Idea: Our organization, Teranet, relies heavily on manual survey plan entry (completing approximately 70 survey plan integrations per day, along with 160-180 other parcel type maintenance workflows per day), and the current traverse entry workflow in ArcGIS Pro, while functional, is still quite limiting. We are currently in the process of transitioning our parcel workflows from ArcMap parcel fabric and upgrading to the ArcGIS Pro parcel fabric. In ArcMap, to increase plan entry efficiency, we import about 50% of our plans using cadastral XML file format, which is deprecated in ArcGIS Pro, and heavily rely on the flexibility of the Construction tool. We are in the process of modernizing our parcel fabric and will be upgrading to ArcGIS Pro parcel fabric. This leaves us with a reduction in current ArcMap functionality once we move to Pro. We’d like to propose several enhancements to the Traverse tool or request additional plan entry functionality that would significantly improve efficiency, accuracy, and alignment with real‑world survey workflows. Our primary goal with this ask is to improve upon the current plan entry capabilities in Pro to allow for maximum efficiency. We’ve listed some areas for improvement/ideas below.
- Ability to Switch Line Templates During Traverse Entry
Traverse entry currently restricts all entered lines to a single layer. Survey plans often include boundary lines, connection lines between isolated boundaries, and ties to control (also connection lines). Allowing users to change the line template mid‑entry, without leaving the traverse, would reduce post‑processing and better reflect how survey plans are constructed.
- Support for Temporary Point Numbers
Temporary point numbers would dramatically speed up entry of sidelines and short segments. Key benefits:
- Users could enter bearing + distance and simply press Enter to increment a temporary point number
- Lines could be entered from point to point, allowing more flexibility and efficiency in entry
- This mirrors how the construction tool worked in ArcMap
- It keeps the workflow aligned with the plan as drawn, rather than relying on calculated bearings
- Temporary point numbers already exist in the Merge tool, so the concept has precedent
- The difference between the entered dimensions and the calculated points could be shown to identify errors or eliminate blunders
- Ability to Continue a Traverse Beyond Closure
Once a traverse closes, the tool currently requires importing a new traverse file to continue. Many plans, especially subdivision plans, contain multiple closures or return to the same point. Allowing users to continue the traverse after a closure would greatly reduce interruptions and file management overhead.
- Multiple Closures & Closure to Existing Control
Multiple closures are extremely valuable for catching small bearing or entry errors. Any time a user revisits a point, the ability to generate a closure is a powerful quality‑control tool.
Additionally, supporting closure to existing control points (and tying into control directly within plan entry) would improve accuracy and reduce manual workarounds.
- Display X/Y Coordinates in the Traverse Table
Including coordinate values directly in the traverse table/chart would make verification easier and support downstream checks.
- Integration With Consistency Checks
After entering a traverse, the next step is typically running a consistency check. With better support for closures and temporary points, consistency checks become even more effective at identifying whether an issue is a data entry blunder or a problem with the original plan.
Summary of Requested Enhancements
- Switchable line templates during traverse entry
- Temporary point numbers + optional temporary point layer
- Continue traverse beyond initial closure
- Multiple closures and closure to existing control
- X/Y coordinates visible in the traverse table
- Stronger integration with consistency checks
Value to Users: These enhancements would bring ArcGIS Pro’s traverse tools closer to how survey plans are actually drafted and reviewed. For Teranet, they would significantly reduce manual entry time, improve accuracy, and streamline quality‑control workflows.
