Residents come from a diversity of national origins and have limited access to private transportation, the considerations of comprehensiveness and convenience are especially consequential for understanding residents’ use of the store, and thus have direct implications for the place’s ability to serve a vital function in their lives. These analyses also suggest that certain features of neighborhood parks may facilitate both the behavioral and social mechanisms linking neighborhoods with health. Research clearly demonstrates inequality in the built environment of neighborhoods in terms of availability and quality of parks and recreation areas (Dahmann et al., 2010; Moore et al., 2008). Park use may be particularly problematic for individuals from low-income neighborhoods, who often experience real and perceived barriers to park use (D. K. Wilson et al., 2004) and are less likely to use parks for physical activity (D. A. Cohen et al., 2012). Not only did Bayview residents use the nearby park for physical activity, but residents spoke about using the park as a gathering place, a place that allows them to BMS-214662 chemical information nurture and sustain their relationships with family and friends. We know that supportive social ties matter for health, and this is particularly true for disadvantaged groups, because they often rely on instrumentally- and emotionally-supportive resources that come with social ties to make up for lack of socioeconomic resources (Morenoff Lynch, 2004). A recent study argues that neighborhood built and social environments are inextricably linked, finding that individualsAuthor Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptSoc Sci Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 07.WaltonPagewho perceive both high walkability and social connectedness in their neighborhoods display the highest levels of physical activity (Kaczynski Glover, 2012); the authors discuss how people base their physical activity decisions on their interpretations of the everyday spaces in which they spend time and the social interactions they have with people in those spaces. Brittingham Park’s apparent facilitation of both behavioral and social mechanisms order Procyanidin B1 toward health suggests that researchers and policy-makers should attend to both in their attempts to understand and improve neighborhood vital places. While these analyses were concentrated on a park in this particular neighborhood, the qualities that made it a vital place may be relatable to other neighborhood recreational areas that support both behavioral and social processes in cities, like schoolyards (Brink et al., 2010), open spaces (Sugiyama et al., 2010), and green spaces (Maas et al., 2009). In support of the idea that parks are vital places that can facilitate both behavioral and social pathways to health, Cattell and colleagues (2008) find that people derive a range of therapeutic benefits from open spaces in cities, such as the ability to escape daily routines, find restorative pleasure in being alone, and nurture the bonds of place attachment. The vital places concept is particularly valuable in explicating the dual roles that neighborhood parks and other open spaces can have in supporting health; appreciating that places can impact health in multiple, synergistic ways increases the potential for making a difference in a community by improving one neighborhood place. Finally, the neighborhood courtyards are vital places at Bayview. Jacobs (2011 [1961]) discusses the importance.Residents come from a diversity of national origins and have limited access to private transportation, the considerations of comprehensiveness and convenience are especially consequential for understanding residents’ use of the store, and thus have direct implications for the place’s ability to serve a vital function in their lives. These analyses also suggest that certain features of neighborhood parks may facilitate both the behavioral and social mechanisms linking neighborhoods with health. Research clearly demonstrates inequality in the built environment of neighborhoods in terms of availability and quality of parks and recreation areas (Dahmann et al., 2010; Moore et al., 2008). Park use may be particularly problematic for individuals from low-income neighborhoods, who often experience real and perceived barriers to park use (D. K. Wilson et al., 2004) and are less likely to use parks for physical activity (D. A. Cohen et al., 2012). Not only did Bayview residents use the nearby park for physical activity, but residents spoke about using the park as a gathering place, a place that allows them to nurture and sustain their relationships with family and friends. We know that supportive social ties matter for health, and this is particularly true for disadvantaged groups, because they often rely on instrumentally- and emotionally-supportive resources that come with social ties to make up for lack of socioeconomic resources (Morenoff Lynch, 2004). A recent study argues that neighborhood built and social environments are inextricably linked, finding that individualsAuthor Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptSoc Sci Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 April 07.WaltonPagewho perceive both high walkability and social connectedness in their neighborhoods display the highest levels of physical activity (Kaczynski Glover, 2012); the authors discuss how people base their physical activity decisions on their interpretations of the everyday spaces in which they spend time and the social interactions they have with people in those spaces. Brittingham Park’s apparent facilitation of both behavioral and social mechanisms toward health suggests that researchers and policy-makers should attend to both in their attempts to understand and improve neighborhood vital places. While these analyses were concentrated on a park in this particular neighborhood, the qualities that made it a vital place may be relatable to other neighborhood recreational areas that support both behavioral and social processes in cities, like schoolyards (Brink et al., 2010), open spaces (Sugiyama et al., 2010), and green spaces (Maas et al., 2009). In support of the idea that parks are vital places that can facilitate both behavioral and social pathways to health, Cattell and colleagues (2008) find that people derive a range of therapeutic benefits from open spaces in cities, such as the ability to escape daily routines, find restorative pleasure in being alone, and nurture the bonds of place attachment. The vital places concept is particularly valuable in explicating the dual roles that neighborhood parks and other open spaces can have in supporting health; appreciating that places can impact health in multiple, synergistic ways increases the potential for making a difference in a community by improving one neighborhood place. Finally, the neighborhood courtyards are vital places at Bayview. Jacobs (2011 [1961]) discusses the importance.
