Transcript Land Evaluation Site Assessment Lesa GIS Application Redesign

LAND EVALUATION SITE
ASSESSMENT (LESA)
GIS APPLICATION
REDESIGN
Brad M. Shirey, GISP
The Pennsylvania State University
Master of GIS Program – Capstone Proposal Advisor: Dr. Doug Miller
Presentation Overview








Background
Project Objectives
Methods
Data
QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Geographic & Historic Context

Where Are We?
Background
Objectives
Methods
Data
QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Geographic & Historic Context

What is the Issue?
Background
Objectives
Methods
Data
QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
State & Regional Implications




Act 138 – Agricultural Easement Purchase Program
How Many Counties are Involved?
Statewide Facts and Figures
• Over $581,000,000 Spent
Participant Counties In Red
• Over 275,000 Acres
What Other States?
Background
Objectives
Methods
Data
QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Berks County Farmland Preservation




History of Preservation in Berks County
History of ALP Office
How Does GIS Play a Role?
Why a Change Now?
1990
1998
2008
Agricultural Conservation Easements Purchased – Farms Preserved
Background
Objectives
Methods
Data
QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Land Evaluation Site Assessment (LESA)






What is it?
Who Uses it?
Why is it Used?
When Was it Built?
Who Built it?
What Platform
Built on?
Background
Objectives
Methods
Data
QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Project Objectives

Create New LESA Application for the Berks County
Agricultural Land Preservation Office (ALP)
•
•
•




ESRI ArcGIS 9.3 Technology
Same Data and Scoring Procedures Used
Intuitive and Adaptable Interface
More Efficient Outputs for Analysis and Ranking
Input from ALP Staff
Proper Documentation and Training
QAQC
Background Objectives Methods
Data
QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Project Requirements







Resolve GIS Data Needs and Program Criteria.
Needs Assessment
Client Involvement
Tackle Software and Code Problems
of Legacy Application
ESRI ModelBuilder for Software Development
Application Documentation
Client Satisfaction
Background Objectives Methods
Data
QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Assessment Criteria




What are Program
Criteria?
Land Evaluation vs.
Site Assessment
Why is GIS Important?
How Complex?
Background Objectives Methods
Data QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Software Development – Model Builder





What is it?
Ties Together Tools, Data and Analysis
Modules
Geoprocessing in
Manageable Parts
Automate
Python Scripting
Background Objectives Methods
Data QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
LESA – Data Requirements



How Many Data Sets?
From Where?
Unique Information
Background Objectives Methods Data QAQC Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
LESA – Data Requirements









Tax Parcels and Preserved Farms
Current Applicants
Ag Security Areas
Roads and Highways
County and Municipal Boundaries
Sewer and Water Service Areas
Soils and Land Use
Cluster Areas
Historic, Scenic, and Government Lands
Background Objectives Methods Data QAQC Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Quality Assurance / Quality Control




Best Practices
Ensure ALP Staff Involvement
Validate Against Legacy Application
Avoid Errors of Omission and
•

Outputs of Project not serving the needs of the client
Errors of Commission
•
Analysis steps expands beyond needs of the project
Background Objectives Methods
Data
QAQC Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Quality Assurance / Quality Control





Module Troubleshooting
Validate Data, What are Outputs,
Validate Calculations
Test Various Steps When Placed Together
Test, Modify, Re-Test
Ample Review for All Parties (Especially Non-GIS)
Background Objectives Methods
Data
QAQC Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Timeline
October 2009 – November 2009
Review Previous Software – Outline Geoprocessing Needs
Assess Needs of ALP – Begin Prelim QAQC
December 2009 – January 2010
Bring Modules Together – Tie to Scripting
Application Documentation – Continue QAQC
February 2010 – March 2010
Finalize Data – Run Test Assessment
Conduct Ranking with New & Previous Version
Complete Documentation
Background Objectives
Methods
Data
QAQC Timeline
April 2010
Present at AAG
Conference
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Anticipated Results / Benefits

Organizational Benefits
•
•
•

External Benefits
•

Berks County Staff Efficiency
Professional Level Software Application
User Friendly, Properly Documented.
Extensible to Other Preservation Programs
Personal Benefits
•
Building Personal Capacity and Precedent for Future
Projects
Background Objectives Methods
Data QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
Challenges




Model Builder and Python Scripting Issues
Documentation of Modules
Flexible Model Interface for Revisions
Project Timeline
Background Objectives
Methods
Data
QAQC
Timeline
Results/Benefits
Challenges
References




County of Berks –
Agricultural Land Preservation Office
Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture –
Bureau of Farmland Preservation
The Pennsylvania State University –
Land Analysis Laboratory
ESRI – ArcGIS Desktop, ArcCatalog, ModelBuilder
Acknowledgements




Berks County Information Systems Department
Todd Simpson, CIO
Berks County Agricultural Land Preservation Office Tami
Hildebrand, Director
Berks County Planning Commission
Beth Burkovich, GIS Analyst
Penn State University
Dr. Doug Miller, Advisor
Questions ?