Print

Print
A numbering system that work well is to generate x & y coordinates from the centroid of each feature. (eg a storm grate)

Summing the x and y coordinates will create a Unique ID that then can be spatially sorted in a table. 

I truncate the the sum at 5 digits to keep each ID unique, which works well for the for closely spaced points at complicated street intersections in New York City.

example:

centroid of x = 1008434.98245795    and   centroid of y = 218626.178611025

Rough ID Sum
1008434.98245795 + 218626.178611025 = 1227061.16106898

Round out to 5 digits and remove the decimal point

Final Asset Management ID becomes 122706116107

You can then add a Text ID version in a new column - eg: SG-122706116107 if you need to distinguish infrastructure point types.

This xy sum allows you to select out logical north to south sequences of stormwater grates along a particular street in sequence.

Big advantage of this system: whenever you add a new feature, the new XY sum ID will be in logical sequence to the ones you had already created.

Eymund

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Jason Wise <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I'm a big fan of unique IDs that don't mean anything.  If you have 1,000 catchbasins, call the next one 1001, regardless of where it is.  If it's in a GIS, the number doesn't need to tell you where it is.

Your boss will hate this idea, so of course you'll have to come up with some kind of watershed-based system.
From: Gambrel, Sean
Sent: ‎8/‎3/‎2016 11:36 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Stormwater Feature Numbering

Hello all,

Here in Bangor  we’ve had our stormwater infrastructure in GIS for some time, but currently use a grid-based numbering system which is not particularly useful for anyone.  We’re considering a switch, as we have not done a significant amount of asset management on stormwater yet and the current system is quite confusing for our field crews.  Looking ahead, toward more asset management work, we’d like to have a better system in place. 

  

Our sanitary sewer system is numbered like a branching tree, with a two letter prefix denoting subsection and a three number pipe id number, which are divided into branches by 100s / 10s as necessary.  So for instance AB123.  This system works well for us, but unfortunately can’t easily be replicated for our stormwater system because it is discontiguous in nature. 

 

Our current grid-based system is more-or-less arbitrary, but includes the complication of using a grid which is otherwise unreferenced elsewhere in the city.  This is creating many headaches and conflicts among staff.

Would you be willing to share what your community is using for stormwater numbering and what the pros and cons have been in using this numbering system?

Thank you very much,

Sean

 

 

Sean Gambrel, GISP

GIS Administrator

Addressing Officer

 

City of Bangor, Maine

207-992-4245

[log in to unmask]

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list (NEARC-L) is an unmoderated discussion list for all NEARC Users.

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from this list, you can remove yourself by going to http://s.uconn.edu/nearcsubscribe.

------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list (NEARC-L) is an unmoderated discussion list for all NEARC Users.

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from this list, you can remove yourself by going to http://s.uconn.edu/nearcsubscribe.


------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list (NEARC-L) is an unmoderated discussion list for all NEARC Users.

If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from this list, you can remove yourself by going to http://s.uconn.edu/nearcsubscribe.