Difference between revisions of "SMT201 AY2019-20G1 EX2 Riana"

From Geospatial Analytics for Urban Planning
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "== Objective == The motive of this project is to find a suitable location for building a National Communicable Disease Quarantine Centre. The selected site must be located in...")
 
Line 11: Line 11:
  
 
   
 
   
−
=== Overview of Gombak Subzone ===
+
== Overview of Gombak Subzone ==
 
<br>
 
<br>
−
[[File:Riana Gombak Overview.png|800px|center|Data Source: Master Plan 2014 Subzone Boundary (No Sea) (SHP) from URA. Roads, Buildings and Natural (SHP) from OpenStreetMap. ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM) dataset (TIFF) jointly prepared by NASA and METI, Japan; raster dataset combined by Professor Kam Tin Seong.]]
+
[[File:Riana Gombak Overview.png|Data Source: Master Plan 2014 Subzone Boundary (No Sea) (SHP) from URA. Roads, Buildings and Natural (SHP) from OpenStreetMap. ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM) dataset (TIFF) jointly prepared by NASA and METI, Japan; raster dataset combined by Professor Kam Tin Seong.|800px|center]]
 
<br>
 
<br>
  
−
For this map, I use the different types and thickness of the lines and different colors to represent different types of road. Since expressway is the most travelled road, I use a thicker line to represent it, then follow by major road and minor road. In order to distinguish the line more, I used the different types of line to represent each of the road. Classification of expressway and major road is retrieved from the data.gov.sg while the minor road is retrieved from LTA DataMall.  
+
=== Buildings (Health Risk Factor) ===
 +
Buildings in Gombak subzone are mostly located around the boundary with some located in the central. It is densely populated in the northern part of Gombak subzone since there are quite a number of buildings situated. Therefore, southern part of Gombak subzone seems to be more appropriate to build the quarantine centre in order to satisfy the health risk factor.  
  
−
=== 2014 Master Plan Landuse ===
+
=== Natural Features (Natural Conservation Factor) ===
−
<br>[[File:2014 Master Plan Landuse Riana.png|800px|frameless|center]]<br>
+
Natural features in Gombak subzone seems to be spread across the whole area. In the east side there are forest and water bodies. North side have situated water body and 2 parks. Following by 2 parks located in western to south-west of Gombak Subzone. Looking at the spread, central and south-east of Gombak Subzone will be the appropriate place to build the quarantine centre.  
  
−
For this map, I have used a different colors and pattern to represent the different landuse purpose. Since there are a lot of categories from the data, I combined some of the categories such as Residential and Business. Besides colors, I used patterns to further distinguish some of the landuse. Furthermore, I have chosen colors that are the closest to the categories, e.g. red for restricted area and blue for waterbody.  
+
=== Roads (Accessibility Factor) ===
 +
Road’s spread in Gombak subzone are quite comprehensive of the area except on the southern part which are not covered by any part of roads. Eastern part of Gombak subzone is the most accessible as they has the most number of roads. Therefore, looking at the accessibility factor, building the quarantine centre in eastern part of Gombak subzone will be the most accessible.
  
−
== Part 2: Choropleth Mapping ==
+
=== Elevation (Economic Factor) ===
 +
There are high elevation covered from central to southern of Gombak subzone. While around the boundary, there are less elevation especially on the northern part. Thus, looking at the economic factor, it is more appropriate to build the quarantine central at the northern part of Gombak subzone.
  
−
=== Aged population (+65) in 2010 ===
 
−
<br>[[File:Aged Population ( 65) in 2010.png|800px|frameless|center]]<br>
 
  
−
Firstly, in order to join to the subzone planning area data, I changed the subzone in the population data to uppercase using excel before importing to QGIS. Then, in order to cut down the processing time, I filtered the data by year 2010 and age group of 65 and above. Afterwards, I use GroupStats plugin to get the sum the aged population by the subzone and join the data with the subzone planning area data. I have used equal interval classification to classify the number of population in each subzone. I chose equal interval as it gives me a better insight of the area that are more aged population. I did not deal with any missing value in this map as I have use another subzone planning area map as a base map.
+
== Proximity of the Four Factors ==
−
From this map, we can infer that there are more aged population in the east side of Singapore in the year 2010.
 
  
−
=== Aged population (+65) in 2018 ===
+
<br>  
−
<br>[[File:Aged Population ( 65) 2018.png|800px|frameless|center]]<br>
+
[[File:Riana Proximity.png|800px|frameless|Data Source: Master Plan 2014 Subzone Boundary (No Sea) (SHP) from URA. Roads, Buildings and Natural (SHP) from OpenStreetMap. ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM) dataset (TIFF) jointly prepared by NASA and METI, Japan; raster dataset combined by Professor Kam Tin Seong.]]
−
 
+
<br>
−
The steps to derive this map is exactly the same with the Aged Population in Singapore 2010 map. In this map, I found that there are no missing value, therefore, I can dispose the use of a base map. I used the same classification as Aged Population in Singapore 2010 to be able to compare the data more accurately. From the classification, we can see that the number of aged population has increase 1.5 times compared to 2010. The area with high number of aged population is still remained the same as 2010, which is on the east side of Singapore.  
 
−
 
 
−
=== Proportional of aged population in 2010 ===
 
−
<br>[[File:Propotion of Aged Population 2010.png|800px|frameless|center]]<br>
 
−
 
 
−
In order to get the proportion of aged population, I get the sum of the total population in the subzone by using GroupStat plugin. After getting the sum of the total population by subzone, I joined the data with the sum of aged population from previous section. With these data, I get the proportion of the aged population compared to the total population.
 
−
In this map, I used the natural breaks classification as it gives me more diverse result compared to other classification. From the map, we can infer that there are more proportion of aged population in the central area despite that there are more aged population in the east side from the previous section.
 
  
−
=== Proportional of aged population in 2018 ===
+
===Building Proximity (Health Risk Factor)===
−
<br>[[File:Proportion of Aged Population 2018.png|800px|frameless|center]]<br>
+
The green color depicts suitable area while red color otherwise. The furthest distance from the buildings is 816.36 meters. The southern part and some part of the central are the suitable lot for building a quarantine centre.
  
−
I have used the same steps as the previous section to get the map. In order to see the changes of Proportion of aged population in a glance, I have used the same classification as the 2010 map. There are also missing values from the map and I also use a base map for this map.  
+
===Natural Features Proximity (Natural Conservation Factor)===
−
From this map, we can see that the proportion of aged population is still higher at the central however there are increase in proportion in the west side.
+
The green color depicts suitable area while red color otherwise. The furthest distance from the natural conservation is  847.27 meters. The southern, central, and some part of west are the suitable lot for building a quarantine centre.
  
−
=== Percentage change of aged population between 2010 and 2018 ===
+
===Road Proximity (Accessibility Factor)===
−
<br>[[File:Percentage Change of Aged Population in Singapore From 2010 to 2018.png|800px|frameless|center]]<br>
+
The green color depicts accessible area while red color otherwise. The furthest distance from the road is 717.03 meter. I have chosen below 200 meter as a cut off for accessible area since walk time for 200 meter should take around 5 minutes. Most area of Gombak are quite accessible by roads except the southern part as said above. Therefore, looking at the road proximity, all area is suitable to build the quarantine centre except southern area.  
  
−
In order to get the data of percentage change of aged population, I use the data of sum of aged population in 2010 and 2018 from the previous section and by using the field calculator, I get the percentage change of from 2010 to 2018.
+
===Slope Proximity (Economy Factor)===
−
For the classification, I have set the range myself as I would like to have 0 – 50 as the middle range. Besides, I use the green colour to represent that there is a drop in the percentage of aged population and red colour to represent that there is an increase in the percentage of aged population. From this map, we can see more clearly the difference of proportion of aged population over the years. We can see that there are mostly increase in the proportion of aged population over the years.
+
The green color depicts flatter area while red color otherwise. The steepest area has a degree of 36.43. Despite high coverage of elevated area, it seems that Gombak subzone as a rather flatten steep. It is suitable to build the quarantine centre on the green area of the map.

