People
- People using Candie Gardens will generally be older then those making use of Cambridge Park; those using Cambridge Park will be making more use of sport facilities, so will generally be younger.
- Cambridge Park will have a lot more people using its grounds; Cambridge Park is significantly larger then Candie and so is targeted at a wider public then Candie.
- Candie Gardens will attract more tourists, whilst Cambridge Park will have more locals; Candie Gardens has more facilities that will attract tourists, i.e. Priaulx Library.
Facilities
- Activities that the sites offer will be different, i.e. Cambridge Park will have more sports facilities; both sites are aimed at different types of audiences, i.e. Candie Gardens is more touristy.
- More Schools will use Cambridge Park; as a pupil I used Cambridge Park with my school and I know of other schools that do as well.
- Cambridge Park and Candie Gardens will contrast greatly in use of plants and visual display; Activities are different so horticulture will be suited to the sites activities.
- Cambridge Park will have greater means of access then Candie Gardens; Cambridge Park is targeted at a broader audience so access will be catering for suitable audience.
Areas around sites
- There will be more residencies around Cambridge Park; more access routes and traffic links make Cambridge Park more likely to be in an area of more houses as opposed to Candie.
- There will be more direct traffic links around Cambridge Park; As previously said, Cambridge Park is probably busier so requires better traffic links.
- There will be more services around Cambridge Park, i.e. shops and garages; if more people choose to use Cambridge Park then more services should be readily available.
- There will be better pedestrian access routes around Cambridge Park; more people will use Cambridge Park and a park tends to be mainly pedestrian so there should be pedestrian access all around it.
- There will be more traffic around Cambridge Park; this corresponds with the following hypotheses; ‘There will be more traffic links around Cambridge Park’ & ‘Cambridge Park will be the more popular site’.
Observations
I have produced a series of experiments to justify these hypotheses. These are presented below in a chart, indicating all planned factors.
Data representation
To represent the results from each of my observations, I will be producing a series of graphs as my main source of data representation, but I will include tally charts and results tables as well.
Route
Physical factors
Cambridge Park
Candie Gardens
Questionnaires
I decided to use a questionnaire in accordance with some of my hypotheses, including;
- ‘There will be more public transport around Cambridge Park as opposed to Candie Gardens’
- ‘People using Candie Gardens will generally be older then those using Cambridge Park’
- ‘There will be a lot more people using Cambridge Park’
- ‘Candie Gardens will have more tourists’
- ‘Activities that the sites offer will be different’
- ‘More schools will use Cambridge Park’
I am going to include each of these hypotheses in my actual questions except for; ‘There will be a lot more people using Cambridge Park’. I can’t really include this into a questionnaire as each site will have an equal number of questionnaires distributed to it. To resolve this I have come up with the idea to record how long it takes for the questionnaires to be filled, the site to have all questionnaires would logically have more people, although this experiment isn’t entirely reliable as it can be influenced by people refusing to participate in my questionnaires.
I have planned and produced 50 questionnaires per site to distribute; these include many hypotheses and will assist my other observations in determining the accuracy of my hypotheses.
The map below indicates where I’ll be distributing the questionnaires. The questionnaire on the next page is a used version of mine
Data according to questionnaires
Cambridge Park: 50 questionnaires were dispersed to people within the grounds. The questionnaires took approximately 2 days to all be filled out. The results are below.
Candie Gardens: The Questionnaires took approximately 4 days to all be filled out.
Overall I think that the questionnaires went very well, they were a good way to prove or disprove some hypotheses and were a generally successful experiment. The data I acquired from the questionnaires has been shown below and adapted from the tally charts.
The line graph below shows the vast difference between the age of those who use Cambridge park, conclusively; from the chart below I can determine that my hypothesis, ‘People using Candie Gardens will generally be older then those using Cambridge park’, is quite accurate.
The following charts show transport around Cambridge Park and Candie Gardens. These supported my hypotheses of, ‘There will be more public transport around Cambridge Park as opposed to Candie Gardens’.
The following chart was very useful in determining how true the following hypotheses are; ‘Candie Gardens will attract more tourists whilst Cambridge Park will have more locals’.
The chart below show the parking areas of both the sites, this chart aided the parking assessment in proving the hypothesis, ‘Candie Gardens will have less parking zones in comparison to Cambridge Park’.
The chart below shows the public opinion of those who take public transport, too from and around each site. This will help prove or disprove the hypothesis; ‘There will be more direct traffic links around Cambridge Park’.
The chart below shows the facilities that are use by people, like all the other charts, it’s a comparison between Candie Gardens and Cambridge Park. It was useful in determining whether the hypothesis, ‘Activities that the sites offer will be different’.
The questionnaires were all distributed in Cambridge Park within 2 days; the questionnaires for Candie Gardens were distributed within about 4 days.
These questionnaires proved the following hypotheses; ‘People using Candie will be older’ & ‘there will be more people using Cambridge Park’ & ‘Candie Gardens will
Attract more tourists’.
Interview
I was unable to prove some of my hypotheses myself, so I came up with the conclusion to ring the groundskeepers or staff of each site, I produced a series of questions (below) to ask the staff.
- How many times a week on average do schools visit? ________________________________
- What kind of facilities do you promote? __________________________________________
- Do these pose any problems to the kind of facilities you supply? ______________________
- Would you agree that your site offers attractions to people of all ages or specifically one group? _____________________________________________________________________
- How efficient, do you think the parking and traffic routes around your site are for site users? --___________________________________________________________________________
Below, displayed in a table, I have shown the answers that staff gave from both sites;
This table proves the following hypothesis;
- More schools will use Cambridge Park
- Activities that the sites offer will be different
- People using Candie Garden will generally be older then those using Cambridge.
