Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Regional Cooperation Through Data Sharing

No description

on 6 April 2017

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Regional Cooperation Through Data Sharing

Regional Cooperation Through Data-Sharing
Charlotte Regional On-line GIS:
Dana Stoogenke, AICP; Rocky River RPO
Monroe Connector/Bypass/Expressway: A 20+ mile bypass to US 74 in Union County
Located in fastest growing county in NC at the time
grew by nearly 200% from 1980-2010
growing by four percent a year in late 1990s through mid 2000s.
Proposed as a project in the 1980s

First placed in long range plan in the 1990s

Initial environmental assessment conducted between 1996-2003

Proposed as a toll road in 2007

And then it was sued over the build versus no-build estimates used to measure impacts

What was the Build Versus No Build?
Build versus No Build was an assessment of the long-range impact of having the road exist

Direct Impact: What is caused by constructing the road

Indirect Impact: What happens to local development patterns due to the existence of the road
Different development pattern for houses and people, as well as commercial development and employment
Different total of houses and people, as well as commercial and employment


Multiple transportation planning organizations
Lack of awareness across study area boundaries
Increasing public expectations of data availability
Convening form was via C.R.A.F.T.
Each MPO and RPO has their own on-line site
Each uses ESRI ArcGIS On-Line program
Common data between sites
Ability for user to “make their own maps.”
Bi-monthly meetings for staff-level coordination and lessons learned

Charlotte Region
Traffic counts (current and historic)
Crash data
Socio-economic projections
Census data
Planning boundaries
SPOT Candidate Projects

Public input
Meeting presentation
General data querying
MPO members
General public
Shape file downloading/sharing

Encourages collaboration
Great tool for the public to view BIG DATA
Easy to share data among organizations

When Projections and Data Sharing Go Wrong
MUMPO and Union County Position on Growth in the EIS
Yes, there will be growth

Looking 25 years into the future, growth will happen with or without the Bypass, so we will use the same totals and the same distribution

But there were some groups that claimed “more” growth would occur once the Bypass was built

Things then got confusing- who spoke for the County regarding actual projections and impacts?

Ultimate Resolution on Build Versus No-Build
Revised EIS completed in 2013
There will be “some” new growth along corridor- approximately 1,800 homes over 25 years
National literature is that transportation projects reallocate growth, not create new growth
BUT, for this project the analysis conservatively estimated that this was in fact new growth
Final result? There will be a little more impact, but not enough to change the analysis and ultimate decision to build the project.
And the project was delayed by several years.

Bjorn Hansen, AICP CTP
Union County Planning Division
A treasure-trove of data & new partnerships for data-sharing

Matt Noonkester, AICP | City Explained, Inc.
Building CRTPO's CTP Database
Curtis Bridges, AICP
Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization
Technical Coordinating

34 Seats on TCC

Three Counties

20+ Cities & Towns

Metropolitan Transit

Two NCDOT Divisions

Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP)
Required by State (NCDOT)
Multi-modal: Roadway, Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Transit
Classification of facility
Status: Existing, Needs Improvement, Recommended
Effectively an inventory of the transportation network

Sharing Data
50+ Fields/Data points/Features for each of 4 transportation modes
Varying local standards for "existing" and "needs improvement"
CTP, MTP, SPOT, and TIP identifiers
Some potential design elements
Funding sources and evaluation scores
How Did We Collaborate?
Shapefile submissions

Shared on-line editing

In-person work sessions


Submitted excel tables

By-hand markups



Transition from Thoroughfare to detailed CTP
Track 'projects' from conception to construction
Coordinate design/planning at jurisdictional boundaries
Regionally consistent language & standards

Strengthened relationships with regional GIS and data staff

Common understanding of planning process (CTP & beyond)

Transferrable to other MPOs, Counties, or even across local Departments (for example: CDOT, Mecklenburg Co Greenways)

Continuing CTP Work Group – working to develop guidelines for maintaining and implementing much of the information contained in database


Many communities do not have GIS/data proficiency, staff, or availability (time)

Concerns related to sharing/disclosure of planning-level data which has not been endorsed or adopted

Overlapping and duplication of geographical data at boundaries

Does sharing require

Proactively Engage Partners

Manage Expectations

Level the Playing Field

Ongoing Partnerships
Cooperation Themes
Data, mapping, software, etc. can be intimidating
Be patient and be willing to invest time

Be clear regarding what data/tools will and
will not
Supervisors and decision-makers should empower staff to make data decisions

Use tools and processes which are technically accessible to all

Be prepared for ongoing maintenance as data changes & expands
CommunityViz Software
Strengthen the Bonds
Full transcript