Story maps combine intelligent Web maps with Web applications and templates that incorporate text, multimedia, and interactive functions. Story maps inform, educate, entertain, and inspire people about a wide variety of topics.This web web map is used in the Austin Shortlist Sample story map application. You can view the blog post on how this map was used, and how you can author your own Shortlist story map.

Details and status of all applications submitted to the Metropolitan Planning Commission (MPC) for review.Source Link: https://maps.nashville.gov/DevelopmentTracker/Metadata Document: Planning Department Development Applications Metadata.pdfContact Data Owner: opendata@nashville.gov

The metropolitan planning organization (MPO) polygon feature class provides California MPO legislative boundaries, primarily for regional planning applications.Data downloaded in February 2023 from https://gisdata-caltrans.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/b3e0ef95520843ba8c1d3b9c0fa9a607_0/explore?location=36.748926%2C-119.524779%2C7.00.

Southwest Michigan Planning Commission (SWMPC) is the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Buchanan-Cass Area Transportation Study (NATS) and the Twin Cities Area Transportation Study (TwinCats).This a clipped version of the orginal data, Source MDOT. NATS is the Michigan portion of the South Bend, Indiana, urbanized area as designated by the United States Census. TwinCats is the Benton Harbor-St. Joseph urbanized area, as designated by the United States Census.An MPO is is a federally mandated and federally funded transportation policy-making organization in the United States that is made up of representatives from local government and governmental transportation authorities. They were created to ensure regional cooperation in transportation planning.

A shapefile was generated from ArcINFO coverages, which were in turn created by digitizing a 1968 paper map of land use in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. The map was originally published by the Twin Cities Metropolitan Planning Commission.

The Columbus Metro Bike Map was created to help bicyclists determine which roads may be better suited for their level of riding in the Greater Franklin County area. The roads are color-coded for non-rush hour travel with green as “Easy”, yellow as “Moderate", and red as “Difficult”. The map is the result of a collaborative effort between a variety of partners, including MORPC, the City of Columbus, COTA, RideSolutions.

Historic Properties, data from the Metro Landmarks Commission, Kentucky Hertiage Council, and National Register of Historic Places about National Historic Landmarks in Jefferson County, Kentucky. Revision 2 January 2007. View detailed metadata.

2024 Updates DVRPC performed an analysis to create the CHSTP Priority Score, a layer that helps users visualize where there is a potentially high need to improve transit service for vulnerable populations to reach essential services in the Greater Philadelphia region. As a metropolitan planning organization, Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) is responsible for updating the region's Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan (CHSTP). The CHSTP update engaged a variety of stakeholders to identify unmet needs and service gaps, recommend innovative transportation access solutions, and empower communities to climb "ladders of opportunity" toward greater social and economic mobility. As part of the CHSTP update, DVRPC created the CHSTP Priority Score Map Toolkit. This interactive web-based tool demonstrates disparities in access to essential services like hospitals, health clinics, recreational spaces, senior centers, and more in the Greater Philadelphia region. Users can view layers representing different datasets including the locations of essential services; bus routes, transit stops, and rail lines; transit walksheds; distributions of vulnerable populations like seniors, households in poverty, and people with disabilities; and areas where transit access is low. https://github.com/dvrpc/gis-chstp includes all code for the analysis.

Below are several of the analyses included in this dataset. Vulnerable Populations answers the question, “Who lives here?” and highlights populations in need. Essential Services answers the question, “Where do people need to go?” and highlights areas with more services in the region. Population-Services Mismatch answers the question, “Where is there a gap between areas of need and essential services?” This layer highlights areas where there are higher numbers of vulnerable populations but fewer essential services and vice versa. Transit Accessibility answers the question, “How is transit service distributed?” and highlights areas in the region with lower transit accessibility. Priority Score answers the question, “Where can transit service be improved to help vulnerable populations access essential services?” This layer, the result of our analysis, highlights areas with higher numbers of vulnerable populations or essential services, but lower transit accessibility and vice versa.

Saint Paul has had a formal structure of neighborhood organizations to engage residents and collaborate with city government since 1975--one of the first in the nation. These organizations are known as district councils because they are resident groups that engage and represent the people living in one of the city's 17 planning districts. Each district council is a 501(c)(3) non-profit with a voluntary board of directors composed of members elected by their neighbors. The district council structure was formed as part of the development of the city's Citizen Participation Program, now known as the Community Engagement Program. The purpose of this program is to create opportunities for residents to learn about what is happening in their neighborhoods and collaborate with one another and city government to maintain and improve the quality of life in neighborhoods. The program includes funding allocated to each district council on a formula basis, technical assistance from city planners and other city staff regarding issues that are important to the neighborhood and non-profit management assistance from the city's Community Engagement Coordinator.District councils each are involved in work to improve the physical, social and economic structures in their neighborhood. The activity common to all district councils is the development of a district plan (sometimes referred to as a neighborhood plan) that is reviewed by the Planning Commission, City Council and the Metropolitan Council--the region's metropolitan planning organization--before being adopted as part of the city's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is a key tool used by the city to guide law-making and budgeting. District plans are an opportunity for residents to influence how those laws and budgets impact their neighborhoods. Along with this critical planning work, district councils may also be involved in:Reviewing community development proposalsAdvocating for park and recreation center improvementsCoordinating community gardens and neighborhood beautification projectsPromoting environmental action through volunteering and advocacyOrganizing block clubs and working with the police department and other city agencies to improve public safetyDistrict councils rely on community-building activities and events as the basis for convening residents to become involved in their neighborhood. These include neighborhood forums, festivals, parades and block parties.A commitment to equity is foundational to successful community engagement. In 2017, the district councils proposed a change to the Community Engagement Program's Innovation Fund that was adopted in 2018. The fund is now divided equally among the 17 district councils to promote equitable practices and neighborhood outcomes. The goals of this program are:District council staff and volunteers more accurately reflect the communities they serve.District councils review and adopt policies and practices that intentionally create space for residents who are currently under-represented.District councils pursue systemic work that reflects the needs and priorities of residents who have been historically under-represented.Additionally, district council staff are required to participate in a peer support/best practices network composed of district councils or similar grassroots, place-based organizations in the region.

NJDOT has revised the New Jersey urban area based upon the 2020 U.S. Census urban area boundaries. The U.S. Census defines an Urbanized Area as any area with a population >= 5,000. Under the 2020 Urban Area definition, Urban Clusters are no longer a classification. FHWA, however, has slightly different criteria for what defines an urban area. Under FHWA, an Urban Area is >= 5,000, with Small Urban Areas 5,000-49,999 and Urbanized Areas >= 50,000. NJDOT followed the FHWA urban area definitions for this urban area update. To perform this update, NJDOT used the 2020 US Census urban areas greater than 5,000 in population. Since census urban area boundaries are based upon census block boundaries, which can be irregular, NJDOT extended outward the urban area ("smoothed") to the nearest road, stream, political boundary, or manmade feature. When a roadway is used as the adjusted boundary, the following buffers will be applied to include the right of way of the roadway: 50’ from undivided roadway centerlines (single centerline) and 80’ from divided roadway centerlines (dual centerline). Where there was no obvious boundary to smooth to, the census boundary was retained. NJDOT also expanded the urban area to include any densely developed areas not included in the 2020 census urban areas. The urban area update underwent a thorough public review and comment period. Representatives from NJDOT and the 3 metropolitan planning organizations (NJTPA, SJTPO, and DVRPC) met during various phases of the project to review the updated urban area. All comments were logged into an Urban Area Comment Tracking Form, and an official NJDOT response was provided for each comment. Further revisions were made to the urban area based upon comments from FHWA. These revisions were limited in scope and consisted of the following: 1) Smoothed the urban boundary outward at water boundaries: 1000’ from corporate boundary / shoreline for coastal areas and 500’ from corporate boundary / shoreline for bay areas. 2) Utilize Census State Boundary for the state boundary except for coastal boundaries.

Shapefile contains census tracts identified as Equity Priority Communities by MTC as part of the Plan Bay Area 2050 process for the five counties that are included in the Bay Area Regional Climate Action Planning Initiative Frontline Communities Map.

The original shapefile was downloaded from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), Equity Priority Communities webpage. The “Clip” tool in ArcMap was used to select only those features which are located within the boundaries of the five Bay Area counties included in the Frontline Communities Map. Only those census tracts where epc_2050 column is equal to 1 are displayed. Where, epc_2050 is defined as "Equity Priority Community PBA 2050" in the original codebook and 1 is equivalent to a true statement. To learn more about the methodology behind the original dataset, please visit: https://opendata.mtc.ca.gov/datasets/MTC::equity-priority-communities-plan-bay-area-2050/about

The Frontline Communities Map is meant to help identify communities that are considered frontline communities for the purpose of the USEPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program’s planning effort, which is a five-county climate action planning process led by the Air District. USEPA refers to these communities as low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs).

Formerly called “Communities of Concern,” Equity Priority Communities are census tracts that have a significant concentration of underserved populations. The Equity Priority Communities framework helps MTC make decisions on investments that meaningfully reverse the disparities in access to transportation, housing and other community services.

The Equity Priority Communities (tract geography) dataset is based upon eight demographic variables: • People of Color (70% threshold) • Low-Income (28% threshold) • Limited English Proficiency (12% threshold) • Seniors 75 Years and Over (8% threshold) • Zero-Vehicle Households (15% threshold) • Single Parent Families (18% threshold) • People with a Disability (12% threshold) • Rent-Burdened Households (14% threshold)

A tract is considered an Equity Priority Community: 1. If a tract exceeds both threshold values for BOTH Low-Income AND People of Color, or 2. If a tract exceeds the threshold value for Low-Income AND exceeds the threshold values for three or more of the six remaining variables

The metropolitan Atlanta Region has grown into a complex combination of county, municipality and jurisdictional boundaries. This map series reflects the various planning areas of the Atlanta Regional Commission and seeks to promote a greater understanding of our rapidly expanding region. Please refer to user notes of each map for explanation of map content and clarification of acronyms and definitions.This static map is for print at poster size. 11x17 version also available.

This data is used in the Materials Management Facilities Web App (Item Details). From the Michigan Association of Regions (MAR) website: "The Michigan Association of Regions is a state association of the fourteen (14) regional councils in Michigan. MAR consists of a policy board of local elected and appointed officials that meets periodically to discuss regional policy issues and programs, and adopts legislative positions. MAR also has an Executive Directors Committee that meets monthly. Member services consists of advocacy of regional programs, training and education, research, membership surveys, networking, as well as liaison to national associations, including the National Association of Regional Councils (NARC) and the National Association of Development Organizations (NADO).State Designated Planning and Development Regions are voluntary organizations comprised of local governments dedicated to serving the regional planning needs of multi-county areas in all parts of Michigan. They are a form of local government voluntarily created by their members, which are largely representative of local governments in the region; although membership also includes road authorities, nonprofit organizations and representatives of the business community in many regions.The land area of Michigan is divided into 14 planning & development regions with counties as the organizing unit. They range widely in size. Five have only three counties, while one has fourteen counties. The two smallest are only 1,711-13 square miles each in size, while the largest is 8,735 square miles in size. Population served varies from 57,510 persons to 4,833,493 based on Census estimates in 2000. Population density ranges from under 14 persons/square mile in Region 13 (Western U.P.), to over 1,043 persons/square mile in Region 1 (Southeast Michigan). The oldest of today’s regions, Tri-County Regional Planning Commission (Region 6 in Lansing, formed in 1956), and the three county Detroit Metropolitan Area Regional Planning Commission (formed in 1947and subsequently replaced by the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments in 1968 (SEMCOG, which covers seven counties in SE Michigan), originated out of a desire by local officials to coordinate transportation infrastructure planning and to serve as a forum for other regional issues."These boundaries are static and were digitized from boundaries shared on the Michigan Association of Regions (MAR) website in March 2023. They were digitized for inclusion on the Materials Management Division's facilities web map. For questions or comments, reach out to EGLE-Maps@Michigan.gov.

Information from the MACRIS database and related records on file at the MHC, including the Inventory of Historic Assets of the Commonwealth, National Register of Historic Places nomination forms, local historic district study reports, local landmark reports, and other materials. MassGIS stores a copy of this polygon feature class as MHCINV_POLY. MassGIS projected the data to the NAD1983 Mass. State Plane Meters Mainland coordinate system.Provided to MassGIS on July 10, 2020.

Road Ownership Layer Attributes DescriptionsFederal Aid Status:

Determines if the road is able to use the Federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funding source. STP is allocated through an MPO, RTF, or small urban program. In Berrien, Cass and Van Buren Counties, the SWMPC manages all of these programs, except for areas within the KATS MPO.

Urban/Rural

Urbanized: A census Designated area with a population of 50,000 or more. All urbanized areas are part of an MPO.

Small Urban – A census defined area with a population between 5,000 and 49,999.

Rural: Any area outside a small urban or urbanized area. Includes cities and villages with a population less than 5,000. Areas within an MPO planning area which are still outside the designated urbanized area are eligible for both MPO and rural funding sources. STP funding in rural areas is distributed through the Rural Task Force.

Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)–

An MPO is a federally designated organization which conducts regional transportation planning for urbanized areas with a population of 50,000 or more. The MPO Planning Area covers the entire urbanized area as well as areas which are expected to become urbanized in the next 20 years. For TwinCATS and NATS the boundary includes the entire jurisdiction for jurisdictions that contain urbanized areas. All federal or state funded transportation projects in an MPO must be included in the MPO’s Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) to receive approval.

There are 3 MPOs which have planning areas within Berrien, Cass, and Van Buren Counties

TwinCATS: Twin Cities Area Transportation Study NATS: Niles Buchan Cass Area Transportation Study KATS: Kalamazoo Area Transportation Study

The Southwest Michigan Planning Commission (SWMPC) staffs the TwinCATS and NATS MPOs.

Act 51 Category

Michigan Public Act 51 governs the distribution of state collected fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees. The Act51 category, also call the ‘legal system’, are set based on which agency is in charge of road maintenance and is used in the road funding formula among other factors. Roads which are not Act51 certified are not eligible to use revenue from the state.

State Trunkline is maintained by MDOT

County Primary and County Local roads are maintained by the County Road Commission

City Major and City Minor roads are maintained by the City or Village the road is located in

National Functional Classification (NFC)

Categories the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) uses to classify roads. This determines federal aid status.