The Application of GIS in Urban and Regional Planning-North American Experience

8/13/2019 The Application of GIS in Urban and Regional Planning-North American Experience

1/19

A ppl i ed G eography (1993)) 13,9-27

The application of GIS in urban and regional planningreview of the North American experience

Trevor M Harris and Gregory A Elmes

Depart ment of Geology and Geography, 425 W hit e H all , West Vi rgini a UM organto w n, W V 26506, USA

Abstract

The diffusion of GIS within North American planning has occurredremarkable rate. Growing awareness, institutional acceptance, falling costs and product diversity have led to a plethora of planning applivarying in maturity and sophistication. The field is now sufficienestablished to allow meaningful trends, evaluations and directions

reviewed. GIS applications in planning are characterized by geographical and the dominant influences shaping GIS utilization in planning are examithe national, regional, trans-regional, metropolitan and neighbourhood Transformations brought about by the interplay of GIS and planninpresented.

Planning, and the technology which supports it, reflects the cultureserves. North America is currently experiencing a revolution computer-based Geographical Information Systems (GIS) to plannsymbiotic relationship reflects the vernacular approach to urbplanning, and an emphasis on high-technology solutions to economiNorth America serves well as a focus for examining trends arGIS-planning initiatives. The continent has a long history of GIplanning and resource management dating back to the mid-1960s. GIS into the planning sphere has continued at a remarkable rate

reasonably well documented, albeit in disparate and mostly Growing awareness, institutional acceptance, falling systemdiversity, the introduction of microcomputers and the availability software have led to a plethora of planning-based applications. Givand rate of growth of GIS in planning in North America, sufficiently well established to allow meaningful trends, evaluations


2/19

10 GfS in urban and ~eg~on~~~lu~~l~~g n North merica

time. Landis (3990), for example, comments on the rapid obsosoftware in planning practice within only 18 months. Bracken anreject an applications-orientated approach and propose a typologysystem architecture. This approach, however, overemphasizes characteristics of GIS in the planning context and is swiftly ousoftware evolution reduces the differences between various systeWhile recognizing the bias inherent in a subjective approach, examining the GIS-planning process within an overarching political-social-economic framework.

Despite the lack of a cohesive body of literature. this pchronology nor an exhaustive census detailing the many iIldividuaGIS in planning. Furthermore a basic understanding of thfuncti[)nality of GIS is assumed (for introductory GIS texts seeAronoff 1989; Star and Estes 1990; Tomlin 1990). This paper trends in the integration of GIS in urban and regional planning in

and to characterize the relationships and forces which have beenshaping the impact of GIS technology on the planning system. Thethe complex multi-dimensionality of this field, identifies the nuwork which have contributed to a headlong advance of GIS into tand considers the implications and prospects of such an alliance. currently significant yet, in all probability. are highly transitory. tends to emphasize the innovative, it is evident that many applications go unpublished and thus unrecognized. Consequently. to suppose that smaller. standard applications may be under-reprreport. As GIS becomes more commonplace it will become profitable to document its acceptance for standard applications. Tof applications, emerging benefits, and their interrelationships wiand sociology of the planning process are of central interest inhuman contribution is significantly more important in the planning hardware and software, and this raises a number of questions conce

of GIS implementation within planning.

Planning and society in North America

As GIS is integrated within planning, so it comes under the inflforces acting on the planning process itself. As Bromley suggests


3/19

Trevor M . H arr i s and Gr egor

environment in which it is used for policy formulation, resourcedecision-making.Of the underlying forces which have shaped planning in Nor

much vaunted concern for individual freedom and individualparamount factor defining its role. This attitude is reflected in a daccept interference or controls, perceived or real, from external ethos is not spatially well defined. Depending on the occasion, work at all levels of government. One outcome of this attitude system of vested governmental interests, each espousing a vibrant county, state, provincial or regional rights and autonomies by eletives, business interests and government agencies with stewardship over public land. Furthermore, the perceived similarities of regioplanning with the monolithic economic plans of previous communcountries continues to have a profound influence on the role of pAmerica. These forces are reflected in the very nature of

continent. At one level they are seen in the selective use programmes, projects and schemes to denote planning r(Bromley et al . 1989). At other levels they have been instrumentalthe constrained role allocated to planners and perforce the role of

These societal attitudes have led to regional planning in Northequated with regional economic development strategies. Such comfortably within the bounds of acceptability and the goals ocapitalist economy. This economic mind-set is reflected in

statewide/regional GIS which have been established to acttechnological focuses to attract business and to promote redevelopment. While there is substantial evidence of GIS beinsupport the development and management of regional economic no documented evidence of systems being developed to undergoing decline, especially in the so-called rust belt. Theparticularly in the context of a global economy, that these initiativesof a zero-sum game in which regions compete for a slice of a dimeconomic pie (Goodman 1979). What is of particular interest in theGIS in the context of regional (economic development) planacquisition of GIS capability is seen as a minimum base with which for scarce economic opportunities. There is a suggestion that GIS as the late-twentieth-century equivalent of the Victorian town ha


4/19

2 GIS in urban and regional planning in North merica

protection. It is noteworthy that GIS is being introduced both encourage economic development and to minimize environmental Urban planning in general has fared somewhat better

counterpart in its general acceptability. Although urban plconsidered as a subset of regional planning, it would be unwise and regional planning as distinguished only by their position on scale. There are no clear boundaries to distinguish regional or sufrom metropolitan or urban units (Branch 1988). Indeed the them, especially with the competing interests in the urban-rural fal. 1988; Ventura et tll. 1988), suburbanization (Befort transportation issues, often implies a substantial overlap betregional planning. The trend is such that urban planning institutionalized throughout the country (Bromley et al. 1989growth has been based on retaining local tax revenues and servicesubordination to larger regional entities.

Planning in a changing technological environment

The rapid adoption of GIS into urban and regional planning icould be considered part of the continuing computerization of p1985; Adler 1987; Dueker 1987b; Marble and Amundson 1988; L1989; Wiggins and French 1990). Early, primarily academic, compemphasized large, mathematically complex models as a means of and regional structures (Brail 1989; Harris 1989), and plan design The generality of these models, and the inability to determine optima from the infinite model permutations, led to these mdisfavour (Harris 1989). With the exception of handling the heavand regulatory load of planning agencies (Klosterman 1986; Landis 1988) and digital mapping (Wiggins 1986), there had been

in computer modelling in planning. GIS may now provide the integframework originally envisaged for large-scale optimizing models.Underlying the widespread adoption of GIS in planning have

technical and marketing developments in the computer and GISprogression from mainframe and timeshare computing to lowflexible, user-friendly microcomputer and workstation computing


5/19

Trevor M . Harri s and Grego

functionality. While funding for planning initiatives is limited, masought and acquired money for GIS implementation. As a result, capability is now both available and affordable to most planning of greater purport is the high cost and effort of generating databases, though even here a growing number of geographical datavailable from federal agencies. These provide both a stimulus to the basis of a planning database.

GIS also reshapes the planning organization and workplace. suggest that reorganization is a prerequisite for successful GIS(Crain 1987; Eason 1988). Institutional advances have not kept painnovation. Existing hierarchical organizational structures tend operation of manual data handling systems. New organizationasupport shared GIS databases are obligatory, though theypostponed. Furthermore, legal issues concerning privacy, informadata access and product liability have also been thrown into pro

(Epstein 1988a, 1988b; Dansby 1991; Dando 1991). These non-techrepresent some of the biggest challenges to the integration of Gand yet they have been overshadowed by the more immediate desitechnology (Chrisman 1987; Dueker 1987a; Saarinen 1987; Some

GIS in the planning environment

Geographic scale, in the form of geographical extent and spatial ras an organizing framework to examine the diversity of urbplanning. Dueker (1988), for example, suggests a spatial hierarchurban GIS applications as wide-area planning, service disanalysis, facilities management and engineering design. Certaiapplications are more prevalent at one scale of a planning project To illustrate this point, Appendix 1 (see pp. 22-7) provides a sGIS and planning initiatives drawn from publications of the UrbInformation Society of America (URISA). URISA is a major fdevelopments in the field of GIS and planning. The table is current developments across a range of geographic scales and applprovides the rationale for reviewing GIS applications in urbplanning at the national, state-provincial-regional, metropoli


