Advertisement

The 2010 Hans Cloos lecture

The contribution of urban geology to the development, regeneration and conservation of cities
  • M. G. Culshaw
  • S. J. Price
Original Paper

Abstract

Urban geology began to develop in the 1950s, particularly in California in relation to land-use planning, and led to Robert Legget publishing his seminal book “Cities and geology” in 1973. Urban geology has now become an important part of engineering geology. Research and practice has seen the evolution from single theme spatial datasets to multi-theme and multi-dimensional outputs for a wide range of users. In parallel to the development of these new outputs to aid urban development, regeneration and conservation, has been the growing recognition that city authorities need access to extensive databases of geo-information that are maintained in the long-term and renewed regularly. A further key advance has been the recognition that, in the urban environment, knowledge and understanding of the geology need to be integrated with those of other environmental topics (for example, biodiversity) and, increasingly, with the research of social scientists, economists and others. Despite these advances, it is suggested that the value of urban geology is not fully recognised by those charged with the management and improvement of the world’s cities. This may be because engineering geologists have failed to adequately demonstrate the benefits of urban geological applications in terms of cost and environmental improvement, have not communicated these benefits well enough and have not clearly shown the long-term contribution of geo-information to urban sustainability. Within this context future actions to improve the situation are proposed.

Keywords

Urban geology Databases Geo-information City management Urban sustainability 

Résumé

La géologie urbaine a commencé à se développer dans les années 1950, en particulier en Californie, en relation avec la planification des territoires, et a conduit Robert Legget à publier son ouvrage de référence « Cities and geology » en 1973. La géologie urbaine est maintenant devenue une partie importante de la géologie de l’ingénieur. La recherche et la pratique professionnelle ont vu l’évolution depuis des banques de données géographiques portant sur un seul thème vers des produits multi-thèmes et multi-dimensionnels destinés à une grande variété d’utilisateurs. En parallèle au développement de ces nouveaux produits d’aide au développement urbain, à la restauration et à la conservation du bâti, est apparue la nécessité croissante pour les autorités administratives de pouvoir accéder à des banques de données géo-référencées complètes, maintenues sur le long terme et renouvelées régulièrement. Une avancée clé suivante a été la reconnaissance que, dans l’environnement urbain, la connaissance et la compréhension de la géologie nécessitent d’être intégrées à une approche environnementale globale (incluant par exemple la biodiversité) et, de plus en plus, à des travaux de recherche issus des sciences économiques et sociales. Malgré ces avancées, il est suggéré que l’importance de la géologie urbaine n’est pas totalement reconnue par les personnes en charge de la gestion des villes et de leur développement. L’explication vient peut-être du fait que les ingénieurs géologues n’ont pas réussi à démontrer correctement les avantages des applications de la géologie urbaine en termes de coûts et d’intérêt environnemental, n’ont pas communiqué suffisamment bien sur ces sujets et n’ont pas montré clairement les apports des données géo-référencées au développement durable urbain, sur le long terme. Dans ce contexte, des actions futures visant à améliorer cette situation sont proposées.

Mots clés

Géologie urbaine Banques de données Géo-référencement Gestion des villes Développement urbain durable 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper is dedicated to Jon Hallam, who was the first author’s guide and friend from his earliest days at the British Geological Survey (BGS) till Jon’s premature death in December 2009. ‘Thank you’ is not enough. The authors are grateful to a large number of individuals who, over many decades, have passed on their knowledge and expertise on the urban environment. Steve Booth (BGS) provided a constructively critical review that helped clarify several parts of the paper. Thanks are due to Dave Brook and, particularly, Brian Marker, both formerly at the UK government department responsible for planning policy (currently the Department for Communities and Local Government), for their leadership in advancing UK research on geology and land-use planning, to Andy Arrick of Roger Tym and Partners for painstakingly explaining how the UK planning system works, to Kevin Northmore, Alan Forster, Pete Hobbs, Dave Bridge, Dave Entwisle, Poul Strange, Steve Booth, Richard Ellison, Kate Royse, Ian Jackson and many others at the BGS for their innovative work on urban geological mapping over the last 35 years, to Dave Falvey for agreeing to fund a raising of the profile of urban geology at the BGS, to Tim Duffy, also of the BGS, and Sandra Alker, formerly of the University of Bradford, for their enormous contribution to the development of the Environmental Information System for Planners (EISP), to Keith Turner of the Colorado School of Mines and Ed De Mulder formerly of the Dutch Geological Survey, for stimulating conversations on a range of aspects relating to urban geological information over many years, to Holger Kessler, Steve Mathers (both of the BGS) and Hans-Georg Sobisch of InSight GmbH, for their enthusiasm to develop user-friendly and useful 3D modelling software and to Ian Jefferson and Chris Rogers at the University of Birmingham for discussions about their innovative research on ‘Urban Futures.’ The first author also wishes to acknowledge the career-long support, collaboration and friendship of Fred Bell (formerly at the University of Kwa-Zulu Natal) and John Cripps (University of Sheffield). Finally, the first author particularly wishes to thank the IAEG for the award of the Hans Cloos Medal. The paper is published with the permission of the Executive Director of the British Geological Survey (NERC).

References

  1. Afonso MJ, Chaminé HI, Gomes A, Fonseca P, Marques JM, Guimarães L, Guilhermino L, Teixeira, J, Carvalho JM, Tocha FT (2009) Urban hydrogeomorphology and geology of the Porto metropolitan area (NW Portugal). In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 92Google Scholar
  2. Alfors JT, Burnett JL, Gay TE (1973) Urban geology master plan for California. The nature, magnitude and costs of geologic hazards in California and recommendations for their mitigation. Bulletin 198. California Division of Mines and Geology, SacramentoGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen PM, Flanigan WD (1986) Geology of Dallas, Texas, United States of America. Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geol 23:363–418Google Scholar
  4. Al-Solami A, Al-Barakati G, Sayed SAS, Al-Bahloul S, Al-Tunsi B (2009) Engineering geological mapping of the holy city of Makkah Al Mukarramah, Saudi Arabia. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 552Google Scholar
  5. Al-Suba’i KH, Barat KA (2009) Ground conditions of Sana’a City, Yemen Republic. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 29Google Scholar
  6. Amaral C, Barros WT (1994) Planning and pollution Engineering geological mapping and zoning in Rio de Janeiro. In: Oliveira R, Rodrigues LF, Coehlo AG, Cuhna AP (eds) Proceedings of the 7th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology, Lisbon, Portugal. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam. 2, pp 1111–1116Google Scholar
  7. Ami HM (1885) Additional notes on the geology and paleontology of Ottawa and vicinity. Ottawa Field Nat Club Trans 6:251–259Google Scholar
  8. Ami HM (1891) On the geology of Quebec and environs. Geol Soc Am Bull 2:477–500Google Scholar
  9. Ami HM (1892) Additional notes on the geology and paleontology of Ottawa and its environs. Ottawa Nat 6:73–78Google Scholar
  10. Ami HM (1897) Synopsis of the geology of Montreal. British Medical Association Guide & Souvenir, pp 45–49Google Scholar
  11. Ami HM (1900) On the geology of the principal cities in Eastern Canada. Proceedings and transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, second series, vol 6, section 4, pp 125–164Google Scholar
  12. Anon (1898) Summary of progress of the Geological Survey of the United Kingdom for 1897. Memoirs of the Geological Survey. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Anon (1900) Lord Playfair. His beneficent career as a man of science. The New York Times, 10 February 1900Google Scholar
