California 2050 Projected Urban Growth

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0

You may use this work for commercial purposes.

You must attribute the creator in your own works.

1909
149
Updated
09 May 2010

50 year Projected Urban Growth scenarios. Base year is 2000. Projected year in this dataset is 2050.

By 2020, most forecasters agree, California will be home to between 43 and 46 million residents-up from 35 million today. Beyond 2020 the size of California's population is less certain. Depending on the composition of the population, and future fertility and migration rates, California's 2050 population could be as little as 50 million or as much as 70 million. One hundred years from now, if present trends continue, California could conceivably have as many as 90 million residents.
Where these future residents will live and work is unclear. For most of the 20th Century, two-thirds of Californians have lived south of the Tehachapi Mountains and west of the San Jacinto Mountains-in that part of the state commonly referred to as Southern California. Yet most of coastal Southern California is already highly urbanized, and there is relatively little vacant land available for new development. More recently, slow-growth policies in Northern California and declining developable land supplies in Southern California are squeezing ever more of the state's population growth into the San Joaquin Valley.
How future Californians will occupy the landscape is also unclear. Over the last fifty years, the state's population has grown increasingly urban. Today, nearly 95 percent of Californians live in metropolitan areas, mostly at densities less than ten persons per acre. Recent growth patterns have strongly favored locations near freeways, most of which where built in the 1950s and 1960s. With few new freeways on the planning horizon, how will California's future growth organize itself in space? By national standards, California's large urban areas are already reasonably dense, and economic theory suggests that densities should increase further as California's urban regions continue to grow. In practice, densities have been rising in some urban counties, but falling in others.

These are important issues as California plans its long-term future. Will California have enough land of the appropriate types and in the right locations to accommodate its projected population growth? Will future population growth consume ever-greater amounts of irreplaceable resource lands and habitat? Will jobs continue decentralizing, pushing out the boundaries of metropolitan areas? Will development densities be sufficient to support mass transit, or will future Californians be stuck in perpetual gridlock? Will urban and resort and recreational growth in the Sierra Nevada and Trinity Mountain regions lead to the over-fragmentation of precious natural habitat? How much water will be needed by California's future industries, farms, and residents, and where will that water be stored? Where should future highway, transit, and high-speed rail facilities and rights-of-way be located? Most of all, how much will all this growth cost, both economically, and in terms of changes in California's quality of life?
Clearly, the more precise our current understanding of how and where California is likely to grow, the sooner and more inexpensively appropriate lands can be acquired for purposes of conservation, recreation, and future facility siting. Similarly, the more clearly future urbanization patterns can be anticipated, the greater our collective ability to undertake sound city, metropolitan, rural, and bioregional planning.

Consider two scenarios for the year 2100. In the first, California's population would grow to 80 million persons and would occupy the landscape at an average density of eight persons per acre, the current statewide urban average. Under this scenario, and assuming that 10% percent of California's future population growth would occur through infill-that is, on existing urban land-California's expanding urban population would consume an additional 5.06 million acres of currently undeveloped land. As an alternative, assume the share of infill development were increased to 30%, and that new population were accommodated at a density of about 12 persons per acre-which is the current average density of the City of Los Angeles. Under this second scenario, California's urban population would consume an additional 2.6 million acres of currently undeveloped land. While both scenarios accommodate the same amount of population growth and generate large increments of additional urban development-indeed, some might say even the second scenario allows far too much growth and development-the second scenario is far kinder to California's unique natural landscape.

This report presents the results of a series of baseline population and urban growth projections for California's 38 urban counties through the year 2100. Presented in map and table form, these projections are based on extrapolations of current population trends and recent urban development trends. The next section, titled Approach, outlines the methodology and data used to develop the various projections. The following section, Baseline Scenario, reviews the projections themselves. A final section, entitled Baseline Impacts, quantitatively assesses the impacts of the baseline projections on wetland, hillside, farmland and habitat loss.

Layer ID 671
Data type Vector polygon
Feature count 10278
Services Vector Query API
1.1.1 Forest Service Mapping Series 6 (FSMS6)

The 23 completed maps provide the distribution of indigenous forest vegetation for all of the North Island and the bulk of the South Island at a scale of 1:250,000. These maps were primarily compiled by Mr John Nicholls with some of the South Island maps compiled by Mr Dudley Franklin. Black and white aerial photographs, dating from 1948 to 1955 and at a scale of 15 chains per inch, supplemented by extensive ground truthing and some 16,000 National Forest Survey and Ecosurvey plots, were used to determine forest class boundaries. These were transferred to 1:63360 topographic maps. The maps were field checked and then copied for production by FRI graphics staff (Herbert 1997, pers. comm.).

