Participation-based Parametric in Early Stages

A participative design process for spatial planning in office building

Elie Daher1, Sylvain Kubicki2, Burak Pak3 1,2Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology 3KU Leuven Department of Campus Sint-Lucas Brussels 1,2{elie.daher|Sylvain.kubicki}@list.lu [email protected]

The term participation has been used to define different activities, such as civil debate, communication, consultation, delegation, self-help construction, political decisions. However, participation in design started from the idea that individuals whom being affected by a design project must contribute to the design process. Recently, have been moving closer to the future users and developing new ways to empower them to get involved in the design process. In this paper we rethink the way the early design process is developed in a participatory approach thanks to parametric methods. A use case is proposed showing the potential of parametric to empower the participation of users in the design of their facilities. The use case is dealing in particular with the spatial planning of an office building where the users together with the spatial planning team are able to design the layout spatial configuration by 1) fixing the objectives, 2) manipulating the model, 3)modifying some parameters, 4) visualizing the iterations and evaluating in a real-time each solution in an interactive 3D environment and together with facility managers 5) choosing the configuration of the spatial layout.

Keywords: Computational design, , Optimization ,

PARTICIPATORY DESIGN of what they design and developing new ways to The term participation has been used to define dif- empower them to get involved in the design pro- ferent activities, such as civil debate, communication, cess (Sanders and P.J. Stappers 2008). The partici- consultation, delegation, self-help construction, po- patory approach (i.e. ‘user as partner’) has been led litical decisions (Davidson et al., 2006). However, par- by Northern Europeans in the early 1970s. Several ticipation in design started from the idea that individ- projects in Scandinavia set out to find the most effec- uals whom being affected by a design project must tive ways for computer-system designers to collab- have a position in the design process. Recently, de- orate with worker organizations to develop systems signers have been moving closer to the future users that most effectively promoted the quality of work

COLLABORATIVE & PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN - Volume 1 - eCAADe 36 | 429 life (Sanoff, 2000). The participation is not a matter ipation is needed in different situation (building par- of fact, but a distributed, heterogeneous and rela- ticipatory residential...). tional process (Andersen et al., 2015). This consists into making a move from user-centered design to a User participation in architectural and ur- participatory design with important impacts on the ban design traditional roles of players and stakeholders in the de- Community design is an umbrella term that em- sign process (Sanders and P.J. Stappers 2008). In the braces community planning, community architec- classical way of the design process, the user is pas- ture, social architecture, community development sive, the brings the knowledge from theo- and community participation, this approach has ries, observation and interviews. Different levels of emerged from the fact that the mismanagement of participation have been identified in the past, rang- the physical environment is a major factor contribut- ing from manipulation to citizen control (Arnstein, ing to the social ills (Sanoff, 2000). On the other 1969). hand, computer application experiences and the de- In the participatory design, the roles and tasks velopment of the technologies, demonstrate that the will be different since the user (eventually with a pas- use of computers with specific methodologies can sive role in the traditional way of design process) help the participation and facilitate the integration is given the position to express his experience and of the user into the decision-making process. BIM plays an important role in transmitting the knowl- can be perceived as a process that facilitates the par- edge into ideas and concept development (Sanders ticipation of users in the design process. Today, the and P.J. Stappers, 2008). Even with this capability complexity of designing and constructing buildings added in the participative design, this remains a re- is more and more increasing. Engaging the user sponsive system, where the designers are looking for in the design-related process issues will ensure the comments about their design and the public is not realisation of the users’ requirements in the design truly empowered to design (Cimerman, 2000). The since housing and emerges as a close concepts around the participatory design and in par- cooperation between architect (designer) and the ticular about who should be involved in the collec- client (user) (Kwieciński and Słyk, 2014). Various re- tive acts of , design or creation, when, and searches and practices explored the methods and in which role vary between different studies in so- techniques in order to engage the participation of cial science. In order to support participatory de- the users in the design of their living environments. sign, a wide variety of methods and techniques have The user participation in the design has emerged as been developed to enhance the involvement of both a key to a gap between the requirements and the users and stakeholders in the same design processes solutions proposed by the designers (Sanoff, 2000). (Abras, et al., 2004). More cost-efficient and effec- The traditional participatory models have been heav- tive practices are needed for gathering users‘ needs ily criticized because they require meetings that are and requirements in real contexts in order to reflect often ineffective and inefficient, held at a fixed time these needs into the final design. The highest and place; severely limiting the number of actors tak- of empowerment of the users through direct partici- ing part (Healey, 1998; Kingston, 2007). In such meet- pation is characterized by the direct engagement of ings, it is almost impossible to establish communica- the user in the design process. In this case, the user is tion that is equal. It is also hard to engage a high considered as the decision-maker. This type of par- number of citizens and to take their experiences into ticipation gets more complex when it is concerned account in early stages of the planning process (Nuo- with the community participation. In a variety de- jua and Kutti, 2008). Too often the involvement of sign instances, the community or individuals’ partic- users is superficial and simply used to bring credi-

