Understanding Complex Urban Systems
Transcript of Understanding Complex Urban Systems
Understanding Complex Urban Systems
John Fernandez MIT
Andrew Dobshinsky, AICP Wallace, Roberts & Todd
Paul Brown, AICP CDM Smith, Inc.
• Integrate the many dimensions of urban function (transportation, utilities, energy)
• Simulate/model the interactions between land use, infrastructure, and environment
• How do land use patterns and infrastructure design affect sustainable performance?
• Feedback loops – causes & effects – Bottom up: agent based
– Top down: urban metabolism
Understanding Complex Urban Systems
Understanding Complex Urban Systems Developing & Measuring Alternative Scenarios
Andrew Dobshinsky Associate / Planner, Wallace Roberts & Todd
Connections 2040 Cedar Rapids, IA
Connections 2040 Overview
Long-Range Transportation Plan Year Population 1980 150,000 2010 200,000 2040 290,000 (projected)
Connections 2040 Community Exercise
Connections 2040 Considerations
The Costs of Alternative Development Patterns: A Review of the Literature. Frank, James E.Washington, DC: The Urban Land Institute.
Municipal Capital Costs for Infrastructure
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
$90,000
$100,000
30 15 12 10 5 3 1 0.25
Mu
nic
ipal
Cap
ital
Co
sts
P
er
Ho
usi
ng
Un
it
Dwelling Units Per Acre
Leapfrog, 10 mile
Contiguous, 10 mile
Leapfrog, 5 mile
Contiguous, 5 mile
Leapfrog, 0 mile
Contiguous, 0 mile
Infill
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
BASE
Afternoon 2
Afternoon 3
Evening 1
Evening 4
Afternoon 5
Average
Afternoon 4
Afternoon 1
Evening 2
Evening 3
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mixed-Use
20-30% low density
40-50% low density 25-35% high density
40-60% low density 10-20% high density
85% low density 5% high density
Connections 2040 Community Exercise Results
Slope Water/ Sewer Service
Floodplain
Road Access
School Access
most likely to be developed
least likely to be developed
Connections 2040 Factors Influencing Growth
Road Access
most likely to be developed
least likely to be developed
Connections 2040 Likelihood of Development
Connections 2040 Future Land Use Plans
Connections 2040 Existing Development
85% low density residential 10% medium density residential 5% high density residential No mixed use 25,081 new acres urbanized Municipal cost to provide services to residences $1.42 billion
Connections 2040 Scenario 1
50% low density residential 20% medium density residential 20% high density residential 10% mixed use Includes downtown redevelopment in Cedar Rapids and Marion 21,841 new acres urbanized (13% less than Scenario 1) Municipal cost to provide services to residences $1.25 billion (12% less than Scenario 1)
Connections 2040 Scenario 2
25% low density residential 40% medium density residential 20% high density residential 15% mixed use Includes downtown redevelopment in Cedar Rapids and Marion and other redevelopment nodes 19,897 new acres urbanized (21% less than Scenario 1) Municipal cost to provide services to residences $1.16 billion (18% less than Scenario 1)
Connections 2040 Scenario 3
Preferred Scenario between Scenarios 1 and 2 Grey represents existing and preferred scenario development Colored areas are excess capacity
Connections 2040 Excess Capacity
Imagine Austin Austin, TX
• Natural and Sustainable
• Prosperous
• Livable
• Mobile and Interconnected
• Educated
• Creative
• Values and Respects People
Draft Vision “Word Cloud”
The Austin we Love is:
Imagine Austin Vision Statement
• Population and employment are projected to grow over the next 30 yrs
Employment Projection
+300,000 new jobs
(+ 1.5 – 1.3% Per Year)
Population Projection
+750,000 new residents
(+ 1.9 % Per Year)
in Austin and ETJ 2010 – 2039 Based on City of Austin projections
Develop a Future Scenario for Austin
Imagine Austin Chip Exercise
Base Map
Imagine Austin Chip Exercise
Mixed Use
Residential
Commercial Industrial
Transportation
Open Space
1 mi
1 mi2
Imagine Austin Chip Exercise
Imagine Austin Chip Exercise
A Distributed B Crescent C Centers D Linear Trend
Imagine Austin Alternative Scenarios
Best estimate of how Austin will develop if current trends continue.
