This data was downloaded from OpenStreetMap (OSM) roads data for Wisconsin from the OpenStreetMap's GeoFabrik website: http://www.geofabrik.de/data/download.html and reprojected to WTM 83/91. Several attributes were added to facilitate use of the OSM data in DNR basemaps. DNR has made edits to this data to correct errors where known and to hide road features within DNR Managed Lands that are not public roadways.This dataset contains only Interstate Highway, US Highways, and State Highways.To report errors in this dataset, contact Bill Ceelen at William.Ceelen@wisconsin.gov. Additional information about OSM is available on the GeoFabrik site: http://www.geofabrik.de/geofabrik/openstreetmap.html

This dataset represents the 1:1 million scale major faults or fault system of the Province of Saskatchewan, Canada. Mapping in support of this dataset includes many years of field observations which were then compiled at 1:1 million scale and integrated into this dataset. The data was created as a file geodatabase feature class and output for public distribution. To view or download more datasets from the Saskatchewan Geological Survey, please visit our GeoHub page (https://er-saskatchewan.hub.arcgis.com/pages/saskatchewan-geological-survey) or our Saskatchewan Mining and Petroleum GeoAtlas (https://gisappl.saskatchewan.ca/geoatlas).**Please Note – All published Saskatchewan Geological Survey datasets, including those available through the Saskatchewan Mining and Petroleum GeoAtlas, are sourced from the Enterprise GIS Data Warehouse. They are therefore identical and share the same refresh schedule.

This geodatabase reflects the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) ongoing commitment to its mission of understanding the nature and distribution of global mineral commodity supply chains by updating and publishing the georeferenced locations of mineral commodity production and processing facilities, mineral exploration and development sites, and mineral commodity exporting ports in Africa. The geodatabase and geospatial data layers serve to create a new geographic information product in the form of a geospatial portable document format (PDF) map. The geodatabase contains data layers from USGS, foreign governmental, and open-source sources as follows: (1) mineral production and processing facilities, (2) mineral exploration and development sites, (3) mineral occurrence sites and deposits, (4) undiscovered mineral resource tracts for Gabon and Mauritania, (5) undiscovered mineral resource tracts for potash, platinum-group elements, and copper, (6) coal occurrence areas, (7) electric power generating facilities, (8) electric power transmission lines, (9) liquefied natural gas terminals, (10) oil and gas pipelines, (11) undiscovered, technically recoverable conventional and continuous hydrocarbon resources (by USGS geologic/petroleum province), (12) cumulative production, and recoverable conventional resources (by oil- and gas-producing nation), (13) major mineral exporting maritime ports, (14) railroads, (15) major roads, (16) major cities, (17) major lakes, (18) major river systems, (19) first-level administrative division (ADM1) boundaries for all countries in Africa, and (20) international boundaries for all countries in Africa.

The USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) downloadable data collection from The National Map (TNM) is a comprehensive set of digital spatial data that encodes information about naturally occurring and constructed bodies of surface water (lakes, ponds, and reservoirs), paths through which water flows (canals, ditches, streams, and rivers), and related entities such as point features (springs, wells, stream gages, and dams). The information encoded about these features includes classification and other characteristics, delineation, geographic name, position and related measures, a "reach code" through which other information can be related to the NHD, and the direction of water flow. The network of reach codes delineating water and transported material flow allows users to trace movement in upstream and downstream directions. In addition to this geographic information, the dataset contains metadata that supports the exchange of future updates and improvements to the data. The NHD supports many applications, such as making maps, geocoding observations, flow modeling, data maintenance, and stewardship. For additional information on NHD, go to https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national-hydrography.

DWR was the steward for NHD and Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) in California. We worked with other organizations to edit and improve NHD and WBD, using the business rules for California. California's NHD improvements were sent to USGS for incorporation into the national database. The most up-to-date products are accessible from the USGS website. Please note that the California portion of the National Hydrography Dataset is appropriate for use at the 1:24,000 scale.

For additional derivative products and resources, including the major features in geopackage format, please go to this page: https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/nhd-major-features Archives of previous statewide extracts of the NHD going back to 2018 may be found at https://data.cnra.ca.gov/dataset/nhd-archive.

