• Contents

Scenario

<aside> 📢 This exercise assumes that you have fully completed the Mapping & Evaluating Qualitative Attributes: WiFi Hotspots in Manhattan exercise.

</aside>

Following a discussion of free versus limited Wi-Fi hotspots, your team is impressed with the proportion of hotspots that are freely accessible, but wonders about their distribution across Manhattan relative to the income distribution of the borough. It seems clear that the freely accessible hotspots follow a few specific streets (as LinkNYC kiosks), are clustered within a couple specific neighborhoods, or are otherwise scattered without an apparent overall strategy (in a few parks, in libraries, and so on). From the distribution of Wi-Fi hotspot locations, it appears that your organization could make several public statements applauding certain efforts on one hand while calling for more targeted investment on the other.

You’ve been asked to create one map that can accompany these statements. Unlike the previous maps which were designed for your team’s internal use, this should be designed for a public audience. These multiple positions should be supported by a mapped comparison of the hotspot points and of income data—clearly showing both on one map.

Your map should address the following questions:

• What is the geographic distribution of different income variables across Manhattan?
• Are lower-income neighborhoods comparably served by these Wi-Fi hotspots as higher-income neighborhoods?

Assignment & Deliverable Format

Complete the exercise below, answering the questions embedded in the exercise.

Produce one 8.5” x 11” (portrait) map composition for a public, lay audience that depicts Manhattan’s public Wi-Fi hotspots relative to income levels across the borough. At a minimum, your map must

• include the necessary map elements;
• cover extents of Manhattan;
• include the Wi-Fi hotspot points; and
• depict income by census tract using a quantitative symbology scheme.

While not required, you may choose to include additional information. Some helpful options:

• An inset map that zooms into one or more specific neighborhoods,
• Tables, charts, or infographics with summary statistics about households, income or poverty, or any of the calculations you performed earlier in the exercise.
• A qualitative symbology scheme for the Wi-Fi hotspot points based on any of the prior questions

<aside> ❔ These are the first questions of this exercise, but should probably be the last ones answered. They are included upfront so you can keep them in mind throughout the exercise.

QUESTION 1: In 1-3 sentences, describe which quantitative symbology approach you have used in this map and why. If you have employed a classified symbology, include which classification system and why. If you have not used a classified approach, why not?

QUESTION 2 (Critical Reflection): Consider the argument presented by your deliverable map and the relationship between mapping practices and urban outcomes. Consider the map (the document, image) and the processes through which it was created (including the previous exercises). Briefly describe the capacity and/or limitations of your map (again, the output and the process) to argue, advocate, or inform decisions. Include specific reference to lectures and readings, if and where appropriate.

</aside>