Revision as of 23:40, 9 November 2019

Objective

The motive of this project is to find a suitable location for building a National Communicable Disease Quarantine Centre. The selected site must be located in Gombak Planning Subzone. Criteria: 1. A contiguous area of 10,000 m2 2. Factors: a. Economic Factor: avoid steep slope b. Accessibility Factor: close to existing local roads, namely: service roads and tracks c. Health Risk Factor: The selected site should be away from population d. Natural Conservation Factor: The selected site should be away from forested land, park and water.


Overview of Gombak Subzone


Data Source: Master Plan 2014 Subzone Boundary (No Sea) (SHP) from URA. Roads, Buildings and Natural (SHP) from OpenStreetMap. ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM) dataset (TIFF) jointly prepared by NASA and METI, Japan; raster dataset combined by Professor Kam Tin Seong.


Buildings (Health Risk Factor)

Buildings in Gombak subzone are mostly located around the boundary with some located in the central. It is densely populated in the northern part of Gombak subzone since there are quite a number of buildings situated. Therefore, southern part of Gombak subzone seems to be more appropriate to build the quarantine centre in order to satisfy the health risk factor.

Natural Features (Natural Conservation Factor)

Natural features in Gombak subzone seems to be spread across the whole area. In the east side there are forest and water bodies. North side have situated water body and 2 parks. Following by 2 parks located in western to south-west of Gombak Subzone. Looking at the spread, central and south-east of Gombak Subzone will be the appropriate place to build the quarantine centre.

Roads (Accessibility Factor)

Road’s spread in Gombak subzone are quite comprehensive of the area except on the southern part which are not covered by any part of roads. Eastern part of Gombak subzone is the most accessible as they has the most number of roads. Therefore, looking at the accessibility factor, building the quarantine centre in eastern part of Gombak subzone will be the most accessible.

Elevation (Economic Factor)

There are high elevation covered from central to southern of Gombak subzone. While around the boundary, there are less elevation especially on the northern part. Thus, looking at the economic factor, it is more appropriate to build the quarantine central at the northern part of Gombak subzone.


Proximity of the Four Factors


Data Source: Master Plan 2014 Subzone Boundary (No Sea) (SHP) from URA. Roads, Buildings and Natural (SHP) from OpenStreetMap. ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM) dataset (TIFF) jointly prepared by NASA and METI, Japan; raster dataset combined by Professor Kam Tin Seong.

Building Proximity (Health Risk Factor)

The green color depicts suitable area while red color otherwise. The furthest distance from the buildings is 816.36 meters. The southern part and some part of the central are the suitable lot for building a quarantine centre.

Natural Features Proximity (Natural Conservation Factor)

The green color depicts suitable area while red color otherwise. The furthest distance from the natural conservation is 847.27 meters. The southern, central, and some part of west are the suitable lot for building a quarantine centre.

Road Proximity (Accessibility Factor)

The green color depicts accessible area while red color otherwise. The furthest distance from the road is 717.03 meter. I have chosen below 200 meter as a cut off for accessible area since walk time for 200 meter should take around 5 minutes. Most area of Gombak are quite accessible by roads except the southern part as said above. Therefore, looking at the road proximity, all area is suitable to build the quarantine centre except southern area.

Slope Proximity (Economy Factor)

The green color depicts flatter area while red color otherwise. The steepest area has a degree of 36.43. Despite high coverage of elevated area, it seems that Gombak subzone as a rather flatten steep. It is suitable to build the quarantine centre on the green area of the map.

Retrieved from ‘https://wiki.smu.edu.sg/1920t1smt201/index.php?title=SMT201_AY2019-20G1_EX2_Riana&oldid=8497’