Parsing Parcels: Using GIS
to Analyze Options for
Farmland Preservation
Growing Wisconsin
Spring 2007
Anna Haines, Eric Olson, Dan McFarlane
UWSP – UWEX
Center for Land Use Education
Presentation Outline
I. Why Care About Parcelization?
II. Details of UWSP Parcelization
Research Project
III. Hypothetical Application of
Research to Policy Analysis
I. Why Care About Parcelization?
Working Definition of Parcelization:
The division of land parcels into
progressively smaller units
– Ownership Units: Ownership Parcelization
– Legal Units: Tax Parcel Parcelization
1
I. Why Care About Parcelization?
Just as the division of tax parcels
precedes division of ownership parcels,
the division of ownership parcels
precedes changes in land use, or
LANDSCAPE FRAGMENTATION.
Parcelization …Is Followed By Development & Fragmentation
1940
1968
2005
I. Why Care About Parcelization?
Nationwide, development pressures in
rural areas continues to grow and the
search for effective management
techniques intensifies
2
I. Why Care About Parcelization?
State
Farmland Loss (2000-05)
Delaware
Hawaii
Massachusetts
Nevada
Vermont
Georgia
California
Wisconsin
-10.34%
-9.72%
-8.77%
-7.35%
-6.72%
-5.41%
-5.04%
-4.94%
Farms and Land in Farms. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service.
Washington, D.C.: February 2001 and January 2006. Summarized at cfed.org
I. Why Care About Parcelization?
We know more about what follows
parcelization (land sales,
developments, loss of farms, etc.)
than we do about the first step in
this process. This suggests a few
questions…
I. Why Care About Parcelization?
• Is parcelization faster today than
earlier times?
• Do policies impact parcelization,
and if so, how?
• Can new or modified policies that
target parcel creation improve the
situation?
3
Why Work On This Now?
• The development pressures seem intense
• Comprehensive planning in Wisconsin
offers a chance to consider new growth
management techniques
• Advances in GIS make the sort of historic
spatial analysis needed to answer our
questions feasible and practicable
II. Details of UWSP Parcelization
Research Project
• Funding through the USDA Rural
Development National Research Initiative
• Competitive federal grant for projects that
bring together research, education, and
extension (22% success rate)
• Funding covers cost of graduate and
undergraduate students and GIS staff at
UWSP ($380,000 over 4 years)
II. Details of UWSP Parcelization
Research Project
• Goals
– Understand the drivers of parcelization
– Measure potential effects that policies
have on land division
• Objectives
– Reconstruct parcel histories
– Systematically analyze change over time
– Communicate results
4
II. Details of UWSP Parcelization
Research Project
County Selection
A. Non-metro adjacent county
B. Community typology
C. Data accessibility
D. Favorable relationships
II. Details of UWSP Parcelization
Research Project
Bayfield County
Columbia County
II. Details of UWSP Parcelization
Research Project
Township Selection
A. Different rates of parcelization
B. Addressing need for comprehensive plan
C. Favorable relationships
5
Results
Lodi
Town of West Point
Town of Lodi
Results
Town of West Point
Town of Lodi
Results
Town of Springvale
6
Results
Town of Springvale
Number of Ownership and Tax Parcels
West Point
Lodi
2500
2500
Ownership Parcels
Tax Parcels
Tax Parcels
2000
Number of parcels
N u mb e r o f Pa rc els
2000
Ownership Parcels
1500
1000
500
1500
1000
500
0
0
1936
1947
1953
1961
1967
1972
1983
1991
2000
1936
2005
1947
1953
1961
1967
1972
1983
1991
2000
2005
Year
Year
Parcelization Rates
West Point
Lodi
50%
50%
45%
Ownerhship Parcels
30%
30%
% increase
% Increase
35%
20%
15%
Tax Parcels
40%
35%
25%
Ownership Parcels
45%
Tax Parcels
40%
25%
20%
15%
10%
10%
5%
5%
0%
1953-1961
1962-1967
1968-1972
1973-1983
1984-1991
1992-2000
2001-2005
0%
1953-1961
1962-1967
1968-1972
1973-1983
1984-1991
1992-2000
2001-2005
7
Number of Ownership and Tax Parcels
Town of Springvale
Number of Parcels
Parcelization Rate
2500
Ownership Parcels
45%
Tax Parcels
Ownership Parcels
Tax Parcels
2000
Number of Parcels
35%
1500
25%
1000
15%
500
5%
0
-5%
1936
1947
1953
1961
1967
1972
1983
1991
2000
2005
1953-1961
1962-1967
1968-1972
1973-1983
1984-1991
1992-2000
2001-2005
Acres Per Parcel Size Class
Lodi
Springvale
30,000
30,000
25,000
25,000
0-2
20,000
2.1 - 5
5.1 - 10
10.1 - 20
20.1 - 30
15,000
30.1 - 40
40.1 - 80
80.1 - 160
Number of Acres
Number of Acres
20,000
15,000
160.1 - 240
10,000
> 240
5,000
10,000
5,000
0
1953 1961 1967 1972 1983 1991 2000 2005
Year
0
1953
1961
1967
1972
1983
1992
2000
2005
Year
These numbers have a
SPATIAL COMPONENT
that simple tables would not
show
8
Spatial Dimensions of Parcel Patterns
Springvale
III. Hypothetical Application of
Research to Policy Analysis
– How might this data set be used when
considering land protection policies?
– Consider a hypothetical scenario
wherein towns are considering a range
of different possible “new rules” to
change development patterns
– Handout summarizes some possible
options
9
III. Hypothetical Application of
Research to Policy Analysis
We are using Columbia County data for
exploring these hypothetical options
because this is where we have data; we
plan to conduct similar analysis with
Bayfield County towns for comparison.
Given time and resources, we would
extend this to a regional scale.
Hypothetical total number of future
new parcels- Town of West Point
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Current
Policy 1
Policy 2
Policy 3
Policy 4
Past Trends Extrapolated to the
Future- Town of West Point
2250
Current
Policy
Policy 3
2000
Number of Parcels
1750
1500
1250
Policy 4
1000
750
500
250
0
1991
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
Year
10
Town of West Point Existing Developed Parcels
Hypothetical Future Development Rights Under Present Zoning
Hypothetical Future Development Rights Under Policy #3
11
Hypothetical Future Development Rights Under Policy #4
TDR Scenario: Send Development to Hypothetical Receiving Area
Alternative TDR Scenario: Compare Hypothetical Policy 4 and TDR
12
So What?
• Measure potential impacts of different
policy alternatives
• Identify areas of concern (ecological,
social, economical)
• Envision future landscapes
Concluding Remarks
• Differences among policies can matter
– Some matter more than others
• Technology exists
– Let’s use it
• Think spatially
Questions?
Contact Information:
Dr. Anna Haines
(715) 346-2386
ahaines@uwsp.edu
Eric Olson
(715) 346-2278
eolson@uwsp.edu
Dan McFarlane
dmcfa072@uwsp.edu
FACTORS INFLUENCING LAND PARCELIZATION IN AMENITY RICH RURAL
AREAS AND THE POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES OF PLANNING AND POLICY
VARIABLES
CONTRACT/GRANT/AGREEMENT NO: 2005-35401-15924 PROPOSAL NO: 2005-01393
UWSP – UWEX
Center for Land Use Education
13