ArcMap Portfolio by Arvind.Gopalakrishnan

ArcMap Portfolio

Exploring cartography and spatial analysis

Arvind G

140°0'0"W

150°0'0"W

160°0'0"W

170°0'0"W

150°0'0"W

180°0'0" 40°0'0"N

15°0'0"N

140°0'0"W

130°0'0"W

120°0'0"W

110°0'0"W

100°0'0"W

90°0'0"W

80°0'0"W

160°0'0"W

70°0'0"W

80°0'0"N

55°0'0"N

20°0'0"N

45°0'0"N

60°0'0"N

50°0'0"N

20°0'0"N

25°0'0"N 65°0'0"N

55°0'0"N 25°0'0"N

75°0'0"N

70°0'0"N

60°0'0"N

65°0'0"N 30°0'0"N 70°0'0"N

75°0'0"N

30°0'0"N

65°0'0"N

60°0'0"N

55°0'0"N

50°0'0"N

45°0'0"N

40°0'0"N

35°0'0"N

30°0'0"N

25°0'0"N

20°0'0"N

15°0'0"N

65°0'0"N

30°0'0"N

80°0'0"N

85°0'0"N

35°0'0"N

85°0'0"N

80°0'0"N

75°0'0"N

70°0'0"N 30°0'0"N 65°0'0"N

60°0'0"N 25°0'0"N 50°0'0"W

40°0'0"W

30°0'0"W

20°0'0"W

700 1,400

2,800

Kilometers 4,200

150°0'0"W

140°0'0"W

130°0'0"W

120°0'0"W

110°0'0"W

1,150 2,300

90°0'0"W

80°0'0"W

70°0'0"W

[

Mercator Conformal projection 0

100°0'0"W

4,600

Kilometers 6,900

45°0'0"N

40°0'0"N

20°0'0"N

35°0'0"N

30°0'0"N 15°0'0"N

25°0'0"N

20°0'0"N 100°0'0"W

90°0'0"W

80°0'0"W

70°0'0"W

60°0'0"W

World Azimuthal Equidistant Equidistant projection

900

1,800

50°0'0"W

40°0'0"W

[

Equal area projection

0°0'0"

[

North Pole Lambert Azimuthal Equal Area

10°0'0"W

25°0'0"N

Kilometers 5,400

3,600 Alberta

01 - Projection comparisons

North American provinces

01 Projection Comparisons

Ineffective

Effective !

! !

! ! !

! !

! ! !

! !

! ! !

! !

# $

! !

# #

^# ^ "

# #

# # # #

# "

" "

## ^

# $

# #

" "

# #

! !

# ^ # # # # " ^ # ## # # # # # # # # " # # # " # # # " # " # " # " # # ## " # ## " # " " ^ " # # ## # # " " # " " # # ^ # # # # " # # # #" " # ## ^ ! " # # ## # " " # ## # # # # # # #" ^ ## " #" # " # " # $ ^ " " ^ ^

# #

# !

" "

^ #

! !

# #

^ #

! !

! ! ! !

! ! !

! !

# #

$ !

# # #

! !

Ineffective

Effective

Number of 65+ aged residents in residential communities across Calgary !

0 - 500

501 - 1000

1001 - 1500

1501 - 2000

2001 - 2500

[

3.75 7.5

02 - Mapping 65+ aged residents in residential communities across Calgary

Kilometers 22.5

02 Symbolizing aggregate data

Shaganappi

Rosscarrock

Sunalta

Number of bus routes intersecting Rosscarrock, Shaganappi and Sunalta Bus routes intersecting the 3 communities

31%

Bus routes outside the communities

Rosscarrock

Sunalta

Shaganappi

Number of bus stops at a 5 minute walking distance from shopping centres(400m) < 400 m

69%

Parks and green spaces

15 out of 22 bus routes(in the map) intersect the 3 communities.

03 - Spatial relationships

Shaganappi

Bus stops within the 3 communities

Bus stops beyond 400m

Bus stops outside the 3 communities

Community boundaries

0 50 100 Number of bus stops

150

Bow river Buildings Parks and green spaces

30 out of 144 bus routes(in the map) are within 5-minute walking distance from the 2 shopping centres.

Sunalta

Number of bus stops in the 3 communities

Bus stops within 400m

> 400 m

community boundaries Bow river

Rosscarrock

Community boundaries

50 75 100 0 25 Number of bus stops

Bow river Buildings Parks and green spaces

40 out of 144 bus routes(in the map) are within the 3 communities 0 185 370

740

1,110

[ Meters 1,480

03 Catalog of spatial relationships

Ineffective

Effective

Map showing built and unbuilt spaces 0 285 570

1,140

1,710

Ineffective

Effective

Meters 2,280

04- Figure ground relationship

Maps showing the road and street network 0 195 390

780

1,170

Meters 1,560

[

04 Figure ground relationship

111 0

11 20

00 11

10 70

1050

1060 1080

1110

90 10

1130

1110

Slope Analysis: Contour lines for every 10m drop in elevation Contour lines

Community boundaries Site boundary

Green spaces Bow river

Building footprints

Author: Land Surveyor Goal: Demonstrate the undulations in the land considered for development. Audience: Architect/Developer

Buildings considered for redevelopment

View from an important location on site

Buildings considered for redevelopment Community boundaries

Green spaces

Bow river

Building footprints

05 - Three stories of a site considered for redevelopment.

