# Presentation: 322620

## Overview of Draft Street Address Standard

**Overview of Draft Street Address Standard**

- Co-Chairs:
- Martha Lombard			Ed Wells			Hilary Perkins
- Spatial Focus, Inc.			DC OCTO			Jacobs Civil, Inc.

**Address Data Standards Working Group**

- Sara Yurman	Carl Anderson
- Spatial Focus, Inc.	Fulton County, GA

## Sponsoring Organizations

**URISA** – Submitting organization
**NENA** – Supporting organization
**U.S. Census** **Bureau **– Support, on-going maintenance

**Urban & Regional Information Systems Association**
- URISA is a non-profit educational and professional association
- Mission: “To promote the effective and ethical use of spatial information and information technologies for the understanding and management of urban and regional systems.”
- 7,000 national and chapter members in the US and Canada
- Members from government, private, and academic sectors
- Slightly more than half are state and local government employees

**National Emergency Number Association**
- NENA is a professional association of 7,000 members and 46 chapters dedicated to providing effective and accessible 9-1-1 service for North America
- NENA fosters the technological advancement, availability, and implementation of a universal emergency telephone number
- NENA promotes research, planning, training, and education
- NENA's objectives include the protection of human life, the preservation of property, and the maintenance of general community security

## Other Organizations Represented

- Local, regional, and state government
- 911/Emergency management associations
- Federal agencies
- GIS software vendors and consultants
- Universities
- Other standards organizations

**Notes:**
Local gov’t:
For example:
Cities of Grand Rapids, MI; Phoenix, AZ; Birmingham, AL
Chester Co., PA; Baltimore Co., MD; Fulton Co., GA
MetroGIS (Minneapolis/St. Paul); TVA
States of Utah, Arizona; West Virginia
Harris County 911 (Texas); Orleans Parrish Communications District (New Orleans)
Census; USGS; FCC
Caliper; ESRI
Delta State University; Oral Roberts University; St. Louis University 
OGC; OASIS

## Authority

- In April 2005, the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) approved URISA’s proposal to create a street address data standard
- The standard is being prepared under the auspices of the FGDC Subcommittee on Cultural and Demographic Data, chaired by the Census Bureau
- If the standard is adopted, the Census Bureau will be the maintenance authority

## Work Plan

- Create four core committees
- Policy and Coordination
- Data Content and Classification
- Data Quality
- Data Exchange
- Work primarily by collaborative website
- Teleconference as needed
- Post two drafts for public comment
- Present at Street Smart and URISA Conferences
- Submit to FGDC for formal review and approval

## Participant Roles

**Participants** (Core Committees): writers/editors/provocateurs for draft sections and responding to comments
**Reviewers**: review and work with the committee to create the drafts
**Observers**: review drafts and provide comments or recommendations on behalf of themselves and/or their organization

**Notes:**
Recognize committee members in the audience!!!

## Schedule

- Present first draft at Street Smart and Address Savvy Conference (Austin, August 15, 2005) - Complete
- Post to URISA website for review and comment - Complete
- Synthesize comments and revise draft- Complete
- Present revised draft at the URISA annual conference in Kansas City (October 11, 2005) - Complete
- Second review period – Underway, ends January 16, 2005
- Synthesize comments and revise draft – First quarter 2006
- Submit revised standard to FGDC for full public review, comment adjudication, and approval as a draft standard

## The Address Standard 

- Introduction
- Part 1: Street Address Data Content
- Part 2: Street Address Data Classification
- Part 3: Street Address Data Quality
- Part 4: Street Address Data Exchange

## Introduction

- Provides background information.
- States the objectives and benefits.
- Defines address.
- States the scope of the standard.
- Outlines the standards development process.
- Identifies the maintenance authority.

## Street Address Definition

- A street address specifies a location by reference to a thoroughfare, or a landmark; or it specifies a point of postal delivery
- Four basic classes of street address:
- Thoroughfare addresses
- Landmark addresses
- Postal addresses
- General addresses (can be any of these three)

**Notes:**
Thoroughfare addresses specify a location by reference to a thoroughfare. A thoroughfare in this context is a linear feature used to travel from or to a specific location. A thoroughfare is typically but not always a road — it may be, for example, a walkway, a railroad, or a river. 
Landmark addresses specify a location by reference to a named landmark. A landmark is named point or area that is prominent enough in the local landscape to be publicly known. 
Postal addresses specify points of postal delivery which have no definite relation to the location of the recipient, such as post office boxes, rural route boxes, etc. 

