<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>idea Add a Remainder Parcel Record Assignment Option to the Split and Divide tool for Parcel Fabric Workflows in ArcGIS Parcel Fabric Ideas</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-ideas/add-a-remainder-parcel-record-assignment-option-to/idi-p/1689401</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Enhancement Request: Add a Remainder Parcel Record Assignment Option to the Split and Divide tool for Parcel Fabric Workflows&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;NOTE:&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;this idea is similar to&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-ideas/parcel-fabric-clip-tool-enhancement/idi-p/1688990/jump-to/first-unread-message" target="_blank"&gt;https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-ideas/parcel-fabric-clip-tool-enhancement/idi-p/1688990/jump-to/first-unread-message&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have been meaning to add this suggestion for awhile.&amp;nbsp; We do splits/divides for hundreds of parcel fabric layers yearly. &amp;nbsp;We are requesting an enhancement to the&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;Split &lt;/STRONG&gt;and&lt;STRONG&gt; Divide&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;geoprocessing tool so that, when used on&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;Parcel Fabric&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;features, it provides a toggle or parameter to control&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;which Record the remainder parcel is assigned to&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;(either the remainder’s original Record or the new Record being created).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Frequently when a new development plan splits out a portion from the larger existing&amp;nbsp; development, the portion removed is assigned to the new plan/record, but the remainder parcel (the portion of the development that has not been impacted by the newly integrated development plan) must retain its association with its original Record.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Example 1:&amp;nbsp; In the example below, a new development (SimultaneousConveyance) record supersedes two other development records.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="CathyAppleton_0-1773067728824.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.esri.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/149538i6A48DFC49E809D67/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="CathyAppleton_0-1773067728824.png" alt="CathyAppleton_0-1773067728824.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The issues is not limited to only the development (SimultaneousConveyance) layer, but is affecting other layers too.&amp;nbsp; Lots/Units (SimultaneousConveyanceDivision), RightofWay layer, etc.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Example 2:&amp;nbsp; in the example below, you can see highlighted lots and lines (SimultaneousConveyanceDivisions) are under the wrong developent (SimultaneousConveyance) record name..&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="CathyAppleton_1-1773067728831.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.esri.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/149539iCA2F2AE56F2A4B94/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="CathyAppleton_1-1773067728831.png" alt="CathyAppleton_1-1773067728831.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We also have issues with RightofWay features.&amp;nbsp; In our data, a right of way &lt;EM&gt;record&lt;/EM&gt;&amp;nbsp;may contain many features.&amp;nbsp; This is because during the parcel fabric creation, we needed to create a record for the right of ways.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; We broke them down by geographic township.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; However, we have found that when a tax parcel split or division is done, the remainder of a RightofWay features become associated with the new record tax parcel record, which it is not.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Example 3:&amp;nbsp; In the example below, the highlighted RightofWay is associated with a tax parcel record, when the remainder from this split or divide should still be kept under the original record.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="CathyAppleton_2-1773067728846.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.esri.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/149540i754642B563DF63AC/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="CathyAppleton_2-1773067728846.png" alt="CathyAppleton_2-1773067728846.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Without a remainder assignment option, editors must manually fix the record assignment, creating additional steps and room for errors.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are requesting that a new parcel fabric-aware parameter/toggle/etc. be added to the Split and Divide tools when used on parcel fabric features.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Possible way to handle this is to allow editors to assign specific feature layers to new/active record with the remainder feature layers keeping their original record.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This improvement would:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Preserve correct parcel lineage without additional manual cleanup or custom workarounds&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Reduce editing time in plan integration workflows (due to said custom workarounds)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Maintain data quality and integrity across fabric edits, especially in scenarios where mappers may forget to assign the remainder to the original record&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Support required patterns of parcel management in the least number of workflow steps as possible&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks and shout out to &lt;a href="https://community.esri.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/664392"&gt;@DavidHendry&lt;/a&gt; for writing up the other suggestion &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2026 15:16:49 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>CathyAppleton</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2026-03-09T15:16:49Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Add a Remainder Parcel Record Assignment Option to the Split and Divide tool for Parcel Fabric Workflows</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-ideas/add-a-remainder-parcel-record-assignment-option-to/idi-p/1689401</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Enhancement Request: Add a Remainder Parcel Record Assignment Option to the Split and Divide tool for Parcel Fabric Workflows&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;NOTE:&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;this idea is similar to&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-ideas/parcel-fabric-clip-tool-enhancement/idi-p/1688990/jump-to/first-unread-message" target="_blank"&gt;https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-ideas/parcel-fabric-clip-tool-enhancement/idi-p/1688990/jump-to/first-unread-message&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have been meaning to add this suggestion for awhile.&amp;nbsp; We do splits/divides for hundreds of parcel fabric layers yearly. &amp;nbsp;We are requesting an enhancement to the&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;Split &lt;/STRONG&gt;and&lt;STRONG&gt; Divide&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;geoprocessing tool so that, when used on&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;Parcel Fabric&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;features, it provides a toggle or parameter to control&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;which Record the remainder parcel is assigned to&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;(either the remainder’s original Record or the new Record being created).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Frequently when a new development plan splits out a portion from the larger existing&amp;nbsp; development, the portion removed is assigned to the new plan/record, but the remainder parcel (the portion of the development that has not been impacted by the newly integrated development plan) must retain its association with its original Record.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Example 1:&amp;nbsp; In the example below, a new development (SimultaneousConveyance) record supersedes two other development records.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="CathyAppleton_0-1773067728824.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.esri.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/149538i6A48DFC49E809D67/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="CathyAppleton_0-1773067728824.png" alt="CathyAppleton_0-1773067728824.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The issues is not limited to only the development (SimultaneousConveyance) layer, but is affecting other layers too.&amp;nbsp; Lots/Units (SimultaneousConveyanceDivision), RightofWay layer, etc.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Example 2:&amp;nbsp; in the example below, you can see highlighted lots and lines (SimultaneousConveyanceDivisions) are under the wrong developent (SimultaneousConveyance) record name..&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="CathyAppleton_1-1773067728831.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.esri.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/149539iCA2F2AE56F2A4B94/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="CathyAppleton_1-1773067728831.png" alt="CathyAppleton_1-1773067728831.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We also have issues with RightofWay features.&amp;nbsp; In our data, a right of way &lt;EM&gt;record&lt;/EM&gt;&amp;nbsp;may contain many features.&amp;nbsp; This is because during the parcel fabric creation, we needed to create a record for the right of ways.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; We broke them down by geographic township.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; However, we have found that when a tax parcel split or division is done, the remainder of a RightofWay features become associated with the new record tax parcel record, which it is not.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Example 3:&amp;nbsp; In the example below, the highlighted RightofWay is associated with a tax parcel record, when the remainder from this split or divide should still be kept under the original record.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="CathyAppleton_2-1773067728846.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.esri.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/149540i754642B563DF63AC/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="CathyAppleton_2-1773067728846.png" alt="CathyAppleton_2-1773067728846.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Without a remainder assignment option, editors must manually fix the record assignment, creating additional steps and room for errors.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are requesting that a new parcel fabric-aware parameter/toggle/etc. be added to the Split and Divide tools when used on parcel fabric features.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Possible way to handle this is to allow editors to assign specific feature layers to new/active record with the remainder feature layers keeping their original record.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This improvement would:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Preserve correct parcel lineage without additional manual cleanup or custom workarounds&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Reduce editing time in plan integration workflows (due to said custom workarounds)&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Maintain data quality and integrity across fabric edits, especially in scenarios where mappers may forget to assign the remainder to the original record&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Support required patterns of parcel management in the least number of workflow steps as possible&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks and shout out to &lt;a href="https://community.esri.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/664392"&gt;@DavidHendry&lt;/a&gt; for writing up the other suggestion &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2026 15:16:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-ideas/add-a-remainder-parcel-record-assignment-option-to/idi-p/1689401</guid>
      <dc:creator>CathyAppleton</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-03-09T15:16:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

