CityPlan by Michael Carbaugh

CityPlan Towards the design of digital tools to encourage and facilitate civic participation in city planning

Michael Carbaugh, May 2012 Department of Graphic Design and Industrial Design College of Design, North Carolina State University submitted in partial fulfillment for the degree of Master of Graphic Design

Santiago Piedrafita Committee Chair Department Head of Graphic Design and Industrial Design and Associate Professor, Graphic Design

Martha Scotford Professor, Graphic Design

Scott Townsend Associate Professor, Graphic Design

ABSTRACT Physical environments of cities continually change, responding to varying needs of citizens, businesses, government and organizations. These adaptations happen for many reasons, ranging from aesthetic improvement to functional infrastructural development. As the Raleigh Metropolitan Area continues to grow at a staggering rate, citizens engaged in a democratic society will be asked to participate in dialogues about proposals for development in their everyday environments. Current types of civic participation in planning often take the form of public workshops, presentations, public hearings, and online commenting forums. I believe design can provide new ways to present perspectives and provocations at this stage of city planning while respecting existing procedures and policies. This project seeks to conceptualize a set of digital tools that proposes alternative ways for citizens to participate in city planning. In this new participatory environment, citizens will have spaces to interact with city information, view augmented planning proposals at physical sites, discuss issues and opinions with other citizens and city representatives, and ultimately take action to contribute to the future of their city. Location-based technologies provide opportunities to create links among physical sites, planning information, and discussion. Storytelling enables different components of the designed system to be framed within possible scenarios during citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; everyday lives. Levels of individual engagement often change over time, and are affected by other media channels and social interactions. Because planning operates at many different levels, tools are tailored for particular stages and scales in the planning process. Keywords: Civic engagement; participation in urban planning; Mobility; mobile interaction design, Locative technology; augmented reality

This project is dedicated to Santiago Piedrafita, Martha Scotford, and Scott Townsend for their enthusiasm and guidance; to friends and family for support; and to the College of Design for the opportunity to spend two years growing as a graduate student.

DOCUMENT STRUCTURE

Table of Contents

1 2 3 4

INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

Researchable Questions

Justification

Initial Interests Relevant Projects Key Texts

DETERMINING SCOPE

Planning Map

Stakeholder Map Digital Touchpoints Matrix

FACILITATING DELIBERATION

Scenario

Social Interaction Outside of CityPlan

Participants

Structure and Roles

VISUALIZING PLANNING INFORMATION

Scenario

Layering Planning Information

Adding Interaction and Time

Experience Map

Facilitating Exploration

Citizen Journeys

INITIAL ENGAGEMENT

APPENDICES

Scenario

A: Analysis of Existing Visualizations

Messiness, Computing, and Everyday Life

B: Visual Studies and Pre-Writing

Transitioning from Other Channels

First CityPlan Experience

Designing Reminders

AUGMENTING PLANNING SITES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

115

Scenario

Books

115

Context-Aware Prompts

Image and Content Credits

117

Augmentation at Physical Planning Sites

Designing for Augmented Sites

Visualizing Proposed Changes

Identifying Recommendations

6 7 8

DEFINING CONTENT

Introduction

RESEARCHABLE QUESTIONS Main Question How can locative technology be designed to encourage citizens to hold opinions regarding proposed development changes in the urban environment? Subquestions 1. How can locative technology guide firsthand perceptions and experiences in areas of the city that have been identified as needing change? What augmentation of that experience is necessary to understand a planning issue? 2. How can locative technology link place with substantive explanations of planning issues that require deliberation amongst the city and citizens? 3. How can locative technology aid citizens in visualizing the consequences of alternate planning strategies?

Chapter 1

Introduction

JUSTIFICATION Physical environments of cities are continually developing, responding to the needs and interests of citizens, business, government and organizations. Whether development is about aesthetic improvements in a neighborhood or new transportation infrastructures to manage an influx of new residents, planning choices will inevitably affect the places and experiences of citizens. These conditions can be found in any physical environment, but different communities will each face their own unique challenges. The development of the Raleigh, North Carolina metropolitan area is particularly interesting, experiencing the second highest growth rate in the United States between 2000 and 2010 (Fisher, 2011). This metropolitan area is also anticipating similar growth in the next two decades; along with this trend, citizens will continue to engage in a participatory democracy, voicing their opinions about proposals for change in their everyday environments. In the City of Raleigh, civic participation in city planning often takes the form of public workshops, information sessions and presentations, public hearings, and online commenting forums. I believe design can provide new ways to present perspectives and provocations for different kinds of citizen participation in city planning while respecting existing procedures and policies. As technological developments such as mobile devices become more common in everyday life, new opportunities emerge to reconsider traditional activities and services organized and provided by government. Currently, initiatives to encourage civic engagement have been especially slow to respond to these changes. Even a simple service, the ability to register to vote online, is only available in 11 of 50 states in the United States (Friedersdorf, 2011). The Internet provides opportunities to make civic participation accessible and engaging. Young people have been the most active in online political engagement, the â&#x20AC;&#x153;demographic group with the lowest civic and political participationâ&#x20AC;? (Mossberger et al, 2008, p. 66). Considering the relationship between online engagement and demographics reveals an important point; although some citizens may be more likely to engage with online systems, how does design accommodate inclusive participation with those that choose not to participate or do not have access to networking technologies? Capabilities of locative technology, augmented reality, and increased Internet access can facilitate new experiences with cities and environments, and present new possibilities for design decisions. These changes, along with the quickly increasing ownership of smartphones, can support new ways for citizens to participate in city planning processes. Remote access can change conventional characteristics of citizen participation by allowing location-based visits of planning sites, guiding citizens to areas in need of change, and enabling the city to make participation in these processes accessible. Augmented reality supplements physical space with additional information, potentially establishing relationships amongst physical sites, relevant planning information, visualized alterna-

Chapter 1

Introduction

tive futures, and information-rich discussions. Because networking technologies aid in collapsing geographic and temporal boundaries, citizens are given the opportunity to participate on their own time. Engaging in public discourse should be exciting, rich, and flexible to meet the varied needs of citizens. These implications suggest a broad range of possibilities; however, they are limited without informed content, an understanding of complex issues, and a commitment to empower citizens in their communities. Design decisions will determine the reality of these possibilities, not the technology itself. Documents that communicate proposals to the public rely on the conventions established for professionals in specialized fields and are generally represented through two-dimensional mapping and occasional photographic documentation. While these methods of visualizing information are commonplace for urban planners, what visual methods might be more suitable for citizens? How can new methods change the way that citizens understand physical spaces and the complex issues that surround them? Key recommendations for areas are often isolated from changes that will occur nearby or affect the larger environment. By providing new ways for citizens to interact with information, citizens can view larger conditions that surround their cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s development. If public participation assumes a greater role in future planning decisions, making information intelligible and accessible will be critical. Acknowledging that most urban design problems occur at a systems level, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reasonable to assume that one individual cannot comprehend every aspect of a planning and development issue. Considering how information is presented to citizens, interacted with over time, and understood in specific contexts begins to address some of the challenges that will arise while designing for these conditions. Designing interactions for citizen participation in planning demands consideration of physical environments, the political processes that determine these environments, and most importantly the stakeholders affected by planning issues. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS Assumptions 1. The number of people with access to smartphones and mobile devices will continue to grow. 2. Citizens will increasingly value the ability to participate in planning issues. 3. Cities will be willing to provide and maintain technological support systems for citizen participation in city planning. Limitations 1. Investigations target citizens 27 to 34 years old with an interest in planning issues. 2. Investigations assume participation from city representatives and planners. 3. Investigations only demonstrate interactions on smartphones.

Selected outcomes from the RaleighNow study.

Chapter 1

Introduction

INITIAL INTERESTS An early interest in mobility and urban environments emerged from a previous study done in the Spring semester of 2011 titled RaleighNow, an event finding and planning system developed for mobile devices and kiosks placed in downtown Raleigh. Although RaleighNow differed in many ways from this effort, it provoked questions about the relationship between technology and place. Envisioning a project specifically for downtown Raleigh was instrumental in understanding that cities are unique, and designed systems that support those cities could be unique as well. The scale of a mid-sized city, everyday life in urban environments, and anticipations of the future in Raleigh were influential in the design of RaleighNow, and are continued here. The motivation to pursue this project resulted from a simple question: How do urban environments change over time, and how do citizens influence these changes? By nature, urban environments are complex and shared by many people. Decisions about these spaces can have long-term effects, whether anticipated or not. This curiosity led to an exploration of existing plans, events, and workshops that frequently take place in Raleigh, organized and provided by city government. After careful observation and research, a new question emerged: What opportunities could further engage and inform citizens in planning processes? During this process, many existing examples of platforms and services became informative in reconsidering what public services could be. Everyday lives of citizens are deeply engrained in these environments; therefore, understanding participation in planning wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t enough. Emphasizing a need for understanding people became a guiding force in the search for design opportunities; therefore, a new question had to be considered: What new opportunities for citizen engagement would conveniently fit into citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; everyday lives? This became especially important; removing barriers for participation and designing for flexibility create more accessible public services. The following examples, ideas and previously mentioned questions were motivation to conceptualize a public service for citizen participation in urban planning that promotes civic engagement and is sensitive to the needs of citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; everyday lives.

Chapter 1

Introduction

RELEVANT PROJECTS Existing initiatives, services, and organizations that promote civic engagement and participation confirm the importance of this project. A variety of initiatives exist internationally, ranging from self-motivated activist projects to services developed specifically for governments. The following examples demonstrate qualities and ideas that align with the purpose of this study. There are various other projects dealing with these ideas, and it is reasonable to anticipate that more will come in the future. Through research of the current context of citizen participation (and activism) in planning, these selected examples have been most informative. Change by Us http://changeby.us/ Created by Local Projects, CEOs for Cities, Code for America, and PlanNYC.

This online platform encourages citizens to suggest projects to help make cities better. Change by Us brings together citizens and city officials to discuss ideas, align resources, and make projects happen. Initial ideas are limited to 175 characters and posted on a virtual bulletin board. Proposed projects can get their own page with details about the location, idea, and a space for discussion. Projects also identify what help is needed (i.e. donations or volunteers). Currently, this platform exists for New York, NY and Philadelphia, PA. Decision Commons http://www.reuw/washington.edu/research/decisioncommons.php/ Initiative of Quality Growth Alliance, Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce, University of Washington Runstad Center for Real Estate Studies.

Decision Commons is a project that uses technological tools to visualize alternative futures that are outcomes of planning strategies and public policy decisions. The software used is meant to be accessible, allowing experts and citizens to discuss the implications of different environmental factors. Geographic visualizations provide a way of showing how decisions are interrelated and decisions can produce unexpected outcomes. Envisioning Development Toolkits http://envisioningdevelopment.net/ Project by the Center for Urban Pedagogy located in New York City, NY.

The aim of the Envisioning Development Toolkits is to provide tools that educate citizens about aspects of planning and development in New York City. Each toolkit has interactive activities that allow participants to quickly visualize concepts such as zoning and affordable housing. Booklets also provide visual examples that make information about development (sometimes confusing and codified) easier to understand.

Chapter 1

Introduction

FreshkillsPark+ Application http://med44.com/media/press/freshkills/FK_release.html/ Project by Med44 using Layar for the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation.

FreshkillsPark+ is an application that utilizes augmented reality to show the plans for Freshkills Park, a park in New York City being built on top of the world’s largest landfill. The application allows visitors and others to see, based on their location, how the park will incrementally change over time. Future plans, as well as current offerings, can be viewed on a map or as overlays in the environment. I Wish This Was http://iwishthiswas.cc/ Project by artist Candy Chang.

I Wish this Was is a project that asks citizens to identify their wishes and make them publicly visible. Stickers are distributed with ‘I Wish This Was _____’ printed; participants fill out their idea or hopes on the sticker, then place it somewhere in the environment. This project is not restricted to issues related to planning, but many outcomes of the project have been about hopes for changes in urban environments. Stickers have ended up on empty storefronts, parking lots, benches, and streets, just to name a few locations. Participatory Chinatown http://participatorychinatown.org/ Project by The Asian Community Development Corporation, Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Emerson College, and Muzzy Lane. Funded by the MacArthur Foundation.

Participatory Chinatown is a videogame available online and used at public meetings in Boston’s Chinatown neighborhood. During public meetings, the game encourages social interaction, as families and individuals assemble in a single space to play. The game is built from a direct model of the neighborhood, allowing citizens to quickly see how changes in the physical environment would look. Citizens play through scenarios, enacting experiences that a fictional persona could have. Participatory Chinatown creates a very direct relationship between future changes, citizens, and physical environments.

Chapter 1

Introduction

KEY TEXTS The following texts were influential at many different stages of this project. The books and articles referenced here come from many different areas including (but not limited to) Human-Computer Interaction, Urban and City Planning, Political Science, Public Management, and Architecture. Different texts became lenses to view current conditions of planning, clarify the purpose of the project, and identify design possibilities. For the purpose of this review, core concepts from each text are summarized, as well as their relevance to the project. Although this review isolates key texts by themselves, they are most informative considered as a whole, and overlap at various points. Synthesizing many ideas (and their relationships) is a necessity to understand the context of any effort in design. The four investigations (Chapters 3 through 6) that articulate the outcomes of this project are evidence that the relationships amongst these different texts and disciplines are significant. Divining a Digital Future: Mess and Mythology in Ubiquitous Computing (2011) In Divining a Digital Future: Mess and Mythology in Ubiquitous Computing, anthropologist Genevieve Bell and human-computer interaction researcher Paul Dourish use two terms to describe the current state of ubiquitous computing, myth—“the ideas that animate and drive ubicomp forward” and messiness—“the practice of any technology in the world is never quite as simple, straightforward, or idealized as it is imagined to be” (2011, p. 4). Messiness is more than tangles of cords concealed inside most machines or hanging behind desks; it is a mix of many cultural, social, political, and economic factors that define ubiquitous computing. Mobility, another major theme in ubicomp research, is not simply movement from point A to point B; it is about the way we experience space, ranging from globalization, to commuting, to the suburbanization of cities (p. 119). In urban computing, Dourish and Bell suggest that residents of urban spaces likely have quite different experiences of mobility; a taxi driver will have a much different understanding of mobility than the typically portrayed young “tech savvy” professional (p. 123). This understanding and perspective of how humans interact with computers in a current technological context is informative for how scenario writing is approached in this study. A thorough analysis of mobility is informative for considering the ways citizens may relate to and make meaning of different spaces.

