Open atdservicebot opened 1 year ago
Let's discuss this topic in the next VZ Sprint Review (Tuesday February 7th, 2023)
In 2/7/23 Planning:
Workarounds
cc: @patrickm02L review
This is something that I think will ultimately fall to Milad, and part of the larger discussion about what to do about #8388
From Xavier on 04/13/2023:
Given rpt_road_part_id and rpt_hwy_num are manually editable. Here are the steps for identifying a Level 5 location_id
Step 1. Assign a Level 5 location_id (using the filter on the locations table: public.atd_txdot_locations.location_group = 2) to the public.atd_txdot_crashes.location_id field using the following criteria, rpt_road_part_id <> 2 AND UPPER(LTRIM(rpt_hwy_num)) IN ('35', '183', '183A', '1', '290', '71', '360', '620', '45', '130') Step 2. If the criteria in Step 1 is not TRUE, then use existing process to identify the location_id (Street Level 1 through 4) Step 3. If the criteria in Step 1 is not TRUE, then assign a Level 5 location_id (using the filter on the locations table: public.atd_txdot_locations.location_group = 2) to the public.atd_txdot_crashes.location_id field or NULL if all three steps are FALSE
If it's helpful, here's the examples of what I needed to do to the SQL snippet to allow it to be inverted via the not
keyword:
-- crashes to be excluded from the VZE
--select count(crashes.crash_id)
select crash_id, rpt_road_part_id, UPPER(LTRIM(rpt_hwy_num))
from atd_txdot_crashes crashes
where true
and crash_date > (now() - interval '5 years')
and rpt_road_part_id <> 2
AND coalesce(
UPPER(LTRIM(rpt_hwy_num))
IN ('35', '183','183A','1','290','71','360','620','45','130')
, false);
-- crashes to be included
--select count(crashes.crash_id)
select crash_id, rpt_road_part_id, UPPER(LTRIM(rpt_hwy_num))
from atd_txdot_crashes crashes
where true
and crash_date > (now() - interval '5 years')
AND not( true
and rpt_road_part_id <> 2
and coalesce(
UPPER(LTRIM(rpt_hwy_num))
IN ('35', '183','183A','1','290','71','360','620','45','130')
, false)
);
From Xavier on 04/13/2023:
Given rpt_road_part_id and rpt_hwy_num are manually editable. Here are the steps for identifying a Level 5 location_id Step 1. Assign a Level 5 location_id (using the filter on the locations table: public.atd_txdot_locations.location_group = 2) to the public.atd_txdot_crashes.location_id field using the following criteria, rpt_road_part_id <> 2 AND UPPER(LTRIM(rpt_hwy_num)) IN ('35', '183', '183A', '1', '290', '71',
'360','620', '45', '130') Step 2. If the criteria in Step 1 is not TRUE, then use existing process to identify the location_id (Street Level 1 through 4) Step 3. If the criteria in Step 1 is not TRUE, then assign a Level 5 location_id (using the filter on the locations table: public.atd_txdot_locations.location_group = 2) to the public.atd_txdot_crashes.location_id field or NULL if all three steps are FALSE
Removing highways 360 & 620 because they are traffic controlled.
I renamed this to better capture what I think is needed—but this issue may just be a dupe. We'll see.
Vision Zero (Editor)
With more of a focus on Level 5 roadways, we would like to ensure our comprehensive cost maps (Level 1 to 4 and Level 5 maps) are as accurate as possible. During a recent review we have uncovered some issues with trying to provide more accurate representations of where these crashes are occurring when a level 5 polygon overlaps with level 1-4 polygons.
Have the ability to manually update crashes based on corrected road part & highway number and improve the accuracy of assigning the proper street level for analysis and aggregation, including level 5 roadways.
ETL Process (potential changes for discussion in Sprint Review mtg):
April 30th, 2023
Request ID: DTS23-106320