In September 2022, USGS officially notified DWR that the NHD would become static as USGS resources will be devoted to the transition to the new 3D Hydrography Program (3DHP). 3DHP will consist of LiDAR-derived hydrography at a higher resolution than NHD. Upon completion, 3DHP data will be easier to maintain, based on a modern data model and architecture, and better meet the requirements of users that were documented in the Hydrography Requirements and Benefits Study (2016). The initial releases of 3DHP include NHD data cross-walked into the 3DHP data model. It will take several years for the 3DHP to be built out for California. Please refer to the resources on this page for more information.

The FINAL,STATIC version of the National Hydrography Dataset for California was published for download by USGS on December 27, 2023. This dataset can no longer be edited by the state stewards. The next generation of national hydrography data is the USGS 3D Hydrography Program (3DHP).

Questions about the California stewardship of these datasets may be directed to nhd_stewardship@water.ca.gov.

The Transboundary Geospatial Fabric (TGF) is a dataset of spatial modeling units consistent with the Geospatial Fabric for National Hydrologic Modeling (abbreviated within this document as GFv1, Viger and Bock, 2014). These features were derived from National Hydrography Dataset Plus High Resolution data (NHDPlus HR, U.S. Geological Survey [USGS], 2018) in the following conterminous United States (CONUS) - Canada transboundary four-digit Hydrologic Units (HUC4): 0101, 0105, 0108, 0901, 0902, 0903, 0904, 1005, 1006, 1701, 1702, and 1711. The data described here include the following vector feature classes: points of interest (POIs), a stream network (nsegment), major waterbodies (waterbodies), and hydrologic response units (nhru). These feature classes are contained within the Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) geodatabase format (TGF.gdb).

The State Lands Commission has prepared the Significant Lands Inventory (report) for the California Legislature as a general identification and classification of those unconveyed State school lands and tide and submerged lands which possess significant environmental values. The publication incorporates evaluated and pertinent comments received on the initial draft report which was circulated statewide in February 1975.The absence of a particular digitized waterway in the dataset does not mean that the State does not claim ownership of that parcel or waterway, or that such specific parcel or waterway has no significant environmental values. This dataset is not intended to establish ownership, only to identify those parcels which possess significant environmental values. Staff was unable to physically inventory all of the considered lands; instead, the advice and participation of those with known environmental expertise was utilized as additional to staff survey.Tide and submerged lands are digitized in the WaterBody and WaterLine feature classes; WaterLines for coastal areas, WaterBody for inland areas. Tide and submerged lands under the jurisdiction of the State Lands Commission are those sovereign lands received from the Federal Government by virtue of California's admission to the Union on an equal footing with the original States. Such lands, and State interest therein, are generally the lands waterward of the ordinary high water mark of the Pacific Ocean (seaward to a three-mile limit); tidal bays, sloughs, estuaries; and, navigable lakes and streams within the State.School Lands are digitized in the SchoolLand feature class. State school lands under the jurisdiction of the Commission are largely composed of the 16th and 36th sections of each township. The Federal Government transferred these lands to the State in 1853, in order to establish a financial foundation for a public school system. In cases where the 16th and 36th sections were mineral in character, incomplete as to acreage total, or already claimed or granted by the Federal Government, the State was permitted to select other lands "in lieu" of the specific sections.The public trust of commerce, navigation and fisheries which the State retains on patented sovereign lands should also be considered included in this inventory. Wherever a waterway, or body of water, is listed or mapped, the common trust state interest in patented sovereign lands, if any, is also included.The State Lands Commission emphasized when it adopted this report at its December 1, 1975 meeting that all tide and submerged lands are significant by the nature of their public ownership. Only because of the methodology used for this report are all of these waterways not specifically listed in this inventory.It is the intent of the State Lands Commission that the Significant Lands Inventory be periodically updated. This dataset should be considered informational, to assist the Legislature, the Commission, and the public in considering the environmental aspects of a proposed project and the significant values to be protected therein.

The dataset and the validation are fully described in a Nature Scientific Data Descriptor https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-019-0265-5

If you want to use this dataset in an interactive environment, then use this link https://mybinder.org/v2/gh/GeographerAtLarge/TravelTime/HEAD

The following text is a summary of the information in the above Data Descriptor.

The dataset is a suite of global travel-time accessibility indicators for the year 2015, at approximately one-kilometre spatial resolution for the entire globe. The indicators show an estimated (and validated), land-based travel time to the nearest city and nearest port for a range of city and port sizes.

