GIS WHITE PAPER by vwt15444

VIEWS: 24 PAGES: 13

									   CREATING A CAMPUS-WIDE
GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM
   A Planning And Management Tool For
        The University Of Arizona




                      Prepared By:

   DEPARTMENT OF CAMPUS AND FACILITEIS PLANNING
              The University of Arizona

                     April 8, 1997
                     CREATING A CAMPUS-WIDE
                  GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM

         A Planning And Management Tool For The University Of Arizona




                    TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                        Page


 WHAT IS A GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS)?                         1


 WHAT IS THE HISTORY AND CURRENT STATUS OF EFFORTS                      2
  TO CREATE A CAMPUS-WIDE GIS?


 HOW WILL A GIS BENEFIT THE UNIVERSITY?                                 3


 WHAT ARE SOME GIS APPLICATIONS OF INTEREST TO THE                      4
  CAMPUS COMMUNITY?


 WHAT ARE SOME OF THE BARRIERS TO SETTING UP A GIS?                     5


 WHAT SHORT-TERM STEPS NEED TO BE TAKEN TO IMPLEMENT                    7
  A CAMPUS-WIDE GIS?


 WHAT IS THE LONG RANGE VISION FOR A “SYSTEM” FOR                       10
  MANAGING INFORMATION ABOUT CAMPUS PHYSICAL
  RESOURCES?
             CREATING A CAMPUS GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM

                 - A Planning and Management Tool for The University of Arizona -


The purpose of this paper is to: 1) frame the issues related to setting up a campus-wide Geographic Information System
(GIS); 2) provide a summary of the current activities and issues related to setting up a campus GIS; and, 3) to suggest
steps to take to begin implementing a campus-wide GIS

The overriding goal is to develop an automated system for managing information about the physical resources
associated with campus and to provide appropriate campus-wide access to that information. This system would build on
the data and activities of existing departments and allow distributed control of information among appropriate
departments. Although control of data and applications should be distributed, it is necessary to impose some level of
centralized or common requirements on participating departments so that information may be shared. Without basic
coordination, software and hardware standards, and integrated applications, there will be a fragmented and non-
functional system.

This paper is focused on GIS technology, although in its ultimate form the University’s “system” for managing spatial
data should integrate other technologies which are used with specialized types of spatial data. For example, some day
there may be an automated system for managing information about electrical systems in all buildings. Although this
paper does not explicitly address this sort of specialized data, a campus-wide GIS could create the overall framework
into which electrical system data can fit. In this context, GIS would be serve as a “system integrator,” and the ultimate
system might be more appropriately termed a “Spatial Data Management System.”

There are numerous GIS applications of interest to academic departments, and there has been considerable
collaboration between staff and academic units on activities related to creating a campus-wide GIS. The focus of this
paper is, however, on creating a system primarily for use by staff in conducting their day-to-day work of managing the
University campus. There are opportunities, some of which are noted below, for future collaboration between staff and
academic units that would facilitate overall campus-wide coordination of GIS activities.

This paper will be updated following review by the campus community. It should be noted that the ideas in this paper
are the result of two years worth of discussions Campus and Facilities Planning (CFP) has had with many departments
across campus, and therefore, a wide range of input and viewpoints have already influenced the thoughts presented
below.



WHAT IS A GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS)?
A GIS is a collection of computer hardware, software, data, procedures, and personnel that functions as an automated
system for the capture, storage, update, retrieval, manipulation, analysis, management, and display of all forms of
geographically referenced information. GIS is an appropriate technology for integrating and managing information
about the campus because it is designed as a mapping and spatial data management tool, in contrast with other
technologies which are, for example, designed primarily for “electronic drafting.” There are many distinctions about
GIS technology which make it an appropriate tool for integrating the University’s spatial data, including the following
key points:
 Data about map features is stored in a database, along with the associated map graphics: This characteristic

The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System                 April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                       Page 1
   allows the creation of intelligent maps, more efficient storage and retrieval of data, spatial analysis, and other
   benefits.
 GIS Data Model: The data model used with GIS software allows for specialized functions and analyses, such as the
   ability for map features to "know where they are" in relation to each other. This characteristic is essential for
   spatial analyses such as proximity analysis, buffering, spatial queries, etc.
 Data is referenced to an established coordinate system: This allows relations to be established between different
   maps and databases.
 GIS software may be used as a data integrator: This provides the ability to tie together a number of different
   software tools into one Spatial Data Management System.


WHAT IS THE HISTORY AND CURRENT STATUS OF EFFORTS TO CREATE A
CAMPUS-WIDE GIS?
The foundation has been laid for a comprehensive mapping system for the University of Arizona campus as a
result of a number of accomplishments over the last few years. While CFP has been focusing on the development of a
GIS for campus planning, it has concurrently promoted the idea of extending the system to serve the entire campus
community.

   In 1992 CFP commissioned a study, titled “A Campus Mapping Automation Report For The University of
    Arizona,” that evaluated the potential for a campus-wide mapping system. This study has provided valuable
    guidance for current CFP activities. The central recommendations dealt with establishing a system that integrates all
    forms of spatial information within a distributed data environment.

   A campus-wide Mapping Service Working Group was active for a few months in the summer of 1995. This group
    clearly established the need for a coordinated mapping system on campus and identified many of the central issues
    that a system will need to address.

   GIS training courses have been offered during Spring, 1997, to a wide range of staff and academic personnel. The
    classes have been provided through a collaboration between CFP and the Advanced Resources Technology Lab,
    which provides certified GIS training courses.

   The Advanced Resources Technology Lab (ART), in the School of Renewable Natural Resources, has played a
    pivotal role in almost all activities that are mentioned above. The ART Lab is the primary hub of GIS training,
    expertise, and data serving on campus (for more information, see: http://grotto.srnr.arizona.edu/ART/).

   Extensive outreach has been conducted by CFP to promote the development of a coordinated system through
    understanding and documenting campus coordination issues, applications, data, software, and hardware.
    Departments were asked many questions regarding maps they use or make and problems they encounter.

     Departmental Coordination: There is no formal coordination or process in place for the orderly management
      of spatial data that should and needs to be shared throughout the University. There have been a number of
      efforts over the years by individual departments, using CADD or Graphics technology, to establish automated
      systems for managing spatial information. However, these have not been in the context of a coordinated
      campus-wide system, and continuity has suffered due to the use of temporary or partially committed staff.

     Applications: Through departmental discussions, many applications have been identified. (“Applications”
      refers to specific uses of data and software to accomplish work tasks.) . Most applications are still not
      automated in any form and are not “integrated” - one department’s analysis for a given purpose will often not
      integrate with other departments’ analyses or systems. The need for analyses, information, maps, etc. has and

The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System                April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                      Page 2
        always will be there; now is simply the right time to find a better technology for meeting these needs.

     Basemap and other spatial data: The Campus Survey &Drainage Study will provide an essential
      ingredient of a campus-wide mapping system: a common basemap. The goal of this mapping effort is to
      create a campus basemap that will serve as a common reference for all spatial data on campus, thereby
      creating a foundation for a campus-wide GIS. There has never been a spatially accurate digital campus map
      available at the University. There are a range of existing paper maps which contain valuable information
      that should be converted to digital form. Additionally, there are a range of existing digital drawings of
      varying quality; however, these cannot easily be spatially referenced to one another or linked to tabular
      databases. There is a wide range of digital tabular data available on campus that relates directly to some
      facility, or at least has a spatial location associated with it. There currently is no system available for linking
      this data to maps - the Campus Survey & Drainage Study data and the GIS will allow tabular data to be
      displayed on maps.

