June 4, 2015 by Greg Bazhaw

Figure 2-5, Private Development Areas Subject To The Plan, states that the map will be updated during Plan implementation based on the best available scientific data. The first meeting with the Habitat Agency (Ed Sullivan) and Rob Eastwood to discuss the steps to update the data in Figure 2-5 was held on June 2, 2015 at the County Administration Building. At that meeting, it was decided that the first step would be to "clean up" the existing data, then through subsequent meetings discuss the next steps to update the data.

Clean up was meant to address those issues identified which were mostly topological based. Topology was ran on these data to identify overlapping polygons, and areas with gaps, both amonst the polygons and against the Study Area boundary as well. About a dozen small sliver areas were identified, most of these area involved extending the data out to the Study Area Boundary, and a few small areas which had overlapping polygons. One large are in the southeast portion of San Jose (see Changes layer, OID 1) had overlapping polygons (Private is Covered and Urban 2 Acres), and this area was reverted to a single designation, Urban 2 Acres, to be more in keeping with Figure 2-5.

===========================================================================

October 17, 2014 by Greg Bazhaw

This feature class was renamed from "private_development_coverage_areas_2"

=========================================================================

September 13, 2013 by Greg Bazhaw

As a result of the Implementation Committee meeting in San Jose on September 12, 2013 (Rob Eastwood, Kim Duncan, Greg Bazhaw, John Davidson, Terah Donovan (phone), and Stan Ketchum (phone), it was decided that the zones in this layer should not overlap, that any area in the Habitat Plan Permit Area should be covered by only one zone. As previously processed on August 5 (see below), the two Rural zones in the USA were pulled out, such that areas within the USA are designated by the "Urban Development >= 2 Acres Covered" only.

On this day, this layer was further processed to remove the "Urban Development >= 2 Acres Covered" zone from the areas between the USA and the PLUG. The concept being that the area between the USA and PLUG is currently Rural in nature, but when the USA expands into these areas, the Private Development Area zone will change from one of the Rural designations to "Urban Development >= 2 Acres Covered".

To do this, first a layer needed to be created which shows the areas between the USA and PLUG boundaries. This layer is called "AreasBetweenUSAandPLUG." The metadata for that layer describes how it was created.

Next, the "Urban Development >= 2 Acres Covered" areas were pulled out into a temporary dataset, and used in the ERASE tool, where they were used as Input Features, and the "AreasBetweenUSAandPLUG" were used as Erase Features.

Next, the "Urban Development >= 2 Acres Covered" areas were replaced with the new zones from the temporary dataset.

Finally, topology was run with a rule that polygons Must Not Have Gaps. Several gaps were found in the vicinity of Boulder Ridge Golf Course. This is because the USA boundary was changed in this area on Jan 17, 2012 at the request of LAFCO (see Planning Office "Changes" feature class for details), and therefore did not match the USA boundary which was used to create this feature class at the beginning. This is to be expected as data changes over time.

The ACRES and SQ_MILES fields were recalculated as well.

NOTE: While the Implementation Committee meeting on September 12 directed that the "Urban Development >= 2 Acres Covered" zones were not to overlap any of the other zones, there is one known area where the "Urban Development >= 2 Acres Covered" overlaps with the "Private Development Covered" zone. The "Private Development Covered" zone is the most susceptible zone and probably should trump all other zones where there maybe a conflict. The known area is centered around the eastern terminus of Aborn Road in San Jose, and this issue needs to be discussed further.

=========================================================

August 6, 2013 by Greg Bazhaw

This feature class was exported and recopied back into this geodatabase with settings to remove the Z and M values from the shapefield, thereby converting the shapes from PolygonZM to Polygon.

=======================================================

August 5, 2013 by Greg Bazhaw

This dataset was processed further using the following procedures. The intent was to better portray the map in Figure 2-5 of the Plan, which had areas within the USA masked instead of the data being processed to remove them from the USA.

1. Pulled out into a temporary dataset the two Rural Zones (Rural Development Not Covered, and Rural Development >= 2 Acres Covered)

2. In the temporary dataset, used the ERASE tool with the two Rural Zones as the Input Features, and the Urban Service Areas as the Erase Features

3. Replaced the two Rural Zones with the new zones from the temporary dataset.

=====================================================================

July 17, 2013 by Greg Bazhaw

A field was added called Zone and is used in lieu of the FinalZone field for labeling purposes and "zone" identification. Perhaps a better nomenclature for identifying the private development coverage areas (zones) could be developed.

=====================================================================

May 3, 2013 by Greg Bazhaw

These data were edited to add a field called DOCUMENTATION and populated with a value to the path of a relevant pdf document

=====================================================================

December 24, 2012 by Greg Bazhaw

These data were edited to remove many fields which were deemed part of previous geoprocessing routines and therefore not needed. A Descrip field was added and populated with the Legend values for A1, A2 and A3 FinalZones. The legend description was then shortened to Area A1, etc. Truncation occured because max value of 255 characters, truncated values have a * at the end. the Original data was backed up and is in the OLD folder.

=======================================================================

March 29, 2012.

These data were obtained from Steve Borgstrom and placed on the Server. In an email, Steve Writes:

Greg:

I’ve placed the HCP development area data under Y:\HCP\Proposed Private Development Coverage Areas.lyr. This is the data set that Rob has requested be placed under the HCP category in GIS4ALL so that planners can reference it. I’ve hesitated handing it off until now because it was still being edited on a frequent basis, but I believe the dust has settled.

Rob:

Could you provide to Greg a description of what this data means and how it was developed? I inherited the project from Matt, so I’m unsure of its roots. Furthermore, you’ve asked for discretionary edits along the way, so it would be good for us GIS folk to have a basis to understand the data so that we may defend its use.

=======================================================================

This dataset defines the Conservation Analysis Zones for the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan. The zones were last updated on May 11st, 2009.