Represent "Undeveloped" Park shapes differently than "Developed" Parks

[mateoclarke]

We've talked about using the quantity of park amenities as a proxy for park quality/development and the people have pointed it out on Twitter too.

@mpusto @MateoClarke the other tricky one with a couple of NE parks is that only a small portion has amenities.

— Brennan Griffin (@brennangriffin) July 9, 2015

[mateoclarke]

We've learned from Allison Hardy what the data field for "Development Status" represents.

• Developed is a park with one or more amenities/facilities
• Undeveloped is a park with 0 amenities/facilities

From CityofAustinParks_Metadata.pdf

We've decided to redraw our park-access map so parks without amenities have no buffer rings symbolizing access. We've also decided to use a different color (gray, or greenish gray) for undeveloped parks.

@kyoder: We should note that this will change the way the "Nature Preserves" are represented on the map, like Barton Creek Wilderness Park. This park surrounds Barton Creek Greenbelt which does have amenities.

[mateoclarke]

@kyoder: I don't know if we should rely on the "Development Status" field that is provided in the park shapefiles. According to austingreenmap's data, there are parks like Walnut Creek Greenbelt or Decker Tallgrass Prairie Preserve that have a handful of amenities/facilities but are still classified as "Undeveloped".

I'm working on adding an amenities/facilities count to each park in our data file.

[kyoder]

I agree. If the field is unreliable, it's better to include both Developed and Undeveloped parks. I think including the amenities count is our best option.

[mateoclarke]

Here is a table of amenity, facility, and trails counts for each park: https://github.com/open-austin/Austin_Parks_Equity/blob/master/data/park_attraction_counts.csv

Here is a text summary of the parks that seems to have inaccurate "development status" listings based on our counts: Bauerle Ranch Park -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Buttermilk Branch Greenbelt -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Earl J. Pomerleau Pocket Park -- 2 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped Blowing Sink Research Management Area -- 1 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped East Boggy Creek Greenbelt -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Barton Creek Wilderness Park -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Armadillo Neighborhood Park -- 9 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped Cherrywood Pocket Park -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Davis Hill Neighborhood Park -- 1 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped Copperfield Neighborhood Park -- 3 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped Country Club Creek Greenbelt -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Decker Tallgrass Prairie Preserve -- 2 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped Hartford Planting Strip -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed J.J. Seabrook Greenbelt -- 3 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped Lewis Mountain Ranch Neighborhood Park -- 2 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped Harris Triangle -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed North Acres Neighborhood Park -- 2 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped Margaret Hoffman Oak Park -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Old San Antonio Park -- 1 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped South Park Meadows Greenbelt -- 1 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped Payton Gin Pocket Park -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Springfield Neighborhood Park -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Plummers Cemetery -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Piney Bend Neighborhood Park -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Stephenson Nature Preserve & Outdoor Education Center -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed The Circle ROW Greenbelt -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Tom Lasseter-South Lamar Neighborhood Park -- 14 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped Highland Neighborhood Park -- 0 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Developed Walnut Creek Greenbelt -- 9 amenities/facilities -- Listed as Undeveloped

[mateoclarke]

We'll go ahead and rely on our count of park amenities plus facilities instead of PARD's "Development Status" data column in decided which parks are truly undeveloped.

Undeveloped parks will use a different color than our other parks (probably brown or greenish grey) and will not show access buffers.

[mateoclarke]

• [x] Add column to park shapefile for amenity/facility count (based on our numbers) - @mateoclarke
  • new geojson with amenity, facility, and trail counts
• [x] Redraw access buffer rings excluding parks buffer rings that have 0 amenity/facility (am_plus_fac_sum) count - @kyoder
• [x] Export new access buffer shapefile - @kyoder
• [x] Incorporate into Leaflet map - @mateoclarke

[kyoder]

• Excluding the parks that have 0 amenity/facility count resulted in the removal of 76 parks from the access analysis bringing the total parks from 286 to 210.
• The park access shapefile(cost_distance_developed08112015.shp) includes new distances for 2 miles, 3 miles, and greater than 3 miles which will hopefully provide some flexibility on the extent of the data. I tried clipping the park access rings to Austin's city limits boundary but felt like too many areas were excluded...

[mateoclarke]

Closing this one out. We may want to share with PARD the inconsistency we found with the "Development Status" data as a separate issue.