  14. Anon (1972) British Standard code of practice for foundations, No. CP2004. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Anon (1977) South Essex geological and geotechnical survey. Part 11: Maps and sections. Report of the Institute of Geological Sciences, London (now the British Geological Survey, Keyworth, UK)Google Scholar
  16. Anon (1985) Geology for urban planning. Report ST/ESCAP/394. Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  17. Anon (1988a) Geology and urban development. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 1. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Anon (1988b) Urban geology in Asia and the Pacific. Atlas of urban geology, vol 2. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Anon (1988c) Urban geology of coastal lowlands in China. Atlas of urban geology, vol 3. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Anon (1990a) Geology for land use planning in Asia. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 4. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Anon (1990b) Geology for land use planning in tropical deltas. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 5. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Anon (1990c) Planning Policy Guidance 14: Development on unstable land. Department of the Environment. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Anon (1991) Polders in Asia. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 6. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Anon (1994) Planning Policy Guidance 23: Planning and pollution control. Department of the Environment. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Anon (1995a) Environmental and urban geology of Ningbo City, Zhejiang Province, China. Atlas of Urban Geology, Vol 7. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Anon (1995b) Manual for a Workshop-cum-Training Course on “Environmental and urban geology of fast-growing cities,” Shanghai, China. Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), BangkokGoogle Scholar
  27. Anon (1996a) Manual on environmental and urban geology of fast-growing cities. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 9. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Anon (1996b) Geological aspects of land-use planning. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 8. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Anon (1996c) Planning policy guidance 14: development on unstable land. Annex 1–landslides and planning. Department of the Environment. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. Anon (1999a) Urban geology in Asia and the Pacific Region. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 10. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Anon (1999b) Urban geology of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 11. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Anon (2000) Report on engineering group strategy review. Available on the Geological Society of London website at: http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/webdav/site/GSL/shared/pdfs/specialist%20and%20regional%20groups/Report_on_Engineering_group_strategy_review_2000.pdf (sic)
  33. Anon (2001a) Integrating geology in urban planning. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 12. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Anon (2001b) Urban geology and the impact on our lives. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 13. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Anon (2001c) Sustainable urban drainage systems––best practice manual. Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) Publication, C523. CIRIA, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. Anon (2002a) Planning Policy Guidance 14: Development on unstable land. Annex 2–subsidence and planning. Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions. The Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  37. Anon (2002b) BS EN ISO 14688-1:2002 Geotechnical investigation and testing––identification and classification of soil––Part 1: identification and description. British Standards Institution, LondonGoogle Scholar
  38. Anon (2003a) The ground beneath our feet: a factor in urban planning. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 14. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Anon (2003b) Geological and geoenvironmental studies of the Calcutta Metropolitan area: the Calcutta Megacity Project. In: The ground beneath our feet: a factor in urban planning. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 14, 221–237. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Anon (2003c) BS EN ISO 14689-1:2003 Geotechnical investigation and testing––identification and classification of rock––Part 1: identification and description. British Standards Institution, LondonGoogle Scholar
  41. Anon (2003d) The economic benefit of the BGS: executive summary. 8p. Roger Tym and Partners, London. Available at: http://www.bgs.ac.uk/about/economicbenefits.html
  42. Anon (2004a) Visioning the future of engineering geology. Association of Engineering Geologists, Denver, Colorado, Special Publication No. 19 (on CD-ROM)Google Scholar
  43. Anon (2004b) The Building Regulations 2000 (Structure), Approved Document A, 2004 Edition. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  44. Anon (2004c) BS EN ISO 14688-2:2004 Geotechnical investigation and testing––identification and classification of soil––Part 2: principles for classification. British Standards Institution, LondonGoogle Scholar
  45. Anon (2006a) Engineering Group of the Geological Society––strategy review 2006. Available on the Geological Society of London website at: http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/webdav/site/GSL/shared/pdfs/specialist%20and%20regional%20groups/STRATEGY_REVIEW.sjt.doc
  46. Anon (2006b) Geology of the cities of the world. Association of Environmental and Engineering Geologists, Denver, USA. On CD-ROMGoogle Scholar
  47. Anon (2006c) Development and flood risk. Planning Policy Statement 25. Department for Communities and Local Government. The Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  48. Anon (2008) Urban geology. Available at the Geological Survey of Canada website at: http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/urbgeo/index_e.php
  49. Anon (2009) Geological atlas of St Petersburg. Committee for Nature Use, Environmental Protection and Ecological Safety, The Government of St Petersburg, St Petersburg. Available on CD-ROM and as a free download from http://www.infoeco.ru/geoinform/dl/atlas_eng.pdf
  50. Anon (2010a) Atlas of Shanghai urban geology (in Chinese). ISBN 978-7-116-06909-1Google Scholar
  51. Anon (2010b) Shanghai urban geology (in Chinese). ISBN 978-7-116-06910-7Google Scholar
  52. Anon (2010c) Urban geology and urban sustainable development. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Urban Geology, Shanghai, China. In two volumes: Abstracts and Powerpoint Files. China Geological Survey, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  53. Apandi T, Wiriosudarmo S (1999) Some aspects of environmental geology for future land-use development in Jakarta, Indonesia. In: Urban geology in Asia and the Pacific Region. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 10. United Nations, New York, pp 95–109Google Scholar
  54. Arnould M (1967) La Géologie de l’Ingénieur. Annales de L’ Institut Technique du Batiment et des Travaux Publics), n° 231–232, 416–429Google Scholar
  55. Arnould M, Broquet JF, Deveughele M, Usseglio Polatera JM (1979) Cartographie géotechnique de la Ville de Paris–premièeres réalisations (13 ème, 19 ème et 20 ème arrondissemants). Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geology 19:109–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Asaduzzaman ATH (1996) Urban geology and environmental aspects of Dhaka City, Bangladesh. In: manual on environmental and urban geology of fast-growing cities. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 9. United Nations, New York, pp 12.1–12.7Google Scholar
  57. Barclay WJ, Ellison RA, Northmore KJ (1990) A geological basis for land-use planning: Garforth-Castleford-Pontefract. British Geological Survey Technical Report WA/90/3. British Geological Survey, KeyworthGoogle Scholar
  58. Barroso JA, Cabral S, Pedroto AES, Lino GLS (1986) Geological-geotechnical mapping of Rio de Janeiro’s Metropolitan region. In: Proceedings of the 5th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology, Buenos Aires. A.A. Balkema. Rotterdam 3:1715–1724Google Scholar
  59. Bauer M, Thuro K, Marcus S, Neumann P (2009) The geology of Munich (Germany) and its significance for ground modelling in urban areas. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 454Google Scholar
  60. Bell FG, Culshaw MG, Forster A, Nathanail CP (2009) The engineering geology of the Nottingham area. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) “Engineering Geology of Tomorrow’s Cities.” Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication, vol 22, pp 1–24Google Scholar
  61. Bennett MR, Doyle P, Larwood JG, Prosser CD (eds) (1996) Geology on your doorstep: the role of urban geology in earth heritage conservation. The Geological Society, LondonGoogle Scholar
  62. Bernknopf RL, Brookshire DS, Soller DR, McKee MJ, Sutter JF, Matti JC, Campbell RH (1993) Societal value of geologic maps. United States Geological Survey Circular 1111, Denver, Colorado, p 53Google Scholar
  63. Bhagwat SB, Ipe VC (2000) Economic benefits of detailed geologic mapping to Kentucky. Illinois State Geological Survey, Special Report 3:30pGoogle Scholar
  64. Bilodeau SW, van Buskirk D, Bilodeau WL (1987) Geology of Boulder, Colorado, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 24:289–332Google Scholar
  65. Bilodeau WL, Bilodeau SW, Gath EM, Oborne M, Proctor RJ (2007) Geology of Los Angeles, United States of America. Environmental and Engineering Geoscience 13:99–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Blais RA, Smith CH, Blanchard JE, Cawley JT, Derry DR, Fortier YO, Henderson GGL, Mackay JR, Scott JS, Seigel HO, Toombs RB, Wilson HDB (1971) Earth sciences serving the nation. Science Council of Canada, Special Study 13Google Scholar
  67. Bottino G, Civita M (1986) Engineering geological features and mapping of subsurface in the metropolitan area of Turin, North Italy. In: Proceedings of the 5th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology, Buenos Aires, vol 3. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 1741–1753Google Scholar
  68. Bourgine B, Dominique S, Marache A, Thierry P (2009) Tools and methods for constructing 3D geological models in the urban environment: the case of Bordeaux. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering Geology of Tomorrow’s Cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 72Google Scholar
  69. Boyer L, Bensoussan A, Durand M, Grice RH, Bérard J (1985) Geology of Montreal, Province of Quebec, Canada. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 22:333–394Google Scholar
  70. Brook D, Marker BR (1987) Thematic geological mapping as an essential tool in land-use planning. In: Culshaw MG, Bell FG, Cripps JC, O’Hara M (eds) “Planning and Engineering Geology”, Engineering Geology Special Publication No. 4. Geological Society, London, pp 211–214Google Scholar
  71. Brown LJ, Beetham RD, Paterson BR, Weeber JH (1995) Geology of Christchurch, New Zealand. Environmental and Engineering Geoscience 1:427–488Google Scholar
  72. Browne MAE, Hull JH (1985) The environmental geology of Glasgow, Scotland––a legacy of urban surface and subsurface mining. In: Glaser JD, Edwards J (eds) Proceedings of the 20th Forum on the Geology of Industrial Minerals, vol 2. Maryland Geological Survey Special Publication, Baltimore, pp 141–152Google Scholar
  73. Browne MAE, Forsyth IH, McMillan AA (1986) Glasgow, a case study in urban geology. J Geol Soc 143:509–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Burke HF, Price SJ, Crofts RG, Thorpe S (2009) Applied 3D geological modelling in the Mersey Basin, NW England. In: Proceedings of the 6th European Congress on Regional Geoscientific Cartography and Information Systems, Munich, Germany, vol 1. Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt, Augsburg. pp 34–36Google Scholar
  75. Burnett AD (1988) Geological and terrain mapping in Hong Kong. In: Geology and urban development. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 1. United Nations, New York, pp 85–97Google Scholar
  76. Campbell SDG, Merritt JE, O Dochartaigh BE, Mansour M, Hughes AG, Fordyce FM, Entwisle DC, Monaghan AA, Loughlin S (2010) 3D geological models and hydrogeological applications: supporting urban development––a case study in Glasgow-Clyde, UK. In: Zeitschrift der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Geowissenschaften, 161, 2, 251–262Google Scholar
  77. Carter NG (1987) Geology of Port Elizabeth, Republic of South Africa. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 24:441–467Google Scholar
  78. Cavaleiro VM, Rodrigues-Carvalho JA, Gomes LF (2009) Geotechnical mapping in the area of Covilhã, Portugal. A methodology using GIS. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 211Google Scholar
  79. Cendrero A, Sánchez J, Antolin C, Arnal S, Diaz de Terán JR, Francés E, Martínez V, Moñino M, Nieto M, Nogales I, Pérez E, Rios C, Robles F, Romero A, Suárez C (1990) Geoscientific maps for planning in semi-arid regions: valencia and Gran Canaria, Spain. Eng Geol 29:291–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Chen J, Wang Q, Jin D, Xia Y, Que J (2010) Urban geo-environmental vulnerability problems of Kunming City. In: Williams AL, Pinches GM, Chin CY, McMorran TJ, Massey CI (eds) Proceedings of the 11th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment on: “Geologically Active,” Auckland, New Zealand. CRC Press/Balkema, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp 4047–4056 (on CD-ROM)Google Scholar
  81. Ciugudean-Toma V, Stefanescu I (2009) Engineering geology of the Bucharest city area, Romania. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 235Google Scholar
  82. Clary JH, Korecki NT, Mondragon RR (1984) Geology of Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 21:127–156Google Scholar
  83. Cooke RU (1984) Geomorphological hazards in Los Angeles. A study of slope and sediment problems in a metropolitan county. The London Research Series in Geography 7. George Allen & Unwin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  84. Costa JE, Bilodeau SW (1982) Geology of Denver, Colorado, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 19:261–314Google Scholar
  85. Cratchley CR, Conway BW, Northmore KJ, Denness B (1979) Regional geological and geotechnical survey of south Essex. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 19:30–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Cratchley CR, Hobbs PRN, Petrides G, Loucaides G (1982) Geotechnical map of Nicosia. Geological Survey Department of Cyprus, NicosiaGoogle Scholar
  87. Culshaw MG (2004a) The first engineering geological publication in the UK? Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 37:227–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Culshaw MG (2004b) Aspects of the applied geology of north-east Wales (Flintshire and Wrexham). In: Nichol D, Bassett MG, Deisler VK (eds) Urban geology in wales. National Museum of Wales Geological Series No. 23, Cardiff. pp 35–44Google Scholar
  89. Culshaw MG (2005) From concept towards reality: developing the attributed 3D geological model of the shallow subsurface. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 38:231–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Culshaw MG, Northmore KJ (2002) An engineering geological map for site investigation planning and construction type identification. In: Van Rooy JL, Jermy CA (eds) Proceedings of the 9th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment Congress, Durban, 423–431. South African Institute of Engineering and Environmental Geologists, Pretoria. On CD-ROMGoogle Scholar
  91. Culshaw MG, Sutarto NR, Duncan SV (1979) Engineering geological mapping of the Banda Aceh alluvial basin, Northern Sumatra, Indonesia. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 19:40–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Culshaw MG, Bell FG, Cripps JC (1988) Thematic geological mapping as an aid to engineering hazard avoidance in areas of abandoned mineworkings. In: Forde MC (ed) Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on “Construction in Areas of Abandoned Mineworkings (Mineworkings 88),” Edinburgh. Engineering Technics Press, Edinburgh, pp 69–76Google Scholar
  93. Culshaw MG, Jackson I, Giles JRA (2006a) The provision of digital spatial data for engineering geologists. Bull Eng Geol Environ 65:185–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Culshaw MG, Nathanail CP, Leeks GJL, Alker S, Bridge D, Duffy T, Fowler D, Packman JC, Swetnam R, Wadsworth R, Wyatt B (2006b) The role of web-based environmental information in urban planning––the environmental information system for planners. Sci Total Environ 360:233–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) (2009a) Engineering Geology of Tomorrow’s Cities. Proceedings of the 10th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment (IAEG2006), Engineering Geology Special Publication No. 22, Geological Society, LondonGoogle Scholar