The datasets are in GeoTIFF format and are suitable for use in Geographic Information Systems and statistical packages for mapping access to cities and ports and for spatial and statistical analysis of the inequalities in access by different segments of the population.

These maps represent a unique global representation of physical access to essential services offered by cities and ports.

The datasets travel_time_to_cities_x.tif (where x has values from 1 to 12) The value of each pixel is the estimated travel time in minutes to the nearest urban area in 2015. There are 12 data layers based on different sets of urban areas, defined by their population in year 2015 (see PDF report).

travel_time_to_ports_x (x ranges from 1 to 5)

The value of each pixel is the estimated travel time to the nearest port in 2015. There are 5 data layers based on different port sizes.

Format Raster Dataset, GeoTIFF, LZW compressed Unit Minutes

Data type Byte (16 bit Unsigned Integer)

No data value 65535

Flags None

Spatial resolution 30 arc seconds

Spatial extent

Upper left -180, 85

Lower left -180, -60 Upper right 180, 85 Lower right 180, -60 Spatial Reference System (SRS) EPSG:4326 - WGS84 - Geographic Coordinate System (lat/long)

Temporal resolution 2015

Temporal extent Updates may follow for future years, but these are dependent on the availability of updated inputs on travel times and city locations and populations.

Methodology Travel time to the nearest city or port was estimated using an accumulated cost function (accCost) in the gdistance R package (van Etten, 2018). This function requires two input datasets: (i) a set of locations to estimate travel time to and (ii) a transition matrix that represents the cost or time to travel across a surface.

The set of locations were based on populated urban areas in the 2016 version of the Joint Research Centre’s Global Human Settlement Layers (GHSL) datasets (Pesaresi and Freire, 2016) that represent low density (LDC) urban clusters and high density (HDC) urban areas (https://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/datasets.php). These urban areas were represented by points, spaced at 1km distance around the perimeter of each urban area.

Marine ports were extracted from the 26th edition of the World Port Index (NGA, 2017) which contains the location and physical characteristics of approximately 3,700 major ports and terminals. Ports are represented as single points

The transition matrix was based on the friction surface (https://map.ox.ac.uk/research-project/accessibility_to_cities) from the 2015 global accessibility map (Weiss et al, 2018).

Code The R code used to generate the 12 travel time maps is included in the zip file that can be downloaded with these data layers. The processing zones are also available.

Validation The underlying friction surface was validated by comparing travel times between 47,893 pairs of locations against journey times from a Google API. Our estimated journey times were generally shorter than those from the Google API. Across the tiles, the median journey time from our estimates was 88 minutes within an interquartile range of 48 to 143 minutes while the median journey time estimated by the Google API was 106 minutes within an interquartile range of 61 to 167 minutes. Across all tiles, the differences were skewed to the left and our travel time estimates were shorter than those reported by the Google API in 72% of the tiles. The median difference was −13.7 minutes within an interquartile range of −35.5 to 2.0 minutes while the absolute difference was 30 minutes or less for 60% of the tiles and 60 minutes or less for 80% of the tiles. The median percentage difference was −16.9% within an interquartile range of −30.6% to 2.7% while the absolute percentage difference was 20% or less in 43% of the tiles and 40% or less in 80% of the tiles.

This process and results are included in the validation zip file.

Usage Notes The accessibility layers can be visualised and analysed in many Geographic Information Systems or remote sensing software such as QGIS, GRASS, ENVI, ERDAS or ArcMap, and also by statistical and modelling packages such as R or MATLAB. They can also be used in cloud-based tools for geospatial analysis such as Google Earth Engine.

The nine layers represent travel times to human settlements of different population ranges. Two or more layers can be combined into one layer by recording the minimum pixel value across the layers. For example, a map of travel time to the nearest settlement of 5,000 to 50,000 people could be generated by taking the minimum of the three layers that represent the travel time to settlements with populations between 5,000 and 10,000, 10,000 and 20,000 and, 20,000 and 50,000 people.

The accessibility layers also permit user-defined hierarchies that go beyond computing the minimum pixel value across layers. A user-defined complete hierarchy can be generated when the union of all categories adds up to the global population, and the intersection of any two categories is empty. Everything else is up to the user in terms of logical consistency with the problem at hand.