6/19

4 GIS in urban and regional planning in North America

Other important national initiatives have supported the wider technology in planning. In a decentralized political system, coopfederal, state and local government agencies takes place in manyDigital data standards and specifications for data transfer are criticand have been addressed by central government in recent years. that will influence the potential of GIS applications in urban and stems from the publication of A Study of Lund Information bthe Interior. A second programme originates from the Fed

Coordinating Committee on Digital Cartography (FICCDC).The Department of Interior report identified the need to provid

comprehensive, consistent, nationwide network of compatible for use by federal, state, and local levels of government as well as (Ventura 1990: 632). The executive recommendations focused geodetic controls, standard base map information, property bouattributes, including legal rights. All these are data elements components in planning. In an analogous role, the FICCDC supporting the development of standards, specifications, proceduresfor data transfer in anticipation of the needs of a nationally distrInteraction and cooperation between government agencies in thwas deemed best effected by establishing data transfer standaimposing data specifications and standards at source. The additiassessments of data error and data lineage to federally produced DLG-E (extended) files, will be a model for other digital data p

improve the ability of end-users to recognize the real limitationproduced digital data.

In the US, national databases such as USGS Digital Line GraDigital Elevation Model (DEM) files, US Bureau of CensuIntegrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) data orthophotographs are in the public domain and distributed to plannthe mere cost of media reproduction. The availability of natiunquestionably encouraged the adoption of GIS within plannreleased CD-ROM, for example, contains every road and street and costs 99). Private firms are able to sell digital data obtained extensive value-added digital data industry has spawned to meet clean data. The frenetic marketing of GIS to undertake redistricting is indicative of the close links between national


7/19


8/19

16 GIS in urban nnd regionalplunning in North merica

power groups in federal government maintaining budgetary suppyear. TVA has been a noted centre for GIS development and exestablished a profitable activity in data conversion and GIS confederal, state and local agencies. Other non-federal trans-regionahave arisen to address common concerns. Associations of local been created to contend with cross-jurisdictional issues of publhazard mitigation. evacuation routing and hazardous mateForemost among these is BASIS, an extensive information

during the 1970s and 1980s in the San Francisco Bay area (Wi1991). The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) isplanning agency supporting private consultants and government levels (see Appendix 1 for typical applications).

In developing from a multi-user, mid-size, timeshare computowards a network of single-user workstations and microcomputypical of many GIS implementations. This trend shifts the integration in planning towards providing greater system decision-takers and lessens their dependence on intermediary number of technological and sociological reasons, decentralized ddifficult to achieve in practice (Eason 1988). One approach beindevelopment of spatial decision support systems and intelligent GIS non-specialists (Armstrong et al. 1991; Densham and Rus

Metropolitan county and municipal systems

The largest group of organizations to have adopted GIS are municmetropolitan authorities which have substantial responsibilities planning. It is here that the greatest potential exists for the continuGIS-assisted planning. Invariably these GIS projects tend jurisdictional and involve both public and private authorities. Mmany such implementations (Huxhold 1990). In large mecomprehensive multipurpose GIS operations are still rare due to complexity of the combined database and the managerial tasksinvolved. The politics and fractured nature of urban jurisdictions, of inter and intra-departmental coordination, have also constrainedcorporate GIS. GIS-based planning applications in the major metrNew York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Toronto and Montreal are


9/19


could emerge rapidly because of the promise of greater public planning. Insecure funding and institutional factors work deployment of top-down neighbourhood schemes and many appearin print than in reality. At the grass-roots level the considerable benland use inventory and control, enumeration of housing unitvacancy, value and condition have long been recognized by neighbourhood organizations and advocacy groups. Public informsuch as Santa Monicas PEN system, connect to elected

neighbourhoods and cities. Such systems provide information that could translate into political influence and power. In modimodel of the planning pyramid, Van Buren (1991) argues for relative mix of policy formulation, management and operations as the planning hierarchy from state agencies to local offices. Currencontrol over planning policy is exerted by those at the top administration pyramid. A GIS fully implemented at the local levepotential to challenge existing organizational bureaucracies, and public involvement in policy formulation and decision-making. however, public access to GIS is likely to be limited to local libagencies, and many Americans are more likely to encounter GInavigation devices.

