A Brief Analysis of Park Development in Raleigh (with Visualizations)

_top100.yml

Types of Parks

Eight types of parks appear in this dataset, the most common types being neighborhood and open space parks.

_top100.yml

We observe something slightly strange in the chart below. While neighborhood and open space parks are the most common types, they account for a relatively small amount of the land allocated for park development, so we can infer that different types of parks vary considerably in size

_top100.yml

For example, metro type parks account for less than 5% of all parks but nearly half of all park land.

_top100.yml

Now let’s take a look at the development status of different types of parks: _top100.yml

My intuition going into this analysis was that larger parks would receive more development resources, which may be the case, but size doesn’t actually seem to be that predictive of development status.

The only type that seems to be systemically underdeveloped is open spaces parks, though I wonder if the developed/undeveloped dichotomy is relevant here. How much do open spaces really need to be developed?

From the interactive below (hover over the points for more info), it seems that parks get developed pretty reliably– given enough time. Undeveloped parks are massively overrepresented among recent acquisitions.

test

There’s probably a lot more I could do with this data. Are there any questions you would like me to answer in a future post? Does anything here make you feel curious? You can let me know by commenting below or emailing me at michaelfosterprojects@gmail.com

Written on February 24, 2018