GIS Steering Committee

“Where People Count ” MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS 1000 Civic Center Drive, Niles, Illinois 60714 Telephone (847) 588-8000 Fax (847) 588-8050 GIS Steering Committee Meeting February 17, 2010 Co-Chairs: Andrew Przybylo – Trustee George Van Geem – Village Manager Persons in attendance: Bob Callero Mayor Steve Cusick MIS Dept. Mousa Nazzal Engineering Dept. Chuck Ostman Community Development Dept. Bob Pilat Public Services Andrew Przybylo Trustee Bill Shaw MIS Dept. George VanGeem Village Manager Andrew Vitale MIS Dept. Rich Wlodarski Community Development Dept. The meeting was called to order at 8:02 a.m. After approval of the last meeting’s minutes, G. Van Geem turned the meeting over to A.Vitale. Agenda Item #1 – Old Business – Project Updates Monument Re-calibration A.Vitale reported that M. Nazzal has gathered three proposals for the re-calibration of our 26 monuments.* M. Nazzal continued that the quotes are as follows: AP Survey Co. - $11,500; W.C. Doland - $13,350; Gewalt-Hamilton - $15,800. All three companies are qualified to do the job; they will all use the same RTK method, the same NGS station, and FEMA benchmarks to re -calibrate the vertical elevations. A.Vitale has very much confidence in using the FEMA benchmarks – that’s primarily what FEMA benchmarks are for. G. VanGeem reviewed that the re-calibration is necessary because we discovered, during the recent GPS data collection project, that the actual measurements of our monuments are an average of eight inches different from what is recorded. We need to rectify this discrepancy to ensure the accuracy of future projects that are done off of the monuments. M. Nazzal assured that these new measurements will be accurate within one-half inch and will not ever have to be measured again. Trustee Przybylo asked if the data collected will be progressive – i.e., will it carry us through any new requirements we may have ten years from now. Will the data be valuable to anything else we want to do? A.Vitale responded that the data will be valuable for any construction project that is done from now on. G. VanGeem stated that the accuracy will be useful forever. It was noted that this data will be useable with our IT systems. It was also noted that the Engineering Department (Scott Jochim and Mousa Nazzal) is ultimately responsible that the chosen company does the job properly and correctly. G. VanGeem moved that we approve AP Survey Co. – the low bid at $11,500. B. Shaw seconded the motion. The motion was carried. Because the bid is under $20,000, it does not require Board approval. It will go directly to the Mayor. *We have 23 monuments in our system, but M. Nazzal “found” three additional monuments while looking through some old files. (These three were established for the air photo taken in 1991/1992, but were never added to our system.) We are now going to add them to our system, and they will be part of the re-calibration project. MWRD GPS Data Share A.Vitale reported that he will rewrite the data sharing agreement for the MWRD this coming week, and will then present it to Joe Annunzio. He hopes to have the agreement in place and have some data to show by the next meeting. He will also follow up with the MWRD to find out exactly what vertical benchmarks they use so we can tie into the same ones and use the same ones when setting our monuments. We will be on the same vertical network as them. Agenda Item #2 – Departmental Projects Sewer & Water Mapping Update M. Nazzal has handed off the last of the water maps from the field crews, who have made comments on all of the final print-ups. A.Vitale will make those comments part of our data. A.Vitale, M. Nazzal and C. Ostman will review everything one more time before printing final atlases. A.Vitale reported that the initial draft of the sewer system is complete, and presented the sewer map to the committee. He has merged all atlases and the GPS points, as shown on the map. He is only showing the actual water mains, not every structure, and was able to print it on one sheet. Shown are the sanitary, storm and combined in gold, green and purple, respectively. He has also reviewed the MWRD maps and plotted those on the map in our data. He is showing all inter- connections to the MWRD system including the deep tunnel and the sanitary canal, and has also built in the capability to potentially model dry-weather flow, or low-storm flow, an overflow to the deep tunnel system as well as a tertiary overflowing situation to the sanitary canal. He is slightly ahead of schedule and is now in a position to start printing off sheets for Community Development’s group and Tom Polcyn’s sewer group so they can go through their field-checking process. 2 C. Ostman noted that he found it interesting that Andrew can click on, for example, next to the MWRD’s interceptor and he can show exactly what area of town that interceptor or that connection covers. A.Vitale added that, at any point in the system, he can click on a main and show exactly where that flows (its end point) during any one of the three flood stages – dry weather, deep tunnel overflow and the sanitary overflow. He can also, at any main in the system, show exactly how much accumulates to that point, so we know exactly what is emptying up to that main or into that main or that manhole, as the case may be, in all three flood stages. These tools are only available through the desktop software that he has access to. It’s a very high-powered license and it’s not very common. He is hoping to expose those tools later, but he has not investigated that process yet. He will share it with the consultant that we hire as part of the Storm Water Committee and, if possible, they will have access to that capability. He will be working with B. Shaw and S. Cusick on how to best expose that. Mayor Callero noted that this is what the Storm Water Committee has been waiting for. A.Vitale