        These existing maps and databases represent valuable pieces of a potential campus-wide GIS and should be
        integrated as part of an overall system. At this point, however, most mapping efforts do not cross
     departmental boundaries and there is little about coordination and standards.

     Software: ESRI mapping software (ArcInfo, ArcView, etc.) is being used at the University of Arizona by many
      academic departments and a number of non-academic departments specifically for campus mapping. Some
      mapping is also done using graphics programs (i.e., Adobe Illustrator). These programs are highly valuable for
      preparing visually appealing maps for end-users, however, they are of limited value for managing actual data
      about the campus. AutoCAD is the de facto software standard on campus for detailed building drawings, such
      as keyplans and as-builts. A number of academic departments utilize other related software for engineering and
      remote sensing applications. With appropriate coordination and standards, GIS, Graphics/Imaging, and CADD
      technologies will fulfill complementary roles within an integrated “Spatial Data Management System.”

     Hardware: There is no “common” hardware on campus dedicated specifically to a campus-wide GIS or to the
      use of data produced in the Campus Survey & Drainage Study; however, some departments may have
      resources that could be dedicated to the GIS, assuming appropriate interdepartmental coordination.



HOW WILL A GIS BENEFIT THE UNIVERSITY?
A GIS is a tool that will result in better planning and management of the physical campus due to easier information
access, less duplication of efforts, and improved data management. Benefits that are likely to result include:

 Cost savings: This applies to both costs associated with handling information, along with cost savings associated
  with better planning and management of physical resources. Current mapping methods in use at the UA are, for the
  most part, based on the limitations of old technology. As better technology evolves, it makes common sense to take
  advantage of it. Duplication of effort could be reduced. Different departments which make maps often repeat efforts
  for the same geographic area, and create duplicate databases. Different scales, basemaps, and standards are often
  used. This is wasteful, and increases the likelihood of inaccurate data being used/presented. Time savings and
  increased efficiencies, which produce cost savings, will result due to better and quicker access to information.

 Better decisions: More thorough, timely, and accurate information will be available allowing for more informed
  decisions. Quicker and better analyses will result from more accessible information, higher quality of data, and
  established procedures for repetitive analyses. Improved administrative reporting and planning will result, such as
  better cost/budgeting analyses, improved trend interpretation, and a higher quality of documentation. Many
  applications exist that will greatly enhance decisions made during the physical planning process.

The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System                   April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                         Page 3
 Improved communications: One of the key characteristics of a GIS is that it facilitates the visualization of data.
  Information that was previously viewed only as tables or charts will be displayed as easy-to-read maps.
  Communication with the public will be enhanced due to the improved quality and accessibility of maps.

 Improved records management: Information that is currently stored in paper form could be more efficiently
stored
   electronically, which in turn allows easier distribution and accessibility of the information. Updating information
   will become easier, while less time will be spent searching files and going into the field to verify information.
   The University stores over100 years worth of paper drawings, many in poor, decaying condition, that need
   to be converted to digital form. There are concerns that the current system of organizing, retrieving, and updating
   these drawings is inadequate: a tool is needed, such as a GIS, for managing these drawings once they are converted
   to digital form. Furthermore, there is no coordinated system for storing, accessing and updating current documents
   related to the physical infrastructure on campus. This ranges from accessing information about underground
   utilities to obtaining accurate maps that are suitable for use in siting new facilities. At any point in time, there is no
   guarantee that any map on campus will provide accurate and current spatial information. Additionally, a significant
   amount of information does not exist in any documented form - it is only known by key staff. A system is needed to
   allow this information to be recorded on maps and databases.

 Meeting customer needs. All of the above points revolve around more effectively meeting customer demands of
  students and faculty, administrative departments, neighbors, visitors, and the Arizona Board of Regents. There is no
  coordinated system for providing public oriented maps on-demand. Many departments on campus do not have map
  making capabilities, however, they often need maps for various public relations and marketing purposes. GIS
  technology is now emerging at campuses across the United States. From the standpoint of customer service, the
  University will be at a competitive disadvantage in a few years without an improved system for managing spatial
  data.



