Title:استفاده از GIS برای بهبود تصمیمات برنامه ریزی

۰۶-۰۵-۲۰۱۱ ارائه دهنده: دن مک فارلین این وب‌کست فقط برای مشاهده در دسترس است، برای اعتبارات AICP CM قابل استفاده نیست. GIS می تواند ابزار ارزشمندی برای ارائه اطلاعات برای تصمیم گیری های برنامه ریزی باشد. در این اولین از یک مجموعه دو قسمتی، به فرآیند بسته‌بندی در جوامع روستایی خواهیم پرداخت. قطعه بندی، یا تقسیم زمین در قطعات کوچکتر، به عنوان گامی حیاتی در تبدیل جوامع روستایی از مکان هایی که بر تولید چند ساله منابع طبیعی خام مناظر متکی هستند به مکان هایی که خود چشم انداز را برای مصرف و توسعه بسته بندی می کنند و می فروشند، برجسته می شود. درک تأثیرات نسبی عوامل منظر بر تقسیم زمین می تواند به تصمیم گیرندگان در تخصیص منابع حفاظت از زمین کمک کند.

قسمتي از متن فيلم: Hello my name is Cody Price and I just want to welcome everyone it is now one o’clock so we’ll begin our presentation shortly today on May 6 we’ll have our presentation on using GIS to improve planning decisions part 1 identifying factors that influence rural land parcel ization given by dan mcfarland for help

During today’s webcast please feel free to type your questions in the chat box found in the webinar tool bar to the right of your screen or call 1-800 two six three six three one seven for content questions please feel free to type those in the questions box and

We’ll be able to answer those at the end of the presentation during the question answer session here’s a list of our participating chapters divisions and universities and I just want to send a personal thank you out to the Wisconsin chapter for sponsoring today’s webinar here’s a list

Of our upcoming webcasts our next one will be on May 13th seekers stream crews consult and client relations and then on May 19th we’ll have new ideas for bike friendly communities you’ll be able to find a complete listing for 2011 and register for your webcast of choice by

Visiting WWE is org slash webcast I’m telling your team credits for attending today’s session please go to www.hsn select activities by day and then on underneath Friday May 6 you’ll see using GIS to improve planning decisions part 1 and this is up already so after the conclusion of today’s webinar you’ll be

Able to find this on the website to log credit and then we are recording today’s session so afterwards you’ll be able to find a PDF and video reporting at today’s webinar @ww utah APA org slash webcast archive and this should be up by the following Monday at this time I now like

To hand it over to Linda Stoll who will be introducing our speaker for today good afternoon I am Linda Stoll I am an outreach specialist with the Center for land use education at UW Stevens Point today my colleague Dan the crowling will be speaking he is a research specialist

With the center in our Center was formed to assist the communities of Wisconsin to meet a state required mandate for comprehensive planning we have since then branched out into a number of different planning arenas and dan is going to speak on one of those today so with that go ahead Dan good afternoon

Everyone and morning for those who are on the west coast my name is Dan McFarlane and welcome today’s presentation I’m going to talk about today some of the factors influencing rural personalization over the years or a few years ago we the Center for land use had had done some research on rural

Parcel ization and it’s been really well received and very a lot of folks have been interested in it so that’s why they asked me to present today and I believe the titles in part one there will be no part two so this will be the GIS component for rural parcel ization so

There will be no part two I guess is the the theme there so today I’m going to talk about some of the trends actually I’ll show you my overview here what is the meaning of parcel ization what do we would be talking about when we talk about personalization and why should we

Care about it with that will also show you hopefully use an innovative approach here to show you what I’m talking about to show you some trends I plan to use Google Earth here today to sort of virtually show you some parcels Asian trends that we were experiencing in

Rural America and then briefly go over some history and some of the causes and then I’ll wrap it up with some of the existing research trends out there what people are doing to measure par civilization or to assess parcel ization and then I’ll wrap it up with some of

The case studies that we’ve done here with the Center for land use education what I’ve been involved with so we’re going to go go ahead and get going here so parcels land parcels sir constitute sort of a fundamentally but largely invisible dimension of the landscape you can’t really see them but they’re there

And and there’s always been a confusion here right recently between parcels ation and fragmentation so what I mean with parcel ization is really sort of the division of parcels into progressively smaller parcels and then their subsequent sale on the market it’s through personalization that you know the land itself and the resources are

Consumed and packaged for retail consumption as real estate this phenomenon isn’t new it’s been going on for a long time but it can’t have profound profound effects on the economics of a rural area and the ecology as well and we’ll get into that so what we’re talking about parcel

Ization we’re talking about the division of land usually larger parcels into into smaller and then they’re sale on the market on the other hand fragmentation is the break breaking up of large contiguous blocks of land as this picture shows here you can see that the homes have perforated the forest

Landscape they’re the the definitions of fragmentation very the land ain’t landscape ecologists are pointed out that you know the rampant parcel ization of undeveloped rural lands particularly in forested areas inevitably leads to habitat fragmentation and now I’m gonna test this for everybody here and go to

Oops Google Earth and show you what I mean by some of our civilization usually parcels ation occurs before fragmentation for example like in a highly personalized forest it’s not necessarily ecologically fragmented however having many different landowner does create sort of a fragmented mosaic of management so this is northern

Wisconsin a heavily forested region that you’re seeing on your screen this is Google Earth by the way I recommend using it for those who like to go on virtual vacations this landscape here is heavily forested and when you look at it without the parcel lines here one would

Think that there’s a lot of forest land here it’s probably very a lot of timber productivity a lot of land resources here when you overlay the the current parcel landscape it tells a different story one would argue that this is highly parcel eyes and so this can have extreme

And dramatic impacts on the resources there in terms of forestry and others another example here is a planted subdivision without any development yet and so again one would argue that this is a highly personalized forest but it’s not necessarily fragmented and so what we’re trying to say here and show here

Is that you don’t have you know you don’t necessarily have fragmentation when you have personalization and we’re finding that a lot of rural areas aren’t really fragmenting or necessarily growing in terms of population but they are growing in terms of the number of parcels that are being carved out this

Is an example taken from a publication and I believe 2005 and what you’re seeing a lot is the desire of people to live in rural areas in order to do that they need to purchase property or to have a lot subdivided this is an example taken from a newspaper clipping of I

Believe it’s an industrial forest landowner in northern Wisconsin several years ago looking to divest some of its premiere land into large 40 acre parcels and then selling them on the market and so that’s a major concern especially among the forest industry is the loss of a lot of the productive industrial

Forest land in this way I want to point this out just as a division of tax parcels proceeds the division of ownership parcels the division of ownership parcels precedes changes in land use now or landscape fragmentation in this example here you see on the screen that should pop up

There it is the red boundary there highlights an ownership tract so the old one owner owns that I believe it’s about probably 20 acres there and the yellow lines are highlighting tax parcels and so as the statement there said Jeannette receives division of ownership parcels a lot of research has been done on

Ownership parcels looking at plat books and whatnot but that necessarily doesn’t show the true picture of what the intention of the land owner has here and you can see that here that the landowner had divided out a road right away and many smaller parcels in a very rural

Area and heavily forested and then the subsequent sale on the market in fact there’s only one lot in this subdivision that’s developed but you can see that fragmentation has already occurred driveways the road and other home sites have been created and I also want to fly

To that one with you and I’ll wait until Google Earth displays for you this subdivision was planted a few years ago near else north central Wisconsin C Google Earth is a little slow so we’ll wait until it catches up for you here’s the subdivision as it looks right now

Mostly undeveloped there’s one home in the center on the right there and what we find interesting is what colleague of mine had driven past there a few years ago and took a picture of the entrance to that and the picture should pop up here for you we just find it kind of

Ironic that this is the name of the subdivision they called it forest edge and as Wow my colleague was taken small fox was running through we find it ironic because the subdivision is there basically creating more forest edge and more forest fragmentation even though it’s it’s mostly empty so what’s driving

Personalization we’re finding nationwide that development pressure in rural areas continues to grow historically if you think way back rural populations outnumbered urban areas in fact most people lived in rural areas up until the early 20th century due to mechanization the Industrial Age there was a less need

For people to be society and I guess in rural areas and there was a large from exodus of rural populations and they moved to the cities however since about the 1950s that has changed and you see a large push of people leaving the cities and moving back to the rural areas

Towards their I guess they’re agrarian pass and the graph here on the Left shows that you know part of that is you know people are moving back to rural areas not to back to their Geary their agrarian past and doing farming and forestry and other extractive resources

They’re moving back to rural areas in more of a consumptive manner and sort of wanting to live there to enjoy the open space themselves and you’re seeing farm land loss and some of our most productive states but you’re also seeing people wanting more elbow room if you

Look at the graph at the right the urban the US population over the last is projected to increase about 24 percent but the amount of land development in terms of how much land per person they consume is expected to increase a lot more and so I guess the alarming trend

With that is that you know these rural areas provide the food the fiber the minerals for an even bigger population but we’re we’re carving out the land and and trying to get more goods of a smaller land base which is causing concern we’re also seeing some nationwide trends in terms of folks

Looking at some survey data of forest inventory survey data and we are noticing that forest parcel sizes are decreasing in fact since about 1953 you’re finding private forest land parcels have decreased from 44 acres per private landowner non-industrial private landowner to about 14 acres and that’s causing concern because the smaller the

Parcel size the less likely you are to manage for forestry and then if you look at the size distribution of those one acre to nine acre size class’ is where majority of the landowners are however if you look at the amount of land owned it’s the large landowners there’s very

Few of them that own 10,000 or more acres but they do own the majority of the forest land a lot of that’s the industrial forest landowners there but this is an alarming trend especially for resource managers trying to any lot on the paper mills and pulp mills as well

Trying to find enough material for their mills this neck slide once it pops up here it’s some more summary statistics again since some of the forest land orders most of the parcel ization literature that you find is forestry base there really isn’t much else out there in terms of other types

Of land cover land use mostly forest based so this is what I’m pulling from and so right now we’re seeing about 94 percent of the forest land owners owned less than 100 acres another trend an alarming trend is that the the aging forest landowner most of them are over

۶۵ years and older and they account for about 90 million acres and also the 10 to 50 acre range that number has doubled over the last two decades and so you’re finding a lot of sort of small to medium sized forest land parcels and every year about 150,000 new forest land owners or

Purchasing forest property and so you’re seeing a large number of new people with very different I guess backgrounds than the traditional forest landowner so now we talk the effects of parcel ization I guess these can sort of be broken down into socio-economic consequences and ecological consequences so first here

With smaller parcel sizes it creates a diminished economy of scale especially with forestry and the same goes for farming as well it’s much more difficult for forest managers and timber companies to manage wood supply and a smaller on a smaller parcel personalise forests are also difficult to manage resulting in

Lower profitability new residents disapprove of land management practices they come from diverse backgrounds and diverse geographic areas and with that I want to show another Google Earth view here what I mean by diverse landowners what I had done with this what you’ll see here is I took some parcels from

Northern Wisconsin which has seen a lot of a many amenity led parcels ation and development and we’re getting it’s experiencing a lot of landowners from out of the region and so if you look at this they call it a spider diagram so I used GIS here to map the basically home

Address of what’s listed on the parcel data and zooming out you can see that a majority of the land owners come as far as away is the east coast most of them are from majority of them are from Duluth area Minneapolis st. Paul so a lot of urban residents own property up

Here and so when you’re trying to plan with a such a diverse a stakeholder group it could be a very challenging part of it is is these people are seasonal they’re not there very often one of the other things we’re finding is a lot of these are waterfront property

Owners and so I work with folks here at the University that are trying to put mannat lake management plans together with with a lot of these parcel i’s lakes and trying to get everybody together with consistent views on how should we manage and protect our lakes becomes very

Challenging with a diverse and so mapping this spider diagram really helps to show you know what’s happening to some of these amenity areas with natural features that are driving rural development one of the other effects that we’re seeing with that’s been pointed out in the literature with parcel ization is especially in forested

Regions is that a lot of pine plantations are being parceled off and sold to people who find them to be very attractive wilderness secluded areas however foresters are are viewing these at you know as very fire prone areas and so if I show you another example of that

I hope nobody is getting turbulence here and sick watching me fly to these areas I apologize on my screen it’s very smooth however as I watched the audience view I see that it’s much choppier but this next area I want to show you is the Pine Barrens of Northwest Wisconsin

There’s a lot of pine plantations very sandy soils what you’re finding is a lot of the the owners of the land whether they’re industrial for spent orders are private landowners is there there they’re clear-cutting the pine plantations are logging them off or select cutting them and subdividing them into many rural Lots

Like this and then you know marketing them to urban folks that find them very attractive wilderness areas but they’re you know the the planning folks and the forces are finding these are very susceptible to fire and damage there we also find it increased need for public services when you have personalization especially low

Density parcel ization this increases the need for public services ensuing tax increases reduces the profits from farming and roll crop production which I guess in turns accelerates the decline I mean they are already startling number of farm producers out there especially in Wisconsin and what I’ll show you

There is another trend you’re finding in some of the more agricultural regions in terms of parcel ization is here in southern Wisconsin which is very agriculturally productive you’re firing finding large large lot development and part of that has to do with the zoning ordinance allowing for large Lots for rural development but

What that does though is it’s creating these very low-density developed areas what you see here on your screen here are many 40 acre parcels that was once productive farmland that are now very large lawns with very long driveways and so to service these to provide emergency management vehicles to get back there or

Like electricity or school buses becomes very expensive to service parcels ation patterns like this very long driveway some of some of these upwards to a half of a mile and so those are it’s a fairly predictable fiscal impact when you’ve got this kind of load low density development we’re also finding farmland

Fragmentation in the literature you will hardly find anything about farm land fragmentation you hear a lot about forest land fragmentation but the same concepts apply with with farm land fragmentation what I highlighted here were some homes in yellow home Lots here in a very agriculturally productive area

And you’re noticing that these home lots are perforating the productive farmland and what happens then is sort of the more edge you have around a farm field edge between you know an egg use versus a non egg use such as residential development you find increased conflicts between farmers and non farmers those

Residents complaining about the smell of manure the noise pesticide application and so the more you fragment a farming landscape the more likely it is that it’s going to be converted probably anyway just due to the lack of capacity for farming and it does create a lot of tension that we’re finding between the

New residents and the farmers what it’s a more fragmented landscape other social consequences with parcel ization is the loss of recreational open space residents often complain about lands that they used to be able to to have access to are now sold and split and the new residents you know want that for

Their own secluded peaceful place and so they’ll put no trespassing signs up as a result of that you’re finding increased pressure on our limited public lands and you’re finding a lot of recreational conflicts on those public lands because there’s more pressure especially between those that are trying to use it in a

More peaceful quiet manner like the photo on the bottom right there and those that are trying to do a little more loud motorized recreational uses on our public lands and so you’re seeing some more social conflicts and loss of open space with continued parcel ization can you see this photo before another

Effective per personalization is eventual forest fragmentation so that there’s a time lag there just because personalization doesn’t necessarily mean fragmentation is gonna happen but it does increase the chances and so by parcel izing a forested landscape it increases the odds that roads will go in building sites will go in driveways powerlines

All creating less forest core area and fragmenting it and in a fragmented landscape increases or encourages the spread of a invasive and exotic species roads provide sort of these utility corridors for them it enhances the habitat for edge species and might reduce the number of more desired species that need large

Core areas may also see a decrease plant animal diversity sort of the negative consequences of forests or a landscape fragmentation in general we’re also seeing forest health impacts with our civilization at least in the Upper Midwest researchers has found that the succession of the forest bass especially in commercially valued species such as

Aspen and oak and pine are reverting to more or less desired species on parse alized landscapes partly because the new owners are less likely to manage for higher desired species and the consequence of that is a lot of the mills paper and pulp mills rely on these higher valued species and when they’re

Not available at least in close proximity they have to rely on outside sources but we’re seeing some of the mills here in central and northern Wisconsin laying people off or even closing right now because of the lack of demand and part of that is the high transportation cost of bringing in new

Materials I mean also areas with a lot of natural amenities like lakes lakes are such a strong driver of parcel ization is that we’re seeing 2nd and 3rd tier and beyond development along those links and so with that you’re seeing degradation of a lot of these sensitive resources wetlands and lakes with an

Increased parcel ization and development increases runoff which eventually degrades water quality and can threaten aquatic ecosystems and I want to show example of that as well I apologize for using mostly Wisconsin examples but that’s where I’m mostly familiar with and that’s where most of my data that I

Have to show you comes from so now we’re going to go back up to northern Wisconsin where we have an abundance of freshwater inland lakes and a lot of parcel ization and development and this example here you can see that the amount and dense parcel ization now granted the to keep

In mind this area is very remote it’s very rural but looking at the parcel landscape you can see that most of these lakes are heavily parcel eyes adding to increased runoff and a lot of these lakes do have issues with runoff and water quality the other example here

I wanted to show it was the second and third tier development is that once the waterfront is divided lakes are still such a strong driver for personalization is that you are seeing just being relatively close to a lake is highly valued in this example right here you

Can see that roads and parcels are being carved out second and third tier and beyond from some of these lakes so next I want to talk drivers of parcels ation I kind of alluded to those a little bit such as some of the natural amenities but the drivers of our civilization that you’ll

Find in the literature they talk about basically two types of drivers there’s the demand side of personalization and then the supply of parcels and on the demand side you’ll find that not surprisingly urbanization or population growth is one of the biggest drivers of personalization as there’s more people

We need more land more space to house them that even Orlan to live and so that is one of the largest drivers of that and I want to show you an example of that of suburbanization that I think is really interesting to show this is an example of parcel ization really a

Subdivision development in Southwest United States just north of Albuquerque I mean it may take you a little bit to fly there with the Google Earth what’s quicker than a normal flight and I’ll wait for it to catch up so what you’re looking at right now is an elevated view of just a subdivision

North of Albuquerque and as i zoom in here you’ll notice some patterns showing up on the landscape those are actually roads that have been scraped in and as I get in closer you’re gonna see parcels appear and so a growing population requires more land needed for people to

Live and I hope the parcels show up for you there we go you see there are actual lots that have been subdivided this is a I forget how many hundreds of square miles of Lots that have been created what I’m going to do is pan here and show you a large

Subdivision that was planted I believe in the 1970s due to urbanization and growing population it was a premature subdivision and you’ll notice that this thing goes on for miles with some very scattered homes that are popped up in here roads called the sacks are in here it’s

Quite amazing when I saw this this amount of parcel ization now the problem with this is that the demand quite wasn’t there for it at the time and the challenge with that as a planner is that over time the needs that the desires the policies change and so yeah we’re still

Moving here a lot of these Lots will probably become non-conforming but a lot of them have been sold to distant buyers and they look at it as a retirement property when they retire they may want to come here and you know and if might find that it’s no longer buildable

Because of the some of the ordinances that are in place and so I just thought I wanted to show this example of what we mean by a growing population even though the population isn’t quite large enough to fill this subdivision the next the man scientist values and motivations

