PARTICIPATORY FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES Martha Patricia Galán Aguilar © 2015 UN Global-Compact Cities Programme Melbourne,

Author - Martha Patricia Galán Aguilar

The results of this project can be shared, with recognition of the author and publisher.

Images: All images provided by research participants. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I have dedicated a lot of effort to this project. However, it would not have been possible without the kind support and help of many individuals and organisations. I would like to extend my sincere thanks to all of them.

I am highly indebted to Global-Compact Cities Programme and especially Elizabeth Ryan for her guidance, constant supervision and providing necessary information regarding the project, as well as her support in completing the project. I would like to express my gratitude to Robbie Guevara, who help me in the beginning of this journey to shape up this project.

I am grateful for meeting my great friend Sandra Moye. She introduced me to the Cities Programme and gave me ongoing support throughout this research project. ¡Muchísimas gracias!

I would like to express my special gratitude and thanks to all research participants for sharing their knowledge and experiences with me: Alexandre Apsan Frediani, Belinda Tato, Emma Cohlmeyer, Esben Neander Kristensen, Gisela Méndez, Liz Ogbu, Marisol García, Mike Lydon, Nerkis Kural and Susan Lengyel.

My special thanks to my love Daniel for his unconditional support. I dedicate this project to my beloved sons Yolotl Ochieng and Tanok Onyango. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The idea for this project arose out of Martha Patricia Galán Aguilar’s previous experience as an urban in various projects in Mexico. Some of these projects involved extensive liaison with members of the local communities, as well as local government officers. Community participation in those cases was spontaneous and proved to be an excellent approach to obtain community endorsement and support for the projects. By engaging the community, the design team ensured community’s needs were met where possible and negotiated others where technical issues mandated decisions.

From professional experience and through a specialist research internship with the UN Global-Compact Cities Programme, this project came to life as a way to find case studies from international public projects and learn from them. The aim of this publication is not only to showcase the “good” aspects but also “what did not work as expected”, as a self-reflection by the facilitators interviewed. It is written for the benefit of community leaders, professionals and governments for an improved understanding and uptake of .

Research Method The research approach chosen was a semi-structured interview with a sample of 10 professionals with previous experience in facilitating participatory design. Research planning was done in 2014 and interviews undertaken in 2015. Ten facilitators from Australia, Canada, Chile, Denmark, Mexico, Spain, Turkey, UK, and USA were interviewed about nine projects in Australia, Canada, Chile, Kenya, Mexico, Norway, Paraguay, Turkey and USA. Some of this professionals were sourced through academic papers and others were recommended by research participants.

Key Findings

• Physical space where face-to-face interaction happens is preferred to online engagement. • The use of appropriate language in a specific context is key to successful communication with stakeholders. This suggests that when facilitators communicate with participants, it is preferable to use “you” or “we” rather than “I”. • Facilitation needs to be adaptable to contexts and specific groups of people. Not all approaches and tools for participation work in the same way with everyone. • Visual material is helpful to communicate ideas and act as an effective “ice-breaker” to start the dialogue. CONTENTS

Participatory Design for Public Urban Spaces 3

Research Method 4

Case Studies 5

DREAMHAMAR / Belinda Tato 7

ANTOFAGASTA LIMPIA Y CONECTADA / Marisol García 11

URBAN FOREST STRATEGY / Yvonne Lynch 15

TACTICAL URBANISM FOR HAMILTON / Mike Lydon 19

NOW HUNTERS POINT / Liz Ogbu 23

ASUNCION’S PUBLIC LIFE AND PUBLIC SPACE / Esben Neander Kristensen 27

CHANGE BY DESIGN: MASHIMONI / Alexandre Apsan Frediani 31

CHILD ATTRACTION CENTER / Nerkis Kural 35

HUERTAS DEL CURA PARK / Emma Cohlmeyer and Gisela Méndez 39

Where to from here? 44

References 46

Appendix A 48 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES Image by: Ecosistema Urbano PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES

This publication reports on research, which identifies and analyses tools used in participatory design processes, as well as the role facilitators play in this process. The report is structured as a case study compilation, exploring nine projects from 10 facilitators’ perspectives. It was conducted by Martha Patricia Galán Aguilar in 2014-2015, an and urban designer, with support from United Nations Global Compact - Cities Programme, which advocates inclusive and collaborative multidisciplinary approaches to urban challenges.

This research study analysed: - Which participation tools have demonstrated to be more effective taking into account the type of project and characteristics of the stakeholders involved in the design process? - What is the role of the facilitator in the design process, their skills and the processes they follow to implement community input into the final design?

Why Participatory Design? Design Participation is a collaboration between stakeholders such as community, government, businesses and professionals where all actively take part in the design process of a specific project. This design approach gives people acknowledgment for their input and final design aims to meet the main stakeholders’ needs.

The term ‘Design Participation’ first appeared in 1971 as an international conference title. It was the first attempt by the design community to explore user participation in design processes (Lee 2008). Nowadays, the practice of design is changing. It is going beyond creation of things and getting more interested in design experiences, products and processes.

“With the society pacing forward, human beings pay more attention to self-awareness, mental and physical needs. Urban public should not only consider the harmony with the natural environment, but also needs to pay attention to human physiological and psychological needs, to provide a convenient and pleasant environment, thus to create a harmonious relationship among people, landscape, and nature to achieve a relative balance.” (Gengli 2013)

To be able to achieve what Gengli defines as a balance it is necessary to address the collaboration gap between experts such as psychologists, sociologists and anthropologists and design professionals (Lee 2008). Participation in design requires multidisciplinary teams to facilitate the process, as well as establish continuous professional reflection among .