Site boundary visible areas

Site boundary

Author: Architect Goal: Demonstrate the buildings that need to be considered for demolotion or redevelopment. Audience: Decision makers

View-point

Community boundaries

Author: Architect Goal: Demonstrate the best location on site in terms of the views Audience: Developer/ Public

[

0 170 340

680

1,020

Meters 1,360

05 Three stories

Bibliography • • • • • •

GIS for Environmental Design EVDP 611 (Winter 2017)

Cartographic Checklist This content on this checklist is excerpted from Krygier, J., and Wood, D. 2016. Making Maps: A visual guide to map design for GIS. 3rd edition. Guilford Press, New York, pp. 24-25.

The Whole map

GOAL AND AUDIENCE OF MAP(S) 01. Goal: Demonstrate the undulations in the land considered for development. Audience: Architect/Developer 02. Goal: Demonstrate the undulations in the land considered for development. Audience: Architect/Developer 03. Goal: Demonstrate the best location on site. Audience: Developer/ Public

Things to consider

Response (provide detail where useful)

Are you sure a map is necessary for these data?

Yes.

Do the data serve the goals of the map?

Yes.

Is the map suitable for the intended audience?

Each map is formatted appropriately for each audience.

Will the audience be confused, bored, interested, or informed?

The audience will be interested as it deals with the physical conditions and profitability on site.

Look at the map in its final medium: does it Yes It does. Colors have been work? Has the potential of a black-and-white or appropriately used to convey the colour design been reached? data effectively. Is the map, its authors, its data, and any other relevant information documented and accessible to the map reader? [NOTE: Data provided in course do not need to be documented]

Only course-provided data has been used. But commands outside of class syllabus has been experimented to get the best results and build an effective story.

Is the relationship between the data and the phenomena they are based on clear?

Yes.

Does the map symbolization reflect the character of the phenomena or the character of the data?

Yes.

Have the data been properly derived?

Yes. Data from course documents have been used although I worked using some new commands.

Is the scale of the map (and inset) adequate, given the goals of the map?

Yes. The scale gives a better understanding of each map.

Things to consider What are the characteristics of the map's projection, and is it appropriate for the data and map goals? What is distorted?

Things to consider The Map design

Response (provide detail where useful) Unless otherwise stated, the Calgary 3TM projection is used.

Response (provide detail where useful)

Does the title indicate what, when, and where?

Yes. All 3 maps relate to the same area but have different characteristics.

Is the scale of the map appropriate for the data and the map goals? Is the scale indicated if useful?

Yes.

Does any textual explanation or discussion on the map enhance its effectiveness?

Yes.

Does the legend include symbols that are not self-explanatory?

Yes.

If the orientation of the map is not obvious, is a directional indicator included?

North arrows are indicated wherever necessary.

Are inset and locator maps appropriate, if used?

No location maps have been used.

Are the data too generalized or too complex, given the map's goals?

The data is descriptive given the mapâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s respective goals.

Is the goal of the map promoted by its visual arrangement, engaging path, visual center, balance, symmetry, sight-lines, and the grid?

Yes. Each map is supported by the arrangement and other visual characteristics.

Has the map been thoroughly edited?

Yes. The map has been edited on GIS and adobe suite.

Does the map contain non data ink?

No.

Has detail been added to clarify?

Every map has appropriate text/ legends for clarifications.

Things to consider

Response (provide detail where useful)

Do variations in design reflect variations in the data?

Yes.

Is the context of the map and its data clear?

Yes.

Are there additional variables of data that would clarify the goals of the map?

No additional data is required.

Do visual differences on the map reflect data differences?

Yes.

Do important data stand out as figure, and the less important as ground, on the map?

Yes.

Are there consequences of data not included on the map?

No. The consequence of data is selfexplanatory in the map and the supporting text.

Have visual difference, detail, edges, texture, layering, shape and size, closure, proximity, simplicity, direction, familiarity, and colour been used to reflect figure-ground relationships appropriate to the map's goals?

Yes.

Are the level of generalization and the data classification appropriate, given the map's goals?

Yes.

Do map symbols work by resemblance, relationship, convention, difference, standardization, or unconvention? How do the map symbols relate to the concepts they stand for? Is the relationship meaningful?

The map symbols relate to the concepts they stand for through these characteristics.

If symbolizing data aggregated in areas, is the most appropriate method used for quantitative OR qualitative data?

Yes.

Has the chosen typeface (font) and its size, weight, and form effectively shaped the overall impression of the map as well as helping to symbolize variations in the data?

The font used is bold enough to inform about the data without distracting the reader.

Things to consider

Response (provide detail where useful)

Does the arrangement of type on the map clarify, as much as possible, the data and the goals of the map?

The type is arranged in a suitable manner to accomplish the goals of each map

Do colour choice and variation reflect data choice and variation on the map?

Yes.

Is colour necessary for the map to be successful? Does colour add anything besides decoration?

Colour, to some degree does help in showing spatial distribution/ intensity/quality of the data.

Do colour choices grab viewer's attention while being appropriate for your data?

Yes.

Does the map's design reflect the conditions under which it will be viewed?

Yes.

Are colour interactions and perceptual differences among your audience accounted for?

In the effective maps, conventional colors are used, so the audience can read and understand the map.

Have symbolic and cultural colour conventions been taken into account and used to enhance the goals of the map?

Yes. Both symbolic and cultural colour conventions have been taken into account. Eg: green for park space