Today people want open space they want elbow room there’s a strong desire for people to to own a second home or a seasonal home that’s sort of been ingrained in us and the recreational land especially hunting fishing camping is a growing activity among people and so owning land for for an outdoor

Lifestyle is appealing and they want that and part of it is is they have the means to do that people are wealthier now than they have been in the past and so a lot of these rural areas with natural amenities are a premier playground for this kind of activity and

You find rules and regulations and are historically have been weaker in rural areas and so the supply for parcels has been relatively easy to get people relish in the ease of rural property I guess and then the third thing here is natural capital what I mean by natural

Capital I’m talking about the amenities themselves lakes are a very strong driver if you look at the bottom picture there there’s such a strong driver that people are willing to create Lots like that just to be on the waterfront and to have access to that we’re finding though

That once you know people can’t afford lakefront property or it already becomes totally developed some of the next best places are where people are looking to to own property and that’s our forest land like I’m the right there you’re seeing subdivisions being carved out into some of our productive forest lands

But also other areas and I want to show you some examples of that as well again using Google Earth and I’m going to fly to another area in Wisconsin that we’re finding we’re teasing out with some of our research that are becoming attractive amenities for folks

And so what you see here is in south-central Wisconsin and I hope it shows up for you there we go I’m gonna try to give you an oblique angle with this using the 3d capabilities of Google Earth and you’ll notice that favorable views or places with long views are becoming very

Attractive places and are being subdivided and parceled off and developed in this area here is one example there’s many other out there that we’re finding that once waterfronts divided and parcel eyes we’re finding that other areas such as places with favorable views other things you’ll find

In the literature is that some of the protected open spaces are becoming prime real estate such as our national parks and for that I’m going to take you out to an example out west in Colorado where people are finding that our national parks are becoming islands themselves because they’re becoming completely

Developed almost nearly around or personalized round and so what you’ll see here is just outside of Rocky Mountain National Park once it catches up here is you’ll see that parcels will pop up and you’ll see how they’re personalizing this if you can notice the parcel lines here along the ridges here

In the mountains is that our national parks are becoming islands themselves and they’re leading to sort of isolated patches of habitat for what they were designed for in the first place and a lot of that was for protecting some of the species there and we’re finding that

Some of these parks may not be big enough for some of the species that they meant to protect so here’s some of the parcel lines showing up here is we’re finding lots of subdivisions being carved out up and through the valleys and along the ridges here and sold to a

Lot of seasonal and recreational homeowners from far off urban areas it’s a growing trend Yellowstone Rocky Mountain National Park are becoming parce alized in terms of their perimeters so now I’m going to talk about the supply side of parcel ization again most of the literature deals with forest land parcel

Ization and what I was able to dig up is on the supply side you find that one of the first things is death when a landowner dies you find that oftentimes the owner will subdivide the property amongst the sons and daughters and so over time you find an increased parcel

Wise landscape now one of the alarming trends that I had talked about before is the growing age of forest landowners and most of them forget what percentage it was but a lot of the four sign owners are over the age of 65 and so relatively soon were expecting to be a large

Turnover in ownership and what that could mean is that we’re going to see increased rate of parcel ization due to that the other thing is high taxes you see that a lot of times again when a landowner dies and it’s inherited by their their kids as the kids often will

Sell it or subdivide it to pay for high inheritance taxes sometimes that’s a burden and they can’t afford it so in order to do that they will often often partial eyes their properties for that taxes in terms of property taxes also as a burden especially in forest lands

Where forest lands are you know is subjected to property taxes and if the tax rate surpasses or approaches the appreciation value or at least the forest value of know an owners find it more profitable to subdivide for other use even despite the ecological services that forest lands provide federal and

Local taxes often do little to encourage the economics of forest land ownership you find more of that in farmland one of the other big suppliers of parcels is land speculation you find that developers especially not so much now but you did in the 1950s and 60s land speculation was very big and very

Problematic the Uwe it’s a sharp rise in income following World War two population grew with the baby boomers and a large and that graph I showed earlier about land development increased and so at the time people were leaving or wanted to leave these congested cities these dirty cities you know for

Better schools peaceful areas and solitude and so they were seeking rural communities and what happened as developers took advantage of that a lot of times with fraud or pre planted subdivisions and so they were able to take advantage of very weak lacks subdivision and planting ordinances in

Many rural areas and they rushed to sell as many Lots as they possibly could by exploiting you know the American dream of people owning a home out in the country this happened particularly in in Florida in the southwest similar to what you saw near Albuquerque there with that

Subdivision but another example I wanted to show you of extreme land speculation and fraud actually occurred in Florida and many of you are probably aware of this but this is a subdivision that was planted in the 1950s in Florida all at one time I believe it’s just outside of

Orlando or something but as you see it here you’ll again notice streets have been carved out onto the landscape and I’ll wait again for Google Earth to catch up to us here there we go so what you see here is a large subdivision miles and miles now as i

Zoom in here you’re going to notice parcels pop up and this was planet at once and there are thousands and thousands and thousands of parcels and these parcels were sold mostly by mail or through newspapers and you can see here the parcels and it goes on for

Miles now I don’t know if you can tell what the landscape here is forested but it’s also very wet this is part of the Everglades system canals were dug in to try to drain it but given the amount of rain and some of the tropical storms of Florida gets is proving challenging now

A lot of this land has been purchased back and is put into a State Forest I believe but at the time and what you’re finding is you know these developers sold these Lots you know by mail sight unseen folks from New York big cities saw the glamorous ads in the newspaper

And purchased them as retirement properties and they would retire and come down here and find that their lot was actually underwater and could not be built on and so it was very challenging people were upset and so there there are methods and approaches and tools to alleviate this in terms of buying

Properties back but when you’re talking about thousands of landowners from you know across the globe own owning properties conglomerating these parcels back together is proving very challenging the northern part of this subdivision once it catches up here you’ll see is sporadically developed again increasing the cost of services maintaining these roads busting these

Children fragmenting the forests and the habitat here there we go now you can see some of the developed part of it and as a result of this the fraud and some of this land speculation here and the headaches that causes the federal land or the federal government passed the interstate land sales full

Disclosure act back many years ago to sort of limit this type of fraud and selling of lots and believe any subdivision over 100 Lots has to be registered with the federal government and so that sort of helps to alleviate that another trend you’re also finding with I guess you can call it land

Speculation or the supply of parcels is that a lot of private landowners are supply in the market with with parcels and you’re finding that farmers or other large landowners are seeking to sort of liquidate their small portion of wealth and land by selling some dividing their property for retirement and so you’re

