Gwinnett Index
Gwinnett County, GA zoning and land use. Resolves an address to its governing jurisdiction.
Open source Repository Open in the app JSON README (API)
About
Gwinnett County, GA zoning and land use. Resolves an address to its governing jurisdiction.
Details
- Kind
- MCP servers
- Topic
- No topic detected
- Publisher
- net.gwindex
- Origin
- official
- Category
- ferramentas
- Transport
- http
- Version
- 0.1.0
- Last push
- 2026-08-17T18:52:20Z
- Repository state
- ativo
- Language
- Python
- Added
- 2026-08-29 04:01:49
- Updated
- 2026-08-29 04:01:49
- Origin id
net.gwindex/gwinnett-index
README
# Gwinnett Index A machine-readable index of zoning, land-use, and development records for Gwinnett County, Georgia and its 17 municipalities. Built for AI agents first, humans second. ## Why this exists A "Duluth, GA" mailing address is usually **not** in the City of Duluth. It's in unincorporated Gwinnett — a different code, a different board, a different permit portal. Nothing on the internet resolves an address to its *governing* jurisdiction before answering a zoning question, so every AI assistant answering "what's the setback in Duluth GA" today is guessing. Unincorporated Gwinnett is **67.3%** of the county's land area. Getting this wrong is the default, not the edge case. ## What's here | Dataset | Records | Source | |---|---|---| | Jurisdiction boundaries | 19 (county + unincorporated + 17 cities) | US Census TIGER — public domain | | County zoning cases | 11,739 (1970–2026) | Gwinnett `GC_Planning` ArcGIS | | Resolved applicants | 7,369 (from 8,246 raw spellings) | derived | | Duluth UDC | 860 sections, 18 tables | city PDF, 426 pp | | Duluth meeting documents | 356 (7,878 pp, 2023–2026) | duluthga.net | | Duluth land-use cases | 109 distinct, 64 with vote records | agenda mining | ## Setup — one time The repo already has a starter README, so clone first and copy in — that avoids a push conflict: ```bash git clone https://github.com/willmobhill-arch/gwinnett-index.git tar -xzf gwinnett-index-repo.tar.gz -C gwinnett-index # overwrites the stub README cd gwinnett-index git add -A && git commit -m "Gwinnett Index: pipeline, schema, and extracted corpora" git push ``` Then, with the repo **public**, load the corpora. Postgres fetches them itself — you don't run anything locally, and no credential is involved: ```sql -- set to your repo's raw base -- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/willmobhill-arch/gwinnett-index/main/data/ SELECT load_udc_sections_from_url( 'https://raw.githubusercontent.com/willmobhill-arch/gwinnett-index/main/data/udc_sections.jsonl'); SELECT * FROM load_duluth_cases_from_url( 'https://raw.githubusercontent.com/willmobhill-arch/gwinnett-index/main/data/duluth_cases.jsonl'); SELECT load_meeting_docs_from_url( 'https://raw.githubusercontent.com/willmobhill-arch/gwinnett-index/main/data/duluth_meeting_docs.jsonl'); ``` Expected: 860 sections, 228 case rows (109 distinct), 356 meeting documents. ## Architecture Ingestion runs **inside Postgres** via the `http` extension — it fetches the county's ArcGIS REST services, Census TIGERweb, and this repo's own raw URLs directly. No external worker, no credentials in transit, and the whole 11,739-case county load moves zero bytes through a client. ``` ingest/ duluth/ UDC PDF -> 860 sections + 18 tables (extract_udc, extract_tables) duluth_agendas/ crawl -> OCR -> parse case items from agendas/minutes/packets db/migrations/ the schema, md5-verified against the live Supabase project scripts/ export_snapshot.py (the only thing that talks to Postgres) + loaders data/ extracted corpora, fetched by the SQL loaders above site/ Astro static site + full agent surface (.md twins, llms.txt, DCAT) worker/ Cloudflare Worker: REST API + MCP server, five tools, no auth docs/plans/ design doc, build plan, status ``` ### Building the site ```bash DATABASE_URL=postgresql://... python3 scripts/export_snapshot.py # writes data/snapshot/ cd site && npm ci && SITE_URL=https://your-domain npm run ci # build + 15 gates ``` Without a snapshot the site builds from `site/fixtures/` — a small committed sample with identical shapes — and says so on every page. `npm run ci` fails the build if any route lacks a `.md` twin, any page presents records before naming its governing jurisdiction, or the bulk export contains geometry. ### The API and MCP server ```bash cd worker && npm ci && npm test # 10 protocol tests, no network wrangler secret put SUPABASE_ANON_KEY && wrangler deploy ``` Five tools, public, read-only, no auth: `resolve_jurisdiction` (always call first), `search_cases`, `get_case`, `get_code_section`, `list_jurisdictions`. The REST API mirrors the same five operations from the same implementation and publishes `/openapi.json`. ### The adapter pattern 17 jurisdictions cannot be 17 hand-written scrapers. The vendor landscape consolidates hard — Municode, ArcGIS REST, CivicPlus, CivicClerk, BS&A, Accela — so roughly six adapters cover ~90% of them, and adding a city is a config file. Health metric: **if a new city needs new code rather than a new config, the adapter layer is leaking.** ## Data quality, stated honestly - **Jurisdiction resolver**: scored on 1,915 probe points from the county's own zoning layers. At `confidence='high'` it is correct **1,546/1,546 — 100%**. Every error falls inside the low-confidence band. All 22 disagreements were within 141 m of a boundary (annexation lag; Census updates yearly). - **Duluth UDC**: 97.3% raw text coverage; the gap is stripped heading lines, leaving 591 unexplained characters across 426 pages. - **UDC Table 2-B** (dimensional standards) is verified cell-for-cell against the rendered source page. The other 17 tables are extracted but **not spot-checked**, and Table 2-B's merged PUD/CBD rows remain unreliable. Flags are in the data. - **Duluth minutes**: 57–69% are scanned with no text layer (printed, signed, re-scanned). OCR text is stored separately with `text_source='ocr'` and is a reconstruction, never a quotation of the record. - **Duluth's 109 cases are a finding aid, not a dataset.** Measured field by field: 67 have a "location" containing no street number, 57 have a "request" that is just the word `ORDINANCE`, 23 have an applicant field that ran on into a mailing address, and only 13 carry a zoning district. Each row links to the PDF it came from; **the document is the record and the fields point at it.** Published as `stats.duluth_extraction`. - **Applicant resolution**: 271 variants merged on tight edit distance; **262 lower-confidence pairs are queued for human review rather than merged on a guess.** A split entity is visibly wrong; a wrongly merged one looks authoritative and is invisible. ## Legal posture | Content | Posture | Basis | |---|---|---| | Ordinance / plan text | Mirror in full | *Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org* (2020) — edicts of government | | Case records | Mirror in full | Facts; Georgia Open Records Act | | County parcel/zoning geometry | **Proxy only, never rehost** | Gwinnett GIS licence forbids redistribution | | Jurisdiction boundaries | Host | US Census TIGER — public domain | | IBC/IRC base text | **Never** | ICC copyright; index Georgia amendments only | This index is a mirror and derived analysis, not the system of record. Every record carries `source_url` and `last_verified`. Published under CC0.