Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 Greek Cadastre Quality Model and Quality Checking of spatial cadastral data Ioannis Kavadas Rural & Surveying Engineer, MSc, Ph.D. Candidate Ktimatologio.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "1 Greek Cadastre Quality Model and Quality Checking of spatial cadastral data Ioannis Kavadas Rural & Surveying Engineer, MSc, Ph.D. Candidate Ktimatologio."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 Greek Cadastre Quality Model and Quality Checking of spatial cadastral data Ioannis Kavadas Rural & Surveying Engineer, MSc, Ph.D. Candidate Ktimatologio S.A. Head of Project Quality Management & Control Department

2 2Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting

3 Greek Cadastre – background & key goals The Greek cadastre is being created Expected - planned completion in 2020 Rights-based, is: a.18% complete Municipalities: 336 (of a total of 5775) Area: km 2 Cadastral parcels: Properties: Rights: Spatial corrections in the 8-year operation of cadastral offices: (0,8%) b.22% in implementation (major cities) c.19% has been launched d.41% will be launched in Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting

4 Greek Cadastre – cadastral data acquisition (1) 4 The spatial cadastral data derived from: the cadastral survey process digitizing the obvious materialized parcel boundaries on orthophotos spatial cadastral data are included in administrative acts after joining the geodetic reference system of National Cadastre boundaries of coastal areas and forest areas Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting

5 Greek Cadastre – cadastral data acquisition (2) 5 The spatial cadastral data derived from: verification of spatial data using the data collected in the collection of owners statements – topographical diagrams spatial data from property titles (area, length of parcel sides e.t.c.) participation of the owners (indicate cp boundaries) Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting … location “Katsouli” of the territory of the Municipality of Salamis, not included in the urban development zones, shown with the upper case letters A- B-C-D-A on the topographic diagram that was drawn by the architect engineer E… M… and is attached to my November 19, 1993, contract, has an area of one hundred and eighty five and 90/100 (185.90) sq. meters and borders, according to the diagram, on the North and along the face C-D that has a length of fifteen and 60/100 (15.60) meters with the property of E… Ps…, on the South, along the face A-B that has a length of fifteen (15) meters with a four (4) meter wide road, on the East and along the face B-C that has a length of eleven and 80/100 (11.80) meters with a property of unknown owner, and on the West, along the face A-D that has a length of twelve and 50/100 (12.50) meters, with a four (4) meter wide road. The same land parcel is also shown…

6 Greek Cadastre – basic notions and key requirements 6 The Greek cadastre is being created Every part of land at the municipal level (including roads, streams, special areas etc.) are cadastral parcel The spatial information is fully connected with legal and property information Involving property owners in the process (statements / objections) Partially created using External Contractors If detected errors or non conformities in the data are corrected by the contractor The management of spatial data is fully digital For the creation of spatial data, we have recent (2009) and complete (full coverage) reference data Use of Hellenic Positioning System (HEPOS) in field measurements Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting

7 7Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting

8 Greek Cadastre – General Conceptual Model (1) Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting8 Feature types Topological relationships

9 Greek Cadastre – General Conceptual Model (2) Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting9 Cadastral parcels Cadastral zoning Administrative unit

10 Greek Cadastre – Spatial feature catalog 10Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting LayerDescriptionFeature typeINSPIRE object PSTCadastral parcelsPolygonCadastral parcels ASTOTAMunicipality boundariesPolygonAdministrative Unit (cz) ASTTOMCadastral sectorsPolygonCadastral zoning ASTENOTCadastral sectionsPolygonCadastral zoning MRTMining areasPolygonCadastral zoning BLOCK_PNTXYZ Control pointspointOther VSTIndependent buildings (Vertical ownerships)PolygonOther EASWays of passage (Servitude)PolygonOther BLDBuildingspointOther ASTIKUrban areasPolygonCadastral zoning EIASpecial property objectsPolygonCadastral parcels EIA_PNTSpecial property objectspointCadastral parcels RoadsRoad networkLineOther OIKSettlement boundariesPolygonAdministrative Unit (cz) CBOUNDBoundaries of urban zone areasPolygonCadastral zoning DBOUND Administrative acts (consolidations, land distributions, urban consolidation plans) PolygonCadastral zoning FBOUNDareasPolygonCadastral zoning NOMILand tenure (property possession)PolygonCadastral zoning POIPoints of interestPointGeographical names POLParcel identification marksPointOther

