Description: Graphic Standards: For districts outside of Tulare County, the data is presented 'as'is' - no effort was made to reconcile overlaps, gaps, or other inconsistancies.For districts within Tulare County, the following rules apply:Tulare County GIS data is 'parcel oriented' ... generally, boundaries are adjustred to coincide with parcel lines (creating consistent error)Parcels within and near to the City of Visalia are 'surveyor accurate' ... accurate to within 3" (more precise that areial photos)Parcels within the 'valley' portion of Tulare County are accurate to within 40'Parcels in the Foothills and Mountains can have significent spatial errorFor collections of small parcels, boundaries are adjusted to correspond to parcel lines, even though that boundary may be offset from 'true position' (as indicated by areial photos)For developments on large parcels, boundaries are adjusted to correspond to aerial photosBoundary vertices were 'snapped' to PARCELS, with sufficient number of points such that the boundary line (line weight 2) would completely obscure the source PARCEL lines, when viewed at 1:5000 scaleDistrict Naming ConventionsDistrict names have been 'standardized' in order to make sorting names useful and to keep district names unique, and to record any special relationship between district. Examples:'Improvement District # 1' is ambiguous ... there are many such districts in the state.... 'ImpD # 1 (C.S.D. of Three Rivers); is unique. The name indicates that this district was spawned by the Community Service District of Three Rivers.'County Water Works # 1' is ambiguous ... there are many such districts in the state.... 'CWW (Tulare) # 1 (Alpaugh)' is unique. The name indicates that this district was spawned by the County of Tulare to serve the community of Alpaugh.
Copyright Text: Casil, USGS, DWR, DPH, LAFCO, etc.
Tulare County GIS (Mike Hickey) compiled this from many sources. The focus was to develop a comprehensive set of boundaries of various sorts of districts that provide water/services in Tulare County, with a secondary focus on adjacent counties in the Tulare Lake Basin. Since much of the compiled data extended beyond the focus area, that data was NOT deleted. (Rather than have every county repeat the process, this compilation may serve as a decent 'starting point' for other counties to develop theirown data.
Carolina Balazs (UC Berkeley doctoral student) developed boundaries for Tulare County and Fresno County Community Water Systems. Boundaries for cities and many publicly owned water systems derived from LAFCO boundaries. Boundaries for most private, or smaller water systems digitized by Balazs from hard copies of water system utility boundaries. Boundaries represent best-approximation of service boundaries, though there may be errors. November, 2010. For questions please email: carolinabalazs@berkeley.edu.
Description: Graphic Standards: For districts outside of Tulare County, the data is presented 'as'is' - no effort was made to reconcile overlaps, gaps, or other inconsistancies.For districts within Tulare County, the following rules apply:Tulare County GIS data is 'parcel oriented' ... generally, boundaries are adjustred to coincide with parcel lines (creating consistent error)Parcels within and near to the City of Visalia are 'surveyor accurate' ... accurate to within 3" (more precise that areial photos)Parcels within the 'valley' portion of Tulare County are accurate to within 40'Parcels in the Foothills and Mountains can have significent spatial errorFor collections of small parcels, boundaries are adjusted to correspond to parcel lines, even though that boundary may be offset from 'true position' (as indicated by areial photos)For developments on large parcels, boundaries are adjusted to correspond to aerial photosBoundary vertices were 'snapped' to PARCELS, with sufficient number of points such that the boundary line (line weight 2) would completely obscure the source PARCEL lines, when viewed at 1:5000 scaleDistrict Naming ConventionsDistrict names have been 'standardized' in order to make sorting names useful and to keep district names unique, and to record any special relationship between district. Examples:'Improvement District # 1' is ambiguous ... there are many such districts in the state.... 'ImpD # 1 (C.S.D. of Three Rivers); is unique. The name indicates that this district was spawned by the Community Service District of Three Rivers.'County Water Works # 1' is ambiguous ... there are many such districts in the state.... 'CWW (Tulare) # 1 (Alpaugh)' is unique. The name indicates that this district was spawned by the County of Tulare to serve the community of Alpaugh.