Craig (1991) documents the considerable barriers to the use othat will impede the adoption of GIS at the neighbourhood scaledemocratizing influence of public access planning GIS. Even

available small-area data the level of disaggregation is stillneighbourhood use. Furthermore, concerns about individual conresulted in restricted access to such data. A traditionally narrow departmental goals will also limit the availability of data to other short-term departmental interests prevail then useful historical discarded. On the other hand, the genuine cost of maintaining andata is frequently a valid reason for a reluctance to disseminate the legal status of data access charges is equivocable, particularlysunshine laws and issues of data in the public domain. Legislabefore the US Congress to formalize such procedures. In Canautomatic right of access to government-generated data and small-area GIS is thereby hampered from the outset.

Because of the links between data acquisition and GIS develo


10/19

18 GIS in urban and regional p l nn ing in Nort h America

The adoption of GIS technology in planning is not a neutraldifferent consequences in the hands of the powerful in contrast Pickles (1991), for example, questions the potential of GIS technology capable of the control or normalization of individualsother institutions. In contrast to readily accountable profits of imefficiency, the benefits of more democratic planning through GIassessed. Previous participatory planning initiatives do suggest thaccess to information does not necessarily result in greater pub

There is a clear responsibility to take a pro-active role on the qaccess to information.

onclusions

Any attempt to classify the role and status of GIS in North Amerthe beginning of the 1990s must consider the effects of various teGIS and planning. As with any technological innovation, GIS political space economy, and conflicts between central and local and between commercial, private and public interests are delineation of these non-technological tensions and their resolutioan emerging focus of enquiry.

The foregoing review suggests that scale is an important factor dapplications in planning. GIS meets a fundamental need fordata-handling capability in planning at all levels. There is a heavy

application of GIS for regional economic planning. Statutory environmental conservation have also encouraged the developmenning applications. Significantly, while the planner may identify a handling and analytic capabilities of GIS, much of the support anfor GIS has originated for other reasons. The perception of GIS hi-tech, single-source solution to multiple problems, and the allureall-encompassing database has stimulated the necessary politifunding for GIS adoption. This perception has been fuelled by GIS

with inexpensive national databases, in the search for greater maWhile the technology of GIS is able to communicate acrosboundaries, inter-agency and inter-personal barriers suggest that not be realized without political instructions. Sociological considover technical issues, and the need to coordinate group access prominent concern


11/19


Armstrong, M. P., Rushton, G., Honey, R., Dalziel, B. T., De, S. and DDecision support for regionalization: a spatial decision support systemservice delivery systems. Comput ers, Envi ronment and U rban Syst em

Aronoff, S. (1989) Geographi c i nform at i on systems: a management perspWDL Publications.

Befort, W. A., Luloff, A. E. and Morrone, M. (1988) Rural land usechange in a rapidly urbanizing environment. Landscape and Urb345-356.

Bracken, I. and Webster, C. (1989) Towards a topology of geographsystems. I nt ernat i onal Journal of Geographi cal I nform at i on Syst ems, 3

Brail, R. K. (1989) The evolution of spatial modeling in the USA.Branch, M. C. (1988) Regional planning: int roduct ion and explanat ion. NBromley, R., Hall, P., Dutt, A., Mookherjee, D. and Benhart, J. E

development and planning. In Geography i n Am eri ca (G. L. Gaieds). Colombus, OH: Merrill.

Burchell, R. W. and Steinlieb, G. (eds) (1978) Pl anni ng t heory i n he 1980Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.

Burrough, P. A. (1986) Pri ncipl es of geographi cal i nform at i on systems fassessment . Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Cannon, J. B. (1989) Directions in Canadian regional policy. The 33(3), 230-238.

Chrisman, N. (1987) Design of Geographic Information Systems based ongoals. Phot ogram metr i c Engin eeri ng and Remot e Sensin g, 53(10), 1367-

Craig, W. J. (1991) Empty promises for small area data: monitoring using operational records. In U rban and Regional Inform ati on SysConference Proceedings,

Vol. 4, pp. 220-229. San Francisco.Crain, I. K. (1987) Non-technical factors in the design, selection and geographic information systems. In Geomat i cs appl i ed to munisymposium proceedi ngs, M ont real, 1987, pp. 327-334. Montreal: Surveying & Mapping.

Dando, L. P. (1991) Open records law, GIS and copyright protection; U rban and Regional I nform at i on Syst ems 1991 Annual Conference Proceedpp. 1-17. San Francisco.

Dansby, H. B. (1991) A survey and analysis of state GIS legislation.Proceedings, Vol. 1. pp. 441-450. Atlanta.

Dear, M. and Scott, A. J. (eds) (1981) Ur banizat i on and urban planning London: Methuen.

Densham, P. and Rushton G. (1988) Decision support systems for Behavi oural model li ng in geography and planni ng (R. GTimmermans, eds), pp. 56-90. London: Croom Helm.


12/19

20 GI S i n urban and regi onal planni ng in Nort h A meri ca

Epstein, E. (1988a) Legal aspects of global databases. In Bui l dingsci ence (H. Mounsey and R. F. Tomlinson, eds). London: Taylor

Epstein, E. (1988b) Litigation over information: the use and misuse of mi nt ernat i onal Sym posium on GI S: The Research Agenda,Washington, DC: NASA.

Fainstein, S. S. (1991) Promoting economic development: urban plannStates and Great Britain. Journal of t he A merican Pl anni ng Associat i

Goodman, R. (1979) The l ast ent repreneurs: Am eri cas regi onal w ars for Boston: South End Press.

Harris, B. (1989) Beyond geographic information systems : computprofessional. Journal of the Am eri can Pl anning Associat ion, 55

Haskins, B. R., Buchan, L. A., Thum, P. G. and Ventura , S. J. (1land use planning officials through use of land information system teand Regi onal I nform at i on Svst ems A ssociat i on Proceedi ngs, Ann ual CSan Francisco, Vol. 1. pp. 7Y-89.

Hopkins. L. (1984) Evaluation of methods for exploring ill-defined probland Pl anning B: Pl anning and Desi gn, 11, 339-348.

Huxhold, W. E. (1990) An i ntr oducti on to urban geographic infor mat ion Oxford University Press.

Klosterman, R. E. (1986) An assessment of three microcomputer sofplanning analysis. Journal of t he A merican Pl anni ng Associ at i on, 52(

Klosterman, R. E. and Landis, J. D. (1988) Microcomputers in US plannand future. Envi ronm ent und Pl anni ng B : Pl anni ng and D esign, 15(3)

Landis, J. D. (1990) Microcomputer-based GIS systems. Journal of thA ssociat i on. 56(2). 373-376.

Lcvinc, J. and Landis, J. D. (1989) Geographic information systems Journal of t he Am eri can Pl anni ng Associ ut i on, 55(2). 209-220.Lindhult. M. S.. Fabos. J.. Brown, P. and Price, N. (1988) Using geog

systems to assess conflicts between agriculture and development.Pl anni ng. 16(4), 3333343.

Maas, K. J. (1991) Development of the Utah state geographic informaUr ban and Regiona l I nfor mat i on Syst em.s 1991 An nual Conference Proceepp. 1244133. San Francisco.

Marble. D. F. and Amundson. S. E. (1988) Microcomputer-based geogrsystems and their role in urban and regional planning. Envir onmPl anni ng and Design, l S(3). 305-324.

Minnesota State Planning Agency (1983) M i nnesota Publ i c Lands, 1083.Management lnformation Center.

Mississippi Research and Development Center (1987) M ississippi Infor mati on System M ARI S: goals and objecti ves Jackson


13/19

Trevor M . Harri s and Grego

Somers, R. (1987) Geographic information systems in local governmenPhot ogram metr i c Engin eeri ng and Remot e Sensi ng, .53(10), 1379-1382.Star, J. and Estes, J. (1990) Geographic infor mati on syst ems: an i ntr odu

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.State of Maryland, Department of State Planning (1981) M AGZ S,

Geographic Information System. Baltimore: Department of State 81-13.

Taupier, R. and Terner, M. (1991) MassGIS: a case study of environmental/geographic information system. In Urban and Sy stems 1991 An nual Conf erence Pr oceedi ngs, Vol. 2, pp. 87-96.

Taylor, P. J. and Overton, M. (1991) Further thoughts on geography and and Planning A, 23, 1087-1094.

Tomlin, C. D. (1990) Geographi c i nform at i on systems and carto gEnglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Tomlinson, R. F. (1987) Current and potential uses of geographical informNorth American experience. Int ernati onal Journal of GeograpSystems, l(3), 203-218.

