Latest Contributions by DeanAnderson2

Problem:  Many users have cartographic feature classes (lines and annotation) that are managed in support of the parcel feature classes/types in the record.  These feature classes are used to clarify and assist record editors and the public in understanding the parcel record features (polygons and lines).   They are currently not viewable as being part of the record and are not retained the way historical polygons and line parcel fabric feature classes are.  Request:  Develop a means where cartographic features classes (lines and  annotation) can be associated/tied to the record types in the parcel fabric.   By having this association when a parcel is marked as historic, the annotation and cartographic lines can also be marked as historic (not deleted but still available.) Conversely, as a parcel is created, all annotation and cartographic elements created are also associated with the record and would be visible, edited and managed as part of the record.    Current WorkAround:  I have added the "created by record", and a field called "current" to my cartographic feature classes.  (In hindsight I probably should have included the "retired by record" field instead of the "current" field).  I have prototyped tasks with embedded scripts to manage how cartographic feature classes are added, retired and viewed as part of a record.  This works but is not a great solution and does not provide the user with much flexibility.    ... View more

We looked at Parcel Type Admin Boundaries in 2.6 and had some issues.  Now that 2.8 is out I am looking at this again.  Business Case:  Our administrative boundaries are managed by our cartographers (along with taxlots).  Our admin boundaries are managed as taxcode areas. Taxcodes have a many-to-many relationship with a variety of taxing districts (fire, school, city, transit, etc.).  Over 95% of the time these boundaries are coincident with taxlot boundaries.  Changing of taxcode boundaries (annexations of any district) are initiated by a "legal" record of some kind.  Every spring our cartographers process these annexations so that they are included in the next tax season valuation (Very simple overview) Pros/Cons:  The advantage of  the admin only parcel type is the built-in nature of the record.  I have built three different sets of custom business flows over the years to track and manage taxcode/district annexations.  The parcel fabric record does all that for me (no coding - nice!).  I have done a few simple business flow tests and it looks good.     Question:  Who has implemented (or are their more detailed ESRI examples of) the Parcel Type as an Administrative Boundary?  Unfortunately, I have not found a lot of documentation or examples where folks have implemented this (impacts on editing, topology rules, etc).  I would like to get some links/contacts to help in my review and testing.  I hope it is in some video that I just missed or that some user has some thoughts on this.  I will continue to test.  ... View more

We are learning how to use traverse within the parcel fabric environment and really like that you can measure and use traverse both working at the same time.  Unfortunately, measure always has a default units of imperial when we open a project.    .  We followed the documented method to set the default units in options/units/distance units to set the default units to feet As follows:  Unfortunately, the units are still imperial.  Are we doing something wrong?  It appears that this was a issue some time ago and was fixed but I was not able to find it as a current bug.  I have tested this in both 2.8 and 2.6 so feel I must be doing something incorrectly.  ... View more

We manage our dimensions for bearing/distance as annotation.  Labels are a great way preview these features and they are easily converted to annotation using the ConvertLabelsToAnnotation tool.   I have built a simple script in our edit environment to manage this process and it is working great.  However, when we display bearing/distance an option my cartographers often use is to place bearing on top and distance below.  I am doing this with Label Class - Position (Regular placement / Allow stacked labels / Centered Straight).  My labels are stacked with this Python Code (I assume it would be the similar  with Arcade).  def FindLabel ( [Direction],[Distance] 😞 beardir = [Direction] + "\n" + [Distance) ] return beardir My issue is,  I need to Offset the Direction Above and Distance Below to be farther then the default allows me.  The only ways I found to do this is to create two separate label classes and position one above and one below or to insert a second line feed "\n".  I like the annotation stacked as the tools in ArcPro to edit stacked annotation work very well and the second line feed creates an offset that is too large.  I am hoping that there is a simple option to offset stacked labels above/below the line and I have missed it.        ... View more