Most maps were completed by the NZ Forest Service, with a small number being finished by the Ministry of Forestry and then by Landcare Research Ltd. Appendix 1 gives the list of maps digitised. The date of the photographs that were used to compile each map is not known exactly.

1.1.2 Forest Service Mapping Series 15 (FSMS15)

There are two FSMS15 comprising 1:1,000,000 maps of the North Island, and South Island (including Stewart Island). These were compiled by NZFS Conservancy and Head Office staff for the 1974 Forestry Development Conference. Forest boundaries for the 1:1,000,000 FSMS15 maps are significantly less accurate than those for the 1:250,000 FSMS6 maps (Herbert and Nicholls, 1997, pers. comm.). Data sources included existing FSMS6 maps (with 18 classes coalesced into eight super classes), local published and unpublished maps and local knowledge for areas not cover by the FSMS6. The Te Anau, Hauroko and Mataura FSMS6 series maps were substituted for by the South Island FSMS15 map.

1.1.3 Forest Service Type Map Series No. 2 (FSTM2)

These are a collection of detailed forest class maps at 1:63360 scale. Coverage is confined to parts of the central North Island.

### 1.1.4 Vegetation of Stewart Island

Mr Hugh Wilson (Wilson, 1987) developed a detailed map of the vegetation of Steward Island. Wilson’s Podocarp/hardwood forest, and rata-kamahi hardwood forest polygons (Types A 1-2, B3) were digitised.

1.2 Forest Class Description

There are eighteen forest classes described in the FSMS6 map series. These are described in Table 1. The source is Nicholls and Herbert (1995). FSMS15 has eight super classes and these are defined in Table 2.

*Table 1: Forest classes, codes and IPCC class

                (Dbase)

*Class Code IPCC Class

*Kauri A C

*Kauri -Softwoods-Hardwoods B M

*Kauri -Softwoods-Hardwoods-Beeches C M

*Softwoods L C

*Rimu-Matai-Hardwoods M M

*Rimu-Taraire - Tawa E M

*Rimu-Tawa D M

*Rimu-General Hardwoods F M

*Lowland Steepland and Highland Softwoods - Hardwoods G M

*Rimu-Tawa-Beeches H M

*Rimu - General Hardwoods - Beeches I M

*Highland Softwoods-Beeches J M

*Taraire-Tawa S B

*Tawa N B

*General Hardwoods P B

*Tawa Beeches O B

*General Hardwoods - Beeches T B

*Beeches K B

IPCC Class Definitions: C: Conifer, B: Broadleaf, M: Mixed.

Table 2: FSMS15 forest classes

            Dbase

Class code / FSMS6Classes Description IPCC Class

Kauri - Podocarp - Hardwood /A, B, C All forest containing kauri, including minor
area of pure kauri and local occurrence of
beech M

Podocarp L/ L Forest of abundant podocarps C

Lowland Podocarp - Hardwood 1/ D, E, F, M, pt. G Virgin or lightly logged podocarp -
hardwood forest below the
altitudinal limit of rimu M

Lowland Hardwood 2/ N, S, pt. P Residual and second growth forest below the
altitudinal limit of rimu and minor areas of
natural pure hardwood forest. B

Upland Podocarp - Hardwood 3/ Pts G, P Virgin or lightly logged podocarp - hardwood
above the altitudinal limit of rimu and
minor areas of natural pure hardwood forest.
M

Podocarp - Hardwood - Beech 4/ H, I Virgin or lightly logged forest of mixed
podocarp - hardwood and beech below the
altitudinal limit of rimu M

Hardwood - Beech 5/ O, T Residual or second growth forest and minor
areas of natural pure hardwood - beech. B

Beech 6/ J, K Virgin and lightly logged or second-growth
forests predominantly composed of beech B

Wilson Stewart Island 7/ Podocarp/hardwood forest, and rata-kamahi
hardwood forest. M

2. METHODS

2.1 Digitising and Topology Generation

The maps were digitised by staff at the Forest Research Institute under standards listed in Appendix 2, using the Terrasoft Geographic Information System. The linear features that made up each forest class polygon are shared between two feature classes one, called NZFS6 which contains the national coverage, and the other based on the respective map sheet number. This allows themes to be developed for a national view and also for the individual map sheets.

The line work is topologically correct with no over-, or under- shoots.

Each polygon has a nationally unique identifier and which is linked to a dbase table containing a code letter which describes the forest vegetation class.

These maps were digitised for the purpose of providing indigenous forest vegetation cover for usage at a national scale. There has been no formal checking of the accuracy of the digitised linework. Any errors are considered to be insignificant for determining a 1990 indigenous forest vegetation baseline database. Each polygon was checked to confirm correct tagging. During that process any significant linear differences were noted and corrected.