The accessibility layers are relative measures of the ease of access from a given location to the nearest target. While the validation demonstrates that they do correspond to typical journey times, they cannot be taken to represent actual travel times. Errors in the friction surface will be accumulated as part of the accumulative cost function and it is likely that locations that are further away from targets will have greater a divergence from a plausible travel time than those that are closer to the targets. Care should be taken when referring to travel time to the larger cities when the locations of interest are extremely remote, although they will still be plausible representations of relative accessibility. Furthermore, a key assumption of the model is that all journeys will use the fastest mode of transport and take the shortest path.

The Geospatial Fabric version 1.1 (GFv1.1 or v1_1) is a dataset of spatial modeling units covering the conterminous United States (CONUS) and most major river basins that flow in from Canada. The GFv1.1 is an update to the original Geospatial Fabric (GFv1, Viger and Bock, 2014) for the National Hydrologic Modeling (NHM). Analogous to the GFv1, the GFv1.1 described here includes the following vector feature classes: points of interest (POIs_v1_1), a stream network (nsegment_v1_1), and hydrologic response units (nhru_v1_1), with several additional ancillary tables. These data are contained within the Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) geodatabase format (GFv1.1.gdb).

Major Utility Easements in Wake County, North CarolinaThis data was provided to Wake GIS by an external vendor in the 1990s, with occasional updates since. Please contact utility companies for further information.

The site suitability criteria included in the techno-economic land use screens are listed below. As this list is an update to previous cycles, tribal lands, prime farmland, and flood zones are not included as they are not technically infeasible for development. The techno-economic site suitability exclusion thresholds are presented in table 1. Distances indicate the minimum distance from each feature for commercial scale wind developmentAttributes: Steeply sloped areas: change in vertical elevation compared to horizontal distancePopulation density: the number of people living in a 1 km2 area Urban areas: defined by the U.S. Census. Water bodies: defined by the U.S. National Atlas Water Feature Areas, available from Argonne National Lab Energy Zone Mapping Tool Railways: a comprehensive database of North America's railway system from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), available from Argonne National Lab Energy Zone Mapping Tool Major highways: available from ESRI Living Atlas Airports: The Airports dataset including other aviation facilities as of July 13, 2018 is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)/Bureau of Transportation Statistics's (BTS's) National Transportation Atlas Database (NTAD). The Airports database is a geographic point database of aircraft landing facilities in the United States and U.S. Territories. Attribute data is provided on the physical and operational characteristics of the landing facility, current usage including enplanements and aircraft operations, congestion levels and usage categories. This geospatial data is derived from the FAA's National Airspace System Resource Aeronautical Data Product. Available from Argonne National Lab Energy Zone Mapping Tool Active mines: Active Mines and Mineral Processing Plants in the United States in 2003Military Lands: Land owned by the federal government that is part of a US military base, camp, post, station, yard, center, or installation. Table 1 Wind Steeply sloped areas >10o Population density >100/km2 Capacity factor <20% Urban areas <1000 m Water bodies <250 m Railways <250 m Major highways <125 m Airports <5000 m Active mines <1000 m Military Lands <3000m For more information about the processes and sources used to develop the screening criteria see sources 1-7 in the footnotes. Data updates occur as needed, corresponding to typical 3-year CPUC IRP planning cyclesFootnotes:[1] Lopez, A. et. al. “U.S. Renewable Energy Technical Potentials: A GIS-Based Analysis,” 2012. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/51946.pdf[2] https://greeningthegrid.org/Renewable-Energy-Zones-Toolkit/topics/social-environmental-and-other-impacts#ReadingListAndCaseStudies[3] Multi-Criteria Analysis for Renewable Energy (MapRE), University of California Santa Barbara. https://mapre.es.ucsb.edu/[4] Larson, E. et. al. “Net-Zero America: Potential Pathways, Infrastructure, and Impacts, Interim Report.” Princeton University, 2020. https://environmenthalfcentury.princeton.edu/sites/g/files/toruqf331/files/2020-12/Princeton_NZA_Interim_Report_15_Dec_2020_FINAL.pdf.[5] Wu, G. et. al. “Low-Impact Land Use Pathways to Deep Decarbonization of Electricity.” Environmental Research Letters 15, no. 7 (July 10, 2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab87d1.[6] RETI Coordinating Committee, RETI Stakeholder Steering Committee. “Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative Phase 1B Final Report.” California Energy Commission, January 2009.[7] Pletka, Ryan, and Joshua Finn. “Western Renewable Energy Zones, Phase 1: QRA Identification Technical Report.” Black & Veatch and National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2009. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy10osti/46877.pdf.[8]https://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/geo/shapefiles/index.php?year=2019&layergroup=Urban+Areas[9]https://ezmt.anl.gov/[10]https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=fc870766a3994111bce4a083413988e4[11]https://mrdata.usgs.gov/mineplant/Credits Title: Techno-economic screening criteria for utility-scale wind energy installations for Integrated Resource Planning Purpose for creation: These site suitability criteria are for use in electric system planning, capacity expansion modeling, and integrated resource planning. Keywords: wind energy, resource potential, techno-economic, IRP Extent: western states of the contiguous U.S. Use Limitations The geospatial data created by the use of these techno-economic screens inform high-level estimates of technical renewable resource potential for electric system planning and should not be used, on their own, to guide siting of generation projects nor assess project-level impacts.Confidentiality: Public ContactEmily Leslie Emily@MontaraMtEnergy.comSam Schreiber sam.schreiber@ethree.com Jared Ferguson Jared.Ferguson@cpuc.ca.govOluwafemi Sawyerr femi@ethree.com