Growth and new development distributed throughout the planning area.
Distributes growth in a crescent, conserving open space to the west.
Most mixed-use activity centers.
Concentrates development along north-south axis.
Imagine Austin Indicators
Imagine Austin Indicators
Imagine Austin Public Preferences
Scenario D (linear) received the highest percentage of 1st choice votes (58%) Scenario C (centers) received the highest percentage of 2nd choice votes (52%)
Imagine Austin Growth Concept Map
Thank You
urban metabolism
John E. Fernández, MIT
David J. Quinn
Noel Davis
Jonathan Krones
Karen Noiva
To Kien (Singapore)
2012 National APA Conference: Los Angeles | April 14-17, 2012
Urban Material Flows
• Goods & Services
• Built Env. &
Infrastructure
• Transportation
Addition to Stock Imports:
• Water
• Energy
• Materials
• Biomass
Domestic
extraction
Air emissions,
waste disposal,
etc.
Exports
Input Urban System Output
Adapted from EUROSTAT (2003)
33
Master diagram – urban material flows – UrbMet.org
Domestic Material
Consumption
eq. 1: I + E = O + S + stock
eq. 2: DMC = (I + E) – O
Flows
I: inputs (imports)
O: outputs (exports)
E: domestic extraction
S: domestic sink
Socioeconomic drivers
UAs: urban activities
(urban provision)
Urban Metabolism of Singapore
34
1960 1975 1990 2005
1.6
5
2.2
5
2.7
4
3.3
5
Pop
.
imports
exports
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
GFCF as % of GDP
Gross Fixed Capital Formation
(GFCF)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
GFCF per year (billion S$)
Singapore city-wide data
0 20 40 60
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
GNI ('000 S$/cap.)
DMC (MT/cap.)
0 20 40 60
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
GNI ('000 S$/cap.)
Thousa
nds
Electricity (kWh/cap.)
0 20 40 60
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
GNI ('000 S$/cap.)
Water (m3/cap.)
37
Urban Resource Visualizer Demo
UNDERSTANDING URBAN COMPLEXITY WITH VALUE-FOCUSED MODELING
Improving the Design Process for High Performing Outcomes
The Challenge of Sustainable Cities
We agree as an industry on what
sustainability means, and we have good
ideas on how to achieve it.
But we struggle to achieve sustained
improvements in sustainability metrics,
even after investments in green
technologies in carefully executed
projects.
The challenge is the complexity of the
city as a system, and the lack of tools to
test our design alternatives.
Our Value Proposition
We work with planners, designers and program developers to incorporate dynamic system simulation tools into the urban planning and design process so that investment decisions can be based on quantifiable environmental, economic and social benefits
Embedding Simulation in the Process
Envision and draw urban plans to ‘feed’ into model
Urban Plan “Maps”
Ou
tpu
t Met
ric
Decision Variable
Alternative C
Alternative A
Alternative B
Target
Output, Analysis, and Decisions
Dynamic, integrated simulation in Urban Systems Model
Model Input Application
GIS Application
PowerSim Simulator
Output Tools
Urban Planners, Designers, and Architects
Staff from Public Agencies / Developers
Community Interests and Individuals
Public Agency / Developer Managers
Iterative Input and Feedback in Design and Planning
Process
Differences from Conventional Models
Not a static report card or rating system – although it can automatically fill out rating “forms”
Map-based platform and multiple building types that mirror the actual design
Forecasts actual performance under expected and unexpected environmental conditions and user demands
Hourly time-step reflecting daily demands not monthly or annual averages
Traffic and materials flows and management not just water and energy
Fully-integrated sub-systems and comprehensive performance reporting
Urban Systems Model
Gre
en
ho
use
Gas
es Water
Energy
Ecosystems
Buildings
Transportation
Solid Waste
Syst
em M
ap
Fin
anci
al A
nal
ysis
Activities
Urban Sectors
Fully Dynamic Integration
Complex Systems
". . . the hallmark of complex systems is their capacity to display counter-intuitive or just plain surprising behavior."
John L. Casti, Would-be Worlds: How Simulation is Changing the
Frontiers of Science.
Building Groups: Building groups will be specified
spatially and then described by
their percent composition of
building types.
General, Spatial Total Area Location Elevation
Composition Percent makeup, each building type
Library of Building Types
Urban Form
Building (and Land) Types: Building types are pre-defined
as appropriate to local project.
Each will include parameters
relevant to resource calculations
and energy modeling.
Occupancy Area per person
Building usage Gender ratio
Daily patterns
Resources (unit) Energy demand Water demand
Waste generated
Location Information Elevation
N-S, E-W location Orientation
Energy zone
Building Geometry Shape Footprint, roof area(s) Number stories Height
Land Properties Area Hardscape Soil Vegetation
Roof and Envelope Construction Material Color/Reflectivity Insulation Glazing
Technology - Water
Water Sector
GHG
Onsite Water
Reuse
Irrigation Reuse
Indoor Building
Reuse (graywater)
Used Water
Rain
Rooftop Rain Capture
& Storage
Rainwater
Management (water quantity and
quality)
System Supplies - Potable
- Recycled Water
Water Sector
• Water Demand Mgmt • Alternative Supplies • Water Reuse • Stormwater Mgmt
Key Features and Functions
• Supply and Demand Dynamics • Centralized vs Decentralized • ‘Closing the Loop’
Other Sectors/Layers
• Energy Consumption • Sludge & Biosolids Mgmt • GHG Emissions • Capital and Operating Costs
Technology - Energy
Energy Sector
GHG
Rooftop Solar PV
Rooftop Solar Hot Water
Bldg Integrated
Solar PV
Wind Turbines (at roof or ground)
System Supplies - Central ‘Grid’
- Local, Alternative
- Electricity, Gas, ‘Thermal’
Energy Efficient
Building Design Electricity Storage (electric vehicles,
batteries, “smart grid”)
Energy Sector
• Energy Demand Mgmt • Alternative Supplies • Electricity Storage • Smart Energy Systems
Key Features and Functions
• Cogeneration at Facilities • Centralized vs Decentralized • District Heating , ‘Waste Heat’
Other Sectors/Layers
• Solid Waste Management • GHG Emissions • Capital and Operating Costs
Transportation
Transportation Sector
Inter-town
private vehicle
Inter-town mass
transit
Intra-town,
multiple-mode
Transportation Sector
• Transportation demand • Inter- and intra-town tracking • Multiple modes • Transportation fuel demands
Key Features and Functions
• Modal split estimate • Influenced by urban form • Walking and cycling networks
Other Sectors/Layers
• GHG Emissions • Fuel demands • Electricity demands for electric modes (train, electric fleet)
GHG
Greenhouse Gases
GHG Layer
• Detailed GHG Accounting • Custom User-Input and Setup • Flexible Pivot-Chart Output • Linked to GIS Mapping
Other Sectors/Layers
• All Sectors Report Emissions • Include Cost of Carbon
Vehicles
Process (landfill, incineration)
Power Plant
Emissions
Energy Use
Refrigerants Atmosphere
Emissions
C02
Sequestered Energy
Use Energy
Use
Energy
Use
Wastewater
Emissions
Water
Ecosystems
