Load Sketch into the Traverse tool without Parcel Fabric/COGO Enable for ArcGIS Pro

[Anonymous User]

In ArcMap, you can Load Sketch into the COGO Traverse tool and modify the survey calls(Metes and Bounds) of a polygon. It seems there is not an exact way to do that in ArcGIS Pro.

Every documentation keeps pointing to COGO enable this or that or Parcel Fabric. This isn't ideal, I would like to see development team to build that feature into ArcGIS Pro Modify Tool suite. 

https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/help/editing/create-a-traverse.htm

https://www.reddit.com/r/ArcGIS/comments/mblcfz/question_about_arcgis_pro_cogo_traverses/

[AmirBar-Maor]

Thanks @MattSund 

Are you currently using the parcel fabric?

Are you using COGO Enabled lines in ArcGIS Pro?

If you use the parcel fabric you can select the parcel polygon and then use the parcel select tool to select the boundary lines.

We can also consider improving the 'select by trace' and/or offer another selection method. Would that work?

[MattSund]

Hi @AmirBar-Maor 

The most important part of checking the linework is before a polygon is created. You need to do a closed traverse of connections between survey marks and a closed traverse of the parcel.

Some of our survey plans are in a different azimuth and coordinate system, so with ArcMap we can traverse them into a sketch as they appear, adjust for missclose, and then rotate the sketch to account for azimuth.

Next we traverse the survey mark to parcel and ensure the traverse around the parcel closes correctly. When it does not, in ArcMap we can load the sketch into the Cogo tool and correct a mistake with a bearing or distance. (With ArcPro we cannot, because the trace tool runs over the underlying vertex of the original parcel or along the boundary of the neighbouring parcel.)

After this closes we construct the polygon from the correct lines. We do not want to construct a polygon before the lines are correct.

We are not using the fabric, as we have manually drawn a near survey accurate cadastre from one that was 5m wrong. We want to preserve straight lines and do not want stretching applied to our parcels like a fabric might permit.

We do not currently have cogo attributes on the lines

Thank you

[AmirBar-Maor]

@MattSund 

The reason organizations adopt the parcel fabric is because they want:

1. Increase their efficiency
2. Assess and improve their data quality
3. Associate all features with the legal record (instrument) they originated from, making the data defendable.
4. Improve their spatial accuracy
5. Maintain historic parcels and parcel lineage
6. ...

We would love to help you. You can get in touch with our product manager @DanielStone or with your account manager.

The workflow you describe is a core workflow of starting connection lines from the commencement point to the point of beginning (POB). That accounts for any rotation (aka Basis of bearing) and scale factor.  We call that 'ground to grid' correction and this is how to use it.

You can also apply rotation interactivity to a group of lines or a parcel after building it. From your description, I can tell that you close your traverse, which means you are already stretching the geometry to distribute the misclose (using the compass method most likely).
Assuming you stitch new parcels to existing parcels (alignment) you effectively stretch and bend geometries. That is not different from what the parcel fabric does.

We understand that changing from ArcMap to Pro requires adjusting your workflows and it can be challenging. 

You can prevent parcel points from moving by simply setting them to fixed. You can easily detect any line that has been stretched or rotated more than you want to allow it. 

Your workflow explains why you are currently missing COGO dimensions on your lines which is a shame, because it sounds like you put a lot of effort of creating a nearly survey accurate cadastre, and good COGO values would allow you to run weighted LSA (Least Squares Adjustment) should you decide to evaluate and/or improve your spatial accuracy even further.

[MattSund]

Hi @AmirBar-Maor , thanks for your reply. I have also watched your videos from the Esri UC, very interesting.

We dont stitch new parcels to existing. We enter new parcels from the latest information and decide to readjust the neighbouring parcels based on the observed error and their known accuracies.

At this point we do not want to use the parcel fabric. We are just looking for an equivalent tool to load the sketch into the cogo editor.

[JasonFuller]

So many of the replies here from ESRI are not really addressing the concerns the OP, and many others, have.  I have not personally met a single GIS professional who works extensively with large metes and bounds legal descriptions and creates traverses who prefers the ArcPro version of the Traverse tool. Its not a resistance to change and not liking something because it is new. It is simply not as good. 

There were a lot of things about the Arcmap tool that were better, faster (Pro version is sooo slow for large traverses), and also not now available in the ArcPro Traverse tool. One specific thing which the OP asked about and others have reiterated more recently is the inability to simply load a traverse from a sketch.  Instead of saying yes we understand this was a really useful feature that has no downside and we should work to add it to Pro instead I always see comments from ESRI about using the Trace feature (not helpful) or change to Parcel Fabric (a major undertaking as a work around for what seemed a very simple functionality in Arcmap). It is clear ESRI wants to push everyone to the parcel fabric but not everyone has the resources, time, or desire to change to Parcel Fabric right now. 

Also why is it that in ArcPro when you create a traverse with Line features it does not create them as a sketch (it did in Arcmap) but it does create as a sketch when you create a Traverse on a Polygon? Just another functionality of the Arcmap Traverse tool that changed in Pro and does not seem to add any benefit. 

If ESRI created a traverse tool that was similar to the Arcmap version and gave people a choice in Pro I really doubt many people would choose the  existing ArcPro version. There are some nice improvements with parts of the pro traverse tool but I think putting some effort in adding some of these functionalities that existed in the Arcmap Version (like loading a traverse from sketch) would be welcomed by the GIS community who have to use these tools frequently on a daily basis.

[AmirBar-Maor]

@JasonFuller 

We appreciate your candid and direct feedback.

When we developed the traverse tool in ArcGIS Pro we had to choose between 2 ArcMap traverse tools as well as the ArcInfo way.
From your perspective, it seems like we chose the wrong one. We understand that the ArcMap COGO Traverse tool is more explicit and relies on fewer key shortcuts, but it also suffers from:

1. Required a lot of mouse clicks, which is not efficient
2. Requires 2 hands
3. If the app crashed or you forgot to create the features you would lose your work.

We have plans to develop something more explicit for those who want more explicit UI and a sketch, but that is not high on the priority list.

If you see performance issues for creating issues, we recommend that you look into them regardless of the traverse tool.

Migrating to the parcel fabric is actually easy.  Where do you see the challenges?

How can we make traverse data entry easier? it's not by trying to improve your data entry speed but by eliminating the need to enter them. In the 'near term' we will release 'COGO Reader'. A tool that uses OCR and extracts all the courses from your deed.

It will be part of the parcel fabric functionality and will focus on US deeds containing 'metes' descriptions.

[DarylHochhalter]

I'm thinking the issue here is that the parcel fabric and associated tools could eventually become an addon license. ESRI doesn't see benefit including the functionality we're all suggesting here. We are simply looking for a way to edit the length and direction of existing line features, which is what the load from sketch offered in ArcMap. Although OCR for deeds might be useful in some cases, it won't eliminate the need for this functionality.

I think to most of us it's really a totally separate issue from the parcel fabric. I use COGO entries for features that wouldn't ever be included in a fabric, with descriptions that come from all kinds of documentation. I'm just sorry it's a low priority. I started using Pro for as many things as possible 5 years ago. It is a much improved application overall, but the attitude toward many suggestions seems to be that we should adapt to how you think we should do the tasks we have. I can remember talking to developers from ESRI several years ago regarding replicas and getting the same kind of response, why use them at all, do it this way. At one point, Pro had the ability to create replicas in a different coordinate system then the parent data, but didn't have that environment setting for the sync tool, ha!

My point is that it is complicated software used by lots of different people for lots of different tasks. User feedback has been integral to ESRI software development and widespread adoption of the many changes over the years, almost 30 for me. 

[JasonFuller]

Thank you for responding.  

I understand those 3 considerations. I just feel that perhaps some of those gains could have been realized without losing some of the features, like loading traverse from sketch which is mainly what this thread is about. I think in some instances ESRI has updated the functionality of the Pro tool from when it was first introduced based to be better based on user responses (like exporting traverses which was not there initially) so hopefully this is something that continues to evolve. 

I am glad that ESRI is looking into an OCR to Traverse tool, there was a custom add-on one for Arcmap floating around many years ago that was pretty useful before it fell behind version updates. However I have not seen too many OCR programs that do not occasionally misinterpret older deeds so those traverses will often have to be checked and updated which always seemed easier as a sketch but I will happily look forward to whatever you guys come up with. Unless its just for people who use Parcel Fabric which would be disappointing.

I will add though that Migrating to Parcel Fabric may be easier now from a data perspective than the Arcmap version but there are certainly some business process and retraining considerations that I would argue are not "easy" for small staffs on tight budgets/timelines to simply just do but that is a different issue altogether.  Thanks again for your feedback and quick response. 

[AmirBar-Maor]

@JasonFuller would you be willing to meet with us to further discuss?
If yes - please send a direct message.

[DucksInaRiver]

@AmirBar-Maor I finally found this community thread after hours of frustration and confusion in ArcPro due to my ignorance that the traverse process had changed so dramatically since my ArcMap days. I have entered hundreds of plats and metes/bounds in ArcMap and know the process like the back of my hand, and although I agree with the other Pro users in this thread on the various challenges this new workflow has precipitated, I am willing to explore the ways I can replicate the parcel boundary digitization process with whatever new processes ESRI is trying to suggest. 

I need to know exactly what training resources are available for Parcel Fabric that can quickly and directly train me on how to enter my Plat/Metes and Bounds and 'Finish' it as a polygon? I want a polygon that represents the closest thing to the on-the-ground boundary like we used to generate in ArcMap. I strongly desire the most similar scenario; I have a plat, I need to entre it and create a polygon, I do not need to average out any distances or directions, and I do not need for it to snap to a neighboring boundary either. 

The issue I am running into at the moment is I'm working off of a compiled plat that uses a boundary line run along a mean water line, and quite a few +/- distances. As such, this traverse is not going to close, nor do I expect it to close. The misclosure contributing to the issue I am running into whereas I cannot 'Finish' the sketch and further edit my polygon because it just disappears when I hit the Finish button. I've already tried to increase my closure tolerance, but that did not work. If I try to 'Adjust' for the misclosure then the averaged-out distances and directions render the parcel boundary unusable for my work purposes. I have saved my traverse calls and can load them over and over again on a selected, empty feature layer. I cannot seem to create an editable and permanent polygon. 

Digitizing land records is absolutely essential to my current work. Tracing any thing that's rendered from the traverse tool is not the best solution, but even if I wanted to try that (which I did before I found this thread), I can't trace anything since the polygon keeps disappearing. 

Thanks for your help!