These data were extracted from the NHD in order to better represent the major rivers wider than 10 feet in Utah

The National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is a feature-based database that interconnects and uniquely identifies the stream segments or reaches that make up the nation's surface water drainage system. NHD data was originally developed at 1:100,000-scale and exists at that scale for the whole country. This high-resolution NHD, generally developed at 1:24,000/1:12,000 scale, adds detail to the original 1:100,000-scale NHD. (Data for Alaska, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands was developed at high-resolution, not 1:100,000 scale.) Local resolution NHD is being developed where partners and data exist. The NHD contains reach codes for networked features, flow direction, names, and centerline representations for areal water bodies. Reaches are also defined on waterbodies and the approximate shorelines of the Great Lakes, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico. The NHD also incorporates the National Spatial Data Infrastructure framework criteria established by the Federal Geographic Data Committee.

description:

This dataset contains locations of major rivers that flow through Allegheny County. These shapes have been taken from the Hydrology dataset. The Ohio River, Monongahela River and Allegheny River are coded as Major Rivers.

If viewing this description on the Western Pennsylvania Regional Data Center s open data portal (http://www.wprdc.org), this dataset is harvested on a weekly basis from Allegheny County s GIS data portal (http://openac.alcogis.opendata.arcgis.com/). The full metadata record for this dataset can also be found on Allegheny County s GIS portal. You can access the metadata record and other resources on the GIS portal by clicking on the Explore button (and choosing the Go to resource option) to the right of the ArcGIS Open Dataset text below.

Category: Geography

Organization: Allegheny County

Department: Geographic Information Systems Group; Department of Administrative Services

Temporal Coverage: 2012

Data Notes:

Coordinate System: Pennsylvania State Plane South Zone 3702; U.S. Survey Foot

Development Notes: Exported from the Hydrology datasets.

Other: none

Related Document(s): Data Dictionary (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16BWrRkoPtq2ANRkrbG7CrfQk2dUsWRiaS2Ee1mTn7l0/edit?usp=sharing)

Frequency - Data Change: As needed

Frequency - Publishing: As needed

Data Steward Name: Eli Thomas

Data Steward Email: gishelp@alleghenycounty.us

This dataset contains locations of major rivers that flow through Allegheny County. These shapes have been taken from the Hydrology dataset. The Ohio River, Monongahela River and Allegheny River are coded as Major Rivers.

If viewing this description on the Western Pennsylvania Regional Data Center s open data portal (http://www.wprdc.org), this dataset is harvested on a weekly basis from Allegheny County s GIS data portal (http://openac.alcogis.opendata.arcgis.com/). The full metadata record for this dataset can also be found on Allegheny County s GIS portal. You can access the metadata record and other resources on the GIS portal by clicking on the Explore button (and choosing the Go to resource option) to the right of the ArcGIS Open Dataset text below.

Category: Geography

Organization: Allegheny County

Department: Geographic Information Systems Group; Department of Administrative Services

Temporal Coverage: 2012

Data Notes:

Coordinate System: Pennsylvania State Plane South Zone 3702; U.S. Survey Foot

Development Notes: Exported from the Hydrology datasets.

