Do administrative lines participate in the parcel fabric topology? Can a topology and/or attribute rule be added to an administrative layer to identify overlapping lines?
Hi - if a parcel type is created with administrative boundaries checked on, the parcel type polygons will not participate in a topology.
As for identifying overlapping lines, I would either try a topology rule or use a spatial query (Select By Location). You can add additional topology rules to the parcel fabric topology, so you could add a Must not overlap rule for your parcel type lines.
I would also see if any of the Select by Location options work for selecting overlapping lines.
Thank you for your response. The adminstrative lines were created with the adminstrative boundaries checked on. Since this is the case, how would I add a topology rule since they are not participating in topology?
I have tried using the ‘Select By Location’ command but it queried the entire database. I then tried using the ‘Select By Location’ GP and changed the ‘Processing Extent’ to the current extent but it is still not selecting just the overlapping lines. Do you have any tips on what parameters I should be using to select just the overlapping lines using the ‘Select By Location’ GP tool?
@chadhickman when creating a parcel type for Administrative boundaries, the polygon does not participate in the topology but the lines do.
By not including the polygons we prevent creating a very large dirty area when a very small portion of the boundary is modified.
If you want to add or change the rules, they are fully configurable - but please be conscious of having to validate larger areas.
If you want to add those topology rules permanently, you can instead create a parcel type that is not administrative.
- Can you change Administrative Parcels to Non-Administrative Parcels without creating a new parcel type?
- Can you add Administrative Parcels (polygons) to Topology?
We have several Administrative Parcel's whose outer boundaries are not coincident with Non-Administrative Parcels. These parcel should be coincident and having a topology rule that could readily identify these misalignments would be helpful.
Amir is right - I modified my answer, its the lpolygons that dont participate in the topology. I would first try the Must not overlap rule in the topology and see if that can identify the overlapping lines. As for Select by location, there are a few options that might work and you would have to test them each out individually to see which one gives the best selection.
You cannot change the parcel type from Administrative to regular parcel type.
If you wanted to change them you can create a new parcel type, copy over the schema, append the data and make sure all association to record has been maintained. TEST!. then remove the old parcel type and delete the feature classes that were associated to that parcel type.
Can you add topology rule to the parcel fabric topology - YES you can. You bring a great use case to extend it.
Once you solve the misalignment issue you can consider removing the topology rule.
There could be some creative ways to use geoprocessing tools to automate fixing the misalignment between your administrative parcels and the non-administrative parcel data. We can set up a meeting if you want us to have a look
Thank you for getting back.
Yes I would be interested in setting up a meeting to discuss the misalignment between administrative and non-administrative parcels. When we met last summer we discussed using the 'Import Parcel Points' and 'Rubbersheeting' GP tools to help correct a similar issue. We had mixed results with those tools.
Two of the administrative parcel types (Land_Use and Site_Boundary) share the same record and their outer boundaries should be coincident. However, in many instances they are not coincident. These two parcels types outer boundaries should also be coincident with the outer boundaries of our 'OwnershipParcels.