How accessible are New Zealand's playgrounds?
We assessed 1,224 public playgrounds across New Zealand for wheelchair access, looking at whether you can get from the car park to the play area, and what you find underfoot when you arrive. Only 13% came out fully accessible.
The problem is almost always the ground
Loose bark chip was the barrier we recorded most often, at 675 of the 1,224 playgrounds assessed (55%). It is a long way ahead of everything else. Bark is cheap, it meets impact-safety standards, and a wheelchair, walker or pushchair sinks straight into it. In most cases the path to the playground was fine and the surface underneath the equipment was what ended the visit.
That is worth saying plainly, because it makes the fix concrete. A playground does not need to be rebuilt to become usable. Replacing bark with poured rubber on the main circulation route, which 77 of the playgrounds we assessed have already done, is often the difference between partial and full access.
Most common barriers
- Bark or wood-chip surface (wheels sink)675
- Grass-only approach (no path)49
- No accessible parking nearby38
- Steep approach from carpark35
- Long uneven path from carpark16
- Stairs needed to reach the play7
- Sand surface (wheels sink)3
- Kerb, no dropped ramp2
Most common accessible features
- Step-free path to the play347
- Accessible parking bay117
- Artificial turf surface (firmer than bark)111
- Poured rubber surface (firm for wheels)77
- Accessible toilet on site68
- Wheel-on roundabout / carousel66
- Supportive swing seat (high-back, basket or nest)63
- Sensory / musical panels at seated height25
By council
Councils where we assessed at least 15 playgrounds, best first. The sample is not evenly spread, so read this as a signal rather than a league table.
| Council | Assessed | Accessible |
|---|---|---|
| Hastings District | 21 | 33% |
| Timaru District | 23 | 30% |
| Upper Hutt City | 18 | 28% |
| Napier City | 15 | 27% |
| Marlborough District | 16 | 25% |
| Whangarei District | 21 | 24% |
| Hamilton City | 50 | 22% |
| Invercargill City | 28 | 21% |
| Lower Hutt City | 22 | 18% |
| Wellington City | 94 | 15% |
| Tauranga City | 43 | 14% |
| Queenstown-Lakes District | 30 | 13% |
| Auckland | 242 | 13% |
| Waipa District | 16 | 13% |
| Dunedin City | 49 | 12% |
| Kapiti Coast District | 28 | 11% |
| Christchurch City | 112 | 7% |
| Selwyn District | 47 | 6% |
| Porirua City | 34 | 6% |
| Palmerston North City | 40 | 5% |
| Whakatane District | 21 | 5% |
| Nelson City | 24 | 4% |
| New Plymouth District | 28 | 0% |
| Rotorua District | 21 | 0% |
| Taupo District | 15 | 0% |
How we did this, and what it is not
Each playground was assessed against a fixed schema: a score out of ten, an overall badge, and named features and barriers drawn from a controlled list. The evidence came from council asset registers and park pages, playground descriptions, and photographs. Every assessment records its reasoning, and you can read it on the individual playground page.
These are not on-site audits by an accessibility professional. They are a structured read of the best available evidence, and they will contain errors. Treat them as a strong starting point for planning a trip, not as certification.
The 1,224 playgrounds assessed so far are not a random sample. They are weighted towards playgrounds we hold the most information about, which tend to be larger, newer and better documented. If anything, that means the true national picture is worse than the numbers above, not better.
Found one we have got wrong? and we will correct it.