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 3 RESEARCH METHOD

Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with facilitators of participatory designed public urban spaces. Participants were selected based on the following criteria: 1. previous experience in facilitating participatory design workshops; 2. previous experience in designing public urban spaces (temporary and/or permanent); and 3. an interest in sharing their experiences.

The interviews were conducted from Melbourne, either face-to-face or by teleconference. A snowball sampling method was used to access some of the participants for this study. Goodman (1961) defines Snowball Sampling as ‘a random sample of individuals drawn from a given finite population… Each individual in the sample is asked to name a different individual in the population…’.

The interview protocol developed for this study was designed to be flexible. However to guide the interview, a set of sample questions were drawn up and forwarded to the interviewees. These provided the participants with an idea of how the interaction would progress and indicated the key areas of interest. These sample questions were divided into four categories: a) Basic description of the project; b) Processes / Tools; c) Drivers; and d) Outcome (see Appendix A).

Interviews began with open-ended questions to encourage interviewees to elaborate. The interviews started by asking the participants to talk about the previous chosen project and when required, additional questions were added. The interviews were recorded and notes taken. The findings were synthesised into core information, highlighting the participatory design process and lessons learnt. These are presented in the following section.

4 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES CASE STUDIES

This section will synthesise information gathered from the interviews by case study (the project participants chose to elaborate about). It contains the following information: name of the project and country; participant’s name, organisation’s name and country where it is based; a brief description of the project; timeline; and participatory approaches and learning classified in approaches that had better outcomes and approaches that did not work as expected.

10PROFESSIONALS 9PROJECTS

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 5 DREAMHAMAR Norway

BELINDA TATO Ecosistema Urbano Spain

Image by: Ecosistema Urbano PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 7 DREAMHAMAR BELINDA TATO Norway Ecosistema Urbano Spain What is the project? It is a re-configuration of Stortorget, the main square in Hamar. It is also a journey to re-think public space and Design Participation.

Partners Hamar City, Norway launched a in 2011, asking for creative proposals to reinvigorate Stortorget, the main city square. Once Ecosistema Urbano was granted with the commission of re-designing the main square, part of the team moved temporarily to Hamar.

Ecosistema Urbano is a Madrid based group of and urban designers operating within the fields of urbanism, , and sociology.

Target users Residents of Hamar, Norway. Ecosistema Urbano enters Urbano enters Ecosistema Art in the the competition launched OneThousandSquare Preliminary Kommune. Hamar by design begins officially Dreamhamar workshop Technology creamhamar painthamar, Public space and people online workshop urbanism online Tactical workshop decides Rucksack Cultural to the project connect to Dreamhamar in involved Universities European the design process workshop Environment Activities workshop greenhamar, arthamar workshop strategy Seasonal People workshop workshop History lighthamar playhamar, Design development Oct 2011 Oct 2011 Oct 2011 Sep 2011 Sep 2011 Sep 2011 Nov 2011 Nov 2011 Nov 2011 Nov Dec 2011 Jan–Jun 2012 Jan–Jun Sep–Oct 2011 Sep–Oct 2011 Sep–Oct 2011 Sep–Dec 2011 May-Aug 2011 May-Aug

8 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES DREAMHAMAR Norway BELINDA TATO Ecosistema Urbano Spain Drivers to use participatory approach Ecosistema Urbano conducted extensive research on the city, its urban structure, people’s everyday life, traditions, habits, culture, interests, environment and context. Ecosistema Urbano then “thought that involving the community would provide a rich and enduring experience for both locals and future users” (Ecosistema Urbano 2013). Their main driver to use a participatory approach was to have a social impact that involves action, social empowerment and ‘planting seeds’.

Where did the participation process take place? • Physical temporary space at the square. • Online platform

PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES AND LEARNING What worked well What did not work as expected Physical Lab – a temporary lab on site where different Facilitator couldn’t recall any of the tools used in this specific theme workshops took place, as well as several tactical project that did not work as expected, but recognised that urbanism interventions. online techniques may not have the expected participation in places where access to technology is limited. Online workshops – people from different locations shared their ideas through an online platform.

Drawing – a total of 1300 children participated in drawing their visions for Stortorget, through a partnership with schools.

Facilitator’s skills that enabled participation Graphic and visual communication and incorporating ludic activities.

Outcomes This project was successful in constructing the plaza design through participation. It is now in full operation and one of the participants of the participation workshops is now employed by the local government to manage the space.

______More information on this project: http://ecosistemaurbano.com/portfolio/dreamhamar/ http://www.dreamhamar.org/about/

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 9 ANTOFAGASTA LIMPIA Y CONECTADA Chile

MARISOL GARCÍA Ciudad Emergente Chile

Image by: Ciudad Emergente PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 11 ANTOFAGASTA LIMPIA Y CONECTADA MARISOL GARCÍA Chile Ciudad Emergente Chile What is the project? It is a plan with an objective to improve life quality in the city through a holistic development vision to convert Antofagasta into an inclusive and innovative city in the long term. Antofagasta Limpia y Conectada is an implementation strategy, which is part of CREO Antofagasta - a strategic planning tool that imagines, builds, evaluates and improves Antofagasta.

Partners Ciudad Emergente is a Lab of Tools and Tactics for Human-Centered Cities. It seeks to improve urban quality of life through social and high impact participatory projects.

Target users Antofagasta’s residents Ciudad Emergente is engaged to is engaged to Ciudad Emergente Limpia Antofagasta the initiative Conectada y cleaning of Collective Antofagasta a Cultural as part of ‘Tree ideas’ Festival as and surveys ‘Tree ideas’ where event ‘Ecocine’ part of shared public space residents while neighbours with their a movie. watching plan and promote to Workshops grey and recycling tree planting water the as part of Perception surveys Heritage tactic Photo-record Okuplaza part 1 Okuplaza part 2 day Tree planting tactic paint Time to and ‘Tree ideas”, surveys the as part of postcards Fair Entrepreneurship tactic play Time to Report on the planning, tactic and professional implemented reflection Apr 2014 Apr 2014 Apr Jun 2014 Jun Mar 2014 Mar Feb 2014 Dec 2013 Aug 2014 Aug Dec 2013 May 2014 May 2014 May 2014 May 2014 May Mar-May 2014 Mar-May

12 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES ANTOFAGASTA LIMPIA Y CONECTADA Chile MARISOL GARCÍA Ciudad Emergente Chile Drivers to use participatory approach Antofagasta has long standing issues of informality, waste and lack of public space. There was a critical need to engage the community to value their neighbourhood and to be part of efforts to develop the area.

Where did participation process take place? • Physical space on-site

PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES AND LEARNING What worked well What did not work as expected Arbol de ideas (Tree ideas) - divided by themes, Use of certain language - it can lead to miscommunication participants get to write their ideas on the space to be if facilitator does not understand the local context designed and hang them on the ‘tree’.

Maps - people engage to them and give their opinion and the territorial information gathered was valuable.

Territorial interventions (tactics in public space) - which attracted many to participate (that not always did so) and facilitated partnerships established with a broader network and community, like schools.

Facilitator’s skills that enabled participation Knowing how to listen and understand what you have been told, and above all to act as a translator of ideas rather than imposing your own ideas.

Outcomes This project created a clean neighbourhood as its main objective but, more importantly it led to establishing a community atmosphere and diverse entrepreneurship initiatives in Antofagasta.

______More information on this project: http://www.ciudademergente.org/es/publicaciones/reportes/ http://issuu.com/ciudademergente_cem/docs/130110_reporte_final_malones_del_cr

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 13 URBAN FOREST STRATEGY Australia

YVONNE LYNCH City of Melbourne Australia

Image by: City of Melbourne PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 15 URBAN FOREST STRATEGY YVONNE LYNCH* Australia City of Melbourne Australia What is the project? Melbourne’s urban forest is a critical element of the city’s fabric, liveability and cultural heritage. Melbourne has long been regarded as Australia’s ‘garden city’, however more than a decade of drought combined with the impact of severe water restrictions has left the city’s urban forest in a state of unprecedented decline.

In 2011, City of Melbourne initiated a four year Public Engagement and Community Planning program to design an Urban Forest Strategy to respond to these challenges. The Urban Forest Strategy puts forward the vision to develop the City of Melbourne to become a ‘city within a forest’. It has a target of doubling the City’s tree canopy cover to provide multiple benefits including, increasing the health and wellbeing of the community and cooling the city’s summertime temperatures.

Partners City of Melbourne is the capital city of the Australian state of Victoria. It is the second most populous city in Australia with over four million people living in the greater geographical area.

Target users Municipality’s residents, workers and visitors. Community was consulted on consulted was Community the Urban of the development Strategy Forest endorsed Strategy Urban Forest Council by Precinct Plans Urban Forest Carlton, for were developed Melbourne and East Yarra, South city the central in Carlton held workshop Public in East held workshop Public Melbourne in South held workshop Public Yarra in CBD held workshop Public in North & held workshop Public Melbourne West in held workshop Public Docklands in held workshop Public & Flemington Kensington Precinct Plans Urban Forest North & for were developed Melbourne, Kensington West and Docklands to engagement Community precinct plan Parkville develop engagement Community and Southbank develop to Fishermans Bend precinct plans and Fishermans Southbank Parkville, engagement Bend community report published summary and Fishermans Southbank Parkville, for Bend precinct plans available feedback community and Southbank Parkville, Final Fishermans Bend precinct plans published 2012 Jul 2015 Jul Apr 2013 Apr 2013 Apr Oct 2013 Mar 2013 Mar Mar 2014 Mar Mar 2015 Mar Feb 2014 Dec 2015 May 2013 May 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 Apr-May 2015 Apr-May May-Jun 2015 May-Jun

16 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES URBAN FOREST STRATEGY Australia YVONE LYNCH* City of Melbourne Australia Drivers to use participatory approach The Lord Mayor’s leadership was a driver for the participator approach. He acknowledged that there are few political, budget or policy decisions that must deliver for people in 100 years, therefore the community really needed to be fully involved.

Where did participation process take place? • Physical space • Online platform

PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES AND LEARNING What worked well What did not work as expected Community workshops - a number of community Levels of engagement by children and young people were workshops were undertaken, ranging from co-design lower than expected. workshops through to development of precinct plans. These were always successful in attracting a considerable number of attendants.

Online tools - this was the first time City of Melbourne used an online platform and it was so successful it has now been transformed into Participate Melbourne for all projects that the municipality runs.

Transparency in provision of information and long term timeframes. Facilitator’s skills that enabled participation Where reported to be good community engagement skills and strategic development planning where the team set clear goals, targets and measurable variables.

Outcomes Participation process still on-going, therefore no outcomes have been identified as yet, apart from successfully engage with stakeholders and diverse community members.