Traffic Assessment
Traffic experiment: In accordance with my hypothesis, an experiment was conducted to make a fair observation of traffic flow between both sites. A chart was originally produced and used to make a tally, but the data is presented below in a different form.
The experiment was performed twice, once at a typical rush hour time and the other at a relatively quiet time of the day.
The experiment was performed on 10 minute intervals. The first chart indicates traffic flow at 12 noon, I chose this time as it was after morning rush hour and just before any lunch rush hours. The second chart indicates traffic flow at 5:30 pm, I chose this time as it was a very typical rush hour as most people finish work then. The map below indicates where the experiment took place, the crossroads are marked with a red marker.
Overall I think that the assessment went very well and was very useful in showing the differences between the traffic flows between Candie Garden and Cambridge Park. This assessment proves my hypothesis, ‘There will be more traffic around Cambridge Park as opposed to Candie Gardens’.
Car parking assessment
Car Parks in and around sites: As planned in hypothesis, a chart was produced to determine amount of car parks, and their spaces in and around grounds of each site, this is shown below. This experiment will also contribute to the hypothesis produced relating to popularity of each site.
The first chart of both sites, shows car parks in grounds, the second chart shows public parking spaces around the sites. The red arrow indicates the road and the white circle is the parking zone.
.
Candie Gardens:
Overall I think that the assessment went very well and was very useful in showing the differences between the traffic flows between Candie Garden and Cambridge Park. This assessment proves my hypothesis, ‘There will be more traffic around Cambridge Park as opposed to Candie Gardens’.
Overall I think that this assessment went very well, I think that it was a very good way in which to prove the hypothesis, ’Candie Gardens will have less parking zones in comparison to Cambridge Park’. I also found that this related to the hypotheses regarding people; ‘There will be a lot more people using Cambridge Park’. There are more Parking spaces in Cambridge Park so it is obviously intended to be used by a larger amount of people then what Candie Gardens intends.
Areas around the sites
One of the hypotheses was that there would be more residencies around Cambridge Park. To teat this I went out and made rough estimates on how many houses there were on each surrounding road (maximum 4), this is shown below.
From the chart, it is easy to determine which site has the most residencies around it. Not only does this show popular areas for homes to be built and lived in (by the large numbers) but the data also indicates the obviously larger site. Overall the experiment was a successful and proved the hypothesis, ‘
Pedestrian access routes
Both sites have pavements on every side of them. Candie Gardens has good access not only to its site itself but also to the CBD, there is a main route that goes down Candie road, to a set of traffic lights at St Julians Avenue, these traffic lights can be crossed at, and this leads straight into the CBD.
This route along with the access points and bus stops are clearly indicated below on the map (follow the key).
Cambridge Park has good access points all around it also but doesn’t have a particularly direct route into the CBD; although one route does lead to the suburban area of the CBD, Les Cotils. To get here, you must walk down the L’Hyvreuse. From here there is a straight route to town.
This route along with the access points and bus stops are marked on the map below, there is a key to show this.
Overall, the hypothesis, ‘There will be better pedestrian access routes around Cambridge’, has been disproved, Candie has a more direct route with the CBD and this route is a lot quicker then the less direct route that leads to the CBD from Cambridge Park.
Shops and services are marked on the map below. This was an assessment performed to prove my hypothesis; ‘There will be more services around Cambridge Park’. This hypothesis was disproved, a list of services in and around the sites are listed below (and marked on the map);
- Doyle Motors Garage
- Candy Cache
- Beau Sejour Leisure centre
- Coffee Shop (in Candie)
- Gift shop (in Candie)
- Parks café (in Beau Sejour)
As you can see from the map, Candie Gardens is a lot closer to all of the services and offers more then Cambridge Park does within its grounds also.
Overall this disproves my hypothesis; ‘There will be more services around Cambridge’ and also shows Candie Gardens to be a more tourism orientated place as its near the CBD and near a variety of services, so supports my hypothesis, ‘Candie Gardens will attract more tourists’. The gift shop is a prime example of this.
Popularity of each site
In accordance with the hypothesis, ‘There will be a lot more people using Cambridge park’, a tally chart has been produced to prove or disprove this hypothesis.
I filled this tally by going up to each site at a set time, on two different Saturdays, I stood and tallied everybody that I could see. This was more difficult in Cambridge Park as there are more areas to tally.
This data has been plotted on a line graph, below the tally chart.
Differences in horticulture & Facilities
Conclusion
I began this study by creating a series of hypothesis and planning experiments, using which to prove or disprove each hypothesis. This is shown below.
Each of these experiments’ were very successful in determining the accuracy of the hypotheses’.
Using these hypotheses I have been able to determine exactly what cultural differences exist between Cambridge Park and Candie Gardens,
- Cambridge Park and Candie Gardens target two completely different audiences; Candie Gardens targets more tourists, this was mainly discovered through the questionnaires. (page 13)
- Cambridge Park and Candie Gardens offer completely different recreational activities.
- Cambridge Park has more custom, this was found mainly through people tally but also how quickly questionnaires were dispersed.
Overall I think that there are many cultural differences that exist between Cambridge Park and Candie Gardens, because of the very different activities the sites offer. Cambridge Park is an area set up for sports activities, whilst Candie Gardens is a site set up mainly for tourism, Cultural differences should be expected.
