Comparing the Current and Future Thermal Comfort Offered by Urban Park Configurations
There is growing interest in utilising urban parks as nature-based solutions to mitigate the effects of climate change and rising temperatures by improving thermal comfort. Nonetheless, understanding remains limited on how different park configurations influence summer thermal comfort, particularly under future warming scenarios. This novel study evaluates park configurations across different neighbourhood layouts within Perth’s Mediterranean climate under both present and future conditions. Study precincts were modelled and simulated using ENVI-met version 5.5 for an average current summer day, based on 25 years of local weather data and climate projections for 2090 under the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 scenario, representing the worst-case scenario. Results showed that park surfaces were consistently cooler than surrounding streets based on LST; however, this did not always translate into improved thermal comfort, as exposed grass areas often exhibited high Physiological Equivalent Temperature (PET) values. PET has been confirmed as the most suitable outdoor human thermal comfort index. Canopy cover and vegetation type, particularly tall trees and bushland, were more influential than park size or configuration in enhancing thermal comfort. These findings provide evidence-based insights, highlighting the importance of strategies that prioritise tree canopy coverage to enhance urban cooling and resilience to climate change.
Authors
- Nicole Edwards (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0924-5384)
- Maassoumeh Barghchi (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9101-8940)
- Julian Bolleter (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1514-2007)
- William J. Grace (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1305-7466)
Institutions
- The University of Western Australia (AU)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Land
- Published
- 2025-10-31
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.3390/land14112172
- Primary Topic
- Urban Heat Island Mitigation
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00