Chapter 1

Introduction

Politics: Deliberation, Mobilization, and Networked Practices of Agitation (2007) In the chapter “Politics: Deliberation, Mobilization, and Networked Practices of Agitation,” Merlyna Lim and Mark E. Kann ask whether or not the Internet “form[s] a new public sphere or does it merely perpetuate the existing conditions?” (Varnelis, 2007, p. 78). Analyzing case studies of the Internet in political practice, Lim and Kann identify two key modes of democratic action: online deliberation and mobilization. Deliberation is about involving citizens in decision making by engaging in discussion and is administered by having a particular set of rules. Mobilization, the “creation of broad social networks of people around a shared interest in blocking or promoting social change,” is different than deliberation because it has a tendency to emphasize public activism (p. 79). Although these tools for political practice offer new spaces for political discussion and action, Lim and Kann conclude that the Internet is ultimately not a singular public sphere. The Internet is a tool that can be used for any purpose, whether or not it supports democracy in essence. It is a vast, complex space that is composed of many overlapping public spheres. The concept of deliberation and its implementation in online spaces provides insight for the design of a platform created to support participation in planning. Deliberation requires rules and procedure to guarantee reason and progress; these factors need to be visible in the structure of an online space for deliberation. Information technology as a tool for public participation in urban planning: A review of experiments and potentials (2007) Malgorzata Hanzl analyzes existing and prototyped technological tools that facilitate citizen participation in urban planning. Currently, there are four categories of Information Technology tools in use: Models, Participatory Planning Geographic Information Systems (PPGIS), computer games, and communication platforms. City modeling aims to “understand and to represent the processes which take place in the city and to support discussion” and is rooted in physical planning (2007, p. 290). GIS systems “gather, store, analyze, and represent data” from geographic databases that can be viewed in a browser and allows visual information to be layered on top of surfaces (p. 290).Games allow real-time 3D graphics, direct object manipulation, and rewards for use of skills like logic, memorization, and problem solving. Collaborative software changes the dynamic between citizens and planners; both parties “become providers and recipients of information” (p. 297). Chat rooms, discussion forums, and social software also facilitate collaboration. Identifying a potential fifth area for IT in participatory planning, Hanzl cites experiments in augmented reality (AR). Although examples are focused on immersive environments (with no discussion of mobile AR), Hanzl concludes that AR systems open up new nonprofessional methods for participation in planning. Chapter 4 (Investigation Two) in this document deals specifically with these opportunities, as well as the integration of other information technologies.

Chapter 1

Introduction

The Image of the City (1960) Kevin Lynch uses sections of Boston, Jersey City, and Los Angeles as case studies to explain the way a city is perceived by observers, identifying five elements of the city image: Paths, Edges, Districts, Nodes, and Landmarks (1960, p. 47). Paths are channels where observers can (or would be able to) move, such as streets or walkways. Other city elements are arranged around these paths, and together they begin to create a network (p. 61). Edges are linear elements not considered to be paths; they are boundaries like shorelines or walls. Districts are sections of the city that share a common character. Observers can also enter nodes, but these areas are smaller; they may be where paths cross or in areas of concentration. A node may be a symbol of focus of a district, which can be called a core. Landmarks are typically physical objects that can be differentiated from the surroundings. Although city elements are distinct, identities may shift in different circumstances and are always related (p. 48). Cities are not one static image; they are “sets of images, which [are] more or less overlapped and interrelated” (p. 85). Many conditions change these images such as viewpoint, time of day, or season. Multiple investigations visualize urban areas; Lynch offers a vocabulary to describe main components of the images the investigations augment or represent. Dealing with overlays on physical space (which occurs in Investigation Two) also complicates city image elements by adding extra layers of content that compete with the existing visual hierarchy of the city. Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance (2006) Acknowledging the complexity of existing conditions necessary for public participation in government, Archon Fung introduces a framework for understanding different designed situations for participation. The first of three dimensions for framing public participation, participant selection, identifies how citizens are chosen or allowed to participate. Communication and decision, the next dimension, “specifies how participants interact within a venue of public discussion”; communication modes can range from being a spectator to deploying expertise (2006, p. 68). The final dimension, authority and power, details what kind of impact public participation will have; citizens have different relationships to government in different situations (p. 69). Placing these three dimensions on independent axes allows for the creation of a democracy cube, a visualization that allows for the comparison of different participation designs (p. 70). Fung observes that properly structured participation can provide evidence that direct democracy can be efficient by counting on citizens’ knowledge and opinions (p. 73). Different aspects of urban planning call for different kinds of participation; Fung’s model acknowledges that these activities are multifaceted and complex. For a digital system, a small change in the design of a participatory process can affect the role citizens have in that particular activity; designers must be sensitive about the roles both citizens and governments play in different design situations. The democracy cube is also a method for visualizing how citizen’s roles are detailed later in this document.

SYSTEM DIAGRAMS

Defining Scope

FRAMING SCOPE AND INTENT OF INVESTIGATIONS The proposed system, CityPlan, is made up of different components, or tools, that encourage citizen participation at different stages and scales in city planning. Because the scope of this system involves many stakeholders and points in time, visualizations aid in making some aspects clearer. The following diagrams attempt to articulate different attributes of the designed system in terms of four criteria: city planning, stakeholders, digital touchpoints, and citizen experiences. Considered as a set, these diagrams explore how CityPlan fits within existing contexts for participation and what is unique about the system. Utilizing methods from experience design (and more specifically service design) that are intended to identify not how to design, but rather what or for whom to design, have been effective in articulating what CityPlan could be. Why is this set of tools referred to as a system rather than a toolkit? The late systems thinker Donella Meadows defines a system in Thinking with Systems as “a set of elements or parts that is coherently organized and inter-connected in a pattern or structure that produces a characteristic set of behaviors, often classified as its ‘function’ or ‘purpose’” (2008, p. 188). The tools conceptualized have functions and outcomes that enable future decisions and behaviors; a citizen’s feedback on a planning recommendation may influence future proposed alternatives, identify talking points in a deliberative process, or even shift a policy maker’s point of view. Although investigations show a progression over time, the core structure of CityPlan is made up of interrelated parts that can be accessed at different points in time. One of Meadows’ Systems Principles, a list of attributes all systems have, encapsulates the point of designing a system for citizen participation that is multifaceted and supports various stages of the planning process: “System structure is the source of system behavior. System behavior reveals itself as a series of events over time” (2008, p. 188). Anticipating a framework for citizens’ experiences and how they might engage with the system enabled the scripting of a story depicting different events contributing to a more significant whole.

Chapter 2

Defining Scope

PLANNING MAP (map on next spread) Overview Understanding the relationships among planners, government, and citizens is necessary to design tools for citizen participation. Johnson defines planning for urban spaces as â&#x20AC;&#x153;the process of making and implementing decisions about their land use and their space-dependent social and economic policiesâ&#x20AC;? (1997, p. 9). Planning involves decisions about environments that are shared by everyone, indicating that many stakeholders may be involved. Planning is also broad, and the concerns that planning addresses will differ depending on the situation; for example, a growing community may be more concerned with future land-use patterns (Levy, 2009, p. 3). Public policy is also created and implemented by urban planning; however, decisions are typically a mix between public and private sectors (Johnson, 1997, p. 13). Considering overarching roles and responsibilities of different stakeholder categories in planning helps frame and anticipate what activities different stakeholders may participate in within the designed system. These planning goals play another important role, identifying possible motivations for citizens to participate or for planners to engage with a local community in making particular decisions. An important area this diagram outlines is the comprehensive planning process, an always in-progress document that is important for stakeholders to have access to. A comprehensive plan outlines the future goals and vision of a city. This map was influential in defining the content present in each and assisted in narrowing the scope of the project as a whole.

Chapter 2

URBAN PLANNING

is inherently political and involves many sta

Public planning at the substate level done by and for cities, counties, towns, and other units of local governments.

Planning Map

Large emotional stakes Visible decisions Process close at hand

Citizens correctly assume they Large financial consequences Link to property taxes

GOVERNMENT requires a separation of powers

Planning is a function of the executive branch directed by AGENCIES or CON Executive manages planning Legislative funds and taxes projects Judicial restricts legislation

including

URBAN PLANN

Urban Design

that can be more complex at a local level

Urban Renewal and Community Development Many political jurisdictions for one metropolitan area Variety of districts with powers and responsibilities (i.e. school districts)

Transportation Planning Economic Development Planning Growth Management, Smart Growth, and Sustainable Development

in different fields

with d st

Environmental and Energy Planning Planning for Metropolitan Regions

who work together to continuously develop

COMPREHENSIVE PLANS designed based on goals th The most basic plans prepared to guide the development of the community. They cover the entire community and are long term.

through an ongoing PLANNING PROCESS Research Phase

Content and relationships generated from Contemporary Urban Planning, 9th Ed. by John M. Levy

Clarification of Commun Goals and Objectives

Defining Scope

akeholders

y know something

CITIZENS

NSULTANTS

Voter Resident Member of organizations Community employer Property owner

NERS Advisory panels

that request community participation

different tyles

Neutral public servant

Public presentations Public meetings Informal meetings Press releases

Builder of community consensus

Web sties

Entrepreneur Advocate

Agent of radical change

Health Public safety Circulation

hat support â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Public Interestâ&#x20AC;?

nity

Homeowner

play different roles

Provision of services and facilities Fiscal health Economic goals Environmental protection Redistributive goals

Plan Formulation

Plan Implementation

Review and Revision

Chapter 2

Stakeholder Map

EXTERNAL PRIMARY

SECONDARY

INTERNAL

CONTENT

Citizens Individuals with the ability to express their opinion

Community Organizations Organizations such as Citizen Action Councils that advocate for the best interest of communities

Planning and Development Department Manages many aspects of city planning and development in different fields

North Carolina Department of Transportation Multi-modal agency provides projects and services

Employers/Businesses Employ citizens and contribute to local economy

Information Technology Department Manages infrastructure that supports tool

Homeowners Individuals who own a home in an affected community Residents People living in communities affected by a planning issue Activists Individuals with strong feelings towards particular issues

Property Owners Own land potentially affected by planning issues News Media Publish news and opinions on planning issues

City Council and Boards and Commissions Discusses and votes on issues that relate to planning. Public Affairs Department Distributes information to the public about city services, policies, and procedures

Wake County Government Develops transit plan for all of Wake County Triangle Transit Authority Operates regional public transportation services Capital Area Transit Operates public transportation services for the City of Raleigh

Defining Scope

STAKEHOLDER MAP Overview Stakeholder maps are a â&#x20AC;&#x153;visual or physical representation of the various groups involved with a particular serviceâ&#x20AC;? (Stickdorn and Schneider, 2010, p. 158). At the broadest level, stakeholders can be organized by two categories: internal, those involved with the operations and maintenance, and external, those engaging in the service. By seeing a general representation of all possible stakeholders, it is easy to indentify who may or may not be included. This diagram also helps illustrate which stakeholders and relationships each investigation considers. Stakeholder Categories External stakeholders that are labeled as primary stakeholders are represented through scenarios in every investigation. All investigations are citizen-centered, focusing on engagement and participation. Other external stakeholders not represented may be groups that debate and advocate for positions on particular content issues; while they certainly have a role in decision-making, the primary focus of the tool is for individuals in their local communities. Internal stakeholders are responsible for implementing and maintaining the tool, as well as acting as mediators between city and citizens. Content stakeholders, the final category, vary depending on what planning issues are being proposed or discussed.

Chapter 2

TOOL CAPABILITIES

Digital Touchpoint Matrix

Feature Phone

Smartphone / Mobile Device

Text message updates

•

E-mail updates

•

Browser, app, or operating system notifications Upload discussion point/ photos via text message

•

ACCESSIBILITY

Desktop

•

• •

Upload discussion point/ photos via browser or app Photograph observations about a site

Laptop

•

Physical site visits

•

Virtual site visits

•

Issue timeline

•

Access to city documents

•

Discussion platform

•

Visualize and layer city information

•

Public Access (ie. Library) Prepaid or monthly contracts available

•

∞

Mobility

•

Connectivity without WiFi

•

Defining Scope

DIGITAL TOUCHPOINT MATRIX Overview Digital touchpoints for CityPlan include feature phones, smartphones and mobile devices, and laptop computers and desktop computers. At each of these access points, the differences among devices afford different interactions. As citizens engage with the designed system over time, it is reasonable to assume they will likely interact at different touchpoints or platforms. This matrix articulates what activities can be performed at each touchpoint, as well as highlights similarities and differences. Smartphone and Mobile Device Interactions Smartphones and mobile devices allow for some exclusive interactions. A nearly alwayson connection and design for mobility allow for augmented visits at physical sites that showcase recommendations and proposals. Location-based technology such as GPS, easy access to maps, and built-in cameras allow citizens to utilize different features present in CityPlan. Choosing smartphones as a touchpoint for investigations, like the use of any particular technology, means that access will be limited to some citizens. To make CityPlan as accessible as possible, a variety of technological touchpoints are included. When considering accessibility, it is also important to evaluate how access may change over time. As of February 2012, 71% of US adults between ages 25 and 34 own smartphones, a 13% increase from May 2011 (Smith, 2012). As a whole, 46% of American adults own smartphones, an 11% increase from May 2011. These trends support the assumption that the personas chosen for investigations could reasonably be smartphone users, and in the near future, ownership should continue to increase quickly.

Chapter 2

Defining Scope

EXPERIENCE MAP (map on next spread) Overview An experience map is a visual representation “that serves to illuminate the complete experience a person may have with a product or service” (Risdon, 2011). This diagram has three main functions: identifies key stages that a citizen will experience throughout a planning issue, lists core behaviors at each stage, and anticipates what citizens may be thinking and feeling. Although the stages and content listed are general, they help provide an overview of CityPlan’s functions and how they may change over time. Stages Considering key functions of the designed system on a citizen-specific timeline breaks down key stages that citizens will experience. These stages are broader than CityPlan itself and acknowledge the role that other media and discussions may have at any point in time. Each citizen’s levels of involvement, awareness, and use will differ and affect their experience as a decision-maker and participant.

Chapter 2

Experience Map

STAGE AWARENESS SERVICE Presence in other media channels or discussions

Awareness

INITIATION Transition from media; Direct firsttime access

Initiation

DELIBERATION

Timeline; documents; News and updates; access to issues tion; initial site visits; discussio city and citizens

Information external

Site visit

ACTIONS

Become aware through media channels and discussion

nonlinear Transition from media to tool

Discussion

Location-based R response in

nonlinear

THOUGHTS • What is this issue?

FEELINGS

nonlinear

external

• Does it matter to me?

• What can I do? • How will this be useful?

• I want an overview. • What do other citizens think?

• Seeing changes in the enviro • These issues are complicate • I feel more involved in my ci

• This could be a big change. • That’s close to home. • Do I have a voice in this?

• The city values my input in these decisions.

• The city feels more accessible now. • I hope this isn’t too complicated.

• I didn’t know that! • Are these viewpoints balanc • I hope my opinion makes se to others.

Defining Scope

city informaons between

Future of alternate choices; important stages of planning process; role of citizen participation or action

RESULTS

Formulate and advocate for an opinion on issue; direct to action if necessary

Return to issue on tool; information and discussion

Measured Action

sources influence knowledge

City plans and data

MEASURED ACTION

Opinions and concerns

Citizen holds a position for the current situation

Results

Next steps discussed; may return to another step in the process

Outside action may be needed

Response d to city nformation

Reflection, consideration, and response

sources influence responses

onment helps. ed! ity.

ced? ense

• I want to make sure my voice is heard. • It seems like a lot of people can relate to my position. • I hope the city is listening.

• I have few doubts about my position. • Will everyone who has been participating take action?

• It’s time to find out more.

• I think I know where I stand now. • Is my opinion relevant with so many people discussing?

• I’m proud I advocated for my opinion. • I hope my effort makes a difference.

• What if things don’t work out? • I wish more people agreed.

Chapter 2

Citizen Journeys Diagram

GLENN

SUSAN

General citizen profile

Glenn is a married 34-year-old with a 3-year-old

Susan is a 27-year-old nurse and recently moved to

child. He is a new homeowner and works in

Raleigh. She drives 15 minutes to work each day and

downtown Raleigh in finance. He enjoys walking

lives two miles outside of downtown Raleigh.

to work when he knows the weather will be nice. Interest in Planning Issues Interest in Planning Issues

Recently hearing about the Triangle’s anticipated

Investing in a home increased Glenn’s interest

growth in the next 20 years sparked Susan’s interest

in planning issues.

in future changes.

Defining Scope

CITIZEN JOURNEYS Overview The following Citizen Journeys diagram outlines key moments in two citizens’ engagement with a planning issue and their participation with the designed system. Stages from the Experience Map are adapted for these scenarios to chart where interactions fit in a larger scope. Citizen journeys are derived from a method called ‘customer service maps,’ that uses touchpoints over time to create an “engaging story based upon their experience” (Stickdorn and Schneider, 2010, p. 158). Moments from these journeys frame the context for discrete design investigations. These moments are identified and presented in more detail in the scripts of each investigation.

Touchpoint

Physical site touchpoint

SETTING OF INVESTIGATION ONE

SETTING OF INVESTIGATION TWO

Reads article about the Peace Stree Corridor Visioning Study. lacks engagement with issue

Scans marker at end of article with smartphone.

Participates in a site visit at the Peace Street Corridor.

Continues to engage with CityPlan at home and work.

Finds CityPlan through a link on a blog post comment.

Headlines

Glenn

Susan

Visioning study done for the Peace Street Corridor

AWARENESS

INITIATION

1. Glenn becomes aware of the tool through small icons placed at the end of an article in the local newspaper.

2. Glenn scans one of the icons with his phone and plans a location-based reminder to do a site visit in the future.

3. After being reminded and declining a few times, Glenn chooses to do a site visit before work. He views potential changes and discussions.

AWARENESS / INITIATION

DELIBERATION

1. During lunch at work, Susan first finds the tool through a link in a local news blog comment.

2. Susan continues to be active checking updates on the tool and viewing discussions, both at home and work.

Chapter 2

Citizen Journeys Diagram (continued)

SETTING OF INVESTIGATION THREE

Finds out about new transit plan from neighbor.

Attends transit plan presentation during lunch.

Glenn and Susan meet at the transit plan presentation.

Drives downtown to attend transit plan during lunch.

Glenn and Susan interact with CityPlan together.

Receives notification from CityPlan about new transit plan.

Visits a planning site for the first time.

Participation with CityPlan increases after presentation.

Wake County Transit Plan announced

Tax increase a possibility to fund future transportation plans

DELIBERATION

4. Glenn's neighbor, active in community organizations, informs him of a presentation about the new transit plan.

5. Glenn attends the meeting downtown during lunch, where Council members mention the tool. He sits down next to Susan, a stranger to him.

6. Glenn meets Susan, and talks about his experience with a site visit. Now he sees more value in the tool than before, and lets her know.

7. Glenn's interactions lead him to participate in discussions. He enjoys receiving notifications and finding aspects of issues that interest him.

3. Susan received a notification about a presentation City Hall is giving about the new transit plan.

4. Susan attends the meeting downtown during lunch, where Council members mention the tool. Citizens in the audience are already discussing their initial reactions.

5. Susan, who is by herself, talks to Glenn. They quickly begin discussing aspects of the new plan they are excited and concerned about.

6. Susan does a site visit near work; she realizes that the changes that interested her could also affect areas near her home.

Defining Scope

SETTING OF INVESTIGATION FOUR

Glenn and Susan both vote on the transportation tax on the 2012 ballot.

Participates in discussions with CityPlan more often.

Chooses to advocate about his opinion on the transportation tax. News about the ballot from different sources capture her interest.

Receives an e-mail from Glenn. Transportation tax makes it on to the 2012 election ballot

MEASURED ACTION

8. Glenn begins engaging with the tool more often. He starts mapping different information and contributing documentation to discussions.

9. As discussion picks up, Glenn feels stronger about his opinions and uses reason to justify his decision to others.

10. Glenn exercises his ability to vote about the tax during the 2012 election. He advocates for his viewpoint with friends and through the tool. MEASURED ACTION

7. Susan receives an e-mail at work from Glenn that discussion has been picking up about taxes making it on to the 2012 election ballot.

8. Increased coverage in news media and discussions at work interest Susan, and she engages in more activity outside of work.

9. Susan advocates for her position by voting, talking to friends, and discussing on the tool.

Peace St. Corridor Visioning Study

Set up a Site Visit! [1]

[2]

[4]

[5]

[3]

[6]

[7]

INVESTIGATION ONE

Initial Engagement

SCENARIO On a Saturday morning, Glenn walks with his wife, Angela, and his three-year-old son, Cliff, downtown to the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences. After Glenn and Angela guide Cliff around the museum, they grab lunch at the museum’s café on the top floor. Glenn isn’t very hungry and chooses to get coffee instead; Cliff eats quickly and is eager to see the dinosaur skeletons again. Angela takes Cliff back downstairs, while Glenn finishes his coffee. He takes a copy of the News & Observer from the counter and scans over it, looking for interesting articles. In the local section, Glenn sees that the City of Raleigh has released the Peace Street Corridor Visioning Study, a document anticipating ways to improve an area that is not far from Glenn’s house. The city is also seeking citizen comments on the study. After reading the brief article, Gleen sees a small row of markers and the City of Raleigh’s seal [1]. He sees that he can view the anticipated changes with his smartphone at the actual site of the study, and can be reminded by setting a time-based or location-based reminder. He scans the marker to set up a site visit reminder, and is prompted with a welcome screen on his phone [2]. Glenn reads the welcome text and continues to the next screen [3], prompting him to select either a time-based or location-based reminder [4]. He chooses a location-based reminder; immediately after, he is prompted to choose the distance from the site where he would prefer to be reminded [5]. Choosing .25 mile from the site, Glenn continues and confirms the information is correct [6]. A confirmation screen with a photo of the location and welcoming text appears before he exits the application [7].

Glennâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first experience with CityPlan on his smartphone.

Chapter 3

Initial Engagement

MESSINESS, COMPUTING, AND EVERYDAY LIFE It’s easy to imagine a technological environment where everything ‘just works’ and interactions with devices are free from outside distractions. Connectivity, seamlessness, and context-awareness are all things technology seems to strive for, but actual implementations rarely meet the expectations of end users. In Divining a Digital Future, Bell and Dourish describe a key aspect of ubiquitous computing as messiness—“the practice of any technology in the world is never quite as simple, straightforward, or idealized as it is imagined to be” (2011, p. 4). These realities are evident in everyday life; the mess of cords behind a desk, losing reception, and dealing with compatibility (or lack thereof) between platforms. Interactions with technological devices are complex and not always predictable. This realization is influential in determining how interactions with CityPlan are represented in each scenario, and just as important, what is happening before and after the interactions detailed in scenarios. Mobility is also another critical aspect to consider in constructing scenarios that involve

Mobility

mobile interactions. What mobility means may be specific to an individual; in Glenn’s

Divining a Digital Future: Mess

case, mobility may mean his ability to access information during brief break periods at

and Mythology in Ubiquitous

nearly any location. Mobility is not about considering movement from point A to point B;

Computing,

it is about human experiences of space and what it means to be in different spaces

Genevieve Bell and Paul Dourish

(Dourish and Bell, p. 119). When citizens interact in a space, whether a café, a bus, or at home, their actions produce meaning. Depending on how citizens experience the city they live in, their perceptions of aspects of the city could be dramatically different than other citizens’ perspectives. Even a relatively simple difference between daily habits, such as walking or driving to work, could influence a citizen’s understanding of mobility (Dourish and Bell, p. 123). Glenn’s actions in the investigation indicate that his family can walk to some destinations downtown, his place of work is not far from home, and he can access information at different points. When out, he also enjoys reading the newspaper. These habits and behaviors are particular to Glenn, and his way of becoming aware of CityPlan is different from the ways by which others will learn of it. Glenn’s preconceptions and investment will be informed by his previous experiences, and his relationship to space in everyday life may guide what issues or proposals he chooses to engage with. As a homeowner that resides a few blocks from Peace Street, the article he reads in the scenario details plans that could change his commute and affect his financial investment. TRANSITIONING FROM OTHER CHANNELS CityPlan would utilize existing ways that citizens become aware of planning-related events and issues as an entry point into different tools. Citizens arrive at their initial interaction with the tool organically, depending on their unique everyday experience.

Chapter 3

Initial Engagement

In the scope of this investigation, Glenn’s entry point is a newspaper article. Different media channels and environments allow for movement from being aware about CityPlan to a first interaction; this behavior could originate from a discussion with a friend who gives a fellow citizen a URL, a news website, or a blog post comment, just to name a few possibilities. The marker, found as a printed component of an article in the newspaper, can be scanned by a smartphone to prompt different system behaviors. This allows markers to be placed in relevant media channels or contexts, creating an identity for entering into CityPlan. This method of entering CityPlan was chosen because there is value in the ability to encode information for citizens into a technological mark; although the codes have specific requirements to function (a thick black square), the marker itself still allows for contextual information that can support the content it links to (unlike a generated QR code). In the future, different media channels will inevitably evolve, converge, or become rare. Citizens will continue to find out about planning issues and events

QR code

through various media; a designed system will need to be flexible to accommodate to these changes over time. Peace St. Corridor Visioning Study

FIRST CITYPLAN EXPERIENCE Any interaction between citizens and government involves some type of power relationship, which could change at any given time. The visual and language-driven components presented in a digital space must embody representation of government, and must also be friendly enough to encourage generalized citizen activity with CityPlan. When a

Set up a Site Visit!

citizen chooses a specific activity, the tone of the tool’s language can also indicate what kind of participation is asked for in that particular activity. Henry Sanoff, an architect and

AR marker for CityPlan

expert on community participation, observes that in design and planning, “participation means different things to different people—and even the same people—depending on the

Participation

issue, its timing, and the political setting in which it takes place” (2000, p.11). The Peace

Community Participation

Street Corridor Visioning Study is about identifying needs for the area and seeks feedback

Methods in Design and Planning,

from citizens.

Henry Sanoff

Because it is specifically about recommendations for the corridor, not implementation, language reinforces that the study looks for opportunities and envisions possibilities in the near future. Citizens are not voting or expressing one preference, but commenting on their impressions from the study. Glenn selects the Peace Street Corridor Visioning Study site visit, a scenario where the City of Raleigh is asking specifically for feedback about a pro bono study done by an architecture and planning firm. The participation requested by the city consists of questions that ask for initial reactions, support, or ideas for improvement. For this kind of activity at this point in a planning process, participation does not follow a rigid structure and emphasizes providing a forum for feedback; other planning situations will require or ask for different methods of participation. Considering the situation a citizen is about to engage in also informs the tone and language CityPlan will employ.

Chapter 3

Glenn chooses to set a location-based reminder in the museum cafe.

Initial Engagement

DESIGNING REMINDERS Expecting a citizen to easily transition from becoming aware of a proposal to engaging with that proposal in a physical site requires acknowledging how a site visit could fit into everyday life. Glenn chooses a location-based reminder over a time-based reminder in the investigation. When he makes this decision, the designed system must be capable of accessing Glenn’s location information through his smartphone. Out of the four investigations in this project, this is the first instance of locative media, which Dimitris Charitos

Locative Media

describes as “systems of situated, context-aware communication” (2009, p. 151). Design-

Precedents for the Design of

ing location-based reminders requires a context-aware relationship with a citizen, which

Locative Media,

raises important design questions about privacy and security.

Dimitris Charitos

In Net Locality, Eric Gordon and Adriana de Souza e Silva note that location-aware technology also “provides the conditions for one to be mastered by the network” (2011, p. 133). CityPlan must openly answer questions about control and access to data. To advocate for the rights of citizens, the intent and actual use of location tracking needs to be made transparent; these reminders are designed for the convenience of citizens and to encourage their participation. If the intentions and uses of the tool’s capabilities are made clear, it is easier to see how locative media can be designed to make citizen experiences more convenient and efficient. After completing the necessary interactions to set up a reminder, citizens are not pushed to create a CityPlan profile immediately after. The choice to give a citizen the option to make a profile as they become more engaged, instead of requiring an account, is an effort to develop privacy and trust in relation to government services. In addition, when a citizen does create an account, the system does require the use of actual identities. This decision means that citizens can have less of a concern about their privacy when interacting with government, but also risks intentional misuse by citizens in participation. To address this potential problem, moderating CityPlan is another responsibility required to maintain the system and is performed by the city.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

INVESTIGATION TWO

Augmenting Planning Sites

SCENARIO On Monday, two days after Glenn sets up a site visit, he receives a reminder for the Peace Street Corridor Visioning Study on his smartphone during his walk to work. He doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have much time, so he decides to wait on visiting the corridor. He will be prompted again when he is near the site. Two days later, Glenn is on his way to work in the morning and receives another prompt [1]. This time Glenn has just enough time to visit the site [2]. After accepting the prompt, he is asked to choose between two options: participating in the Visioning Study, which displays recommendations from the study he read about, or a Discussion mode, which allows citizens to view all proposals, discussions, and other issues that are related to the site. Glenn chooses to participate in the Visioning Study, and is prompted on the procedures for viewing key recommendations [3]. As the screen transitions into an augmented view, Glenn sees overlaid renderings of development recommendations on the site [4]. A map view also lets him see each recommendation in proximity to his current location [5]. Glenn selects a rendering of the sidewalk he is standing on; information appears on the screen about the need for a Pedestrian and Bike Facility [6]. Glenn reads short descriptions that detail the recommendation, and sees that he can provide feedback to the city [7]. After providing an initial reaction, he walks towards another destination and sees a rendering of a transit station across the street [8]. Glenn selects the recommendation for a Downtown Transit Station and views the information [9]. After viewing each recommendation and giving feedback for the two previously mentioned, he views a checklist that shows completed and remaining recommendations [10].

Chapter 4

[7]

[8]

Augmenting Planning Sites

CONTEXT-AWARE PROMPTS Glenn’s first experience with CityPlan at a physical planning site occurs when his phone prompts him with a location-based reminder previously set up in Investigation One. Because this mobile interaction and system behavior is different from how users have conventionally interacted with computers (in an environment where a computer is in a fixed location), different design considerations are required. Charitos observes “locationbased mediated environments bring human-computer communication […] back into the context of the physical world, instead of expecting humans to adapt to the needs of a computer environment” (2009, p. 151). Similar to Investigation One, this requires consideration of the implications of mobility and how CityPlan could fit into everyday life, but this scenario is different: rather than a citizen initiating interaction, the system itself is prompting (and potentially interrupting) the citizen. A location-based reminder does not have a direct relationship to a specific time, and instead responds to a citizen when they are within a certain distance from a physical space. Because of a lapse in time, citizens could potentially forget exactly what the system prompt is intending to communicate. Taking this challenge into consideration, the prompt displays an image that evokes the physical site, as well as a short description of what the reminder is for. Ambient informatics, “a state in which information is freely available at the point in space and time someone requires it,” adequately describes the condition of this scenario and

Ambient Informatics

suggests implications for design (Greenfield and Shepard, 2007, p. 10). If the technologi-

Urban Computing and its

cal infrastructure exists, designers can structure prompts to provide easy access to infor-

Discontents,

mation that may be useful to citizens. Providing an opportunity to reinforce the purpose

Adam Greenfield and

and capabilities of the system, particularly in relationship to an earlier reminder a citizen

Mark Shepard

set up, can be informative. After a reminder prompt, if a citizen chooses to participate in a site visit, they are given with two options: participating in the Visioning Study and Discussion mode. These two options are designed to accommodate different types of participation for a physical site; the ‘Visioning Study’ identifies key recommendations from a specific study and prompts citizens to provide feedback, whereas ‘Discussion’ mode augments any relevant discussions, proposals, and projects in the planning site. The ‘Visioning Study’ is a more directed and intentional mode for citizen participation, proposing a new approach for citizens to comment on documents released by the city. AUGMENTATION AT PHYSICAL PLANNING SITES Glenn’s participation in a ‘site tour’ is the first instance of augmented reality demonstrated in an investigation. This ability for the activity has two requirements: that a citizen is at a physical site with information related to the location, and that the citizen has access to a connected mobile device. In Digital Ground, McCullough defines augmented reality

Augmented Reality

as “conditions in which a virtual display is overlaid onto a physical scene” (2004, p. 124).

Digital Ground,

The ability to overlay information that directly relates to planning proposals that affect

Malcom McCullough

Chapter 4

[9]

[10]

Repton’s ‘before/after flaps’ presented in Visual Explanations.

Augmenting Planning Sites

the physical environment offers an alternative way of visualizing planning information, as well as an interface with the city that can create a stronger relationship between place and change. Hanzl, in an analysis of information technologies used for public participation in planning, considers augmented reality systems to open “utterly new ways of non-professional participation in urban planning” (2007, p. 303). Looking mostly at immersive environ-

Planning Technologies

ments and tangible devices (likely because of the time it was published), this article does

Information technology as a tool

not mention mobile AR as a possible planning technology. Mobile AR could share similar

for public participation in urban

capabilities with these experiences, but has different constraints and opportunities.

planning,

Mobile screen sizes are very small and likely less immersive that a CAVE-like system (a

Malgorzata Hanzl

“cave automatic virtual environment,” composed of projectors and a cube-shaped room), but at the same time they allow for a direct relationship to a physical environment. Using smartphones or mobile devices also dramatically increases accessibility and decreases costs of an AR tool, functioning as software that can be easily installed on devices many citizens own. DESIGNING FOR AUGMENTED SITES Utilizing augmented reality to visualize planning changes appears promising, but also bears unique design challenges. An important design consideration emerges from the idea of augmentation—the representation of actual space in an experience. Mobile augmented reality puts a citizen directly in an environment that may or may not be a part of their everyday life. Designing for augmentation necessitates acknowledgement that the physical environment is not a static image but a living, breathing space. Traffic will pass by, people will walk to destinations, and the weather will change. An augmented experience of a site includes the current situation, which could potentially affect the strength or weakness of a proposal. When pedestrian issues in the Peace Street Corridor Visioning Study are introduced, would Glenn’s position be influenced by witnessing a pedestrian walking across a tight sidewalk next to heavy traffic? VISUALIZING PROPOSED CHANGES In Visual Explanations, Edward Tufte mentions a British architect from the early 1800s,

Visualizing Time

Humphry Repton, who showed clients renderings with before/after flaps (1997, p. 81).

Visual Explanations,

This example of visualizing a future change in an environment is over 200 years old,

Edward Tufte

but the concept of the flap is strikingly similar to augmented reality. Repton’s renderings simultaneously display both his design proposal for the space and how the surrounding environment may appear with that change. Tufte acknowledges the charm of Repton’s visualizations, but also reaches the conclusion that “comparisons are usually more effective when the information is adjacent in space rather than stacked in time” (1997, p.81). The flap introduces the challenge for a citizen to be able to view a current environment and a future environment without having too much information to recall. Because an augmented experience is already placed into the actual environment, a citizen has the ability to view a site both through their own eyes and the screen of their smartphone (overlaid with supplemental information). In this

Chapter 4

Glennâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interaction with a planning site and augmented space.

Initial photograph for the Pedestrian and Bike Facility.

Augmented layer over the Pedestrian and Bike Facility.

Initial photograph for the Downtown Transit Station.

Augmented layer over the Downtown Transit Station.

Augmenting Planning Sites

instance, mobile augmented reality affords a view of the real context (a physical site) with a dynamic, real-time view of possible futures (overlaid changes). Enabling access to both of these environments at the same time may alleviate some of the cognitive challenges that exist for time-based design. IDENTIFYING RECOMMENDATIONS Glenn’s ability to view key recommendations from the Peace Street Corridor Visioning Study at their respective physical sites is quite different from viewing planning information from static renderings on paper. For the designer, augmenting physical sites, especially on a small screen, can become overwhelming if too much information is present. A balanced relationship needs to be formed amongst the physical space, the representation of that space on the screen, and supplemental information. In this investigation, there are two types of supplemental information present: interactive renderings and text-based descriptions about planning recommendations. The design of an augmented reality system requires the acknowledgement of two different kinds of cues happening at the same time. Discussing ambient informatics, Mark Shepard observes there is “a shift from material/tangible cues (streets, squares, rivers, monuments, transportation hubs) to immaterial/ambient ones through which we form our mental maps” (Greenfield and Shepard, 2010, p. 12). Planning information is necessarily material, and digital interfaces possess immaterial cues pervasive in many contexts. While Glenn participates in the Visioning Study, a mix of these two cues in the same space is necessary. Renderings of planning recommendations, directly representative of material space, are also embedded with immaterial cues that allow for interactive behaviors. Each rendering can be interacted with to obtain more detailed information, necessitating visual ways for separating recommendations and indicating renderings not yet viewed. Planning recommendations typically result in changes in the physical environment; however, the visual qualities of recommendations vary widely. As previously mentioned, Kevin Lynch, in his seminal text The Image of the City, identifies elements of the city

City Image

image as paths, edges, districts, nodes, and landmarks (1960, p. 47). In Lynch’s terms,

The Image of the City,

The Pedestrian and Bike Facility recommendation Glenn views is a path, a channel that

Kevin Lynch

observers can move along. Augmented spaces that are paths exhibit a unique challenge because they are not a fixed line; the recommended facility can be viewed at many points, spanning multiple blocks. A path is also a long and thin line that risks being lost in a comprehensive city image; creating visual contrast on the screen can help identify this physical space as a recommendation in the study. The Downtown Transit Station, the other recommendation demonstrated, becomes a landmark in the augmented space, clearly defined in the existing environment. This recommendation is more prominent and takes up a greater area of the screen. Considering the city image of a site from multiple perspectives can assist in identifying ways to balance recommendations in space. Augmenting a space with multiple renderings necessitates that all recommendations are seen in relationship to one another rather than isolated landmarks in space.

[1]

[3]

[2]

[4]

[5]

INVESTIGATION THREE

Facilitating Deliberation

SCENARIO After reading an article announcing a presentation by Raleigh City Council about the newly-released Wake County Transit Plan, Susan decides to attend the presentation in downtown Raleigh during her lunch break. Glenn also chooses to attend the presentation after hearing about it from a neighbor. As Council members introduce the plan, they mention CityPlan’s function as a tool for discussion about planning issues. Citizens and city officials in the audience are already discussing their initial reactions on CityPlan’s discussion tool in the first thread about the Wake County Transit Plan. A planner from the City of Raleigh asks for early opinions on the plan and attaches a map with proposed transportation routes and improvements. Earlier in the week, Susan had set up a notification for updates from CityPlan on her desktop computer regarding the recently announced transit plan; she receives a notification on her phone at the presentation, and looks at the first discussion started on the plan [1]. As the presentation opens up for questions, the audience grows restless. Susan, sitting next to Glenn, introduces herself and shows him the CityPlan discussion activity on her smartphone [2]. A planner has posted a map in the discussion thread that identifies the changes proposed in the plan; Susan and Glenn view the map on Susan’s device, showing each other how the plan could affect their respective neighborhoods [3]. Glenn shows her the Peace Street Corridor, pointing to the area where he recently did a site visit [4]. Susan zooms out, reorienting the map near her neighborhood [5]. She was not aware of these proposed changes in her area before. After they talk, Susan interacts with CityPlan by herself, responding to a point in a discussion [6]. To state her opinion, she selects her neighborhood in the map view and adds a brief annotation, explaining how the plan could affect her [7]. After her response is completed, she looks over recent activity in the discussion thread [8].

Chapter 5

[6]

[7]

[8]

Facilitating Deliberation

SOCIAL INTERACTION OUTSIDE OF CITYPLAN As shown in previous investigations, location-based technology does far more than store and represent information online; it can become a way to incorporate technology back into physical space. Considering location-based technological aspects in a social context, Charitos observes, “the introduction of mobile location-based communication networks relates the concept of a ‘meeting place’ to the physical space of an urban environment” (2009, p. 150). This aspect of locative technology is promising and can help encourage unexpected real-life social interaction; however, as a designer, it is equally important to realize that moments of social interaction can occur with a designed system whether intended or not. Even a smartphone, which is typically used for personal communication, and be interacted with or shared between two individuals. In this scenario, Glenn’s and Susan’s experiences demonstrate how two citizens could possibly use CityPlan without the system itself initiating that social interaction. A conversation, which is facilitated on CityPlan and tied to an event happening in a specific location, becomes a connection between the two. This, together with the ability to visualize planning information and see proposed changes with the new Wake County Transit Plan, enables Susan to better understand and explain her thoughts on the plan to Glenn. The interaction is driven by the people and social context rather than CityPlan itself; it is important, however, to acknowledge these moments can happen in everyday life without being facilitated by a designed system. PARTICIPANTS Fung’s Democracy Cube model is particularly useful in this scenario because it helps

Participation

frame the role of citizens (including Glenn and Susan) at the City Council presentation.

Varieties of Participation in

Typically, a presentation is open to all citizens and attendees choose to come. Although

Complex Governance,

an event may be open, limited publicity or visibility can also affect attendance and

Archon Fung

participation. Communication at an event is especially important; at many events the majority of participants don’t put forward their own views (Fung, 2006, p. 68). Although the format of this event is evidently a presentation where citizens listen as spectators, the use of CityPlan in this scenario increases the potential for citizens to express preferences in a public forum. It is also important to remember that this event takes place at an early stage that relates to a larger planning issue; citizens will quickly begin deliberating, then discussing potential outcomes in more depth, finally to recognize different possible plans for action. The ability for the city to initiate a conversation by presenting the updated plan and its implications is key, and traditionally has required a formal presentation to officially communicate that information to the public. Considered broadly, this meeting serves as an entry point into issues that will be deliberated. At some point, the fate of the Wake

Chapter 5

Glenn and Susan discuss the implications of the Wake County Transit Plan.

Facilitating Deliberation

County Transit Plan will be determined; if a tax to support the plan makes it onto the 2012 election ballot, citizens will have the opportunity to vote and take measured action. This sequencing is necessary to see how one event can influence or relate to other events. Participant activity extends beyond the presentation itself due to the designed structure of discussions in CityPlan. Discussions can be accessed by citizens online and can act as a starting point for a larger public to engage with. An online tool for deliberation also adds further flexibility for citizens: “although no one has time to deliberate on every issue, the Internet can host an unlimited number of forums, and citizens can participate in issues of importance to them” (Lim and Kann, 2008, p. 83). Through activity at the City Council’s presentation, the event can extend itself across time and citizens can report their own reactions to the event at their own pace for the benefit of others over time. STRUCTURE AND RULES

Deliberation

In order for structured discussion to occur online, some basic rules and procedures must

Politics: Deliberation,

be defined and implemented. For online deliberation, “rules are intended to foster equal-

Mobilization, and Networked

ity (everyone should be able to contribute), diversity (of participants and positions on

Practices of Agitation,

issues), and common goals” (Lim and Kann, 2008, p. 85). In order to meet these criteria

Merlyna Lim and Mark E. Kann

and still encourage participation from all stakeholders, particular design decisions need to be made. To foster equality, the significance of citizen participation needs to be clear, and CityPlan needs to communicate in a welcoming tone. Diversity can only be evident if different stakeholders are identified and present in online discussions. For CityPlan, city officials and citizens are labeled for easy recognition; this information also allows for a balance (in a digital space) between citizens and city officials actively engaging in discussion. If the purpose of a deliberative platform is for citizens to influence decision-making, the absence of other parties could be discouraging. If implemented correctly, this platform could strengthen the working relationship between decision-makers and the public through rules that support common goals and ensure that discussions are mediated, remaining on topic. This designed structure of discussion posts can also ultimately help in the definition of common goals (an example could be a rating or voting system). Limm and Kann also discuss the notion that the Internet enables many diverse and overlapped political spheres that can be chaotic, not far removed from Bell and Dourish’s notion of messiness in the reality of ubiquitous computing (Lim and Kann, 2008, p. 101). The design of this discussion system cannot assume it will house all opinions and discussions. It would be perfectly reasonable to expect that many (or most) individuals might already have other ways they learn about and discuss planning-related issues. Regardless of the messiness that inherently surrounds political deliberation, especially on the Internet, a well-designed and considered platform can differentiate itself through the services and experiences it provides. There are many forums for citizen deliberation with strengths and weaknesses governments that can learn from. Designing a forum with the qualities and capabilities needed to encourage citizen participation offers new value, citizen engagement opportunities, and participatory possibilities, strengthening the bond between policy makers and the public.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

INVESTIGATION FOUR

Visualizing Planning Information

SCENARIO Susan becomes aware of the ability to visualize planning information in CityPlan from the City Council presentation detailed in the previous scenario. After opening the mapping tool, Susan sees that there is a search function. She remembers that Glenn mentioned his site visit at the Peace Street Corridor; she searches for the area [1]. After CityPlan displays the Peace Street Corridor on the map [2], Susan chooses to turn on layers of planning information [3]. At this point, she is most interested in how transportation in Raleigh may change over time, so she begins by selecting layers for Priority Pedestrian Streets and Bike Lanes [4]. She views these layers on the map [5], adjusting the timeline to see what changes could occur at certain points in the future [6]. She zooms in on the corridor; at a level of greater detail, more icons representing particular plans appear [7]. Susan selects the Pedestrian and Bike facility icon, and an overlay with planning information appears [8]. Susan wonders what other changes may occur in transportation; she selects the Greenway and Light Rail layers [9]. As she views the layers, she begins to see that changes occurring throughout the city are interconnected. With more traffic and a need for public transportation, facilities for pedestrians will need to be proposed. After viewing plans in the area she zooms out, looking at the Peace Street Corridor in relationship to more of the city; she also adjusts the timeline to see possible Light Rail developments [10]. Eager to see how nearby areas in her community may change in the future, she zooms in near her neighborhood [11].

Chapter 6

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

Visualizing Planning Information

LAYERING PLANNING INFORMATION The information presented in this investigation is purposefully layered; without this technique, seeing relationships amongst different information would not be possible. In Envisioning Information, Edward Tufte elegantly summarizes the purpose of

Layering

designing with layers of information:

Envisioning Information, Edward Tufte

“Layering of data, often achieved by felicitous subtraction of weight, enhances representation of both data dimensionality and density on flatland. Usually this involves creating a hierarchy of visual effects, possibly matching an ordering of information content. Small, modest design moves can yield decisive visual results, as in these intriguing demonstrations of the illusory borders of subjective contours” (1990, p. 60). Weight is a descriptive quality of visualizations; using visual elements sparingly makes layers easier to read. Although layering is about separating information so that differences are visible, the ultimate goal is creating a better understanding of the complex relationships among the available data. Designing for these situations requires attention to the differences in visualizing paths, points of interest, and coverage of physical areas on one surface. The hierarchy in these relationships determines the success and legibility of the map. Geographic Information Systems (GIS), the technological systems that make viewing

GIS Systems

layered information possible, are typically difficult to navigate for people not familiar

Information technology as a tool

with planning issues or software (Hanzl, 2007, p. 293). Developing an interface that

for public participation in urban

accommodates for quick exploration and modification may encourage citizens to explore

planning,

planning information. The content of information layers and their significance to

Malgorzata Hanzl

planning must also be clear; it can’t be assumed that a citizen knows exactly what each layer represents on its own. Creating associations with iconography, patterns, line, and color can develop meaningful relationships between a layer selection interface and the information presented on a map. Planning information is diverse and large in scope. Even relationships within certain aspects of planning, such as transportation, can quickly become complex. Most planning maps are static and only deal with one content area, such as transportation. Because maps are presented as static objects, the same colors tend to represent different information in different maps (see Appendix A). Proposing a new taxonomy of colors and patterns used in planning information would be a valuable task, and would help support visualizing the interrelatedness of planning content. For the scope is this investigation, CityPlan alludes to a unified system of color that allows visualization of different content combined.

Susan adjusting the timeline for proposed changes in the Peace Street Corridor.

Chapter 6

Visualizing Planning Information

The difficulty of creating a unified color system is the range of functions for color: “to label, to measure, to represent or imitate reality, and to enliven or decorate” (Tufte, 1990, p. 81). Some planning information is measured by density, represented through the tint of a color; other information may be represented by naturally occurring colors, such as green for parks; aspects like transportation typically adopt more abstract color systems to label and create visual contrast. Because color is representative in various ways, patterns could also be a significant area for exploration. ADDING INTERACTION AND TIME Two elements in this investigation add complexity when layering: interaction (adjusting layers, viewing details) and change over time (adjusting an interactive timeline). Developing a system that legibly displays geographic information, allows for scale changes, and provides a quick way to modify layers requires a mix of interface components and strong visualizations. Because this investigation is limited to devices with a small screen size, successful conventions in visualization for larger formats are not necessarily the best fit for these efforts. Tufte’s accounts of layering and color, written prior to interaction design’s spread, do not address considerations that interactivity demands. For this investigation, planning information has to be dynamic, adjusting to different scales and layers. As a citizen zooms into an area, CityPlan has the ability to provide more detailed information including proposals and recommendations. Showing this level of detail helps explain that the same recommendations highlighted in Investigation Two can be accessed through different aspects of CityPlan. The same information can be arrived at through exploring a map or doing a site visit. As citizens zoom in, viewing finer details, creating landmarks through iconography becomes more important. Once these icons are selected, a new layer of information appears. More specific planning information, in this case a rendering of the Pedestrian and Bike Facility, consists of text and images tied to location, but not represented geographically. Adding this level of information requires an interface that clearly displays this information but doesn’t lose its relationship to place. Visualizing change is inherently challenging because it requires a comparison of information. In CityPlan, citizens can view changes by adjusting a timeline, requiring them to recall the previous information. When showing change over time, Tufte writes that “comparisons must be made by contrasting a remembered image with a currently viewed image, sometimes a difficult task” (1997, p. 79). One approach to overcome this challenge is to present ‘small multiples,’ many images with the same composition placed in a grid that show changed information (Tufte, 1990, p. 67). Because smartphone screens are very small, this method is difficult to implement. In CityPlan, citizens can press and hold a point on a timeline, then select another point; thus highlighting the difference between points in time.

Chapter 6

Visualizing Planning Information

FACILITATING EXPLORATION Geographic visualization is a way of displaying information embedded within planning conventions. Planners, city officials, and citizens engaged in planning issues are already familiar with this type of display; however, developing new visualization strategies can communicate to a broader audience. Viewing and interacting with planning information on smartphones also changes the time and environments that the information may be accessed; visualizations could become as easy to access and interact with as any other application on a smartphone. Susanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interactions with CityPlan in this investigation are about more than accessing information; she engages with the information, making it relevant to her interests and needs. Individuals will likely choose to focus on areas they have a connection to or have heard about; in this sense a map can be a platform to think about personal experiences and how they could change over time. The ability to quickly see both large and smallscale changes also allows for different perspectives on planning information. In Susanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interactions, changes at the Peace Street Corridor and her neighborhood are shown to be interdependent. Interacting with information is not limited to adjusting layers and viewing plans; discussions use mapping as a communicative tool. This feature of CityPlan allows citizens and city officials to discuss information not solely based on opinion. Citizens can view rationales for a position, look at other areas in greater detail, and compare justifications by adding layers of information. Because planning issues are complex and interconnected, deliberation can help reason and support different viewpoints. This feature also reinforces the need for planning information to be accessible and clear; if interactions with CityPlan are confusing, a barrier for participation could inhibit interaction between the city and its citizens.

PROCESS

Appendix A: Analysis of Existing Visualizations

OVERVIEW The objective of this analysis is to identify how the Peace Street Corridor is represented in documents that highlight anticipated changes, visions, or proposals to the area. Each of these documents include future-oriented information that led to insights about presentation standards and are also specific to the site of the project. The observations and conclusions from these documents informs the development of a visual system that represents planning issues. THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF RALEIGH The comprehensive plan “establishes a vision for the City, provides policy guidance for growth and development and contains action items directed at the City to implement the vision.” Within this expansive document, I have chosen to highlight visualizations that pertain to the geographic location of the project and may also be relevant for issues in the project. Because of the scope of this document, not all visualizations are included. The plan was completed in 2009, although it is often revised and amended when appropriate. PEACE STREET CORRIDOR VISIONING STUDY Completed in March 2011 as pro bono work by J. Davis Architects, this study aims to “identify, envision, and propose potential improvements that would enhance the corridor’s capacity to operate at the highest level of urban form and function.” This study focuses on a broader level, and the ideas presented would require further study before implementation. Because this is the area of concentration for the project, each visual representation is shown. CONCLUSIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES The end of Appendix A acknowledges the results from analyzing both documents and identifies common themes across the visualizations. From these results, opportunities are identified that inform the explorations in visualizing CityPlan.

Chapter 7

DOCUMENT ONE

The 2030 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Raleigh

Negative Space

DOWNTOWN

Areas where buildings are not present create negative space. The surface or use of these areas is not defined.

Downtown Element Boundary Buildings Streets Railroads

Variation Considering more criteria for buildings (height, for example) may be helpful in understanding the physical structure of downtown.

page 311

Land Use Colors

DOWNTOWN FUTURE LAND USE

Different greens signify natural spaces. For residential areas, the tint of the color represents the density of the space.

Downtown Element Boundary Special Study Areas Future Land Use Categories Public Parks & Open Space

Proximity

Private Open Space

When two tints of the same color are not close to each other, it can be difficult to distinguish the differences between those tints.

Rural Residential Low Density Residential Moderate Density Residential Medium Density Residential

Quantities The number of colors presented in one map can make it difficult to recognize relationships between color and land use.

page 315

High Density Residential Office & Residential Mixed Use Office/Research & Development Institutional Public Facilities Neighborhood Retail Mixed Use Business & Commercial Services Community Retail Mixed Use Regional Retail Mixed Use Central Business District General Industrial Buildings Railroads Streets

Appendices

DOWNTOWN TRANSITION AREAS

Importance of Transitions The relationship of these areas to downtown and the way they grow will be important. Visualizing these areas in relationship to other elements of City planning, such as transportation, would be helpful.

Downtown Element Boundary Downtown Transition Areas Buildings Streets Railroads

page 320

PRIORITY PEDESTRIAN & GREEN STREETS

Walking in Context Understanding larger changes in the Corridor will help indicate what pedestrian issues may be important.

Green Streets Priority Pedestrian Streets Downtown Element Boundary Buildings Railroads Streets

page 325

Transportation in General

PARKING GARAGE CONSTRAINTS

Visualizing transportation issues with more variables could help provide rationale for decisions.

Parking Garage Constraints Downtown Element Boundary Buildings Railroads Streets

page 331

Chapter 7

GROUND FLOOR RETAIL STREETS

Color Gradations Tinting colors to highlight important areas can be helpful to create hierarchy; however, other colors need to be distinguishable from a range of tints.

Primary Retail Street Secondary Retail Street Existing Retail Frontage Buildings Railroads Streets

page 335

Color Combinations

¹ ?

» ? o I

NE OF S

Upgrade to Freeway

540

STR

Æ I IC

§ ¦ ¨

DU R D RD

540

TCH FOR

SIX

D RD

§ I EZ EN

D SR RK

FORESTVILLE

LYNN RD

ER C

RC H

L BR OO K

L O E RD FF A

§ ¦ ¨

Line Quality

Principal Arterials Proposed

o I E MIL

E RD HO P

440

W N NE

o ?

¤ I

WADE AVE

BOR

OUG

H ST

NB LVD

ER NE W B

§ ¦ ¨

440

o I

GARNER RD

G OR M

HILLS

W EST

§ ¦ ¨ 40

T RY O

POO

Secondary Arterials Proposed Major Thoroughfares

§ ¦ ¨ 40

§ I

QUA

Dashed lines can become difficult to distinguish in an information-rich area.

ARTERIALS, THOROUGHFARES, & COLLECTOR STREETS

§ ¦ ¨ l ?

Many colors with high values in the same area make reading information difficult.

R RY RD

Minor Thoroughfares Collectors Proposed

MAP T-1 Types of Thoroughfares Upgrade to Freeway Principal Arterials Proposed Secondary Arterials Proposed

page 69

ETJ Major Thoroughfares Minor Thoroughfares Collectors Proposed Principal Arterials Secondary Arterials Major Thoroughfares Proposed Minor Thoroughfares Proposed Collectors Major Roads Symbols

Highway

Major Streets

00.375 0.75

Miles 1.5

Map created 3/1/2011 by the City of Raleigh Department of City Planning & GIS Division

Principal Arterials Secondary Arterials Major Thoroughfares Proposed Minor Thoroughfares Proposed Collectors Major Roads Symbols ETJ Highways Major Streets

Appendices

Icons and Color

PLANNED TRANSIT FACILITIES

Contrast between icons and background help make them recognizable. Shapes also need to stand out at a small scale.

Regional Rail Multi-Modal Transit Center Rail Transit Stations Moore Square Station

Visual Breaks

Secondary Bus Hubs

Providing small gaps around icons may help make them visible without competing for legibility with defined paths.

Proposed Commuter Rail CORE Loop Railroad Multi-Modal Corridors Enhanced Regional Bus Service

page 86

ETJ Highway Major Streets BICYCLE FACILITIES MAP

Pattern Variation

» ? o I

§ ¨ ¦ 540

l ?

S TR

Æ I IC

§ ¨ ¦

DUR D RD

AN T

540

L IT

Sharrow, Stripe

F NE

Bicycle Network CH FO R

SI X

LYNN RD

U RC H

E MIL

L BR O O K

o I

CH RD

AL OE R D

§ ¨ ¦ E

E RD

o ?

HOP

LA N TI C

440

W N NE

WADE AVE

SBO

¤ I ROU

NB LV

GORM

WEST

o I

# * # *

ER NE W B

# *# # *# *# * * # * # * #* # * *# * # *#

§ ¨ ¦ 40

Bicycle Lane, Restripe

§ ¨ ¦

HILL

Bicycle Lane, Stripe

440

GARNER RD

Bicycle Lane, Road Diet

FORESTVILLE

Wide Lane, Restripe

D RD

§ I EB

TR Y O

OLE

§ ¨ ¦ 40

QU A

§ I

RR YR D

Bicycle Lane, New Construction Paved Shoulder, New Construction

MAP T-3 Bicycle Network

Sidepath, Proposed

Bicycle Lane, Road Diet

Greenway, Existing

Greenways & Sidepaths Sidepath, Existing Sidepath, Proposed Greenway, Existing Greenway, Proposed Greenway, Planned Existing Bicycle Racks Rec. Bicycle Stations (Transit Hubs) ETJ Highway Major Streets

Greenway, Proposed

Bicycle Lane, Restripe Bicycle Lane, New Construction Paved Shoulder, New Construction Bicycle Lane, Existing

page 88

Highway

Sidepath, Existing

Wide Lane, Restripe

Bicycle Lane, Stripe

Bicycle Lane, Existing

ETJ

Greenways & Sidepaths

Sharrow, Stripe

Greenway, Planned # *

Existing Bicycle Racks Rec. Bicycle Stations (Transit Hubs)

Major Streets 0 0.45 0.9

Miles 1.8

Map amended 4/5/2011 by the City of Raleigh Department of City Planning & GIS Division

Repeated patterns that have slight variations, such as an alternating color change, are difficult to identify on a map.

Chapter 7

Dominant Paths

FREIGHT ROUTES

By highlighting Rail Corridors on a map with minimal information, it is easy to understand where they are in relationship to the City.

Rail Corridors Through Truck Routes Local Truck Routes Local Truck Areas ETJ Highway Major Streets

page 98

Distinct Form

TARGET AREAS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Prominent forms contrast subtle backgrounds, but also allow for the background to be a point of reference.

1. Glenwood Ave. NW from Pleasant Valley to Ebenezer Church Rd. 2. Falls of Neuse Rd from Lynn Rd. to Newtown Rd. 3. Mini-City 4. Atlantic Ave. from I-440 to Spring Forest Rd. 5. Capital Blvd. from I-440 to Mini-City 6. New Bern Ave. / I-440 East 7. Capital Blvd. from Downtown to I-440 page 156

8. Saunders North 9. Wilmington St. from Tryon Rd. to I-440 10. Hillsborough St. / University North 11. Downtown East 12. Poole Rd. South 13. I-440 Southeast 14. Auburn Church 15. I-440 South from Lake Wheeler Rd. to S. Saunders St. 16. Oberlin Village 17. University West 18. NC 54 / Jones Franklin Rd.

Appendices

PARKS & GREENWAYS

Color and Association Colors that have associations to features on the map make geographic space more familiar. This strategy makes it easier to process information.

Lakes/Neuse River Raleigh Greenways Parks State Park ETJ Highway Major Streets

page 184

EXISTING & POTENTIAL DOWNTOWN

Districts and Form

RALEIGH HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICTS

Designations of particular districts help identify areas clearly. They can also become a point of reference for navigating the map.

Existing 1. Boylan Heights 2. Blount Street 3. Oakwood 4. Capital Square 5. Moore Square Potential 6. Depot 7. Fayetteville Street 8. S. Person / S. Blount

page 268

Chapter 7

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GENERAL OBSERVATIONS Independent Maps Each map presented in the Comprehensive Plan depicts a specific planning element that is supported by text on other pages. Because of this structural choice and the format of the Plan being a book, different elements cannot by layered and revealed. Getting a sense of how many anticipated changes may work out together is difficult from these maps. Emphasis Highlighting important aspects in a visualization help create a hierarchy within the image. Hierarchical relationships exist in every visualization; on a geographic map, areas of emphasis will always relate to location. Color and Meaning When maps become complex and visualize many categories in one image, the use of color to signify meaning can quickly become confusing. When possible, colors should have associations with what they represent. Color should also be used sparingly enough to create contrast that makes information easier to identify. Icons as Markers Icons can be effective to mark specific points of interest, but in order to be legible they need to be large enough to view from a distance and have enough space to contrast with their surroundings. They may also be a useful way to categorize and display planning issues on a location-based surface.

Appendices

DOCUMENT TWO

Peace Street Corridor Visioning Study

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS (FIGURE 1)

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE VISIONING STUDY

Scale of Area

(FIGURE 3)

A 3/4 view helps define general relationships between areas of the study. This view could help articulate potential changes effectively.

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS:

This representational illustration is arranged next to key recommendations from the Visioning study. It is an aerial view of the Peace Street Corridor.

• Guide the design of the planned Capital Boulevard Bridge replacement in a manner that both improves traffic flow and enhances and promotes safe pedestrian and cycling traffic along the Peace Street Corridor. • Establish an integrated Pedestrian/Bike Facility along Peace Street from North Person Street to Glenwood Avenue. • Encourage Triangle Transit to locate a Downtown Transit Station on, or in close proximity to, the CSX Rail Bridge over Peace Street. • Explore the potential for a mid-block Urban Greenway with direct access from Peace Street, extending from the CSX Bridge at Seaboard south into Downtown at Harrington Street. • Explore the potential for a Pedestrian/Bike Corridor along North West Street from Peace Street south to the future Raleigh Union Station and on to the Dix property. • Explore roadway improvements at the Wilmington/Halifax/Peace intersection, including the prospect of a roundabout and new civic space. • Extend North Harrington Street one block north to intersect with Peace Street. • Encourage redevelopment of underutilized properties along the Corridor with mixed use buildings with ground floor retail and service uses. • Undertake near-term safety and functional improvements along the Peace Street corridor in support of vehicular, pedestrian and bicyclist use.

page 5

PEACE STREET CORRIDOR • VISIONING STUDY

FIGURE 2

MARCH 2011 | RALEIGH, NC

URBAN PLANNING AND DESIGN

page 5

PEACE STREET CORRIDOR: FIGURE 3

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS (FIGURE 2)

Defining Forms Without clear indications of what colors and forms mean, information is difficult to understand. If their meanings are not obvious, there needs to be a key.

Pedestrian/Bike Facility Pedestrian/Bike Corridor Annotations Text Boxes FIGURE 3

Key Recommendation Points (correspond to locations specified on page 5)

page 6

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS PEACE STREET CORRIDOR • VISIONING STUDY

MARCH 2011 URBAN PLANNING AND DESIGN

RALEIGH, NC

page 6

*This key is inferred from the visualization and not a part of the actual document

Indicating Flows

CAPITAL BLVD INTERCHANGE PROPOSALS

Explicitly stating the direction of a path demonstrates that information related to the environment that is not static.

Proposed Interchanges with Traffic Flow Buildings Paved Surfaces Streets Green Spaces

ROUNDABOUT OPTION

CAPITAL BOULEVARD INTERCHANGE PROPOSALS PEACE STREET CORRIDOR • VISIONING STUDY RALEIGH, NC

*This key is inferred from the visualization and not a part of the actual document

JOHNSON STREET OPTION

FIGURE 4

page 8

MARCH 2011 URBAN PLANNING AND DESIGN

Chapter 7

Human Scale

PEACE STREET CORRIDOR: FIGURE 5

Change identified on a map is enriched by seeing how changes may be experienced at a more concrete level.

PEDESTRIAN BIKE FACILITY

A cross-section of a street view visualizes what a bike facility on Peace Street may be like. Renderings are representational and to scale. Background

Perception in Context Although it begins to allude to scale, this diagram doesn’t give a sense of how these changes will relate to the environment.

*This key is inferred from the visualization and not a part of the actual document

FIGURE 5

page 11

PEDESTRIAN BIKE FACILITY PEACE STREET CORRIDOR • VISIONING STUDY

MARCH 2011 URBAN PLANNING AND DESIGN

RALEIGH, NC

page 11

In-Map Annotations

PEACE STREET CORRIDOR: FIGURE 6

Assigning colors meaning through embedded text may be useful, but without clear hierarchy it is difficult to find annotations.

REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES

Office Residential Retail Parking FIGURE 6

page 14

REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES PEACE STREET CORRIDOR • VISIONING STUDY

MARCH 2011 URBAN PLANNING AND DESIGN

RALEIGH, NC

page 14

Specificity

PEACE STREET CORRIDOR: FIGURE 7

By addressing every areas with the same visual style, the ability to distinguish or categorize changes visually is lost.

*This key is inferred from the visualization and not a part of the actual document

NEAR TERM IMPROVEMENT

Proposed Near-Term Improvements Annotations Text Boxes *This key is inferred from the visualization and not a part of the actual document

FIGURE 7

page 16

NEAR TERM IMPROVEMENTS PEACE STREET CORRIDOR • VISIONING STUDY RALEIGH, NC

page 16

MARCH 2011 URBAN PLANNING AND DESIGN

Appendices

VISIONING STUDY GENERAL OBSERVATIONS Seeing the Bigger and Smaller Picture Representing a proposal at a scale that shows the general area and surroundings is helpful to place the issue within the Corridor, but providing a cross-section view of a proposal (even a sketch) adds much richer information. Seeing multiple aspects of an issue offers different entry points and a more comprehensive way of seeing a proposal or issue. Embedding Information in Images Integrating relevant information into a visualization offers more material in the same place, but is also difficult to execute successfully. One important consideration is how different types of information (text, icons, lines) exist in relationship to one another. Another issue that must be dealt with when embedding is redundancy; if a category is labeled in only one area of a map, but exists in many locations, the viewer must see the labeled category first to understand the information. Differentiating Proposals and Issues When proposals are presented on a map through annotation, a system that differentiates them by categories should be in place. A system implemented in this fashion could also be useful in approaching many points about one issue that are all tied to location. Depth Although people who view these representations may be familiar with the area, providing a sense of the overall environment that extends beyond boundaries and land use categories can represent the scale of the area in relation to the city. Direction and Flows Many aspects of planning are not static and involve the movement of people and objects in space. Alluding to intended patterns or flows that would be present in proposed changes could aid in activating spaces that are designed specifically for people to use or pass through them. These techniques could be especially important for pedestrian and transportation issues.

Chapter 7

CONCLUSIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES:

Next Steps for Visualizing Planning Issues

CONCLUSIONS Both documents provide insight into how ideas about the future and proposals may be represented in planning issues. Multiple approaches to displaying information are represented throughout both documents, sometimes working together to communicate better than they do separately. The biggest issue present in these visualizations is balancing complex information with clarity and legibility. When dealing with large amounts of information, it is also difficult to maintain clear standards throughout many maps. Experiencing and analyzing these documents has revealed important opportunities to consider when designing for planning issues. Although the Comprehensive Plan and Visioning Study are both presented as books, the maps provided also offer insights into exploring how interaction may improve visualization strategies. OPPORTUNITIES Related Sourches

Layering

Else/Where: Mapping,

The ability to hide and reveal certain information, layer multiple perspectives onto one

Janet Abrams and Peter Hall

surface, and combine separate components of studies in the same space are promising for facilitating planning issues. Exploration will be necessary to determine what methods

The Image of the City,

can be successful.

Kevin Lynch

Interaction Envisioning Information,

Similar to representations present on a map key, interactions represent a navigational

Edward Tufte

structure. The structure of interactions within a system will also be important to guide a particular kind of experience that is centered around planning issues. Complex, Dynamic Relationships Planning issues are often about something larger than a corridor or neighborhood, such as public transportation systems. The ability to understand multi-faceted impacts of certain decisions not only in one area, but across a city or metropolitan area, could enable a citizen to see a broader perspective. Interrelated elements of planning could also be combined to explain more complex situations related to one space. Time and Change The representation of time can be explored to visually articulate the future-oriented mindset necessary for planning decisions. The effect smaller decisions can have may also be more evident when anticipated changes are viewed over time.

Appendices

PROCESS

Appendix B: Visual Studies and Pre-Writing

OVERVIEW Over the course of three weeks, thematic studies were done to identify core concepts and possibilities for design investigations. Each study, which lasted a week, consisted of the following: three relevant case studies , a text with a written supplement, three scenarios expanding on concepts introduced in readings, rough examples of screens presented as a slideshow on a mobile device, and learning outcomes. The three themes were mobility, deliberation, and planning technologies. Case Studies For each study, three relevant case studies supported scenarios by highlighting technological capabilities or ways of facilitating participation in planning. Each case study was summarized, and key qualities that informed scenarios were identified. Readings and Pre-Writing Readings were selected from initial research and were read closely to identify how presented ideas could inform design scenarios. Pre-Writing exercises articulated and summarized core concepts from each reading. Concepts were developed into themes, guiding choices about scenarios for the studies. Scenarios Three scenarios were executed as storyboards, utilizing personas to envision different possibilities for what the designed system could do. In the design process, these scenarios were necessary to articulate possible needs. In Sketching User Experiences by Bill Buxton, this idea is articulated in his continuum between sketching and prototyping (2007, p. 141). Sketching is an activity that seeks to explore, question, and provoke, where prototyping has a tendency to be about refining, resolving, and answering (p. 141). In the visual studies, scenarios were about sketching and the process of designing investigations (presented in the main body of the document) was about prototyping. Scenarios were also important because they provided more than just ideas to build on; as an artifact they allowed for critical reflection in following iterations. Mobile Screens Demonstrating rough screen sequences that personas would be interacting with created an opportunity to enact scenarios at a more personal level. They also hinted at how elements of an interface, especially language, could be articulated in a system. Outcomes Learning outcomes framed how studies would live on in future iterations, as well as what design opportunities were present for each themes. This reflection was also a way to tie each component of the study together, creating ideas relevant to the study as a whole.

Chapter 7

Appendices

STUDY 1: PLACE AND AUGMENTATION Objectives 1. Consider a citizenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s movement through time and space -Consider perspective of a young homeowner that lives near downtown/Peace St. Corridor -Script how they become aware of an issue -Script how/why they engage with the designed tool 2. Demonstrate how designed tool can be dynamic (location-aware, real time) -Information display -Augmented reality 3. Prototype transition to augmented spaces 4. Speculate how augmented experiences may be recalled or experienced later Pre-Writing 1 Summarize big ideas in key texts that will inform a literature review. Key Text Dourish, P. and Bell, G. (2011). Divining a Digital Future: Mess and Mythology in Ubiquitous Computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Deliverables 1. Maximum 600 word essay framing key ideas in preparation for a Literature Review 2. Short synopsis of three related case studies 3. Three visual concepts prototyped 4. Click-throughs of interactions and slideshow on mobile device 5. What I learned from studies/activities Selected Learning Outcomes 1. The tool must be flexible and fit into citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; everyday lives. 2. Redundancy in necessary, but should be used with caution. 3. Even if mobile devices were ubiquitous, a physical presence could still be the only way someone might become aware of an issue.

Case Studies RemindThat Allows users to set location-based reminders. -Locations and descriptions in reminders set by user. -Radius from location is variable -Same alerts apply to all reminders (in preferences) -List view and Google Maps view of reminders -Ability to search for locations https://market.android.com/details?id=fistukApps.remindThat&hl=en

ARToolkit Open source software project that allows for real time augmentation. Markers composed inside a black border in physical space indicate areas to be augmented. -Works from any device with a camera installed that can run some form of software with AR -Augments in real time, including 3D if desired -Allows for customizable design inside markers -Initiated by scripts running in background of device original software library: http://www.hitl.washington.edu/artoolkit/

Participatory Chinatown Planning game and tool that allows citizens to virtually experience changes in town hall meetings. Idea resembles getting citizens to experience and understand environments, the end goal of this study. -Engagement starts by making it to a town hall meeting -Experience is both social and personal -Places self into an environment project by The Asian Community Development Corporation, Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Emerson College, and Muzzy Lane. Funded by the MacArthur Foundation. http://www.participatorychinatown.org/

Chapter 7

Appendices

PRE-WRITING 1 Dourish, P. and Bell, G. (2011). Divining a Digital Future: Mess and Mythology in Ubiquitous Computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Mark Weiser famously described ubiquitous computing in 1991 as a paradigm that would follow personal computing into an age of ‘calm technology,’ where “technology recedes into the backgrounds of our lives” (Bell and Dourish, 2011, p. 1). Twenty years later, Weiser’s vision of ubiquity is a reality in many ways, but different than what he anticipated. Computing is networked and present in many places, but also fragmented, unreliable, and unevenly distributed. In Divining a Digital Future: Mess and Mythology in Ubiquitous Computing, anthropologist Genevieve Bell and HCI researcher Paul Dourish analyze the current state ubiquitous computing, which they consider present in most people’s everyday lives (p. 3). Bell and Dourish use two terms to describe the current state of ubiquitous computing, myth—“the ideas that animate and drive ubicomp forward” and messiness—“the practice of any technology in the world is never quite as simple, straightforward, or idealized as it is imagined to be” (p. 4). Messiness is more than tangles of cords concealed inside most machines or hanging behind desks; it is a mix of many cultural, social, political, and economic factors that define what ubiquitous computing is. This kind of mess is not a problem, but an opportunity to reconsider the way ubicomp is seen both in research and in design. In order to understand messiness, Bell and Dourish argue, social and cultural aspects must be understood: the technological is part of social and cultural production. The social focuses on the scales and structures of social life, where the cultural looks at the ways in which people find things meaningful (p. 46). Culture is viewed as a generative activity, meaning that it is a product of everyday experience. We encounter the world through (many) cultural lenses (p. 53). Investigating social and cultural aspects provides an understanding of how technology is used, how it relates to the way people live, and how alternatives could be considered. Mobility is a common characteristic present in ubicomp research. The idea of mobility is not simply movement from point A to point B; it is about the way we experience space, ranging from globalization, to commuting, to the suburbanization of cities (p. 119). In urban computing, Dourish and Bell find that residents of urban spaces likely have quite different experiences of mobility; a taxi driver will have a much different understanding of mobility than the typically portrayed young “tech savvy” professional (p. 123). These differences provide evidence that mobility is mediated through many different cultural lenses, implying both research and design opportunities.

Chapter 7

When designing technology, it is important to remember that mobile technology doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t operate within spaces; it becomes part of the space and experience. A space consists of many infrastructures, and new technologies become another layer on these experiences (p. 108). Understanding the relationship between these layers requires an understanding of social, cultural, and technological aspects.

Appendices

Study 1: Scenario 1 General citizen profile Glenn is a married 34-year-old with a 3-year-old child. He is a recent homeowner and works downtown Raleigh in finance. He enjoys walking to work when he knows the weather will be nice. Interest in Planning Issues Investing in a home increased Glenn’s interest in planning issues. Experience with tool Familiar with tool, but no activity Day/Time of Scenario Wednesday Evening Outline of Scenario Glenn’s neighbor sends an e-mail suggesting the tool because there are many interesting issues and opportunities that could affect their community. Glenn chooses to register and begin engaging with the tool.

VIEW APP

Glenn receives an e-mail from a neighborhood friend. His friend is very engaged in community issues. He lets Glenn know that he finds the tool useful, and he might be interested in it.

Glenn thinks visiting sites could help him understand potential changes in a more concrete way, so he accesses the tool on his mobile device.

Glenn successfully creates an account. The tool lets him choose a username and does not ask for his actual identity.

Still at home, he decides to set up a reminder when he passes the site. It’s on his way to work, so he should be able to make time soon.

The reminder will be active when Glenn is within .25 miles of the site.

The next time Glenn is near the site, he will have an opportunity to use the tool’s augmentation or wait when it is more convenient.

Glenn looks for activity happening near his home, finding a proposal for changes that interests him.

Chapter 7

Study 1: Scenario 2 General citizen profile Glenn is a married 34-year-old with a 3-year-old child. He is a recent homeowner and works downtown Raleigh in finance. He enjoys walking to work when he knows the weather will be nice. Interest in Planning Issues Investing in a home increased Glenn’s interest in planning issues. Experience with tool None before scenario Day/Time of Scenario Saturday morning Outline of Scenario Glenn discovers the tool through a news article that is relevant to planning. His first interaction with the tool is a marker than is recognized by his phone.

SITE VISIT SITE VISIT

Glenn enjoys coffee on a Saturday at a nearby coffee shop while he reads the local newspaper.

SITE VISIT

DISCUSS

An article about potential changes near his neighborhood interests him because the issue may influence his property value.

SITE VISIT

DISCUSS

Glenn decides whether to remind himself to visit the site by time or by the next time he is near.

DISCUSS

After finishing the article, Glenn sees that there is a way to see more information and potential changes at the actual site.

SITE VISIT

Glenn’s mobile device prompts him to create an account with the tool so he can be aware of his own and other’s activity.

DISCUSS

He chooses to remind himself in a few days, and will try to visit the site.

He uses his mobile device to read the ‘visit site’ marker.

Appendices

Study 1: Scenario 3 General citizen profile Glenn is a married 34-year-old with a 3-year-old child. He is a recent homeowner and works downtown Raleigh in finance. He enjoys walking to work when he knows the weather will be nice. Interest in Planning Issues Investing in a home increased Glenn’s interest in planning issues. Experience with tool Heard something about it before, but little knowledge Day/Time of Scenario Saturday morning Outline of Scenario Glenn discovers the tool through markers and descriptions that are present at a site with planning-related information.

SITE VISIT

DISCUSS

SITE VISIT SITE DISVISIT CUSS

SUB-

SITE VISIT

Glenn and his wife decide to take their young child to the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences. The weather is nice, so they choose to walk there.

SITE VISIT

DISCUSS

As they walk towards the museum, Glenn notices signage that indicates proposed changes in the area.

Glenn scans the marker; since he is busy with his wife and child, he chooses to remind himself at a later date.

The family continues to walk to their destination.

DISCUSS

SUB-

After reading a prompt for the proposals, Glenn scans the ‘visit site’ marker.

When he finishes reading the presented information, he sees that he can visit the site through a mobile app.

Chapter 7

Appendices

STUDY 2: SPACE FOR DELIBERATION Objectives 1. Consider how and when a citizen might be interested in discussion -Script how this could fit in a typical day -Script transition from awareness of an issue to discussion 2. Demonstrate how citizens can participate in discussions over time -Build scenarios with at least three different actions at different times and places -Build a notification system to represent activity 3. Prototype between platforms to show relationships 4. Describe what qualities of a tool can encourage citizens to engage in discussion Pre-Writing 2 Summarize big ideas in key texts that will inform a literature review. Key Text Lim, M. and Kann, M. (2008). Politics: Deliberation, Mobilization, and Networked Practices of Agitation. In Varnelis, K. (Ed.), Networked Publics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Supporting Texts de Waal, M. (2011). The Urban Culture of Sentient Cities: From an Internet of Things to a Public Sphere of Things.In Shepard, M. (Ed.), Towards the Sentient City: Ubiquitous Computing, Architecture, and the Future of Urban Space. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Habermas, JĂźrgen. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere : An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Deliverables 1. Maximum 500 word essay framing key ideas in preparation for a Literature Review 2. Short synopsis of three related case studies 3. Three visual concepts prototyped, explained through a scenario 4. Click-throughs of interactions and slideshow on mobile device 5. What I learned from studies/activities Selected Learning Outcomes 1. An individualâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s activity within the tool needs to be archived and accessible. 2. A timeline needs to consider multiple futures. 3. Citizens will access the tool with different levels of awareness.

Case Studies Change by Us Online platform to â&#x20AC;&#x153;share ideas, do projects, and make our cities better.â&#x20AC;? Includes representatives from government, organizations, and institutions. -Representation of different stakeholders -Location tied to ideas -Ideas include supplemental information on what resources and plans are needed -Discussion/voting system -Uses post-it board to visualize activity and idea generation happening on platform by Local Projects, CEOs for Cities, Code for America, and PlanNYC http://nyc.changeby.us/

MyBlockNYC Map-based website with uploaded personal videos capturing New York City. Videos correspond to the block they originate from on the map. -Specific link to location represented -Has discussion-based and social interactions mixed with location-based information -Uses visually oriented medium (video) uploaded by citizens as a starting point http://myblocknyc.com/

Cowbird Platform for storytelling that also seeks to find overarching themes about the world. Strong ways of remembering individual activity through usergenerated stories and the way the platform archives. -Uses images, text, sound, as storytelling -Traces personal story on a time (also place, people, collections) -Indexes stories into themes and collections -Entry point makes it easy to navigate, browse, or search. by Jonathan Harris http://www.cowbird.com/

Chapter 7

Appendices

PRE-WRITING 2 Lim, M. and Kann, M. (2008). “Politics: Deliberation, Mobilization, and Networked Practices of Agitation.” In Varnelis, K. (Ed.). Networked Publics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Many view the Internet as a tool that can change the way citizens participate in political conversation, giving citizens greater access and importance in decision-making and policy. Merlyna Lim and Mark E. Kann investigate this viewpoint, asking if the Internet “forms[s] a new public sphere or does it merely perpetuate the existing conditions (p. 78)? Jurgen Habermas defines the public sphere as “a network for communicating information and points of view” that includes democratic deliberation (p.78). In this vision of the public sphere everyone has equal status (middle-class citizens in his example), discusses issues, and reason prevails. An attempt to carry on some of these ideals is exhibited through existing services on the Internet. Analyzing case studies of the Internet in political practice, Lim and Kann identify two key modes of democratic action: online deliberation and mobilization. Deliberation is about involving citizens in decision making by engaging in discussion. For Habermas, these discussions are a rational form of debate that eventually shape public opinion (p. 78). Online spaces provide new opportunities that differ from traditional political deliberation, including number of people involved, diversity, and an unlimited number of forums for particular issues. Online models for deliberation most often directly adapt offline practices. Typically, online forums aim to produce three results: participants become more thoughtful and their views are taken seriously, public officials become more trusting of informed citizens, and a relationship forms between decisions makers and the public. (p. 87). Deliberation also has a structure of rules that confirm quality, diversity, and common goals. These qualities affirm deliberation is about issues between citizen and government that concern some form of law or policy that will change over a longer period of time. Mobilization, the “creation of broad social networks of people around a shared interest in blocking or promoting social change,” is different than deliberation because it has a tendency to emphasize public activism (p. 79). These activities are quickly organized and distributed in varying forms; one-to-one conversation, one-to-many broadcasting, or many-to-many conversation. Mobilization is often about gathering individuals with a certain position on an issue, such as the World Trade Organization protests in Seattle. Activists can easily align interests by forming communities and planning meetings in physical locations.

100

Chapter 7

Although these tools for political practice offer new spaces for political discussion and action, Lim and Kann conclude that the Internet is ultimately not an ideal public sphere. The Internet is a tool that can be used for any purpose, whether or not it supports democracy. It is also messy and composed of multiple overlapped political spheres (p. 101.). Social networks, political blogging and remix, and traditional media presence on the Internet, among other forms of communication, all exist simultaneously. Although many issues keep the Internet from facilitating an ideal public sphere, it does provide a format for deliberative democracy and democratic mobilization.

101

Appendices

Study 2: Scenario 1 General citizen profile Susan is a 27-year-old nurse and recently moved to Raleigh. She drives 15 minutes to work and lives two miles outside of downtown Raleigh. Interest in Planning Issues Recently hearing about the Triangleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s anticipated growth in the next 20 years sparked Susanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interest in how it may change. Experience with tool Recently started using the tool as a source for information; occasionally logs in. Day/Time of Scenario Tuesday at 1 pm Outline of Scenario Susan makes it to a presentation with the City Council about the new transit plan and engages in discussion.

Susan is able to see the Wake County Transit Plan presented at the Raleigh City council by taking a slightly later lunch than normal.

During the presentation, a representative of City Council recommends using the tool for more information and discussion.

Susan remembers she can use the tool on her mobile device. She sees that people are already discussing the plan. It seems like some might even be attending the meeting right now.

Susan is not familiar with the history behind the transit plan, so she looks at the timeline for an overview.

NEW

2005

Susan sees that Commissioners will decide if the tax to fund the plan will make it on the 2012 ballot.

She joins this discussion, advocating her opinion.

A few weeks later, the draft is seen by more people and discussion picks up.

2010

2015

2020

Susan uses the timeline to view her personal activity.

102

Chapter 7

Study 2: Scenario 2 General citizen profile Susan is a 27-year-old nurse and recently moved to Raleigh. She drives 15 minutes to work and lives two miles outside of downtown Raleigh. Interest in Planning Issues Recently hearing about the Triangle’s anticipated growth in the next 20 years sparked Susan’s interest in how it may change. Experience with tool Recently started using the tool as a source for information; occasionally logs in. Day/Time of Scenario Tuesday at Noon Outline of Scenario Susan comes across information about the new transit plan. She is intrigued and views more information about transit plans through the tool.

TRANSPORTATION AND LIGHT RAIL TIMELINE NEW

Susan is browsing the news at lunch during a typical day at work.

Susan sees a notification that the City of Raleigh has received a draft of a transportation plan from Wake County.

Susan has heard talk about a light rail in the Triangle in the future, but doesn’t know much about it. She is curious.

Susan sees that this article is part of a larger theme, and clicks to view a timeline of the issue.

! Is this the best option in this economy?

Commissioners will decide if the transportation tax will make it onto the 2012 ballot. New draft of Wake County Transit Plan.

! Voting could take place for the transportation tax.

2010

2015

The timeline shows past news and plans, the possible future(s) of the issue, and discussions.

Is this the best option in this economy? I’m excited for better public transportation, but I’m still worried.

A discussion started by a citizen grabs her attention.

I disagree.

She views the citizen’s discussion post; Susan finds the poster’s argument compelling. Susan sees responses from other citizens, planners, and policy makers.

Susan makes her first post. She disagrees with the reasoning behind a planner’s statement.

103

Appendices

Study 2: Scenario 3 General citizen profile Susan is a 27-year-old nurse and recently moved to Raleigh. She drives 15 minutes to work and lives two miles outside of downtown Raleigh. Interest in Planning Issues Recently hearing about the Triangle’s anticipated growth in the next 20 years sparked Susan’s interest in how it may change. Experience with tool Recently started using the tool as a source for information. Day/Time of Scenario Tuesday at Noon Outline of Scenario Susan comes across information about the new transit plan on an online news blog. A comment leads her to the tool, and she engages in discussion.

Susan sees a comment on a new blog about Raleigh that says an interesting discussion has been happening in the tool. She clicks a link that is provided.

In the discussion, a citizen raised an interesting question about the transit plan. It is related to a specific location. This discussion interests Susan, but she isn’t familiar with the site.

The citizen’s post includes the site’s geographic location and images uploaded to try to explain their reasoning visually.

A planner responds in agreement with their points; Susan feels that her opinion is valued.

Susan stays aware of her environment when she is out, thinking about the issue. She makes a realization about another site, and photographs it.

Susan gives herself some time to reflect, uploads the photo, and writes her comment.

The photos remind Susan of a similar situation of the city she lived in before Raleigh. She comments on the discussion about her past experience.

104

Chapter 7

Appendices

STUDY 3: VISUALIZING CHANGE Objectives 1. Visualize how physical environments may be augmented to show potential change. -Focus on citizen’s experience of information -Incorporate findings from Visual Analysis 2. Prototype how citizens interact with augmented planning information. -Specify differences/opportunities for mobile interactions -Explain how sequence and interaction can help citizens understand issues with many possibilities or viewpoints. 3. Demonstrate interactions that integrate visualization into deliberation and site visits. 4. Consider how strategies in studies could scale across tool. Pre-Writing 3 Summarize big ideas in key texts that will inform a literature review. Key Text Hanzl, M. (2007). “Information technology as a tool for public participation in urban planning: A review of experiments and potentials.” Design Studies, 28(3), 289-307. Supporting Texts Lynch, Kevin. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: Technology Press. Abrams, J. and Hall, P (Eds.). (2006). Else/Where: Mapping New Cartographies of Networks and Territories. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Deliverables 1. Maximum 500 word essay framing key ideas in preparation for a Literature Review 2. Short synopsis of three related case studies 3. Three visual concepts prototyped, explained through a scenario 4. Click-throughs of interactions and slideshow on mobile device 5. What I learned from studies/activities Selected Learning Outcomes 1. Interactions with complex information will vary at different touchpoints. 2. Visual information can help create common ground for citizens. 3. Shifts from physical sites to virtual spaces need to show their relationship.

105

106

Case Studies Freshkills Park+ Application for a park in New York City built on top of the world’s largest landfill. The application helps show what the park currently offers, as well as what will incrementally be developed. -Augments future plans on to park space -Incorporates both future and present activities -Augments future plans on to park space by Med44 using Layar for the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation. http://www.layar.com/layers/freshkills

t@g Playstation Vita application that allows the creation of personal graffiti tags on augmented spaces for others to see. Others can reclaim those spaces, layering their customized tags on top. -People augment the space -Ability to customize and construct own message -Interaction between people who participate Developed for Sony Playstation Vita, developers/designers not listed.

Decision Commons Allows participants to “visually explore the economic and environmental implications of policies and alternative futures.” -Attempts to visualize consequences of alternate planning strategies -Communication tool for policy makers and citizens -Visual character of spaces -Considers interrelatedness of issues by Quality Growth Alliance, Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce, University of Washington Runstad Center for Real Estate Studies http://decisioncommons.org/Decision_Commons.html

Chapter 7

Appendices

PRE-WRITING 3 (1) Hanzl, M. (2007). “Information technology as a tool for public participation in urban planning: A review of experiments and potentials.” Design Studies, 28(3), 289-307. Malgorzata Hanzl analyzes existing and prototyped technological tools that facilitate citizen participation in urban planning. Currently, there are four categories of Information Technology tools in use: Models, Participatory Planning Geographic Information Systems (PPGIS), computer games, and communication platforms. City modeling aims to “understand and to represent the processes which take place in the city and to support discussion” and is rooted in physical planning (p. 290). Models can depict different events or scenarios in the past, present, or future, and are represented either two or three-dimensionally; two-dimensional plans remain a legally regulated way of presenting planning information. Three-dimensional models can be presented in three ways: as static pictures, animations, or interactive Virtual Reality models (p. 291). Static images are most common, likely because of bandwidth issues, time investment, and technical knowledge. GIS systems “gather, store, analyze, and represent data” from geographic databases that can be viewed in a browser (p. 290). This technology is especially useful for presenting information such as demographic data, master plans, and information on cultural heritage. It also allows participants to layer different information visually to understand relationships (p. 293). Unfortunately, the accessibility for viewing GIS rarely transfers into accessibility for interaction; interfaces are complex and require familiarity. With these tools, citizen participation typically happens in chat rooms or forums, not within a GIS system itself (p. 290). Efforts in Planning Support Systems seek to make information easier to understand. Hanzl notes that games allow real-time 3D graphics, direct object manipulation, and rewards for use of skills like logic, memorization, and problem solving. Game technology can be used to create virtual worlds for communication where “avatars of users play their roles in virtual scenes” (p. 290). These environments are best for discussing and visualizing future development. Simulation and role-playing games often incorporate ideas about town planning (SimCity and Civilization), require participants to change roles, and offer ways to develop consensus among people (p. 296).

107

108

Chapter 7

Collaborative software changes the dynamic between citizens and planners; both parties “become providers and recipients of information” (p. 297). Software in this group can enable mutual contacts (email or instant messaging), process management applications (calendars by several users), or create and manage information (Wikis). Chat rooms, discussion forums, and social software also facilitate collaboration. Deliberation online, which Hanzl considers to be “interdisciplinary discussion,” includes activities such as voting, debate, and online facilitation for group decision-making (p. 298). Identifying a fifth area for IT in participatory planning, Hanzl cites experiments in augmented reality (AR). According to Werner Lonsing, AR “generates a composite view in real time […] to enhance the perception of use” (p. 300). Although Hanzl’s examples are focused on immersive environments (no discussion of mobile AR), she concludes that AR systems open up new non-professional methods for participation in planning. Summarizing the purpose of new media in planning, Hanzl identifies three goals: communication platforms with fewer barriers, distant contact, and managing a participatory planning process.

Appendices

PRE-WRITING 3 (2) Lynch, Kevin. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: Technology Press. Kevin Lynch uses sections of Boston, Jersey City, and Los Angeles as case studies to explain the way a city is perceived by observers. To understand the role of images in everyday life, detailed field maps were made and samples of city residents were interviewed (p. 4). Interviews clarified common problems in city images, as well as points of legibility. Although the forms of these three cities are significantly different, they share common elements with similar qualities for strengths and weaknesses (p. 43). Some significant elements were a broad view of the city environment, landscaping, and a sense of passing time. Lynch identifies five elements of the city image that are limited to the perception of physical space: Paths, Edges, Districts, Nodes, and Landmarks (p. 47). Paths are channels where observers can (or would be able to) move, such as streets or walkways. Other city elements are arranged around these paths, and together they begin to create a network (p. 61). Edges are linear elements not considered to be paths; they are boundaries like shorelines or walls. Districts are sections of the city that share a common character. These spaces are larger and observers can ‘enter’ them. Observers can also enter nodes, but these areas are smaller; they may be where paths cross or in areas of concentration. A node may be a symbol of focus of a district, which can be called a core. Landmarks are typically physical objects that can be differentiated from the surroundings. They can be distant, like a tower, or smaller, like a store sign. Although city elements are distinct, identities may shift in different circumstances and are always related (p. 48). Cities are not one static image; they are “sets of images, which [are] more or less overlapped and interrelated” (p. 85). Many conditions change these images such as viewpoint, time of day, or season. In the construction of images, there are four stages that represent structure: free elements with no relationship between parts, positional structures, flexible structures with some connections, and rigid structures that are firmly connected (p.88). Lynch concludes that the reshaping of cities should help give form that makes facilitating and identifying structures easier. In the design of cities, visual hierarchy is critical and explains the way an observer may see different city elements and their relationship. To explain physical design aspects, Lynch identifies ten form qualities that together develop a sense of the whole city (p. 105). Because cities are for large numbers of people, they must be provided with rich elements that make use of all form qualities; different people will see the same image differently (p. 110).

109

110

Chapter 7

111

Appendices

Study 3: Scenario 1 General citizen profile Glenn is a married 34-year-old with a 3-year-old child. He is a recent homeowner and works downtown Raleigh in finance. He enjoys walking to work when he knows the weather will be nice. Interest in Planning Issues Investing in a home increased Glennâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s engagement in planning issues. Experience with tool Previously planned a site visit Day/Time of Scenario Saturday morning Outline of Scenario Glenn approaches a site that he previous set a location-based reminder for. He does a Site Visit and learns more about potential changes.

Glenn is on his way to a coffee shop he frequents to relax on a Saturday morning.

As heâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s walking, his phone vibrates. He checks, and remembers that he set a location-based site visit where a light rail station may be at Peace Street.

He chooses to do the site visit now; a prompt with a brief summary shows up.

Glenn sees an overlay of the anticipated site changes that supplement the physical space.

Glenn realizes that a light rail stop is only part of the environment; many other plans exist.

In a visioning study, Glenn sees that pedestrian issues are identified as a future concern.

He highlights the designated location and decides to save it.

A few days later, after the site visit, Glenn is able to recall his annotations from his computer.

112

Chapter 7

Study 3: Scenario 2 General citizen profile Susan is a 27-year-old nurse and recently moved to Raleigh. She drives 15 minutes to work and lives two miles outside of downtown Raleigh. Interest in Planning Issues Recently hearing about the Triangle’s anticipated growth in the next 20 years sparked Susan’s interest in how it may change. Experience with tool Familiar with the tool, mainly as a source to get an overview of issues. Day/Time of Scenario Tuesday at Noon Outline of Scenario Susan, who subscribes to transportation plan issues and frequently uses the tool, views a discussion utilizing city data, and builds a response to it.

NEW

Susan is browsing the news at lunch during a typical day at work.

Susan sees a notification that there has been a lot of discussion about the new transportation plan for Wake county. She subscribes for transportation information.

According to my evidence,

Susan views this argument, along with mapped evidence.

Citizens and planners have been using public information to evaluate the ways the light rail plan might affect the community.

POST

She uses more layers of information to build an argument, and hopes that this issue will be analyzed by more citizens and experts.

Susan isn’t convinced by the evidence and information presented, so she compares other layers of information.

Susan sees that one comment uses evidence to make an argument.

113

Appendices

Study 3: Scenario 3 General citizen profile Johnathan is a 42-year-old employee for the Downtown Raleigh Alliance and takes public transportation to work. His nearest bus stop is often crowded and has little seating. Interest in Planning Issues Interested in transportation issues because it is a part of his everyday life. Experience with tool Recently started using the tool and enjoys discussion. Day/Time of Scenario Thursday at 9 am Outline of Scenario Johnathan and other citizens at the bus stop develop a short sequence of photographs and annotations that articulate their experiences to others.

Johnathan waits at the bus stop and sees that a revised draft of the transportation plan has been posted.

Johnathan gets in a discussion with others waiting for the bus about the future of transit. He shows them how the tool can be used to discuss these issues.

Together, citizens at the bus stop explain their current experiences. They take a picture to explain to others.

What about the problems we experience every day?

After annotating a few aspects of the stopâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s condition, they realize that they are concerned about seeing smaller improvements along with such big change.

A small slide sequence quickly explains to others on the tool that these citizens arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t content with their current experiences.

Johnathan and the citizens are enthusiastic that others may understand their experience of transportation in everyday life. They are eager to access the tool.

Johnathan selects areas on the screen to annotate frustrations in their everyday routines.

114

115

8 Bibliography RELEVANT SOURCES

STATISTICS AND INFORMATION ON CIVIC PARTICIPATION AND MOBILE TECHNOLOGY Fisher, Daniel. (2011). America’s Fastest-Growing Cities. Forbes. Retrieved from http:// www.forbes.com/2011/05/20/fastest-growing-cities.html. Friedersdorf, Conor. (2011). Registering to Vote Online Is Now Legal in California. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/registeringto-vote-online-is-now-legal-in-california/247583/. Katz, James (Ed.). (2008). Handbook of Mobile Communication Studies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Mossberger, K, McNeal R. and Tolbert, C. (2008). Digital Citizenship: The Internet, Society, and Participation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Smith, A. (2012). Nearly Half of American Adults are smartphone owners. Pew Research Center: Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Smartphone-Update-2012/ Findings.aspx TECHNOLOGY, POLITICS, AND SOCIETY Callon, M. et al. (2009). Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Dourish, P. and Bell, G. (2011). Divining a Digital Future: Mess and Mythology in Ubiquitous Computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Gordon, E. and Silva A. (2011). Net Locality: Why Location Matters in a Networked World. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Greenfield, A. and Shepard, M. (2007). “Urban Computing and Its Discontents.” Architecture and Situated Technologies Pamphlet 1. New York, NY: The Architectural League of New York. Lim, M. and Kann, M. (2008). “Politics: Deliberation, Mobilization, and Networked Practices of Agitation.” In Varnelis, K. (Ed.). Networked Publics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. McCullough, Malcom. (2004). Digital Ground: Architecture, Pervasive Computing, and Environmental Knowing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

116

Chapter 8

Meadows, Donella (2008) Thinking in Systems: A Primer. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing. MAPPING, VISUALIZATION, DESIGN Abrams, J. and Hall, P (Eds.). (2006). Else/Where: Mapping New Cartographies of Networks and Territories. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Bertin, Jacques. (1967). Semiology of Graphics. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Buxton, Bill. (2007). Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design. Boston, MA : Morgan Kaufmann. Charitos, Dimitris. (2009). “Precedents for the Design of Locative Media” in Future Interaction Design II, (p. 141-156). London: Springer. Lynch, Kevin. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: Technology Press. Risdon, Chris. (2011). The Anatomy of an Experience Map. Adaptive Path: Ideas. Retrieved from http://adaptivepath.com/ideas/the-anatomy-of-an-experience-map Stickdorn, M., Schneider, J., Eds. (2010). This is service design thinking: basics – tools – cases. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers Tufte, Edward R. (1990). Envisioning Information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press. Tufte, Edward R. (1997). Visual Explanations. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press. URBAN AND PLANNING AND CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Arnstein, Sherry R. (1969). “A Ladder of Citizen Participation.” Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 34 (4), p. 216-224. Fung, Archon. (2006). “Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance.” Public Administration Review, 66 (1), p. 66-75. Johnson, W. C. (1997). Urban Planning and Politics. Chicago, IL: American Planning Association. Levy, John. (2009). Contemporary Urban Planning, 8th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Bibliography

Hanzl, Malgorzata. (2007). “Information technology as a tool for public participation in urban planning: A review of experiments and potentials.” Design Studies, 28(3), 289-307. Sanoff, Henry. (2000). Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning. New York, NY: J. Wiley & Sons. IMAGE CREDITS FROM INVESTIGATIONS (in order of appearance) • Photo of downtown Raleigh: North Carolina Department of Transportation • City of Raleigh logo: City of Raleigh • Maps of Raleigh: Modified from OpenStreetMap (http://www.openstreetmap.org) • Pedestrian Bike and Transit Facility rendering: Peace Street Corridor Visoning Study • Renderings in Investigation Two done with models from the Google Sketchup Warehouse. CONTENT CREDITS • The City of Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Peace Street Corridor Visioning Study are both provided by the City of Raleigh and are available on the city website. • The Wake County Transportation Plan is provided by Wake County.

117