People's Preferences for Greenway Landscapes: 

Survey Ratings of Indianapolis Trails

What were the main findings of the study?  

The study has six main findings that have implications for greenway trail planners and managers:

1. Most people found most trail landscapes both attractive and safe.  

2. People generally agreed which trail landscapes appeared attractive or unattractive and safe or unsafe.  

3. With respect to the attractiveness of trails, people indicated clear preferences for certain landscape features: asphalt surfaces, water, and natural rather than built surroundings.

4. With respect to the safety of trails, people thought that trails with high levels of maintenance, asphalt surfaces, and nearby water were safer than trails without these features.

5. Users of greenway trails were more likely on average to rate greenway trails both more attractive and safer than non-users.

6. Peoples’ backgrounds also influenced their perceptions of trail landscapes.

Some Practical Implications may also exist as a result of this project.

Respondents were also asked two open-ended questions to provide general comments regarding trail landscape likes/dislikes and comments regarding the Indy Greenways program.  See respondent General Comments.

        In general, the survey experienced a relatively high response rate of 34% (137 out of 400).  Upon analysis of the demographics and trail use responses, researchers discovered that the survey sample is not completely representative of the sample population (Indianapolis-Marion County).  For instance, almost 70% of the respondents were male (only 43% in Indianapolis-Marion County), almost 87% of the respondents were white (70.5%), and over 54% of respondents had a bachelor’s or graduate degree (22%).  Furthermore, although the respondent median income is similar to that of the general population ($40-$49,999), the second highest income categories are above the median income ($50-$59,999; $70-$79,999).  

        These data could influence survey results due to the fact that it has been proven that higher education/income is correlated with a higher amount of trail use.  Furthermore, this survey also shows that users rate trails higher in terms of attractiveness and safety than non-users do.  Therefore, survey respondents are more likely to rate the trails higher than the general population of Indianapolis-Marion County would.

Most people find most trail landscapes attractive and safe. 

        The majority of average ratings for the photographs were above 3, the midpoint on the scale.  This result indicates that people generally agreed that the trails appeared attractive and safe.  The average ratings for the photos overall were 3.62 for attractiveness and 3.42 for safety.

        Among the 20 photographs, 15 had attractiveness ratings above 3.  The highest mean attractiveness rating for any photograph was 4.72 (photo #22).  The lowest mean attractiveness rating for any photograph was 1.37 (photo #24). 

        Sixteen photographs had safety ratings above 3.  The highest and lowest safety ratings for the photographs were, respectively, 4.49 (photo #19) and 1.69 (photo #24).

        Trail safety can be interpreted in two ways: safe as in minimal risk from traffic accidents or safe from personal harm associated with criminal activity.  From the ratings of the photographs, it appears that people may have considered both types of safety.   Photo #24, for example, was rated low.  In this photograph, the trail is on a sidewalk next to a street with little or no right-of-way separating the two transportation facilities.  It is likely that people rated this photograph low because of risk of traffic accidents.  Photo #15 was also rated low.  This photograph, which depicts a trail that passes beneath an overpass, is dark and includes many shadows where people could hide.  It is likely that people rated this photograph low because of concern about personal safety.  Trail planners and managers need to consider both aspects of safety when developing trails.

[Top]

People generally agreed which trail landscapes appeared attractive or unattractive and safe or unsafe. 

        The photos that had the highest and lowest mean ratings for attractiveness and safety also tended to have low variances.  The variance is a statistical measure of how widely ratings varied.  For example, photograph #22 had the highest mean rating for attractiveness; this photograph also had the lowest variance among all the photographs.  Photograph #24, the least attractive photograph, had the fourth lowest ranked variance.  Similarly, with respect to safety ratings, the highest and lowest rated photographs (photos #19 and #24, respectively) had the lowest and seventh lowest ranked variances.  

        These results mean that people generally agreed on which landscapes appear attractive and safe.  This fact means that trail planners and managers can use images of existing landscapes as guides for development of new trails as well as management and maintenance of existing ones.

