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.
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.