EGEO 452 Final Project
| Background | Methods | Results | Conclusion | Maps | Portfolio |
| |
The five criteria for determining the probability of survival by building type and their order of importance are explained in the methods section. For every criteria, the buildings are given an H for high, M for medium, or L for low probability. For each High probability two points are assigned and for each M one point. Lows do not contribute to the score. Scores between 0-2 have are the worst with a Bad survival probability, 3s have a low probability, 4-5 is medium, 6 is high, 7 is very high, and scores between 8-10 have an optimal survival rating. See results of the buildings analysis in Table 1.
Table 1:Analysis of Building Type Based on Most Priority Criteria |
|||||||
Building Type |
Basic Needs |
Defense |
Lack of Zombies |
Offense |
Long Term Survival |
TOTAL |
Survival Probability |
Rural |
H |
H |
H |
H |
H |
10 |
Optimal |
School |
H |
H |
H |
M |
M |
8 |
Optimal |
House Multistory |
M |
H |
L |
H |
H |
7 |
Very High |
Apartment |
H |
H |
L |
M |
H |
7 |
Very high |
Shipyard |
M |
M |
H |
M |
M |
6 |
High |
Suburban |
H |
M |
L |
H |
M |
6 |
High |
House Singlestory |
M |
M |
L |
H |
H |
6 |
High |
Grocery store |
H |
L |
M |
M |
M |
5 |
Medium |
Industrial |
L |
L |
M |
M |
L |
5 |
Medium |
Mall |
H |
M |
M |
L |
M |
5 |
Medium |
Airport |
H |
L |
L |
M |
M |
4 |
Medium |
Commercial |
L |
L |
M |
M |
L |
4 |
Medium |
College Campus |
H |
M |
L |
L |
L |
3 |
Low |
Boathouse |
L |
M |
H |
L |
L |
3 |
Low |
Church |
L |
H |
M |
L |
L |
3 |
Low |
Police station |
L |
L |
L |
H |
L |
2 |
Very Low |
Hospital |
M |
L |
L |
L |
L |
1 |
Very Low |
Public services |
L |
L |
L |
L |
L |
0 |
Very Low |
The results of this analysis yeilded a distribution of buildings that primarily fall within good survival probability ratings. In fact 47% are high probabilities, 36% have a very high rating, and 13% are optimal. Only 4% are medium, and less than 1% are rated below those. These results are scewed in favor of the better probabilities because houses and appartments account for 32% and 38% respectively of all buildings in bellingham.
Figure 1: This is a breakdown of all the buildings in Bellingham. Houses with only one story account for 38% of buildings, apartments for 19%, houses with multiple stories have 12.5% and both rural and suburban have 11%.
Because this project is designed to be an interactive tool, the best way to show results is in the form of a web map. This web map allows for quick viewing of every building in Bellingham. Based on the analysis the buildings are color coated to show a danger scale. Red and orange buildings are not very safe, yellow are medium, and green shades are safest. When a user clicks on a specific building, a popup of the building’s classification, name (if it has one), and overall rating appears.
Figure 3: This is downtown Bellingham from the webmap. Here each building is assigned a color based on the rating criteria of Table 1. Green means its safer to be in during a zombie apocalypse, red means that it is a bad stop to be.
Bellingham is split into 25 neighborhood districts. For each neighborhood the building safety ratings were averaged to give a sense of the probability of a neighborhood safe from zombies. The mean safety rating is 6.0 and all but 2 fall within ± 1 of the average. Western Washington University has the lowest survival probability and was 2.8 below the mean. This makes sense because college campuses have poor safety ratings and the neighborhood is almost entirely college campus buildings. Barkley and Roosevelt each scored an average rating of 6.7 because these are primarily residential areas.
Figure 4: Average Neighborhood Survival Rating