Responsive public spaces use interactive technologies to adapt to users and situations. This enhances the quality of the space as a public realm. However, the application of responsive technologies in spatial design is still to be explored. What exactly are the options for incorporating responsive technologies in spatial designs to improve the quality of public spaces? The book Responsive Public Spaces explores and disentangles this new assignment for designers, and presents inspiring examples. A consortium of spatial designers, interaction designers and local stakeholders, headed by the Chair of Spatial Urban Transformation of Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, carried out a two-year practice-based study of responsive public spaces. This book draws on those insights to provide a practical approach and a roadmap for the new design process for responsive public spaces.The study results are of signi¬icance for various professional fields. The book is intended for clients and stakeholders involved in planning and design of public spaces, spatial designers, interaction designers and students.
DOCUMENT
Information and communications technologies (ICT) can be very important to provide access to urban cultural heritage collections. Urban archives contain a lot of (historical) information about people, places, events, objects, trade and artefacts. Its worthwhile to make this information accessible for a bigger public. The core challenge nowadays is to explore the role and meaning of ICT in disseminating this historical knowledge in public spaces. In this paper, we will research the theoretical background of the information value chain in archival science and of the use and context of new media technologies in public spaces. Our research method was a combination of desk research and a case study, in which new interactive media technologies were used to reconstruct historical images of Amsterdam in public spaces. The case study blended digital historical content with physical interactions to provide a user experience of urban history by using innovative storytelling techniques. The resulting prototype made it possible to disseminate historical information from Amsterdam urban archives.
MULTIFILE
The present social and environmental challenges, the impact of climate change andthe pandemic, revealed the urgency and the opportunity to rethink urban designthrough its renewed spaces and temporalities. The pandemic offered a ‘natural exper-iment’ to explore and develop new perspectives, making public spaces more resilient.Contributing towards a rethink of these spaces, the present paper explores adaptivearchitecture with responsive technologies and their capability of shaping public spacesto constitute a conversation piece with the surrounding environment. This approachcombines and reflects different disciplinary fields: architecture, civic interaction and ur-ban design. The exploration works around a speculative design case – produced aspart of broader research at the Amsterdam University of Applied Science in collabora-tion with the Master in Digital Design.
DOCUMENT
This chapter explores the use of “responsive” or “interactive” urban media technologies as a tool or “building block” in the (re)design of urban public spaces. This is especially relevant as in the last two decades, urban development and digital technologies have brought out new types of urban typologies and practices often referred to as “networked urbanism.” These typologies and practices bring out specific challenges with regard to their functioning as public space. We argue that responsive technologies could reinforce qualities of public space in this condition of “networked urbanism”; however, their implementation demands new strategies and above all new forms of cooperation between disciplines such as architecture, urban design, and urban interaction design. To aid such an approach, this chapter introduces a heuristic of five mechanisms of responsive media. These are meant to function as a shared vocabulary aiding designers of various backgrounds to collaborate in an interdisciplinary design process for public spaces in a broader development of networked urbanism.
DOCUMENT
Introduction:A space’s atmosphere is an important factor in how that space is experienced. In fact, festival visitors consider the atmosphere as the most important factor in how they experience a festival (Van Vliet 2012). Atmosphere is also what distinguishes physical shops from online web shops (Van Vliet, Moes & Schrandt 2015). Much research underlines the influence of atmosphere on cognitive and emotional processes. As early as 1956, research showed that an assessment of facial expressions in photographs depended on the atmosphere of the space in which the photos were viewed (Maslow & Mintz 1956). The importance of atmosphere inspired the search for ways to influence visitors and allowing them to react to, and even (co-)design, a space’s atmosphere – from museum spaces (Noordegraaf 2012) to urban spaces, from consciously-manipulated spaces to the now inevitable layer of digital information that has entered the public sphere (Mitchell 2005). Researchers have been studying the influence of atmosphere for decades, particularly through the lens of environmental psychology, which focuses on the interplay between humans and their environment (Mehrabian & Russell 1974; Steg, Van den Berg & De Groot 2012). A milestone in atmosphere research was the introduction of the concept of ‘atmospherics’ by Kotler (1973). From here, research into atmosphere mainly took place in the context of marketing research into consumer behaviour in shops and service environments such as restaurants, hotels, museums and festivals (Van Vliet 2014). The question here is whether these gathered insights contribute to understanding how atmosphere works in open public spaces.
MULTIFILE
Augmented Play Spaces (APS) are (semi-) public environments where playful interaction isfacilitated by enriching the existing environment with interactive technology. APS canpotentially facilitate social interaction and physical activity in (semi-)public environments. Incontrolled settings APS show promising effects. However, people’s willingness to engagewith APSin situ, depends on many factors that do not occur in aforementioned controlledsettings (where participation is obvious). To be able to achieve and demonstrate thepositive effects of APS when implemented in (semi-)public environments, it is important togain more insight in how to motivate people to engage with them and better understandwhen and how those decisions can be influenced by certain (design) factors. TheParticipant Journey Map (PJM) was developed following multiple iterations. First,based on related work, and insights gained from previously developed andimplemented APS, a concept of the PJM was developed. Next, to validate and refinethe PJM, interviews with 6 experts with extensive experience with developing andimplementing APS were conducted. Thefirst part of these interviews focused oninfluential (design) factors for engaging people into APS. In the second part, expertswere asked to provide feedback on thefirst concept of the PJM. Based on the insightsfrom the expert interviews, the PJM was adjusted and refined. The Participant JourneyMap consists of four layers: Phases, States, Transitions and Influential Factors. There aretwo overarchingphases:‘Onboarding’and‘Participation’and 6statesa (potential)participant goes through when engaging with an APS:‘Transit,’‘Awareness,’‘Interest,’‘Intention,’‘Participation,’‘Finishing.’Transitionsindicate movements between states.Influential factorsare the factors that influence these transitions. The PJM supportsdirections for further research and the design and implementation of APS. Itcontributes to previous work by providing a detailed overview of a participant journeyand the factors that influence motivation to engage with APS. Notable additions are thedetailed overview of influential factors, the introduction of the states‘Awareness,’‘Intention’and‘Finishing’and the non-linear approach. This will support taking intoaccount these often overlooked, key moments in future APS research and designprojects. Additionally, suggestions for future research into the design of APS are given.
