TUDelft Campus Urban Game

Delft Campus

urban game

STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP

RESULTS

preparatory activity for the 51st ISOCARP Congress 2015

report by : Milena Ivković | blok74 _ URban gaming | rotterdam game design and development : blok74 _ URban gaming | rotterdam implementation and execution : tu delft | 24th June 2015

editorial

what is urban gaming?

Urban gaming is an explorative, interactive and strategic approach to spatial planning. It uses digital and analogue gaming mechanics as tools to better understand and change built environment.

The simulation of the decision-making and spatial design process are at the core of urban gaming. By engaging different planning actors in the gameplay, urban gaming encourages cross-sectoral interactions and leads to more driven and reliable answers to urban challenges. Through playfulness and competitiveness, the game participants (“players”) create spatial and strategic solutions in an open, “one on one”, eye-level communication process.

Rotterdam-based practice Blok74 (the creative force behind the Delft Campus Urban Game) designs and produces different urban gaming formats, from highly complex, experts-only design sessions to civic engagement workshops. The gaming formats are based on the combination of the actual 3D model building and a custom-made digital simulation, with the purpose to give a fresh spin to the planning process.

Ir Milena Ivković MSc Arch director and game designer Blok74 | urban gaming | Rotterdam

content

06 workshop background 10 delft campus ambitions 12 gaming methodology 21 results

06 workshop background

51st ISOCARP CONGRESS THEMES The International Society of City and Regional Planners (ISOCARP) has chosen an intriguing title for it’s 51st Congress: “Cities Save the World: Let’s Reinvent Planning”.

This specific motto comes at a time when urban planning professionals around the globe are increasingly looking for new ways and methods to provide solutions for the contemporary urban challenges. An ISOCARP Congress, well-known for it’s large scale, is therefore an ideal setting to open new themes and exchange expertise.

Knowledge production, management and valorization are high-performing engines of the Rotterdam - Delft - The Hague economy.

Spatial, economical and cultural development of the knowledge institutions (universities, higher education, institutes and research facilities) and their ties with other entities and industries are therefore extremely important for the region.

To gain more insights on the mechanisms at play within a knowledge region, Delft -The Hague Workshop hosts (TU Delft, Delft Municipality, Delft Design and The Hague Municipality) opted to produce a 2-day urban game format workshop. The main reason for choosing this particular format Between 19th and 23rd of October 2015, was the fact that urban game is a userthe ISOCARP Congress focused on 12 differfriendly medium, suitable to ignite discusent Thematic Workshops, covering variety sions among different actors, in this case an of topics, ranging from food production to international planning experts; audience. By small-scaled neighborhood initiatives to deploying a urban game as a framework for the airport development. Each workshop it’s workshop, the hosts were aiming at getwas hosted by a different city in the Nethting a fresh perspective on the knowledge erlands, Germany and Belgium. The concluregion development, in an engaging, open sions of the workshops were presented and and creative way. debated at the Congress’ Plenary Session in Rotterdam.

Architect and urban game designer Ir. Milena Ivković (Blok74, Rotterdam) was invited As one of the 12 workshops hosts, the cities to be the workshop’s Theme Director. of Delft and The Hague joined their forces together in organizing the international Thematic Workshop around the topic of “How to create a sustainable knowledge region”.

6

The host cities and Theme Director decided that urban game format should be applied on three different spatial scales, in order to illustrate three different key areas of the sustainable knowledge region:TU Delft Campus as “knowledge incubator” (following the “Living Campus” policy document) - City as a “knowledge campus” (examining the possibilities of New Delft station area and relation between Delft city and TU Delft campus) - Knowledge region ( establishing the area between Leiden, Den Haag , Delft and Rotterdam as a coherent knowledge region )

7

This report contains details of a specific TU Delft Campus Urban Game session which took place at the TU Delft Faculty of Architecture on June 24th 2015, as a preparatory activity for the ISOCARP Delft - The Hague Thematic Workshop on knowledge regions.

The task of the Campus Urban Game (UG) is to establish an experimental ground for thinking and acting outside of the wellknown patterns and planning procedures.

In this way, UG encourages discussions between the professionals involved in the Campus development. By trying out different “moves” in the game, they come up with new and fresh programmatic solutions, and are more aware about the interdependencies between different stakeholders.

programmes), including education, built-up structure, transport, water / nature, housing, manufacturing and culture.

The expected results of the UG are twofold: - promotion of the better collaboration between different actors,and understanding of the possible conflicts - a good thought-through spatial programme resulting from several rounds of the gameplay.

The UG highlights the spatial programmes and success factors which could lead to strong partnerships across different stakeholders involved in the making of the future of the TU Delft Campus.

The basic gameplay of the Campus UG is derived from the “Living Campus” policy document. “Living Campus” summarizes the the ambitions for the future transformation of the TU Delft Campus from the typical monofunctional spatial entity (of the ‘50es and ‘60es) to mix-used, livable and sustainable part of Delft.

The UG looks at the “Living Campus” policy from both spatial and managerial standpoints: - the players take 4 roles, mirroring the real actors involved in realisation of the “Living Campus” plans - the players build the future model of the Living Campus across several sectors (

9

10 delft campus ambitions

In the field of innovation incubators and their spin-off’s, TU Delft has a good track record. An evaluation commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, Delft is a mid-sized town of 100.000 inhabit- mentions the Technopolis (a part of the ants that serves the Rotterdam/The Hague Delft University campus) as provider of the region with millions of inhabitants. Its eco- largest growth in spin-off’s of the top-18 nomical development is strongly linked with campuses in The Netherlands. And Yes!Delft the development of the TU Delft Campus, incubator from Technopolis belongs to the nearby business park (Technopolis) and the top-10 incubators in Europe. Besides the redevelopment of the station area (New Yes!Delft, there are more incubators to be Delft). Besides shaping new opportunities, found in the area of the University camthe growth of Delft as knowledge city crepus and the city of Delft. As a growing job ates certain tensions, such as tightening of motors, they become more and more an the housing and labour market and road important part of the so-called “science and congestions. economy ecosystem”.

TOWARDS A KNOWLEDGE CITY AND A LIVING CAMPUS

For decades, the urban structure of Delft has been divided by the railroad connecting The Hague with Rotterdam. At the time when TU Delft is rethinking its campus, a new train tunnel replacing original elevated rail has been put to use. The area that has been made free by this intervention is developing right now in a new vital district called “New Delft”.

This ecosystem crosses the borders of the city and the campus. The important questions raised are: 1)How can spin-off’s and the ecosystem mutually contribute to a growing strong and sustainable local and regional economy?

2) What are the conditions (hard ware and software) for spin-off’s (first step after the incubator)?

With this in mind, the TU Delft has set its sights on developing a new Campus concept: an area that provides sufficient and 3) Are the local government and the univerhigh quality facilities to position the TU and sity, in cooperation with the private market, Delft City as major players in the sustainable able to provide it? knowledge region of the future. Education, research and innovation, the three pillars of knowledge, need an appealing, safe and healthy environment for learning, working and living.

10

12 gaming methodology

THE ELEMENTS OF THE GAME The Delft Campus UG consists of: 1. gaming board: a large scale map of the Campus area 2. programmatic icons: graphic representations of the possible programmatic content of the future Living Campus development 3. stakeholders votes: graphic representations of the different “negotiation powers” and opinions of the roles involved in the gameplay.

4. digital tracking: enabling the real-time following of the game on the screen and precise capture of the results and statistics. (*)

The roles, the programmatic icons and stakeholders votes are derived from the thorough analysis of the relevant planning and design documents dealing with the development of the TU Delft Campus, most of all the “Living Campus” policy document.

The present decision-making structure of the Campus is reflected in the main elements of the game, in order to give a engaging representation of the real-life dynamics.

1.GAMING BOARD

Gaming board represents the actual play field of the TU Delft Campus. It contains vital spatial information, which have been simplified for the purpose of the game. The visual simplification is a necessary in order to focus the players on the important aspects of the interaction. An attractive design The gaming board facilitates maximum of 16 of the gaming board is essential for the swift participants (players). The players are dividunderstanding of the game and a positive ed in four teams (up to maximum 4 people). dynamics of the gameplay.

Each team represents a certain role, and has its own colour.

The gaming board is segmented into several playing fields - “domains”. Each role has its The roles in the Delft Campus UG are: own domain, a piece of the Campus which they are primarily interested in developa) TU Central (the management of the Caming. Outside of these domains, some areas pus) of the gaming board are marked as “mixed b) Hard Campus ( the leadership of the interest” areas, which can be claimed by all Campus) roles. c) Knowledge Institutes (the research and knowledge production community of the Campus) d) Soft Campus - inter(national) student and scientific community of the Campus

12

(*) Digital tracking was not tested on the 24th of June, but was included in the final version of the game which took place during ISOCARP congress)

2.PROGRAMMATIC ICONS Programmatic icons are symbolic graphic representations of the actual spatial functions which can be realized on the Campus.

They reflect the outcomes of previous discussions and studies about how the Campus should be developed. Each role has a set of its own icons.

Some icons represent measurable programme, e.g. number of parking lots, or water and nature surface. During the course of the game, the players will try to find out where and how much of those quantities can be placed in the Campus. In that way, the game serves as a benchmark of the programme defined by various planning documents.

Other icons represent more creative ideas and possible directions of development.

Their purpose is to spark the creative brainstorm and discussion about the Campus development. Some of these icons are chosen on purpose to be slightly “provocative” in order to stimulate the “out of the box” thinking. The game gives enough free space to the players to try out some of the programmatic combinations they usually would not (or dare not) to propose.

The icons represent different physical features – from pop-up mobile offices to housing units, from public transport stations

14

to new bicycle lanes. All these features are relevant for the achievement of the desired science, knowledge and economy system at the Campus.

By placing the icons on the board, teams claim space for certain development, trying to develop as much possible of the programme. For extra ideas, which are not depicted by the given set of icons, there are blank “balloon” stickers, allowing the players to customize the icons.

15

3. STAKEHOLDERS VOTES

4. DIGITAL SUPPORT

The players can express their opinions about others’ solutions and strategize about the programme they have placed on the board. For this, the players use “stakeholder votes” . The stakeholder votes represent the network of different Campus actors, who presumably support the opinions of the roles. The network consists of the actual users of the Campus space, such as actual land owners, governmental institutions involved in the planning process, etc. but also some of the other potentially interested groups, such as citizens’ groups, entrepreneurial organisations, local politicians… This network can be sees as an supporting “army” of the each role, used to express the role’s standpoints.

To be able to fully analyze and compare Start and Final Design and draw conclusions, the game board is divided into following locations: Zone 1 - Zuidpolder ( defined by Mekelweg, Berlageweg, Van der Boekweg roads) Zone 2 - Civile Techniek Blok ( defined by Mekelweg, Stieltjesweg, Berlageweg, with important buildings of TNO, Deltares, Faculty of Civil Engineering) Zone 3 – Aula / Bibliotheek ( defined by Mekelweg, Stieltjesweg and Van der Waalsweg)

A custom-made application serves as a score sheet to track all the outcomes of the The design of the game proposes less supgame. In this way, it is easy to project the port votes then the opposition ones, mean- gameplay on the larger screen ( if needed ing some of the programme’s can not be for a bigger audience) and present vital defended completely. game statistics.

After calculating the positive and the negative votes, the icons with negative balance of the votes have to be removed from the board. The player / role who managed to preserve the most of its original programme is the winner – its spatial strategy was most appreciated by the other players, and he knew how to diverse every opposition.

16

17

GAME STAGES

ments within the Campus. At this point the aim of the players is to receive as much as possible positive votes (“support”) and at least negative votes (“opposition”) in order to prove themselves as the makers of the most appreciated Campus scheme.

The game develops in several stages, simulating the actual urban planning phases.

Each stage is led by a Game Master - a moderator and evaluator of the whole interactive process. Game master guides the players, explains the rules, and proposes rel- To have their proposal within Start Design evant questions to initiate discussions and validated as “the best”, each role has to get as much as possible support and as little as keep up the rhythm of the play. possible opposition from the other teams at the table. To achieve this, the teams can ne1st stage - Start Design gotiate, form coalitions, or use the last-minute “wild card / joker” stakeholder votes.

In the first stage, the players choose their teams and roles, and get their set of proAfter the voting round, ---the Game Master grammatic icons and stakeholders votes.

Acting from their roles’ motives, the players comments the new situation, pointing out create the “Start Design”, by positioning the the “conflict items”: programmes and locations which received the most attention of icons on the board, marking the locations the players. Due to the strong visual charfor the future development. acter of the game and the fact that players Each team works independently on the Start have built a tangible 3D model of both the Design. At the end of this stage, the teams space and the planning process, this part of the game is the most existing one. After “pitch” their design concepts, explaining why they positioned their programme, and removing the obvious undesired, disputed how their scheme contributes to the realiza- or non-compatible programmatic props (the ones that received the most negative votes) tion of the Living Campus concept. the players are left with a “Final Design” situation.

