Property line offsets by direction sector

Hi Nick,

Since I'm sure you're looking for little things to keep busy...  I would like to be able to offset from property lines by different distances based on their orientation to the turbines.  For example, if the primary wind direction on a site is from the west, I would like to be able to say that turbines need to be offset from lines in a file by x distance in the east/west direction, and by y distance in the north/south.  The easiest way I could see to do this would be to have a similar set of options for a line file (or maybe a polygon file) to the ones in the "site" tab of a layout, where you could specify a major axis orientation and directional offsets.  The only difference would be that the orientation specific offsets would be applied to a line rather than a point (or essentially to an infinite number of points that fall along that line).  Not sure if that's fundamentally possible or practical to implement, but it seems somewhat logical to me...

Hope all is well,

-Kevin

Hey Kevin,

Good to hear from you.

I suspect that what you're suggesting is possible although just now I am concentrating on trying to get a rock-solid version 1.0 completed so it wont be for a little while.

In the meantime, perhaps you could do a little ground-work and check that you can actually get away with what you propose? Restrictions on turbine placement like setbacks from property boundaries are usually set by local municipalities and they generally don't care about wind direction.

See you in Dallas?

Nick

Thanks Nick.  I'll definitely keep looking into it, but it seems that these rules are set by municipalities and are meant to protect the "wind rights" of neighboring properties who may want to develop in the future by keeping turbines farter away from them in the prevailing direction(s).  Hope things go well at EWEC, and I'll see you in Dallas.

-Kevin

We run into this often actually.  One state in particular actually has it as a state-wide requirement, and it is becoming more and more common.   I second this request! We work around it in Arc, but if you could add it, it would save lots of time.

Alright alright. When the two of you gang up what hope do I have? I'll add it but it will most likely only be available in the Enterprise version at least to begin with. Them are the breaks am afraid.

Of course I'll need more info on how exactly you would implement this. Do you want it to be some automatic relationship between a met mast and the vector layer or do you want to define it with some sort of sliders in the interface?

Nick

My vote is to be able to define it.  Sometimes they actually state the "predominant" directions in the ordinance, and it doesn't always match the met data exactly. (go figure).