Seeing that not only do developers and whatnot are adding to the rural land market in terms of parcels but you’re finding that a lot of the private land owners are adding to that as well now some folks would think that you know real parcel A’s personalization isn’t

Necessarily a bad thing you know new people bring in new ideas raises revenue and creates jobs but that always isn’t the case especially with subdivisions like this here especially with these large pre-plan and subdivisions is that with the baby boomers looking to retire some of these areas that have undergone

Parcel ization and have a lot of vacant lots now have been undergoing huge population shifts people are retiring there and they don’t really have the adequate services to support a population like that and so you’re finding a lot of negative impacts of some of these rap and parcel ization areas

And then some of the other supplies is globalization and what I mean by that is you’re talking about some of these industrial forest landowners historically they’ve been mostly locally a local company in terms of where they owned their property and where they did their business however over the past

Several years as you’re finding that a lot of these locally owned private industrial forest companies are being purchased by global companies and their interest isn’t necessarily timber or Forest Products a lot of it what you’re finding is that they’re divesting some of their properties some of their premier property for hire more immediate

Returns and so the globalization of a lot of the forests in which industry is causing a lot of concern among planners in rural areas especially those that have an adequate amount of forest land dust riyal forest land and the other thing is this technology and infrastructure technology especially

With the internet folks are able to live at home so they are not necessarily tied to a specific place of work they can now live out in rural areas near where they want to be and you can work from home and the other the other thing I want to

Show you is and talk about is infrastructure the interstate highway system has really led to a lot of rural parcels ation rural development and you’re gonna see here again in southern Wisconsin where an interchange along in the interstate has influenced a pattern of personalization here there we go is

You find that you know now folks can quickly get to work and live out in the country due to the some of the transportation infrastructure improvements that we’ve made across the country and so here’s a pattern in a very heavily productive farmland area you’re finding near this intersection

Here folks could easily get on the interstate and so you find a personalization pattern here now this is likely to grow potentially in the future so now I want to talk about some of the historic trends parcels agents like I said before personalization isn’t new it’s been happening for a very very long

Time this snapshot here is from is actually from Europe in France I believe and it shows land ownership that has gone on and land I guess parcel ization for centuries and you can see it’s a very complex system their subdivision has gone on for centuries they’re creating very complex system very narrow Lots

And so how we divide our land and sell our land it goes back a long time and part of that’s due to the you know the government’s duty for enforcing private property rights and so in order to resolve those you know states need a clear method of determining where one

Person’s land ends and another one’s meets and so over time the states have become more demanding of house surveys and records are maintained hopefully to mitigate some of those issues this is the French long lot system here that you see and this pattern you also see in the

United States as well because the French were some of the earliest settlers in the United States this slide here I took a screen shot of a County’s data in Louisiana this is an oxbow lake along the Mississippi again this is the law French long lot system pattern here and

This shows centuries you know 200 years of land division in the United States and this system you know the decision to to I guess divide your property this way has implications far into the future we’re still dealing with complications like this with this system emphasis was

Placed on you know on the water you want an access to the water so that you know at the time water was the main transportation routes and so now not having access to water it wasn’t a good thing and so when someone would you know split their land for offspring or for to

Sell to another owner they wanted to make sure that that land would sell in order to do that they had to make sure we had access to water and so over time you filing lots of long narrow Lots the challenge with this though is that you know floods especially in this part of

The country rivers change course and so you find that property boundaries are being bisected by you know a new river channel but also it’s a very complex system with very thin very thin properties and so you know again the decision to have this kind of system has

Implications far into the future so how we personalize our landscape even today we know is going to have implications far into the future as well centuries from now the other system I want to talk about is the meets and balanced system that you find in the eastern United States this is a snapshot

From eastern Tennessee parcel boundaries here overtop of an aerial photo and again this is several hundred years of land division in East Tennessee and this type of pattern of subdividing land use natural features to subdivide properties like trees rocks and ridge tops and streams and by doing so it’s a much more

It’s a very complex looking very random pattern but also it you know research is finding that this pattern is less fragmenting because they’re using not arbitrary boundaries but they’re using natural features for boundaries especially along the middle diagonal there is a ridge top you can see there’s a purse

Boundaries go from the top right to the bottom left that line there that’s a ridge top there so they use natural features for that the advantage of this again using natural features you know maintain the natural landscape and reduce fragmentation and many people find it more in a more appealing look

When they’re driving through that rural area it does have disadvantages though using natural features they’re not permanent and so they’re by you know verifying property boundaries can be challenging especially if a tree is no longer available or there or a river changes course and and moves property

Boundary shifts and you find a lot of conflicts with this type of system as well so after if we step back a little bit and talk about when the United States gained its independence it acquired a whole bunch of land and so in order to divest its land which it was

Interested in doing early because it wanted to get rid of government-owned land and put it into private ownership partly to raise tax revenue to increase the wealth of the country it needed a system that was less complex as the previous to the French Launch System and the metes and balance it was

Very complex and there were a lot of disputes and so they developed a public land survey system again a lot of you were probably aware of this it’s a rectangular system that divides the land into sections and townships and down to quarter quarter sections it’s very square but it was very

Effective in quickly being able to subdivide land and so if you think about one of the all-time parcel ization events one could argue that the public land survey system was one of the largest and public person events in the US history when it personalized and divided and described a lot of its

Western lands from Ohio westward but the PLSS has also played a formative role in land ownership patterns given that the spatial layout of it is very square allowed folks to sort of live in low-density fashion and I want to show you an example of a couple examples of

The PLSS system one is going to be in Ohio and I’ll show you the the landscape pattern of that so here’s an example of the PLSS system implemented in Ohio again a couple hundred years of land division in Ohio very rural very farm based very square you find the dark

Patches you see are isolated forest patches if you zoom in parcels will show up here and you see very square parcels following the public land survey system roads every mile and parcel boundaries that don’t necessarily conform to the landscape the drainage system the drainage pattern so when trying to

Implement you know runoff management plans or stormwater or something like that it becomes a very challenging when you’ve got many different landowners with the arbitrary parcel lines that don’t really conform to the natural landscape the other example I wanted to show you is out west as another implication of the public land survey

System was the railroad land grants and I’m not going to go into the history of the railroad land grants but essentially the United States government every other mile section was given away to the railroad companies which in turn was then sold to a lot of the private or the

Industrial forest companies and then the federal government maintained ownership of all of the other diagonal parcels as well and so what you see here is a checkerboard pattern of forest management the dark areas being mature forests that aren’t necessarily logged those are government held properties and the lighter shades here like in the

Center are actively harvested areas private forest companies and they’re mostly clear-cut and so from space or from out they have a distinct checkerboard pattern now this is evident all over the western United States and what’s interesting is when you get an oblique view of this and again the one

Of the implications with the public land survey system was that they don’t conform to natural features or boundaries or topography and so you find that a bear it’s very fragmenting and that’s what some of the conservationists across the country have argued is that this system is increased fragmentation

Due to the squaring of fields and forests along arbitrary boundary lines others a peep you know argue that it’s very it’s less appealing and it’s too controlled it will look like what we saw in Ohio so that’s some history on land division techniques not all rural areas

Are growing though this is a picture of some rural areas in Wisconsin during the Great Depression areas that don’t have abundant amenities and natural features you know aren’t experiencing personalization or growth in fact during the Great Depression area era a lot of rural rural communities lost population

This is a plat book that you see in Douglas County Northwest Wisconsin in the 1930s or 40s I believe and you can see it’s all parse alized all privately owned and after about ten years or certainly after during the Great Depression you saw reverse parcel ization in fact

Many people just abandon their lands and they left and they couldn’t make a living off of some of this land and so they left and you saw a reverse parcel ization the green shaded here you see has reverted back into public ownership and the the county now maintains that

And so you saw what was once a parcel wise landscape privately owned now half of it is is actually one landowner the county with much larger parcels many response strategies to parcel ization wisconsin was one of the first states to implement rural zoning and encourage rural zoning part of that was

Due to what you saw the previous slide and people living in far-flung rural Wisconsin it was very expensive to maintain roads for a landowner on the end of a dead-end road to bust some of these kids way out in the middle of nowhere and so zoning has been implemented to address some of

These as well also subdivision ordinances and one of the you know probably lesser used strategies or tools for implementing parcel ization however you find that with the example of the picture you see there there are a lot of people that try to you know subdivision Torrance’s oftentimes tend to be weak

Especially in rural areas and people will obviously oftentimes try to dodge the subdivision review ordinance this example use appears to be a subdivision that has a road in a cul-de-sac and many Lots however this subdivision did not go through a public public review process or a subdivision review process because

The subdivision ordinance was rather weak stating that I think in order to be reviewed it had to have five parcels one and a half acres or less well the landowner here decided to put a road in and create parcels that were larger than the required minimum therefore not

Triggering a review process and at the time when the they sold the Lots and it was developed the road was a private road however you know the first big snowfall people in the town the Town Board or the the Town Road crew was getting called to have the road plowed

And the town said well this is an are that that’s not our road we don’t maintain it eventually the town ended up taking it over but it shows some of the challenges of you know landowners playing developer and and taking it into their own hands as you find that a lot

Of the roads and parcels aren’t up to code would there aren’t enough stormwater management techniques in the subdivision but as some people ordinances they are you’re finding to be a little more innovative here recently to address some of those concerns other strategies you’re seeing purchase of development rights programs transfer development

Rights and also one of the bigger things you know because of personalization and the loss and development of sensitive lands as you saw I think it wasn’t about the 1970s you saw really the growth of land Trust’s and conservation easements purchasing land to limit to limit parcel

Ization on some of these properties and so now I’m going to talk a little bit about some previous research on parcel ization you know parcel ization research does not go back very far most of the research has been rather new and they focus on the drivers of personalization through surveys dealing with

Stakeholders and then the other research that you find is people who are trying to measure parcel ization in trying to get a handle on you know how do we quantify parcel ization and and how they’ve done that is essentially they’ve counted the number of landowners they

Are the number of parcels in an area and and documented that over time or they documented the change in average parcel size so most of the analysis and parcel ization has been non spatial in nature and as I alluded to before is parcel ization does lead you know Papa sized

Lead to fragmentation so pattern of parcel ization does matter and that’s kind of what I want to show here and talk about here is the conventional way to measure parcel ization was to use average parcel size with the number of parcels and there’s several studies out

There that try to show that yeah the number of parcels are increasing and if you look at this example here this hypothetical landscape is both of these have the same number of parcels and the same average parcel size and so so one would without looking at the pattern would assume that they’re the

Same but they’re not in fact the pattern is very different and so we tried to do here with the center for land use education is try to use a more spatially sophisticated approach on analyzing parcel ization can we quantify the pattern because pattern does matter we

Have the tools available to do that now such as GIS and landscape ecology and so one of the reasons why you don’t see a lot of studies at least historical studies of parcels ation is because there’s really inadequate data most of the data is paper records publish plat

Books that go back a long ways but they’re in a paper format sometimes they don’t even exist and there’s inconsistent data especially if you’re looking at between different municipalities or different counties the way they record them is different and that proves as a challenge so now I want

To talk about how the Center for land use used GIS to study and analyze parcels Asian we received a grant a few years ago to address this and study parcels Asian and our goal was to take those paper records and come up with an historic paper a digital record spatial

Database of parcel patterns so we recreated historic land parcels Asian patterns over time in two different communities in Wisconsin one was in the northern flora stood region to understand some of the forest patterns going on and the other was in the southern portion looking at farm land

Parcels Asian and what we really wanted to do our objectives were to you know see if we got a spatial metrics other than number and average size to really Express the spatial pattern of our civilization and our other goal was to you know see if we can predict parcel

Ization using some of the factors or landscape factors that influence it you know looking at a current parcel layer there’s definitely a pattern there and if you overlay that on top of slopes and water and wetlands and roads there appears to be things that are influencing where parcels are being

Created so we wanted to see if we can come up with an historic temporal database in terms of parcels and land cover and these other variables and see if we can’t model parcels patient and then the other third thing we wanted to do is to see you know what is the link between

Parcel ization land use change and fragmentation there’s a hypothesized link that yeah parcels ation does lead to fragmentation but we wanted to get at sort of you know does it really or is there you know what is that time lake between when a parcel is created and when land use for fragmentation occurs

So one of the reasons why you don’t see a lot of personalization research especially going back that far is that again it’s in digital it’s in paper format and so it took us nearly two years to recreate parcel data layers for six towns in two counties what we did is

We researched archival tax assessment records we basically started with the current digital tax parcel layer and work backwards we merged parcels into their parents so to speak based on a PIN number that was recorded in the tax rolls and we use supplementary data plan books and local knowledge as well in

