Urban parks are central to social resilience and everyday well-being, yet accessibility continues to be defined through proximity rather than lived experience. This study explores how local realities of access intersect with planning practice in Liverpool CBD, Western Sydney, a rapidly densifying district where social and climatic inequalities are deeply spatialised. Building on prior spatial modelling, this phase integrates 110 on-site survey responses from two district parks (Apex and Bigge) with insights from 5 expert interviews to investigate how perceived accessibility translates or fails to translate into planning action.
Survey findings reveal a paradox of use: Apex Park, though scoring lowest in spatial accessibility, functions as a “doorstep park” embedded in community life, while the Bigge Park is perceived as transient and under-comforted in certain cases. Perceived barriers shape not only park use but also emotional attachment. Strategically, even with its central location and above-average facilities, one large park may never meet the diverse needs of all groups. Planners, architects and academics emphasised that green-space strategies often prioritise mapping and metrics over lived experience, under-addressing mundane yet critical issues such as toilets, lighting, and family-friendly facilities. As experts noted, people can often reach parks but cannot access their benefits. They advocate for planning policies grounded in people’s rhythms, vulnerabilities, and temporal uses of public space.
By combining community perceptions with expert reflection, this research reframes accessibility as a socio-spatial dialogue between residents’ everyday geographies and institutional design logics. It aligns SDG 11(Cities and communities) and concludes that future strategies should foreground experiential and networked approaches—planning for shade, maintenance, and everyday safety as essential conditions for inclusive urban resilience.