geographic information systems report - ardc's regional

Mesabi Iron Range

Geographic Information Systems Report

August 2005

Mesabi Iron Range Geographic Information Systems Report Prepared by: Arrowhead Regional Development Commission

Assisted and funded by: Iron Range Resources

With contributions from: St. Louis County Planning Department “Mapping a Course: Improved Land Records Management”, Jan. 2005 St. Louis County Public Works Department Itasca County GIS City of Grand Rapids Engineering Department City of Hibbing Engineering Department Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Lands and Minerals Division Duluth Superior Metropolitan Interstate Council

Mesabi Iron Range GIS Report

Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction ........................................................................1

Section 2: GIS for Iron Range Communities...........................................3

Section 3: Iron Range GIS Community Assessments...............................9

Section 4: Potential for GIS Collaboration on the Iron Range................. 13

Section 5: Case Studies...................................................................... 22

Section 6: Summary and Next Steps ................................................... 30

Appendix A: Community Assessment Attributes.................................... 32

Appendix B: Project Partners .............................................................. 34


Section 1: Introduction

1


Regional planning efforts like the Laurentian vision partnership and sub-regional efforts like the Central Iron Range Initiative are showing excellent possibilities for what can be achieved when communities, government agencies, and mining companies work together to plan and implement a vision for the future. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) offer a wide-ranging suite of tools that could be utilized by communities and partnering organizations, both for the planning of individual community needs and also for cooperative efforts where several communities and entities combine resources to further their goals, address issues, and facilitate new projects. Recognizing an absence of GIS technology and resources in most of the communities of the Arrowhead region, particularly the smaller Iron Range cities; the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission (ARDC) and Iron Range Resources have begun a process that could ultimately lead to a collaborative GIS effort in the region. Building off the recent successes and future direction of the Laurentian Vision Partnership, the two agencies envision many opportunities for Iron Range communities to develop and utilize Geographic Information Systems for purposes such as community and economic development planning, future land use planning, engineering and public utilities mapping and inventories, parcel and land records management, and more. An implemented GIS that would be available to communities on the Iron Range would provide more efficient methods of viewing and decision support with the data that is important to local officials, while also providing a means for improved interaction with the general public. While it will be important for each community to improve its own data such as infrastructure, zoning, and land use for planning projects and day-to-day mapping or analysis activities; the potential long-term future benefits for the entire Iron Range are very encouraging. By working collaboratively through agencies such as the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission and Iron Range Resources, as well as key data producers including the Department of Natural Resources, St. Louis and Itasca counties, and educational/research institutions, the long-term visions of the Laurentian vision partnership will start to take shape over time as each community on the Iron Range provides input through a common base of geographic information. As a first step towards regional collaboration, ARDC and Iron Range Resources funded an Iron Range Community Assessment. GIS staff from ARDC conducted interviews with city officials across the Iron Range, as well as with consulting engineers, county GIS contacts, DNR mining engineers, and others to determine the status of current and planned future GIS usage


2


throughout the Mesabi Iron Range. The results of the Iron Range Community Assessment can be found in Section 3 of this document. This document is intended to provide an educational background for Iron Range community officials and staff, to learn about GIS and some of its potential uses in a municipal or regional government context. That background information, along with data collected from the Iron Range Community Assessment, provides a framework for discussing a potential future collaborative effort for GIS coordination on the Iron Range, which is outlined in Section 4.

Location Map: Mesabi Range



Section 2: GIS for Iron Range Communities

3


What is GIS? Geographic Information Systems (GIS) advance the potential for innovative problem solving and planning for the future, especially for local governments. GIS is a commonly misunderstood tool, and unfortunately that means that a number of potential uses of the technology go unrecognized when it is implemented by a community or other entity. A common definition of Geographic Information Systems from the textbooks: “GIS is an organized collection of computer hardware, software, geographic data, and personnel designed to efficiently capture, store, update, manipulate, analyze, and display all forms of geographically referenced information.” This definition is often simplified into “a computer system capable of making maps”, however this type of simplification does not begin to realize the full potential of a Geographic Information System. GIS is not simply a computer system capable of making maps. Computerized cartography has been around for many years, as has been Computer Aided Drafting (CAD) software which is commonly used for engineering applications in government. Both computerized cartographic programs and CAD programs offer the ability to visualize real-world geographic features as lines, points, polygons, and other symbol types as drawn on a computer. GIS, on the other hand, takes the visualization side of geographic data and links it to sophisticated databases of information. Data that is stored in a tabular

database format can be physically linked or joined to features that are drawn in geographic space. This linkage between tabular and graphic data is sometimes referred to as “spatially enabled data” or “geocoding”. When geographic data has been spatially enabled or geocoded, it becomes possible to query information about features, not only by their attributes (tabular data) but also by their geographic position on the earth’s surface. Since every feature that is mapped in a GIS is linked to a corresponding


4


record in a tabular database, queries can be written in the software to determine which features in any given dataset meet certain criteria; not only by analyzing their individual characteristics but also by considering their position relative to other mapped features. Data that is spatially enabled can be analyzed along with data that is not inherently geographic in nature. Outside databases of information can often be linked or joined to the attribute tables of spatial data to provide enhanced mapping capabilities based on values common to the spatial features and associated tables. One of the features of GIS that makes it such a powerful tool is the ability to analyze layers of information, whether individually or compared to other layers that share a similar geography. Unlike a paper map that exists in a 2-dimensional space, and can become cluttered and unreadable when too much information is introduced; GIS provides the ability to interactively turn layers on and off, and analyze the features of these independent layers based on their location and attributes. GIS provides a powerful tool for decision support, for government staff, policy officials, and the public. Data of many different themes can be collected and presented in a manner that effectively communicates locations, trends, and values to diverse audience types. In addition to integrating data of many different types and formats, GIS also provides a means of quickly and efficiently performing searches and queries, as well as a platform on which to maintain and edit data in an enterprise environment. Changes to data can be reflected in projects and output in maps in real-time, which means that the people using the data have access to the best information possible, without delays common to other mapping and analysis platforms. GIS in Local Government Many local governments are using GIS to help facilitate public policies and initiatives. The types of uses vary, often depending upon which government departments are using the GIS. Several usage areas that have become commonplace in many local or municipal governments across the country include Finance and Administration, Code Enforcement, Community


5


Development, Public Works, Law Enforcement and Public Safety, Sewer and Water, and many others. The following list outlines some of the potential users and data types that could be managed efficiently using a GIS in local government:

• Assessor: Management of Land Records. Analysis of parcel data for tax valuation, identifying ownership, assessments. Management of Land Records.

• Community / Economic Development: Common uses include zoning

and land use, as well as permitting and notification. Other data such as demographics, infrastructure, topography, and wetlands, as well as unique data such as future mining activities, could be utilized for the purposes of determining future growth areas and site selection.

• Public Works /

Engineering: Maintaining information through inventories of roads, utilities, signage, and other equipment; planning for road, utility and infrastructure improvements, capital improvements planning. Monitoring conditions of utility pipes, flow, financing, and service calls.

• Law Enforcement / Fire / Public Safety: Crime analysis, integrating

police and emergency response data, hazard planning, network/routing analysis, address location, dispatch support, search and rescue, community notification, and Homeland Security initiatives.

• Other: Facility Management, basemaps, elections/voting maps and

redistricting, wastewater planning, natural resources management, public transit, and many others.


6


Benefits of a GIS While it is apparent that GIS has many applications in government, how does it all tie together to make government operate more efficiently? How does GIS have an advantage over other types of mapping and information retrieval systems? The answers to these questions depend on how the system is implemented and who is using the system within the context of local government. If a GIS is limited to only a single department or a few select users, such as technical or computer staff, then there will tend to be less integration and introduced efficiencies throughout the local government entity. However, if GIS is expanded to be available to multiple departments and programs, and the user base includes employees from all these departments, it is typical to see widespread integration of GIS in the day-to-day activities of local government; and in fact, a change in the way that government conducts its business. Better access to data typically yields better decision making in government. Data management throughout the government structure will improve if proper consideration is given to GIS integration at all levels. Because data in a GIS is often capable of being linked to other data sources, data sharing between departments and even other units of government becomes more widely accepted. Standardized, shared databases contribute to an overall ability of government operations to capitalize on prior investments, and the work of other departments; as a result, information can be distributed enterprise-wide in a better-managed and more user-friendly format. Future data investments can be recognized across department lines, as other departments make use of data that is input into the system. Another aspect to the benefits of data sharing that should be mentioned, is sharing of information between government entities, as well as sharing of information with the general public and private sectors. In the past, there have been many planning opportunities where cities, counties, regional governments, and other agencies could have worked together to collaboratively look at an issue; however, the necessary protocols for data sharing were not in place. Even if data sharing was an accepted practice, it was fairly common to find that databases for different government organizations varied too greatly to readily integrate and utilize each others’ data.


7


Who Else Benefits? There are currently many users of GIS systems and producers of spatial data outside of municipal governments around the Laurentian vision partnership area. Examples include St. Louis and Itasca counties, Federal and State government agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, non-profits, regional agencies such as ARDC and Iron Range Resources, and educational institutions such as Itasca Community College. While each of these organizations may have different types of applications and uses for their data, it is typically shareable and can be utilized outside of the entity that maintains it. There are numerous examples of government entities working together on projects, and many of these efforts have been largely facilitated by the availability of GIS data and systems between the organizations. The general public is another potential beneficiary of an implemented GIS system at the local government level. Public data is often very fragmented between various departments and agencies; therefore the ability of government to provide efficient data services to the public has been lacking. The availability of GIS and the inherent data integration, along with internet mapping technology and customizable software allows government to deliver to its residents in ways not possible just a few short years ago. A classic example of improved data dissemination is the “information kiosk” or “web portal” that can be made available in government offices, or even online from the residents’ home. Most of the information that has traditionally been widely distributed in a government organization can now be gathered from a single “one-stop-shop” location. This provides residents, realtors, and business owners a means of obtaining the information they require, often including detailed maps, without tying up valuable staff time which can ultimately lead to significant savings for the government and its taxpayers.


8



Section 3: Iron Range GIS Community Assessments

9


Purpose ARDC and Iron Range Resources began an Iron Range GIS Community Assessment process in April, 2005. Staff from the two agencies felt that in order to develop a strategy for future collaborative GIS efforts, it would be necessary to first determine the level of GIS utilization in Iron Range communities; and also to gain a sense of the extent to which communities would be interested in the potential benefits of a collaborative GIS approach in the region. Having worked with communities in the region for many years, both agencies staff were fairly certain that most communities probably did not actively use GIS, if at all. However, it was known that at least two of the larger cities – Grand Rapids and Hibbing – were utilizing such systems, and also that many of the smaller cities were receiving mapping services through consulting engineering firms, which may have been in the process of converting older data into GIS-enabled formats. Assessment Process For the purposes of this study and follow-up activities, a study area has been chosen that is essentially limited to cities and other units of government located on the Mesabi Iron Range. There are 23 such cities, as well as 13 organized townships that meet that geographic criteria. GIS staff from the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission conducted the interviews with city staff. Typically the staff included City Clerk/Administrator positions or City Engineers. In addition to these staff, others affected entities were interviewed, such as the MN Dept. of Natural Resources Lands & Minerals Division in Hibbing, Itasca County GIS, St. Louis County Planning Department, Itasca Community College GIS program, and representatives from area Engineering firms. Several interviews/discussions were conducted in-person, and a number were done over the phone. Conversational in nature, the community assessments were aimed to gather the following types of information about each community:

• Is the organization using GIS or related technology?


10


• Purpose / Reasons for using above technology? • Departments / Divisions using above technology? • Approximate number of users / seats? • Types of Framework data available? • Is data documented (metadata)? • Data Sharing Policy? License Agreement? • Data or technology needs / wish list? • Planned (future) anticipated uses or enhancements to system? • Who / Where do you access data and technical assistance? County,

private engineering firm, etc? • Interested in future collaborative GIS efforts? • Interested in GIS Information / Training seminars?

If a city uses GIS, most of the topic areas could be answered; if the city did not utilize GIS, then only a few selected topic areas regarding their current utilization of mapping and data would be relevant. The resulting conversation / interview would typically involve answering questions such as “how do you currently manage mapping information”, and after explaining some of the uses of GIS, determining the extent to which the city would be interested in future collaborative efforts focused on data development, delivery, and training. Assessment Results As anticipated, there were only two cities that utilized GIS (in-house, to an extensive degree) at the time of the Assessment. Hibbing and Grand Rapids have both been developing their GIS systems over the years. In both cases, the cities are nearly complete with their framework data such as parcels, utility lines, streets, zoning, future land use, etc. While the framework data may be at or near completion for these two cities; that is not to say that information gathering has stopped or that their needs have been completely met. In nearly all cases, but especially with the two municipal users in the study area, it was found that cutbacks to Local Government Aid and other programs have severely restricted the ability of cities to adequately maintain, update, or expand their data holdings. Also, city staff have discovered that utilizing GIS to its full potential can be a challenge at times, as staffing and commitments to other projects often take precedence when budget limitations are encountered. Regardless of future funding, it was encouraging to see that these two cities have taken the initiative to move forward with GIS development. The benefits


11


to all city departments and operations were apparent, as the data and overall system has begun to spread to areas of the city government that were not originally involved. Many day-to-day operations are being served by the GIS data and systems, which allows for staff to concentrate their efforts on other tasks which would normally not be possible. As for the 21 other cities on the Mesabi Range which were not utilizing GIS at the time of the assessment, the status of their mapping programs varied considerably. Examples of the mapping status could be classified as one of the following:

• All maps are out-of-date, hardcopy only • Most mapping is out-of-date & hardcopy; some specific areas

have been mapped using a CAD system by consulting engineers.

• Most mapping is up-to-date; consulting engineers or in-house engineering staff have a majority of the cities infrastructure, utilities, zoning, etc. mapped in a CAD environment.

According to the consulting engineers that were interviewed, most of their client cities have a mix of data available for parts of their cities, usually developed on a project-by-project basis. Most of the consulting engineers would be agreeable to a future data collaboration effort, however it was noted that much of their data would be incomplete at least in the sense of providing complete geographic coverage for entire cities. In several cases, the data that has traditionally been developed utilizing CAD-based systems, is in the process of being converted to GIS-enabled formats. Most of the cities that were interviewed, whether GIS usage was present or not, were at least somewhat interested in future collaborative GIS efforts. Of course, it is to be expected that some skepticism exists when talking about a program or service that does not yet exist, and which is based


12


on technology that has never been utilized within many of these cities. Generally speaking, the city representatives that were interviewed were mostly concerned with costs; if the costs of being involved are to be significant, then it is less likely that the smaller communities would participate. However, if costs are kept to a reasonable limit, the cities would be fairly interested; especially if it could provide them with increased access to data and current maps, which could be utilized for their various projects and city business. In summary, the majority of cities on the Mesabi Iron Range are not currently utilizing Geographic Information Systems to any extent. Two of the larger cities, Grand Rapids and Hibbing have already invested significant amounts into their systems, and are now seeing results such as improved efficiency in data analysis and dissemination of data to the public. In the cities where GIS is not currently utilized, there is an interest in GIS collaboration so long as that effort does not require a significant financial contribution on their part. These communities will need to see a real benefit from a collaborative GIS effort, which may take a considerable time, before they would be favorable towards committing dollars from their fiscally restrained budgets. The cities that are presently utilizing GIS show an interest in technical assistance that may be available through such an effort, especially if it will help them to continue on the path of maintaining and modernizing their systems. Of course, the needs of any community will vary from one to the next, so a future GIS collaborative effort needs to be structured in a manner that will allow for flexibility between units of government.



Section 4: Potential for GIS Collaboration

13


For as much as GIS may seem like an obvious choice to move forward with, many communities on the Iron Range are simply not in a position to do so. There are several reasons for this:

• Cost: The combined costs for hardware, software, training, personnel time, consulting fees, and data result in too much of a financial burden, especially for smaller, fiscally-restrained communities.

• Workload: Smaller Iron Range communities are unlikely to hire

a full-time GIS Specialist. This results in the GIS duties falling on the shoulders of someone in an existing position, often this individual doesn’t have the time to work on GIS with their other job duties.

• Expertise: In order for GIS to be used effectively, users need to

work with the software and data on a regular, if not daily basis. The capabilities of an employee that only occasionally uses GIS software and data will tend to be very limited.

• Continual change: GIS software, technology, and data are

constantly evolving and changing. If a local unit of government doesn’t stay on top of these changes, the system will become outdated in a relatively short time period.

The above reasons and others contribute to an overall sense that GIS is more of a burden than most small cities can deal with. How can the benefits of GIS outweigh these factors, to make the investment worthwhile for small communities? ARDC and Iron Range Resources believe that a collaborative effort between communities on the Mesabi Iron Range, with assistance from the two agencies and other partner organizations, could result in an effective GIS platform that would be available


14


to all local units of government in the region. There have been several examples of communities on the Range working together over the past few years, such as the Regional JOBZ application and the Laurentian vision partnership, both of which have involved the many local government units and partnering agencies such as the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission and Iron Range Resources. The Laurentian vision partnership could be an excellent vehicle for starting a GIS collaborative that would benefit not only the individual communities of the Iron Range, but also the many sub-regional planning efforts that take place, such as CIRI; and the Laurentian vision partnership vision as a whole. The remainder of this section will outline a possible structure for such a collaborative effort, along with anticipated costs for the startup and ongoing maintenance. Key Elements Any potential collaborative effort for GIS on the Iron Range would need to focus on several areas, some of which would be more critical in the startup phases and others which would be more applicable to the long-term maintenance of the Collaborative. ARDC and Iron Range Resources believe that there are at least two main factors that need to be addressed: A Data Clearinghouse, and Technical Assistance to Communities. The following points address some of the basic issues that would need to be considered.

Data Clearinghouse

• A key issue when trying to work with GIS over a number of entities is the maintenance and currentness of the data being utilized. Since the framework data will be provided by several sources (each city, county, DNR, ARDC, consultants, etc.), it would be beneficial for this


15


data to be centrally housed for the Collaborative.

• ARDC and Iron Range Resources could negotiate data sharing agreements with the various data providers, which would enable the Collaborative to keep a clearinghouse of framework data, accessible to the member governments; with data availability determined by organizational and geographic criteria.

• One of the most common issues with GIS, is the ability to obtain

critical data in a timely manner. While there are many publicly-available data sets that can be downloaded from other clearinghouses, there is not a single source of data that would be applicable to municipal or local GIS needs in a small regional area such as that covered by the Laurentian vision partnership. One goal of the Collaborative would be to maintain a clearinghouse that brings in relevant data from other clearinghouses, in addition to key data sets produced by other regional entities.

• Keeping the data you work with as current as possible is another

issue that is faced regularly by GIS users. The data clearinghouse for the Iron Range GIS Collaborative would be set up with the intent of regularly updating data sets as the data providers make changes or upgrades.

Technical Assistance to Communities

• Even if communities on the Iron Range are given access to data through a clearinghouse, they still will need some type of help in being able to effectively utilize it. A data clearinghouse, by itself, does not address that need, and cities would still need to rely on consultants or other resources to provide them with the applications of GIS.


16


• Recent advancements in GIS technologies have made it possible to serve spatial data and maps via the internet, without the need for a GIS Technician to be physically located at a client site. One possible technical assistance role of ARDC or Iron Range Resources, through the Laurentian vision partnership, would be to provide an interactive mapping server that would allow Collaborative members to login and utilize the spatial data that they are eligible to receive, via an interactive mapping platform. This type of map service would likely be tied into (or even a direct part of) the Collaborative GIS Data Clearinghouse.

• If member communities wish to expand beyond the capabilities of

an online map server, and take advantage of the other tools available in GIS software packages such as ArcGIS, there are GIS staff from ARDC and other organizations in the region that could provide necessary technical help to those communities, possibly through visits to the members site.

• Sometimes a customized mapping service is all that is needed by a

community. Perhaps the local government does not wish to utilize GIS in-house, and it is possible that the online interactive maps do not quite facilitate their specific mapping needs. In these cases, GIS staff from an organization like ARDC could step in to provide the required maps.

• Many cities are currently utilizing the services of a consulting

engineer to provide maps and technical data. The data clearinghouse and technical assistance offered through the collaborative could potentially be made available to consultants working for the cities, to facilitate and maintain the relationships between member communities and their respective contracted engineering firms.

The overall concept of the Collaborative provides a centralized source for relevant, up-to-date GIS data, for the Iron Range communities and partnering organizations. The data could then be utilized by those cities that choose to invest in an in-house GIS; via an internet map server for those without in-house capabilities; and also through technical assistance and mapping services that could be provided by ARDC or consultants to member communities.


17


The concept for the Collaborative will need to be flexible to changing technology, data, and the nature of GIS work that takes place over time in member communities and through the larger planning efforts of the Laurentian vision partnership. Staffing and technical direction for the Collaborative will initially be provided by ARDC and Iron Range Resources. It is anticipated that a staffing role will continue to be held by those organizations. A Technical Advisory Committee and/or Member User Group will likely be formed to guide the future direction of the Collaborative. Partnering Organizations The success of the Iron Range GIS Collaborative will depend largely on cooperation and data sharing on the parts of many units of government and agencies. The list below does not include all possible project partners, but does name several—from key groupings—that will play an important role in the setup and ongoing work of the Collaborative.

• Cities: Twenty-three units of government along the Mesabi Iron Range are classified as cities. Each of these cities, that chooses to participate in the Collaborative, would provide access to their spatial data. The cities are expected to be the primary users/beneficiaries of the Collaborative’s data clearinghouse and technical assistance.

• Townships: Thirteen

organized townships are located along the Mesabi Iron Range. Townships may elect to take part in the Collaborative in much the same way as the cities. There may be opportunities for cities and neighboring townships to work together on projects that involve GIS data and analysis, as they will face similar land use issues and common-interest planning initiatives.

• Counties: Two counties, St. Louis and Itasca, contain the

Mesabi Iron Range. Each of these counties produces and


18


maintains a number of data sets that would figure into the framework for a Collaborative data clearinghouse. Examples of data produced or maintained by these two counties include parcels, zoning, roads/public works data, natural resource data such as forest cover type, public lands, etc.

• State Agencies: Many state agencies are utilizing GIS in their

work, and several agencies produce data unique to their organization. Examples include the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT).

The DNR’s Lands and Minerals Division in Hibbing produces information pertinent to mining activities in the region, along with other data related to the area’s geology and soils. MnDOT District 1 maintains information related to the state’s roads. Many data sets exist that can be utilized for transportation planning activities.

• Regional Government: Organizations such as the Iron Range

Resources and Arrowhead Regional Development Commission. Each of these organizations deals with Economic Development issues in the region, and data has been produced by both agencies for the purposes of community development, transportation planning, mining and mineland reclamation, business development, and tourism. The two agencies will play a key role in the setup and future staffing for the Iron Range GIS Collaborative.

• Education / Research: Several educational institutions in the

region offer courses or certificates in GIS, and their programs and research could potentially factor into the Iron Range GIS Collaborative training and data development initiatives.

Itasca Community College in Grand Rapids has a certificate program in Geographic Information Systems. Their facility would provide an excellent location from which training sessions and workshops could be conducted for Iron Range GIS Collaborative functions. Additionally, such a program and student work could be utilized for GIS internships, community data development or data maintenance projects.


19


All MnSCU colleges and universities are eligible to utilize a system-wide ESRI GIS software site license. This means that schools such as Hibbing Community College and Mesabi Range Community and Technical College may also offer lab use or specialized training for local government GIS users. The Natural Resources Research Institute (NRRI) does many studies related to mining and geology, as well as other natural resource work in the area. It is possible that NRRI could provide data or services to the Laurentian vision partnership and the Iron Range GIS Collaborative as needed.

There are many other organizations in the region and at the state or federal level that have integrated GIS into their work. As the Collaborative begins to take shape and grow, it is possible that these other unidentified organizations could participate. Costs As with any venture of this scale, it is likely that the startup costs will be significant. It is envisioned that the Laurentian vision partnership along with Iron Range Resources and the Arrowhead Regional Development Commission will play a critical role in allocating or obtaining funds to set the process in motion. The long-term maintenance and day-to-day operations of the Collaborative will depend largely on contributions from the member communities and partnering organizations. Of course, costs for a collaborative could vary depending on the level of services offered, the degree to which the Collaborative requires software purchases, and other factors. The following is a possible budget scenario for startup and future maintenance of the collaborative, the details of which are only speculative in nature at this time.


20


Anticipated Costs for an Iron Range GIS Collaborative Startup Elements:

• Meetings and Administrative functions • Technical Advisory Committee formation • Clearinghouse Server and Software • Personnel Costs to develop Clearinghouse and Mapping Tools • Front-end technical assistance and training to member

communities and organizations • Negotiated Data Sharing Agreements with partners • Data Acquisition, Capture, Conversion • Up-front maintenance

Predicted Cost: Up to $100,000 each of first two years* Maintenance of Collaborative Elements:

• Ongoing Technical Assistance to member Communities • New Data Initiatives • Clearinghouse and Map Server maintenance • Troubleshooting • Educational Materials / Workshops • TAC/User Group Meetings

Predicted Cost: Up to $60,000 per year* *Startup costs include software, hardware, and data purchases which haven’t been priced out in detail as of this writing. *Maintenance costs depend largely on the number of members in the collaborative and the volume of data being served and maintained. Membership numbers will ultimately determine the extent to which technical assistance is offered and in what manner it is conducted.


21


Cost Sharing The financing of the Collaborative will depend largely on contributions from the membership. Initial startup funds may be sought from the funds available through the Laurentian vision partnership and Iron Range Resources, ARDC, and potential grant funding sources. As the initial startup shifts into an ongoing maintenance and technical assistance process, the contributions of the member communities and organizations will fund the Collaborative to a greater extent. A scaleable cost-sharing structure will need to be developed, to ensure that member communities are receiving an equitable amount of service for the amount paid in, relative to other communities and members. Based on preliminary cost estimates, and the number of potential partners/member communities, it is anticipated that annual membership fees for communities could range from $1,000 to $5,000; a probable average for each community would be around $2000 per year. These figures are preliminary, and would ultimately depend on the size of the community, the extent to which technical services are offered, and other potential collaborative funding sources.



Section 5: Case Studies

22


Arrowhead Regional Development Commission The Arrowhead Regional Development Commission (ARDC) is a regional planning organization, serving the counties of Aitkin, Carlton, Cook, Itasca, Koochiching, Lake, and St. Louis in Northeastern Minnesota. As a regional government entity, ARDC assists communities with planning efforts and program development, and it is often responsible for bringing together diverse groups in order to solve community issues. ARDC utilizes Geographic Information Systems in nearly all of its projects, especially in the areas of transportation and community development planning. In addition to being a regional census data repository, ARDC also maintains a node on the Minnesota Geographic Data Clearinghouse where pertinent metadata for the region’s GIS data can be hosted for others to research via clearinghouse searches. ARDC has been utilizing ESRI’s ModelBuilder extension to ArcGIS as a means of analyzing different how different variables may affect future land uses. In a recent project, the Metropolitan Interstate Council (MIC) division looked into future land uses in the Duluth/Superior metropolitan area, from the standpoint of “where should” future utility services be provided given the expanding population; and factors such as proximity to roads, water, sewer, wetlands and floodplains, along with zoning and other factors. With the capabilities of GIS, these multiple factors can be analyzed together. The geographic information is entered into the model and the importance of the different data layers is ranked or weighted. The final result displays as a cumulative score for all weighted data.


23


For more information about ARDC GIS, contact: David Yapel Sr. GIS Specialist Arrowhead Regional Development Commission 218-529-7539 Minnesota DNR – Lands and Minerals Division

The Division of Lands and Minerals manages the state's mineral resources for the benefit of all Minnesotans and provides a range of real estate services supporting the resource goals of the department. The Division manages mineral exploration and mine development on state-owned and tax-forfeited lands in Minnesota to generate equitable rental and royalty income for the state's School and University trust funds, local communities, and the state's General Fund. Equally important is the Division's stewardship of state lands for future generations. The division is responsible for ensuring that mineral development is environmentally sound, and mined areas are reclaimed to be safe, free of pollution, and suitable for future use. The Division also maintains surface and mineral land records for state-owned, DNR-administered lands.

The Hibbing office of Minnesota DNR Lands and Minerals has taken an active role with past Laurentian Vision and current Laurentian Vision Partnership mapping activities. Working with the mining companies and local units of


24


government, the Division has created a series of data layers that represent the extent of past and current mining features, as well as predicted future mining activities assuming current levels of taconite production at the existing facilities. These layers have contributed to an Iron Range GIS Atlas, and while the atlas represents only a snapshot in time, the Division continues to update the geographical information to support their own activities as well as the data and mapping needs of others in the region.

For more information about GIS at the MN DNR Lands and Minerals, contact: Tim Pastika Mining Engineer MnDNR Division of Lands and Minerals 218-262-6767 City of Grand Rapids The City of Grand Rapids has been using GIS for several years now, primarily in the Engineering and Community Development departments. Typical uses of GIS include mapping of features such as zoning, land use, utilities, transportation features, aerial photography, and annexation areas. Utilizing parcel data to determine property ownership for assessment purposes has been a very common use at the City.


25


Staff in the engineering department now have detailed mapping capabilities which enable them to display utility and other infrastructure information on top of six-inch resolution aerial photography. The department is now also able to provide detailed maps and other useful information to citizens when they come in to apply for permits. In fact, it is now possible for a department secretary to pull up the necessary information from the GIS system and provide property maps and information to members of the public upon request. In the Community Development Department, staff regularly meet with the planning commission and city council to discuss developments, proposed zoning changes, and other land use related issues. The use of a laptop computer with ArcGIS software and City of Grand Rapids GIS data gives city officials a perspective of exactly how these land use issues will affect surrounding properties and neighborhoods. This kind of ability is making quality decision support a reality in Grand Rapids, and city staff are extensively utilizing the technology of GIS to their advantage to make their work more efficient and effective. Other departments in the city, such as public works and police have taken notice and may soon be utilizing GIS for their needs as well.


26


For more information about GIS at the City of Grand Rapids, contact: Cindy Hendrickson Engineering Assistant City of Grand Rapids Engineering Department 218-326-7627 Itasca County GIS The Itasca County GIS (IGIS) is a centralized GIS unit that serves all the departments in Itasca County. The GIS unit is part of the Surveying and Mapping Department. Like many centralized GIS operations in county government, IGIS is responsible for building and maintaining datasets that are utilized in the performance of county functions. Over the years, IGIS has created and maintained a number of key datasets, including a parcel layer which is nearly complete for the entire county, a zoning layer, GPS-inventoried roads, and many others. This data is utilized for a variety of purposes in Itasca County Government offices The core data for IGIS is the parcel layer which has been developed over a span of several years and is constantly being updated to reflect the most current land ownership data. The uses of parcel data vary greatly, but nearly all who have seen and used it would agree that it makes working in Itasca County much more efficient than the way it used to be. An example of “day-to-day” parcel data usage can be seen from a recent request to the Itasca County GIS Office. The GIS Coordinator received a call from a township supervisor who wanted to know if there was any way she could get a list of


27


people residing on township roads in her township. She would use this information to inform residents of an upcoming project in which the township would be spraying noxious weeds. This township supervisor was amazed when the Itasca County GIS Coordinator informed her that a list could be generated very quickly using GIS. All that was required was a fairly simple query utilizing a road layer and the parcel layer, and the mailing list was created! From an analysis standpoint, Itasca County has used GIS for a number of projects, recently including trail planning. The map pictured above depicts the route of a proposed snowmobile trail connecting Deer River to Grand Rapids. GIS was used to identify potential routes for the trail, and ultimately it provided a database of land owners to a contractor that procured the easements for the trail. This particular project had been in various stages for fifteen years before GIS was applied to the problem, and at long last, a viable route has been identified and construction will soon be underway. For more information about Itasca County GIS, contact: David Bily GIS Coordinator Itasca County 218-327-7380 St. Louis County Public Works Dept. The St. Louis County Public Works Department is one of several departments at the county that operate GIS for planning, inventorying, and analysis of their data. Other departments at the county include Assessor, Auditor, Land, Planning, and Public Health. While each of these departments operates GIS independently, they do regularly collaborate on various projects of importance to the county; and they also send representatives to regularly scheduled user group meetings at which GIS issues are discussed and moved forward. The use of GIS has dramatically improved the nature by which departments share data, and has shown some very promising results over the years. The St. Louis County Public Works Department uses its GIS primarily as an inventory tool and for updating the county highway map which is published annually. The majority of information used by Public Works is transportation-related, however many other types of information are utilized on a regular basis.


28


Creating accurate inventories of the many different types of transportation data can be challenging, especially given the fact that a lot of that data has traditionally not been archived. In the past, it was not uncommon for an engineer to know all the critical information for a particular process; only to see all that information disappear when the individual retired or took another job. Geographic Information Systems offer an opportunity to effectively gather these types of information and build tools that can be used by everyone in the department for years into the future. One such example is a striping program implemented by the Public Works Department. It helps with determining where and how far striping can be applied throughout the county. Center yellow line is applied each year on every paved road. White edge line (Fog Line) is applied every few years based on wear of the road. Add the longer lasting Epoxy (Yellow and White) striping that is applied when the road is reconstructed, and the complexity of the program grows. Maps have been created for each county road, and Public Works staff can now refer to this mapped information when needed.

For more information about GIS in the St. Louis County Public Works Department, contact: Jeff Storlie GIS Specialist St. Louis County Public Works 218.625.3872


29


Other Notable Uses of GIS in the Region As mentioned in Section 3, the City of Hibbing has begun to use GIS over the last few years. Primarily used in the Engineering Department, the City has a parcel layer that is nearly complete, along with layers that depict utilities, and recent high-resolution aerial photography. While the focus of GIS activities in Hibbing have been primarily engineering and assessment oriented, other city departments are taking advantage of the availability of parcel data and other information that can be analyzed in a spatial context. The City continues to develop, expand, and maintain its existing basemap data for uses by the Engineering Department and other units of city government. St. Louis County is actively pursuing a parcel layer, with hopes to have a completed layer in the next five years. In preparation for the new parcel layer, the various county departments have held discussions through a GIS Advisory Committee, and ultimately would like to see the formation of a new or modified division that would serve the GIS needs of the county. This office will coordinate many GIS functions across St. Louis County and develop portals to access GIS information, e.g., Land Records, Demographics, etc. As the GIS efforts of various organizations in our region continue to take shape, an important part of their success will be an effective network of communication and coordination. A mechanism for continued dialogue between these efforts would be desirable, to ensure that redundant operations can be avoided; and overlap of responsibilities and outcomes can be minimized or channeled in such a way as to provide more efficiencies to all involved entitites.


Section 6: Summary and Next Steps

30


Summary Geographic Information Systems offer a wide array of potential applications for end users in local government settings. Unfortunately, high costs involved with the implementation and maintenance of an enterprise-wide GIS often means that the technology is under-utilized in these settings, especially in smaller communities where resources are stretched thin. The benefits of GIS to local governments are numerous, and aside from the many types of specific applications that work well for government offices; there are also many big-picture aspects to GIS implementation that facilitate better efficiencies in daily operations, improved customer service, better decision support capabilities, and data sharing opportunities to help plan with neighboring communities and organizations. The Arrowhead Regional Development Commission and Iron Range Resources have recognized that GIS could be a very effective tool for Iron Range communities to plan for future growth and changes to the landscape around them. The Laurentian vision partnership offers a unique opportunity to put GIS to use in the affected communities on the Iron Range, so that each of them can take part in planning operations while utilizing information from a common spatial database. The inclusion of data and projects from many potential partners in the region will make the Laurentian vision partnership a much stronger forum for planning for the future. By adding Geographic Information Systems and Data to the suite of tools available to local units of government, the Laurentian vision partnership and its sub-regional groups will directly benefit through improved data sharing and analysis of data across traditional barriers or boundaries. Utilizing GIS for community planning will also bring about a return on the investment of many agencies and organizations that have already begun to invest in GIS. The State of Minnesota, ARDC, Iron Range Resources, St. Louis and Itasca counties, MnDNR Lands and Minerals, the cities of Hibbing and Grand Rapids, and many other government entities and organizations have already invested considerable resources into the development of spatial databases using GIS. The capability of extending these resources to communities will only serve to strengthen these collective efforts as government entities strive to work collaboratively on finding answers and innovative, effective solutions for regional issues.


31


Next Steps ARDC and Iron Range Resources are considering the formation of an Iron Range GIS Collaborative to advance the progress of GIS across the Mesabi Iron Range. The two agencies will soon hold workshops, to which cities from across the region will be invited to attend and find out more about GIS and potential applications in a local government setting. If there proves to be sufficient interest among cities and potential partnering organizations, the two agencies will look for funding opportunities through which a startup process could be initiated. As that process unfolds, ARDC and Iron Range Resources will begin to work closely with data providers, current GIS users, and potential future GIS users in the region to build the Collaborative and offer services such as a GIS Data Clearinghouse and Technical Mapping Services for interested communities.



Appendix A: Community Assessment Attributes

32


Community Assessment Contact List and Info

Entity Contacted: Key Contact Position Phone GIS In-House GIS Consultant Primary ConsultantSt. Louis Co. CitiesAurora City Phone Linda Cazin City Clerk 218-229-2614 N N S.E.H.Babbitt City In-person Pete Pastika City Administrator 218-827-2188 N NBiwabik City In-person Terry Lowell City Administrator 218- 865-4183 N N BenchmarkBuhl City Phone Mary Markus City Clerk/Finance Dir. 218-258-3226 N N BenchmarkChisholm City Phone Steve Erickson Assessor/Building Official 218-254-7906 N N BenchmarkEveleth City Phone Jackie Monahan-Junek City Clerk 218-744-4329 N N BenchmarkGilbert City Phone Gary Mackley City Clerk 218-748-2232 N N RLKHibbing City Phone Mike Swanson Engineering Aide 218-262-3486, x128 Y Y Community GIS ServicesHoyt Lakes City Phone Rick Bradford City Administrator 218-225-2344 N N S.E.H.Kinney City No ContactLeonidas City No ContactMcKinley City No ContactMt. Iron City In-person Craig Wainio City Administrator 218-748-7570 N Y BenchmarkVirginia City In-person John Tourville City Operations Director 218-749-3562 N N In-house Engineering Dept.

Itasca Co. CitiesBovey City Phone Tiffany Johnson City Clerk 218-245-1633 N N RLKCalumet City Phone Julie Childs City Clerk 218-247-7542 N N TKDA, Lorne WikstromCohasset City Phone Deb Sakrison City Clerk 218-328-6225 N Y S.E.H.Coleraine City Phone Sandy Bluntach City Clerk 218-245-2112 N N S.E.H.Keewatin City Phone Julie Warmbold City Clerk 218-778-6517 N N BenchmarkMarble City No Contact Don Martella City Clerk 218-247-7576 N NNashwauk City Phone Ed Bolf City Clerk 218-885-1210 N N RLKTaconite City Phone Mike Troumbley City Clerk 218-245-1831 N N Landecker & AssociatesGrand Rapids City In-Person Cindy Hendrickson Asst. Engineer 218-326-7627 Y Y In-house Engineering Dept. & S.E.H.

EducationItasca Community College In-Person Tim Fox Geography/GIS Instructor 218-327-4309 Y NHibbing Community College Phone Ken Simberg Provost 218-262-7241 N NMesabi Community College No Contact

Engineering ConsultantsRLK Kuusisto Phone John Minne 218-262-5528 N NS.E.H. Phone Michelle Olson-Kallio 218-322-4512 Y NBenchmark Engineering Phone Rodney Flannigan 218-735-8914

CountiesItasca County GIS In-Person David Bily GIS Coordinator 218-327-7380 Y NSt. Louis County Planning In-Person Darren Jablonsky Planner II 218-725-5011 Y NSt. Louis County Public Works In-Person Jeff Storlie GIS Specialist 218-625-3872 Y N

MnDNRLands and Minerals - Hibbing In-Person Tim Pastika Mining Engineer 218-262-7346 Y N

Appendix A: Community Assessment Attributes

33



Appendix B: Project Partners

34


What is ARDC? The Arrowhead Regional Development Commission (ARDC) is a multi-disciplined planning and development organization whose jurisdiction encompasses the Northeast Minnesota counties of Aitkin, Carlton, Cook, Itasca, Koochiching, Lake, and St. Louis. In accordance with the Minnesota Regional Development Act, the Commission serves as an advocate for local governments in Northeast Minnesota, provides leadership in the development of projects that benefit the Arrowhead Region and serves as a catalyst to identify needs and seek solutions to issues of regional significance. This role is especially important with regard to problems and opportunities that are multi-jurisdictional in scope or impact. Throughout its existence, ARDC has developed numerous planning and implementation programs aimed at meeting the needs of the Arrowhead Region. ARDC also serves as an umbrella agency for a wide variety of local, state, and federal initiatives. These programs include services to aging, human services, transit transportation, metropolitan planning, economic development, community development, and natural resources. Other responsibilities of ARDC include the development and maintenance of resource data to support the preparation of comprehensive development plans for units of government.


35


What is Iron Range Resources? Iron Range Resources is a Minnesota state agency created by the Legislature in 1941 to diversify the economy of the iron mining areas of northeastern Minnesota. The agency’s service area, known as the Taconite Assistance Area (TAA), encompasses approximately 13,000 square miles, with its headquarters in Eveleth. Besides accomplishing its core mission of economic development, Iron Range Resources undertakes extensive mineland reclamation initiatives and owns and operates two facilities, Ironworld Discovery Center and Giants Ridge Golf & Ski Resort. Iron Range Resources is funded by a portion of the taconite production taxes paid by mining companies on each ton of taconite produced. The mining companies pay these taxes in lieu of property taxes. As a State of Minnesota agency, Iron Range Resources acts as a fiscal agent for this money. School districts, cities, townships and counties are the primary recipients of the taconite tax dollars. Once the funds are distributed according to a formula designated in Minnesota Statute 298.28, Iron Range Resources receives the remaining funds. Unlike other state agencies, the agency receives no direct operational funding from the State’s general fund. The agency’s efforts focus on promoting the region’s resources, including:

• Agency resources that are structured to advance the region’s economic growth;

• Business resources such as grants, loans and equity investments; • Human resources with a high level of existing skills and knowledge,

plus available training from a variety of programs in support of business development;

• Regional resources, including a large number of business locations that offer exemptions from state and local taxes;

• Natural resources, including timber, taconite and value-added opportunities; and,

• Tourism resources that highlight the rugged beauty of the region and the pre-eminent facilities that contribute to an excellent quality of life.


36


Mesabi Iron Range Geographic Information Systems Report

June 2005

Prepared by: Arrowhead Regional Development Commission

ARDC’s Mission:

“To serve the people of the Arrowhead Region by providing local units of government and citizens groups a means to work cooperatively in identifying needs,

solving problems, and fostering local leadership”.

Assisted by: Iron Range Resources

Iron Range Resources’ Mission:

The agency's mission is to advance regional growth by stabilizing and enhancing the economy of northeastern Minnesota's Taconite Assistance Area.

If you have any questions regarding ARDC or the Iron Range Resources GIS Community Assessment, please contact:

David Yapel, Sr. GIS Specialist

Arrowhead Regional Development Commission 221 West First Street

Duluth, MN 55802 Direct: 218-529-7539

Toll Free: 1-800-232-0707 FAX: (218) 529-7592

E-mail: [email protected] Web Address: www.ardc.org

OR

Dan Jordan, Mining Program Coordinator

Iron Range Resources P O Box 441

4261 Highway 53 South Eveleth, MN 55734

Phone: 218-744-7400 Ext. 226 E-mail: [email protected] Web Address: www.IronRangeResources.org

geographic information systems report - ardc's regional

Documents