  96. Culshaw MG, Tragheim DG, Bateson L, Donnelly LJ (2009b) Measurement of ground movements in Stoke-on-Trent (UK) using radar interferometry. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering Geology of Tomorrow’s Cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 125Google Scholar
  97. Da Silva APF, Rodrigues-Carvalho JA (2009) Engineering geological mapping for the urban planning of Almada County, Portugal. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 165Google Scholar
  98. Dai FC, Liu YH, Wang SJ (1994) Urban geology: a case study of Tongchuan city, Shaanxi Province, China. Eng Geol 38:165–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. De Beer JH (1986) Geology of Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 23:105–137Google Scholar
  100. De Beer H, Price SJ, Ford JR (2011) Modelling 3D geological and anthropogenic deposits in the heritage cities of York (UK) and Bergen (NO). In: Quaternary International. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference of Landscape Archaeology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam (in press)Google Scholar
  101. De Freitas MH (2009) Geology; its principles, practice and potential for geotechnics. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 42:397–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. De Mulder EFJ (1988) Engineering geolgoical maps: a cost-benefit analysis. In: Marinos PG, Koukis GC (eds) Proceedings of a Symposium on “The engineering geology of ancient monuments, works and historical sites: preservation and protection,” Athens. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam. 1347–1357. Republished in 1990 in Environmental Geology, 16, 23–28Google Scholar
  103. De Mulder EFJ (1994) Background of the International Working Group on Urban Geology. In: Sijing W, CunyuW (eds). Geoscience in urban development. Proceedings of Landplan IV. China Ocean Press, Beijing. 589–594 (actually numbered 1–6 at the back of the book)Google Scholar
  104. De Mulder EFJ (1996) Urban geoscience. In: McCall GJH, De Mulder EFJ, Marker BR (eds) Urban Geoscience. Association for Geoscience in Development (AGID) Special Publication Series, No 20. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 1–11Google Scholar
  105. De Mulder EFJ, McCall GJH, Marker BR (2001) Geosciences for urban planning and management. In: Marinos PG, Koukis GC, Tsiambaos GC, Stoutnaras GC (eds) Proceedings of the International Symposium on “Engineering Geology and the Environment,” Athens, vol 4. Swets & Zeitlinger B.V., Lisse, The Netherlands, 3417–3438Google Scholar
  106. Dearden RA (2010) Feasibility study for a SuDS suitability tool. British Geological Survey Internal Report IR/10/013. Keyworth, NottinghamGoogle Scholar
  107. Dearman WR (1991) Engineering geological mapping. Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  108. Dearman WR, Strachan A (1983) Engineering geological plans of Tyne and Wear County N.E. England. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 26:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Dearman WR, Money MS, Coffey RJ, Scott P, Wheeler M (1977) Engineering geological mapping of the Tyne and Wear conurbation, North-east England. Q J Eng Geol 10:134–168Google Scholar
  110. Dearman WR, Money MS, Strachan AD, Coffey JR, Marsden A (1979) A regional engineering geological map of the Tyne and Wear County N.E. England. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 19:5–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Do Val MA, Lázaro AA, Stuermer MM (2009) The influence of geology on the urban development of São Paulo City, Brazil. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 480Google Scholar
  112. Dorsch J (2004) Eduard Suess: master tectonicist and progenitor of urban geology. Presentation to the North-Central Section of the Geological Society of America, 38th Annual Meeting, St Louis, USA, 1–2 April 2004. At website: http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2004NC/finalprogram/abstract_71698.htm and Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, 36 (3):18
  113. Douglas I, Lawson N (2001) The human dimensions of geomorphological work in Britain. J Ind Ecol 4:9–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Ellison RA, Calow R (2001) The establishment of baseline information as a basis for cost-benefit analysis of geological data. In: Integrating geology in urban planning. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 12, pp 19–29. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  115. Entwisle DC, Wildman G, Campbell SDG, Merritt JE, Self SJ, Monaghan AA, Reeves HJ (2008) 3D geological modelling and geotechnical GIS for planning and development: an example from Glasgow, UK. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European Regional Conference of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment (EuroEnGeo 2008), Madrid, Spain. Asociación Española de Geologia Aplicada a la Ingeniería, Madrid. CD-ROM Paper No. 046Google Scholar
  116. Fernandez JA, Pinto JLP, Lopez FF (1982) Geoscientific map of the natural environment of the Province of Almeria. In: Proceedings of the 4th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology, New Delhi, vol 1. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 47–56Google Scholar
  117. Ford J, Burke H, Royse K, Mathers S (2008) The 3D geology of London and the Thames Gateway: a modern approach to geological surveying and its relevance in the urban environment. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European Regional Conference of the International Association of Engineering Geology and the Environment (EuroEnGeo 2008), Madrid, Spain. Asociación Española de Geologia Aplicada a la Ingeniería, Madrid. CD-ROM Paper No. 015Google Scholar
  118. Forster A (1997) The engineering geology of the London area: 1:50,000 geological sheets 256, 257, 270, 271. Technical Report WN/97/27. British Geological Survey, KeyworthGoogle Scholar
  119. Forster A, Hobbs PRN, Wyatt RJ, Entwisle DC (1987) Environmental geology maps of Bath and the surrounding area for engineers and planners. In: Culshaw MG, Bell FG, Cripps JC, O’Hara M (eds) “Planning and Engineering Geology”, Engineering Geology Special Publication No. 4. Geological Society, London, pp 221–235Google Scholar
  120. Forster A, Lawrence DJD, Highley DE, Cheney CS, Arrick A (2004) Applied geological mapping for planning and development: an example from Wigan, UK. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 37:301–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Foster C, Pennington CVL, Culshaw MG, Lawrie K. The National Landslide Database of Great Britain: development, evolution and applications. Landslides (submitted)Google Scholar
  122. Gates WCB, Watters RJ (1992) Geology of Reno and Truckee Meadows, Nevada, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 29:229–298Google Scholar
  123. Gazel J, Peter A, Simon JM (1982) Consequences d’une structure geologique particuliere sur l’urbanisation de la butte Montmartre a Paris. In: Proceedings of the 4th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology, New Delhi, vol 1. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 201–210Google Scholar
  124. Ghayoumian J, Fatemi Aghda SM, Maleki M, Shoaei Z (2009) Engineering geology of Quaternary deposits of Greater Tehran, Iran. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 248Google Scholar
  125. Gordon T, Skuse M, Statham I (2004) Urban geology of Cardiff centre and the Bay region. In: Nichol D, Bassett MG, Deisler VK (eds) Urban geology in Wales. National Museum of Wales Geological Series No. 23, Cardiff. pp 13–22Google Scholar
  126. Gostelow TP, Browne MAE (1986) Engineering geology of the upper Forth Estuary. Report of the British Geological Survey, 16, 8. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  127. Gostelow TP, Tindale K (1980) Engineering geological investigations into the siting of heavy industry on the east coast of Scotland. 1. The north side of the Cromarty estuary. Engineering Geology Report 80/51. Institute of Geological Sciences, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  128. Gozzard JR (1985) Medium-scale engineering- and environmental-geology mapping of the Perth Metropolitan region, Western Australia. Eng Geol 22:97–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Grecchi RC, Pejon OJ (1998) Geoenvironmental mapping of region of Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil. In: Moore D, Hungr O (eds) Proceedings of the 8th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology and the Environment, Vancouver, Canada, vol 4. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 2591–2597Google Scholar