Other: none

Related Document(s): Data Dictionary (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16BWrRkoPtq2ANRkrbG7CrfQk2dUsWRiaS2Ee1mTn7l0/edit?usp=sharing)

Frequency - Data Change: As needed

Frequency - Publishing: As needed

Data Steward Name: Eli Thomas

Data Steward Email: gishelp@alleghenycounty.us

This data was prepared as input for the Selkie GIS-TE tool. This GIS tool aids site selection, logistics optimization and financial analysis of wave or tidal farms in the Irish and Welsh maritime areas. Read more here: https://www.selkie-project.eu/selkie-tools-gis-technoeconomic-model/

This research was funded by the Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) through MaREI, the SFI Research Centre for Energy, Climate and the Marine and by the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland (SEAI). Support was also received from the European Union's European Regional Development Fund through the Ireland Wales Cooperation Programme as part of the Selkie project.

File Formats

Results are presented in three file formats:

tif Can be imported into a GIS software (such as ARC GIS) csv Human-readable text format, which can also be opened in Excel png Image files that can be viewed in standard desktop software and give a spatial view of results

Input Data

All calculations use open-source data from the Copernicus store and the open-source software Python. The Python xarray library is used to read the data.

Hourly Data from 2000 to 2019

• Wind - Copernicus ERA5 dataset 17 by 27.5 km grid
  10m wind speed

• Wave - Copernicus Atlantic -Iberian Biscay Irish - Ocean Wave Reanalysis dataset 3 by 5 km grid

Accessibility

The maximum limits for Hs and wind speed are applied when mapping the accessibility of a site.
The Accessibility layer shows the percentage of time the Hs (Atlantic -Iberian Biscay Irish - Ocean Wave Reanalysis) and wind speed (ERA5) are below these limits for the month.

Input data is 20 years of hourly wave and wind data from 2000 to 2019, partitioned by month. At each timestep, the accessibility of the site was determined by checking if
the Hs and wind speed were below their respective limits. The percentage accessibility is the number of hours within limits divided by the total number of hours for the month.

Environmental data is from the Copernicus data store (https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/). Wave hourly data is from the 'Atlantic -Iberian Biscay Irish - Ocean Wave Reanalysis' dataset.
Wind hourly data is from the ERA 5 dataset.

Availability

A device's availability to produce electricity depends on the device's reliability and the time to repair any failures. The repair time depends on weather
windows and other logistical factors (for example, the availability of repair vessels and personnel.). A 2013 study by O'Connor et al. determined the
relationship between the accessibility and availability of a wave energy device. The resulting graph (see Fig. 1 of their paper) shows the correlation between accessibility at Hs of 2m and wind speed of 15.0m/s and availability. This graph is used to calculate the availability layer from the accessibility layer.

The input value, accessibility, measures how accessible a site is for installation or operation and maintenance activities. It is the percentage time the
environmental conditions, i.e. the Hs (Atlantic -Iberian Biscay Irish - Ocean Wave Reanalysis) and wind speed (ERA5), are below operational limits.
Input data is 20 years of hourly wave and wind data from 2000 to 2019, partitioned by month. At each timestep, the accessibility of the site was determined
by checking if the Hs and wind speed were below their respective limits. The percentage accessibility is the number of hours within limits divided by the total
number of hours for the month. Once the accessibility was known, the percentage availability was calculated using the O'Connor et al. graph of the relationship between the two. A mature technology reliability was assumed.

Weather Window

The weather window availability is the percentage of possible x-duration windows where weather conditions (Hs, wind speed) are below maximum limits for the
given duration for the month.

The resolution of the wave dataset (0.05° × 0.05°) is higher than that of the wind dataset
(0.25° x 0.25°), so the nearest wind value is used for each wave data point. The weather window layer is at the resolution of the wave layer.

The first step in calculating the weather window for a particular set of inputs (Hs, wind speed and duration) is to calculate the accessibility at each timestep.
The accessibility is based on a simple boolean evaluation: are the wave and wind conditions within the required limits at the given timestep?

Once the time series of accessibility is calculated, the next step is to look for periods of sustained favourable environmental conditions, i.e. the weather
windows. Here all possible operating periods with a duration matching the required weather-window value are assessed to see if the weather conditions remain
suitable for the entire period. The percentage availability of the weather window is calculated based on the percentage of x-duration windows with suitable
weather conditions for their entire duration.The weather window availability can be considered as the probability of having the required weather window available
at any given point in the month.