430 | eCAADe 36 - COLLABORATIVE & PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN - Volume 1 bility to the planning and decision-making process scape plans. By using serious games, the participants without really transforming it (Sennett, 2012). Conse- are given the possibility to interact with the design quently, the removal of the public from the decision submitted, to vote for the preferred option or even making process leads to a sense of alienation of the chat with other participants (Poplin, 2014). Recent users from their environment (Jones et al., 2009). The trends in video games industry focus on improving benefits of community participation in urban plan- graphic quality and easy to use attractive interface, ning are: enhancing the capacity of the population to this fact led to using video games in urban studies, cultivate a ”stronger sense of commitment”, increas- teaching and research (Rufat et al., 2009). One of the ing user satisfaction and creating realistic expecta- most common game to be used is the SimCity, which tions of outcomes (Al-kodmany, 1999). is developed by William Wrigh. SimCity is used also in universities laboratories for urban simulation re- INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES FOR THE search as a tool for participatory design in urban con- BENEFIT OF THE PARTICIPATION IN ARCHI- text (Hanzl, 2007). TECTURAL AND Recent developments in ICTs, such as 3D modelling EARLY DESIGN software, communication platforms and computer Architectural design process in its general terms, is serious games as tools for urban planning, are offer- a procedure intended to the improvement of the ing new potentials of citizen participation in urban project through socially situated reflection-in-action planning design (Hanzl, 2007). In general, these soft- (Schon, 1983). In the early phases of the architec- ware systems enable displaying data in forms that tural design process the level of detail is typically can be easily understood by the participants. The low: requirements, constraints, larger scale problems informatics applications allow the simulation of fu- and priorities are exposed and restructured before ture urban plans by implementing the parameters getting into details and smaller issues.This under- essential to the planning development. A key fea- standing of the design process as a progression of ture of most participative design activities is the use ideas and inputs can be confronted with different fac- of physical artefacts such as sketches, games, or lay- tors (Cross, 2011). In the early design phase, eval- outs on which participants can place objects to repre- uating the performance of the concepts on larger sent houses, gardens, roads... Researchers developed scale issues can be achieved on different basis in- various technological tools to enable participation. cluding: energy analysis, daylight modelling, cost Among those, the tangible table can be foreseen as and schedule impacts, or even structural analysis. In- a participatory technology that helps to increase the deed, one of the important task in architectural early engagement of users and community in urban de- design stages (or even in the reconsideration of an sign by manipulating physical objects (Maquil et al., interior layout) is that architects should find solu- 2007). In a later research, Wagner showed how to tions to the organization of the interior plan- use a set of participatory technologies in combina- ning layout to have an appropriate relations between tion with methods to enable a participation to cre- the different spaces and functions (Calixto et Celani, ate a vision of an urban project (Wagner et al., 2009). 2015). For architectural space planning problem, ar- Digital serious games are another approach to enable chitects explore solutions based on varied parame- participatory urban planning design. These aim to ters. Various parameters such as input features can support learning in a playful and engaging way. They be taken into account for the space planning layout, represent an emerging research area, enabling learn- these parameters can be related to the adjacency, ing about the environment and an exchange of con- distance, functional arrangement, occupancy, work- trasting views on proposed urban, regional, or land- space area standards, financial allocation, sustainable