  130. Gwynn JW, Klauk RH, Mabey DR, Mulvey WE, Sprinkel DA, Tripp BT, Black BD, Nelson CV (1990) Geology of Salt Lake City, Utah, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 27:391–478Google Scholar
  131. Hack R, Orlic B, Ozmutlu S, Zhu S, Rengers N (2006) Three and more dimensional modelling in geo-engineering. Bull Eng Geol Environ 65:143–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Hasan SE, Moberly RL, Caoile JA (1988) Geology of Greater Kansas City, Missouri and Kansas, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 25:281–341Google Scholar
  133. Heiken G, Fakundiny R, Sutter J (eds) (2003) Earth science in the city: a reader. American Geophysical Union, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  134. Hobbs PRN (1982) Geotechnical map of Nicosia. British Geological Survey Technical Report EG/82/10. British Geological Survey, KeyworthGoogle Scholar
  135. Hobbs PRN, Humphreys B, Rees JG, Tragheim DG, Jones LD, Gibson A, Rowlands K, Hunter G, Airey R (2002) Monitoring the role of landslides in ‘soft cliff’ coastal recession. In: McInnes RG, Jakeways J (eds) Proceedings of an International Conference on “Instability–planning and management,” Ventnor, Isle of Wight, UK. Thomas Telford, London, pp 589–600Google Scholar
  136. Holden J, Howard AJ, West LJ, Maxfield E, Panter I, Oxley J (2009) A critical review of hydrological data collection for assessing preservation risk for urban waterlogged archaeology: a case study from the City of York, UK. J Environ Manag 90:3197–3204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Holmes TV (1884) The completion of the one-inch map of the geological survey of England and wales. Letter to the editor. Geological Magazine, Decade III, vol I, p 240Google Scholar
  138. Hough E, Kessler H, Lelliot M, Proce SJ, Reeves HJ, McC Bridge D (2006). Look before you leap: the use of geoenvironmental data models for preliminary site appraisal. In: Moore HM, Fox HR, Elliott S (eds) Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the International Affiliation of Land Reclamationists on “Land Reclamation: extending the boundaries.” Swets & Zeitlinger, Lisse, pp 369–375Google Scholar
  139. Hunt DVL, Jefferson I, Rogers CDF (2009) A toolkit for testing sustainability use of underground space in future scenarios. In: Proceedings of the 7th Asian Regional Conference of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment on “Geological engineering problems in major construction projects,” Chengdu, China. Institute of Geology and Geophysics Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, pp 802–812Google Scholar
  140. Hunt DVL, Jefferson I, Rogers CDF (2010) Sustainable use of the underground space. In: Williams, AL, Pinches GM, Chin CY, McMorran TJ, Massey CI (eds) Proceedings of the 11th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment on: “Geologically Active,” Auckland, New Zealand. CRC Press/Balkema, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp 4235–4244 (on CD-ROM)Google Scholar
  141. Jackson I (2009) OneGeology–making geology accessible. In: Proceedings of 6th the European Congress on Regional Geoscientific Cartography and Information Systems, Munich, Germany, vol 1. Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt, Augsburg, pp 245–247Google Scholar
  142. Jahns RH (1958) Residential ills in the Heartbreak Hills of Southern California. Eng Sci 22:13–20Google Scholar
  143. Kapoor AK (1982) Geotechnical studies and its application in environmental management of Ujjain City, Madhya Pradesh, India. In: Proceedings of the 4th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology, New Delhi, vol 1. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 187–200Google Scholar
  144. Karakouzian M, Candia MA, Wyman RV, Watkins MD, Hudyma N (1997) Geology of Lima, Peru. Environ Eng Geosci 3:55–88Google Scholar
  145. Karnawati D, Ibraim I, Anderson MG, Holcombe EA, Mummery GT, Renauld J-P, Wang Y (2004) An initial approach to identifying slope stability controls in southern Java and to providing community-based landslide warning information. In: Glade T, Anderson M, Crozier MJ (eds) Landslide hazard and risk. Wiley, Chichester, pp 401–428Google Scholar
  146. Karnawati D, Pramumijoyo S, Hendrayana H (2009) Geology of Yogyakarta, Java; the dynamic volcanic arc city. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 363Google Scholar
  147. Karrow PF, White OL (eds) (1998a) Urban geology of Canadian cities. Special Paper 42. Geological Association of Canada Special Paper 42. St John’s, Newfoundland. ISBN 0-919216-62-5Google Scholar
  148. Karrow PF, White OL (1998b) Preface. In: Karrow PF, White OL (eds) “Urban geology of Canadian cities”. Special Paper 42. Geological Association of Canada Special Paper 42. St John’s, Newfoundland, pp vi–viiiGoogle Scholar
  149. Karrow PF, White OL (1998c) A summary view of Canadian urban geology. In: Karrow PF, White OL (eds) 1998. Urban geology of Canadian cities. Special Paper 42. Geological Association of Canada Special Paper 42. St John’s, Newfoundland, pp 11–20Google Scholar
  150. Kaul BL, Dasgupta G (1999) The role of earth science in urban planning and sustainable development: a case study of the Delhi area. In: Urban geology in Asia and the Pacific Region. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 10. United Nations, New York, pp 79–87Google Scholar
  151. Kessler H, Mathers S, Sobisch H-G (2009a) The capture and dissemination of integrated 3D spatial knowledge at the British Geological Survey using GSI3D software and methodology. Comput Geosci 35(6):1311–1321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Kessler H, Campbell D, Ford J, Giles J, Hughes A, Jackson I, Peach D, Price S, Sobisch H-G, Terrington R, Wood B (2009b) Building on geological models––the vision of an environmental modelling platform. In: Proceedings of the Geological Society of America Annual Meeting 2009, Illinois, USA. Geological Society of America, Boulder Colorado, USA, pp 24–30Google Scholar
  153. Khantaprab C, Boonnop N (1988) Urban geology of Bangkok metropolis: a preliminary assessment. In: Geology and urban development. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 1, pp 107–135. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  154. Kingsley C (1877) Town geology. Isbister & Co., LondonGoogle Scholar
  155. Knill J (2003) Core values: the first Hans-Cloos lecture. Bull Eng Geol Environ 62:1–34Google Scholar
  156. Kong TB, Komoo I (1990) Urban geology: case study of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Eng Geol 28(1–2):71–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. Kraft BW (1981) The background and engineering geology of the city of Pretoria. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on the Engineering Geology of Cities in South Africa, pp 168–171Google Scholar
  158. Krauter E, Feuerbach J, Witzel M (1990) The engineering geological map of Mainz/Rhine, FRG. In: Price DG (ed) Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology, Amsterdam, August 1990, vol 1. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 163–168Google Scholar
  159. Kumapley NK (1982) Geologic and geotechnical inputs into the planning of the city of Accra, Ghana. In: Nutalaya P, Karasudhi P, Thanasuthipitak T, Kheoruenromne I, Sudhiprakarn A (eds). Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on: “Soil, geology and landforms: impact on land use planning in developing countries” (Landplan I). Association of Geoscientists for International Development, Bangkok, pp F3.1–F3.12Google Scholar
  160. Leeds DF (1966) Engineering seismology in Southern California. In: Engineering geology in southern California. Special Publication. Association of Engineering Geologists, Los Angeles, pp 35–53Google Scholar
  161. Leeks GJL, Jones TP, Hollingworth NT (2006) Forward: an introduction to UK research on the urban environment. Sci Total Environ 360:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Legget RF (1969) Urban geology. Canadian Building Digest 113. Institute for Research in Construction, Ottawa, 4pGoogle Scholar
  163. Legget RF (1973) Cities and geology. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  164. Legget RF (ed) (1982) Geology under cities. Reviews in engineering geology, vol 5. Geological Society of America, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  165. Leighton FB (1966) Landslides and hillside development. In: Engineering geology in southern California. Special Publication. Association of Engineering Geologists, Los Angeles, pp 149–193Google Scholar
  166. Lelliott MR, Bridge DMcC, Kessler H, Price SJ, Seymour KJ (2006) The application of 3D geological modelling to aquifer recharge assessments in an urban environment. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 39:293–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Lelliott MR, Cave MR, Wealthall GP (2009) A structured approach to the measurement of uncertainty in 3D geological models. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 42:95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. Liverman DGE, Pereira CPG, Marker B (eds) (2008) Communicating environmental geoscience. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, p 305Google Scholar
  169. Lund WR, Christenson GE, Harty KM, Hecker S, Atwood G, Case WF, Gill HE, Galster RW, Laprade WT (1991) Geology of Seattle, Washington, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 28:235–302Google Scholar
  170. Lynch K (1981) A theory of good city form. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  171. Marache A, Breysse D, Piette C, Thierry P (2009) Geotechnical modeling at the city scale using statistical and geostatistical tools: The Pessac case (France). Eng Geol 107(3–4):67–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Marker BR (1996) The role of the earth sciences in addressing urban resources and constraints. In: McCall GJH, De Mulder EFJ, Marker BR (eds) Urban geosience. Association of Geoscientists in Development (AGID) Special Publication Series, No 20. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 163–179Google Scholar
  173. Matildes R, Taborda R, Almeida IM, Pinto C, Jeremias F (2010) 3D geological model of Lisbon. In: Williams AL, Pinches GM, Chin CY, McMorran TJ, Massey CI (eds) Proceedings of the 11th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment on: “Geologically Active,” Auckland, New Zealand. CRC Press/Balkema, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp 2201–2208 (on CD-ROM)Google Scholar
  174. Maud RR (1981a) The engineering geology of the city of Durban. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on: “The engineering geology of cities in South Africa”, pp 78–82Google Scholar
  175. Maud RR (1981b) The engineering geology of the city of Pietermaritzburg. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on the Engineering Geology of Cities in South Africa, pp 96–98Google Scholar
  176. Maud RR, Bell FG (2002) A brief review of the geology and the engineering geological conditions present in the Durban Metropolitan Region, South Africa. In: Van Rooy JL, Jermy CA (eds) Proceedings of the 9th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment, Durban. pp 2150–2155. South African Institute of Engineering and Environmental Geologists, Pretoria. On CD-ROM only. ISBN 0-620-28559-1Google Scholar
  177. Mavlyanov NG, Siyahi B (2003) Geoecological problems of Tashkent, capital of Uzbekistan. Urban environmental geology in Turkey: current legislation and regulations. In: the ground beneath our feet: a factor in urban planning. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 14, pp 409–411. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  178. McCall GJH, De Mulder EFJ, Marker BR (eds) (1996) Urban geosience. Association of Geoscientists in Development (AGID) Special Publication Series, No 20. A.A. Balkema, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  179. McFeat-Smith I, Workman DR, Burnett AD, Chau EPY (1989) Geology of Hong Kong. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 26:23–107Google Scholar
  180. McGill JT (1964) Growing importance of urban geology. Circular 487. United States Geological Survey, RestonGoogle Scholar
  181. Meisina C (2008) PSInSAR(TM) technique for detecting and monitoring ground deformations in urban areas. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European Regional Conference of the International Association of Engineering Geology and the Environment (EuroEnGeo 2008), Madrid, Spain. Asociación Española de Geologia Aplicada a la Ingeniería, Madrid. CD-ROM Paper No. 032Google Scholar
  182. Mellon P, Frize M (2009) A digital geotechnical data system for the City of Glasgow. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering Geology of Tomorrow’s Cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 346Google Scholar
  183. Mendes RM, Lorandi R (2002) Engineering geology mapping of the urban center area of São José do Rio Preto (Brazil) as an aid to urban planning. In: Van Rooy JL, Jermy CA (eds) Proceedings of the 9th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment, Durban, pp 636–645. South African Institute of Engineering and Environmental Geologists, Pretoria. On CD-ROM only. ISBN 0-620-28559-1Google Scholar
  184. Merritt JE, Monaghan A, Entwisle DC, Hughes A, Campbell SDG, Browne M (2007) 3D attributed models for addressing environmental and engineering geoscience problems in areas of urban regeneration––a case study in Glasgow, UK. First Break 25:79–84Google Scholar
  185. Mironov OK (2010) Data management, GIS and 3D modelling technologies for megapolis geological mapping. In: Williams AL, Pinches GM, Chin CY, McMorran TJ, Massey CI (eds) Proceedings of the 11th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment on: “Geologically Active,” Auckland, New Zealand. CRC Press/Balkema, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp 2241–2247 (on CD-ROM)Google Scholar
  186. Mountain MJ, van der Merwe WJ (1981) Engineering geology of the city of Cape Town. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on the Engineering Geology of Cities in South Africa, pp 103–124Google Scholar
  187. Mückenhausen E, Müller EH (1951) Geologisch bodenkundliche Kartierung des Stadtkteises Bottrop I W für Zwecke der Stadtplanung. Geol Jahrb 66:179–202Google Scholar
  188. Natani JV (1996) Geofactor ignorance in urban planning, leading to disaster: a case study of Jaipur. In: Manual on environmental and urban geology of fast-growing cities. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 9, pp 12.8–12.11. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  189. Nespereira Jato J, Yenes Ortega M, Charfole JF, Sanchez FJ (2009) Engineering geological mapping for the urban area of Salamanca (Spain). In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 315Google Scholar
  190. Nickless EFP (1982) Environmental geology of the Glenrothes district, Fife Region. Description of 1:25,000 sheet NO 20. Report of the Institute of Geological Sciences No. 82/15. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  191. Nield T (2008) Altered priorities ahead: or how to develop fruitful relationships with the media. In: Liverman DGE, Pereira CPG, Marker B (eds) Communicating environmental geoscience, vol 305. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, pp 5–10Google Scholar
  192. Northmore KJ, Bell FG, Culshaw MG (1996) The brickearth of South Essex. Q J Eng Geol 29:147–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  193. Northmore KJ, Bell FG, Culshaw MG (1999) The engineering geology of the Claygate Beds and Bagshot Beds of South Essex. Q J Eng Geol 32:215–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. Nott JF (2003) The urban geology of Darwin, Australia. Quat Int 103:83–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  195. Nutalaya P, Karasudhi P, Thanasuthipitak T, Kheoruenromne I, Sudhiprakarn A (eds) (1982) Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on: “Soil, geology and landforms: impact on land use planning in developing countries” (Landplan I). Association of Geoscientists for International Development, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  196. Ogilvy RD, Meldrum PI, Kuras O, Wilkinson PB, Chambers JE, Sen M, Pulido-Bosch A, Gisbert J, Jorreto S, Frances I, Tsourlos P (2009) Automated monitoring of coastal aquifers with electrical resistivity tomography. Near Surface Geophysics 7(5–6):367–375Google Scholar
  197. Oliveira R, Gomes C, Guimarães S (2009) Engineering geological map of Oporto: a municipal tool for planning and awareness of urban geoscience. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 615Google Scholar
  198. Osipov VI (2009) Geological conditions of Moscow subsurface development. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 254Google Scholar
