Use of geodesign tools for visualisation of scenarios for an ecologically sensitive area at a local scale

Abstract

This study presents methods to create past, recent and alternate scenarios for an ecologically sensitive and development prone area in a sub-tropical coastal spit. A variety of geodesign tools were used for creating interactive 3d representations of the digital earth at a local scale. The geodesign tools included existing and archived high-resolution active and passive remote sensing datasets, existing, derived and digitised spatial layers together with products of procedural modelling. The 3d representations in virtual environments of different scenarios were further converted to a diverse variety of digital formats to enable their visualisation across diverse media that included interactive 3d scenes in geographical information systems (GIS), interactive web scenes on web browsers (desktops and smart devices), fly-through in generic movie formats and real 3d visualisation in the CAVE2 environment. This study discusses the utility of all the resources for planning curriculum and the potential of these resources to facilitate an understanding of alternate scenarios for citizens, stakeholders and new learners. Finally, this study evaluates sources while critically discussing openly shared resources in the context of collaborative planning with citizens, educators, students and planners.

Keywords

Scenarios geodesign urban forms collaborative planning planning education immersive visualisation

Introduction

On a global scale, cities will keep expanding and encroaching on natural resources and agricultural land, and this spatial expansion is bound together with demographic projections of overpopulation (Cohen, 2003; McPhearson et al., 2016). Studies have urged for a new mix of expertise for urban planning that includes experts from ecosystem and landscape ecology, water quality and quantity, agricultural soil quality and productivity, economics transportation, infrastructure engineering and community development (Costanza et al., 2017; Forman and Wu, 2016; McPhearson et al., 2016). Moreover, the need for continual citizen dialogue, interaction and collaboration in different phases of the planning process is also recommended (Billger et al., 2017). However, citizens and most stakeholders may not understand conventional visualisation of the urban planning process, for example, 2d paper-based plans (Onyimbi et al., 2018). There are conceptual models proposed for collaborations among diverse groups in the 3d geospatial environment (Chang and Li, 2013). Presenting a well-designed, user-friendly and interactive plan that does not require planning experience is the best way to develop two-way dialogues as well as collaborations between citizens, stakeholders and planners during the planning process (Onyimbi et al., 2018). Modern visualisation methods are capable of constructing past, alternate-past, present and alternate scenarios in an artificial environment in such a way that feels real for citizens, stakeholders and novices without requirements of expert knowledge.

Scenarios are well recognised to address a large number of current and future challenges by capturing complexity to understand urban systems, the impact of changes and alternate development trajectories (Priess and Hauck, 2014). There are many interpretations of the concept of “scenario” across so many different kinds of literature, and broadly they are vivid stories constructed to describe alternate, future, contrasting trends, course of events, forecasting and varying land use (Amer et al., 2013; Priess and Hauck, 2014). In this study, we are using scenario modelling where 3d models of various objects that include buildings and vegetation types are used to create 3d views of the study area at a local scale.

The methods used in this study not only create 3d views of the recent and past state of the study area but also create 3d views for alternate states. Such scenario modelling is a way of envisioning and examining potential changes to the landscape associated with various development trajectories, and an effective geographic visualisation should reveal novel insights that are not apparent with other methods of presentation. The geographic visualisation provides graphical ideation to epitomise a place, a process, or a phenomenon enabling spatial cognition of information and patterns (Dodge et al., 2008); therefore, for the effectiveness of geographic information, visualisation is considered as the key. Visualisation of data for different earth system processes as well as for urban systems has been recommended across different scales in many studies mainly because a non-scientific audience wants to visualise information with minimum abstraction and maximum content (Bishop, 1994). Moreover, informed visualisation together with real-world context is identified as key pivotal principles for prosperous living in the 21st century (Desha et al., 2017).

Visualisation of past, recent and alternate scenarios are vital across the following two principal areas of planning (Tress and Tress, 2003):

Visualisation techniques are used in generating data to understand present landscape changes and to generate past and alternate urban development options for a region or suburb (overall impression of proposed development or amenity, density, scale, height and bulk of structures).

Planners may use geovisualisation tools and immersive experiences to illustrate the potential spatial effects of a proposed development on the surrounding area.

Therefore, the use of visualisation media in planning curriculum has been transformed over the last few years, thereby providing opportunities to create various learning resources in digital formats. Moreover, visualisation through 3d models for cities has been closely related to new planning concepts such as Digital City, Green City and Smart City (Luo et al., 2017), and such resources are highly recommended for planning education (Paradis et al., 2013).

In the recent past, the intersection of geography and design has led to the evolution of geodesign tools that support dynamic and iterative design and modelling (Batty, 2013; Crooks, 2013; Gu et al., 2018; Steinitz, 2016). Geodesign is defined as the system of integrating constantly evolving techniques, concepts and approaches in design and planning with geospatial technologies (Goodchild, 2010; Steinitz, 2012). Scenario-based techniques, enhanced by improvements in computer capability, visualisation and spatial analytics, have become increasingly adopted within geodesign and regional planning practice (Lee, 2016). A variety of planning support systems have emerged using desktop and web-based 3d visualisation tools such as Urban Canvas, CityEngine, Precincts CommunityViz, and Envision Scenario Planner (Trubka et al., 2016). However, some systems, for example, Urban Canvas and CityEngine, demand a high level of expert knowledge and training to be useable (Walker, 2017). Other tools, such as GoogleEarth, have a high usability rating but do not on their own directly support modelling of scenario outputs (Trubka et al., 2016). This highlights the need for a variety of visualisation resources to be available to citizens, stakeholders, planners and educators to enhance levels of interoperability between them.