Addition to creating historical parcel layers we also collected and ortho rectified archived historical aerial photos as well so we were able to generate historical land cover land-use data layers that mirrored some of the dates that we had parcel data for and so we’re able to generate and know these

Historical land cover data layers as well to try to tease out some of these trends and variables so here’s a two graphs that show for two of the four three of the town’s in our southern County or farmland County using traditional metrics the number of parcels created over time from 1953 to

۲۰۰۵ and then the average parcel size now this is what a lot of other researchers have done to quantify trends and parcel ization and by just looking at this graph the blue line on the left is the town of Lodi had the most parcel creation during that time period

Springvale having the least and the town of West Point red having about the middle and you would have suspect on the right you know that the average parcel size would reflect the number of new parcels and so looking at these two graphs one would say well Lodi and West

Point had the most parcel ization and the town of Springville had the least however if we put on our spatial glasses here and and try to look at this landscape in a different lens trying to apply landscape ecology metrics we might find that it’s not so much the number

And quantity and size of parcels as it is the patterns and so that was our approach to this and just a little primer on landscape ecology is landscape ecology and with that you utilize maps remote sensing data and species information to improve the understanding of species and ecological landscapes

Essentially what they’re trying to do is you’re trying to quantify and measure a landscape spatially what is the pattern of it the the field has grown tremendously the last twenty years I mean you’re finally starting to see it infiltrate into the planning realm especially with you know mapping

Corridors and core area and kind of you know connecting some of these greenways and whatnot what we did with our first objective was to apply a landscape ecology metric that seemed to make sense and that people can understand the one we chose was the nearest neighbor metric the nearest neighbor metric essentially

Creates or calculates an index based on the average distance between new features and its nearest feature and so with our temporal parcel data we essentially extracted at each time period the new parcels and calculated a nearest neighbor index on that and what you’re trying to do is trying to assess

Is this pattern more dispersed or clustered over time is our parcel patterns more to cluster or dispersed similar to the graphic there below so if we apply that to our parcel layers over time we see that sort of the reverse trend here happened where Lodi had the most parcels but the nearest

Neighbor index shows that most of the parcels were very clustered and close together the town of Springdale had very few parcels and they were all really scattered about they didn’t have much parcel ization growth but all their parcels were very dispersed now a dispersed pattern is really considered a

More fragmented pattern because it perforates the surrounding open landscape and then west point in the middle there and like I said we also mapped historic land cover and land use data over time so now we’re able to measure the pattern of parcel ization and then analyze the resulting landscape

With landscape ecology metrics on the landscape also reflect what we saw in terms of the spatial pattern of parcels and so this is showing the farmland landscape so we extracted land the farmland cover from the land use and measured its pattern and so we found that in Lodi even though Lodi had the

Most number of new parcels created over time they had over 2000 parcels created or parcel line or generated during that time you saw that the number of farmland patches increased but not as much as what we saw in the town of West Point and similarly with the core area we

Found the core area in West Point decrease more than you saw in Lodi albeit not as much but still it decreased more and the largest patch index which is a measure of the largest patch size of a landscape we saw that decrease mostly with West Point and so

Just looking at the a spatial metrics the number of parcels and the average parcel size one would conclude that Lodi experienced the most parcel ization when in fact because of its pattern did not and I think what I’ll do with that is go so you example of our historic parcel layers

For West Point so this is a web map that I generated that highlights where our case study communities are on the red outline show the town boundaries I’m going to zoom down to the town of Lodi and West Point and you’re going to see pop up here is the 19 roughly 1950

Parcel pattern in these two towns and you can see that again this took us about a year to generate these parcel lines if we fast-forward or play this you will see that parcels are popping up over time and it there is a pattern there and when I guess what the the main

Point of this is is trying to measure spatially the pattern of parcel ization is that the town of Lodi on the right here had the most parcels but you can see most of the parcels are embedded in this one subdivision that is up on the top northern part of the town if you

Scroll over to West Point which did not have as much parcel ization in terms of number of parcels the parcels according to the nearest neighbor index were much more dispersed they were not as clustered and as a result of that we’re finding that the the farmland in that

Town is becoming more fragmented you’ll notice little pockets of larger parcels subdivided scattered throughout the tongue than you do in the town of West Lodi and so the take-home message was with that is that you know pattern does matter and so you know if we can apply

Some of these facial tools to how we analyze and assess parcel ization it could really help how the resulting landscape might be like I said and like we saw with the French lot system in in Louisiana and how some of these you know how we decide to parcel eyes or

Landscape now have dramatic effects and implications many decades now and if we know parcel ization leads to fragmentation which probably should be a little more aware and careful on how we patterned the personalization and the other thing I want to show with this graph with this web tool I guess is

There’s a concern that parcel ization today as higher the rate of parcels ation is higher than it’s ever been in the past by conducting this historical and creating this historical parcel database we found that the actual number of parcels and many of these have actually decreased we found that during

The 1960’s the number of parcels have actually decreased okay okay we’ve got lots and lots of questions coming in and I think we want to take a quick pause dan if you’ve got a couple apart parting shots and let’s go ahead and grab some questions sure all right we have a

Number of people have asked if there’s been any sort of study or can help might this be applied to an urban area I mean I think it can be parcel ization you expect personalization develop in urban areas and around urban areas I guess my focus in my research I’m more familiar

With rural areas is the interesting part is we’re finding a lot of rural areas that don’t have much population growth or even negative population growth but they’re still parcel izing and so you know as far as an urban focus I you can still look at the periphery I guess

Of an urban boundary and try to do some studies there I guess we’re finding that you know density does matter so if we’re concerned about parcels ation and development in rural areas I guess the the key here would be to you know try to increase density near in cities and

Urban areas or along the periphery or even you know infill development couple questions here in regard to how this happens whether it is from zoning or the lack of zoning or you know what what tends to be in place from a regulation standpoint that would allow this to happen have you discovered anything

Study a lot of in this study a lot of the the parcel station events took place prior to zoning or subdivision regulations however we do find a lot of you know parcel ization in areas you know for example a lot of forested areas have a forestry district at least in

Wisconsin that’s where I’m most familiar with is a forestry district of a five acre minimum lot size and so you find a lot of landowners that create these piano key Lots and I can bring that up I can show examples of that piano key Lots along roads that are exactly five acres

And so having a zoning ordinance that you know allows that is especially in areas where you want to protect is challenging and the other thing is is is the subdivision ordinance tends to be weak a lot of times we’re finding that a lot of towns and communities now are