WHAT ARE SOME GIS APPLICATIONS OF INTEREST TO THE CAMPUS
COMMUNITY?
 Planning and Administrative Analysis: GIS technology is intentionally designed as a tool to analyze the physical
  environment. The analytical power of a GIS is derived from two basic capabilities. First is the capability to establish
  spatial relationships among map features. There may be a need to, for example, calculate the quantity of a particular
  land use (one map feature) that falls within a given boundary (another map feature). Second is the capability to
  establish relationships among characteristics of map features that are stored in a database. For example, a question
  might be asked about showing all buildings built before 1950, with 30,000 GSF or greater, and which sit upon a
  certain type of land-use. A GIS has the potential to directly respond to the concerns about space utilization that are
  discussed in the DeMichele report. Additionally, demographic trends related to various campus populations could
  be more effectively analyzed, interpreted, and presented.

 Facilities Management/operational analysis: There are unlimited possibilities for how GIS can be used as a
   facilities management tool. A primary problem with traditional mapping procedures (a problem that is present with
   electronic drafting technologies) is that as more and more detail is added to, or layered over, a map it becomes
   increasingly difficult to decipher and manage specific information. With facility information stored in a database, it
  is possible to depict on a map precisely the information that is needed. As a practical tool for improving work
   processes, there are many possibilities. For example, rather than physically going to a building to determine what
   type of light bulb needs to be replaced, this information can be easily accessed from a database. By clicking on a
   specific fixture shown on a map, a range of applicable data could be displayed, including the bulb type.


The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System                     April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                           Page 4
   Additionally, there are many potential applications related to emergency response and risk management.

 Thematic Mapping: Thematic mapping refers to the creation of maps which emphasize specific characteristics of a
  given geographic area. All thematic maps are built over some sort of a base map that provides a sense of
  geographic context. For example, a map could be created to communicate where turf is located on campus (i.e., turf
  is the theme to be emphasized). This map would depict streets and buildings as thin lines (base map/context),
while showing all turf areas as bright green patches surrounded by heavy black lines. Another familiar example of a
        thematic map is one showing the location of all parking lots. In this example, context information is shown for
  reference, while the parking facilities are graphically emphasized. Thematic maps are often used in conjunction with
  the other GIS uses mentioned above; however, they are particularly well suited for presenting complex information
  in an understandable format. Making complex information understandable is a primary purpose of any map geared
  toward the general public.

 Records Management: Records, such as as-built drawings, parcel information, utility data, and facility use data
  may be effectively stored and retrieved using a GIS, and critical documents will receive effective protection from
  deterioration. Although a GIS can provide an overall framework for organizing data storage and retrieval, the actual
  data may be stored using a different technology. For example, a GIS basemap of the entire campus could be used for
  locating a particular building, and then once the building is located, clicking on the building would establish a link to
  a keyplan drawing that is stored in CADD format.



WHAT ARE SOME OF THE BARRIERS TO SETTING UP A GIS?

Barriers to creating a campus-wide GIS result from a lack of:
 Software, Data, and Applications Standards: For there to be a system that is usable by the entire campus
      community, it is necessary for there to be basic standardization in terms of software; map accuracy, content,
and   presentation; and, the integration of applications.

 Common data/basemap: The key foundation of a system is to have a common base map that may be used
  by a range of departments. This insures that thematic layers of data that are developed for special purposes by
  one department will overlay properly with thematic layers created by other departments. The Campus Survey
  Project will begin to address this issue.

 Data in digital form: A significant portion of the maps on campus are not in digital form. In order for a
  GIS to operate, existing paper maps and other data need to be converted into digital form. A system that is based
  on sharing data across a network requires digital data.