*Originally interviewed Susan Lengyel who was a contractor at the time.

______More information on this project: http://participate.melbourne.vic.gov.au/nature

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 17 TACTICAL URBANISM FOR HAMILTON Canada

MIKE LYDON The Street Plans Collaborative USA

Image by: The Street Plans Collaborative PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 19 TACTICAL URBANISM FOR HAMILTON MIKE LYDON Canada The Street Plans Collaborative USA What is the project? Using Tactical Urbanism, the Hamilton project commenced in April 2013. The Hamilton/Burlington Society of Architects (HBSA) invited Mike Lydon as a keynote speaker and as facilitator for a tactical urbanism workshop. During the workshops, sites with a specific urban problematic were identified. With these sites the various stakeholders proposed solutions and Herkimer and Locke streets was one of the sites with a more successful outcome. From a tactical urbanism intervention temporary plastic hazard cones were placed in strategic locations to improve street crossings.

Partners Hamilton/Burlington Society of Architects (HBSA) is comprised of members and affiliates from the local architecture community. The HBSA represents the Ontario Association of Architects (OAA) locally, providing communication, public relations and professional development for its members.

The Street Plans Collaborative is an urban planning, design and research-advocacy firm.

Target users Local residents of Hamilton, specifically residents directly affected by five road intersections identified as unsafe for pedestrians. Tactical Urbanism Workshop Tactical #1 and #3 Interventions Tactical publishes The Spectator Urbanism workshop article Urbanism Tactical Lecture on #4 Intervention ‘Crackdown’ Hamilton of City summarises the Hammer Raise Urbanism Lecture Tactical meeting / HBSA Hamilton of City “pilot” agrees to Hamilton of City improvements street to approach install agrees to Hamilton of City and Herkimer at bump-outs streets Locke begins painting Hamilton of City and crossing pedestrian new at bump-outs temporary streets and Locke Herkimer 1 May 2 May 2 May 7 May 5 May 8 May 28 May 14 May 19 May 23 May 19 April 30 Apr - 1 May - 1 May Apr 30

20 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES TACTICAL URBANISM FOR HAMILTON Canada MIKE LYDON The Street Plans Collaborative USA Drivers to use participatory approach Architects knew there was an issue but residents were not aware of it. Street Plans Collaborative was brought in to teach participatory skills.

Where did participation process take place? • Physical space

PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES AND LEARNING What worked well What did not work as expected Making photomontages – with the help of cut-outs from Facilitator could not recall any of the tools used in this photos, participants can visualise their ideas in a clear specific project that did not work as expected. manner.

Models – with simple materials like carton, paper and colour markers, participants were able to communicate their ideas in 3D to other participants and have a better understanding of the space.

Analyse photos of examples in other places – this helped participants to understand different materials, their sources, cost and how to use them.

Facilitator’s skills that enabled participation Guide participants very closely.

Outcomes After temporary interventions, and even authorities attempts to remove them, local authorities acknowledged the need for permanent actions to improve pedestrian crossings and undertook necessary works to do so. Since the first intervention at Locke and Herkimer Streets in Hamilton, the City has gone on to improve more than 100+ intersections using a temporary to permanent approach. Moreover, the municipality recently adopted a new policy allowing for citizens to develop urban interventions.

______More information on this project: www.streetplans.org http://issuu.com/streetplanscollaborative/docs/tactical_urbanism-hamilton_report_f

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 21 NOW HUNTERS POINT USA

LIZ OGBU LIZOGBU USA

Image by: Anne Hamersky PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 23 NOW HUNTERS POINT LIZ OGBU USA LIZ OGBU USA What is the project? NOW_hunters point was created as part of a plan to revitalise the site of a former PG&E power plant in the Bayview Hunters Point neighbourhood of San Francisco.

Partners LIZ OGBU A designer, urbanist, and social innovator, Liz is an expert on and spatial innovation in challenged urban environments globally. She is founder and principal of Studio O, an innovation firm that works with communities in need to use the power design to deliver deep social impact.

envelope A+D is an architectural firm based in San Francisco It is a collaborative design group inclusive of outside disciplines and individuals.

PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company, incorporated in California in 1905, is one of the largest combination natural gas and electric utilities in the United States. Based in San Francisco, the company is a subsidiary of PG&E Corporation.

Target users San Francisco’s Bayview Hunters Point neighbourhood is incredibly diverse. It is historically an African-American community and has an active industrial workforce, an artist community, and a growing middle class community among others. Interviews with key stakeholders stakeholders with key Interviews in the community including Intervention, Early site and general Booth Listening improvements. Night Movie Summer of End events community On-going Aug 2014 Aug Dec 2013 May 2014 May Mar-May 2014 Mar-May

24 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES NOW HUNTERS POINT USA LIZ OGBU LIZOGBU USA Drivers to use participatory approach In 2006, a community initiative led the closure of the power plant and its owner worked with the community to undertake remediation of the site. Following this previous community involvement, PG&E invited LIZOGBU and envelope A+D to collaborate in the conversion of the former power plant site into a public space for the neighbourhood.

Where did participation process take place? • Physical space on-site

PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES AND LEARNING What worked well What did not work as expected Listening Booth – recorded interviews were undertaken Not having frequent follow up communications – when no with key community members on their vision of the follow-up communications were done after a community neighbourhood and specifically for Hunters Point. engagement event, the community lost trust in the facilitators and the project.

Facilitator’s skills that enabled participation The facilitator views empathy as a very important skill, as well as forming partnerships with community members to achieve participation.

Outcomes 24 events, 28 stories recorded and archived, 52 local youth and 8 local residents hired, 6 stories edited and shared back with the community and 12 local vendors hired.

______More information on this project: http://lizogbu.com/portfolio_page/now-hunters-point/ http://nowhunterspoint.org

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 25 ASUNCION’S PUBLIC LIFE AND PUBLIC SPACE Paraguay

ESBEN NEANDER KRISTENSEN Gehl Architects Denmark

Image by: Gehl Architects PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 27 ASUNCION’S PUBLIC LIFE AND PUBLIC SPACE ESBEN NEANDER KRISTENSEN Paraguay Gehl Architects Denmark What is the project? The project is a study on public space and the public life of the City of Asuncion; it is about re-examining its public spaces and transportation network. The study analysed the pedestrian, leisure, bicycle, transit and vehicular patterns in several areas of the city, with the aim of designing a pilot intervention that can demonstrate improvements to these patterns, especially in the pedestrian experience. The strategy Gehl Architects followed was to run workshops with volunteers to teach them how to document human activity in public space followed by going on site to document human activity. Gehl Architects then analysed the statistics and produced a report with recommendations to improve public space.

Partners Gehl Architects is an practice that is internationally recognised with the headquarters in Denmark.

Municipalidad de Asuncion is the local government authority in Asuncion, the capital city of Paraguay.

Inter-American Development Bank is the main source of multilateral financing in Latin America. It provides solutions to development challenges and support in the key areas of the region.

Target users City of Asuncion’s residents Public Space Public Life study Public Space Life study areas within focus on the users analysis Quantitative in public space and its relation open space with the current conditions public space issues key Identify and development Report and recommendations projects with pilot Oct 2015 Nov 2014 Nov Aug 2014 Aug Sep-Oct 2014

28 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES ASUNCION’S PUBLIC LIFE AND PUBLIC SPACE Paraguay ESBEN NEANDER KRISTENSEN Gehl Architects Denmark Drivers to use participatory approach Gehl Architects undertook an extensive pedestrian movement and cars counting to understand the space. This process requires involvement from locals.

Where did participation process take place? • Physical space on-site

PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES AND LEARNING What worked well What did not work as expected Presenting scenarios - this helps the audience to unlock The biggest challenge was the changing conditions of their minds and creativity the related projects in the downtown area of Asunción, necessitating several changes to study area and methods throughout the process.

Facilitator’s skills that enabled participation Knowing when to be open.

Outcomes Gehl Architects produced a recommendation report for Asuncion’s authorities and the Inter-American Development Bank has allocated funding to undertake streetscapes upgrades to improve public life in the city.

______More information on this project: http://gehlarchitects.com http://www.iadb.org/en/countries/paraguay/paraguay-and-the-idb,1039.html

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 29 CHANGE BY DESIGN: MASHIMONI Kenya

ALEXANDRE APSAN FREDIANI Architecture Sans Frontières UK

Image by: Architecture Sans Frontières PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 31 CHANGE BY DESIGN: MASHIMONI ALEXANDRE APSAN FREDIANI Kenya Architecture Sans Frontières UK What is the project? It is an action research workshop for a slum upgrade in Mashimoni, Mathare Valley, Kenya.

Partners Architecture Sans Frontières UK Through exhibitions, talks and events, outreach, international workshops and UK workshops ASF-UK explores and engages in complex issues concerning development. ASF-UK uses ‘participation’ as the primary methodology for achieving a more equitable and fair existence for everybody.

Pamoja Trust is a local NGO that has been working for over 15 years in supporting slum dwellers in Kenya to resist forced evictions and fight for their right to adequate housing.

UN-HABITAT is the United Nations programme working towards a better urban future. Its mission is to promote socially and environmentally sustainable human settlements and development and achieve adequate shelter for all.

Target users Mashimoni’s residents, grassroots organisations and NGOs active in the neighbourhood. City visit and City with symposium including 120 participants over workshop and local international practitioners, local participants, UN- academics, makers, policy dwellers’ and slum staff Habitat organisations. were divided in three Participants and assigned a different groups Community Institutional, topic: during worked and and Dwelling; tools. week using different one were the three groups All together work back to brought a game: ‘Portfolio and developed Options’. of Jul 2011 Jul 2 weeks Jun 2011 Jun Jun 2011 Jun

32 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES CHANGE BY DESIGN: MASHIMONI Kenya ALEXANDRE APSAN FREDIANI Architecture Sans Frontières UK Drivers to use participatory approach Mashimoni is a slum in Nairobi. In order to undertake upgrades a series of tensions were found between individual priorities and needs, and those of the collective. Through participatory design undertaken, stakeholders were able to analyse their issues and solutions at three different scales: institutional, neighbourhood and dwelling, and then link them together.

Where did participation process take place? • Physical space, in designated sites but also walking tours around Mashimoni.

PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES AND LEARNING What worked well What did not work as expected Interviews by drawing during interviews - residents were The limited timeframe and large size of the neighbourhood asked to draw and comment on their drawings. At the compromised the possibility of having a more same time, facilitators were taking notes on what was comprehensive and detailed analysis of the locality and being explained to them. engaging with its relationship with city wide processes.

Life stories - drawing a timeline stating where residents used to live, and capturing milestones in residents’ lives.

Models - were use to explore a dream dwelling but also at an urban scale to identify issues.

Facilitator’s skills that enabled participation Facilitation of this project was successful because of its multidisciplinary team, comprising architects, social scientists and planners, which brought: • Visual skills: thinking through a space design, • Social understanding and skills to engage the community, • Planning vision of all scales of development: dwelling, neighbourhood and municipal levels. • Social diversity in the team, and social change was the unifying vision. Outcomes This project led to recommendations for changes on planning regulations as well as examples for of participatory practices. ______More information on this project: https://www.scribd.com/doc/75033019/Change-by-Design-Building-Communities-Through-Participatory-Design http://www.asfparticipate.org

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 33 CHILD ATTRACTION CENTER Turkey

NERKIS KURAL Middle East Technical University Turkey

Image by: Nerkis Kural PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 35 CHILD ATTRACTION CENTER NERKIS KURAL Turkey Middle East Technical University Turkey What is the project? It is a project that won a competition hosted by the World Bank. It was presented as an experimental project for demonstrating the role architects can play as stakeholders in shaping urban environments while valuing local experience. The project is an open air centre for children, where they can participate in different activities and interact with their peers, as well as adults in Ankara, Turkey.

Partners Basic Design Studio, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Bilkent University is the first private university in Turkey

World Bank is a vital source of financial and technical assistance to developing countries around the world.

Target users Children, parents, teachers and visitors of Ankara with the community Workshops Bank World to Report submitted 2005 End 2004 End June 2006 June

36 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES CHILD ATTRACTION CENTER Turkey NERKIS KURAL Middle East Technical University Turkey Drivers to use participatory approach The design team proposed the project as an innovative open and semi-open spaces as a learning environment for under- priveleged children in a low-income area. The objective was to help them be integrated to urban living with the support of urbanites of Ankara that have skills in music, drawing, literature, etc. and would be volunteering to share these with the children in an informal environment they would come and go. Novel also because it was planned to be built by recycled and reused materials and objects chosen by the children themselves from a second hand yard of the city.

Where did participation process take place? • Physical space: school library, on site and the city’s junkyard.

PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES AND LEARNING What worked well What did not work as expected Drawing and model making – children were provided with Not involving adults in the participatory process – Lack materials for drawing and model making to express their of engagement with parents and other members of the ideas of what needed to happen in the space. community meant that the project did not reach the endorsement expected to bring the project to life. Site visits – these allowed children to relate their drawings and models with the real space.

Facilitator’s skills that enabled participation Team members were successful in relating with the children in a clear and sincere manner. They also spent time with children in a friendly social environment by sharing refreshments and picnics with them.

Outcomes Concept design was developed with children’s input and the municipality undertook site cleaning. Unfortunately no construction was undertaken due to two main factors: lack of funding and failure to engage with adults in the participatory process. ______More information on this project: Kural, N. et al. (2006) “A Participatory Process: Defining Urban Public Space for Children in a Squatter Settlement”, Children and Young People in Everyday Environment, unpublished paper, Multidisciplinary Seminar. Rennes University 2 , Haute Bretagne, France.

Kural, N. et al. (2010) “Un Processus Participatif: Concevoir un Espace Public Urbain Pour Enfants Dans un Bidonville”, Enfants et Jeunes dans les Espaces du Quotidien, Isabel Danic et al ed. Presses universitaires de Rennes, Haute Bretagne, France, 247-262.

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 37 HUERTAS DEL CURA PARK Mexico

GISELA MÉNDEZ EMMA COHLMEYER Gobierno de Colima Sustainable Cities International Mexico Canada

Image by: Emma Cohlmeyer PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 39 HUERTAS DEL CURA PARK EMMA COHLMEYER GISELA MÉNDEZ Mexico Sustainable Cities International Gobierno de Colima Canada Mexico What is the project? It is an historical park that had been abandoned. The park was re-designed with a grant from the “Programa de rescate de espacios públicos” (Public space recovery program).

Partners Instituto de Planeacion para el Municipio de Colima (Planning Institute for the City of Colima)

Sustainable Cities International (SCI) is a registered non-profit based in , Canada. With a core team of directors, volunteers and a network of international associates, SCI works with cities around the world to bring about change towards urban . SCI focuses on building human capacity within cities so that innovation and change can occur.

Target users Community surrounding the historical park Huertas del Cura. Research and planning for Las Research and planning for begins Huertas project strategies participatory Identify stakeholders Invite visioning meetings, Community and community workshops take place in the park events vision for ideas and of Translation drawings technical the park into submissions and architectural with local Coordination funding and federal government design final confirm to program phase first of Construction begins mural community of ‘Creation phase first of Construction complete remaining of Construction phases 2010 Apr 2011 Apr 2011 Apr Apr 2012 Apr Feb 2011 Feb 2011 Apr 2010 Apr Mar 2010 Mar Feb 2010 Apr 2011- Apr Aug –Dec Aug Dec 2010- Apr- Aug Aug 2010 Apr-

40 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES HUERTAS DEL CURA PARK Mexico GISELA MÉNDEZ EMMA COHLMEYER Gobierno de Colima Sustainable Cities International Mexico Canada Drivers to use participatory approach This approach facilitates the development of a sense of ownership and pride in the community, social cohesion and integration as well as highlighting the importance of in municipal planning and politics. Residents, neighbours, community leaders, local youth and children are directly involved in the process, from the outset to project implementation.

Where did participation process take place? • Physical space, a designated meeting place and on site.

EMMA COHLMEYER PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES AND LEARNING What worked well What did not work as expected with maps - with the aid of maps, locate Meetings with large groups or too many meetings - having issues, dreams, and visions of the site and start imagining large groups intimidates some of the participants and does solutions. not allow for everyone to express their thoughts. If there are too many meetings, participants cannot commit to all of Site visits and meetings on-site - being on site helps them and people start losing interest. everyone to have a better understanding of the space.

Facilitator’s skills that enabled participation Good listening skills. The facilitator stated that most of the community members did not feel intimidated by her (being a professional) because Spanish is her second language. Community members seemed to feel that they could express themselves more confidently because of this and that they would not be judged.

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 41 HUERTAS DEL CURA PARK EMMA COHLMEYER GISELA MÉNDEZ Mexico Sustainable Cities International Gobierno de Colima Canada Mexico

GISELA MÉNDEZ PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES AND LEARNING What worked well What did not work as expected Visionary maps – while on site working on stakeholders, Presenting the plan in a non-participatory way - it was very vision and locate them on maps. It is the best data important to recognise the plan as being ‘ours’ – developed gathering technique as it has a high of accuracy by the community, not only the technical team. This requires and understanding of the space, for both facilitators and a different thinking for most trained professionals. stakeholders.

Facilitator’s skills that enabled participation Facilitator identifies the following skills and characteristics that enabled successful participation: •Empathy •Capability to express ideas clearly and acknowledging through language used that the community is the expert, for example when presenting the design it is important to say “you propose…” instead of “I propose…”, given that your role as a designer is to interpret communities’ inputs and not implement your own ideas. •Model the participatory strategies during the process, according to needs as they arise. •Emotional intelligence

Outcomes This project was successfully constructed and embraced by the community. It also worked as a model to replicate in other parks within the municipality and the participation methodology has been showcased in diverse forums around Mexico.

______More information on this project: http://sustainablecities.net/our-work/sustainability-projects/how-we-work/participatory-planning/item/23-los-huertas-del-cura-a- community-park-designed-by-and-for-the-people https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIjmAaAHoFw http://ipco.gob.mx/index.php/servicios-y-programas/53-parque-las-huertas-del-cura

42 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES Image by: Emma Cohlmeyer PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 43 WHERE TO FROM HERE?

This extensive research effort has demonstrated that public space and its design complexities represent an opportunity for design participation, both in the design process and its implementation. Implementing participatory approaches in public space projects promotes and ensures community involvement in decision-making and overcomes the commonly experienced disconnect between communities and their representatives in government.

Participation also benefits all parties involved. It guaranties transparency in the community-government dialogue, creates community cohesion, enables voices to be heard, ensures long lasting projects and develops a strong sense of ownership among communities.

Even though participation is sometimes not an easy process, it improves quality in decisions made and makes decision-making processes more democratic. Participation is also the best way to facilitate a common understanding of objectives, identify issues and solutions and develop implementation strategies.

It is hoped that the practices and learnings from the nine case studies presented in this publication help community members, professionals and governments to better understand design participation and promote its use in their neighbourhoods, cities and countries.

44 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES Image by: Architecture Sans Frontières PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 45 REFERENCES

Ahn, H.-C. (2007). Design Tools and Three Steps in Participatory Design Processes: A Proposal for Better Communications among Residents and Experts, based on a Case Project of Neighbourhood Park in Seoul, Korea. 6th Conference of the Pacific Rim Community Design Network, Quanzhou, Fujian, China.

Alexander, C. (1977). A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction. USA, Oxford University Press.

APA, C. M. (2013). Guía Práctica para la Participación Communitaria en Parques Públicos de Bolsillo. Mexico City.

Bratteteig, T., Wagner, I. (2012). “Spaces for participatory creativity.” CoDesign: International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts 8(2-3): 105-126.

Carmona, M. e. a. (2003). Public spaces, urban spaces: the dimensions of urban design. USA, Architectural Press.

Clark, A. e. a. (2008). “Learning to see: lessons from a participatory observation research project in public spaces.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 12(4): 345-360.

Crewe, K. (2001). “The Quality of Participatory Design: The Effects of Citizen Input on the Design of the Boston Southwest Corridor.” Journal of the American Planning Association 67(4): 437-455.

D’hondt, F. (2003). Visioning as Participatory Planning Tool Learning from Kosovo Practices. Kosobo, UN-HABITAT.

Dubbleling, M., Bracalenti, L., Lagorio, L. (2009) “Participatori design of public spaces for Urban agriculture, Rosario, Argentina.” Open House International 34, 36-49.

Dunne, J. (2011). “ Extraction A Community-Based Approach to Public Open Space Design in Mexico City.” Architectural Engineering and 3(3): 160-168.

Ecosistema Urbano (2012), Dreamhamar, a network design process for collectively reimagining public space, Lugadero, Madrid, Spain.

Forlano, L., Mathew, A. (2014). “From to Design Friction: Speculative and Participatory Design of Values-Embedded Urban Technology.” Journal of Urban Technology 21(4): 7-24.

Gengli, L. (2013). Open space: Urban Public Landscape Design. Hong Kong, Send Points.

Goodman, L. (1961). “Snowball Sampling.” The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 32(1): 148-170. Hasirci, D. e. a. “A Participatory Process: Defining Urban Public Space for Children in a Squatter Settlement.”

Herrington, S. (2009). On Landscape. USA, Routledge.

46 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES REFERENCES

Hussain, S. (2010). “Empowering marginalised children in developing countries through participatory design processes.” CoDesign: International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts 6(2): 99-117.

Iltus, S., Hart, R. “Participatory Planning and Design of Recreational Spaces with Children.” Arch. & Behav. 10(4): 361-370.

Kita, S. K. (2011). Facilitator Manual. web. S. K. Kita.

Klok, J. V. (2013). Participatory Design and Public Space Catalyst for Community Development. Master of , University of Guelph.

Kural, N. et al. (2006) “A Participatory Process: Defining Urban Public Space for Children in a Squatter Settlement”, Children and Young People in Everyday Environment, unpublished paper, Multidisciplinary Seminar. Rennes University 2 , Haute Bretagne, France.

Kural, N. et al. (2010) “Un Processus Participatif: Concevoir un Espace Public Urbain Pour Enfants Dans un Bidonville”, Enfants et Jeunes dans les Espaces du Quotidien, Isabel Danic et al ed. Presses universitaires de Rennes, Haute Bretagne, France, 247-262.

Lee, Y. (2008). “Design participation tactics: the challenges and new roles for designers in the co-design process.” CoDesign: International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts 4(1): 31-50.

Loebach, J. (2011). “The Magical Park of Aviacion: Lessons from a participatory design project with the children of Aviacion, Peru.”: 1-9.

Manzini, E., Rizzo, F. (2011). “Small projects/large changes: Participatory design as an open participated process.” CoDesign: International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts 7(3-4): 199-215.

Medina Ramírez, S., Veloz Rosas, J. Manual de Participación en Políticas de Movilidad y desarrollo urbano. ITDP.

Mehta, V. (2013). “Evaluating Public Space.” Journal of Urban Design 19(1): 53-88.

Montes Ruiz, A. P. (2013). Activaciones Urbanas para la Apropiación del Espacio Público. San José, Costa Rica, UN-HABITAT. 978-92-1-132547-8.

Nielsen, J., Chistiansen, N. (2000). “Mindtape: A Tool for Reflection in Participatory Desgin.” 309-313.

Palich, N., Edmonds, A. (2013) “Social sustainability: creating places and participatory processes that perform well for people.” 78.

Rayner, J. P., Rayner M.T., Laidlaw, A.C. “Children’s participation in designing landscapes - examples from Melbourne, Australia.” 1-19.

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 47 REFERENCES

Rebstock, M. e. a. (2011). Methodology Plan for good planning and designing of urban open spaces. UrbSpace-Project.

Romero, G., Mesías, R. (1999). Participación, planeamiento y diseño del hábitat popular. CYTED. Mexico City, Grupo Erre: 205.

Romero, G. et. al. (2004). La participación en el diseño urbano y arquitectónico en la producción social del hábitat. CYTED: 122.

Sanders, E., Brandt, E., Binder, T. (2010). “A Framework for Organizing the Tools and Techniques of Participatory Design.” 195-198.

Schadewitz, N. (2009). “Design patterns for cross-cultural collaboration.” International Journal of Design 3(3): 37-53.

Stevens, H. K. (2010). Participatory Design for Community Planning and Development: Tools to Collect, Synthesise, and Use Local Knowledge in Decision-Making Processes. Master of Consumer and Applied Sciences in , Uneversity of Otago.

Svendsen, E. (2013). Storyline and Design: How Civic Stewardship Shapes Urban Design in New York City. Resilience in Ecology and Urban Design: Linking Theory and Practice for Sustainable Cities. S. S. B. M. Dordrecht. USA.

UN-HABITAT (2013). 53 UN-HABITAT Model Projects. Time to think urban. Nairobi, Kenya.

UN-HABITAT (2013). The relevance of street patterns and public space in urban areas. Nairobi, Kenya.

UN-HABITAT (2013). Streets as Public Spaces and Drivers of Urban Prosperity. Nairobi, Kenya.

Verstrate, L. and L. Karsten (2011). “The Creation of Play Spaces in Twentieth-century Amsterdam: From an Intervention of Civil Actors to a Public Policy.” Landscape Research 85-109.

Verstrate, L., Karsten, L. (2011). “The Creation of Play Spaces in Twentieth-century Amsterdam: From an Intervention of Civil Actors to a Public Policy.” Landscape Research 85-109.

48 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES Image by: Ecosistema Urbano PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 49 APPENDIX A

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

A. BASIC DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

1. What is the name of the project and where is located (Country and city)?

2. Description of the project Type (i.e. park, square, plaza, etc.) Location in the urban context Size in square meters Target users

B. PROCESSES / TOOLS

1. What was your role as facilitator during the design process?

2. What participation tools were/are used during design?

3. How did you analyse the inputs from the community?

4. How did you translate your analysis into the final design?

5. From the tools you used/use, which ones do you think gave the best outcome and why?

6. From the tools you used/use, which ones do you think did not work as planned and why?

7. Where did/does participation facilitation takes place? Is it a physical space? Is it an online platform?

8. What financing model did you use to undertake participation in design?

9. What are the skills you have to make participation happening?

50 PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 10. How long did/does the entire participation process and final design take to be completed? Date when the initiative stared Dates when workshops and/or other participation tools stared and ended Time it took you to analyse inputs from the community Time is took you to translate your analysis into the final design

C. DRIVERS

1. Who had the initiative for this project?

2. Who was/is involved during design and decision-making process?

3. What kind of institution leads the participation process?

D. OUTCOME

1. What was the outcome of the participatory design process you undertook?

2. How do/did you measure the success of the project?

3. Are there any photos and/or graphic material that you would like to share of the participation process and the final design? If so, please sent them to [email protected]

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN FOR PUBLIC URBAN SPACES 51