Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 13, 2023. It is now read-only.

Research: change historic district update to use district file, not lot-based file #344

Open
AmandaDoyle opened this issue Jun 21, 2022 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
question Information request

Comments

@AmandaDoyle
Copy link
Member

AmandaDoyle commented Jun 21, 2022

LS request: LPC data - change historic district update to use district file, not lot-based file

What would the implications be of changing the LPC source data from lpc_historic_districts: LPC Individual Landmark and Historic District Building Database to lpc_historic_district_areas: Historic Districts

How will the results change in PLUTO? What logic would need to change?

Dig into previous issues because AD remembers debating this at length and coming to a decision.

@AmandaDoyle AmandaDoyle added question Information request research labels Jun 21, 2022
@Oysters1874 Oysters1874 self-assigned this Jun 22, 2022
@Oysters1874
Copy link
Contributor

By comparing the spatial join results using the new area-based file (lpc_historic_district_areas) and the results of the original lot-based file, we observed several changes that may lead to further concerns.

Firstly, the new area-based file cannot capture the information of individual landmark. If using the new file to assign BBL with a historic district, some individual landmarks will be assigned to a particular district, which shouldn't be the case.

Secondly, there are some overlapped historical districts, such as there are 2 polygons of Carnegie Hill Historic District located within the polygon of the larger Expanded Carnegie Hill Historic District. Also, both "Central Park West-West 73rd - 74th Street Historic District" and "Central Park West-76th Street Historic District" are located within the larger "Upper West Side/Central Park West Historic District". Therefore, if we are switching to the new area-based dataset, we need extra steps to limit the scope when assigning BBLs with historic districts. Probably, just assign them with the smaller geometry.

Thirdly, by manually checking, there are 2 BBLs are switching from West 71st Street Historic District to West End-Collegiate Historic District Extension. Both of them are locating on the boundary of two districts. By eyeballing, they do belong to the latter, which means the new area-based file is correct in terms of this. Not sure whether there is any error in the lot-based file, lpc_historic_districts.

Also, the naming of historic districts are incoherent between the two files in terms of spelling, plural/single form, whitespaces near punctuations, etc. If we are using the area-based file, it may be necessary to make the naming coherent in order to keep track of changes.

@Oysters1874
Copy link
Contributor

image

@damonmcc damonmcc removed the research label Apr 3, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
question Information request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants