Skip to content

avrignaud/seattledogparkdata

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

29 Commits
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

Seattle Off-Leash Areas: A Data Story

Data-driven research on Seattle's 14 designated off-leash areas (OLAs), how they compare to peer cities, and why a system that serves ~150,000+ dogs with ~26 acres of fenced space produces measurable system failures — including rampant illegal off-leash use and one of the worst per-capita dog park ratios on the West Coast.

This is a civic advocacy research project. Everything here is sourced from public data: Seattle Parks & Recreation budget books, the Seattle Park District financial plans, Trust for Public Land ParkScore, WA OFM population estimates, and contemporaneous reporting.

Findings at a glance

  • Seattle has been stuck at 14 OLAs since ~2009 while population grew +34%. First net increase (to 16) opens fall 2026.
  • Seattle's dog-park density is 1.82 per 100,000 residents — one-third of Portland (5.74), SF (5.03), and Vancouver BC (5.44).
  • 99% of Seattle residents live within a 10-minute walk of a park. Only an estimated 33% live within 10 minutes of an OLA.
  • Of Seattle's 14 OLAs, 7 are under 1 acre and 4 are under a quarter-acre. The smallest (Kinnear) is 0.1 ac.
  • SPR's own 2016 survey: 39% of dog owners admit illegally off-leashing in parks monthly or more often. SPR acknowledges this in its own planning documents as a supply problem.
  • Peer-city OLA acreage per 10K residents: Vancouver BC 2.54, Portland 1.29, Seattle 0.32 (~8× and ~4× gaps respectively).
  • It's not a money problem — Seattle spends $418/resident on parks (near the top nationally). Portland spends less and has 3× the dog park density. This is an allocation issue, not a funding issue.
  • Park District Cycle 2 (2023–2028) is the first meaningful OLA investment in 15 years: $3.1M capital for two new OLAs plus ~$1.8M/yr operational. Real progress, but still <1% of SPR's total budget, and SPR has said additional OLAs will require future funding requests.

The reports

  • Part I — The Gap — population growth vs. OLA count, peer-city comparison, budget reality.
  • Part II — Access — walkability analysis with interactive Seattle map, peer-city acreage comparison, illegal off-leash use, and the Kinnear Park case study.

Both render as standalone HTML with Chart.js and Leaflet. No build step, no backend — open the files in a browser.

Update these URLs after the first GitHub Pages build, or replace syrinxventures with your own org/user.

Repo layout

.
├── docs/                           # GitHub Pages publishes from here
│   ├── index.html                  # Landing page linking both reports
│   ├── part1-the-gap.html          # Population / budget / peer-city analysis
│   └── part2-access.html           # Walkability, mapping, Kinnear case study
├── data/
│   ├── seattle-olas.csv            # 14 existing OLAs: coordinates, acreage, neighborhood
│   ├── seattle-timeseries.csv      # Population, SPR budget, OLA budget by year
│   ├── peer-cities.csv             # Portland, SF, Vancouver BC, Austin, Boise, etc.
│   ├── illegal-use-indicators.csv  # SPR survey data, enforcement stats, walkshed
│   ├── kinnear-timeline.csv        # 20-year chronology of Kinnear encampment/safety
│   └── planned-olas.csv            # Under-construction + planning-phase OLAs
├── sources/
│   └── SOURCES.md                  # All primary sources with URLs, organized by category
├── CHANGELOG.md                    # Version log
├── TODO.md                         # Known gaps / planned work
├── LICENSE                         # MIT
└── README.md

Methodology notes

A few places where I had to estimate or normalize — all documented in the reports' footnotes, but worth highlighting here:

  • 33% walkshed estimate (Part II) — the "residents within 10 minutes of an OLA" number is a straight-line half-mile buffer around each OLA's coordinates, overlaid on 2020 Census block groups. TPL uses network analysis that accounts for barriers (I-5, Ship Canal, etc.), which would produce a smaller number, not larger. The 33% is the optimistic version.
  • Peer-city OLA acreage — cities define "off-leash area" differently. Portland counts unfenced voice-control areas; Seattle only counts fully fenced. The per-capita gap holds up under several normalization approaches; the specific numbers shift 10-20% depending on methodology. See Part II Finding 04.
  • OLA improvement budget post-2022 — the Park District's "Maintaining Parks & Facilities" BSL funds both OLAs AND P-Patch community gardens, and SPR doesn't publish the split. Numbers after 2022 include both; the OLA share is some fraction smaller.
  • Dog population — "150,000+" is the conservative figure cited since ~2013. SPR's 2023 Expansion Study cites estimates up to 400,000. I use the conservative floor throughout.

License

Code and analysis: MIT (see LICENSE). Underlying data is all from public government sources and is not separately licensed by this project.

Contact

Project maintained by Andre Vrignaud. Issues and pull requests welcome.

About

Public data reference on Seattle's off-leash dog area system — supply, access, enforcement, peer-city comparisons

Resources

License

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

 
 
 

Contributors

Languages