  199. Osipov VI, Medvedev OP (eds) (1997) Moscow: geology and the city. Moscow Textbooks and Cartolithography Publishing House, Moscow (In Russian)Google Scholar
  200. Parcharidis I, Kokkalas S, Fountoulis I, Foumelis M (2009) Detection and monitoring of active faults in urban environments: time series interferometry on the cities of Patras and Pyrgos (Peloponnese, Greece). Remote Sens 1(4):676–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  201. Peck WA, Neilson JL, Olds RJ, Seddon KD (eds) (1992) Engineering geology of Melbourne. A.A. Balkema, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  202. Pells PJN (ed) (1985) Engineering geology of the Sydney Region. A.A. Balkema, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  203. Penning WH (1872) Notes on nuisances, drains, and dwellings: a short popular treatise on the form and origin of the various nuisances arising in houses, from imperfect drains and other causes, etc. Baillière, Tindall and Cox, London, p 33Google Scholar
  204. Peter A (1966) Essai de carte géotechnique. Sols-Soils, Paris 16:13–28Google Scholar
  205. Phommakayson O (2003) Urban geology in Vientiane Municipality, capital of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. In: The ground beneath our feet: a factor in urban planning. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 14, pp 341–348. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  206. Phu TH, Hung DT (1999) Geology for urban planning in Ho Chi Minh-Bien Hoa-Vung Tau triangular development zone, Viet Nam. In: Urban geology in Asia and the Pacific Region. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 10, United Nations, New York, pp 135–153Google Scholar
  207. Power SJ, Statham I (2004) Applied earth science mapping in the Swansea-Llanelli district: 10 years on. In: Nichol D, Bassett MG, Deisler VK (eds), Urban geology in Wales. National Museum of Wales Geological Series No. 23, Cardiff, pp 44–53Google Scholar
  208. Prame WKBN (1996) Geology, environment and urban planning in Sri Lanka with special reference to the Greater Colombo area: some problems and perspectives. In: Manual on environmental and urban geology of fast-growing cities. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 9, pp 12.29–12.30. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  209. Ford JR, Kessler H, Cooper AH, Price, SJ, Humpage A (2006) An enhanced classification for artificial ground. British Geological Survey Internal Report IR/04/038Google Scholar
  210. Price SJ, Ford JR, Kessler H, Cooper AH, Humpage A (2004) Mapping our impact on the surface of the Earth. Earthwise 20:30–31Google Scholar
  211. Price SJ, Campbell D, Royse K (2007) Geoscience where it matters. Earthwise 25:18–19Google Scholar
  212. Price SJ, Terrington RL, Burke HF, Crofts RG, Thorpe S (2008a) The 3D geological and anthropogenic history of the Mersey Corridor. In: Mathers SJ (ed) Extended Abstracts of the 2nd International GSI3D Conference, British Geological Survey Open File Report OR/08/054. Keyworth, UK, pp 12–13Google Scholar
  213. Price SJ, Terrington RL, Ford JR, Crofts RG, Diamond K, Seymour KJ (2008b) A 3D assessment of urban aquifer vulnerability using geological and buried asset models: Knowsley Industrial Park, NW England. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European Regional Conference of the International Association of Engineering Geology and the Environment (EuroEnGeo 2008), Madrid, Spain. Asociación Española de Geologia Aplicada a la Ingeniería, Madrid. CD-ROM Paper No. 025Google Scholar
  214. Price SJ, Burke HF, Terrington RL, Reeves HR, Boon D, Scheib AJ (2010) The 3D characterisation of the zone of human interaction and the sustainable use of underground space in urban and peri-urban environments: case studies from the UK. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Geowissenschaften 161(2):219–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  215. Price SJ, Ford JR, Cooper AH, Neal C (2011) Humans as major geological and geomorphological agents in the Anthropocene: the significance of artificial ground. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, A 369:1056–1084Google Scholar
  216. Puchner RA (2010) Using Google Earth in geotechnical investigations. In: Williams AL, Pinches GM, Chin CY, McMorran TJ, Massey CI (eds) Proceedings of the 11th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment on: “Geologically Active,” Auckland, New Zealand. CRC Press/Balkema, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp 2393–2400 (on CD-ROM)Google Scholar
  217. Randell DH, Reardon JB, Hileman JA, Matuschka T, Liang GC, Khan AI, Laviolette J (1983) Geology of the city of Long Beach, California, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 20:9–94Google Scholar
  218. Ranga Rau MP, Senthiappan M, Panda PK, Ravindran KV, Shukla HN (1982) Geo-environmental studies in parts of Bhopal and adjoining districts, Madhya Pradesh, India. In: Proceedings of the 4th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology, New Delhi, vol 1. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 27–37Google Scholar
  219. Rau JL (2003) The state of geosecurity in Asian cities. In: The ground beneath our feet: a factor in urban planning. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 14. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  220. Richards NP (2002) Engineering geological and geohazard mapping of the Durban Metropolitan area, Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa. In: Van Rooy JL, Jermy CA (eds) Proceedings of the 9th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment, Durban, pp 725–734. South African Institute of Engineering and Environmental Geologists, Pretoria. On CD-ROM only. ISBN 0-620-28559-1Google Scholar
  221. Richards NP, Botha GA, Schoeman P, Clarke BM, Kota MW, Ngcobo FN (2009) Engineering geological mapping in Pietermaritzburg, South Africa: constraints on development. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 407Google Scholar
  222. Rosenbaum MS, Turner AK (eds) (2003) New paradigms in subsurface prediction. Proceedings of the Euroconference, Spa, Belgium, 7–12 July 2001. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences 99, Springer-Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  223. Royse KR, Entwisle D, Price S, Terrington R (2006) Gateway to Olympic success. Geoscientist 16(5):4–10Google Scholar
  224. Royse K, Aldiss D, Terrington R, Ford J (2008) 3D modelling and visualisation of digital geoscientific data as an aid to land-use planning in the urban environment: examples from the Thames Gateway and their limitations. In: Mathers SJ (ed) Extended Abstracts of the 2nd International GSI3D Conference, British Geological Survey Open File Report OR/08/054. Keyworth, UK, pp 10–11Google Scholar
  225. Royse KR, Rutter HK, Entwisle DC (2009) Property attribution of 3D geological models in the Thames Gateway, London: new ways of visualising geoscientific information. Bull Eng Geol Environ 68:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  226. Rozoz D, Koukis G, Sabatakakis, N (2009) Large-scale engineering geological map of Patras city wider area, Greece. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 241Google Scholar
  227. Schulz WH (2004) Landslides mapped using LIDAR imagery, Seattle, Washington. United States Geological Survey, Open-file Report 2004-1396Google Scholar
  228. Scott JS (1998) Urban geology in Canada–a perspective. In: Karrow PF, White OL (eds) “Urban geology of Canadian cities”. Special Paper 42. Geological Association of Canada Special Paper 42. St John’s, Newfoundland, pp 1–9Google Scholar
  229. Shata AA (1988) Geology of Cairo, Egypt. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 25:149–183Google Scholar
  230. Sherlock RL (1922) Man as a geological agent; an account of his action on inanimate nature. H.F. & G. Witherby, London, p 372pGoogle Scholar
  231. Sijing W, Cunyu W (eds) (1994) Geoscience in urban development. Proceedings of Landplan IV. China Ocean Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  232. Siyahi B (2003) Urban environmental geology in Turkey: current legislation and regulations. In: The ground beneath our feet: a factor in urban planning. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 14, pp 401–408. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  233. Smith A, Ellison RA (1999) Applied geological maps for planning and development: a review of examples from England and Wales, 1983–1996. Q J Eng Geol 32:S1–S44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  234. Strachan A, Dearman WR (1982) The Tyne and Wear databank, N E. England. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 25:45–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  235. Suess E (1862) Der Boden der Stadt Wien (The ground of the city of Vienna). Wilhelm Braumüller, WienGoogle Scholar