11 Greek Cadastre – Data model basic requirements and constraints 11 For all cadastral data are not overlapping entities within the same layer The ASTOTA polygon must be composed entirely of ASTTOM polygons The ASTOTA polygon must be composed entirely of PST polygons The ASTOTA polygon should include entirely ASTIK polygons The ASTENOT polygons should be included in the ASTTOM polygons The ASTIK boundaries should not intersect with the boundaries of the PST polygons The VST polygons should be included in the PST polygons The EAS polygons should be included in the PST polygons The BLD points should be included in the ASTOTA polygon The MNT polygons should be included in the ASTOTA polygon The EIA polygons should be included in the ASTOTA polygon The EIA_PNT points should be included in the ASTOTA polygon The CBOUND polygons should be included in the ASTOTA polygon The DBOUND polygons should be included in the ASTOTA polygon The FBOUND polygons should be included in the ASTOTA polygon The NOMI polygons should be included in the ASTOTA polygon The BLOCK_PNT, POI and POL points should be included in the ASTOTA polygon

12 12Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting

13 INSPIRE Cadastral parcels – General Conceptual Model 13 Basic property unit + INSPIRE identifier + temporal information + national cadastral reference + area value Cadastral parcel + INSPIRE identifier + temporal information + geometry + national cadastral reference + area value + reference point (portrayal) + label (portrayal) 0…n Cadastral boundary + INSPIRE identifier + temporal information + geometry + estimated accuracy Cadastral zoning + INSPIRE identifier + temporal information + geometry + national cadastral zoning reference + name + level (hierarchy) + level name (hierarchy) + original scale denominator + Estimated accuracy + reference point (portrayal) + label (portrayal) Temporal Information + begin lifespan + end lifespan + valid from + valid to 0..1 Cadastral Parcel Cadastral Boundary Cadastral Zoning Cadastral Parcel Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting

14 Greek Cadastre GCM vs INSPIRE GCM (1) Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting14 Temporal information is also available part of dataset Cadastral diagram

15 Greek Cadastre GCM vs INSPIRE GCM (2) Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting15 Temporal information is also available identified in data model for every Cz part of dataset Cadastral diagram

16 16Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting

17 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (1) 17Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Full InspectionSampling If there are errors (error number> 0) the subset should be rejected, and a report with corrective actions prepared and sent to the contractor FGDC : Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards - Part 3: National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy ISO 2859

18 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (2) 18Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Quality elementCompleteness Quality sub elementCommission Quality measureNumber of excess items ScopeAll items classified as “cadastral parcel” in the dataset. MeasureError count Measure definitionNumber of items within the dataset that should not have been in the dataset. Result value typeNumber (integer) Result unit count

19 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (3) 19Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Evaluation method description Number of cadastral parcels, which are not presented in the dataset (in relation to cadastral parcels in the universe of discourse) QC RangeFull inspection QC procedureAutomatic Reference dataMunicipality boundaries SoftwareCustom application, ArcGIS QCR type / format List / KAEK in MSExcel Conformance level Zero violations in dataset Sample:33 municipalities parcels Requirement: Every part of land at the municipal level are cadastral parcel Part of qcr checklist Quality requirement: Completeness Conformance level: Absence of area gaps within the municipality boundaries Result: Accepted

20 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (4) 20Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Evaluation method description Number of cadastral parcels, which are not presented in the dataset. Every cadastral parcel included in the database of property information is also included in the spatial data and vice versa (1:1) QC RangeFull inspection QC procedureAutomatic Reference dataDatabase with ownership and property data Software QCR type / format List - KAEK in MSExcel Conformance level Zero violations in dataset Sample:33 municipalities parcels Key note: The spatial information is fully connected with legal and property information Part of qcr checklist Quality requirement: Completeness (spatial vs property data 1:1 identification) Conformance level: For each property record there is a corresponding cadastral parcel and vise versa Result: Not accepted Report: KAEK of non-compliant cadastral parcel

21 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (5) 21Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Quality elementLogical consistencyQC procedureAutomatic full inspection Quality sub element Format consistencyConformance level Zero violations in dataset Part of quality report

22 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (6) 22Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Part of quality report Quality elementLogical consistencyQC procedureAutomatic full inspection Quality sub element Topological consistency Conformance level Zero violations in dataset

23 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (7) 23Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Quality elementPositional accuracy Quality sub elementAbsolute accuracy Quality measureMean value of positional uncertainties / id 28 ScopeAll items classified as “cadastral parcels” set in the dataset. MeasureRoot Mean Square Error (RMSExy) Measure definitionGeometric accuracy of cadastral parcels with regard to the adopted geodetic reference system (EGSA’87). Result value typemeasure Result unit -