COLLABORATIVE & PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN - Volume 1 - eCAADe 36 | 431 factors such as energy conservation, daylight, view... collaboration between different stakeholders, (archi- (Hassanain, 2010). Besides these, the inclusion of tects, engineers, contractors, and fabricators). This users and their preferences in the reflection-in-action collaboration tends to be practical and ensures a bet- processes in the early design phase can help the re- ter coordination of the project for supporting what structuring of the design requirements and make the Manzini (2015) calls “expert design”. This contrasts final design more responsive to the people’s needs with “diffuse design” where the designers aim to trig- (Commission for Architecture and the Built Environ- ger and support meaningful social changes between ment, 2008). the experts as well with the users, develop and test emerging forms of collaboration. Even for the pro- EXTENDING COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN fessionals, the adoption of computational technolo- Computational tools are fundamentally shifting ar- gies (in particular parametric design tools) seems to chitectural design practice to another paradigm. In have varying degrees of practical experiential knowl- particular, parametric design tools developed in the edge. Thus these tools are generating inaccessible last three decades allow the designers to make de- and isolated areas of specialists. Nevertheless, the cisions earlier in the design process based on a lack of participatory approaches in these methods, multi-objective optimization workflows (Brown et al., especially in the early design phase is a major chal- 2016). In parametric design methods, some con- lenge in the daily work basis in particular with the straints can be implemented in the early shift of architecture towards a more partic- phase which can be maintained during the design ipatory and social direction. As introduced above, a process. These constraints can be related to require- significant problem of the parametric design process ments, contextual and physical aspect. However, the is the exclusion of non-physical factors related to hu- participation of users in these processes is not sup- man aspects and the intense focus on performative ported sufficiently. The participation of the users in and optimization based design answering technical the early design phase can empower the design pro- issues (solar, energy, cost...). cess by the inclusion of non-physical factors related The application of computational methods for to human preferences aspects. The current practice space planning has been increasing recently with of parametric design methods needs to be extended both research and real-application fields. Many aca- to include non-physical aspects in the early design demic researches was developed trying to investi- phase. A significant challenge in this venture is that gate in the space planning generated with com- these aspects cannot be easily parameterized and putational tools. Various applications of evolution- optimized. Rather they can be reflected upon, dis- ary computing and parametric approaches were de- cussed and negotiated during the course of design. ployed for architectural space planning generation Therefore new ways of enabling in parametric design (Dutta and Sarthak 2011). These applications vary methods need to be developed to trigger and sup- in terms of objectives and desired output. Some port meaningful social changes, focusing on emerg- researches considered the space layout and func- ing forms of collaboration (Manzini, 2015). tional parameters, whereas other researches have Several tools have been developed in order to been focusing in also in the energy and light factors. support the parametric design methods: Grasshop- Autodesk researchers (Nagy et al., 2016) also have per a plugin for Rhino, Dynamo a plugin for Revit, worked in developing a flexible workflow for gener- Generative component, Houdini... These tools are ative design applied to architectural space planning. based on visual programming languages accessible First, a computational design model was able create by a limited audience. With the digital and para- a variety of office layouts including locating all neces- metric era, design workflow continues to be a close sary programs and people using a small set of input

