Property Line Tool

[Jim Smith 323]

I avoid using this tool as it never really seems to work as advertised. Here's a screen grab to illustrate what I mean. (This is an imported PDF) Also why can't one use a square to indicate segment corners? Every survey I've ever seen uses this standard. I've tried creating these clockwise or counter clockwise but can't get the thing to agree with the survey info. One can see that the info from the editor calls out the property lines as North by East, but the resulting line is South by West. 

 

PS: I gave up that's why this example is a triangle but the dimensions on the top & sides are / should be accurate.  

Edited December 7, 2018 by Jim Smith

[Vlado 64]

Hi Jim, 

 

can you send me a test file, so we can see what's going on and fix it?

Please send it to vstanev@vectorworks.net

 

Also, i'll make sure we add the option for rectangles. Thank you for the suggestion.

 

Regards,

Vlado

[Rossford 23]

Have you looked at the tool settings?  Seems to give many options, including, I think angle.

[Jim Smith 323]

Thanks Vlado!  As with anything in PDF I first open it in a blank file to workgroup into a template, so this is a my blank file with a couple of abandoned attempts. Please see the attached. 

Sheidan Whitby site.vwx

[Vlado 64]

Hi @Jim Smith,

 

I've played around with this file, and i think i can see the underlying issue.

This a little bit a workflow issue. Of course, we have to tune up the feature to make it easy, but for the time being you can be mindful of this while using it.

 

First, the align issue is that the PDF page is not rotated nor scaled to match the document in Vectorworks. So if you precisely draw by angle and length it will not match until you position, rotate, scale, and then position again the PDF page under your drawing.

 

And then, there is the issue of clock-wise (CW) vs. counter-clock-wise (CCW) direction of the polygons.

If you look on the left side of the PDF page, the lines are at N72°38'40"E and then it turns to N17°59'00"W. The first direction is CCW but the next one is CW. This means that if you draw the polygon of the Landscape are using these values, it will go the other direction than what's on the PDF. This is expecting, as you cannot have a single polygon with conflicting directions.

 

So, for this file i would suggest the following workflow:

- start of without importing the pdf, but have it in front of you so you can read the directions;

- use the Property Line tool in the Bearing and Distance Mode;

- enter the corners one by one using the bearing-distance provided in the PDF. With each corner you have to be mindful of the direction it is going in your drawing to match the PDF. if it goes the other-way as you expect, then go back one (with the 'Previous' button) and edit the bearing by flipping the direction (if 'N' make 'S' and if 'E' make 'W' or reverse), then click 'Update' so you can see the change in the drawing. The "Next' button will get you to the new one to be added again;

- at this point you should have a Property Line that resembles the shape of the one on the PDF;

- now you can import the PDF page

- having the PDF selected, use the Modify -> Scale Objects menu command to adjust the scale of the PDF to match the drawing. You can use the dim-buttons to precisely match points on the drawing.

- then you can use the cursor and protractor tools on the PDF object to position and rotate it to match with the Property Line.

 

Here you will note that the bearings from the drawing not always match the PDF. You can use the 'Reverse Direction' checkbox from the 'Segments' group of the Property Line shape pane. But again, in your PDF they are not consistent directions. With a single Property Line polygon you can have them either CW or CCW.

 

Of course, you can break it up into several Property Line objects and each can be set appropriately to match the PDF if that's important.

 

I hope that helps, let me know if you have more questions.

 

I'll see to adding a rectangle for the corner indicators, and think about how do we improve presentation of mixed CW and CCW property line segments.

Regards,

Vlado

 

 

[bob cleaver 24]

Vlado-

This is a great explanation - even better than the help manual

[Jim Smith 323]

Thanks very much Vlado! I'll be trying this technique later today.

[Jim Smith 323]

Thanks Valdo, but this tool just does not work for me. I had been using the tool more or less as you suggested in the past & really never been able to make it work. I've taken your suggestion & not imported the scaled PDF of the survey and after more than an hour my frustration is getting the better of me. The attached illustrates my frustration one may see that the tool is producing segments that have no basis in reality. The set of lines to the right is drawn on a blank file to illustrate the size of the anticipated property lines. The dopey thing on the left is what the property line tool is producing, and I think you can see that the line segment that's nowhere near correct. As you may also be able to see this segment says it's 179.33 M - but it ain't nearly that big.

 

As I said in my first post & you can see from the screen grab I cannot get the tool to produce Azimuth that agrees with the survey call-outs. The tool doesn't work like surveyors work. The East & West survey lines are n7º 53'w but if the tool were to actually accept my inputs properly, to close the survey one would have to start introducing Azimuth that is the OPPOSITE of what is called out on the survey. 

 

Thanks for your help, but I'm going to just use lines & text and not waste my time on the tool.

[Neil Barman 152]

Hi @Jim Smith, I'd recommend giving the Property Line tool another try after a bit of a break. If it helps to know, I followed, word-by-word, Vlado's great instructions above (without relying on my previous experience with the PL Tool) and I was able to get the result below.

 

One of the key aspects of Vlado's guidance that I found useful was the advice about being mindful about the direction a segment is going once you add it. I did have to use the "Previous" button in the dialog box a number of times in order to change an N to S or an E to W, and it was pretty obvious when I needed to do so – When the segment I just added wasn't going in the correct direction visually, I used the Previous button to go "back" one point, I adjusted the bearing info, then pressed Update. I could then carry on to the Next point.

 

 

Hang in there and you'll get it!

 

 

 

 

[rgcn 77]

I have found the easiest way to create a property line is to have the site plan situated in its correct orientation.  Trace the property line with the polygon tool, then with the polygon selected, I go to AEC > Create Objects From Shapes... then select property line from the pull down. It converts the polygon to a bang on property line representative of the legal survey.

 

I just did one this afternoon for the project I am working on as I just received the survey an hour ago.

 

Rob

 

 

[Jim Smith 323]

Thanks Rob, I've not attempted to make a property line by using the AEC command, (that I use all the time) for other objects; just never noticed property lines as a choice. Oh dopey me!

 

Hi Neil, 

By using mental gymnastics I can get the tool to work as you & Vlado have pointed out, by going back. The issue is lines that are parallel are illustrated with the opposite bearing ie SxE rather than those called out on the survey as NxE (cue the mental gymnastics). 😁

I don't use the tool enough & generally we just want to get the setbacks for a lot. For the most part we either import a digital file or mark-up a PDF.  I hate to give up on a tool, but as I say I don't use it enough. I do have some ideas that I'll add to the wish list.

 

[P Retondo 82]

This is an old thread, I was looking for some guidance.  But I have to say I completely disagree with everyone who thinks the property line tool is acceptable!  The direction of next segment problem has been there since the beginning - a simple box to reverse is what is needed, and no one has apparently ever thought to upgrade the tool.  Arcs are next to impossible.  Enter the data, and you get a mishmash of multiple incorrect segments.

 

The idea of the property line tool is to generate a geometrically correct polygon.  I've used this tool for years, and eventually after multiple trials and errors usually get something reasonably correct - but it shouldn't be so difficult.  Now I am faced with a boundary that has two arced lines, and it's just impossible.

[unearthed 14]

@P Retondo Many have asked for this very essential tool to be maintained and updated - it also needs topological editing / auto updates on surrounding property lines. Also has a total lack of control over information. IDK about later versions but I can't get a superscript 2 for square metres. I did a 60 lot sub with it once, tottal nightmare really - and really something that we all need to do - vw seem to think we're all doing single gardens that float in space.

[P Retondo 82]

I posted a request in the wish list forum to fix the tool.  Apparently, there haven't been many complaints?!!  I reckon that most people try to use it once, and just give up.

[Vlado 64]

Hi @P Retondo

 

This is a known issue, and there are wishes to update this tool.

We have it high on our lists to update and improve the workflows with.

 

Regards,

Vlado

[P Retondo 82]

@Vlado 

I posted 6 items that need to be fixed.  Some are more important than others.  The key thing to realize is that surveyors mark their drawings with bearing notations that can be pi radians different from what the tool assumes, and that is very common.  Often, the bearings are copied from an adjacent co-linear or parallel property line.  Also, the assumption about arcs always is that they are tangent to the straight segments at either end.  The notation "back tangent" is not going to be helpful to most users, and given the above assumption, is probably not something users need to be aware of.  The tool should automatically draw arcs tangent.

 

The red circle is helpful to know which end of the polyline is where the next segment starts (but automatically displaying the closing line is confusing).  When editing a property line, however, the red circle is ambiguous, and the actual segment being edited needs to be distinguished.

 

I'd reckon that if you can easily recreate this boundary, you will have solved most of the problems (bear in mind that like many surveys, this one does not close):

 

Property line.pdf

 

To understand the context of this survey, I have attached the document from which it was derived.  We often have to work from this kind of information (the parcel is at 7027 Shirley Dr.).  At times I've had to work from a metes and bounds description, which is a verbal recitation of the segments of a boundary.

48D7296.02.PDF

Edited May 29 by P Retondo