Grantee Research Project Results
Final Report: Mapping Regional Development for Smart Growth Planning to Minimize Degradation of Water Quality and Enhance Green Infrastructure
EPA Grant Number: R833345Title: Mapping Regional Development for Smart Growth Planning to Minimize Degradation of Water Quality and Enhance Green Infrastructure
Investigators: Katnik, Donald , Hertz, Elizabeth , Walker, Steve
Institution: Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife
EPA Project Officer: Packard, Benjamin H
Project Period: July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2011
Project Amount: $249,919
RFA: Collaborative Science And Technology Network For Sustainability (2006) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Pollution Prevention/Sustainable Development , Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Objective:
“Smart-growth” planning guides future landscape development to minimize impacts to natural resources. Since 2000, Maine’s “Beginning with Habitat” program has been facilitating smart-growth planning by providing maps and information about where natural resources occur on the landscape. Planners use this information for zoning and local ordinances that govern growth. Missing from this process, however, was good information about where development already exists and new development is occurring. The goal of this project was to map changes in development (new buildings and roads) to assist smart-growth planning and to assess the effectiveness of smart-growth planning strategies.
Summary/Accomplishments (Outputs/Outcomes):
This project developed 1-meter resolution maps of development (commercial and residential buildings and paved roads) for two time periods—2004 and 2007—for all organized townships in Maine. The data allow the calculation of development areas for both time periods and development changes in between. Overlaying these development data with other landscape boundaries, such as zoning districts, provides an objective and comprehensive method to compare landscape change differences. Planners also can use the data to examine “what if?” scenarios to evaluate the potential effectiveness of proposed ordinances and zoning laws.
We used two methods to capture (i.e., digitize) development features (paved roads and commercial/residential buildings) from high-resolution aerial imagery: 1) semi-automated extraction using commercial software (ESRI’s ArcGIS© and Overwatch Geospatial’s Feature Analyst©) followed by quality control (QC)/cleanup and 2) manual capture. Both methods produced data of sufficient quality for the project but manual capture was simpler to implement and required no more time. Error rates (both “missed” development features and undeveloped features mistakenly classified as development) were below the desired level of 10%; classifying unpaved roads as development accounted for much of the error and it is possible that some of these may not be considered errors because unpaved roads often are the precursor of future development. The data are publicly available through the Maine Office of GIS.
The process we used was simple to implement. Good aerial imagery is becoming increasingly available throughout the United States, providing a ready source of development data. The GIS techniques required to capture development features from this imagery are not difficult to master; indeed, it is ideal work for temporary interns with a little computer knowledge such as a typical college undergraduate. Creating the first time period of development data requires the most investment and best imagery. Adding additional time periods is much easier because there will be much less “new” development compared to the “old” (development that already exists in Time Period 1). We are building on this project by mapping development for two additional time periods, 2009 and 2011. This relatively simple process (digitizing buildings and roads) from an increasingly abundant source of data (aerial and satellite imagery) can provide an extremely powerful tool for enabling better smart growth planning, which will lead to better protection of environmental resources.
Conclusions:
Manual capture of features was an effective and practical way to generate data sets of development. Key limitations were access to high resolution aerial imagery, preferably during leaf-off season; access to GIS software and a few custom tools to improve efficiency, and access to GIS technicians. High resolution aerial imagery is becoming increasingly available nationwide and should not be a limitation for most entities. We used imagery available for free from the U.S. Department of Agriculture for the 2007 data set. Many organizations have access to GIS software. The custom tools we developed were relatively simple to create and not necessary for the mapping although they did increase efficiency. GIS technicians are relatively easy to find and inexpensive to employ. We made extensive use of a university cooperative program that sought to obtain on-the-job experience for undergraduates. We believe the data generated by this project will be extremely useful to town planners and other state agencies.
Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 3 publications for this projectSupplemental Keywords:
Smart-growth, planning, development, mapping, buildings, roads, GIS, conservation, natural resources, RFA, Scientific Discipline, Sustainable Industry/Business, POLLUTION PREVENTION, Sustainable Environment, Energy, Technology for Sustainable Environment, Ecology and Ecosystems, Social Science, green design, sustainable water use, ecological design, environmental sustainability, alternative infrastructure design, community based, sustainable urban environment, energy efficiency, environmental educationRelevant Websites:
http://www.beginningwithhabitat.org Exit
http://www.maine.gov/megis/catalog
Progress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.