24 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (8) 24Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Evaluation method description Mean value of the positional uncertainties for a set of positions where the positional uncertainties are defined as the distance between a measured position and what is considered as the corresponding true position. QC RangeSampling using FGDC standards Based on “Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards - Part 3: National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy”, Subcommittee for Base Cartographic Data / Federal Geographic Data Committee QC procedureField measurements Reference data- SoftwareGPS receiver and Total Station / ArcGIS and Autocad QCR type / formatMSExcel file & Shapefile Conformance level Urban areas: RMSExy ≤ 0,56m Agricultural & other areas: RMSExy ≤ 1,41m Sample:33 municipalities control points

25 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (9) 25Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Quality elementPositional accuracy Quality sub elementRelative accuracy Quality measureRelative horizontal error ScopeAll items classified as “cadastral parcels” set in the dataset. MeasureParcel’s shape compatibility (1 st ) Parcel’s boundary’s length compatibility (2 nd and 3 rd ) Measure definitionEvaluation of the random errors in the horizontal position of one feature to another in the same dataset Result value typemeasure Result unit -

26 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (10) 26Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Evaluation method description Check the compatibility of the parcel shape compared to the "Compatibility Zone" of the cadastre parcel. Parcel’s shape compatibility, is true when all points of the outline of parcel on the topographic diagram can be placed in the "Compatibility Zone" of the cadastre parcel. QC RangeSampling inspection using Procedure A of ISO standard QC procedureManual Reference dataTopographical diagrams (collected with owners statements) and diagrams from administrative acts SoftwareArcGIS QCR type / formatMSExcel file & Shapefile Conformance level LQ=8,0 Sample:33 municipalities 2400 parcels Compatibility Zone defined as the zone which lies between border of an inner and an outer polygon with sides parallel to the sides of the cadastral parcel, located on either side as follows: Uo = 0,50m for urban areas Uo = 2,00m for non urban areas

27 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (11) 27Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Evaluation method description Compare the length of the boundary of the parcel as measured in the field with the same length in the spatial database QC RangeSampling inspection 2~3 cadastral sections (blocks) per municipality. With the new technical specifications, we increased (three times) the number of the inspected parcels QC procedureField measurements Reference data- SoftwareGPS receiver and Total Station / ArcGIS and Autocad QCR type / formatMSExcel file & Shapefile Conformance level Urban areas: Es ≤ 0,79m Agricultural & other areas: Es ≤ 1,99m Sample:33 municipalities 1350 parcels

28 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (12) 28Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Evaluation method description Compare the length of the boundary of the parcel as measured or shown in topographical diagram with the same length in the spatial database QC RangeSampling inspection 5~7 parcels per municipality. With the new technical specifications, we increased (three times) the number of the inspected parcels. QC procedureManual Reference dataTopographical diagrams (collected with owners statements) SoftwareArcGIS QCR type / formatMSExcel file & Shapefile Conformance level Urban areas: Es ≤ 0,79m Agricultural & other areas: Es ≤ 1,99m Sample:33 municipalities 224 parcels

29 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (13) 29Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Quality elementThematic accuracy Quality sub elementClassification correctness Quality measureNumber of incorrectly classified features ScopeAll items classified as “cadastral parcel” in the dataset. MeasureError count Measure definitionNumber of incorrectly classified features Result value typeNumber (integer) Result unit count

30 Greek QM for cadastral parcels (14) 30Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting Evaluation method description Visual inspection based on the delineated boundaries of the properties as shown on orthophotos. QC RangeFull inspection QC procedureManual Reference dataOrthophotos SoftwareArcGIS QCR type / format Shapefile Conformance level Zero violations in dataset Sample:33 municipalities parcels Requirement: Every part of land at the municipal level are cadastral parcel data inspection also for: Presence of blunder errors mainly in the shape of parcels Existence of drawing faults Systemic movement of parcel boundaries Existence of discontinuities in the entities

31 Conclusions The results of quality control performed in 6 resent contracts (33 municipalities / with new specifications) meet compliance criteria set in the specifications. To accept the data needed 1 to 3 (max 5) re-submissions by the data producer with corrections or clarifications resulting from our quality checking. The project's success is mainly based on following factors: Using both the data producers and Ktimatologio S.A. detailed quality plan based on ISO 10005, Mandatory implementation of internal quality checking by the data producer (similar with quality controls of Ktimatologio S.A.) and submit their results to us for checking and validation, Implementation of quality checking from the Ktimatologio S.A using quality plan and detailed quality manual, trained staff and specialized software applications, The effectiveness of quality checing that adopted by Ktimatologio S.A., which resulted very small percentages of appeals and requests for correction by owners - avg 1% (in total of parcels) for spatial data during the suspension of data 31Reykjavik, 31/05/2012QKEN – Plenary meeting

32 32 Thank you for your attention


Download ppt "1 Greek Cadastre Quality Model and Quality Checking of spatial cadastral data Ioannis Kavadas Rural & Surveying Engineer, MSc, Ph.D. Candidate Ktimatologio."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google