Timeline for ArcGIS Spatial Join - one-to-many, polygon-to-polygon with simplified boundaries [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 16, 2016 at 23:06 | history | closed | PolyGeo♦ | Needs details or clarity | |
| Aug 4, 2016 at 8:09 | comment | added | PolyGeo♦ | I think you should include a picture that illustrates that, and specify the license level that you will be using. | |
| Aug 4, 2016 at 8:02 | comment | added | h.Augustin | @PolyGeo: Ok. Then I understood you correctly, and the Operation would be fairly simple in ArcPy, but I don't understand how that would solve the problem of too many hunting districts being assigned to a parcel, when overlapping by a meter or two with multiple neighbors is the problem. | |
| Aug 4, 2016 at 0:02 | comment | added | PolyGeo♦ | What I mean is running a cursor through the result of a Union to get a list of each district that overlaps with each parcel for each parcel. And then writing that list comma separated into a field on your parcel feature class. I'm pretty sure there are ArcPy code examples of this in at least one other Q&A on this site. | |
| Aug 3, 2016 at 0:28 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackGIS/status/760633483412791296 | ||
| Aug 2, 2016 at 14:08 | comment | added | Richard Fairhurst | The Buffer tool is about 10 times faster than setting a negative search radius for the Spatial Join tool, so do the negative buffer of the hunting districts. So there is a radical difference in the optimization of the two tools when using a negative buffer. If you use the one-to-one with the Join merge rule and a delimiter be sure to make the field you are joining a text field and increase the length to 255 (or at least big enough to hold the longest list of districts). | |
| Aug 2, 2016 at 14:03 | comment | added | h.Augustin | @johns: I'll check out the integrate or snap Tools and the one-to-one with a merge rule and delimiter. Thanks in advance for the host of suggestions! The simplification is more coarse in some areas than I initially thought. | |
| Aug 2, 2016 at 14:03 | comment | added | h.Augustin | @PolyGeo: what do you mean by flattening the districts per parcel? Do you mean a sort of aggregation? | |
| Aug 2, 2016 at 14:02 | comment | added | h.Augustin | @Klewis: buffering the parcels inwards and doing spatial join is the same as doing a spatial join "within distance of" and a negative radius, or am I wrong? -- that seems to work fairly well with a -5meter radius, but some areas are shifted a bit further and a larger negative radius gets dicey with smaller parcels. I am still playing around with it, though -- the simplification is more coarse in some areas than I initially thought. | |
| Aug 2, 2016 at 13:37 | comment | added | John | If the problem really is just the simplifying, you might try: 1 to use the Integrate or Snap tools to get them to match, or 2 use klewis's suggestion or the scale tool to "avoid" the overlaps, or 3 use PolyGeo's suggested overlay but with a large enough tolerance to get rid of the tangle. After 1 or 2 use a spatial join one to one but in the dialog box field map properties for hunting districts set a merge rule and delimiter. After 3 you might try a pivot table or group by of the results and join back to your original layer. | |
| Aug 2, 2016 at 12:34 | comment | added | klewis | What about Buffering the Parcels a negative distance, inward. Then using that result for the Spatial Join to Hunting boundaries. | |
| Aug 2, 2016 at 10:30 | comment | added | h.Augustin | I changed it to one question. Sorry for the newbie mistake. I assumed that they all fell under the same question of of what Parameters can be set under spatial join. | |
| Aug 2, 2016 at 10:29 | history | edited | h.Augustin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 153 characters in body
|
| Aug 2, 2016 at 10:29 | comment | added | PolyGeo♦ | My approach to this would be to do a polygon overlay operation like Union followed by some ArcPy cursor processing to flatten the multiple districts per parcel into perhaps a comma separated list. | |
| Aug 2, 2016 at 10:21 | review | First posts | |||
| Aug 2, 2016 at 10:56 | |||||
| Aug 2, 2016 at 10:19 | history | asked | h.Augustin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |