Latest Contributions by AndrewVitale3

Almost a year later, and this is proving useful to NYSDOT. Thanks, Kyle. ... View more

Ryan Koschatzky wrote: A reassign does not capture the route it will be come in the reassign record for the route but there should be a record for a created route with the new route id. To add to this a little, the ROUTEID field in the Lrs_Edit_Log will show the original Route ID. To access the NewRouteId, you can right click the text "Blob" in the EDITDATA field and look through the XML. Kyle, if the missing Route IDs were created using the Create Route tool, that's probably something to be concerned about. Especially if you're using the Relocate Events workflow with external systems. However, if they were loaded in as new routes using the "Load Routes" wizard, it's expected that the Route ID does not show up in the ROUTEID field. You need to query the EDITDATA field for the XML, which will have a list of all of the routes loaded in that run. This one tripped me up while trying to do some trouble shooting on an external system. ... View more

Is there any pattern to the edits you believe are missing from the log? ... View more

Here's our stats by activity and "Roadway Type". We currently have 4 roadway types: Ramp Road (Local roads) Route (Signed Routes) Not in RIS (Dual-carriageway geometries that are waiting on the inventory) ROUTEID ACTIVITY ROADWAYTYPE 01 - Create route Not in RIS 87 Ramp 46 Road 1292 02 - Calibrate route Not in RIS 12 Ramp 95 Road 816 Route 41 03 - Reverse route Not in RIS 2 Road 188 Route 3 04 - Retire route Not in RIS 64 Ramp 117 Road 622 Route 40 05 - Extend route Not in RIS 7 Ramp 10 Road 531 Route 7 06 - Reassign route Not in RIS 3 Ramp 10 Road 175 Route 8 07 - Realign route Not in RIS 111 Ramp 39 Road 322 Route 154 12 - Carto realign/GP Tool Not in RIS 4 Ramp 112 Road 1386 Route 10 # Edit: My original "join" logic was adding rows to the table‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍ I'd say on the whole, the stats kind of match my expectations. The vast majority of our edits are on local roads. This  makes sense given the shear quantity of local roads and our business practices. The most surprising stat to me in the above table is the fact that 3 of our state routes underwent a "Reverse Route" edit. If I had to guess, these were probably short administrative routes that we have in our system. We've had various "efforts" throughout the years that partially show up in these statistics, but I feel like a lot of the story is missing. For example, as we became comfortable with R&H's concurrency model, we made a concerted effort to remove local roads that were fully overlapped by state routes. Much of this work took place in 2018, hence we see a slightly larger number of retire route activities in 2018 compared to 2019. I'd have expected the difference to be much greater. I think the interesting story for this particular example lies in the magnitude of the edits. We'd probably have to parse the XML from the edit log to test this, but I'd guess that the majority of the 2018 retire route activities were conducted on the entirety of a route, whereas 2019 probably saw more partial route retirements. We are still working towards managing our inventory as internal events. I'll be curious how the event edit statistics compare to the route geometry statistics once we get there. I'd imagine a lot more transactions take place on the event tables. ... View more

Nice! You've been busy. Here's where NYSDOT came in for the year: COUNT ACTIVITY 01 - Create route 1425 02 - Calibrate route 964 03 - Reverse route 193 04 - Retire route 843 05 - Extend route 555 06 - Reassign route 196 07 - Realign route 626 12 - Carto realign/GP Tool 1512 13 - Load route 7‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍‍ ... View more

Thanks for soliciting input on this! Limited Access Highways The most important case to our business is the case of self-intersecting signed routes. The self-intersection is typically due to the route passing through a limited access intersection. Here's a good example: Routes like the above example of NY-7 in Schenectady County, NY are currently built with a small gap at the point of self-intersection. Once complex geometries are supported, we'd soon after remove the gap from the approximately 25 state routes. As an example edit, we recently had to realign one of these self-intersecting state routes due to a bridge reconstruction. This edit involved moving the point of self-intersection, which is probably the most complicated scenario we'll encounter with these. Additionally, we'd hope to be able to edit route geometries and events upstream from the self-intersection, downstream from the self-intersection, and along the loop that's created by the self-intersection. We have a fair number of ramps that exhibit a similar geometry. We haven't implemented any type of workaround on those R&H routes in Desktop, since they're much shorter and easier to manage than the highways. It would be great if those existing alpha ramp geometries were magically supported when we install the latest ArcGIS! However, if there are some particular requirements regarding Calibration Points, we would probably take the time to implement the self-intersecting support on all of the ramps. It's easier to justify since it's a lasting solution rather than a temporary workaround. Local Roads Another case that's likely to come up is with our Local Highway Inventory, which is an annual program that allows municipalities to submit changes to their local roadway network. These changes can influence reimbursement of funds for highway projects. In areas of suburban development, we'll often see submissions come in piecemeal as the roadways are constructed. Some of these developments are choosing to use "barbell" style roadways. Our business rules dictate that cul-de-sacs of a certain diameter are modeled using a "lollipop" rather than a dead end, and the instinct of most of our analysts is to assign a route to each named road. All of this means we'll probably want the ability to turn a cul-de-sac into a barbell route, whether it be through reassignment, extension, or realignment. Here's an example: Hypothetically, let's say this is an area of new construction. In our 2022 Local Highway Inventory, the municipality submitted the recently constructed roadway highlighted in yellow. It was modeled as a "lollipop", per our business standards. In 2024, the cyan highlighted roadway was added to the development, opened to traffic, and accepted by the Town government, so it will be added to the Local Highway Inventory. Rather than using two routes here, we'd like the ability to combine the yellow and cyan route into a "barbell" geometry. Once these routes are in place, geometry edits are unlikely. However, it would still be nice to be able to use the full suite of R&H tools on any portion of the route, whether it be on the loops or the line that connects them. It's relatively likely that the events will be edited again at some point. Let me know if anything is unclear, and I'll add more examples if they come up. Thanks! ... View more

Hello, Did you find a workflow that suits your needs? I'm facing a similar issue, where we would like to be able to verify exceptions in child versions, and have Data Reviewer respect those exceptions in new child versions. Adding a new field to the authoritative data's schema to track exceptions is not an option for us. Also, did you find a document that states how the duplicate filtering works in Data Reviewer, or is that just based on trial and error? Thanks, Andrew ... View more

Very cool! Thanks, Michelle. ... View more

Michelle, Were you able to get these tools (or something like them) working in >10.6? I'm most interested in the Copy Data Reviewer Records tool. Thanks! ... View more

I came across these articles recently, and figured you'd be interested: https://ai.facebook.com/blog/mapping-roads-through-deep-learning-and-weakly-supervised-training/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/07/23/facebook-and-openstreetmaps-empower-the-mapping-community-with-ai-enhanced-tools/ I wonder what their compute bill would look like... ... View more

Thanks, Erin. I actually stumbled onto that site as well. It's no small task to ingest New York state into ArcGIS. It took about 12 hours using a tool called arcgis-osm-editor from Esri. ... View more

Thanks for the info, Nicole. It's great that you guys are getting buy-in with the redline feature. Do you find that the edits coming in through red lines are easier to manage than the screenshot via email? I'd like to see us get a similar process in place. ... View more

Feature extraction from imagery would be awesome... I've kind of resigned myself to that being a pipe-dream at this point. But hey, someone is bound to figure it out. While at GIS-T, I saw a quick presentation about SharedStreets. Their software is capable of generating a unique ID per roadway segment that will be consistent across datasets. Here's the basic concept: They also offer OpenStreetMap data via their API, which apparently has already been assigned the SharedStreets IDs. I'm wondering if this could be leveraged to create a report of potential update locations on the LRS. If you were to split your LRS network at each intersection and generate SharedStreets IDs, you could create something like a centerline sequence table that tracks which SharedStreets IDs belongs to which RouteId. I'm not super familiar with it, but I think OSM data has the last edit date for each segment associated with it. You could relatively easily query for all of the OSM updates within the last month, query the SharedStreets sequence table for the related RouteIds (and m-values if you'd like), then generate a simple PNG of the LRS overlaid on OSM to easily see what's changed. There's still a lot of thinks and maybes in there, but if we could make something like this work, it would be awesome. ... View more