190 likes | 357 Views
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
E N D
A Tour of Geodesign Methods and Tools Dr. Michael FlaxmanGeodesign Technologies, Inc.
Overview • Definitions & Tools • Implications of methods on tools • Ways of Thinking About Tools • Chronological Approach • Taxonomic Approach
Caveat / Scope • Necessarily incomplete view • Covering the most widely-known tools • Purposefully omitting tools to be discussed by others in the forum
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
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”
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 ?!
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
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”
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”
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
Treatment of Urban Growth • By Sketch • From External Plans / Buildout • Simulated • At Plan Level (agglomerations of built forms) • At Building/Parcel Level (simulating siting)
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
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.
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