Outline
and Introduction
Methodology
Errors and Problems
Data Collection
Spatial Analysis
Data Collection
Finding data that would apply to my project area
was not difficult. I ended up using Census data from 1996, covering
the GVRD. One of my earlier ideas required data that covered both
the Vancouver and Toronto tracks, and the proposed tracks in Surrey in
great detail. I could not successfully find data such as this at
a suitable scale. All available data was at a scale too small.
I had hoped to be able to look at specific areas within each course layout.
I started with the ct96 raster image as a base
for all of my maps. The tables accompanying the image were thorough,
but did not suit all of my individual needs. I produced new fields
using the Database Workshop. Here are the determining factors and
constraints that are used in my analysis:
People per square kilometer; this number is calculated for each census
tract of the GVRD. Table 1 provides the
database used for this operation. Locating the track in a sparsely
populated area is obviously more suitable, for
safety and transportation issues alone.
Table 1, Categories 3 and 5: PopDens = [V003] / [V005]
= [Population, 1996] / [Land area in square kilometres, 1996]
-
Distance from Skytrain stations (1996 data); same
as those used by Molson Indy
A distance of 5,000 m would be used. I digized the present locations
of stations on the ct96 raster image. Locating the track near transportation
hubs
is of key influence.
Table 1, Category 102: Total number of persons 65 years and over.
I felt that using the actual number (keep in mind it's a 20% sample) rather
than
as a density would be more effective. It would keep the course away
from all large clusters of elderly people. This is done simply to
be considerate to the
general population of the city. Previous studies in other cities
have proven this to be an effective means of operation.
The age of the buidlings surrounding the track is of importance in its
selection. A track located near older neighborhoods does not improve
on the land
value of its surroundings. The course in downtown Houston is an example
of this phenomena. Before its conception, it was thought that locating
it in older
neighborhoods would improve on their value. After intensive study,
the track was finally located in a newer neighborhood. A racecourse
better integrates
itself with its surroundings when development is of recent memory.
Table 15, Categories 31-34: Old Buildings = [V031] + [V032] + [V033]
+ [V034] + [V035]
= [All Buildings built before 1981]
The income of the residents of a city allegedly has influence on the location
of a racetrack. This factor came somewhat as a surprise. I
believe that factor
has little to do with track policy, but more with CART's image. Can
you imagine a global television audience viewing a race through the slums
of a
major city? While not exactly the best moral stance, I do understand
the motive.
Table 14, Categories 5-9: Low Income = [V005] + [V006] + [V007] +
[V008] + [V009]
= [Population aged 15 and older with an annual income less than $10,000]