2.2 Problems
2.2.1 Incorrect map details

In several places errors on the maps were found. Either the FSTM2 maps were consulted for greater detail where coverage existed or Mr John Nicholls was, personally, consulted and the error corrected.

2.2.2 Map source quality

Most FSMS6 maps where unused, unfolded sheets with only sheet 12 being an unused folded map. The FSMS15 South Island map was a well used map with significant fold lines. This map also had other printed information which made precise measurement of some forest class boundaries difficult.

Standards

This document defines the standards used for digitising the forest class maps (NZFS Map Series 6, FSMS15 and Wilson, 1987).

Source

The source of the FSMS6 data is the 1:125,000 flat map sheets, the FSMS15 maps and the Vegetation map contained in Wilson (1987).

Digitising

The following digitising standards were used.

A minimum of five points for registration should be selected from a rectangular range encapsulating the immediate digitising area.
These points then should he entered into Convert and both the input and the resultant NZMG coordinates checked before the map is registered.
The registration error should be (in Terrasoft) 0.00%.
The media should be anchored firmly to the digitiser. The RMU laboratory should be used with the air conditioning turn on.
Registration should occur at least twice a day, but occur more frequently if the humidity changes.
All lines and polygon which represent a forest type needs to be captured irrespective of size.
All intersections should have a node digitised.
The two feature classes are NZFS6 and NZFS6_; NZFS15, and SI_WIL respectively.
All joins to lines must be done to the actual point not the nearest digitised node, (touch line is preferable to snap).
The polygon construction method should be used for small polygons, though care must be used in the final close to ensure correct shape is retained.
The line to be digitised, for a boundary defined by the bush symbol, is along the top of the symbol. Where the bush symbol changes direction care does need to be taken. In a convex direction change the above is true, but in a sharp concave (cave shaped) direction change the vertexes of the line may well go through the ‘base of the symbol.

Output

Shape must be identical

Theme creation

A Theme will be created for each map sheet.
The national NZFS6 theme will be created by including the previously digitised map sheets and the FSMS15 and Wilson’s map.
Polygon tags are to be corrected between the map sheets to make them all unique.
All dangles and overlaps, and bad polygons are to be corrected.

Tagging

All polygons are to be tagged with a code representing the forest type.
All sliver polygons are to be removed.

Checking

A plot should be created at the original scale and overlayed over the original map. Each polygon is checked to confirm correct tagging.

Layer ID 300
Data type Vector polygon
Feature count 7742
Services Vector Query API

Erosion Susceptibility 4 Classes

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand

You may use this work for commercial purposes.

You must attribute the creator in your own works.

1446
534
Updated
19 Dec 2012

Erosion susceptibility is defined by the predisposition (of a land unit) to erode, preparatory factors (such as the are removal of forest), the Likelihood and severity of an erosion event, and the consequences of an erosion event.The Erosion Susceptibility Classification uses 4 fields: Legend (NZLRI Region); LUC (LUC unit code); PolyMaxSev (maximum erosion severity for each polygon unit); ESC (erosion susceptibility class for each polygon). This version has removed the LUC from the attribute table and dissolved the geometry to the erosion susceptibility class.

Layer ID 3655
Data type Vector multipolygon
Feature count 60
Services Vector Query API, data.govt.nz Atom Feed

Northland Flood Susceptible Land

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand

You may use this work for commercial purposes.

You must attribute the creator in your own works.

1448
409
Updated
21 Jan 2011

This interpretation of Flood Susceptible Land areas is based on the NZLRI boundaries (from Landcare Research).
Appropriate Scale of Use is 1:50,000, this data should not be used at any more detailed scale.

Layer ID 1184
Data type Vector polygon
Feature count 1266
Services Vector Query API, data.govt.nz Atom Feed

California Faults

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0

You may use this work for commercial purposes.

You must attribute the creator in your own works.

1172
268
Updated
17 Oct 2011

Faults in California.

Source: tin.er.usgs.gov/geology/state/state.php?state=CA

Layer ID 701
Data type Vector linestring
Feature count 28743
Services Vector Query API

REC Catchment Order 1

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand

You may use this work for commercial purposes.

You must attribute the creator in your own works.

1008
387
Updated
17 Oct 2011

The REC groups rivers and parts of river networks that share similar ecological characteristics, including physical and biological. Rivers that share the same class can be treated as similar to one another and different to rivers in other classes. The REC classification system groups rivers according to several environmental factors that strongly influence or cause the rivers’ physical and ecological characteristics (climate, topography, geology and land cover). A catchment is a polygon that defines the upstream watershed of a river system or sub-system. Land cover within the catchment was used to populate the river classification factors (see table 1.1 of the User Guide www.mfe.govt.nz/environmental-reporting/about/tool... ).

