SMT201 AY2019-20G2 Ex2 JerryTohvan

From Geospatial Analytics for Urban Planning
Revision as of 00:41, 4 November 2019 by Jerrytohvan.2016 (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Part 1: Study Area Map Components

Overview map.jpg

FIGURE I

Study Area Map Components



Firstly, the above summarises an overview of the study area and its map components we want to consider in this suitability land analysis for the Communicable Disease Quarantine Centre in Bukit Gombak.

Map Target Roads.jpg

FIGURE II

Target Road Map



Figure II shows Bukit Gombak's Road Network that will be accounted in as an Accesibility factor in weighing the location suitability.

Map Buildings.jpg

FIGURE III

Target Building Map



Figure III shows Bukit Gombak's Buildings that will be accounted in as an Health Risk factor in weighing the location suitability. We want the Disease Quarantine Centre to be further away from residential in order to ensure safe-zone. Health Risk factor will be prioritised as for the very fact that a Quarantine Centre exists, to ensure no further disease spreading. Bukit Gombak has mostly residential areas in its'subzone.

Map Natural Features.jpg

FIGURE III

Target Natural Features Map


Buffered Merge Waterway.jpg

FIGURE IV

Incomplete Waterway Target Inclusion. Applying buffering and merging of polygons in QGIS.



Figure IV shows Bukit Gombak's Natural Features that will be accounted in as an Natural Conservation factor in weighing the location suitability. The Natural features includes forest, park, water, and also waterway(canal, drain, stream). Waterway polygon was merged into the natural features in order to account in medium of disease transmission that could potentially cause disease spreading. We account this as risk factor that needed to be considered.

Map elevation.jpg

FIGURE V

Digital Elevation Map




Figure V shows Bukit Gombak's Elevation Map that will be accounted in as an Economical factor in weighing the location suitability. Most projects will always assess its cost in building. In estimation, slope inclination of about 15 degrees and beyond could add further costs to increase significantly as the risks become greater and the work becomes more difficult to build.



Part 2: Study Area Proximity Maps

Proximity Roads.jpg

FIGURE VI

Accessibility Factor: Road Proximity Map



After target map elements have been rasterised. We perform the raster proximity distance on its layer and apply binary model classification on all the factor layers. Figure VI includes the binary criteria based on the accesibility factor where we prefer location under 200 m.


Proximity Buildings.jpg

FIGURE VII

Health Risk Factor: Building Proximity Map



Applying the same methods used on road proximity map, the Figure VII includes the binary criteria based on the health risk factor where we prefer that buildings are 250 meters away from the Disease Quarantine Centre.

Proximity Natural Features.jpg

FIGURE VIII

Natural Conservation Factor:: Natural Features Proximity Map




Next, the Figure VIII includes the binary criteria based on the natural conservation risk factor where we prefer public natural features and waterways are 200 meters away from the centre.


Slope Layer.jpg

FIGURE IX

Economic Factor: Slope Layer




Lastly, Figure IX includes the binary criteria based on the economical factor where we locations where slope inclination is below or equal to 15 degrees.


Criterion Scores for Map Components

Binary Roads.jpg
Criteria access.jpg

FIGURE X

Accesibility Factor: Road Binary & Criteria Score


Binary buildings.jpg
Criteria health risk.jpg

FIGURE XI

Health Risk Factor: Building Binary & Criteria Score


Binary natural.jpg
Criteria natural conv.jpg

FIGURE XII

Natural Conservation Factor: Natural Features Binary & Criteria Score



Binary slope.jpg
Criteria Slope.png

FIGURE XIII

Economical Factor: Slope Binary & Criteria Score


Analytical Hierarchical Process Input Matrix & Approach

AHP Scale.jpg

FIGURE XIV

SCB Associates' AHP Scoring Framework


Pairwise Comparison Matrix.jpg

FIGURE XV

AHP Scoring Framework for Accounting Factors


AHP Analysis.jpg
AHP Analysis 2.jpg
AHP Ratio.jpg

FIGURE XVI

AHP Results


Raster calc AHP.jpg

FIGURE XVII

Weighing AHP Scores into QGIS Raster Calculator


Reclassify binary AHP.jpg

FIGURE XVIII

Reclassifying Raster Values using SAGA's Plugin for Degrees of Suitability



Recommendation

Suitability map overview.jpg

FIGURE XIX

Suitability Map Overview


Suitability map zoomed.jpg

FIGURE XX

Qualitative Analysis: Zooming into Possible Region Using Google's Satelitte


Recommendation Area.jpg

FIGURE XXI

Making Recommendation based on Availibity of Land