" time period. 6. Preliminary Revised Population Projections for simply kept adding facilities until the addition of t Texas Counties to 1990, Series I-A, compiled more facilities had a negligible effect on demand. In DPNHH = the average days of participation per by the Population Resea@ch . Center, The most cases this point was reached after two i household of the selected city size in University of Texas at Austin, June 1971. interations. Supply was interated in this manner for region "i" for time "t". each activity and each time period. By using this In some cases, the secondary sources provided t directly the required information. However, in most technique the possiblity of deriving a low Th.e,NHH i is a population statistic and is given for cases, the methodology had to be developed to participation rate as a result of a lack of opportunity each year -and each analytical region. The number of establish trends from available time series data. Where was overcome. households by city size by analytical region for each time series data was utilized to establish demographic projection year was determined from population and socio-economic trends, personnel from the TREND MODEL estimates prepared by- the Popuiation Research Bureau of Business Research and the Population . Center, the University of Texas at Austin. It was The Trend Model was utilized to project urban necessary to calculate DPNHH!, as shown below. Research Center of the University of Texas at Austin I - resident participation for the remaining eleven were consulted regarding the appropriate trending activities, including basketball, walking for pleasure, DPNHH t was computed by establishing an average methodology to be utilized. bicycling, nature study, salt and freshwater fishing, househo iId participation rate for each activity and for One element of the basic projection data set proved salt and freshwater boating, salt and freshwater each city size in each analytical region in 1968, .to be particularly difficult to trend over time. While skiing, and surfing. The Trend Model projections were 196-8, verage annual change in this the' Recreation Facilities Inventory provided based on both population trends and trends in -DPNHH i Iand the a t-1968 The formula complete information on the existing availability of recreation participation patterns. The methodology rate bf participation,&DPNHH i outdoor recreation facilities in the urban areas of A6termined resident days of participation, or the for computing DPNHH 1968 is simply: Texas, no comparable data were available for earlier amount of participation in each activitiy originating i periods. The lack of earlier data bases for facilities the specified region and taking place in that region, PD 1968 inventories prevented the simple trending of for each city-size category in each region using the DPNHH 1968 availability. into the future. To provide a basis for following procedu .re: i NHH 1968 projecting availability, it was decided- to employ a i computerized technique which would interate the TDP@=(NHHt) (1DPNHHt) supply facilities for a given time period. For example, aIs in the case of the year 1975, the projection Where: Wb_ere: equation would determine the number of swimming DPNHH. 1968 the average days of participation -per t i days of demand for a given city as a function of the TDP i the total days of participation by household in the specified activity soci-economic characteristics of the city and the residents of a selected city size of region i occurring in the selected city size in ,magnitude of the available swimming facilities. in some specified outdoor recreation 1968 region "i" in 1968. However, it has been determined that the availability activity taking place in a selected city size PD i the total number of resident participation of any facility does have a significant effect on the in region "i" for "t" time period. days for the specified activity generated 147 by the residents of the selected city size determined that approximately 90% of the m a specified metropolitan area located in 1968 in region "i" in 1968. non-resident participation originated from within 30 region "i". NFIH i the total number of households residing, miles of the urban area in which the participation POPi the estimated or projected population of in the selected city size in'reg'ion "i" in took place. Thus, the majority of non-resident region "i". 1968. participation generally originated within the region in Non-resident participation in the cities and towns for 1968 which the participation occurred. 1968 was determined by using the statewide After determining DPNHH i the next steps were non-resident participation in cities and towns as a to determine the annual change in the rate of The determination of non-resident participation in basis. The 1968 regional non-resident participation participation. The steps were as follows: the metropolitan areas was computed differently than for cities and town's was calculated by proportioning 1. Determine the regional DPNHH for the years it was for the cities and towns for the year 1968. The -out participation on the basis of population, i.e., the 1963 and 1968 for a selected city size. different methods were due to the fact that the metro ratio of the total regional population to the statewide 2. Compute the annual average change in the areas could -provide a broader, more in-depth data population was applied to the statewide total regiional DPNHH's between 1963 and 1968 for base to work with than could the cities and towns. non-resident participation for cities and for towns for the selected city size as follows: Consequently, for each metro, the 1968-1969 each activity. The resulting 1968 figures were then Household Survey non-resident participation in that projected trending them out on the basis of the total 1963-1968 = DPNHH 1968 _ DPNHH 1. 963 metro was utilized as the basis for projecting future regional population growth. The computation of &DPNHH i L participation. The technique employed for metros non-resident participation for 1968 may be expressed 5-. was, for a particular projection year, to simply vary as follows: 1970 1975 the initial 1968 participation level by the same Computation of DPNHH -i DPNHH i percentage as the total regional population had varied - POP1 1968 1980 1990 2000 h 1968 11968 DPNHH i I DPNHH i , DPNHH i since 1968. T us, for example, for 1970, the 1968 NRP ij (NRP Si 1968 for each activity for the pr.ojected years was d. etermined non-resident participation was increased by a POP s by.combiningIDPNHH 1968 and DPNHH t as follows: percentage equal to the total regional population Where: i i increase from 1968 to 1970. Similarly, non-resident participation for 1975, 1980, 1990, and 2000 was 1968 t 1968+ 963-1968 cleterm .ined, except that projected population changes ij the total day's of non-resident DPNHH i DPNHH (t-1968)(ADPNHH1 i were utilized instead of the actual changes. participation tor a given activity taking place within city size "j" (cities or towns) The model may be expressed as follows: located in region "i" for the year 1968. URBAN NON-RESIDENT PARTICIPATION t 1968 POKI i the I planning region in which the MODEL NRP im (NRP im 1968 city/cities or town/towns are located. POP. Non-resident . participation, or that participation the city-size category for the urban place occurring in an urban place by one who does not Where: (in this case, only cities or towns). reside there, was projected for all 20 activities. NRPt the total days of non-resident Although it varTes.by activity artiong the three im participation for a given activity taking NRP 1968 the total days of non-resident sj city-size categories, as w6tt as, among the urban areas place within a selected metro "m" participation for a given activity taking within a particular city-size category, non-resident located in region "i" for time period "t". place with city size "j". (cities or towns) participation accounted for approximately 9% of the t the projection year (1970, 1'975, 1980, throughout the state for the year 1968. total recreation participation occurring in the-urban 1990, or 2000). 1968 areas of Texas. The average for metro areas was 6* 4 the planning region in which the metro is POP i the estimated total population of region for cities, 19%; and for towns, 13%. It was also located. "i" in 1968. 148 1968 whereas regional ..data was utilized in the resident 2. Compute the annual average change in the POP the estimated total population of the participation model for DPNHHt previously DPNHH's between 1963 and 1968 as follows: s state in 1968. i discussed. Therefore, the model to compute statewide 1963-1968 = D 1968 1963 average household participation rates. by city-size ADPNHH cs PNHH cs DPNHH cs The formula for the computation of non-resident category for resident participation for each of these 5 participation for the remaining planning years may be six activities becomes DPNHHt = DPNHH 1968 + expressed as follows: cs cs The computation of DPNHH 1970 DPNHH 1975 (t- 1968) (&DPNHH 1963-1968)- and the procedure 1980 cs cs cs. POP t to determine DPNHH t may be outlined as follows. and DPNHH cs for each activity was determined by NRF@- (NRP 1968 i s combining DPNHH1968 and DPNHHt as follows: 1J t cs cs POP 1i968 DPNHH cs was computed by establishing 1968 statewide average household participation rates by DPNHH t DPNHH 1968 4- (t-1968) (ADPNHH 1963-1968 Where: city-size category for each of . the six activities, cs cs cs 1968 DPNHH cs and the statewide average annual Where: NRP t the total days of non-resident t-1968 participation for a given activity taking. change in this rate of partiCiDation, DPNHH cs GPNHH t the average days of participation per place within city size "j" (cities and The formula for stating DPNHH 1968 is cs household by city-size category for time cs towns) located in region "i" for time t period "t". 1968 PD 1968 DPNHH cs cs 196-8 t the projection year 1970, 1975, or 1980. t the projection year (i.e., 1970, 1975, NHH cs 1980,1990, or 2000). cs city-size category (metro, city, or town). OTHER ACTIVITIES Where: DPNHH 1968 = the average days of participation per DPNHH 1968= the average days of participation per cs household by city-size category in the In addition to the previously discussed activities, cs household by city-size category in the specified activity in 1968. Chapter 4 presents projected statewide household specified activity in 1968. participation rates for metropolitan areas, cities, and t-1968 = the specified projection year minus 1968; towns for the years 1970, 1975, and 1980 for 1968 := the total number of resident participati 2,.7, and 12 for the y Iears 1970, 1975, archery, sport shooting, horseback riding, zoos, PD cs on rodeo, and cultural centers. Statewide rates for days for the specified activity generated and 1980, respectively. by the residents of each city-size category 1963-1968 metropolitan areas, cities, and towns were computed in 1968. aDPNHH cs the annual average change in the rates of because variations from region to region in resident participation in each specified participation rates and trending patterns made 1968,.=, regional rates impractical to determine. The NHH cs the.total number of households residing activity between the years 1963 and 1968 methodology used to compute statewide household in each city-size category in 196.8, for each city-size category. participation rates by city-size category for these six After determining DPNHH1968 , annual rates of FACILITY STANDARDS activities is the same procedure utilized to establish cs change by city-size category in the rates of regional average household participation rates by city-size category for resident participation, participation were calculated as follows: A facility standard is defined as the averagenumber t of outdoor recreation opportunities, measured in DPNHH i , with. one difference; statewide data is used 1. Determine the DPNHH cs for the years 1963 days of participation, or "activity days," which can for each city-size category for these six activities and 1968. be provided by one unit of a specified outdoor 149 recreation facility per unit of time, given the existing resulting figure, the resource requirements, WD is the number of weekdays during the established participation patterns and preferences of outdoor expresses the deficit recreation facility or peak use.season, based on user participation, by recreationists. The purpose of the facility standard is resource units. to provide a conversion factor so that supply and specified activity. demand can be compared, and from this, resource Example: J is the ratio of the number of participation days requirements determined. The procedures explained DEFICIT OF CURRENT occurring on weekdays during the peak use below illustrate the use of standards in comparing supply and demand and computing resource OR FUTURE season to participation occurring on weekends requirements: RESOURCE OPPORTUNITY DAYS and holidays during the peak use season by REQUIR-EMENTS FACILITY STANDARD specified activity; or J may be defined as a 1. First, the standards for each activity are used to (PARTICIPATION weighing factor for reducing or expanding the convert the existing supply of related outdoor DAYS PER FACILITY UNIT) average number of opportunity days provided recreation facilities to existing opportunity The primary data sources used in developing facility by one unit of the specified outdoor recreation days for that activity regardless of geographical standards were the 1968 Texas Outdoor Recreation facility during the peak use season. breakdown. The resulting quantity, Household Demand Survey and the 1970 Texas .participation days, is in terms of measurement Outdoor Recreation On-Site Demand Survey. P is the average number of outdoor recreation which can be compared with geographically opportunities, measured in participation days, compatible demand, which is in terms of days The Household Survey provided information on which can be provided by one unit of a of participation. seasonality, peak-use periods, and weekday-weekend specified outdoor recreation facility per day participation patterns. The On-Site Survey furnished during the peak use season, given the current Example: information on daily participation patterns, length of participation patterns and preferences of outdoor recreationists. stay, number of persons utilizing a facility, turnover NUMBER OF EXISTING OPPORTUNITY rates, and the attitudes and preferences of urban DAYS = FACILITY STANDARD x recreationists with respect to the spacing of facilities. Computed as follows: P = (Y) (T) EXISTING SUPPLY Secondary sources were used for comparison purposes, or where primary data was lacking. Where: 2. Second, the computed existing opportunity days for the activity (existing supply) are From the information gathered in these surveys, a Y the average number of participants that compared with current or projected future model was developed to compute a standard for each normally use or occupy one unit of the participation days for the same activity (current of the urban outdoor recreation facilities. The general specified outdoor recreation facility at or future demand) to determine whether a formula for computing standards and definitions of one point in time during the peak season. surplus or deficit of opportunity days exists for each variable are presented below. the activity. T the turnover rate of participants per unit OD = [WD(J)P + WE(P)l EF of the specified outdoor recreation Example: facility per day during the peak use Where: season. SURPLUS OR DEFICIT = EXISTING OPPORTUNITY DAYS-CURRENT OR OD is the average number of outdoor recreation WE is the number of weekend days and holidays FUTURE PARTICIPATION DAYS opportunities, measured in participation days during the established peak use season, based which can be provided by one unit of a on user participation, by specified activity. 3. Third, if there is a resulting deficit of specified outdoor recreation facility per year, opportunity days for the activity, the deficit is given the current participation patterns and EF is the reciprocal of the proportion of total annual* divided by the standard for the activity and the preferences of outdoor recreationists. participation which occurs during the peak use 150 season by the specified activity; or EF may be C defined as an expansion factor which converts omputed as follows: EF It should be pointed out that standards are meant to serve as guidelines, and should not be interpreted as the average number of outdoor recreation Where: inflexible measuring tools universally applied in -all opportunities, measured in participation days, planning situations. Standards are not substitutes for which can be provided by one unit of a K the percent of total participation in the the judgments of professional recreation planners specified outdoor recreation facility during the specified activity which occurs during the who have gained the ability to make competent peak use season, to an annual figure. peak season. judgments through experience. Rather, the standards, serving as guidelines, provide the planner with a means of comparing supply and demand, thus TABLE C.6 improving the planner's ability to make professional judgments. URBAN FACILITY STANDARDS FOR SELECTED OUTDOOR RECREATION ACTIVITIES AND FACILITIES Urban facility standards are presented in Table C.6. Each urban facility standard applies to each urban Urban Standard city-size category. No significant differences were (Days of Opportunity) found which identified a need for different standards Activity/Facility Unit of Measure Per Unit of Measure according to city-size category, i.e., each urban Designated Swimming Square yard of water 150 facility standard may be used to compute resource requirements for metros, cities, towns, or all three of Child's Play Acre 27,623 these urban areas combined. Standards for the Baseball /Softbal I Field 13,804 activities of freshwater boat fishing, boating, and skiing are provided for information only. The Picnicking Table 1,702 combined boating, skiing, and boat fishing standard Football/Soccer Field 7,224 was used to compute resource requirements for surface acres of freshwater. Golf Hole 4,047 Tennis Court, double 2,694 Basketball Court, full 8,795 ADDITIONAL STANDARDS Boat Fishing, Freshwater Acre of surface freshwater 310 Boating, Freshwater Acre of surface freshwater 306 Standards were presented in Chapter 4 for the activities of archery, sport shooting, and horseback Skiing, Freshwater Acres of surface f reshWater 228 riding. Participation varied rather widely across the Boating, Skiing, and Boat Acre of surface freshwater 629 state. Due to these wide variations in participation, Fishing, Freshwater resource requirements were not computed. However, (Combined Activities) planners in some areas of the state are planning Boat Lane-Freshwater Lane 13,486 facilities for these activities because of local interests. The decision to provi4e facilities for these activities is Boat Lane-Saltwater Lane 10,986 best suited for local levels rather than on a statewide Bicycling, Walking, and Mile of trail 8,464 (7ORP) basis because of the variations in Nature Study participation from one locale to another. Standards (Combined Activities) are provided for these activities to assist the local 151 planners in their planning efforts. The methodology the Urban Volume. In Chapter 4, the order of support facility which normally accompanies a boat utilized to calculate these three standards employed presentation was land, water, and facility ramp. This distinction is necessary to understand the same procedures discussed above for facility requirements because this was considered a more that, continuing the example, the 1.2 acres includes standards. logical organization for presenting these three types more than the boat ramp itself, if the ramp is of resource requirements when grouped as resources. visualized in terms of the launching facility only, CONVERSION OF RESOURCE REQUIREMENT while excluding land areas such as large open space TO LAND ACRES The purpose of this section is to explain the use of buffer zones which may accompany a recreational the conversion factors used to compute developed facility. To provide another perspective of the resources land acres and to briefly describe the procedure needed to satisfy estimated resource requirements, adopted in the Urban Volume to produce developed Figures presented in Table C.7 are statewide urban resource requirement units were converted to land land acres. Land acres required per facility unit are averages utilized in the TORP for metropolitan areas, acres. These land acreage figures represent estimates. presented in Table C.7. Figures listed under the cities, towns, and these three city-size categories of the land acreage that should be developed with column titled "ACRES PER UNIT" represent the combined. However, variations will occur across the recreational facilities (henceforth, referred to as acreage needed to develop one facility unit as listed in state in the amount of land required to develop a a developed land acres) to meet the resource t h e adjacent " F AC I L I TY UNIT OF particular type of facility. These variations in requirements for the 13 selected facilities presented MEASUREMENT" column. For example, it would developed land required will result primarily from in Chapter 4. Developed land acre figures do include require 1.2 acres of land to construct one freshwater differences across the state in terrain and vegetation, some minor sized buffer zones but the large open two-lane boat ramp. The 1.2 acres includes only the and to a lesser extent participant's preferences in the spaces which may surround outdoor recreation land necessary to develop the ramp and does not,, spacing of facilities. For example, picnic tables may facilities are not included. The methodology utilized include open space lands that may be desired adjacent be spaced closer in the dense forests of deep East to convert resource requirement units to land acres to the boat ramp, particularly if the ramp is located Texas than in the open terrain found in far West follows facility standards in this appendix because in a park. The 1.2 acres does include enough land to Texas. Therefore, as iterated in Chapter 4, resource this is the order of calculations actually followed in construct a 35 car (with trailers) parking lot, a requirements expressed in terms of facility units are more accurate when utilized by local planners than the developed land requirements. Resource TABLE C.7 requirements enumerated in terms of numerical facility units are less subject to variations across the LAND ACRES REQUIRED PER FACILITY UNIT, STATEWIDE AVERAGES state than variations caused by converting these requirements to developed land acres. For example, FACILITY 10 picnic tables required in any part of the state is a ACTIVITY UNIT OF MEASUREMENT ACRES PER UNIT constant figure; however, converting these 10 picnic tables to developed land acres required would Swimming (Pools) square yard .0013 possibly produce varying figures if terrain, vegetation, Child's Play (Playground) acre 1 and user preference variations are considered. Baseball/Softball field 3 Picnicking table .25 Football/Soccer field 3.8 A variety of secondary sources were reviewed in Golf hole 10 determining factors to be used in converting facility Tennis court, doubles .13 requirements to developed land requirements, Basketball court, full .2 Boating, Boat Fishing, Skiing FW ramp (with 2 lanes) 1.2 principle of which was the NRPA's publication titled Boating, Boat Fishing, Skiing SW ramp (with 2 lanes) 1.2 National Park Recreation and Open Space Standards, Walking mile 8 June 1971. Figures from secondary sources were Bicycling mile 8 Nature Study mile 8 modified to produce developed land area figures (for Combined Trail mile 8 applicable facilities) that were appropriate to the 152 urban areas of Texas. These figures, listed in Table facilities. A series of maps were developed and C.7, were multiplied by the number of facility units CUMULATIVE utilized for this analysis. These metro maps showed RESOURCE Deficit Opportunity Days for each activity required for each projection year to the different socio-economic subsections of the area REQUIREMENT Facility Standard obtain developed land requirements. (UNITS OF FACILITY) (Days Per Facility Unit) and the dispersion of parks and recreational facilities. Also given special attention were the areas expected Land acres required for each picnic table were based Incremental resource requirements, which are the to undergo rapid population growth and physical on information gathered in the 1970 On-Site Demand number of units needed within a specified time expansion in the future. Then, conclusions drawn Survey. Respondents were asked their opinions and period, assuming that the units of facilities needed for from this analysis were used to qualify, where preferences regarding usage patterns, the number of previous time periods have been provided, were necessary, the resource requirements calculated in the people using a site, and spacing. These attitudes, calculated simply by subtracting the cumulative first step to compensate for inadequate facility patterns, and preferences were then considered in resource requirement oi the preceding year from the dispersion. A similar analysis was conducted for cities developing the "ACR ES PE R UN IT" f igures in Table cumulative resource requirement of the year in and towns, excpet that it was based on inter-city or C.7. Although On-Site Survey data was not gathered question. inter-town distribution of parks and facilities. Again, for the remaining activities/facilities, these land this analysis was used to qualify, where necessary, the standards were based upon, extensive study and If a surplus resulted (opportunity days greater than resource requirements previously calculated to experience in the design of recreation facilities and participation), the resource requirement was simply account for inadequate inter-city or inter-town parks, and represent generally accepted design criteria stated as zero. In some instances, participation dispersion of facilities. for facility spacing in Texas' urban areas. occurring in an urban area declined from one planning year to the next. Where this occurred, the In the development of resource requirements, the RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS resource requirements for that activity were left at assumption is made that the facility units satisfied the the previous high level, rather than advocate what total demand for the activity, with the exception of Facilities for which urban resource requirements were would amount to removing facilities to meet a swimming pools, boat ramps, and miles of trails. (The computed include square yards of swimming pools, lessened demand. The incremental requirements were different treatment for these three facility types is acres of playgrounds, baseball/softball fields, picnic then recorded as zero. explained later.) For instance, it was assumed that .tables, football/soccer fields, holes of golf, tennis everyone who picnics away from home does so at a courts, basketball courts, surface acres of freshwater For boat ramp resource requirements the deficit in table, that all child's play away from home takes lakes, boat ramps (freshwater and saltwater), and opportunity days were first divided by the boat lane place at a playground, etc. Resource requirements miles of trails for walking, bicycling, and nature facility standard to give a resultant boat lane repres ent facility development needed in addition to study. Resource requirements were computed for all requirement. The boat lane requirement was then existing facilities. In no way should facility needs be 37 analytical planning regions for the years 1970, divided by two (the number of boat lanes per boat interpreted to mean that all of the stated 1975, 1980, 1990, and 2000. ramp) to give the number of boat ramp requirements. requirements should be provided by local parks and Two lanes per ramp were used as the standard recreation departments. Recreation resources are also Resource requirements were determined by means of number of lanes per ramp, realizing that the number supplied by federal and state agencies, private a two-step analysis. First, resource requirements were of lanes per ramp will vary from site to site. concerns, quasi-public concerns, and school systems. calculated by comparing projected participation with All relevant support facilities should be provided in opportunity days available: In the second stage, an analysis of the availability and addition to the resource requirements shown in the Existing Opportunity spatial distribution of recreation opportunities was tables. An example of support facilities is grills and SURPLUS OR DEFICIT = Days- Current of Future conducted. For the metropolitan areas, the analysis garbage cans for picnic tables. Participation Days was more detailed than for the cities and towns. In If a deficit resulted (participation greater than this analysis of the metro areas, consideration was SURFACE ACRES opportunity days), the deficit was divided by the given to the economic and ethnic subsections of the standard to determine cumulative resource metro and the contiguous cities and towns with The computation of urban surface acres which requirements: respect to the distribution of parks and recreation considered the combined total participation in 153 boating, skiing, and boat fishing, in volved several as comparable urban data was unavailable and more To compute urban resource requirements for surface special problems, and consequently, certain difficult to collect, the assumption was made that the acres, the combined suitability factor was first assumptions and qualifications were necessary. The averages of the 37 regions for rural surface access multiplied times the actual number of surface acres in first assumption dealt with the availability of should represent good approximations of suitable each region for each city size to obtain the total freshwater lakes to support boating, boat fishing, and water for urban areas as well. suitable acres. Suitable freshwater acres multiplied by skiing. It was assumed that all freshwater lake surface the combined boating-skiing-boat fishing standard acreage reported by the various types of urban areas 2. 1968 Total Annual Freshwater Participation yielded opportunity days, which was compared to was available for these activities. This assumption was Days by Activity participation. If a deficit resulted, the deficit was made due to the limited existing data on the a. Boating 1,538,150 activity days' divided by the combined standard to determine availability of lakes. Exceptions to this assumption resource requirements for suitable surface acres. might be due to restrictions limiting usage, for b. Water Skiing 471,180 activity days Finally, suitable surface acres divided by the example, for sanitary reasons, or due to limited itability factor gave actual surface acres required, or .sul accessibility because of a lack of boat ramps. C. Boat Fishing 988,075 activity days 1 surface acres needed assuming that a portion of them would not be suitable for the three activities. A second assumption dealt with the suitability of a This data was taken from the 1968-1969 Texas freshwater lake for the three activities of boating, Household Demand Survey for urban 'areas. In the computation of fresh .water surface acre boat fishing, and skiing. Generally, the entire surface requirements, it was assumed that all boating, skiing, acreage of a body of fresh water is not suitable for 3. 1968 Total Combined Participation Days: and boat fishing took place on a lake or reservoir, these activities because of water depth, proximity to the shore, obstructions, etc. Consequently, an (a) + (b) + (c) = 1,538,160 + 471,180 + 988,075 either public or private. Rivers and streams were not adjustment factor was developed to account for those 2,997,405 considered because of the problems involved in trying portions of freshwater lakes that could not support to develop a standard and determine opportunity boating, boat fishing, and skiing. For urban 4. Weighted Freshwater Suitability Proportions By days provided by rivers or streams. Of course, it is freshwater lakes, this factor, a weighted proportion, Activity: recognized that river or stream participation could be was determined to be .6632, or the proportion of a substituted for lake participation depending upon the 1 538 1150 preference of local residents, adequacy and quality of lake estimated as suitable for boating, boat fishing, a. Boating = .2!9f77M ! (.6932)=.3557 streams for recreation, etc. and skiing combined. The following steps illustrate the computation of this factor: b. Skiing = 471 -1 90.@ (.3689)=0580 2,997,405 SWIMMING POOLS 1. Proportions of fresh water suitable for boating C. Boat Fishing= 988,M (.7568)=.2495 (B), skiing (S), and boat fishing (F): T,997-,47 Resource requirements for swimming pools were computed based on the fact that 94% of all urban a. -Boating .6932 The purpose of this step is to weigh the suitability swimming in inland regions takes place in pools. b. Skiing .3689 factors for each activity according to each activity's Thus, in computing resource requirements for pools, proportionate participation. 94% of the total swimming participation taking place C. Boat Fishing .7568 in the inland regions was used. For the six saltwater 5. Weighted -Boating, Skiing, Boat Fishing regions, it. was found that 70.48% of the total The above figures are statewide averages of the Combined Freshwater Suitability Proportion: swimming participation in each region occurred in estimated proportions of freshwater surface acres .3557 +.0580 +.2495 = .6632 swimming pools. Likewise, 70.48To of the total suitable for each of the respective activities. The data swimming participation was used to compute on a regional basis was actually collected for rural swimming pool resource requirements for the six 1. It was determined that, on a statewide basis, 21.1% saltwater regions. It* should be pointed out that surface acres and gathered from a. telephone survey of all urban freshwater fishing took place from a boat. taken in each of the 37 analytical regions. Inasmuch designated freshwater and saltwater swimming areas 154 may be substituted for swimming pool requirements. boat hoist, boat house, marina, slip, etc. The data was The total regional participation for each of the three However, in doing so, total swimming participation extracted from the 1968-1969 Texas Household activities was multiplied by the activity's respective (figures in the participation table, Chapter 3) should Demand Survey. The three factors shown above were adjustment factor. The three adjusted participation be considered, not the participation figures Used to calculated by computing the ratio of days of figures were then summed and compared with the compute the swimming pool resource requirements, participation in a given activity attributed to boat opportunity days available. If a deficit resulted it was .which were adjusted to reflect only participation ramp usage to days of participation in that same divided by the combined trails standard (walking, occurring in pools. Substitutions should be made only activity attributed to all means of launching or bicycling, and nature study) to arrive at a combined if it has been clearly determined that swimmers storing a boat. trails requirement. The combined requirement was would be satisfied with these substitutions. then broken down separately for walking, bicycling, The adjustment factors for salt water for the three and nature study, by 'percentage on the basis of BOAT RAMPS activities were computed in a similar manner, and are participation. For this reason, and due to rounding, as follows: the sum of the incremental resource requirements Regional participation totals for boating, boat fishing, may not agree exactly with the total. and skiing were also adjusted downward to consider Saltwater Boating-.303 only the estimated proportion of participation Saltwater Skiing-.965 In the computation of resource requirements for wherein a boat ramp was usecL For instance, a Saltwater Boat Fishing-.885 trails, horseback riding trails were included in the recreationist may leave his boat in the water until the opportunity days figures only if the horseback trail next time it is used, or he may simply launch from Resource requirements for saltwater boat ramps were was designed for multiple use. Trails designated solely the bank. Factors used to adjust participation for then computed in the same manner as they were for for horseback riding were not included. these three activities shown below reflect the fresh water. For saltwater boat fishing, the proportion of participation occurring in each activity proportion of total fishing estimated to have taken OTHER ACTIVITIES where access is gained to the water through a boat place from a boat was .184. ramp facility. Although participation figures were calculated for TRAILS surfing, sightseeing, and driving for pleasure, resource Freshwater Boating-.6381 requirements were not computed. This was due to the Freshwater Skiing-.8223 The resource requirements for three types of trails difficulties encountered in quantifying these activities Freshwater Boat Fishing-.9736 activities, walking, bicycling, and nature study, were in terms of a standard, and in defining facilities which should be provided to satisfy the demand for these also . accorded a different type of treatment. activities. For freshwater boat fishing above, total freshwater Participation data for these three activities was fishing participation in the region is first adjusted to adjusted downward to consider only trails SUGGESTED RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS FOR determine only freshwater fishing'occurring from a participation taking place at public recreation areas. SMALL COMMUNITIES boat (.211 of the total freshwater fishing) then From the 1968-1969 Texas Household Demand freshwater boat fishing is adjusted for boat ramp Survey, it was found that a substantial amount of Small communities, defined in the TORP as urban usage by the factor specified above. participation occurs at other than designated areas ranging in population from 200 to 2,499 and recreation places, such as on streets and sidewalks. not contiguous to a metropolitan area, should have The adjusted participation totals for each of the three Consequently, adjustment factors were derived to adequate park and recreation facilities to meet the ..activities were then summed and this figure used to account for trails parti@ipation at public recreation recreational needs of its residents and visitors. The compute freshwater boat ramp resource areas. These factors were determined from the methodology utilized to compute resource requirements. Household Survey, and were as follows: requirements for metropolitan areas, cities, and towns, was modified slightly to determine suggested These adjustment factors were developed from data Walking-.105 resource requirements for an urban area with a on the incidence of facility usage for the various Bicycling-.040 population of 2,500 based on 1980 household ,means of launching or storing a boat, e.g., boat ramp, Nature Study-.201 participation rates. Table C.8 outlines this modified 155 TABLE C.8 ADAPTATION OF TORP METHODOLOGY TO CALCULATE SUGGESTED RESOURCE REOUIREMENTS FOR SMALL COMMUNITIES USING CITY SIZE OF 2500 POPULATION AND 1980 PROJECTED PARTICIPATION RATES 11) (2) 13) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) TOWNS 1980 Households Ratio Total Total Recreational Projected Per Town Total Resident Participalion Total Adjusted Urban TORP Resource Days Per 2500 Participation to Resident Participation Adjustment Participation Facility Requirements Activity Householda Populationb (1) x (2) Participationc (3) x (4) Factors (5) x (6) Standards (7) -L (8) Swimming (Pools) 32.56 814.33 26,515 1.108 29,379 .94d 27,616 150 184.1 Child's Play (Playgrounds) @.24 814.33 5,081 1.043 5,299 --- 5,299 27,623 .2 Baseball/Softball 3.98 814.33 3,241 1.099 3,562 --- 3,562 13,804 .3 Picnicking 3.86 814.33 3,143 1.500 4,714 --- 4,714 1,702 2.8 Football/Soccer .57 814.33 464 2.943 1,366 --- 1,366 7,224 .2 Golf 2.77 814.33 2,256 1.145 2,583 2,583 4,047 .6 Tennis .85 814.33 692 1.000 692 --- 692 2,694 .3 Basketball 1.49 814.33 1,213 1.107 1,343 --- 1,343 8,795 .2 Freshwater Surface Acres For Boating 2.33 814.33 1,897 1.253 2,377 --- 2,377 Fishing 3.34 814.33 2,72Q 1.9.58 5,326 .211 e 1,124 Total 3,501f 629 '5.6 Freshwater Boat Lanes For Boating 2.33 814.33 1,897 1.253 2,377 .6381e 1,517 - Fishing 3.34 814.33 2,720 1.958 5,326 (.211 x.9736)8 1,094 Total ... --- ... --- 2,611 t 13,486 .2 Trails Activities Walking 21.45 814.33 17,467 1.014 17,712 .1059 1,860 Bicycling 28.95 814.33 23,575 1.001 23,599 .0409 944 Nature Study .85 814.33 694 1.159 802 .2019 161 Combined Trails --- --- 2,965 8,464 .3 Note: Dashes indicate data not applicable to column. a. Projected 1980 statewide average for Towns, by activity, taken from Outdoor Recreation in the Urban Areas of Texas Part 4: Towns. b. Based on University of Texas Population Research Data, the projected household size of those residing in Towns in 1980 will be 3.07 people per household. Dividing the maximum population of a Town, 2500, by the projected 3.07 people per household give the 814.33 households projection for 1980 used to estimate participation. c. Computed: Ratio total participation towns 1980 to resident participation towns 1980 total participation (resident and non-resident) occurring in towns 1980a. Total resident participation occurring in towns 1980a a. Source: Chapter 3 of this volume. d. Refer to section of this appendix titled "Swimming Pools" for rational behind this adjustment factor. e. Refer to section of this appendix titled "Boat Ramps" for rational behind this adjustment factors. f. Skiing participation was omitted from these calculations since skiing would not be practical on the amount of surface acreage suggested. g. Refer to section of this appendix titled "Trails" for rational behind this adjustment factor. 