|
<br />- -p---~ --p--~~- ..~-- ------- - - - - -
<br />
<br />Minneapolis
<br />Unlike the Chicago and Vancouver,
<br />Minneapolis does not use a single map inter-
<br />face, but instead a grid map where users
<br />select a grid square to begin their search.
<br />While functional, this approach requires t.he
<br />user to either know which grid contains the
<br />property or use a trial-and-error approach to
<br />finding it (particularly when the property is
<br />located. near the edges of a grid square). The
<br />web~ite contains two separate map layers for
<br />base and overlay zones, and it is not easy to
<br />view. both at the same time. Minneapolis's
<br />zoning code is maintained by MuniCode, and
<br />links to that site are not particularly friendly-
<br />m~nylinks simply take yo'u to the beginning
<br />of the code and require the user to restart the
<br />search within the code document. Similarly,
<br />links from maps to zoning district descrip-
<br />tions take the reader to the beginning of a list
<br />of disti"icts with short titles-clicking on those
<br />titles takes you to the MuniCode site rather
<br />than a description of the district. A link from
<br />the maps to the development review proce-
<br />dures also leads to the. MuniCode site. As for
<br />many cities, links between planning and zon-
<br />ing inform.ation are weak.
<br />
<br />Portland, Oregon
<br />Portland has a very detailed GIS system
<br />accessible through a map interface that pro-
<br />vides an unusually wide range of information.
<br />An address search takes the user to an asses-
<br />sor's parcel map showing the building foot-
<br />pri.nt and the following property data:
<br />assessor's data .
<br />zoning penmits and cases
<br />schools within one mile
<br />parks within one mile
<br />, businesses within one mile (not particularly
<br />- . help.ful since they show up as unidentified
<br />dots and appear to include home businesses)
<br />capital improvement projects within one-
<br />half mile (dots with codes but no description)
<br />stormwater incentive areas' ,
<br />floodplains within so feet
<br />slopes over 20 percent
<br />potential landslide hazards
<br />potential wildfire hazard
<br />earthquake hazards
<br />noise contour areas
<br />crime statistics
<br />water and sewer lines
<br />transit lines
<br />zoning
<br />
<br />.While many of the maps are thorough,
<br />they are sometimes not scalable-:-700ming in
<br />and 'out is not easy without a cursor drag box
<br />feature. In addition, some of the information
<br />is displayed on different base maps, so that
<br />turning on a new layer takes you to a different
<br />map, sometimes at a different scale. Like
<br />many other cities, Irnks between GIS/zoning
<br />information and planning information are not
<br />particularly strong.
<br />
<br />Sa'n Diego
<br />Like Anchorage, San Diego uses multiple
<br />maps to convey planning and zoning informa-
<br />tion. General zoning maps are shown as PDF
<br />grid maps (i.e., the user selects a grid square
<br />to begin using the system and must dick
<br />back out to the main map to select a second
<br />. grid). Unlike some PDF maps, these are
<br />zoomabie without much loss of resolution,
<br />butthere is nocursor drag box feature. The
<br />zoning map legend appearsto cover both
<br />base and overlay districts-which means a
<br />total of 82 legends with subtle color differ-
<br />ences that are difficult to distinguish on the
<br />map. Searching by address can confirm wl:Jat
<br />;zone the property is in but requires that the
<br />user actually know the property address in
<br />question. A link can take the user to the com-
<br />mu~ity planning area containing the property
<br />Onduding the contact person) but does not
<br />map any plan information. A "base zone
<br />guide" link takes users to the code text, and
<br />the searchable PDF format makes navigation
<br />through the code fairly easy. General Plan
<br />maps are helpful but not complete. The three
<br />maps presented appear to have been devel-
<br />oped as part of a habitat conservation plan-
<br />ning process, and they distinguish between
<br />vegetation/urban land, city owned/non-
<br />owned lands;and active fault areas. Other
<br />plan maps are in citywide PDF formats that
<br />lose resolution as yotl zoom in and cannot
<br />'. easily be used to find designations for spe-
<br />cific parcels. In spite of some weaknesses,
<br />however, San Diego is one of the few sur-
<br />veyed cities that has tried to link planning
<br />and zoning information.
<br />
<br />Seattle
<br />liRe Minneapolis, Seattle uses a grid map to
<br />present zoning information, butthe "grain" is
<br />much firier than many other cities. The grid
<br />cells are smaller and more detailed, but the'
<br />user needs to be able to find the proper grid
<br />square; which may take some trial and error.
<br />
<br />Zoning maps are zoomable without losing res-
<br />olution and present information on parcel
<br />boundaries, boundary adjustments, zoning
<br />boundaries, and sometimes the names of key
<br />buildings and developments. Unfortunately,
<br />the map legend is not repeated on each grid
<br />square map-you need to click back out to
<br />the main mqp to see it. Like Portland, a very
<br />wide range of information is presented,
<br />including assessor numbers, lot dimensions,
<br />meander lines, 2,ooo-foot rail station buffers,
<br />urban villages and centers, historic larid-
<br />marks, critical areas requiring SEPA review,
<br />critical areas not requiring SEPA review,
<br />closed ornonpublic streets, mineral or aerial
<br />righ~s, known landslide locations, and streets
<br />with special requirements. Amongthe cities
<br />surveyed, this is a standout GIS/mappingsys-
<br />tem with the GIS informa~ion linked to
<br />Microsoft Virtual Earth data. There are sub-
<br />menus that show permitting and approval
<br />data as flags on a zoom able map. Aerial
<br />satellite images can be shown on the same
<br />base map as parcel and GIS data while
<br />remaining mostly readable. Unfortunately, the
<br />zoning layer sometimes requires panning off
<br />the property in question to find the designa-
<br />tion for the area, and does not link to a
<br />description of that zoning designation. The
<br />user-friendly layer menu minimizes the need
<br />to Zoom in and out or between different
<br />maps-once you find the property in question
<br />you can toggle layers on and off without hav-
<br />ing to move around to understand the data.
<br />Only assessor's data is available by address
<br />query, however.
<br />
<br />Vancouver, British Columbia
<br />. .
<br />like Chicago and Anchorage, Vancouver
<br />bases its presentation of data in a single
<br />map (not a grid map) where you use a cursor
<br />drag box to zoom in on the desired search
<br />area. In fact the map appears to be a very
<br />high-resolution scan of a wall map available
<br />for sale to the public. The quality of the
<br />Vancouver map is very high, and can be
<br />zoomed from the base 14 percent image to
<br />almost a parcel-level image with no loss of
<br />resolution. A single legend on the main map
<br />shows both zorie designations and descrip-
<br />tions. Unfortunately, this amazing map is not
<br />linked to a query function-either you find
<br />the information you are looking for or you
<br />don't. Tosupplementthis map, the city's GIS
<br />system is searchable by address and (like
<br />Portland and Seattle) contains many layers
<br />
<br />ZONING PRACTICE 10.08
<br />AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIA1l0N I pages
<br />
<br />97
<br />
|