Current music:

Everything You Can Think Of is True - TOM WAITS

Virtual London launched

Imagine a world where every street in your city has been digitised into a 3D virtual environment; where, using your laptop, you can move around its streets and squares. In the real world, this development may be just around the corner. Virtual London, a prototype 3D model covering 20km2 of central London, is being developed by Michael Batty and Andrew Hudson-Smith of University College London’s Centre of Advanced Spatial Analysis (Casa). The project is funded by the Greater London Assembly and Glasgow is also considering adopting the system.

Architects applying for planning permission would submit 3D models of their proposals for incorporation into Casa’s, rendered in red line to denote a scheme under consideration. Viewers would be able to approach the scheme from any angle, for an understanding of how it would modify the immediate environment. Click on the building, and you could access its plans and elevations. Enter a ‘globe’ and photographic images allow you to ‘look around’ the area online.

Your tour complete, click on the ‘email’ icon and register your assent from the comfort of your armchair. No more need for the often overlooked planning notices that invite interested parties to view the plans at the town hall. All the information you need is a mouse-click away. You are now a citizen in the virtual realm of online planning; you, and eight million other Londoners. Welcome to e-democracy.

This is the main objective of the project. The GLA wants to spearhead the campaign by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to promote e-democracy by empowering and better informing Londoners of changes in the public realm. What differentiates Casa’s model from other 3D models of London is that it will be online. For architects and planners, it offers the possibility of allowing any firm to place its proposal in the Virtual London matrix for free.

</p>

Casa’s model comprises 45,000 ‘blocks’ projected in 3D, with plan data based on the Ordnance Survey 2D Mastermap. Building heights were calculated using Lidar (a laser measurement technique) and rooflines were produced using global positioning system points supplied by geographical information system firm Infoterra. While not rendered to the same level of detail as other London models, Casa’s provides a good, accessible overview of the city’s density and scale. Other London models are CAD-based – points in virtual space define the buildings, and the computer will not differentiate between them. Casa treats them as ‘toids’ (an OS identification), so that each building can be tagged with its own unique information such as its age, function, energy use or owner. Casa’s Michael Batty sees these querying capabilities as the model’s main advantage, because they allow it to be interrogated using real building data. You could, for instance, ask to see only post-1945 buildings and the city will reshape itself before your eyes.

Layers of information can be added to the model to create a 3D graph. City traffic densities and pollution levels can be monitored and mapped on to the model, something that could, for instance, tell the GLA more about the effects of expanding the congestion charge. CCTV positions can be mapped (are you in a ‘no-go’ area?), along with school locations or Tube lines. The ability of the Casa model to selectively and clearly render physical and abstract information simultaneously is its biggest strength, and means it could soon be a key tool for helping residents better understand the complex issues that underlie city living..

Its use as a planning tool is further off. The ideal scenario would be to have one all-encompassing, homogeneous 3D planning model, but at the moment architects and planning authorities have to deal with a variety of models supplied by commercial firms. These models may vary slightly depending on whether Lidar or photogrammetry was used to ascertain the heights. While most firms use the OS Mastermap for x and y co-ordinates, it is in the ‘z’ dimension that the system goes awry. .

There is no independent body to verify height information, so planning authorities tend to treat height data with suspicion. They are aware of dimensional divergences between the commercial 3D models and wish to see this addressed by the firms themselves. Peter Rees, chief planner at the Corporation of London, says: ‘They should agree a set of data and jointly fund an independent standards authority to authenticate its veracity. This would ensure we end up with a verified 3D map of London without jeopardising the rules of the free market. The important thing is for competitors to agree on the data and the standards in order to provide virtual models with real credibility.’.

GIS companies take issue with this. Philip Dellar, a research scientist at the Geoinformation Group, claims its height data is accurate. ‘It’s true every commercial GIS firm has its own means of calculating height information, but all are working to at least an accuracy of +/-0.5m,’ he says. Raju Pookottil of Zmapping says it is possible to achieve accuracy of +/-100mm. .

Commercial mapping firms are understandably reticent about sharing their technology, so the only course must surely be ratification by the planning authority. Pookottil says: ‘While it would be unreasonable for planners to demand verification of every point on a model, they could independently verify say, 50 points across London, and then randomly select points from an applicant’s model to see if they coincide.’ In this way, planners could .

control independently verified height ‘checkpoints’, leaving commercial firms free to use any modelling technique they want – under the proviso that their accuracy levels would be subject to this random scrutiny. .

Information overload.

The need to have the Casa model streamed on the web is a potential difficulty, because the levels of information are too much for a standard modem. Lars Hesselgren, R&D director at Kohn Pedersen Fox, which has developed its own city model, fears this will restrict access to Virtual London. The GLA is aware of the problem and is looking to its 8-16 bit streams, rather than a standard modem, to address it. .

When you sit down to use the Casa model, the virtual ‘meeting room’ is clearly influenced by computer games technology. ‘Avatars’ – virtual people that act as guides in the model environment – allow interest groups to meet ‘on site’. Architect and planning consultant Richard Coleman sees the project’s potential, but has reservations about the ‘gaming’ interface. ‘There is a danger that innovative ideas are driven by what is possible, what is fun, and what is sometimes only for the fanatic, rather than what is practical and necessary for GLA planning purposes,’ he warns. True, the user interface does resemble an early version of Tomb Raider, but given that it was achieved on a £30,000 grant rather than the millions invested in Lara Croft, it doesn’t look bad..

Coleman believes the GLA ‘should focus less on giving abstract access to abstract information to the computer buff at home’. He says: ‘They are less likely to visit that part of the city about which they are concerned, if it becomes too much fun to operate the software from the keyboard.’.

Maybe this is the real crux of the issue. In a planning world that is becoming increasingly mediated by virtual effects, we are in danger of losing touch with the real thing. Many other stimuli apart from physical form affect our understanding of an environment. We should not allow cities to become ‘virtualised’ in our minds. So instead of registering that complaint online, why not shut down the computer, walk out into the city, and vote with your feet. .