Energy
Buildings
Transportation
Solid Waste
Qu
alit
y o
f
Life
Energy ProducedRoof Area for Rain Capture
En
erg
y
De
ma
nd
Waste Generated
Water Demand, Wastewater Generated
Urb
an
He
at Is
lan
d
Te
mp
era
ture
Shading
Urban Heat Island
Index
Quality of Life
Eco Index
Wa
ter
Atte
nu
atio
n
Air Emissions
To
tal E
ne
rgy U
se
Em
issio
ns
GH
G
Re
du
ce
d D
em
an
d
Re
liab
ility
Grid
Re
qu
ire
me
nt
Re
ne
wa
ble
En
erg
y
Pe
ak P
ow
er
Sh
ave
d
Water Demand
(cooling)
Air Emissions
GHG
Eco Intrusion Index
Fuel Demand
Ve
hic
le M
iles, H
ou
rs T
rave
led
Qu
alit
y o
f L
ife
Pro
xim
ity M
etr
ics
Impervious Surface, Runoff
Electric Vehicle
Demand
Air Emissions
Ma
teria
l F
ate
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n D
em
an
d
Energy Generated
(Waste to Energy)
Energy Demand
Water Demand, Wastewater Generation
Wa
ter
Ava
ilab
le
Re
liab
ility
De
ma
nd
Re
du
ctio
n
On
site
Ca
ptu
re
an
d R
eu
se
Flo
od
Mitig
atio
n
Energy Demand
(process)
Po
llutio
n
Bicycle
Auto
Bus
Light Rail
Transport Modes
TransportationDemand
Origin/Destination
Population
Trips
Built Areas
Natural Area
Surface Water Area
Open Area
Infrastructure
Area Summary
Inp
uts
- R
ain
Se
rie
s
- E
T S
erie
s
- D
em
an
d F
acto
rs
Inp
uts
- S
ola
r S
erie
s
- W
ind
Se
rie
s
- D
em
an
d F
acto
rs
- G
rid
Typ
e
Inp
uts
- M
od
es
- N
etw
ork
De
scrip
tio
n
- V
eh
icle
typ
es
- T
rip
s/d
estin
atio
ns
Inp
uts
- R
ou
tin
g o
ptio
ns
Inp
uts
- B
uild
ing
de
sig
n
- S
ite
la
yo
ut
- U
rba
n d
esig
n
- P
op
ula
tio
n
- B
uild
ing
usa
ge
- P
er
ca
pita
de
ma
nd
s
Inp
uts
- C
lima
te
- T
op
og
rap
hy
- W
ate
rsh
ed
an
d
b
io c
ha
racte
ristics
Water Sector
Energy Demand
Demands• Indoor Potable• Indoor Nonpotable• Cooling• Irrigation
Discharge
Rain Capture
Treatment
TreatmentPumping Storage
Pumping Storage
StorageRooftop Runoff
Municipal WTP
Municipal WWTP
Pumping
Municipal Supply
Greywater
Recycled Water
Rainwater
Losses Consumption Electric Power Demands
Solar EvaporativeCooling
Ground SourceHeat Pump
RainwaterCooling Exchange
Surface WaterCooling Exchange
SolarHeat Exchange
SewerHeat Exchange
Waste-to Energy
Building Solar PV
Building Hydro Power
Fuel Cells
Grid Power
Site Wind
Site/City Solar PV
Biogas (WW)
Electricity
OtherSector
Demands
AirCooling
Lighting
WaterHeating Water
PumpsPlug
Loads
Co
-Ge
ne
rati
on
FuelDemand
WaterSector
Energy Sector
Solid WasteGeneration
He
igh
t
AmbientTemperature
BuildingOrientation
Angle ofSunlight
Area
TreeShading
Landfill
Process Process Process
Waste-to-EnergyRecycleCompost
WaterSector
EnergySector
WasteGeneration
Biogas Energy
Greenhouse Gas Layer
Hourly Output Example
Value-Focused Modeling
Performance of decentralised technologies
Waste minimisation and reuse
Capital and operating lifecycle cost reductions
Comprehensive tracking of GHG emissions
Maximizing synergy among technologies and avoiding redundant or low-yield investments
Resilience under both normal and extreme conditions
Holistic innovation that improves quality of life
Q & A