Additional metadata can be found at www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/ser/metadata/env-clas... .

Layer ID 1648
Data type Vector polygon
Feature count 324993
Services Vector Query API, data.govt.nz Atom Feed

Public Swimming Pools and Bathing Places (2009)

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0

You may use this work for commercial purposes.

You must attribute the creator in your own works.

1375
12
Added
20 Jun 2009

The objective of this program is to minimize the risk of disease and injury at public swimming pools and bathing places. Chapter 64E-9, F.A.C., governs sanitary standards and practices at these facilities.

The department is responsible for reviewing plans and issuing new pool construction permits.

Sixteen county health departments have been delegated the authority to review plans and issue permits: Broward, Collier, Dade, Duval, Escambia, Hillsborough, Lee, Manatee, Okaloosa, Palm Beach, Pinellas, Polk, Santa Rosa, Sarasota, Volusia, and Walton. All county health departments conduct routine inspections, collect samples, and maintain standards at public swimming pools and bathing areas. When violations are found, county health departments take action to enforce Florida laws. This can include immediate closure of a facility.

The objective of this program is to minimize the risk of disease and injury at public swimming pools and bathing places. Chapter 64E-9, F.A.C., governs sanitary standards and practices at these facilities.

The department is responsible for reviewing plans and issuing new pool construction permits.
Chapter 64E-9 F.A.C. rules, applications for Approval of Swimming Pool Plans, permits, Monthly Swimming Pool Reports, Public Swimming Pool Engineering Inspection Report, Application for Swimming Pool Exempt Status 32 Units, Application for Annual Renewal or Reissuance of Public Swimming Pool/Bathing Place Operating Permit, Application for Swimming Pool Exempt Status 32 Units or Less, Application for Variance from Chapter 64E-9, F.A.C., Swimming Pools and Bathing Place, Apply for a License, permit application form. This shapefile contains public pools inspected by the Department of Health.

For more information go to www.doh.state.fl.us/environment/water/swim/index.h...

Source: www.doh.state.fl.us/environment/programs/ehgis/EhG...

Layer ID 1050
Data type Vector point
Feature count 38649
Services Vector Query API

Porirua Wind Zones

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand

You may use this work for commercial purposes.

You must attribute the creator in your own works.

1156
198
Added
29 Jul 2011

Wind Zone codes for Porirua City for building codes.

When applying for a building consent, the wind zone in which a structure is located determines structural requirements (New Zealand Building Code - NZBC B1 - Structure) and weather tight requirements (NZBC E2 - External Moisture).

Codes for Wind Zones:
a = Specific Design (zone outside the scope of NZS3604:1990)
b = Very High Wind
c = High Wind,
d = Medium Wind,
e = Not Assessed/Unknown

Porirua City Council gives no warranty in relation to the data, including its accuracy, reliability and suitability and accepts no liability whatsoever in relation to any loss, damage or other costs relating to the use of any data, any compilations, derivative works or modifications of the data.

Layer ID 3810
Data type Vector multipolygon
Feature count 39
Services Vector Query API, data.govt.nz Atom Feed

Land Environments New Zealand (LENZ) - Level 2 Polygons

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand

You may use this work for commercial purposes.

You must attribute the creator in your own works.

882
414
Updated
14 Oct 2011

Land Environments of New Zealand (LENZ) is a classification of fifteen climate, landform, and soil variables chosen for their relevance to biological distributions. Classification groups were derived by automatic classification using a multivariate procedure. Four levels of classification detail have been produced from this analysis, containing 20, 100, 200, and 500 groups respectively.
More information is available from the LENZ web site:
www.landcareresearch.co.nz/databases/lenz/

Layer ID 1102
Data type Vector polygon
Feature count 130829
Services Vector Query API

Northland Marine Management Areas

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 New Zealand

You may use this work for commercial purposes.

You must attribute the creator in your own works.

You must not release derivatives of this work.

1135
128
Updated
17 Oct 2011

Marine Management Areas form part of the Northland Regional Coastal Plan

The coastal marine area has been divided up under the following six zones or Marine Management Areas: Marine 1 (Protection), Marine 2 (Conservation), Marine 3 (Marine Farming), Marine 4 (Moorings), Marine 5 (Port Facilities), Marine 6 (Wharves).

Appropriate Scale of Use 1:25,000

For context information please visit the NRC Regional Plans Resource Library

Layer ID 1154
Data type Vector multipolygon
Feature count 359
Services Vector Query API, data.govt.nz Atom Feed
Results 11 to 20 of 168 items.