 Metadata: In order for data to be retrieved, there needs to be a system for looking up the availability of the
   data. This is done using metadata, or data about data. A metadata system provides a description of data,
similar
   to the description of a book that would be found in a library card catalogue.

 Equipment/software: Many departments on campus lack the hardware and software necessary to create
  maps. Additionally, some departments lack a network connection; therefore, they have a reduced ability to access
  data.

 Embracing currently available technology: Manual procedures have been used for many years. In some cases,
  using new technology is resisted, training is inadequate, and there is simply a lack of interest in “something new.”


The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System                  April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                        Page 5
   Departments must be willing to share information and overlook “territory” concerns. Another necessary shift in
   thinking is to think of maps not simply as graphics or images, but as visual representations of data. It is key
to understand that we are dealing primarily with data, and only secondarily with the sort of “graphics” that are
   traditionally associated with maps.

 Staff: Proper staffing is required, both for individual departments and for a campus-wide coordination role. CFP
has
   committed staff internally for its GIS function and is providing leadership campus-wide. However, the pace at
   which any system develops will be directly related to levels of staffing.

 Training: Ongoing training of staff is essential for both starting a system, as well as maintaining a system. This is
  particularly important in an environment characterized by rapidly changing technology.

 Technology Plans: Plans establish direction and focus for expenditures and work activities. Additionally, they
  provide a framework for discussing issues of mutual interest among many departments. At this point, it appears that
  CFP is the only department preparing written plans for managing campus spatial data.

 Understanding and recognition of the great complexity of the system: A campus-wide system involves a high
  degree of both administrative and technical complexity. There must be recognition and support of this at campus-
  wide administrative levels in order for a system to meet expectations in terms of budget, timeline, and service. There
  must be “buy-in,” support, and understanding by managers: this is not an undertaking to simply leave to technicians.

 Precedent: GIS is a relatively new technology and most applications have been for infrastructure systems on the
  scale of an entire city or for natural resource mapping of an entire region. Given this, it should be recognized that
  there are few models to use for setting up the system, and, therefore, we are in many respects working in uncharted
  territory. On the other hand, this sort of system is rapidly under development in campus environments and there is
  an opportunity for the University to be a leader in this area.

 Campus-wide mandate for coordination and direction: An underlying component of most barriers listed
  above is the lack of campus-wide coordination and direction. Without an entity that provides overall coordination,
  there will always be duplication of effort, incompatible standards, different software and hardware systems, different
  basemaps and scales, etc. Without a basic level of consistency and communication throughout the institution, each
  department will always be left to fend for itself. It is unlikely that the necessary coordination and direction will
  occur without a mandate from a high level within the University administration.




WHAT SHORT-TERM STEPS NEED TO BE TAKEN TO IMPLEMENT A
CAMPUS-WIDE GIS?

The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System                April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                      Page 6
1. Institutional Context and Support
   A. Create a Campus-wide GIS Working Group: A GIS Working Group should be constituted to manage an
       initiative focused on the development of a campus-wide GIS. This “GIS initiative” would be similar to FAME,
       UNITE, and other information technology initiatives. In addition to coordinating the “short term
       implementation activities” listed below, it would develop a proposal for a formalized, funded, and campus-wide
       system (similar to FRS, PSOS, SIS, etc.) for managing all forms of spatial data related to the University
       campus and its facilities.

        This working group would likely be coordinated by a team of staff from departments such as CFP, Decision and
        Planning Support (DAPS), and the ART Lab. Both CFP and the ART Lab have taken a central role in activities
        to date related to creating a campus-wide system. DAPS would be a valuable participant because of its central
        role with campus data and because it is at a level that serves the entire campus rather than specific
departmental                        concerns. The composition of the coordinating team and the GIS Working Group as a
whole is, of course,                       dependent on the interest and willingness of these and other departments to
take an active role in this initiative.                    It       will be essential that management level staff in these
departments are involved in the process as well as those                     dealing directly with the technology.

    B. Continue current campus-wide coordination activities, particularly those related to the Campus Survey
       data: CFP should coordinate with other campus departments who wish to use the Campus Survey data, and
       continue to facilitate dialogue between departments. This should include collaboration between staff and
       academic units wherever possible, including collaboration on student class projects.

    C. Coordination and support should be provided by departmental MIS entities: Ongoing support will need to
       be provided from campus MIS entities. Current MIS priorities will need to be balanced with priorities to
       improve systems which deal directly with management of physical resources.

    D. Build on and support existing campus resources: It is recommended that collaboration be continued between
       staff and academic units. As an example, it would be wise to provide increased support and recognition to the
       ART Lab for its GIS activities on campus. Although external support (i.e., consultants) will play a role for
       specialized aspects of developing the system, permanent staff should be the focus of this effort.

    E. Recognize that a “system” is being created, not a static “product”: The word system implies something
       that has a number of interrelated parts. In the case of a GIS, the parts of the system are software, hardware,
       staff, applications, and institutional support. All parts of the system require ongoing development and
       financial support over time. This is particularly when the effort is characterized by a grassroots, bottom-up
       approach with modest resources. Resources can be modest, but they need to be provided consistently.
       Millions of dollars could be allocated upfront for a turn-key system, but even this approach could take years
       to implement and it has many pitfalls that could reduce chances for success.


2. GIS Staff
    A. Assign current staff to roles within the system: Appropriate current staff from applicable departments
should        be assigned to assist with the GIS effort. Ideally, existing staff would be assigned a permanent role in
the     implementation of the GIS (at this point, the only department which has done this is CFP).

    B. Utilize student workers wherever possible: Participating departments will need student workers to assist
       with field data collection, development of additional “data layers,” and applications development.

    C. Utilize the ART Lab’s staff resources: The ART Lab has trained, permanent and student staff that are
       available on a consulting basis for assistance on projects.

The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System                 April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                       Page 7
3. Applications Development
   A. Develop prototypes of “functional” applications: This will include known applications (and many yet to be
      identified applications) such as using the maps for updating land use plans, evaluating space needs, managing
      data about physical resources, etc. Keep in mind that a map in paper form is simply a static “product.” When
      the map is automated in a digital GIS form, it can be considered an “application” because it can be
      dynamically updated and used to accomplish tasks and answer questions that would have never been possible
      with a paper map. Typically, applications development will include project definition, database design,
      software programming, data collection/entry, and final map preparation. The ART Lab can provide these
      beneficial services to campus departments on a consulting basis, and in the process provide experience for
      students (this is now occurring with an ADA mapping project). Designing and prioritizing applications could
      be one function of the GIS Working Group.

    B. Support Research & Development efforts with emerging GIS technology applications: Resources should
       be made available for applications development using emerging GIS technologies (e.g., Spatial Database
       Engine, WWW map viewing and data access systems, Workstation ArcInfo on Windows NT, ArcView 3
       extensions). Depending on staff availability and expertise, this may be done in-house or with consultant
       assistance.

    C. Support the integration of data/systems/software applications: Resources should be made available for
       applications development focused on the merging of disparate data/systems/software on campus that will
       eventually make up an integrated system. For example, this would include development of a procedure for
       converting and/or linking CADD drawings to the comprehensive GIS basemap. Additionally, work is needed
       on integrating various databases ranging from Microsoft Access to Oracle. This would also include
       development of specialized interfaces for various users of the system (i.e., the software would have certain
       functions “enabled” or “disabled” to meet specific staff needs). Designing and prioritizing these applications
       would be a key activity of the GIS Working Group.


4. Campus Basemap and Related Data Management
   A. Clarify data stewardship responsibilities: Efforts should commence immediately to define appropriate
      “data stewards” within relevant University departments for various components of the core database and
      basemap. A “data steward” is an individual or department that is assigned a responsibility to maintain specific
      data and serve as the “owner” of that data. Portions of the data will be available for various ad hoc uses that do
      not need to fit into the “system”, although the core database and basemap must be managed based upon
      interdepartmental agreements. Without agreements, a similar fragmented “non-system” will emerge as currently
      exists with paper maps. With proper arrangements a system would evolve whereby individual departments
      maintain data they “own,” while at the same time, the data would fit into an overall framework which would
      allow data sharing. For example, one department may maintain drawings of landscape features, while another
      maintains drawings of buildings; however, both “layers” would overlay properly and would be available to
      both departments for creating presentation maps. Defining stewardship responsibilities would be a major
      function of the GIS Working Group.

    B. Designate CFP as the clearinghouse for the survey data until other arrangements are developed: It is
       recommended that the core database and basemap produced from the Survey/Drainage Study be managed by
       CFP until a time at which interdepartmental agreements specify commitments for data stewardship. The data
       will initially be made available through a number of methods, depending on user needs. Following the
       development of interdepartmental agreements, the data may be moved to a more powerful and centralized
       server computer. The server computer/data could be managed by CFP; however, there are a number of other
       options worth considering. One would be to have a campus-wide staff unit such as CCIT manage the system.

The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System               April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                     Page 8
        Another option would be to have the ART Lab serve as a coordinator for not only academic-related GIS
        matters but also for the staff-related campus-wide GIS.

    C. Develop Interdepartmental Data Standards: Standards and procedures will need to be developed for
       integrating consultant-generated information, conversion of data between various software formats, data
       maintenance and stewardship, and access to the data.. Defining data standards would be a key function of the
       GIS Working Group.

    D. Distribute the Campus Survey data initially in ArcView 3 format: Initial use of the data is most
       likely to occur in ArcView3 format. A copy of the basemap data should be maintained in Workstation ArcInfo
       format: this format will be necessary should a true campus-wide GIS be developed.

    E. Adopt the Survey Study Basemap Data as the “official” source of campus spatial data: Departments
       should be asked to base future mapping off of this new source of data. A significant investment was made to
       create this basemap. This investment was made, in part, on the premise that the basemap would be used
       campus-wide. Without departments developing and updating their respective portions of the basemap, it will
       rapidly become outdated and the value of the original investment will be compromised.

    F. Continue to develop the database: The Campus Survey and Drainage Study data will need to continually be
       added to and updated: the delivery of the final study “products” represents more of a beginning than a
       conclusion.. Ideally, the database development and updating will occur primarily through assignments of
       current staff. Some departments may need to hire consultants for specialized projects. Additionally, student
       workers would provide an excellent resource for developing the database. Database development activities
       involve topics such as: development of new thematic layers (i.e., a map showing the location of all irrigation
       valves), completing existing thematic layers (i.e., locating and mapping those light poles which were not
      mapped in the Campus Survey & Drainage Study), and populating the data tables associated with the maps
       (i.e., add information to the database about the types of lights).


5. Software Systems
   A. Establish the ESRI family of GIS Software as the standard for campus mapping: The primary software to
       be used is ArcView3. Other variations of ESRI’s GIS software will be used as needed, including programs such
       as: Workstation ArcInfo, ArcCAD, and specialized modules of the previously noted programs (for more
       information, see: http://www.esri.com/base/index.html). As needed, software standards should be adopted for
       specialized subsets of the overall “system,” i.e., AutoCAD as the standard for as-built drawings.

    B. Consider a University-wide annual financial contribution to the University Site License with ESRI: The
       annual $16,000 cost could be split among major administrative divisions or it could be paid for in one
       allocation (e.g., from the President). Currently, the ART Lab (which is the site license administrator) solicits
       financial contributions from the many software users on campus. This is too costly for some departments and it
       adds unnecessary administrative tasks for the ART Lab.

    C. Support Software Training opportunities: Training opportunities will be essential for users of the system,
       ranging from the relatively large pool of individuals who will only want to view information to the smaller
       group of individuals who will do application programming. Four ArcView 3 training courses (approximately 65
       individuals) have been provided since January, 1997, through the ART Lab.

    D. Evaluate and integrate GIS software with other information systems under development on campus:
       Other information technologies which are being standardized within the University should be fully documented
       and evaluated regarding integration with the campus-wide GIS.. These systems (e.g., Powerbuilder, Sybase,
       Oracle, etc.) will eventually have a key relationship to the GIS. This sort of integration would be an

The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System               April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                     Page 9
        appropriate topic for the GIS Working Group to address.


6. Hardware Improvements
    A. Provide a map server computer: Data produced in the Survey & Drainage Study will initially be made
        available from CFP via a number of methods, depending on the needs of specific users. Assuming that
        interdepartmental arrangements are defined, the data could eventually be located on a powerful server
computer                 that is dedicated as a common resource for the entire University. The funding, location, and
management of                     this server could be approached a number of ways. Potentially, a department such as
CFP could                                          purchase/manage this computer, although it would probably be
preferable to have the financial resources made                   available from an upper administration level and have
the computer managed by a campus-wide organization                        (i.e., CCIT) so that it would truly function as a
campus-wide resource.

    B. Provide Global Positioning System (GPS) units: GPS units allow field surveying, based on satellite
       positions, of a range of features (such as valves) that were not mapped as a part of the Campus Survey &
       Drainage Study. The GPS survey information is then used to locate features on the GIS basemap.

    C. Provide Large format color plotters: These would allow hardcopy production of large format (i.e., 24”x36”)
       color maps and drawings. It is anticipated that plotters will be required in a number of University departments
       (a number of departments currently have plotters). The need for multiple plotters could be reduced if there were
       a comprehensive, centralized, and reliable reproduction/plotting service available on campus.

    D. Provide upgrades to individual PCs: Upgrades will be necessary within individual department in order to run
       the software and process large datasets.




WHAT IS THE LONG RANGE VISION FOR A “SYSTEM” FOR MANAGING
INFORMATION ABOUT CAMPUS PHYSICAL RESOURCES?
A long range vision should be defined by the GIS Working Group that is recommended above. Current directions
suggest that the ideal “system” would have minimal centralized control and resources - this would be considered a
distributed system. Control of data and applications would be distributed among departments, although the activities of
these departments would fit under a campus-wide umbrella of standards and coordination. This does not mean,
however, that there is no need for any centralized resources. It may be necessary, particularly in the mid-term, to
dedicate staff and support resources (e.g., a new section within an existing department which has campus-wide purview)
which would provide the “glue” to hold the system together. These staff members would manage common resources
(i.e., server computers, plotters, etc.); coordinate among departments; develop and implement standards; and, provide
“on-demand” maps when necessary.

The basic staff roles that typically make up a GIS department include:
        Manager/coordinator
        Database administrator
        Programmer
        Systems/network manager
        Applications manager/developer
        Training coordinator
        Production cartographer

The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System                  April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                        Page 10
            Administrative support

This is not to suggest that an individual staff member is needed for each of these roles. It does indicate, however, the
wide breadth of skills and functions that are required for a GIS, even if there is only one staff member that must cover
all these roles. For the sake of comparison, a typical municipal GIS department would require between two and four
staff members for each of these functions.

The new entity could take a number of forms, including the possibility of serving a joint role for both academic GIS
needs as well as non-academic GIS needs. It may be possible to co-locate with an existing unit on campus (i.e., the
Advanced Technology Resources Lab). Additionally, the staff would require space, hardware, software, and other
ancillary resources. Periodic expenditures would be needed for specialized applications development along with
ongoing database development efforts.




The University of Arizona                  Creating A Campus Geographic Information System                  April 8, 1997
Department of Campus & Facilities Planning                                                                        Page 11

								
To top