1 / 19

A Tour of Geodesign Methods and Tools

A Tour of Geodesign Methods and Tools. Dr. Michael Flaxman Geodesign Technologies, Inc. Overview. Definitions & Tools Implications of methods on tools Ways of Thinking About Tools Chronological Approach Taxonomic Approach. Caveat / Scope. Necessarily incomplete view

glain
Download Presentation

A Tour of Geodesign Methods and Tools

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Tour of Geodesign Methods and Tools Dr. Michael FlaxmanGeodesign Technologies, Inc.

  2. Overview • Definitions & Tools • Implications of methods on tools • Ways of Thinking About Tools • Chronological Approach • Taxonomic Approach

  3. Caveat / Scope • Necessarily incomplete view • Covering the most widely-known tools • Purposefully omitting tools to be discussed by others in the forum

  4. Definitions • Several geodesign definitions are in use • Inclusive and non-technical definitions • “Geography by Design” – Steinitz • Narrower and more technical • “… a design and planning method which tightly couples the creation of design proposals with impact simulations informed by geographic contexts.” - Flaxman

  5. Definitions & Tools • By broader definitions, almost all GIS & CAD systems, and even non-digital tools could be considered “geodesign tools” • However, I prefer to stick to my earlier definition, and include tools which • Are “tightly coupled” • Include “impact simulations informed by geographic context”

  6. Relationship with Goals & Metrics • Design methods may or may not start with explicit goals • Often have only implicit goals (accommodate Use X legally, minimizing initial costs) • “Client goals” are most often quantified • “Public interest”/sustainability only considered relative to legal requirements • “Informed by geographic context” implies non-trivial representation of contextual area • ~= GIS ?!

  7. Representation of Contextual Geography • Implicit or narrowly-considered goals tend to lead to very limited representations of geographic context • In many cases, the ‘site’ is considered as a parcel boundary, floating in “paper space” • This, in turn, implies that only components of the design itself are significant • Existing site presumed to have no pre-existing values worthy of consideration

  8. Deepening and Broadening “Design Context” • In contrast to “paper space” design methods, geodesign requires the ability to • Embed proposed changes in context of existing site and neighborhood • Compute impacts based on geographic context • Introduces in technical terms, requirement for • Georeferencing • Ability to compute (or request computation of) “design + context”

  9. Relationships between Spatial Scale and Methods • At site to regional scales • Reasonable to “draw” abstract characterizations of areas (i.e. residential vs. industrial) • City scale • Several forms of “picking” from uniform tessellations or other pre-defined areas • At regional scales and above • Unreasonable to “draw” or “pick” • More practical to “simulate”

  10. Geosemantic Sketching • Original idea embedded in “ArcSketch”, now in ESRI GeoPlanner • Avoids creating raw geometry, then adding attributes, then computing characteristics • Workflow starts by picking rich symbol, which sets object/class characteristics • This concept is *not* proprietary, and many web tools, for example, would benefit from adopting it

  11. Treatment of Urban Growth • By Sketch • From External Plans / Buildout • Simulated • At Plan Level (agglomerations of built forms) • At Building/Parcel Level (simulating siting)

  12. By Chronology • Interesting Historical Tools • Analog map overlay • TR55 & USLE – Woodlands, Tx • CityGreen – Ecosystem Services Evaluation • Mature Digital Tools • CommunityViz™ • Criterion Planners INDEX • NatureServe Vista • Cutting/Bleeding Edge • Research Prototypes

  13. Taxonomy • Impact Simulators with Parameter/Scenarios Input • General-purpose • Special purpose • Impact Simulation with Implicit-geography • CAD with orthophoto underlay • Sketch tools with semantics but not evaluation • ArcSketch • Generative design tools • CityEngine, etc.

  14. CommunityViz™

  15. INDEX / Sparc

  16. NatureServe Vista™

  17. Envision Tomorrow (Fregonese and Associates)

  18. RapidFire / Urban Footprint (Calthorpe – Open Source)

  19. Conclusions • All the cool kids are doing it (geodesign) • Initial challenge was “tight coupling” • Response was integrated applications • New challenge is “interoperability” • First, to open world of indicators/evaluations • Second, to allow widespread public engagement

More Related