The integration of 3d visualisation and geographical information systems (GIS) in planning education is also recommended (Yin, 2010). Traditional planning practices and education have been largely confined to two-dimensional mapping and visualisation in a GIS environment (Al-Kodmany, 2002). Recently, following extensive debate, the Planning Institute of Australia identified the value of 3d city modelling in planning processes, assessment and stakeholder interaction (PIA, 2016), prompting changes to planning education. This new approach builds on the existing 2d visualisation techniques to enhance citizens and community visual literacy, participation as well as the ability to envision future planning scenarios (Marzouki et al., 2017; Rosier and Dyer, 2010).

The use of 3d visualisations on the desktop over the web as well as in immersive environments, coupled with modelling of alternate scenarios, can facilitate easier communication of complex urban environments for citizens, stakeholders, planning educators and new learners (Yin, 2010). The recent technological advances in 3d visualisations, as well as immersive environments, enable 3d representations of detailed urban environments that can be further modified and modelled. The 3d virtual learning environments are known to enhance spatial knowledge representation together with greater opportunity for experiential learning and improved contextualisation of learning (Dalgarno and Lee, 2010; Philips et al., 2015). Furthermore, utilising 3d visualisation may assist new learners with a low spatial ability to process spatial images more clearly (Ritz and Buss, 2016), and can enhance spatial thinking (Goodchild, 2008). Several studies have found that 3d visualisation is particularly useful for introducing complex scenarios such as exploring city form and function on a finer scale, in combination with 2d materials to effectively enhance the strengths of one another (Herbert and Chen, 2015; Morrison and Purves, 2002; Wissen et al., 2008).

This study describes a method for creating scenario-based visualisations that can be used for planning education as well as for facilitating collaboration between planners, stakeholders and citizens during a planning process. The data sets are openly shared in the formats that can be accessed by and interacted with by citizens, stakeholders, learners and educators with basic level computer literacy. The area selected for this study is an ecologically sensitive and development prone coastal spit of a sub-tropical region. The resources developed during this study will provide a better understanding of the implications of planning processes on the environment with examples of visualisation for different scenarios in a real-world context.

Methods

A collection of visualisation tools was used for the ecologically sensitive and development prone study area to create a variety of scenarios.

Study area

Mooloolaba Spit area was selected as the study area because of its iconic status in the south-east Queensland region of Australia. It is a key contributor to the natural beauty of the area because of the north-facing Pacific Ocean beach with shady foreshore (Gillen and Stewart, 2015). This area first developed as a fishing and timber village but slowly it developed as one of the premier water-based leisure and holiday precincts (Figure 1). The vegetation species of the study area include Casuarina, Banksia and Pandanus (Queensland Herbarium, 2015).

Figure 1.

Past and recent aerial photographs of the study area.

The Queensland State Government is preparing plans for the spit, which is managed as government leasehold land. The government and the local Sunshine Coast Council, which manages the foreshore and beach area, aim to achieve a balance between its diverse competing uses and values including its unique and fragile environmental characteristics. The developmental activities in this iconic area have been a matter of debate for several decades (Heywood and Jackman, 1987). It was subject to a recent planning process through the Sunshine Coast Council to create the 2015 Place Making Mooloolaba Master Plan (Gillen and Stewart, 2015), which identified future development plans for four key urban planning precincts, including the foreshore and esplanade and the wharf area. Therefore, this area is well suited for visualising past, recent and alternate scenarios.

Data sets

A variety of existing spatial data sets were utilised for this study (Figure 2). This included light detection and ranging (LiDAR) point cloud data collected during 2014 as LAS tiles. This data set is composed of point clouds that are classified according to return classes. An aerial photograph taken during 1958 was used in creating the past scenario (DNR&M, 2018a). For the recent scenario, a Nearmap aerial image was utilised (Nearmap, 2018). Various other spatial layers such as roads, vegetation types, precinct types and coastal boundaries were used for the study (ABS, 2018; DNR&M, 2018b). Additionally, spatial layers were created through digitisation to represent alternate scenarios such as forest cover, roads and new land parcels. The UTM zone 56S coordinate system with GDA1994 datum (EPSG 28356) was utilised for all the data sets. For elevation, ellipsoidal height, the Australian Height Datum (AHD) (EPSG 5711) was used.

Figure 2.

3d visualisation and scenario modelling workflow of the study area—the Mooloolaba Spit.

Geoprocessing

All the geoprocessing was performed using ArcGIS 10.6 and ENVI 5.5 software packages.

The LiDAR data set was geoprocessed using ENVI Lidar that transformed Lidar point clouds into spatial layers such as buildings, trees, power poles and power lines. Additionally, information about building heights, tree heights and canopy diameter was extracted. This tool also derived digital elevation and digital surface models. All other required spatial layers were digitised in ArcGIS software using high-resolution remote sensing images as the base map (Figure 2).

