Activities

Best Cities 2010: 5 Worst Cities for Recreation

by admin


Best Cities 2010: 5 Worst Cities for Recreation

The bottom cities on our list need more green spaces for families. What do you think: did we get it right?

Of the cities and towns we surveyed, these 5 are most in need of more outdoor recreation spaces, like pools, playgrounds and parks. No surprise: major cities with a dearth of space rank low on our list.

Want to check out these towns? Save a bundle when you book your trip online through Parenting Privileges. You’ll get cash back on your reservations at Expedia, Travelocity, Hotels.com, Enterprise Rent-a-Car, or Priceline.com!

See our list of best cities for recreation

(Our list was compiled by using a list of the top 100 cities by population, adding in well-known smaller cities too, and removing cities so close to other large cities that they would have similar data. We ranked the best cities for recreation based on the amount of parkland per 100,000 people.)

Philadelphia, PA
Philly’s got it covered when it comes to historical sites, but when it comes to park space per person, more room for kids to run around would be nice.

Read more about Philadelphia

Anaheim, CA
More bad news for Anaheim, which also ranked poorly in health: Green spaces are scarce, with less than 700 acres of parkland.

Read more about Anaheim

Norfolk, VA
Although its location on the water means lots of opportunity for watersports, Norfolk does not do as well on land, with only about 500 acres of park space.

Read more about Norfolk

Chicago, IL
Yes, Chi-town has the famous and sprawling Lincoln Park, but with a population of almost 3 million, even more green space would be ideal.

Want to check out these towns? Save a bundle when you book your trip online through Parenting Privileges. You’ll get cash back on your reservations at Expedia, Travelocity, Hotels.com, Enterprise Rent-a-Car, or Priceline.com!

Read more about Chicago