GeoLayers Studio
Keep source data, map context and outputs in one project.
Explore →CASE STUDYPlanning
Planning
Suitability Analysis
An applied GeoLayers workflow showing how to move from project evidence to a structured planning suitability analysis result.
Browser-based GISGeoAI + spatial analyticsSouth African context
THE DECISION
What makes a site suitable for this use?
Translate the planning question into explicit criteria. Separate absolute constraints—such as prohibited or unavailable land—from scored criteria such as accessibility, proximity, slope or surrounding land use.
CRITERIA
Prepare comparable spatial evidence
Clean and normalise the selected criteria so they can be compared. Define whether higher values are better, lower values are better or a target range is preferred.
WEIGHTS
Make priorities visible
Assign weights based on the decision context and document why they were chosen. Run alternative weight scenarios so the final ranking does not depend on one hidden set of assumptions.
RESULT
Generate and inspect the suitability score
Calculate a 0–100 suitability score, map the distribution and inspect high-ranking candidates against the original layers. A good model should make it possible to explain why a candidate scored well.
VALIDATION
Use suitability as screening evidence, not automatic approval
Check shortlisted areas against planning rights, site conditions, stakeholder constraints and any statutory requirements that the model cannot encode. Publish the assumptions alongside the map so the result remains reviewable.
PROJECT INPUTS
Evidence required for a credible analysis
The quality of the result depends on the source evidence and the assumptions attached to it.
- Candidate parcels or analysis grid
- Absolute constraints
- Scored benefit/cost/target criteria
- Normalisation rules and weights
- Planning/environmental/access context for validation
DECISION OUTPUTS
What the workflow should produce
A useful case-study result should leave the project with evidence that can be inspected, compared and communicated—not only a final map.
- Suitability score by candidate
- Excluded areas and reason
- Sensitivity across alternative weights
- Shortlist of high-performing candidates
- Documented criteria and assumptions for review
INTERPRETATION & LIMITATIONS
A high score is a screening result, not a development right
Suitability models compress multiple criteria into one score, which is useful for comparison but can hide uncertainty if the inputs are treated as precise facts. Always distinguish statutory exclusions from weighted preferences, check the resolution and date of source data, test sensitivity to weights and confirm shortlisted sites against planning rights, ownership, engineering feasibility and site-specific investigations.
- Constraints are separated from preferences.
- Weights and normalisation rules are documented.
- Sensitivity testing shows whether the shortlist is stable.
- The final map includes enough context for a planner or reviewer to understand why a site ranked highly.
RELATED CAPABILITIES
Recreate the workflow with connected GeoLayers tools
The case study pattern can be adapted to your own project data rather than copied as a fixed recipe.