Visualisation products

The visualisation products were created using CityEngine 2017 software which is a procedural-based modelling package for creating 3d visualisation scenarios. Procedural modelling encompasses a variety of generative techniques that can produce a variety of content which includes 3d models of trees and buildings to a city layout (Smelik et al., 2014). Procedural modelling is considered as one of the fastest-growing tools in geographical information science (Rautenbach et al., 2015; Watson et al., 2008). Various existing rules were utilised to create past, recent and alternate scenarios (Figure 2).

The CityEngine software uses Computer Generated Architecture (CGA) rules in the form of a script that defines how 3d geometry of objects are created, for example, a building geometry for a polygon and a tree geometry from a point. Many CGA rule packages are available with the software and additional rules shared on the web (ESRI, 2020). For creating the recent scenario, the building footprint shapefile was used and an existing rule from the ESRI Rule Library was used to create 3d models for buildings. Similarly, the tree locations file was used for displaying 3d trees from an existing library. The road network data were used for displaying the roads using existing rules for the roads. Since the study area has been modified to build canal estates along with structures to mitigate possible erosion, for displaying past scenarios, the terrestrial regions were digitised as polygons. This was done after geo-registering the aerial photograph of the study area acquired in 1958.

Evaluation of resources

An online survey was set up on Survey Monkey to get anonymous feedback from a targeted audience comprising of planners, educators, students, environmental managers and citizens. The following documents and links were provided to the respondents:

Graphical abstract of the study.

Information sheet of the project with the details of the project and human research ethics approval.

Video of the scenarios on YouTube and Vimeo.

The following 3d scenarios that can be opened on Internet browsers available with desktop computers and a variety of smart devices (mobile phones, iPad, Tablets):

The recent scenario of the Mooloolaba Spit area with 3d models.

The past scenario (1958) of the Mooloolaba Spit area.

The alternate scenario of the Mooloolaba Spit area: High Rise Buildings.

The alternate scenario of the Mooloolaba Spit area: Apartments.

The alternate scenario of the Mooloolaba Spit area: Commercial Development (Offices).

The alternate scenario of the Mooloolaba Spit area: Forest

The alternate past scenario (1958) of the Mooloolaba Spit area: Random Forest.

The alternate past scenario (1958) of the Mooloolaba Spit area: High Rise Buildings.

A few respondents were present during the past presentations in the CAVE2 environment and they responded based on their experience in a real 3d environment.

Ten questions were put to respondents which are available in the online Supplemental material. One open question was included in the survey asking respondents to provide their critique and comments on resources for further improvement.

Emails with relevant links and documents were sent to people with a diverse professional background and they were further requested to forward the email with links and documents to other relevant people. A reminder was sent to all such people after a week. The survey was conducted as per the guidelines provided by the human research ethics committee at the university.

All the quantitative responses were transformed on 1–5 Likert Scale (Table S3). The critiques and comments provided by respondents were qualitatively analysed in NVIVO 12.0 software (QSR, 2020). The text was auto coded to create different nodes (themes) and a hierarchy chart. A hierarchy chart visualises the hierarchy of coding patterns in the form of rectangular boxes that vary in size depending on the amount of text coded for different themes.

Results

Scenario modelling

The following scenarios were initially created using existing rule files which were further modified:

Recent scenario

○ With blocks representing houses and buildings

○ With 3d models matching the real ones

Past scenario

○ With 3d trees

Figure 3 depicts the recent scenarios with and without 3d models matching the real houses and buildings superimposed on an aerial photograph. A past scenario where the spit is modelled as primarily a natural and recreational space covered in the forest is also depicted, with the trees superimposed on the aerial photograph from 1958.

Figure 3.

A collection of scenarios displayed across a variety of visualisation media. (a) Recent scenario, (b) past scenario, (c) recent scenario with 3d models, (d) past scenario with 3d models, (e) alternate scenario in CityEngine web browser, (f) alternate scenario on a mobile device and (g) alternate scenario in a real 3d (CAVE2) immersive environment.

A variety of alternate scenarios was created for the study area with the following alternate developmental activities:

High rise buildings

Offices

Forests

Apartments

Once the scenarios were generated, the 3d views were exported to multi-patch files in ESRI’s geodatabase (gdb file format) containers for their subsequent display in ArcScene and ArcGIS Pro.

Additionally, 3d interactive CityEngine Webscenes were created for different scenarios which can be uploaded on the following ArcGIS online website (ESRI, 2018b) for interactive visualisation.

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/CEWebViewer/viewer.html

All the 3d Webscenes created in this study will be made freely available on the web, and selected scenarios are used for creating videos. Fly-throughs were created using a digitised path covering the study area with ArcScene software. The fly-throughs along the path were repeated for each scenario and subsequently exported as Audio Video Interleave (AVI) movie files, which is a generic movie file format that can be played on standard video playing devices. A video abstract in mp4 format embedded in a PDF document with examples of different scenario was created. The video can be accessed from the following websites:

https://vimeo.com/489823055

https://youtu.be/HaP2iH2M4gk

The scenarios created in this study can be displayed across multiple media that included video players (including desktops) for AVI files, web browsers for interactive 3d Webscenes, and the CAVE2 immersive environment. In the CAVE2 immersive environment, it was possible to walk-through different scenarios to have a feeling of ‘being there’ (Figure 3).

