Pre-Incident Planning Solution Plan ID

[LindseyStone]

I'm starting to look into the Pre-Incident Planning Solution via ArcGIS Online and I have a question on the the relationships.  It appears to me the Pre-Incident Plans (Polygons) has a Building Identifier and a Plan ID field.  The Plan ID is a globalID so that is automatically being assigned and a relationship back to the site visit table.  What is the Building Identifier used for, anything the fire dept. wants that they have to manually enter in? However, on all the dashboards and editing it doesn't appear this Building Identifier by default is hidden.

Then on the Site Considerations, all the layers have a Plan ID field that is a String, but I'm not seeing any relationship.  So what is this field used for?  Is there there no relationships between the Site Considerations and the plans besides spatially next to each other?

[Baylie_Scott]

Hi, Lindsey!

Great to hear you’re looking into the Pre-Incident Planning solution!

The building ID is often used as a local identifier (parcel ID, etc. from the local authoritative building data source). While the plan ID is a GUID, the building ID can be plain language and used in popups and Dashboards to identify a building.

You’re correct: By default, there is no relationship class established between the plans and site considerations, but the planID field is there in case the user desires to extend the solution and establish one. This is intentional (based on fire service stakeholder feedback) to optimize data portability of the site considerations into other systems, like CAD or MDT.

Happy to help as you work through the solution should you have any additional questions!

Baylie

[LindseyStone]

@Baylie_Scott Thank you for the response.  I have a few follow up questions.

Can you expand on more on the feedback of why there is no relationship between site consideration and plans to optimize data portability.  What would we be loosing if we did this?  Also, what would this look like in Field Maps for adding those site considerations?  Our intention is the plan polygon will be there or created through the Manager App and all the site considerations would be added in the field via Field Maps.  Our initial thought that is you create an occupancy record for example you want it linked to that plan because it goes with that building.

Also,  looking at the preconfigured mobile map  Site visit via field maps the Site Visits table is not on option to add records too.  What is the intentions to leave this off.  This would mainly be used for historical records, correct?.  Is this intention for the manager to create that historical record or was it just omitted in the event the historical record keeping doesn't want to be kept?  I don't really see it linked on any of the other viewer maps or dashboards either.

Thanks for the help!

[Baylie_Scott · Accepted solution]

Lindsey,

We talked a little about your all’s use cases outside of this chat, but I wanted to summarize our discussion for reference and in case it can help someone else.

With a formal relationship class, a new relationship would be required if you wanted to extend the solution by adding a new site considerations layer. Additionally, many fire departments want to push the points (site considerations) into CAD or MDT and not the buildings (they may already have authoritative building data in those from 911 or planning).

For this reason, I recommend passing the Building ID in the Plans layer to the Plan ID in the Site Considerations layer through an intersect. This will correlate the points to the buildings while retaining the flexibility and portability of the layers. This can be done in Field Maps or using Smart Forms. Here’s an excellent blog with some sample code for intersects: https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/arcgis-online/mapping/from-the-smart-editor-to-smart-forms.... If you want to create a relationship class, you absolutely can using a Building ID to Plan ID relationship.

Configuring the Site Visits table to retain the historical records is documented in the Maintain site history section of the Configure Pre-Incident Planning topic. This is helpful for meeting requirements like ISO.

Let me know if I can assist or clarify anything.

Baylie