Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

ROADS_MAINTAIN

61 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

ROADS_MAINTAIN

  1. 1. Making a tabular dataset become spatially enabled or
  2. 2. If you cannot find a field in common between the two tables (GIS_spatial and DOT_tabular) then you need to make one. Build it. 3 weeks in my “spare” time. Used Name field. “First_ABBREV_NAM” Evaluating what we do have: We have a GIS spatial Road Centerline We have a DOT.tbl, an extract from PAVER database. BUT THEY HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON.
  3. 3. Newly created field in common between the two tables (GIS and DOT) “First_ABBREV_NAM” How many non-unique Branch ID occurrences will I have to wrestle with? Praying for lots of one-to-one or one-to-many. One Branch ID to many SameName-on-same- linear-segment. Hopefully not geographically disparate split segments. Wanted-> dreaded->
  4. 4. GIS LABELDOT TABLE LABEL Finally got it filtered down to the hard part. Many DOT TBL branch id to many GIS names. “Many to many” Don’t look at the count of records because it will discourage you! Just eat one bite of elephant at a time. At this time I gave up trying to populate the DOT table with Centerline ID and just focused on populating the branch ID in the GIS spatial data. I tried very hard to not split many Centerline IDs. Coded the private split part as Centerline ID 999999 because we are striving to keep unique Centerline IDs.
  5. 5. IDENTIFY AND ISOLATE (code as) ROADS THAT DON’T NEED A BRANCH ID, OR WOULD NOT HAVE ONE. (Because the county does not maintain them) STATE PRIVATE PRIVATEstw PRIVATEcity PrivateTstw (temporary stormwater BILLED) PRIVATE UNPAVED PRIVATE UNPAVED ABANDONED OOC (OUT OF COUNTY) CITY (UNDEDICATED= Platted ROW in GSSCCA but not yet accepted by DOT) ADD2PAVER (acknowledged in Streetmaster but has not been put in PAVER yet) NONEXISTENT (roadbed does exist or isn’t maintained, but needs editing out from the GIS spatial) CITY_SETTLEMENT EASEMENT Populate the BranchID field with the value of “STATE” OR “PRIVATE*” or etc. This will help REDUCE OR prevent the problem of “same name in geographically disparate locations” getting loaded with a wrong branchID when we join tables based on the road name label. I will only join ABBREV_Nam (in DOTtbl) to GIS FULLNAME where BranchID is not already populated.
  6. 6. IDENTIFY AND ISOLATE ROADS THAT DON’T NEED A BRANCH ID, OR WOULD NOT HAVE ONE. (Because the county does not maintain them) •STATE •PRIVATE •CITY •NONEXISTENT (23 COUNT) •UNDEDICATED (174 COUNT) This later became labeled as “REQUESTED” •ADD2PAVER (41 PER VINCE) ALSO IDENTIFY •CITY_SETTLEMENT (COUNTY MAINTAINS, BUT ARE IN CITY LIMITS) Used the text description from the 09.12.2011 City Roads List Exhibit B (Settlement Discussions) to identify those segments involved but DID NOT SPLIT THEM at the city limit in order to avoid creating another non-unique centerline ID (so the SDS mileage is off; errs to the generous side) DOT and IT to solve (remediate) that issue. THESE REQUIRED A MANUAL LOOK-UP, INDIVIDUALLY, TO LOAD WITH A BRANCH ID.
  7. 7. Add a field to the GIS table called “Branch ID” and populate it with the dummy values STATE RAMP PRIVATEstw (is on a parcel in billable uninc Gwin Co or Lilburn or Peachtree Corners) PRIVATEcity PrivateTstw (temporary stormwater BILLED) PRIVATE UNPAVED PRIVATE UNPAVED ABANDONED OOC (OUT OF COUNTY) CITY (UNDEDICATED= Platted ROW, recorded in GSCCCA as public ROW but it has not been officially accepted by DOT yet) ADD2PAVER (acknowledged by DOT staff , county maintained, in Streetmaster, but has not been put in PAVER yet) NONEXISTENT (roadbed doesn’t exist or isn’t maintained, but needs editing out from the GIS spatial) CITY_SETTLEMENT EASEMENT Later in the project, some of these values were simplified. i.e. Unpaved, Easements, Private*. Because we want to find all private roads that might have billable stormwater impervious area. (GIS: Select by location-road centerlines intersecting stormwater impervious billable on parcels) Use aerials, look for gated communities. Find gates, find gatehouses. ID them in QC comments. This could be the basis of a future geospatial point file for public safety officials access. I looked at every “private” coded road, in the GIS “Road Classification” field. I also extracted from Oracle Streetmaster all the PRIVATE streets (1,055 as of 4/1/2015) (There were 1,014 in 2008) Stormwater Impervious is turned on City Limits Layer is turned on Parcel_ID is turned on Because I want to use this layer later in our stormwater billing tasks to easily identify billable impervious and QC it.
  8. 8. My first load is going to be where I have already isolated out as many records as possible with dummy values of “STATE” OR “RAMP” OR “PRIVATE*” OR “CITY” OR “NONEXISTENT” or “UNDEDICATED”…anything not county maintained. Remaining records which are blank in “branchID” are then available to load. I will flag this so I know it will not require extensive QC later. Join 1: Manually identified Centerline IDS that could not be matched to a name. 3,044 records. Join 2: One (branch ID) record in DOT for any number of records in GIS (this will be mostly residential roads). One-to-many. (One branch ID, one or many possible centerline IDS will all get the same branch ID). Find in GIS where same name exists in multiples but they are geographically disparate. QC those. (used a GIS technique SUMMARIZE “FULLNAME” where report included a municipal left, municipal right COUNT. Where the report indicated a multiple, investigated all those.