Extreme Wind and Wave

The Extreme wave layers show the highest significant wave height expected to occur during the given return period. The Extreme wind layers show the highest wind speed expected to occur during the given return period.

To predict extreme values, we use Extreme Value Analysis (EVA). EVA focuses on the extreme part of the data and seeks to determine a model to fit this reduced
portion accurately. EVA consists of three main stages. The first stage is the selection of extreme values from a time series. The next step is to fit a model
that best approximates the selected extremes by determining the shape parameters for a suitable probability distribution. The model then predicts extreme values
for the selected return period. All calculations use the python pyextremes library. Two methods are used - Block Maxima and Peaks over threshold.

The Block Maxima methods selects the annual maxima and fits a GEVD probability distribution.

The peaks_over_threshold method has two variable calculation parameters. The first is the percentile above which values must be to be selected as extreme (0.9 or 0.998). The second input is the time difference between extreme values for them to be considered independent (3 days). A Generalised Pareto Distribution is fitted to the selected
extremes and used to calculate the extreme value for the selected return period.

This dataset is a series of digital map-posters accompanying the AdaptNRM Guide: Helping Biodiversity Adapt: supporting climate adaptation planning using a community-level modelling approach.

These represent supporting materials and information about the community-level biodiversity models applied to climate change. Map posters are organised by four biological groups (vascular plants, mammals, reptiles and amphibians), two climate change scenario (1990-2050 MIROC5 and CanESM2 for RCP8.5), and five measures of change in biodiversity.

The map-posters present the nationally consistent data at locally relevant resolutions in eight parts – representing broad groupings of NRM regions based on the cluster boundaries used for climate adaptation planning (http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/adaptation) and also Nationally.

Map-posters are provided in PNG image format at moderate resolution (300dpi) to suit A0 printing. The posters were designed to meet A0 print size and digital viewing resolution of map detail. An additional set in PDF image format has been created for ease of download for initial exploration and printing on A3 paper. Some text elements and map features may be fuzzy at this resolution.

Each map-poster contains four dataset images coloured using standard legends encompassing the potential range of the measure, even if that range is not represented in the dataset itself or across the map extent.

Most map series are provided in two parts: part 1 shows the two climate scenarios for vascular plants and mammals and part 2 shows reptiles and amphibians. Eight cluster maps for each series have a different colour theme and map extent. A national series is also provided. Annotation briefly outlines the topics presented in the Guide so that each poster stands alone for quick reference.

An additional 77 National maps presenting the probability distributions of each of 77 vegetation types – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroups (NVIS subgroups) - are currently in preparation.

Example citations:

Williams KJ, Raisbeck-Brown N, Prober S, Harwood T (2015) Generalised projected distribution of vegetation types – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroups (1990 and 2050), A0 map-poster 8.1 - East Coast NRM regions. CSIRO Land and Water Flagship, Canberra. Available online at www.AdaptNRM.org and https://data.csiro.au/dap/.

Williams KJ, Raisbeck-Brown N, Harwood T, Prober S (2015) Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050), A0 map-poster 9.1 - East Coast NRM regions. CSIRO Land and Water Flagship, Canberra. Available online at www.AdaptNRM.org and https://data.csiro.au/dap/.

This dataset has been delivered incrementally. Please check that you are accessing the latest version of the dataset. Lineage: The map posters show case the scientific data. The data layers have been developed at approximately 250m resolution (9 second) across the Australian continent to incorporate the interaction between climate and topography, and are best viewed using a geographic information system (GIS). Each data layers is 1Gb, and inaccessible to non-GIS users. The map posters provide easy access to the scientific data, enabling the outputs to be viewed at high resolution with geographical context information provided.

Maps were generated using layout and drawing tools in ArcGIS 10.2.2

A check list of map posters and datasets is provided with the collection.