agreed, adding that it is what the consulting engineers will need to see. He is hoping that they will not have to use our tools; he will discuss with B. Shaw and S. Cusick on how to best share the capability. B. Shaw suggested that it would be easier if the consultant we hire was used to ESRI tools and had his own licenses so we could just share data with them. Perhaps we can add these points to the specification. A. Vitale would not want to limit the committee’s search to only firms that have that level of licensing. It was noted that we are using Network Utility Analyst within ArcGIS desktop. Mayor Callero suggested we check with the three potential firms to see who has it. A. Vitale will comply. Trustee Przybylo asked for clarification: The point of knowing where all of these checkpoints are is to measure the flow of water in the sewer, the overflow, and where things will back up when they surcharge. The Storm Water Committee has not yet decided if or how we are going to monitor the flow, but there are tools available to do so that could be tied into this system. We could potentially see water levels rise and fall as they happen. These points show where our Village connects with drain lines of other villages. We cannot monitor overland flow. A.Vitale and M. Nazzal have already begun the field-checking process and will have more in the next few days. It was noted that A.Vitale does not have data for Milwaukee Avenue (Albion to Neva), so it has not yet been completed, and there was some conflicting information about the areas around the Maintenance Garage and the Public Services building on Touhy. Maintenance Management System (MMS) B. Shaw reported that he and S. Cusick are working on three programming projects: rewriting the Rental System for Community Development (almost completed), rewriting Utility Billing System, and the Maintenance Management System. We have been focusing on the pieces that are common to all three systems in order to integrate the features proposed in our early design discussions. We are making progress, and interesting new features will be in these applications. 3 Agenda Item #3 – New Business Cook County Data Sharing (Assessment Data) Last month, A. Vitale put in front of the Board a resolution for data sharing regarding the assessment data. He is waiting to hear back from the Assessor’s office. The Cook County GIS office has already pledged to share the parcel data that goes with that assessment information. Hopefully, they will arrive at the same time, and he will update the parcel and the ownership information that is displayed on Atlas. Employees will then have, via Atlas, access to the most current parcel layer and ownership information that he has access to. A.Vitale does not yet have permission to make the library and school district layers available to the public. He does have the name and number of the Cook County GIS manager’s supervisor, and will contact her in due time. Even though the data is public, A.Vitale is trying to honor our data sharing agreement by not making it available without express permission. ESRI Deprecation Plan (IMS – i.e., Atlas) A.Vitale reported that ESRI came out with a Deprecation Plan for its suite of software. This is a plan of their intentions over the next few years for their different software packages and licensing levels. There were a lot of implications in regard to our IMS (Internet Mapping Software), which is the primary driver of the Internet mapping portion of Atlas – not the property information or the tabular portions, strictly the mapping portions. In about a year, the IMS software, as we know it, will be entirely unsupported, and will no longer be regarded as a viable software product. There are many implications for how we move forward with IMS in regard to Atlas. S. Cusick continued that there are two points of contention: 1) The next version of the ESRI software that comes out will be the last release of IMS, and will come out August 2010 at the earliest. 2) That release of IMS will not support the method that we use for putting the map into it. Our current version is the last version we can be on. We will still be allowed to use previous releases even as they further their releases, but that presents the question of whether or not it can still talk to the newest version of the database. If yes, we can stay on it but there will be no new enhancements from ESRI, nor will it be supported. Any “bugs” or errors will be up to us. And there are many things in that IMS black box that we cannot touch. This is definitely the end of IMS. We knew this going into the building of Atlas, but this group chose IMS over ArcGIS Server because it was a better engine and because there were more people around that built interfaces around the IMS engine. We need to begin to consider what our upgrade path and future path will be. Eventually, we will have to go to ArcGIS Server. How aggressive do we want to be to meet that goal? Mayor Callero asked for clarification of the comment “We will have to go to ArcGIS Server.” S. Cusick responded. Everything in Atlas consists of three pieces: 1) the webpage code that we have full control over; 2) the database (ESRI database software, over which we have some control, and our own custom database, over which we have full control); 3) the engine that runs the map itself, that actually draws the pictures of the map. The new product from ESRI is ArcGI S Server – their new way to draw maps. The problem is that our website is written around IMS. We can’t just take the IMS map out and put it into the ArcGIS Server engine. We’ll have to change the code that talks to it. 4 Other agencies are in the same predicament. ESRI is forcing people to do it now. As the months go by, more people will start developing their plans. Ultimately, ArcGIS Server has hit a point where it is a solid product, where it’s starting to look as good as, if not better than, IMS. We won’t know