## Why A Street Address Standard?

- Street addresses are the location identifiers most widely-used by state and local government and the public.
- Street addresses are critical information for administrative, emergency response, research, marketing, mapping, GIS, routing and navigation, and many other purposes.
- Street addresses have evolved over many decades, under the control of thousands of local jurisdictions, in many different record and database formats, and to serve many purposes.
- The variety of different address formats and types pose a number of complex geoprocessing and modeling issues.
- As a consequence, government agencies struggle with these issues as they seek to integrate large, mission-critical files into master address repositories.

## Goals

- Create a street address content and classification standard that provides the foundation for data exchange and data quality standards
- Define tests of street address data quality
- Provide a statement of best practices for street address data content and classification
- Offer a migration path from legacy formats to standards- compliant ones
- Different users may require different levels of standardization
- Build on previous FGDC address standard efforts

## Objective

- Objective: Create a data standard for street addresses
- Content
- Classification
- Quality
- Exchange
*One Standard – Four Parts*

## Part 1: Street Address Data Content

- Address Elements
- Simple – defined independently of all other elements
*Complex – formed from two or more simple or other complex elements*
- Address Attributes
- Provide descriptive information about an address, including geospatial information

## Address Elements

- Address Number
- Street Name
- Building, Floor, and Unit
- Landmark Name
- Larger-Area
- USPS Postal Address
- USPS Address Lines

## Address Number Elements

- Prefix:		**B**317 Main Street
- Number:		**123** Main Street
- Suffix:		123 **1/2** Main Street
- Separator: 	123**-**04 Main Street
*Complete address number:* **123 1/2**
*Address number range:*** 405-411 Main Street**

## Street Name Elements

- Pre-modifier:		**Old** North B Street
- Pre-directional: 	**North** Main Street
- Pre-type: 		**Avenue** A
- Name: 			**Main** Street
- Post-type:		Main **Street**
- Post-directional:	Main Street **North**
- Post-modifier:		B Street **Extended**
*Complete Street Name:*** North Main Street**

## Building, Floor, Unit Elements

- Building Type, Building ID
*Building Element*
- Floor Type, Floor ID
*Floor Element*
- Unit Type, Unit ID
*Unit Element*
- Private Mailbox (PMB)
*Complete Occupancy Identifier:*
**Building 12, Mezzanine Level, Suite 200**

## Landmark Name Element

- Landmark Name
**Statue of Liberty**
**Galleria Mall**
**Winona Park Elementary School**

## Larger-Area Elements

- Community (Urbanization) Place Name
- Municipality Place Name
- USPS Place Name
- County
*Place Name (one of the above four)*
- State
- ZIP Code
- ZIP+4
- Nation

## USPS Postal Address Elements 

- USPS Postal Box Type, Postal Box ID
- USPS Postal Group Type, Postal Group ID
- USPS General Delivery Point
**PO Box 6943**
**RR 1, Box 27**
**CMR 4, Box 2 (overseas military)**
**General Delivery, Tampa, FL 33602**

## USPS Address Lines

*Complete Feature Address*
**1 Main Street Suite 204*** *
*Place State Zip*
**Ajo, AZ  85321**

## Address Attributes

**Address ID**
**Address Coordinates**
- Address X Coordinate
- Address Y Coordinate
- US National Grid Coordinate
- Address Z Value
- Address Latitude
- Address Longitude

## Address Attributes (continued)

**Descriptive Attributes**
- Address Classification
- Feature Type
- Address Lifecycle Status
- Address Official Status
- Address Anomaly Status
- Address Range Type
- Location Description

## Address Attributes (continued)

**Spatial Organization Attributes**
- Address Parity
- Address Scheme Name
- Address Scheme Description
- Address Scheme Origin
- Address Scheme Axes
- Address Scheme Extent
*Address Scheme*

## Address Attributes (continued)

**Address Lineage Attributes**
- Starting Date for Address Status
- Ending Date for Address Status
- Address Direct Source
- Address Authority
- FIPS Identifiers for Addressing Authority

## Part 2: Street Address Data Classification

- Classes Defined by Syntax
*Classes defined by their data elements and the order in which they are arranged*
- Four Classes
- Thoroughfare Address
- Landmark Address
- Postal Address
- General Address

**Notes:**
There are many valid ways to define and classify types of addresses. The most appropriate way depends on the purpose the classification is intended to serve. FGDC standards are data processing standards; thus this classification standard is created to serve data processing needs. 
The address data classification standard classifies addresses according to their syntax, that is, their data elements and the order in which the elements are arranged. Syntax determines the table structure needed to hold and exchange the address, and often it is all we know about addresses in a given file. 

