As more data on our environment becomes openly available, new ways to use it in design and decision-making emerge. A-Konsultit, a Finnish architectural design firm, and Sipoo, a municipality, set out to use geospatial data in a novel way.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n \u201cWe got a commission from Sipoo to devise a method for determining development rights in rural areas. The work was part of their district planning process. We already had ideas about how to use geospatial data for locational evaluation, but, now, we had a chance to test it out in practice,\u201d Matti Heikkinen<\/strong>, architect at A-Konsultit<\/a>, tells.<\/p>\n Planning The problem A-Konsultit There\u2019s A-Konsultit As an EU A-Konsultit \u201cIn Heikkinen According The Heikkinen envisions \u201cIn an If you wantDeveloping Rural Areas
\nFavorably<\/h2>\n![\"-\"](\"https:\/\/aec-business.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Matti-Heikkinen-2.jpeg\")
\nwhat and how much to build in sparsely populated areas follows a convention
\nthat does not take into account socio-environmental factors. If no town plan
\nexists, Finnish municipalities use a simple formula that outputs the allowed
\ndevelopment rights as a percentage of the real estate area. Its purpose is to
\ntreat land owners fairly.<\/p>\n
\nwith a mechanical calculation is that it fails to develop areas that are most
\nfavorable for a new building \u2013 for example, a large estate far away from main
\nroads, schools, or public utilities can enjoy generous air rights, whereas a
\nsmaller, more favorably located area gets next to nothing.<\/p>\n
\nset out to create an assessment system that would take into account various
\nenvironmental factors and determine development rights accordingly. The method
\nthey were developing works for any type of location-based evaluation both in
\nurban environments and sparsely populated areas. They got funding from the
\nFinnish government\u2019s KIRA-digi project that aims at digitalizing built
\nenvironment processes.<\/p>\nOpen Geospatial Data as a
\nBasis<\/h2>\n
\nalready a lot of open geospatial data available in a digital format. However,
\nusing it as a basis for environmental analyses is not always easy because of
\nincompatible data models.<\/p>\n
\nwas able to collect and combine GIS data on Sipoo properties, infrastructure,
\ntopography, soil, and so on. Fortunately, the data followed national standards,
\nwhich made the process straightforward.<\/p>\n
\ncountry, Finland is committed to the Union\u2019s INSPIRE directive. It defines
\ncommon, EU-wide standards for 34 spatial data themes. Once fully implemented,
\ndesigners and software developers can make use of the huge repositories of
\ngeospatial data across Europe.<\/p>\nCreating an Assessment
\nFramework<\/h2>\n
\nhad to come up with evaluation criteria to determine the value of various
\nenvironmental elements in respect to a location \u2013 for example, distance from a bus
\nroute or a sewer. To do that, they created a grid that covered the whole
\ndistrict. Each rectangular cell of the grid got a certain number of points based
\non the criteria. The result looks like a heat map with colors referring to the
\npoint count.<\/p>\n
\npractice, we created several maps, laid them on top of each other, and
\ncalculated the sum of the plusses and minuses of each rectangle. The higher the
\nscore, the better a location is as a building site,\u201d Heikkinen explains. \u201cWe
\nused QGIS for maps and Excel spreadsheets for the calculations.\u201d<\/p>\n![\"-\"](\"https:\/\/aec-business.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/evaluation-map.jpg\")
<\/a>
\nadmits that as mathematical, open, and objective as the process looks like, it
\nhas subjective aspects. A team that sets the criteria has a great influence on
\nthe outcome. For land owners, the air rights correlate with the value of the
\nproperty. On the other hand, having high development rights in an unfavorable
\nlocation does not add much value.<\/p>\n
\nto Heikkinen, the Sipoo project is unique because that the geospatial
\nevaluation leads directly to legally binding decisions. So far, he has not
\ndiscovered similar solutions elsewhere. The city of Stockholm has used an
\nanalogous method in district planning, but at a strategic level.<\/p>\nAutomating the Design
\nProcess<\/h2>\n
\nprinciple demonstrated in Sipoo applies to all kinds of environmental
\nevaluation scenarios. Depending on the purpose of the analysis, the evaluation
\ncan be augmented with various calculation algorithms and scripts. Apart from
\nestablished GIS sources, the data could be collected from mobile devices and
\nother real-time sources.<\/p>\n
\nadvanced applications of the technology. An algorithmic design app could use
\ngeospatial data to generate optimized 3D city models. The app could analyze the
\nresults from various points of view \u2013 for example, windiness or noise. If the
\nuser is not be satisfied, they can restart the process by adjusting certain
\nparameters to get different results. It\u2019s easy to imagine that machine learning
\nwould also come into play at some point in the process.<\/p>\n
\nenvironment that is becoming more complex every day, politicians and designers
\nshould take a huge number of variables into account,\u201d says Heikkinen. \u201cFor
\nhumans, that\u2019s becoming impossible. Machines can manage the flow of information
\nand help in reaching a balanced design solution.\u201d<\/p>\n
\nto learn more about the experiment, contact Matti Heikkinen at