156 procedure, key of which is that opportunities For example, it is obviously not feasible to provide .3 baseball /softbal 1-f ootbal I /soccer field if local interests available (supply) were not considered. Resource of a baseball/softball field. First reaction from this in softball and football increase to levels which requirement computations were based on total point was to round the resource requirements up to exceed the capacity of existing field '(s). The 25 acre projected participation without modifications for whole units, or units which could be feasibly figure was determined as shown in Table C.9, existing opportunities. In Table C.8 requirements constructed. Again, problems were encountered. To Columns 2 through 4. The quantities of facilities, were calculated for surface acres of recreational round all resource requirements off to whole numbers 'Column 2, were multiplied by the amount of freshwater and selected recreational facilities which would overstate requirements needed for some 'developed land acres estimated to be required to included swimming pools, children's playgrounds, facilities (child's play and boat lanes) understate them construct one unit, Column 3. The product is the games and sports facilities (base bal I /softbal I and for one (excludes group picnic tables), and provide conversion of the quantities shown in Column 2 to football/soccer fields and tennis and basketball satisfactory suggestions for others (swimming for developed land acres, Column 4. The sum of the courts), picnic tables, golf courses, freshwater boat example). Most small communities could not be developed land* acres in Column 4 is 17.25 acres. This lanes, and combined walking, bicycling, and nature expected to provide the full range of recreational figure, which includes only developed land, was study trails. With the recreational freshwater and resources listed in Table C.8 due to the limited fiscal expanded to include both developed and undeveloped facilities data in Table C.8 serving as a base, suggested resources at their disposal. Even if their fiscal land as shown in Footnote b. This suggested 25 acres resource requirements were determined for small resources were sufficient to provide the full range of compares to the 17.2 acres per park for the 122 small communities as ' lis-ted in Table C.9 under the column resources the demand may be insufficient to justify communities reporting existing park and recreation titled "Quantity" for recreational land, recreational the expenditures. The intensity of demand will vary areas. f reshwater, and selected recreational facilities. for each activity from one small community to Additional documentation in Table C.9 was provided another based on local interests. It then becomes Eight surface acres of recreational water are also to explain how the recreational land and freshwater apparent that each small community should provide suggested for each small community (Table C.9). figures were calculated. those facilities determined to be in greatest demand These 8 acres of water are not included in the 25 by local citizens, particularly if fiscal resources are acres of park and recreation land; however, it is most A city size of 2,500 population was used in Table C.8 limited. Therefore, resource requirements suggested preferable that the recreational water be located because data in Columns 1 through 5 were for small communities cover a wider range of facilities within or adjacent to a park. Should sufficient determined utilizing data from Outdoor Recreation in than practically feasible for most small communities recreational water already exist in the community, it. the Urban Areas of Texas Part 4: Towns. Of the data to provide. These resource requirements are may be more feasible to locate parks adjacent to the available to compute these 5 columns, towns data summarized in Table C.9. The reader is referred to water to accomplish this preference. These 8 acres (applicable to urban areas ranging in population from Chapter 4 for explanations required to more fully were expanded to compensate for that portion of the 2,500 to 9,999) was the most appropriate. The understand the conditions under which it is suggested freshwater unsuitable for boat fishing or boating assumption was made that the recreational needs and each of .the Ise facilities be provided in small (approximately 281/6) as shown in Footnote C. Skiing characteristics of small communities should be more communities. is not practical on water bodies of this size; therefore, similar to towns than to cities or metropolitan areas. it was excluded from the suitability adjustment factor Results of the computations in Table C.8 identified (.7181). several problems encountered in determining resource For park and recreation areas it is suggested that 25 requirements for small communities. It proved that land acres be set aside in small communities. Both Suggested facility requirements, Table C.9, were the methodology used to compute resource open land and areas developed with facilities are based on data shown in Table C.8. Figures shown in requirements for the larger city-size categories would included in the 25 acre figure. The total 25 acres Table C.8 for swimming pools (184 square yards) and .require modifications. These modifications, referring Would not have to be developed entirely at once. It single picnic tables (3) were not changed because to Table C.8, were required because most of the provides enough land to develop additional facilities these two types of facilities could be constructed in requirements produced (Column 9) were to small to included in "Other Facilities" listed in Table C.9. It these sizes (swimming pools) or quantities (picnic recommend as suggested resource requirements, also provides land that may be used to add additions tables). Other facility requirements were rounded up particularly in view of the fact that 2,500 is the upper to existing facilities, i.e., a community may want to or set at levels considered feasible from a limit of the population range of small communities. a d d a n o t h e r m u I t i p I e purpose construction standpoint or from the standpoint that 157 th ese quantities are realistic for small communities to .provide; i.e., within fiscal and resource means. :Base bal I/softball and football/soccer fields were TABLE C.9 combined and suggested as 1 multiple purpose field; likewise, tennis and basketball courts were combined SUGGESTED RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS FOR SMALL COMMUNITIES and suggested as 1 multiple purpose court. These I facilities were combined because the projected 1980 f2) (3) (4) participation for each activity did not justify Developed individual fields or courts. Golf course data is Developed Acres provided in Table C.9 for the suggested number of Resource Requirements Land Acres Required holes and the developed land acre required per hole, Recreational Resource Units QuantitVa Per Unit (2) x (3) but data was omitted in determining the total developed land acres required, Column 4. To include Land Acres 25b --- golf course acreage in computing the developed land Freshwater Surface Acres SC --- acres would distort the suggested developed land acre figure, 17.25 acres, a s well as the combined developed Facilities and undeveloped land acre figure, 25 acres. Most Swimming Pools Square Yards 184 .0013 .24 small communities cannot justify the construction of Children's Playgrounds Acres 1/4 1.0 .25 Baseball /Softball and Football/Soccer Multiple Fields 1 3.8d 3.80 a golf course; therefore, the 25 land acres is more Tennis and Basketball Multiple Courts 1 -.2e .20 representative of the park and recreation land acreage Picnicking Single Tables 3 25 .75 that the average small community should attempt to Picnicking Group Tables 1 .5r .50 provide. Golf Holes 9 10.0 Omit Trails (Walking, Bicycling, Nature Study) Miles 1/2-1 4.0-8.0 8.00 Other Facilitiesf 3.51 f Boat lanes were exluded as an individual type of TOTAL 17.25b facility and grouped in the "Other Facilities" category for several reasons. It was suggested that 8 surface acres of freshwater be provided. Ramps Note: Dashes indicate data not applicable to column. resource requirements presented for metros, cities, a.I These quantities were determined based on data in Table C.8 and are suggested only if demand is sufficient to justify their and towns were in terms of 2.0 lanes per. ramp. It provision. would not be practical to provide a two lane ramp on b. Computations: in the Towns Volume, the ratio of developed land to undeveloped Ibnd, based an publicly-administered an 8 acre body of water; however, local demands in park lands available, was .69 to .31. Therefore, 17.25, the sum of developed land acres required for the facilities listed, was boating and boat fishing may justify the construction. expanded to provide a land acreage figure that would include both developed and undeveloped land as follows: 17.25 .69 = 25 land acres (developed and undeveloped) of a one-lane ramp. In fact, a boat launching facility Undeveloped land is 7.75 acres, computed: 25 land acres x .31 = 7.75 acres should be provided on 8 acres of water. Therefore, C. The f igure 5.6, from Column 9, Table C.8, was expanded to 7.8 acres to account for that portion of the water unsuitable initial computations in Table C.8 attempted to justify for boating and boat fishing using the factor .7181 (see section in this Appendix titled "Surface Acres") as follows: 5.6 .7181 = 7.8 acres a one-lane ramp, not a two-lane ramp. In Table C.8, The figure 8 acres shown is 7.8 rounded to the nearest whole number. Column 9, it can be seen that only .2 of a one-lane d. To construct multiple fields the suggested average size of a football/soccer field was selected since it exceeds the suggested ramp was justified, or, in other words, the lane would average size of a baseball /softball field, 3.0 acres. a. To construct multiple courts the suggested average size of a full basketball court was selected since it exceeds the suggested be utilized approximately 20% of its capacity under average size of a doubles tennis court, .13 acres. average conditions. For these reasons boat ramps f. Examples include boat lanes, urban camping facilities, archery ranges, 9port shooting rangeg- cultural centers, were placed in the "Other Facilities" category in entertainment facilities, etc. The figure 3.51 is the amount of land acres suggested for small communities to provide to accommodate local demands for these types of facilities, or any other facilities needed that are not presented in this table. Table C.9. 158 Table D.7 presents a regional comparison of selected Appendix 1) urban outdoor recreational facility units per 1000 population available in the metropolitan areas, the cities, the towns and the total urban areas. The rankings readily indicate the relationships between regions while the figures at the bottom of the table make possible the visualization of the relationship of each region to the statewide average. The second section of this appendix (Tables D.8 and D.9) presents a regional comparison of urban resident participation, on a household basis, for selected urban outdoor recreation activities for the years 1970, 1975, 1980, 1990, and 2000. The estimates show Table D.1 presents a regional comparison of the rates of participation for the average urban household available parkland and water acreage within or residing within each of the metropolitan areas, cities, adjacent to the publicly administered urban parks of and towns of the region as well as combining the city the 24 metropolitan areas of the State. The land sizes and showing the participation rates for the total acreage figures are ranked to illustrate the urban areas of each region. The statewide average relationships of the various metropolitan areas. The participation rate on a household basis, for each city REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF URBAN figures at the bottom of the table make possible the size and total urban -areas, is pr -esented for comparison between each metropolitan area and comparative purposes. For the purposes of this statewide metropolitan averages. analysis, non-resident and total participation rates were omitted. In-depth analysis of participation Appendix D is used to present selected urban supply, including resident, non-resident, and total demand, and resource requirement data by analytical Table D.2 and D.3 present similar data for the 27 city participation are presented in the detailed parts of planning region for metropolitan areas, cities, towns regions and the 37 town regions respectively. this volume, Part 2: Metropolitan Areas, Part 3: Cities and for these three city sizes combined. Even though and Part 4: Towns. data for metropolitan areas is listed by region, each metro is presented separately. Only two regions had On Table DA the regional comparison of total more than one metro area, Regions 18 (Midland and number of parks and total park-land acreage is In the regional estimates, participation is presented to Odessa) and 34 (Brownsville and McAllen), which had presented for the 24 metropolitan areas. For each the year 2000. These projections indicate the two metros each. Metro data for these two regions are metropolitan area the data is presented on a expected rates of participation if adequate recreation people-per-park and people-per-acre basis, as well as .combined and summed with the cities and towns of on a parks-per-1000 population and acres-per-1000 areas and facilities are made available. Thus, the each respective region to arrive at the total urban population basis. The figures at the bottom of the projections indicate, in general, the magnitude of areas figures for these two regions. table permit comparisons between each individual participation that would take place if adequate metropolitan area and statewide metropolitan recreation opportunities were available and The first section of this appendix (Tables D.1 through averages determined.. maintained at adequate levels for each specified time D.7) presents analyses of various facets of the period. Certainly, if adequate facilities are not publicly administered recreation opportunities developed and maintained, participation will be currently available in the metropolitan areas, the Tables D.5 and D.6 present similar data for the city dampened due to reduced access and overcrowding of cities and the towns across . the State. regions and town regions respectively. existing facilities. 159 TABLE D.1 REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF URBAN PARKLAND ACREAGE AND WATER ACREAGE WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO PUBLICLY-ADMIN ISTE RED URBAN PARKS, METROS, 1971 TOTALLAND DEVELOPED LAND UNDEVELOPED LAND TOTAL LAND WATER ACREAGE WITHIN OR AND WATER REGION ACRES RANK ACRES RANK ACRES RANK ADJACENT TO PARKS ACREAGE 1 1,050 9 1,148 2 2,198 5 55 2,253 4 1,055 8 651 6 1,706 8 72 1,778 5 881 11 119 16 1,000 12 2,330 3,330 7 352 16 153 14 505 16 2 507 10 7,903 1 868 3 8,771 2 9,964 18,735 11 4,909 2 5,621 1 10,530 1 2,860 13,390 12 173 22 97 18 270 21 0 270 13 149 23 280 10 429 18 6 435 14 321 17 55 19 376 19 0 376 16 2,107 4 739 5 2,846 4 60 2,906 17 227 20 11 24 238 22 64 302 18 Midland 307 18 202 13 509 15 0 509 18 Odessa 191 21 30 22 221 23 0 221 20 1,145 7 854 4 1,999 6 7,347 9,346 21 306 19 42 21 348 20 48 396 23 1,433 5 402 8 1,835 7 525 2,360 25 4,603 3 387 9 4,990 3 518 5,508 27 1,234 6 52 20 1,286 10 0 1,286 28 474 14 100 17 574 14 2 576 29 886 10 416 7 1,302 9 50 1,352 33 800 12 257 11 1,057 11 19 1,076 34 Brownsville 481 13 237 12 718 13 179 897 34 McAllen 361 15 122 15 483 17 41 524 35 33 24 14 23 47 24 0 47 Total Metro 31,381 12@857 44,238 24,142 68,380 Average 1,307 536 1,843 1,006 2,849 Table D.8 presents regional participation rates per just described and presented in Table D.8. However, However, the desire (latent demand) of the residents household and their rankings by city size and total the regional comparison by city size is only made for of those areas to participate in these freshwater urban areas for the five specified time periods. This the areas which have saltwater access. The "average" related activities without leaving their urban areas of presentation is made for thirteen of the urban line at the bottom of each column represents the residence is still present. To estimate the latent outdoor recreation activities. The "average" line at average participation rate for each city size in the demand in these areas an average participation rate by the bottom of each column represents the statewide specified time period of only those urban areas which ci ty 'size, based on days per household, was average participation rate for the specified time have saltwater access. determined for areas having freshwater resources. period and city size. This estimate was used as the rate at which a Evidently, there are urban areas which have either household, of residence in the same city size, could inadequate or no freshwater resources available to be expected to participate if adequate freshwater For the saltwater related urban outdoor recreation activities, Table D.9 presents the same information support the recreational activities of freshwater resources were available. This average participation fishing, freshwater boating, or freshwater skiing. 160 TABLE D.2 REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF URBAN PARKLAND ACREAGE AND WATER ACREAGE WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO PUBLICLY-ADMINISTERED URBAN PARKS, CITIES, 1971 TOTAL LAND DEVELOPED LAND UNDEVELOPED LAND TOTALLAND WATER ACREAGE WITHIN OR. AND WATER REGION ACRES RANK ACRES RANK ACRES RANK ADJACENTTOPARKS ACREAGE 1 100 20 214 8 314 15 0 314 2 341 7 149 10 490 9 16 506 3 278 10 270 4 548 7 15 563 .5 5 27 15 23 20 27 0 20 6 322 8 28 21 350 13 28 378 7 952 1 505 2 1,457 1 5 1,462 8 209 15 0 0 209 19 36 245 9 265 11 307 3 572 6 199 771 10 35 26 32 20 67 25 0 67 12 841 2 109 11 950 2 4 954 13 152 17 34 19 186 21 2, 188 14 260 @12 7 26 267 16 18 285 15 253 13 96 13 349 14 27. 376 18 160 16 600 1 760 3 0 760 19 355 6 66 15 421 11 3 424 23 91 22 10 25 101 23 0 101 24 479 3 53 16 532 8 1 533 25 57 24 190 9 247 17 9 256 26 38 25 12 24 50 26 0 50 27 77 23 19 22. 96 24 1 97 28 423 5 241 6 664 5 78 742 31 139 18 49 18 M 20 0 188 32 241 14 220 7 461 10 0 461 33 133 19 107 12 240 18 8 248 34 100 20 50 17 150 22 0 150 36 300 9 81 14 381 12 30 411 37 453 4 254 5 707 4 42 749 Total Cities 7,059 3,718 10,777 522 11,299 Average 261 138 399 19 418 rate was applied to all regions by corresponding city The third and final section of this appendix (Tables converted to a per thousand population basis in order size. For this reason a table, similar to Tables D.8 and D.10 through D.13) presents the various resource to eliminate population differences between the D.9, presenting regional comparisons of urban requ irements (land requirements and facility urban areas 'and to facilitate comparisons. resident participation days per household for the requirements) as needed for each specified time Incremental resource requirements indicate the freshwater related activities would simply be a table period: 1970, 1975, 1980, 1990, and 2000. This quantities of units (either land units or facility units) listing the average participation rate by city size for section presents regional comparisons of incremental by activity that should be provided by each specified each region. Therefore, the freshwater related resource requirements per thousand population for time period, assuming that the incremental recreational activilies were omitted from this analysis metropolitan areas, cities, towns, and total urban requirements from the previous time period were presentation. areas. The incremental resource requirements were provided as scheduled. 161 TABLE D-3 REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF URBAN PARKLAND ACREAGE AND WATER ACREAGE WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO PUB LI CLY-ADM IN ISTE RED, URBAN PARKS, TOWNS, 1971 TOTAL LAND DEVELOPED LAND UNDEVELOPED LAND TOTAL LAND WATER ACREAGE WITHIN OR AND WATER REGION ACRES RANK ACRES RANK ACRES RANK ADJACENT TO PARKS ACREAGE 1 85 21 86 11 '171 19 6 177 2 71 24 8 27 79 28 0 79 3 139 15 118 8 257 9 0 257 4 83 .22 16 25 99 25 5 104 5 384 3 328 1 712 2 145 857 6 24 30 0 0 24 32 3 27 7 199 9 201 3 400 5 29 429 8 124 17 99 10 223 12 28 251 9 71 24 53 14 124 22 0 124 10 38 28 64 12 102 24 0 102 11 .89 20 17 24 106 23 0 106 12 687 1 191 4 878 1 23,284 24,162 13 98 18 29 17 127 21 0 127 14 168 12 @12 26 180 17 500 680 15 199 9 23 20 222 13 2 224 16 9 33 19 35 29 0 35 17 238 4 122 7 360 6 11 371 18 231 5 6 28 237 10 0 237 19 218 7 3 30 221 15 10 231 20 208 8 29 17 237 10 5 242 21 190 11 118 8 308 8 80 388 22 98 18 55 13 153 20 0 153 23 146 13 174 5 320 7 22 342 24 618 2 21 21 639 3 15 654 25 26 29 2 33 28 30 0 28 26 12 31 3 30 15 33 0 15 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 70 26 18 23 88 26 0 88 29 3 35 0 0 3 36 0 3 30 7 34 21 21 28 30 0 28 ',@31 220 6 230 2 450 4 0 450 32 10 32 0 0 10 34 0 10 33 60 27 162 6 222 13 5 227 34 140 14 40 16 180 18 0 180 35 2 36 6 28 8 35 0 8 36 137 16 44 15 181 16 0 181 37 79 23 3 30 82 21 2 84 Total Towns 5,181 2,328 7,509 24,152 31,661 Average 140 63 203 653 856 162 TABLE D.4 REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF SELECTED DATA FOR PUBLICLY-ADMINISTERED URBAN PARKS, METROS, 1971 NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER PARKS PER 1,000 PEOPLE PER ACRES PER 1,000 REGION PARKS PAR K UNITS RANK LAND ACRES ACRE UNITS RANK 1 48 2,646 .378 9 2,198 58 17.306 1 4 40 3,728 .268 16 1,706 87 11.442 4 5 35 2,788 .359 12 1,000 98 10.250 5 7 15 5,977 .167 23 505 178 5.633 13 10 167 3,809 .263 18 8,771 73 13.788 3 11 338 3,853 .260 19 10,530 124 8.086 8 12 20 2,699 .370 11 270 200 5.000 17 13 23 2,243 .446 6 429 120 8.316 7 14 19 3,041 .329 13 376 154 6.509 12 16 78 8,773 .114 24 2,846 240 4.159 19. 17 32 1 P96 .501 4 238 268 3.725 21- 18 Midland 29 2,050 .488 5 509 117 8.560 6 18 Odessa 23 3,408 .293 14 221 355 2.820 23 20 44 2,686 .372 10 1,999 59 16.917 2 21 29 .564 2 348 148 6.771 11 23 69 3,686 .271 15 1,835 139 7.214 9 25 285 5,046 .198 21 4,990 288 3.470 22 27 61 3,744 .267 17 1,286 178 5.630 14 28 45 2,597 .385 8 574 204 4.912 18 29 65 4,958 .202 20 1,302 248 4.040 20 33 151 1,354 .738 1 1,057 193 5.168 16 34 Brownsville 41 2,497 .401 7 718 143 7.014 10 34 McAllen 47 1,888 .530 3 483 184 5.443 15 35 @13 5,310 .188 22 47 1,469 .681 24 Total Matra 1,717 44,238 Average 72 3,754 .267 1,843 146 6.864 The tables that follow, Tables D.1 0 and D.1 1, present respqct to the incremental land requirements per Table D.12 presents the regional comparisons of regional comparisons of urban incremental land thousand' population in those regions to support incremental facility requirements per thousand resource requirements per thousand population for saltwater boat ramp usage. The "average" line at the population and their regional rankings for selected urban outdoor recreation facilities. Table bottom of each column represents the average metropolitan areas, cities towns, and total urban areas D-10 presents the regional comparisons of amount of incremental land required in each specified for thirteen selected activities. The "average" line at incremental land requirements per thousand time period for each city size having saltwater access. the bottom of each column represents the statewide population needed to support each of thirteen average incremental facility unit requirement per selected recreation facilities. The "average" line at the Tables D.12 and D.13 present the regional thousand population for the specified time period for bottom of each column represents the statewide comparisons of urban incremental facility resource each city size. Table D.13 presents the comparison of average incremental land required to support the requirements per thousand populati ,on for selected. regions having saltwater access in respect to the selected recreation facility for the specified time urban outdoor recreation facilities. Resources needed incremental saltwater boat ramps required per period for each city size. Table D.1 1 presents the to correct inadequate distributions of facilities within thousand population and the relative rankings of comparison of regions having saltwater access in or among urban areas are not included in these tables. these regions. The "average" line at the bottom of 163 T ABLE D.5 REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF SELECTED DATA FOR PUBLICLY-ADMINISTERED URBAN PARKS, CITIES, 1971 NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER PARKS PER 1,000 PEOPLEPER AC RES PER 1,000 REGION PARKS PARK UNITS RANK LAND ACRES ACRE UNITS RANK 1 12 1,118 B95 5 314 43 23.408 3 2 36 998 1.000 2 490 73 13.641 7 3 18 1,696 .589 9 548 56 17.943 4 5 2 5,727 .175 26 20 573 1.746 26 6 17 2,370 .422 13 350 115 8.686 13 7 6 3,865 .259 .23 1,457 16 62.826 1 8 20 868 1.152 1 209 83 12.034 8 9 33 .2,747 .364 17 572 158 6.31-0 17 10 4 4,829 .207 25 67 288 3.469 24 12 46 2,674 .374 16 950 129 7.724 15 13 13 2,621 .381 15 186 183 5.457 20 14 24 3,883 .258 24 267 349 2.865 25 15 14 3,257 .307 19 349 131 7.655 16 18 8 1,585 .631 7 760 17 59.927 2 19 35 2,279 .439 12 421 189 5.279 22 23 5 3,772 .265 22 101 187 5.355 21 24 19 3,365 .297 21 532 120 8.321 14 25 26 1,692 .591 8 247 178 5.616 19 26 5 5,916 .169 27 50 592 1.690 27 27 16 1,529 .654 6 96 255 3.925 23 28 64 1,084 .923 3 664 104 9.572 12 31 8 1,992 .502 11 188 85 11.799 9 32 14 2,402 A16 14 461 73 13.709 6 33 12 3,327 .301 20 240 166 6.011 18 34 8 lR14 .522 10 150 102 9.796 11 36 12 3,058 .327 18 381 96 10.383 10 37 38 1,087 .920 4 707 58 17.121 5 Total Cities 515 10,777 Average 19 2,143 .467 399 102 9.767 each column represents the average number of correct inadequate distributions of recreation incremental saltwater boat ramps required in each facilities are presented in the supplementary reports, specified time period for each city size having Part 2: Metropolitan Areas, Part 3: Cities, and Part 4: saltwater access. Towns. The estimates of incremental resource requirement units were developed from the aggregate comparisons In a few cases, data in this appendix may vary slightly of supply and demand relationships in each of the from data presented in the individual chapters. These urban areas and include non-resident demands. More variations are due to minor corrections made in the detailed analyses of resource requirements for the appendix but not made in the chapters because of the specified time periods, including those needed to sequence of compiling this volume. 164 TABLE D.6 REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF SELECTED DATA FOR PUBLICLY-ADMINISTERED URBAN PARKS, TOWNS, 1971 NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER PARKS PER 1,000 PEOPLE PER ACRES PER 1,000 REGION PARKS PARK UNITS RANK LAND ACRES ACRE UNITS RANK 1 26 1,405 .712 5 171 214 4.680 23 2 16 1,407 .711 6 79 285 3.509 26 3 21 1,448 .691 7 257 118 8.452 1"! 4 9 1,945 .514 15 99 177 5.656 i9 5 34 1,687 .593 11 712 81 12.414 7 6 6 2,272 .440 21 24 568 1.761 '32 7 22 1,204 .831 3 400 66 15.100 3 8 13 1,994 .502 17 223 116 8.604 10 9 7 2,829 .354 26 124 159 6.263 17 10 9 2,864 .349 27 102 253 .3.957 25 11 2 4,614 .217 36 106 87 11.488 8 12 19 2,426 .412 23 878 52 19.052 2 13 9 2,900 .345 28 127 206 4.865 21 14 24 2,718 .368 25 180 362 2.760 29 15 11 1,576 .635 9 222 78 12.806 6 16 5 2,078 .481 18 35 297 3.368 27 17 14 784 1.276 1 360 30 32.799 1 18 29 1,054 .949 2 237 129 7.752 15 19 19 1,920 .521 14 221 165 6.058 18 20 8 3,666 .273 34 237 124 8.081 12 21 7 3,128 .320 30 308 71 14.066 4 22 6 3,831 .261 35 153 150 6.656 16 23 20 1,215 .823 4 320 76 13.172 5 24 30 2,218 .451 20 639 104 9.603 9 25 5 2,337 .428 22 28 417 2.396 30 26 5 3,004 .333 29 15 1,001 .999 33 27 0 --- 37 0 ... --- 37 28 13 3,357 .298 32 88 496 2.016 31 29 1 3,241 .309 31 3 1,080 .926 34 30 4 2,155 .464 19 28 308 3.249 28 31 33 1,700 .588 12 450 125 8.020 14 32 5 3,386 .295 33 10 1,693 .590 36 33 30 1,527 .655 8 222 .206 4.845 22 34 21 1.988 .503 16 180 232 4.310 24 35 4 2,439 410 24 8 1,219 .820 35 36 13 1,726 .579 13 181 124 8,067 13 37 10 1,678 .596 10 82 205 4.887 20 Total Towns 510 7,509 Average 14 1,976 .506 203 134 7.450 --- indicate not applicable. 165 > < w j 0 m jh. w m M 0 0o CL CL > > m CL 0 a 0 K3 0 00 r) pa 0) co (A Z;,J":g -imooTm w CA) fl) w 00 j 00 r1i Ul 00 OD 00 m 0 41 8 Z3 4@ @0) 61 Co @j 0) K) N Z Z8 8 t2 0 0 -n m 0 0 ck K3 0 pa 0 Ln Co 0 0 co co pi W z r z m 0 00 0 .4 0 (n A. -P. C-n 8 zs w u 0 m c c > 0 co) c @j L) 0 w r.) 0 0 N Z; ED Z; @j 0 00 M-0 ow 4w @c C Z 0) 4@ 0 0 K) %J - K)OW0092000" IJWS@jf-r 8-0 r Co 0 CO r 0 Z > -n m ONO W 8 N Z N (n W "D Al N N Z; 80 > z 0 W 0 0 M m @ c -1 m 0 E , a > m VI -i G) 0) w wO-+wmwwVsljwwlj" w 0 %J w Oj mul a) %J %J r w m co w 0 K3 w co j -.4 4@b "Wo a F M 0 0 co tb 0 Go W ba 0 W DD 4 V"J 0 ;b c z > Z LTI li Ul :j 00 o"D 0 4 zil 42 00) li CIS 0 Ili 8 W W W N w m 0 C02m c All > 0 > 0 r 0 -+-+so: Sisoo 0 OR ij Foa > Im 41 .p. w w tn w I C) li @j w @j 0 m m m 0 0 m > 0 W -4 0 0 W 0 Z m -n M c > . . . . . . . . . . 1,10 - - - - - - - 00 . . . 0 li NJ sO"m::4sOw;;w 0 cn li 0 4 ca li C) 0 0 CA cn 0 C) w 0 w In K) (n W w 0 C i7n Q) ca > z 1,03 0 > M V) 7. o 0 m 0 coo 0 14 K) in b r Ab w j -+8 'n e? 8? 'm co 0 0 co C" W L" co 00 0 Ul %J (n 0) 0) W Fa 0 M5 2 0 z z c L 000 Mj a o 0 0 O:@ 0 8 0 zsZj 0 0 w C"4 0 r 0 c c a > L" 0 cn om OF 00 a 0 oz@ 0 2 0 C04 0 0 08 0 r o!Rw%jsmmm M %J cpnj j %J 0 21 0 m w m Z - w - w Ili @j 0 c W z K3 > N (,n, 0 (,A3)80W POE, -Aw8ti m m A ui Z N r, w N m v r- o q w o N N w w 0 w 000 4 N N N - - - z w qc z co o � 0 0 00 N �T Mm AN m r- wm N r' r� V c.2 4- W 4- 0 0 4- .T 0 4- IT J Lf) C14 11 a C, 8 8 C) N N 04 8 - M N N Boo o C', C', C', Cl) 3 Cl . . . . . . C!C!q qc!qc! q q C! q LU M CL CL A LU Z m 0 (D C14 o v m r- 0 0 0 m 0 W 0 N Cl MOOOM0000-0000ow 000 LL. cc z LLI Z 0 3 0 U 0 � 0 N 4- 4- 4- W W 4- 4- W N 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- P- 4- 4- N Ct cl r-802 2 A A q C! q LLI Cc IL us Z om-:0001*00 r, 0) N :::Ooooww::OVON 0 a LL z > 0 LO 0 Lf) P, r, Lo C', Lr) ui w a: . R CY 0) (D M @w r-OOM @o 0 V 0 :00vo 0 LU W M N M A NMWMr' 4- 1- 4- 4- 4- C, C', C', N C', A qc? q q q q qq . . . Ul CC CL Xwo IL CL 0 LLI w r- M 0 M r. r% LU 4c 4 M C-4 V) N N C.) Cl) - Cl) N C.) N _j z cc co z cc _j w 8 Lo LE) cv) 00 00 cl) r, Ln . 00 m 00 r@ 04 r- Cl) C4 CD 0 LO r- N 0 &D T COI) U0, r* r- @o N LO N Cl) 04 cli 04 N cl r! c"! c! Cli cl Cli cl cl . . . cl cl C"! Ci Lu 0. CL 21 ( .) Z 0 m 0 0 0 r% N - - - M M N N M M N N N Z z LU 2 0 0 @- N r@ 0 M @ to!$ 0 r, 0 M 0 0 0 9!2 co CO LO M W 0 M N co 00S.Rwr-C., w 3 A Wo om 0 wo 4- Wr@ M M IT N M R - .j M N N LU a. CL CL Z WW- Nwow M M WMANOV M q 0 N Mm C'4 C-4 N N > z CO 0 ul w MCAINM N"OR Ln 0 (D 0) 0 0 0 'cr M C) LD N R) Lo 0 R +. co ID co LO La r, Lo 0 LO CO . . . Lq cl cl .j ci Ci" Ci cl! LU 0. ui 0 Z Ce 04 N LO (*4 0 CD 4T (7) 00 r- Q 4 , - @2 N C,4 @2 C4 cc 0 z cc 0 Ln cc Cl) w4r tf) V 00 - C', 0 m m P- r- 00 (7) m C', 0 r, CM4 ro- N M _j A m cl! C'! Cli N UA CC CL 1 0 CL > (D LU ca (D < < 0 LLJ C-4 m "r Lo (0 r' co CD 0 c@ c2 C* 0 C14 CI),q Lf) (0 r- 00 CY) 0 N M T Ln W r- .2 N MMM TABLE D.7 (Continued) PICNIC TABLES PLAYGROUND ACRES METRO CITY TOWN TOTAL URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN TOTAL URBAN AREAS TABLES TABLES TABLES TABLES ACRES ACRES ACRES ACRES PER 1000 PER 1000 PER 1000 PER 1000 PER 1000 PER 1000 PER 1000 PER 1000 Region POPULATION RANK POPULATION RANK POPULATION RANK POPULATION RANK POPULATION RANK POPULATION RANK POPULATION RANK POPULATION RANK 1 1.315 13 1.153 21 1.486 22 1.339 24 .173 19 1.230 4 .702 13 .362 24 2 --- 4.872 3 4.130 3 4.620 3 --- --- 1.083 6 .826 11 .993 4 3 ... --- 4.516 4 1.933 16 3.249 4 --- 1.000 7 .900 8 .952 5 4 .342 22 ... --- 1.444 23 .462 36 .215 17 --- --- 1.000 7 .300 27 5 1.531 9 1.090 22 3.859 5 2.296 8 .255 15 .272 23 1.070 4 .535 14 6 --- --- 2.025 11 2.714 12 2.207 10 ... 1.250 3 .500 22 1.057 3 7 .922 19 4.347 5 4.192 2 2.096 14 .088 22 1.130 5 1.038 5 .438 19 8 ... ... 1.000 26 1.769 20 1.455 22 --- --- 2.059 1 .576 14 1.155 1 9 --- --- 1.516 15 3.600 6 1.901 17 --- --- .626 12 .850 10 .670 9 10 .621 21 2.684 7 .461 31 .672 34 .161 20 .157 26 .500 22 .175 34 11 1.462 11 --- --- .444 32 1.455 22 .306 11 --- --- .333 28 .307 26 12 1.481 10 2.634 8 2.956 9 2.421 6 .425 9 .943 8 .891 9 .807 7 13 1.557 8 1.088 23 4.115 4 2.013 16 .673 2 .912 9 1.538 1 .948 6 14 .292 23 1.774 12 2.600 13 1.624 21 .448 7 .570 13 .523 20 .523 15 15 --- --- 2.522 9 .7654 27 2.050 15 --- .435 17 .411 26 .429 20 16 1.175 15 ... --- .100 34 1.159 26 .040 23 ... --- .500 22 .048 36 17 1.406 12 ... ... 2.909 10 1.630 20 .125 21 --- --- 1.272 3 .294 28 18*Midland 1.169 16 1.077 24 4.258 1 2.281 9 .508 4 .308 22 1.032, 6 .475 17 *Odessa 2.538 2 .256 15 1.350 19 --- ... 1.262 19 2.500 14 1.643 18 --- --- .105 2 .555 17 1.101 2 20 2.2 71 3 ... --- 1.517 21 2.115 12 .338 10 --- --- .758 12 .420 21 21 1.921 6 --- --- 2.818 11 2.183 11 .450 6 --- --- .545 18 .478 16 22 --- --- --- --- .652 28 .652 35 --- --- --- .565 16 .565 12 23 2.173 4 1.736 13 1.791 19 2.111 13 .295 12 .105 27 .416 25 .292 29 24 ... ... 3.281 6 1.910 17 2.590 5 ... --- .562 14 .507 21 .536 13 25 .861 20 1.159 20 2.083 15 .880 32 .205 18 .386 18 .250 31 .211 33 26 --- ... .466 27 1.866 18 .942 31 ... ... .533 15 .133 33 .404 22 27 1.184 14 1.041 25 t 0 1.071 29 .456 5 .208 25 t 0 .396 23 28 .974 18 1.449 17 1.386 24 1.196 25 .444 8 .348 20 .568 15 .439 18 29 1.110 17 --- --- t 0 1.106 28 .257 13 --- --- .333 29 .258 30 30 --- --- --- --- .777 26 .777 33 --- --- --- --- .111 34 .111 35 31 12.187 1 3.142 8 5,150 2 --- .250 24 .392 27 .361 25 32 --- ... 1.500 16 .352 33 1.127 27 --- --- .353 19 .058 36 .257 31 33 2.853 1 1.675 14 .978 25 2.401 7 614 3 .700 11 .543 19 .617 10 34*13rownsville 2.079 5 2.133 10 .571 29 1.640 19 .225 16, 533 15 1.285 2 .685 8 *McAllen 1.561 7 .955 1 35 t 0 ... --- t 0 t 0 t 0 --- --- .200 30 .025 37 36 ... ... 1.324 18 .545 30 1.032 30 --- --- .324 21 .090 35 .237 32 37 --- --- 10.829 2 3.352 7 8.627 1 --- --- .732 10 .176 32 .568 11 AVERAGE 1.230 2.499 2.131 1.499 .258 .712 .653 .363 168 TABLE D.7 (Continue*d), SWIMMING POOLS BOAT LANES, FRESHWATER TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Square Yards Square Yards Square Yards Square Yards Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 34.645 8 30.000 18 47.297 19 36.956 21 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 2 --- --- 26.000 21 157.260 4 77.914 .4 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 3 --- 41.806 14 10.400 30 26.384 28 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 4 25.456 11 --- ... 89.777 9 32.466 23 + 0 ... + 0 + 0 5 2.551 24 + 0 88.508 11 31.826 24 + 0 + 0 .017 7. .006 19 6 --- --- 52.725 9 40.000 22 49.494 12 --- ... + 0 .071 4 .019 8 7 4.200 23 79.956 5 154.230 5 44.691 16 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 8 --- - 79.058 6 72.000 13 74.298 15 --- .058 1 + 0 .023 7 9 --- 34.945 17 49.550 17 37.765 19 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 10 19.053 19 23.864 22 + 0 18.449 34 031 1 + 0 + 0 .029 6 11 36.894 7 --- 88.888 10 35.252 22 .011 5 --- --- + 0 .011 13 12 102.962 1 53A87 7 51.391 16 65.018 6 + 0 + 0 .217 3 .045 3 13 21.788 16 36.764 16 36.346 24 29.775 26 + 0 + 0 + 0 .+ 0 14 29.310 10 42.569 13 64.153 14 45.463 14 + 0 + 0 .230 2 .069 2 15 --- --- 30.000 18 10.764 29 24.838 29 - + 0 + 0 + 0 16 21.023 17 + 0 20.701 32 001 9 + 0 .001 20 17 21.875 15 --- --- 167.273 3 43.281 17 .016 3 --- --- + 0 .013 10 18*Midiand 34.067 9 86.307 4 152.870 2 61.436 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *Odessa 41.730 6 + 0 19 --- --- 29.187 20 32.333 26 30.103 25. --- + 0 .027 '6 .009 14 20 44.042 5 --- ... 10.344 31 37.269 20 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 21 23.529 13 --- --- 95.590 8 45.067 15 + 0 --- --- .454 1 .136 1 22 --- --- 52.173 15 52.173 8 --- --- --- 4- 0 + 0 23 92.862 2 1.263 25 134.625 6 90.219 3 .008 8 + 0 + 0 .007 16 24 --- 14.062 24 41.671 20 28.296 27 --- .031 3 + 0 .015 9 25 10.281 21 23.818 23 125.000 7 11.605 36 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 26 --- --- + 0 41.000 21 13.789 35 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 27 24.298 12 48.583 12 + 0 24.337 31 009 7 + 0 + 0 .007 16 28 11.837 20 149.754 2 4.545 32 51.848 9 + 0 .029 4 + 0 .009 14 29 9.937 22 --- --- + 0 9.831 37 .012 4 --- --- + 0 .012 11 30 --- --- 229.555 1 229.555 1 --- + 0 + 0 31 ... --- 87.500 3 27.517 27 40.822 18 + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- 52.941 8 32.647 25 46.580 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 33 20.653 18 50.500 11 19.760 28 24.677 30 .010 6 + 0 + 0 .007 16 34*Brownsville 46.205 4 41.666 15 36.380 23 51.341 10 .029 2 + 0 + 0 .012 11 *McAllen 66.022 3 + 0 35 23.463 14 ... --- + 0 20.551 33 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 36 --- --- 51,108 10 48.863 18 50.159 11 --- ... .054 2 + 0 .034 4 37 --- --- 196.341 1 79.764 12 161.969 2 --- --- .024 5 .058 5 .034 4 AVERAGE 25.934 52.043 56.504 32.902 .008 .007 .039 .011 169 TABLE D.7 (Continued) CAMPSITES FISHING PIERS, BARGES, MARINAS, FRESHWATER TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Campsites Campsites Campsites Campsites Linear Yards Linear Yards Linear Yards Linear Yards Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank. 1 + 0 + 0 .648 6 .136 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 2 --- --- .333 5 .043 16 .222 10 - - + 0 + 0 + 0 3 --- ... .645 3 .266 13 .459 8 ... - + 0 + 0 + 0 4 .550 2 --- --- + 0 .492 6 + 0 --- - + 0 + 0 5 + 0 + 0 .087 15 .030 22 + 0 + 0 .105 5 .036 9 6 --- --- .450 4 1.000 4 .593 5 + 0 4- 0 + 0 7 + 0 + 0 .884 5 .165 12 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 8 --- ... .235 7 + 0 .092 17 --- --- + 0 +1 0 + 0 9 --- --- + 0 .600 7 .109 16 ... ... + 0 + 0 + 0 10 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 126 3 + 0 + 0 .117 6 11 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 .143 1 --- ... + 0 .142 5 12 + 0 + 0 .543 8 .112 15 + 0 + 0 4.347 2 .897 2 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 14 + 0 .021 8 1.553 2 .476 7 + 0 + 0 5.384 1 1.619 1 15 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... ... .435 1 + 0 .318 4 16 + 0 ... ... + 0 + 0 022 4 --- --- + 0 .002 10 17 + 0 --- --- 6.636 1 .975 4 + 0 + 0 + 0 18*Midland .050 4 + 0 .290 11 .066 19 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *Odessa + 0 + 0 19 --- --- .012 9 + 0 .009 23 + 0 .277 4 .086 7 20 017 5 - --- .344 10 .081 18 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 21 + 0 --- --- .454 9 .136 13 .136 2 --- --- 1.500 3 .546 3 22- --- --- - + 0 + 0 - - + 0 + 0 23 + 0 15.789 1 1 A58 3 1.126 3 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 24 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 25 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 017 5 + 0 + 0 .017 11 26 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 27 .412 3 + 0 + 0 .341 9 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 28 + 0 + 0 .181 14 .035 20 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 29 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 30 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 31 --- --- + 0 .267 12 .208 11 --- --- + 0 .089 6 .069 8 32 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 33 + 0 .250 6 + 0 .034 21 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 34*Brownsville 5.861 1 + .0 + 0 2.418 2 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 36 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- - + 0 + 0 +. 0 37 ... ... 5.171 2 + 0 3.651 1 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .121 .525 .370 .203 .049 .013 .599 .110 170 0 00 0 C4 C4 N N C-4 LU ix 0 o.2 Z 0 00 0 C4 Ln 0.3 + mo 0 + -T 09 + G + N 0 C, 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 a 0 000 0 00 CL 0 no 0. .x c 0 0 0 0 C4 0 cq 0 0 0 00 N 0 0 a 0 0 -*000CO00000000000 coo 10 cc z r- 0 0.. C4) F- 0 - Cl) LO OD 00 Ln 0 + + + + + 00 . . . Cl) C%l Cl) 00 . . . . in + + +v . . . . . . . u) . . . + + + LU CN - co 0 0 C! CL 0 IL CL X c orv:oooowo.oo-o::m -::.oNWooM::oooc,4 '00 0.0 0 U) Ln W 0 C4 + + C14 w 00 + co -'s + Ln . . . . + + + + C,4 +t2LO+ +0 : : CL 09 C! CL .X C 0 C-4 0 U) 0 0 'too 0 00 0 C LU 0.0 w ou Ln CN Cl) C4 v . . . LO IT C4 @2 :CO M (4 * 0 cl, + + LO 0 CD C, 0 LO + + 0 C') + C'J CL q R q R 41 0 c 0 4( 0 cn N N CN CN N N CN N C-4 LU LU -i -i w cc 4c z < 0 .0 F- 0 4 - 0 @ m Ln CN N Ict V 9 N m m m m mGwg@;mw+-MLn LOWCNW r- 0 v 'A 0.3 0 + CD w to m CD co w + 11 L40wc,-W-@t CncnLo+rLnw& + Ln Cn Cli C'! cl R Ci cl ct c! 11 q V: C@ CL 0 X C OCOOMOOOOOOVOOWONO CN r, CO 0 Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OCN- m z C 0 P,2 w m 00 00 CD C'J 00 00 LO + + Ln v . . . . CO+ +N+ + Ln P r, . . . . . . CN . . . w Ci P@ Lq cl 't cq Ci CN! LU CL -1 0 0 CL LL x -i C L9 C CN N CN - 0 CN 0) m 00 (D 0.2 eq 0 + V r, r, R M+ w m M + 00 . . . cn 04 + + 0 (R Lq I Cl! Ci Lq Cl! cq X c 00 N W (2!2@00 M co 0 ON M 00 CN 0 rl . . . Ln LO 0 cr 0 cz LU 0.0 Ln 00 w 00 N cn CN o CN CD 00 N r, (0 CD 0 Ln r, LO LO Ln 00 LO 0 C%! Ci q Ci CN! > 'D LU c ca a) 0 (D 0 c 13 cc 0 LU @20,Nmv wwr- WOO;; Nm"t Lf) w r, > Ix C4 NNNNNNNNM M Cl) Cl) mmm < TABLE b.7 (Continued) COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTERS TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Centers Centers Centers Centers Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 .008 21 .153 3 + 0 .017 34 2 --- --- .111 4 .043 22 .086 6 3 --- --- .097 6 .066 13 .082 7 4 114 1 .111 8 .114 1 5 + 0 + 0 .070 12 .024 30 6 --- --- .075 8 .142 6 .093 4 7 045 7 .043 14 .192 5 .072 8 8 ... - .176 2 .038 24 .092 5 9 --- --- .032 18 .100 9 .045 15 10 .028 12 + 0 + 0 .026 28 11 .037 9 ... --- + 0 .037 22 12 .019 16 .073 9 .065 14 .058 10 13 .078 3 + 0 + 0 .036 23 14 + 0 .064 11 .092 10 .056 11 15 --- - .043 14 .235 3 .095 3 16 032 10 --- --- + 0 .032 25 17 + 0 --- --- .363 1 .053 12 118*Midland .016 18 .231 1 .322 2 .105 2 *Odessa .064 4 19 --- .037 16 .055 17 .043 18 20 025 13 + 0 .020 32 21 .019 16 --- .045 20 .027 27 22 --- --- - .043 23 .043 is 23 .020 15 .105 5 .208 4 .040 21 24 --- --- .015 22 .044 21 .031 26 25 045 7 ..045 13 .083 11 .046 14 26 .033 17 + 0 .022 31 27 .022 14 .083 7 + 0 .025 29 28 .051 5 .058 12 + 0 .044 16 29 .050 6 ... - + 0 .049 13 30 --- - --- --- + 0 + 0 31 ... + 0 .053 18 .042 20 32 --- --- + 0 .058 16 .020 32 33 029 11 .025 20 .065 14 .034 24 34*Brownsville .010 20 .066 10 .047 19 .044 16 *McAllen .079 2 35 .014 19 --- --- + 0 .013 36 36 --- --- .027 19 .136 7 .068 9 indicate regions not having metros or cities. 37 --- .024 21 + 0 .017 34 t indicates facilities were not available or units per 1000 population were less than AVERAGE .037 .053 .070 .043 .001. Midland, Odessa, Brownsville, and McAllen are metro areas. Figures for cities, towns, A- and total urban areas are listed, adjacent to Odessa and Brownsville where applicable. 172 TABLE D.8 REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION FOR SELECTED URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION ACTIVITIES BY CITY SIZE, 1970-2000 SWIMMING 1975 SWIMMING, 1970. TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 14.88 15 40.97 1 38.82 4 21.19 14 16.60 19 47.70 2 39.12 7 23.91 1@ 1 --- 14.81 17 21.12 17 17.21 20 --- --- 19.25 17 27.41 16 22.50 20 2 --- 22.14 11 47.64 1 34.53 2 . - ... 29.93 11 68.40 1 48.37 2 3 --- 23.44 11 --- --- 44.04 6 25.37 15 4 18.53 11 --- --- 33.92 6 20.10 17 5 16.26 14 4.61 27 16.25 22 15.38 21 23.32 13 6.25 27 21.89 .21 21.54 21 --- --- 20.83 15 32.35 14 23.45 19 6 --- --- 18.87 13 27.28 12 20.88 15 14.23 20 22.56 13 10.46 33 14.79 26 7 10.89 20 14.98 16 8.15 32 11.02 26 --- --- 7.34 25 3.75 37 5.19 37 8 --- --- 5.34 26 3.15 37 4.00 37 ... 9.96 23 11.68 30 10.36 36 9 --- ... 7.67 23 9.34 29 8.01 35 .28.1-8 8 32.04 7 36.64 10 28.71 12 10 20.62 10 22.38 10 24.98 15 20.83 16 41.06 1 --- --- 42.00 2 41.07 1 55.61 1 --- --- 58.62 2 55.63 1 11 10J2 24 12.42 20 16.76 25 12.78 29 12 8.30 24 9.49 21 12.46 26 9.81 28 13 14.54 16 5.87 24 18.43 19 12.67 24 23.42 12 7.81 24 29.08 17 19.65 23 14 12.70 19 12.43 18 11.70 27 12.29 25 17.06 18 15.90 18 15.17 27 16.01 25 --- --- 12.12 21 16.72 26 13.25 28 .15 9.64 20 14.81 25 10.98 27 36.65 6 ... --- 45.66 4 36.84 6 16 28.04 5 --- --- 32.07 8 28.10 6 17 9.25 22 --- --- 8.22 31 9.09 31 12.49 21 --- ... 10.80 32 12.24 30 18*Midland 34.38 3 34.92 3 31.08 10 28.43 5 39.79 3 43.47 3 38.31 8 33.17 9 *Odessa 17.98 12 19.81 15 10 --- 24.12 9 23 22.06 12 --- --- 31.31 10 27.15 19 30.31 19 --- 22 --- --- 4.93 36 11.19 33 20 9.46 21 --- --- 3.98 36 8.55 34 21 9.14 23 --- --- 8.13 33 8.83 32 11.80 23 --- --- 11.72 29 11.78 31 22 --- --- --- --- 9.35 28 9.35 29 ... --- ... --- 13.40 28 13.40 27 23 14.15 17 15.84 15 6.00 35 13.55 23 19.61 16 20.49 16 6.96 35 18.71 24 --- --- 31.79 9 24.05 20 28.05 13 24 --- --- 26.64 8 19.28 22.99 11 4 45.50 5 38.80 5 25 30.67 4 31.26 4 37.67 5 30.74 4 38.70 4 40.23 26 --- --- 5.78 25 16.36 21 9.31 30 --- --- 6.87 26 21.71 22 11.62 32 27 26.20 7 18.83 14 27.86 11 25.69 9 36.27 7 21.66 14 33.05 13 34.81 8 28 13.57 18 27.50 6 26.32 14 20.10 17 17.21 17 31.99 8 33.19 @12 25.25 16 29 34.84 2 -.- --- 41.67 3 23.76 10 -45.76 2 --- ... 56.08 3 45.86 3 30 --- --- --- --- 15.22 24 15.22 22 --- --- --- --- 20.62 24 20.62 22 31 --- --- 10.47 19 7.09 34 7.80 36 --- 13.15 19 9.78 34 10.49 35 32 --- --- 19.67 12 16.72 20 18.71 19 --- --- 24.39 12 20.90 23 23.23 18 33 23.54 8 29.81 5 32.22 7 25.74 8 27.39 9 34.56 5 36.60 11 29.74 11 34*Brownsville 21.10 9 26.76 7 31.65 9 21.88 13 24.84 10 32.46 6 38.31 8 2161.26 14 *McAllen 17.27 13 21.29 14 --- 18 36.59 7 35 26.49 6 --- --- 21.22 16 25.86 7 37.76 -5 50-i'l- 1 30.60 15 42.78 4 36 --- 37.91 2 26A7 13 33.59 3 --- 10.87 22 10.89 31 10.58 34 37 --- --- 8.58 22 8.91 30 8.67 33 AVERAGE 27.41 17.23 18.98 25.08 36.52 22.14 25.07 33.40 173 TABLE D.8 (Continued) SWIMMING 1980 SWIMMING 1990 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO_ CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual rn-n -ua r %-nn-uar- Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 .18.70 119 54.51 2 40.90 12 27.35 22 23.43 22 72.99 5 47.45 18 36.36 23 2 7-' ... 24.57 15 34.77 18 28.81 18 --- --- 36.88 14 51.61 14 43.52 18 3 --- --- 45.18 5 91.06 1 66.98 2 --- ... 62.22 6 153.78 1 104.85 2 4 29.01 13 ... --- 57.92 5 31.50 14 42.57 12 --- ... 92.72 5 46.21 15 5 31.76 10 7.88 27 28.35 22 28.79 19 53.21 10 11.75 26 45A2 20 47.38 13 6 - --- 22.78 17 37.45 15 25.90 23 --- ... 27.06 18 50.23 15 31.20 25 7 18.01 20 31.84 12 12.98 33 19.08 26 27.26 18 55.18 7 18.82 33 29.36 27 8 --- --- 9.78 25 4.31 37 6.54 37 ... --- 15.56 24 5.52 37 9.77 37 9 --- ... 12.47 23 14.71 30 13.06 36 --- --- 18.32 23 23.20 30 19.88 35 10 37.07 8 43.77 6 49.70 9 38.07 11 59.54 8 74.49 4 83.70 8 62.26 9 11 73.17 1 --- --- 78.85 2 73.22 1 117.77 1 --- --- 131.71 2 117.94 1 12 12.31 24 15.68 20 21.94 25 16.16 29 17.03 24 24.50 19 36.53 24 25.31 28 13 35.05 9 24 42.55 11 28.47 20 67.54 7 15.48 25 77.64 9 51.90 11 14 22.36 16 19.99 18 19.04 27 20.39 25 35.22 16 30.61 17 27.80 28 31.20 25 is - --- --- 15.52 21 20.47 26 16.67 28 --- --- 23.65 20 29.35 27 24.83 29 16 45.11 6 --- --- 58.92 4 45.51 7 69.29 5 --- --- 95.23 4 70.40 7 17 15.87 21 --- --- 13.64 31 15.56 30 24.50 2D --- --- 20.49 32 24.00 30 18*Midland 44.51 7 52.10 3 50.58 7 38.54 10 56.68 9 77.43 2 65.92 10 49.75 12 *Odessa 21.72 17 26.30 19 19 1 --- --- 39.65 8 43.09 10 4Q.45 9 --- - --- 45.53 12 87.99 6 54.89 10 20 15.65 22 --- --- 6.12 36 14.10 33 24.30 21 --- --- 8.70 36 21.80 32 21 23 --- --- 15.91 29 15.35 31 23.20 23 --- 26.02 29 23.92 31 22 ... --- ... --- 17.97 28 17.97 27 --- --- --- --- 31A6 26 31.46 24 23 25.66 14 25.39 14 8.09 35 24.49 24 42.89 11 36.78 15 10.29 35 40.95 22 24 --- ... 37.01 10 29.24 20 33.35 13 ... --- 50.87 10 41.28 23 46.53 14 25 47.75 5 50.62 4 56.00 6 47.91 6 69.11. 6 76.25 3 84.61 7 69.53 8 26 ... --- 7.92 26 28.83 21 14.32 32 --- --- 10.14 27 45.20 21 19.91 34 27 48.30 4 24.56 16 36.37 16 45.28 8 78.24 4 32.19 16 46.63 19 71.16 6 28 21.19 18 36.13 11 40.83 14 30.72 16 30.33 17 48.45 11 59.53 12 44.94 16 29 57.45 2 --- --- 70.00 3 57.57 3 89.41 2 --- --- 105.99 3 89.54 3 30 --- --- --- --- 26.88 23 28.88 17 --- --- --- 42.31 22 42.31 20 31 --- --- 15.79 19 12.97 34 13.57 34 --- ... 22.26 21 21.33 31 21.52 33 32 --- --- 29.62 13 25.80 24 28.33 21 - I- ,I --- 45.15 13 35.59 25 41.86 21 33 31.10 11 39.30 9 40.90 12 33.62 12 41.54 13 52.26 9 53.08 13 44.53 17 34*Brownsville 29.05 12 41.06 7 45.83 8 31.22 15 39.50 14 53.00 8 63.06 11 42.67 19 *McAllen 25.57 15 36.25 15 35 50.68 3 --- --- 32.@4 19 48.79 5 85.77 3 --- --- 49.10 16 82.46 4 36 --- --- 63.62 1 35.62 17 53.14 4 --- --- 100.16 1 48.39 17 80.91 5 37 --- 13.45 22 13.30 32 13.41 35 ... --- 19.41 22 18.48 34 19.16 36 AVERAGE 47.17 27.87 32.56 43.16 75.28 41.80 52.90 68.96 174 TABLE D.8 (Continued) SWIMMING 2000 TOTAL CHILDS PLAY - 1970 TOTAL MFTRO CITY TOWN _MANAREAS_ METRO____ CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 .28.23 23 92.84 5 53.15 25 46.72 24 14.01 7 7.57 4 8.93 2 12.61 7 2 --- --- 51.21 14 71.82 13 61.22 18 --- --- 5.97 18 6.35 19 6.12 29 3 --- --- 91.89 6 230.04 1 155.29 2 --- --- 5.74 20 7.16 8 6.43 25 4 58.92 12 --- --- 134.93 6 63.48 14 12.88 12 --- ... 6.97 12 12.28 9 5 @80.95 9 16.71 26 68.77 14 71.86 12 14.62 5 4.15 25 5.76 24 10.73 11 6 --- --- 32.30 20 64.32 17 36.66 28 --- --- 6.67 11 8.77 3 7.17 20 7 38.50 18 85.51 7 M90 33 41.61 26 10.50 15 5.76 19 5.08 28 8.65 15 8 --- 23.12 24 7.33 37 14.29 37 --- --- 4.73 24 4.13 36 4.36 36 9 --- 26.89 22 34.45 30 29.70 34 --- --- 5.63 22 6.48 17 5.80 30 10 87.99 8 115.15 2 128.59 7 93.90 10 12.76 13 7.25 6 7.60 5 12.41 8 11 174.35 1 --- --- 200.77 2 174.75 1 18.86 1 --- 7.39 6 18.78 1 12 22.45 24 36.93 18 55.40 21 37.73 27 7.60 22 6.38 13 7.36 7 6.88 22 13 112.03 5 23.12 24 124.45 8 83.02 11 13.66 9 5.06 23 6.14 20 9.28 14 14 51.44 14 43.65 16 37.79 29 44.49 25 19 5.72 21 5.94 22 6.63 24 5 --- --- 33.89 19 40.37 27 35.12 29 --- - 6.11 16 7.13 9 6.37 27 16 95.93 6 --- --- 138.59 5 98.36 8 14.41 6 --- --- 5.89 23 14.28 5 17 35.35 19 --- --- 28.96 32 34.74 30 10.19 16 --- --- 4.88 29 9.37 13 18*Midland 69.74 10 105.80 4 90.90 10 63.44 15 18.86 1 7.22 7 8.74 4 14.45 4 *Odessa 31.15 22 12.91 11 6.34 14 19 --- --- 85.12 8 153.34 3 99.37 7 --- 6.03 21 6.26 28 20 35.27 20 --- --- 11.80 36 31.56 33 5.27 24 --- ... 4.86 30 5.21 34 21 33.09 21 --- --- 38.64 28 34.38 31 5.83 23 --- --- 4.80 32 5.51 32 22 . I... --- --- --- 50.05 26 50.05 23 --- ... ... --- 6A1 is 6.41 26 23 68.60 11 46.78 is 12.64 35 65.47 13 8.69 20 6.69 10 4.83 31 8.25 17 24 1 --- --- 66.81 10 55.36 22 61.81 17 --- --- 7.33 5 7.00 11 7.17 20 25 95.14 7 107.71 3 120.00 9 95.91 9 13.36 10 6.51 11 6.83 14 13.10 6 26 --- 12.62 27 66.77 15 26.26 35 ... --- 7.68 3 6.92 13 7.42 19 27 .1 17A5 4 40.19 17 56.90 20 103.83 6 15.63 4 8.16 1 9.38 1 14.52 3 28 40.90 17 64.38 12 82.62 1 i 63.27 16 9.90 18 7.06 9 7.07 10 8.53 16 29 .127.03 3 --- --- 144.93 4 127.14 3 16.63 3 --- --- 6.76 15 16.63 2 30 --- --- --- --- 53.62 23 53.62 22 ... ... --- --- 4.46 35 4.46 35 31 --- --- 29.32 21 32.78 31 32.04 32 --- --- 6.16 15 5.55 26 5.68 31 32 - --- 63.22 13 53.42 24 59.77 19 --- ... 6.04 17 3.86 37 5.33 33 33 52.98 13 66.46 11 66.07 16 56A2 20 13.95 8 7.08 8 6.70 .16 11.89 10 34*Brownsville 51.17 15 68.45 9 81.83 12 55.35 21 11.17 14 4.12 26 5.31 27 9.41 12 *McAllen 47.99 16 10.11 17 35 1129.41 2 --- ... 61.86 19 124.23 4 8.25 21 --- --- 4.67 34 7.82 18 36 --- 144.60 1 62.85 18 114.39 5 ... --- 7.82 2 4.77 33 6.67 23 37 --- 26A5 23 24.73 34 26.00 36. --- --- 3.75 27 5.69 25 4.28 37 .AVERAGE 110.14 62.39 79.75 101.33 14.08 6.24 6.32 12.14 175 > www - --------- < -A m K co 09 0 3 0. CL > > CD m CL CD 0 2) zi to N3 Z3 c < 0 Lrl li 4@h :- w 00 rD b. lin b) @j 0) w C. o"o COD OR A@ -4 a) w -4 0 N) (7) w m W 0 p P, p 9) 9) PO @-j 9) 9) p P) 0) momm lim-phW04 LTI Ln @l r M Ij (F -4 (0 00 R Ij 4 (D ul - bo @j 6 ij b) b) b) L, 5- 0 LTI tj li li CJ 0 W N) . . . 00 m li -N 0 0 -Ph N3 00 00 CY) 0 Ij PQ CD :74 -j - (4 K) C) - 4. co w tj 0 LTI r > 0 w > 0) Ul Ah 0. 00 4 ul 0) (31 C) -j --4 j 0) -4 ul 00 Ln (7) a) cr) 00 K) Lq in iD b @) 6 Ln @j b) bo b *W'W 'm 0 w w 'm b br) bo @n im b :p. @-j Zo Zo :c@, Zn S ou ul M 'Wi 'Wj ELP Lwn 8 - . " I w " 4 - OD w w " 0 a 0 0 w 0 -4 C) 00 -N M w pi co cri w CD 0 0 * z (A t8 I"i lWj C"n C144 04 wo WN) 2 pi C2 p"i "o ow) 'Mo 4h. C".) w w > c 0 80 '1 zn' m 0 80 0 j t7@ -j 0 4 0 z Im 0, Z3 Or- <w 2= m :-. @,j s 0 r M iD L. LT, j io L,) Z4 in i. 6 k:@j 6 L@ i,) i.., i,@ Ln Z., b@, 14 w (n 00 00 0 - W W @j 0 tn -i w D. li 00 (D 0 (n co to - 14 03 " (n 'a > 0 Z 0 > > m '141 WN ww (W;l po Zo w 8 j N Z@, "Ji W NU31 o 4 '0'0' No' 2 a, NW) CL)4) N") (5 oo ("D WO CD > ID (a bo 0 2) 0 N3 - K3 c @c :@ C4 NJ 0 W r po m -0 4) 9 0 0 C CD 0 CD @ @ i,@ b, i, : : Z. i, ZD ij m 010 14 W- 0 co -4 co 0 w (D 2., c CD 0 tj ca Z.. Z; j NN j 00 > M :.j Cj 0) cn C) m li li 0) a) -4 0) 0) M Ln (n m li Ln 4@b Ul CD 4 Ln 0) m r cn -4 E? w co o in o w 23 COO T (N") 00 2 '080 WE cwj M" imn :-'j @000' @I-j Zwn CL ri ::J- cn w G) 00 ul co-pj"-44 cn!@Wo 0 j r M > r- 0 CU 3 > c -< = -< 0 m 0 MJJ.4 0 4 4 j 0 m 0 m w r Ul w 00 w w 0 0 0 W:.j ;.j @j Zj 6 L., 6 b@ b ill bL- b666boblkIL- w L li (n " CD Ln co 00 0 CY) a 0 0 0 0) OD - co 0 W 0 co w p. w - 00 w - 00 w co 0 -, 0 to :* M z Ila CA) w Ln 0 " -W4 NJ -W4 W CWA) w 8 CW4 %Mi WO "o N 6; W > 0 N3 -4 0 4 i@ M :@:@ M:@ s Z3 Z j 6; M Z3 M W W M FO !j . . . . . . . r- r @D. 'o :N @D, ii b) :9h Z4 C,3 0 4 m 4 w 00 w es W Ln 88 @:r, a3 = -0 W CD j cn cn 1%) a 0 to 0 14 Q li 00 0 (7) co 00 CY) m 0 NJ 000 0 0 71 -4 r Li fl) w CA) w t) CA) C4 U) - tj tj tj 4 C.) ul 0 w w 0) Ul al -4 0 - li 4 0"D (D 0 W - LTI " 0) 0) 4@b to co TABLE D.8 (Continued) CHILDS PLAY - 1990 TOTAL CHiLos PLAY - 2000 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 2 .3.61 13 6.45 5 7.70 3 17.06 16 29.64 16 5.99 * 12 7.22 5 18.63 17 2 --- --- 6.02 15 6.31 16 6.15 29 ... ... 6.02 11 6.24 14 6.13 28 3 --- --- 5.29 22 6.33 15 5.77 31 --- --- 5.08 22 5.99 19 5.50 33 4 26.74 9 --- --- 6.48 13 25.27 8 36.06 9 --- 6.27 12 34.27 8 5 44.00 2 4.00 25 5.45 25 26.94 6 66.02 2 3.82 25 5.28 23 38.78 5 6 --- -'- 6.28 6 7.40 4 6.48 24 --- --- 6.08 9 7.15 6 6.22 26 7 24.31 12 5.60 20 4.83 30 18.48 14 33.67 11 5.51 21 4.76 29 25.46 14 8 --- 4.37 24 3.98 36 4.14 36 --- ... 4.48 24 -3.'96 35 4.19 36 --- 5.55 21 6.17 19 5.75 32 5.58 18 6.16 16 6.80 30 9 --- 10, 31.30 8 7.11 4 7.39 5 27.99 5 43.55 7 7.06 5 7.28 4 37.23 7 11 43.37 3 --- --- 6.94 8 42.91 1 59.23 3 --- --- 6.81 7 58.44 1 12 16.17 22 6.28 6 7.30 -6 8.72 22 21.72 22 6.24 7 7.30 3 9.74 22 13 53.44 1 5.02 23 6.31 16 25.94 7 84.77 1 5.08 22 6.34 10 37.96 6 14 22.68 15 5.79 18 6.00 20 10.89 21 32.70 14 5.82 16 6.01 18 14.26 20 15 --- --- 6.25 8 6.60 10 6.33 26 6.31 6 6.48 9 6.34 25 16 34.10 6 --- ... 4.82 31 32.84 3 46.61 6 --- --- 4.44 31 44.21 3 17 25.18 11 --- --- 4.70 32 22.61 11 35.35 10 --- --- 4.98 27 32.45 9 18*Midland 32.16 7 6.04 14 8.80 1 22.65 10 40.31 8 7.83 3 8.76 1 27.63 13 *Odessa 21.30 19 26.59 m 19 --- --- 5.77 19 5.92 21 5.80 30 --- --- 5.52 20 5.85 20 5.59 32 20 13.91 24 --- --- 4.96 28 12.48 18 20.02 23 ... -.- 4.96 28 17.64 18 21 14.05 23 --- --- 5.06 27 11.77 19 19.88 24 --- --- 5.15 25 16.46 19 22 --- --- --- --- 6.20 18 6.20 28 ... ... ... ... 6.18 15 6.18 27 23 22.04 17 6.20 11 4.51 34 20.23 13 31.46 15 5.87 14 4.21 33 29.00 12 24 --- ... 6.16 13 6.49 12 6.31 27 ... --- 5.77 17 6.26 13 5.98 29 25 25.59 10 6.26 9 6.62 9 24.67 9 33.24 13 6.14 8 6.55 8 31.87 10 26 --- --- 7.92 1 6.51 11 7.52 23 --- --- 8.04 1 6.15 17 7.56 23 27 37.97 5 7.78 3 8.40 2 32.21 4 53.39 5 7.69 4 7.99 2 43.90 4 28 20.83 20 6.25 10 6.46 14 11.23 20 27.95 17 5.91 13 4.11 34 11.70 21 29 39.34 4 --- --- 6.95 7 39.08 2 54.85 4 --- --- 6.34 10 54.53 2 30 --- --- --- --- 4.90 29 4.90 35 --- --- --- --- 4.36 32 4.36 35 31 --- --- 6.17 12 5.55 23 5.68 33 ... ... 6.04 10 5.52 22 5.63 31 32 - --- 5.87 17 3.27 37 4.97 34 --- --- 5.86 15 3.12 37 4.89 34 33 22.33 16 5.94 16 5A7 25 17.87 15 27.20 19 5.58 18 5.04 26 21.52 16 34*Brownsville 21.31 is 3.46 26 4.69 33 16.81 17 27.95 17 2.84 27 4.57 30 21.61 15 *McAllen 17.99 21 22.29 21 35 22.97 14 --- --- 5.59 22 21.40 12 33.53 12 --- --- 5.77 21 31.41 11 36 --- --- 7.82 2 4.09 35 6.43 25 ... --- 7.97 2 3.87 36 6.46 24 37 --- ... 3.28 27 5.40 26 3.84 37 --- --- 3.05 26 5.21 24 3.61 37 AVERAGE 32.20 6.05 6.18 26.41 43.99 5.97 6.09 35.60 177 TABLE D.8 (Continued) BASEBALUSOFTBALL - 1970 TOTAL BASEBALL/SOFTBALL - 1975 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY Annual Annual Annual A ... I Annual Annual Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Pot Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 2.21 12 8.35 1 11A8 1 4.39 6 2.58 13 8.69 1 12.07 1 5.08 5 2 --- 3.58 11 2.72 16 3.25 12 --- --- 4.26 9 3.35 15 3.90 9 3 --- --- 5.33 4 6.51 4 5.90 3 --- --- 6.38 4 7.65 4 6.99 2 4 1.69 16 --- ... 2.07 23 1.73 29 1.94 17 --- ... 2.50 23 1.99 29 5 1.79 15 1.15 24 3.08 14 2.19 22 2.32 15 1.62 23 4.12 8 2.91 17 6 --- --- 7.13 2 3.65 8 6.30 2 ... ... 7.82 2 4.08 9 6.97 3 7 .53 23 4.48 8 5.18 5 2.10 23 .62 23 5.54 6 5.90 5 2.39 25 8 --- ... 2.75 16 1.38 30 1.91 25 --- --- 3.44 15 1.67 29 2.37 26 9 --- ... 2.77 15 1.62 28 2.54 16 - ... 3.56 13 1.95 28 3.18 15 10 2.06 14 2.90 14 2.29 20 2.09 24 2.44 14 3.47 14 2'77 17 2.50 24 11 2.38 10 --- --- 2.35 19 2.38 19 2.80 8 --- --- 2.75 18 2.80 19 12 1.38 20 2.08 22 .84 36 1.77 28 2.13 16 2.48 20 1.01 36 2.10 28 13 .88 21 A8 27 1.14 35 .81 35 1.37 21 ..61 27 1.65 30 1.19 34 14 .365 24 .1.02 25 1.27 32 .90 34 .48 24 1.33 25 1.57 33 1.16 35 15 --- --- 1 @61 2 1 A6 29 1.57 31 --- ... 1.91 22 1.50 35 1.81 30 16 6.66 1 --- 10.47 2 6.72 1 7.50 1 ... --- 11.87 2 7.60 1 17 3.33 4 --- 3.08 14 3.30 11 3.95 4 --- --- 3.51 12 3.88 10 18*Midland 2.34 Ill 6.35 3 7.99 , 3 3.57 8 2.71 10 7.44 3 8.80 3 4.05 8 *Odessa 2.43 8 2.72 9 i � .-. --- 3.25 13 1.66 27 2.86 14 --- ... 3.93 10 2.27 26 3.53 14 20 .69 22 --- --- 1.36 31 .80 36 .86 22 --- --- 1.61 31 .98 36 21 2.16 13 --- --- 1.20 33 1.86 26 2.160 12 -.- ... 1.56 34 2.29 27 22 --- --- --- --- 1.20 33 1.20 33 --- --- --- --- 1.58 32 1.58 33 23 1.60 19 2.29 20 2.12 22 1.69 30 1.71 20 2.64 19 2.28 25 1.81 30 24 --- --- 4.98 6 3.24 11 3.85 7 --- --- 5.64 5 3.02 16 4.37 7 25 2.41 9 4.81 7 3.28 10 2A8 17 2.69 11 5.38 7 3.55 11 2.78 20 26 --- ... .95 26 .42 37 .77 37 --- -.- 1.14 26 .61 37 .97 37 27 2.66 7 2.11 21 3.13 13 2.65 is 3.15 7 2.33 21 3A2 14 3.11 16 28 1.62 is 3.59 10 2.47 18 2.40 18 1.89 18 3.88 11 2.70 19 2.74 22 29 3.30 5 --- ... 4.50 7 3.31 10 3.80 5 --- ---- 4.75 7 3.81 11 30 --- ... --- --- 1.86 25 1.86 26 --- --- --- --- 2.53 21 2.53 23 31 --- --- 3.90 9 1.98 24 2.38 19 --- --- 4.72 8 2.36 24 2.86 18 32 --- 2.50 18 5.15 6 3.36 9 --- ... 2.89 17 5.63 6 3.79 12 33 5.57 3 2.71 17 3.20 12 4.81 4 5.79 3 2.85 18 3.44 13 5.05 6 34*Brownsviije 5.69 2 3.35 12 2.51 17 3.10 13 6.52 2 3.69 12 2.68 20 3.57 13 *McAllen 1.64 17 1.75 19 35 2.85 6 ... --- 3.40 9 4.70 5 3.59 6 ... --- 3.72 10 5.27 4 36 --- --- 2.36 19 2.29 20 2.33 21 ... --- 2.93 16 2.51 22 2.77 21 37 ... ... 1.23 23 1.71 26 1.36 32 ... --- 1.39 24 2.21 27 1.61 32 AVERAGE 2.78 2.94 2.91 2.82 3.19 3.44 3A2 3.25 178 X co c2 c) In w 'T C'j 0 00 c) RT 0 N 0 N w w M r- N w 0 r- r- M w r' Lf) a) IT LU NN-NNNMMM - M N N M N M - N Cl) 0 z 0 r@SN MWM;zw rIN r-wme;;N M 0 OD r% z 9L It Cir@cl ."r@ rt C!"-: ."Rp@11toRcl . .01 cl v! -: Lq c0 >@ rl LC) 0 (Ij LD 0) m C-) Lf) Cl) .0, M N C-4 N 0 to L) L7 Cl M N (D 07 - -T M LO 0) V LD U) U) w IT N V c0 c C4 N MR (00) Lnv WW 0 w N Rm (2 Lo 0 C4) C4 @ C4 M C4 C.) M M N M M C4 cl z 3: V 0 - 0 ;; CD Lp Lo 00 co a ;; CD - a N :: OD In cl rl:@ (D A CD 8 CD r% r, N Lf) U) to g 0 0 r- W 00 9L = ClqLqtqcl!cq .0?-: r@ iq C?Cqr*@ "t q OR CR . Ci a? " q "! 00 mrlwr-NN-T M-MNN WOO -tNNMNMV vmwmmwvm Lf) M 04 Lc) c0 LL 0 qT 0 V) (4NMN m N (4 N C,4 N N co LU co r, M0800V :22 in Lo Lf) 0. CR . Cl . Ul It '7 . CPR ul I Ci Ci Ncq q (7) co CD N 0 CD Lo CD Lr) M - N C43 Ln Ir OD r, cl) -T co -T Cl) -T I* LC) r >- mo 0 00 0 to r- Ln C4 0 0 r- (D MC4&V cc C14 - 04 V LU --a Lf) 0 cm Ln 8 La CD C4 200S.0 r, W CO :3 , A cq r, N CD C4 F- co w r- C"i CD rl V . . . C.) 0 v) C-,i 'i C-i -0: ci C4 Ci Lf; C-i ci 4 csi ui @d ci csi (d 4 c m 0 0 v 0 o) co M r, U-) Ln 0 W qt 0 0 N W MWWN ;;W@; r- c4c) A( @2 qt to r-, 04 0) Cl) LU N- c4c,4- cNc4mmm -Mc4m Cl) N C.) z Ci CS! IR CR . . . . Cli It . Ci %t Lq . . . . . . . Lq . . . . CR 14: eq CR le Lf) C-4 U) ca IL 8 a; 2 ;; N "- W M 11; M w < a) L, L6 od c,4 v) r, c,4 eq m cN m c4 c,4 oo 4 v v - c,4 c4 c4 v m m m v N m v w v v m m c>. 20 r 0 Cl) Cl) N Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl N C14 .j 0 t0 Coco C)o Lf);;C,)Oo Aocn tf)c,4wN q gm g N w m 0 M w 0 to Cl) C4 0 N N OD .j IL =OD - w a) - . -0: oq . vi (31 q (31 r-i c)I i q .01 . . . Cl q IR rl: 01 It r% q P% Cq 14: U@ 01 4 2 0 81 C4 C@ 06 04 Ui 1* CD CN M C-4 C4 - - N V M N - N N M M MNONNWMN -0, N N M r S 0 c N N N 04 - - - co LU w t M Lclol OM C,3 (w, In - c*l 0 r- . . . . . . . M a)- Lq IQ q CL 4 cd 06 6 4 4 'i C'i 6 C6 'i c) w (D N .0. L6 vi ci li Cl) M r > ca0 &D Ln O@ N M r, OD V V) CN co N 10) 00 Co Lf) CIJ 00 M 00 CN N 0 (D LU 32 A -0 C'. Co - IS 0 cq rl@ NTqui qc3i q q G) 0 0) C41 V U) IL N CN C-4 (N M C14 00 v CN N - M (i ci N v L6 F-4 0 > LU C co c < 0 Ir 0 LU N Cl) Lf) to r, > N 04 N 04 N N C14 N (N Cl Cl) C-1 M M C.) Cl) Cl) < 00 M C-D 1@ r-*- M- CON N c) V Lr) 'D r, co 0) 0 - eq M V Lf) (D rl TABLE D-8 (Continued) BASEBALL/SOFTBALL - 2000 TOTAL PICNICKING - 1970 TOTAL MPTag. OWN URBAN AREAS METRO ..QTY OWN nnual Annual Annui Annual Annual Annual AnnuaT, Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1. 4.49 11 10.25 5 16.76 2 9.34 4 4.48 14 3.65 21 2.28 35 4.01 21 2 ... --- 7.73 11 6.66 11 7.21 10 --- --- 2.55 27 2.33 32 2.47 35 3 --- - 12.50 2 12.90 3 12.69 1 --- --- 6.46 3 4.23 9 5.38 11 4 3.25 19 --- --- 4.23 25 3.31 31 5.01 11 --- --- 4.15 10 4.92 13 5 5.80 7 3.34 24 10.60 4 7.44 7 4.22 18 3.23 24 2.83 25 3.66 27 6 --, --- 12.07 3 7.70 10 11.47 3 --- --- 4.91 10 3.17 19 4.49 15 7 1.29 23 11.22 4 8.98 6 3.75 29 3.75 22 4.87 11 4.13 11 4.01 21 8 --- --- 6.90 12 2.79 34 4.60 24 --- - 3.05 26 1.97 36 2.39 30 9 .-- ... 8.73 7 3.83 28 6.91 11 --- --- 3.71 20 2.49 31 3.46 29 10 4.49 11 6.33 14 5.06 15 4.70 23 4.49 13 4.83 12 2.78 26 4.43 17 11 4.90 10 --- --- 4.66 19 4.89 21 4.47 15 --- --- 3.02 23 4.46 16 12 4.03 16 4.85 19 2.35 36 4.15 28 4.42 16 3.30 23 3.16 20 3.55 28 13 3.83 17 1.37 27 4.33 23 3.06 33 4.33 17 3.22 25 3AI 16 3.78 25 14 1.07 24 3.78 22 4.27 24 3.07 32 4.11 19 3.85 18 3.59 14 3.84 24 15 ... --- 3.93 21 2.62 35 3.68 30 --- --- 4.76 13 2.56 29 4.18 19 16 11.25 2 --- --- 17.71 1 11.62 2 10.70 3 --- --- 4.58 5 10.61 2 17 6.88 5 --- --- 6.33 12 6.83 12 5.21 10 --- - 3.08 21 4.88 14 18*Midland 4.47 13 14.35 1 10.08 5 6.20 15 3.50 23 4.62 14 3.56 15 3.92 23 *Odessa 4.42 14 4.52 12 19 --- --- 7.91 10 5A5 14 7.39 8 5.45 9 3.74 13 5.02 12 20 1.94 22 --- --- 3.49 31 2.19 36 1.00 24 --- --- 4.37 7 1.55 37 21 5.11 9 --- 3.86 26 4.82 22 5.53 9 --- ... 4.93 4 3.27 32 22 --- ... --- 4.93 18 4.93 20 --- ... --- --- 3.07 22 3.07 34 23 2.63 20 5.69 15 3.51 30 2.85 34 4.09 20 5.63 8 4A7 6 4.21 18 24 ... 9'75 6 4.60 20 7.50 6 --- --- 6.95 2 5.70 2 6.33 7 25 4.14 15 8.50 8 5.71 13 4.33 26 4.08 21 6.36 5 4.37 7 4.15 20 26 ... - 1.70 26 .93 37 1.50 37 --- --- 3.47 22 2.31 33 3.08 33 27 5.73 8 3.98 20 5.05 16 5.53 18 6.99 7 3.82 19 2.53 30 6.38 6 28 3.37 18 5.13 17 3.86 26 4.33 26 6.29 8 6.24 6 5.30 3 6.12 8 29 6.66 6 --- --- 8.15 7 6.67 13 9.11 5 --- --- 3.38 17 9.06 4 30 --- --- --- --- 4.36 22 4.36 25 --- ... --- --- 1.86 37 1.86 36 31 --- --- 8.28 9 4.56 21 5.35 19 --- --- 7.59 1 5.77 1 6.11 9 32. --- 5.01 18 7.81 9 5.99 16 --- ... 4.37 15 2.57 28 3.78 25 33 7.04 4 3.45 23 4.99 17 6.33 14 7.41 6 5.94 7 4.11 12 6.70 5 34*13rownsville 11.68 1 5.27 16 3A7 32 7.32 9 15.23 2 4.12 16 2.70 27 16.85 1 *McAllen 2.11 21 28.12 1 35 8.70 3 --- --- 7.84 8 8.63 5 10.28 4 --- --- 2.97 24 9.40 3 36 ... ... 6.58 13 3.77 29 5.54 17 --- --- 3.96 17 2.29 34 3.33 31 37 --- --- 2.24 25 3.42 33 2.55 35 - --- 6.42 4 3.22 18 5.54 10 AVERAGE 5..22 6.29 6.37 5.47 5.72 4.67 3.63 5.34 180 TABLE D.8 (Continued) PICNICKING - 1975 TOTAL PICNICKING - 1980 TOTAL METRO UaCITY . TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN #RBAN AREAS r Annual Annual Annual Annual _- 7 Annual Annual ua Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 4.97 12 3.86 20 2.40 35 4.34 18 5.47 11 3.86 20 2.56 34 4.64 17 2 --- --- 2.73 27 2.45 33 2.61 35 --- --- 2.92 27 2.57 33 2.77 35 3 --- ... 6.57 5 4.28 10 5A7 11 --- --- 6.65 6 4.30 10 5.53 12 4 5.31 10 --- --- 4.10 12 5.19 13 5.61 9 ... ... 4.26 11 5.64 11 5 4.68 14 3.47 22 3.05 26 4.01 24 5.13 13 3.71 21 3.26 25 4.35 21 6 - --- 5.03 11 3.26 21 4.63 15 --- --- 5.15 10 3.68 17 4.84 15 7 4.08 21 5.12 10 4.34 8 4.29 19 4.53 18 5.41 9 4.56 6 4.66 16 8 --- --- 3.28 26 2.19 36 2.62 34 --- --- 3.53 24 2.32 36 2.81 34 9 --- --- 3.75 21 2.77 30 3.52 29 ... --- 3.66 22 2.94 30 3.47 30 4.56 16 5.00 12 3.19 24 4.51 17 4.62 16 5.16 11 3.51 22 4.59 18 11 4.55 17 --- --- 3.43 19 4.54 16 4.60 17 --- --- 3.82 16 4.59 18 12 4.50 18 3.42 24 3.26 21 3.65 28 4.53 18 3.58 23 3.96 14 3.74 28 13 4.64 15 3.29 25 3.53 17 3.95 25 4.84 15 3.43 25 3.52 21 4.07 24 14 4.19 19 3.95 19 3.61 16 3.92 27 4.25 20 4.02 19 3.56 20 3.95 27 15 --- --- 4.81 13 2.57 31 4.28 20 --- ... 4.89 13 2.81 31 4A1 20 16 10.45 3 --- --- 5.03 4 10.34 2 10.06 3 --- --- 5.39 4 9.93 2 17 5.25 11 --- --- 3.24 23 4.95 14 5.29 12 ... ... 3.13 27 4.99 14 18*Midland 3.79 23 4.76 14 3A7 18 4.13 22 4'06 22 4.42 16 3AO 23 4.32 22 *Odessa 4.79 13 5.11 14 19 - -.- --- 5.68 8 3.85 13 5.24 12 --- -- 6.00 8 3.94 15 5.52 13 20 1.10 24 --- --- 4.33 9 1.62 37 1.20 24 - --- 4.36 9 1.71 37 21 5.54 9 --- --- 4.82 5 3.22 31 5.56 10 ... 4.84 5 3.19 32 22 --- --- --- --- 3.17 25 3.17 32 --- --- --- ... 3.35 24 3.35 31 23 3.95 22 5.28 9 4.44 7 4.06 23 3.93 23 4.97 12 4.48 8 4.03 25 24 ... --- 6.93 2 5.68 2 6.33 6 --- --- 6.87 4 5.64 2 6.29 7 25 4.11 20 6.80 3 4.50 6 4.20 21 4.16 21 7.26 1 4.56 6 4.26 23 26 --- --- 3.43 23 2.44 34 3.12 33 --- --- 3.39 26 2.37 35 3.08 33 27 7.15 6 4.02 17 2.95 27 6.53 5 7.26 6 4.09 18 3.25 26 6.61 5 28 6.39 8 6.43 6 5A7 3 6.24 7 6.50 8 6.80 5 5.53 3 6.42 6 29 8.67 5 --- --- 3.80 14 8.62 4 9.27 4 --- --- 3.64 18 9.22 3 30 --- --- --- --- 1.81 37 1.81 36 --- --- --- --- 1.77 37 1.77 36 31 --- --- 7.40 1 5.72 1 6.07 9 --- --- 7.18 2 5.74 1 6.05 10 32 --- --- 4.48 16 2.81 29 3.93 26 --- ... 4.48 15 3.01 29 3.98 26 33 6.96 7 6.01 7 4.13 11 6.09 8 6.53 7 6.04 7 4.21 12 6.12 8 34*Brownsville 15.66 2 4.49 15 2.85 28 16.57 1 16.03 2 4.65 14 3.13 27 16.32 1 *McAllen 26.60 1 25.11 1 35 9.73 4 --- --- 3.72 15 9.06 3 9.23 5 --- --- 4.02 13 8.68 4 36 - --- - --- 18 2.51 32 3.42 30 --- --- 4.11 17 2.81 31 3.62 29 37 --- --- 6.72 4 3.32 20 5.79 10 --- --- 7.06 3 3.60 19 6.12 8 AVERAGE 5.66 4.84 3.74 5.34 5.66 5.01 3.86 5.38 181 TABLE D.8 (Continued) PICNICKING - 1990 TOTAL PICNICKING - 2000 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Wnnual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 6.50 8 4.17 19 2.73 33 5.17 15 7.74 6 4.54 15 2.89 33 5.67 15 2 ... ... 3.17 27 2.70 34 2.96 35 --- --- 3.54 24 2.91 32 3.23 33 3 --- --- 6.78 4 4.45 9 5.69 13 .-- --- 6.90 6 4.61 10 5.85 12 4 6.26 9 --- --- 4.32 12 6.12 9 .6.93 10 --- --- 4.39 13 6.78 8 5 6.16 10 4.00 22 3.59 22 5.06 17 7.37 8 4.30 is 3.90 20 5.85 12 6 --- ... 5.34 11 3.89 18 5.08 16 ... --- 5.47 12 3.85 21 5.25 18 7 5.42 14 5.77 10 4.95 5 5.38 14 6.45 12 6.12 9 5.28 6 6.21 11 8 --- --- 4.02 21 2.57 35 3.18 32 --- --- 4.10 20 2.79 34 3.37 32 9 ... ... 3.25 26 3.25 29 3.25 31 --- --- 3.32 25 3.48 26 3.38 31 10 4.74 17 5.99 9 4.15 16 4.78 20 4.83 19 6.89 7 4.74 9 5.00 20 11 4.72 19 m.. ... 4.69 8 4.72 21 4.84 18 --- ... 5.55 4 4.85 21 12 4.66 20 3.84 23 3.35 26 3.93 27 4.73 20 4.07 21 3.34 29 4.05 27 13 4.96 16 3.58 24 3.73 19 4.20 24 5.09 17 3.65 23 3.72 23 4.25 24 14 4.41 21 4.06 20 3.50 24 4.01 26 4.49 21 4.05 22 3.39 28 4.01 28 is --- --- 4.93 13 2.95 32 4.52 22 --- --- 4.89 13 3.24 30 4.58 22 16 10.10 3 --- ... 6.16 1 9.93 2 10.04 3 --- --- 6.78 1 9.85 2 17 5.34 15 --- --- 3.02 31 5.05 18 5AO 16 --- --- 3.17 31 5.18 19 18,*Midiand 4.74 17 4.32 15 3.10 30 4.83 19 &.49 15 4.22 19 2.65 35 5.36 17 *Odessa 5.97 12 6.87 11 19 --- ... 6.55 7 4.18 15 6.03 10 --- --- 7.13 4 4.35 15 6.55 9 20 1.45 24 ... --- 4.2@ 14 1.90 36 1.71 24 --- --- 4.16 16 2.10 36 21 5.63 13 ... --. 4.81 6 3.18 32 5.66 14 --- --- 4.80 8 3.16 34 22 --- --- --- --- 3.68 20 3.68 30 ... --- --- --- 3.93 19 3.93 29 23 3.85 23 4.32 15 4.37 11 3.91 28 3.78 23 3.20 26 4.04 17 3.75 30 24 --- ... 6.70 5 5.53 4 6.17 8 ... --- 6.93 5 5A7 5 6.29 10 25 4.24 22 8.18 1 4.75 7 4.39 23 4.31 22 8.99 1 5.15 7 4.51 23 26 --- ... 3.33 25 2.49 36 3.10 34 --- 3.20 26 2.61 36 3.05 35 27 7.52 6 4.22 17 3.53 23 6.80 6 7.79 5 4.38 .17 3.84 22 7.00 7 28 6.73 7 7.46 3 6.11 2 6.89 5 6.95 9 8.16 3 6.72 2 7.46 5 29 7.90 5 --- --- 3A8 25 7.86 4 7.58 7 --- --- 3.62 24 7.56 4 30 ... --- ... ... 1.75 37 1.75 37 --- --- --- --- 1.68 37 1.68 37 31 --- ... 6.61 6 5.73 3 5.92 11 --- --- 6.04 10 5.70 3 5.77 14 32 ... --- 4.61 14 3.27 27 4.14 25 --- --- 4.67 14 3.44 27 4.23 25 33 6.12 11 6.19 8 4.30 13 5.86 12 5.72 13 6.35 8 4.49 12 5.62 16 34*Brownsville. 17.75 2 5.20 12 3.67 21 16.83 1 19.65 2 5.67 11 4.02 18 17.54 1 *McAllen 23.70 1 22.37 1 35 8.67 4 --- 4.39 10 8.29 3 8.22 4 --- --- 4.54 11 7.94 3 36 --- --- 4.22 17 3.27 27 3.87 29 ... --- 4.42 16 3.57 25 4.11 26 37 --- ... 7.69 2 4.01 17 6.71 7 --- --- 8.28 2 4.39 13 7.26 6 AVERAGE 5.61 5.37 4.11 5.43 5.64 1 5.76 4.40 5.53 182 Lf) N let 0 M F, (D CF) 0 0 00 w N N cc m C-4 C-4 c,) - M N Cl) C%j C.) - C4 N N - m CN m LU -1 cc Go V 02 0,208 a, 0 LO C4 00 P4 v 8 ;; 2 Lf! Lq CR . . . .. . . . CR c! "t CR CR (I U@ . . . c! U@ Lq . ()q 0 0 x .X c 8 19 04 WMNMIT r-N -too V- V 0 U) CM'4 M M N M M N V) C%l M C4) M 0 U) IM M CD M C4 Q 0 :: N 0 0 W a OOMMWGj@;MWMW3 r- 00 CD v m Id: OR Vi Vi uj 0. . . . LOCO M i*-4:c! .,O:Lqcqc!rt F! cl -0: cl -0: Lq -0: al cl co C4 0 N CY r- > c cc A C --0 OWCOU)COV) cm C4 N @:r%mv)oo 0oc4cov cn LO 92 - N N N 0 LL Mc + + co cp to oo c4 cN r- co co c4 o r- c4 c4 r- t C rl CR r,: N oq Ci IQ: R CR (0 CD COO N C, N LD Mq 0 (D C4 to A C2 co w -g LO r- N 0 cowco to CN c LU w m Cq (3) r- W) 0 co- C*l Rt CL N ui r g C cx@ LU W W 0 0 m rl::,q m 0 N I N m m C4 CN m - M N M - - N N N N C4 LU 0 1@ to m N (0 r, 0) V) M Ln co m co Lon CLn4 8 5? Cm, ovo C04 @; 9 mw G CCT Co. r%m a r- r- a) m Ln 0 N V) r@ N r, r, ; r, @R 'CIN, 0 m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m _: 4 * , _: C m 0 !2 !R 0 cc N MMNMMMM co N S;z V tz mom 0 Lu LQ'OqCnC4MMCOM Ict LO CD 0 N cn v V) m le U) -T to . . . . . . . . . m LO CO co (D m co z . . . . . . . . N Cj r r > zo c 0 0 0 to m w a N C4 r, 0 LO a, 0 CO CN LO -cr M LO w N - - N C4 N 0 cc 0> LL 00 00 + + CN 00 00 0) CD '002mo : : CL Ft 40: ai 't r,@ Plt r@ LQ OR Ci q (Q 0 C) 'A mo , 0 : : (D : :co 0 @o (D C') C4 -t c C4 - C4 CN - Lf) M cc Ir M a) t2 r- 0 - W W C) C)An CD CD M M CD CO Cl r*@ Cl Cl q w (4 Ln ul q Cl cl . . . C@ "t C-4 cq N Ln "0 > co w Cow 0 u .2 0 w v m w w m 0 (2 @2 @t L@2 @2 r- 00 (D 0 CN cn g Ln to r, 00 (D 0 CN cn q Lo W r, > m - M Cl) cl > w w w C.) w w w I'j r') " @j I'j " K) r') r-j < J (7) Ul -P. C.) 11) 0 W M -4 M 4bb W a) m 09 0 :1) 0 o 0. a > > CD C) m CL 4@- M W W co -C@ co 4 0) Ij Ln P. 00 -4 CL L) 00 4 C.) ul CD W 0XO> C bo b, @, b@ Z" :@j 6 0 00 -j 0. -j W li co 1%) Ul al 000 -0 00 olli + ir 0 Ul Zb K) CO Ab FO W Ul %J -N 0 00- r 0 0 0 in Ln 00 o o 4 w w 4 0 w 0 0 i.) @P. Lj:c@. k) ip bo :ob -4 @- i. 4, :, Z. L, in :pb L4 M -AbLn lJ---4wwW"m-W-oDcok a- 0m CL *-I z w w C4 w K3 w C4 m w 8 Wo 4 8D w C'n (D Z@ t3 50 (y u Ab 0) %J (YI (A) t%) 0 0) Oj 8 C-)) a- c 00 hi 00 Ul C.) 0 @j W a) b):P. @4 ij b) b %J :pb @j @j :N :pb in W 0 IIJ M M M M W al 00 00 00 rl) o 0 Z @3 j Lm lb CaR s 0 CL -1 > > m m m w m NTI CWj 8 V W 8 6; 0' WK) LJ 8 0 owl C"o w w OW) Cnj "0 N 0 p. - -.5 o" 9 0 pr bo > 0 0 r c 'D -00 (A) I @j :P, @n K, i. in 0 m m owl @Cno '010 IN) 23 010 0 N 00 Ul PJ 00 FL 0 N) tu w cn 8 0 N 8 -1 Fo V 8 00 a, 0 r tj V 0) L) @4 :- t @ob b) @j :- bD b) b) :p, :.j =r Imi goo w (7, 00 m -Wj -Wj 8 CMI, Ul 00 00 0 (n li 00 OD + + "C) s CL <0 0 m -1 PO 0 Ul -C@ r) r"') c" 0" co 00 j co j C".) 8 i: IN 0-8 = r > 0 0 c I c 0 m Ln 4 OD 0 4 co 4 @j bo :N :Db ii in in :0. i4 :N k) @4 b bn bi :P@ '- io !a :D. ia 'Na L) La :P@ 'c@ im L) :pb - L -1 tj Ln 0 m -t W 0 ;h. 0 W '1 0 I@j 0 '1 w (D Ln 0- o CL * z w ww ww"W"=Jw m 0 8 " %J o. En w 0 6,0 z ON 3 w W 0"D (n 0 0 W %4 W O"D (n 00 rn iJ CP 0 > 0 lu 71 71 . . . . . . 71. 71. :171. . 71. 8 IJ C.) IJ Ln W CO 0) t -Ob E -IN, 1@ :N in 7 2 M CD Ab 14 @4 W 00 to li - W co 4 W 00 00 a) 0 al li N) 0 W 00 r') o4 FL w W @4 %"i C24 W O"D 80 0 UWI Wo C"D W 8 (WD o"Al Z. 0 0 W TABLE D.8 (Continued) FOOTBALL/SOCCER - 2000 TOTAL GOO: - 1970 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN- URBAN AREAS METRO CITY -- TOWN URBAN AREA Annual Annual Annual Annual Anfi(jal Annual Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per. Days Per DaysPer Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 .52 20 .69 12 .46 19 .53 25 4.55 5 5.22 1 5.01 1 4.68 3 2 --- ... .39 21 .42 24 .40 31 --- - 3.42 4 2.85 7 3.21 12 3 ... --- + 0 .46 19 .21 34 --- --- 3.18 7 4.34 2 3.74 7 4 1.68 5 --- ... .47 15 1.61 5 4.28 6 ... --- 3.20 5 4.17 4 5 .79 15 + 0 .40 28 .59 23 4.82 3 1.38 19 2.14 13 3.62 8 6 ... --- .69 12 .55 9 .67 18 --- --- 3.37 5 3.17 6 3.32 10 7 1.26 11 .61 17 .40 28 1.03 13 3.78 10 2.18 14 1.06 24 2.98 14 8 --- --- .93 5 .15 36 .49 27 --- --- 1.37 20 .59 30 .90 32 9 --- --- .15 23 .30 33 .20 36 --- --- 1.48 16 1.25 20 1.43 26 10 1.34 8 .70 11 .42 24 1.20 11 4.04 7 3.54 3 2.78 8 3.98 5 11 1.27 10 - --- .44 23 1.26 9 5.61 2 --- ... 3.70 3 5.60 2 12 .08 24 .67 14 .27 34 .46 30 2.26 19 1.41 17 1.36 18 1.61 24 13 .63 18 .52 19 .10 37 .47 28 3.62 11 .96 24 1.48 17 2.31 20 14 1.10 12 1.88 2 .42 24 1.24 10 2.26 19 1.33 21 .75 27 1.41 27 15 --- --- .15 23 .50 11 .21 34 --' --- 1.29 22 1.10 23 1.24 29 16 1.35 7 --- --- .48 14 1.30 7 2.72 15 --- --- 1.64 16 2.70' 16 17 .72 17 --- --- .90' 6 .73 15 3.29 12 --- --- 1.28 19 2.98 14 18*Midland .22 23 2.81 1 3.72 1 1.06 12 7.63 1 2.60 9 3.24 4 5.64 1 *Odessa .34 22 4.80 4 19 --- --- .75 9 .24 35 .64 20 --- --- 3.67 2 2.29 11 3.32 10 20 .40 21 --- .40 28 .40 31 2.28 18 --- --- .39 37 1.97 21 21 .89 14 --- .47 15 .79 14 2.10 21 --- ... .40 36 1.58 25 22 --- --- --- ... .50 11 .50 26 --- --- --- --- .67 28 .67 36 23 .74 16 .53 is .35 31 .72 16 2.69 16 1.41 17 .59 30 2.44 19 24 --- --- .77 7 .52 10 .66 19 --- --- 2.51 10 1.14 21 1.83 22 25 1.33 9 .77 7 .47 15 1.30 7 3.93 8 3.25 6 2.73 9 3.91 6 26 --- --- .63 16 .56 8 .61 21 --- --- .84 26 1.05 25 .91 31 27 1.10 12 .80 6 .47 15 .58 24 3.79 9 2.76 8 2.53 10 3.61 9 28 .59 19 .43 20 .45 22 .61 21 2.62 17 2.48 11 1.85 14 2.46 18 29 3.68 2 --- .-- .91 5 3.66 2 3.18 13 --- ... 2.25 12 3.17 13 30 --- --- --- --- .34 32 .34 33 --- --- --- --- 1.11 22 1.11 30 31 --- --- .67 14 .42 24 .47 28 --- --- 1.23 23 .60 29 .74 35 32 --- ... .17 22 1.72 3 .71 17 --- --- 1.67 15 .43 34 1.26 28 .33 1.57 6 .71 10 .46 19 1.31 6 2.89 14 2.45 13 1.83 15 2.67 17 34*13rownsville 2.99 3 1.22 4 1.28 4 2.32 3 1.12 22 .51 27 .58 32 .81 34 *McAllen 1.86 4 .56 24 35 5.17 1 --- --- .82 7 4.84 1 .70 23 --- ... .42 35 .66 37 36 ... --- 1.40 3 2.48 2 1.80 4 --- --- 2.46 12 .53 33 1.73 23 37 --- --- .06 25 .49 13 .17 37 --- --- .87 25 .95 26 .89 33 AVERAGE 1.38 .66 .54 1.21 3.92 2.11 1.64 3.41 185 TABLE D.8 (Continued) GOLF - 1975 TOTAL GOLF - 1980 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 5.15 7 5.79 1 4.95 2 5.16 4 5.78 10 6.39 1 5.06 6 5.67 8 2. --- --- 4.43 4 3.86 6 4.20 12 --- --- 5.48 5 5.00 7 5.28 12 3 --- --- 4.03 5 6.01 1 4.98 7 --- --- 5.70 3 7.73 1 6.67 3 4 5.14 8 ... --- 4.28 4 5.06 5 6.06 7 --- --- 5.45 5 6.01 6 5 6.70 3 1.85 21 3.00 11 5.02 6 8.91 4 2.09 22 3.97 11 6.63 4 6 --- --- 3.67 7 3.81 8 3.70 15 --- .-- 3.99 10 4.60 9 4.12 17 7 4.63 10 3.18 11 1.33 23 3.84 14 5,80 9 4.51 8 1.52 24 4.81 14 8 --- --- 2.03 17 .73 30 1.25 31 --- --- 2.57 18 .88 31 1.57 31 9 --- ... 2.09 16 1.74 19 2.01 26 --- --- 2.85 16 2.16 19 2.67 27 10 5.29 6 4.59 2 3.61 9 5.19 3 6.70 5 5.80 2 4.62 8 6.55 5 11 7.19 .2 --- --- 4.58 3 7.16 1 8.92 3 ... --- 5.81 3 8.89 1 12 2.89 20 1.87 19 1.95 18 2.13, 25 3.63 20 2.40 20 2.66 16 2.73 24 13 6.06 4 1.30 24 2.31 14 3.68 16 9.18 2 1.75 24 3.31 13 5.40 11 14 3.13 18 1.88 18 1.06 27 1.99 27 4.21 15 2.52 19 1.40 26 2.68 25 15 ... - 1.69 22 1.17 25 1.56 29 --- ... 2.16 21 1A1 25 1.99 30 16 3.44 15 --- ... 2.21 16 3.41 17 4.14 16 --- --- 2.70 15 4.10 18 17 4.37 12 --- --- 1.62 20 3.96 13 5.43 13 --- --- 1.99 21 4.95 13 18*Midland 8.66 1 3.57 8 4.05 5 6.44 2 9.67 1 4.42 9 5.63 4 7.40 2 *Odessa 5.32 5 5.96 8 19 --- --- 4.53 3 3.85 7 4.36 10 --- --- 5.51 4 5.82 2 4.59 15 20 3.02 19 --- --- .50 36 2.61 21 3.81 18 --- --- .62 35 3.30 21 21 2.82 21 ... ... .65 33 2.18 24 3.64 19 --- --- 1.02 30 2.91 23 22 --- ... --- --- .97 28 .98 36 --- --- --- --- 1.34 27 1.34 33 23 3.54 14 1.86 20 .72 31 3.23 18 4.57 14 2.62 17 .87 32 4.21 16 24 --- --- 3.01 12 1.43 22 2.25 23 --- --- 3.56 12 1.69 22 2.68 25 25 4.72 11 3.97 6 3.32 10 4.69 8 5.57 11 4.77 6 3.99 10 5.53 9 26 --- --- .95 26 1.22 24 1.64 33 --- --- 1.13 26 1.58 23 1.27 3!5 27 4.99 9 3.24 10 2.83 13 4.66 9 6.35 6 3.71 11 3.25 14 5.83 7 28 3.29 16 2.89 13 2.22 15 2.96 20 4.01 17 3.30 13 2.51 17 3.45 19 29 4.23 13 --- --- 2.85 12 4.22 11 5.45 12 --- --- 3.64 12 5.43 10 30 ... --- --- --- 1.45 21 1.45 30 ... --- --- --- 2.12 20 2.12 29 31 --- --- 1.64 23 .82 29 1.00 34 --- --- 2.05 23 1.10 29 1.31 34 32 --- --- 2.29 15 .60 35 1.73 28 ... --- 2.95 15 .56 36 2.15 28 33 3.27 17 2.85 14 2.06 17 3.03 19 3.60 21 3.16 14 2.23 18 3.34 20 34*Brownsville 1.37 22 .79 27 .71 32 1.00 34 1.61 22 .82 27 .75 33 1.16 37 *McAllen .68 24 .76 24 35 1.04 23 --- ... .41 37 .97 37 1.50 23 --- --- .40 37 1.38 32 36 ... 3.40 9 .63 34 2.36 22 --- --- 4.53 7 .70 34 3.10 22 37 --- --- 1.04 25 1.11 26 1.06 32 --- --- 1.20 25 1.26 28 1.22 36 AVERAGE 4.98 2.70 2.16 4.37 6.16 3.38 2.77 5.44 186 CC 04 - Cl) C14 04 N cl) - - - M C14 m Cl) CA " Cl) N cn LU P. -J CC oo 4 4 T- M 0 z (3) C4 CV 04 Cl) Lf) 10 Lf) r- 04 r, N 00 N M 8 04 00 8 CS R @o W ;; a) Cl) Lf) CD 00. c r, r@ 04 cs (D ql In: Ci Ci q q ": Ci Lq Lq CR . . . . . . It Lq (Q Ci q . . . r-z c@ ci ui Lti 6 co w ci r- co Lo cD v r- o (D r- Cl) a) V 0) C14 :: Lf) C V cl) -T -t r, - 0 cc 0 m N Cl) 04 cn C'4 - N M Cl) C.) Cl) 0 co 0 Lf) o F, It: 1q: LQ C! CQ Ci CP CQ q Lq cq CR Nt cq It q C'i Cq CR q c! q cl Cli c! C@ C! 00 IL C 0 L6-:60 MN M @t M rl - M M - M r- N M V W t N - M N W N cc 0 LL -i 0 r- m 0 r-- 'ct W- -0 C2 m c2 0 :wm Nwowmm N--r- Nw CN N N - N N CN N r, r, 0m r, N N Ln r- ,2 oo r, N 00 0 cl q (31 ll@ cl ;t cl q rl: rl@ Cli Gi (n . lo: CR Cl! IR C31 'a CL m7m T 0 :: Ln 1@ @4 M it W r co a) W to 00 - (D Ln W It - CD 0 N IM Ln Cl) 0 C4 00 v 'T @e @2 'D 00 r- &RAN N 0 w -0 C') a) 00 r, CV .2 C') r, C') CD C') m CY) 0 q co 00 N 00 Lf 8 0 0) UA Z IR Lq rl: . c! C; M M Cl M co N rl Lf) 0 00 (D U*) N 0 3 CL Co 00 0 c) r, P- co c; r-: C@ 06 r-Z cd a; ai Ci r%: r4 . . . L6 Vi .: L6 cNi - C'4 - N E c 0 0 r cq 0 1 @2 Ln N C04 C-) 'Cn) CA V CW4 C) cc'.) 01 r-' co '-;t -M & NM 0- rN' MM w NN r' W" VM ON ON (MD @2 cr,, LLI co < 0 C rl W CD 0 00 C4 r, R 0 M C3 00 0 CD 0 -@t - r, 00 N CNI - (7) 0 C'J 0 0 00 04 1 09N cr) r- q Cl LQ OR q Cl 4 C"t q r,: U@ _: q q (p "t Lq r4% Cl rl@ Lq Lq q V@ 7 Cl Cl r*,@ CR C6 rl 0) 00 0 V r, C4 V C4 V a) -* Cl) Lf) r, 0) r, Iq It C4 CD C-) r- - 00 qt OD Cl) C14 Cl) N Lf) - r, r X r Ln - V 00 0 CD;; 0 r- M V W M r- W M W M M N N V M 0 0 M r, 0 & q r, W 0 - C4 04 C14 C%l m C14 C14 Cl) C14 N - - - - Cl) Cl) m Cl) C.) z M 0 , - . 0 C'4 04 r- r@ M to C4 0) 0 W r. rl (D to 00 a) Lo C'4 Cl) N CF) r@ & 0 Cl) cl) 0 N CL 14: f,@ cq cq OR " -: -: OR N qv: c! (31 oQ cl q q CR It 7 C! Lq (I q c! . Iq OR C! oq oq r,@ Lo r, r@ W LD 04 - Cl) (D 00 It W N - Cl) Cl) rl 0 - - C4 - CIJ Ln C-4 V Cl) Lf) Cl) - 04 > c mo 0 Cn C4 CD M 0 @D r@ 000 rl W 0 W C4 L0 n r C4 N C14 N - C14 CN C14 00 (D (D r, C14 (,S 0 (D 0 00 Cl) 04 W 00 CO V I -) 00 Ict V 0) 0 CD 00 OD .0 owvo to (3) - cn C C 0 r Lr) -@ 4 v co vi c@ 4 c@ cd Lo vi 4 6 r, r, w r-: 6 4 r C6 c >. 0 0 c V) ON OD M V) 0 LD 0) 'q 04 C .2 @2 CD r- r- M A N N 04 C-4 0 Nt 80 t2 CD Z; r- (i Lf) Lf) F S : W M 0 CD Lf) r, 0 - M W LU 0 Ci C! CR C', 03 t v r- w Lf! Cl q OD CY) 2 'a CL r, 06 v 00 0 N Lr) r- to m w r@: ui L6 6 r-@ 6 L6 c6 V C-4- CIJ 06 c m 0 > C m LU cM c (D M 3: < 0 Ir "a 0 LU * > LC) co r, - - - - - - - - - - > C4WG) - - - - - - - - - - .cc: W@Jmm4sw " 0 W WJ M 0 4@. W K) 0) CO m 03 0 K m a CL CL > C) m CL > z 0) 00 w C, 2. m 10i Ij (4 N 00 co (D Ln Ul '.j M 00 0 E0 co c) j Ln "m 'D w (,a 4, 1=0 pr > 0 a) C P!Q. iD :.j 'CO '(D "00 "1 C) ko "k) @.j i4 TRECO 00 w Ul @n 'LTJI Lq (n 0 Ul w 00 @j cy) " K) w I'a N) o 0@ FE w w j 4. to - f%) 0) N) co Z!l 0 (1) Ul 0 w jC) a? - W rn z > 71. @.j C4 Z@ N) -P- 0 0 00 ro w a). (D ii w :-- o) 00 cn 0 w + W w w b) -in bo b) 4 a 0) (31 0) N) -4 w m 0 0 li w j M W 0 - 0 M - @j 0 w + Lq CA) li (n CY) o !@ 0 z pj 0 60 w 0 4 CW) WD 1WJ li w w w rl) K) WO 0 (NOJ 4 > 71 7171. 71 M - - - MW OD li 0 LI) co li 0 + _j i" i.T, bo i. LT, 6 .0 -W C-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r (@ R w li 0 %J 4 w @4 w K3 0 0 m N) CA) %J - Ul _j co Ln 0 U) 0) Ln 0 Ul CD 0 WOOD K) _j (D U) 00 0 li Ul Co 0 0 - 1 0 CL bo 0 mww. 0 71 OD C4 (D W co (D G3 LTI W LTI c CD 0 ID m CJ - W li (1) (D C.) LTI (D :C@ @j b 41 fD bo :.i io b) 'a) '0 '00 :9@ CD 0 4 - W W -J 4s j 4 W to 0 (3) 00 00 ul ID 0 m EL 0 l') Cj r) ro r) PO - - F w O'd w w 0 -4 0 tj 04W U, K3 0 4, Nj K) in @3 W bo bo @j @-j iD i,) b) @4 iD 6 Ln . . . m to _j 'i 0 Ul Ul K) 0 w 0 Ij En - 0 CD 40-0 w 00 00 G)G) = CD 0 m to K) m w m to m 'Jtom-4:@ wwom owwmw%i 0 Ul Nyl z W z ro > - 0 0)3 to 71 71 71. . 71. 71 71. c z @j %j bo :pb bo bo 0 + (D iD @q b)'4 b w W:@ w w 1,j - 0 -1 0 w b:p. @j im @j in b Zo in in CID c Ul (D www w w 0 A. 0 -4 W '1 0 0 W 0 - J 0 IJ 0 -J -J M -4 fJ 4@1 IIJ a -4 0 z CA m OW) m "0 w 0 "'Ji LNA NW) li 0 "-j W 4 0 C")) NO '"i Z@ Z; W(l) Wb. 1Z.3 LWTI OW -4 Z@a W W _j @o - C4 0 a) il) zo bo 4h, b + tj in %J b@ b bo Z. i. %j b b bo in b t. bo b, b. b, bo:,-- b @, b Sc D co 0)0)(0 li 0 00 U) w 4 W-wom-M 4 %J -4 1%) CF) 0) -4 00 (D 00 0 (D Ul W N w = t > -4 0 z 0 CL r m W Lj - pj N) K3 K3 CJ w w K) w w > WWWi oor,)4mM-JN rj) pr I I W c V v r- @Comww W It N wm@ 0@2m -T N 0 0 0 M W v m P, 0 U) r, c) Ca oo'co CN 0) co 4 @ m C-4 M - CN C14 CN C.) Cl) C14 CN (N - C14 M - CN - MN M uj Ch -i M co V OZ 00 Om co Cl) CD 0" 1 q r% N 7 a! cy@ cq C! 'It r*@ a@ CR 0: cq cl a! ct Cl Lei v!q oq a? cq a! eq r 0 - .t -r, - Cli N - >@ 8 - - C14 r, Cl) - - - CN m cli R r . a , N (14 a x X c C-3 co o 0) 00 q Lr) cr 'T CD CN C-4 w 0 00 r@ r@ N c) N - r, M (D 0 C.) LO 0 V CN 0) It 0 U) (D m cn CN (14 CN Cl) C14 m C14 (1) N M Cli C-4 N - - - cl) CN - - - M z 0 rl M 0 q Ci r% q r% Ci q Ui r% Lq a@ r% OR cq q q Lq P@ cl 01 q cl q Cl C! r EN - :1. m CN cn c 0 z z Ln W N M @r r, N M (D C', uj cc CN CN CIJ - C14 C14 N N cn LU P (D CD -T CY) to 0 (D C%4 00 Lf) 0 tj a Cl) LO M CV P, -* 0 @2 t2 ,t cq q r, 14: I C : 'I M c CR V: Cqcqq "q 14: - CIJ C.) 04 CN CN (N N r X c CD Lo -0 r4 co v C) CN U) 00 11 0 N C14 CN CN - - 0 LLI 0 v Lo r, c oo o c Ln c4 n . t2 CL -C C@ Clq Cq ci q tq . . . . . . . . . (N cl) - N CN co CIJ P, v 00 V - V >. 20 N C14 4@ 0 X L) (n r mw NWW Lnv NM a N M It Cl) CIJ CN C-4 C14 CN CN Cl) (1) cq LU cc 4 M LLI -1 0 z 0 co @- 4 = 0 CL 0 s . q CQ (31 r% It r% N OR q r,% Cl q OR V@ Ul CR (31 q 0 Lr) C (7) C') 1; Cl) M - CN 0) C 0 X r r- N:l w w w w m N r, m m m a w N t m r, 0) Cl) cc Cl) (14 N Cl) C14 Cl) Cl) - N N Cl) C14 C14 (14 C.) M CN - M z M 0 - 0 -V(D Lf) co CR oq r@ C! r,% Lq Cq I;t cq cl q r% a! (q - oq cl cq (3) CM0 z z ui 0 w q @2 r- CC? w @2 N @:M-000::c2mmv cc CN N C'4 C44 04 CN N F- (D 0 0) (D r, 00 cn C', m co W LO LO cl w 0 a) cn co cq P% q Ol (q cq cl " 113: (31 q C"! OR cq -: (q CN C 4 CIJ LO 04 CA 0 R 11 N LO -t N cl "t (D cn C4 LO r, (D C* r- CD m cr N 04 N cc ui 0 CL = 04 r- CO M @ :It 0) MOO 00 00 C oq 113: r% rl@ eq cq tq r > w (D Cl) Cli 0 r w CO ca g 0) 0 < < 'D ir 0 LU W r, M M a w a N m V Ln W r- w m o N Mq Lf) W P, > > www wwwww m < j 0 0 p.W 0 FO 6; m 0 m I CL > > 0 CD G) CD m > cu bo iD io K) b (i ODECY)ODO) 0 W i. C.) (n (7) @j CF) @4 0 m 0 @j M-No- LTI M Ul (D C.) Cc K) 41, "a !L K 0 !4m EL -1 m 0 00 (31 N) -P- W " 41 CO W M ma> 0 0) 0) c @c c b t-i '41 OD40@; '4-bbbobo: b) Lqj"jo@n :.j to @4 IS -V 0) C.) 0 4- 0) w MWOWN)o ca 0 4@ LTI OD Ln C.) W .9b. rl) a) @j 00 _0 FL m Ow"O. w 0 NI w Z3 "Ij K"a 00) p. z > 7' 7' 7" ca N) C.) to co 4 -m4"4-"Ijwo womo- a @'0 CL z W w pi LTI (D 0 C; FO 2 0 w 00 ("F) j :@ "W w w 4:@ 00 j K) C.) OD N) 0) (n LJ 0 z ;r w Xo> c > w CA) 46 4 rl) LTI 0= PJ 00 K) - - r ip. in zo L, i. i. b b, b i. %j 4 %j i. b %j -4 b@:- I 4 0 0 D. mww 4 0 li 4 w li w 0 0 4. 0 03 > z 0 i CL > > 00 M r w tj w W-N) 0 EO 8 z ;11 w NW) ("n -Wi m 0 @j -W ("D w w Ol D. @j 0 (A a) -.j 0 00 40 :3 CD CL 0ID z rz C M . . . 9L i Zo @j bD @o- C4 0 m m 0 FO 00 0, w j 4 w w Xv> 0ImZ 2 r bo in 'N, Zj ;@j ii %j K) :c@, b %j @j %j K) L- @j @j L- Ln @j @j @j b) ij 0 OD 0)0)w_ coa)tjmcnco . . . tj 0 @Jwmw mwwwww.-4m 0 j ("n "%j Fo m w r 0 CD N) to L) b @n + bo :o. @j + tj'w',j @j Lj%'" + bo Lo b'- + + EL 00 b, + + b + w w liwo li (n cn 00 0 K) to D. %J 0 0 w li w w OD (n 0) .9h 0) 0 00 (n co co @4 0 CL z 0") 0 A- 0 0 @4 IJ "Ij 0 0 'cjn 0 W CA) > C + bo bi In b @,j W @j K, @-- U i.., L, b@ a 40-ch -cnww w(D.C. W-W-i-ON) to 0 00-40-c"ON)"tim-CDO 0 z 0 CL > r w - CA) w 00 "G) -4 1-04 CW) 0 0 "W cm C04) - 4 w "0 100 O"D 8 (D C4 6; C"n cn 0 N) - ;D CN Cl) 04 CIA CNI C4 C14 cn cv) cv) CN C.) cl) ul -i 0 z CL r. CD U') woo 0 Lq P@ q Ul (Q "t Lq 1% CR CR OR P@ .,0: V. Cl! IN .,q: Lq V: " el C"! Cl) >.Z Cv) @ CD N V) LO @ (y) Cl) Cl) M CO (n CV) 0 -1 C) cl) r- CO M V (N LO 0 r@ L9) (n W 9@? Cl) @o r, 0) rl 9) C4 0 Lf) Cn 0 U) N - 0 0000) Cl) cli N CN N - M - - - - - Cl) Clq N - C4 04 N N z M 0 1- co 4)a CL C %rwwwww WW;z+ Gwm 0 a) 0 lop . . . . . It q cl Ui rIt ()i OR r% q cl C'! Cl n -: + -:,7 >.= le - 04 Cl) q 00 C.) Cl) cc0 co LU r, 0 womm",e m F- L4 m CN N C14 N C14 > 0 m N t moo4om w m r, o r, v co o o r- w C-) OD r, LO M qe q cp Cli Cli cq (31 U@ cp -: Lq OR It rt c! Cl Lq C! V: q 4N cl CN cr It -e le 04 00 N X c .4 CC4 W 'q 00 C4 PIZ (3' IZ4 N M LAJ 0 r" V: cl Lq N Lo r- OR cl cl Cn r' C4 r' (2 a) N r- (D (N Ln M c! Lq CR W Ld c 2 F@ e4 U) 0) Ln V le co en cn c m0 X c N cn N (N m N CN N N Cl) C.) C4 cl) C14 (n 0 cq 0 MO 0 w Pq cl ll@ 0i q W. Ci ci Ct le. + ll@ CR Cl r N cn - C14 N V C14 CN 04 N Cl) 00 CN -e - LO (14 N N >= c to0 r V le rl 04 r, 'V 0 rl 11 LO C'J Ln rl (D Ln r@ rl M 0 CII 0 rl 0 C4 0 00 Cl (D 12 M 04 C%4 04 CIJ - N C4 - (n eq cli C14 - N C%4 C4 N z m Ln 0 C N Ln 00 0 0 It 0 CD w (N V 0 C@ G) 0 cn (Yj 04 0 0 (D W 0 0 OOW+ r- Lf) N le C? CR q rt 10: OR oq CR c! cq CR cl M P% n C'l cl It C.) Cl) N Ln P, C14 N w 00 C)) C-4 V N 00 0 CO C-4 V r@ r- Ln Ln to CD LU c U) - C14 N - 04 - 04 04 C-4 cli > 0 mom :Mxowmw w WMN 0 N W M M N q(R W CL = 0 c! V: CR OR r,@ C*i CR a! Cl OR CO Cn CN N Lf) o m r, Ln M V CD N C-4 00 0 Lo (n M c) C4 CN N 04 0 LU 0 w r- Zgwcnww to g c) c,) o v) o w w C-4 m c-4 t2 Lo cp = - C) 0 (D VO)-C-) (D CN 00 le M (D W 'e . . . Lf) Cl) Ln LO C@ C@ q C4 (6 C@ C@ C.4 6 C4 ui C-i r4 co0 > w 0 0 0 w 0 N v 0 w rl w 0 m @r LO CO r, > C-4 c) 'zr Lc) CO r- 00 m 0- :1 L@2 @2 @2 C4 CN 04 C%A C4 N N Cl) C.) Cl) Cl) mmm >< wlj Ow) (wn w;@ cwj @2 Ow W@J OmO "4 CrJD CN;31 24 FCA3) t"J2 wo 3@o z;. Z5 to oo .j a) a, 4 w @j m m :1) K 0 K .0 > o 0 C) L> :.: m > ri 0 a) 3 NJ rl) p 9) 9) P. (M 00 CD LTI @j bi o in al g -4 T OD -C@ L4 b 6:.j iD Zo C4 'a tQ "jj W 0 WOW 0 4 li m -i (a .06 4 CYI (3) 0) m 0 0 M w an -,j "W-W . . . > 0 a) w li m 00 LTI 00 to (n c @r b '4b- Zo LT, @-j in' :P, '4 ',j bo bo iD @4 Lq :.j K) N) bo @j @n lo .0 a) L" tj 0 li m 4 MW4004 S@ co (b7) -mliom-4 ww j = 0 po t,3 Ul IQ 4"Z"o w 8 4 NGI) "0 ",J) 0 N3 cNA a,)) 2; %J co =w m X -4 co > r 0a) @j P) 0 C.) 4 W W C@< wwc cj - + :a. ij k) Z4 b @P. W b) @j @j bo IN. b) k) 'm bo b' 0 " M -j N) N) K, @j iD w 0 0 W co 4,joo-N O.D.Cotomowm-imomm = C) a) to -4 to 00 z N3 m N) po w N) N3 w cy) a) 4 C.) a) 0) Ln LTI J 0 0 fQ 0 fl) al Cj 0) a) 00 > W (3) C" - ES N) al --1 68 G3 0) a) 0) 0) N) 0cu3c CO b b za @j '4 i4 li '- @n in " in 1.) :cN bo '4 Ln %j in bo'c, bo b@ -4 b bo Z,, i. K, b r ha @j CD m N) 0) (n C) MMWWMW . . . L" -th- W IJ -4 IJ w J@. r%) w - 4-ljwowwmo > 2. z 0 CL bo M m 0 @g j m w m Fo m w w 2 co Pi li Kj f-j 0 4 0 0) C" W li tj 0 co 41 a) CD CL :,J '4 pi CO @j w PO p p W r cn io @n Z4 m co w b) bo io w 18, CY) M - Ul (D A. -4 CD W rl) C)o fl) LTI W 0'Dm FL 0 t13 M tO -N 00 O(D C" @4 W W@ -4 Zn X 0 co j N3 . :N :-j r 0 b) co 00 @n @n %4 (o bo bo" K) a) @4 b Z" 4 N) co :C@ : : Z3 4 pj Lq p li 4 00 K3 - W 0 0 womo"w . . . w 4 C4 0) (D @J CO -N 0) 4:- 00 0) -0 w po - I-j "3 A 0 4 - N) W co C-) -t@ '2 '00 EO irl (n -4 W @4 IJ 'LTJI 'M'W m Ir -1 r tj 0Im PO :-j p 6; 2; .0, m j (3 + *4 :N @j 6 La bo 'w W io :N t@j Li to b *,j k) b :.j W @j Z4 ii L) :o. 00 M NJ W W @4 M W M @J 0 W V (D -4 0 0 CL z w K3 - Cj m w w w w wm 8 '4%) 2 n -4 W4, ww 0"D C"i (wn > M 00 0wzc @4 -4- 6; w V, 8 -1 c<M 5" p -4 @j CD bo @-j :A. bk):-, to:N ij i4 b)m bo bo:N m w -1 '-4 bo bD o a -4 b io b@ bo @j zp,4 w W w 0 L" w w 4 m 0 tb -4 w w W Z@aiww.@Oo%jlm " 0 OWL"COO-4 > 0 0 z to w N) 8 0 w M"Wo-sh, W cn 0 4w %wi 2 COJ Lwn m 6;.w 5@ 4 w m li 0) W Pi cn TABLE D.8 (Continued) WALKING, 1970 WALKING, 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS. METRO CITY TOWN .-URBAN AREAS Annual Annual Annual Zn-nual Annual Annual Annualm. Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 .21.9B 5 .3.39 23 25.43 7 21.40 6 31.20 2 3.48 23 M67 10 27.79 7 .2 --- --.. 10.19 13 1.68 32 6.95 24 --- --- 19.08 10 .5.53 -31 13.68 23 3 --- --- 18.35 7 12.92 17 15.71 15 --- ... 22.71 8 13.05 22 18.08 18 4 13.46 12 --- --- 32.79 2 15A3 16 18.78 12 --- --- 41.54 2 20.91 15 5 6.67 17 7.61 15 22.36 9 12.24 19 15.47 15 11.57 20 31.15 7 20.75 16 6 --- ... 5.75 20 9.25 20 6.59 27 --- .-- 10.78 21 7.61 27 10.06 28 7 13.65 11 3.71 22 4.34 30 10.18 20 17.26 14 12.60 18 14.57 19 16.03 21 8 --- 11.75 12 3.35 31 6.63 26 --- --- 18.74 11 8.75 26 12.74 26 9 --- --- 49.99 1 .25 36 39.97 1 --- --- 58.83 1 .51 35 45.21 1 10 25.34 2 23.99 4 21.00 10 25.14 4 30.87 4 29.49 5 26.50 11 30.61 5 11 25.02 3 --- --- 24.87 8 25.02 5 27.90 6 --- --- 27.25 9 27.90 6 12 1.08 24 1.08 25 8.07 22 2.51 34 1.06 24 1.33 25 16.94 16 4.46 34 13 7.52 15 7.56 16 47.11 1 16.35 13 12.39 18 12.40 19 55.96 1 22.17 11 14 2.06 23 26.'63 3 26.65 6 20.01 8 5.49 22 33.41 @3 33.44 5 25.67 8 15 --- - --- 4.43 21 4.39 29 4A2 33 ... ... 13.22 15 13.21 21 13.21 24 16 171.28 7 --- --- 20.62 11 17.33 11 17.27 13 ... ... 20.72 14 17.35 19 17 6.01 --- --- .26 35 5.12 31 14.81 16 --- --- .54 34 12.72 27 1.8*Midland 14.69 10 19.34 6 32.38 4, 15.81 14 23.46 8 28.58 6 32.41 6 22.52 10, *Odessa 11.96 13 20.69 16 19 ... --- 6.10 19 6.13 25 6.11 28 --- --- 10.05 22 10.07 25 10.06 28 20 5.62 20 --- ... 4.76 27 .5.48 30 9.39 19 ' ... --- 4.83 30 8.65 30 21 7.03 16 --- 7.07 23 7.04 23. 7.0.4 21 --- ... 7.03 28 7.04 32 22 ---- ---- --- --- .27 34 .27 37 --- --- --- .49 36 .49 37 23 5.58 21 6.69 18 6.71 24 5.74 29 7.24 20 12.88 16 12.84 23 7.99 31 24 --- --- 10.00 14 9.99 1� 110.00 21 --- --- 14.39 14 14.43 20 14.41 22- 25 16.47 8 13.22 10 16.38 14 16.38 12 22A2 9 17.05 12 24.64 12 21.98 12 26 --- - - 20.92 5, 11.95 18 17.93 9 --- --- 29.77 12.18 24 24.14 9 27 32.45 1 32.52 2 32.47 @3 32A6 2, 41.24 1 41.24 2 41.31 3 41.25 2 28 24.04 4 12.64 .11 6.09 26 17.54 10 30.58 5 12.61 .17 6.10 29 19.92 17 29 20.96 6 ... --- 20.27 12 20.96 7 31.19 3 --- --- 29.47 .8 31.17 4 30 --- 31.56 5 31.56 3 ... --- ... ... 38.71 4 38.71 3 31 --- .82 26 .88 33 .87 36 --- --- 1.23 27 1.32 33 1.30 36 32 --- --- 7.29 17 8.15 21 7.57 22 --- ... 16.13 13 17.08 15 16.44 20 33 6.30 18 .44 27 14.78 6.83 25 14.66 17 1.27 26 15.27 18 12.98 25 34*Brownsville 11.67 14 15.70 8 16.89 13 13.56 17 19.69 11 23.75 7 16.91 17 21.21 14 *McAllen 16.10 9 24.85 7 35 4.65 22 --- --- 4.67 28 4.65 32 4.63 23 ... --- 4.55 32 4.62 33 36 --- --- 3.11 24 .18 37 2.00 35 --- ... 3.12 24 .47 37 2.12 35 37 --- 13.42 9 13.46 16 13 A3 18 21.68 9 21.78 13 21.70 13 AVERAGE 18.21 13.71 13.67 17.09 23.09 18.35 17.86 21.90 193 TABLE D.8 (Continued) WALKING, 1980 WALKING, 1990 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS ITY Annual Annual Annual Annual Annu`a@ AnnuaF wmuil'OWN Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days. Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 39.90- 2 3.56 23 27.0 12 33.59 6 57.84 3 3.60 23 30.58 17 43.4i 10 2 --- --- 27.86 9 9.37 27 20.17 23 --- --- 45.44 9 17.12 23 32.67 20 3 --- - 27.04 10 13.08 25 20.41 22 --- --- 35.62 14 13.17 25 -25.17 24 4 24.12 12 --- --- 50.26 2 26.37 16 34.79 15 --- --- 67.88 2 37.19 17 5 13.01 19 15.54 20 39.93 6 29.26 12 41.82 11 23.50 .20 57.50 5. 46.30 8 6 ... ... 15.80 19 7.98 28 14.13 28 --- --- 25.78 18 10.51 27 23.05 27 7 20.87 15 21.33 14 24.91 15 21.69 20 28.10 16 39.05 13 45.57 11 32.58 21 8 --- --- 25.98 11 14.15 23 18.97 25 --- --- 40.20 11 24.90 18 31.38 23 9 ... ... 67.64 1 .78 36 49.99 2 --- 85.26 1 1.36 33 58.38. 4 10 36.38 5 35.00 6 18.78 20 35.37 5 47.43 8 46.03 8 43.09 12 47.03 6 11 30.79 9 --- --- 29..71 11 30.78 9 36.56 14 --- ... 34.69 14 36.53 18 12 1.10 24 1.08 27 25.75 14 5.96 33 1.07 24 1.20 27 45.58 10 9.92 32 13 17.23 17 17.29 18 64.73 1 27.99 15 26.91 17 27.04 17 82.40 1 39JBS 15 14 8.87 21 40.13 3 40.19 5 31.25 8 15.65 20 53.67 5 53.79 7 42.35 12 15 --- --- 22.01 13 22.03 16 22.02 18 -- -' --- 39.65 12 39.75 13 39A7 16 16 17.28 16 ... --- 20.76 17 17.38 27 17.28 19 ... --- 20.77 20 17.43 30 17 21.59 13 --- --- .85 34 20.43 21 41.16 12 --- --- 1.34 35 36.17 19 18*Midland 3i.23 8 36.80 5 32.51 9 29.16 13 49.84 7 54.40 4 32.59 15 42.28 13 *Odessa @9.45 10 -47.02 9 19 --- --- 14.00 21 14.08 24 14.02 29 --- --- 21.88 21 22.04 19 2121 28 20 13.14 18 --- ... 4.88 31 11.80 30 20.68 18 ... 4.96 31 18.17 29 21 7.03 22 --- ... 7.00 29 7.02 32 7.02 22 --- 7.03 29 7.02 33 22 --- --- --- - .78 36 .78 37 --- --- --- 1.36 33 1.36 37 23 8.90 20 18.91 16 18.91 18 10.15 31 12.22 21 31.02 15 31.16 16 14.27 31 24 --- --- 18.81 17 18.86 19 18.83 26 --- --- V.65 16 .18.99 -21 23.73 26 25 33.32 7 20.26 15 3Z65 8 32.89 7 50.17 6 23.99 19 48.99 8 49.17 5 26 - -'- --- 38.56 4 12.05 26 30A5 10 --- --- 56.23 3 12.26 26 43.97- 9 27 50.03 1 50.14 2 50.14 3 50.05 1 67.61 1 67.67 2 67.80 3 67.64. 1 28 37.14 3 12.61 22 6.14 30 21.74 19 50.26 5 12A3 22 6.26 30 23.85 25 29 37.14 3 --- - 38.18 7 41.39 4 61.88 2 --- ... 55.60 6 61.83 2 30 --- --- --- --- 45.63 4 45.63 3 --- --- ... --- 59.79 4 59.79 3 31 --- ... 1.64 26 1.82 33 1.78 36 ... ... 2.64 26 2.72 32 2.70 35 32 --- --- 24.95 12 25.80 13 25.24. 17 --- 42.62 10 39.72 13 41.62 14 33 23.00 14 .2.01 25 15.80 22 19.22 24 39.69 13 3.56 24 16.83 24 31.94 22 34*Brownsville 27.69 11 31.75 7 17.04 21 28.24 14 43.71 10 47.80 6 17.16 22 42.51 1 *McAllen 33.65 6 51.22 4 35 4.64 23 --- --- 4.82 32 4.66 34 4.63 23 ... - 8.38 28 4.97 34 36 --- --- 3.19 24 .84 35 2.31 35 --- --- 3.25 25 1.29 36 2.52 36 37 --- 29.90 8 30.02 10 29.93 11 ... --- 46.37 7 46.55 9 46A2 7 .AVERAGE 29.20 22.39 21.45 27.51, 39.89 30.41 29.82 37.73 194 TABLE D.8 (Continued) WALKING, 2000 BICYCLING, 1976 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS ___METRO CITY TOWN- URBAN AREAS Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual XnnuaT Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 75.78 3 3.65 24 33.19 18 5OA3 17 22.17 4 5.48 18 19.14 11 20.48 9 2 --- --- 63.12 7 24.96 22 44.59 20 --- --- 12.42 11 .13 28 7.74 24 3 - ... 44.29 14 13.28 26 30.06 26 44.89 2 12.37 13 29.10 3 4 45.46 14 --- --- 85A1 3 47.86 18 18.66 8 ... --- 26.95 5 19.50 11 5 50.40 10 31.51 19 75.07 4 95.17 1 2.82 19 .69 27 10.58 16 5.38 29 6 --- --- 35.86 18 11.00 28 32A7 25 --- --- 6.13 17 .24 26 4.72 30 7 35.31 18 56.53 12 66.06 8 43.05 22 9.51 13 1.15 21 .11 33 -6.27 27 8 --- --- 54.45 13 35.65 17 43.92 21 --- --- 24.41 7 .10 36 9.61 18 9 --- --- 102.90 1 1.89 35 65.37 6 ... --- 36.38 3 .13 28 29.07 4 10 58.47 12 57.07 11 54.14 14 57.97 10 45.37 1 45AO 1 44.89 3 45.35 1 11 42.33 15 --- --- 39.64 15 42.29 23 21.88 5 --- --- 21.84 8 21.88 6 12 1.09 24 1.25 27 62.66 11 14.09 32 + 0 1.10 23 .13 28 .63 33 13 36.64 17 36.80 16 100.10 1 51A4 16 .77 22 1.13 22 53.60 2 12.65 15 14 22.42 19 67.18 5 67.33 7 53.26 15 30.64 2 35.21 4 35.24 4 33.99 2 15 --- ... 57.28 10 57.44 12 5731 11 --' --- 9.38 15 9.33 17 9.37 20 16 17.28 20 --- --- 20.72 23 17A7 31 7.77 15 --- 9.16 18 7.79 22 17 58.71 11- --- --- 1.81 37 53.28 14 7.09 -16 --- --- + 0 6.00 28 18*Midland 67.43 5 72.03 4 32.78 19 55.21 13 7.09 16 20.78 8 .11 33 7.46+ 26 *Odessa 64.61 7 9.16 14 19 --- --- 29.79 20 29.96 21 29.82 27 ... ... 7.78 16 7.80 19 7.78 23 20 38.21 16 --- ... 5.10 31 24.55 28 5.26 18 --- 86.10 1 18.58 12 21 7.03 22 --- 7.02 29 7.03 33 .36 23 --- .13 28 .29 35 22 --- - --- --- 1.92 34 1.92 37 --- ... ... --- .13 28 .13 37 23 15.54 21 43.13 15 31.26 20 17.76 30 10.77 12 1.76 20 1.65 22 9.47 19 24 --- --- 36.44 17 36.62 16 36.52 24 --- --- 18.51 10 18.41 12 18.46 13 25 67.02 6 28.70 21 65.24 9 65A5 5 25.77 3 24.47 6 26.21 6 25.73 5 26 - --. 73.84 3 12.31 27 58.34 9 --- --- 9.46 14 11.95 14 10.29 17 27 85.19 1 85.41 2 85.51 2 85.25 2 19.91 7 19.88 9 19.96 10 19.91 10 28 63.40 @8 12.62 22 6.38 30 24.06 29 12.07 10 10.86 12 23.23 7 13.39 14, 29 82.34 2 --- --- 73.37 6 82.28 3 21.03 6 --- ... 21.40 9 21.03 8 30 --- --- - --- 74.06 5 74.06 4 --- --- ... --- .37 25 .37 34 31 --- --- 3.58 25 3.66 33 3.64 35 ... ... .82 25 .11 33 .26 36 32 --- --- 60.25 9 55.61 13 58.62 8 --- --- 1.04 24 3.22 21 1.75 31 33 56.38 13 5.15 23 17.82 24 44.89 19 11.09 11 .79 26 .15 27 729 21 34*Brownsville 59.71 9 63.99 6 17.17 25 57.03 12 14.14 9 5.15 19 1.64 23 7.61 25 *McAllen 68.82 4 i63 20 35 4.66 23 --- - 4.54 32 4.65 34 1.34 21 --- --- 1.27 24 1.33 32 36 --- --. 3.12 26 1.89 35 2.79 36 ... ... 30.95 5 5.82 20 21A6 7 37 --- --- 62.85 8 62.96 10 62.88 7 --- --- 10.60 13 10.61 15 10.61 16 AVERAGE 50.31 37.81 37.95 47.56 20.30 15.45 14.08 1824 195 TABLE D.8 (Continued) BICYCLING, 1975 BICYCLING, 1980 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Annual "Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 33.85 8 14.87 16 23.16 14 31.45 10 49.56 6 24.36 15 27.10 13 41.88 11 2 --- --- 30.83 10 19.18 15 18.60 21 --- --- 49A1 8 .26 29 28.97 20 3 ... --- 63.53 1 15.19 16 40.36 4 --- --- .82.15 1 17.94 16 51.65 8 4 35.31 .6 - --- 41.72 6 35.91 7 51.96 5 ... --- 56.56 6 52.35 7 5 9.89 18 .69 27 29.06 11 16.02 23 16.92 17 .70 27 47.58 10 26.76 22 6 --- --- 15.24 15 .27 27 11.85 27 --- --- 24.27 16 .31 26 19.17 25 7 20.43 16 1.94 21 .22 31 13.70 24 31.36 15 2.70 24 .23 33 21.41 24 8 ... ... 29.20 11 .21 32 11.81 28 --- ... 34.00 14 .22 35 14.00 29 9 --- --- 36.38 7 .21 32 27.93 12 --- --- 36.40 12 .26 29 26.86 21 10 62.11 2 62.15 2 61.63 3 62.09 1 78.84 1 78.84 2 78.40 3 78.82 1 11 64.68 1 --- --- 30.23 10 30.25 11 38.61 14 --- --- 38.68 12 38.62 12 12 + 0 1.92 22 .18 35 1.10 33 + 0 2.76 22 .27 28 1.64 33 13 .76 23 1.91 23 72.15 2 17.15 22 .76 .23 2.77 21 90.65 2 21.74 23 14 48.33 3 51.69 3 51.67 4 50.75 2 65.99 2 68.13 4 70.19 4 68.11 2 15 --- --- 27.63 13 27.58 12 27.62 13 --- --- 45.91 11 45.94 11 45.92 10 16 7.82 19 --- 9.46 20 7.86 30 7.88 19 --- --- 9.44 20 7.93 30 17 24.75 14 --- --- .27. 27 21.16 19 42.45 12 --- .28 27 36.58 15 18*Midland 24.77 13 34.24 9 .23 30 21.91 18 42.46 11 47.69 9 .23 33 36.25 16 *Odessa 26.78 10 44.47 9 19 ... ... 12.67 17 12.64 19 12.66 26 --- --- 17.57 18 17.55 18 17.56 26 20 10.35 17 ... --- 104.62 1 25.71 14 15.43 18 ... --- 123.11 1 32.86 19 21 1.19 22 --- --- .13 37 .88 34 2.01 22 --- --- .25 31 1.52 34 22 --- --- --- ... .24 29 .24 37 --- ... ... ... .22 35 .22 37 23 26.78 10 2.48 20 2.52 23 23.52 17 42.79 10 3.17 20 3.36 22 37.84 14 24 --- ... 37.24 6 36.89 8 37.07 6 --- - - 55.99 .6 55.39 9 55.71 5 25 43.44 4 44.14 5 44.55 5 43.47 3 61.12 3 60.33 5 63.02 5 61.11 3 26 ... 28.14 12 15.02 17 23.95 16 --- --- 46.91 10 17.77 17 38.00 13 27 34.72 7 34.76 .8 34.70 9 34.72 8 49.53 7 49.50 7 49.57 8 49.53 9 28 25.93 12 22.99 14 23.28 13 24.42 15 39.78 13 35.15 13 23.35 15 34.79 17 29 38.70 5 --- --- 38.97 7 38.70 5 56.38 4 --- --- 56.36 7 56.38 4 30 ... ... ... .36 26 .36 36 --- --- ... ... .35 25 .35 36 31 --- --- 1.23 25 .17 36 .39 35 ... ... 1.64 25 .22 35 .52 35 32 ... ... 1.89 24 3.22 22 2.33 32 --- ---- 2.76 22 3.20 23 2.91 32 33 28.77 9 .79 26 .21 32 20.73 20 46.43 8 .79 26 31 33.66 18 34*Brownsville 20.52 15 11.35 19 1.63 25 11.00 29 26.90 16 17.79 17 1.73 .24 14.57 27 *McAllen 2.53 20 2.54 21 35 2.44 21 --- --- 2.48 24 2.45 31 3.61 20 --- --- 3.62 21 3.61 31, 36 --- -.- 49.64 4 5.96 21 33.22 9 --- --- 68A1 3 26.79 14 52.83 6 37 --- --- 12.60 18 12.92 18 12.69 25 --- --- 14.58 .19 14.20 19 14.48 28 AVERAGE 32.77 24.62 21.18 30A4 45.25 33.86 28.95 42.06 196 TABLE D.8 (Continued) BICYCLING, 1990 BICYCLING, 2000 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBANAREAS. METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 76.95 9 43.32 14 35.14 14 61.22 14 104.33 12 62.22 13 43.12 14 77.93 16 2 --- --- 86.43 6 .39 26 47.64 19 --- --- 97.30 11 .55 25 50.31 23 3 --- --- 119.37 1 23.61 16 74.78 8 ... 156.69 1 29.25 17 98.21 12 4 9.28 17 ... --- 86.24 8 14.86 29 118.53 5 ... --- 115.81 10 118.37 7 5 31.06 15 .71 27 84.56 9 48.62 18 45.14 17 .72 27 121.52 .8 70.81 18 6 --- --- 42.41 15 .39 26 34.89 22 --- --- 60.51 14 .55 25 52.34 22 7 53.23 13 4.92 21 4.09 23 37.73 21 75.10 14 6.12 21 .53 27 54.35 21 8 --- --- 43.70 13 .39 26 18.73 27 ... ... 53.33 15 .44 36 23.73 27 9 --- --- 36.40 16 .39 26 24.86 25 --- --- 36.39 18 .50 29 23.05 28 10 112.33 1 112.34 2 111.86 3 112.29 1 145.65 1 145.81 2 145.35 3 145.76 1 11 55.34 12 --- --- 55.31 12 55.34 16 72.07 15 --- ... 72.09 12 72.07 17 12 + 0 4.44 22 .37 31 2.60 34 + 0 6.10 24 .47 33 3.63 34 13 .78 23 4.40 25 127.64 2 31.11 23 .74 23 6.12 21 164.59 2 40.74 24 14 101.33 22 101.05 4 101.05 4 101.13 2 136.68 2 133.97 4 131.45 5 13413 2 15 --- --- 64.40 11 82.44 10 68.15 9 --- --- 118.89 7 118.86 9 118.89 6 16 8.00 19 --- --- 9.57 20 8.07 30 8.12 19 --- --- 9.55 20 8.20 30 17 77.79 8 --- --- .34 37 68.08 10 113.12 8 --- .45 35 102.36 10 18*Midland 77.80 7 74.55 10 31 64.99 13 113.12 8 101.58 10 .53 27 93.77 14 *Odessa 79.86 5 115.21 7 19 --- --- 27.35 18 27.35 15 27.35 24 --- --- 37.15 17 37.15 15 37.15 25 20 25.59 16 --- --- 160.06 1 47.11 20 35.77 18 ... 197.05 1 61.29 20 21 3.72 21 --- --- .37 31 2.87 33 5.40 21 --- .47 33 4.25 33 22 ---- --- ... --- .39 26 36 --- ... --- .50 29 .50 36 23 74.79 10 4.99 20 5.08 22 67.19 12 106.81 11 6.67 20 6.67 22 97.38 13 24 --- --- 93.45 5 92.38 6 92.96 4 --- ... 130.94 5 129.35 6 130.25 4 25 96.46 3 81.09 9 100.11 5 95.92 3 131.81 3 103.12 9 137.04 4 130.71 3 26 --- ... 84.41 7 23.56 17 67.46 11 --- ... 121.88 6 29A7 16 98.60 11 27 79.17 6 8 79.16 11 79.33 7 108.80 10 108.75 8 108.80 11 108.79 9 28 67.50 11 59.42 12 23.23 18 53.61 17 95.20 13 83.70 12 23.24 18 70.22 19 29 9.17 18 --- --- 92.09 7 91.73 5 127.08 4 ... --- 126.81 7 127.07 5 30 --- ... --- --- .35 35 .35 37 ... --- --- --- .34 37 .34 37 31 --- --- 4.41 24 .35 35 1.21 35 --- - 6.04 25 .48 32 1.66 35 32 --- --- 4.42 23 3.09 24 3.97 32 --- --- 6.11 23 3.12 23 5.06 32 33 81.78 4 .75 26 .37 31 60.03 15 117.13 6 .77 26 .50 29 86.94 15 34*Brovvnsville 39.68 14 30.48 17 1.61 25 22.06 26 52.42 16 43.34 16 1.64 24 30.08 26 *McAllen 2.55 22 2.51 22 35 5.86 20 --- --- 5.99 21 5.87 31 8.12 19 --- --- 8.25 21 8.13 31 36 --- --- 105.90 3 47.69 13 84.26 6 ... --- 143.37 3 68.61 13 115.74 8 37 --- --- 18.52 19 18.48 19 18.51 28 --- --- 22.48 19 22.45 19 22.47 29 AVERAGE 68.44 52.85 44.36 64.12 95.49 73.79 59.81 89.31 197 < '1 0) LTI P@ C.3 r,) 0 r.0 00 j 0) en jh@ 0 4- W" go * * a T 09 1 0. CL > CD C. rr CL 0 > +b@o: p.Zo: r,) bo @j li lo Ln 0 CA) UP tj C.) W j Ln OD W (0 (A) 0 Ul C) 00 00 W .0. m m 0 N) (8 -g@ Go j w w 0, Ir + + + + 4 + + bo :P- b b + + + + + + 0= 0 r,) oo 4@b @j al W @j 00 (A) OD 0CD 0 - " :1 z> EL c m c co . . . . . . + + i4 + + L)b K) + @4. + + @a + t4 + b + in k) we 0 c 0 cn -j (n IM 0 co w (" N) P6 OD al li = "0 co 2., 0 -4 CL * 0 z 000 ooo.=OoC)OOPJ=80cnoo Im c .42 > jr) + b + b'm + b) @j b:N + to b + ia zr b + b + b ia + b wo c w w li WA--41 c)OOO oo 00 0 w 4 00 li w C,3 CP r, 2. m CL > r OD m F 0 V W C-D FO z 0 0 N :4 w 0 00 4 O"D CJ 0 W W 0 @J o 5" 4@- OD 0 > 0 c CY) o c 6 bo @n io b :P. in b@boi-) bbLAb@ b bb tz CA al Pi co w o ul 00 (n M 0 w W W CD m FE 0 0) 0) 0 N) NJ w .4 wo 4cn;8 Z; 6; co 0) PNJJ OD 0 0) + + + + + + Co -j to (D m 00 0) (n 0) (D 00 w Ul w w 0 - 0 z CA) W M 0 OD LTI U) 0) 0 K) 40)0000 080 m c > co z -4 = :< CY) + '- + "o + + zo + + + + c C) 'i (n VI 000 K)0)00 @j 01jcD-"4h(DOO- 000003M -0 0 CL * cn z to N) K3 m o w 0 0 .1 0 0 K, WO C-) LTI IOJ 0 o w 0,0 :@-w CD 4@ '0 o '0' Z; w "o X, Xo> 0 0). z c C4 M b L-) bO + b):@ b b) b b:N in b 14 ZO "J L) @j b b @P- b b b b + b b b 1- 1.) (31 00 Ul (n 0 0 wwwwoliri"Wom 4m@iWoo-jo MM4 C"OLTIMM -> z 0 -q >> M F- M r-J > Ul 0 LTV Ul Lq 0 p. WLTI 0 w "W (31 C" 01 LTI 4 al -N 4 @j c Ict OLD r, m m m mmm 0 0 w w:: m PIN @!rl rl@)( -M mor, .,@ m @? C14 N C14 Cl) C14 Cl) C4) C4) V) N Cl) C14 M M-N 0) LU z 0 C, 0 04 00 0) M -e Lf) C4 a) 04 M 0) 0) 0) 0 Lf) R !R :1 L4 :1 (2 N C, C4 N . . . . . . . . . C-1 V: -: q '": r,: " V: -: C4 Ct Lq c! -: IS: 7 c! cq 1 2 C.) I* cn Cl) 04 00 - 11 0() M N 00 cn 0 X r@ C14 C14 W 0 0 N N M W m N M M T N W 00 N C4 Lf) 0 N 00 N ID C-4 .2 (@2 M 0 04 N - N M N N C.) N N N M cl) N m V) z g M 0 C wle-mwwom @ of, Olt r, rm 0 M r, Lf) c CN C'i Ci Cl! Cl Ci (q -: Ci Vi lq: Ci Lq C@ Cli cq Cl! C@ Cli U@ -: + Vi OR v! CN 14: qr M W 00 c 0 x COD X w c oom 0,toomN Nor- CD r, C) 00 0 C') m 0 m C') m D 0 N r, 00 mr, MrCDW OD N -e Cl) V 000 C14 C.) r@ CL C 0 + cl + C! + + qtq 7qqcq q N 0 0 It + r% + fl: cl+ 'It c -T 04 m N 0 99 x X c W CO r, r- r- 0) 0 co v LD r, 0 `j r.- C', N N 0 V LU t a r. w 0) CF) CN C-4 w 0 CL = C*4 rl@ Cl CNC@ q IT r- W C) le C14 C.) 0 0 W Cq C6 : - . . , . . . , 00 c C.) -V M C43 m 0 pox c 0 C-) C 0 0 0 r, r, P, 0 M @t N - r, W N N C-4 N - N C%4 C*4 C*4 Cl) cn N N - CIJ C14 V) - C'4 w V LLJ z - 0 0 W Itr 0 0) r, r-- rl (D m w co 0 in rl w CD r- N a) W W N - cn cn (D 0) U) 0 0 r-t q + q q ct (p (q Ct q 7 cl C'4 cl Lq q (q R"@ r@ Ct OR eq + cl ORq C! cl -: N 04 - 0 C14 V C4 -0 N c Z, 00 - 0 x .X C r, r- CD -@t CO N 0 r@ 0) CD M W M 0) N N N N N 0 C14 04 N N N z 0 0 m 0 r, v 04 (7) M W C N - - - - - Lc) 2 0 M W 00 r, 0 V Ito + :1 @2 + .cq Oq . . . 1q: C@ Lq CR cl -: q Cli + M. cq > C 04 CIJ C14 0 x w -V C2 0 a 0 0 r- C@ 0 r- N w MwLf)mor- 0 Lr) 0 0 00 CD Cl) q m V N ov U) 1, 0 00 Ci Cli R q (q '0 CY N a x X 00 r- !2 W ()I M 01 0) OV Cn C4 M C4 04 0 cc LAJ - 0 M W r, N 0 -t W Ln Lf) C')! 00 W 0 M C-4 04 Cl) 0 LO 0. 0 W M -00 M V V 0 W V: CR C@ q c Cq v Lf) 04 I m 0 a x > C m w M 0 It 20 w N M 4 * @2 :1 L4 @2 N @D MO-NMVMW r- M 0 0 Lf) W rl > cc C4 C14 N N 04 N N C4 N N M M M M M m Cl) V) < >@ co w w w w w (@ w ` N3 t'j 8 " 'a " " 2 " 8 ;; :@ 8 @n @: n ;@ = 8 w w .j m m ,@ w t,) - 10 < 'i M Ln S@ W 0 w 00 .j Ln C@ W 0 CD T 0 _K 0 0 o Q. CL > rr m CL > 0 2 c 0) 0) M in iD @j iD b) bo bo 0 : : PI) = c 8 010 8 S) . . . PO W N) NJ (n N) U) (D C.) U, 0) N 0 CA) a) 0 m 0 to r) 0 + 00 w + @4 + -ch. bD Zn b b b + + + 0) Ul li 00 Ln Ul - 0 Lrl 0) 00 . . . CF) w li (7) -1 0) CD CD (D -4 z > co 04wo wom'28= -i m c x a P 00) n j N (3) w ta c< z :< P@ 4 Z4 ij Z4 W za bo ii + @j - tj iD .N *4 :N @D. *Lrl Z4 I.) :th @D @1) :.j i.) @j :o. bi *C.) Z4 'o. :P@ :@ .0 r. CD 'a EL -I K) to 0 - -4 li - 0) 4% -4 -4 J 0) 00 W - 0 0 li al w -4 ca 0 (D a) (D CA CD 0 Ln Cn - 0) W =1 0 2. 0 0 CL :* 0 z W C13 tj W NJ W 2 ta (cjj "M c.4 mm 0) - 4 CP C" -"--2"0 5n cia)(n co (nol oco w1i woo 0 vc w C4 (3) ow cn - .9, cb 2 2 T b) Zii K) i4 b) bo b @D @4 :@ :cl L) to *- @n bo K) *j@- bo '-4 b) bo im N3 :Ch. > tj " -4 oo s@ w ri co w w c.) w ro j cn 4 , cn a m 4m 4 T c -i m in cn o a - a cn 0 Z 0 m m r m bo > Wo. 'Ln 'a) 'w 2 w "i tj "-j 8 INS 4 "OD Z; w Eo m ow wo .4 m 0"D wo wo w;@ '04) w 'NJ 80 0 U) W 0 x 0 0 :3 fli 00 00 tl) Cj CD CD 0 00 bo 0 W 0 4h. L" bO @j CL m (n NJ a) 0 CD N) 0) (M CD to ONO) Oj S, -4 CL. m 0 t,3 co 4, "4 "o N) "r%) co C@ xC3 > tj W j CD LTI ha 4 CD in @j + zo b j :N b = w w m w 4 m CO Ij 00 . . . N3 4 CD Cl) 0 (D 0 0) C.) N co w 0 -4 CO -to @j 4 ww 0") L"Ti W;@ @4 m M XO> z 0 G) X) j (8 Ln Ul Zn, CA) LTI zo b) bo b (D 0 li - b) @j @3 :. N3 + + @n %J @4 Zo in b) + L4 + + Ln 4 0 li 4@ 0) (D 0) 4 m w 0 0 w -4 li w 0 0 li .0. w M "_JMwwwm4ma) 0 0 z Ul Co @j co M 04 0 0 "'J N) ooi@wm wow W Xo> 0 c :r > @j K) '4 b) %j bo + bo 6 '4 @3 Zn imN lo @3 @4 @j 4) @j',j lp. I.) bo "t, K3 6 A CA) li 0 CD Ul N) Ili " w -4 w li 0 'J.;@004100000M-Owww OD 0 Z 0 CL r m N)w ",Www ..... M4"88ww ca > 0 Ln I '"1 0 m CW) @3 00 L" (n 4 0000- 4 N) = X TABLt D.8 (Continued) SIGHTSEEING,- 1975 TOTAL SIGHTSEEING, 1980 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS. METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual' Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 2.96 8 1.93 10 .67 21 2.39 15 4.18 6 1.93 12 .94 17 3.20 12 2 - --- .51 18 .77 19 .62 32 --- - .55 18 .90 is .69 32 3 --- --- 2.25 7 5.40 7 3.76 8 --- 7 - 2.76 8 5.35 9 3.99 10 4 3.87 5 --- --- 4.10 11 :3.89 7 4.55 4 --- --- 4.26 10 4.53 8 5 2.26 13 9.25 2 4.60 9 3.61 9 3.24 10 14.15 2 7.04 a 5A1 6 6 --- --- 2.08 9 1.09 15 im 20 --- 2.74 9 1.23 2.42 17 7 3.07 6 7.61 3 15.13 3 6.08 4 4.23 5 7.51 3 14.74 4 6.66 5 8 --- --- 4.06 6 7.08 5 5.87 5 --- --- 4.65 6 9.39 5 7A6 4 9 --- --- 1.87 11 .51 22 1.56 22 --- --- 2.51 10 .69 23 2.03 21 10 1.72 17 ..31 22 .17 30 1.60 21 1.89 16 35 23 .18 30 1.73 22 11 .81 20 --- --- + 0 .80 29 .88 20 --- ... .17 31 .87 29 12 2.63 10 .33 21 + 0 .81 28 3.15 11 .39 21 + 0 .93 27 13 1.86 16 .46 19 .22 29 1.04 25 2.88 12 .58 17 .21 28 1.52 24 14 .43 21 A 23 A6 25 .317 34 .50 21 .45 20 .72 21 .54 34 15 --- --- -11 .17 30 .12 36 --- --- .09 26 .16 32 .11 35 16 9.06 1 ... 5.43 6 8.98 3 9.16 2 - 5.53 8 9.06 3 17 9.06 1 --- --- 19.72 2 10.62 2 9.43 1 --- --- 19.89 2 10.89 2 18*Midland .90 is 1.79 12 .46 25 1.23 24 1.21 18 2.36 26 1.61 23 *Odessa 1.95 14 2.56 14 19 --- ... 4.46 5 .10 32 3A2 10 -.- . --- 6.08 4 .09 33 4.69 7 20 .08 24 --- --- 5.03 8 .89 26 .10 24 --- ... 6.44 7 1.13 26 21 .43 21 --- --- 1.30 14 .69 31 .49 22 --- --- 1.40 14 .74 30 22 --- --- --- --- .49 23 .49 33 --- --- --- --- .56 25 .56 33 23 1.88 15 .16 24 14.28 4 2.71 14 1.66 17 .14 24 15.30 3 2A7 15 24 --- --- 1.39 15 2.97 12 2.15 17 --- --- 1.76 13 2.99 12 2.34 18 25 .86 19 1.08 16 A7 24 .86 27 .91 19 1.11 16 .57 24 .91 28 26 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- - + 0 + 0 + 0 27 2.32 12 .39 20 .24 28 1.98 18 2.48 15 .38 22 .19 29 2.09 20 28 5.54 3 .55 17 .35 27 2.86 12 6.24 3 .52 19 .34 27 291 14 29 2.75 9 --- --- + 0 2.72 13 4.02 7 --- --- + 0 3.98 11 30 --- - --- .72 20 .72 30 --- ... ... --- .71 22 .71 31 31 --- 5.34 4 4.12 10 4.38 6 --- --- 5.33 5 4.14 11 4.39 9 32 1.49 14 .80 18 1.26 23 --- - - 1-52 15 .75 20 1.26 25 33 2.99 7 .16 24 .83 17 2.29 16 2.79 13 .14 24 .99 16 2.18 19 34*Brownsville 2.63 10 1.58 13 .92 16 2.88 11 3.30 9 1.64 14 .86 19 2.99 13 *McAllen 4.39 4 3.81 8 35 .16 23 --- + 0 .14. 35 .19 23 ... --- + 0 .17 36 36 - 2.17 8 1.41 13 1.89 19 L.. --- 2.94 7 1.68 13 2A7 15 37 --- --- 27.77 1 19.56 1 25.53 1 --- --- 31.63 1 20.67 1 28.67 1 AVERAGE 2.34 2.50 2.92 2.42 2.50 2.84 3.07 2.61 201 > www < j 0 M 4w"-0@3w,4 L71 W"-O li J* w w j m 0 4 w to m m K sp 09 6 0 0 CL > > a) CL > W4-" CDO) . . . . @j 0 ;,4 M 10 LTI 00 00 W 1) 0. 0 D 00 LTI LTI 00 r) - 03 li Co CA) 0 0) K) wo "NJ) CG4) "Do m NJ w 00 w rIIJ) '04 - w -0 C-D 0) -j 4 a, K3 cyl N) tj 4 ul 'i A. (D 4 c< zo @j b b : 1 @n + K) bo @3 4: @ bo :N @ :@, L, b, bo 4, bo 00 (D 000 00 w W cn K) w a) N) -i ul Ln 01 CD -j CD Ij 0 W M W 4* C) x IQ 4 GJ) "0 o C., loji "N) NJ (7) A. co j 0 -W en m m z 4h, Cyl 0 (A w + b3 -ch 6 ba:.j boG3 @j + @n bo o m m a @j @- @j @a Lv U + b (D @j @-j L3 bo :o, @j @4 to b. w w to cn 0 -1 (n 00 " CD 0) Co Ul K3 w al (A co 00 ci - W NJ 0 4- - -4 " CD Ln UD CL z W 0 L"in Ni @"4 CIDJ 0 0") C4 El 8 .4 w 00 C"D FO 0"D 0 WW 24 CD In Z; o. 8 (D loj 0 z M.C. wrj -W -W. 0 @o in to bo t. 1" + t 1. b) !D- j tO W '4 '-4 G) OD 0 LTI 0 0 Pb Ln 4 CD 00 0) CA) (n a) W40-0 0 00 co 0 0 .01 0 m Z,M 0 0 m 2 0 W r 00 w K) CA) tj K) K) w > ci (M @j Z8 C., 0 0) (o w CC) 0 L"" cb a, co CNI w % F W 0Im FL K) 00 C.) CD ci OD c < a 0 r il) '4 La j W Ul .4 0 W N) ul a-0 (a =co W w 82@ 2- 2) Ul 0 Ln Ul (31 w N) 0 0 ri m -4 w 0 to . . . C4 C, tS "Pb CD i@ @ 4 Lq 8=8ED@; K) w 00 a, Ul Ul Lq .9h co Ul 0) Ul -4 11 p 90 Ul @r @b + Li w i%) L" @n iD b Li w (LD" (4-0- -0) o in j CYI to L" Q tj t@ M";@n -4 0 0 -4 -P, MWM-.WWOMM- MWO CA m T z to Q .P. 0 a) w c @j FO p p P). 7,PNPOD :.j @n w b) iD i4:th L. b) OD 0 4 4 CD 0 bo to @3 *4 b Z; 8 Ln W L" iD 'i T co 00 N) 4 fJ (D 0) C" co w C) 0 Go W -4 " 0 4 K) w w m w 0 CA) CA) W-"Www" m 00 w w m .9h. w w 0 m -Ob w w 0 0 w -i -th m -1 0 (D 0 C.) w N) 71 li F:- bo b) '4 '-j 4h 0 ca j W il) K) in --momm-Wito w N) C) 1) @4 (D (1) C.) N) > 0 NJ 0 00 W li j 00 0 to (71 0) co 4 w co 00 8 (n 14 coo) 4" NW "a C"ll NI tj w z cC,, > CO) X, V) r, CN 0 -q 0 m 0 ; CD -* a) LO r, v co 00 0) Cl) N cl) M (N - - - N N C*404-v)- r4m-cN -N m CD CM 0 z 0 (R Lq CR CQ r@ 14: Cl q CR 'It CR q CR OR cp (R Lq rt qV. tq C@ 0. IR Ci 7 c LO CD LO 00 Of G) OD -T M 00 0 Cn -V C%j 0C4) (D C4c C4 Lr) 0 cz @2 'n cv) Cl) C14 N C4) - N M N M C-iN N CIA V N N - C.) - - - M lqr CN cl) r . N M 0 0 0 00 Cl) to Cl) IT OD CD r, ;; C C) to @ V 0 (D Ln co Lc) Cj 0 ; r- m P, r, Ln W - In C4 C4N - CN - Cl) N - Cl) C.)N N04 Cl) M cl)- 2 LLi 0 V M Cl) CN CN 00 CN -V - M 0 0) Ln 0) t, 0) 00 CF) CN 0) 00 LD E- Ln LnM C) M M (D 0) 0 0 D z 0 rl: q (q It Lq C!q 14: a! cp Lq LqqLq r,: U@ Iq r,@ cl lp It U@ cl cl It C@ Iq U-) r, r, CD OD r@ gD,0 Ln Lo OD c,)Mr, ci tn r, (.4 'Ir 10 IT CO 0 cn C14 OD CII CD 04 LO007 N M gi LO m a - C14 C14 V) - (C) C.)N C14N 04 C'4- mto Lf)V NP,M N - -Cl)- C-) CN 04- - V) M 0 CL MMO N M q@r - P. W 0 r@ 0 Ln 00 . . . cn U) - CN V V CO CD f'- M 0 m CN C4 C4 - - - 04 CM C4- N N LL W > z V ; - 0 N M @?MWMN; L4wvm r- 0 'V; 0 m MCIO M 3 CL = 0 r, . q (q cl 7 . .Lq 10: cl cl Lq . . . cl q q@ q . C'! Lq Oi c 0 a a) Ln r, co o)-m N - m N 0 04 CD 00 00 - Cl) Lf)M CY) r, r > 2 -T -e Ln - 0 a - N V r, M V r N N V N M cn N M (N N co M 00 CD CO rl CN 0)M (D Ln 1* 0 V 00 M V CN r, LD . . . 0 N M NN N N 0 V w 0 CO 00 M LO LO CD M CD 0. 0 0 Cl) @4 Lf) :3 :: :V Cv)t CN c Cli Ci IR Ci r% Ci M (D LD CN C-4 C-) CO 11 U) LO 4@ v c3i d cli vi r4 'i PZ C; C6 C-i C'46 (D C; c) -: C-i Cl) 04 cq OL Uj V) CN N - - - N NN -(n cn CNmN N CNN ui < z 0 0 4 -a 0. = 0) r@ 0 0 W M N M 0 W r- r@ 0 0 M 0 co , (D q r,@ t! CR It cl q ct q q q1t IQ -: oq Lq C! LQ v! c! r@ (Q cl It r% cq cc c >. 2 N m 0 0 Lo - m m w 0 - 0 N N MID CN 0 m m 0) m (D C4 0 0) (1 m 0 'q 0) 0 f' c m 0 - CN M - N M N r- m - - N N CN N N N N - N - - - M V N - LD a 3: X C (N CO CNM r- U) to V 00 N m 0m c2 0 0r-N0 r' w 'e N m CN CN - N m cn (N - 0 cc cn cn CN cm CN cn cn cn P, 0) z V LL; 0 cc C ;Wmt2MNWWWmNLnWWOOWM M V r- W qW r- N 0 0 0 r- 0 W -@t V W W q Ci (P " U@ " rl@q ll@ cq P@ Iq c! q1t a! C! a! oq r,: cl cl r,@ cl" q Lq r MO; N c M-MVNN co LU CL m N m -i r, Ln o w w m - v c 0 cc N CNN- CN 04 LL cc > z I.C 0 C4 N V W M - M N N w Lq C@ cq r@ (n Lq 7 ul 711 CR q LQ OR (N Iq r@ C@ C@ r- w v -w v - Me - Lf) w . . . r- w O'C4 00 00 0 N Ic CD M qt r, C.) C4 C14 C13 C*4 V) C.) N CIJ CN C14 C14 LO m X c ca C OD (D r- C-4 0 M OD fD V0Lf) (7) M- V N I-cr M CN 04- CN 04 CN 0 cc LU C to c) q) cj r- v - v cD co oo oo Lo r, c4 r, a) o c,4 cl) co fL = 0 V 7 (R q Lq CR(P C@ . . . cl " r,@ CR cl c@i L2 v c)) 0 c-4 0 m c2 w 0 w c2 V C4 IT @2 N N I cc 0 CN C*4 > LLI C m c 0 0 0 LU * N cl) V :1 t2 @2 @2 @2 N C*4 N C%l C14 04 C.) m Cl) Cl) m Cl) M TABLE D.8 (Continued) DRIVING FOR PLEASURE, 1980 TOTAL DRIVING FOR PLEASURE, 1990 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Annual Arinual Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per. Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 11.73 18 21.98 22 17.92 31 14.17 31 12.34 is 25.12 22 20.64 30 16.25 29 2 --- 25.03 20 29.26 20 26.78 14 --- --- 27.47 20 31.92 20 29A8 14 3 --- ... 45.53 5 30.54 17 38A1 6 --- --- 47.24 6 33.44 16 40.82 6 4 14.79 9 --- - 31.86 16 16.27 27 15.83 9 --- --- 33.63 15 17.12 26 5 19.23 6 81.40 2 39.31 9 31.01 11 23.41 3 93.07 2 44.55 8 36.17 9 6 --- --- 37.83 9 20.87 28 34.21 7 --- --- 39.36 9 24.53 28 36.70 8 7 15.40 8 48.21 4 69.82 3 30.30 12 16.70 8 51.61 4 73.81 3 31.23 13 8 ... --- 85.95 1 89.85 1 88.26 1 --- --- 99.11 1 101.67 1 100.58 1 9 ... --- 42.45 7 33.39 14 40.06 5 --- --- 43.26 8 38.15 11 41.62 5 10 9.98 22 26.52 18 26.54 24 11.66 36 10.23 20 28.62 17 28.63 25 12.76 34 11 11.66 19 --- --- 26.56 23 11.80 35 12.25 19 --- --- 29.25 23 12A6 36 12 13.02 15 23.54 21 30.09 19 22A7 .21 13.43 16 25.54 21 32.21 19 24.20 20 13 13.04 14 44.36 6 25@06 27 2611 15 13.54 14 48.10 5 26.81 27 28.50 16 14 13.26 13 26.53 17 30.18 18 23.79 20 15.28 10 28.13 18 30.92 21 25.07 19 15 --- 33.35 10 18.60 30 29.94 13 --- --- 34.94 11 20.22 31 31.89 12 16 19.94 5 --- --- 36.94 10 20A2 23 20.25 5 --- --- 42.50 10 21.20 21 17 13.80 10 --- - 65.38 4 20.98 22 14.25 11 ... --- 65.84 4 20.72 23 18*Midland 12.89 16 19.13 25 17.84 32 15.05 30 14.13 12 21.30 23 15.98 33 16.26 28 *Odessa 15.57 7 18.03 7 19 - ... 42.39 8 55.29 6 45.40 3 --- 45.87 7 58.19 5 48.59 3 20 7.54 23 --- --- 55.74 5 15.35 29 8.34 23 --- --- 56.09 6 15.98 31 21 10.71 20 ... ... 42.89 8 19.68 25 11.08 21 --- --- 43.16 9 19.20 24 22 ... --- --- --- 26.01 25 26.01 16 --- --- --- --- 28.45 26 28.17 17 23 6.24 24 32.16 13 76.63 2 12.42 34 6.40 24 32.02 16 79.95 2 11.49 37 24 --- --- 30.32 15 34.64 11 32.31 10 --- --- 34.20 13 34.83 14 34A9 10 25 13.37 11 33.31 11 27.52 22 14.14 32 13.58 13 35.12 10 29.12 24 14.54 32 26 --- --- 19.32 24 10.27 37 16.55 26 --- --- 18.94 25 10.53 37 16.60 27 27 12.30 17 19.44 23 16.17 33 13.24 33 12.81 17 20.97 24 19.19 32 14.17 33 28 13.36 12 30.95 14 33.90 12 24.08 18 13.52 15 34.72 12 36.34 12 27.94 18 29 19.95 .4 - --- 20.00 29 19.95 24 18.91 6 --- --- 21.72 29 18.93 25 30 ... --- --- .-- 33.25 15 33.25 9 ... --- --- --- 32.87 18 32.87 11 31 --- --- 32.21 12 46.60 7 43.54 4 --- --- 32.62 115 46.79 7 43.79 4 32 --- - 25.33 19 25.99 26 25.55 17 --- --- 27.81 19 30.09 22 28.60 15 33 10.31 21 28.88 .16 28.94 21 15.48 28 9.79 22 33.20 14 33.23 17 16.06 30 34*Brownsville 46.27 1 14.23 26 11.97 35 34.13 8 51.40 1 18.01 26 14.08 35 37.66 7 *McAllen 31.06 2 31.01 2 35 22.30 3 --- --- 11.25 36 23.87 19 22.02 4 --- --- 11.98 36 21.11 22 36 --- --- 10.41 27 13.04 34 7.14 37 --- --- 11.00 27 14.96 34 12A7 35 37 --- --- 56.46 3 33.79 13 50.34 2 ... --- 54.56 3 36.09 13 49.66 2 AVERAGE 13.67 33.21 34.35 18.35 13.86 35.11 35.70 18.63 204 TABLE D.8 (Continued) DRIVING FOR PLEASURE, 2000 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Annual rnn -u.I Annual Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank 1 12.94 18 29.11 21 23.94 30 19.09 24 2 --- --- 29.73 19 34.39 19 31.99 15 3 --- --- 48.84 7 37.39 15 43.59 6 4 16.79 10 --- --- 35.26 16 17.90 27 5 28.22 3 103.37 2 49.20 7 41.39 8 6 --- --- 40.89 9 28.04 28 39.14 9 7 17.99 8 54.69 3 77.69 3 32.52 13 8 --- --- 103.67 1 105.91 1 104.93 1 9 --- --- 45.91 8 41.96 11 44.44 4 10 10.45 21 30.56 16 30.56 25 13.95 34 11 12.74 19 --- --- 31.76 22 13.03 36 12 13.73 15 27.36 22 33.70 20 25.80 20 13 14.00 13 51.13 5 28.17 27 30.62 17 14 17.38 9 29.26 20 31.28 23 26.10 19 15 --- 36.10 14 21.93 32 33A2 12 16 20.36 6 --- --- 48.98 8 21.99 21 17 14.62 12 --- --- 66.06 4 19.53 23 18*Midland 15.12 11 23.64 23 13.00 35 17.33 28 *Odessa 20.81 5 19 --- --- 49.18 6 61.02 5 51.66 2 20 9.13 23 --- --- 56.20 6 16.58 30 21 11.33 20 - --- 43.44 10, 18.80 25 22 --- --- ... --- 29.92 26 29.92 18 23 6.56 24 29.88 18 81.84 2 1OA0 37 24 --- --- 38.71 11 35.03 17 37.11 10 25 13.78 14 36.89 13 30.61 24 14.89 33 26 --- --- 18.52 26 10.82 37 16.58 30 27 13.20 17 22.81 24 22.88 31 15.22 32 28 13.69 16 38.90 10 38.90 12 32.38 14 29 18.63 7 --- --- 24.46 29 18S6 26 30 --- --- --- ... 33.51 4 33.51 11 31 --- --- 32.68 15 47.00 9 43.97 5 32 --- --- 30.47 17 34M 18 31.95 16 33 9.29 22 38.15 12 38.12 14 16.77 29 34*Brownsville 57.49 1 21.06 25 16.26 34 41.74 7 *McAllen 30.72 2 35 21.65 4 --- --- 12.78 36 20.97 22 36 --- --- 11.64 27 17.18 33 13.69 35 37 --- 53.42 4 38.23 13 49.45 3 indicate regions not having metros or cities. + indicates activity was applicable but annual days per household was less than .01. AVERAGE 14.10 37.02 37.21 19.18 Odessa, Midland, Brownsville, and McAllen are metro areas. Figures for cities, towns, and total urban areas are listed adjacent to Odessa and Brownsville where applicable, 205 TABLE D.9 REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF URBAN RESIDENT PARTICIPATION FOR SELECTED SALTWATER URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION ACTIVITIES BY CITY-SIZE, 1970-2000 SKIING, SALTWATER SURFINGt, SALTWATER METRO CITY TOWN TOTAL URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN TOTAL URBAN AREAS Annual Annual Tn-nual I Annual Annual Mn -nual 7'n n u Mal Annual Days Per Days Per Days Per Days Per DaysPer Days Per DaysPer DaysPer Year Region Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Rank Household Household Household Household 24 ... ... .05 2 .05 1 --- + + 25 .04 3 .07 1 .04 2 + + + 1970 27 .04 3 .04 2 + + 28 .05 1 .04 3 + 0 .04 2 5.42 3.42 + 3.93 33 .05 1 .08 1 .05 1 + + + 34 + 0 + 0 + + Average .05 .05 .03 .04 .33 1.45 + .40 24 --- --- .05 2 .05 1 --- + + 25 .04 2 .06 1 .04 2 + + + 1975 27 .04 2 .04 2 + + 28 .05 1 .03 3 .07 1 .05 1 8.54 3.26 + 5.17 33 .04 2 .07 1 .05 1 + + + 34 + 0 + 0 + + Average .04 .04 .05 .04 .45 1.40 + .51 24 ... --- .04 2 .04 2 ... + + 25 .04 2 .05 1 .04 2 + + + 1980 27 .06 1 .05 1 + + 28 .06 1 .03 3 .06 1 .04 2 11.65 3.04 + 6.09 33 .04 2 .06 1 .04 2 + + + 34 + 0 + 0 + + Average .04 .04 .05 .04 .54 1.32 + .58 24 ... .04 1 .04 2 --- + + 25 .04 2 .03 3 .04 2 + + + 1990 27 .04 2 .04 2 + + 28 .05 1 .04 1 .04 2 .05 1 17.89 2.61 + 7.16 33 .04 2 .05 1 .04 2 + + + 34 + 0 + 0 + + Average .04 .04 .04 .04 .64 1.14 + .66 24 --- --- .03 3 .03 5 --- + + 25 .04 1 .05 1 .04 2 + + + 2000 27 .04 1 .04 2 + + 28 .03 4 .05 1 06 1 .05 1 24.13 2.12 + 7.24 33 .04 1 .05 2 .04 2 + + + 34 + 0 + 0 + + Average .04 .04 .05 .04 .66 .96 + .66 --- indicate Region 24 does not have a metro area. * indicate (by region) metros, cities, or towns not having saltwater access. + indicates activity was applicable but annual days per household was less than .01. t Surfing participation per household figures apply to Metros and Cities in Region 28, the only region in the state having urban areas where surfing participation was recorded, therefore, rankings are omitted. 206 CM LAJ cc < X z M CD N Lf) M M It N LO CO en (D N W @t M. Ln N W) C-) Lf) CN U) Cl co cc CL co r- C,) C-4 r- C, Ln C-4 Q N 00 r' LO C) 'e 'e Cy, Co CO C-4 00 00 00 a) a co C', co 0) C4) 0) cr) Cl) 0 C-4 C@ .X C.) C'4 C.) N cli Cl) C: LU z 0 Ln C4 LO - ;& - CD C4 r- LO CS Lo CR C9 eq OR cq OR cq C. "q cq eq cq X c C14 cl) N cn C4 Cl) CIA 0 CO > M ro 00 00 00 co co m N 8* a- C@ a! q a! q CR Ci C4 04 - N C4 CIJ C-4 04 C4 N N C, -e C14 N 0 13 uj = . a ;& :;S 2 Y, 12 O-D 00 00 OD 00 c >. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . P MO 41 c 0 z c C,) V (D C-4 Ln Cl nr to N Ln C-) V CD 04 LO tv) W C11 Lf) cn U) co N 0 =0 t cD r@ -@t @D (n Cl) N Do CO LD v L 2 LO 00 0 Lf) CD V 0) LD $ 0 M V P@ 000 V .2 LU j CL 4) (3) CD 0 r@ C'4 V) (D r, Ln 00 r- CD 0 0 Ln rl 0 rl 00 r@ 0 M r- 0 r- r- C@ vi (d (d vi (D r-: csi co 0 0 < X c C4 m Lu Z r. 'D . r < 0 - 0 m 0. (D CD C4 N N Ln (D (n 0) (N CO Cl Pl r% r >. C4 N N 0 Ad 04 N C-4 Cl) N r4 N :2 0 LL > 0 q L) 0. Ln Nr It U, cn 11 m Ln Ci Ci ri Ci CL 4; v cn Ci Ci Ci r.> en IT U) in Ln Ln r 0 Cq cq C4 N cn m V) (n m M t !@ r r 0 Cl) CN C.) It C*4 M V C4 m qr N o C cn It N 0 0 V 0 LU .0) r, 00 ?1 4m to 00 w 0 co m ii Lqq % 2 CY) CD 0) Lq q q cl CR rl@ r% Lqq(q r% -C -am C CO (D u r = 0 CL CL 0 E cc C'J .2 C o c .2 Ln rl 00 m V le Ln r, 00 Cl) le La P. co V) q w m It U) r, OD M V CII CIJ N CN Cl Cl) C14 N CN N m m N N eq m Cl) C14 cli Clq 04 V) Cl) eq N N C.) m .111, wu a Ln m M cn + TABLE D.10 REGIONAIL COMPARISONS OF URBAN INCREMENTAL LAND RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS PEKTHOUSAND POPULATION FOR SELECTED URBAN.OUTDOOR RECREATION FACILITIES BY CITY SIZE, 197112000 SWIMMING POOLS, 1970 SWIMMING POOLS, 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population i,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + .069 .038 .013 .003 .047 .020 .010 2 ... .011 + .006 --- .010 + .006 3 --- .005 .108 .057 --- .023 .059 .040 4 .019 --- + .017 .020 --- .002 .018 5 .043 .028 + .027 .020 005 + .012 6 --- + .019 .005 --- + .004 .001 7 .026 + + .017' 010 + + .006 8 --- + + + + + + 9 ... + + + + + + 10 034 .055 088 .037 .028 .050 .054 .030 11 .067 --- .111 .067 .057 --- .097 .057 12 + + + + + + + + 13 .014 + .010 .009 .026, + .031 .019 14 + + + + .011 + + .003 15 --- + .032 .009 --- .002 .009 .004 16 .051 .141 .052 030 .069 .031 17 + + + .009 --- + .008 18*Midland .070 + .023 .009 + + .003 Odessa + + 19 --- .036 + .025 ... .026 .032 .027 20 + --- .042 .001 + --- .002 + 21 + + + .005 + .004 22 --- --- + + --- --- + + 23 + .052 + .003 + .017 + .001 24 --- .032 + .016 --- .015 + .008 25 048 .052 + .047 026 .033 .033 .026 26 --- .018 + .012 ... .005 .011 .007 27 .022 + .059 .023 024 .021 .021 28 .131 + .041. .074 .018 .024 .013 j9 .067 --- .184 .069' .035 --- .061 .036 30 --- --- + + --- --- + + 31 --- + + + + + + 32 --- + + + --- + .011 .004 33 032 + .035 .028 .014 .005 .014 .013 34*Brownsville + + .005 .001 + .007 .007 .002 McAllen + + 35 .028 ... .050 .031 .030 .012 .027 36 013 + .008 .036 .011 .026 37 + + + --- + + + AVERAGE .043 .011 .018 .036 .029 .009 .013 .025 208 TABLE D.10 (Continued) SWIMMING POOLS, 1980 TO TAL SWIMMING POOLS, 1990 TOTAL METRO CITY- TOWN- URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per, Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,060 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .013 .052 .025 .619 .008 .125 .062 .031 2 --- .011 + ... .025 + .013 3 --- .047 .069 058 .061 .185 .120 --- .046 .025 .055 ... .106 .058 4 023 5 .024 .005 + .014 .060 012 .028 .045 6 ... + .002 .001 --- + .003 .001 + + .007 028 .022 .022 7 010 8 + + + --- + + + 9 --- + .014 .003 - .010 .035 .018 10 .031 .059 .062 .034 .074 .137 .148 .082 11 .070 --- .109 .070 .173 ... .249 .174 12 + + .010 ..002 + .021 .050 .022 13 .034 + .040 .025 .092 ..009 .101 .066 14 .018 .006 + .008 .042 .030 .183 .626 15 --- .014 .013 .014 --- .033 .029 .032 16 .031 --- .074 .033 .082 --- .163 .08.5 17 .010 ... + .008 .021 ... + .019 + .004 .023 060 + .015 18*Midiand .011 012 Odessa + + 19 --- .030 .051 .035 ... .031 .141 .054 + --- 20 + ... .003 016 .004 .014 21 .012 --- + .009 .028 --- + .021 22 + + --- --- .037 .037 23 + 018 + .001 054 042 + .050 24 --- .016 '.004 .010 .037 .029 .033 .050 .029 063 .087 .111 .065 25 029 .038 26 --- .005 .021 .010 --- .009 .046 .020 27 029 + .018 .025 067 .007 .038 .059 28 .019 + .027 .013 .038 .004 .060 .028 29 .040 --- .051 .040 .103 --- .118 .103 30 --- --- + + + + 31 --- + + + ... + .019 .015 32 --- .032 .014 .026 - .018 .029 .022 33 .014 .015 .015 .014 031 .034 .034 .032 34*Brownsville + .011 .003 .002 + + + + McAllen + + 35 .035 --- .015 .033 .092 --- .037 .087 36 --- .041 .018 .032 ... .104 .041 .081 37 --- + + + --- + + + AVERAGE .035 .014 .019 .031 .090 .036 .058 .081 209 > w C.) C.) w (4 C4 w (4 Pi pa K) hi tj pq K) < CD m ED 0,9 a CL > > 0 Cb C) :3 CL mr Is + W m 160 164 18 'POJ + WO: Ul OW @j 0 0 .4 . . . tj 0 li (D 0 C" ha 0 W (n A w to 0 a) 0 r cCL 6 CL + to w cn + 1" 8 14 1 IJ + 08 11 1 W 0 M w On Co w 0 @j e.) WtN(n 00 -4 W co (A 00 r 0 Co 0) C, & = 0 E. , -I po + + + + + 8 . I > o W Cn @j CD c4 0)808 2wwwmow 8 w 0 n- CJ 00 (D CD o cn - L" CO 0) CO to pj OD z cc OA CCL W bbbb :-bbbbb:Abbb:- 0 + 0 W (n tJ + K) Lq 00 K) j 4b 0 0) fQ N) 8 K) 0 4@b 8 0 W IJ M 0 W M I. @n -4 -pb D. j - CJ w 0 Nj p. w -40 N) 0 -4 CY) 0 CA) OD c > > CD 0 m 3 0 cc CAZ F OS.3 0 (ODO . . . + + + + 10 -03"- a Ul al 0 CL c 0 CD r 82-. cc CL .0 > r + + + + +'+ + . . . . . . + . . . . . . 0 c m 0 c z a m r > 0 zo om c, S. CL m a> 0r hi 00 L n0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . co c a Z OA > > + @4 . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z 0 -4 -4 V-V> > c0 m r m TABLE D.10 (Continued) PLAYGROUND ACRES, 1975 PLAYGROUND ACRES, 1980 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBANAREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Rbquired Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .036 + + .025 .033 + + .023 2 + + + + + + 3 + + + + + + 4 012 --- + .010 060 --- + .055 @5 + + + + .081 + + .047 6 ... + + + + + + 7 033 + + .022 .044 + + .030 8 --- + + + + + + 9 + + + --- + + + 10 059 .008 + .054 .071 .023 .065 11 .026 - + .026 .112 ... + .111 12 + + + + + + + + 13 + + + + + + + + 14 + + + + + + + + 15 + + + ... + + + 16 .065 + .063 070 + .068 17 .046 --- + .040 .077 --- + .067 18*Midland + + + + + + + + *Odessa + + 19 --- + + + ... + + + 20 + --- + + + ... + + 21 + --- + + + ... + + 22 --- --- + + --- --- + + 23 + + + + + + + + 24 + + + --- + + + 25 Oil + + .011 060 + + .058 26 ... + + + --- + + + 27 + + .035 .003 + + + + 28 + + + + + + + 29 + --- + + .074 ... + .073 30 + + - + + 31 + + + ... + + + 32 + + + + + + 33 + + + + + + + + 34*Brownsville + + + + + + + + *McAllen + + 35 .026 --- + .023 .048 ... + .043 36 + + + --- + + + 37 --- + + + --- + + + AVERAGE .023 + .001 .018 .062 .001' + .048 211 TABLE D.10 (Continued) PLAYGROUND ACRES, 1990 PLAYGROUND ACRES, 2000 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres rianAcres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .060 + + .042 .038 + + .026 2 ... + + + + + + 3 --- + + + --- + + + 4 .147 ... + .137 .160 --- + .150 5 .202 + + .116 .265 + + .150 6 --- + + + --- + + + 7 .095 + + .066 .108 + + .078 a --- + + + --- + + + 9 + + + --- + + + 10 156 .037 + .138 .166 .032 + .142 11 .256 --- .008 .253 .279 --- .041 .275 12 + + + + + + + + 13 + + + + .384 + + .157 14 + + + + .074 + + .023 15 --- + + + --- + + + 16 168 + .161 .194 + .183 17 .177 --- + .156 .303 + .275 18*Brownsville + + + + + + + + *Odessa + + 19 --- + + + --- + + + 20 + --- + + + --- + + 21 + + + + --- + + 22 --- + + --- --- + + 23 .090 .008 + .079 .203 .027 + .181 24 --- + + + --- + + + 25 126 + + .120 .143 + .007 .136 26 --- + + + --- + + + 27 .075 + .022 .063 .226 + .033 .183 28 + + + + + + + + 29 .183 --- + .182 .226 --- + .224 30 --- + + --- --- + + 31 ... + + + --- + + + 32 --- + + + --- + + + 33 + + + + + + + + 34*Brownsville + + + + + + + + *McAllen + + 35 .092 + .084 .135 ... + .124 36 --- + + + --- + + + 37 --- + + + --- + + + AVERAGE .153 .002 .001 .120 .184 .003 .003 .145 212 TABLE D.10 (Continued) BASEBALL/SOFTBALL FIELDS, 1970 BASEBALL/SOFTBALL FIELDS, 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Tend Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per R equired Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + .057 + .003 + .185 .075 .030 2 .084 + .051 --- .090 + .054 3 --- + + + ... + + + 4 + + + + --- + + 5 + + + + + + + + 6 --- + + + --- + + + 7 + + + + + + + + 8 --- + + + --- + + + 9 + + + + + + 10 + + + + + + + + 11 + --- + + + + + 12 + + + + + + + + 13 + + + + + + + + 14 + + + + + + + + is + + + ... + + + 16 .207 --- .576 .213 .102 --- .360 .108 17 + ... + + + + + 18*Midland + + + + + + + + *Odessa + + 19 + + + + + + 20 + --- + + + + + 21 + + + + + + 22 --- --- + + + + 23 + + + + + + + + 24 + + + + + + 25 + + + + + .108 + .003 26 ... + + + + + + 27 + + .264 .021 + + + + 28 + + + + + + + + 29 + .231 .003 + ... .873 .009 30 --- + + --- --- + + 31 --- + + + + + + 32 --- + + + ... + + + 33 .264 .225 + .216 066 + + .045 34*Brownsville .030 + + .012 .027 + + .012 *McAllen + + 35 .042 --- .309 .075 .039 --- + .036 36 + + + + + + 37 --- + + + + + + AVERAGE .030 .012 .015 .027 .012 .009 .012 .012 213 TABLE D.10 (Continued) BASEBALL/SOFTBALL FIELDS, 1980 TOTAL BASEBALL/SOFTBALL FIELDS, 1990 TOTAL METRO . CITY TOWN - AREAS. METRO CITY - TOWN-@ URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + .312' .201 .069 + .336 .495 .135 2 --- + + + --- + + + + + --- + .021 .009 4 + + + + --- + + 5 + + + + + + + + 6 + + + ... + + + 7 + + + + + + + + 8 --- + + + --- + + + 9 ... + + + --- + + + 10 + .069 + .003 069 .225 .036 .075 11 + + + + --- + + 12 + + + + 13 + + + + 14 + + + + 15 --- + + + ... .369 .102 .198 --- .549 .213 16 093 17 + + + 18*Midland + + + + *Odessa + + + + 19 --- + + + + ... + + 20 + + + + ... + + 21 + --- + + + + 22 + + + + + + 23 + + + + + + + 24 ... + + + + .243 .234 .012 25 + .090 .045 .003 26 + + + 27 + + .087 .009 + + .129 .018 28 + + + + 29 .015 ... + .015 .114 ... + .114 30 --- --- + + 31 --- + + + 32 ... + + + + + .042 .105- .057 + .084 33 057 34*Brownsville .057 + + .027 .036 + + .018 *McAllen + .153 + .141 35 .072 --- + .063 + + + 36 --- + + + + + + 37 ... + + + AVERAGE .012 .012 .018 .015 .036 .036 .051 .039 214 TABLE D.10 (Continued) BASEBALL/SOFTBALL FIELDS, 2000 TOTAL PICNIC TABLES, 1970 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per. Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + .258 .510 .135 + .037 + .003 2 + + + --- + + + 3 ... + .216 .099 ... + + + + .243 + .009 .272 4 009 .109 + .008 5 + + + + + 6 + + + --- + + 7 + + + + + + + + 8 + + + --- + + + 9 + + --- + + + .165 .099 .133 + .233 .133 10 084 .195 + 1.165 .008 11 .093 .... .123 .093 + .024 12 + + + + .097 + + 13 + + + + + + + 14' + + + + .169 + + .045 15 - - + + + --- + 16 .183 .537 .204 .288 .794 .295 17 + + + + + 18*Midiand + + + + + 099 + .007 19 *Odessa .+ -+ .003 + .002 .165 + .132 20 + ... + + + + 21 + + + + 22 ... --- .021 .021 ... --- .011 .011 23 + + + + + .027 + .002 24 --- .114 + .066 --- + + + 25 .063 .234 .177 .069 .004, .432 .835 .024 26 --- + + + ... .085 + .056 27 + + .099 .015 056 .051 .220 .069 28 + + .054 .015 1.357 .007 + .692 29 .126 --- + .123 .097 --- 1.018 .106 30 --- --- + + --- ... + + 31 --- + + + + + + 32 --- + + + ... + .059 .020 33 .114 .051 .042 .096 + + + + 34*Brownsville .078 + + .039 .117 + .018 .282 *McAllen + .645 35 .189 - .315 .198 .384 ... .180 .359 36 --- 048 + .030 ... + + -+ 37 - + + + --- + + AVERAGE .078 .060 .087 .078 1.000 .025 .047 084 ___j 215 TABLE D.10 (Continued) PICNIC TABLES, 1975 TOTAL PICNIC TABLES, 1980 TOTAL METRO TOWN UFIBANAREAS _ MFTRQ_ CITY - TOWN MZ=AREAS - -' ---QLX-- - Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Populatio n 1 + .077 + .006 + .052 + .005 2 + + + --- + + + 3 --- + + + + + + 4 .059 --- + .054 .057 --- + .052 5 + .022 + .002 + + + + 6 ... + + + + + + 7 + + + + .008 + + .006 8 --- + + + --- + + T 9 --- + + + --- + + + 10 .041 .115 .088 .046 .035 .102 .074 .040 11 + --- .222 .002 + --- .188 .002 12 .031 + + .007 .029 + + .007 13 + + + + + + + 14 .016 + + .005 .019 + + .006 15 --- + .007 ... + .013 .003 16 .052 --- .135 .053 041 --- .123 .043 17 + --- + + + + 18*Midland + + + + + + + *Odessa + + 19 .036 + .028 .040 + .031 20 + --- + + + + 21 + ... + + + + 22 .020 .020 --- --- .018 .018 23 + .034 + .002 + .021 + .002 24 + + + + + 25 .037 .146 .204 .042 .033 .130 .194 .038 26 ... .015 + .011 .014 + .010 27 .007 .020 .044 .012 .047 .010 .044 .043 28 .125 .060 + .079 .121 .064 .039 .082 29 .030 --- .073 .031 .067 --- .140 .068 30 --- + + + 31 ... + + + + + 32 + .014 .005 --- + .013 .005 33 + + .005 .001 + + .023 .004 34*Brownsville .019 + + .008 .017 + + .008 *McAllen + + .616 35 .023 .051 .026 .018 + 36 + .010 .004 --- + .018 .007 37 ... + + + + + AVERAGE .024 .020 .014 .022 .024 .021 .018 .023 @116 TABLE D.10 (Continued) PICNIC TABLES, 1990 PICNIC TABLES, 2000 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .056 .122 + 051 .030 .108 .016 .036 2 --- + + + + + + 3 --- + + + + + + 4 116 .012 .109 .092 .025 .088 5 + .022 + .002 + .23 + .002 6 --- + + + + + + 7 .053 + + .037 .041 + + .030 8 --- + + + + + + 9 ... + + + --- + + + 10 .061 .189 .125 .073 .040 .162 .106 .054 11 .045 --- .280 .048 .048 ... .214 .050 12 .027 + + .007 .050 + + .011 13 + .013 + .004 . + .018 + ..006 14 .028 + + .008 .028 + + .009 15 --- + .023 .005 --- + .040 .008 16 095 .194 .100 .071 .142 .075 17 + + + + --- + + 18*Midland + + + + + + + + *Odessa + + 19 --- .069 + .055 --- .079 + .064 20 + - + + + --- + + 21 +. + + + --- + + 22 --- --- .040 .040 --- - .041 .041 23 + .041 + .003 + .013 + .001 24 --- + + + + + + 25 .054 .238 .323 .064 .044 .183 .220 .052 26 --- .024 .017 --- .025 + .019 27 .039 .010 .054 .039 .050 .021 062 .050 28 .229 .114 .109 .150 .256 .116 .107 .148 29 .020 --- .197 .022 .038 --- .201 .039 30 ... --- + + --- --- + + 31 + + + + + + 32 + @025 .009 --- + .023 .008 33 + .042 .036 .011 + .050 .038 .012 34*Brownsville + + + + + + + + *McAllen + + 35 .033 --- .050 .037 .029 --- + .027 36 --- + .038 .014 --- 004 .033 .015 37 --- + + + - + + + AVERAGE .050 .048 .043 .049 .044 .049 .044 .045 217 TABLE D.10 (Continued) FOOTBALL/SOCCER FIELDS, 197.0 FOOTBALL/SOCCER FIELDS, 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY JOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres r -anT rcr -es Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + .285 .103 .042 + + + + 2 --- + + + --- + + + 3 --- + .125 .061 ... + + + 4 .509 --- .217 .479 .065 .213 .080 5 + .084 .015 .011 + + + + 6 --- .023 .277 .087 --- + + + 7 .171 .163 + .137 + + + + 8 + + + + + + 9 ... + .049 .008 --- + + + 10 186 .395 .296 .194 .034 .125 .103 .042 11 .209 --- 2.470 .224 .049 --- .281 .053 12 + + .163 .034 + .008 + .004 13 .072 + + .034 + + + + 14 .198 .243 .175 .213 + + + + 15 --- + .953 .015 - + + + 16 .182 --- 1.463 .201 .015 --- + .01.5 17 .239 --- + .201 + --- + + 18*Midland .065 + .247 .065 + + + + *Odessa + + 19 --- .011 .027 .015 --- .038 + .030 20 .160 - .258 .179 + --- + + 21 .517 --- .175 .414 + --- + + 22 - --- .167 .167 --- --- + + 23 .357 .201 .156 .331 .042 + + .034 24 --- .179 .114 .144 --- + + + 25 .175 .258 2.603 .198 .046 .068 .281 .049 26 --- .129 .255 .171 --- + + + 27 049 + .334 .068 + + + + 28 .194 + .175 .133 + + + + 29 .638 --- 2.345 .654 .053 --- + .053 30 --- --- .110 .110 + + 31 --- .239 .068 .106 --- + + + 32 --- + .448 .152 --- + + + 33 .315 .190 .167 .274 034 + + .023 34*Brownsville .445 + + .228 + + + + *McAllen .129 + 35 .714 - .391 .676 .049 --- + .046 36 --- 209 .338 .258 - + .152 .057 37 ... .023 .228 .084 --- + + + AVERAGE .224 .084 6209 .201 .034 .011 .019 .030 218 TABLE D.10 (Continued) FOOTBALL/SOCCER FIELDS, 1980 FOOTBALL/SOCCER FIELDS, 1990 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per. Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + + + + + .141 .068 .030 2 + + + --- + + + 3 + + + --- + + + 4 .057 --- + .053 .114 ... + .106 5 + + + + + + .015 .004 + + + --- + 6 + + 7 + + + + + + + + 8 --- + + + ... + + + 9 + .194 .034 --- + + + 10 .027 + .076 .027 .049 .095 .087 .057 11 .049 --- .205 .049 .084 --- .346 .087 12 + .023 + .015 + + .061 .011 13 + + + + + + + + 14 .057 + + .015 + .034 + .015 15 --- + + + --- + + + 16 015 .156 .019 .030 --- .087 .034 17 + + + + --- + + 18*Midland + + + + + + + + *Odessa + + 19 --- + + + .030 + .023 20 + --- + + + --- + + 21 + --- + + .053 --- + .038 22 --- --- + + --- --- + + + + .065 .125 .182 .076 23 038 .034 24 --- + .057 .027 ... .042 + .023 25 038 .057 .452 .042 .065 .114 .448 .068 26 --- + + + ... + + + 27 015 + + .011 28 .030 + .065 .027 + + + + 29 .057 --- + .057 .084 --- + .084 30 --- --- + + --- --- + + 31 --- + + + --- + + + 32 --- + + + + + + 33 .015 + .068 .023 .038 + + .027 34*Brownsville + + + + + + + + *McAllen + + 35 .091 + .080 .080 ... + .072 36 --- + + + 068 + .042 37 ... + + + --- + + + AVERAGE .034 .008 .030 .030 .057 .027 .034 .049 219 TABLE D.10 (Continued) FOOTBALL/SOCCER FIELDS, 2000 GOLF HOLES, 1970 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN-AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + + + + 1.650 + 3.830 1.980 2 --- + + + --- 3.060 2.660 2,910 3 --- + + + --- + 3.290 1.640 4 .072 --- + .068 1.940 --- 2.860 2.040 5 + + + + 2.560 1.750 .350 1.740 6 ... + + + --- + 2.200 .560 7 + + + + 1.340 2.160 + 1.220 8 + + + --- 1.150 .770 .920 9 --- + + + --- 1.320 1.520 1.360 10 .027 .061 .061 .034 1.840 3.620 3.100 1.940 11 .057 --- .308 .061 4.090 --- 6.500 4.110 12 + .019 + .011 .370 + + .090 13 + + + + 3.100 .880 1.530 2.060 14 .046 + .053 .030 2.940 1.290 .770 1.570 15 --- .008 + .008 --- 1.100 + .790 16 .019 ... .057 .023 .960 --- 2.890 .990 17 .182 --- + .163 1.410 + 1.200 18*Midiand + + + + 4.540 + 2.620 3.150 *Odessa + 2.810 19 --- + .106 .023 --- 2.260 + 1.550 20 + + + 2.540 --- + 2.030 21 + ... + + + --- + + 22 --- + + --- -7. + + 23 .068 + + .057 .550 1.590 .820 .640 24 ... + + + --- + + + 25 .049 .061 .334 .053 2.630 3.640 5.990 2.680 26 ... .076 + .057 --- .680 .670 .670 27 .011 + .061 .019 1.490 2.450 2.200 1.630 28 + + .034 .008 3.080 1.010 1.370 2.130 29 .065 --- 1.015 .072 1.610 --- 3.090 1.630 30 - + + --- --- 1.160 1.160 31 + + + --- + + + 32 --- + + + --- + 590 .200 33 .019 .065 + .023 1.220 2.000 1.530 1.380 34*Brownsville + + + + + .660 A80 .120 *McAllen + + 35 .103 ... + .095 .430 --- .260 .410 36 --- .061 .099 .076 --- + + + 37 --- + + + --- + + + AVERAGE .042 .019 .042 .038 2.280 1.090 1.110 1.990 220 TABLE D.10 (Continued) GOLF HOLES, 1975 GOLF HOLES, 1980 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS, METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acr7s- Land Acres Land Acres, Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population. 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .64 + .74 -.61 .650 1.040 .890 .740 2 --- .60 .88 .71 --- .640 .880 .740 3 --- + 1.55 .73 --- + 1.470 .710 4 1.21 --- 1.11 1.20 1.260 --- 1.060 1.240 5 1.53 + .85 1.19 1.930 .880 .830 1.470 6 --- + .69 .19 --- + + + 7 .77 .47 .+ .58 .870 1.030 + .740 8 --- .59 + .24 --- .610 + .250 9 --- .55 .71 .59 --- .660 1.010 .720 10 1.43 1.97 1.35 1.44 1.570 2.270 1.580 1.610 11 2.02 --- 2.22 2.02 2.290 --- 2.680 2.290 12 .52 + + .12 .820 + + .180 13 2.12 .56 .74 1.31 2.890 .270 .720 1.020 14 .81 .42 .31 .50 1.220 .610 .310 .700 15 --- .56 + .42 --- .640 + .490 16 .77 ... 1.20 .77 .810 --- 1.230 .820 17 .93 --- + .80 .920 + .800 18*Midland .36 + .35 .24 .750 + 1.080 .550 *Odessa .14 .290 19 --- .93 .35 .80 --- 1.130 2.000 1320 20 .55 --- + .46 640 --- + .530 21 + --- + + .160 ... + .120 22 --- - + + --- --- + + 23 .99 .45 .35 .90 1.250 .830 + 1.130 24 --- + + + .390 + .210 25 1.13 1.28 1.49 1.14 1.200 1.340 1.790 1.210 26 .31 .64 .42 --- + + + 27 9.37 AO .71 1.05 1.310 .400 .580 1.160 28 .59 .63 .64 .61 .680 .620 :520 .620 29 .99 --- 2.91 1.01 1.210 ... + 1.200 30 --- --- + + --- ... + + 31 --- + + + + + + 32 --- + + + --- + + + 33 .56 .46 .20 .49 .540 .420 .370 .500 34*Brownsville + .68 .26 .08 + + + + *McAllen + + 35 .26 --- + .23 .360 --- + .320 36 --- .06 + .04 --- .110 + .680 37 --- + + + --- + + + AVERAGE 1.19 .43 .45 1.02 1.370 .570 .530 1.180 IL 221 > < 6;Z8 ZA i: i@ zt 8wwj 0 m 4. wm m .9 ca 09 5' m r, 3 CL 2 > > C) m CL :5. m r J2 E.. CL + + i >m 0 @j 00 b. 0) 00 W w C" tj o t a) (D ccb 0 m r 'cc 0 0.0 = 0 c CL W + w + w + + 14 bo Ek cn . . . w Z4 L) @j b :N bo ia + bo :D. 4 o co ca co a, . . .00 00 to 0) to -4 W D. to 00 v c 0 0 0 r m M (n ,a r W -4 'T pj W fj 'o 0 + + + + . . . . . . + bo + "Do :@j + .Ih. @) ;a 'C@. io ;,) bo 0 w ww cool ci 0 @4 0 w V c z 0 3 C cc OM 0 E.> (4 pa fli rQ t@ cr W W N3 K) - .01 z 0 + :N + + w :4 bo b b) k:) 10 - @n in in b) + "4 :.j in '00 in0L. -1 CD Ul w ci w Ln 00 0 NO ooomoo-N)WOOIJ@4N) -(4(4-Ul -0 > > cM > w 'D M r r, m m 0 m r 54 Pi p :N K) K)- WCONPP tj CL -cn -co -0 -W - w 2 . cq D. 0 ca CD (n -01)., -0 > m + + 1, : : : I o a C" Sn 8 104 0 (on WO .-Ollooolo 00 0. 00 0 m 0 . . . c o CD 0 m r o,-,- 0 CL M-I'J w K3 0 K) w 0 b@ b@ 'm in i. bo b b %.A io in zo :g@ "y > E? + + + co + : m 0 CL to 0 N) cn CD %J W 0 M cn 0 0 L" 00 000-0 -0000.0000 0.000 c 0 rn 0 z 0 m K) 0 CL 0 W-1 8 M m> 0 CL 0 0 00 000000 0 0 0 00000 00 r-moz F 0 c OM -w-w w "-4 W"W-- 0E. > -4 z 0 14 C" w +ww+cn- WOW"W -Now -mm-mmwww j8mwo 0 0 00 00 000000000000 000000000000 d 000 M-01>> cc 9 @ ;Im m > U) TABLE D.10 (Continued) TENNIS COURTS, DOUBLES, 1970 TOTAL TENNIS COURTS, DOUBLES, 1975 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + + + + + + + + 2 --- + + + + + + 3 + + + --- .001 + .001 + .002 .006 --- + .005 4 003 5 + .011 + .00.1 + + + + 6 --- .001 + .001 --- + .002 .001 7 + + + + + + + + 8 + + + + + + + + + ... + .001 + + + .045 .030 .013 + .028 10 482 11 .116 --- + .116 .089 --- + .088 12 + + + + 13 + + + + + 14 + + + + 15 --- .001 + .001 ... .007 + .006 --- 003 .080 .048 --- .016 .048 16 082 17 + + + 18*Midland + *Odessa + 19 --- + + .+ --- .004 + .003 20 + --- + + + 21 + ... + + + 22 --- --- + + + .012 + .019 013 .012 23 022 .007 24 --- + + + ... .002 + .001 .003 .158 .130 .028 + .126 25 163 .035 26 --- .004 + .003 ... .004 + .003 + .001 .019 .011 .001 .009 .010 27 023 28 .006 + .003 .003 .002 .001 .011 .004 29 .020 --- + .020 .012 --- + .012 30 ... ... .004 .004 ... --- + + 31 + + + 32 --- + + + + + .008 .010 + + .007 33 012 34*Brownsville .001 + + .001 .001 + + .0.01 *McAllen + + 35 .006 - .003 .005 .005 --- .013 .006 36 - 004 + .002 --- .003 + .002 37 --- + .002 .001 --- + + + AVERAGE .077 .002 + .058 .059 .003 .001 .046 L 223 TABLE D.10 (Continued) TENNIS COURTS, DOUBLES,1980 TOTAL TENNIS COURTS, DOUBLES, 1990 TOTA L METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN - URBAN AREAS. Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population I + .002 + + + .015 + .001 2 --- + + + --- + + + 3 ... .004 + .002 --- .006 + .003 --- + .006 .014 --- + .013 4 007 5 + + + + + + + + 6 --- + + + --- + + + 7 + + + + + + + + 8 + + + --- + + + 9 --- + .007 .001 --- + .006 .002 10 .023 .018 + .021 .042 .042 .012 .040 11 .085 --- .007 .084 .188 ... .020 .186 12 + + + + + 005 + .002 13 + + + + + + + + 14 + + + + + + + + 15 --- .006 + .005 ... .011 + .009 16 .031 --- .016 .030 054 .033 .053 17 + --- + + + ... + + 18*Midiand + + + + + + + + *Odessa +. + 19 --- .007 + .006 .014 + .011 20 + - + + + --- + + 21 + --- + + + --- + + 22 --- ... + + --- ... .001 .001 23 .015 + + .013 032 .004 + .028 24 --- .005 + .003 --- .009 + .005 25 .100 .031 .008 .097 .174 .064 .010 .168 26 --- + + + --- .003 + .002 27 .099 + .004 .007 .013 + .008 .011 28 + .009 .009 .005 + .018 .016 .012 29 .011 - + .011 .021 --- + .021 30 --- + + --- --- + + 31 + + + --- + + + 32 --- .001 + .001 --- .004 + .002 33 .009 + + .007 017 .005 + .013 34*Brownsville .001 + + .001 + + + + *McAllen + + 35 .005 --- + .004 .014 --- + .006 36 --- .003 .001 .002 --- .002 .004 .003 37 --- + .007 .002 --- + + + AVERAGE .050 .004 .001 .040 .103 .012 .004 .08 3 224 TABLE D.10 (Continued) TENNIS COURTS, DOUBLES, 2000 BASKETBALL COURTS, FULL, 1970 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS. Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Am, Land Acres T-an-d'rc-res Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 0+ .015 .006 .003 + .004 + + 2 --- + + + + + + 3 --- .008* + .004 --- + + + 4 .015 - + .014 .005 --- + .005 5 + + + + + .004 + + 6 + + + --- + .029 .007 7 + + + + .007 .017 + .007 8 ... + + + + + + 9 --- + .009 .003 --- .002 + .002 10 .038 .059 .018 .038 026 .010 .016 .025 11 .207 ... .032 .204 + --- .022 + 12 + 008* .002 .005 .004 + .001 .001 13 + + + + + + .002 .004 14 + + + + .021 + + .006 15 --- .014 + .011 ... + + + 16 .056 --- .045 .056 + ... .019 + 17 + --- + + .003 ... + .003 18*Midland + + + + .010 004 + .008 *Odessa + .010 19 --- .018 + .014 --- + + + 20 + --- + + + --- + + 21 .003 --- + .002 + .002 + 22 --- ... .004 .004 --- --- .009 .009 23 .044 + + .038 036 + + .031 24 ... .011 + .006 - + + + 25 197 .075 .011 .190 + + .017 + 26 --- .003 .002 1.002 --- + .067 .022 27 .018 + .009 .015 + + .002 + 28 + .025 .022 .018 + + .001 + 29 .020* --- + .020 + .015 + 30 --- --- .003 .003 --- --- .006 .006 31 --- + + + ... + + + 32 --- + .001 .001 + .003 .001 33 020* .011 .002 .016 + + + + 34*Brownsville + + + + + + + + *McAllen + + 35 .009 ... + .009 .009 ... .005 .008 36 --- 006 .007 .006 --- + .002 + 37 --- .002 + .002 ... + .003 + AVERAGE .118 .017 .008 .096 .005 .001 .003 .004 225 TABLE D.10 (Continued) BASKETBALL COURTS, FULL, 1975 BASKETBALL COURTS, FULL, 1980 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + + + + + + +0 + 2 + + + --- .006 + .004 3 --- + + + --- + + + 4 .022 ... + .020 .024 --- + .022 5 + + + + + + + + 6 --- + + + --- + + + 7 + + + + + + + + a ... + + + --- + + + 9 --- .015 + .012 ... .015 + .013 10 .009 .020 .032 .010 009 .014 .008 11 .002 --- + .001 .020 --- .011 .002 12 .014 012 + .010 .013 .016 .012 13 + + .007 @002 + + + + 14 .026 + .001 .007 .027 + .003 .009 15 --- + + + --- + + + 16 + + + .002 --- + .002 17 + --- + + + --- + + 18*Midland .018 + + .008 .019 .017 + .049 *Odessa .006 .006 19 --- + + + --- + + + 20 006 --- + .005 .010 + .008 21 + + + + .009 .002 22 ... --- .008 .008 ... + + 23 035 + + .029 .040 .034 24 ... + + + --- + + + 25 005 .001 .015 .005 .015 .015 .024 .015 26 ... + + + --- + .013 .004 27 + + + + + + .006 .001 28 + + .004 .001 + .002 + .001 29 .016 .058 .016 .021 ... + .021 30 - + + --- + + 31 + + + ... + + + 32 ... .001 + .001 --- .006 + .018 33 + .001 ..024-- .004 + .025 .037 .009 34*13rownsville + + + + + + + *McAllen + + 35 .008 --- .020 .009 .005 --- + .004 36 ... + + + ... + + + 37 --- .001 .012 .004 --- .013 .011 .013 AVERAGE .006 .003 .004 .005 .009 .006 .003 .008 226 TABLE D.10 (Continued) BASKETBALL COURTS, FULL, 1990 BASKETBALL COURTS, FULL, 2000 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land-Acres Land Acres Land Acres rand-Acres rand-Acres Land Acres -La-ncrA-cres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .002 .007 + .002 .018 + + .012 2 --- .015 + .008 --- .009 + .005 3 --- + + + ... .037 + .020 + 4 054 + .050 056 .053 5 + + + + + + + + 6 --- + + + --- + + + 7 .002 + + .001 + + + + 8 --- + + + ... + + + 9 --- .032 + .022 --- .033 + .021 10 016 .026 .017 .014 .026 .024 .016 11 .004 --- .006 .004 .003 ... .008 .003 12 .027 029 + .022 .032 .037 + .028 13 + + .014 .003 + + .007 .002 14 .055 + + .016 .060 + .003 .020 15 --- .003 + .002 --- + + + 16 005 - .003 .005 .005 --- .006 .005 17 + + + + + + 18*Midland .028 .017 .024 016 + .015 *Odessa .016 .013 19 ... + + + --- + + + 20 016 ... + .014 .014 --- + .012 21 + --- + + + --- + + 22 --- --- .006 .006 ... --- + + 23 089 + + .077 108 + + .095 24 --- .001 + + --- .002 + .001 25 031 .034 .039 .031 .034 .037 .035 .034 26 --- .005 + .003 --- .012 + .009 27 + + + + + + .003 .001 28 + .020 + .009 + .024 + .011 @29 .044 --- .053 .044 .047 --- 053 .027 30 --- --- + + --- ... .005 .005 31 + + + --- + + + 32 --- .005 + .003 ... .005 + .003 33 + .052 .070 .017 002 .060 .081 .020 34*Brownsville + + + + + + + + *McAllen + + 35 .029 --- .020 .015 .014 ... + .013 36 + + + + + + 37 --- .021 .022 .021 --- .023 .020 .022 AVERAGE .019 .014 .007 .017 .020 018 .008 .019 227 TABLE D.10 (Continued) BOAT RAMPS, FRESHWATER, (2-0 lanes per ramp), 1970 BOAT RAMPS, FRESHWATER, (2.0 lanes per ramp), 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres and Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .019 + .032 .020 .008 + .030 .012 2 --- .034 + .020 --- + .053 .022 3 ... .040 .040 .040 --- + + + 4 024 --- + .022 .079 --- + .006 5 .024 + .020 .022 .012 + .020 .014 6 --- .030 + .023 --- + + + 7 .026 + .046 .026 + .056 + .008 8 --- + .047 .028 --- + + + 9 --- .026 .061 .032 --- + .042 .010 10 .002 + .094 .005 013 .040 .032 .014 11 .013 ... .260 .014 .012 --- + .012 008 + 12 .112 .019 + .037 .020 .010 13 .023 .035 .046 @032 + + + + 14 .020 .025 + .017 .019 + + .006 15 --- .026 .070 .038 --- + + + + --- + 16 018 .017 .011 .011 17 .037 --- .109 .048 + --- + + 18*Midland .020 + .040 .020 .022 + + .007 *Odessa .016 + 19 --- .016 .032 .020 - .012 + .010 20 030 .041 .032 008 + .007 21 .023 + .017 + ... + + 22 --- - .053 .053 --- + + 23 029 .064 .049 .032 .017 + .042 .018 24 --- + .018 .010 --- + .019 .010 25 018 .028 .018 .012 + .089 .012 26 --- + .080 .026 ... .037 + .025 27 .011 .008 014 + .042 .013 28 .020 + .028 .016 .010 .012 + .010 29 .007 --- + .007 .010 ... + .010 30 --- --- + + ... --- + + 31 ... + .043 .034 + + + 32 --- + + + --- .035 + .023 33 .012 + .026 .012 .011 .028 + .011 34*Brownsville .024 + .029 .019 + + + + *McAllen .013 + 35 .017 --- + .016 + --- + + 36 ... + + + --- + .048 .018 37 --- + + + ... .028 + .020 AVERAGE .017 .016 .030 .018 .011 .008 .011 .011 228 a) LU C%l cc C%l m o m w C4 co Co LD 0) CD 0 a) C4 r co m co C4 co 0 V (D 0 0 0 cli (D cv) IT Cl) rl -T N m N N N N - N N - M - - (N 0 N 0 - M M - N N N N N + M + + cv)- M 0 z 0 0 00000 OOOOOOqq q qqqqct(:iqc!c!ctq C! C! 4R q q 0 11 cr 0 cri c 0) C-L CL E .0 CL Z to 0 co Cl) to 10, LC) CN v r- C*4 C.) C.) C*4 N C4 C@ co N m N N N co F" co 1*' r, 0) cn 0 0 a. q C! q Ct q q R C! q q Ct Mo fj we C-L uj < .0 LU 0 CL 4m r, C4 0 N 0 V) M CN C-1 C'J Iq N 00 C14 N N CN N m N tn C4 CL 0 -0 00 coo 0 ... 0 0 0.. 0 0 .00 0 LL IL to CL _j CC Or- o 0 cc 0) COL CF) 00 U') q (7) to q -t** C.) 0) 10 C'j C', Lo Lf) :3 LU CL CN C14 C*j N N 6 04 Cl) 04 + + 04 CN C, N CN + + CN CN co 0 .00 0 C, C, C.3 cr c 0 .0 LU cc 0no = 7 + + + + @t @2 :1 @2 @2 -0 v + + C@ + + 2 @2 + + CL CN N 0 0 0 C14 o z 0 0 000.0000000 0. q q Ct Ci C! C! Ct q q q rty 4) CL .0 CL Z 0 CL CL -T co q Lf) (3) m 0 3 . 1 N + + + + ?. 2! . (D + r, . . . 04 to . . . . + + + Nr . . . ... . . cq C*q oulao 0 0 00 0 0 co Ct cr m CL LU < Cl) > N CD C'4 (D CD 00 00 0 LU rL cc 0 + + + + + + + + ci < LL CT CL 0) CL c 0 m 0 cc CL CL 13 0 T + c@ @2 c4 c-4 00 CD c@ LL, .0 C,4 + + 0 o o 0 0 . . . 0 <Ea- 0.-0 r CFO m 0 i CC ca LLI c a) < 'D 2 0 Lij N M V 0 CD N W 0 0 N M q Lf) CD r, 00 G) 0 C4 M IT LD CD r, 00 (7) 0 CN Cl) q Lr) Co rl > - - - - - - - - - - N 04 N C4 CN Cl) M Cl) Cl) Cl) Cv) M Cl) > w w w C4 ci w !@3 (4 ti t@j tj tj ta NJ N3 - - --- - - - - - - < '-J 0) 0 -1:- W N) 0 (D 00 IJ CD Lll .4 W W. 0 0 00 -4 0) 0 4@. CJ PQ 0 CD 00 @4 0) Ul P@ W N) m g 09 m 0 0- & > > CD D = .1 F m CD w = CL co r (D CA Cs. CL PQ K) N jh- hj N) K) N) + Gj N) K3 N) co W M cin 00 0 co Ln 0 (D En o 10 > -mr V Or CL p 0> 0 -n 00 0 000 0 0 0000.00 0 1 + +tiw+ "+"N)K)+ (D C.) hi rl) . . . . K3 + w C) COL < M (D 0- cyl 4S oo c.) Ul -4 0). (D ol (n cn 13 r- > m m m r (D 03 N A Z, 0 C r- b 0000 0 Vo 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 CL + + +-++N)+"-++W . . . . . . . wp. + + - 4 W 4 +,+ + - + @j + CIO .4 0 M 00 0 W %J - -00 * z m r c MI, I= m CL to > > 00 00 i@oooc)bbb b*o' b b bb *0 b b, b i PJN)W+,J-o 00000 00+ 0 + + + "w8z;@JMK)L2+8+ " 20 LTI -Db 0 0")8 a)(Ni"026,000mm mooo" LNA Ln co 4 (D -P@ Ul 0) 13 > )> r m m > 0 m r 'L" bo '4 b K3 b) in b ij @.j "J in CL a) Ln W 0 " tj @j w + N) + + cj > m .0 1010 cooo c, 4- 0) 00 Pi co M N) 00 00 R , --I m-0 CD c x CD 4 0 o a- 0 m r cc CL w w K3 :.j bo i4 :c@, > E! + + Db + + + On q -, > + + + 0 M 4 OD 4% N) 0) CY) 41 A z 0 Q > CA m U) 5CL. in L3 tj 0+ li 4 co co a) 0 0 w + + bo 00 Ul li + N) + oc4co4+ + CY) li + -N m m Ln + + li -4 a N3 00 -IN a) co 0 00 00 00 41 CY) 4, N) t-j c CD CL + -0 + + 0 ZO + 1 4 cy) 4 (n N) 0 WWK30m4wo cn 0 W 4 M M 0 N) 4@ W M 4 W CD co 0. > > co M r m > TABLE D.10 (Continued) WALKING TRAILS, 1975 WALKING TRAILS, 1980 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY _L(LW N URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 AOO Population 1,000 Population 1,000. Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .344 + + .240 .312 + .360 .296 2 --- .240 .352 .288 --- .256 + .144 3 --- .224 + .120 --- .224 .232 .224 4 + --- .448 .040 200 .424 .224 + .192 .328 + .136 .232 5 .248 704 ... .216 + .152 6 --- .208 + .152 088 .416 + .120 7 .176 .376 + .176 ... A88 .336 A08 8 --- + .328 .192 9 --- .352 + .264 --- .264 + .216 .528 .432 .296 .288 .360 + .272 10 280 --- + .232 .200 ... .432 .200 11 .232 12 + + + + 13 .152 .224 .592 .280 .152 .216 .288 .208 14 .126 .256 .248 .216 .120 .248 .248 .208 15 --- .296 + .224 .384 .400 .392 ... .480 .072 _056 - - 7 + .056 16 064 17 .368 + 320 .368 ... + .320 118*Midland .288 + + .144 .304 664 + .248. *Odessa .112 .232 19 --- .080 + .064 --- .152 .264 .176 20 .112 --- + .096 .168 ... + .144 21 + + + + 22 --- + + 23 088 + .280 .096 .104 .328 + .120 24 .104 .256 .184 --- .208 .120 .168 25 .280 + .592 .272 .456 + A80 A40 26 --- .488 + .336 ... .448 + .312 27 .360 .320 .848 .408 344 .320 .464 .352 28 .200 .080 + .120 .200 .072 .136 .136 29 .376 --- 2.328 .392 .376 --- + .368 30 --- --- + + --- ... .888 .888 31 --- + + + + + 32 --- .232 + .152 ... .224 .424 .296 + .160 .224 .312 + + .224 33 280 .152 + + .136 34*BroWnsville .224 + + .168 .216 *McAllen .200 35 + --- + + .096 --- + .088 36 --- + + + + + 37 --- .368 .464 .400 ... .360 + .256 AVERAGE 224 .168 .152 .208 264 .184 .136 .240 231 TABLE D.10 (Continued) WALKING TRAILS, 1990 WALKING TRAILS, 2000 TOTAL TOTAL @METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN- Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres and Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .568 .296 .296 .480 .304 + .504 .312 2 .592 .352 .480 --- .368 + .184 3 .384 + .200 --- .496 + .264 4 .544 --- .384 .536 .552 --- .784 .568 5 .648 + .768 .648 .488 .720 .624 .552 6 ... .216 + .144 --- .224 + .136 7 256 .456 + .240 256 .552 .392 .312 a --- .528 + .232 --- .560 .456 .504 9 .600 + .408 --- .744 .136 .512 10 .544 .896 1.024 .592 .472 .840 .816 .528 11 .480 ... .480 .480 .408 --- .648 .408 12 + + .128 .024 + + 1.912 .400 13 .312 .400 .560 .400 .320 .568 .816 .528 '14 .224 .520 .048 .416 .296 .528 .576 .472 15 --- .800 .360 .704 --- .872 .960 .888 16 .096 --- .184 .104 .080 --- .360 .096 17- .512 --- + .456 .512 --- + .464 18*Midland .496 + + 368 .400 .648 + .392 *Odessa .480 .512 19 --- .328 .248 .312 --- .056 .224 .088 20 .192 --- + .160 216 + .176 21 .112 --- + .080 .184 --- + .144 22 --- --- + + --- --- + + .768 .264 .240 .424 + .248 23 480 .528 24 --- .352 + .200 ... .384 .600 .472 25 768 + .624 .744 .824 .064 .936 .800 26 --- .760 + .544 .808 + .600 27 .720 .328 .872 .712 .776 .664 1.048 .808 28 .424 .104 + .184 .232 .080 .072 .120 29 .824 --- + .816 .864 --- + .856 30 --- --- + + --- --- .840 .840 31 ... + + + + + + 32 ... .648 .392 .560 ... .616 .728 .656 33 640 + .128 .488 .712 .136 .112 .560 34*Brownsville .376 + + .224 .208 + + .160 *McAllen .144 .176 35 + + + + --- + + 36 --- + + + --- .128 + .080 37 --- .680 .440 .608 --- .616 .816 .672 AVERAGE .520 .344 .280 .480 .512 .352 .480 .488 232 TABLE D.10 (Continued) BICYCLING TRAILS, 1970 BICYCLING TRAILS, 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Tand Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .192 + .216 .184 .168 .496 .200 .200 2 --- + + + --- .240 + .144 3 --- + .264 .128 --- .224 + .120 4 + ... .456 .048 + --- + + 5 + + + + .080 + + .048 6 ... + + + --- .208 + .152 + + .112 .088 + + .056 7 176 8 ... .464 + .184 --- + + + 9 --- .352 + .288 --- + + + 10 .488 .832 .624 .504 .280 .784 .216 .296 11 .248 --- + .243 .144 --- .592 .152 12 + + + + + .056 + .032 13 .040 + .616 .160 + + .296 .072 14 .136 .432 .368 .336 .128 .168 .248 .184 15 --- .176 + .128 --- .152 .432 .224 16 .080 --- + .080 .008 --- + .008 17 .128 --- + .104 .248 + .216 18*Midiand .136 1.264 + .176 .288 + + .144 . *Odessa .104 .112 19 --- + + + --- + + + 20 .064 1.088 .272 .056 --- .280 .096 21 040 + .024 + --- + + 22 --- --- + + --- --- + + 23 .064 + + .056 .168 + + .144 24 --- .128 .240 .184 --- .208 .126 .184 25 256 + .688 .248 .264 .288 + .264 26 --- .272 + .176 --- + + + .200 + + .160 27 176 .328 .352 .200 28 .136 .112 .184 .136 .200 .080 .168 .152 29 .224 --- + .224 .216 --- + .216 30 ... + + --- + + 31 + + + --- + + + 32 --- + + + --- + + + 33 120 + + .080 .208 + + .144 34*Brownsville .160 + + .072 .072 + + .032 *McAllen .024 + 35 .032 + .024 + + + 36 --- + + + --- + + + 37 ... .192 + .136 ... + + + AVERAGE .208 .144 .152 .192 .168 .104 .072 .152 233 TABLE D.10 (Continued) BICYCLING TRAILS, 1980 TOTAL BICYCLING TRAILS, 1990 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS, METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres rand Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per R equ ired Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .160 + + .112 .264 .296 .296 .272 2 --- .256 + .144 --- .296 + .160 3 --- .224 + .112 --- .568 + .304 4 .160 - + .144 .512 --- .768 .536 5 .080 + + .048 .160 + .512 .280 6 + + + ... .216 + .144 7 .176 + + .120 .256 + + .176 8 + + + + + + 9 --- .088 + .072 --- + + + 10 .272 .544 + .296 552 .992 .832 .592 11 .152 + .152 .336 --- .480 .336 12 + + + + + + + + 13 + + .288 .072 + + .560 .136 14 .240 .248 .248 .248 .664 .440 .048 .512 15 --- .384 + .296 --- .304 .720 .392 16 .008 --- + .008 016 .184 .024 17 .120 + .104 .512 --- + .456 18*Midland .152 + + .096 .376 656 + .312 *Odessa .112 .320 19 .152 + .012 --- .064 .248 .104 20 .056 --- + .048 .064 --- .336 .112 21 + + + + + + 22 --- --- + + ... --- + + + + .208 560 + + .488 23 240 24 --- .312 .240 .280 --- .528 .552 .536 25 .296 .360 .480 .296 .592 + .624 .568 26 --- .448 + .312 .384 + .272 .232 .224 376 .328 .520 .392 27 216 .320 28 .136 .216 + .136 .280 .376 .096 .280 29 .240 --- + .232 .496 --- + .496 30 --- --- + + ... + + 31 --- + + + --- + + + 32 --- + + + ... + + + 33 .248 + + .176 .488 + + .352 34*Brownsville .072 + + .032 + + + + *McAllen + + 35 + --- + + + - + .072 .440 .248 .368 36 --- 352 .288 .328 37 --- + + + --- + .440 .120 AVERAGE .184 .168 .080 .176 .400 .240 .264 .368 234 TABLE D.10 (Continued) BICYCLING TRAILS, 2000 NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1970 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN MAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Lind Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per. Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population I POO Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .192 .464 .248 .232 .016 + + .008 2 --- + + + --- + + + 3 --- .664 .192 .448 --- + + + + + --- 4 552 .520 + + 5 .160 + A96 .280 + + + + 6 --- .224 + .136 - + + + 7 256 + + .192 .024 + + .016 8 --- + + + --- + + + 9 --- + + + --- + + + 10 .504 1.096 .816 .576 024 + + .024 11 .328 --- .328 .328 .024 ... + .024 12 + .040 + .024 + + + + 13 + + .272 .064 .040 + + .016 14 .592 .448 .464 .496 .032 + + .008 15 --- .872 .320 .760 --- + + + 16 .016 ... + .016 032 + .032 17 .384 --- + .344 .032 --- + .024 18*Midland .400 .648 + .336 .032 + .520 .112 I*Odessa .344 .024 19 --- .112 .224 .136 --- + + + --- .016 ... + 20 144 .376 .176 .016 21 .088 ... + .072 .040 --- + .024 22 --- + + --- + + .008 + + 23 704 + + .616 .008 24 --- .608 .600 .600 - + + + 064 + + 25 640 1.184 .704 .664 .064 26 --- .648 .472 .600 --- .272 + .176 .008 + + 27 464 .328 .656 .488 .008 28 .312 .456 .072 .312 .136 + + .072 29 .528 --- 2.13@6 .536 .024 ... + .024 30 --- + + --- --- + + 31 + + + --- + + + 32 --- + + + --- + + + 33 584 + + A32 .272 + + .192 34*Brownsville .104 + + .056 .016 + + .016 *McAllen + .024 35 + --- + + .032 --- + .024 + 36 496 .424 .472 + + 37 --- .152 + .112 --- + + + AVERAGE .424 .416 .264 .408 .040 .008 .016 .032 235 TABLE D.10 (Continued) NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1975 NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1980 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres 7and Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + + + + + + + + 2 + + + + + + 3 --- + + + + + + 4 + ... + + 040 + .040 5 .024 + + + + + + + 6 + + + + + + 7 + + + + + + + + 8 --- + + + --- + + + 9 --- + + + ... + + + 10 064 + .216 .072 072 .184 + .072 11 .040 ... + .040 .056 .432 .056 12 + + + + + + + + 13 + + + + + + + + 14 + + + + + + + + 15 --- .152 + .112 + + + 16 + --- + + .008 --- + .008 17 + --- + + .120 --- + .104 18*Midland .144 + + .096 .152 + + .096 *Odessa .112 .112 19 --- + + + --- + + + 20 + + + + --- + + 21 .144 --- + .104 + --- + + 22 --- + + + + + + .024 + + + + 23 032 24 --- + + + --- + + + + + .112 .136 + J952 .136 25 120 26 --- + + + ... + + + 27 + + + + + + + + 28 .136 + + .054 .136 + + .056 29 + --- + + .016 --- + .016 30 --- + + --- + + 31 ... + + + --- + + + 32 --- + + + --- .224 + .144 33 .312 + + .224 336 + + .240 34*Brownsville + + + + + + + + *McAllen + + 35 + --- + + + --- + + 36 --- + + + --- + + + 37 --- + + + --- + + + AVERAGE .056 .008 .008 .048 .072 .016 .024 .056 236 TABLE D.10 (Continubd) NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1990 NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 2000 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per. Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,600 Population 1 AOO Population 1 AOO Popul6dan 1 AOO Popu lation 1 AOO Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 + .144 .032 + + .128 .024 2 --- + + + --- + + + 3 + + + --- + + + 4 120 ... + .112 .104 + .096 5 + + + + .080 + + .048 6 + + + + + + 7 + + + + + + + + 8 ... + + + + + + 9 --- + + + --- + + + 10 .144 .200 .184 .144 .144 .256 .248 .168 11 .120 --- + .112 .120 --- .160 .120 12 + + + + + + .320 .064 13 + + + + + + + + 14 + + + + + + + + 15 --- .200 + .160 --- .240 + .192 16 008 + .008 .008 --- + .008 17 + + + .128 --- + .112 18*Midland .248 + + .160 .136 + + .112 *Odessa .160 .168 19 .064 + .048 --- + + + 20 + ... + + + + + 21 .112 .336 .160 .184 + .144 22 --- --- + + --- --- + + 23 + + + + .024 + + .016 24 + + + ... + + + 25 .288 + .624 .280 .320 + .232 .304 26 --- + + + --- + + + 27 + + + + + + + + 28 .216 + + .072 .152 .040 + .056 29 .032 --- + .032 .040 + .040 30 --- + + --- ... + + 31 + + + --- + + + 32 --- + + + - .208 + .128 33 720 .152 + .544 .824 .264 + .640 34*Brovvnsville + + + + + + + + *McAllen + + 35 + --- + + + + + 36 --- + + + + + + 37 --- + + + ... + + + AVERAGE .144 .032 .040 .120 .168 .048 .056 .144 237 TABLE D.10 (Continued) COMBINED WALKING, BICYCLING, NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1970 COMBINED WALKING, BICYCLING, NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres !:and Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .696 .152 1.096 .736 .512 .496 .200 A48 2 --- .056 .088 .072 ... .480 .352 .424 3 --- .064 .528 .296 .440 + .232 4 + - 1.368 .144 + --- .448 .040 5 + 176 + .016 .328 704 .136 .288 6 --- .200 .144 .184 ... .416 + .304 7 .624 .088 + .416 .264 .376 + .232 8 ... .920 .080 A16 ... + .328 .192 9 --- 1.680 .104 1.392 - .352 + .264 10 1.248 1.656 1.240 1.256 .616 1.312 .864 .656 11 1.016 --- .864 1.016 .416 --- .592 .416 12 + 064 .+ .032 + 056 + .032 13 .312 .232 1.840 .648 .152 .224 .888 .352 14 .136 1.200 1.224 .928 .256 .424 .504 .400 15 --- .352 .464 .384 .600 .432 .352 16 688 .768 .688 072 .480 .080 17 .248 --- .184 .240 .616 + .536 18*Midland .808 1.896 1.568 .792 .728 + + .384 *Odessa .304 .336 19 --- + + + --- .080 + .064 20 .200 --- 1.360 .432 .168 .280 .184 21 .152 ... .368 .216 .144 --- + .104 22 ... --- .088 .088 + + 23 .128 424 + .136 280 + .280 .264 24 --- .376 .480 A32 - .344 .384 .360 25 760 .048 1.368 .744 .656 .288 .592 .648 26 1.080 .536 .896 - .488 + .336 27 1.016 1.312 1.056 1.048 .560 .320 .848 .568 28 1.160 .464 .368 .800 .544 .168 .168 .336 29 .816 --- .616 .816 .592 --- 2.328 .608 30 --- --- .920 .928 --- --- + + 31 .128 + .024 + + + 32 ... .240 .472 .320 --- .232 + .152 33 584 + .352 A72 .800 + .160 .592 34*Brownsville .472 + .384 .320 .304 + + .200 *McAllen .184 .200 35 .112 .208 .128 + + + 36 --- + .088 .032 --- + + + 37 ... .584 .480 .552 .368 .464 .400 AVERAGE .744 .496 .528 .688 .448 .280 .240 .456 238 TABLE D.10 (Continued) COMBINED WALKING, BICYCLING, NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1930 COMBINED WALK ING,BICYCLING, NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1990 oOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS , METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 AOO Population 1,000 Population 1 .472 + .360 .408 .832 .600 .728 .784 2 --- .512 + .296 --- .888 .352 .640 3 --- .440 .232 .344 --- .952 + .504 4 400 --- .424 .408 1.176 --- 1.152 1.176 + .136 .280 5 .808 + 1.272 .928 6 --- .216 + .152 --- .440 + .296 7 .264 .416 + .240 504 A56 + .416 8 --- .488 .344 .408 ... .528 + .232 9 --- .352 + .288 --- .600 + .408 10 632 1.0(38 .472 .640 1.232 2.088 2.040 .1.336 11 .408 --- .856 .416 .936 --- .968 .936 12 + + + + + + '128 .024 13 .152 .216 .576 .272 .312 .400 1.112 .536 14 .368 .488 .488 A56 .880 .960 .952 .936 15 --- .768 .400 .680 1.304 1.080 1.256 16 080 --- + .072 120 --- .368 .136 17 .616 - + .536 1.024 ... + .904 18*Midland .600 .664 + .440 1.120 656 + .840 *Odessa .464 .960 19 --- .304 .264 .296 --- .456 .496 A64 20 224 + .192 .264 .336 .272 21 + --- + + .216 --- .336 .248 22 --- --- + + --- --- + + 23 352 .328 + .328 .768 .528 .768 .752 24 ... .520 .360 .448 --- .888 .552 .736 .25 888 .360 IA32 .872 1.648 + 1.256 1.584 26 --- .896 + .616 --- 1.144 + .824 27 .560 .640 .696 .576 1.088 .656 1.392 1.104 28 .472 .280 .136 .336 .920 .480 .096 .536 29 .632 - -- + .624 1.352 --- + 1.344 30 ... --- .144 .888 --- --- + + 31 + + + + + + 32 ... .448 .424 .440 --- .648 .392 .560 33 896 .040 + .648 1.848 .152 .128 1.384 34*Brownsville .224 + + .176 .376 + + .224 *McAllen .216 .144 35 .096 --- + .088 .168 --- + .072 36 352 .288 .328 --- 440 .248 .3(58 3T --- .360 + .256 ... .680 .880 .736 AVERAGE .528 .360 .232 .472 1.072 .616 .568 .968 239 TABLE D.10 (Continued) COMBINED WALKING, BICYCLING, NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 2000 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1 .496 .464 .880 .568 2 --- .368 + .184 3 --- 1.168 .192 .712 4 1.208 --- .784 1.176 5 .735 720 1.120 .880 6 --- .448 + .280 7 .520 .552 .392 .504 8 --- .560 .456 .504 9 --- .744 .136 .512 10 1.128 2.200 1.888 1.264 11 .856 --- 1.136 .856 12 + .040 2.232 .496 13 .320 .568 1.080 .592 14 .896 .976 1.040 .968 15 --- 1.984 1.280 1.848 16 .104 --- .360 .112 17 1.016 --- + .928 18*Midland .994 1.304 + .840 *Odessa 1.024 19 --- .168 .448 .224 20 .360 --- .376 .360 21 .456 + .360 22 --- --- + + 23 960 .424 .880 24 --- .992 1.192 1.080 25 1.784 1.240 2.344 1.768 26 --- 1.456 472 1.208 27 1.240 .992 1.712 1.296 28 .704 .576 .144 .488 29 1.432 --- 2.136 1.432 30 --- --- .840 .840 31 --- + + + 32 --- .824 .728 .792 33 2.128 .400 .112 1.632 34*Brownsville .312 + + .208 *McAllen .176 35 + --- + + 36 --- ..624 .424 .552 --- indicates regions not having metros or cities 37 - .768 .816 .784 + indicates land acres were not required or land acres required per 1,000 population were less than .001. AVERAGE 1.104 .816 .808 1.040 Midland*'Odessa, Brownsville, and McAllen are metro areas. Figures for cities, towns, ____j and total urban areas are listed adjacent to Odessa and Brownsville were applicable. 