        Trails that were ranked in the middle for both attractiveness and safety tended to be ranked high by some people and low by others.  Comparisons of these photographs with photographs that were ranked either higher or lower provides additional insight into the combinations of features that people find attractive and safe.

[Top]

With respect to trail ATTRACTIVENESS, people rated photographs of landscapes with asphalt surfaces, water, and natural rather than built surroundings higher than photographs without them. 

All other factors equal, statistical analyses indicate that the attractiveness rating:

With respect to the SAFETY of trails, people thought that trails with high levels of maintenance, asphalt surfaces, and nearby water were safer than trails without these features.

All other factors equal, statistical analyses indicate that the safety rating:

[Top]

Users of greenway trails were more likely on average to rate greenway trails both more attractive and safer than non-users.

        Overall, the mean attractiveness rating for all photographs by greenway users was 3.68; the mean attractiveness rating for nonusers was 3.52.  When other factors are accounted for, greenway users rated photographs about two-tenths of one point (0.20) higher (that is, more attractive) than non-users.

        Similarly, the mean safety rating for all photographs by greenway users was 3.59; the mean safety rating for nonusers was 3.26.  When other factors are accounted for, greenway users rated photographs almost one-quarter of one point (0.23) higher (that is, safer) than non-users.

[Top]

Peoples’ backgrounds also influenced their perceptions of trail landscapes. 

With respect to attractiveness, holding other factors constant:

With respect to safety, holding other factors constant:

[Top]

What are the practical implications of these findings?

        Overall the results suggest that trail managers in Indianapolis have done a good job creating and maintaining trails that people find attractive and safe.  These results also indicate factors for trail planners to consider when developing new trails.  To the extent that conditions allow, trail planners can try to locate trails near water, introduce curves into trails, plan for asphalt surfaces, and design trails and place plantings to minimize views of built structures and other human alterations of the landscape.  To increase perceptions of safety, trail managers can plan maintenance programs to ensure that signs of maintenance are visible and that trails are well-maintained maintenance.  Use of asphalt trail surfaces also may increase perceptions of safety. 

        One potential issue raised by these results concerns the potential conflict between people’s preferences for highly maintained landscapes and goals of conservation and ecological restoration.  People may perceive natural landscapes to be less attractive or less safe if they have no visible signs of maintenance.  By carefully introducing visible signs of maintenance into natural landscapes, planners may be able to increase appreciation of them. 

General Comments

        The survey contained a section that asked respondents to make  comments regarding trail likes and dislikes, as well as comments about the greenways program in general.  This section provides a synopsis of these comments.  

Likes

        One hundred people responded to the open-ended question, "Please tell us which landscape features you liked or disliked in the photographs," and many of their answers were very similar.   For example, most people responded that they liked lots of trees and vegetation (58 people), but not overhanging the trail (7).  They also liked water near the trail (29), and clear visibility with open spaces (25).  Some answers, however, did not agree.  For instance, some liked the view of the downtown skyline (4), whereas others preferred more natural views (6). This dichotomy in trail preferences creates a predicament for greenways managers everywhere.

Survey respondents also commented that they liked: 

Other landscape features that were mentioned included design features such as signs, safety rails, dividing paths, center lines, wooden walkways, wood fences, and artwork.  Other natural features that were liked include wildlife and the use of native plants.

Dislikes

        Of the 137 respondents, 49 people advised researchers of various landscape features that they disliked about the trails.  Many of the answers were similar, and addressed different safety features of the trails.  For example, the top five trail features that were disliked include: trails near traffic (20), vegetation overhanging or too close to trail (11), places near trail where people could possibly conceal themselves (9), narrow trails (6), and tunnels (6).

Other features that were mentioned that were disliked include: 

[Top]

[ Home ] [ Urban Forestry ] [ About Greenways ] [ About this Project ] [ Photo Ratings ] [ Project Results ] [ Survey ] [ Acknowledgements ] [ Links ]

Please send comments or questions to kldickso@iupui.edu

People's Preferences for Greenway Landscapes: Survey Ratings of Indianapolis Trails http://www.trailsurvey.urbancenter.iupui.edu