2009 a.d. latornell camaps · 2015. 5. 25. · battery backup internal vs asp 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 12...
Post on 04-Oct-2020
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
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
top related