DOCUMENT
This booklet holds a collection of drawings, maps, schemes, collages, artistic impressions etc. which were made by students during an intense design moment in the project (re)CYCLE Limburg, which took place in December 2016. Students of Built Environment, Facility Management, Social Work and Health & Care cooperated in making designs and developing strategies for urban renewal in Kerkrade West (Province of Limburg, the Netherlands). The study focused on the importance of qualitative and shared public spaces. The local community (inhabitants, shopkeepers, entrepreneurs, municipality, housing corporation) was actively engaged by sharing knowledge and information, ideas and opinions. These reflections are part of the Limburg Action Lab (part of the Smart Urban Redesign Research Centre). It engages in research by design on innovative and tactical interventions in public space, that might enhance the identity, sustainability and socio-spatial structure of neighbourhoods.
DOCUMENT
Urban densification is promoted for sustainable urban growth, yet it also generates concerns about negative health impacts on local citizens. Engaging local citizens in the co-design of densification projects is therefore crucial to address their needs and concerns. The use of immersive Virtual Reality (VR) technologies creates potential for advancing the participatory co-design of healthier urban spaces by allowing citizens to not only visualize but also experience the impacts of future designs or “what-if” scenarios. Theoretically grounded in an extended version of Sheppard's approach, which we call the Experiencing the Future Framework (EFF), we developed a study to create and evaluate an immersive VR application called CoHeSIVE. This application was designed to facilitate participatory co-design processes for healthy public spaces. CoHeSIVE, as the technological manifestation of our framework, was created through iterative workshops with end-user input. During the final workshop with 41 participants, both qualitative and quantitative data were collected, including user behavior and experiences with CoHeSIVE, especially regarding its experiential and interactive components. The vast majority of participants had positive experiences and recommended CoHeSIVE for participatory co-design processes. Participants felt confident in their design outcomes and found the user interface easy to use and effective for making and communicating design decisions. The most preferred design attributes were found to be many and clustered trees, several benches, large grass areas, high-rise buildings, more lampposts and the presence of a fountain, showing that the design outcomes were meaningful for the selected local context. Future enhancements of CoHeSIVE might include adding more design attributes, enhancing visual representations, adding multi-user capabilities, integrating generative AI and expanding CoHeSIVE's applicability to other contexts.
LINK
This collection of articles contains contributions to the research project ‘From Prevention to Resilience’ (FPtP). In this project, the research team has generated insights and tools for designers, policymakers, and other professionals to contribute to more resilient cities and neighborhoods. The point of departure was public space as a site for intervention, while learning from the ongoing developments revolving around the Covid-19 pandemic. During the early phases of the pandemic, governments initially focused on preventing the virus from spreading. Public spaces came to be seen as potential places for contamination. In response, fences, markings, and barrier tapes were put into place to orchestrate people’s movement and promote physical distance. With our research project, we explored the role that public space could play besides such often ad hoc preventive measures. What other challenges can public space tackle with regard to the various shocks and stressors that hit cities and neighborhoods, now and in the future? And how to tackle these challenges in an integral way? An integral approach to designing public spaces involves many disciplines, and it is to a great extent dependent on local governments’ take on public spaces. To this end, we asked relevant experts to share their disciplinary reflections on a design perspective we have developed in the FPtP project, called Human / Non-Human Public Spaces. An earlier version of this design perspective was handed over to experts to provide feedback from an urban climate adaptation perspective and from a governance and cultural change perspective. Stephanie Erwin and Jeroen Kluck provide concrete feedback on the design perspective and offer a discussion in relation to the field of urban climate resilience. Alex Straathof offers an essayistic text in which he reflects on some of the key notions of the design perspective, reflecting on some of the key notions of the design perspective based on cultural theory and his experience with interventions on the neighborhood level. In parallel, we commissioned two independent experts in the field of spatial development and governance to make a preliminary analysis of the impact of COVID-19 on the government perspectives on public spaces. Both experts were given the same question, but they applied different methods. Hugo Verschoor Plug conducted an analysis on two national policy documents and six ‘omgevingsvisies’ – i.e., strategies on spatial planning and the environment – of large and middle-sized cities: Amsterdam, Breda, The Hague, Groningen, Rotterdam and Zwolle. Denise Vrolijk was asked to interview professionals from a cross-section of Dutch Cities in order to obtain their perspectives on how local governments viewed the role of public spaces in relation to resilience. Together, these analyses provide an overview of the current state of affairs in public space and urban resilience. We thank the authors for sharing their expertise and insights and thereby contribute to the FPtR project. This project is funded by The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw), part of the subsidy round ‘COVID 19: Maatschappelijke Dynamiek’, project nr. 10430032010029.
MULTIFILE
