20110815 co creation-in_urban_planning_case_kangas

IFHP Urban Planning and Design Summer SchoolJyväskylä, Finland 15.8.2011

Antti Poikola (HUB Jyväskylä)[email protected]

Co-creation in urban planning and designCase: , Jyväskylä

Antti PoikolaHUB JyväskyläNetwork facilitator

http://hubjkl.wordpress.com/



Co-creation in urban planning

Who: Planners perspective (Other perspectives: politicians, civil cervants, citizens, businesses and other organizations...)

What: Open planning process which involves different stakeholders

Why: Democracy – quality of planning – less complains

How: Few words on methods and general process of participation

When: Earlier, earlier, earlier

Case: Results and methods from the participative urban planning project at Kangas, Jyväskylä, Finland

Open discussion



Who?

- Different people with different roles (politicians, civil cervants, citizens, businesses and other organizations)

- Who is invited to participate and who may participate even if not invited? Open vs. Closed participation

- Behind the roles, participants are all people

- Who has the responsability of participation in urban planning?

- How many participants is enough?



Who?



Image: jurek_durczak (Flickr)

What? - Open and smart city

- How to get the citizens / companies / communities, politicians and civil cervants to collaborate?

- Urban planning as a open process, which involves different stakeholders

- Planning is not same as zoning

- In city development there

are many processes where

collaboration could be usefull



What? - Open and smart city

Image: jurek_durczak (Flickr)

Transparency

Participation

Collaboration



Ideas

© Toni laturi

Transparent City

Elaboration

ImplementationDATA

DATA

DATA

City organizationCivili Society & Companies



Ideas

© Toni laturi

City enabling participation

Planning

ImplementationDATA

DATA

DATA



Ideas

© Toni laturi

Collaborative City

Planning

ImplementationDATA

DATA

DATA



Why?

- Ideal: Open processes enable functional democracy

- Practical approach: Quality of processes get better when more people get involved.

- Monetary motivation: Open process lead to less complains → time and money is saved

- Extra: Some work load can be diveded to the people interested in participation



How? Process view

- Collaboration needs resources and official role in the planning process.

- Challenge is fitting the used methods to the regular planning process

- Can collaboration be outsourced?



Workshops14 facilitated events

Self organized groups

10 visions

Individualsn. 10 visions

Wiki -planning

DigitalStorytelling

NewspapersRadio

Web-site15 000 visitors

TV

LIGHTPARTICIPATION

Kangas arond the clock56 stories

Online forum63 ideas, 166

comments402 registered usersDay at

Kangas40 stories and a

summarizing video

31 VISIONSmore than 353 people

participated in creating these PUBLICITY

How? - Case: Kangas Jyväskylä

More than active 600 participants during two months



How? Methods from Kangas case

- Some methods: Wiki planning, Digital Storytelling, Online forums

Wiki -planning method (Peter Tattersall) 15.3 ja 24.2011



When?

”Jyväskylä listens to the citizens before the architects”

Helsingin Sanomat March 11th 2011



When? Earlier you get more than expected

- Feedback from a outdoor expert - How to build good ”Pitkospuut”?

- Useless detail for a urban planner, but usefull for the one who orders the pitkospuut to the natural parks



• Diversity

• Community and encounters between people

• Incentives for activity and nature

• Mobility

• Lively, active, city of people

Case Kangas: Overall results



VisionsIhana aineisto!

Kaupungin uusi keskus

”Nykyinen keskusta saisi ajan saatossa muokkautua puolestamme vanhaksi kaupungiksi painopisteen siirtyessä lähemmäksi Kangasta.”

Kestävän liikenteen kaupunginosa

”Tilapäinen huoltoliikenne liikkuisi sekaliikennekatuja, jotka pääasiassa olisivat kävely- ja pyöräilykäytössä. Kaikki autopysäköinti olisi järjestetty parkkihallissa alueen laidalla.”



Wiki planning: dream housing blocks



Visualized story (Anne Kalliomäki, Tiina Hoskari and Lasse Saari)

Open story



Online idea forum (Uservoice)



Examples fron the online forum

Harjoitusjäähalli juniorikäyttöön

"Keinojäiden sijoittaminen kankaan alueelle olisi nopein ja edullisin vaihtoehto jääurheilun olosuhteiden parantamiseksi."

Tourujoki pitäisi ehdottomasti päästää vapaaksi!

"Upea koskimaisema keskellä kaupunkia - sellaista ei moneen paikkaan ole mahdollista saada, muttä Kankaalle on!”

Materiaaleina punatiili sekä puu

”Puutalokaupunki alkoi ennen Tourujoen takaa, kunnes se purettiin. Nyt toivoisi Puun palaavan uudessa muodossa rakennuksiin ja uusina innovaatioina Kankaan alueelle.”



Digital storiesDigital Story Telling -workshops (Hanna Mehtonen-Rinne) 4-6.4.2011



Open discussion!



Thanks:

Kangas team: Laura Browne, Antti Poikola ja Asta Ruodemäki (HUn Jyväskylä)

Support group: Lasse Saari (HUB Jyväskylä), Johanna Hytönen ja Ville Keränen (Monkey Business), Esa Toivonen (Pengon), Katriina Lahtinen (Jyväskylän yliopisto), J-P Nousiainen (Aivoteollinen toimisto)

Facilitators and experts: Peter Tattersall (Aalto yliopisto), Hanna Mehtonen-Rinne (Otavan Opisto), Tiina Hoskari (Kuvitellen), Anne Kalliomäki (Tarinakone), Karoliina Jarenko (Aalto yliopisto), Johanna Kerovuori ja Tanja Korvenmaa (Cohousing Suomi)

Jyväskylä city people: Anne Sandelin ja Pirjo Heinänen (Kaupunkirakennepalvelut), Laura Ahonen ja Tuija Hämäläinen (CLIQ -hanke), Mikael Ratschinskij (Verkkotuotanto), Pertti Kuustonen ja Ulla-Maija Valtonen (JYKES Kiinteistöt Oy)

The leaders and participants of all self organized gropus and all the individuals who contributed with visions and commentaries.

The participative planning project was made possibel by:

20110815 co creation-in_urban_planning_case_kangas

Technology

open planning process

wiki planning

regular planning process

kangas jyvskyl

city of people case

democracy quality of

kangas case

different people