Van Buren, T. S. (1991) Rural town geographical information systems: issIn U rban and Regional I nform at i on Syst ems 1991 Annual Conference Pro3, pp. 136-151. San Francisco.

Ventura, S. J. (1990) Federal land and geographic information Phot ogram metr i c Engin eeri ng and Remot e Sensi ng, 56(S), 631-634.

Ventura, S. J., Niemann, B. J., Jr and Moyer, D. D. (1988) A information system for rural resource planning. Journal of Soil and W43(3), 226-229.

Vermont General Assembly (1988) Grow th Management Act (Act 2Vonderohe, A. P. and Saleh, R. (1991) Status of GIS within state transp

(abstract). Technical Papers 1991 ACSM-ASPRS Annual Conventioand GISLIS, 324, Baltimore.

Warnecke, L. (1992) Stat e geographic inform ati on acti vi ti es compendCouncil for State Governments.

Weber, G. (1987) Transferring GIS technology to community decision mGeography Conferences, Vol. 10, pp. 52-61. Binghampton: SUNY

Wellar, B. S. (1975) Urban data management systems. In Canada: Papers from t he 12t h Annual U RI SA Conference, Ur ban and RegionalSystems: Resources and Results, Vol. 1, pp. 377-391. Montreal.

Wiebe, V. N. (1986) The Burnaby experience with computerized mappinAuto-Cart0 London, Vol. 2, pp. 102-111. London: The Royal InstiSurveyors.

Wi i L L (1986) Th l t i k f i t


14/19

A

n

x1SeedGSa

co

inub

a

r

o

pa

n

1

L

o

S

e

Cm

e

syem

M

na

co

A

e

Dasoc

C

on

a

Sae

12

(See

Z

Up

e

Ssm

ch

dz

m

n

C

onaD

o

C

v

o

Dvso

oMn

a

G

o

M

s

Saewd

12

A

NO

O

Ua

Saewd

12

11

12

0

15

S

hCon

Saewd

11

12

A

NO

M

pepp

da

V

o

R

M

tae

sa

d

A

NO

M

pp

E

om

a

m

m

H

d

w

esn

Go

we

m

m

Ina

uue

pc

E

mc

d

om

Cm

y

d

om

R

o

saec

pa

n

Seseoeoc

ao

o

Cm

w

h

o

M

s

E

v

Oc

o

E

om

a

Aa

SaeoUa

Aome

Da

Ree

C

e

(A SCon

Sae

D

om

B

d

UG

q

DG

M

dg

zn

g

o

sos

fas

g

ec

Im

y

L

u1

S

cag

o

H

oodan

P

c

b

e

Tapao

nwk

O

sp

a

e

C

u

g

a

P

cwe

su

e

DG

DM

TG

A

c

a

po

o

C

be

da

DG

TG

L

c

SO

im

y


15/19

S

Fas

R

o

lhaegd

pR

e

NwY

k

R

o

n

ose

Fod

R

o

1c

e

E

T

R

o

MTPan

D

R

o

M

S

H

Cd

G Cm

eVso

AoC

E A

NO

O Up

e

v

oUp

e

M

pp

R

o

pan

Seseo

E

mcd

om

E

om

a

a

m

H

dm

m

D

so

su

R

m

c

o

(H

d

meas

tap

M

opoe

nua

reo

c

Fo

c

o

Wae

su

y

A

cuaub

d

om

E

mcd

om

R

o

pan

Emg

ep

T

a

as

Ce

svc

Sd

w

e

m

m

Tapao

n

a

m

Svcpan

S

n

Mk

np

inosyem

E

n

nF

e

m

m

Aoao

oB

Ae

G

nm

s(A

R

a

Pye

c

In

ue

C

e

o

Uba

E

om

a

Sue

S

hFodWae

M

m

Dsc

D

E

T

D

om

Aoao

D

E

T

C

oG

nm

M

sB

Tap

Ah

y

M

A

C

aTapao

Pan

Sa

C

MTTapao

C

e

M

pe

DM

TG

S

m

co

nwk

A

ap

oa

Im

y

E

n

n

dawn

Tm

ca

C

opcs

P

c

b

e

Tapao

C

uaa

e

E

om

a

Im

y

TG

C

Re

m


16/19

An

x1C

L

o

SL

sOsp

C

S

e

C

y

11U

Cm

esyem

Up

e

p

V

o

D

Mana

c

o

L

d

om

pce

D

om

te

Im

oacua

a

e

om

a

reo

c

S

LsOsp

C

y

C

PySaeUv

Da

so

t 2

T

ao

pc

da

g

UG

q

;

