| - Full Metadata - | - View Attributes - | - View Sample - | - Get Data - |
| Originator | Metropolitan Council |
| Abstract | The Metropolitan Council routinely compiles individual land use plans and plan amendments from communities within the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area into a single regional data layer. A principal goal of the Regional Planned Land Use dataset is to allow users to view, analyze and display planned land use data for anywhere in the seven county metropolitan area with a consistent land use classification scheme. The Metropolitan Council uses the Regional Planned Land Use (PLU) data to help monitor growth and plan for regional services such as regional parks, transit service, and wastewater collection and treatment. Although the planned land use data is based on the locally adopted land use plans and designations for each community, it represent only data that has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review per the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 (Minn. Stat 473.864, Subd 2 and 473.175, Subd 1). See Data Quality Information (Section 2 of this metadata) for specifics about the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 under Completeness information. Since there is no official State or Regional land use coding scheme that communities must conform with, the variability of content and codes between communities' land use plans is nearly as vast as the number of communities themselves (187). Differences among communities can range from the implementation of different land use categories to conflicting definitions of similar categories. The PLU dataset attempts to effectively level out the variability among communities by translating communities land use categories and descriptions into a common classification scheme developed and endorsed by MetroGIS (a regional GIS data sharing consortium) participants while retaining each communities' original categories. Although the comparability of land use plans between communities has greatly improved as a result of this translation or 'regionalization' of communities' land use codes, it is possible that not all community land use definitions have been precisely translated into the most appropriate regional land use category. In conjunction with other regional information (i.e., land use trend data, households and jobs forecasts), the PLU data can help communities more easily understand regional and sub-regional planning goals and Council staff, working with individual local units of government, can better plan for the future needs and financing of regional services. This is a MetroGIS Regionally Endorsed dataset. (See http://www.metrogis.org/data/about/index.shtml#whatis for more information). - Contact individual communities for more information on their locally adopted planned land use categories. - See Data Quality Information (Section 2 of this metadata) for specifics about the development of the regional dataset and its accuracy. - See Entities and Attributes Information (Section 5 of this metadata) for specifics about the regional land use codes and categories. |
| Browse Graphic | View a sample of the data. |
| Time Period of Content Date | 06/12/2009 |
| Currentness Reference | Initial planned land use data was received between June, 2000 and April, 2002. Communities reviewed the currentness of the Planned Land Use Information between March 8, 2002 and May 10, 2002. The actual date of a community's locally adopted plan is not known but the regional data are current as of the date that the Comprehensive Plan was reviewed and subsequent amendments by the Metropolitan Council per the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 (Minn. Stat 473.864, Subd 2 and 473.175, Subd 1). The Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 requires communities in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area to submit a Comprehensive Plan and subsequent plan amendments to the Metropolitan Council for review and consideration of the impact, if any the plan or plan amendment may have on the regional systems (i.e., roads, parks, wastewater collection and treatment. The following communities have either endorsed a new comprehensive plan (a requirement of all communities by 2008) or plan amendment and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Comprehensive Plan: Belle Plaine Carver Denmark Twp. Falcon Heights Farmington Grant Hamburg Lauderdale Long Lake Loretto Marine on St. Croix May Twp. Mayer North St. Paul Osseo Plymouth Scott County: Belle Plaine Twp. Blakeley Twp. Cedar lake Twp. Credit River Twp. Helena Twp. Jackson Twp. Louisville Twp. New Market Twp. Sand Creek Twp. Spring Lake Twp. St. Lawrence Twp. Scandia Shoreview St. Anthony St. Marys Point Stillwater Twp. Sunfish Lake Watertown Plan Amendment: None NOTE: Parts of Watertown Township show the City of Watertown's 2020 land use plan for lands the city had anticipated would be within their municipal boundary. These designations will remain until the Carver County 2030 Comprehensive Plan is finalized. |
| Access Constraints | None |
| Use Constraints | This dataset is the result of the compilation of interpreted planned land use for each community in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Although the data is based on the locally adopted land use designations of each community, they represent those designation that have been submitted to the Metropolitan Council per the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 (Minn. Stat 473.864, Subd 2 and 473.175, Subd 1). Locally adopted planned land use designations and corresponding regional interpretations are subject to modification through comprehensive plan amendments. Amendment information will be updated quarterly. For more information regarding any locally adopted planned land use designation, contact the individual community. By acceptance of this data, the user agrees to include a copy of this metadata record, including the liability disclaimer, whenever the user transmits or provides the GIS Data (or any portion of it) to another user. We recommend that other interested parties download this dataset from the Data Finder web site (www.datafinder.org) to ensure that the most current data is obtained. |
| Distributor Organization | Metropolitan Council |
| Ordering Instructions | This dataset is distributed on the internet in three ways. 1. This dataset can also be viewed and downloaded from the MetroGIS DataFinder Cafe at http://www.datafinder.org/cafe/ . The Cafe allows users to subset or clip datasets using an existing feature, such as a city or school district boundary or an ad-hoc, user defined area. 2. This dataset can be downloaded by clicking below after 'Online Linkage'. Doing so will tell your browser to start downloading a self extracting 'ZIP' file which will contain the ENTIRE dataset, including: - ArcView shape file - metadata for the dataset (.htm) - NOTICE.RTF, an important notice about this dataset that can be read by any word processing software. After downloading this self extracting 'zip' file (which will have an '.exe' extension), simply execute (run) the file. (For example, you can double click it from windows Explorer or File Manager). Doing this will automatically extract the files described above. 3. Additionally, this dataset is available for direct use via one or more map services. More information about what a web mapping service is can be found at http://www.datafinder.org/services/ The specific map service and layer name for this dataset can be found by clicking the blue or green boxes under the map service column of the DataFinder Catalog at http://www.datafinder.org/catalog/ . |
| Online Linkage | Click here to download data. (See Ordering Instructions above for details.) By clicking here, you agree to the notice in "Distribution Liability" in Section 6 of this metadata. |
Go to Section:
1. Identification Information
2. Data Quality Information
3. Spatial Data Organization Information
4. Spatial Reference Information
5. Entity and Attribute Information
6. Distribution Information
7. Metadata Reference Information
| Top of page | |
| Section 1 | Identification Information |
| Originator | Metropolitan Council |
| Title | Regional Planned Land Use - Twin Cities Metropolitan Area |
| Abstract | The Metropolitan Council routinely compiles individual land use plans and plan amendments from communities within the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area into a single regional data layer. A principal goal of the Regional Planned Land Use dataset is to allow users to view, analyze and display planned land use data for anywhere in the seven county metropolitan area with a consistent land use classification scheme. The Metropolitan Council uses the Regional Planned Land Use (PLU) data to help monitor growth and plan for regional services such as regional parks, transit service, and wastewater collection and treatment. Although the planned land use data is based on the locally adopted land use plans and designations for each community, it represent only data that has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review per the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 (Minn. Stat 473.864, Subd 2 and 473.175, Subd 1). See Data Quality Information (Section 2 of this metadata) for specifics about the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 under Completeness information. Since there is no official State or Regional land use coding scheme that communities must conform with, the variability of content and codes between communities' land use plans is nearly as vast as the number of communities themselves (187). Differences among communities can range from the implementation of different land use categories to conflicting definitions of similar categories. The PLU dataset attempts to effectively level out the variability among communities by translating communities land use categories and descriptions into a common classification scheme developed and endorsed by MetroGIS (a regional GIS data sharing consortium) participants while retaining each communities' original categories. Although the comparability of land use plans between communities has greatly improved as a result of this translation or 'regionalization' of communities' land use codes, it is possible that not all community land use definitions have been precisely translated into the most appropriate regional land use category. In conjunction with other regional information (i.e., land use trend data, households and jobs forecasts), the PLU data can help communities more easily understand regional and sub-regional planning goals and Council staff, working with individual local units of government, can better plan for the future needs and financing of regional services. This is a MetroGIS Regionally Endorsed dataset. (See http://www.metrogis.org/data/about/index.shtml#whatis for more information). - Contact individual communities for more information on their locally adopted planned land use categories. - See Data Quality Information (Section 2 of this metadata) for specifics about the development of the regional dataset and its accuracy. - See Entities and Attributes Information (Section 5 of this metadata) for specifics about the regional land use codes and categories. |
