In 2025, The Association for Geographic Information, the membership group for organisations and individuals working in geospatial, launched the 3D Network group. One of nine (soon to be more) AGI Networks, run by volunteers, established to investigate the current and emerging need for 3D geospatial data across the UK, with growing demand for richer spatial insights in both the public and private sectors.
Headed up by Mick Dunn, a Business Development Specialist at Nottingham City Council who specialises in 3D, Digital Twins and GIS, the 3D Network is run by volunteer members of the AGI representing all aspects of the 3D community.
The AGI 3D Network has four core objectives:
- Define Key 3D Geospatial Data Models – develop clear definitions and naming conventions for essential 3D geospatial data models,
- Identify Business Applications and Opportunities,
- Demonstrate Value and Return on Investment by provide evidence of the tangible benefits that 3D models deliver,
- Support a case for National 3D Data Strategy and contribute to shaping a vision for a national approach to 3D data capture and provision,
Since its launch the network has hosted an inaugural event, is actively seeking user case studies, and has produced this podcast on 3D data models.
In June 2026 the AGI 3D Network was delighted to present a panel discussion at GEO Business, the UK’s largest event for those involved in the capture, analysis, and use of geospatial data. Under the title ‘Advancing the UK’s 3D Geospatial Data Landscape’, members of the group explored and discuss how 3D geospatial demonstrates value and measurable return on investment across multiple sectors and applications.
Chaired by Fergus Craig, Chair of the AGI and UK Sales Manager at NV5 Geospatial, the specialist panel included Ralph Coleman, Chief Commercial Officer at Bluesky International (a Woolpert company), Christopher Wandel, Key Account Manager for the Public Sector at VU.CITY, Laura Pullen, GIS Manager for Nottingham City Council, and Robert Goldsmith, Geospatial Mager at Devon and Cornwall Police.
Take aways:
- We don’t live in a 2D world we live in a 3D world
- Humans are inherently visual – we think spatially and 3D shows us where things are
- When you have to analyse threat and risk you need to be representing the real world
- The major thing that has changed is access – suddenly there is abundance
- Computers are better, game engines have improved, we have lighter weight models, better internet and networks – that is accessibility.
- We can collect data and we can share data – that’s interoperability
- Five years ago, 3D was novel, now it’s become business critical
- Trust speeds up decision making
- We have real-world examples of what geospatial can unlock but work is required around adoption and availability
- We need standardisation into our nomenclature, our terminology for 3D geospatial, so there is a better understanding across wider markets
Described in the pre-event publicity material as ‘engaging with the audience, the panel will explore the 3D geospatial landscape: its evolution, current presentation, and potential future. The audience will hear from those at the cutting edge of capturing, creating, storing, and disseminating 3D geospatial data, and also from those who are using this valuable resource on a daily basis to help inform decision making and communicate outcomes.
The session will present and validate published ROI figures of 2:1 within the Local Authority Planning Process and will, it is hoped, inspire the audience to evaluate their own current and prospective use of 3D geospatial data.’
Fergus: 3D geospatial has been on the agenda for a while, what do you think has changed recently to make it genuinely mainstream?
Robert: In policing I would say the major thing that has changed is access. Suddenly there is abundance, with national datasets from Bluesky or Ordnance Survey. To give an example a bomb was recently found in Plymouth and we were able to work with multiple agencies using 3D geospatial data. We were able to collect data, using drones, we were able to share data, and we all had that working interoperability.
Christopher: So, it’s not been an easy ride. Reality mapping started in the 1990s with big, heavy, expensive files that were difficult to build and difficult to access. Also, the computer and graphic technologies weren’t great. Since then, computers have got better, game engines have improved, and we have lighter weight models. We have better internet and networks, so models are easier to get and easier to deploy – that is accessibility.
Fergus: And, if we are trying to explain the value of 3D geospatial, to a non-specialist audience, what is the simplest way to articulate why it matters?
Laura: As a local authority we have always seen the importance of geospatial information to support all of our operational and strategic activities. We don’t live in a 2D world we live in a 3D world – so 3D geospatial adds value to the processes we are undertaking, it takes it to a new level. One example, is the use of 3D to support urban planning because it helps visualise new developments or infrastructure. Using 3D, we can understand strategic views ad we can really understand specific scenarios helping us increase the design quality and ultimately the impact on our city landscape.
Fergus: So where are we in the technology cycle, are we at the early stage or are we scaling for mature adoption of 3D geospatial?
Ralph: I don’t think we are mature, I think we are scaling. There are some great examples of the use of 3D geospatial in the UK but there isn’t an awful lot of operationally embedded use yet. The panel have already shared examples of where 3D geospatial is core, foundational rather than nice to have, and I do think that is the direction of travel.
In the UK we are data rich, but is it always used in the right way, is it always combined in the right way, is it actually embedded? And I think that is one of the big challenges for the geospatial sector; its embedding data into systems and making systems talk to each other. It’s creating an environment in which people can use data in a federated manner like Nottingham.
So, to summarise, I think we are in a developmental stage, I think there are lots of fantastic green shoots and we have seen lots of progress, but we still have a little way to go.
Fergus: Taking a step back, Robert you have been working with 3D geospatial data for a few years. How do you think it has evolved from both a technological and market perspective?
Robert: I think I already alluded to the fact that we had the G7 summit in our force area – a large event with a lot of risk! So, this gave us some funding and some backing and you could say forced us to push out boundaries. We invested in a LiDAR system so we could create a digital twin of all the key sites. We were also able to work with lost of different software companies so our breadth of knowledge increased massively.
At the time the LiDAR and the photogrammetry were quite new in the policing, security and defence space, so this gave us the chance to show how it should be part of daily working. As Laura said we don’t live in a 2D world we live in a 3D world and when you have to analyse threat and risk you need to be representing the real world.
In a way we were lucky to have that event to act as an impetus for us to showcase what we had done and the impact it had. I would like to say that as a result of this we have seen a growth in awareness and adoption in fact I would say that five years ago 3D was novel, now it’s expected.
Fergus: Again, looking back, were there any barriers to adoption that existing 5, 10 years ago, and have these been resolved?
Robert: As I said we have more data, and we have more knowledge of that data. I also think that the ease of getting data and sharing data is better, that interoperability has been greatly improved. To use the bomb example, we can build a surface model around the site, we can work with partners, like the MOD, to understand where the explosion might impact, and we can create different models and different scenarios. We now understand what data formats work across what platforms which makes data sharing much easier than it would have been 5 years ago.
Fergus: That’s great to hear from a data perspective, so Christpher, what has changed and what is changing from a platform or software perspective?
Christopher: I think it’s important to say that there are parallels to the video games industry which is essentially driving a lot of the developments in 3D. For example, the new VU.CITY is switching to Unreal which now includes the Nanite virtualised geometry system. This makes it easier to visualise cities with smoother performance and we can use BIM models as well as other datasets.
However, you still need to hook up to a graphics card in the cloud and this is a barrier, one we have tried to address inhouse as ultimately it would be better if the data was processed on your device. So, the next development is going to be AI native, web native, its going to be LLMs and DLSS5. We are going to be using low poly, that is up scaled on your phone, and when that happens the cost to serve is going to drop and we are going to see a lot more applications, more easily coded, and we are expecting far more video games to flood the market.
For 3D geospatial this is going to be a great thing, it means we will have more interoperability and the ability to create custom bespoke apps, so in the next 5-10 years I think there will be a big explosion.
Fergus: Just trying to loop back to the 3D Network core objectives, specifically the last one to ‘support a case for a national 3D data strategy’, where does the UK sit globally in terms of capability and adoption?
Ralph: If you look at the geospatial landscape per se I think the UK is positioned second, however, I don’t think we are second from a 3D geospatial point of view. There are significant advancements in other countries specifically Singapore where they look at geospatial as the foundational content that they build all of their infrastructure on and they make legislative decisions on. It’s embedded into their IT structure at a government level and it’s used for cadastre, renewable energy, etc. I get that Singapore is much smaller, half the size of London in terms of population, but this is where we need to be looking for a blueprint for our cities.
On a national scale, the Netherlands data strategy is also well developed and mature. The Netherlands is at the stage where there is significant competition nationally for geospatial infrastructure. There’s not just one organisation or one national procurement exercise; there are multiple organisations building national datasets and competing. I think this illustrates just how important geospatial and 3D geospatial is, and we are not just talking about digital surface models, we talking about collection from mobile mapping systems, the synergistic integration of different modalities of collection all together in one platform creating a homogenous environment.
This is where we need to moving towards and, although we are making good strides, the government needs to offer more support for the geospatial landscape, working off the excellent examples we already have.
Fergus: These are great examples of what other countries are doing, what’s your perspective on this Laura?
Laura: I’m going to echo what Ralph said; we have a growing appreciation, particularly in the public sector, of the value of geospatial, what geospatial can unlock. We have lots of real-world examples but I think there is still some work required around adoption and availability.
I would really like to see a focus on national provision because at the moment, as a local authority, we have been fortunate to have accelerated funding, and Robert you mentioned additional funding as well, as a result of our planning use cases. But this isn’t the case universally for the public sector. We are also looking at a lot of time and resource around the actual procurement. I can almost draw parallels with aerial photography twenty years ago where we were all individually procuring data, and it feels very wasteful when it could, like aerial photography is now, be done at a national scale. We could then concentrate on use cases more effectively and draw that value ourselves.
Fergus: Looking at value in terms of return on investment, another of the 3D Network’s core objectives, I understand that Nottingham commissioned a formal ROI report on this – can you tell us more about the results and outcomes?
Laura: Yes, this was particularly focused around our urban planning example. We felt strongly that it was really important to undertake an independent return on investment study to showcase the value of 3D and provide evidence to national bodies.
So, we made sure we had a robust methodology and we used an independent supplier, and I think it has been really valuable to us. We wanted to be able to use the outcomes and results locally, to keep driving investment, but we also wanted to be able to share with others across the country to use in planning use cases driving investment is one of the biggest challenges we, and other local government organisations, face. We wanted this to be a resource for everyone to be able to use, even, hopefully, at the national level.
The study focused on two simple use cases within planning and it showed a 2:1 return internally, and a much larger return when we started including the AEC sector in general. We saw an increase in the speed of decision making and faster spades in ground.
I think the outputs and results have been really valued, not only by ourselves, but by other organisations as we have freely shared the results on our website. This is the formal report, built on a robust methodology, however we also have more rudimentary ROI analysis for different use cases, for ground realities. One of the great examples is the use around transport schemes – reducing the need for site visits for design stages or reinstatement reports.
Fergus: That’s great Laura – thank you. Christopher, do you have other examples of how 3D geospatial is providing a return on investment?
Christopher: Our example of working with Bellway homes is a good example: we had an existing project, with existing consent, but in order to make it viable in terms of costs, and also to meet housing figures, ideally it needed two or three extra levels. One of the things that I always do with planners, when we are training them, it to get them to guess the height of a building. It is the most difficult thing. Anyway, using VU.CITY via the pre-app process we could see there was no harm in the extra levels, none at all. The result – more affordable housing. This was a huge win and there are many others that can, and have been, achieved if we stick to good pre-app processes on robust quality control models.
Fergus: Laura – do you have any other use cases you’d like to mention?
Laura: I think one of the biggest win areas is around transparency. Before, when a developer came to us, we would have had to rely on things like CGI, but that requires a lot of trust. I think the transparency of using a BIM model, that can be dropped into out city environment gives planners, stakeholders, the developers, the confidence to trust that the model is accurate, trust that what we are looking at is a true representation. This trust speeds up decision making and we can undertake analysis on urban design models to drive service delivery. For housing targets this means that we can help ensure that sites are delivering the maximum capacity they can.
Fergus: Coming at this from a slightly different angle, Robert what is your point of view, where does that value really come from?
Robert: Something that is prominent around policing, with restricted budgets, is the efficiency of using data to work together. I look at events like the Manchester Arena incident, where all of those agencies were trying to respond, without the correct data, without a shared version of the truth, lots of people trying to pull together, with no notice, on something that has the highest level of importance. I think if that happened now things would be different.
So, what we have done in our area is to make sure that all of those where locations where 1,000s of people are likely to congregate – sporting events, festivals, concerts, etc. we have complete digital twins for. We have all the key intelligence, so you can understand where the doors are, how to get to a specific location, what are the alarm codes, where are the fire extinguishers, the defibrillators. If you have a digital twin of the site, that is cloud based yet secure, you can share that with every agency so it’s not just the efficiency you are gaining, the time you are saving, the working better together, being more interoperable, its potentially lives that are being saved.
There is also something more than money savings or efficiencies, being able to have a shared version of a site or location, that everyone can access, ahead of time means that we can work out risk, we can understand vulnerabilities, we can plan. This is a massive benefit.
Fergus: Ralph – from a data acquisition perspective, where do you feel the value comes from?
Ralph: Well, you have just heard Robert mention digital twins and that is a bit of a divisive phrase. We are lucky to have three very different users of 3D geospatial here today; Robert uses drones a lot as well as Bluesky data to provide context, Nottingham have been really forward thinking using textured mesh data alongside ground capture merged with ortho-photos, and VU.CITY using stereo photography to create object models. So, we have good examples of the multimodal collection that I alluded to earlier.
We have all these different methods of collecting data and we are brining them all together into one seamless environment, and the more we do that, the more value we get. I mentioned the phrase ‘vertical integration’ and we are now looking at subsurface, with ground penetrating radar, and integrating this into the same model to view transport data, heritage data, renewable energy ecosystem data. We are talking a whole range of data file formats here and trying to bring them together so I think there is a job for standards – that dreaded word!
We already have some good established standards for geospatial but I think there is another challenge, and it is one we have spoken about, quite a bit, and its one of my favourite subjects; terminology, the language we use. I just used the term photogrammetric model, well there are probably six or seven different names used in the market. There are object models, block models, semantic models, and they all mean something slightly different to different users. There is an argument about not getting too hung up on what we call things, it’s the end use case that is important, but from a marketing perspective, from a story telling point of view, I think we need to bring some standardisation into our nomenclature, our terminology for 3D geospatial, so there is a better understanding across wider markets. I think this is a key challenge and one that we are trying to address within the AGI 3D Network.
Fergus: Absolutely that is one of the key objectives – we need standardisation of terminology so we all know exactly what we are talking about.
So, we have talked about the past and present, let’s think about the future. Robert, what do you think 3D geospatial will look like in five years’ time?
Robert: Ideally, I would like to see a national platform or some agreed way that multi agencies can easily share data. Obviously, the best way would be if that were paid for centrally but that’s not going to happen so we need partners to understand that by sharing data we can build this national resource that can be used by different agencies.
I also think we will see the continued elevation of drones and the data they capture. Prices for software are coming down and it’s easier to build our data and share it. Accuracy of data is also really changing, so modelling we did just five years ago looks terrible compared to the data we are producing now. We are looking at new methodologies, for example Gaussian splats, and we are combining our mesh models with lidar and ground level data, so I think we are also going to see a real increase in the hardware to process larger datasets.
We are going to see more agency sharing platforms, with parties able to bring their own data, and I think we are going to see some kind of standards with working groups or national bodies putting processes into place that make it easier for users to access, share and create their own data.
Fergus: Laura is 3D the future? Are we all going to be working in 3D, is 2D in the past?
Laura: Another tough question but I think so. It makes sense, doesn’t it? We live in that world and there are more and more generic tools, used by the general public, that becoming standard, so there is an expectation as local authorities and the public sector because, actually it represents the real world. When we look at examples around engagement, consultations, when we publish in 3D, we show the reality and people understand where they are, where the development will take place, and what impact it will have. So, I do think it will become the default, not to say that 2D won’t have value, but 3D generally provides a better basis for analysis, visualisation, and engagement.
Fergus: We can’t have a geospatial session without mentioning AI. Christopher, how important is AI in unlocking geospatial?
Christopher: Its hugely important because it will let us model more effectively, it’s going to bring down costs so we can have that national model for a much lower price. But ultimately, I think it will give citizens a voice. At the moment co-design is something that only really happens with big agencies, it’s for major one-offs and its just pushed at people, it’s not really scalable. If we want o give citizens a voice the first thing we need to do is publish the web map, like Laura said, where people can see consents, they can see what the future of their town is. Allowing people, through a language model, to be able to suggest changes and have those changes modelled, would actually give them a voice and encourage them to be more pro-growth, and ultimately a language model, interfacing with a web map is the vehicle to do that.
Fergus: And Ralph, what is the capability or breakthrough that you are most excited about?
Ralph: In such a fast-moving space as geospatial, as Robert mentioned, I think splatting at scale, and by the way that is such a great phrase, will be a major breakthrough in the next few years. I think if anyone has visualised Gaussian splats, they will instantly realise how they can advance geospatial, the quality of the combination of photogrammetry and visual impact is quite breathtaking but it’s not a technology that is going to exist in isolation. It needs to be something that is brought in alongside existing technologies, so again we are talking about all different types of data working together.
Fergus: So, what needs to happen, where do we need to go next? Is it policy, standards, Laura what do you think?
Laura: I think a lot of it will be around continuing what we are doing and collaborating. So, we have spent a lot of time sharing what we are doing with other local authorities, with our suppliers, with universities, to really make sure we are using everyone’s expertise effectively and sharing our experience and outputs for engagement. For example, we work very closely with our university and we have a physical model that supports our engagement and the university have led on this and we have worked with Bluesky around AI products derived from our mesh model.
As a local authority we don’t have the time to do all of those investigations so, through collaborations, we can make sure that everyone is doing the bits that are expert in and sharing good practice.
Fergus: Turning to our audience, can we have a show of hands as to who is using 3D geospatial? About 50%, that’s really good. Now we only have a few minutes left so Laura if you could give one piece of advice to an organisation starting their journey what would it be?
Laura: As I’ve already said make sure you are collaborating locally, but perhaps start simple. That’s is effectively what we did – we knew it would be useful to use 3D but we didn’t necessarily have the data to enable of all the things we wanted to do so we started simple. We started with a public app sharing the developments that were happening across the city. We started with simple block data integrated with the developments and we shared that with investors, etc.
So, I think starting simple, in a business area that you know will gain value, is the best place to start. Show your value, and then you can move onto the more complicated examples.
Fergus: Good advice, thank you. Ralph, in one sentence, what is the biggest reason to invest in 3D geospatial today?
Ralph: I think humans are inherently visual. We think spatially and 3D shows us where things are. Its massively important as it helps us understand and simulate interactions and it helps us understand how things might fail and that is critically important across all of the functions we have discussed.
Fergus: Thank you Ralph and thank you panel and audience for helping us invoke this conversation. This was brought together by the AGI 3D Network and we look forward to continuing these discussions at future events.