Laura Stone

Thanks for the tip on root zones, will be useful.

Would be good to have the ability to combine the canopies of existing tree objects when they are groups (G01 etc as labelled by Arboriculturist). Adding individual trees when they are very crowded is a visual mess (see example below without existing tree objects)

This is still not working. Tree ID number doesn't import at all - this makes it very difficult to place trees that have not been surveyed to co-ords. The category imports as 'custom' because the surveyor writes A, B, C or U but presumably VW wants the exact wording which is not practical. I would also very much like to be able to import the RPA but there doesn't seem to be any capacity to do that unless I am missing something?

Did this ever get resolved? Just tried and it doesn't seem to be working. Thanks Laura

Hi Lori, yes it is

Will this include an ability for the site model to be coloured depending on the depth of cut and fill in each area? Just been asked for this and realised it can't currently be done, think it can be in Civils 3D.

As an update has now been parked but this does not affect functionality Laura

Trying to make a mixed native hedge with 9 plants, but hitting a wall at 7. It seems this is the maximum number of plants I can have in a hedgerow. Can this be changed? Maybe 15 or so just to catch everything.

Vectorworks Landmark Perpetual 2026 License £1,800 + VAT Will transfer by Vectorworks License Transfer Form, but any fees for this payable by buyer to VW This license is perpetual but will not be upgradable to VW2027 and beyond Laura

Anyone know why the dormer is behaving oddly here? Thanks

I tried that - edited the extrude component and deleted one of the loci, but unfortunately it did't work. From memory it then added its own random second locus which was unhelpful! There's a checkbox to 'use edge modifier' so ideally that could be modified so that you could individually check boxes to use the back edge or the front edge, or both. The other thing that's frustrating is that if you've carefully set all of the kerb modifiers to the right height (e..g for an existing site where the height is uneven) if you later have to remove a vertex from the kerb it all just pops back into its default position.

In this instance I had a site where I have the existing site model and had been given car park levels by the Engineer. The Client wants cut and fill. So I used the grade tool to add the Engineer's levels (I only had the base of kerb levels). You can't really use kerbs for this because their levels can only be manipulated in 3D views and you need a central level for a radius kerb. The idea was then for the top of kerb level to be added to the site model via the kerb modifier, but the problem is that the kerb modifier seems to be a '2 modifiers or none' thing, so I end up with another modifier that duplicates what I'd already done with the grades and sends my site model haywire. Ideally what we'd have is the ability to have a front of kerb OR a back of kerb modifier (or both) to be fully flexible. That way I could have had modifiers only at the back (top) of the kerb and there would have been nothing clashing with the grades.

The Curb modifiers are clunky to use, if it had something like the radius grade with two levels and a rise over run in plan view I could use it like that, but you really need to be in 3D view to make it work properly. I do that for existing kerbs, but for new ones it's far easier to use the gravity button to send them to the surface of the site model.

By the way this is what happens to the site model if you have a radius grade and use it to place a curb object that has modifiers - I think probably a clash of slightly different points along the curve. Workaround is to move the grade to a different layer not referenced to the site model or perhaps could get rid of the front modifier.

Just checked - no