| Purpose | To view, analyze and display planned land use (PLU) data for anywhere in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area with a consistent land use classification scheme. In conjunction with other regional information (i.e., land use trend data, households and jobs forecasts), the PLU data can help communities more easily understand regional and sub-regional planning goals and Metropolitan Council staff, working with individual local units of government, can better monitor growth and plan for the future needs and financing of regional services such as regional parks, transit service, and wastewater collection and treatment. |
| Time Period of Content Date | 06/12/2009 |
| Currentness Reference | Initial planned land use data was received between June, 2000 and April, 2002. Communities reviewed the currentness of the Planned Land Use Information between March 8, 2002 and May 10, 2002. The actual date of a community's locally adopted plan is not known but the regional data are current as of the date that the Comprehensive Plan was reviewed and subsequent amendments by the Metropolitan Council per the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 (Minn. Stat 473.864, Subd 2 and 473.175, Subd 1). The Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 requires communities in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area to submit a Comprehensive Plan and subsequent plan amendments to the Metropolitan Council for review and consideration of the impact, if any the plan or plan amendment may have on the regional systems (i.e., roads, parks, wastewater collection and treatment. The following communities have either endorsed a new comprehensive plan (a requirement of all communities by 2008) or plan amendment and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Comprehensive Plan: Belle Plaine Carver Denmark Twp. Falcon Heights Farmington Grant Hamburg Lauderdale Long Lake Loretto Marine on St. Croix May Twp. Mayer North St. Paul Osseo Plymouth Scott County: Belle Plaine Twp. Blakeley Twp. Cedar lake Twp. Credit River Twp. Helena Twp. Jackson Twp. Louisville Twp. New Market Twp. Sand Creek Twp. Spring Lake Twp. St. Lawrence Twp. Scandia Shoreview St. Anthony St. Marys Point Stillwater Twp. Sunfish Lake Watertown Plan Amendment: None NOTE: Parts of Watertown Township show the City of Watertown's 2020 land use plan for lands the city had anticipated would be within their municipal boundary. These designations will remain until the Carver County 2030 Comprehensive Plan is finalized. |
| Progress | Complete |
| Maintenance and Update Frequency | As needed |
| Spatial Extent of Data | Twin Cities 7 County Metropolitan Area. This includes the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott and Washington in Minnesota. |
| Bounding Coordinates | -94.012 -92.732 45.415 44.471 |
| Place Keywords | Twin Cities, Anoka County, Carver County, Dakota County, Hennepin County, Ramsey County, Scott County, Washington County |
| Theme Keywords | Planned land use, regional planned land use, regional parcel data, future land use, planning and development |
| Theme Keyword Thesaurus | None |
| Access Constraints | None |
| Use Constraints | This dataset is the result of the compilation of interpreted planned land use for each community in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Although the data is based on the locally adopted land use designations of each community, they represent those designation that have been submitted to the Metropolitan Council per the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 (Minn. Stat 473.864, Subd 2 and 473.175, Subd 1). Locally adopted planned land use designations and corresponding regional interpretations are subject to modification through comprehensive plan amendments. Amendment information will be updated quarterly. For more information regarding any locally adopted planned land use designation, contact the individual community. By acceptance of this data, the user agrees to include a copy of this metadata record, including the liability disclaimer, whenever the user transmits or provides the GIS Data (or any portion of it) to another user. We recommend that other interested parties download this dataset from the Data Finder web site (www.datafinder.org) to ensure that the most current data is obtained. |
| Contact Person Information | Paul Hanson,
GIS Coordinator - Community Development Metropolitan Council 390 Robert Street North St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1805 Phone: 651-602-1642 FAX: 651-602-1674 E-mail: paul.hanson@metc.state.mn.us |
| Browse Graphic | View a sample of the data at: http://www.datafinder.org/metadata/bg/landuse_planned.jpg |
| Browse Graphic File Description | Sample map showing the Regional Planned Land Use layer. |
| Associated Data Sets | Planned land use maps or datasets may be available individually from each community. Parcel data is available for each county. See http://www.datafinder.org/metadata/metrogis_regional_parcels.htm for details. Existing land use datasets for various years are also available: Year 2005: http://www.datafinder.org/metadata/landuse_2005.htm Year 2000: http://www.datafinder.org/metadata/landuse_2000.htm Previous years: http://www.datafinder.org/metadata/landuse_hist.htm |
| Top of full metadata - - - - - - Top of page | |
| Section 2 | Data Quality Information |
| Attribute Accuracy | Each community's planned land use is subject to review by the Metropolitan Council per the Comprehensive Land Planning Act of 1995 (Minn. Stat 473.864, Subd 2 and 473.175, Subd 1). The accuracy of a community's locally adopted planned land use or land use plan is based on the information that has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council. Any locally adopted land use designation that is not submitted to the Council for review either through their comprehensive plan or subsequent plan amendments may not be incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use dataset. Regional classifications are 'best fit' interpretations of locally adopted designations into the MetroGIS endorsed Regional Coding Scheme. Any error in interpretation is solely the responsibility of the Metropolitan Council. Valid code checks have been conducted on the regional classification codes. No known code attribute errors exist. Locally adopted land use designations and therefore corresponding regional classifications are subject to change through comprehensive plan amendments. |
| Logical Consistency | The dataset is topologically 'clean'. |
| Completeness | This dataset is the result of the compilation of interpreted planned land use for each community in the Twin Cities metropolitan area to the year 2020. Although the data is based on the locally adopted land use designations of each community, they represent those designation that have been submitted to the Metropolitan Council per the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1995 (Minn. Stat 473.864, Subd 2 and 473.175, Subd 1). Locally adopted planned land use designations and corresponding regional interpretations are subject to modification through comprehensive plan amendments. Amendment information was updated 06/11/2009.Some communities have submitted their 2008 2030 comprehensive plans. For those communities the planning year is differentiated with the BENCHMARK data field. NOTE: some comprehensive plans or plan amendments may not be included that occurred before 06/11/2009. For more information regarding any locally adopted planned land use designation, contact the individual community. |
| Horizontal Positional Accuracy | The horizontal position accuracy is based on the county parcel data. See metadata for individual counties for positional accuracy statements. In areas where counties have improved altered the positional accuracy of their parcels, the planned land use boundaries may not be conterminous with thte parcel boundaries. For areas where planned land use delineations foreshadows existing parcel delineation, parcels were split to approximate the locally adopted land use delineation. As a general rule when developing this dataset it was the Metropolitan Council's intention to meet or exceed the National Mapping Accuracy Standards at 1:24,000 (within approximately 40 feet of actual location), with the exception of right-of-way for local roads. No testing has been conducted to verify this. |
| Lineage | This dataset was assembled by staff at the Metropolitan Council. Lineage Outline: I. Processing Step II. Dataset Goals and Summary III. Creation of the Regional Planned Land Use (PLU) Dataset A. Land Use Coding Scheme B. Geography (Spatial Base) C. Data Capture Methodology IV. Assumptions, Observations and Regionalization Consistencies V. Updates I. PROCESSING STEPS: 1) Added Comprehensive Plan Amendments : 09/01/02 2) Data Structure Update Implemented: 09/01/02 3) Added Comprehensive Plan Amendments : 01/01/03 4) Added Comprehensive Plan Amendments : 03/06/03 5) Data Structure Update Implemented: 03/25/03 6) CAdded Comprehensive Plan Amendments : 05/29/03 7) Added Comprehensive Plan Amendments : 10/13/03 8) Data Structure Update Implemented : 05/01/05 9) Added Comprehensive Plan Amendments : 06/01/05 10) Added Comprehensive Plan Amendments : 02/02/06 11) Added Comprehensive Plan Amendments : 11/07/06 12) Added Comprehensive Plan Amendments : 12/28/06 13) Added New Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments and Data Structure Update Implemented : 04/04/07 14) Added New Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments and Data Structure Update Implemented : 08/21/07 15) Added New Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments and Data Structure Update Implemented : 01/16/08 16) Added New Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments and Data Structure Update Implemented : 03/26/08 17) Added New Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments and Data Structure Update Implemented : 07/07/08 18) Added New Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments and Data Structure Update Implemented : 10/08/08 19) Added New Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments and Data Structure Update Implemented : 12/31/08 20) II. DATASET GOALS AND SUMMARY A principal goal of the Regional Planned Land Use (PLU) dataset is to allow users to view, analyze and display planned land use data for anywhere in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area with a consistent land use classification scheme. In conjunction with other regional information (i.e., land use trend data, households and jobs forecasts), the PLU data can help communities more easily understand regional and sub-regional planning goals and Metropolitan Council staff, working with individual local units of government, can better monitor growth and plan for the future needs and financing of regional services such as regional parks, transit service, and wastewater collection and treatment. Since there is no official State or Regional land use coding scheme that communities must conform with, the variability of content and codes between communities' land use plans is nearly as vast as the number of communities themselves (187). Differences among communities can range from the implementation of different land use categories to conflicting definitions of similar categories. The PLU dataset attempts to effectively level out the variability among communities by translating communities land use categories and descriptions into a common classification scheme while retaining the communities' original categories. Although the comparability of land use plans between communities has greatly improved as a result of this translation or 'regionalization' of communities' land use codes, it is likely that not all community land use definitions have been precisely translated into the most appropriate regional land use category (see 'Summary of Regionalization Consistencies and Assumptions'). III. CREATION OFTHE PLANNED LAND USE (PLU) DATASET A. LAND USE CODING SCHEME: The PLU dataset came to fruition in 2002 based on an original 'Information Need' outlined by MetroGIS and the Metropolitan Council's need to collect and compare communities' land use plans across jurisdictional boundaries for planning and servicing regional services (i.e., regional parks, transit, and waste collection and treatment). Derived from communities' individual land use plans and subsequent plan amendments, the data set is displayed utilizing a uniform classification scheme that incorporates the concepts and practices fostered by the American Planners Association. The classification scheme - the Regional Planned Land Use Coding Scheme - is the result of more than 3 ½ years of collaboration between MetroGIS, the North Metro I-35W Corridor Coalition and the Metropolitan Council. The combined, uniform regional vision allows users to visualize information in a variety of ways and make 'apples to apples' comparisons between communities which can influence regional and sub-regional planning policies in ways that hadn't been possible in the past. Based on the recommendation of MetroGIS, the classification scheme distinguishes between use and 'intensity of use.' To better explain this distinction, consider the following often-used land use terms: 'Multifamily Residential' and 'High Density Residential.' Both terms are describing a form 'Residential' land use. Whereas 'Multifamily' defines the type residential land use, 'High Density' is a qualitative term reflecting the intensity of use the 'Residential' land. Such intensity descriptions are not reserved solely for residential land uses. Although not use as frequently, intensity qualifiers are just as applicable to other types of land use (i.e., 'High Intensity Mixed Use', 'Medium Performance Industrial' or 'Low Density Business - Office Park'). Acknowledging that there is a distinction between a land use and the intensity of that use, an 'Intensity of Use' Work Group was formed to refine the proposed Regional Land Use Coding Scheme land use categories and determine what 'intensity' measures would be useful to supplement planned land use data, or more specifically, the Regional Coding Scheme. The Work Group outlined several measures but, only 'Housing Density' was designated as a priority and addressed by the group as of 2002. As a result, 'Housing Density' (i.e., 'HSG_DEN') and 'Housing Density Range' (i.e., 'HSGDEN_RNG') are included as separate data fields in the Regional Planned Land Use dataset to record the community's known allowable housing density range associated with a residential land use category and which standardized density range category is most appropriate for the community's description, respectively (see Definition of the 'Intensity of Use' Work Group's Housing Density Ranges list below). For more information about the activities and participants involved in the development of MetroGIS's Regional Planned Land Use Coding Scheme or data set, refer to www.metrogis.org/data/info_needs /planned_land_use/index.shtml. To view the land use categories of the Regional Planned Land Use Coding Scheme refer to Definition of Planned Land Use Categories listed below. B. GEOGRAPHY (SPATIAL BASE): Like all geographic data managed by the Metropolitan Council, a goal of the PLU data is to interoperable with other geographic data. As such, the PLU data is compiled and delineated using a topologically CLEANED spatial database comprising of county-produced city and township boundaries and parcel boundaries for the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area (i.e., Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington Counties), data made available through MetroGIS. As a result, where coterminous, the planned land use designations align with parcel (or property) boundaries. In areas where the planned land use boundaries do not follow parcel boundaries, parcels are split to approximately reflect the land use plan designations. Initially, land uses were delineated to parcel boundaries and non-parcels lands (lands not defined as a parcel such as road rights-of-way) were delineated and designated accordingly (i.e., Vehicular Rights-of-Way or Pedestrian Rights-of-Way, etc.). However, due to the structure of some county parcel datasets and the difficulties associated with maintaining the geographic integrity of the Regional Planned Land Use Dataset due to periodic parcel alignment adjustments by counties, the methodology was re-evaluated. When combined with the fact that the data capture methodology of the Council's 5-Year 'Existing' land use inventories included land use delineation to rights-of-way centerline and users' desire to compare current land use patterns with planned development, a call to change the way rights-of-ways are classified in the PLU dataset was made. As a result, starting in 2005, only major highways are delineated and classified as 'Vehicular Rights-of-Way' in the PLU dataset. The major highways are defined by the Metropolitan Council's Functional Roads classification. All other rights-of ways were delineated from the adjacent land use boundaries to the centerline, using The Lawrence Group (TLG) Street Centerlines as a guide, and assigned the appropriate land use designation. C. DATA CAPTURE METHODOLOGY: The following general data capture procedures (the translation or 'regionalization' of community's land use categories) are used to create the PLU data set: 1. Quarterly, gather all new community land use plans and plan amendments and incorporate their geography into the existing PLU dataset using current parcel boundaries to guide delineation - starting in 2005, incorporation means delineation to the rights-of-way centerline. 2. Record communities' land use designations exactly as defined in their land use plans, 3. Translate or 'regionalize' communities' land use designations and housing densities into the detailed Regional Planned Land Use Coding Scheme and Housing Density Ranges through a 'best-fit' procedure. See 'Summary of Regionalization Consistencies and Assumptions' for more information about 'best-fit' procedures. 4. Dissolve or summarize the geography by land use types per community so that the final PLU dataset contains neither complete, original parcel boundaries nor any original parcel attribution (information) as specified in the current MetroGIS data-sharing agreement for the county parcel data. 5. Upon completion of the the first version of the Regional PLU dataset (May 2002) and after a major significant data structural change (05/01/05), individual community information was mapped and sent to the communities for review and comments on accuracy of the Council's land use information and their regionalization of community designation into the Regional Planned Land Use Coding Scheme. NOTE: accuracies of the data and concerns regarding the regionalization of data will be continually addressed as they are presented. As land is developed and land use plans are 'realized,' frequently, development occurs with slightly different geography or alignment as speculatively depicted on the land use plan maps. Because of this reality, it was believed that an annual realignment of the preceding PLU data with actual parcel alignment would help achieve and maintain the goal of having geographically aligned regional datasets. To date, an automated, consistent annual realignment procedure has not been developed. As plan amendments are incorporated in the Regional dataset, realignment of previously incorporated planned land use may occur to improve the geographic representation of the data which, in turn, can alter the total land use area for a community's land use category beyond simple growth or land use change. Additionally, periodic review and realignments may occur when resources allow also impact land use area totals. IV. ASSUMPTIONS, OBSERVATIONS AND REGIONALIZATION CONSISTENCIES: Please review the following document to learn more about Assumptions, Observations and Regionalization Consistenties made regarding the Regional Planned Land Use Dataset: http://www.datafinder.org/metadata/PLU_Consistencies.pdf V. UPDATES: 1) ADDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS : 09/01/02 The following communities had comprehensive plan amendments and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use: Andover Chaska Crystal Eden Prairie Long Lake Ramsey Shoreview In addition, changes have been made to Minneapolis based on community review which was not received prior to the initial release of the Regional Planned Land Use data. These changes include roadway realignment, Light Rail Transit (LRT) location, and detailed plan developments surrounding the LRT. 2) DATA STRUCTURE UPDATE IMPLEMENTED : 09/01/02 In the previous release of the Regional Planned Land Use (PLU) data, some residential designations were indistinguishable by housing type - the principle value of residential classification. These areas were classified as 'Residential, Undifferentiated' (RESU) at PLU Level 2. In general, these designations were classified as 'Single-Family Residential (SRES) at PLU Level 1. However, some communities had designated residential areas by housing density (units per acre). Inferring housing densities to define likley allowable housing types, those communities that had areas classified as RESU at PLU Level 2 and had 'higher' housing densities (typically 4 to 6 units per acre or more) were classified as 'Multi-Family Residential' (MRES) at PLU Level 1 rather than 'Single-Family Residential (SRES). However, the previous coding scheme created an inability to distinguish between PLU Level 2 - 'Residential, Undifferentiated'(RESU) at PLU Level 1 - 'Single-Family Residential'(SRES) or PLU Level 1 'Multi-Family Residential'(MRES). As a result, the coding scheme has been slightly altered to make the distinction between these designations clearer to interpret when mapping at PLU Level 2. No longer will 'Residential, Undifferentiated' be coding as 'RESU' , but rather will be coded as 'RESUS' for PLU Level 2 'Residential, Undifferentiated' with PLU Level 1 - 'Single-Family Residential'(SRES) and coded as 'RESUM' for PLU Level 2 'Residential, Undifferentiated' with PLU Level 1 'Multi-Family Residential'(MRES). In other words, Below illustrates how 'Residential, Undifferentiated' could have been coded and how it will be coded from now on: Previously........ PLU Level 2 PLU Level 1 ----------------------------------------------- 'RESU' 'SRES' 'RESU' 'MRES' Currently.......... PLU Level 2 PLU Level 1 ----------------------------------------------- 'RESUS' 'SRES' 'RESUM' 'MRES' NOTE: The PLU Desc field essentially remains the same with the exception of a ...' - S' for single-family or a ...' - M' for multi-family tack on the end: 'Residential, Undifferentiated - S' or 'Residential, Undifferentiated - M' 3) ADDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS : 01/01/03 The following communities had comprehensive plan amendments and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use: Andover, Champlin, Eagan, Golden Valley, Inver Grove Heights, Maple Grove 4) ADDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS : 3/06/03 The following communities had comprehensive plan amendments and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use: Andover, Blaine, Burnsville, Champlin, Corcoran, Columbia Heights, Cottage Grove, Eden Prairie, Hampton, Inver Grove Heights, Lakeville, Medina, Rogers 5) DATA STRUCTURE UPDATE IMPLEMENTED : 03/25/03 A bug in the error checking procedure was discovered that missed a potential error in the land use codes. The error centered on the old 'Residential, Undifferentiated' category that was be coding as 'RESU' prior to 09/ 01/02. The result of the error was a mismatch in land use codes between the raw data and the mapping legends. All data was rechecked and verified. 6) ADDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS : 05/29/03 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan amendments and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Apple Valley, Andover, Belle Plaine, Blaine, Bloomington, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Chanhassen, Circle Pines, Columbia Heights, Coon Rapids, Eagan, East Bethel, Eden Prairie, Farmington, Forest Lake, Greenfield, Hampton, Hastings, Inver Grove Heights, Jordan, Lake Elmo, Maple Grove, Minnetrista, North Oaks, Oak Grove, Plymouth, Prior Lake, Ramsey, Rogers, Roseville, Savage, Shakopee, Shoreview, Victoria, West Lakeland Twp., Woodbury 7) ADDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS : 10/13/03 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan amendments and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Andover, Anoka, Bloomington, Burnsville, Columbia Heights, Eagan, Eden Prairie, Greenfield, Inver Grove Heights, Lakeville, Lino Lakes, Maple Grove, Minnetrista, Oak Grove, Prior Lake, Ramsey, St. Louis Park An addition Level 2 code was added to address passenger rail. Rail Transit Way (RTW) was added to Level 2 Railroad to distinguish between passenger and freight rail corridors. As a result a slight modification to the Level 1 railroad (RL) and Level 2 railway corridor (RLW) definitions were made to clarify their designations 8) DATA STRUCTURE UPDATE IMPLEMENTED : 06/01/05 Because the Regional Parcel data was used as a spatial based, the first several versions of the Regional Planned Land Use dataset produced de-facto rights-of-way that were classified to their appropriate land use where possible (see Preparing Regional Parcel Data above) and all others where classified as vehicular rights-of-way. However, there are many difficulties associated with the 'de-facto' vehicular rights-of-way that hinder the ability to maintain a Regional Planned Land Use dataset with their incorporation. - Because many counties did not separately delineate 'non-taxing' entities (water bodies, roadways, railways, easements, and even public lands) it is difficult to consistently delineate an accurate 'existing' vehicular rights-of-way from the Regional Parcel dataset. This difficulty essentially eliminated the ability to annually realign the Planned Land Use data with improved Regional Parcel data. - There were embedded inconsistencies in the Regional Planned Land Use dataset by even attempting to delineate vehicular rights-of-way. The ability to delineate and therefore quantify 'existing' rights-of-way but the inability to represent 'planned' rights-of-way limits the overall value of incorporating vehicular rights-of-way beyond well-known, planned major roadways. - Significant changes in the predominant ArcGIS structure: architectual language and data model (from predominately coverages and shapefiles to personal geodatabases). These changes alone do not demand changes in the Regional Planned Land Use dataset but the need to change the maintenance application and convert the dataset into the new data model (personal geodatabase) precipitated an opportunity to make overall improvements to the data, the data model (how information is stored and retrieved), and maintenance routines of the dataset. Rather than continually attempting to compensate for all of weaknesses and difficulties in the original data structure, it was decided in 2003 to modify the spatial structure of the Regional Planned Land Use data by representing land uses to the street centerline (with the exception of 'Major Highways'). By doing so, many of the maintenance difficulties would be eliminated. For those users that wish to represent vehicular rights of way could do so by overlaying an appropriate dataset. The Regional Planned Land Use dataset was converted from an ArcInfo Coverage to an ArcGIS Personal Geodatabase. The Regional Planned Land Use geodatabase was UNIONed with The Lawrence Group's Street Centerline data to generate centerline edits. All previous delineated vehicular rights-of-ways were then SPLIT and coded to 'extend' the non-vehicular rights-of-way land use (i.e. commercial, industrial, park, etc) to the street centerlines. All land use codes were checked and verified to accurately represent each community's known planned land use data. The resulting geodatabase was then modified to incorporate new data model structure. The new Regional Planned Land Use geodatabase consists of a single feature dataset ('plu_poygons' - polygons representing the spatial information) and 4 associated database tables: 'Regional_Level1_Codes', Regional_Level2_Codes', 'Complan_Reviews', and 'Sector_Rep_Info' (See ENTITY AND ATTRIBUTE OVERVIEW and ENTITY AND ATTRIBUTE DETAIL CITATION for detailed database structure information). 9) ADDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS : 06/01/05 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan/comprehensive plan amendments and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Andover, Apple Valley, Arden Hills, Bayport, Baytown Township, Blaine, Bloomington, Burnsville, Carver, Centerville, Chanhassen, Chaska, Circle Pines, Coates, Columbia Heights, Corcoran, Eden Prairie, Falcon Heights, Farmington, Forest Lake, Golden Valley, Hastings, Hopkins, Hugo, Inver Grove Heights, Lake Elmo, Lakeville, Lino Lakes, Long Lake, Loretto, Maple Grove, Minneapolis, Minnetrista, Mound, Oak Grove, Oak Park Heights, Oakdale, Plymouth, Prior Lake, Ramsey, Randolph Township, Robbinsdale, Rosemount, St. Louis Park, Shakopee, Shorewood, South St. Paul, Stillwater Township, Watertown, West St. Paul, White Bear Lake, and Woodbury 10) ADDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS : 2/02/06 (add retroactively by PEH) Communities were updated Feb. 02, 2006, however, it is unclear which communities had plan amendments. 11) ADDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS : 11/07/06 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan/comprehensive plan amendments and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Afton, Andover, Anoka, Apple Valley, Blaine, Bloomington, Brooklyn Park, Burnsville, Carver, Centerville, Champlin, Chanhassen, Chaska, Circle Pines, Cologne, Coon Rapids, Corcoran, Cottage Grove, Dayton, Eagan, Eden Prairie, Empire Township, Forest Lake, Ham Lake, Hastings, Hopkins, Inver Grove Heights, Jordan, Lake Elmo, Lakeville, Lilydale, Lino Lakes, Long Lake, Mahtomedi, Maple Grove, Minneapolis, Minnetonka, Mound, Mounds View, Norwood Young America, Oak Grove, Oak Park Heights, Plymouth, Prior Lake, Ramsey, Richfield, Robbinsdale, Rogers, Rosemount, St. Louis Park, St, Paul Park, Shakopee, South St. Paul, Stillwater Township, Vermillion, Waconia, Watertown, West St. Paul, Willernie 12) ADDED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS : 12/28/06 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan/comprehensive plan amendments and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Andover, Burnsville, Chaska, Cologne, Farmington, Maple Grove, Minneapolis, New Brighton, Plymouth, Robbinsdale, Rosemount, Watertown Twp., Woodbury 13) ADDED NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PLAN AMENDMENTS AND DATA STRUCTURE UPDATE IMPLEMENTED : 04/04/07 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan (a requirement of all communities by 2008) or plan amendment and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: PRIOR LAKE (New 2030 Comp Plan) Apple Valley, Baytown Twp., Burnsville, Chanhassen, Columbia Heights, Coon Rapids, Eden Prairie, Hastings, Inver Grove Heights, Lino Lakes, Mendota Heights, Minntrista, Oak Grove, Plymouth, St. Louis Park, South St. Paul, Stillwater, White Bear Lake. Adjustments were also made to Norwood Young America in conjunction with Young America Twp. In addition, the BENCHMARK field was added to the database to track the planning year represented for each community. The CTU_ID field was added. CTU_ID is the new Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) official federal unique identifier for each city, township or unorganized territory ( 9 digit Long Integer). The CTU_CODE will be discontinued following the 2010 U.S. Census. NOTE: the Town of New Scandia has changed to the City of Scandia and the Cities of Elko and New Market have merged to create the single City of Elko New Market. In both of these situations, the CTU_CODE has been changed to reflect these changes (see Entities and Attributes for new value CTU_CODEs for these communities). 14) ADDED NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PLAN AMENDMENTS AND DATA STRUCTURE UPDATE IMPLEMENTED : 08/21/07 15) ADDED NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PLAN AMENDMENTS AND DATA STRUCTURE UPDATE IMPLEMENTED : 01/16/08 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan (a requirement of all communities by 2008) or plan amendment and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: EAST BETHEL (New 2030 Comp Plan), Andover, Anoka, Apple Valley, Burnsville, Coon Rapids, Edina, Fridley, Hassen Township, Inver Grove Heights, Lakeville, Lino Lakes, Maple Grove, Oakdale, Orono, Plymouth, Richfield, St. Louis Park, Shakopee, Stillwater, Waconia, Watertown, Woodbury Additionally modifications were made to the geography and / or database. 1) New, preliminary parcel realignment was acquired for part of Anoka County. This new data allowed the Council to make adjustments to the planned land use alignment for several communities within the county (i.e., all communities except for parts or all of the City of Anoka, Burns Township, Columbus, Lino Lakes, Linwood Township, and St. Francis). 2) In versions past, not all major water bodies were present in the Regional Planned Land Use dataset. the reasons for this are varied but are primarily resulting from water not delinated in the county parcel data or communities were not representing water in their land use plan. The Council's Local Planning Assistence group (i.e., Planning Sector Representatives) felt it was best to add major water bodies to the Regional Planned Land Use dataset to help narrow differences in land use numbers that may arise between the Regional Planned Land Use dataset and a community's land use inventory. As such, open water features defined in the Council's Generalized Land Use, 2005 dataset were uincorporated with the final version of the Regional Planned Land Use dataset. 3) To help avoid confusion with the Generalized land use category 'Mixed Use', 'Mulitple Use' was changed to 'Multi-Optional Development.' The definition of the catagory essentially remains the same - describing an area mark for development that could be developed into one of many possible land use types BUT not more than one. It should be noted that initially, 'Multiple Use' was also designed to be used for larger areas that were made up of many single-use buildings or activities (i.e., a business campus that has Office, Industrial and possible commercial activities) - what counld be described as 'horizontal'Mixed Use.' However, frequently communities consider these types of areas 'Mixed' and it proved difficult for the Council to clearly distinguish, let alone, refine these areas effectively into individual uses. As a result, the Regional Planned Land Use was rarely using 'Multiple Use' to describe 'horizontal' Mixed Use and encouraged the Council to create a more representative and intuitive land use category name for areas that can be developed into one of many land use options: 'Multi-Optional Development'. It should also be noted that the DETAILED land use categories for both 'Mixed Use' and Muti-Optional Development' have been renamed. With the general overall exception of 'Multi-Optional Development' the DETAILED land use categories are different only in name, not content. 16) ADDED NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PLAN AMENDMENTS AND DATA STRUCTURE UPDATE IMPLEMENTED : 03/26/08 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan (a requirement of all communities by 2008) or plan amendment and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Blaine, Bloomington, Coon Rapids, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka Beach, Ramsey Additional changes made recently to the personal geodatabase filename and featureclass name may effect existing applications. For the record, the personal geodatabase filename is now 'landuse_planned.mdb' to coorespond to the shapefile name used for years. And the featureclass name has also changed from 'plu_polygon' to 'landuse_planned.' Please check older applications to make sure these changes are registered. 17) ADDED NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PLAN AMENDMENTS AND DATA STRUCTURE UPDATE IMPLEMENTED : 07/07/08 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan (a requirement of all communities by 2008) or plan amendment and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Anoka, Burnsville, Eagan, Empire Township, Golden Valley, Hassen Township, Inver Grove Heights, Lakeville, Lilydale, New Germany, Shoreview, Woodbury. Also the town of Burns has been incorporated as the City of Nowthen. 18) ADDED NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PLAN AMENDMENTS AND DATA STRUCTURE UPDATE IMPLEMENTED : 10/08/08 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan (a requirement of all communities by 2008) or plan amendment and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Burnsville, Eagen, St. Paul, Waconia 19) Added New Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments and Data Structure Update Implemented : 12/31/08 The following communities either had new comprehensive plan (a requirement of all communities by 2008) or plan amendment and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use or previously overlooked comprehensive plan amendments that were incorporated into the Regional Planned Land Use: Bloomington, Chanhassen, Maplewood St. Louis Park An additional adjustment was made to Forest Lake to compensate for a previous overlooked amendment when Forest Lake township was fully incorporated into the City of Forest Lake. 20) Added New Comprehensive Plans: 06/11/09 The following communities had new comprehensive plan (a requirement of all communities by 2008) and thus subsequent changes in land use designations since the last release of the Regional Planned Land Use: Belle Plaine, Carver, Denmark Twp., Falcon Heights, Farmington, Grant, Hamburg, Lauderdale, Long Lake, Loretto, Marine on St. Croix, May Twp., Mayer, North St. Paul, Osseo, Plymouth, Scott County: Belle Plaine Twp., Blakeley Twp., Cedar lake Twp., Credit River Twp., Helena Twp., Jackson Twp., Louisville Twp., New Market Twp., Sand Creek Twp., Spring Lake Twp., St. Lawrence Twp., Scandia, Shoreview, St. Anthony, St. Marys Point, Stillwater Twp., Sunfish Lake, Watertown. NOTE: Parts of Watertown Township show the City of Watertown's 2020 land use plan for lands the city had anticipated would be within their municipal boundary. These designations will remain until the Carver County 2030 Comprehensive Plan is finalized. |
| Source Scale Denominator | |
| Top of full metadata - - - - - - Top of page | |
| Section 3 | Spatial Data Organization Information |
| Native Data Set Environment | ESRI Personal Geodatabase, ArcGIS 9x |
| Geographic Reference for Tabular Data | None |
| Spatial Object Type | Vector |
| Vendor Specific Object Types | polygon shapes |
| Tiling Scheme | The dataset is one shapefile for entire seven county area. |
| Top of full metadata - - - - - - Top of page | |
| Section 4 | Spatial Reference Information |
| Horizontal Coordinate Scheme | |
| Ellipsoid | GRS80 |
| Horizontal Datum | NAD83 |
| Horizontal Units | |
| Distance Resolution | |
| Top of full metadata - - - - - - Top of page | |
| Section 5 | Entity and Attribute Information |
| Entity and Attribute Overview | PLU_POLYGON feature class attribution |
| Entity and Attribute Detailed Citation | plu_polygons.mdb SPATIAL DATA (POLYGON) ATTRIBUTES: OBJECTID: Unique polygon identifier SHAPE: ArcGIS feature type MCD_NAME: MCD name; e.g. Burns Twp., Blaine PLUSE_DESC: Unique community PLU description; e.g. Single Family,Detached - all descriptions valid HSG_DEN: Community's residential density ranges; e.g. 1 - 4 units per acre - all defined ranges valid HSGDEN_RNG: Best-fit regional residential density range; e.g. LOW - see valid ranges and definitions listed in Entity and Attribute Detailed Citation section CO_CODE: 3 digit FIPS code for the county in which the polygon resides; CTU_CODE: 5 digit FIPS place code for minor civil divisions (City, Township, and Unincorportated) REGIONAL_N: Numeric regional land use code; e.g. 211 - see valid codes listed in Entity and Attribute Detailed Citation section BENCHMARK: Alphanumeric code for year of Comprehensive Plan (i.e., 2020) ACRES: Polygon area in acres CTU_ID: The Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) official federal unique identifier for each city, township or unorganized territory ( 9 digit Long Integer) SHAPE_LENG: Perimeter length of polygon in meters SHAPE_AREA: Polygon area in square meters Valid HSGDEN_RNG Codes - RURAL, EXURBAN, LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH, VERYHIGH, URBAN. See Valid HSGDEN_RNG Codes and Corresponding Density Ranges as defined in the PLU_Regional_CodesDB.mdb listed below. Valid CO_CODE codes -- Three digit county FIPS code for the county that the polygon exists within. Note: For communities that exist within multiple counties, the entire community has been county coded as the county that constitutes the largest land mass of the community. St. Anthony is an exception to this rule - St. Anthony data exists in within Hennepin and Ramsey data. - 003 = Anoka County - 019 = Carver County - 037 = Dakota County - 053 = Hennepin County - 123 = Ramsey County - 139 = Scott County - 163 = Washington County Valid CTU_CODE codes -- 5 digit FIPS 'Place' code, Census Bureau standard code and proposed state standard ID code for cities, townships and unorganized territories CTU_ CODE MCD_NAME 00316 - Afton 01486 - Andover 01720 - Anoka 01900 - Apple Valley 02026 - Arden Hills 04114 - Bayport 04132 - Baytown Twp. 04834 - Belle Plaine 04852 - Belle Plaine Twp. 05266 - Benton Twp. 05554 - Bethel 06058 - Birchwood Village 06382 - Blaine 06418 - Blakeley Twp. 06616 - Bloomington 07948 - Brooklyn Center 07966 - Brooklyn Park 08740 - Burns Twp. 08794 - Burnsville 09406 - Camden Twp. 10144 - Carver 10306 - Castle Rock Twp. 10450 - Cedar Lake Twp. 10648 - Centerville 10846 - Champlin 10918 - Chanhassen 10972 - Chaska 11494 - Circle Pines 12376 - Coates 12664 - Cologne 12700 - Columbia Heights 12718 - Columbus Twp. 13114 - Coon Rapids 13168 - Corcoran 13456 - Cottage Grove 13726 - Credit River Twp. 14158 - Crystal 14482 - Dahlgren Twp. 15022 - Dayton 15148 - Deephaven 15616 - Dellwood 15688 - Denmark Twp. 16228 - Douglas Twp. 17288 - Eagan 17486 - East Bethel 18116 - Eden Prairie 18188 - Edina 18662 - Elko New Market 19871 - Eureka Twp. 20078 - Excelsior 20420 - Falcon Heights 20618 - Farmington 21770 - Forest Lake 21965 - Fort Snelling (unorg.) 22814 - Fridley 23318 - Gem Lake 24308 - Golden Valley 25334 - Grant 25622 - Greenfield 25802 - Greenvale Twp. 25918 - Greenwood 25982 - Grey Cloud Island Twp. 26666 - Hamburg 26738 - Ham Lake 26864 - Hampton 26882 - Hampton Twp. 26918 - Hancock Twp. 26990 - Hanover 27530 - Hastings 28322 - Helena Twp. 29258 - Hilltop 29726 - Hollywood Twp. 30140 - Hopkins 30392 - Hugo 30842 - Independence 31076 - Inver Grove Heights 31580 - Jackson Twp. 57184 - St. Lawrence Twp. 34244 - Lake Elmo 34622 - Lakeland 34658 - Lakeland Shores 34865 - Lake St. Croix Beach 35108 - Laketown Twp. 35180 - Lakeville 35414 - Landfall 35738 - Lauderdale 36836 - Lexington 37016 - Lilydale 37322 - Lino Lakes 37376 - Linwood Twp. 37502 - Little Canada 38006 - Long Lake 38222 - Loretto 38294 - Louisville Twp. 39428 - Mahtomedi 40166 - Maple Grove 40256 - Maple Plain 40382 - Maplewood 40562 - Marine on St. Croix 40724 - Marshan Twp. 41120 - May Twp. 41462 - Medicine Lake 41480 - Medina 41678 - Mendota 41696 - Mendota Heights 42092 - Miesville 43252 - Minnetonka 43270 - Minnetonka Beach 43306 - Minnetrista 44476 - Mound 44530 - Mounds View 45430 - New Brighton 45556 - New Germany 45628 - New Hope 45754 - New Market Twp. 45790 - Newport 45808 - New Prague 48900 - Scandia 46024 - New Trier 46330 - Nininger Twp. 46924 - Northfield 47104 - North Oaks 47221 - North St. Paul 47680 - Oakdale 47690 - Oak Grove 47914 - Oak Park Heights 48580 - Orono 49012 - Osseo 51316 - Pine Springs 51730 - Plymouth 53026 - Ramsey 53098 - Randolph 53116 - Randolph Twp. 53260 - Ravenna Twp. 54214 - Richfield 54808 - Robbinsdale 55006 - Rockford 55186 - Rogers 55726 - Rosemount 55852 - Roseville 56680 - St. Anthony 56770 - St. Bonifacius 56950 - St. Francis 57220 - St. Louis Park 57292 - St. Marys Point 58000 - St. Paul 58018 - St. Paul Park 58486 - San Francisco Twp. 58738 - Savage 59008 - Sciota Twp. 32174 - Jordan 59350 - Shakopee 59998 - Shoreview 60016 - Shorewood 61492 - South St. Paul 67432 - Waconia 61996 - Spring Lake Park 62014 - Spring Park 62824 - Stillwater 63544 - Sunfish Lake 65164 - Tonka Bay 66460 - Vadnais Heights 66802 - Vermillion 66820 - Vermillion Twp. 67036 - Victoria 67450 - Waconia Twp. 68530 - Waterford Twp. 68548 - Watertown 68818 - Wayzata 69520 - West Lakeland Twp. 69700 - West St. Paul 69916 - White Bear Twp. 69970 - White Bear Lake 71500 - Woodland 72130 - Young America Twp. 71428 - Woodbury 52594 - Prior Lake 68566 - Watertown Twp. 43000 - Minneapolis 58324 - Sand Creek Twp. 27476 - Hassan Twp. 47520 - Norwood Young America 61978 - Spring Lake Twp. 19376 - Empire Twp. 70366 - Willernie 62842 - Stillwater Twp. 41138 - Mayer Valid REGIONAL_N codes - 110, 120, 130, 149, 198, 199, 211, 212, 213, 218, 219, 221, 222, 224, 228, 310. 320, 330, 340, 350, 399, 410, 420, 430, 440, 470, 499, 510, 520, 530, 540, 599, 610, 620, 630, 699, 710, 720, 730, 799, 812, 813, 819, 820, 830, 911, 914, 921, 922, 939, 950, 1029, 1030, 1040, 1100. REGIONAL_N codes relate to Valid 'DETAILED' numeric land use codes as defined in the PLU_Regional_CodesDB.mdb. See Valid 'DETAILED' numeric land use codes and associated description information (i.e., DESC_ or FULLDESCMEMO) as defined in the PLU_Regional_CodesDB.mdb listed below. Valid BENCHMARK codes - '2020', '2030' Valid CTU_ID codes -- The Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) official federal unique identifier for each city, township or unorganized territory ( 9 digit Long Integer). Valid codes not listed. ========================= PLU_Regional_CodesDB.mdb ============================== PLU_Regional_CodesDB.mdb contains three(3) relational database tables: 1) REGIONAL_GENERALIZED_DESIGNATIONS 2) REGIONAL_DETAILED_DESIGNATIONS 3) REGIONAL_HOUSING_DENSITY_RANGES 1) REGIONAL_GENERALIZED_DESIGNATIONS table attributes: GENERALIZED - 'GENERALIZED' numeric regional land use code associated with 'DETAILED' numeric regional land use code DESC_ - Description of 'GENERALIZED' regional numeric land use code (e.g. Single Family Residential) FULLDESCMEMO - Full description of 'GENERALIZED' regional numeric land use code 2) REGIONAL_DETAILED_DESIGNATIONS table attributes: GENERALIZED - 'GENERALIZED' numeric regional land use code associated with 'DETAILED' numeric regional land use code DETAILED - 'DETAILED' numeric regional land use code DESC_ - Description of 'DETAILED' regional numeric land use code (e.g. Single Family, Detached Residential) FULLDESCMEMO - Full description of 'DETAILED' regional numeric land use code 3) REGIONAL_HOUSING DENSITY RANGES table attributes: HSGDEN_RNG - 'Best Fit' Regional Housing Density Range ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Valid GENERALIZED Land Use Codes and Corresponding Descriptions (i.e., DESC_ or FULLDESCMEMO) 100 -- Agricultural - Land used for agricultural purposes, including farming, dairying, pasturage, horticulture, floriculture, viticulture, and animal and poultry husbandry and accessory uses; provided that such accessory uses shall be incidental to the agricultural activities. 190 -- Rural or Large-Lot Residential - Land containing a building or portion thereof used for residential purposes, including mostly one-family homes but may include some two-family (code 219), but not including hotels, motels, and boarding and lodging houses, nursing homes, or elderly care facilities - may include land used for agricultural purposes, including farming, dairying, pasturage, horticulture, floriculture, viticulture, and animal and poultry husbandry and accessory uses provided that such accessory uses shall be incidental to the agricultural activities. Housing development across the land use designation should not exceed 1 housing unit per 1 acre and no less than 1 housing unit per 40 acres. 210 -- Single Family Residential - Land containing a building or portion thereof used exclusively for residential purposes, including mostly one-family homes but may include some two-family (code 219), but not including hotels, motels, and boarding and lodging houses, nursing homes, or elderly care facilities - or open space within or related to a residential development, not in individually owned lots or dedicated for public use, but which is designed and intended for the common use or enjoyment of the residents of the development. 220 -- Multifamily Residential - Land containing a building or portion thereof used exclusively for residential purposes, including two-family, and multiple-family dwellings, but not including hotels, motels, and boarding and lodging houses, nursing homes, or elderly care facilities - or open space within or related to a residential development, not in individually owned lots or dedicated for public use, but which is designed and intended for the common use or enjoyment of the residents of the development. 300 -- Commercial - Land use primarily engaged in the provision of goods or services for an unspecified market area. 400 -- Industrial - Land used primarily in the manufacture and/or processing of specified or unspecified products; could include light or heavy industrial land use, large warehouse facilities, or utilities land use. 500 -- Institutional - Land used for primarily religious, governmental, educational, social or health care facilities excluding clinics. 600 -- Mixed Use - Land containing or potentially containing a building or buildings with significant amounts of two or more of the following: residential, industrial, commercial and/or office uses. 700 -- Multi-Optional Development - Land potentially containing a building with a significant amount of only one of the follow land uses: residential, industrial, commercial and/or office uses. 810 -- Park and Recreation - Land used primarily for public recreation activities improved with playing fields, playground or exercise equipment and associated structures. May include land containing a building(s) developed, used and maintained primarily for recreational activities. 815-- Open Space or Restrictive Use - Land used and maintained for public or private recreation, resources use (i.e., pasture, woodlot), or resource protection, amenity, or buffer. 910 -- Rights-of-Way (i.e., Roads) - Land area or strip of land, either public or private, intended to be reserved for vehicular rights-of-way or pedestrian rights-of-way - may include unspecified transportation land use. 920 -- Railway (inc. LRT) - Land area or strip of land, either public or private, intended to be reserved for rail activities: freight or passenger. 930 -- Airport - Land area or strip of land, either public or privade, intended to be reserved for airport activities. 1000 -- Vacant or No Data - Land not currently used for any defined purpose that may or may not contain buildings or other structures or lacks a clearly defined land use. 1100 -- Water - Permanently flooded open water not including wetlands, or periodically flooded areas. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Valid DETAILED Land Use codes and Corresponding Descriptions (i.e., DESC_ or FULLDESCMEMO) 149 -- Agricultural, Undifferentiated - Land used for agricultural purposes, including farming, dairying, pasturage, horticulture, floriculture, viticulture, and animal and poultry husbandry and accessory uses provided that such accessory uses shall be incidental to the agricultural activities. 110 -- Farmstead - Land used constituting the area comprising of the livable space; house and surrounding agricultural buildings and activities which may include small dairying, and animal or poultry husbandry operations. 120 -- Cropland - Land used for agricultural purposes, including farming, pasturage, horticulture, floriculture, viticulture, and accessory uses. 130 -- Agricultural Support & Other - Land used for agricultural purposes, including major dairying, and animal or poultry husbandry operations; other unclassified accessory agricultural activities provided that such accessory uses shall be incidental to the agricultural activities. 198 -- Rural Residential - Land containing a building or portion thereof used for residential purposes, including mostly one-family homes, but may include some two-family (code 219), but not including hotels, motels, and boarding and lodging houses, nursing homes, or elderly care facilities; may include land used for agricultural purposes, including farming, dairying, pasturage, horticulture, floriculture, viticulture, and animal and poultry husbandry and accessory uses; provided that such accessory uses shall be incidental to the agricultural activities. Housing development across the land use designation should not exceed 1 housing unit per 2.5 acre and no less than 1 housing unit per 40 acres. 199 -- Large-Lot Residential, Undifferentiated - Land containing a building or portion thereof used for residential purposes, including mostly one-family homes, but may include some two-family (code 219), but not including hotels, motels, and boarding and lodging houses, nursing homes, or elderly care facilities; most likely does not include any land for agricultural purposes. Housing development across the land use designation should not exceed 1 housing unit per 1 acre and no less than 1 housing unit per 2.5 acres. 211 -- Single Family, Detached Residential - Land meeting the general definition of residential and containing a residential building with not more than one dwelling unit entirely surrounded by open space on the same lot. 212 -- Seasonal / Vacation Residential - Land that provides seasonal activities that may contain a single dwelling unit residential building that meets the general definition of residential the land and/or residence does not serve as a primary residence of an owner. 213 -- Manufactured Housing Park - Land meeting the general definition of residential and under single ownership that has been planned and improved for the placement of manufactured housing for dwelling purposes. 218 -- Single Family Residential, Undifferentiated - Land containing a building or portion thereof used exclusively for residential purposes, including one-family, two family, and multiple-family dwellings, but not including hotels, motels, and boarding and lodging houses, nursing homes, or elderly care facilities; or open space within or related to a residential development, not in individually owned lots or dedicated for public use, but which is designed and intended for the common use or enjoyment of the residents of the development. Residential type are unknown and housing density community designation is unknown or known to be low (approximately less than 4 to 6 units per acre). 219 -- Single Family, Detached or Attached Residential - Land meeting the general definition of residential and containing a residential building with not more than one dwelling unit entirely surrounded by open space on the same lot - or one or more buildings containing two or more dwelling units, each of which has primary ground floor access to the outside and which are attached to each other by party walls without openings 221 -- Single Family, Attached Residential - Land meeting the general definition of residential and containing one or more buildings containing two or more dwelling units, each of which has primary ground floor access to the outside and which are attached to each other by party walls without openings. 222 -- Single Family, Attached or Multifamily Residential - Land meeting the general definition of residential and containing one or more buildings containing one or more buildings containing two or more dwelling units, each of which has primary ground floor access to the outside and which are attached to each other by party walls without openings - or three or more dwelling units, one or more of which does not have primary ground floor access to the outside and which are attached to each other by party walls without openings. 224 -- Multi-Family - Land meeting the general definition of residential and containing one or more buildings containing three or more dwelling units, one or more of which does not have primary ground floor access to the outside and which are attached to each other by party walls without openings. 228 -- Multifamily Residential, Undifferentiated - Land containing a building or portion thereof used exclusively for residential purposes, including one-family, two-family, and multiple-family dwellings, but not including hotels, motels, and boarding and lodging houses, nursing homes, or elderly care facilities; or open space within or related to a residential development, not in individually owned lots or dedicated for public use, but which is designed and intended for the common use or enjoyment of the residents of the development. Residential type are unknown and housing density community designation is known to be 'higher' (approxiately 4 to 6 units per acre or more). 399 -- Commercial, Retail or Undifferentiated - Land use primarily engaged in the provision of goods or services for an unspecified market area. 310 -- Neighborhood Commercial - Land use primarily engaged in the provision of goods or services with a primary service radius of 1 to 1.5 miles. Neighborhood Commercial/Retail Land Uses would typically be located in a predominantly residential area and have a Gross Leasable Area (GLA) of approximately 25,000 square feet or less. 320 -- Community Commercial - Land use principally engaged in the provision of goods or services with a primary service radius of 3 to 5 miles. Community Commercial/Retail Land Uses would typically be located in a small commercial/retail/rural center with a Gross Leasable Area (GLA) of approximately 50,000 to 150,000 square feet. 330 -- Regional Commercial - Land use principally engaged in the provision of goods or services with a primary service radius of 10 or more miles. Regional Commercial/Retail Land Uses would typically be located in or near a large commercial/retail center with a Gross Leasable Area (GLA) of approximately 350,000 square feet or more. 340 -- Highway / Convenience Commercial - Land use principally engaged in the provision of goods or services that primarily services customers attracted from a nearby major transportation arterial in a predominately rural setting located outside the MUSA line. 350 -- Rural Commercial - Land use principally engaged in the provision of goods or services that primarily services customers attracted from rural communities with a Gross Leasable Area (GLA) of approximately 25,000 square feet or less. 360 -- Office, Undifferentiated - Land use predominantly involved in administrative, professional, or clerical services; includes medical clinics 370 -- Marina - Land used for the operation of boating and sailing water sports and related leisure activities. 499 -- Industrial, Undifferentiated - Land used primarily in the manufacture and/or processing of unspecified products; could be light or heavy industrial land use. 410 -- Light Industrial - Land used primarily in the manufacture and/or processing, fabrication, assembly, packaging, incidental storage, sales, and distribution of predominantly previously prepared materials, finished products or parts. Light Industrial land uses would typically have all processing within buildings, require exterior storage, generate amounts of truck or rail traffic, and be free of hazardous or objectionable elements such as noise, odor, dust smoke, glare, or other pollutants. 420 -- Heavy Industrial - Land used primarily in the manufacture and/or processing of products from large bulky, predominantly raw, extracted, or hazardous materials; or use engaged in the storage of flammable, explosive, or other materials that may pose a threat to public health or safety. Heavy Industrial land uses may require exterior storage of large equipment or material, be engaged in outside processing or assembly, generate significant amounts of truck and/or rail traffic, or emit limited amounts of objectionable elements such as noise, odor, dust, smoke, glare, or other pollutants. 430 -- Extractive - Land used for certain branches of industry which are conveniently designated extractive: e.g., agriculture, pastoral and mining pursuits, cutting of lumber, etc 440 -- Utility - An area or strip of land, either public or private, occupied by a power plant or substation, electric transmission line, oil or gas pipeline, water tower, municipal well, reservoir, pumping station, water treatment facility, communications tower, or similar use. 470 -- Water Navigation (i.e., Locks) - Land used for the operation of water navigation and associated accessory uses; predominantly navigational lock and dams. 599 -- Institutional, Undifferentiated - Land used for primarily religious, governmental, educational, social or health care facilities excluding clinics, use unspecified. 510 -- Religious - Land used for primarily religious activities, may include churches, synagogues, temples, cemeteries, and other support activities. 520 -- Educational - Land used for primarily educational activities, may include schools and surrounding recreational facilities. 530 -- Governmental - Land used for primarily governmental activities. 540 -- Health - Land used for primarily health care facilities excluding clinics, may include hospitals or other medical/residential care facilities. 699 -- Mixed Use, Undifferentiated - Land containing or potentially containing a building with significant amounts of residential, industrial, commercial and/or office uses, composition of use unspecified. 610 -- Residential and Other Mixed Use - Land containing mixed uses comprising of no less than residential and one other land use predominantly contains residential apartments over commercial or office uses, but may contain other land uses. 620 -- Industrial and Other Mixed Use - Land containing mixed uses comprising of no less than industrial and one other land use but excluding any residential predominantly industrial uses with commercial or office uses. 630 -- Commercial and Other Mixed Use - Land containing mixed uses comprising of no less than commercial and one other land use but excluding any residential or industrial predominantly commercial and office uses. 799 -- Multi-Optional Development, Undifferentiated - Land that has yet to develop that potentially will contain a building with only one of the follow land uses: residential, industrial, commercial or office use. 710 -- Residential or Other Use - Land that has yet to develop that potentially will contain a building with either residential or another land use individual use uncertain. 720 -- Industrial or Other Use - Land that has yet to develop that potentially will contain a building with either industrial or another land use but excluding residential individual use unspecified. 730 -- Commercial or Other Use - Land that has yet to develop that potentially will contain a building with either commercial or another land use but excluding residential or industrial, individual use unspecified. 812 -- Community Park and Recreation - Land used primarily for public recreation activities improved with playing fields, playground or exercise equipment and associated structures. May include land containing a building(s) developed, used and maintained primarily for recreational activities. 813 -- Golf Course - Land used for the operation of a golf course may include other leisure activities, such as pall-mall, tipcart, croquet and curling. 819 -- Open Space: Passive or Undifferentiated - Land used and maintained which supports unorganized public or private recreational activities which may contain trails, picnic areas, public fishing/boating docks, etc. May include unspecified open space land use, unprotected wetland areas, or other privately owned lands. 820 -- Open Space: Natural - Land predominantly undeveloped or unaltered and preserved in its natural state for environmental or aesthetic purposes. 830 -- Open Space: Restrictive - Land used and maintained for resource protection, amenity, or buffer - Restricted use (i.e., floodplain, conservancy land, etc.). 914 -- Transportation, Undifferentiated - Land used for any undefined transportation activity. 911 -- Vehicular Rights-of-Way - An area or strip of land, either public or private, on which an irrevocable right-of-passage has been recorded for the use of vehicles. 950 -- Pedestrian Rights-of-Way - An area or strip of land, either public or private, on which an irrevocable right-of-passage has been recorded for the use of pedestrians. 921 -- Railway Corridor - An area or strip of land occupied or intended to be occupied by freight-service rail or other similar use. Includes rail that may support passenger commuter rail. 922 -- Rail Transit Way - An area or strip of land occupied or intended to be occupied only by passenger rail or other similar uses. Includes light rail transit (LRT) and commuter rail. 939 -- Airport - Land used for the operation of aircraft and associated accessory uses provided accessory uses are incidental to the airport activity. 1029 -- Vacant Land - Land not currently used for any defined purpose that may or may not contain buildings or other structures. 1030 -- No Data - Land use information is missing information not submitted to the Metropolitan Council. 1040 -- Uncertain - Land use information indistinguishable. 1199 -- Open Water - Permanently flooded open water not including wetlands, or periodically flooded areas. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Valid HSGDEN_RNG Codes and Corresponding Density Ranges - RURAL = 1 housing unit per 2.51 acres or more - EXURBAN = 1 housing unit per 1.1 to 2.5 acres - LOW = 1 to 4 housing units per acre - MEDIUM = 4.1 to 8 housing units per acre - HIGH = 8.1 to 12 housing units per acre - VERYHIGH = 12.1 to 20 housing units per acre - URBAN = Greater than 20 housing units per acre |
| Top of full metadata - - - - - - Top of page | |
| Section 6 | Distribution Information |
| Publisher | Metropolitan Council |
| Publication Date | Periodically revised |
| Contact Person Information | Mark Kotz GIS Database Administrator Metropolitan Council 390 Robert Street North St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1805 Phone: 651-602-1644 FAX: 651-602-1674 E-mail: mark.kotz@metc.state.mn.us |
| Distributor's Data Set Identifier | landuse_planned |
| Distribution Liability | NOTICE: The Geographic Information System (GIS) Data to which this notice is attached are made available pursuant to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13). THE GIS DATA ARE PROVIDED TO YOU AS IS AND WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY AS TO THEIR PERFORMANCE, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The GIS Data were developed by the Metropolitan Council for its own internal business purposes. The Metropolitan Council does not represent or warrant that the GIS Data or the data documentation are error-free, complete, current, or accurate. You are responsible for any consequences resulting from your use of the GIS Data or your reliance on the GIS Data. You should consult the data documentation for this particular GIS Data to determine the limitations of the GIS Data and the precision with which the GIS Data may depict distance, direction, location, or other geographic features. If you transmit or provide the GIS Data (or any portion of it) to another user, the GIS Data must include a copy of this disclaimer. |
| Transfer Format Name | polygon shapefile |
| Transfer Format Version Number | ArcGIS 9x |
| Transfer Size | 34 MB for self extracting ZIP file. |
| Ordering Instructions | This dataset is distributed on the internet in three ways. 1. This dataset can also be viewed and downloaded from the MetroGIS DataFinder Cafe at http://www.datafinder.org/cafe/ . The Cafe allows users to subset or clip datasets using an existing feature, such as a city or school district boundary or an ad-hoc, user defined area. 2. This dataset can be downloaded by clicking below after 'Online Linkage'. Doing so will tell your browser to start downloading a self extracting 'ZIP' file which will contain the ENTIRE dataset, including: - ArcView shape file - metadata for the dataset (.htm) - NOTICE.RTF, an important notice about this dataset that can be read by any word processing software. After downloading this self extracting 'zip' file (which will have an '.exe' extension), simply execute (run) the file. (For example, you can double click it from windows Explorer or File Manager). Doing this will automatically extract the files described above. 3. Additionally, this dataset is available for direct use via one or more map services. More information about what a web mapping service is can be found at http://www.datafinder.org/services/ The specific map service and layer name for this dataset can be found by clicking the blue or green boxes under the map service column of the DataFinder Catalog at http://www.datafinder.org/catalog/ . |
| Online Linkage | Click here to download data. (See Ordering Instructions above for details.) By clicking here, you agree to the notice in "Distribution Liability" above. |
| Top of full metadata - - - - - - Top of page | |
| Section 7 | Metadata Reference Information |
| Metadata Date | 06/12/2009 |
| Contact Person Information | Paul E. Hanson,
GIS Specialist Metropolitan Council 390 Robert Street North St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1805 Phone: 651-602-1642 FAX: 651-602-1674 E-mail: paul.hanson@metc.state.mn.us |
| Metadata Standard Name | Minnesota Geographic Metadata Guidelines |
| Metadata Standard Version | 1.2 |
| Metadata Standard Online Linkage | http://www.gis.state.mn.us/stds/metadata.htm |
This page last updated: 06/12/2009
