neighborhood tree canopy
Post on 14-Jan-2016
60 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Neighborhood Tree CanopyNeighborhood Tree CanopyNeighborhood Tree CanopyNeighborhood Tree Canopy
The purpose of this poster is to examine the neighborhoods of College Station, TX to determine which contains the highest percentage of tree canopy: an indicator of biodiversity and human well-being.
•Digital Orthographic Quarter Quadrangle photographs were obtained from the TNRIS website for the area within College Station’s Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ). •The photographs were mosaicked using ERDAS Imagine software, and a supervised classification was performed to isolate the tree canopy in the photograph•Zonal attributes of the canopy image (canopy=1, all other features=3) were applied to the subdivision boundaries to obtain a percentage of canopy cover for each subdivision.
LAND 640 Final ProjectLAND 640 Final ProjectLAND 640 Final ProjectLAND 640 Final Project AprilApril 29, 2008, Mike Droske29, 2008, Mike DroskeAprilApril 29, 2008, Mike Droske29, 2008, Mike Droske
Introduction
Methods
Literature
Results
Relevance Finding Source
Ecology Tree canopy density is an indicator of biodiversity.
Noss, 1990; Noss & Harris, 1986
Ecology and Well-Being
Tree canopy provides habitat, reduces energy consumption, improves air and water quality, and reduces stormwater runoff.
Plotnik, 2000
Well-being
Views of vegetation provide benefits in psychological and physical health.
Ulrich, 1984
Smallest subdivision:
Plumtree Condos- 0.19 acres.
% Canopy: 40.9%
Largest subdivision:
Franklin Estates- 1480.46 acres.
% Canopy: 71.9%
Tree Canopy and Subdivision Area
TC = 0.0079a + 53.014
R2 = 0.0041
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00 1000.00 1200.00 1400.00 1600.00
Subdivision Area (In Acres)
Pe
rce
nt
Tre
e C
an
op
y
Subdivision Name Area (in Acres) % Canopy
CREEKSIDE TERRACE 2.56 100
CARTER LAKE MCGEE 2.58 99.7
SPRINGBROOK-COMMON AREA 18.55 96.9
LAKE PLACID EAST 4.96 96.2
BAKER 1.66 94.3
Subdivision Name Area (in Acres) % Canopy
BRANDYWINE 10.52 20.2
404 UNIVERSITY CENTER 2.49 24.6
CSISD WILLOW BRANCH & OAKWOOD SCHOOL SITES 31.78 28.9
CORNERSTONE COMMERCIAL 8.56 29.4
STONE FOREST 35.16 29.9
Top 5 Subdivisions in Percent Canopy
Bottom 5 Subdivisions in Percent Canopy
All subdivisions within the study area contained at least 20% canopy, and one contained 100%. There does not appear to be a strong correlation between percent canopy and subdivision area.References:Noss, R.F. “Indicators for Monitoring Biodiversity: A Hierarchical approach.” Conservation Biology. Vol. 4 #4. December 1990. p. 355-364.Noss, Reed F.; Harris, Larry D. “Nodes, networks, and MUMs: Preserving diversity at all scales.” Environmental Management. Vol. 10, No 3. May,1986.Plotnik, Arthur, "The Urban Tree Book: An Uncommon Field Guide For City and Town", Three Rivers Press, NY, 2000, 7-8.Ulrich, Roger S. “View Through a Window May Influence Recovery from Surgery.” Science, Vol. 224. April 27, 1984. p. 420-421.
Conclusion
Neighborhood Tree CanopyNeighborhood Tree CanopyNeighborhood Tree CanopyNeighborhood Tree CanopyLAND 640 Final ProjectLAND 640 Final ProjectLAND 640 Final ProjectLAND 640 Final Project AprilApril 29, 2008, Mike Droske29, 2008, Mike DroskeAprilApril 29, 2008, Mike Droske29, 2008, Mike Droske
Tree Canopy and Residential Tenure
y = 0.0002x + 53.78
R2 = 6E-09
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Residential Tenure (in Years)
Pe
rce
nt
Tre
e C
an
op
y
Correlation With Other Factors
As an exploration of the relationship between tree canopy coverage and well-being, I plotted residential tenure against percent tree canopy. However, there was no apparent relationship between the two factors.
top related