Bring Your Own...

Earlier this week, I joined others involved with the Mobilities Design Group at C-MUS for an afternoon seminar. The title of this event was "Bring Your Own…Models, Plans or Objects of Mobilities Design". There was no exact prescription for what participants should bring and no rule that the work had to be your own. The primary purpose was to share our own thoughts and experiences as well as engage in a dialog about what Mobilities Design means and what it is.

Asking..."What is this thing?"

My research partner and myself used this as an opportunity to exhibit our current research, present preliminary results of our user survey, and start thinking about how to pull it all back into mobilities design. Although our project is comprised of four research questions, we targeted in on our largest and most complex question: "Route 100 - What is this thing?" This question was a uniquely appropriate focus for this seminar, as it is essentially asking "What mobilities is this space designed for?…Why?…How?…When?…For Whom?…Under what circumstances?…For what purpose?" That is to say that this primary focus of our work begs us to consider what it is that Route 100 is, with respect to its physical infrastructure of the space, the planning that went into it, the goals it aims to achieve, and how it is experienced by users.

Of all the presentations, we were the only individuals presenting an active Mobilities Design research project. This meant that our part of the conversation was more in the realm of "how do we research mobilities design" instead of "how is this mobilities design." Joining the seminar from this perspective, we described the theoretical framework that we are using and linked our analysis of the survey results and user interviews to this methodological approach. The framework that we are working with is the Staging Mobilities Model that is a structure developed by our supervising Professor Ole B. Jensen at Aalborg University in his book likewise titled Staging Mobilities.

The perspective taken in this book established "a shorthand for a way of thinking about the relationship between mobilities and cities..." Jensen proposed a model for considering mobilities is comprised of three primary pieces: 1) Physical Infrastructure--the materials, facilities, physical and technological services, etc; 2) Embodied Performers - the people interacting with the facility, the users, the bicycle riders, pedestrians, drivers, etc; and 3) Social Interactions - the way people interact with one another as they interact with the infrastructure. This framework then addresses that how these three pieces come together depends on the policies, regulations, and political will "from above" and how those coming into contact with the infrastructure are using the space "from below". As researchers, we are sitting int he middle of the model, looking out, trying to ascertain what the space really is--what mobilities are actually afforded or hindered as a result of the infrastructure.

(11/09/2013 | Staging Mobilities Model | Credit: Ole B. Jensen)

Considering our question asking what Route 100 is, we are adding to the "from above" and "from below" portion of this framework as we consider how and what we should be focusing our research on. Our current thinking is that the "from above" concept primarily interacts with the Physical Infrastructure and the "from below" portion is mainly involved with the uses by Embodied Performers and the Social Interaction among users. While we recognize that there absolutely is cross over, this is our starting place for our investigation of the route. We tentatively have four primary areas we are looking into to better understand the "from above" of Route 100, which are: 1) Physical Limitations; 2) Design Guidelines; 3) Municipal Policies; and 4) Project Financing. We anticipate that there are many more areas that will play into this and expect to expand what is under the "from above" umbrella.

(12/10/2013 | Route 100 Working Theoretical Framework | Credit: Cat Silva)

With regards to how we are looking at Route 100 "from below", we have planned that our online user survey and interviews with users will help us frame how to best investigate how the route is affected by those interacting with it. Our online survey closes tonight and our last interview will take place on Wednesday, December 18th. So far we have received feedback from 171 survey respondents and we will have completed 8 or 9 interviews with users. Based on our analysis of the results and what we learn from our nine interviews, the "from below" portion of our expanded Staging Mobilities model will become more refined as we develop categories for how to explore and discuss users and their interactions.

The Seminar

The presentation we gave at this event can be viewed below. (You can scroll through it within this post or click on the presentation for a larger version.) If you are interested in a downloadable copy, please contact me with you inquiry.

This was the first such event for the Mobilities Design Group and I thoroughly enjoyed the experience. Our own presentation led into a great discussion about how bicycle infrastructure and facilities are implemented and how different road users interact with them. My favorite comment came from a research assistant expressing the often accurate fact that bicycle lanes in the United States are unable to provide the same level of safety as infrastructure typically provided in Denmark - pointing to the grade-separated facilities often seen on major roads here. To this, I responded that I 100% agree, but there are bicycle lanes on routes like Route 100 and these lanes seem more capable of providing security for riders than what we have in the States. My reasoning is that in a Danish context, all types of road users take better care of one another. The man driving the car, and the woman walking across a bicycle lane, understand the experience of the student riding their bicycle. In a country where riding a bicycle is such a germane task, you end up with drivers that yield better to pavement markings indicating bicycle priority. Back home, drivers often look at bicyclists as "in the way" and bicycle lanes are disrespected and are often blocked by unloading trucks or cars dropping off passengers. In this line of thinking, we had a great discussion of how the bicycle lane is has the chance to take on a different character in a Danish city. Here, there is a greater deal of respect and understanding given to bicyclists by other road users, which influences how effective a single painted lane and bicycle pavement marking can be for providing safety. Of course they're not perfect in any context...but it was a great discussion!

Topics that others brought to the table in the seminar included:

• A model of new Nørrebro Station area in Copenhagen, which was created by students attempting to design a site plan accommodating intermodal use of the space. The concept was based on a telephone operator's switchboard, and focused on how different users have different needs, uses, and time constraints as they pass through the station area.
• Images and a video of the Highline in New York, presented as an example of designing for non+motorized mobilities and experiences in an interesting way. He pointed out that the park is experienced differently than the large expansive parks often provided, due its linear shape and connection it has to so many different parts of the city.
• The introduction of a sleeping pod provided in the international airport in Delhi, which provides travelers a quite space to nap and relax in between place to place. The room can be rented for $10/hour and comes with a chair, bed, and sink...providing comfortable, private space in an often uncomfortable, public area.
• One individual even presented her self as an example of designed mobilities, discussing how mobilities have designed who she is and how she perceives and interacts with the world. She suggested that you don't really think about "home" is until you leave it and addressed the cultural, financial and infrastructural influences on how mobile each individual person is designed to be.
• And, photos from a presentation given by urban design researchers to a class of planning students. They introduced diagraming to the students and asked the planners, who normally focus on the written word, to grab a pen and diagram a project, concept, or idea they have been working with. This was easily my favorite - it was great to see the outcome and interdisciplinary interaction!