how big a job it is or how much work the transition will entail until we try to do it, but we do know it will take at least weeks of Bill’s, Andrew’s and his time. But from the way that ESRI has laid out their Deprecation Plan, we don’t have to make any moves immediately. Mayor Callero asked if the software can “talk” to each other, or if we would have to reenter the data. S. Cusick responded that the data is solid. The problem is with the engine that actually draws the map on the Internet. Our commands to tell the engine how to draw the map would not work. Our markups were built around IMS; they know how to talk to the IMS engine. ArcGIS Server engine uses a completely different language. A. Vitale added that it can still use our data as it exists, but a lot of our custom applications and enhancements would not work. Mayor Callero suggested that sometimes, when many companies are having the same problem, someone will be smart enough to develop a software solution. A. Vitale stated that this is something that a lot of his colleagues have been hoping to find. B. Shaw submitted that most software companies develop a transition path. But in this case, the two architectures are so different there is no such path. If we’re patient, we may get some help along the way based on what other people go through. Trustee Przybylo asked for an explanation of “deprecation plan.” A.Vitale responded that it is a plan for how a company intends to develop its software in the coming year or two or five – providing a life cycle of what their intentions are with a particular software package. S. Cusick added that it is the plan by which a company will stop enhancing or supporting certain features or pieces of their software, possibly because they found a better way to do it or because it is not beneficial to continue. Two analogies were presented: 1) You can still use Windows 3 after Windows 7 comes out, but Windows 3 will no longer be supported and many tools built for Windows 3 will not work in Windows 7; 2) Your car has crank windows. You pull apart the doors and install electric windows. The windows still go up and down, but via a different system. A.Vitale is in contact with his colleagues who are facing the same challenge and is keeping them updated on what he wants to see. We must plan for this in the next six to twelve months. GIS Budget Update B. Shaw stated that, at the budget review, the ESRI conference expense was the only item eliminated from the GIS budget. The cost of the GPS was moved to the Water fund, while the cost of the GPS equipment training was kept in the MIS budget. We have $75,000 in the budget for data collection that goes along with the storm water consultant’s costs to make sure we can pick up elevation information for storm water. We have at least one GPS set-up and the training for it; Public Services has a second one. We need to decide if we need the second one. 5 Everything in the budget is related to maintaining what we have or to continue to aggressively pursue storm water issues. This is the lowest budget in three years. Trustee Przybylo asked what part of the budget is devoted to storm water issues. G. VanGeem said we will know after the budget review has been completed at the end of the week. G. VanGeem asked for a vote of confidence that this is the budget that the GIS Steering Committee recommends. With no one having any changes to the budget, a vote was taken. The vote passed, with one abstention. Atlas Training A.Vitale, B. Shaw, and S. Cusick think it is necessary to provide employees with additional training in Atlas. Many employees are not aware of all the new enhancements and, based on the phone calls to MIS Department, many do not seem to be aware of the existence of Atlas or how it can serve them. B. Shaw stated that Police and Fire employees are the most frequent callers, so we should provide them and Public Service employees with a refresher course. A.Vitale commented that we have had great response from those who use Atlas the most - our front desk staff, as well as Finance and Community Development staff. Mayor Callero spoke of the value of secondary training that builds on the initial training. With so many new features recently added to Atlas, additional training makes sense. S. Cusick suggested that we need to focus on getting employees to attend training sessions in the first place. Some supervisors haven’t stressed the importance of Atlas. In the next couple of weeks, the MIS Department will contact department heads asking them for their input and support in scheduling new training sessions. We can offer training onsite or at Vi llage Hall. Mayor Callero suggested that we pick out two or three people that seem to be in control and train them so that they can be the point of contact for employees’ questions. B. Shaw asked the GIS Steering Committee members to sit in on their department’s training sessions so they can provide real-life examples of how Atlas can be used and to reinforce how it has helped do their jobs better. Mayor Callero said that the key then is to have onsite training. Go to their departments, and hold the training sessions there. A. Vitale will keep the committee informed. Agenda Item #5 – Schedule the Next Meeting The next meeting will be Thursday, March 18, 2010 at 8:00 a.m. in the 2nd floor main conference room 218. The meeting was adjourned at 8:48 a.m. 6 Steering Committee Members Andrew Przybylo Trustee atp@vniles.com George Van Geem Administration gvg@vniles.com 847-588-8002 Bill Shaw MIS wfs@vniles.com 847-588-8015 Andrew Vitale MIS ajv@vniles.com 847-588-8022 Steve Cusick MIS src@vniles.com 847-588-8018 Moses Nazzal Engineering mhn@vniles.com 847-588-7924 Scott Jochim Public Services snj@vniles.com 847-588-7901 Bob Pilat Public Services rmp@vniles.com 847-588-7926 Chuck Ostman Community Development cfo@vniles.com 847-588-8041 Rich Wlordarski Community Development rjw@vniles.com 847-588-8085 7