Map Series: 7.(1-77) National probability distribution of vegetation type – NVIS 4.1 major vegetation subgroup pre-1750 #0x

8.1 Generalised projected distribution of vegetation types (NVIS subgroups) (1990 and 2050)

9.1 Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for plants and mammals (1990-2050)

9.2 Revegetation benefit (cleared natural areas) for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

10.1 Need for assisted dispersal for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

10.2 Need for assisted dispersal for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

11.1 Refugial potential for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

11.1 Refugial potential for reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

12.1 Climate-driven future revegetation benefit for vascular plants and mammals (1990-2050)

12.2 Climate-driven future revegetation benefit for vascular reptiles and amphibians (1990-2050)

The MS&R Plan identifies the general location and size of existing and proposed freeways, arterial and collector streets, future rights-of-way, setback requirements, typical intersections and cross sections, and gateway and scenic routes. The City’s Department of Transportation and the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD) implement the MS&R Plan. The MS&R Plan is considered a Land Use Plan as defined in the Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 3.6, and, therefore, is subject to amendment in accordance with the standard Land Use Plan and Adoption and Amendment Procedures. The MS&R right-of-way lines are used in determining the setback for development through the MS&R Overlay provisions of the UDC. As stated in the current MS&R Plan, page 4, “The purpose of the Major Streets and Routes Plan is to facilitate future street widening, to inform the public which streets are the main thoroughfares, so that land use decisions can be based accordingly, and to reduce the disruption of existing uses on a property. By stipulating the required right-of-way, new development can be located so as to prepare for planned street improvements without demolition of buildings or loss of necessary parking.”PurposeThe major purposes of the Major Streets and Routes Plan are to identify street classifications, the width of public rights-of-way, to designate special routes, and to guide land use decisions. General Plan policies stipulate that planning and developing new transportation facilities be accomplished by identifying rights-of-way in the Major Streets and Routes Plan. The policies also aim to encourage bicycle and pedestrian travel, "minimize disruption of the environment," and "coordinate land use patterns with transportation plans" by using the street classification as a guide to land use decisions.Dataset ClassificationLevel 0 - OpenKnown UsesThis layer is intended to be used in the Open Data portal and not for regular use in ArcGIS Online and ArcGIS Enterprise.Known ErrorsLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Data ContactLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Update FrequencyAs needed

This is a geographic database of San Antonio's Major Thoroughfare Plan, last updated February 6, 2014

The Geospatial Fabric is a dataset of spatial modeling units for use within the National Hydrologic Model that covers the conterminous United States (CONUS), Alaska, and most major river basins that flow in from Canada. This U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) data release consists of the geospatial fabric features and other related datasets created to expand the National Hydrologic Model to Hawaii. This page contains data and information related to the GIS features of the Geospaital Fabric for National Hydrologic Model, Hawaii domain. An Open Geospatial Consortium geopackage (GF_20.gpkg) contains 4 feature layers (layer names in parentheses): points of interest (poi), a stream network (nsegment), aggregated catchments (catchment), and hydrologic repsonse units (nhru). Features were derived from NHDPlus, version 2.0, and several hydroclimatic datasets representing domain-specific processes and key drainage basins within the Hawaii. All data cover the National Hydrologic Model's (NHM) Hawaiin domain. The NHM is a modeling infrastructure consisting of three main parts: 1) an underlying geospatial fabric of modeling units (hydrologic response units and stream segments) with an associated parameter database, 2) a model input data archive, and 3) a repository of the physical model simulation code bases (Regan and others, 2014). The pois represent hydro locations and points on the network. Segments are connected by the pois and are used to route streamflow and characterize upstream watershed conditions. The HRUs represent the spatial modeling units at which most of the physical processes (such as precipitation, runoff, evapotranspiration, and infiltration) are simulated. Some HRUs are connected to a corresponding segment, and may represent left and right-bank areas of each stream segment. See Regan and others (2018) and entities and attributes for more information.

This city boundary shapefile was extracted from Esri Data and Maps for ArcGIS 2014 - U.S. Populated Place Areas. This shapefile can be joined to 500 Cities city-level Data (GIS Friendly Format) in a geographic information system (GIS) to make city-level maps.

The Major Water Sources list was created by IDNR to address concerns that new confinements would be constructed within view of "floatable/canoeable" rivers. The definition of major water source in Iowa Administrative Code - Natural Resource Commission - Chapter 65 is: "a water source that is a lake, reservoir, river or stream located within the territorial limits of the state, or any marginal river area adjacent to the state, if the water source is capable of supporting a floating vessel capable of carrying one or more persons during a total of a six month period in one out of ten years, excluding periods of flooding." The list was created by getting the counties to identify "canoeable" streams and with additional input from DNR staff.