  9. 9. I do a “count” of branch ID so I can remove from the join set, records with “same name” and “multiple branch ID” THAT WILL BE A DIFFERENT JOIN LATER REQUIRING MUCH QC AND REPAIR.
  10. 10. Zone field in the DOT’s PAVER table extract is integral to identifying their county maintained roads. Where an “X” is in the zone code string, that is a Gwinnett County DOT maintained road segment. A “Y” in the zone code string represents a city-maintained road segment. This is showing that one (same) branch ID will get put on four different centerline ID segments. We strive to put them in the correct order as described in “From” and “To” Use all your resources! Technology tools like “conditional formatting” in XLS and “find mismatched” queries in MS Access.
  11. 11. This is showing that one (same) branch ID will get put on four different centerline ID segments. We strive to put them in the correct order as described in DOTtbl “From” and “To”. This is the most tedious part of the project.
  12. 12. Keep plugging away matching the many-to-many and putting branch IDs in the correct order, geospatial location. Simplify branch IDs as much as possible Create metadata Distribute cautiously for review and QC Hope you get some feedback and remediated data from someone Deal with issues where there are centerline segments in the GIS but they do not exist in the DOT PAVER table. Consult with DOSS. (Department of Support Services). Deal with issues where there are “county maintained” records in the DOT PAVER table and they should be evaluated to add to the GIS (they are not represented in the GIS and they are on a parcel (not in the ROW). 32,674 Centerline ID road segment records vs 20,053 “Streetmaster/PAVER tabular records. Only 60 "directional" Branch IDs could not be matched to a centerline ID in SDE roads; 37 Branch IDs had significant overlaps making them not useful; 29 Branch IDs are not represented in the GIS. DIRECTIONAL = divided highways not spatially represented as divide. 126 out of 20,053 Branch ID records could not be matched = 0.006 percent of records! Less than 1%!
  13. 13. 37 branch IDs could not be matched because they overlap another branchID segment with the same description Caveat: There are many overlaps where a centerline ID does not exactly match the described branch ID “from” and “to” limits.
  14. 14. Deal with issues where there are “county maintained” records in the DOT PAVER table and they should be evaluated to add to the GIS (they are not represented in the GIS and they are on a parcel (not in the ROW).
  15. 15. CENTERLINE ID PARCEL ID NAME ROW DESIGNATED EXISTING STREET ABANDONED STATUS 199106 near 5208 028 Airport Access Rd Yes Yes No Runs under airport parking/storage area. Could remove street name from centerline layer. Could also eliminate ROW designation. County owns the property so abandonment is not required. 189151 near 6165 004 Sioux Dr Yes Yes No Road access to golf course is unnecessary. Could remove street name from centerline layer. Could also eliminate ROW designation. Could initiate abandonment if adjacent property owner requested. 186936 6139C010 Huntley Dr No No QCD 1991 This street was abandoned in 1991. There is a residence on the property. This no longer a street and is not designated as ROW. It is unclear how this abandoned street still has a centerline ID number. 180959 near 6034 157 Blossom Hill Dr Yes Yes No This street needs to be abandoned and ROW designation eliminated. Citizens trespass and dump trash on this property creating a liability for the County. There have been two previous attempts to abandon this street, but all adjacent property owners did not want the abandoned area. 180961 near 6031 329 Helena Ct Yes Yes No This street and ROW designation appears to serve no purpose. Could remove street name from centerline layer. Could also eliminate ROW designation. Could initiate abandonment if adjacent property owner requested. 181635 near 6162 0101 Baskette Ct Yes Yes No This street and ROW designation appears to serve no purpose. Could remove street name from centerline layer. Could also eliminate ROW designation. Could initiate abandonment if adjacent property owner requested. A portion of this road was previously abandoned. It is unclear why only a portion of it was addressed at the time. 191358 near 6162 0101 Baskette Dr Yes Yes No This street and ROW designation appears to serve no purpose. Could remove street name from centerline layer. Could also eliminate ROW designation. Could initiate abandonment if adjacent property owner requested. A portion of this road was previously abandoned. It is unclear why only a portion of it was addressed at the time. 181368 6054 158 Country Ln No Yes No The street centerline appears to run through a building. This street name needs to be eliminated from the centerline layer. There is no ROW designation. 180203 near 5022 039 Wayne Dr Yes No No This area provides access to several land parcels. The street name has been removed from centerline layer. ROW designation should remain in place. 180522 4321 413 Balley Ct No Yes No This appears to be private property. Perhaps it was previously abandoned. The street name should be removed for the centerline layer. There is no ROW designation. 