4.1 Land Use Mapping
As stated previously, our first round of spatial analysis consisted of visually mapping the Dallas County parcel shapefile, supplemented by residential and commercial property data in ArcGIS. Figure 11 shows the result.
4. 1.1. Dallas County Map of Springville Land Use
Figure 13. Dallas County map of Springville land use. Source: Dallas County Appraisal District (2022) with county information elaborated by the authors.
County data poorly documents the current state of occupancy and the diverse range of land uses in Springville. For instance, county data shows only one industrial and one commercial lot on the outskirts of the community. It shows three public spaces. Two of these are the churches in the community—First Baptist Church on Elm Drive and Fellowship Church on South Road—but one of these lots seems to be misclassified. County data also shows 41 residential plots and a high level of vacancy in the neighborhood.
The lack of accuracy or resolution of land uses and occupancy rates required us to conduct bottom-up mapping to achieve a more accurate record of Springville’s residential, commercial, and public spaces.
4.1.2 Research Team’s Bottom-Up Map of Springville Land Use
Our bottom-up mapping from observational data, survey data, and geocoded GPS coordinates documented the diverse range of land uses in Springville. We developed a land use classification that more accurately reveals the extent of vacancy and residential land use. Our observations helped disaggregate residential land use into occupied and abandoned categories. We also observed commercial, industrial, and public spaces, as well as land expropriated by the county. Figure 12 presents the map that resulted from this process.
Figure 14. Research team’s bottom-up map of Springville land use.
The bottom-up map generated from our research reveals many fewer vacancies than the county map and quite a number of abandoned structures. Likewise, it shows more public spaces, including a neighborhood park on Pecan Street, an abandoned community center on Water Street, a social gathering place on Ralph Street, and an unused community garden across from the First Baptist Church. There are also substantially more commercial and industrial land uses than the county indicates. Our observations of land use revealed t a total of 182 single and multi-parcel lots: 22% are vacant, while 31% have occupied residential structures.
4.2 Housing: Types and Quality
Four housing types are prevalent among our survey participants: 49% report that they live in an RV, followed by 27% in a single-family home, 14% in a mobile home, and 10% living in a makeshift shed.
Figure 15. Recreational vehicles are the predominant housing type in the Springville community.
Housing quality is a pressing environmental issue since the nature of enforcement of floodplain regulations prevents residents from building on their properties and residents with single-dwelling homes from making renovations. Residents reported fires in the community, their severity exacerbated by the lack of water infrastructure; yet they are prevented from rebuilding their homes. These conditions mean many residents resort to living in RVs. Because residents have few rebuilding options, they often live alongside the rubble of destroyed structures. One resident’s childhood home burned down; he continues living in the lot beside his burnt home because he cannot remove that structure because of floodplain restrictions and lack of funds. Another long-term resident whose ceiling collapsed had no choice but to cover the holes in her roof with a blue tarp to prevent leaking when it rains.
Figure 16. Picture taken by resident illustrating roof deficiencies.
Figure 17. Springville housing types
Figure 18. A Springville residential lot with RV, water tank, refrigerator, and solid waste.