432 | eCAADe 36 - COLLABORATIVE & PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN - Volume 1 parameters. Bahrehmand et al (2017) proposed an is to include not only the physical factors to the early approach for space planning addressing subjective parametric design process, but also the non-physical aspects of the design; the research has developed factors, and investigate in the participation process also a genetic algorithm with a multi-parental recom- of the end users as being one of the solution for em- bination method that improves the chance of gener- powering the design process by the non-physical pa- ating higher quality offspring. This method was able rameters. Information development and new tech- to generate satisfactory feasible floor plans based on nologies, such as 3D modelling software, communi- spatial quality metrics and designer’s taste. cation platforms and computer serious games are of- fering new potentials of participation in the design of OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH facilities. Emergent information and communication The scope of this study covers the early design stage technologies and tools can support as foundation for in general, although the case study developed deals a reconsideration of the culture of design. The need with the spatial planning, the general approach can is to develop processes and tools to support different cover different situations in early design such as ur- scale of users’ feedback to inform the different scale ban planning. Studies have been recently made of decision making process in the early design phase. by the author for the configuration of the early ur- In this context, the central research questions to ban space planning for refugees camp (Daher, 2016). be addressed in this study are: As shown in this research, for each space planning on building or urban level, fixed parameters or con- 1. How can we enable different levels of partici- straints should be taken into account, such as build- pation the early phases of parametric design? ing physical constraints, orientation and others... 2. How can we include non-physical factors re- In this research we will rethink the way the early lated to human aspects in the early paramet- design process is developed in order to allow the par- ric design process? ticipation of users in the early design phase. The need 3. What are the key challenges of and critical fac- tors for this task?

Figure 1 Conceptual framework for the the participative design

COLLABORATIVE & PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN - Volume 1 - eCAADe 36 | 433 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK about how this task is usually performed. To address the issues raised in the state of art we 5. Developing a prototype answering the re- consider a framework conceptually (Figure 1) repre- search objectives. senting (1): processes and actors involved in the par- ticipative design, the associated data (2) and digi- tal technologies (3) enabling to provide a computer- DEVELOPMENT based participative parametric modeling environ- Design process ment. The participative design process relies on a platform described below (Figure 2). This is a combination of METHODOLOGY OF WORK different tools and devices to enable 1) the participa- To answer these questions, a case study will be intro- tion of users in the design, 2) the of design problems duced for the design of an office building located in based on library predefined in the parametric soft- Luxembourg. The focus is to enable the participation ware and 3) the of the results and the of a group of users in the design of their interior lay- data manipulated, it is expected to use devices such out office building in the early design phase. Once as the tangible tabletop, touch screens and the aug- defined, the participation process is implemented mented reality creating a better understanding and through several computer-based systems. To enable visualization. the participation process a set of of architectural an- Identification of parameters. This design process alytic and parametric design tools will be combined is developed to answer the requirements and needs with other participative methods such as a tangible related to the management of an office building lo- tabletop and graphical interfaces. Design decisions cated in Luxembourg. The organizations occupies will be constantly evaluated with the use of para- multiple buildings in different locations, while the metric design tools allowing the users to evaluate use case considers the relocation of worskpaces into each decision and modification in real-time analytic one of these buildings. The need is expressed by the effects; visual indicators on the graphical interface “space management unit” to develop tools that help provide constantly information about the modifica- in the space planning strategies for new building in tions. To achieve the objectives of this research, the early design stage. The parameters identified to in- following activities were carried out: fluence the configuration of spaces are related to the: 1. Literature review of the published academic and practical researches considering the 1. Regroupment and relation between the dif- space planning and management and para- ferent departments and the organisation. metric approach. 2. Adjacency and distance (horizontal and ver- 2. Literature review about the technologies used tical distance) between the divisions and/or for the participation of the users in the design units. of their facilities. 3. The circulation between the workspace areas 3. Identifying the parameters that should be and the informal areas (such as small informal taken into consideration during the space meetings rooms, coffee areas,...). planning design, and identifying which from 4. Health, safety and well-being factors are not these parameters should considered into our the main focus in this use case. However, fac- case study. tors like the views (meeting rooms to be in 4. Conducting different meetings with respon- dark areas or areas with no view), and the fire sible of the space planning group in our exit (rooms to respect the standard distance case study organisation to have some insights to fire exit doors) are considered.

