The Interface Design Challenge of Neighborhood Crime Mapping -City of Tigard, Oregon

Site Archive
You are viewing a static copy of the 2009 Sunriver Conference website archived on December 11, 2013. To view current Northwest GIS User Group events and news, visit

Web-based crime mapping and reporting applications present a number of the persistent design challenges that confront GIS practitioners charged with providing the public with access to meaningful geospatial information. While reported crime data is typically available in an evolved structure of classifications, categories, and definitions, many organizations continue to struggle to expose it through sufficiently coherent and simple graphical user interfaces. To deliver an effective crime mapping application, a development team must:
· Distill and aggregate domain specific spatial data into a presentation format that can be quickly and easily understood by a lay audience;
· Provide straightforward and highly intuitive means for users to search, filter, visualize, and review this data;
· Find ways to integrate the element of time, allowing users to view both data trending and conditions at particular moments;
· Avoid oversimplifying information or presenting information in a manner that may be misleading or easily misinterpreted.
In an attempt to tackle some of these challenges -in particular aggregation of crime data and display of multiple types of crimes- the City of Tigard has employed some of the latest dynamic web mapping tools and GIS technologies (ESRI’s ArcGIS Server, and the associated Flex API), to create a highly focused and easy to use crime visualization tool for its emerging Neighborhood Networks program. This presentation will discuss the objectives, design, development, and challenges of developing public-facing GIS applications with a focus on the City of Tigard’s experience with this dynamic web-based neighborhood crime application.

Bryce Gartrell, Principal, The Gartrell Group & Preston Beck, GISP, GIS Coordinator, City of Tigard
Your rating: None Average: 4 (16 votes)