While importing lines from our staging line feature class or performing routine edits to our parcel line work, there are sometimes tiny gaps in the line features that need to be fixed prior to being able to create seeds (or reconstruct from seeds) in our workflow. This workflow is standard and we understand that the create seeds tool (or the reconstruct from seeds tool) requires an active closed loop of lines in order to construct the parcel polygon from the lines. We regularly work with large, complex polygon features as pictured below that are built from many lines, and tiny gaps (or possibly overlaps) may be present in the line work. In such a case, it becomes extremely time consuming to visually inspect the points/lines and closely review attribution to determine where problems exist or have been introduced through the course of regular parcel maintenance edits/plan integration.
Gaps in linework can be found with an analysis workflow (something like running feature vertices to points and completing a Near analysis on the output) but this seems like a lot of effort for detecting gaps in the linework of one parcel feature. The highlight gaps and overlaps parcel fabric quality tool is able to quickly find gaps for parcel polygons, however; there is no ability to use the highlight gaps and overlaps tool for quickly finding gaps within line features.
We would like to request additional functionality to allow for a more helpful way to identify small gaps or overlaps in line features that are causing trouble when creating or regenerating seeds- perhaps something along the lines of a Highlight Gaps and Overlaps (Lines) tool that parcel mappers can use in order to quickly determine where a gap (extend) or overlap (trim) scenario occurs.
How can a 'Gap' or an 'Overlap' be defined when working with lines?
A line can 'cross' or 'overlap' another line, but I think you are asking to define overlaps and gaps in areas between lines.
Parcel seeds help identify small slivers when zoomed out. You can make their symbol larger if that helps.
Please clarify.
@AmirBar-Maor - thanks for the questions on this. I guess really we're looking more for a way to identify dangles...think of it as the 'gaps and overlaps' equivalent for lines - something that would prevent a parcel from being built. Does that help?
If the goal is to find dangles we already have this topology rule for that.
Maybe this idea should be deleted and redefined, if still needed.
@AmirBar-Maor soooooo we tested topology and it wasn't picking this up as an error - we thought because there was a point at the end of each line (but a gap in between the 2 end points). But, as it turns out, what was actually happening was we were running into the bug where topology becomes disconnected from the version (so it is pointing to an old version and the rest of the fabric is pointing to a different version), and that is actually why the topology errors weren't coming up. My bad!
We need an interactive tool to highlight gaps and overlaps in order to recreate the parcels, like the one we had in ArcMap.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.