Latest Contributions by TiffanyPuett

Ditto! Please add a configurable search to the Basic Viewer or throw some elements into the Parcel Viewer app. Thanks! ... View more

See if it is enabled when you click "map" instead of presentation. ... View more

GOOD TIMES!!! It also looks like they took away the "size" column in the "My Content" page. I think folks are going to need that to assist with budgeting credits! ... View more

It also makes sense that you may need to log back into ArcMap as well. I had trouble until I did that. ... View more

Good question! Was the service a feature service or a tiled map service? (Service Editor|Capabilities|Tiled or Feature Access?) ... View more

...I'm not sure I understand what you mean by running the topology on both subs & parcels at the same time. Do you mean the 6 rule topology? My understanding is that it's run on the parcel line and poly layer, then on the sub line & poly layer. Also, if I run the rule (sub) 'boundary must be covered by...parcel line', I'm going to get a lot of exceptions to mark where parcel lines don't cover the sub boundary (streets, alleys, etc.)... What Christine said about Intergrate is a good tip! About the topo errors:  If you're not changing your existing cluster tolerance or you don't have bezier curves, you shouldn't have many errors on parcels and parcel lines no matter which way you go.  The main point I was trying to make about topology and migrating to the fabric is that the parcels and subs should be coincident when appropriate. If they are already coincident as you mentioned, then I would create my lines from parcels as I mentioned before and as suggested in the white paper. If the object here is to keep the good lines, then do that. Again the errors shouldn't be that bad if you're already using a topology with the same cluster tolerance. With respect to the parcels being split by subs, I'm pretty sure those lines get created during the migration process anyway, so I wouldn't mark them as exceptions.  Remember all polys migrated to the parcel fabric is a parcel feature and is only distinguished by type, which means it must have lines, has the same attributes, and has to adhere to the same topology rules. It just seems like it would save time to run the boundary topology (boundary must be covered by & must be covered by boundary of) on subs & polys at the same time. Hope that helps... ... View more

Chris, What version are you on? Does the associated parcel have a value of 1 in the historic field or a system end date? I have seen some similar problems related to historic parcels. The only workaround that I have found is saving edits and restarting ArcMap. This will occasionally "fix" features that should be pushed to history. ... View more

I'm not sure why you'd want to create polys from the lines other than to weight the lines topologically. I may be missing something...I would suggest keeping your polys--along with their attributes--but continuing to run the curves and lines tool. Then run your topology on the subs & the parcels at the same time: boundary must be covered by...parcel line. FYI, the curves & lines tool does not like bezier curves. It will turn them into straight lines. These are generated when you run a smooth on your data, typically on r/w's. ... View more

Haven't had any problems working with a topology.  I have experienced certain poly building problems that seem to be related to the number of vertices or the number of intersecting polys (IE Nodes) that you have. For example if either the new feature or the existing features have a lot of vertices, ArcMap seems to have a hard time processing that into a poly unless you trace the entire boundary. Likewise, that number seems even lower when you have a large number of polys that intersect the new poly on its boundary.  See the circled intersections on the attached graphic. I'm not exactly sure at what number things break down, but there may be a registry setting you can tweak. A similar thing happens when you try to create polys from lines using Construct Polygons.  Thus, I don't exactly know a workaround. I do however have a suggestion. You might try using a line featureclass to "Construct" your polys instead of auto-complete. That way if it fails, you have the line feature as a backup and don't have go through and click the same points all over again. ... View more

Ran it many times...haven't encountered anything yet.  What version of Desktop are you running? SP?  You don't really see the need as much in 10.1 to use that tool. Also, what makes you think you need it? Are you experiencing some odd behavior?  It could be that you need another tool. I'd be happy to recommend something. ... View more

Hi Tom, Based on the information you provided, I'm thinking that managing them as encumbrances would be the way to go.  Obviously all geographic features aren't required to be managed in the fabric, but if they tend to have some sort of survey description then fabric features is an option. Because all of the features are linked together in a kind of network, you don't have to worry about duplicating boundary resurveys.  In other words, topology is inherent and as long as the overlapping polygon types are "joined" any resurvey of a shared line will be updated multiple times. Another option would be to use a "feature adjustment" and associate the patented claims to your fabric parcels.  This works by applying any displacement vectors stored on the parcel points to the associated features such that a shared corner of a patented claim will be adjusted to shifts in coincident parcel points when you run the feature adjustment.  The main difference here is that the user has a little bit more control and QA over the adjustment and the associated feature is loosely tied to the parcels (no real survey). ... View more

There have been a lot of upgrades since 10.0 so depending on which version you're using, your specific workflow may not be supported.  If using 10.1 sp1, select the historical parcels (History = 1), hover over your data frame with the parcel editor tool and then right-click and "delete" should be enabled.  Historical parcels will only show up in the parcel explorer if they are selected or unjoined. ... View more

You can extend the data model to include more parcel types as well as tweak the domains for your needs. Use caution that if you delete one parcel type to not reuse the number (IE Tax Parcel = 7) for another parcel type.  Also, if you are looking into the Local Government Information Model, you'll want to check out the Tax Parcel Editing Template to see how to use definition queries to symbolize the various parcel types separately (IE PLSS). http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=86027c6c0bd742928a43af789b675947 ... View more