## Thoroughfare Classes

*	**A thoroughfare in this context is a linear feature used to travel from or to a specific location.  A thoroughfare is typically but not always a road — it may be, for example, a walkway, a railroad, or a river. *
**Site:** 1230A North Main Street Extended
**Landmark-Site:** City Hall, 410 Main Street
**Intersection:** Seventh Street and D Street
**Address Range:** 110-126 Main Street
**Block Range** (TIGER format):
- 100-130, 101-135 Main Street
**Unnumbered Thoroughfare Address:** Fagaima Road

## Landmark Classes

*	**A landmark is a named point or area that is prominent enough in the local landscape as to be publicly known. *
**Single Site:** Howard University
**Multi-site:** Truth Hall, Howard University
**Community:** 123 Urbanization Los Olmos

## Postal Classes

*	**Postal addresses specify points of postal delivery which have no definite relation to the location of the recipient, such as post office boxes, rural route boxes, etc.*
**USPS Postal Delivery Box:** PO Box 6943
**USPS Postal Delivery Route:** RR 1, Box 100
**USPS General Delivery Address:**
- General Delivery, Tampa FL  33602-9999

## General Class

- Holds addresses of any class:
*   **Complete Feature Address, *
*	**Place, State, ZIP, ZIP+4, Nation*
- For general mailing and contact lists
- Supports specialized profiles such as USPS Publication 28 standard
- A starting point for parsing and classification

## Part 3: Street Address Data Quality 

- Goal: Define quality control for addresses (not redefine principles of spatial quality)
- Existing standards and documents describing spatial data quality
- Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (CSDGM)
- Topic 11: OpenGIS Metadata (ISO/TC 211 DIS 19115)
- Supporting ISO Geographic Information standards
- 19113: Quality principles
- 19114: Quality evaluation procedures
- Spatial Data Transfer Standard (SDTS)
- All the standards describe spatial data quality in similar terms

## Elements of Quality

- Dataset Purpose and Use
- What is this stuff?
- Attribute (Thematic) Accuracy
- What do we know about it, and with what degree of certainty?
- Logical Consistency
- If (A = B), do A and B both exist? Are they equivalent?
- If A implies B, is B consistent with A?
- Completeness
- Are all the addressable objects within the schema or jurisdiction addressed?  If not, do we know why?

## Elements of Quality (continued)

- Positional Accuracy
- Do we know where it is?
- Does where we think it is align with anything else?
- Lineage
- How did it happen? Who did this?
- Temporal Accuracy
- How long has it been like that? Are we sure?

## What’s Different About Addresses?

- Uncertainty is common, especially as to:
- Source, date, and conditions of assignment
- Current status: lifecycle and official
- Agreement with local address schema
- Ground conditions: posting, street signs, etc.
- Coordinate location information
- Addresses are interdependent
- Addresses are typically controlled by one or more local schemes
- Schemes have not always been applied systematically
- Anomalies are expected and must be accommodated

## Testing Address Quality

- Tests grouped by Content and Classification:
- Tests of Address Elements
- Tests of Address Attributes
- Tests of Address Classes
- Tests described by:
- Measure Name
- Measure Description
- Report
- Evaluation Procedure
- Pseudocode Example (Pseudo SQL)

## Address Element Tests

**Tests for Simple Address Elements**
- Does each value have the correct data type?
- Does each value conform to its domain or range of values?
- Conformance to spatial domain – does the address fall in the correct municipality, ZIP Code area, etc.?
**Tests for Complex Address Elements**
- Are the component elements assembled in the right order?
- Does the street name in the address match to an authoritative street name list?

## Address Attribute Tests

**Tests of Address Coordinates**
- Is each coordinate pair complete?
- Is the address feature actually at the location indicated by the coordinates?
- Do the XY, Lat-Long, and USNG coordinates equate to the same location?
**Tests of Other Address Attributes**
- Is every AddressID unique?
- Is every Address Start Date <= its End Date?
- Do the Address Start and End Dates conflict with the Address Official Status?
- If the address status is “official”, does the address have an Address Authority?
- Has every Location Description been field-checked for accuracy?

## Address Class Tests

**General Tests for Address Classes**
- Completeness: Does every addressable feature have an address?
- In each class, is every address unique?
**Address Range and Situs Address Tests**
- Does every address range have a non-zero low and high value?
- Is every address range low value <= its high value?
- Do any ranges with the same complete street name (and parity, when relevant) overlap?
- Are address ranges in the correct sequence along a thoroughfare?
- Do address numbers increase with distance from the origin point or axes of the address schema?
- Do the low and high numbers for each block-face range have the same parity?
- Are the even and odd numbers in each block-face range on the correct side (right or left) side of the thoroughfare?
- Does every intersection address name a pair of thoroughfares that actually intersect?
- Does every situs address align spatially with the range that contains it?