Actually trying to implement or actually implementing a subdivision ordinance where every single last split gets reviewed rather than you know some sort of arbitrary number or size triggering a review process I could sit here all day and zoom around and show crazy parcel patterns throughout not only Wisconsin but the

Country landowners and developers are creative they will try to fit as many parcels as they can on a property given the regulatory constraints minimum lot sizes setbacks if they can fit them on there they’ll do that let’s see if I can find that okay while you’re looking

Perhaps you could this is just a very specific question someone wanted to know you made the remark about the highest personalization occurring in the 1960s did that data come from across the US over there is that for a specific area well we’re finding that most of the large pre planted subdivisions like I

Showed in Albuquerque in Florida most of that happen in the south and west some of the numbers that we found in Wisconsin what going back retreating our data in Bayfield County in Columbia County is most of the parcels were traded during the 1960’s there were large subdivisions that were

Platted in and here all even so this example here shows piano key Lots in northern Wisconsin I think these are ten acre lots or these are five acre Lots I think so amid a five acre minimum lot size does I’m sorry nothing for protecting forest land going back to

Your question about the the rates of parcel ization in Bayfield County we found that most of the parcel ization was in during the 50s and 60s now I think a lot of that had to do with shoreland zoning a lot of developers and landowners knew that shoreland zoning

Rules were going to be in place and allowing and restricting the amount of rampant sales along our shorelines this subdivision here for example is an example what you’ll see here in Bayfield County in the 1950s it would looked like this shortly after that a subdivision like this one in right before shoreland

Zoning and the same thing happened along the Wisconsin River in southern Wisconsin his developers took advantage of knowing that these rules were going to be in place and so I think during the 1960’s you saw the subdivision interstate land sale or interstate subdivision law shoreland zoning I’m sort of this environmental movement and

So I think a lot of developers and landowners took advantage of that to rush to create as many Lots as they can before these ordinances gotten place are you aware of any jurisdiction that has tried to reverse this parcel ization the subdivision I showed in Florida for

Example half of that I think has been purchased by the state and is now estate property other municipalities have tried to do that it’s complex they essentially what they a lot of times what they will do is if they are non-conforming Lots if the subdivision of the parcels were

Created before an ordinance went in and are not now conforming they’ll require that a landowner conglomerate or merge several parcels together before they can build upon it that’s happened that’s happening I mean you find these subdivisions all over the country a lot of them are smaller but there are tools

I think in place for for folks but the problem is I think as planners are pulling their hair out because these these folks have held onto this property for such a long time or it’s been passed down generations and you know the great-great grandchild of it you know

Comes in with a building permit and a variance and you know what do you do okay another question I’m talking about availability of data as if you’d looked at the growth and square foot of average sized house in the example given an old house is demolished other larger house

Built with very little green space is there any type of data available to show I guess the changing imperviousness in a particular lot has that increased well there are studies I think in terms of the Wisconsin shoreline zoning law that you know they’ve they’ve analyzed this but I mean anecdotally older homes were

Much smaller and we’re finding that a lot of our riparian properties that are some of the older properties have much smaller building footprint less impervious surface and we’re finding that some of these newer parcels are having much more impervious surface the building footprint is being much larger people are building bigger homes

And in fact you know a lot of counties and you know grand variances to expand their older cabins to make them more livable if any is any data available if someone were to like want to do assessment usually if you can get tax assessment data from the Assessor a lot

Of times they will have building footprint data of square footages sometimes it’s complex to analyze its it’s stored in a complex you know data base but pulling that out usually can be attacked attached back to the parcel one of the things that we’re trying to get communities and counties to do in

Wisconsin is you know this you know parcel ization is really you know we’re sort of at the cusp of its facially partly because only recently has a parcels been in a digital format and since they have been a lot of counties every year when they update their parcel

Database is they overwrite the previous year in terms of the tax assessment data and also the property boundaries and so we’re trying to get counties to archive this to say ok this is your you know time one time two and every year so 15 years from now you’ll have 15 years of

Tax personal boundaries and tax assessment data allowing us to not spend a year digitizing and recreating parcels but instead having a much wider scale and more data in terms of economic data land use data housing square footage data to do much more spatial modeling and statistics okay and then another

Quick question just about the technology is someone asked how you can add parcels to Google Earth it’s really not that hard if you have ArcGIS I think 9.3 or later in our toolbox you will find a tool oh you know I can’t remember which one it’s under conversion you can convert

Your your shape files for your feature classes to a KML file and KML files can be brought into Google Earth the version I have here this is Google Earth Pro so while I was zooming out to some of these areas you saw white parcel lines pop up that’s a an amenity

With Google Earth Pro it doesn’t come with the free version of Google Earth but all all all GIS data can be access or exported to Google Earth and I like it because Google Earth is much faster and it gives you a the 3d rendering which is very powerful so if you’re not

Doing any you know sophisticated spatial statistics or landscape ecology metrics just a visual of it you know it is very important and we find that a lot of the citizens and find that very powerful as well okay when you looked at your study did you look at anything in regards to

Property tax exemptions as sort of a management tool or any sort of assessment of how property taxes or how that was tweaked dimension partly because our historic nature a lot of that data was too dynamic or too difficult to track and so again going forward we’re hoping that counties and

Communities keep records of that digital copies of that now with technology today and arc ste and the storage limits on our servers archiving this data should not be a problem in fact we’ve got numerous counties now on board that are doing that but we did not specifically

Look at that just because of the amount of time and effort that was taken just to create you know accurate parcel lines okay and then kind of a parallel question having to do with did you track anything with zoning changes or try to make a relationship between a certain

Type of zoning and the resulting personalization we again we did not because we found in our two counties the zoning was very dynamic changed almost at will that seemed like and so trying to relate that or you know the relationship between zoning and parcel ization we couldn’t we couldn’t

Do that because it was too dynamic again we’re hoping that with comprehensive planning and updated zoning ordinances going forward we will be able to do that alright I guess Cody its back to you you’re in a tunnel I just want to say too long Sam Crenshaw just need to go to

WWE’s by day and then underneath it’s Friday May 6 you’ll see using just improve decisions and this is up so you’ll be able to go and log this as soon as you log got it here and then we are also recording today’s session so

You’ll be able to find a feed a PDF and video recording of today’s webinar @ww Utah APA org archive and this should be a by Monday so again I just want to thank Dan and Linda for today’s presentation thank you thank you

ID: 65HMJLMYc4c
Time: 1344190700
Date: 2012-08-05 22:48:20
Duration: 01:28:58

منبع