*4.1. The Service of Community Greenways for Di*ff*erent Activities*

Like other urban greenways, the community greenway serves various activities. In this study, daily traffic (40.4%), leisure activities (36.4%) and physical exercises (54.6%) are the major activities. From the classification of the activities (Figure 5), it is concluded that necessary activities and optional activities are more important in the community greenway. To further analyze, different groups of people showed specific preference for activities. For example, males prefer exercise while females choose social activities more than males. This result is contrary to the previous study, which concludes that exercising was a stronger motivation for female [32]. The reason could be that in China, a large part of females prefer group dancing as a kind of exercise while in community greenways, there is limited space for this kind of activity. The social activity is an important activity for females because most retired females in China would take care of their grandsons and granddaughters, and the community greenway is a convenient open space for childcare. Different from other groups, young people mainly take the community greenway for commuting (62.5%) rather than leisure activity (18.75%) and physical exercise (37.5%). It is likely because of the lack of recreation facilities [27]. This could be an issue to be considered when constructing community greenways.

From Table 5, the most obvious improvement of the community greenway lies in necessary activity (3.78). Optional activity and social activity rank the second and the third respectively. The ranking corresponds to the status evaluation of the community greenway (Table 7). As there is positive relationship between the connectivity with other urban living facilities and transportation convenience (β = 0.504, 95% C.I. = 0.411–0.862) and between the service facility and neighborhood communication (β = −0.257, 95% CI = −0.654–0.073). It reflects to some extent that the convenient transportation is due to the connectivity with other urban living facilities. While the relatively weak improvement of social interactions is because of the lack of service facilities. Public space is the carrier of social interaction [45,46], as residents have shown intentions to connect with others in open spaces [47]. From this result, the improvement of service facility could be a way to increase social connections.
