HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/12/2017 05A Equity Study Analysis1
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDASTATEMENT
Item No. 5.A.
For Meeting of: December 12, 2017
ITEM TITLE: Presentation of Final Equity Study Assessment from WSU Metro
Center
SUBMITTED BY: Cliff Moore, City Manager
Joan Davenport, Community Development Director
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
The WSU Metro Team has submitted the Final of the Equity Study Assessment Report. Staff
from WSU will be available at the December 12th City Council meeting to present the findings of
this report.
ITEM BUDGETED:
NA
STRATEGIC PRIORITY: Neighborhood and Community Building
APPROVED FOR
SUBMITTAL:
City Manager
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Review report
BOARD/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
The Neighborhood and Community Building Committee has reviewed the draft reports as well as
presentations from the contributing staff for this report.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date
equity study 12'72017
Type
Coyer Memo
2
Metropolitan Center for
Applied Research & Extension
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY
EXTENSION
City of Yakima
Equity Study Analysis
Conducted by the WSU Metropolitan Center for
Applied Research & Extension
Final Report, Revised
December 4, 2017
The Metropolitan Center for
Applied Research & Extension
WSU Everett
91 5 N. Broadway
Everett, WA 98201
206-219-2426
http://metrocenter.wsu.edu
3
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Contents
Executive Summary 3
Scope of Work 7
16th Avenue — demographics over time 8
Task 1, Part A: Summary of the City of Yakima's Data Collection Methods 11
Terminology 11
Methods 11
Findings 12
Public Safety Calls for Service 12
Streetlights 12
Code Compliance Requests 13
Parks 13
Transit (Ridership, and shelters/benches) 13
Conclusion 14
Task 1 Part B: Process and Accuracy Audit Site Visit 14
Methods 14
Findings 16
Conclusion 16
Task 2 Part A: Data Quality and Limitations 17
Task 2 Part B: Confirm the input and output variables for the analysis 17
Methods 17
Task 2 Part C: Statistical Analysis 18
Methods 19
Results: Analysis of Historical Data - Parks 19
Results summary - parks 28
Results: Analysis of Current Data 28
Police Department calls for service 28
Fire Department calls for service 32
Streetlights 34
Code compliance requests 38
Transit ridership 41
Bus stop benches 45
Bus stop shelters 49
Conclusion and Recommendations 52
November 2017
4
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 2
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
About the Metro Center 55
Appendices 56
Appendix A — Complete City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis 57
Appendix B — City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Task 1 Report 58
Appendix C — Demographic Variables Over Time 63
Appendix D — Project Proposal 72
Appendix E — Summary of Accuracy Audit Findings 75
Appendix F — Estimated Census Tract Population Over Time 77
Appendix G — Census Tract Maps Over Time 78
December 2017
5
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 3
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Executive Summary
Washington State University's Metropolitan Center for Applied Research and Extension (Metro Center)
was contracted by the City of Yakima to conduct of an analysis of a specified range of variables using
data compiled for the City of Yakima's Equity Study. This report presents the principal findings from the
analysis (Appendix A— Complete City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis) and an overview of the city's
methods for collecting, storing and sharing that information. This analysis of the Equity Study data is one
of a "series of actions the Yakima City Council has taken to address equitable distribution of resources
throughout the City of Yakima related to social, racial and economic benefits"
(https://www.yakimawa.gov/council/equity-study/ ).
On June 6, 2017, we met with Yakima City Council members on the Neighborhood and Community
Building Committee: Chair Dulce Gutierrez, Carmen Mendez and Avina Gutierrez, to clarify the scope
of work, define the specific variables and geographic dividing line to be analyzed, and the overall intent
of the study. Data used in the analysis came from existing sources, including data collected by the city
and census data. We were not contracted to collect additional data for this analysis.
This report includes characterization and analysis of data sets specified in the scope of work which
follows, and provided to us by city staff:
Public safety calls for service
• Streetlights
• Code compliance requests
• Parks (excluding privately funded parks, or those that charge for use)
• Transit ridership, shelters, benches
These data were compared across demographic variables obtained from U.S. Census Bureau and the
geographical dividing line of 16th Avenue. In addition to examining the applicability of the data for the
purposes of the Equity Study, we also documented the methods of collection, storage, and sharing of
these data between departments.
On September 15, 2017 we submitted an initial report (Appendix B — City of Yakima Equity Study
Analysis — Task 1 Report) which concluded that City of Yakima has a professional and appropriate
process for collecting, storing, and analyzing data, and a staff knowledgeable in the data infrastructure.
Additionally, the data is recorded and handled in a reasonable and professional manner for its original
intent: to support the city's geospatial data and land use planning.
However, our examination revealed that while most of data sets assessed in this contract were
developed using best practices and are a professionally appropriate resource for the operations of their
associated departments, with the exception of the Parks and Recreation and Parcel data, the data did
not include date attributes. For example, the data indicated the presence of a streetlight, but did not
indicate the date it was installed. As a result, while the data are appropriate for their designated use in
city asset management, they could not be used to evaluate budgetary decisions and resource allocation
over time, making it difficult to use the data to address the equitable distribution of resources
throughout the city. The specific details of the utility of the data, and a summary of the analysis of the
data sets, appear in the body of this report.
December 2017
6
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 4
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Findings and Recommendations
Demographic Change over Time
The City of Yakima has undergone many changes since it was incorporated in 1883. Yakima's population
has become more diverse, more educated, and median family incomes have risen (Appendix C —
Demographic Variables Over Time). However, although social conditions in Yakima improved overall,
they have not been shared by all residents as demonstrated by the ethnic segregation marked by 16th
Avenue:
The proportion of residents who are of Hispanic origin has increased at a greater rate on the
east side
Median family incomes have increased at a greater rate on the west side
College graduation rates have increased on the west side and decreased on the east side
The proportion of youth has increased over time on the east side. Whereas the number of
seniors has steadily decreased on the east side and steadily increased on the west side over the
same period
City of Yakima's Data Collection Methods
Our analysis suggests the City of Yakima has a professional and appropriate process for collecting,
storing, and analyzing data, and a staff knowledgeable in the data infrastructure. We found no major
sources of explicit bias in the collection, handling or storing of data. However, we did find several
opportunities to improve data quality and quantity related to equity analysis
Develop the Yak Back application in Spanish to meet the needs of more residents
Develop an anonymous way to determine the status of Yak Back complaints to eliminate
duplicate complaints and illustrate the city's responsiveness
Create a system to allow residents to request additional street lights
Create criteria for prioritizing code compliance requests, including those that do not threaten
public safety
Creating a formal system of reporting the conditions of bus benches and shelters
Add the condition of park amenities to the data currently collected
Process and Accuracy Audit Site Visit
Our team was able to confirm the accuracy of the parks data provided for the Equity Study. Using the
parks data as an indicator of overall quality, and in combination with the assessment of data collection
methods, we can infer the general reliability of the city's data. We also identified opportunities to
provide park improvements with an increased emphasis on equitable distribution of parks and
amenities.
Add qualitative data (condition of amenities) to supplement the quantitative data (existence of
an amenity)
Develop a set of criteria for prioritizing park improvements that include indicators of equity, in
addition to the current practice of informing service organizations of planned capital
improvements
Provide the prioritized list, and suggestions, to private entities seeking to fund park
improvements
Develop a policy whereby the city keeps a percentage of private contributions for parks to
support park improvements and amenities across the city
December 2017
7
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 5
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Statistical Analysis of Historical Data — Parks
Parks were the only data that included an attribute storing the year of establishment, allowing for an
analysis from 1980-2015. Much of the data needs to be considered in historical terms; the east side was
developed earlier, following typical pre -WWII patterns (smaller parcels on regular street -blocks),
whereas the west side was more recently developed, with more suburban forms (larger parcels, some
irregular street patterns). More recent developments often include parks as formal design elements,
whereas older developments frequently did not include similar land set aside for parks.
When stratified by 16th Avenue, it appears that far more persons on the east side reside within
-mile of parks than on the west side.
While many demographic variables showed little change over the years, it appears that within
the Y -mile area around parks, there were lowering proportions of persons of Hispanic origin,
younger and older persons, married persons, and home owners.
Some notable trends are the decrease in the number of persons residing within 1/4 mile of a
park on the east side, and an increase on the west side; a drop in younger persons within buffers
on the east side; and changes in the proportion of Hispanics that seem to mirror general
demographic shifts over time.
Statistical Analysis of Current Data
Most of the GIS data sets were not encoded for longitudinal analysis — that is, the features in the GIS do
not contain attributes representing the time at which the real-world features were created, installed or
developed. Therefore, analyses for specific data sets were restricted to examination of current features
and data sets with respect to current demographic data. These data sets therefore represent a
benchmark more than allowing for analysis. No regression trend lines were added to the graphs; due to
the small sample size, trend lines are easily leveraged by outlier points, and correlation coefficients and
p -values are unstable. Findings include:
Police department calls for service
o The tracts with the greatest number of per -capita calls were on the east side, but there
appeared to be no association between demographic characteristics and counts of calls
per capita.
Fire department calls for service
o There is no consistent trend of more calls coming from tracts with differential income,
percent of residents of Hispanic origin, or renters.
Street lights
o There appears to be no general association between streetlight density and
demographic variables that cannot be explained by basic principles of urban form and
historical development.
Code compliance requests
o Code compliance requests per capita appear to occur in greater numbers on the east
side.
o The data do not indicate whether the resident who submitted the code compliance
request is a neighbor, landlord, or someone who is just driving by. Therefore, the origin
of the request cannot be directly ascribed to any difference in services provided.
o The data did not include any consistent record -level information on either status or date
of resolution; it is not possible in this analysis to make any conclusions on questions of
equity related to how the City responds to such requests.
December 2017
8
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 6
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
• Transit ridership
o Patterns in transit ridership are similar to those of streetlights, and are likely due to
similar underlying urban characteristics.
o There is slightly higher ridership in tracts containing lower proportions of persons under
18 years of age, pointing to a potential mismatch between level of service and need.
o The patterns of bus stop bench density are similar to those of transit ridership, likely
indicating that benches and shelters are placed in locations with greater ridership.
o Bus stop bench density appears to be higher in tracts with lower proportions of persons
65 years or older on the east side.
Conclusion and Additional Recommendations
Over the course of this project we found that the city is doing professional work in the development and
management of the various data sets under their purview, gathered for specific purposes related to city
and department management. The data sets are useful for their original purpose but, as this analysis has
shown, the data sets within the scope of this study cannot adequately provide an assessment of
whether city resources have been equitably distributed. While this determination cannot be made, we
believe that information in this analysis, and the act of engaging in this analysis, can prove valuable to
the city.
City Council approved this analysis of the Equity Study data with the intention of using it as a tool to
move forward, and to inform data driven decisions to benefit the city. Data driven decisions cannot be
made without reliable data and proper systems for handling them. Our study concluded that Yakima has
both the staff and the systems to support the use of data as a powerful tool for decision making, and
data that can be used as an initial conditions statement and a base upon which to build. This is a
tremendous asset for the city. The city can now determine what additional data it needs to collect - date
and time attributes, for example — based on the questions the city wants to address in the future.
We provide the additional recommendations to assist the city:
In order to look forward, the city may benefit from also examining its history and the current
conditions that evolved from typical patterns of growth.
As a reference for understanding the forces leading to modern inequities in the City of Yakima, it
may be useful to place Yakima in the larger context of other cities across America that are facing
similar situations.
Many cities, large and small, have developed criteria for making decisions that include equity,
typically called an Equity Lens. An Equity Lens is a practical tool to help insure that planning,
decision making and resource allocation lead to policies and programs that help to achieve
equity across the community, racially, socially and economically.
To evaluate progress toward equity, the city must determine what it should measure. Hence,
the value of a reliable system of collecting and managing data, which this study concluded that
Yakima possesses, becomes critically important.
A cornerstone of equitable decision making is authentic community and stakeholder
engagement. It, too, is a process that requires care and commitment to insure that engagement
sparks lively civil discourse without resulting in acrimony and deep division.
December 2017
9
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 7
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Scope of Work
The Metro Center's Scope of Work consisted of the two tasks listed below, as specified by the City
Council. The findings of this report are organized by these tasks. The complete project proposal is found
in Appendix D — Project Proposal.
Task 1: Validate Equity Study data
Methods
Confirm with City Council up to 6 data sets identified in Task 2 B, excluding US Census Bureau data, to
assess the validity of those data. For each data set selected we will conduct, as appropriate:
A. A process audit by interviewing City staff and reviewing documents associated with how these
data were collected, compiled, summarized, and made accessible to the public.
B. An accuracy audit of the data by randomly selecting a representative sample of data points, and
independently determining the accuracy through direct observations.
Task 2: Analyze existing Equity Study data to assess the geographic distribution of public
resources and funds (e.g. city, State, or Federal)
Methods
A. Assess the quality of the data to understand any qualitative concerns and limitations that would
impact data analysis or interpretation (i.e. period of time collected, geographically resolution of
the data, etc.).
B. Confirm the input and output variables for the analysis, and the geographical dividing line. Initial
request included the following 6 data sets, upon which this estimate is based:
• Input variable:
o Demographics, to include income, race, education level, marital status, home
owner or renter, property value and age
• Output variables:
o Public safety calls for service (location, response time)
o Streetlights
o Code compliance requests
o Parks (exempt parks that are privately funded or charge for use)
o Transit ridership, shelters, benches
Geographical dividing line
o 16th Avenue
C. Perform the appropriate statistical analyses to assess any relationships amongst the input and
output (i.e. response) variables.
December 2017
percent Hispanic
20-
D -
10
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 8
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
16th Avenue - demographics over time
The City of Yakima has undergone many changes since it was incorporated in 1883. Economic and
demographic transitions, as well as geographic changes have been ongoing for the city as it adapts to
regional and national influences. In the past thirty-five years, Yakima's population has become more
diverse, more educated, and median family incomes have risen (Appendix C — Demographic Variables
Over Time). However, although social conditions in Yakima improved overall, they have not been shared
by all residents as demonstrated by the ethnic segregation marked by 16th Avenue. The following four
sets of graphs illustrate different trends that residents in eastern versus western Yakima have
experienced between 1980 and 2015. These figures show the significance of the dividing line of 16th
Avenue, which was identified by the City Council as a demarcation line for this project.
Figure 1 shows that the proportion of residents who are of Hispanic origin has increased at a greater
rate on the east side; Figure 2 shows that median family incomes have increased at a greater rate on the
west side, and Figure 3 shows increasing college graduation rates on the west side and decreasing rates
on the east side. Figure 4 shows dramatic changes in age profiles; the proportion of youth has increased
over time on the east side, particularly from 2000 onward, whereas the number of seniors has steadily
decreased on the east side and steadily increased on the west side over the same period.
a)
a)
a
LL
1
1980 1990 2000 2010 2015
year
16th Ave divide
■ e
■ w
Figure 1: Percent Hispanic, east and west of 16th Avenue
December 2017
11
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 9
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
60000 -
40000 -
20000 -
0-
median family income
1980 1990 2000 2010 2015
year
16th Ave divide
■ e
■ w
Figure 2: Median family income, east and west of 16th Avenue
December 2017
12
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 10
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
percent college graduate
15-
6th Ave divide
2 10- ■e
U
Q MIN
a)
5-
-
0-
0-
1980
1980 1990 2000 2010 2015
year
Figure 3: Percent of residents who are college graduates, east and west of 16th Avenue
2G
m2
percent < 18 years
1990 2000 2010
year
16th Ave divide
■ e
■ w
c
2
tG-
O.
0-
percent >= 65 years
1980 1990 2000
year
16th Ave divide
e
Figure 4: Percent of residents by age (< 18, left; >_ right), east and west of 16th Avenue
December 2017
13
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 11
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Task 1, Part A: Summary of the City of Yakima's Data Collection Methods
This section provides an overview of the methods used by City of Yakima employees to collect, store and
share data for five city -provided data sets: public safety calls for service, streetlights, code compliance
requests, parks, and transit (ridership, benches, and shelters).
Terminology
Throughout this report the following terms: equity, equality and bias will be used. As it relates to the
scope of work of this project, the following definitions will be used
Equality — an equal service level regardless of need
Equity — a service level appropriate to need, regardless of the absolute amount of service
• Bias — intentional or unintentional (systematic) treatment or distortion of either equity or
equality in favor of, or against, one group as compared with another
Methods
After receiving portions of the data and conducting an initial review, we met by phone with City
Manager Cliff Moore, Community Development Director Joan Davenport, and city staff to clarify the
intent of some portions of Task 1 of the Scope of Work, and to make sure there was a common
understanding of the city's interest in positive strategies for the future. Through this discussion we came
to understand that the language of the scope required clarification. Task 1 "Validate Equity Study data"
means something different in the academic realm and the applied real-world one. A technical data
validation process would be overly statistical, particularly with a "representative sample of data points"
across the various datasets, would be prohibitively expensive and, most important, would not achieve
the city's objectives. Instead, we decided that we needed to determine if the city's data are being
collected and recorded in appropriate ways (Task 1, part A), and whether the data are useful to the
current analysis (Task 1, part B). Then, as appropriate, we would check for accuracy of the acceptable
data by ground-truthing through site visits (Task 1, part B) to complete Task 1.
For our process audit we reached out to city staff in multiple departments to learn about the internal
processes used to gather, compile, and store data for the Yakima Equity Study. Staff were uniformly
open and helpful in sharing their processes for data collection and handling with us, as well as the data
itself.
We contacted the City of Yakima's Supervising Senior Analyst, Tom Sellsted, to obtain the five datasets
of interest. After reviewing the data available, we spoke with Tom Sellsted and Jill Ballard to discuss the
methods used to collect and display datasets in the Equity Study's ArcMap Online Story Maps
(https://yakima.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=edb33521fed7400e839ae1b1e7a
d3fcc). Mr. Sellsted also provided us with contact information for the city data steward(s) of each of the
five datasets, and we scheduled one-hour phone calls with each data steward. During these calls we
asked questions to identify and clarify our understanding of the methods used to collect the data used in
the Equity Study. We took detailed notes during the call and, in some cases, followed up with additional
emails or calls for clarification.
December 2017
14
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 12
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Findings
Public Safety Calls for Service
Public safety calls for Yakima Fire and Police services are recorded by the 9-1-1 dispatch center operated
county -wide by Yakima County's Suncomm. When a call is received by Suncomm, the call taker confirms
the physical address and inputs it into a database shared with city staff. As call takers continue gathering
more information from callers, a dispatcher simultaneously contacts the appropriate agency to provide
services to the caller. The location, type of response, services provided, and department providing the
services are all recorded in real time. Because this information is being input directly into a database
shared with the city, current data on public safety calls for service are continuously being recorded. This
method is used to record all calls received by Suncomm, from all city locations, and for all types of
service needs. Data for the Fire Department and Police Department calls for service are both recorded in
the same way.
The data displayed in the story maps of the city's Equity Study is populated by the data in the database
shared by Suncomm and the city. A programming code (using Python, the same coding language used by
ArcMap, a geographic information system software) collects the real-time data being input into the
database by Suncomm call takers, and displays it on the Equity Study story map. Although the story
maps only display the most recent month of data, Suncomm has been recording data for Public Safety
Calls for Service in a way that can be displayed on GIS maps since 2012. Calls that are made directly to
the Yakima Police Department are manually added to the database shared by the city and Suncomm as
are service requests from walk-in visitors to the Police Department offices.
Streetlights
Digital maps of streetlight locations were developed over 15 years ago, and display the current locations
of streetlights throughout the city. Originally satellite photography was analyzed to identify and
geolocate streetlights within the city. Since then, the digital maps have been updated as needed to show
the addition of new streetlights, or the acquisition of streetlights formerly owned by Pacific Power.
The Public Works Department identifies damaged or non-functioning streetlights in two ways: first from
phone calls and submissions on Yak Back (the city's web application to report potholes, graffiti, etc.) and
from residents who observe a streetlight that needs repair. There is no documentation to indicate how
many residents call rather than use the Yak Back application. The second way that staff identify
streetlights needing maintenance is by direct observation - driving along portions of the city's street grid
after dark between November and March, beginning with main arterials and streets around schools, and
working their way along the grid to residential streets. In this way, all streetlights are assessed for
maintenance by City staff annually. In 2017 the Public Works Department is overseeing the installation
of LED light bulbs in all of the city's streetlights. During this upgrade process the GIS locational data is
being updated and revised.
Residents can request a new streetlight be added to their street by contacting the city. Those requests
are prioritized by the city's transportation engineers, who review crime statistic data, the cost of
installation, and the length of time a request has been on the list. The target for the spacing of
streetlights is between 200 and 250 feet, but can be as far as 400 feet apart, depending on the
dispersion of the light by a given streetlight.
December 2017
15
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 13
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Code Compliance Requests
Data used in the Equity Study to show the locations and type of code compliance request are recorded
by the Yak Back web application. The Equity Study story maps only display data from the Yak Back
application; those data do not reflect the code compliance requests made by phone, or those initiated
by Yakima Code Compliance Officers or other city staff.
When Code Compliance Officers receive code compliance requests, from either the Yak Back
application, phone calls, or from other city departments, that information is entered into the
SMARTGOV database used by the Code Administration Division. Because the code compliance cases
managed in SMARTGOV do not have a method for tagging whether a case was submitted by Yak Back or
other means, it is not clear how many cases are initiated by phone versus Yak Back. City staff report that
requests submitted via Yak Back make up the majority of requests. Yak Back provides an anonymous
means of contacting the City and can be used by anyone with internet access, however, Yak Back is only
available in English, and no other languages spoken by city residents — a limitation to this type of request
system.
After a code compliance request is made and a case is opened by Code Compliance Officers in
SMARTGOV, the officers update the information related to the case on a daily basis until the case has
been resolved. When resolved, cases are marked as "closed" in the SMARTGOV database, and no longer
receive updates unless re -opened. In this way, up-to-date information on the progress of code
compliance requests is available to city staff, and can be used to develop GIS maps as needed.
Code Compliance Officers prioritize their responses to code compliance requests based on the degree to
which they believe a case threatens public safety. There is no formal criteria for prioritizing the officers'
decisions — only their judgment. By developing an anonymous way to find out the status and resolution
of Yak Back complaints, such as a case number that could be entered into the application, the city could
potentially reduce the number of duplicate or follow-up complaints, and illustrate its responsiveness to
residents' concerns.
Parks
The Yakima parks inventory is updated in every Comprehensive Plan cycle. During Comprehensive Plan
updates, the Yakima Parks and Recreation department (YPR) surveys the parks and their amenities,
takes note of needed improvements, and assesses current conditions. The updated inventory of parks
and their amenities is then compiled by YPR into a report, which is shared with the data analysts who
created the online Equity Study maps. The data analysts translate the parks data into GIS format, and
develop ArcGIS maps with attribute tables that describe information about each park, such as Capital
Improvement Plan spending, types of amenities, and completed projects. Details about the condition of
the amenities are not recorded, only that it exists.
Transit (Ridership, and shelters/benches)
Transit ridership in the City of Yakima is recorded by the bus drivers who enter rider information,
including the number of passengers entering and the method of payment, into an application on an
iPad. The iPads on city buses run a JavaScript application that submits data to a database shared by
Yakima Transit and the city GIS analysts. These data were used to populate Equity Study maps with
December 2017
16
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 14
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
ridership information as soon as it is recorded. There is no alteration or editing of the data between
when they are taken from the recordings of the bus drivers and uploaded onto the Equity Study maps.
In the event of failure of an iPad or the network, manual devices for counting ridership are also available
to bus drivers. These manually recorded data are later entered into the database by transit staff to
maintain accurate ridership data.
The transit benches and shelter location data are the product of annual inventory surveys that Yakima
Transit conducts. The GIS data are also updated to reflect the removal or addition of benches and
shelters between annual surveys. The condition of benches and shelters is informally observed both by
riders and bus drivers, who typically notify Yakima Transit maintenance crews if a bench or shelter is
damaged or needs maintenance. Creating a formal system of reporting these conditions would help
reduce the possibility of any bias in the reporting.
Either residents or Yakima Transit employees can suggest the placement of a bench or shelter. The
criteria for approving the addition of a bench or shelter focus primarily on the availability of space in the
public right of way, condition of the sidewalk and the volume of riders who use that bus stop.
Conclusion
Our analysis suggests the City of Yakima has a professional and appropriate process for collecting,
storing, and analyzing data, and a staff knowledgeable in the data infrastructure. Most of the city's data
is recorded and handled in a reasonable and professional manner for its original intent: to support the
city's geospatial data and land use planning. We note that Yakima's GIS architecture was developed over
more than 30 years, and that the city benefits from having a mature system in place. We found no major
sources of explicit bias in the collection, handling or storing of data; although we did find opportunities
for the city to decrease the possibility of unintentional bias by creating additional criteria as noted in this
assessment.
Task 1 Part B: Process and Accuracy Audit Site Visit
To complete the accuracy audit described in Task 1, part B, we reviewed the Yakima Parks and
Recreation (YPR) parks data. This data set was selected in part because of its applicability to the City's
Equity Study, specifically the ability to track parks over time. The accuracy audit was conducted on
September 12th at ten city parks to verify the parks data provided by YPR for the Equity Study, and to
further assess differences in parks on either side of 16th Avenue that may not be recorded, or obvious,
in the data. YPR staff provided information and support during the sit visit. It should be noted that
privately funded parks were included in this process to provide a more comprehensive assessment
however, per the scope of work, privately funded parks were not included in the statistical analysis.
Methods
We developed a set of criteria for selecting ten parks at which to perform direct observations in order to
confirm the amenities listed in the parks data, and to compare the accuracy of the data on either side of
16th Avenue. The following criteria were used to select ten parks for onsite observation:
December 2017
17
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 15
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Geographic Location: select parks that are entirely located on either the west or east side of
16th Avenue, and do not span across that dividing line.
o For eight parks: select only parks that have not received funding from private donations
o For contrast, select two additional parks, one on each side of 16th, that were built using
private donations
Data Enumeration or Completeness: select parks for which data was not richly recorded and
amenities enumerated, to possibly provide YPR with a more complete inventory. This would
include for example:
o Counts of amenities rather than binary observation of presence vs. absence of an
amenity
o Presence of parking lots
o ADA parking compliance
Variability: select parks with different types of amenities (fields, usage type, bathrooms, courts,
etc.) as well as variations in size and age of the park
Amenities: select parks in pairs, one on the east side of 16th and one on the west side that have
the same type of amenity, and could have their condition and quality assessed and directly
compared
Ken Wilkinson, Yakima Parks and Recreation Manager, and Jenise Sanders, Parks and Recreation
Administrative Assistant, showed us each park and answered questions pertaining to the current
information provided and the history of park development. During the visits to each park we walked
through the park, and recorded notes on data collection sheets. We paid specific attention to the
amenity that was selected for comparison (e.g., horseshoe pits at both Milroy Park and West Valley
Community Park). We also took photographs of the parks and the built environment of the surrounding
neighborhood. Table 1 shows the complete list of the parks visited. Appendix E — Summary of Accuracy
Audit Findings shows a summary of findings at each park.
Table 1: Summary of parks visited, and the amenities of interest
Side of
16th
Council
District
Park Name
Amenity Comparison
E
1
McGuinness
Picnic Shelters
W
3
Emil Kissel
Picnic shelters
E
2
South 2nd St
Open space
W
6
Gilbert Park
Open Space
E
1
Milroy Park
Horseshoe pits
W
7
West Valley Community park
Horseshoe pits
E
2
Yakima Arboretum
Arboretum (landscape,
maintenance)
December 2017
18
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 16
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
W
3
Fisher golf course
Golf course (landscape,
maintenance)
E
2
Kiwanis park (private funding)
Recreation facilities - baseball fields
W
4
Franklin Park (private
funding)
Recreation facilities - Pool
Findings
The direct observations of the selected parks confirmed the accuracy of the documentation of the
amenities, approximate size, and location of the parks. Appendix B provides a summary of the audit
findings. While these data might be used for the Equity Study, there are observable differences in the
age and size of amenities between parks that are not described by the data. For example, while both
McGuinness Park and Emil Kissel Park each have one picnic shelter, the available data does not describe
the size, age, or condition of the respective picnic shelters. By adding qualitative data to supplement the
quantitative, primarily binary data, the Equity Study can be better informed about the conditions that
city residents experience.
According to YPR parks data and conversations with staff, a portion of the improvements to Yakima's
parks have been made possible by contributions from several non-profit and service organizations. The
city benefits from the generosity of those organizations, however, improvements to city parks by
donation have been made based primarily on the interest of the group providing the donation. This
finding provides an opportunity for the city to make future decisions that increase the equitable
distribution of parks amenities by, for example, developing prioritization criteria to determine the order
in which parks receive funding for improvements (from both public, and private sources). Including
considerations of equity in these criteria provides the YPR with a valuable tool for guiding the donations
and volunteer efforts of Yakima's highly engaged service organizations.
Conclusion
Given that the parks data can be analyzed to show its relationship between demographic "input"
variables over time, it is likely the only directly applicable dataset of the five "output" variables provided
to the Metro Center team. This was an important factor in choosing parks as the dataset for which to
conduct an accuracy audit. By making direct observations at ten parks with the assistance of YPR staff,
we were able to confirm the accuracy of the parks data provided for the Equity Study. Using the parks
data as an indicator of overall quality, and in combination with the assessment of data collection
methods in the previous section, we can infer the general reliability of the City of Yakima's data.
Although intention bias was not observable, we identified the opportunity to provide park
improvements with an increased emphasis on equitable distribution of parks and amenities by providing
guidance regarding donations and efforts of service groups. This would entail developing a set of criteria
for prioritizing parks investments to include indicators of equity (such as income, educational
achievement, property value, race, and distance to parks). These criteria could be added to the
comprehensive planning documents and planned capital improvements to parks that YPR already shares
with service organizations.
December 2017
19
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 17
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Task 2 Part A: Data Quality and Limitations
The city is to be commended for its long commitment to a citywide Geographic Information
System. However, it is important that staff and council recognize the limitations of that data to answer
questions for which it was not originally designed. Because the datasets were collected and developed
for purposes other than to assess equity, they are insufficient to do so because they lack necessary
elements including but not limited to: an accurate recording of the date of resource development (e.g.
the date a streetlight was installed), qualitative characteristics of variables, or the method that data are
collected by the city (e.g. Yak Back).
In Appendix B, we provide a summary table of the data sets and the possible usage of each. We hope
this will help council understand possible approaches they might take, and what analyses are not
supported by the data as composed.
Task 2 Part B: Confirm the input and output variables for the analysis
Methods
The data provided were limited with regard to being able to answer questions of equity, so we
developed additional datasets by compiling data sets for each of the demographic "input" variables:
income, race, education level, marital status, and homeowner or renter. These data sets were collected
for years 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2015. It should be noted that the 1970 Census data contained no
values for Yakima County, so analyses for 1970 were not possible. Census data came from three sources:
• 1970, 1980, 1990 -time series data: NHGIS (https://www.nhgis.org/)
• 2000 Decennial data, US Census: Summary File 3, 2000
(https://www.census.gov/mp/www/cat/decennial census 2000/summary file 3.html)
• 2010, 2015 American Community Survey data: censusreporter.org
(http://censusreporter.tumblr.com/post/73727555158/easier-access-to-acs-data)
The Census data collected also included:
• Total population
• Persons by sex
• Persons by age, with specific classes <18 and >_65
• Persons by race (white, nonwhite)
• Persons of Hispanic origin
• Total households
• Total families
• Persons by nativity
• Persons 25 years and over by educational attainment
• Household income in previous year
• Family income in previous year
• Occupied housing units by tenure
• Marital status
• Poverty (percent of population below poverty level)
December 2017
20
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 18
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
These data sets were used as input variables to perform statistical analysis of output variables (Task 2,
part B), as well as to tell the demographic story of Yakima over time (Appendix D). Data for property
value and age was also obtained from city GIS staff. Since these data include time stamps (i.e. a specific
date and/or time associated with the variable), they allowed for a longitudinal analysis of age and value
through the years of census data available.
Data obtained from city GIS staff were converted to a PostgreSQL/PostGIS database, used to run
tabulations, and then used to determine any correlations. For each data set and each field of interest,
we generated tabulations of values. These tabulations should prove useful as a guide for city staff in
forming particular questions about data sets.
Overlay analyses were performed (e.g., point -in -polygon) to generate summaries by administrative unit.
Administrative units were represented by sociodemographic variables, and bivariate scatter plots were
generated for each pair of variables of interest.
Task 2 Part C: Statistical Analysis
Results are presented in two sections, one for data that were encoded with temporal data (i.e., date of
infrastructure installation), and one for current data that did not have attributes representing date of
installation. In order to perform longitudinal analysis of infrastructure data stored in the GIS, it is
necessary to have GIS data sets that include variables that represent when a feature of infrastructure
was created or installed (e.g., installation date for a streetlight or patch of sidewalk).
Throughout this report, graphs were selected that best illustrate the findings. All of the graphs created
for this study can be found in the online Appendix A at http://gist.gis.washington.edu/yakima equity. It
should be noted that the data and analysis in Appendix A will be transferred to the city in the near
future, and this URL will cease to be active once that transfer has occurred. The city will determine how
to make this information available.
Scatter plot graphs illustrate results of the statistical analysis. Scatter plot graphs present demographic
variables of interest on the X-axis (horizontal) and compared to quantities, such as per -capita area of
parks on the Y-axis (vertical), time -matched by year. The dots indicate individual census tracts (or tracts
that were bisected by 16th Avenue), with census tracts east of 16th represented by orange dots, and
west of 16th indicated by blue dots. In cases where a census tract crosses 16th Avenue, some pairs of
points represent the same tract ID, but the E and W portions, respectively.
To aid in interpretation of the demographic graphs, the table (Appendix F) and set of maps (Appendix G)
enumerate census tracts with population (in the table) and tract IDs (in the table and on the maps). The
tract IDs can be used to cross-reference the graphs and the maps. It should be noted that some tract IDs
changed over time, such as tract 900 being split to 901 and 902 after the year 2000, and some tracts had
no overlap with the city limits in earlier years (e.g., 2802).
The set of Census tract maps display the census tracts with census tract identifier and "e" or "w" based
on the 16th Avenue dividing line. These maps, along with the tables of Census tract demographic
December 2017
21
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 19
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
aggregates should be helpful in interpreting the scatter plots, which include text labels showing the tract
identifiers. It should be noted that 16th Avenue divides some tracts; for those tracts that span 16th
Avenue, there will be two data points on the map, each with an area -weighted estimate of the
proportion of the both X and Y variables.
Methods
Historical Demographics
In the first set of analyses, historical boundaries (i.e. annexations) of City of Yakima were overlain with
contemporaneous Census data to provide estimates of the demographic conditions of Yakima as a
whole, and also as stratified by the 16th Avenue geographical dividing line. In the GIS overlay process,
census tracts that are straddled by the city limits are "clipped." The ratio of clipped area to original area
gives a value that can be multiplied by the original census values to produce an estimate of the
enumeration within the clipped area (assuming a uniform distribution across the census tract). For
example, if a census tract had 4000 persons, and 75% of the tract was within the city limits, the estimate
of the number of persons in the portion of that tract within the city limits would be 3000
(4000*0.75=3000). For enumerated variables (i.e., counts of persons), the sum of these area -weighted
estimates was generated.
Parcel -level data were used for historical analysis of property value and year built. Because each parcel
is recorded with its year of construction and assessed value, it was possible to select parcels that were in
existence at each census year. It should be noted that this analysis is not truly historical, in the sense
that we did not have access to data representing parcels that were redeveloped between the original
year built and the census year used for the analysis.
Historical Infrastructure Allocation
In order to perform longitudinal analysis of infrastructure data stored in the GIS, it is necessary to have
GIS data sets that include variables that represent when a feature of infrastructure was created or
installed. As mentioned previously, most of the GIS data sets do not include variables that can be used
for historical analysis except for parks data.
Results: Analysis of Historical Data - Parks
Most parks were encoded for historical analysis with an attribute storing the year of establishment. For
these analyses, the park data were selected to match the year of the census data, such that the GIS data
selection represented those infrastructure features that existed at the time of the census. The park
polygon data were then overlain on the census polygon data to generate tables that were then graphed,
allowing comparison of potential park accessibility and demographic patterns.
Parks
Historical analysis of parks was done using two separate methods. For both methods, per the scope of
work, parks which received private funding in the past were excluded from the analysis. The following
parks were not included in the analysis:
Chesterly Park
Franklin Park & Pool
Harman Center at Galleon Park
December 2017
22
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 20
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Kiwanis Park & Gateway Sports Complex
Larson Park
Miller Park
North 44th Ave. Park
Randall Park
Rosalma Garden Club Park
Southeast Community Park
The parks within Yakima City limits are shown in Figure 5. It should be noted that some of the parks did
not have a value for the "year created" field and were not included in this analysis; results would differ
with the use of a fully attributed data set. Note that there are generally larger and fewer parks in west
side tracts, and smaller, but more dispersed parks on the east side. This is consistent with parks
distribution in other cities where more space and larger parcels of land are available in the newer,
expanding, portions of the city, compared to smaller parcels in the older, original portions.
Parks
parks
! =
city limits. 2015
Figure 5: Parks in Yakima with 2015 city limits
December 2017
23
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 21
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
For parks and census data sets, years were matched (e.g., for the 1980 census, only those parks that
existed in 1980 were selected). A GIS intersection was performed to tabulate the total area of parks
within each census tract. Demographic characteristics of the tract and the area of parks within the tract
were graphed as XY scatter plots. Because many tracts had no parks overlapping their boundaries, the
number of available points is small, therefore no formal statistical tests were performed.
The area of park per capita across 1980-2015, stratified by the 16th Avenue divide, is shown in Figure 6.
Overall, there was more park area per capita on the west side versus the east side. The other noticeable
trend appears to show that the amount of park area per capita was greater for western Yakima in 1980,
but as the city grew in subsequent years, the area of park per capita became more uniform across the
16th Avenue dividing line. It should be noted that the calculation of per -capita area of park is dependent
on both the total area of park as well as the number of residents. Additionally, the area of park does not
necessarily reflect actual accessibility, and cannot reflect quality or amenities.
Area of parks per capita stratified by 16th Avenue
400 -
300 -
oci 200 -
100-
0-
1
1980 1990 2000 2010 2015
year
16th Ave divide
■ e
.w
Figure 6: Area of park per capita, 1980-2015
Figure 7 and Figure 8 show park data from 1980, plotting per -capita park area on the Y-axis (vertical)
against the percent of residents on the X-axis (horizontal) who were Hispanic and median family income,
respectively (including all data (left panel), and with a large "outlier" removed (right panel)). The obvious
stratification in the X-axis (percent Hispanic and median family income) reflect the general segregation
of ethnicity and income across the 16th Avenue divide.
Overall, the amount of park per capita is uniform across census tracts, meaning that the data values
(dots) are distributed vertically similar regardless of their location along the horizontal axis. Yet, there is
December 2017
1980:
1980: park area per capita x percent Hispanic
• 300-
00-
500-
500-
o-
0-
1980: park area per capita x median family income
0-
1980: park area per capita x median family income
'00- -
J.
•
0-
24
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 22
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report 12.4.17
an overall greater variation on the west side, with a single west side tract having a relatively large area
of park within the tract. This is tract 1100, at the southern end of the City, intersecting Fairbrook Islands,
Kissel Park, and Tahoma Cemetery, and with an estimated population of 2,244 persons. The three tracts
with the greatest per -capita area of park are on the west side. These tracts also have a relatively low
Hispanic population, although one tract on the west side with the lowest Hispanic population also has
the lowest per -capita park area. Figure 8 should be interpreted with caution since per -capita values are
highly dependent on the denominator (i.e., tract population); two tracts with the same park area but
different populations will have different per -capita area—which is not necessarily a good proxy for
accessibility.
1100
.400
1000
• 1200.600
.800 • •
i00 200 100
1500•
10 15 20
percent Hispanic
16th Ave divide
• e.0 =6
• w,n=4
300
200
100
0
1980: park area per capita x percent Hispanic
.400
1000
• •800
600
1200
•
700
J2
1500•
10 15 20 25
percent Hispanic
16th Ave divide
• e,n -
• w,n=3
Figure 7: Park area per capita by percent Hispanic, 1980. All data (left); outlier removed (right)
Figure 8 is more or less a mirror of Figure 7, since median family income and percent of residents with
Hispanic origin are strongly correlated.
500
40r-
1200
••_ • •
100 1"
•
1000
800•
400•
10000 15000 20000 25000
median family income ($)
16th Ave divide
• 0,0=6
• w,n=4
:00
10000 15000 20000 25000
median family income ($)
16th Ave divide
041= 6
▪ w1=3
Figure 8: Park area per capita by median family income, 1980. All data (left); outlier removed (right)
December 2017
25
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 23
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
The same data are shown for 2015 in Figure 9, and Figure 10. There are more data values, reflecting
both the geographical growth of the city as well as some census tracts being subdivided, this is indicated
by the larger number of both orange and green dots.
Comparing 1980 data with those for 2015 show similar patterns, but now with a single east side tract
having a relatively large per -capita area in park land. This represents tract 1602 at the far eastern side of
the City, containing the large areas of Sarg Hubbard Park and the Yakima Area Arboretum, but with an
estimated population of only 791 persons. Therefore, while this city has grown geographically and in
the number of residents, the general uniform distribution of park area per capita relative to percent
Hispanic and median family income has not changed overtime.
2015: park area per capita x percent Hispanic
•1602
g. 2000-
ao
•000-
•
1100
1000 902•
300
400 , • • 1202 6Ci'
••
300 700 •
0-•800.500 ••10020C ••1501 •
^-t 40 60
percent Hispanic
16th Ave divide
• 8,n=8
• w,n-7
2015: park area per capita x percent Hispanic
800-
790-
400-
of0
m
LDC -
1100
902
•
•
300
300
•
1000
•
• 1202
400 • 700 • 600:
500
0- •800 100 200 1501
•
20 40 60 80
percent Hispanic
16th Ave divide
• e,n . 7
• w,n.7
Figure 9: Park area per capita by percent Hispanic, 2015. All data (left); outlier removed (right)
December 2017
26
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 24
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
2015: park area per capita x median family income
1e0!
7110-
2000 -
p • e,n=8
• w,n = 7
16th Ave divide
300 -
0-
•
300 1100
•
600 300 902
•
15/,_1202' • 4001
10 2 0 •700 1000 500 8006
40000 60000
median family income ($)
a0o00
2015: park area per capita x median family income
01 • 02
•N 600
100 203
40000 60000
median family income ($)
•
902
300
•
•
Ina
1000•
00
200
400 •
s0000
16th Ave divide
• e,n • 7
• w,n • 7
Figure 10: Park area per capita by median family income, 2015. All data (left); outlier removed (right)
One method to assess accessibility and equitable distribution or access is look at how close individuals
live to a park. Therefore, Buffers of 1/4 -mile, as a proxy for locations within reasonable walking
distance, were generated for the parks polygons. These buffers were then overlain on the census tracts
to obtain estimated demographic counts (converted to percentages using total tract population as the
denominator) within and outside the buffers. This is similar to the approach used to assign absolute
population numbers to census tracts that crossed the 16th Avenue dividing line in the above analyses.
The relative proportion of persons in each demographic category was tabulated using the same year-to-
year matching. Total area of parks per capita was tabulated for each year with stratification by 16th
Avenue.
December 2017
27
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 25
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Figure 11 presents demographic characteristics of the population residing within 1/4 mile of any park.
For example, about 45% of Yakima residents have their home within the 1/4 mile buffer (upper left corner
graph), and between 40% and 45% of residents whose homes are within the buffer are of Hispanic origin
(upper right graph). While many demographic variables showed little change over the years, it appears
that within the 1/4 -mile area around parks, there were lowering proportions of persons of Hispanic origin,
younger and older persons, married persons, and home owners.
percent of persons residing within 1/4 mile of any park
total population
45 -
40 -
35 -
30 -
■
nonwhite
45 -
40 -
35 -
30 -
age >= 65=1
} 45 -
40 -
L 35-
0- 30-
45
40 -
35 -
30 -
below poverty
■
■
renter
45--
40 -
35 -
30 -
Hispanic
age <18
college graduate
married
owner
1980 1990 2000 2010 1980 1990 2000 2010
year
Figure 11: Demographic characteristics of the area within 1/4 mile of parks, 1980-2015
December 2017
28
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 26
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
When stratified by 16th Avenue, it appears that far more persons on the east side reside within %-mile
of parks than on the west side (Figure 12). This appears to be due to larger parks on the west side that
are not uniformly distributed; whereas on the east side there are more parks that are both smaller and
more uniformly distributed over space (see Figure 5). Trends generally follow overall demographic
patterns with respect to the east and west sides. Some notable trends are the decrease in the number of
persons residing within 1/4 mile of a park on the east side, and an increase on the west side (top of
graphs); a drop in younger persons within buffers on the east side; and changes in the proportion of
Hispanics that seem to mirror general demographic shifts over time.
December 2017
29
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 27
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
40 -
30 -
20 -
10 -
percent of persons residing within 1/4 mile of any park
e w
a
0
o
w w
0
40 -
30 - N
20 - w
10 - '
c
40-
30-
20 -
10-
40 -
30-
20 -
10-
40 -
30 -
20-
C 10 - ~`
U
N 40 -
et- 30-
20 -
10-
40 -
30 -
20 -
10-
40 -
30 -
20 -
10-
40 -
30 -
20 -
10-
0
0
rn
40 -
30 -
20 - f`
10-
1 1 1 1 1 1
1980 1990 2000 2010 1980 1990 2000 2010
year
3
:0
cp
a
0
c➢
Figure 12: Demographic characteristics of the area within 1/4 mile of parks, stratified by 16th Avenue
1980-2015
December 2017
30
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 28
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Results summary - parks
The results presented above should be interpreted with some caution for several reasons, a few of
which are enumerated as follows. First, the use of census areas in a GIS overlay analysis assumes that
there is a uniform distribution of persons across the census unit, which is generally not true. Second, not
all parks are equal in terms of the amenities they provide as attractors of activity. For example, use of a
cemetery is likely to be very different from use of a sports complex. Third, simple overlay ignores actual
location; having a park overlapping a census unit at one side of the unit does not provide equal
accessibility to all persons residing in the unit. Fourth, residents of a census unit that has no overlap with
a park may actually reside close to a park that lies in an adjacent census unit; in fact, some of these
persons may reside closer to a park than some of the residents in the adjacent unit but whose homes
are relatively far from the park.
In addition, these data need to be considered in historical terms; the east side was developed earlier,
following typical pre -WWII patterns (smaller parcels on regular street -blocks), whereas the west side
was more recently developed, with more suburban forms (larger parcels, some irregular street
patterns). More recent developments often include parks as formal design elements, whereas older
developments frequently did not include similar land set aside for parks.
Results: Analysis of Current Data
Most of the GIS data sets were not encoded for longitudinal analysis (that is, the features in the GIS do
not contain attributes representing the time at which the real-world features were
created/installed/developed). Therefore, analyses for specific data sets were restricted to examination
of current features and data sets with respect to current demographic data. These included public safety
calls for service, streetlights, code compliance requests, and transit (ridership, benches, and shelters).
These data set therefore represent a benchmark more than allowing for analysis.
The scatter plots presented on the following pages are the result of performing the GIS and statistical
analyses per Task 2, Part C. These plots also include the stratification by the 16th Avenue geographical
dividing line. The scatter plots here are a representative sampling of the demographic variables. The
complete set of graphs for each selected GIS data layer and demographic variable are provided in
Appendix A. Maps showing changes in demographic variables over time are presented in Appendix D.
A general trend to be noted in these graphs is the obvious stratification between west and east sides of
Yakima in the X-axis (horizontal axis). This is a reflection of the city's underlying sociodemographic
stratification. While segregation itself is of concern, these graphs would indicate inequity in city -
provided service only if there appears to be increasing or decreasing trends (i.e., a visible slope in the
point pattern); if the point pattern appears to be uniform (equally distributed across the horizontal axis)
or random, that would not indicate inequity in services. It should also be noted that no regression trend
lines were added to these graphs, and no formal statistical tests were performed; due to the small
sample size, trend lines are easily leveraged by outlier points, and correlation coefficients and p -values
are unstable.
Police Department calls for service
Police Department calls for service per capita are graphed in Figure 13, Figure 14, and Figure 15 (median
family income, percent Hispanic, and percent housing renter occupied respectively). The tracts with the
December 2017
3C
31
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 29
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
greatest number of per -capita calls were on the east side, but there appeared to be no association
between demographic characteristics and counts of calls per capita. There is no consistent trend of
more calls coming from tracts with lower or higher incomes, percent of Hispanic residents, or renters.
There are four tracts with high values that warrant further investigation. The other tracts are uniformly
distributed in terms of the count of calls per capita (y-axis) and the demographic variable (x-axis).
count per capita
YKPD calls x median family income
20-
0-
10 -
10-
200
200
•
1501
1600
•
•
02 1201
1400
•
•
0
• 300
1502
• 700
• 1100
1000 •
1300 • • •
12 • 500 2802
902 901• 400 ▪ •
40000 60000 80000
median family income ($)
1602
•
3400
•
•
3400
800
16th Ave divide
e,n = 14
• w,n=10
Figure 13: Police Department calls for service by median family income
December 2017
32
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 30
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per capita
YKPD calls x percent Hispanic
20 -
10-
•2400
1602
•
•
3400
1100
800 1000 •
• ••
400• 500
901• • 2802 902
•
300
20
1400
•
20 • 1502
•
700 • 1501
1201 .1202 • •
•• 600
1300
40 60
percent Hispanic
80
16th Ave divide
e,n = 14
• w,n=10
Figure 14: Police Department calls for service by percent of residents who are of Hispanic origin
33
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 31
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per capita
20-
YKPD calls x percent of housing renter -occupied
•
10- •• •
•
•
•
•
•••• •
• •
•
•
•
•
•
30 50 70
percent of housing renter -occupied
90
zone 16th
e
w
Figure 15: Police Department calls for service by percent of residents who are renters
December 2017
34
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 32
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Fire Department calls for service
Similar to Police Department calls for service, there appeared to be no association between
demographic characteristics and count of Fire Department calls for service (Figure 16, Figure 17, and
Figure 18). It should be noted that there is one tract on the east side that had a relatively high number
of calls per capita. Other than this one "outlier," there is no consistent trend of more calls coming from
tracts with differential income, percent of residents of Hispanic origin, or renters.
count per capita
YKFD calls x median family income
8-
6-
4-
• 00 1702
300 3400
ti
800
•
1300
2- 200
1400 700
• 500 3400
902 1602•
1501 1502 • • • • 400
1100
• • •
•
600• 202 1201 • ?000 901 2802
40000 60000
median family income ($)
80000
16th Ave divide
• e,n=14
• w,n=10
Figure 16 Count of Fire Department calls for service per capita by median family income
December 2017
35
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 33
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
aS
O.
as
0
Q.
6-
YKFD calls x percent Hispanic
= 4-
o M 00 •
o 3400 1702 100
• •
800
2 - 3400
1 1602 500 1 100 700 200
• • 2802 9•02 1400 • 12102 • 1502
• 400 • •r • 1 1501 --• •
•
901 1000 1201 600
20 40 60 80
percent Hispanic
■
1300
16th Ave divide
e.n = 14
w.n = 10
Figure 17 Count of Fire Department calls for service per capita by percent of residents who are of
Hispanic origin
December 2017
36
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 34
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per capita
YKFD calls x percent of housing renter -occupied
8-
6-
4-
1702
•
3400
800
2 - 3400 602
1100
400:1400 •
9012802 1202
•
1300
•
300
•
100
500 700 200
•
1502 902 1501
•
100 •1201 •600
30 50 70
percent of housing renter -occupied
9C:
16th Ave divide
e,n = 14
• w,n=10
Figure 18 Count of Fire Department calls for service per capita by percent of residents who are renters
Streetlights
There appears to be a greater number of streetlights per square mile in tracts on the east side (Figure
19, Figure 20, and Figure 21). Streetlight density was greater in tracts with lower college graduation
levels, which is also mirrored in ethnic composition and median family income. These differences are
likely due to the greater street density in the older part of Yakima that was developed previous to the
newer areas on the east side. There appears to be no general association between streetlight density
and demographic variables that cannot be explained by basic principles of urban form and historical
development. It should be noted that this analysis did not include any consideration of streetlight type
or condition (type and condition were not available consistently for all streetlight records).
•
300
0
1i
02
37
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 35
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
600 -
Street lights x percent college graduate
m
m
L
0- 400 -
u)
600
=
120• 111.-
1504
20?1541
v 200- •• 1502
200 •
-
• 1202
1400
0
•
1300
300
•
902• 4
1702
•
)00
~ 500
901
•
1100
•
1602
28
800 •
400
•
10 20 30
percent college graduate
16th Ave divide
e,n = 13
• w,n=9
Figure 19: Streetlight density by percent of residents who are college graduates
600
38
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 36
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
600 -
400 -
Street lights x percent Hispanic
300
•
•
800 700
•
10000.500• 1502
200 - 9` 1 300 1201 1501 •
2802ii
•••
D2 200
•
• 902 •• • 12
400 1100 1400
• •
0- 1602 1702• 1300
20 40 60
percent Hispanic
16th Ave divide
e,n = 13
• w,n=9
Figure 20: Streetlight density by percent of residents who of Hispanic origin
39
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 37
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
600 -
400 -
200 -
Street lights x median family income
•
600
1.501 12.1 •
• 15C
209i
1202 •
1400
300
•
•
700
1000 500 •00
2
•
300 110
• •
902
•
0- 1300 1702•
40000 60000
median family income ($)
901
0
• 2802
•
•
1602
400
80;00
16th Ave divide
e,n = 13
• w,n=9
Figure 21: Streetlight density by median family income
December 2017
40
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 38
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Code compliance requests
Code compliance requests per capita appear to occur in greater numbers on the east side, which is also
mirrored by east side tracts having lower median family income, with higher proportion of residents of
Hispanic origin, and who are renters (Figure 22, Figure 23, Figure 24). Code compliance requests
originate from residents; however, the data do not indicate whether the resident who submitted the
code compliance request is a neighbor, landlord, or someone who is just driving by. Therefore, the origin
of the request cannot be directly ascribed to any difference in services provided. Additionally, as the
data were delivered without any consistent record -level information on either status or date of
resolution, it is not possible in this analysis to make any conclusions on questions of equity related to
how the city responds to such requests.
count per capita
Code compliance requests x median family income
300• •700
0.06 -
0.04 -
0.02 -
1501
•
200 1502
• •
• •1201
•
600 1202 1000
•
1400
•
0.00 -
300
•
40000
•
902
•
1100 2802
•
• 500 800 400
•
1702 •
• 3400
•
•
901
1602 •
60000
3400
•
median family income ($)
80000
16th Ave divide
• e,n=13
• w,n=10
Figure 22: Code compliance requests by median family income
December 2017
41
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 39
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per capita
0.06 -
0.04 -
Code compliance requests x percent Hispanic
1000
•
1100
•
2802
•
800 •
0.02 - • 500
3400 400
300
• •
700
•
100
•
300
•
• • 1 702
901
• 3400
1501
•
200
• 20 • 15 •2 16th Ave divide
•
1202 600 • • e,n = 13
• w,n=10
1400
902 •
•
0.00 - 160!
20 40 60
percent Hispanic
Figure 23: Code compliance requests by percent of residents who are of Hispanic origin
?00
42
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 40
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per capita
0.06 -
0.04 -
0.02 -
0.00 -
Code compliance requests x percent of housing renter -occupied
•
800 2802
Ihr
1702 400
•
3400 •
901
•3400
1602•
1502
•
•
1202
1000
•
1100
•
1501
•
•
1400
500
•
1201
300
902
•
600
•
30 50 70
percent of housing renter -occupied
90
16th Ave divide
e,n = 13
• w,n=10
Figure 24: Code compliance requests by percent of residents who are renters
43
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 41
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Transit ridership
Patterns in transit ridership (Figure 25, Figure 26, Figure 27, Figure 28, and Figure 29) are similar to
those of streetlights, and are likely due to similar underlying urban characteristics. Transit is
economically feasible only in areas of relatively high residential density, which usually includes older
developments. Newer, lower density, and more car -dependent communities are generally not served by
transit. These types of newer developments also tend to have demographic characteristics that are
different from areas that are well -served by transit. For this probable reason, there is generally higher
ridership in tracts with lower median family income, lower rates of college graduation, and greater
rental rates. There is also slightly higher ridership in tracts containing lower proportions of persons
under 18 years of age, pointing to a potential mismatch between level of service and need, since
younger persons tend not to have access to cars and rely more heavily on public transportation. It
should be noted that the transit data did not include school buses, which may confound interpretation
of bus service to youths.
count per square mile
750000-
50000-
500000-
500000-
250000-
250000-
Bus
Bus ridership x median family income
100
•
200 1400
•
1201
300
•
700
•
300 •1000
. • • 500 •
600 • • 1502 902 L 901 800
1202 • • • • 4.0
0- 1300 1100 2802
40000 60000 80000
median family income ($)
1602
•
16th Ave divide
• e,n=12
• w,n=9
Figure 25: Transit ridership by median family income
December 2017
44
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 42
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
750000 -
500000 -
Bus ridership x percent college graduate
250000- 10'
1400 • 700
•1502 100:
2Af 300 500 • 1602 800
111010
1202 90w . .901• .
0 -
640 1300 1 100 2802 400
11 1
01 10 20 30 41,
percent college graduate
•
300
16th Ave divide
e,n = 12
• w,n=9
Figure 26: Transit ridership by percent of residents who are college graduates
45
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 43
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
750000-
500000 -
250000 -
Bus ridership x percent of housing renter -occupied
300
•
1400 700
1000 •
1602 1 1202• • 20 0
•
800 110 15.2 • 300
0 •
•
1 - 1 • 1201 600
• 500 N.
0 400 •2802 1300 902
20 40 60
100•
80
percent of housing renter -occupied
16th Ave divide
e,n = 12
• w,n=9
Figure 27: Transit ridership by percent of residents who are renters
46
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 44
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
750000-
50000-
500000-
500000-
Bus
Bus ridership x percent < 18 years
300
•
250000- •00
1000 300
• • 7602
800 901ii50• 0 •
0- 1100 400 902 ~2802
20 25 30 35
percent < 18 years
700
"1 1400 2
•
600
•
•
1202
1300
00
• 1502
• •
1201
16th Ave divide
e,n = 12
• w,n=9
Figure 28: Transit ridership by age (< 18 y) under 18 years of age
47
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 45
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
750000-
50000-
500000-
500000-
Bus
Bus ridership x percent >= 65 years
300 •
100
250000- •
• 1400
200 700 • 1602
••
2 1201 •
• 1000 • 80: 300 •
11502 202 90 :300 1100 • 00
•
0 - 600 280P 1 901••
400
10 20
percent >= 65 years
16th Ave divide
e,n = 12
• w,n=9
Figure 29: Transit ridership by age (>_ 65 y) 65 and older
Bus stop benches
Not surprisingly, the patterns of bus stop bench density (Figure 30, Figure 31, Figure 33, and Figure 32)
are similar to those of transit ridership, likely indicating that benches and shelters are placed in locations
with greater ridership.
48
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 46
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
40-
0-
30-
30-
Bus
Bus stop benches x percent Hispanic
• 16th Ave divide
700
e,n = 12
20 - 300 • w,n = 9
• 100 600
• •
• 1202•
1000 • 1502
800 • 1501
10- • 500 1400 •
901 • • •
11602 1100 1201 200
f• 902-
1 300
0- 400
•` 2802
20 40 60
percent Hispanic
Figure 30: Bus stop bench density by percent of residents who are of Hispanic origin
49
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 47
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
40-
0-
30-
30-
Bus
Bus stop benches x median family income
700
•
20- 300
600 •
• • 1502
100 1202 •
•
1501 •
10- • 1400
0-
• •
200 1201
•
1000
• 800
1300 00 •901 400
• •• • •
902 1100 1602
•
2802
40000 60000 80000
median family income ($)
16th Ave divide
e,n = 12
• w,n=9
Figure 31: Bus stop bench density by median family income
Bus stop bench density appears to be higher in tracts with lower proportions of persons 65 years or
older on the east side with one exception (Figure 32). If a large number of riders are older, this could
point to an opportunity for providing better service for these age groups. However, the proportion of
elderly is also greater on the west side, where transit usage is lower, and where higher socioeconomic
levels point to potentially less need for transit (if the elderly have access to cars). Likewise, the number
of youths is greater on the east side. In order to come to any conclusions on whether the elderly are
underserved in terms of bus stop benches, more data would be needed on the characteristics of
individual transit riders.
50
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 48
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Bus stop benches x percent >= 65 years
30-
crs
CT
N
Q. 20 600
•
•
U 1502
•
700
100
• 1000
•
10- 150•
• •
00 1201
•
1202 • 80 1400 •
300 1100
•
1602
•
1 • 500
902 901 •400
2802 •
•
10 20
percent >= 65 years
300
16th Ave divide
e.n = 12
w.n = 9
Figure 32: Bus stop bench density by percent of residents who are 65 years or older
December 2017
51
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 49
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
40 -
30 -
20 -
Bus stop benches x percent < 18 years
3UU
100 •
•
•
1000
800
10- •
0-
•
700
600
•
1202
• •
Ann
•
901 500
• 1300
•1100 *1602+ •
400 902 •802
1502 •
• 12U1
1501 • •
200
20 25 30 35
percent < 18 years
16th Ave divide
e,n = 12
• w,n=9
Figure 33: Bus stop bench density by percent of residents who are less than 18 years old
Bus stop shelters
Bus stop shelters have patterns very similar to bus stop benches: they tended to have greater density in
tracts with lower median family income (Figure 34), and higher proportion of youths (Figure 35), with
one outlier having very high ridership but about 23% of younger residents. Shelter densities were
slightly greater in areas with lower proportions of seniors (Figure 36). There were also more shelters in
tracts with a higher proportion of persons of Hispanic origin (Figure 37).
December 2017
D •902
•
1400
52
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 50
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
7.5-
5.0-
2.5 -
Bus stop shelters x median family income
•
700
•
300
40000
902 5n0 1602
• • •800
901 • 400 •
60000
•
1100
median family income ($)
80000
16th Ave divide
e,n = 8
• w,n=7
Figure 34: Bus stop shelter density by median family income
count per square mile
7.5-
5.0 -
2.5 -
Bus stop shelters x percent < 18 years
•
•
300
100
800 1602
• 901 500
1100 • 400
0.0- , , ,
20 25 30 35
percent < 18 years
•
700
1501
•
120140
2 00
16th Ave divide
• e,n=8
• w,n=7
December 2017
53
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 51
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Figure 35: Bus stop shelter density by age (< 18 years)
count per square mile
7.5-
5.0-
2.5 -
Bus stop shelters x percent >= 65 years
•
700
100
• •
1501 • 1400
1201
300 •
•200 902 1602 500
• • • •
• 800• 400
0.0- 1100 s 901 •
1'0 20
percent >= 65 years
16th Ave divide
o e,n=8
• w,n=7
Figure 36: Bus stop shelter density by age (>= 65 years)
December 2017
3
54
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 52
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
count per square mile
7.5-
5.0-
2.5-
0.0 -
20 40 50
percent Hispanic
Bus stop shelters x percent Hispanic
1602 500 902
• • ••
901 800 •
• • 400 1100
•
00
16th Ave divide
700 e,n = 8
1400•
•
• 100
•
1201
15011
•
200
80
• w,n=7
Figure 37: Bus stop shelter density by percent Hispanic
Conclusion and Recommendations
Over the course of this project we found that the city is doing professional work in the development and
management of the various data sets under their purview, gathered for specific purposes related to city
and department management. The data sets are useful for their original purpose but, as this analysis has
shown, the data sets within the scope of this study cannot adequately provide an assessment of
whether or not city resources have been equitably distributed. While this determination cannot be
made, we believe that information in this analysis, and the act of engaging in this analysis, can prove
valuable to the city.
The City Council approved this analysis of the Equity Study data with the intention of using it as a tool to
move forward, and to inform data driven decisions to benefit the city. Data driven decisions cannot be
made without reliable data and proper systems for handling them. Our study concluded that Yakima has
both the staff and the systems to support the use of data as a powerful tool for decision making, and
data that can be used as an initial conditions statement and a base upon which to build. This is a
tremendous asset for the city. The city can now determine what additional data it needs to collect - date
and time attributes, for example — based on the questions the city wants to address in the future.
In order to look forward, the city may benefit from also examining its history and the current conditions
that evolved from typical patterns of growth. The legacy of annexation and other development patterns
is both a benefit to the city and a challenge to overcome. For example, parks are larger on the west side,
55
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 53
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
likely because of the later annexation of larger county parcels. It is unlikely that the city would be able to
agglomerate significant park acreage in the east side to match the west if residents prefer fewer, larger
parks relative to more numerous, smaller parks. Understanding the existence, and some of the likely
reasons for current conditions, can help the city strategically address this disparity without the need for
an expensive historical analysis.
The challenges of growth and equity facing Yakima are shared by many cities, and echo national trends
described in a report issued by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Planning for Social Equity (2017)
authored by Kathleen McCormick (http://www.lincolninst.edu/publications/articles/planning-social-
equity). In this report, it is noted that inequality is now at levels the U.S. has not seen since the 1920s. As
a reference for understanding the forces leading to modern inequities in Yakima, it may be useful to
place the city in the larger context of other cities across America that are facing similar situations.
Many cities, large and small, have developed criteria for making decisions that include equity, typically
called an Equity Lens. An Equity Lens is a practical tool to help insure that planning, decision making and
resource allocation lead to policies and programs that help to achieve equity across the community,
racially, socially and economically. The foundation of an Equity Lens is a set of values or principles. Each
new policy or program is evaluated to see whether it upholds those values or principles using a set of
questions or procedures that include equity. For example: "What is the impact of the policy or program
on diverse groups?" While the questions may seem simple, the process of preparing for, and developing
an Equity Lens takes time and commitment.
To evaluate progress toward equity, each city determines what it should measure. Hence, the value of a
reliable system of collecting and managing data, which this study concluded the city possesses, becomes
critically important. Although each city must develop its own Equity Lens, the examples below provide
some insight into the process.
City of Seattle Racial Equity Toolkit -"lays out a process and a set of questions to guide the
development, implementation and evaluation of policies, initiatives, programs and budget
issues to address the impacts on racial equity."
http://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/RSJI/RacialEquityToolkit FINAL August2012.
pdf
City of Portland — Racial Equity Toolkit https://www.portlandoregon.gov/oehr/71685
All -In Cities Policy Toolkit - Building an Equitable Economy from the Ground Up, an initiative of
PolicyLink http://allincities.org/toolkit
To explore a practical example of how an Equity Lens could influence policy decisions in Yakima, we turn
to parks. The city has long benefitted from private funding for parks and other amenities. As part of an
Equity Lens, the city could develop a set of criteria for parks around equity and inclusion. This criteria
would rank possible investment opportunities for philanthropy and provide this rank ordered list to
community partners. The city could also consider developing a policy whereby a percentage of any
donation to a specific park project would be retained by the city to fund park amenities across the city.
A cornerstone of equitable decision making is authentic community and stakeholder engagement. It,
too, is a process that requires care and commitment to ensure that engagement sparks lively civil
December 2017
56
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 54
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
discourse without resulting in acrimony and deep divisions. The Metro Center provides tools that
promote understanding and assist communities in making difficult decisions.
• The Poverty Immersion, facilitated by the Metro Center, is an interactive workshop that changes
attitudes and challenges stereotypes about the working poor. Through this experience,
participants develop a better understanding of community needs, ultimately improving policy
and program development and decision making.
The Metro Center is part of a nationwide project with the Kettering Foundation to frame
complex issues for public discussion. Using structured deliberative dialogue, the Metro Center
facilitates productive community conversations aimed at understanding residents' perspective
on their community and the issues that are of greatest importance to them.
Throughout the course of this project, we have engaged with Yakima City Council members, city staff,
and concerned residents. To a person they have shown a strong commitment to their work, and a deep
affection for the city. Addressing equity is difficult under the best of conditions, and we commend the
city for the progress it has made, and welcome the opportunity to support your efforts in the future.
December 2017
57
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 55
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
About the Metro Center
The WSU Metro Center connects decision -makers in Washington's cities with the expertise of
Washington State University to produce practical solutions to the challenges of growth. Using a project -
based and client centered approach, we respond to emerging needs, and help communities build
capacity to create sustainable solutions for the future. We work at the direction of clients, and follow a
defined scope of work which is negotiated with the client. For each project we compile a unique team
with the necessary expertise and attributes to successfully complete all project goals. Team members
include WSU faculty and staff; however, we also utilize external partners as needed to implement the
project.
This analysis of the City of Yakima's Equity Study was conducted, data compiled, and this report written
by the following team assembled because of their expertise in urban planning and geospatial analysis. In
particular we wish to acknowledge the work of Dr. Branden Born, with whom we have often worked on
community based projects, and Dr. Philip Hurvitz, who led the data analysis.
WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research and Extension
Martha Aitken, Senior Associate and Project Manager
• Brad Gaolach Ph. D., Director
University of Washington, Department of Urban Design and Planning
• Branden Born Ph.D., Associate Professor
• Philip M. Hurvitz Ph. D., Research Assistant Professor
• Connie Combs MUP
• Kizz Prussia, MUP candidate
December 2017
Appendices
•
•
•
•
•
••
58
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 56
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Appendix A — Complete City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis
Appendix B — City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Task 1 Report
Appendix C— Demographic Variables Over Time
Appendix D — Project Proposal
Appendix E — Summary of Accuracy Audit Findings
Appendix F - Estimated Census Tract Population Over Time
Appendix G — Census Tract Maps Over Time
December 2017
59
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 57
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis - Final Report 12.4.17
Appendix A - Complete City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis
http://gist.gis.washington.edu/yakima equity/ (It should be noted that the data and analysis in
Appendix A will be transferred to the city in the near future, and this URL will no longer be active. The
city will determine how to make this information available.)
December 2017
60
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 58
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis - Final Report 12.4.17
Appendix B - City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis - Task 1 Report
Introduction:
On June 28, 2017 the City of Yakima entered into an agreement with WSU's Metropolitan Center for
Applied Research and Extension (Metro Center) to analyze data from the city's Equity Study
(http://www.yakimawa.gov/council/equity-study/ ) for the purpose of helping inform the 2018 budget
and future budget decisions. The contract's Scope of Work included two tasks listed below, with
variables to be used in the analysis, and the geographical dividing line specifically stated.
The Metro Center assembled a team comprised of experts in urban planning and geospatial analysis to
perform the activities required to meet the deliverables of the project. This report serves as the Task 1
deliverable and provides an overview of the Metro Center's activities to analyze the data collection and
handling processes the City of Yakima employs with regard to the data used in the Equity Study, and a
preliminary summary of findings. This report also addresses aspects of Task 2, Parts A and B, much of
which could most efficiently and appropriately be implemented concurrently with Task 1.
Review of Scope of Work:
Task 1: Validate Equity Study data
Methods
Confirm with City Council up to 6 data sets identified in Task 2 B, excluding US Census Bureau data, to
assess the validity of those data. For each data set selected we will conduct, as appropriate:
A. A process audit by interviewing City staff and reviewing documents associated with how these
data were collected, compiled, summarized, and made accessible to the public.
B. An accuracy audit of the data by randomly selecting a representative sample of data points, and
independently determining the accuracy through direct observations.
Task 2: Analyze existing Equity Study data to assess the geographic distribution of public
resources and funds (e.g. city, State, or Federal)
Methods
A. Assess the quality of the data to understand any qualitative concerns and limitations that would
impact data analysis or interpretation (i.e. period of time collected, geographically resolution of
the data, etc.).
B. Confirm the input and output variables for the analysis, and the geographical dividing line. Initial
request included the following 6 data sets, upon which this estimate is based:
Input variable:
o Demographics, to include income, race, education level, marital status, home
owner or renter, property value and age
Output variables:
o Public safety calls for service (location, response time)
o Streetlights
o Code compliance requests
o Parks (exempt parks that are privately funded or charge for use)
o Transit ridership, shelters, benches
Geographical dividing line
December 2017
61
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 59
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
16th Avenue
C. Perform the appropriate statistical analyses to assess any relationships amongst the input and
output (i.e. response) variables.
Methods:
Clarify Intent
WSU Metro team first met with Yakima City Council members on the Neighborhood and Community
Building Committee: Chair Dulce Gutierez, Carmen Mendez and Avina Gutierez, to further clarify the
scope of work, define the specific variables and geographic dividing line to be analyzed, and the overall
intent of the study. After receiving portions of the data and conducting an initial review, the Metro
Center team met by phone with City Manager Cliff Moore, Community Development Director Joan
Davenport, and city staff to clarify the intent of some portions of Task 1 of the Scope of Work, and to
make sure there was an understanding of the city's interest in positive strategies for the future.
Through this discussion we came to understand that the language of the scope required clarification.
Task 1 "Validate Equity Study data" means something different in the academic realm and the applied
real-world one. A technical data validation process would be overly statistical, particularly with a
"representative sample of data points" across the various datasets, and would be both prohibitively
expensive and, most important, would not achieve the city's objectives. Instead, we decided that we
needed to know if the city's data are being collected and recorded in appropriate ways (Task 1, part A),
and whether it is useful to the current disparity analysis (Task 1, part B). Then, as appropriate, we would
check for accuracy of the acceptable data by ground-truthing through site visits (Task 1, part B) to
complete Task 1. We hope this clarification is helpful.
If the city would like to pursue the academic level of statistical validation of their collected data, the
Metro Center could assist in providing suggestions about how that could be done.
City of Yakima Data
For our process audit we reached out to city staff in multiple departments to learn about the internal
processes used to gather, compile, and store data for the Yakima Equity Study. Staff were uniformly
open and helpful in sharing with us their processes for data collection and handling, as well as the data
itself.
The Metro Center team contacted the City of Yakima's Supervising Senior Analyst, Tom Sellsted to
obtain the five datasets of interest. After reviewing the data available, a Metro Center team member
spoke with Tom Sellsted and Jill Ballard to discuss the methods used to collect and display datasets in
the Equity Study's ArcMap Online Story Maps. Mr. Sellsted also provided the Metro Center team with
contact information for the city data steward(s) of each of the five datasets, and the team scheduled
one-hour phone calls with each data steward. During these calls the Metro Center team asked questions
to identify and clarify our understanding of the methods used to collect the data used in the Equity
Study. We took detailed notes during the call and, in some cases, followed up with additional emails or
calls for clarification. The description of the methods used by the City of Yakima will be included in the
final report.
'nal Data
To supplement city data from the Yakima Equity Study, we compiled census data from the American
Community Survey (ACS) for each of the demographic "input" variables: income, race, education level,
marital status, and homeowner or renter. These data sets were collected for years 1980, 1990, 2000,
December 2017
62
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 60
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
2010, and 2015. These data will be used as input variables to run statistical analysis of output variables
(Task 2, part B), as well as to tell the demographic story of Yakima over time as discussed in the Metro
Center/City staff telephone conversation mentioned above.
Data for property value and age has also been collected. Since these data include time stamps, they will
allow for a longitudinal analysis of age and value through the years that we have census data.
Results and Analysis
Process and Accuracy Audit
Our analysis suggests the City of Yakima has a professional and appropriate process for collecting,
storing, and analyzing data, and a staff knowledgeable in the data infrastructure. Additionally, most of
the data is recorded and handled in a reasonable and professional manner for its original intent: to
support the city's geospatial data and land use planning. We note that the city's GIS architecture has
been developed over more than 30 years, a positive quality which means that the city has a mature
system in place.
An accuracy audit was conducted on a sample of city parks, on both the east and west sides of 16th
Avenue, to assess parks data - one of the most complete and historically available datasets provided.
This audit will also add richness to the binary nature of the parks data, and will help us understand
whether there are qualitative differences in park resources across that geographic dividing line. The
results of that audit will be presented in the final report.
We found no major sources of explicit bias in the collection, handling or storing of data, but we do
recognize some sources of potential unintended consequences that may insert bias into the city's data
collection for some of the datasets provided. These will be detailed in the final report.
Data Quality and Limitations
While the city is to be commended for its long commitment to a citywide Geographic Information
System, staff and council should understand that, because the datasets were collected and developed
for purposes than an analysis, or to assess disparity, most are insufficient to demonstrate either
disparity/inequity or associated causation. The original intent of the data collection ultimately limits our
ability to use the data to answer some of the current equity questions regarding past city practices: it is
simply invalid for those purposes based on the time period, scale, or collection method used.
In the Table 2, we provide a summary table of this data and its possible usage. We hope this will help
council understand possible approaches they might take, and what analyses are not supported by the
data. Much of this work is part of Task 2, part A.
Recommendations
We note that while the data is too variable in quality, especially with regard to availability over time, to
do historical examination of whether city resources have been distributed equitably, we think that a
current "snapshot" or examination of existing conditions is appropriate and warranted.
Most of the contemporary data statistical analysis on the correlation of demographic variables (such as
poverty, race, etc.) with geographic location is appropriate. And, when compared or cross-checked with
a historical analysis of the growth of the city through annexation and demographic change over 30
years, we think a reasonable story can be developed to answer some of the equity questions. Moreover,
December 2017
63
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 61
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
we will be able to point to areas where the city may be able to implement future strategies that will lead
to positive outcomes.
Our understanding of the Code Compliance data, though, suggests that this dataset remains problematic
for analyzing equity due to the anonymous nature in which the data is collected. However, further
conversations with city staff might clarify for us some possible lines of inquiry for which the Code
Compliance data could be used.
Next Steps
We will complete any remaining portions of Task 2 Parts A and B, and complete the analysis in Task 2
Part C including the accuracy audit on parks data, historic and contemporary demographic maps and
historic demographic summary tables, and contemporary disparity/equity statistical analyses as
appropriate. The demographic maps will show "input" variables across the period 1980-2015. We will
then draft a final report of our findings for the city.
Timeline to Completion
Due to some of the challenges presented by the data, we request an extension of the contract to
October 31, or a mutually agreeable date.
December 2017
64
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 62
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Attachments
Summary of Data Utility
Table 2: Summary of data utility
Output
Variable
Public
Safety Calls
(for
Service)
Recommended use in
Equity Study
• Analyze current
disparities in response
times for both Fire and
Police Services
• Analyze Fire and Police
services by council
district and by 16th
Avenue dividing line
Streetlights • Analyze current
disparities in streetlight
presence per council
district, by demographic
output variables
Limitations
• GIS Data are only available from
2012 to present day (not suitable
for historical analysis)
• Walk-in cases to YPD are not
consistently tracked. The database
is shared with SunComm
• Historical data not available in GIS
format
Recommendations
• Define levels of service (LOS)
standards for streetlights
throughout the City of Yakima
Code
Compliance
Requests
• Display the data
spatially to identify
possible disparities
• Data in GIS format are only
available from 2015 to present day
(not suitable for historical analysis)
• There are many confounding
factors that could lead to
disparities in types of code
complaints, and responses
• Create tag to identify which
code compliance cases were
received by Yak Back, phone
calls, emails, or other methods
• Develop documentation of
response prioritization criteria
Parks
• Analyze the
development of parks in
each council district
over time, by population
• Analyze the
development of parks in
each council district
over time, by
demographic
characteristics
Transit
(Ridership)
Transit
(Benches)
Transit
(Shelters)
• Historical data not available in GIS
format
• Obtain data for analysis of
disparities in level of service for
transit
• Review criteria for placement of
benches to prioritize need as
well as feasibility, and ridership
Review criteria for placement of
shelters to prioritize need as
well as feasibility, and ridership
December 2017
65
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 63
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis - Final Report 12.4.17
Appendix C - Demographic Variables Over Time
All maps are available at http://gist.gis.washington.edu/yakima equity/
Income - Median household income
1980 - 2015
Median household income
1000 S US
10-20
—I20-30
30 40
-
n 40-50
- 50 - 60
60-70
1990
2010
1980
2000
2015
December 2017
66
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 64
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Marital Status — Percent Married
1980 - 2015
Percent married
10-20
I—I 20 - 10
1 130 40
-
I -I 40 - 50
I -I 50 -GO
1990
2010
1980
2000
LJ m .l• o
so • so
■
Qi 1 LS
2015
December 2017
67
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 65
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Income — Percent living below the poverty line
1980 - 2015
Percent below poverty
F-1 0 -10
I—I 10- 20
I-120-30
I -I 30 40
-
= 40 - 50
1990
2010
2000
2015
December 2017
68
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 66
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Percent Non -White
1980 - 2015
Percent nonwhite
I-1 10 - 20
I-1 20 - 30
- 30 40
-
MI 40 -50
1990
2010
1980
2000
2015
December 2017
69
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 67
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis – Final Report 12.4.17
Percent Hispanic
1980 - 2015
Percent Hispanic
10-20
0 20 - 30
0 40-50
I—I 50 - 60
- 60 - 70
- 70 - 80
- a0 - g0
1990
2010
1980
2000
2015
December 2017
70
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 68
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Education Level - Percent college graduate
1980 - 2015
Percent college graduate
I-7 0-5
5-10
n 10-15
- 15-20
25-30
2010
Percent college 9rac wte
2010
LJ O.r,
C 1.11
D 00 15
1, SO
JO
I. SS o„
0 OG I 11
1 1
2000
2015
Perrent college gradrurr
7015
LI
Ds•w
D 1010
In
I x
r--1 s
0 QG 1 1G ] n
1
r
December 2017
71
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 69
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Percent Renter Occupied
1980 - 2015
Percent renter Occupied
0 20
-
20 40
-
I—I 40 - 60
I—I 80 - 100
1990
2010
1980
2000
2015
December 2017
72
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 70
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Mean year home built
1980 - 2015
Mean year built
19 9-1940
n 1940 - 1950
I-1 1959-1950
I-1 1960 - 1970
1-1 1970 - 1990
1990 - 2000
1990
Mean yes, built
1990
19 -194
• Iob•lY+
O 1559.1969
0 1900 • 19>0
2010
1980
2000
2015
December 2017
73
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 71
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Median Property Value
1980 - 2015
I'ledian property value
$ US0 �y y1�y00y�00y!5
I—I - ,0
I—I 100,000 - 200,000
I—I 200,000 - 300.000
- 600,000 - 1 M
- 1M -3M
1990
2010
1980
2000
2015
December 2017
74
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 72
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis - Final Report 12.4.17
Appendix D - Project Proposal
Objective:
To analyze data from the City of Yakima's Equity Study to help inform the 2018 budget and future
budget decision.
Background
In May 2016, the Yakima City Council directed City staff to begin an Equity Study to research the
distribution of city funded services and improvements. This study was launched through the
encouragement of a private non-profit organization. The data collected to date have been made
available to the public on the City's website at https://www.yakimawa.gov/council/equity-study/.
Representatives from the City of Yakima contacted WSU's Metropolitan Center for Applied Research and
Extension (Metro Center) to assist the City with addressing equity concerns of Council Members around
resource allocation.
About the Metro Center
The Metro Center helps Washington's cities and metropolitan communities create vibrant economies,
healthy communities, and sustainable environments. We do this by connecting decision -makers with the
expertise of Washington State University to produce practical solutions to the challenges of growth.
Using a project -based and client centered approach, the Metro Center remains flexible to respond to
emerging needs, and help communities build capacity to create sustainable solutions for the future.
About our process
The Metro Center compiles a unique team for each project with the necessary expertise and attributes
to successfully complete all project goals. Team members include WSU faculty and staff; however, we
also utilize external partners as needed for a project. Potential partners were contacted during the
creation of this draft to ensure that the Metro Center has the ability to undertake and fulfill the actions
proposed below. Their input and expertise is incorporated into this proposal.
Project Tasks:
Task 1: Validate Equity Study data
Methods
Confirm with City Council up to 6 data sets identified in Task 2 B, excluding US Census Bureau data, to
assess the validity of those data. For each data set selected we will conduct, as appropriate:
A. A process audit by interviewing City staff and reviewing documents associated with how these
data were collected, compiled, summarized, and made accessible to the public.
B. An accuracy audit of the data by randomly selecting a representative sample of data points, and
independently determining the accuracy through direct observations.
City of Yakima Responsibilities
City staff will make original data available for an audit and staff members will be available for questions.
Metro Center Deliverable
December 2017
75
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 73
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
We will provide a written report of our findings to the City with an option for an in-person or remote
presentation.
Task 2: Analyze existing Equity Study data to assess the geographic distribution of public
resources and funds (e.g. city, State, or Federal)
Methods
A. Assess the quality of the data to understand any qualitative concerns and limitations that would
impact data analysis or interpretation (i.e. period of time collected, geographically resolution of
the data, etc.).
B. Confirm the input and output variables for the analysis, and the geographical dividing line. Initial
request included the following 6 data sets, upon which this estimate is based:
a. Input variable:
o Demographics, to include income, race, education level, marital status, home
owner or renter, property value and age
b. Output variables:
o Public safety calls for service (location, response time)
o Streetlights
o Code compliance requests
o Parks (exempt parks that are privately funded or charge for use)
o Transit ridership, shelters, benches
c. Geographical dividing line
o 16th Avenue
C. Perform the appropriate statistical analyses to assess any relationships amongst the input and
output (i.e. response) variables.
Metro Center Deliverable
We will provide a written report of the process we used for the analyses, results of the analyses, and an
interpretation of the data, with an option for an in-person or remote presentation.
City of Yakima Responsibilities
City staff will make all data sets, including any meta -data available to the WSU team in mutually agreed
upon format(S), documentation as to how data were collected, accessed, and / or manipulated as well
as being available to answer questions as needed.
Timeline
Completion by 90 days from initiation of the contract, or mutually agreeable date.
Budget: $25,100
The budget includes personnel, materials, travel, and WSU's required 26% indirect costs.
Personnel
Includes all salaries, wages and benefits of project personnel required to implement project tasks as well
as administrative aspects of the project including, but not limited to, meetings, reporting, and
communication.
Materials
Materiel costs will be minimal and may include photocopying and binding of final reports.
Travel
December 2017
76
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 74
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Travel costs will be incurred only as necessary to complete project tasks and will include: travel to and
from Seattle and Yakima, hotel and meals while in travel status, and local ground travel, as set by the
U.S. General Services Administration.
Indirect Costs
A Facilities and Administration (F&A or Indirect Cost) rate of 26% is added to all direct project costs.
NOTE: These are preliminary estimates only, and have not been reviewed by WSU contracting or finance
offices. As such, they are subject to modification as part of the formal contracting process. These
estimates include a good faith assessment of the appropriate Facilities and Administration (F & A or
Indirect Cost) recovery rates (26% for most activities herein), which may also be changed after formal
review. These estimates are provided to facilitate discussion and negotiation, but do not constitute a
formal offer or the basis of a formal contract — which may only be executed by the WSU Office of
Research Support and Operations. All expenses regarding the venue, food, and rentals are to be paid for
by the funder.
December 2017
77
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 75
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis - Final Report 12.4.17
Appendix E - Summary of Accuracy Audit Findings
Table 3: Park audit details
Park Name
Data
Errors
(Y/N)
Reported Location and
Amenities
Observed Location and
Amenities
Notes
McGuinness
Park
N
14th Ave & Swan Ave
• Playground
• Picnic Shelter
• Basketball court
• Asphalt pathway
14th Ave & Swan Ave
• (1) Playground
• (1) Picnic shelter
• (1) basketball court
• Asphalt pathway
Shelter fits four
picnic tables
Emil Kissel
Park
N
3000 W Mead Ave
• Tennis Center (12
courts)
• (1) Restroom
• Playground
• Asphalt path
• Picnic Shelter
• Basketball court
3000 W Mead Ave
• (12) Tennis Courts
• (1) Restroom
• (1) Playground
• Asphalt path
• (1) Picnic Shelter with
grill
• (1) Basketball court
• Parking lot
(estimated* 83 stalls)
Picnic shelter with
grill, wall on two
sides providing
shelter from wind.
Gilbert Park
N
500 W Lincoln Ave
• Open Space
• Parking lot
500 W Lincoln Ave
• Open Space
• Parking lot
(estimated* 87 stalls)
South 2nd St
Park
N
706 E Race St
• Open space
706 E Race St
• Open space
Milroy Park
N
SE Corner of 16th & Lincoln
Ave
• Playground
• Restroom
• Volleyball court
• Horseshoe pits
SE Corner of 16th & Lincoln
Ave
• Playground
• Restroom
• Volleyball court
• Horseshoe pits
• Parking lot
(estimated* 29 stalls)
horseshoe pits
missing the posts,
inoperable
West Valley
Community
Park
N
1323 80th Ave
• (3) Picnic Shelters
• (2) Playgrounds
• (1) Restroom
• Horseshoe Pits
(unspecified number)
1323 80th Ave
• (3) Picnic Shelters
• (2) Playgrounds
• (1) Restroom
• (4) Horseshoe Pits
• (2) Basketball Courts
Well maintained
structures.
Horseshoe pits
unmowed, have tall
weeds.
December 2017
78
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 76
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Park Name
Data
Errors
(Y/N)
Reported Location and
Amenities
Observed Location and
Amenities
Notes
• Basketball Courts
(unspecified number)
• (2) Parking lots
(estimated* 54, and
60+ stalls)
Yakima
Arboretum
N
1401 Arboretum Dr
• Open space
• Parking lot
• Jewitt center (owned
by Arboretum, not
YPR)
1401 Arboretum Dr
• Open space
• Parking lot
(estimated* 135
stalls)
• Jewitt center (owned
by Arboretum, not
YPR)
Fisher Golf
Course
N
823 S 40th Ave
• 9 -hole 3 par course
• Starter house
• Maintenance building
823 S 40th Ave
• 9 -hole 3 par course
• Starter house
• Maintenance building
• Small parking lot
(estimated* 23 stalls)
Franklin
Park
N
2101 Tieton Dr
• Outdoor pool
• (2) Small picnic tables
• (1) Pavilion
• (1) Playground
• Tennis courts
(unspecified number)
2101 Tieton Dr
• Outdoor pool
• (2) Small picnic tables
• (1) Pavilion
• (1) Playground
• (6) Tennis courts
Previous capital
improvements
received private
funding
Kiwanis Park
N
1501 E Maple St
• Restrooms,
concessions
• Playground
• Picnic Shelters
(unspecified)
• (8) Baseball/softball
fields
• Basketball court
• Concrete skate park
1501 E Maple St
• Restrooms/concessi
ons
• (1) Playground
• (2) Picnic Shelters
• (8) Baseball/softball
fields
• (1) Basketball court
• Concrete skate park
• Large Parking lot
(estimated* 441
stalls)
Previous capital
improvements
received private
funding
December 2017
79
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 77
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis - Final Report 12.4.17
Appendix F - Estimated Census Tract Population Over Time
Tract
pop_1980
pop_1990
pop_2000
pop_2010
pop_2015
100
2113
2426
2778
3356
3094
200
3221
3665
5374
5787
5996
300
232
493
3905
4172
4216
400
1635
1719
2758
5011
5216
500
3327
3730
5011
5811
5141
600
3829
4566
6485
6866
7743
700
5995
6447
6684
6477
7520
800
5086
4822
4614
4398
4441
900
1325
1830
2596
NA
NA
901
NA
NA
NA
7504
7464
902
NA
NA
NA
3341
4110
1000
5459
5689
5725
5541
5516
1100
2244
2749
4065
4460
4691
1200
5932
6509
9048
NA
NA
1201
NA
NA
NA
3712
3859
1202
NA
NA
NA
6415
6344
1300
187
178
197
219
194
1400
630
591
660
674
726
1500
2841
6583
8380
NA
NA
1501
NA
NA
NA
6132
7569
1502
NA
NA
NA
2616
2944
1600
42
154
215
NA
NA
1602
NA
NA
NA
764
791
1702
NA
NA
NA
64
62
2802
NA
NA
NA
1784
1903
3100
NA
NA
123
NA
NA
3400
NA
NA
NA
182
212
December 2017
80
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 78
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
Appendix G — Census Tract Maps Over Time
The set of Census tract maps display the census tracts with census tract identifier and "e" or "w" based
on the 16th Avenue dividing line. These maps, along with the tables of Census tract demographic
aggregates should be helpful in interpreting the scatter plots, which include text labels showing the tract
identifiers. It should be noted that 16th Avenue divides some tracts; for those tracts that span 16th
Avenue, there will be two data points on the map, each with an area -weighted estimate of the
proportion of the both X and Y variables.
All maps are available at http://gist.gis.washington.edu/yakima equity/
1980
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 mi
December 2017
81
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 79
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
1990
0.5 1 15 2mi
1
2000
0.5 1 1.5 2mi
1 1 1 1
December 2017
82
The WSU Metropolitan Center for Applied Research & Extension 80
City of Yakima Equity Study Analysis — Final Report 12.4.17
2010
0.5 1 1.5 2 mi
1 1 1 I
2015
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 mi
I I I I
December 2017
1
Metropolitan Center for
Applied Research & Extension
WASH INC;IUN STATE UNIVERSIIY
EXTENSION