434 | eCAADe 36 - COLLABORATIVE & PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN - Volume 1 Figure 2 Schematic description of the participative design process platform

In this prototype we use the concept of non-physical objectives can be related to cost, environment, en- parameters as important parameters to take into ac- ergy, space allocation, and routing distance...For this count in the design process willing to create informal project we set with the space management unit dif- interaction between collaborators which contributes ferent objectives related to the following aspects: to knowledge sharing and team building. The non- physical parameters are collected by satisfaction sur- 1. Cost of the configurations proposed veys conducted with employees located in different 2. Space allocation efficiency (increasing the buildings of this organization. The surveys are deal- rentable area and the density of worksta- ing with: open spaces vs. closed offices, view to the tions). exterior, noise and privacy which has an impact on 3. Space productivity (proximity and distance the adjacencies. between different spaces). 4. Satisfaction of collaborators (interaction with Set different objectives. For each optimization pro- informal areas, privacy and visual access of cess, objectives should be set in order to define the desks). expected solution to answer the requirements. These

COLLABORATIVE & PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN - Volume 1 - eCAADe 36 | 435 Users’ involvement in the design process. The par- rators, ticipation of the users and in particular the space 4. Fixing objectives and setting the importance management unit is enabled by giving them the con- level of each objective. trol of the design parameters. Colored and graphi- cal charts will be illustrated to provide some insight Optimization. Several optimization plug-ins are in- to the decisions and iterations made. Users will be tegrated into parametric modelling software allow- able to add, remove walls, generating future layouts ing numerical simulation and iteration of different so- by predicting the number of employees and the allo- lutions. This helps the users to evaluate the design it- cation of each head division. Users will also be able to eration in terms of KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) fix the proximity between the different departments for the fixed objectives. spaces and when needed they were able to modify Envisaged participation level in the prototype. this proximity. Users will be able to set objectives re- The level of user participation (Table 1) in the de- lated to the cost of different space planning iteration sign process varies from an informing participation and to choose between the different options. where users ares being informed of necessary infor- Prototype mation, to a direct participation where users are able to have a direct involvement in the design process by A prototype is being developed at the time writing setting the objectives and the level of importance of this article, the main features of this prototype are: each one. Each department representative is able to Visualisation. Visualization devices were used to set and change by slider each objective according to help the space planning department to understand the needs. Other intermediate type of participation the spaces being designed. Augmented reality is the are also envisaged in the prototype such as consul- potential mean for representatives to conduct tests tation where the users will be answering surveys for and visualize the proposed layouts of the working the post-occupancy evaluation. space. By creating a 3D model of the working space, users were able to interact with the model via the Hololens headset. This helped a projection in the DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION real context of the real space and better understand Conclusion the solutions proposed. The team is given the abil- This prototype is a first try to enhance the participa- ity to easily interact with the model and make some tion of the users in the design of their building spaces changes in the configuration and update the model. and in particular the space planning layout through Simultaneously, visualization of the plan will be pro- a parametric approach. The idea is to incorporate jected on a digital tabletop. Users are capable to in- the simulations and iteration of different solutions for teract with the plans of the working spaces over a tan- the space planning in different participative devices gible interface tabletop that will be mainly used for: and technologies (Augmented reality, digital table- top) where users are able to interact with the space 1. Modifying the collected data on spreadsheets planning layout in the early stages of parametric de- and defining the relation between the differ- sign. The user is able to explore possible scenarios ent spaces, and design alternatives, by manipulating the param- 2. Adding some physical constraints (related to eters values and evaluating in real time the results the building geometry, external constraints of the modification. The main idea in co-designing such as view, energy, daylight and noise), is that everyone brings something important to the 3. Defining the density of the workstations dur- discussion and that everyone is capable of develop- ing different time in the year and predicting ing ideas, expressing them, being creative and being the needed spaces for the upcoming collabo- part in the decision making. Users are seen as ex-

436 | eCAADe 36 - COLLABORATIVE & PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN - Volume 1 Table 1 Envisaged participation level in the prototype

perts on the situation and there is shift from a passive veloped for this case study. This is resolved by dele- role to a co-creator or representative role in the de- gating the role of the participation for representative sign process. However, this prototype raises several to be involved in the design. Another challenge is questions related to the participation of users and the dealing with non-professional in the computational number of users that can participate in the design. environment and the software used, therefore, it is Another question raised in this prototype is the incor- important to work on a light easy to use platform and poration of the artificial intelligence and agent-based explain to users how this process works. Another im- modelling for the design of workplace. portant challenge is to transform all useful require- ments into a digital model with the appropriate con- Discussion trol on parameters. In the co-design process, the users are collaborating Another challenge raised is the discussion con- with the spatial planning experts and architect in the ducted about equality between the users. The de- design of a new spatial environment. This creates signer as a facilitator has a new task towards achiev- new roles for both users and the planning experts or ing this desired equality between the participants. the architects. The role of the spatial experts or ar- The prototype provides tools that develop under- chitects is to help users to understand the configura- standing of the configuration made with a trans- tion qualities and to point on some issues that need parency in implementing of the different guidelines, to be solved. The designers are creating a set of meta- however, the discussion about equality is raised in design where parameters, constraints and objectives particular for assignment of the spaces to each de- are fixed. This meta-design is creating a limited space partments. of solutions and iterations that satisfy the needs and requirements of the users. As for the users, they help ACKNOWLEDGEMENT to find the main focus and the most important as- This paper is a part of the PhD thesis entitled “Method pects to be taken into account by the designers and and tool-set for data-driven optimization of design they are being active in the design process. These ac- solutions in parametric modeling systems” at KU Leu- tions are being taken into account at different stage ven Faculty of Architecture and the Luxembourg In- of the design process and at different levels of partic- stitute of Science and Technology. ipation. Users are also able to justify and explore dif- ferent solutions and participate in the decision mak- ing process. REFERENCES Abras, C, Maloney-Krichmar, D, Preece, J and Bain- bridge, W 2004 ’User-centered design’, Encyclope- Challenges dia of Human-Computer Interaction. Thousand Oaks: The main challenge is to incorporate a number of Sage Publications, 37(4), pp. 445-456 users and representatives in the design process de-

COLLABORATIVE & PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN - Volume 1 - eCAADe 36 | 437 Al-kodmany, K 1999, ’Using visualization techniques Jones, P. D., Petrescu., D and Till, J 2009, Architecture and for enhancing public participation in planning and Participation, Taylor and Francis, New York design: process, implementation, and evaluation.’, Kingston, R 2007, ’Public participation in local policy Landscape and Urban Planning, 45 Issue 1, pp. 37-45 decision-making: the role of web-based mapping.’, Andersen, L.B, Danholt, P, Halskov, K, Hansen, N.B and The Cartographic Journal, 44(2), pp. 138-144 Lauritsen, P 2015, ’Participation as a matter of con- Kwiecińsk, i and , 2014 K and Słyk, J 2014 ’System for cus- cern in participatory design.’, CoDesign, 11(3-4), pp. tomer participation in the design process of mass- 250-261 customized houses’, Proceeding from eCAADe 32, pp. Arnstein, S.R 1969, ’A ladder of citizen participation.’, 207-215 Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), Manzini, E 2014, ’Making things happen: Social innova- pp. 216-224 tion and design.’, Design Issues, 30(1), pp. 57-66 Bahrehmand, A, Batard, T, Marques, R, Evans, A and Blat, Maquil, V, Psik, T, Wagner, I and Wagne, M 2007 ’Ex- J 2017, ’Optimizing layout using spatial quality met- pressive interactions - supporting collaboration in rics and user preferences’, Graphical Models, 93, pp. urban design’, Proceedings of the 2007 international 25-38 ACM conference on supporting group work., Florida. Brown, N 2016 ’Early-stage integration of architectural USA. and structural performance in a parametric multi- Nagy, D, Lau, D, Locke, J, Stoddart, J, Villaggi, L, Wang, R objective ’, International Conference on and Benjamin, D 2017 ’Project Discover: An Appli- Structures and Architecture cation of for Architectural Space Calixto, V and Celani, G 2015 ’A literature review for Planning.’, Symposium on Simulation for Architecture space planning optimization using an evolutionary and Urban Design algorithm approach: 1992-2014.’, Proceedings of the Nuojua, J and Kuutti, K 2008 ’Communication based web 19th Conference of the Iberoamerican Society of Digi- mapping: a new approach for acquisition of local tal Graphics - vol. 2, Brasil, pp. 662-671 knowledge for urban planning.’, Proceedings of the Cimerman, B 2000 ’Participatory Design in Architecture: 12th international conference on Entertainment and can computers help?.’, In PDC, pp. 40-48 media in the ubiquitous era, pp. 136-140 Cross, N and Roozenburg, N 1992, ’Modelling the design Poplin, A 2014, ’Digital serious game for urban plan- process in and in architecture.’, Journal ning: B3—Design your Marketplace!’, Environment of Engineering Design, 3(4), pp. 325-337 and Planning B: Planning and Design, 41(3), pp. 493- Daher, E, Kubicki, S and Guerriero, A 2016 ’Data-driven 511 development in the smart city. Generative design Rufat, S and Minassian, H.T 2009 ’Video games and ur- for refugee camps in Luxembourg.’, Proceedings of ban simulation: new tools or new tricks?’, Interna- the Sustainable Places 2016 Conference., France tional Conference Emergence in Geographical Space: Davidson, C.H, Johnson, C, Lizarralde, G, Dikmen, N and Concepts, Methods and Models Sliwinski, A 2007, ’Truths and myths about commu- Sanders, E.B.N and Stappers, P.J. 2008, ’Co-creation and nity participation in post-disaster housing projects.’, the new landscapes of design’, Co-design, 4(1), pp. Habitat international, 31(1), pp. 100-115 5-18 Dutta, K and Sarthak, S 2011 ’Architectural space plan- Sanoff, H 2000, Community participation methods in de- ning using evolutionary computing approaches: a sign and planning., John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York review.’, Artificial Intelligence Review, 36(4), p. 311 Schon, D. A 1983, The reflective practicioner: how profes- Hanzl, M 2007, ’Information technology as a tool for pub- sionalsthinkinaction(Vol. 1)., New York: Basic books. lic participation in urban planning: a review of ex- Sennett, R 2012, Together: The Rituals, Pleasures and periments and potentials.’, Journal of , Politics of Cooperation, Yale University Press„ New 28(3), pp. 289-307. Haven, Connecticut Hassanain, M. A 2010, ’Analysis of factors influencing of- Wagner, I, Basile, M, Ehrenstrasser, L, Maquil, V, Terrin, fice workplace planning and design in corporate fa- J.J and Wagner, M 2009 ’Supporting community en- cilities’, Journal of Building Appraisal, 6(4), pp. 183- gagement in the city: urban planning in the MR- 197 tent.’, Proceedings of the fourth international confer- Healey, P 1998, ’Building institutional capacity through ence on Communities and technologies, pp. 185-194 collaborative approaches to urban planning.’, Envi- ronment and planning A, 30(9), pp. 1531-1546

438 | eCAADe 36 - COLLABORATIVE & PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN - Volume 1