  236. Suess E (1885–1908) Das Antlitz der Erde (‘The face of the Earth’). F. Tempsky, Vienna (in 4 volumes)Google Scholar
  237. Suhari S (1996) Urban geology of Greater Bandung, Indonesia. In: Manual on environmental and urban geology of fast-growing cities. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 9, pp 12.12–12.20. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  238. Sujkowski Z, Rosycki SZ (1936) Geologia Warszawy. Zarzad Miejski, WarsawGoogle Scholar
  239. Sun CW (1988) Geological hazards in the urban centre of Kuala Lumpur. In: Geology and urban development. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 1. United Nations, New York, pp 98–106Google Scholar
  240. Tan BK (2009) Urban geology of Kuala Lumpur and Ipoh, Malaysia. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering Geology of Tomorrow’s Cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 24Google Scholar
  241. Tan BK, Rau JL (eds) (1986) Role of geology in planning and development of urban centres in southeast Asia. Proceedings of Landplan II. Association of Geoscientists in Development (AGID) Report Series, No 12, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  242. Tepel RE (2009) The core attributes of engineering geology: a US perspective. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities, vol 22. Engineering Geology Special Publication, Geological Society, London, pp 273–276Google Scholar
  243. Tepel RE (2010) Issue LVI: risk management as the essence of licensed engineering geology practice. AEG News 53(2):32–34Google Scholar
  244. Terrington RL, Napier B, Howard A, Ford JR, Hatton W (2008) Why3D?: the need for solution based modeling in a national geoscience organization. In: Oleschko K (ed) GIS in geology and earth sciences. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference “In Vista of New Approaches for the Geoinformatics,” Queretaro, Mexico. American Institute of Physics, New York, pp 103–112Google Scholar
  245. Terzaghi K (1925) Erdbaumechanik auf bodenphysikalischer Grundlage (Fundamental principles of earth mechanics). Deuticke, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  246. Thanadpipet C, Ramingwong T, Lerdthusnee S (1982) Environmental geology of Chiang Mai. In: Nutalaya P, Karasudhi P, Thanasuthipitak T, Kheoruenromne I, Sudhiprakarn A (eds). Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on: “Soil, geology and landforms: impact on land use planning in developing countries” (Landplan I). Association of Geoscientists for International Development, Bangkok, pp B15.1–B15.14Google Scholar
  247. Thomas RG (1989) Geology of Rome, Italy. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 26:415–476Google Scholar
  248. Toulemont M (1995) Abandoned underground mines. Risks and prevention. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 51:94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  249. Tudes S, Ceryan S (2009) Urban geology of Gumushane. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 832Google Scholar
  250. Tuladhar GB (1996) Urbanization problems, challenges and issues in the Kathmandu Valley. In: Manual on environmental and urban geology of fast-growing cities. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 9, United Nations, New York, pp 12.40–12.42Google Scholar
  251. Turner AK (2003) Putting the user first: implications for subsurface characterisation. In: Rosenbaum MS, Turner AK (eds) New paradigms in subsurface prediction. Proceedings of the Euroconference, Spa, Belgium, 7–12 July 2001. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences 99, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 61–68Google Scholar
  252. Turner AK (2006) Challenges and trends for geological modelling and visualisation. Bull Eng Geol Environ 65:109–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  253. Ündül Ö, Tuğrul A (2009) The engineering geology of İstanbul, Turkey. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 392Google Scholar
  254. Vicente EM, Jermy CA, Schreiner HD (2009) Urban geology of Maputo, Mocambique. In: Culshaw MG, Reeves HJ, Jefferson I, Spink TW (eds) Engineering geology of tomorrow’s cities. Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publication 22, CD paper number 338Google Scholar
  255. Walton M (1982) Engineering geology of the Twin Cities area, Minnesota. In: Legget RF (ed) “Geology under cities”. Reviews in engineering geology, vol 5. Geological Society of America, Boulder, pp 125–131Google Scholar
  256. Waters CN, Northmore K, Prince G, Marker BR (eds) (1996) A geological background for planning and development in the City of Bradford Metropolitan district. Technical Report No. WA/96/1. British Geological Survey, KeyworthGoogle Scholar
  257. Waters CN, Price SJ, Davies J, Tye AM, Brown SE, Schofield DI (2005) Urban geology of Swansea-Neath-Port Talbot. In: Bassett MG, Deisler VK, Nicol D (eds) Urban geology in wales: 2. National Museum of Wales Geological Series No. 24, Cardiff, pp 7–22Google Scholar
  258. West TR, Warder DL (1983) Geology of Indianapolis, Indiana, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 20:105–124Google Scholar
  259. White OL, Karrow PF (2001) Urban geology: a Canadian perspective. In: Marinos PG, Koukis GC, Tsiambaos GC, Stournaras GC (eds) Proceedings of the International Symposium on “Engineering geology and the environment,” Athens, Greece, vol 4. A.A. Balkema, Lisse, pp 3439–3450Google Scholar
  260. Whiteside PGD (ed) (1987) The role of geology in urban development. Proceedings of Landplan III. Geological Society of Hong Kong Bulletin, No. 3. Hong KongGoogle Scholar
  261. Wongsosentono S, Purbo-Hadiwidjoyo MM (1988) Urban geology of Surabaya city, Indonesia. In: Urban geology in Asia and the Pacific. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 2, pp 127–136. United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  262. Woodhouse D, Barosh PJ, Johnson EG, Kaye CA, Russell HA, Pitt WE Jr, Alsup SA, Franz KE (1991) Geology of Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 28:375–512Google Scholar
  263. Woodward HB (1897) Soils and subsoils from a sanitary point of view: with especial reference to London and its neighbourhood, 1st edn. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  264. Woodward HB (1906) Soils and subsoils from a sanitary point of view: with especial reference to London and its neighbourhood, 2nd edn. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  265. Woodward HB (1912) The geology of soils and substrata with special reference to agriculture, estates and sanitation. Arnold’s Geological Series Edward Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  266. Wyman RV, Karakouzian M, Bax-Valentine V, Slemmons DB, Peterson L, Palmer S (1993) Geology of Las Vegas, Nevada, United States of America. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 30:33–78Google Scholar
  267. Xinguo S (1990) Experience in integrating urban geology with city planning in Shanghai. In: Geology for land use planning in Asia. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 4. United Nations, New York, pp 89–98Google Scholar
  268. Yagüe AG (1986) Geotechnical maps 1:10,000 of Madrid, Spain. In: Proceedings of the 5th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology, Buenos Aires, vol 3. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 1781–1787Google Scholar
  269. You HC, Shing LF (1988) Environmental geologic problems in Nantong City. In: Urban geology of coastal lowlands in China. Atlas of Urban Geology, vol 3. United Nations, New York, pp 53–54Google Scholar
  270. Zereba K (1947) Technicko-geologicke pomery bustehradskeho katastru na Kladensku ve strednich Cechach. Geotechnica, Praha, 1Google Scholar
  271. Zhuang Y, Cheng G, Zhai G (2010) Cities sustainable development support––urban geological work in China. In: Anon (ed). Urban geology and urban sustainable development. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Urban Geology, Shanghai, China, vol 1, abstracts 1–10. China Geological Survey, BeijingGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© British Geological Survey - NERC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil Engineering, University of BirminghamBirminghamUK
  2. 2.British Geological SurveyNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations