www.CAMaps.ca

2009 A.D. LatornellConservation Symposium

November 20, 2009

Tracey Boitson, Ausable Bayfield Conservation Authority

CAMapsFrom Pilot Project to Full Service Mapping

Application

Overview• Background – Conservation

Authorities and the project• Quick comparisons of original pilot

(THEN) project and existing services (NOW)

• Here and now – more detail • Importance of the pilot project• Re-cap and summary • Questions at the end of

presentations

Conservation Authorities• Are local, watershed based management agencies

that deliver services and programs that protect and manage water and other natural resources in partnership with landowners, governments, and other organizations.

• 36 in Ontario• Conservation Ontario represents CA’s at a

Provincial and Federal level

Our services and programs include:

Conservation education, flood plain management, property management, Species at Risk and Recovery Strategies, erosion control projects, research and monitoring, municipal planning, stewardship, recreation areas, and source water protection.

CA’s are responsible for enforcing regulations related to The Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses (under Ontario Regulation 97/04) – Generic regulations.

In 2004 Conservation Authorities were joined up to create Source Water Protection Regions and are responsible under the Clean Water Act to create Protection Plans

The Project (Pilot)

Conservation Authorities Common Internet Mapping PortalWWW.CAMAPS.CA

-Initiated in 2005 – work really started in 2006-Initial funding from the Ministry of Natural Resources (continued funding as well)-Consultants (3) hired to help 6 participating CA’s and CO.

A common internet mapping application that provides a Geographical Information System (GIS) Web Mapping Site.Common: look and feel website, data layers & structure, data symbology, mapping tools.Shared services to reduce costs.Business plan development.

Quick comparisons2006 , 2007,2008 (THEN)6 CA’s Conservation Ontario (CO) and 3 consultants participating.

CA lands and Regulation Limits displayed in an Internet Mapping Application.

2009 (NOW)10 CA’s, CO, and one Source Protection Group participating Internet Mapping Applications plus Web Mapping Services (WMS) running.

Data includes lands, regulation limits, and data related to Source Water Protection planning. Secure password protected sites available to our partners (MOE for Source Protection Planning)

Quick comparisonsTHENConsultant was the project manager and produced a business plan

Consultants created sites and housed all the hardware, software and data.

Individual participants update individual sites. Consultant update data quarterly for CA’s.

NOWConservation Ontario rep is the project manager and updates business plan

Conservation Authority staff set up new sites

All hardware, software and data housed at the GanarskaConservation Authority office.

Master site created with child sites that inherit characteristics of master

Individual participants update individual data.

Quick comparisons - TechnologyTHENArcIMSArcSDEGeoPortal

1 box serving up sites

NOWArcGIS Server MS SQL Server and ArcSDELatitude Geographics GeoCortex Essentials

Reverse Proxy server setupWebserverApplication ServerDatabase ServerDevelopment Server

Here and now – more detail

.

Chris Durand SCRCATracey Boitson ABCAChris Gerstenkorn TRCAJeff Moxley GRCATravis York CRCAAlex Broadbent MVCKim Blair ORCAWill Murphy LTRCAShan Mugalingam TCCNancy Aspden KRCAChris Wilkinson COJohn Campbell UTRCAPeng Du LSRCA

www.CAmaps.caKnowledgableProject Team (NOW)

Proxy Server

Database Server (Production)

Application Server(Production)

Web ServerDevelopment Box

Monitor KeyboardBattery Backup

Internal vs ASP

02468

101214

1 2 3 4 5

Time

Cos

t

Internal CostExternal Cost

Shared Hardware

Calculate Map Services

15 – 20 services ~200Mb Memory / WebServiceServer: Application Type: Dell Quad Core Xeon X3220, 2.4Ghz, 4x1GbComponents: ArcSOC, ArcSOM, ArcSDE ,published ArcGIS Server services

Maximize

Use Extend SiteFunctionality

Enable Roles

ADF Functionality

NOW

Web Mapping Service

Data - data models for all Generic Regs layers and property information- The project now has set up the development environment which has a database that is used strictly for edits. - Users remote desktop into the development server.Each participant only has access to their data to edit via a username and password. - Once a CA is finished edits, QA/QC, synchronize with the main database.

Data - continued

- data models also for all Source Water Protection information- for this data a check-out check-in replication process has been set up for updating the information- there are a number of delivery methods available to get the information to the MOE.

Remote Check In - Check Out

Consider Check In / Out

Importance of the Pilot Project

Comply with Legislation

Improve decisionmaking

Save $Improve service to public and partners Unique cross boundary business

Why go there?

Cost Avoidance

- Simplify - Share - Do it once- Support Client Self-Service - Share purchasing

$50k Min / yr. for locally hosted solution

CAMaps charges $2000 / yr!

Business Plan Cost Model

– An annual subscription fee for software maintenance, support staff, and small amount hardware replacement in the future

– A one time fee setup fee (Now) Original 6CA’s only payed with in-kind contribution

– Local data preparation

– Support for up to 13 Organizations– Requires ArcEditor License locally– Requires adoption of data models and upload

and maintenance of existing data

The Best Business Value…1. Seeding innovation (2005)2. Piloting its use3. Establishing early adopters

4. Learning from the experience and be prepared to adjusting the service(s) as required

5. Rolling the shared service(s) out for wide spread replication and adoption (2008)

Demonstrate ROI

– Over the counter mapping avoided saves $100 (assuming 2 -3 hours staff time per request)

x

– Avoiding 3 to 4 per week (150 to 200 per year) over the counter requests

= Service Paid For

To individually develop a similar solution would cost over $150,000 over three years per independent group.

From Pilot to Full Service SuccessSummary

Improving accessibility to data- Conservation Areas, Boundaries- Users don’t have to be GIS trained

Data is integratable across municipalities- Improved decision making- Report collectively- Better Information

Endorsement and Participation- By members and clients - 50,000 + hits / year

From Pilot to Full Service SuccessSummary

Understanding business- Managing geographic-based information is

fundamental core business cost to support all CA activites

Saving $– Less data requests– Improved efficiency with clients– Demonstrated ROI

Complying with legislation– Flood Lines, Clean Water Act

www.CAMaps.ca

URISA (Urban and Regional Information Systems Association)

Best Web GIS Award – Silver Medal