Dbk: 1 revision imported

2016-11-10T13:26:25Z

1 revision imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 14:26, 10 November 2016
(No difference)

Ajhil at 11:13, 21 October 2016

2016-10-21T11:13:15Z

New page

__NOTOC__
{{OR/16/014}}
{|
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
| style="width: 1100px;" |
[[Image:nerc-logo_banner4.jpg|frameless|right|500px|]]
|}

An overview of the city challenges around spatial planning and subsurface management were presented and then discussed amongst the expert group. The issues and potential opportunities were captured during the breakout session and focussed on four challenges areas, commercial issues, technology development, people and policy and scientific knowledge.

<center>
{| class="wikitable" style="color:black; background-color:#70ad47;"
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
|
| '''Issues'''
| '''Ideas'''
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Commercial'''
| style="background-color: #e2efd9;" |
* Ownership of data by private companies.
* Understanding commercial value of data.
* Levels of access to data requires thought e.g. for interpretation; analytical tools.
* Investment ahead of need is limited by utility company five year plans.
* Short-term view of infrastructure providers; only go where there is demand; developers unwilling to pay for front loaded infrastructure.
| style="background-color: #e2efd9;" |
* Data ownership and government directive for its release.
* Legislation UK-wide to allow public sector to front load infrastructure to unlock brownfield for development. Allow public sector to benefit from profit of sale to unlock more land.
* Utility company infrastructure development plans need to be flexible enough to match city development needs.
* Encourage release of private data into public domain.
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
| style="background-color: #ffffff;" colspan="3" |
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Technology'''
| style="background-color: #e2efd9;" |
* Geotechnical variation: how to acquire data and model.
* Information is lost in translation — need to account for different audiences and levels of technology capability.
* Software compatibility remains an issue across platforms.
* Multiple outlets for same data.
* Accuracy of data and need for updating datasets.
* Storing raw versus interpreted data.
| style="background-color: #e2efd9;" |
* Resource management e.g. use waste heat from assets like the London Underground.
* Data standards (formats, use, sharing, updating) and data sharing networks.
* Benchmarking against others.
* More value in using source data for different applications.
* Connection of land registry/OS to subsurface data.
* Create a ‘Hub and spoke’ city model where each domain-expert retains ownership of their models (spokes) but it’s accessed via a central shared hub.
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
| style="background-color: #ffffff;" colspan="3" |
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''People and Policy'''
| style="background-color: #e2efd9;" |
* Silo mentality of data generators:
:: o My data — not sharing
:: o My profit — want to sell
* Silo’s based on domain-expertise. Need people with the big picture.
* Perceptions on urban underground space limit joined up city plans for whole city space.
* Value creation.
* Different challenges are faced in different places.
* Losing ownership of data/models when opening them up.
* Who will regulate new policy? Piecemeal responsibilities.
| style="background-color: #e2efd9;" |
* Tailoring information for specific decisions.
* More spatial modelling needed.
* Stronger leadership needed.
* Create place-making policy.
* Should policy be national or city-region specific?
* Should cities commission their own research, projects, policy-reform?
* Sharing of good practice.
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
| style="background-color: #ffffff;" colspan="3" |
|- style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Science and knowledge'''
| style="background-color: #e2efd9;" |
* Advancing data storage and data manipulation.
* Academic ‘ta-da’ moments that don’t get used because they haven’t talked to people on the ground dealing with the problem.
* More concentration on other space than underground space — investment is needed.
* No recognised standards for baseline monitoring.
| style="background-color: #e2efd9;" |
* Joint working bringing real world professionals together with academics.
* Create awareness of the potential use of urban underground space.
* Make sure solutions are achievable in reality but be innovative.
|}
</center>

[[Image:OR16014train.jpg|frameless|center|500px| ]]
[[Category: OR/16/014 City spatial planning and modelling - hidden depths: workshop report | 02]]

OR/16/014 Session 1: Issues and ideas - Revision history

Dbk: 1 revision imported

Ajhil at 11:13, 21 October 2016