Visualisation media

The visualisation products were created in different file formats enabling their visualisation across diverse media.

Creation of fly-through in AVI format enabled playing the visualisation of different scenario across all digital media that included mobile phones and tablet devices, desktop and laptop computers, and standard video players.

Creation of CityEngine Webscenes enabled their upload on ArcGIS Online. Webscenes are sharable 3d scenes hosted on the ArcGIS platform (ESRI, 2018a). ArcGIS Online is a cloud-based mapping platform hosted by ESRI (2018b). ArcGIS online enables the sharing of maps and other geographic data by citizens with little or no GIS skills (Panek, 2016). Uploading the Webscene may require a subscribed or public account, but once the scene is publicly shared, anyone with Internet-ready devices to display 3d scenes can interact with it (Figure 3). Additionally, the Webscene files can be uploaded onto the CityEngine Web Viewer website for subsequent interaction (ESRI, 2018b). The resources are provided in the online Supplemental materials.

Exporting the 3d scenes to ESRI’s file geodatabase layer enabled their display and interaction in ArcScene and ArcGIS Pro software packages on standard computer systems. Visualisation of the 3d scenes in a CAVE2 environment provides a powerful immersive environment accomplished through a network of computers, projectors, stereoscopy and graphic imagery (Davis, 2016). To view the scene in stereo in the CAVE2 environment, Mechdyne’s Conduit™ software was used to intercept the normal graphics commands of a desktop application, e.g. ArcGIS, and redistribute them to multiple nodes driving the immersive display. This enabled the display of 3d scenes in the immersive stereo virtual reality environment of CAVE2 (Mechdyne, 2018).

Evaluation of resources

Altogether, 34 people responded to the survey. The respondents belonged to the categories of educators, environment managers, students, planners and citizens (Figure S4). The interactive 3d resources (Webscenes) were viewed by almost all respondents (Figure S5) followed by the movie on YouTube and Vimeo. Only six respondents visualised the 3d scenarios in GoogleEarth while nine respondents had visualised the scenario in the CAVE2 environment (the CAVE2 visualisation was experienced by a few educators and students in the past when the work was presented before the COVID19 lockdown).

A very positive response was noticed from the respondents about the 3d resources. Most questions scored more than 4 on a 1–5 Likert Scale (Table S3). The best responses were noted for the effectiveness of these resources to facilitate a better spatial understanding of the area and to enable better decision-making for further development and management of the area. A high response score was also noted for facilitating collaboration among planners, stakeholders and decision-makers (Table S3). The number of responses for the CAVE2 visualisation was minimal, and the score was also lower.

In addition to responses on a Likert Scale, useful comments were received from respondents that not only provided praise for the resources but also their criticisms and the ways to further improve the resources. A hierarchy chart was created from the comments text after auto coding the text using NVivo 12 software (Figure S6). The chart was presented as a treemap consisting of different rectangles of varying size and the size of the rectangle reflects proportionally to key themes in the comments text.

Discussion

This study demonstrates an integration of archived, digitised and derived data sets to create visualisation resources that can be used by planners to demonstrate alternate scenarios to citizens and stakeholders. The data set and tools used in this study include big data such as LiDAR scans, Earth observations from different platforms on a temporal scale, procedural modelling to create alternate scenarios and 3d visualisation of created resources across diverse media. The use of 3d resources available in generic media is known to enhance students’ learning (Srivastava, 2014). While evaluating the resources for students’ understanding, we received a very positive response from the respondents (Table S3). The respondents commented as follows:

Great resource to visually compare past and current landscapes. Gives a better spatial understanding of the area.

The 3D models in the web-browser are very nice as well and good for more in-depth exploration.

The resources provided insight into the change in Mooloolaba spit over time and was insightful in visualising different planning scenarios for the area.

Altogether, use of these tools in planning can potentially enhance spatial thinking which, in turn, will enable better decision making by planners and other stakeholders (Billger et al., 2017). Most respondents felt the utility of such resources to enhance the spatial understanding of an area and will enable better decision-making for further development and management of the area. The ingredients used for this study are part of what has been described as an ‘information revolution’ (Desha et al., 2017). For example, big data, Earth observation and 3d visualisation are considered among emerging and powerful technologies that can drive a society to the path of sustainability (Desha et al., 2017). Additionally, this study demonstrates the utilisation of advancement in visualisation methods that have been identified as a key development towards the vision of a digital Earth (Craglia et al., 2012). For further improvement of resources, respondents of the evaluation survey commented as follows:

In terms of visualising future urban planning projects, it may be more beneficial to focus on the integration of finer scale models, such as those developed in CAD software, with the geo-visualisation tools in a GIS at smaller spatial scales.

…there are already some amazing examples of geo-visualisation using very high spatial aerial and drone imagery with LiDAR products and geo-visualisation tools are continuing to improve as video game engines and virtual reality are integrated into GIS platforms.

Utilisation of this 3D visualisation will be incredibly useful for teaching. I think the incorporation of current cadastral boundaries would augment the use of the model, however. Incorporation of these boundaries will allow parties to get an accurate representation for planning layers, and everyday land use on a more precise scale.

Various 3d depictions of the alternate scenarios across multiple media are presented in Figure 3. For example, the high-rise buildings scenario can be superimposed on the 1958 aerial photograph, which helps citizens and stakeholders to visualise the impacts on the natural environment of a more intensive development trajectory, for instance as occurred on the Gold Coast to the south of Brisbane from the 1960s. A 3d interactive version of the alternate scenario will be made available via a website that can be presented on different media that include a desktop computer, smart device, and CAVE2 virtual environment (Figure 3).

The challenge was to create tools for citizens, stakeholders and new learners that incorporate aspects of the three broad geovisualisation approaches termed as ‘looking’, ‘querying’ and ‘questioning’ (Dodge et al., 2008). This was made possible by providing past, recent and alternate scenarios to non-experts in the form of movies where they could compare different scenarios, in the form of interactive 3d Webscenes where they could change the view within a web browser, and in the immersive CAVE2 visualisation where they were able to walk through the scenarios. The CAVE2 provides a hybrid reality environment that represents the intersection of better display walls with a better virtual environment. This enables users to visualise 2d and 3d data through a unified visualisation tool (Febretti et al., 2013). The immersive environment provided by CAVE2 has been used for recreating vanished historical heritage (Giloth and Tanant, 2015) and for understanding forest growth (Fabrika et al., 2018). However, considering the huge cost involved with this visualisation and unlike virtual resources, one has to be physically present in such an environment together with a person capable of displaying resources in the CAVE2 environment; we therefore received fewer responses with a lower rating for resources in the CAVE2 environment (Table S3).

Scenarios created for this study could incorporate some, but not all, the underlying ecological, social, economic and political processes that drive and constrain landscape planning outcomes in the study area. A critique of various scenarios also enables planners to understand the effects of planning scheme provisions on the future development of the spit from an environmental impact perspective. For example, each of the leasehold areas has different agreements with lessees about a possible building footprint and site coverage overall. Leases all vary in terms of their timeframe and management conditions. There are many historical uses (i.e. yacht club and moorings, fishery wharf and facilities, and cafes) which influence the character of the spit as a visitor destination and need to continue. Also, the local Council has limited development of multi-storey residential buildings to the western part of the study area, where land is less affected by storm inundations and flooding. However, a large area of the car park has been developed to serve the spit recreation areas and the main Mooloolaba shopping precinct to the west of the spit.

From a planning perspective, the respondents of the evaluation survey for the resources commented as follows:

[Resources] Provide graphic impressions before potential planning errors are made.

… the concept is a very helpful visualisation tool and hugely beneficial to the planning process.

These resources are useful for collaboration among policy makers, planners and environmental managers.

These resources will provide a good opportunity for citizens to engage themselves in decision-making process.

Lee (2016) argues that scenario modelling enables planners and designers to ‘explore aspects of the future that are the most vital and the most uncertain to a community’. In an increasingly complex world, envisioning future landscape change requires an interdisciplinary approach as well as informed community opinion: ‘Planning and design must… have methods that identify uncertainties, structure contingencies, and propose options that align with community values’ (Lee, 2016). Likewise, there is a need to anticipate scenarios amidst future climate change projections and related impacts (Rani et al., 2018). Learning the techniques of scenario modelling using different modes of geovisualisation will, therefore, become an increasingly important skill for citizens and planning students.

The respondents of the evaluation survey for the resources commented as follows:

Good way to foresee future of cities through different development processes.

I especially find the side-by-side comparison of scenarios in the YouTube videos very useful for a quick overview.

Scenario modelling exercises also reinforce the notion of interoperability of data sources, software and visualisation media, which has been identified as a key concept across disciplines dealing with spatial science and big data (Foresman, 2008; Srivastava, 2013; Srivastava and Tait, 2012). The integration of geoprocessing and subsequent geoprocessing products into the planning discipline and the use of 3d visualisation techniques within GIS are both examples of the increasingly porous boundaries between disciplinary domains. Planners are required to integrate knowledge from a variety of disciplines including ecology, demography, urban economics, statistics and computer modelling (Costanza et al., 2017; Forman and Wu, 2016). To perform geovisualisation and other GIS tasks at an advanced level, planning students should develop an appreciation of interoperability. This will entail an understanding that the spatial tools available in GIS can be integrated with analytical tools used by other disciplines, including planning. The 3d models created in this study were highly interoperable on different platforms such as web browsers on desktop computers and other smart devices. A respondent of the evaluation survey commented as follows:

The 3D models in the web-browser are very nice as well and good for more in-depth exploration.

The hierarchy chart, created after autocoding the evaluation survey respondents’ comments, gave a sense of the impact of the resources on educators, students, planners, environmental managers and students (Figure S6). The hierarchy chart displayed themes such as visualisation, scenarios, planning, resources, decision-making and development, indicating multiple utilities of resources. Visualisation dominated the chart indicating more emphasis given by respondents on this theme that encompassed scenarios and future development. The need for faster Internet and more background information to take full advantage of the resources was also felt by a few respondents (Figure S6). Learning and the planning process were the two key texts associated with the purpose of the resources.

The evaluation of the resources provided useful information for their further improvement. A few respondents expected more background information before using these resources while a few of them had Internet speed issues to load the models. A few of them wanted the resources to be more interactive. Following are the key critiques received from the respondents of the online survey about the resources:

…it would be good if stakeholders could interrogate the data layers. For example, in the high-rise scenario there is a large area we would have required more information to make a decision.

…. it should be more interactive so that the user can create their own scenes. Views are sometimes slow as they use a lot of computer power.

Some further background information would have been useful regarding the scenarios

Suggestion would be to make the 1958 model that same aspect as the rest as it was slightly confusing to compare them.

3d visualisation tools are more demanding on the technical abilities of both educators and students. An earlier survey of planning students’ use of visualisation tools at the authors’ university found relatively little difference in the rankings between various methods (Rosier and Dyer, 2010). It has also been observed that students generally used visualisation methods illustratively rather than effectively integrating GIS skills into developing their visual literacy (Rosier and Dyer, 2010). With the number of students using maps primarily for navigation, there is a gap between the need to educate new learners on the ability to use maps as a communication tool, and the need to deliver this using visualisation tools in the planning programme.

The pedagogical value of content-focused and technology-focused instruction within a planning programme nevertheless presents an issue for educators in developing appropriate learning material for planning students (Montagu, 2001). With an elevated level of access to a variety of visualisation tools at the authors’ university, the ability to reconstitute this material into the core planning courses presents a relevancy issue for planning educators. While practitioners are more interested in a graduate planner’s ability to apply geospatial technologies in work they produce, students of planning may lack the fundamental geospatial concepts that underpin visualisation (Carlson, 2008; Montagu, 2001). Consequently, attempts to substantiate the core dimensions of geospatial technologies in planning programmes is at the expense of practical training of visualisation that students will need to be competitive in the workplace.

Conclusions

Development of geospatial information tools continues to grow and is put to use with a variety of data sets, analysis tools and visualisation media, along with interoperability between them. Modern spatial tools enable comprehension and analysis of urban landscapes through locational representation, management and modelling of information (Desha et al., 2017). The emergence of the recent concept of geodesign that embraces the intersection of geography and design has provided a new suite of planning support tools to enhance planning and design of cities at a local scale (Steinitz, 2016; Trubka et al., 2016). The scenarios created with geodesign tools enable decision-makers, planners, educators and learners to interact with recent, past and alternate views of a given area with various development options. This leads to an informed visualisation of the available spatial databases to create different scenarios for the study area. Scenarios are known to act as the boundary objects at the interface of scientific knowledge and the planning process to provide alternative visions of the future (Wang et al., 2016). Using procedural modelling, this study created past, recent and a variety of alternate scenarios that can provide users with different visions of the study area.

This study utilised archived, digitised, and derived data sets plus a variety of visualisation resources that can be employed across multiple media to cater to the diversity of learners. Since the visualisation resources were created for diverse media, this enabled their use in a variety of ways. For example, the Webscenes uploaded on the web only requires a computer with an Internet connection, and students in their own time can interact with various scenarios. Similarly, the display of scenarios in the CAVE2 environment provided an immersive feeling to citizens, stakeholders and new learners, enabling them to think about the implications of various planning decisions on an ecologically sensitive area.

Although this study provides various resources to get a deeper insight into the area of interest, modern visualisations may not completely replace conventional learning and teaching. Therefore, the aim should be to augment learning with the variety of visualisation resources that can be used in a user-friendly manner to relate them with different planning scenarios. The evaluation of the resources through an online survey provided useful information to further improve the resources.

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-epb-10.1177_2399808321991538 - Supplemental material for Use of geodesign tools for visualisation of scenarios for an ecologically sensitive area at a local scale

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-epb-10.1177_2399808321991538 for Use of geodesign tools for visualisation of scenarios for an ecologically sensitive area at a local scale by Sanjeev Kumar Srivastava, Gary Scott and Johanna Rosier in EPB: Urban Analytics and City Science

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia, for providing necessary support and resources to conduct this study. Authors acknowledge Sunshine Coast Council for providing LiDAR point cloud data sets to conduct this study. This study was funded by University of the Sunshine Coast’s Centre for Support and Advancement of Learning and Teaching (C-SALT). Data collected for this study met the requirements of the National Health and Medical Research Council’s (NHMRC) National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2007). Human research ethics approval number is A201471.

Authors’ note

Gary Scott is now affiliatred with School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University. Johanna Rosier Retired from School of Social Science, University of the Sunshine Coast.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was funded by University of the Sunshine Coast’s Centre for Support and Advancement of Learning and Teaching (C-SALT) under USC Commissioned Learning and Teaching Grant.

ORCID iD

Sanjeev Kumar Srivastava

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Sanjeev Kumar Srivastava is teaching and coordinating spatial science courses which include geographical information systems (GIS), earth observation and surveying courses that are part of Geospatial Analysis Minor. He has developed several innovative ways to engage students in learning spatial science and geospatial analysis. These innovative approaches include engaging students in field-based and lab-based activities, using diverse assessment-feedback regimes utilising web 2.0 tools, using Threshold Concepts Framework, using activity-based learning in the real-world environment, and using 3D models as well as animations in desktop and immersive environments. Dr Srivastava has several years of experience in the application of geographical information systems (GIS) and remote sensing techniques to natural resource and urban resources management.

Gary Scott has an academic background in human geography (with some undergraduate economics) and considerable experience working for environmental and indigenous organisations in Australia. He had academic positions at University of the Sunshine Coast and Griffith University Australia. He has also worked with Central Land Council as a mining officer, working with Aboriginal landowners in the Tanami desert area.

Johanna Rosier retired as an associate professor and program leader of the Regional and Urban Planning program at the University of the Sunshine Coast. Her research aims to identify obstacles to effective coastal governance in managing the effects of climate change, and she is continuing evaluation of the effectiveness of coastal plans in both New Zealand and Queensland, Australia.

References

ABS. (2018) Metadata for digital boundary files. Available at: www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/1270.0.55.001Explanatory%20Notes1July%202011?OpenDocument (accessed January 2021).

Al-Kodmany

(2002) Visualization tools and methods in community planning: From freehand sketches to virtual reality. Journal of Planning Literature 17: 189–211.

Amer

Daim

Jetter

(2013) A review of scenario planning. Futures 46: 23–40.

Batty

(2013) Defining geodesign (= GIS plus design?). Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 40: 1–2.

Billger

Thuvander

Wästberg

(2017) In search of visualization challenges: The development and implementation of visualization tools for supporting dialogue in urban planning processes. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science 44: 1012–1035.

Bishop

(1994) The role of visual realism in communicating and understanding spatial change and process. In: Hearnshaw HM and Unwin DJ (eds) Visualization in geographical information systems. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley & Sons.

Carlson

(2008) Scaffolding instruction in a university-level GIS course. Journal of Planning Education and Research 28: 258–262.

Chang

(2013) Geo-social model: A conceptual framework for real-time geocollaboration. Transactions in GIS 17: 182–205.

Cohen

(2003) Human population: The next half century. Science 302: 1172–1175.

10.

Costanza

de Groot

Braat

, et al. (2017) Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosystem Services 28: 1–16.

11.

Craglia

de Bie

Jackson

, et al. (2012) Digital Earth 2020: Towards the vision for the next decade. International Journal of Digital Earth 5: 4–21.

12.

Crooks

(2013) A framework for geodesign: Changing geography by design. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 40: 1122–1124.

13.

Dalgarno

Lee

(2010) What are the learning affordances of 3‐D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology 41: 10–32.

14.

Davis

(2016) Immersive GeoDesign: Exploring the Built Environment through the Coupling of GeoDesign, 3D Modeling, and Immersive Geography. Morgantown: West Virginia University.

15.

Desha

Foresman

Vancheswaran

, et al. (2017) Pivotal principles for digital earth development in the twenty-first century. International Journal of Digital Earth 10: 371–385.

16.

DNR&M Queensland Government (2018a) Mapping, data and imagery services. Available at: https://www.business.qld.gov.au/running-business/support-assistance/mapping-data-imagery (accessed February 2021).

17.

DNR&M Queensland Government (2018b) Digital topographic data. Available at: https://www.business.qld.gov.au/running-business/support-assistance/mapping-data-imagery/data/topographic (accessed February 2021).

18.

Dodge

McDerby

Turner

(2008) The power of geographical visualizations. In: Geographic Visualization: Concepts, Tools and Applications. Chichester; Hoboken: Wiley, xxiv, 325 p.

19.

ESRI (2018a) About the web scene specification. Available at: https://developers.arcgis.com/web-scene-specification/

20.

ESRI (2018b) CityEngine web viewer. Available at: www.arcgis.com/apps/CEWebViewer/viewer.html

21.

ESRI (2020) CityEngine rule packages. Available at: www.arcgis.com/home/group.html?id=023a5bfcb98f467f9c1673423ad75fd1#overview

22.

Fabrika

Valent

Scheer Ľ (2018) Thinning trainer based on forest-growth model, virtual reality and computer-aided virtual environment. Environmental Modelling & Software 100: 11–23.

23.

Febretti

Nishimoto

Thigpen

, et al. (2013) CAVE2: A hybrid reality environment for immersive simulation and information analysis. IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 864903–864903-864912.

24.

Foresman

(2008) Evolution and implementation of the Digital Earth vision, technology and society. International Journal of Digital Earth 1: 4–16.

25.

Forman

(2016) Where to put the next billion people. Nature News 537: 608.

26.

Gillen

Stewart

(2015) Place Making Mooloolaba. Master Plan Report. Fortitude Valley: Sunshine Coast Council, 15.

27.

Giloth

Tanant

(2015) An immersive labyrinth. In: Proceedings of IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), Aries, France, 23–27 March 2015, pp. 183–184. Piscataway: IEEE.

28.

Goodchild

(2008) The use cases of digital earth. International Journal of Digital Earth 1: 31–42.

29.

Goodchild MF. (2010) Towards geodesign: Repurposing cartography and GIS? Cartographic Perspectives 66: 7-22.

30.

Deal

Larsen

(2018) Geodesign processes and ecological systems thinking in a coupled human-environment context: An integrated framework for landscape architecture. Sustainability 10: 3306.

31.

Herbert

Chen

(2015) A comparison of usefulness of 2D and 3D representations of urban planning. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 42: 22–32.

32.

Heywood

Jackman

(1987) High rise buildings on Queensland's Sunshine Coast. Australian Planner 25: 18–20.

33.

Lee

(2016) Geodesign scenarios. Landscape and Urban Planning 156: 9–11.

34.

Luo

(2017) A rule-based city modeling method for supporting district protective planning. Sustainable Cities and Society 28: 277–286.

35.

Marzouki

Lafrance

Daniel

, et al. (2017) The relevance of geovisualization in citizen participation processes. In: Proceedings of the 18th annual international conference on digital government research, Staten Island, NY, USA, June 2017, pp. 397–406. New York: ACM.

36.

McPhearson

Parnell

Simon

, et al. (2016) Scientists must have a say in the future of cities. Nature News 538: 165.

37.

Mechdyne (2018) Conduit: Making the impossible possible. Available at: www.mechdyne.com/software.aspx?name=Conduit

38.

Montagu

(2001) Repackaging the revolution. Journal of Planning Education and Research 21: 184–195.

39.

Morrison

Purves

(2002) Customizable landscape visualizations. Implementation, application and testing of a web-based tool. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 26: 163–183.

40.

Nearmap (2018) Nearmap Aerial imagery Where you need it most. Available at: /www.nearmap.com.au/nearmapnow

41.

Onyimbi

Koeva

Flacke

(2018) Public participation using 3D web-based city models: Opportunities for E-participation in Kisumu, Kenya. International Journal of Geo-Information 7: 454.

42.

Panek

(2016) From mental maps to GeoParticipation. Cartographic Journal 53: 300–307.

43.

Paradis

Treml

Manone

(2013) Geodesign meets curriculum design: Integrating geodesign approaches into undergraduate programs. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability 6: 274–301.

44.

Philips

Walz

Bergner

, et al. (2015) Immersive 3D geovisualization in higher education. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 39: 437–449.

45.

PIA (2016) 3D city modelling in Queensland: A conversation starter. Available at: www.planning.org.au/documents/item/8323

46.

Priess

Hauck

(2014) Integrative scenario development. Ecology and Society 19:12.

47.

QSR (2020) NVivo 12. Available at: www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/home

48.

Queensland Herbarium (2015) Regional Ecosystem Description Database (REDD). Version 9.0. Queensland Government, Department of Science. Information Technology and Innovation (DSITI), Brisbane, Australia.

49.

Rani

Lange

Cameron

et al. (2018) Future Development Scenarios for Adaptation to Climate Change in the Ci Kapundung Upper Water Catchment Area, Bandung Basin, Indonesia. Journal of Digital Landscape Architecture 3: 23-33.

50.

Rautenbach

Bevis

Coetzee

, et al. (2015) Evaluating procedural modelling for 3D models of informal settlements in urban design activities. South African Journal of Science 111: 161–170.

51.

Ritz

Buss

(2016) A framework for aligning instructional design strategies with affordances of CAVE immersive virtual reality systems. TechTrends 60: 549–556.

52.

Rosier

Dyer

(2010) Visual literacy: A necessary skill for planning graduates. Social Alternatives 13: 61–89.

53.

Smelik

Tutenel

Bidarra

, et al. (2014) A survey on procedural modelling for virtual worlds. Computer Graphics Forum 33: 31–50.

54.

Srivastava

(2013) Threshold concepts in geographical information systems: A step towards conceptual understanding. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 37: 367–384.

55.

Srivastava

(2014) Techniques for developing resources to understand geographic and projected coordinate systems. Journal of Spatial Science 59: 167–176.

56.

Srivastava

Tait

(2012) An activity-based learning approach for key geographical information systems (GIS) concepts. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 36: 527–545.

57.

Steinitz

(2012) A Framework for Geodesign: Changing Geography by Design. Redlands: ESRI.

58.

Steinitz

(2016) On change and geodesign. Landscape and Urban Planning 156: 23–25.

59.

Tress

(2003) Scenario visualisation for participatory landscape planning—A study from Denmark. Landscape and Urban Planning 64: 161–178.

60.

Trubka

Glackin

Lade

, et al. (2016) A web-based 3D visualisation and assessment system for urban precinct scenario modelling. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 117: 175–186.

61.

Walker

(2017) The Planners Guide to CommunityViz: The Essential Tool for a New Generation of Planning. New York: Routledge.

62.

Wang

Miller

Brown

, et al. (2016) Visualisation techniques to support public interpretation of future climate change and land-use choices: A case study from NE Scotland. International Journal of Digital Earth 9: 586–605.

63.

Watson

Muller

Wonka

, et al. (2008) Procedural urban modeling in practice. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 28: 18–26.

64.

Wissen

Schroth

Lange

, et al. (2008) Approaches to integrating indicators into 3D landscape visualisations and their benefits for participative planning situations. Journal of Environmental Management 89: 184–196.

65.

Yin

(2010) Integrating 3D visualization and GIS in planning education. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 34: 419–438.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.89 MB