2nd stage - Voting The outcomes of the Start Design are put to a test by voting. Each role has a certain amount of positive an negative stakeholder votes they can give to any of the programme positioned on the gaming board.

Acting from their own point of view, the players support or oppose certain develop18

Horeca

Kennisinstituten

EXPO

Picknick bankjes

TU

i’m TU Delft

START DESIGN FINAL DESIGN

19

3rd stage - Final Design The Final Design clearly shows which player / role is the actual winner of the game: the one who managed to preserve the most of the original icon setting from the Start Design stage. he element of “winning� is important to keep both the simulation close to the real planning situations, and as a motivation to get the best performance out of the players.

Although the game is based on a competitive mechanics, the outcome (the Final Design) represents what does the Campus need as a collaborative effort. The remaining programmes of other players are an inseparable part of the Final Design.

21 results

START DESIGN

ZONE 3: AULA / BIB

Just as in the Zuidpolder, in this location the emphasis has been on finding spatial soluThe zone is dominated by an existing large tion for parking lots (some 600 lots) and reshaping the traditional campus programme parking space, next to the sport park. The Start Design proposes intensification of the by adding more new forms of education existing parking lot (extension by some 350 (College out) and non-academic accompanyparking places) and developing of the sur- ing functions such as sport and restaurants. rounding open green field in an open-air lab and an event centre, with the preservation By looking closer to the structure of proposed programme, we can see that the of the open-air sport facility. The existing majority of the future parking space is building of Geosciences could be transpositioned in-between existing buildings on formed into a budget hotel. the Aula / Bib location. Interesting fact is that although the Civiele Techniek location ZONE 2: CIVIELE TECHNIEK is the most densely build-up location, the The dynamics of this location concentrated players proposed expending the open water on the issues of re-use and re-programming surfaces of the existing building stock and open spac- as well as new bike parking facilities.

ZONE 1: ZUIDPOLDER

es. Besides enriching the open spaces with more water, more trees and new nature, there is a clear trend in introducing muchneeded programmes such as DUWO housing, (students’ social housing) expo, experimental lab and retail (both small-scale and medium scale) and food-culture elements to enrich the campus life. Characteristic for this zone is intensive mix of academic, scientific (labs) and more extrovert programmes such as expo and mobile food carts.

Extra ideas Each of the players used the possibility to visualise ideas about programme outside of the proposed icons. These extra ideas are: - From the role Knowledge Institutes: a new EXPO terrain about their achievements - From the role Hard Campus: picnic benches nearby the main Campus buildingsd - From the role Soft Campus: more small scaled catering / horeca outlets in the Campus - From the role TU Central: “I’m TU Delft” - a students’ start-up agency.

21

In the other two zones, the opposition was mostly focused on the issues of additional infrastructure, such as car parking spaces, bike parking spaces and water.

7. Gastdocenten

-1

6. Locale policitus

-2

5. Support staf

4. Studentenraad

-2

-2

1. TNO

-2

2. Green Village

The first round of voting process went as expected: the intensification of the parking lots in the zone Zuidpolder met a lot of opposition. Also, the positioning of a budget hotel on the Campus premises was perceived as “too commercial� for an academic setting.

-2

VOTING PROCESS

-1

6. Locale policitus

-2

-2

-2 2. Green Village 4. Gemeente Delft

5. Support staf

-2

7. Gastdocenten

+2

+2 -2

4. Studentenraad

2. Aula 1. TNO

2. Green Village

+2

The possible realisation of DUWO social housing met (quite unexpectedly) some opposition, as well as the positioning of the retail and services.

22

-1

+1

5. Supermarkt

4. Locale politicus -2

+1

+2

4. Vleermuizen

1. Bibliotheek

3. Sodexo -1

4. Vleermuizen 3. Mobiele cateraar -1

-2

7. Conrector -1

5. UHD-ers -1

1. CiTG

-2

-2 6. Kenniswerker

5. Supermarkt

4. Bewoners Wippolder -2

3. Ondernemingsraad

6. Hoogleraren

7. Bezoeker -1

1. Bibliotheek

-2

-1 +1

6. Kenniswerker

+2

5. Studenten TNW 2. TNW

1. Hoogheemraadschap

-1

7. Bezoeker -1 1. TNO +2 6. Hoogleraren -2 3. DUWO +2 3. Ondernemingsraad -1 5. Supermarkt 4. Bewoners Wippolder -1 1. CiTG -2

+2

-2

3. Onderzoekers

7. Conrector -1 +1

5. Onderzoekers

+2

5. UHD-ers -1 +1

3. Ondernemers

3. Campus bewoner -2 2. Bouwcampus +2

-2

5. Support staf

+1

-1

7. Studentenvereniging 1. CiTG

3. Universiteitsdiensten

-2 3. Ondernemers

-2 2. Aula 4. MSc studenten

3. Campus bewoner

+1

7. Studentenvereniging

4. Ecoloog

-1 -1

-1

-2

-1

5. Studenten TNW

2. Aula

-2

1ST ROUND SUPPORT

3. Sodexo -1

2. TNW -2

6. Mobiele cateraar -1

4. Locale politicus -2

2. Bouwcampus

1. Hoogheemraadschap 1. Bibliotheek

-2

-1 1. Hoogheemraadschap -2

2ND ROUND OPPOSITION

2. TNW 5. Studenten CiTG -2

2. Bouwcampus +2

6. Mobiele cateraar -1 4. Campus bewoners +1

-2

+2

-2

23

FINAL OVERVIEW As the role who managed to keep the most of it’s icons in the game, the winner is the “Knowledge Institutes” team. This means the majority of other players are prepared to collaborate with this particular role in the realisation of the Living Campus concept.

two new espresso bars 300 bike parking places 50 trees 1 mobile caterer 1 budget hotel 1 open air sport facility

The winning programme of the Knowledge Institutes team focused on their domain The least successful team was “Soft Campus”. area, around the TNO Buildings complex.

The most moves of the Soft Campus which were disapproved by the other players were Although, several of their programmatic icons (50 car parking lots, ecological proplacing of the parking spaces. gramme and 300 bike parking lots) were Another controversial item were the DUWO placed in the domain of the Hard Campus. social housing and it’s positioning in the Team Hard Campus opposed to the placing Campus. The Soft Campus team opted for of the car and bike parking lots, but team preserving this specific programmatic item Knowledge Institutes has won the argument and insisting on their realisation, which somehow ended them on the bottom of the by getting support from other teams. score sheet.

The most consensus among the players was reached around the ecological programme Looking generally at the programme proand more space for nature. posed on the programmatic icons, the most controversial issue was the increase of the parking lots. Half of the amount of the park- As for the rest of the quantifiable proing lots that was introduced at the beginning gramme, all of the proposed capacities found its place on the Campus terrain. If we take of the game was discarded. a closer look where to develop overall programme, the most mixed-use location is the THE WINNING PROGRAMME Zone 2: Civiele Techniek. Zone 1 distinguished itself as a zone for open-air experimentaThe winning programme consists of the foltion and knowledge incubators, while zone 3 lowing: was developed as a concentration of the new open areas.

300 parking places space for nature development water 1000 m2

24

Where to develop the programme? i’m TU Delft

EXPO

Kennisinstituten

Picknick bankjes

TU

Horeca

1

Zone 1 - parking

3

2

Zone 2 250 lots

- parking - water - bikes - DUWO - trees - study places

Zone 3 350 lots 3000 m2 900 lots 600 units 50 pieces 200 places

- parking - water - bikes - DUWO - trees

600 lots 2000 m2 300 lots 0 woningen 150 pieces

25

FINAL design statistics

- parking - water - bikes - DUWO - bomen - study places

26

850 lots (out of 1200) 5000 m2 (out of 5000 m2 1200 lots(out of 1200) 600 housing units (out of 600) 200 pieces (out of 200) 200 places (out of 200)

eventcentre

DUWO

supermarkt

budgethotel

studie

espressobar

EXPO

buitenlab

sportkooi

mobiele horeca

college OUT

horeca

bomen

eco

retail

water

fietsen

parking

TU

team ranking

15 icons

1

Knowledge Institues

2

TU

14 icons Hard Campus

3

13 icons TU Central

4

10 icons Soft Campus

27

CREDITS Photo credits: Frank van der Hoeven Milena Ivkovic Game design credits: Blok74 Screen shot credits: Ticklebot Game Studio Blok74 Text: Milena Ivkovic Digital application and game support: Ticklebot Game Studio Rotterdam, June 2015 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA.