|
The meeting began at 8:30 AM in at the Land Management Information Center (LMIC) in the Centennial Building.
Members Present: David Windle, City of Roseville; Dick Carlstrom, TIES; Scott Hovet, Washington County; Jim
Maxwell, The Lawrence Group; James Piegat, Hennepin Conservation District; Scott Renne, City of Minneapolis; Ron Wencl,
U.S. Geological Survey.
Support Staff: Mark Kotz, Metropolitan Council
1. Introductions and Modifications to Agenda and Meeting Notes
Team members made introductions. There were no modifications to the agenda or the meeting notes from the
previous meeting.
2. Information Sharing & News from Other Committees and Teams
Update on MetroGIS Data Content Team:
David Vessel, support staff for the Data Content Team, explained that that team is currently in the middle of
a large project to identify regional data needs. The process involves asking a variety of mainly public sector people
"What information do you need to answer your business questions?" Approximately 80 core information needs have been
identified thus far. The consultant hired to help with the project (Advanced Strategies Inc.) has developed a business
model showing the relationship between business needs and their entities and attributes. The results of the projects
will be the identification of regionally significant data needs and where information sharing is needed to meet those
needs. A ranking of the data needs is expected to be completed by June of this year, after which specific datasets
will begin to be identified. However, the committee should have a good idea of the top several data needs prior to
June.
Ron Wencl suggested that the Standards Team begin to keep close track of what is going on with the data
content team. Vessel said he would notify us of the next meeting of the Content Team and invite one or more of us to
attend.
Update on Coordinating Committee and Policy Board:
Wencl reported that at the Dec. 18th meeting of the Coordinating Committee, they approved the recommendation
of the Standards Team to use UTM, NAD83, Meters as the coordinate system of choice for metro-wide layers. Among other
things they also gave the go-ahead to the Data Access team to explore the possibility of developing a web based data
search index for MetroGIS. Click here for notes from the meeting.
Additionally, Wencl reported that the new MetroGIS Policy Board met for the first time on Jan. 15th. The
Board, composed primarily of elected officials from representative organizations (7 counties, cities, watershed
districts, Met Council, Schools), was given an overview of GIS, a presentation of the development of MetroGIS and an
update from each of the strategic issues team, including the Standards Team. Again, check the web page for more
details.
3. Update from the Coordinate Systems Working Group
Wencl reported that the Coordinate Systems Working Group is putting together a document to explain coordinate
systems, datums, projections, etc. in language understandable to the lay person. The document will also list the
perameters for each of the county coordinate systems used in the state and give some specific examples of how to
convert from one coordinate system to another. Wencl also explained that Ken Whitehorn (Itasca Co. Surveyor) is in the
process of publishing a document somewhat like this, which is much more technical, and aimed primarily at surveyors and
other technical users. We are in contact with Whitehorn and do not intend to duplicate the work that he is doing. We
will however, site his work and draw from it to create our document.
Kotz also explained that since this document will cover all counties, and not just the metro area, it will
likely be a joint effort with the Governor's Council.
4. Update from the Address Working Group
Kotz reported on the progress of the address working group and handed out an update to pages 1 through 12. The
Address Issues and Guidelines document nearing completion. Team members discussed what the next step ought to be. It
was decided that we will bring the document to the Coordinating Committee at it's next meeting on March 6th. In order
to do this, we will need comments from team members by Friday, February 21st. All team members are asked to review the
document and get changes to Kotz by this date. Kotz will send out an updated version to team members that did not
attend the meeting with a reminder to send in comments.
5. Next Team Meeting
The next team meeting will be on Wednesday, March 19th; 8:30 AM to 10:30 AM at LMIC.
6. The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 AM.
Action Items: All team members are asked to review the Address Issues and Guidelines document and get comments
to Kotz by February 21st. Kotz will send out an updated version to team members that did not attend the meeting.
Prepared by Mark Kotz, GIS Specialist, Metropolitan Council
|