PanD

m

se

9=

C

Dvso

oFey

2

FeHd

33

Dgzp

cs

B

C

yo

m

h s 5 -_

L

C

yO

C

y

Cm

Up

e

m

n

poe

Hsb

o

C

y

C

yF

12

b

G

m

O pA

NO

CakC

yN

C

y

Ub

1:

2

Up

e

R

d

n

oy

Em

g

svc

L

e

d

m

m

Po

ya

as

Inauua

m

m

L

u

pan

Z

n

Em

g

m

m

M

pp

L

C

yP

c

WokD

R

o

nom

o

S

em

L

C

o

G

nm

s

C

yE

n

n

Svc

S

hw

FWae

M

m

Dsc

Emg

O

ao

C

e

A

ap

ob

; >

UG

DG

TG

Ce

egL

V

Oh

o

B

d

Cy

L

e

d

R

o&

Fo

C

o

G

DM

Dsc

R

o

Tap

Cms

o

L

V

V

eWae

Dsc


17/19

Pn

W

am

C

y

Cy

V

12

Jeo

C

y

C

y

TX

12

14

A

NO

M

pepp

A

NO

D

om

o

u

e

L

b

reoc

ino T

a

as

Ind

m

n

Oa

C

y

F

C

y

163

b

117

Lg

e

pcs

GO

SO

O

Po

ya

as

L

u

m

m

Ta

caysa

pa

n

M

o

a

Pc

D CakC

yS

Dsc

CakC

yS

ao

Dsc

D

oD

om

Amns

ao

O

c

oPan

A

m

s

SvcAh

y

D

oH

h

Ceko

hC

D

P

cWok

D

oFe&R

Svc

Pc

M

n

P

cS

s

G

a

R

sa

E

mcD

om

Jeo

C

y

A

as

Dsc

Oa

C

y

Poy

A

as

CyoOa

Oa

C

y

Pan

D

M

pe

C

o

Pcs

Z

n

C

yb

m

F

esom

dan

P

cb

e

Tapao

E

om

a

C

o

Pcs

TacA

ysZ

Esna

u


18/19

26 IS in urban and regional planni ing n N ort h Americm


19/19

A

M

Mdeo

W

Ano

TX

OoU

v

y

D

m

o

Ga

Gso

T

c

Svc

Sa

N

Ra

RaUb

Pna

C

y

Dsc

F

13

Ub

11

Twhp

11

120

b

14

a

RaS

c

y

PA

A

e

C

d

E A

NO

Up

e

p

rae

D SA OUM

p

CP

Up

e

p

A

dsp

o

m pA

NO

Fs

m

oa

d

om

Fm

ao

og

s

a

pce

D

nea

u

pa

dscs

Id

ymem

ao

saee

F

ysn

L

u

aenv

L

seseo

A

puo

m

m

Pum

m

n

Fo

anm

m

Fo

mgo

Poy

a

m

Cvcc

u

B

n

a

m

CyPa

n

D

Two

Mdeo

Pan

Cm

so

Uv

yoT

a

Ano

OoU

v

y

Ah

O

PnaPkWae

WaeM

m

Dsc

PnaC

y

Poy

A

as

O

c

G

DM

C

ubo

as

Sesa

ne

o

L

u

Pcse

d

P

cL

Sv

S

em

UG

DG

Oh

o

T

pcs

UG

UAmC

po

E

n

UD

Ss

C

vo

Svc

2

OoE

om

a

Poeo

(R

so

o

SdWae

R

UEAA

q

y

5

re

ao

30 f

F

aEm

g

:

M

m

A

2

(FM

F

RM

2

Fo

z

m

k

SWFodWae

?

M

m

Dsc

Fo

anto

o

Pcsb

m

S

c

U

SA

1

A

C

ee

Po

n

S

Fas

The Application of GIS in Urban and Regional Planning-North American Experience

Documents

Transcript of The Application of GIS in Urban and Regional Planning-North American Experience