240 TABLE D.11 REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF URBAN INCREMENTAL LAND RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS, PER THOUSAND POPULATION FOR SELECTED SALTWATER URBAN OUTDOOR RECUAMNAL FACILITIES BY CITY-SIZE, 1970-2000 BOAT RAMPS, SALTWATER (2.0 LANES PER RAMP) TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Land Acres Required Per Required Per Required Per Required Per Year Region 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 1,000 Population 24 --- .037 .018 25 .007 + .007 1970 27 .005 .005 28 .154 .086 + .104 33 .112 .602 174 34 .029 .005 Average .008 .007 .029 .011 24 --- .017 .010 25 .001 .022 .002 1975 27 .005 .004 28 .020 .012 + .014 33 .011 .048 .014 34 + + Average .001 .002 .002 .001 24 + + 25 + .001 1980 27 + 28 .010 + .020 .008 33 .010 .044 .013 34 + + Average 001 + .004 .001 24 --- + + 25 .002 + .002 1990 27 + + 28 .022 .016 + .014 33 .016 .038 .017 34 + Average .001 .001 .002 .001 24 .012 006 25 .001 .010 .001 2000 27 + + 28 .035 .012 + .014 33 .017 .067 .022 34 + + Average .001 .002 .004 .001 indicate Region 24 does not have a metro area. indicates (by region) metros, cities, or towns not having saltwater access. + indicates land acres were not required or land acres required per 1 000 population were less than .001 . 241 > < @4 (7) Lrl w K3 -j M kl) M 0 :1) cl) 0 CL CL > CD M CL -0 -0 CA 0 Cl) r-j Ul C.) -0 tj - w 8 COY) rl) 00 a") M + + @D L) + + + + + :C@ + b) Lrl ia + (11 al co 4@- 00 00 @j 4b C4 li (71 00 U, 0)- 0 z 0 r o0ow o o o. 00 0 ul ul 0 V 0 > ho V w 4 co pi ii + 0 + + Ln @pl b b) @P, + + + + + + + + + W CO ZO @4 0 ha 0 W t,3 Ila Ln WW- z M ca M I- o M n 0 M 0 0 c > CA) Zi w -C, C.) OD K) V r 00 PO :p, Fn p 9 P, -1 :lj @j L" + + " 0 to + + + -1 00 co . . . . . . @4+ ++ + + 11) + bo > z U0, 0 co Z 0 Z OM CE I M OZ 0 0 > 0 0.0 M r 00 -n bo -1 00 0 0 "Wow"4w M M > --I +tJ- btj . . . oiniQto izn++to :0-:@ *4 b) + Zn + i:. + + L, Zn -4 bo 10 W b W -4 M co @j "c4,j-,js 01@4 Ln j 0) cn wwwow-w > 0 C')> ZO M > > M M r- > M M > 0 L"n w o 0 o ES43;M 8 4' o o 0 "0 0 Wj o o 4 K"):@ M M z rn t,) -n V W > 0 MJ2 M, c Cl) -rl) a) 0) 008 0 Ln al c- W - L,) '++il): boto ZD + + + - - - '. - 0.< A 0 . . . (D OD oD @C) to :; 0ol CL CA M 0 0 @j 0 N) OD w (h o Ln 0 7r M rn co Z .4 Zb w i:4- CD '0 V) + + + + + + bo CD LT, li C4 CY) N) 4 (7) -j 0o" 0 M rn co M C) r M CA 0 > 0 CD 0 z to 00 00 (p 8 00 A 0-0 5, 00 IN w (n rl) @j 4 4 .0 r q w w wo s 0 V @n + W tj b) Ln io + + b) @o, bo:-. @) . . b) 1D + + b + :.j + 14 LD . . . @j + :N:... + w 'o CD 00 (D W 4 ul ha (n 0 co rn 0 cn li -N cn 00 Ln 4. (7) w 00 0 * @j V Z ul a 3 co 0 c r 00 00 CO pj 'i w 0 @j L" w w li "NJ) 4 oz@'04,j @4 +bbo @j zn bo + + b Z. b@, + K) -" L@ @ io -- L" ip + + + -, :@, -- %, @ *L" b) - ..i ul Ln - 0 00 W -4 Ln @J -J CJ Ul fJ 4 CD Ul IIJ @4 cn - co > 0 0 z 3 > > M M 0 co 0) %'4 o o w -W 8 (o '08 o W '0' -1 0") 0-0 4 NO LN o 0 o o '0' t"D 2 pr X cy) CN CN @r cl) M 0 00 CD V M - M M r, 0 N;; 0 0 a 0 m 0 0 N r- 0 1* r, 0 C.) C.) CN C4 (14 N - C4 V@ N N - N cli N 0 .2 M@r a WWNM;@Nmw r-Z;v m C.) CL to 'q: cl It. CR r,@ CR cn It r,@ -: CR N q Cl . V@ Cli v! C4 q V: q LQ cn C,4 + Ci - 73 C-) '-T '-t 'W M N C4 W S C4 It I@t V 00 W 00 00 M M 00 V W 3 CL C*4 - 0 -T M CD M N (D - -T - - CN M C14 Ict r- cli cr 0 0 0 C14 00 M r- 0 0 00 V C4.0 Ln 0 cl) 0 0 M CD 0 (D 0 04 r- Cl) M - W V G) r- V 0 - 04 CN - CN N N - C-4 .7 CN C-4 Z .0 3: 'E r 0, a, 0 -0 0 ca v r, CD v m 0 a co 0 (0 0 r, v 00 m m 0) CN m r, v Cl) 0, rl% 14: LQ + + Lq rl@ CR OR + + a I + m + rl% Cl f4t a? (q 4,0 , q + m r,: Cq 10-S N oo - N w N rl w w m r, CN W ;r M 0 0 CO Cl) A m t a -T V 00 C14 M N m N N CN C4) 04 V N N m 0 cr 0 0 z C-4 M M 1- 0 V 0, W rc r, 00 1-d' 0 N 4 owoo N C,4 c 0 0 ca Cl) 0 a C4 r, r- C-4 ca r, U) cr) + + 5@ ED r' ;Z r' C4 C4 + W . (D a? Ui Lq t6 cd c6 cd w r, m ui w vi v LO co 00 W CD LO CN V) P% z 0 CN N N C.) C14 w r- 04 , m v N 17 'D CL CL c 0 : 0) (42 (D 0 cn CN w r-0 L@? CO N C4 m Cj 0 LU 0 0 W 0 r. CD 0 U) (7) LD LO 0 v C;) to r- Go C', C4 00 w CL .9 q M ID CO OR 14: CR rt C? -: r@ r@ q cl al q = Lf) L6 0 Lf) - (7) - - W r, -0 00 OD r, cv) a) cd CL C4 Lf) @2 (D M CD Cli Lf) N r, 04 CD CD 0 CL 0 L) @t LO C-4 S2 t2 v 0 N 0 w N m w N " w cli CN CN C4 - C14 - N N Cl) C4) cli CO CN LU LU -E 0 z -0 .2 0 CO 0 CD CO M rl CO rl M 0 - 0- - r, C4 Cl) 40 M 0 V W 0 N C14 M 0 < cq q q q (I q + q q r.@ cq . cl V: cl cl CR + q r% C'4 cl -: q cl c'! CR V. Cl LQ + "t m 000 M - Ln C2 M 'I w (1 cc) w r, CN r, 0 CY) 0 m 0 - LO lir m CL C14 C14 CN C14 CN C*4 CL no 0 X r 0 M W 0 'cCr4 0 0 W- V C04M Co N00 W MC4 000 NN r@ N- V- 0- M 0 CW4 N- W- F4 0 Z V 0 >. 0 '4 0- 0 wwgm- 00 Cl) N r- (D CD N r, Moog m 0 C.) 0 CL .2 + -: r% + Cl + + r*@ C"! . P% It + q -: + + r.@ (p q q OR q + cl 0@ c! + " C4 0 rl cli r, 0 0 CD N r, U') Cl) 0 m 0 C2 :i M N M -i CL Lf) Cl) - 00 cl) - Ln 0 (D 0 2 , 0 .9 CL CL IL CD X r z m N N . . . w 0 r- oo 0 w 0 m 0 > 'E 0 0 c) CN C, Lf) N 00 LO CN N r- r, rl r- m q + + cq CR CR q Lq + + + + 6 C6 L6 v Lf) 0 00 CN v) 00 C.) 00 CN C-4 C-4 Cl) go 0 IL CL X Lf) C;R 0 0 Lr) r- 00 C%4 co 0 0 m 0 CC @- k a c LU >. .2 00 0 (D M C'4 U) F, 0 .2 CL + + + + r,@ cl! . . . LQ 14: cq P@ .7 Lq CR cl (I q m r-Z o6 r, m C14 w Cl) m r, 00 0 CD C*q M N C14 C14 Cl) cli > m w M a < cu 0 '0 cr 0 w C*4 m V M CO r, 00 0 0 @2 :1 t2 @2 0 j; C14 C, g M R P@ 00 R 0 N M IC L CO r- > CN C14 N CN C%4 CN m C13 m cl Cl) M M < > < IJ (M Cn J@b LJ N3 0 00 li m (31 w Pi 0 CD m 09 0 CL 2 0 m > > C) m D CL 0 00 ha (0 C.3 li Ln 00 @j pj 'i w Ul CF) Ln 4 "a c 91 -j p P:- , !" . @j @j p p :11 PO :41 @j li a) P@ c lu el) 0+ bo bo b (D (D r) OD N) + bo to CD L" a) + (n 0 0 in C"D CO -4 . . . li w li rl) N) 0 0 I'S C.) w j 0) -j M 0 ul A CL M 0 W CJ a) ED (n En 00 o w m -.j "r-jo-w M 0 Ln N) cli .0, - li ci C4 (0 fn M a) cyl Ka 0 CO -N al 0 0 li 0 (.n E p 50 @D PO F) P, W cu CD + N) (.nOO4+ ci w m j :P, %j Ln bo :P, iD !j6+K)b)bo 'C.) in 0 4 A. li Ul Lrl o) 00 CA) w . . . N) (D Ij IJ IJ Ul K3 CD @j 0 0 0 00 m 0(l) 4h@ 0) 0 0 Ln N3 W . . . j @n FO -,40ww- mow z Q X M -010 0 0 0 0) w w fj '1 0 w 4 0 f') 4 OY m w Db w 00 00 .0b 'a r- -P@ cn (D 00 N) 4 li " (n N) a) (3) w NJ to w w PJ 4 (n a) 0 0 t E. + L) w + *00 '00 "1 k *cn +b) in + + zo W Ln :C@ b) :N zo :pb . . . br) :.j i,) + b) j W Ul to K3 W - -4 li W w 0 co Z. -4 4 C li j Ll. 0 CL z o 6; 'Ln "IJ2 8 wc@ o w 8 j o i@ cwO aw) w co4"O"WmZ-o:@o00=00"o@n :,3 w -0-00 0 M c -4 li co ri W :@ 0 4:. M o j 4@, W 0 = to j !2 W j L2 M j M 4 Ln "a a w -40 N) 00 w tj N) tj co E. + b @j in + bo 'W zo bo ZO @j p Z,!D PPO:N ZD"" b to bo @j 0 b) m omm N) m li 0 (n al li 8 -4 0 iOD ro '00 m ca m 0 ., w 00 -4 (0 En 0 mo(nwww-jw-mw Ul N) w 0) 4 0 (7) w 0 Z > 00 m w m 0 li Ul '4 C'08 o 4 8) '0'0 2 N '0' w C"n (o @o "0 w "W o '"J WW ZS N) 4 (a X 0 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 CIS . . . (D 0 m 0 m 0 + + + . . . . . . + + . . . . . . M 0 C) m m oooo::000000:::o 0 c z > > !Q 0 m . . . . . . . . . . . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m 00 60 0 * Z -4 m 2) 000 0000000-00000000 000000000000000000 = X -0 'a > 0 c 0 m + + . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N) K3 CY) CD (2 > 0 z M r m coN) 0000000-P-00000000 00-0000000OW0000001 > -oorwoooow-oooom.*o OOOOOOWOOONOOOOO 000 LU Le) -j M v 44 N 0 @- z 0.2 0- C, Lo r- 0 r, cck cc) CL -2 04 LO a Cl) Lo . . . . co . . . . . . LO . . . + + + + + + + co CD to + CL pa. CL w CD 0 0 cl@ 0 r. w CL .2 w - =. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L) @ rL CD0 CL CL 13 z Jld 0 000:00000-:0000::o 0:::Oooooo::Oooo :00 > C 00 C.) CL CL2 . . . . . . . . C'A + + . . . . . . + + 0 CL CL 9L .X r, C-4 cc (D0 Q) LLI C.- 0 . . . Im CN CL2m 0 m CD r, P, + +,: + + + co m- 2 or, + + C 00 0 0- 0 C 0 0 CL CD0 CL IL 0 C14 7 c woomoorloo".*0000-cno 00000OW000000000 (000 LU LU -j 0 z 0.2 0 LO 0 C*4 't to 0 c) +2 . . . . . . . CN + + F- CL Cq + + + + CN + + Lo CN . . . . co . . . . . . .. S 0 0. CL 0 IL .X 000000000000000000 00,000000-0000000 OCDO Lf) P, z CY) c 0 00 ce P 0 'r- LU CL .2 = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 .. . . . . . . . . . CL 0 CD 0)0 CL CL z X n c 0 cc 000:00000-:0000::o 0:::O(DOOOO::Oooo :00 > > 0o 0 'r@ I Oo 0.2 .+ + + + + . . . . . . + + + CL 00 CL CL 00 0 Lf) C'4(0000 -Cv)00 :00:0:CD :000 :000(0: 0 00 w I.- -L 10 CN C, ID M c)(D Lf) Co C') + m Lo C4 . . . + + + + + + + + CN C! rL u 0 41- CL > Ul c M. c - 0 ca 3 ;i < cu 0 .2 0 LU Im * C14 Cl) t LO CO r. 00 (3) 0 @2 @2 @2 0 r@ W 0 rl Cl) It V) CD r- > C4 C%l CN CN CN M (1) Cl) V) M C,) < j 0) Ul LJ tj > www 00 li Lrl C.) hi 4:h m 09 m 0 CL > C) m CL cl) 0 M + + Zj COD + + + + . . . Ul CD 0) Ul 0) .4 OD - 8 m 0 0 f'J 00 00 0 0 A. al a) to CJ 0 13 + + V 0 + + + + + + + +.+ + Pi 00 . . . 0 CD + . . . . . ... . . . N) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . U@ N) co Z . . . . . . . Cl)+;3+'J++++ 0 w to 00 0) cy) -4 K) z o > -q co > > r- M r m m 0 @3 K) @13 'W K) N) -N 0 + + + + 0 CD + Ij 0) a 0)0) Ul CD Q) W w CD CY) OD m 0 co 0)'o @. 0 m m 0 0 -1 m 0 K) 0 0 0 (n 0 Cn IJ 0 0 M 00 W W M T > () m 0 13 @ , E,@ CD + + + + + + + + Pi 0 W > > 0 0 C, b b .0 @ 0 . . . . . . . . . . w + 0 . . . ... . . . . . . . . . v. . . . . . . . . . . C @ a m G) -4 m 0 a 0 Z 0 m pr + + tj . . . . . + C4 Do + + + Ul C)) Ln W @j Ln 00 z 0 m > TABLE D.12 (Continued) BASEBALL/SOFTBALL FIELDS, 1970 BASEBALUSOFTBALL FIELDS, 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS __METRO----- CITY T9.&N URBANXREAS Fields Fields Fields Fields Fields Fields Fields Fields Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 + 0 .019 3 + 0 .001 7 + 0 .062 1 .025 3 .010 5 2 --- .028 2 + 0 .017 4 --- ... .030 3 + 0 .018 2 3 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 4 + 0 --- - + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 5 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 6 --- --- + + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 0 8 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 9 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 10 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 11 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 12 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 14 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 15 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 16 069 2 .192 1 .071 2 .034 1 .120 2 .036 1 17 + 0 --- - + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 18*Midland + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *Odessa + 0 + 0 19 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 20 + 0 - --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 21 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 22 --- ... + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 23 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 24 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 25 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .036 2 + 0 .001 8 26 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 27 + 0 + 0 .088 3 .007 5 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 28 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 29 + 0 .077 4 .001 7 + 0 .291 1 .003 7 30 --- --- - ... + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 31 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- - + 0 + 0 + 0 33 .088 1 .075 1 + 0 .072 1 022 2 + 0 + 0 .015 3 34*Brownsville .010 4 + 0 + 0 .004 6 .009 4 + 0 + 0 .004 6 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .014 3 --- --- .103 2 .025 3 .013 3 ... --- + 0 .012 4 36 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- - + 0 + 0 + 0 37 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .010 .004 ..005 .009 .004 .003 .004 .004 247 TABLE D.12 (Continued) BASE BAL L/SOFTBAL L FIELDS, 1980 BASEBALL/SOFTBALL FIELDS, 1990 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY 0Rd.AN AREAS Fields Field, Fields Plelds Tields Fields, -Fi.lip" Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 + 0 .104 1 .067 2 ..023 2 0 .112 1 .165 2 .045 3 2 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 3 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 .007 6 .003 10 4 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 5 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 6 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 8 ... ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 9 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 10 + 0 .023 3 + 0 .001 8 .023 5 .075 3 .012 5 .025 6 11 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 12 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 14 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 15 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 16 .031 1 ... --- .123 1 .034 1 066 1 --- --- .183 1 .071 1 17 + 0 ... + 0 + 0 + .0 --- ... + 0 + 0 18*Midiand + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *Odessa + 0 + 0 19 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 20 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 21 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 22 --- --- ... --- + 0 + 0 --- ... --- --- + 0 + 0 23 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 24 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 25 + 0 .030 2 .015 4 .001 8 + 0 .081 2 .078 3 .004 9 26 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 27 + 0 + 0 .029 3 .003 7 + 0 + 0 .043 4 .006 7 28 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 29 .005 5 ... + 0 .005 6 .038 3 + a .038 4 30 ... ... --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 31 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 33 019 3 + 0 + 0 .014 4 .035 4 .019 4 + 0 .028 5 34*Brownsville .019 3 + 0 + 0 .009 5 .012 6 + 0 + 0 .006 7 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .024 2 --- - + 0 .021 3 .051 2 + 0 .047 2 36 + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 37 ---- - --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .004 .004 .006 .005 .012 .012 .017 .013 248 TABLE D.12 (Continued) BASEBALUSOFTBALL FIELD, 2000 PICNIC TABLES, 1970 TOTAL TOTAL METRO URBAN AREAS METRO CITY __jS&N_ URBAN AREAS Fields Fields Fields Fields Tables Tables Tables Tables Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 + 0 .086 1 .173 2 .045 3 + 0 .149 6 + 0 .011 18 2 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 3 --- --- + 0 .072 4 .033 6 + 0 + 0 + 0 4 .003 9 --- --- + 0 .003 17 1.087 5 --- --- + 0 .972 5 5 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 437 2 + 0 .030 16 6 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 6 + 0 8 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 9 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 10 .02B 6 .065 .055 6 .033 6 531 7 + 0 .931 5 .531 '6 11 .031 5 --- --- .041 7 .031 9 + 0 --- ... 4.660 1 .033 15 12 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .389 9 + 0 + 0 .094 11 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 +1 0 + 0 14 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .675 6 + 0 + 0 .180 10 15 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 16 .061 2 --- --- .179 1 .068 1 1.150 4 --- --- 3.176 4 1.180 3 17 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 18*Midland + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .394 3 + 0 .028 17 *Odessa + 0 + 0 19 --- --- .055 4 + 0 .044 4 --- --- .013 9 + 0 .009 19 20 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 21 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + .0 + 0 22 --- --- ... .007 11 .007 14 --- --- --- .044 10 .044 14 23 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .+ 0 .106 7 + 0 .007 20 24 --- --- .038 5 + 0 .022 11 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 26 .021 8 .078 2 .059 5 .023 10 017 12 1.728 1 3.338 3 .094 il 26 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .338 4 + 0 .224 9 27 + 0 + 0 .033 8 .005 15 .223 11 .204 5 .881 6 .276 8 28 + 0 + 0 .018 9 .005 15 5.426 1 .029 8 + 0 2.767 1 29 .042 3 --- - + 0 .041 5 .388 10 --- --- 4.011 2 .424 7 30 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- --- + 0 + 0 31 + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + a + 0 + 0 32 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 .236 8 .079 13 33 .038 4 .017 6 .014 10 .032 8 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 34*Brownsville 7 + 0 + 0 .013 12 .469 8 + 0 .072 9 1.128 4 *McAllen + 0 2.591 2 35 .063 1 --- --- .105 3 .066 .2 1.536 3 ... --- .718 7 IA34 2 + 0 + 0 + 0 36 016 7 + 0 .010 13 37 --- --- + 0 + 0 + --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .026 .020 .029 .026 .398 .098 .186 .334 249 > C.) C.) C.) w C.) W C.) W (r2 Pi m @g Pi ha tj N tj - - - - - - j 0) (n 4@. C.) PQ 0 00 Ij a, 4. C.) N) io li 41 W W MJ 0 MAP- W cn m 0 OD - 0 I CL CL > > C) m 5 CL CD 0 CD in 0 A, 0 + + + + + tj + 5) + + + N3 Ln 0) CA K) 4, oa j 0 m OD 0 co 0 -j al 0 00 o0ow 0 0 O.P, 0" 0 + + cn . . . . 00 + + 0 c to 8TT co 00 00 Fos 0 00, 0000 a. 00 CD - 0 CD 0 0000 0 0 0 0,j 0 0 C.) > m 0 N) 00 rl) co 0 A + + S I cr U) (n + p. 0 + N) + + C2 + + + + @4 + + + + + + + + cn . . . . . . . ,4 E - - 0 0 to 0 00 0 0 z CD co > + + + + + + + + + . . . . + + cr p. 0) 0 j m Ul C" Ul -4 Pi @4 CD (D C"o 0-0 -04 CY) Ul cli m 0 00 M + + .010, + + cr PI) CD W" (o W a) ?A CL 40 m 00=0 -N 0 00 0 0 0 en (00000o) ow 0 1=0 0 V cr + + !A + 0 + + + + + + 0 c 21 00 F Y 0 z 00C)o wooi-om (A 0 0 0 0: "00000: 004 F) Ir m I cr 0 40 li 0 a m + + + + + + + + '10i + + + + + . . . . . . . . . r C.) 00 ul p. W -j o w z o(DO OM=OOW-JMO-Oowooo 00.1hZ000 T c 0 13 cr CD + tj 8 W- - + + + 8 + + + + + + + + + + + ;; E I W -44 0 .9k 00 (D W Ul %oi 0 a- 00 z 0 c z m m m o C- 8 MCDOOOD 00010004-000c"00wo .) @j 0 > TABLE D.12 (Continued) PICNIC TABLES, 1990 PICNIC TABLES, 2000 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Tables 'Tab[.. Tables Tables -Ta rl as- Tables Tea-bles Tables Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 .223 5 .486 3 + 0 .204 7 .119 11 .431 4 .063 14 .143 11 2 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 3 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 4 .465 2 --- .048 14 .434 2 .367 2 .098 12 .351 2 5 + 0 .089 9 + 0 .006 23 + 0 090 8 + 0 .006 22 6 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 210 7 + 0 + 0 .148 11 .162 8 + 0 + 0 .118 12 8 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- -.- + 0 + 0 + 0 9 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 10 .243 4 .757 2 .499 5 .292 4 158 9 .646 2 .424 6 .217 5 11 .178 8 --- --- 1.119 2 .190 8 .190 6 --- --- .854 2 .200 7 12 .107 12 + 0 + 0 .026 19 .200 4 + 0 + 0 .042 17 13 + 0 .050 10 + 0 .017 21 + 0 .071 10 + 0 .025 21 14 .110 11 + 0 + 0 .032 18 .112 13 + 0 + 0 .035 18 15 ... --- + 0 .090 13 .020 20 --- --- + 0 .160 9 .032 20 16 .381 3 --- --- .776 4 .398 3 .284 3 --- --- .567 4 .300 3 17 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 118*Midland + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + .0 + 0 *Odessa 0 + 0 19 --- --- .276 5 + 0 .219 6 --- --- .317 5 + 0 .254 4 20 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 21 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 22 --- --- --- --- .158 9 .158 9 --- --- ... --- .163 a .163 9 23 + 0 .165 7 + 0 .013 22 + 0 .053 11 + 0 .004 23 24 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 25 .216 6 .950 1 1.293 1 .255 5 177 7 .730 1 .880 1 .207 6 26 --- --- .095 8 + 0 .068 14 --- --- .101 7 + 0 .075 14 27 .154 9 .041 11 .217 7 .155 10 200 4 .083 9 .247 7 .200 7 28 .914 1 .454 4 .436 6 .600 1 1.024 1 .463 3 A26 5 .593 1 29 .080 13 --- --- .789 3 .086 13 .151 10 ... --- .802 3 .155 10 30 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 31 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... ... + 0 + 0 + 0 32 + 0 .099 12 .035 17 --- --- + 0 .091 13 .033 19 33 + 0 .168 6 .143 11 .042 16 + 0 .200 6 .153 10 .046 16 34*Brownsville + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + .0 + 0 + 0 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .133 10 --- --- .200 8 .140 12 .117 12 --- --- + 0 .108 13 36 --- --- + 0 .153 10 .057 15 --- ... .016 12 .132 11 .059 15 37 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .201 .190 .171 .197 .177 .196 .177 .179 251 TABLE D.12 (Continued) FOOTBALUSOCCER FIELDS, 1970 FOOTBALUSOCCER FIELDS, 1975 . TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN ields Fields Fields Fields Fields a s Fields Fields Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 + 0 .075 2 .027 26 .011 29 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 2 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 3 --- --- + 0 .033 23 .016 28 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 4 .134 4 --- --- .057 15 .126 3 017 1 .056 3 .021 1 5 + 0 .022 12 .004 31 .003 34 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 6 ... ... .006 13 .073 10 .023 24 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 045 15 .043 10 + 0 .036 20 + 0 + 0 +1 0 + 0 8 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 9 --- --- + 0 .013 29 .002 35 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 10 049 12 .104 1 .078 9 .051 14 009 7 .033 1 .027 5 .011 7 11 .055 9 --- --- .650 2 .059 9 .013 3 --- --- .074 1 .014 3 12 + 0 + 0 .043 21 .009 30 + 0 002 4 + 0 .001 12 13 .019 18 + 0 + 0 .009 30 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 14 .052 10 .064 4 .046 16 .0w 10 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 15 --- --- + 0 .014 28 .004 32 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 16 .048 13 --- .385 4 .053 11 004 9 + 0 .004 11 17 .063 8 + 0 .053 11 + 0 + 0 + 0 18*Midland .017 19 + 0 .065 13 .017 27 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *Odessa + 0 + 0 19 --- .003 15 .00 30 .004 32 --- .010 3 + 0 .008 9 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 20 042 16 .068 11 .047 15 21 .136 3 --- .046 16 .109 4 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 22 ... --- --- --- .044 19 .044 17 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 Oil 6 + 0 + 0 .009 8 23 094 6 .053 7 .041 22 .087 5 24 --- --- .047 9 .030 24 .038 19 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 25 .046 14 .068 3 .685 1 .052 13 012 5 .018 2 .074 1 .013 5 .26 ... --- .034 11 .067 12 .045 16 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + + 27 013 20 + 0 .088 8 .018 26 0 0 28 .051 11 + 0 .046 16 .035 21 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 29 .168 2 --- --- .617 3 .172 2 .014 2 ... --- + 0 .014 3 30@' --- --- --- - .029 25 .029 22 ... --- --- --- + 0 + 0 31 --- --- .063 5 .018 27 .028 23 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 .32 --- --- + 0 .118 5 .040 18 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 33 083 7 .050 8 .044 19 .072 6 009 7 + 0 + 0 .006 10 34*Brownsville .117 5 + 0 + 0 .060 8 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *McAllen .034 17 + 0 35 .188 1 --- .103 6 .178 1 .013 3 + 0 .012 6 36 --- 055 6 .089 7 .068 7 --- --- + 0 .040 4 .015 2 37 --- --- .006 13 .060 14 .022 25 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .059 .022 .055 .053 .009 .003 .005 .008 I 252 TABLE D.12 (Continued) FOOTBALUSOCCER FIELDS, 1980 FOOTBALL/SOCCER FIELDS, 1990 TOTAL TOTAL TOWN URBAN AREAS. METRO CITY TOWN Fields Fields Fields Fields Fields Fields Fields ields Per 1000 Par 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population. Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .037 1 .018 6 .008 11 2 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 3 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 4 .015 2 --- --- + 0 .014 3 030 1 + 0 .028 1 5 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .004 8 .001 17 6 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 8 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 9 --- --- + 0 .051 3 .009 6 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 10 .007 9 + 0 .020 5 .007 8 013 8 .025 4 .023 4 .015 7 11 .013 5 --- --- .054 2 .013 4 .022 2 --- --- .091 2 .023 2 12 + 0 .006 2 + 0 .004 13 + 0 + 0 .016 7 .003 16 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 14 .015 2 + 0 + 0 .004 13 + 0 .009 7 + 0 .004 15 15 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 16 .004 10 --- --- G41 4 .005 12 008 10 .023 4 .009 10 17 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 18*Midiand + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *Odessa + 0 + 0 19 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .008 8 + 0 .006 13 20 + 01 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 21 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 .014 7 + 0 .010 9 22 --- --- --- - + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 23 .010 6 + 0 + 0 .009 6 017 5 .033 2 .048, 3 .020 4 24 --- --- + 0 .015 8 .007 8 --- --- .011 6 + 0 .006 13 25 .010 6 .015 1 .119 1 .011 5 017 5 .030 3 .118 1 .018 6 26 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 27 .004 10 + 0 + 0 .003 15 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 28 .008 8 + 0 .017 7 .007 8 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 29 .015 2 --- --- + 0 .015 2 .022 2 + 0 .022 3 30 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 31 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 33 .004 10 + 0 .018 6 .006 11 010 9 + 0 + 0 .007 u 34*Brownsville + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .024 1 --- --- + 0 .021 1 .021 4 --- --- + 0 .019 5 36 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .018 5 + 0 .011 8 37 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 .+ 0 AVERAGE .009 .002 .008 .008 .015 .007 .009 .013- 253 TABLE D.12 (Continued) FOOTBALL/SOCCER FIELDS, 2000 TOTAL GOLF HOLES, 1970 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN ARL6L. METRO CITY TOWN 2MI&U A Fields Fields AM-1-ds Fields Holes Holes Holes Holes Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .165 12 + 0 .383 3 .198 2 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .306 3 .266 9 .291 3 3 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 .329 4 .1.64 12 4 .019 3 --- --- + 0 .018 .5 194 10 --- --- .286 8 .204 7 5 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .256 8 .175 8 .035 24 .174 11 6 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 .220 11 .056 27 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 134 16 .216 6 0 .122 19 8 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .115 12 .077 19 .092 23 9 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... .132 10 .152 15 .136 18 10 .007 9 016 3 .016 6 .009 10 184 11 .362 2 .310 5 .194 10 11 .015 6 --- --- .081 3 .016 6 .409 2 --- ... .650 1 All 1 12 + 0 .005 6 + 0 .003 16 .037 21 + 0 + 0 .009 31 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .310 3 .088 15 .153 13 .206 6 .294 5 .129 11 .077 19 .157 15 14 .012 a + a .014 9 .008 11 --- .110 13 + 0 .079 24 15 - --- .002 7 + 0 .002 17 --- --- 12 096 18 .289 7 .099 22 16 .005 10 .015 8 .006 .141 15 --- --- + 0 .120 20 17 .048 1 --- --- + 0 .043 1 .454 1 + 0 .262 10 .315 2 18*Midland + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .281 6 *Odessa + 0 19 ... . ... + 0 .028 4 .006 12 --- --- .226 5 + 0 .155 16 20 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 .254 9 --- --- + 0 .203 8 21 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 0 0 22 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 23 .018 4 + 0 + 0 .015 7 .055 19 .159 9 .082 is .064 26 24 - --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 25 .013 7 .016 3 .088 2 .014 9 .263 7 .364 1 .599 2 .268 4 26 --- --- .020 1 + 0 .015 7 --- --- .068 16 .067 21 .067 25 27 .003 12 + 0 .016 6 .005 15 149 14 .245 4 .220 11 .163 13 28 + 0 + 0 .009 10 .002 17 .308 4 .101 14 .137 16 .213 5 29 .017 5 --- --- .267 1 .019 4 .161 13 --- --- .309 6 .163 13 30 --- + 0 + 0 --- --- ... ..116 17 .116 21 31 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 0 + 0 32 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 .059 22 .020 29 33 .005 10 .017 2 + 0 .006 12 122 17 .200 7 .153 13 .138 17 34*Brownsville + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .065 17 .048 23 .012 30 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .027 2 ... ... + 0 .025 2 .043 20 --- --- .026 25 .041 28 3 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 36 016 3 .026 5 .020 37 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .011 .005 .011 .010 .228 .109 .111 .199 254 TABLE D.12 (Continued) GOLF HOLES, 1975 GOLF HOLES, 1980 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY -TOWN URBAN AREAS CITY -TOWN Uft�ANAREAS_ Holes Holes Holes Holes Holes Hole, Holes Holes Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 .064 14 + 0 .074 10 .061 15 .065 17 .104 5 .089 10 .074 13 2 --- --- .060 6 .088 8 .071 14 --- --- .064 10 .088 11 .074 13 3 --- --- + 0 .155 3 .073 13 --- --- + 0 .147 5 .071 17 4 .121 6 .111 7 .120 4 126 6 .106 8 .124 5 5 ..153 .4 + 0 .085 9 .119 5 .193 3 .088 7 .083 12 .147 3 6 --- --- + 0 .069 14 .019 27 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 .077 12 .047 11 + 0 .058 18 .087 12 .103 6 + 0 .074 13 8 - --- .059 7 + 0 .024 24 --- --- .061 13 + 0 .025 25 9 --- --- .055 10 .071 -12 .059 17 .066 9 .101 9 .072 16 10 .143 5 .197 1 .135 5 .144 2 .157 4 .227 1 .158 4 .161 2 11 .202 3 --- --- .222 2 .202 1 .229 2 --- --- .268 1 .229 1 12 .052 18 + 0 + 0 .012 28 .082 13 + 0 + 0 .018 28 13 .212 2 .056 8 .074 10 .131 3 .289 1 .027 18 .072 13 .102 10 14 .081 11 .042 14 .031 20 .050 19 .122 8 .061 .13 .031 17 .070 18 15 --- --- .056 8 + 0 .042 22 --- -064 10 + 0 @.049 24 16 .077 12 .120 6 .077 12 .081 14 .123 6 .0.82 11 17 .093 10 --- --- + a .080 10 .092 11 + 0 .080 12 18*Midland .036 19 + 0 .035 17 .024. 24 .075 15 + 0 .108 7 .055 21 *Odessa .014 21 .029 21 19 --- --- .093 3 .035 17 .080 10 ... --- .113 3 .200 2 .132 4 --- --- ... - 20 .055 17 + 0 .046 21 064 18 + 0 .053 22 21 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 .016 22 --- + 0 .012 29 22 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- --- + 0 + 0 23 .099 8 .045 13 .035 17 .090 9 .125 7 .083 8 + 0 .113 9 24 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .039 17 + 0 .021 25 25 .113 7 .128 2 .149 4 .114 6 .120 10 .134 2 .179 3 .121 6 26 --- --- .031 16 .064 15 .042 22 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 27 .937 1 .040 15 .071 12 .105 7 131 5 .040 16 .058 14 .116 a 28 .059 15 .063 5 .064 15 .061 15 .068 16 .062 12 .052 15 .062 20 29 .099 8 --- --- .291 1 .101 8 .121 9 ... ... + 0 .120 7 30 --- - ... --- + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 31 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 - ... + 0 + 0 + 0 33 .056 16 .046 12 .020 22 .049 20 .054 19 .042 15 .037 16 .050 23 34*Brownsville + 0 .068 4 .026 20 .008 29 + 0 + 0 + 0 + *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .026 20 --- - + 0 .023 26 .036 20 --- --- + 0 .032 25 36 ... --- .006 17 + 0 .004 30 --- --- .110 4 + 0 .068 19 37 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .119 .043 .045 .102 .137 .057 .053 .118 255 TABLE D.12 (Continued) GOLF HOLES, 1990 GOLF HOLES, 2000 TOTAL TOTAL __.WLLR URBAN AREAS METRO ITY .a_ CITY TOWN C ___LOWN _UaLiNAREAS Holes Holes Holes Holes Holes Holes Holes Holes Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 .109 20 .411 2 .183 1 .155 18 .057 22 .345 4 .157 15 .110 26 2 - - .148 7 .220 10 .181 12 --- --- .092 18 .237 9 .163 20 3 --- --- .143 9 .397 3 .263 8 --- .250 8 .456 .345 8 4 .276 8 --- --- .240 8 .273 .7 .276 9 --- --- .195 11 .271 11 5 .444 3 089 19 .223 9 .341 4 .510 3 090 19 .249 8 .387 5 6 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 .210 11 .114 16 + 0 .162 16 .195 14 .275 6 + 0 .173 18 8 --- --- .132 13 0 .057 30 - --- .141 16 + 0 .063 30 9 --- --- .183 5 .135 13 .167 15 --- .248 9 .172 12 .219 15 .343 4 .447 1 .348 4 .350 3 .363 7 .509 1 .393 4 .376 7 11 .511 2 --- .454 2 .510 1 .539 2 ... --- .468 2 .538 1 12 .160 15 .109 17 + 0 .099 26 .213 13 179 12 .106 17 .171 19 13 .689 1 .126 15@ .279 6 .402 2 .889 1 .143 15. .339 5, .495 2 14 .261 9 .139 10 .089 17 .161 17 .360 8 .207 10 .101 19 .226 13 .15 --- .138 11 + 0 .108 24 --- --- .189 11 + 0 .151 21 16 .185 14 --- --- .183 11 .185 11 194 15 .209 10 .194 17 17 .193 13 --- + 0 .170 14 .255 12 --- --- + 0 .232 12 18*Midland .124 17 + 0 .115 16 .098 27 .084 20 + 0 .166 13 .084 29 *Odessa .080 22 .064 21 19 --- --- .098 18 .494 1 .180 13 --- --- .399 2 .673 1 .453 3 20 .122 18 ... --- + 0 .102 25 .143 18 --- --- + 0 .120 24 21 .203 12 --- ... + 0 .154 19 .276 9. ... --- + 0 .214 16 22 --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- --- .054 23 .054 32 23 .308 5 .165 6 + 0 .281 6 .119 4 .265 7 .058 22 .393 4 24 --- --- .144 8 + 0 .080 29 --- .162 13 + 0 .092 28 25 .246 10 .283 3 .313 5 .248 10 .273 11 .280 5 .293 6 .273 10 26 --- --- .048 21 .061 19 .051 31 --- --- .061 21 .059 21 .060 31 27 .291 7 .082 20 .130 14 .255 9 365 6 .124 17 .164 14 .319 9 .142 16 .133 12 Al 15 .133 21 .146 17 .149 14 .133 16 .144 23 29 .304 6 --- --- .263 7 .303 5 .382 5 --- --- .267 7 .381 6 30 --- - -- --- --- .011 20 .109 23 --- --- --- ... .105 18 .105 27 .31 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .051 22 .046 24 .049 33 33 .122 18 .131 14 .064 i8 .115 22 133 19 .083 20 .070 20 .118 25 34*Brownsville + 0 + 0 + 0 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .082 21 --- .100 16 .084 28 .162 16 --- - 7 + 0 .149 22 36 --- --- 238 4 + 0 .149 --- --- .359 3 + 0 .226 13 37 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .313 .150 .134 .276 .347 .218 .168 .315 256 TABLE D.12 (Continued) TENNIS COURTS, DOUBLE, 1970 TENNIS COURTS, DOUBLE, 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN - URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Courts, Double Courts, Double Courts, Double Courts, Double Courts, Do ble Courts, Double Courts, Double Courts, Double Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 2 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 3 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .007 11 + 0 .004 18 --- ... + 0 .018 13 .046 9 --- --- + 0 .042 10 4 020 11 5 + 0 087 2 + 0 .006 15 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 6 --- --- .006 6 + 0 .005 16 --- --- + 0 .017 5 .005 17 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 8 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 9 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 .009 6 .002 20 10 .371 4 + 0 + 0 .346 4 230 4 .098 2 + 0 .214 4 11 .895 2 --- --- + 0 .889 2 .682- 2 ... --- + 0 .677 2 12 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 14 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 15 --- --- .005 7 + 0 .004 17 ... --- .056 4 + 0 .042 10 16 .627 3 --- .024 3 .618 3 373 3 .120 1 .367 3 17 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 18*Midiand + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *Odessa + 0 + 0 19 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .031 5 + 0 .024 13 20 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 21 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 22 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- ... --- + 0 + 0 23 .169 6 .053 3 + 0 .148 6 .102 5 .090 3 + 0 .093 6 24 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- .014 8 + 0 .008 16 25 1.257 1 .273 1 .021 5 1.219 1 1.000 1 .219 1 + 0 .968 1 26 --- --- .034 4 + 0 .022 12 --- --- .031 5 + 0 .021 14 27 .175 5 + 0 .011 7 .146 7 .082 7 .010 9 .071 4 .075 7 28 .043 9 + 0 .023 4 .026 11 .017 11 .010 9 .086 3 .027 12 29 .155 7 --- --- + 0 .154 5 .096 6 ... --- + 0 .095 5 30 --- --- --- --- .029 1 .029 10 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 31 + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 33 .093 8 + 0 + 0 .065 8 .078 8 + 0 + 0 .055 8 34*Brownsville .010 12 + 0 + 0 .004 17 .009 12 + 0 + 0 .004 18 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .043 9 --- .026 2 .041 9 .039 10 --- --- .101 2 .046 9 --- --- 024 7 + 15 36 027 5 + 0 .017 14 0 .015 37 --- --- + 0 .615 6 .004 17 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .590 .015 .002 .447 .453 .023 .009 .350 257 TABLE D.12 (Continued) TENNIS COURTS, DOUBLE, 1980 TENNIS COURTS, DOUBLE, 1990 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREA ]METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Courts, Double Courts, Double Courts, Double Courts, Double Courts, Double Courts, Double Courts, Double Courts, Double Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000. Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 + 0 .013 9 + 0 .001 21 + 0 .112 4 + 0 .011 21 2 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 3 --- --- .028 7 + 0 .014 17 --- --- .048 8 + 0 .025 15 --- ... + 0 .046 9 .110 8 --- --- + 0 .102 7 4 050 9 5 + 0 + 0 + a + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 6 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 8 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 9 --- + 0 .051 6 .009 18 --- --- + 0 .045 7 .015 .20 10 .176 4 .136 2 + 0 .165 4 .326 4 .323 2 .093 4 .310 4 11 .654 2 .054 5 .648 2 1.445 1 --- --- .151 2 1.429 1 12 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .035 10 + 0 .019 17 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 14 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 15 --- --- .049 5 + 0 .037 12 --- --- .088 6 + 0 .069 12 16 .237 3 --- - .123 1 .234 3 .413 3 --- --- .251 1 .406 3 17 + 0 .. --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 18*Midland + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 0 + 0 *Odessa + 0 + 0 19 --- .057 4 + 0 .044 10 --- --- .106 5 + 0 .084 11 20 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 21 + 0 ... ... + 0 + 0 .003 11 --- --- + 0 .003 23 22 - + 0 + 0 --- --- --- ... .008 9 .008 22 23 .115 5 + 0 + 0 .099 5 244 5 .033 11 + 0 .215 5 24 --- ... .039 6 + 0 .021 14 --- --- .066 7 + 0 .037 14 25 771 1 .238 1 .060 3 .747 1 1.336. 2 .495 1 .078 5 1.291 2 26 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .024 13 + 0 .017 is 27 .066 8 + 0 .029 7 .057 7 097 10 0 .065 6 .086 10 28 + 0 .071 3 .069 2 .042 11 + 0 .140 3 .121 3 .090 9 29 .086 6 ... ... + 0 .086 6 .159 6 --- --- + 0 .158 6 30 --- + 0 + 0 --- ... --- + 0 + 0 31 ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- ... .007 10 + 0 .005 19 --- .027 12 + 0 .017 18 33 .073 7 + 0 + 0 .053 8 132 7 .037 9 0 .100 8 34*Brownsville .009 11 + 0 + 0 .004 20 + 0 + 0 0 + 0 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .036 10 --- ... + 0 .032 13 .105 9 --- --- + 0 .047 13 --- ... 15 --- --- .018 14 .031 8 .023 16 36 .022 8 .009 8 .017 37 ... + 0 .057 4 .016 16 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .388 .034 .011 .304 .795 .090 .033 .636 258 m CN C-4 - - - C14 04-04 C4 LU ir .J cc tb < < = C4 0 @- z 3 c 0 0 v N r- (D 0) W - CO rq CO - C.) 0 M40 - N - - - o LO + 0 :: 0 a 0 CN + 0 + + 0 cli 0 '@@ z; + + m m + 0 N a o o C4 + 0 E; r ++a m 0000 0-0000 0 0 0 - 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 75 0 LL 0 0 rl co w Lc) 0 (0 (o (n co F, 0) LO LO fn LL o m + + CD + + + + + + 00 c) 0 r@ N + + + R Ci a CL 0 ir 0CL CL 0 U c m Lf)00'MO-O(Drl:oooo::v c:::Oooaoo::Oooo :00 .j w > 750 c 0 LLI U. .2 CD cm @w Cl C.) 0 1 3 + + N + 00 + LO -+ . . . . . . + +,+ + + + V@ ct .2 Ix L) IL IL .x r m a Nomom O@?Lov a 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 (D w 0 CC @- = 0 c : Cl) 0 C) q CDC- Cl) LU LL CN D 0 + + @2 + + + Lf) + + @o + + + + C-4 .c E ; 0 04, 0 0 CL IL mqlt C-4 w co w 0 oz co.2 m + m w C14 0 CD 00 00 00 r, to 0 0) M r, CO 1* CO (D CY) -T LO 0 @ CN m NM'M++WN++ Notw-M N+ON+ CD V - cw) 41@0 q lq: Ci C! r@ CL 0 0 0CL CL z LS 0 0 r -4 00.2 "- WO :3 @2 M r, 00 Ln CO co to V m N ca 0 , v . . . . . . . + + -IT + + + + + N + + co 3 co 'D + N + + + + Vo M C! 0 75 0 u CL CL X LO 0 0 00000CN (DOOW 0-cr OOMO -M 0 u cn > z 0 c U 13 c .2 Lo cj m CD LO 0 0 C'3 C'j ,,@ 0 + (D + + + + + (0+ +0 +cn rl C14 (4 co @2 LU 0.2 0 0 - Lq q C; CL 0 t a U 9L a. .9 r 0 mo 0 LO-000 M'O 0 0 0- le 04 w 0 CD a 0 0 02 0 w 0.2 C') c) Ln a) 10 C-4 0 - + + + m 4m . . . m . . . + C*4 cw) 0 CN LO 0 cq @2 + Lo + + ` CL 0 a; 0 9L CL > C cca a) w -0 d) 0 'D ri .0 0 w N m MRO;No'l mmm MO-NMM9r- Lf) (D r, > C14 04 CN CN N 04 CN cw) Cl) (n TABLE D.12 (Continued) BASKETBALL COURTS, FULL, 1975 TOTAL BASKETBALL COURTS, FULL, 1980 TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Court., M-11 Courts, Full Courts, Full Courts, Full Courts, Full Courts, Full Courts, Full - Mo, rts, Full Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 2 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .032 8 + 0 .018 15 3 ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 4 110 3 0 .099 2 121 3 + 0 .110 2 5 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 6 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 8 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 9 --- --- .077 2 + 0 .059 4 --- ... .077 4 + 0 .063 6 10 .043 7 .098 1 .162 2 .050 5 043 9 .068 6 + 0 .042 11 11 .008 12 ... --- + 0 .007 16 .010 12 --- --- .054 5 .011 18 12 .070 6 .059 3 + 0 .050 5 .066 7 .082 3 + 0 .062 7, 13 + 0 + 0 .037 8 .009 15 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 14 .130 2 + 0 .004 10 .037 10 .137 2 + 0 .015 a .044 9 15 --- - + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 16 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 010 12 --- ... + 0 .009 19 17 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 18*Midland .091 4 + 0 + 0 .042 8 .094 5 .083 2 + 0 .049 8 *Odessa .028 9 .029 10 19 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... ... + 0 + 0 + 0 20 .028 9 --- --- + 0 .023 12 .050 8 --- --- + 0 .042 11 21 + .0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .044 6 .012 17 22 ... -- --- --- .040 7 .040 9 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 23 .173 1 + 0 + 0 .146 1 .199 1 + 0 + 0 .172 1 24 - - - ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ---- + 0 + 0 + 0 25 027 11 .005 7 .074 5 .027 11 .074 6 .074 5 .119 2 .074 4 26 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 .063 3 .019 14 27 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .029 7 .003 20 28 0 + 0 .021 9 .004 18 + 0 .009 10 + 0 .003 20 29 .080 5 --- --- .291 1 .082 3 .104 4 ... --- + 0 .103 3 30 ... --- --- - + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 31 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 ... --- .007 4 + 0 .005 17 --- --- .028 9 + 0 .018 15 33 + 0 .006 5 .120 3 .019 14 + 0 .127 1 .183 "1 .044 9 34*Brownsville + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .039 8 --- ... .101 4 .046 7 .024 11 --- --- + 0 .021 13 36 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 37 - .006 5 .058 6 .021 13 --- ... .067 7 .057 4 .064 5 AVERAGE .029 .016 .018 .026 .044 .031 .016 .039 260 c VOWN00cor--mmooMON m moo -ev- r- mw mw a -w a mow ca 04 N N - - - N N - 04 C'4 LLI T- co cm 0 Z L= c L.0 0 < -;, C'4 M 0 U) Cl) 0 to 0 00 00 M r, 0 W Lc) 0 Lf) M (D W CO W 0 to CIJ in ; 0 W C14 0 W . . . . 0 00 0 M + C'i + r, w + + r, a r, -cr 0 Lf) C') C-4 + + + Cl! q C%! R 10 C, q R 0 a. 9L x 0 o o Q o 0 o o 't w o P, o a 00 0 0 =)coooomo(nocj;:0o-o COW @M CNI Z- @ '5 8 0 U. .0 OD le -e 0 W CD r- W v (14 0 LL . . . . . . . . . @ 't + Cl) + M . . . . . . . . r, + - + (D C'J + + 0 + + + 0 .0 0 0 0 CIA 17 0 0 V CL CL 0 U ccl > @- 75 LU LL 0 0 W r- LO IM 0 W 00 W a) w co 0 .r C14 Ike + cr 00 (C) C4 + +,+ 00 C) + 02 (0 + + C%l a) + + 0 0 0 0 C4 Q 0 0 CL 00 c) 0 0 (c) 0 C'4 @2 0 r' C' 0 m 0 0 't 0 C" M 0 0 0 - N -Wo 00 v 00 I-r C-4 M W . . . 00 C.4 LU LL C D (3) OD + + r, C 0) C14 41 + w + + 0 + + r- a 2 ;o C! Cl! Cli C! Ci 0 t 75 0 = CL 0 0 C4 IL Not- LU N C14 N N LU -J Ir Oz 0 0 < LL 0 'r. -0 0) G)rFC @:F( T M OD N rl N LO r, M M r, ; IT -T (14 00 W 2WOOE 9 E; 00 w 4CL2 + ++0 +000 4,@ 0 .2 + + + + + + + + cc L - = . q ri C! 7 q . . . . . CL :3 t 0 9L CL 7S 0 LL 000 0 to N CD Cl) 0 a 0 rl LL 0. -M . . . . . . . . . N - + - ++a + + + + + C) + + M . . . w + + + - + 0 + 0 0 0 C*4 M CL 0 0 cc U CL 0. 0 u ca 0 0. 't M C14 I-T a I I r, r-4 0 0 m r, + . . . . 04 + cn ct 2 cc + + 0 04 +0 + C14 W + + 0 r, 0 0 - a 04 - ca 0 0. CL X C') 0 M m 00 0 C'I C2 0 r, 0 M COV 0 0 0 CO LU LL 0 C'4 0 C') LO 00 + + + r, 019 CO + + + W 00 C14 Cl) r, 04 t co cn C-4. 00- N 0 -0. 0. 04. CL 0. > LLJ II-C,4 0 0 LU L2 C o w r, > N N N N N N m m m m m m m m > w w w w w w w w K) t,) t,) N) tj t@3 t,3 f') - - - - - - - - - - - < 0) m 09 0 o CL CL > > CD C) ET m 0) :3 3 < CL CA 0 V 71 it 71 ic C.) w C) 4@6 + CO a) Ij IQ 4@- Ul a 9 Ln + + w w to + Z 00 A. S L-no t Iwo -4k -0i) (D Ul En ci 0 0 > rr, w o o oo C31 o cr o m C.) 'i w -g@ 00 o cn C r D c 71 'A P 71 7' n 00 o 'on + 0-1 21, ONO) + + IWJ 001 '410 + + + cpnj + -4 W W M 4:- o M 0 U, a @j 4 K) - 0 co -4 a) a K) 0 li 0) 4 00 4@6 0 0 - 0 m ri N" Ul w M40 9D m -n 0 0 c m -0 :. 7. 0) 113 - - - co (3) fl) 0) bi Li i,3 i7) k) b) in ii io 'ul N3 w li 00 a) -N C" io @j b)" (D + (D L" w w w D.:@ " -4 w w w 0 " + li 0 w " W 0 + a) + 'N 4 '1 + T 'o -9h, p. Ln -i-omm wmmow"w w w w 4 m 4 '1 -1 0 0 w - -4 -1 w P@j > 0 > C) :E -4 Z M m wow "Mm"m 0 CD 0 IQ (D (A) -4 0 rl) 41 00 0 j 200")!@0@30- 48@0 E)i 0 X, -0 -0 U) 0 0 C :17h. 7A. 7 7 7' > 0) (A) 8 N) 8 W W 0 IJ 11) W 0 W 4 0 W 0 IJ W W W M W 0 Jh- W to W 14 + wow CD(7)'JcD:@oDcjooDN)-4G)oocD N3 0) 00 OOPI)O)W(i N)"Omc-) (40-00 CO LTI co - 0) (n li tj C.) w 00 0 0) 0 > 0 a > z -4 > > m b ww 0 0 CD Irli) 4 0 FNJI 00) C"o C")) m "0 C.) ("D 81 m 0 "r.) w '"1 4 LTI 'i OD CD 0 0 0 T 0 m -0 @ :3 7A. a b) C3 . . . @j -1 00 :0. b) CD co + + + Cow C& U'l "0 L"" + + + CD 4 C.) + "'J L,n 14 (A) K3 a - > m m 400-4 m C) o 40 00 Ln w o 0 C" CA c 0 m r- Z4 im Ci Lq CY) in + -o6 w 00 m 'i (n :N b) . 'M 0 a) CD W w co w CD CO OD Ij 8 a) @j + + + 2 + w C5 C) 00 (D OD Ul -i w 0 41. Ln 00 0 m Ln 0 w oli ao) 0 0 0 )> 0 m w ZS w 8 o -.t- m a) o 0 o j 0:@ C4 m U) to 0 -n m M (A W 0 0 c @D. f@ io bo b zn in *- L) b b) b) 6 w + coo rJ M W W 4 0 Cn CO W IIJ -4:@ + (n 0) tO @4 4 W IJ CD (n M 0 00 Pi N) 0 Lil - 0 4 co CO LTI W LTI el) co L" a o o --I P m z ul wo 0 'th W- 0 0 V - m ij b) b) b . . . . . . . . . . i ip b) bo @j "m :-'@j @n @-'4 b0b) 'rr.bo E - T ul Ln @j cn @J:@ 0 Cb 4 (7) 0 N m li 00 Ul N) N3 m J:@ w w w 0 "s 0 N) m 4 0 m 'i m 0 '1 0 '1 0 > CD N3 @j OD w a) 0 (A) Ln (D N) 0) tj Ul M 0 4 - K3 0 (D (D Z 0 0 m OW) w WW w - 'Wi zha 1 :@Ww > TABLE D.12 (Continued) SURFACE ACRES, FRESHWATER, 1980 SURFACE ACRES, FRESHWATER, 1990 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Surface Acres Surface Acres Tu-rface Acres Surface Acres Surface Acres Surface Acres Surface Acres- 9u rf ace Acres Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 .750 12 1.089 2 1.180 5 .869 5 1.335 13 2.429 2 2.670 3 1.721 7 2 --- --- .479 20 .527 27 .499 24 --- --- .961 24 1.234 22 1.085 23 3 --- ... .662 11 .705 15 .683 17 --- --- 1.476 8 1 A56 14 1.467 12 4 968 3 --- --- .637 22 .939 2 2.120 2 --- --- 1.394 16 2.067 2 5 + 0 878 5 .630 23 .282 31 + 0 1.068 21 1.418 15 .584 31 6 --- --- .511 17 .325 33 .457 25 --- ... 1.042 22 + 0 .697 30 7 + 0 .361 24 A12 31 .126 33 + 0 .972 23 .916 25 .280 33 8 --- --- .605 13 .303 34 .429 27 --- ... 1.121 19 .856 29 .971 25 9 --- --- + 0 1.717 2 .308 30 ... --- + 0 2.159 6 .598 29 10 + 0 1.137 1 1.624 3 .138 32 + 0 2.980 1 3.026 2 .384 32 11 1.039 2 ... --- 2,463 1 1.0521 1 2.211 1 --- --- 4.143 1 2.235 1 12 1.229 1 900 4 + 0 .794 10 1.692 8 1.417 11 + 0 1.195 20 13 .868 8 .373 23 .682 19 .665 18 1.477 11 1.507 6 1.255 21 1.433 14 14 .914 4 .389 22 + 0 .429 27 1.775 6 1.173 16 .018 33 1.080 24 15 --- --- .738 9 .955 10 .791 12 --- ... 1.770 4 1.535 12 1.719 8 16 891 7 -.- --- 1.267 4 .902 3 1.833 4 .-- ... 2.351 5 1.855 3 17 .736 13 --- --- .504 29 .765 15 7.316 74 --- --- .596 30 1.230 19 18*Midland .807 11 413 21 .506 28 .@91 20 1.194 16 1.148 17 .997 .24 1.170 21 *Odessa .490 16 1.235 15 19 --- --- .745 8 .899 11 .779 13 ... --- 1.480 7 1.637 10 1.513 11 20 + 0 --- .619 24 .101 35 + 0 --. ... .509 32 .082 36 21 .906 5 .654 20 .839 7 1.813 5 --- 1.900 8 1.834 4 22 --- --- .873 13 .873 4 ... --- ... 1.577 11 1.577 10 23 + 0 786 6 .860 14 .113 34 + 0 1.582 5 1.340 18 .192 34 24 --- --- .711 10 .696 16 .704 16 --- --- 1.463 10 1.375 17 1.424 15 25 + .0 .937 3 1.131 6 .041 37 + 0 1.931 3 2.429 4 .098 35 26 ... --- .756 7 .878 12 .793 11 --- --- 1.475 9 1.155 23 1.385 17 27 862 9 .199 25 .989 9 .824 9 1.654 9 1.356 12 1.867 9 1.662 9 28 .728 14 + 0 1.023 7 .503 23 1.366 12 1.134 18 1.952 7 1.406 16 29 .845 10 --- --- .558 25 .843 6 1.759 7 --- .526 31 1.750 5 30 --- --- ... --- A42 30 .442 26 ... .874 27 .874 28 31 --- --- .508 18 .549 26 .540 22 --- ... .958 25 .871 28 .890 27 32 --- ... .533 16 .640 21 .570 21 --- --- 1.078 20 1,285 19 .1.151 22 33 .903 6 .657 12 .695 17 .839 7 1.839 3 1.310 15 1.494 13 1.722 6 34*Brownsville + 0 .494 19 .384 32 .091 36 + 0 .457 26 + 0 .028 37 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 .695 15 --- --- .994 8 .727 14 1.518 10 --- --- .900 26 1.461 13 36 ... --- .570 15 .690 18 .615 19 --- ... 1.318 14 1.258 20 1.295 18 37 --- --- .581 14 + 0 .416 29 ... --- 1.332 13 + 0 .961 26 AVERAGE .523 .578 .730 .552 1.104 1.394 1.496 1.777 263 www w w W!2 w tj N) r') " N) ri Cc' w 00 '1 CD o A- W IQ < -1 (3) M 4@6 ca NJ 0 W OD 'i M LIn 4 N3 0 m 09 F 0 CD CL > > C) m < CL V "a U) Pa 71:1 ri M 000 00 M bo 9 + + 14 0) 0 + + ow Cc) Loll ow con rm) + + Z@ : : 0 M W -;h 41 -j 0 00 00 to W 4h. W w Cl) m w 8 Go 0 40 a) P-) 0 0 0 C.) (0 U) 4@- .4 00 w .9h. N3 D. ij in ig bo ='-j w w (D (D K) C.) N) 0) W OD w 41 U) li to w 4 + OD 00 0 -N !ca, +(3) LT, 4 m 40) Ul w W -4 W a) K) Cn CY) (3) W K3 (11 - 00 li - C, > 0 4" Ila m K) 01 Lin w 0 00 U) 0 a) . . . W Cl) -j Ul 0 :a 0 M M cn m 0 V + @j 0100 w + M Cl) C.) -9- W + rl) 0 CA 0 (D 0+000+- ommow ON)-4 0 > 0 0) a) 0 0) OD K) W W M 00 LTI - w wm"M:@ > 0 :* m z wm m 0 CM0 0 i: C-8 Lmn Z, 3D -W m 0 -pb w a r--) 0 w w (7) 0 "0 -9@ j B m ,a a W -0 c 71 7171. 7171. 71 71 71:1 7A :1 :1 7a a 0 " w w - 0 m " w w b) i,3 %J o b in in 4 E--, w 4 g, w m w j w 0 2 w R g j 0 " Z@ m @ > 00 ON300G)MO) 00-- W 0 al 0 0 li m 0 0 N) r%) 0) -4 W .4 A. z 0 > --I > m m m ww" > vr 0 b bb 6 b b bb bbbb b6bbb b OECD 0 00 . . . CF) li COD L-TI "N C"n "0 OIJ 0" cc, 60 m CC- CL 0 > to MN 01 m m M 0 b 0000 0 0 00+ 'a + + N03 + ccnD m w rl) + @j + + hi + C.) w c -n C4 w W . . . C-j N) - CLO (71 C.) 00 -8-0 0 0 m 00 0000 000C)c- 0 '1 CD w 0 '1 0 0 m 0 0 m b b *0 *0 0 0 000b b b 0 ri +++ Ili + + + + + + 2 00+0+0+,2 + +W+ v N) w C.) N) w W LTI W li m L.) W r Ul W 00 co 00 W 00 w Om 0 > 6.0 0 z m Z m 000 pr > m c 0 b + + + + 2; 0"D 00) Z@ (ID4 'Na) OOD "J R 1"1 0 'N') 'i Z '4b I"i C,3) Ow 8-0 z 0 0 1 V > > M r- rm K3 r@ tj w N3 c m 11) K) 0 C.) 000) WOO)c w 00 w U) X Moo C4 (N C4 CN N - - - C*4 c C4 0 00 - 0 0 R q q 00 z -0 'm m 00 0) r, 0 0 't N @2 w r' N + so r- 0@ + moo + + W M M 0) q q . . . . Ct Ct q q 0 R . q - - E' 7cS,. o++6'Z;O+'3Soqo- 0 0 E; Owc cc 0 S IL X 000000000-000mmo cc OOOMO-00or-NOOOOMOO cc LU CL 0 Z r uj 00 0 c) 00 CL Ln . . . LO + + + + E . . . LO + CD . . . CN 8++ + C') . . . . . . CL R LU X C m -oo:oooo-o:wowm ::o M:::OmvoNm::Oooo loo > c LU o .2 CC .0- . . . cn to 00 LL CLO j! C14 cl) + + 0 + + 0 E C=L Lon + + + + 0 00 0 X P, 00 C 0 V 0 04 M CN 0 C4 -T 0 W 0 C', 01 m N cc Cj 0 0 cc 0.2 .c Lu 0 r, LO .0 w co 0 .0 0, C) C, CL 0 @D- + 0 LO 0 0 G+ 0 0 0 C) 0 + 0 0 C9 0 E COL q C! a. CL CN LLJ ca 12 C14 CN 04 CN LU C in 0 z 0 co LO C14 00 cli 0 co Ln 0) r'O 00 CD LO CO 0 (2 co 00 0) m Ln r- a) F, @- E; F o F r, 0 a E; 0 0 0 0 00 0 C, 0 a 0 0 CL + +0 + . . . + + C! 0 E Om C! C! C! q Ct q R R m 0 CL DIM IL CL X 0000qo-oqooooooo ocv)o c wNoomoooq-00000000 cc cc LU a. (a Z r ui s.2 z 0 Ln r LO r, Ln CD Rt LO 0 0) + cn . . . . . . . . . * + E C'4 + + m C'4 . . . . . . . . 4) 0 C! 0. 9L LU r m 0-0.0 0 0 - 0 0 CN Mooo 0 r, 0..ttoo CD LD > ui ..2 " u 8 -2 N C, r, . 0 0 CD M m r, U. + C'4 CN + + CN .0 0 00 0 0 E "@ =CL . . . + + '0* + + 2) Cc+++ + + + + c) + 0 X C 0 (Or-Nom 0 V LO N N 0.2 LU 00- 0 + + 00, + CFO + r, + 00 co (n . . . cy) CL 0 -2 o os 0 co E COL q C@ 0 Z r w M M 0 0 < < U Cc 0 w o Ln CD I,, > > www < imm twrl) oww-4mm WN) 0 zo, 3; C@ w W-i m 0 J@h w m 09 S, 0 o a CL 2 > > CD C) m CL 0 M, IP M -9 N) + + 00 2 tj co + + N3 N3 N) CO 00 m to 00 N) 0. co co 0 40 ca 0 > 'n NJ o 0 00 w 00 0) co 4 al > 9 T T -0 0 m ju (10 + + + tj + M + + 03 K3 + + a V ED ED 00 0 -N 0 LI) DD Ln -J 01 @4 (D m > 'i Z'o w (.q 5@1 (n co o 0.4 '1 o o -4 m 0 13 Cil + + + + + rol) + OW 0- + OW + + (S + + + + U)+Sows+?+,2+ NO) + w r, (n 0) (D .1h rl) 0 A. N) w m 0 Ul Ili A. 0) 0) -4 > 0 Z M 0 "0 m 0 ct. c V bb b'O bb b b'O b b 'o b b b'O b b b b bb b b b N3 + + + + " N)!2 (@ + r.J!2 K) M p0jo ED 0 zlo ::@j "a L"TI "W 8 -04 C@ IOJ 0" Ul 4h. W (Yi w 00 a z 0 m > K3 li 0"o wo U) 0 0 b 0 bb '0 'D '0 13 3 0 N3 + + + c 8-0 E tj .00 '1 J@ KW3 CL,)) N E@o IJ4 "P. Z'. 0) ow m CD CL "00W m 0 mz W;;8w o K) w 0 W a m V 0 a 000 0 O..bbbb.bb b b + + + + + N) + N) Eo (n .40) O"J wj wo coo "th p. (D 0 0) ow - m m 0 ;@l -P@ 0 00 o ;:J, @,j o co tj ol (n 00 o o o o 00 0 C.) m W m -0 0 +"+ . . . . . . . oWop.++204ww+++ +tli+ V 0) 4@6 co 0) LTI 00 W -N 5) E. 0 -0 r ol -1 > 0 z m Z fn V m m 0000 0400-0=;@Oowooooo 00,iWoo@;"M400ozo8ow = m pr > 9 M 0 cm c b *0 bb bbb b w 3 m + + + +0+;3t2bj+ c OM ca 8; > @j 00 00 0 a CY) co Z 00 ha N) N- r%) m CA TABLE D.12 (Continued) WALKING TRAILS, 1970 WALKING TRAILS, 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO ___ui_y_ TOWN jaj&%AREW -JULIM.- CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Mifes Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles miles Miles Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 .063 8 + 0 .109 5 .068 10 .043 4 + 0 + 0 .030 11 2 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- .030 10 .044 9 .036 7 3 --- --- + 0 .033 20 .016 26 ... --- .028 12 + 0 .015 24 4 + 0 --- ... .114 4 .012 .29 + 0 ... --- .056 7 .005 30 5 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .031 9 088 1 + .0 .024 16 6 - --- .025 14 + 0 .019 25 --- --- .026 14 + 0 .019 21 7 .056 9 + 0 + 0 .036 17 022 14 .047 4 + 0 .022 19 8 ... --- .058 7 + 0 .023 23 --- --- + 0 .041 10 .024 16 9 --- --- .165 1 + 0 .136 1 --- --- .044 6 + 0 .033 10 10 .091 4 .104 3 .078 11 .091 5 035 6 .066 2 .054 8 .037 6 11 .093 3 --- --- .108 6 .093 4 .029 10 --- --- + 0 .029 1@ 12 + 0 008 16 + 0 .004 31 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 13 .039 11 .029 13 .153 1 .063 13 .019 15 .028 12 .074 3 .035 8 14 .004 21 .097 4 .107 7 .075 6 .016 16 .032 9 .031 13 .027 15 15 --- .022 15 .058 15 .032 18 --- --- .037 8 + 0 .028 13 16 072 6 .096 8 .072 8 .008 20 .060 5 .009 28 17 .016 18 --- --- + 0 .013 27 .046 2 --- --- + 0 .040 5 18*Midland .084 5 079 5 .131 2 .066 12 .036 5 + 0 + 0 .018 23 *Odessa .026 13 .014 17 19 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- .010 16 + 0 .008 29 20 017 17 .034 19 .020 24 .014 17 + 0 .012 26 21 .019 16 .046 17 .027 21 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 22 --- - --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 23 .008 20 .053 8 + 0 .010 30 .011 19 + 0 .035 11 .012 26 24 --- --- .031 11 .030 21 .031 20 --- ... .013 15 .032 12 .023 18 25 .054 10 + 0 .086 10 .053 14 035 6 + 0 .074 3 .034 9 26 --- --- .068 6 .067 12 .067 11 --- ... .061 3 + 0 .042 4 27 .105 2 .123 2 .088 9 .105 3 045 3 .040 7 106 2 .051 1 28 .111 1 .043 10 .023 22 .074 7 .025 12 .010 16 + 0 .015 24 29 .071 7 --- --- + 0 .071 9 .047 1 --- --- .291 1 .049 3 30 ... --- --- .116 3 .116 2 - - + 0 + 0 31 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 - --- .030 12 .059 14 .040 16 --- --- .029 11 + 0 .019 21 33 .024 14 + 0 .044 is .024 22 .035 6 + 0 .020 14 .028 13 34*Brownsville .039 11 + 0 .048 16 .032 18 .028 11 + 0 + 0 .021 20 *McAllen .023 15 .025 12 35 .014 19 --- --- + 0 .013 27 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 36 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 37 --- --- .048 9 .060 13 .052 15 --- --- .046 5 .058 6 .050 2 AVERAGE .063 .042 .043 .058 .028 .021 .019 .026 I 267 > < j 0) Ul -N W rQ 0 to 00 -1 Ul 4 w m 0 m 0 K m CL > > 0 CD C) CD m = CL co 0 CD . . . . . . . . . . . 0 coo a w : 2 : + :" C.) 4h a C.) @j CS C.) (D li M W -4 CD OD C) li cn U, a) co m m 0 I-j m 01 0 0) N3 4 0 CO W OD pr -0-03 0 CD + + + bo+ m + o Lq N) 4 co -9b fl) -C@ W a) ul N) rl) tj c LTI 00 (000) CF) - (D W 00 (.n W - Po j 00 N) 0 0 0) o co 0 to w a 00 m t-l) a) 8 a c. > + + + b + + + la r- + + + + + + + tn + 0) L'i W A. (n fl) c j co 0 w 0 C) fQ tj co 'n F Y, 0 - to 5 co Z 000 Ooulo-o:@Wc"80000:, 0 a 0 -4 r@j 0 o w o 0:@ ul Zi 0 00 M 0 CD c b'Ob :-Ibbbbbbb bb bbb, '0 'a b '0 w U) + " w + 4::@ w 0 + + - m 4 0 fl) oo 0) j W (_n N) 0 li CCDII 00) Ln 4 j W CO OD 'i > z 0 > co > r- M m m > o w 0 - 0 "1 0 w "Cj to 0 0 cn %J NW) 4 C-0 0 w "0 "N L"TI W V) M 0 0 CD 00 0 cc 00 (D N) Mg C.) co m ul 00 @4 0 a) 0) 4 OWTZ ca w 0 co w 00 m 0 m c CD 0 to w a 0 ;@r o -4 -N %J (y) MID . . . . . . . . 0 cob 00 + + + 00. + 2P. ED + + 9 'Ul + _9 (8) L'" IN) + 00 -0 En ul 40) 0 ol 0 Ln (n -4 -4 co -C@ -,1 0 0 .9h. 0 0000 W 0 (7n W i@ 0 M W jo 0 Z@ j z M m . . . . . . . 0 CD 00000oz =1 W Lrl + + + 4 + -9 + So . . . S + + m 4 -4 co . . . . + P. w - r c M 0 8(0 00 CF) w tn 0 0 (n OD 4, '1 0000 0 8,) w o 0 0 o P@j o (n o w 0 o 0:@ o 0 ED a) 6) '1 0 o o o w 0 N) C4 'a C 0 CD 0090 -000000 200 00000000000000008b m -4 + + K3 'i + + 0 w + m cc %MW"W O"w .0 0 CY) 00 0 N) W 00 w M C,3 0 (D Mi WfJOW04-wo -40 > ..0 z 0 0 -4 > P m m moo 4 rn 00 0 TABLE D.12 (Continued) WALKING TRAILS, 2000 BICYCLING TRAILS, 1970 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Miles Miles Miles Miles miles ImIles Miles Miles Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region. Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 .038 13 + 0 .063 15 .039 22 .024 5 + 0 .027 10 .023 9 2 --- - .046 17 + 0 .023 26 ... + 0 + 0 + 0 3 --- - .062 14 + 0 .033 24 --- --- + 0 .033 8 .016 17 4 .069 5 --- --- .098 9 .071 9 + 0 --- --- .057 5 .006 25 5 .061 8 .090 5 .078 12 .069 11 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 6 --- --- .028 18 + 0 .017 30 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 .032 15 .069 12 .049 17 .039 22 022 6 0 + 0 .014 19 8 --- --- .070 11 .057 16 .063 15 --- --- .058 3 + 0 .023 9 6 --- --- .093 4 .017 20 .064 14 --- --- .044 5 + 0 .036 3 10 .059 9 .105 2 .102 6 .066 12 061 1 .104 2 .078 3 .063 1 11 .051 10 --- --- .081 11 .051 19 .031 3 --- --- + 0 .031 5 12 0 + 0 .239 1 .050 20 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 13 .040 12 .071 10 .102 6 .066 12 .005 18 + 0 .077 4 .020 14 14 .037 14 .066 13 .072 14 .059 16 .017 9 .054 4 .046 6 .042 2 15 --- --- .109 1 .120 3 .111 1 --- --- .022 9 + 0 .016 17 16 .010 22 --- --- .045 18 .012 32 010 15 + 0 .010 21 17 .064 6 --- --- + 0 .058 18 .016 12 --- --- + 0 .013 20 18*Midland .050 11 .081 7 + 0 .049 21 .017 9 .158 1 + 0 .022 12 *Odessa .064 6 .013 14 19 --- --- .007 23 .028 19 .011 33 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 20 .0 .27 18 --- --- + 0 .022 27 .008 16 --- --- .136 1 .034 4 21 .023 20 --- --- + 0 .018 29 .005 18 ... --- + 0 .003 26 22 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 23 .030 16 .053 15 + 0 .031 25 .008 16 + 0 + 0 .007 24 24 - --- .048 16 .075 13 .059 16 --- --- .016 10 .030 9 .023 9 25 .103 2 .008 22 .117 4 .100 5 .032 2 + 0 o86 2 .031 5 26 --- --- .101 3 + 0 .075 8 --- --- .034 7 + .0 .022 12 27 .097 3 .093 6 .131 2 .101 4 .022 6 .041 6 .044 7 .025 8 28 .029 17 .010 21 .009 22 .015 31 .017 9 .014 11 .023 11 .017 15 29 .108 1 ... --- + 0 .107 2 .028 4 --- --- + 0 .028 7 30 - --- --- --- .105 5 .105 3 --- --- + 0 + 0 31 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- --- .077 8 .091 10 .082 7 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 33 .089 4 .017 19 .014 21 .070 10 .015 13 + 0 + 0 .010 21 34*Brownsville .026 19 + 0 + 0 .020 28 .020 8 + 0 0 .009 23 *McAllen .022 21 .003 21 35 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 .004 20 --- --- + 0 .003 26 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 36 016 20 + 0 .010 34 37 --- --- .077 8 .102 6 .084 6 --- --- .024 8 + 0 .017 15 AVERAGE .064 .044 .060 .061 .026 .018 .019 .024 1 269 > < m 09 > C) CD m :3 CL 0 CD CD + + + a) 03(m Lq (n w -0 m Pr b b ++: .... ++C.)"+:::+ +::20+0:0+++ +: 0 co ri cla a) c (D 0 0) m 4 00 co 0 0 0 C.) 0) 0 0 0 co 00 0 -00000 Ln 4@ r) 00. Coco 0) z Q -4 V "a m 0 > CD ... ...... ... (2 ... W+ ........ w r- 4@ 14 Ul 10 .. 0 0 0 * z T -0 0 c + + + CD CD jo ul 0) C4 w ED Pi 00 -4 00 C.) to W -4 li C) - 0 z 0 > rn r m 000 0 (D + + 00 C03 (2 Coll OW + + (83 N) E. 8 W- 0 j -4 -4 0 '1 cn ED -C@ co 0 a) 0 m m 00-Aw D. Z@ j 4 0 0 co (D (D 0 00+ -M + + @W+ + + + + tj w 13 0 @j a Ln CD 00 CO co tj Fo 0 r (n 0000 0 -th, -4 0 0 WCOOO -Z@OOOO 8 CO 0 z L) + . . . . . . . . bm + 0b) 8 . . . . . . . . . C.) C.) . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 to 00 CY) (n 0 z co 0000000MO-L"COC)OO 00004K3000000C)OO000 0 c 0 a bb K):@ " tj ca CD co to Ul 8 Zn Z ES !R '101 !2 cS 8 COD c7n 8 5; FO > z 0 m 0-0 CD 0 CO (n CD K3 to a) 0 0 0 Z. a) - a li fl) -j N) 0 pi Cl) 0 a) 0 P6 w 00 (4 co r TABLE D.12 (Continued) BICYCLING TRAILS, 1990 BICYCLING TRAILS, 2000 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS M;Ies 9 Ties - ffrsl- Miles miles Miles Miles Miles Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 .033 14 .037 11 .037 12 .034 is .024 15 .058 9 .031 14 .029 19 2 --- --- .037 11 + 0 .020 21 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 3 --- --- .071 3 + 0 .038 15 --- --- .083 4 .024 16 .056 12 4 .064 5 --- --- .096 2 .067 3 069 5 + 0 .065 8 5 .020 16 + 0 .064 8 .05 16 .020 16 + 0 .062 6 .035 18 6 --- --- .027 13 + 0 .018 22 ... --- .028 13 + 0 .017 22 7 .032 15 + 0 + 0 .022 20 032 14 + 0 + 0 .024 20 8 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 9 ... ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 10 .069 4 .124 1 .104 1 .074 1 063 7 .137 2 .102 2 .072 6 11 .042 11 - --- .060 9 .042 13 .041 12 --- --- .041 11 .041 16 12 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .005 16 + 0 .003 28 13 + 0 + 0 .070 5 .017 23 + 0 + 0 .034 13 .008 26 14 .083 1 .055 5 .006 17 .064 5 .074 3 .056 11 .058 8 .062 9 15 --- --- .038 10 .090 3 .049 9 --- --- .109 3 .040 12 .095 1 16 .002 18 .023 15 .003 28 .002 20 --- ... + 0 .002 29 17 .064 5 --- ... + 0 .057 8 .048 10 --- --- + 0 .043 14 18*Midland .047 9 082 2 + 0 .039 14 .050 9 081 5 0 .042 15 *Odessa .040 12 .043 11 19 --- --- .008 14 .031 13 .013 26 --- --- .014 15 .028 15 .017 22 20 .008 17 --- --- .042 11 .014 25 018 17 --- --- .047 10 .022 21 21 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 .011 19 --- ... + 0 .009 25 22 --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- ... --- --- + 0 + 0 23 3 + 0 + 0 .061 7 088 1 + 0 + 0 .077 3 24 --- --- .066 4 .069 6 .067 3 --- --- .076 7 .075 5 .075 4 25 .074 2 + 0 .078 4 .071 2 080 2 .148 1 .088 3 .083 2 26 - --- .048 7 + 0 .034 18 --- --- .081 5 .059 7 .075 4 27 .047 9 .041 9 .065 7 .049 9 058 8 .041 12 .082 4 .061 10 28 .035 13 .047 8 .012 16 .035 16 .039 13 .057 10 .009 17 .039 17 29 .062 7 --- --- + 0 .062 6 .066 6 --- --- .267 1 .067 7 30 --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- ... --- + 0 + 0 31 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 33 .061 8 + 0 + 0 .044 12 .073 4 + 0 + 0 .054 13 34*Brownsville + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .013 18 + 0 + 0 .007 27 .McAllen + 0 + 0 3@ + 0 --- --- + 0 .009 27 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 36 --- --- .055 5 .031 13 .046 11 --- --- .062 8 .053 9 .059 11 37 --- ... + 0 .055 10 .015 24 --- --- .019 14 + 0 .014 24 AVERAGE 050 .030 .033 .046 .053 .052 .033 .051 271 TABLE D.12 (Continued) NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1970 NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1975 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO URBAN AREAS Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 .002 16 + 0 + 0 .001 .17 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 2 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 3 ... --- + 0 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 4 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 5 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .003 10 + 0 + 0 .001 10 6 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 + + 0 + 0 + + 7 003 10 + 0 0 .002 13 0 0 8 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 9 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 10 .003 10 + 0 + 0 .003 7 008 7 + 0 .027 1 .009 6 11 .003 10 --- + 0 .003 7 .005 8 --- --- + 0 .005 8 12 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 13 .005 4 0 + 0 .002 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 14 .004 6 0 + 0 .001 17 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 15 --- --- + 0 + Q + G --- --- .019 1 + 0 .014 2 16 .004 6 --- --- + 0 .004 6 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 17 .004 6 --- --- + 0 .003 7 + 0 --- --- + 0 0 18*Midland .004 6 + 0 .065 1 .014 3 .018 2 + 0 + 0 .012 5 *Odessa .003 10 014 6 19 ... ... + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 + 20 002 16 0 .002 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 21 .005 4 + 0 .003 7 .018 2 --- ... + 0 .013 4 22 --- --- + 0 + 0 --- --- ... --- + 0 + 0 23 001 19 + 0 + 0 .001 17 .004 9 + 0 + 0 .003 9 24 ... ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 25 .008 3 + 0 0 .008 5 015 5 + 0 + 0 .014 2 26 --- ... .034 1 + 0 .022 2 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 27 .001 19 + 0 + 0 .001 17 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 28 .017 2 + 0 + 0 .009 4 .017 4 + 0 + 0 .008 7 29 .003 10 + 0 .003 7 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 30 --- --- --- - --- + 0 + 0 --- --- --- + 0 + 0 31 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... ... + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 33 .034 1 + 0 + 0 .024 1 .039 1 + 0 + 0 .028 1 34*Brownsville .002 16 + 0 + 0 .002 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *McAllen .003 10 + 0 35 .004 6 ... --- + 0 .003 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 36 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 - + 0 + 0 + 0 37 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .005 .001 .002 .004 .007 .001 .001 .006 272 TABLE D.12 (Continued) NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1980 NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1990 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN Uaft&L&aUL Miles Miles Miles Miles miles Miles Miles Miles Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 .018 4 .004 11 2 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 3 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 m.. --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 .005 9 .015 7 --- ... + 0 .014 7 4 005 9 5 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 6 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 7 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 8 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 9 --- --- + .0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 10 .009 7 .023 2 + 0 .009 6 018 6 .025 1 .023 3 .018 6 11 .007 8 --- --- .054 2 .007 7 .015 7 --- --- + 0 .014 7 12 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + .0 13 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 +1 0 + 0 14 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 15 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... ... .025 1 + 0 .020 3 16 .001 11 --- - + 0 .001 11 .001 11 --- + 0 .001 13 17 .015 5 ... --- + 0 .073 4 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 18*Midland .019 2 + 0 + 0 .012 5 .031 3 + 0 + 0 .020 3 *Odessa .014 6 .020 5 19 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- - .008 4 + 0 .006 10 20 + 0 --- - + 0 + 0 + 0 ... ... + 0 + 0 21 + 0 + 0 + 0 .014 9 --- .042 2 .020 3 22 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 ... --- ... --- + 0 + 0 23 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 24 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- + 0 + 0 + 0 25 .017 3 + 0 .119 1 .017 3 .036 2 + 0 .078 1 .035 2 26 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 27 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 +3 0 28 .017 3 + 0 + 0 .007 7 .027 4 + 0 + 0 .009 9 29 .002 10 --- --- + 0 .002 10 .004 10 ... --- + 0 .004 1 30 --- --- ... --- + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- + 0 + 0 31 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- --- .028 1 + 0 .018 2 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 33 .042 1 + 0 + 0 .030 1 090 1 .019 3 + 0 .068 1 34*Brownsville + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 *McAllen + 0 + 0 35 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 36 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- 0 0 + 0 37 ... --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... + 0 + 0 + 0 AVERAGE .009 .002 .003 .007 .018 .004 .005 .015 273 > < '1 0) 0 .4 (A) to 0 00 -j Ul N rl) N) 0 m 09 5' 4 m CL 3 > C) m :3 CL 0 M '0+ +: 2 2: + 'p, cl, hj Ln 0 w W 2:@ 2: cn 00 ow coo- cn 0 rj Ca 0 4, IJ W 0 0 CO CD 0 CD 00 0 CD 0 + + + + + + 0 0 w " 0 z CD w cr) cn . . . > 0 -4 c m m U) 0 ... ......... b ...... ...... b96@ ........ 6 6 K) @) c a > 00- 930 0 z 0 0 coo 000000000WO00000 000000-4"00000000M 'C > 0 0 b b ou + + + + 00 + + 0 a + + coi + +2++ 22 . . . . . . . . . . 2 0 0 K) 0 - + + 0 LTI -1 00 w 00 4 4@b - -P, Co Ul > m 20 m > 000 0-0001:@;OOW080(noo 00 oo::!,C.) o o 'i -N o o o o o o r 0 5 MID r_ 0 CD (n @j . . . + + Z i@ : 8 : 2 hJ 2 PJ UP @4 00 ci NA) (a W.. Lin M Ln 104D CCO) @4 C) CO '.0 m mtjw aw 3@, 0 w m M -a '0 (7) -4 + + + LOTI C-3) C-.) 0 4h cyl + c La 00 -N al 0) li CA) 0'0 "1 (,n - (A Nj 000-04 0 coo 0 0 LI) w p. 0 0 r z 0 VID + .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 z 10i (om:@ 8 + 2 0 + A 0 � 0 6 " C) & u 0 w+,05;22+2+-4 2 ZS > C) 00, 00 w li 0 0 co 0 00 ol CA) 0 OD - CF) - j -4 c 0 m C. owo "P. 0" N C-0 o 8 Z3 2 w 8 c owo 2 m o C"" o 0 @-j o mm o 0 CM0 w w 2 ;vr MID 0 b bbb b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b co 008 4 0 p. + . c 0 0 C4 w w to 4 CO C" -4 Ul Cn 0 60 0 0 m w -ob awo hjo- w -j co 00 %J li 4 w ha zo- @4 > > M r m TABLE D.12 (Continued) COMBINED WALKING, BICYCLING, NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1975 COMBINED WALKING, BICYCLING, NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1980 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN -URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank. 1 .064 9 .062 4 .025 17 .056 8 .059 8 + 0 .045 10 .051 15 2 - --- ... - '4 0 .060 6 .044 13 .053 9 06 7 + .037 22 3 - --- .055 7 + 0 .029 22 ... --- .055 11 .029 15 .043 18 4 + 0 - --- .056 10 .005 31 .050 13 .053 7 .051 15 .051 11 + 0 017 17 .035 25 5 041 12 088 2 .017 20. .036 19 6 --- --- .052 9 + 0 .038 18 .027 20 + 0 .019 31 .7 .033 15 .047 10 + 0 .029 22 .033 16 .052 12 + 0 .030 28 8 --- - + 0 .041 14 .024 25 .061 8 .043 12 .051 15 9 ... --- .044 11 + 0 .033 20 ... - .044 .15 + 0 .036 24 10 .077 4 .164 1 .108 3 .082 1 .079 3 .136 1 .059 6 .080 5 11 .052 10 --- .074 5 .052 10 .051 11 - .107 2 .052 14 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 12 + 0 007 20 + 0 .004 32 13 .019 19 .028 17 .111 2 .044 15 .019 20 .027 20 .072 4 .034 26 14 .032 16 .053 8 .063 7 .050 11 .046 14 .061 8 .061 5 .057 10 15 --- --- .075 3 .054 11 .069 6 --- --- .096 3 .050 9 .085 3 16 .009 21 --- ... .060 8 .010 29 .010 22 --- ... + 0 .009 33 17 .077 4 --- --- + 0 .067 7 .077 5 ... --- + 0 .067 9 18*Midland .091 2 + 0 + 0 .048 13 .075 6 .083 4 + 0 .055 12 , *Odessa .042 11 .058 10 19. --- --- .010 19 + 0 .008 30 - --- .038 18 .033 14 .037 22 20 .021 18 --- .035 15 .023 26 028 17 + 0 .024 29 21 .018 20 + 0 .013 28 + 0 - ... + 0 + 0 22 --- - + 0 + 0 --- --- - --- + 0 + 0 23 .035 14 + 0 .035 15 .033 20 .044 15 .041 17 0 .041 20 24 --- ... .043 13 .048 12 .045 14 --- --- .065 6 .045 10 o56 11 25 .082 3 .036 15 .074 5 .081 2 ill 2 .045 13 .179 1 .109 2 26 --- --- .061 5 + 0 .042 16 ... _7 .112 2 + 0 .077 7 27 .070 7 .040 14 .106 4 .071 5 .070 7 .080 5 .087 3 .072 8 28 .068 8 .021 18 .021 18 .042 16 .059 8 .035 19 .017 17 .042 19 29 @074 6 --- --- .291 1 .076 3 .079 3 ... --- + 0 .078 6 30 - --- --- --- + 0 + 0 --- ... --- ... .018 16 .111 1 31 + 0 + 0 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 32 .029 16 + 0 .019 27 --- --- .056 10 053. 7 .055 12 33 .100 1 + 0 .020 19 .074 4 .112 1 .005 22 0 .081 4 34*Brownsville .038 13 + 0 + 0 .025 24 .028 17 + 0 + 0 .022 30 *McAllen .025 17 .027 19 35 + 0 + 0 + 0 .012 21 ... --- + 0 .011 32 36 --- --- + 0 + 0 + 0 --- ... .044 15 .036 13 .041 20 37 - .046 12 .058 9 .050 11 ... ... .045 13 + 0 .032 27 AVERAGE .056 .035 .030 .051 .066 .045 .029 .059 275 TABLE D.12 (Continued) COMBINED WALKING, BICYCLING, NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 1990 COMBINED WALKING, BICYCLING, NATURE STUDY TRAILS, 2000 TOTAL TOTAL METRO CITY TOWN URBAN AREAS METRO CITY TOWbI URBAN AREAS Miles Miles 01-e-s Miles Miles Miles le. Miles Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Per 1000 Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank 1 .104 13 .075 12 .091 12 .098 14 .062 16 .058 19 .110 12 .071 21 2 --- --- .111 6 .044 17 .080 18 --- --- .046 23 + 0 .023 33 3 ... --- .119 5 + 0 .063 22 ... --- .146 6 .024 24 .089 19 4 .147 5 --- --- .144 5 .147 6 151 6 .098 15 .147 8 5 .101 14 + 0 .159 3 .116 10 .919 1 090 13 .140 9 .110 12 6 --- --- .055 18 + 0 .037 27 --- --- .056 20 + 0 .035 30 7 .063 16 .057 17 + 0 .052 24 065 15 .069 18 .049 21 .063 24 8 --- --- .066 14 + 0 .029 30 --- --- .070 17 .057 18 .063 24 9 --- --- .075 12 + 0 .051 25 --- ... .093 13 .017 26 .064 23 10 .154 14 .261 1 .255 1 .167 4 141 7 .275 1 .236 4 .158 6 11 .117 10 --- --- .121 8 .117 8 .107 13 --- --- .142 8 .107 14 12* + 0 + 0 .016 21 .003 34 + 0 .005 22 .279 2 .062 26 13 .039 18 .050 20 .139 6 .067 20 .040 19 .071 16 .135 10 .074 20 14 .110 12 .120 4 .119 9 .117 8 .112 12 -122 9 .130 11 .121 10 15 --- --- .163 2 .135 7 .157 5 --- --- .248 2 .160 6 .231 1 16 .015 23 --- --- .046 16 .017 32 013 22 .045 23 .014 34 17 .128 8 --- --- + 0 .113 11 .127 9 --- --- + 0 .116 11 18*Midland .140 6 082 9 + 0 .105 12 .118 11 163 4 + 0 .105 15 *Odessa .120 9 .128 8 19 --- --- .057 17 .062 14 .058 23 --- - .021 24 .056 19 .028 31 --- --- 045 18 .047 22 .045 28 20 033 19 .042 18 .034 28 21 .027 20 --- --- .042 18 .031 29 .057 17 --- --- + 0 .045 28 22 --- --- ... - + 0 + 0 ... --- --- --- + 0 + 0 23 .096 15 .066 14 .096 11 .094 15 120 10 .053 21 + 0 .110 12 24 ... --- .111 6 .069 13 .092 16 --- --- .124 7 .149 7 .135 9 25 .206 2 + 0 .157 4 .198 1 223 3 .155 5 .293 1 .221 2 26 --- --- .143 3 + 0 .103 13 ... .182 3 .059 17 .151 7 .155 5 124 7 .214 5 .162 5 27 136' 7 .082 9 .174 2 .138 7 28 .115 11 .060 16 .012 23 .067 20 .088' 14 .072 15 .018 25 .061 27 29 .169 3 --- - + 0 .168 3 .179 4 --- ... .267 3 .179 4 30 ... --- --- ... + 0 + 0 --- --- --- --- .105 13 .105 15 31 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 32 --- - --- .081 11 .049 15 .070 19 --- .103 10 .091 16 .099 17 33 .231 1 .019 21 .016 21 .173 2 266 2 .050 22 .014 27. .204 3 34*13rownsville .047 17 + 0 + 0 .028 31 .039 20 + 0 + 0 .026 32 *McAllen .018 22 @022 21 35 .621 21 + 0 .009 33 + 0 --- --- + 0 + 0 36 --- --- .055 18 .031 20 .046 26 --- .078 13 .053 20 .069 22 37 --- --- .085 8 .110 10 .092 16 ... --- .096 11 .012 14 .098 18 AVERAGE .134 .077 .071 .121 .138 .102 .101 .130 indicate regions not having metros or cities. Midland, Odessa, Brownsville, and McAllen are metro areas. Figures for cities, towns, + indicates facilities were not required or units per 1,000 population were less than and total urban areas are listed adjacent to Odessa and Brownsville were applicable. .001. 276 TABLE D.13 REGIONAL COMPARISONS OF URBAN INCREMENTAL FACILITY RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS PER THOUSAND POPULATION FOR SELECTED SALTWATER URBAN OUTDOOR RECREATION FACILITIES BY CITY-SIZE, 1970-2000 BOAT RAMPS, SALTWATER (2.0 LANES PER RAMP) METRO CITY TOWN TOTAL URAN AREAS Ramps Ramps Ramps Ramps Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Per 1,000 Year Region Population Rank Population Rank Population Rank Popualtion Rank 24 --- --- .031 2 .015 3 25 .006 3 + 0 .006 4 1970 27 .004 4 .004 5 28 .128 1 .072 1 + 0 .087 2 33 .093 2 .502 1 .145 1 34 .024 2 .004 5 Average .007 .006 .024 .009 24 --- --- .014 2 .008 3 25 .001 4 .018, 1 .002 5 1975 27 .004 3 .003 4 28 .017 1 .010 3 + 0 .012 1 33 .009 2 .040 1 .012 1 34 + 0. + * 0 Average .001 .002 .002 .001 24 --- + 0 + 0 25 .001 3 + 0 .001 3 1980 27 + 0 + 0 28 .008 1 + 0 .017 2 .007 2 33 .008 1 .037 1 .011 1 34 + 0 + 0 Average .001 + .003 .001 24 --- ... + 0 + 0 25 .002 3 + 0 .002 3 1990 27 + 0 + 0 28 .018 1 .013 1 + 0 .012 2 33 .013 2 .032 1 .014 1 34 + 0 0 Average .001 .001 .002 .001 24 --- ... .010 1 .005 3 25 .001 3 .008 3 .001 4 2000 27 + 0 + 0 28 .029 1 .010 1 + 0 .012 2 33 om 2 .056 1 .018 1 34 + 0 + 0 Average .001 .002 .003 .001 --- indicate Region 24 does not have a metro area. * indicates (by region) metros, cities, or towns not having saltwater access. + indicates ramps were not required or ramps per 1,000 population were less than .001. 277 Appendix 5 PARTIAL LISTING OF STATE AND FEDERAL PROGRAMS APPLICABLE TO OUTDOOR RECREATION STATE PROGRAMS as general reference materials providing more detailed information. The following information is presented as a partial listing of State Programs and Agencies whose 1 . Catalog of State Services to Local activities may have an impact on the provision of Governments, September 1970 edition, outdoor recreational opportunity or outdoor out of print but may be available from a recreation planning in Texas. The list is partial in that local public library or the Texas State new programs may have been added since its Library, Austin, Texas. compilation from documents listed below. Resources made available through the programs listed may vary 2. Guide to Texas State Agencies, 1972, 4th from time to time. Policy guidelines, agency edition, Lyndon B. Johnson School of priorities, or funding levels may preclude aid to the Public Affairs, Austin, Texas, Price entent desired and the user should be aware that each $10.00. agency or commission may change its policies and/or programs after publication of this list. Interested 3. The Legal Basis for Planning in Texas: A users are urged to contact the agency involved to Handbook, January 1973, Division of determine its capabilities to meet his needs. Users are Planning Coordination, Office of the also encouraged to utilize the documents listed below Governor, Austin, Texas. PARTIAL LISTING OF STATE PROGRAMS APPLICABLE TO OUTDOOR RECREATION PROGRAMS PROGRAM PRIMARILY APPLICABLE TO ADMINISTERING STATE AGENCY AGENCY ADDRESS PROGRJ Airport Technical Any political subdivision Texas Aeronautics Chief Engineer t FAssistance Commission Texas Aeronautics Commission 204 West 16th Street Austin, TX 78701 278 PARTIAL LISTING OF STATE PROGRAMS APPLICABLE TO OUTDOOR RECREATION PROGRAMS PROGRAM PRIMARILY APPLICABLE TO ADMINISTERING STATE AGENCY AGENCY ADDRESS Approval of Bond Districts created under Texas Water Texas Water Rights Sam Houston State Office Issues for Districts Rights Commission Commission Building Box 12396, Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 Assistance in the Fine Local governmental agencies, private University of Texas at Dean of College of Fine Arts Arts groups, communities and other education- Austin University of Texas at al institutions Austin Drama Building 101 Austin, TX 78712 Attorney Generals Any interested person Attorney Generals Office Attorney Generals Office Seminar on Eminent Box R, Capitol Station Domain Austin, TX 78711 Boat Ramp Construction Subdivisions of government, recognized Texas Parks and Wildlife John H. Reagan Building and Maintenance Access civic organizations Department Austin, TX 78701 Roads and Comfort Stations on Public Waters Business Enterprises Any udit of local government Texas State Commission for 317 Sam Houston State Office Program: Commission the Blind Building for the Blind Austin, TX 78701 Camp and Recreational Public agencies, professional designers, Texas State Department of Division of Sanitary Area Sanitation business firms, private citizens Health Engineering 1100 West 49th Street Austin, TX 78156 Center for Environmental Any governmental unit or municipalities North Texas State Univer- North Texas State University Studies sity Denton, TX 76203 City Manager Internship Any city with council-manager government North Texas State Univer- Chairman, Department of Program which meets standards of International sity Political Science City Management Association North Texas State University Denton, TX 76203 Coastal and Ocean Any individual with educational back- Texas A&M University Short Course Director Engineering Short ground (usually bachelor's degree) in Division of Coastal and Course Science or Engineering Ocean. Engineering Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843 279 PARTIAL LISTING OF STATE PROGRAMS APPLICABLE TO OUTDOOR RECREATION PROGRAMS PROGRAM PRIMARILY APPLICABLE TO ADMINISTERING STATE AGENCY AGENCY ADDRESS Community development; Any community interested in economic Texas Tourist Development Chief of Community Relations Tourism development through tourism Agency Texas Tourist Development Agency Box TT, Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 Community Service Regional planning commission, councils Texas A&M University Community Service Seminar Seminars of government, policyrnakers Program Department of Economics Texas A&M University College Station, TX 78743 Concentrated Employment City and county governments and local Texas Employment Administrator Program non-profit organizations Commission Texas Employment Commission Austin, TX 78701 Consultant Services on Any municipality, volunteer Office of the Governor Executive Director Aging organization, individual, institution Governor's Committee on Aging Box 12125, Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 Creation of Water Any town, community, county, private Texas Water Rights Texas Water Rights Commis- Control and Improvement development or subdivision Commission sion . Districts Sam Houston State Office Building Austin, TX 78711 Dam and Reservoir Any individual, city, water district or Texas Water Rights Commis- Texas Water Rights Commis- Project Approval other political subdivision sion sion Sam Houston State Office Building Austin, TX 78711 Ecologically based Any governmental unit except districts, Stephen F. Austin State Special Programs recreation and open councils of government, regional University School of Forestry space development councils organized undev Stephen F. Austin State state law University Nacogdoches, TX 75961 Employment Service Small Small communities needing services Texas Employment Chief of Placement Depart- Communities Team Commission ment Texas Employment Commission Austin, TX 78701 Enforcement of Effluent Any person, public or private corpora- Texas Water Quality Board Director, Field Operations Standards tion affected by wastewater discharge Texas Water Quality Board 1108 Lavaca Street Austin, TX 78701 280 PROGRAMS PROGRAM PRIMARILY APPLICABLE TO ADMINISTERING STATE AGENCY AGENCY ADDRESS Environmental Any governmental unit except districts, Stephen F. Austin State Special Programs Conservation councils of government, regional devel- University School of Forestry opment councils organized understate SPA law Box 6109 Nacogdoches, TX 75961 Financial Assistance to Any political subdivision (city, water Texas Water Development Texas Water Development Political Subdivisions district, etc.) of the state Board Board in Development of Water 301 West 2nd Street Supply Projects Box 12386 Capitol ttatlion Austin, TX 78711 Flood Plain Information Local governmental units having severe Texas Water Development Texas Water Development Program flood hazards Board Board 301 West 2nd Street Box 12386 Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 Forest Property Valua- Any governmental unit except districts, Stephen F. Austin State Special Programs tion councils of government, regional devel- University School of Forestry opment councils organized under state SPA law Box 6109 Nacogdoches, TX 75961 Freshwater Fisheries All lake owners who meet specific Texas Parks and Wildlife John H. Reagan Building Lake Surveys and Manage- requirements Department Austin, TX 78701 ment Herbarium Plant-Identi- Parks and Wildlife Department of any University of Texas at Director, LIT Herbarium fication Service county, city, etc., physicians seeking Austin University of Texas at information on possible toxic plants Austin Building 222 Austin, TX 78712 Hunter Safety Training Any interested groups Texas Parks and Wildlife Director, I&E Division Program-Hunting and Local Texas Parks and Texas Parks and Wildlife Fishing Laws Wildlife Law Enforcement John H. Reagan Building Offices Austin, TX 78701 Institute for Small Representatives of cities and counties, Texas State Historical Museum Consultant Museums private organizations and groups, and Survey Committee Texas State Historical individuals Survey Committee 108 West 15th Street Austin, TX 78711 Land and Water Conserva- State of Texas and political subdivisions Texas Parks and Wildlife John H. Reagan Building tion program (cities counties, river authorities and Department Austin, TX 78701 water districts.) Only outdoor recrea- tion proposals which cannot be financed in any other manner are eligible. 