183857 near 6051 028 Highland Way Yes Yes QCD 2006 This street and ROW designation appears to serve no purpose. The street was abandoned in 2006. The street name has not been removed from the centerline layer. Could also eliminate ROW designation. Could initiate abandonment if adjacent property owner requested. 186602 5065 021 Cox Rd No Yes No This area appears to provide access to something. The street centerline could be removed from the centerline layer. There is no ROW designation. 192024 near 7028A015 Morningside Drive No No No This area provides access to a land parcel. The street name has been removed from the centerline layer. ROW designation should remain in place to support the access. 193690 near 6125 112 Bowers Dr Yes Yes No This street and ROW designation appears to serve no purpose. Could remove street name from centerline layer. Could also eliminate ROW designation. Could initiate abandonment if adjacent property owner requested. 195436 near 6157 636 Old Arcadia Rd Yes No QCD 2004 This street and ROW designation appears to serve no purpose. The street was abandoned in 2004. The street name was removed from the centerline layer, but the ROW designation still exists. Could eliminate ROW designation. 201078 near 7160 035 Preakness Ln Yes Yes No This area appears to provides access to a land parcel. The street name could be removed from the centerline layer. The ROW designation should remain in place to support the access. 200714 near 6265 087 Betty Ann Ln Yes Yes No This area appears to provides access to a land parcel. The street name could be removed from the centerline layer. ROW designation should remain in place to support the access. 204518 near 7034 092 Warren Morrow Rd No No QCD 1997 There is a commercial structure on the property. The street was abandoned in 1997. The street name was removed from the centerline layer and there is no ROW. It is unclear how this street still has a centerline ID number. 204490 near 7034 091 Warren Morrow Rd Yes No QCD 2004 There is a commercial structure on the property. The street was abandoned in 2004. The street name was removed from the centerline layer and there is no ROW. It is unclear how this abandoned street still has a centerline ID number. 205992 near 7254 006 Roberts Rd Yes Yes No This street and ROW designation appears to serve no purpose. Could remove street name from centerline layer. Could also eliminate ROW designation. Could initiate abandonment if adjacent property owner requested. 207226 near 5183 429 Old New Hope Rd Yes Yes No This street provides access to several properties. The street name and ROW designation should remain in place. 209069 near 7012A008 Lakeside Dr Yes Yes No This area appears to provides access to several land parcels. The street name could be removed from the centerline layer. The ROW designation should remain in place to support the access. 211375 near 6088 400 Nash Circle Rd Yes Yes No This area will serve as future access to several land properties. The street name and ROW designation should remain in place. 211378 near 6088 400 Nash Circle Rd Yes Yes No This area will serve as future access to several land properties. The street name and ROW designation should remain in place.
  16. 16. Divided roads represented spatially will have to be worked into it later, as they are built out by (GJAC-IT). I put one of the pairs of branch ids on a named road segment, wherever I could. i.e. the “headed South” was used, for Jimmy Carter Blvd. These 60 “directional” branch ids, representing 35 Unique Street names, could not be used in this model.
  17. 17. REQUESTED to be added to PAVER. (We found plats in support of adding these UNDEDICATED roads (in the public ROW )to PAVER and we ask to be provided with the Branch ID) jacgisfs01GISData0301-Public_WorkspaceDWR_KarenLanes_aeroatlas_pdf250_REQUES Caveat: I found out later there is a whole business process related to undedicated roads which preempts this plan…
  18. 18. MaintBy codes schema came from knowledge of GADOT (state) coding schema. In their “RC File” which uniquely identifies a road segment, a “1” represents state maintained, a “2” represents county maintained, a “3” represents city maintained. That value was used in the “100’s” position. In the tens and ones position, I used county tag /district number schema, where 01= unincorporated Gwinnett County. Then invented these: 00=nonexistent. 30=a city. 50=“halfway processed” 99=future. The “private” schema is a spontaneous creation, too.
  19. 19. Acknowledgements Don’t worry about what cannot be done. Focus on what parts can be useful. Don’t expect the magic of GIS to solve the whole problem with one push of a button or one spatial analysis tool. MS Access was integral to the work process. I never expected the end product to be 100% perfect. This effort could not have been done without the spatial Road Centerline data being supplied by IT with a unique ID, and the PAVER.tbl extract being supplied by DOT with a unique branch ID and their explanations of the purpose of the zone code. This effort could not have been done without the support of our DWR supervisors in acknowledging the need for DWR inspectors, investigators, and engineers to have access to “Maintained By” road data in a spatial format. This effort could not have been done without the assistance of a colleague, Miss Tiffany Waters, Customer Service Clerk 2, who matched up the 3,044 GIS Centerline ID records that could not be paired to a road name, and researched plats on www.gsccca.org How do you eat an Elephant? One bite at a time.

×