## Test Example

- 42

## Part 4: Street Address Data Exchange

- Two basic forms:
- Monolithic or Complete
- Transactional or Incremental
- 	*The address data exchange standard supports both types using slightly different structures. *
- Required Elements:
- Address Data
- Metadata

## Exchange (continued)

## Reasons for XML

- 	Business reasons for using XML as  the exchange data language
- FGDC standards require its use
- XML protects content producers and content consumers from changing data
- Field order is unimportant
- Missing fields don't prevent exchanges
- Extra fields don't prevent exchanges
- XML is extensible

## Sample Detail of Current Address Model

## Preparing to Exchange Data

- Undo localizations of data (normalize the data)
- Reparse data into one of the address classes
- Express data in the XML format of the Standard
- Prepare metadata describing the data being exchanged

## 125 | E 11th | St | Austin | TX | 78701
reparse local data into normal form
125 | East | 11th | Street | Austin | TX | 78701
express data in XML
<ThoroughfareAddress>
<CompleteAddressNumber AddressNumber=”125” />
<CompleteStreetName StreetPreDirectional=”East”
StreetName=”11th” StreetPostType=”Street” />
<PostalZip>78701</PostalZip>
<PostalPlaceName>Austin</PostalPlaceName>
<PostalState>TX</PostalState>
<AuthorityId>4845305000</AuthorityId>”
</ThoroughfareAddress>

*reparse local data into normal form*
- 125 | East | 11th | Street | Austin | TX | 78701
*express data in XML*
- <ThoroughfareAddress>
- <CompleteAddressNumber AddressNumber=”125” />
- <CompleteStreetName StreetPreDirectional=”East”
- StreetName=”11th” StreetPostType=”Street” />
- <PostalZip>78701</PostalZip>
- <PostalPlaceName>Austin</PostalPlaceName>
- <PostalState>TX</PostalState>
- <AuthorityId>4845305000</AuthorityId>”
- </ThoroughfareAddress>

- Preparing Data (sample)

## <ThoroughfareAddress action=‘add’>
<CompleteAddressNumber AddressNumber=”125” />
<CompleteStreetName StreetPreDirectional=”East”
StreetName=”11th” StreetPostType=”Street” />
<PostalZip>78701</PostalZip>
<PostalPlaceName>Austin</PostalPlaceName>
<PostalState>TX</PostalState>
<AuthorityId>4845305000</AuthorityId>”
</ThoroughfareAddress>
<ThoroughfareAddress action=‘delete’>
<CompleteAddressNumber AddressNumber=”125” />
<CompleteStreetName StreetPreDirectional=”East”
StreetName=”11th” StreetPostType=”Street” />
<PostalZip>78701</PostalZip>
<PostalPlaceName>Austin</PostalPlaceName>
<PostalState>TX</PostalState>
<AuthorityId>4845305000</AuthorityId>”
</ThoroughfareAddress>

- <CompleteAddressNumber AddressNumber=”125” />
- <CompleteStreetName StreetPreDirectional=”East”
- StreetName=”11th” StreetPostType=”Street” />
- <PostalZip>78701</PostalZip>
- <PostalPlaceName>Austin</PostalPlaceName>
- <PostalState>TX</PostalState>
- <AuthorityId>4845305000</AuthorityId>”
- </ThoroughfareAddress>
- <ThoroughfareAddress action=‘**delete**’>
- <CompleteAddressNumber AddressNumber=”125” />
- <CompleteStreetName StreetPreDirectional=”East”
- StreetName=”11th” StreetPostType=”Street” />
- <PostalZip>78701</PostalZip>
- <PostalPlaceName>Austin</PostalPlaceName>
- <PostalState>TX</PostalState>
- <AuthorityId>4845305000</AuthorityId>”
- </ThoroughfareAddress>

- Transactional Data (sample)

## Open Issues

- Abbreviate, or spell out completely?
- Use the name as given by the local authority
- Spell everything out in the base record
- Use views and interfaces to abbreviate
- Use of FIPS Codes to identify address authorities, states, and nations
- How much change constitutes a new address? When is a new AddressID required? When is a status change required, with changes to start and end dates?
- Puerto Rican address patterns require further research.
- Need for an implementation guide to accompany the standard.

## Next Steps

- Posted for comments – ***Until January 16, 2006 ***
- Synthesize comments – March 2006
- Review by FGDC Standards Working Group – (30 days)
- Review by FGDC Coordination Group (15 days)
- (If approved) Post in Federal Register
- (If approved) Full public review (90 days)
- Comment adjudication
- Review by FGDC Standards Working Group (30 days)
- (If approved) Review by FGDC Coordinating Committee (14 days)
- (If approved) Review by FGDC Steering Committee (quarterly meetings)

## View the Draft Standard

**www.urisa.org**
- (Comments due: January 16, 2006)
- We invite you to:
- Review the draft document
- Comment in online discussion forums

## Slide 53