281 PROGRAMS PROGRAM PRIMARILY APPLICABLE TO ADMINISTERING STATE AGENC -Y AGE NCY ADDRESS Live Wildlife Conserva- This program is restricted to Fairs, Texas Parks and Wildlife Wildlife Exhibits Supervisor tion Education Program Boat and Sport Shows, Livestock Exposi- Department John H. Reagan Building tions and Similiar events. Interested Austin, TX 78701 organizations should contact the admin- istering agency for further information. Local Planning Assist- Cities of 50,000 population or less Office of the Governor Local,Planning Assistance 'd-F-ce Program Program Office of the Governor Drawer P, Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 Local Sales and Use Tax Any municipality may adopt the Local State Comptroller of State Comptroller Act Sales and Use Tax by complying with Public Accounts Capitol Station provisions of the Act Austin, TX 78711 Grant Program: National Cities, counties, non-profit organiza- Texas Fine Arts Commission Executive Director Endowment for the Arts tions, service clubs Texas Fine Arts Commission 825 Brown Building Austin, TX 78701 Off-Duty Police Office Regional planning commissions, councils Office of the Governor Criminal Justice Council in Civic and Recreation- of governments, units of local govern- Office of the Governor al Programs ment 730 Littlefield Building Austin, TX 78701 Older Americans Act Any municipality, volunteer organiza- Office of the Governor Executive Director tion, educational institutions, local Governor's Committee on committee on aging Aging Box 12125, Capital Station Austin, TX 78711 Outdoor Recreation Municipalities with populations of Texas Parks and Wildlife Executive Director Planning Assistance 7,500 or less, Counties with populations Department John H. Reagan Building of 15,000 or less Austin, TX 78701 Park Administration Communities requesting assistance with- Texas Tech University Department of Park Admini- Projects in reasonable distance stration, Horticulture and Entomology Texas Tech University Lubbock, TX 79409 Planning of Manpower Local governments who desire to Office of the Governor Manpower Planning Staff Development and Training establish manpower planning Office of the Governor Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 282 PROGRAMS RAM PRIMARILY APPLICABLE TO ADMINISTERING STATE AGENCY AGENCY ADDRESS Prevention and Control Any municipality Texas A&M University Director of Forest Tree Pests in Texas Forest Service a Municipality College Station, TX 78743 Public Beach Cleaning Any city or county of Texas which Texas Parks and,Wildlife Executive Director and Maintenance Fund borders on Gulf of Mexico Department John H. Reagan Building Austin, TX 78701 Public Health Education, Any city, county or regional organiza- Texas Tech University Department of Health, Physical Education and tion interested in promoting sports, Physical Education and Recreation Services recreation, etc. Recreation for Men Texas Tech University Tech Station Lubbock, TX Public Relations Seminar City, county or regional groups or Texas Tech University Department of Journalism organizations Texas Tech University Tech Station Lubbock, TX 79409 Reclamation Engineer Any district, individual or corporation Texas Water Development Chief Engineer Services and Authority Board Texas Water Development Board Box 12386 Austin, TX 78711 Recreation for Senior Recreation directors and others in North Texas State Univer- Director Citizens in Hospitals, public and private institutions, hospi- sity University Center for Nursing Homes and Insti- tals, nursing homes, etc. Community Services tutions North Texas State University Denton, TX 76201 Southwest Park and Any city, county, state or federal Texas Tech University Department of Park Adminis- Recreation Training agency may enroll park and recreation tration, Horticulture and I nstitute personnel Entomology Texas Tech University Tech Station Lubbock, TX 79409 State Parks Facilities All socio-economic groups Texas Parks and Wildlife I&E Division Information Department John H. Reagan Building Austin, TX 78701 Surplus Property Educational institutions, educational Texas Surplus Property Executive Director,.Texas Donation radio and TV, public libraries, medical Agency Surplus Property Agency institutions, Civil Defense organizations 3507 Copeland Box 8120, Wainwright Station San Antonio, TX 78208 263 PROGRAMS PROGRAM PRIMARILY APPLICABLE TO ADMINISTERING STATE AGENCY AGENCY ADDRESS Swimming Pool Operator Municipalities, local health department, Texas State Department of Division of Sanitary Training YMCA's, etc., or any group wanting Health Engineering assistance Texas State Department of Health 111 West 49th Street Austin, TX 78756 Technical Assistance to Any city greater than 12,000 or county Office of the Governor Technical Assistance Coor- Local Government may apply, private groups may find dinator assistance. Division of State-Local Relations Office of the Governor Drawer P, Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 Texas Airport Grant and Any political subdivision less than Texas Aeronautics Commis- Airport Facilities Super- Loan Program 50,000 sion visor Texas Aeronautics Commission 204 West 16th Street Austin, TX 78701 Texas Antiquities Comm- Any qualified person or group who meets Texas Antiquities Committee Executive Secretary ittee the criteria in the Code and Regulations Texas Antiquities Committee 108 West 15th Street Box 12276, Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 Texas Communities City administrators, community leaders, Office of the Governor Community Development Coor- Tomorrow local industrial development organiza- dinator tions Division of State-Local Relations Office of the Governor Austin, TX 78711 Texas Outdoor Recreation All interested groups Texas Parks and Wildlife Head, Comprehensive Planning Plan Department John H. Reagan Building Austin, TX 78701 Texas State Historical Cities, counties, private organizations, Texas State Historical Executive Director Survey Committee Services etc., interested in preservation of Survey Committee Texas State Historical local history Survey Committee 108 West 15th Street Box 12276, Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 284 PROGRAMS PROGRAM PRIMARILY APPLICABLE TO ADMINISTERING STATE AGENCY AGENCY ADDRESS Topographic Mapping Bona fide map users Texas Water Development Chief Engineer, Board Texas Water Development Program Board, OR Chairman, Texas Mapping Advisory Committee Box 12386 Austin, TX 78711 "Touring Program," Cities, counties, non-profit organiza- Texas Fine Arts Commission Texas Fine Arts Commission Cultural Activities tions, service clubs 825 Brown Building Support Austin, TX 78701 Trees for City Parks Any governmental unit except districts, Stephen F. Austin State Special Programs councils of governments, etc., organized University School of Forestry under state law Stephen F. Austin Box 6109 Nacogdoches, TX 75961 University Center for All local governmental officials and North Texas State Univer- Director, University Center Community Services employees sity for Community Services North Texas State University 1501 Maple Street Denton, TX 76201 Upstream Watershed Soil and Water Conservation Districts Texas State Soil and Water Texas State Soil and Water Protection and Flood and other political subdivisions Conservation Board Conservation Board Prevention 1018 First National Building Temple, TX 76501 Urban Service Program Local, regional, state officials in University of Texas at Director, Institute of urban areas Arlington Urban Studies University of Texas at Arlington University Station Arlington, TX 76010 Water Safety Education All Interested groups Texas Parks and Wildlife Executive Director Program Department John H. Reagan Building Austin, TX 78701 Water Use Permit Program Any individual, city, water district, Texas Water Rights Texas Water Rights Commission etc. Commission Sam Houston State Office Building Box 12397, Capitol Station Austin,TX 78711 285 PROGRAMS PROGRAM PRIMARILY APPLICABLE TO ADMINISTERING STATE AGENCY AGENCY ADDRESS Wildlife Conservation All interested groups (must be 18 yrs. Texas Parks and Wildlife Director, I &E Division and State Parks Films of age) Department John H. Reagan Building Library Austin, TX 78701 Winedale Restoration Rei3resentatives of cities, counties, Texas State H istorica I Restoration Architect Conference private groups interested in restora- Survey Committee Texas State Historical tion Survey Committee 108 West 15th Street Box 12276, Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711 FEDERAL PROGRAMS It should be noted that a Ii st of this type may 1. Federal Outdoor Recreation Programs, be incomplete due to continuing changes in the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. organization of agencies, policies, and directives from Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. the President of the United States and Congress. The The following , information is presented as a user must determine the availability of services for his partial list of available Federal programs related to interests. Users are also encouraged to consult the 2. Catalog of U. S. Federal Domestic Assistance outdoor recreation. The user is encouraged to contact most current issues of the following documents as Programs, Superintendent of Documents, U. S. the appropriate agency if interested in a particular general reference materials which provide more Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. program. In many instances, he may be referred to a detailed information. The list provided was extracted local or regional office for fulfillment of his request. from these documents. LISTING OF FEDERAL GRANT AND CREDIT PROGRAMS PROGRAM PRIMARILY APPLICA ETO 0 r o.2 0 M Z CL N E FEDERAL OUTDOOR 7i ADMINISTERING AGENCY 0 13 r RECREATION PROGRAMS LL E C-n W - Z a. U'j M FEDERAL AGENCY ADDRESS Special Programs for X X Office of the Secretary Department of Health, the Aging Education and Welfare Washington, D.C. 20201 Airports Federal Aid X X Federal Aviation Administra- Washington, D.C. 20590 tion Assistance to States for Tree X Forest Service Department of Agriculture Planting and Reforestation Washington, D.C. 20250 Comprehensive Planning X X Office of Planning and Management Department of Housing & Assistance Assistance, Community Planning andl Urban Development Development Washington, D.C. 20410 286 co CM (D c6 r6 0 to co 0 c 0 0 U) Cl) m r@ �! Lo v .- C) v C4 N cli C14 Lo 3 C14 cla 0c-4 E w Lo N 0 i:0 E ON R , R . C04 'o 0 'o 0 0 04 CD C 04 c 0C', < C4 04 t . < 2 > <' Li (3 (j -E (j > u ci -E Li 0 ci 6 136 < Li 2 - m > Z M 0 c; ci ci Li ci -0 6 t".6 -0 ci ci ci '7,0 -0 ci -0 0, C3 - e C@ e e e 6 e e e - e - e -C C- o 0 0 0 0 < 0 c . 0 E o 0 0 0 L; 0 0 E 0 E ES ES E V. o C" tS tS t 0 0 -S t E- m 00 CL a CL CL CL m 4)M 0 Cc MM d) 0 a) 0 W M LL LL In a c 0 0 0 (D a) .rz c (D > c a c M, 'T m (n C% 0 1 d) 0) CD r 0) 'o m 0 E E c .2 - m - z E E E E E E 0 0 z CL CL a LU 0 0 0 'a E :5 Cc cr < Lu a < < < .2 .2 0r al ID > a C < 0 > I o cn _j 2 (D .2 d) 0 - c 0 0 a c CL CL CC (D .2 -2 .0 .0 .;; x x - - w 0 0 0 w U) E-T E M E -T m T oE o s o E 0 LL uj cE ID c E E E E CL U. 0 -0 0 -0 E, LL w< ui< w < cn LL LL M z; D ca co x x x x x x x 0 Suollez!ue6j 0 w 4wessom x x -j I I co sesijdAGIU3 SIBAlAd x x x x x CL stsopez!uefijo < x x x x suognipsul x E leuoileonp3 CL x x x cc a ejejS x x x x x 0 x x cc 7 CL siels.184ul Rue (eial3e 11 %e 0 m 0 < 0 z c c @c > -i (D w - 0 0 0 'rz *rz cl) 4 E E E co c CL a 0. 0 LL LU 0 0 0 -1 0 cc 0 LL > LU 0 ID cr-, Ui a)C a 0 CL - 3 o Co _j 76 m 0) U. a Cc a T 0 m C 0 w (v CD c .0 LU > a, -j ca b 0 co C/3 co - E w u M > > w E E cL cm 0 0 0 0 0 cc w LL S cc a) cl m C co a) 0 C c c r c E E E 0 00 OM r.- 2 0 L) wm w -j w 0. LU LL LL w LL (D LL < L) W" 0 '00 M Z 0 M m r q) K r r r r @ r- -n r- "o r ;;-M 0 0 x 0 0 @ M 0 0 w 0) 0 r- w ico 0 = D M Z M CD 0 M M 0 3 3 4 M 2L Q CL CL CL CL CD CD 3 cO CL 0) M M 1 C) E (n CO 6 M E. o 0 a) C 'cn 3 ocD CD w M RL , 0 L_ -0 ID 0 CD rn 'a 0 M n U =$ - CD M CDD 0 C co CL 1 Z U CD Z C CD m n Cx (M ". I V; * I C 0 2 FL 0 CD 0 m 0 -0 C =r > M a 'a 3 c m @ 0. 3 @ C6 M CD = 5 T. CO M CD a) CD CL > m CD 0 5, 0 3 0 r 0 :3 0 3 Cb C*) 0 0) 0) CQ 0 0 CL CL > a) 0 :3 M 3 0 r CL CD 0 CL 0 0 3 CD -0 C 0 M 0 M C) 0 0 > 9 (n Federal and Interstate V - M x X. x x x x x State 0 0 M Local > x x x x x x 9 Government V x x x x x lEducational -institutions M x x x x x x x Non-Prof it Organizations > M x x x x x x Private r 0 Enterprises > Research m Organizations --I 0 x x x x x Individuals 0 9 Z -n K Z cn Go M > r a) 0 0 M a) 3 CL - :3 CL =t 0) CD 3 m > 'o 0 CD 0 CD 0 0 CD 0 0 a) Co C 21 . - m M 0 0 M M 0 a) m > M =r 3 M 3 > > > CD 0) U*. C r, CL CL 5 EL 3 3 (n C CL CD 0 1C) M CD - > CD Q. 0 Z) > 9 0 0 0 C16 0 3 CD W, 0) CD CD 0 0 3 CD 0) n M 0 0 CD M M 0 ::5: a 0 0 CD Co M 0) CD w (D 0) M M M CD W CD 0) CO 'a 0 .0 0.1 m m =r a) =r W 5 a) a CL 3 S' CD u@ 3 IR 3 U 0 3 3 uA w 3 0 0 IR IR 3 uR B 105 3 IR c) > > E; CD o - 0 - E; CD 0 Co 0 M 0 0 CD 0 w CD 0 M 0 0 0 a Z 0 a 0 a Z M r r CL k 0 2: 0 CL ri tj 3 C. M * N ro 5@. K) CD IQ 0 CD CD 0 0 CD T 0 CD 0 0 0 M C) 1,j Z w 0 N CID 04 Lr) LO 0 co CD 0 0 0 Cl) LD z N LO LO LO Lc) 0 N cli N N 2 CN LO C%l N I;t Ict N CN 75 N 0 0 0 0 0 .10 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 0 0 CN CN N C4 C4 N (14 C4 C14 N N CN C4 04 4) > '0 - < - C3 > (3 L) L) <Li (3 C3 (3 <C3 (3 LU 6 ci ci ci ci ci -a 0 CC 0 r 0 0 0 0 LU c0 c c o c c 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 a 0) - - C Z - - a), w E -M cm M E cm Een E Im ch CD E CD EIm E S S :3 c 0 c 12 :E t: t M M C, LU CL CL < co M M M w M M M CO (b Cc c 0 0 c c c > (DI 0 0 E E 2z 'Z a CL 0 M U) LU 0 0 M L) a E a c -i < < < .0 T3 (DI wc M > > .2 @2 0 w0 - U CA E @t .2 E a) 2 > M 4t 0 w :t 0 E - a ui E E w ca co z aS o 0 a M L) uj c ol QT ,E E CL .2 E M M E 'a LL 0'0 0) 'a t -0 E E 0 u 0 co Lu< w< < cr< LL cn W co cn LL sienp!A!PUI x x x x p suollez!Ue6jo 43jesseEl < sosijdj84u3 2 ezeAlJd x x x CL < suoileziue6jo > x x x suogn4ppul x x x leuoize3np3 CL tuotuujaA.E) x x x x x 1800-1 x x x 0@ e4els: x x x x x x x .4. pu. IL x x x x cc E 0 w TO a c cm 0 .0 CC 2 CL co 0z .2 2 2 0 w aL)) (>D a E 8 (D .S 0 0 0 0 4 - <- 'E w c c cm c 0. c (L Lo M 2 a) 0 E -D0 > 0 a, (D 0 UJ co c; ;, -0 c c c CD .2 ca a) 0 UJ C 2 CO. -;,0 .C, 'ro LD en .0 E U. M FL r o - c cu M LU E 0 -Lz :t 'd- c-i c = c 0 .- .- .2 0z 0'ci > o 0 co E m w > M in cr ui 0 Cc uLL LL M :3 C C 1 E c c .0 > =M m, = liE W0 -0 M I u cr0 M Eo E E E CzL 'ED OE' cc ct am)< M cc x(9 -j m LL U) L) U) (n V) cn < >-n -n -n v. -n -a -n > cy -n -1m cD > > -n CD CD CD m@ r G CD Co Co 3 Cp 0. cab I-D CL UL CR CD =r M :r Zo C" CD Cn 0) 3 EL =r m :3 11 Si CL w m CD CD Cn >m 0. m -< M > w CD 0 r CL CD >0 r' C 0 5 0 0 to CD 0 0) rm C M M 0 0 "0 m 0) m w CD LL m CL 0 0 CD G) -0 M 0 CD > 6' -n 6'3 CD 0 CL CD (b m m 0 CL 3. to CD r x CL 3 0 r CD 0 0 CD CD 0) 0 z > 0 m CD C to Co 0 -4 3 CL 0 0 00 M 0 > x x x x federal and jnterstate m 0 X x 0 x X x e Q x m z a] > 7- x x x x x x ernment V r cational x x x itutions -prof it x x x x > nizations z T 0 T x x x m x x te 0 > rproses > z arch m x x x -4 rn nizations 0 x x x x x x iduals rn 3 ,n EnC C w >m 0 > -n wCo -n < -n 0 C C 0. 0 0. m 0) "n = m 3 13 m 3 3 (cDL > T Ei _. I CD 2. S m 0 G. 0 m o > m LL0 m Co > m m > co U) 0 CL > r. Z 0 Et0 tt a) r1l V F CL CL c 0CD 92. 0 3 CL q 3 m CL F. CD 3 z m o -4 > m CD _n CL R. > V z ;_r m CD CD Co 0 (n q 0 m 0 > 0 m L5 L50 M (D CD a) 0)M a) CD 0) CD CD =r 0) 0 :r 0) S'A 5q a 51 to ('R !@ ts to to3 3 3 U23 UR a 3 - S % 3 U3 50 UR3 % 3 > > 0 0m 0CD 0 0 (D 0 0 1 0 0m 0 m m 0 CD 0 0 0 M 02, Do- 00- a 0 0 z m C) o > > to to a) wa 0 tj Vah rc nizat ions 'idu als m 0 En K) (D (A (A- Ln (5 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD CD Co o 0 0 0 o Lp qr G @2 v !R @) @ C41 le = Lp :3 04 CN Cl) 'C'14 7-5 CA@l A -5 eu,41 eq 3 N N 0 C*4 .2 2 CIA C4 (N 00 0 -0 00 0 0 N 0 N CD N CN a) N E 6 i - @i N 0, 04 (D CD cm m < > Li c3 < (3 (j (3 Li -E Li Li C3 u w . < . . E (3 z 0ci - - r 0 *8 ci ci z ci 6 ci - d z C3 "6 C3 C3 C3 ci cc 0 0 0 w 13 c Ic -C OCM C@ 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 r 0 r- 0 r- 0 0 0 0 0 E -C E cm E En E Im E 0, E 'E S 'E S E V. EIm E r r. E cm E - - 0 . I .C t E t E S S t E r E- E E 0. - - m E = -9 CL m m M CO m = M OL CL a OL CL CL CL CL w CL C. C& 'a CL W W a 0 M W M Q) 0 a) M CD w ca d) w w 0 0 0 C3 a C3 3: o m z > co L) d) w z E .2 .2 z FE w > w (D to (D '0 .0) u 'UP -0 .2 .0 2 .2 a 2 c Z r > > - c 0 > M 03 m t "6 a) LL w CL 0. CL CL a)= (1) a. w z -C U) - w U) E 0 cn Z U)M co 3 c c c c V m c w (D I T CL '0 a, .2 .2 .2 12 .2 a' .0 LL T 0 a) 0 w m m a C'l LL m m L) cn U- z z z LL z LL z sienp!A!PUI x x x x x x x x x x x 0 suollevue6jo LU 43jessaki < ses!jdJG4u3 2 8jeAJJd x x x x x x CL * suoiteziueojo x x x x x x x x * 4!;OJd-uON suo!4ni!zsul x leuo!ie*nP3 CL JUBLUUAGAOE) leoo-j cc a GIBIS 0 x x x x cc ezetsialul F-pue jejapa:1 x x Do E 0) cm 8 a) 0 z m E (M -j 0 c 4 - I m (D E CC (D C V a) c - E 0 2 E > > 0 cc c CL > w W 0 (D V cn (n w CO :5 c U. EL , 2 - -F- c 13 0 w 0) LL U- IL C iL .0 E cr Cc i@ w - - - 0 > CL 2 m -.p w > c a E c E E 0 0 0, c a m c 4, 0 0 .2 r- .2 .2 .2 0 (D 'r , 0 -i r. 0 > 75 - C@V m m 10 > 2 0 > z LLa E CS, cc Z C/) z z z Z CL z cn (4 > (4 (1) > Cp En m U) -0 M Z) "o CL x 2j M, M0 0 0 CL <M 0CDM L 0) 8 :5. 0 0 CD (b C) @ D w a' VV CD CD t@ 0 M 03 M (D M CD 0 0 1 3 M -0 8 3a) a. 3=0 x 0 0 3 M 0 0) < 0 a) CD 0 5 - M in CD CD - w >M M I F3 " CD 0 0 > CD 3 M 0 0 'M 3 M 0) CD W. in 0) (0 W_ ;i0 0 0 M ID 0 M CL n 0 = - 3 C, 0 CD C CD 0 -1 CD > m 5*00 a) 3 CD W- -0 'D :3 Cn CD M 3 M D-1 0 a C) > CD CL ,0 3 5 0 CD CD3 CD 0 > 0 r 3 " 0 Z 0 r. > CL 0 C 00 M 0 0 0 x x x X Federal and Interstate "a x x x x x x X State 0 C) Local > x x x x x x x x x 7- Government V Educational x x Institutions r x x x Non-Profit _< Organizations > "a T x x x x x x x Private Enterprises > x Research M Organizations -i M 0 x x x x x x x x Individuals C a 0 0 ca w -n CA) (n 0 Cn Co 0 Z CD 0 0 C - M n CD _- COL 2. 3 3 CD CD CIL - 0) 0) M > CD 0 M 0 0 CD 0 0 a 21 3 'a0 0 CD 0 m CD CL 0 0 m :3 0 CD a) 3 = - - - AjZ CDM (D m T. M i;, U) 5 M Z, ID 10 CD CD CD M F, CL M a) X CD 0 (2. (n CD 0 Z 0 M 0 M C)M > > M :r -n M M CL M 01 M Cn 3 3 F. Z Z w CD 0 M CD 0 C) 1. CD 0 m 0 *a m0 *a w CD a.) In Co CD M a) CD0 CL co 0) CD < CD M ID CD CO w -0 -0 (R 3 cc <:0 M 3 cO 3 a 3 Ua 3 Co uA 3 IR -A "33 9Z 5'3 @R3 > > I M 0 3 cD cD 0 cD 0 CO 0M 0 :3M 0CD C) 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 D cc, 0 0 p 02, 0 :3 0 00 Z 0 0 0- 0 0- C) 0. m 0 > 0 > > > 0 to - CD 0 IR 3 "a CD. w CD CD - N M r%)3 9 0 CD 0 5. 3 r on on CD - " S. -N CA) tj tj to 0 CO-" C_@ (5 0 C 0 0 CD CD_ CD CM v LO LO - Lf) IT 0 F) 0 0N 0N N N 75 N F) OOL 'D a Lo C4 C14 Lf) CL to 0 r- 0 00 0 >. a . 0 0 0 0 a . a ai C-4 CN C14 N .(j c (14 N C14 04 r C14 E c-4 C14 co r_ co .1 2 > E6 E(i (3 < Li <' Li C3 6 -E 6 -E Li L) L) UJ -0 -0 -60 -60 -0 "6 a z cc 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LU C@ -e e - e - e e -, CF - e - e - e - e - e 0 0 a 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 c c a) - , a) 0 0 Ecm EIm E s E s E r. E S E S 'E -tm E Im E cm E - Im E tm 0 t E S E 0 E E E cc CL CL 0. CL Cl OL w p = = m CO M cl CL w Cl.. Cl a CD 4) M CD ca w m W M (D m D3: 3: a (D 0 0 C#) C (D E 0 @a u a) > a) > (D JT LU u =, d) co ir z z cc U) c z co LU 0 0 a) a) 0 LU 3.1 OM Im M" LU 0 CD (D 0 -1 0 w co x w C.) LLI cn - 0 LU La M E 0 0 0 3 0 0 LL LL o 0 1 w . C.) 0 (a m c CL w VD a) uj (d 0 'a & ui C6 C6 LL 0 w 0 3 cq z w U cn LL U ca m D :5 2 sienp!A!PUI X x x x x x x x 0 suollez!ueBjo LU 4DJeSSOU x 0 x x -i LL ca 4 ses!jdjolu3 2 BIBA!Jd x x 3f x CL 4 suo!lezlueBjo x x x x x > JljoJd-UON LU LU suo!4nj!jsuj leuoijeonp3 JUBLUUABAOE) x x LU X 1030-1 In LU LL. Glels x x LL x x x x 0 cc 0 CL ejelsAalul 0 pue jejapaj X x x x x W 0 C 2 CD m cc E 0 z st 8 2 .J u 0 u o cm a) > .2 0 a) 0 wr r- co Lu E 0 w .2 aw) 0 0 0 0 rl "D -2 UJ c x I X ca U > c 0 - < 0 U. co LU LU LU c 0 :3 0 r- 72 Ic 0 a c a, -j 0 m cc .2 o m c 2 .2 w C Q) - C co 0 0 > a) W F@ .2 0 0 0 z w = , 0 0 c E 'S r 75 m 0 m E :5 :5 .2 m .2 .2 (D M .2 B o 0 0 (D M 0 'o 0 x < car) < cn w 0- < co m cc m -r@ 0 u Lu CnZ MZ C) r- m x -n -n m -n w -n -o -n mM ro- mZ m a) IDR a - -. g 0 1CDL MX@ EZM m X 'm2 5 'a MM 0 Q@ CD 0) CD 0 M0 0 a) :3 ID - Cn CO :3 !2. 03 CD CD 0 a) 3: 1,0 rb 0 m w 30. :1 -0 -0 CD M0 Lk (n C 3 m CD CD 0.0 W 2L CD V) 0 -00 g;@ k 5 CD M M r 0) Cl) 0 m CL CD CD > m 0 CDn Co 3 S T) -4 CD C 5 m ;P 0) > R CL -0 r. CD 2 0 C 0 C) 0 0 m Cn x x x Federal and I nterstate M m 0 x x x x x x State Local > ic x x x Governinent T Educational x x x x x x x x x Institutions x Non-Prof it x x x x x 'Organizations > V M Private x x x -Enterprises > w F_ x x x x Re h m Orc@ arc nizations o x x In viduals cu 00 Z Z 0 -n -n -M n ::E C -0 -n C 0 m 0 0 0 CD w a., CL tn ft C"D 0 rn m m fn m 9 1 0 0 F), 0 CD 0 0 m CD CD Co Cl) rn m "V -0 m 2 CD cu.) > 0, 0 0 P CD 7r X cD CD CD CL r. :3 C) > Cx Cn Cl) (n :3 !a. CD cc m to 0 0 m CD m CD 0 2 m 0 < 1 9 > 3 m m CL CD Z CD CD CD CD 2 0 CD CD CL CD 0 0 C) m m M M CD m M 0) CD Q) M CD CD cc m =r a) =r a) w > m =r 0) CL CL 7- S.A S. C S. 5 :3 - F7. 5 3 S3 3 to 2L 3 > 0 CD 0CD m - CD 0(D m CD CD m m 0 0 0 0 0 0CD 0 m 0 C/) 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - - a, - Q 0 rn - h CD > > g 0 CL , . 3 . 0 to to M (D M 3 tj M CD =. 0 05 05 C) 0 0 M 0 0 on 00 on 0 M K) Q K) " =, F !@ to E. w S. C 0 hj P. 0 m "8 U1 01 U1 0 0 0 to 0 C) 0 C 0, U1 m CD m CD F @ed e ra.1 ta n @d I tr@ n st a S, _,te Local "e, arch 0 r, z, ni It 0-s u ,+lnid alis LO M 04 0 0 o 0 0 LO I@r V m 0 (a 0 Lf) N N 0 (14 0 N = C'4 = N mN C4 N C14 73N m (D W 0 = o 0 0 0 C4 wC'4 CN CIA N N CN C-4 N CIJ 64 E a) .0 (D > -0 .0 Li (3 C3 <' Li c3 0 LU ci - ci Z w -0 -0 -0 ci -06 -0 6 -0 CIO ci -0 Iro ci -0 rm- -0 ci -0a a 0 UJ .2e - .9 c@ - e - C@ e c c 0 C C w 0) 0 0 0 0 0 (D 0 0 a) C@0 c 2 -- 0 0 w - rm E cm: cn E E -M E Im E E -cm co E ED E 2 Em E Im t t E s t S CML M m c M Cc 0 Lu m ui Z m uJ_- mJ_- m C m CL CL CL Cl a CL CL 3 Q. cl. CL CL ca ca co w M w ID ID (D -0 (D C3 0 0 w 0 c c .0 .2 .0 .0 m m m ci > 43 U cr cr m cr z z LU 0 .0 .0 0 c a", 0 0 0 0 .2 0 .2 'D Cl) m m c co 2 > 0 0 0 0 0 CL LU LU LU a) 0 0 0 0 0 0 U) c LU 3 :3 d) 0 :3 0 m m 0 ci u 0 0 m 0 w ul LL :3 m 0 0 :3 0 0 co m co m z 0 0 0 LL cn co w sienp!A!PUI x x x x x 0 suoilez!uefijo LU 43"OSOH x x x x cc ses!jdja4U3 2 SleA!Jd x x x x x CL CL suo!lez!ueojo < x x x x x x x > Z!IOJd-UON suo!qnj!isu x x x x x x jeuoqeonP3 JUMUAGAOE) x x x x x leoo-j cc 0 ejejS x x x x x 0 x cc CL almialul pue jejape.1 x x x x x cn 72 0 D CL a) 0 ca z OL .0 'a0 (D -j 0 U) c c c 0 0 CM C -a c -0 .2 .2 .2 .0 0 0 LO co UJ CC CL UJ w , c co (D c 0 a) m IL C V,o 0 C) LL ? (D CL 3: LU 'm LZ .2 E c Cl LUr a LU0 M a)E -- w u 2 cL m m m 0 a = c 0 0 0 - 2 2 -3 ';7M *@ m ,? - 2 0 m 0 0 0 CL U 2 .2 . u E E 0 r > u > r M CL a, *0 3 -0 a)M a) w 0 co Z, 0 w (D m 0 it 0 x 0 < 0 m 0. CL m cc 7: CL CL CC -A CC -j fr a) 0< (1)< (n -1 -1 -00 -q U) > cn rj) (n Cn (D 0 (D C '0 3 :3 CD 0 50 5' @ "D C'D m Cl) a) @ > to - = CL 13 n CL m V) 0 El) CD - 0 m < CL ,a 1 2 0) S. - - m CD Cn m - > V L. 0 m 3 0 oi, m a CL Cn m < 0 m (n > (D -4 CD CD rM CL Z 0 T C 00 0 0 m 0 > x x x x Federal and Interstate T x X x x x x 0 jSta a M Local > x x x x x 3 lGovernment I V x x Educational Institutions > x x x x x Non-Profit Organizations> M M .x x x Private Enterprises > Research m Organizations -4 _10 x x x x _11ndividuals < m 0 m w w < y m 0 m w w Z D --I > (n (n Cn En 0 0 V;, 0 c:C a) CD CD 0 0 _n (D CD 'D MM M, M, 0 3 E?. > j6' 77M D m -4 (n W < U) W@I CD CD 0 Ca CD 0 aC to (n 0 ;;- a) 0 0 0 0 > Cn 00 5' 3 0 :3 m < CD r - - m 5, Z3m L ID =r Cl) mr- r- @ > Z 0 Cn < m 9 - 0 C w 0 0 to EL CD a) 0 0 < (n CD CD 0 Z 06 En < m Z M -. a) CL m m 0 0 a M 0,M 3 < 39 1 0 En Cn m CD" . 0) > 3 En Cn En a" CD rb0 t%3 5, m CD Z Z Z 0w :3Z 0a) CD 0 C) SL 3U3 = E to (D .CD M F FCD C m C3 CD (D m CS co m CD CD in CD tnZ < 0 0 :E 0 :E a A 0 mo CD CD CD CD w CD CD 0 'a 0 m 'a 0 w _0 -0 W 'a 0 -0 X :r a) =r 0)X3@ a) w 0) x :r a) < S, 1@ 3' 1-<5, 1@ ;,+ 4 S' "_ 3 3 Q_3 Q 3 9i 3 Q3 to3 IF.3 'a3 u23 u-23 0 3 a 3 0 w 0m 0 Q 0 0 CD CD 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G) .7 F, P @3 P '? ? m 0 0- 0 0 CD 00 00 02, 00 C) 0 Z n m 0 0 > > 0 0 > > > 0 ha N) CDwK) N f-j r') S@ 3 NJ 9@. K) Zo 0 o o < 0 M. 1j 0 0 oa- CB. 0 0 00 on on N) S.w bi m w K) K3 N) (D .0.3 tj Ln 4@ 0. 4@. Ul Ln o C 0 0 0 0 0 I . . 0 0 0 0 (D (D CD ED cl, c c6 M c) m a 0to 0 'p to M q .2 q E -e '04 c-4 EcN C14 c) N C-4 C11 C11 =C4 N OCL Lo -wo a) 0 . 0 0 > EC4 EC-4 Cq - C,4 C*4 ECI4 CD CN CN N E N CN CI4 0 0 0 0 0 I Li 2 U UL) L)0 cL) fLQ CL Li 6 oC3 C3 C3 6 0 CL u z o -0 'CO ci z -0o -0a -00 0 0 0 0 UJ .2e a c e -e - e - e -r C@ - - 00 0) 0 rC c r c - r (5o (D0 (D0 w0 0 0 0 0 - 0 s E E 0 - w- 010 E - ECD E E'm acm c ES E Ecm E Em > cn 'm r r > > r cn E E 0 @OS 0 U.S t r- :E .!= Cr m m co .0 o G m car c '5 a .> a CL a CL a CL OLW > 0)M (DM co r C" m W, W, w < r CD E CL 2 .2 .2 (D > 'a (D 0 (D c z z z c 2 2 LLI > > .2 r M CO co co cu .2 CD co m c m = @a m m LU M4) CL CL co U) =4) m w 0 00 0 0 0 a" w m 0 r 0 0 c - M 'a CD w w 0) L) 0 0 (D m a) w u :t F .2 .2 co .2 Lr- :5 LL N N Co Co D D 0 0x 0 m o('r D ZM ZIO sienp!A!PUI � x x x x x x x x x CL 0 SUOIJEZIUL-Bio LU 43JBBSBH x x x -j w sesiAdAOIU3 x OZEA!Jd X 4 suoilezluefiAo LU > I!IOAd-UON x x x 0 LU U. suogm!isuj LL x x x x 0 jeuoi4eanp3 JUGLUUJGAOE) 1BOO-1 x x x x x x x IS x x x x x x x 0 1- ale CL '91elsisjul pue jejapej x x x x x 00 0 c .2 CL cc -6 .2 z 2 '-p - -6 0 -6 0 m c3: 0 > c a) d) u -i cr Q C(D C LL > .2 0U) 0 a") c E r cc rc a 0w cf) 0 CL .2 LU (D 0 X (D c .a a 0 C.) w 0 C0 c CD a) 0 60 u LA 0 0 r a) LU M - 0 LL 0 w co '4 D 'r- ID LL U I c CO CD 0 LU m m .2 .2 c CL L) E 0 F- C tm 0 E .2 u" CL CL (D LU c .2 E (D w .2 S 0) co co M ca m 5? a) co (D a) 0 E M W r > > cc 0 Z rj) cn > cc SUMMARY OF LAND AND WATER Appendix F CONSERVATION FUND PROJECTS AND MONIES DISTRIBUTED TO URBAN LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 1967-1975 The Land and Water Conservation Fund was authorized in 1965, by Public Law 88-578. Appropriations, as authorized by Congress on an. annual basis, are distributed to the state and local governmental units through the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. As originally established in 1965, the Fund was supported by entrance and user fees charged at designated Federal recreation areas, proceeds from the sale of surplus Federal real property, and a Federal tax on motor boat fuel. In 1968, Congress supplemented those funds with revenues from the General Fund or Outer Continental Shelf mineral lease receipts. The following information summarizes Land and Water Conservation Fund grants awarded to cities and counties of Texas for urban parks since the beginning of the program in 1967. Figures presented are based on the fiscal year used by the State of -ptember I through the following Texas, i.e., from Se . ... .. August 31. (Example: Fiscal year 67 covers the time frame from 1 September 1966 to 31 August 1967.) Charts included illustrate the relative proportions of grants awarded to various city sizes and trends. Table F.1 shows a general increase over the nine-year sp from 1967 to 1975 in the total amount of Federal matching money granted to the municipalities in the various city-size categories. City sizes receiving the most in terms of matching federal LWCF grants were towns in 1967 and 1969, cities in 1970, and metro areas in 1968 and 1971 through 1975. From 1971 through 1975, the total amount of grants received generally decreased as the city-size category decreased. Data from Table F.1 is illustrated graphically in Figures F.1 and F.2. owl, 298 TABLE FA ANNUAL DISTRIBUTION OF LAND AND WATER -CONSERVATION FUND MONIES TO URBAN AREAS BY CITY SIZE, 1967-1976" CITY SIZE 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Metro Areas $ 134,383 $ 820,346 $ 216,422 $ 159,439 $1,835,677 .Cities 124,092 82,018 182,672 4(34,070 590,873 Towns 564,000 191,375 218,400 53,825 148,129 Small Communities 14,424 120,650 0 30,000 99,325 TOTAL $ 836,899 $1,214,389 $ 617,494 $ 647,334 $2,674,004 1972 1973 1974 19750 TOTAL Metro Areas $2,760,847 $1,530,645 $ 988,808 $1,243,336 $9,689,903 Cities 664,302 649,410 257,571 11068,100 4,023,108 Towns 250,200 485,630 234,050 1,173,472 3,319,081 Small Communities 248,950 174,200 138,840 370,600 1,196,989 TOTAL $3,924,299 $2,839,885 $1,619,269 $3,855,508 $18,229,081 a. Includes only projects for urban municipal or urban county parks, totalled by city-size category for state fiscal vears in which project was approved. b* Partial listing for the fiscal year 1975 which ends August 31, 1975. Data collected covers the period through May 31, 1975. The total dollar amounts in federal matching money amounts of grants and the number of cities receiving planning region basis. Only three of the 37 regions, have generally increased'over the years. During the grants remained relatively small, fluctuating 29, 32, and 35, had no Land and Water Conservation five year period from 1967 to 1971, almost 45 somewhat over the years. However, beginning in fiscal Fund projects for urban municipal or urban county percent of the matching funds were providedin 197 1. year 1971 and continuing through 1975, the total parks for the nine-year period, fiscal years 1967 Of the funds provided to metro areas during this five amount of funds and the number of cities receiving through 1975. year period, nearly 58 percent was received in 1971 @ these grants have shown a tremendous increase, When Cities and small communities received almost 43 fiscal year 1967 is compared with fiscal year 1972, it A good indication of the increasing interest by local percent and 38 percent, respectively, of the total can be seen that the total federal matching money has governments in receiving grants under the Land and funds provided to each of these city-size categories increased by 369 percent from $836,899 in 1967 to Water Conservation Fund program can be seen by from 1967 to 1971 in the year 1971. Partial figures $3,924,299 in 1972, Even though fiscal year 1975 comparing 1967 with 1975. In 1967, the for 1975 are over 21 percent of the nine year total. was only three-fourths completed <it the time these municipalities in only 10 of the 37 regions received Even though the total funds provided annually have figures were tabulated, the total matching funds have grants, while in the partial year 1975 municipalities in fluctuated significantly over the nine-year period, the increased 361 percent from $836,899 in 1967 to 34 of the regions had received grants, general trend clearly shows that the total amount $3,855,508 in 1975 while the number of urban areas available has steadily increased. Further increases are receiving grants has increased by 246 percent from 13 The regions that have received the most total dollars also expected to be needed in the future to assist in 1967 to 45 in 1975, Of special note is the fact that in federal matching money are Region 11 with over local governments in meeting their funding all monies appropriated to the State of Texas from 2.0 million, followed by Region 25 with close to $1.9 requirements, the Land and Water Conservation Fund have been million, and Region 28 with $1.4 million, In most expended. instances, the regions containing major metropolitan areas have shown a tremendous increase in the dollar Table F.2 and Figures FA and F.2 illustrate that for Table F.3 gives a breakdown of urban local Land and amounts in the past several years, principally Regions fiscal years 1967 through 1970, both the total Water Conservation Fund projects awarded on a 10, 11, 16, 23, 25, 28, and 34. 299 K) " w fl) 4@- -;@ Ul (A cr) -4 -4 0 0 Ul 0 Ul 0 Vi 0 01 0 0 0 @,o m ju 3 to z 0 0) z -4 ME Fil FirEK111111MEM FEE c > o -n C, C z CD C, X (71 0 c 0 C 0 z 0 co > Z zo m -n m > > > z C 4 CD co > :n Z w= @4 rn 0 Hill 0 Z m cn ID 0 METRO AREAS z CL CITIES -4 4 0 TOWNS 8 SMALL COMMUNITIES m CL 0 Ln (n CD m -n 0 CL c -4 @m G z > -4 > m > z z CD r- 0 >c >0 > m -n 0 > H c z c CD :n > > to z -4 > M 4 m 0 > 0 z rn to < CA 0 4 z TABLE F-2 ANNUAL DISTRIBUTION OF LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND MONIES AND NUMBERS OF PROJECTS TO INDIVIDUAL MUNICIPALITIES, 1967-1975 .1967 STATE FISCAL YEAR 4 New Braunfels 45,550 13 Pasadena 81,600 NUMBER 5 Brenham 141,100 14 Valley Mills 10,600 -LCWF FEDERAL 6 Nacogdoches 79,625 15 Bishop 16,250 PROJECTS CITY LOCATION MATCHING MONEY 7 Galveston 40,122 16 Texas City 208,450 8 Dallas 176,300 17 Levelland 13,750 1 Eldorado $ 14,424 18 Dallas 255,300 2 Port Lavaca 49,527 Total $617,494 19 Baytown 120,973 3 Copperas Cove 43,326 20 Houston 85,500 4 Dallas 16,272 21 La Porte 3,350 5 Brady 119,650 22 Denton 279,300 6 Alpine 58,229 23 Terrell 25,600 7 Lubbock 79,825 1970 - STATE FISCAL YEAR 24 Earth 9,725 8 Coleman 22,999 25 Bonham 46,900 9 Eagle Pass 31,239 NUMBER 26 Carrollton 135@983 10 Mesquite 24,200 LCWF FEDERAL 27 Hunters Creek Village 20,000 11 Fredericksburg 268,045 PROJECTS CITY LOCATION MATCHING MONEY 28 Grand Prairie 58,300 12 Cuero 95,077 29 Eagle Pass 65,150 13 Fort Worth 14,086 1 Tyler $32,639 30 Del Rio 7,600 2 Lamesa 9,000 Total $ 836,899 3 Schulenburg 18,800 Total $2,674,004 4 Killeen 213,900 5 Kerrville 108,400 1968 - STATE FISCAL YEAR 6 New Braunfels 40,143 1972 - STATE FISCAL YEAR 14UMBER 7 Portland 53,825 NUMBER lLWCF FEDERAL 8 Weslaco 10,127 PROJECTS CITY LOCATION MATCHING MONEY 9 Pasadena 126,800 LWCF FEDERAL 10 Del Rio 22,500 PROJECTS CITY LOCATION MATCHING MONEY 1 Diboll $ 174,500 11 Pottsboro 11,200 1 Austin $ 323,100 2 Corpus Christi 225,475 2 San Antonio 480,010 3 Waco 226,352 Total $ 647,334 3 Tulia 78,400 4 McKinney 82,018 4 North Ricland Hills 115,500 5 Amarillo 70,235 5 Fort Worth 69,950 6 Dallas 42,900 1971 - STATE FISCAL YEAR 6 Eagle Pass 31,100 7 Austin 116,925 8 Houston 100,400 NUMBER 7 Duncanville 135,100 9 Port Aransas 120,650 LWCF FEDERAL 8 Paducah 11,200 10 Portland 16,875 PROJECTS CITY LOCATION MATCHING MONEY 9 Bryan 55,150 11 Wichita Falls 38,059 10 Monahans 113,900 1 Burkburnett $31,114 11 E uless 80,300 Total $1,214,389 2 Olney 31,265 12 Follett 72,200 3 Moscow 20,300 13 Dallis 153,150 4 Haltom City 50,320 14 Throckmorton 18,800 1969 - STATE FISCAL YEAR 5 San Antonio 283,409 15 Port Arthur 13,200 NUMBER 6 Wake Village 58,700 16 Houston 56,500 LWCF FEDERAL 7 Elgin 9,300 17 Carrollton 140,250 PROJECTS CITY LOCATION MATCHING MONEY 8 Amarillo 244,515 18 Chester 21,900 9 Waco 50,450 19 Nassau Bay 205,000 1 Killeen $ 57,497 10 Port Lavaca 78,500 20 Spur 38,550 2 Hallettsville 37,200 11 Brownfield 13,300 21 Huntsville 59,965 3 Lampasas 40,100 12 Galveston 358,500 22 Weslaco 107,950 301 Table F.2 (Continued) 1972 (Continued) -- 23 Marble Falls 69,100 29 Terrell 168,400 1975b - STATE FISCAL YEAR 24 Mesquite 185@800 30 Bellville 46,550 25 New Braunfels 76,075 31 Pear Ridge 32,650 NUMBER 26 Brownsvillii 400,500 32 Plano 57,700 LWCF FEDERAL 27 San Antonio 212B15 33 Lake Worth 45,400 PROJECTS CITY LOCATION MATCHING MONEY 28 Austin 63,000 34 Baytown 14,850 29 Fort Worth 105,400 35 Canadian 25,400 1 Fort Stockton $ 133,572 30 Orange 60,100 36 ElCampo 55,200 2 Hidalgo 115,000 31 Lufkin 105,912 37 Imperial 18,900 3 Dennison 11,300 32 Abilene 25,800 38 San Augustine 43,180 4 Nacogdoches 127,860 33 Corpus Christi 20,622 39 Victoria 75,200 5 South Houston 212.220 34 Baytown 142,900 40 Garland 97,385 6 Webster 55,450 35 Quitaque 17,200 41 Houston 87,700 7 League City 103,800 36 Yoakum 57,900 42 Silsbee 80,400 8 Nederlands 200,400 9 Hallsville 7,900 Total $3,924,299 Total $2A39A85 10 Carthage 135,500 11 Mansfield 83,631 12 Smithville 31,405 13 Hedwig Village 49,170 1973 STATE FISCAL YEAR 1974 - STATE FISCAL YEAR 14 Seabrook 10,400 NUMBER NUMBER 15 Missouri City 12,950 LWCF FEDERAL 16 Weatherford 120,500 LCWF FEDERAL PROJECTS CITY LOCATION MATCHING MONEY 17 Nixon 52,350 PROJECTS CITY LOCATION MATCHING MONEY 18 Longview 207,780 1 Booker $ 8,600 19 Dallas 103,100 1 Abilene $ 138,250 2 Spearman 67,900 20 Huntsville 47,500 2 Nassau Bay 109,400 3 Alvin 64,000 21 Bullard 8,500 3 Falls City 12,600 4 Meridian 11,600 22 Shamrock 81,409 4 Clifton 23,500 5 Silverton 1,730 23 Bedford 226,255 5 Glen Rose 15,750 6 Plano 21,800 24 Bay City 248,560 6 Kerrville 71,000 7 Beaumont 123,073 25 Big Spring 79,900 7 Houston 174,400 8 Bedford 150,200 26 Schertz 125,400 8 College Station 133,150 9 Garland 20,200 27. San Benito 151,950 9 La Porte 14,400 10 Arlington 34,500 28 Teague 29,675 10 La Porte 2,000 11 Amarillo 100,400 29 Seadrift 6,650 11 Turkey 33,000 12 Mesquite 75,400 30 Muenster 12,900 12 Livingston 41,000 13 Cisco 57,800 31 Converse 78,400 13 La Porte 3,950 14 Hemphill 45,800 32 Amarillo 162,500 14 Del Rio 116,260 15 Goliad 61,250 33 Navasota 22,690 15 Bryan 16,210 16 Naples 1,900 34 Bryan 10,300 16 Carrollton 44,250 17 Cleburne 100,400 35 Breharn 136,750 17 Bryan 6,650 18 Lufkin 49,945 36 Clute 146,500 is Austin 50,300 19 Lamesa 21,426 37 New Braunfels 40,400 19 Stephenville 122,400 20 Childress 13,500 38 Memphis 21,900 20 Cibolo 7AOO 21 El Campo 44,400 39 Forrest Hill 105,741 21 Fort Worth 7,800 22 San Antonio 283,735 40 Borger 80,500 22 Lake Jackson 146,000 23 Pasadena 80,400 41 Friendswood 18,650 23 Dallas 393,250 24 Idalou 7,960 42 Peariand 81,400 24 Yorktown 14,200 25 Austin 20,700 43 Jacksonville 112,040 25 R usk 76,800 26 Round Rock 50,450 44 Farwell 33,450 26 Austin 56,800 27 Austin 100,200 45 Orange 11,300 27 Clifton 43,150 28 Houston 116,700 Total $1,619,269 Total $3,855,508 aincludes only projects for Urban municipal or urban county parks, totalled by city location and the State Fiscal Year in which project was approved. bPartial listing for Fiscal Year 1975 which ends on August 31, 1975. Data collected covers the period through May 31, 1975. 302 TABLE F.3 ANNUAL DISTRIBUTION OF LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND MONIES TO URBAN AREAS BY OUTDOOR RECREATION ANALYTICAL PLANNING REGIONS, 1967-1975 a REGION 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975b TOTAL 1 $ 0 $ 70,235 $ 0 $ 0 $ 244,515 $ 78,400 $ 0 $ 100,400 $ 162,500 $ 656,050 2 0 0 0 0 0 89,400 58,400 78,230 183,809 409.839 3 0 0 0 0 36,775 0 0 0 33,450 70,225 4 79,825 0 0 0 0 38,550 0 7,960 0 126,335 5 0 38,059 0 0 62,379 11,200 0 13,500 0 125,138 6 0 0 0 9A00 0 0 0 21,426 79,900 110,326 7 0 0 0 0 0 44,600 138,250 0 0 182,850 8 22,999 0 0 0 0 0 0 57,800 0 80,799 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 138,150 100,400 120,500 359,050 10 14086 0 0 0 50,320 371,150 53,200 184,700 415,627 1,089,083 11 40:472 42,900 176,300 0 449,583 6i4,300 534,885 95,600 103,100 2,057,140 12 0 82A18 0 11,200 351,800 0 226,100 21,800 24,200 717,118 13 0 0 0 0 58,700 0 0 1,900 0 60,600 14 0 0 0 32,639 0 0 76,800 0 471,720 581,159 15 0 174,500 79,625 0 0 105,912 43,180 95,745 127,860 626,822 16 0 0 0 0 283,409 692,825 0 283,735 78,400 1,338,369 17 134,074 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 134A74 18 0 0 0 0 0 113,900 18,900 0 133,572 266,372 19 43,326 0 97,597 213,900 0 0 0 0 0 354,823 20 0 226,352 0 0 61,050 0 66,650 11,600 29,675 395,327 21 0 0 141,100 0 0 55,150 156A10 0 169,740 522AOO 22 0 0 0 0 20,300 21 @900 121,400 0 0 163,600 23 0 116,925 0 0 0 455,200 107,100 171,350 0 850,575 24 144,604 0 37200 0 78,500 57,900 191,150 105,650 19,600 634,604 25 0 100,400 0 126,800 311,423 404,400 523,400 80,400 327,240 1,874,063 26 0 0 0 0 0 59P65 0 0 47,500 107,465 27 0 0 0 0 0 73,300 32,650 123A73 211,700 440,723 28 0 0 40,122 0 566,950 0 146,000 64AOO 598,910 1,415,982 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 58,299 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58,229 31 0 0 0 18,800 9,300 0 20,400 0 209,155 257,655 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 363,000 0 53,825 16,250 20,622 0 0 0 453,697 34 0 0 0 10,127 0 508,450 0 0 266,950 785,527 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 31,239 0 0 22,500 72,750 31,100 116,260 0 0 273,849 37 268,045 0 45,550 148,543 0 76A75 71,000 0 40,400 649,613 Total $836,899 $1,214,389 $617,494 $647,334 $2,674,004 0,924,299 $2,839,885 $1,619,269 $3,855,508 $18,229,081 aincludes only projects for urban municipal or urban county parks, totalled by Region for State Fiscal Years in which project was approved. bPartial listing for fiscal year 1975 which ends on August 31, 1975. This date was collected on May 31, 1975. 303 ev. die e.X PF 444 .09,Wwwo @eoeo