A Better Way to Manage Design Data During GIS Modernization
Inspired by insights from Al Eliasen’s article in Informed Infrastructure
Utilities moving toward next-generation GIS platforms, especially ArcGIS Utility Network, are discovering that one of the most important decisions they must make has nothing to do with software features or data models. It has to do with design data.
In the December issue of Informed Infrastructure, SBS CEO Al Eliasen explored a question many utilities are now confronting: how should GIS support in-progress design work during a migration. His article highlights a challenge that has become increasingly common across the industry. GIS was never intended to function as the design workspace, yet many organizations still rely on it in that way.
As utilities take on large modernization programs, this long-standing assumption is becoming a significant source of risk, cost, and delay.
Why GIS-Centered Design Creates Problems During a Migration
Al’s article notes something utilities experience every day. Design work requires capabilities that a GIS system is not built for.
Design is more than geometry.
Engineering calculations, scenario analysis, construction phasing, and integration with systems such as ERP, EAM, and work management all fall outside GIS’s intended role. When design data is forced into GIS, it triggers a series of workarounds including manual steps, custom tools, brittle integrations, and duplicated effort.
Proposed designs accumulate inside GIS.
Over time, temporary design features slow down map performance, increase maintenance overhead, and complicate topology validation. During migration, these issues become even more challenging. Old or partially completed design features must be identified, cleaned, or removed, which becomes a major distraction from the migration itself.
Approval workflows become inconsistent.
Many teams rely on ad-hoc attributes, spreadsheets, or disconnected systems to track project status. This reduces traceability and makes auditing more difficult, especially when moving to a new platform.
These challenges create friction at exactly the moment when utilities need clarity and stability.
The Strategy Al Recommends: Decouple Design From GIS
In the Informed Infrastructure article, Al describes a shift that more utilities are embracing. Manage design work in a dedicated design system, and treat GIS as the system of record, not the design workspace.
This approach provides several advantages:
- A lighter and more responsive GIS environment that is not clogged with temporary construction sketches
- Lower migration risk, because design data is isolated, validated, and reintroduced only when it is complete
- Higher data quality, supported by structured workflows and tools built for engineering
- Flexibility to model and test design scenarios without affecting GIS integrity
Utilities such as LG&E/KU and Fortis Alberta have already taken this approach and have seen measurable improvements in editing efficiency and system performance.
A More Resilient Future for Design and GIS
Modernization programs continue to grow in complexity, and the demands on utility engineering and GIS teams are increasing. As Al emphasized in his article, keeping design work inside GIS creates unnecessary strain, not only during migration but also in daily operations.
By separating design from GIS, utilities gain the flexibility, speed, and data integrity required for modern network management. The result is a more efficient migration process and a more resilient operations model for years to come.
Now is the time for utilities to reassess long-standing assumptions about design data. A decoupled strategy equips teams to work smarter, reduce risk, and support the networks of the future with greater confidence.
Read Al’s full comments in Informed Infrastructure.