ai receipts
Search your own problem
From the firm's own write-upReceipt no. 4937
What sucked

Government agencies used inconsistent, broadly manual, inflexible methods for land-use analysis, individual searches across distinct databases, often outsourced to consultants for hundreds of thousands of dollars, taking weeks or months.

Government & Public SectorOperations
What they built

Land iQ, built on the Giraffe platform, pulls data from 100+ sources to assess a site's size, location, and zoning constraints and to virtually test how planning scenarios perform in a place or region. It replaces separate database searches, serves as a shared cross-department database (Transport, Education, Treasury), and was tested in northern NSW flood-response planning.

What changed
Months → minutes

Site assessment cut from weeks or months to a day or days, and to minutes for initial screening, done in-house.

100+ datasets

Agencies bring together 100+ datasets from many sources to find sites meeting development requirements.

<$1M build

Department spent under $1M to develop (excluding staff time), replacing repeated consultant fees.

More fixes like this
Who did it
James Blackwood
Giraffe

Pulled from work they published. Pluris hasn't reviewed it yet.