City Reverberations of Public Places and Urban Spaces

Gehl%Architects%Creating%Opportunities%to%Interact%%The$Human$Scale$0 Complex%and%vibrant%0 Diversity%and%sensory%experience%

Invitations$to$Use$Space$0 Private%–%Public%

“Soft”$Metrics$0 Consider%the%perspective%of%the%study%0 Process%over%perception%%0 Integration%of%complexity%–%how%does%place%integrate%with%space%

UTS Movement & Unscheduled Activity UTS Movement & Unscheduled Activity Gehl Architects Gehl Architects

Page 13

1.0 /Assessment 1.0 /Assessment

A study of circulation has helped to illuminate how the campus is experienced by students, and where signifi cant routes are.

Circulation Snapshot

Broadway Shopping Centre attracts circulation along broadway. This will be challenged by the new Frasers development, and will probably decrease signifi cantly.

McKee Street Child Care

B10B02

B01

B06

B05

Harris St11,000/day

9,000/day

3,000/day

5,000/day

6,000/day

9,000/day

1,000/day3,000/day

9,000/day

5,000/day

Goods Line15,000/day

Library Entry*15,000/day

Quay Street15,000/day

Broadway21,000/day

Entry9,000/day

Market City

Central

Bulga Ngurra Accom.

Gumal Ngurang Accom.

Broadway Shopping

Central Railway Station along with the associated bus stops is the defi nitive driver of pedestrian tra! c on campus.Pedestrian Tra! c on Broadway

drops o" signifi cantly past Building 01 & 02.

Harris, The Goods Line & Quay are all signifi cant carriers of students. Harris Street is the location of most pedestrian injuries & deaths near the campus. The Goods Line has had problems with safety. Quay Street will increase in signifi cance for the city with the removal of the entertainment centre, but decrease in signifi cance for UTS once U Building and the Chau Chak Wing Building are complete.

The Library is the single largest driver of the informal use of campus. Moving it will decrease visits to the Haymarket Campus by many student groups.

This survey asked students to map their typical path when moving

through UTS - 70 responses are mapped here. In addition to this

we took spot counts over the course of one day, which are marked

accordingly. All pedestrians were counted - both students and non-

students.

The survey gives a snapshot of circulation, and how it defi nes the

extent of the campus - essentially sitting within the triangle of

Central Station, Market City and Broadway Shopping Centre.

The busiest streets on campus are:

01. Broadway (21,000/day)

02. Goods Line (15,000/day)

03. Quay Street at Haymarket (15,000/day)

04. Library Entry (15,000/day*)

05. Harris Street (11,000/day)

*Library fi gures based on data

collected in a separate study.


Page 9


The Goods Line is most used when in sunshine. Despite ample provision of seats and high pedestrian tra! c few people stay here. We anticipate because of a lack of active frontages.

Alumni Green has very poor use. Frontages around are inactive, and the low quality, at grade, grass is very hot in the sun.

Building 01 Podium is predominantly a recreation space. Notable exceptions are the long study tables on higher levels that are well used by students.

The Architecture Study Space is very well used for informal learning.

Building 02 atrium is a well-used informal learning space.

The Architecture Courtyards have very low use. This is due to inactive edges and a lack of programming and quality in these spaces.

Building 10 has a high quality atrium with low usage. The cafe and GAC, while adjacent, have distinctly di" erent uses.

Informal Learning - One dot represents one personRelaxing & Recreation - One dot represents one person

Mapping is overlaid for 11:00, 14:00 & 18:00, for all levels surveyed. Green outlines indicate study extent.

Unscheduled Activity measured

Informal learning tends to happen indoors, recreation is split between indoor and out. But overwhelmingly, UTS is an indoor campus.

Unscheduled activity is what creates the impression of a lively

campus. In documenting the informal use of UTS campus Gehl

Architects divided activity into informal learning and recreational

activity. We made this distinction as these two activities represent the

major two non-scheduled activities on campus, and that they are by

their nature di" erent. Informal learning can be done for many hours

at a time and requires a particular set of resources to accomplish -

usually internet, power, printing, solid tables and the like. Recreation

on the other hand is often done opportunistically, whenever students

have a spare 5 or 50 minutes. Recreational spaces need to be close but

of high quality. Informal learning requires tools.

From surveys documenting where people sit throughout the day and

what they do in a variety of common spaces on campus, we can see

that places providing some support for study (tables, chairs,

power) are already magnetic to students. Places where studying and

socializing combine are very attractive. An increase in the overlap

between informal learning and recreation activities can make the

campus a more interesting and collaborative environment.

A major point of note is that while Sydney has one of the best climates

in the world, relatively little activity (and even less informal learning)

on campus occurs outside. This is a signifi cant missed opportunity.

89% of activity measured was inside.

Quay Street has little staying activity, the Northern Cafe and Library Entrance being the exceptions.

Large Study Tables with power placed close to circulation routes throughout the campus attract many students throughout the day, predominantly for studying.

The new ‘green’ learning space demonstrates a rare characteristic of any space on campus - recreation and informal learning exist side by side (and often blur together) in a space immensely popular with students.

The Haymarket Courtyards have similar levels of use. To the north this is driven by the cafe, to the south by quality tables & power outlets that allow for outdoor informal learning - one of the few places this is possible on campus.

UNSCHEDULED ACTIVITYBROADWAY CAMPUS

UNSCHEDULED ACTIVITYHAYMARKET CAMPUS

UNSCHEDULED ACTIVITYDAB & GOODS LINE

RQ#:#How#can#one#use#digital#methods#and#tools#to#measure#urban#qualities#of#

the#physical#city#landscape?##%This%overarching%question%can%be%broken%down%into%three%subCquestions:%%%%0 What#are#the#relationships#between#Social,#Local#and#Mobile#technologies#and#how#do#they#help#measure#a#reAlection#of#urban#qualities?#%

0 What#are#the#new#methods#and#tools#for#measuring#the#new#and#old#metrics#that#can#measure#people’s#usage#of,#and#their#relationship#with,#their#city?%

0 What#are#the#implications#and#the#new#opportunities#that#emerge#from#the#ability#to#measure#urban#qualities#digitally?%

RQ1%:%THEORY%0 What#are#the#relationships#between#Social,#Local#and#Mobile#technologies#and#how#do#they#help#measure#a#reAlection#of#urban#qualities?%

Mobile%0 The%Mobility%Turn%0  Smartphones%have%become%a%takenDforDgranted#part%of%our%relation%with%each%other%and%interlaced%with%our%activities%

0  Interfaces%are%connecting%smartphones,%users,%and%public%space%closely%together.%%

0  Smartphones%have%unlocked%a%potential%for%dynamic%coordination%of%more%activities%with%more%people%in%more%ways%

Social%0  The$Participatory$Turn$

0  Social%communication%channels%have%made%it%easy%and%meaningful%for%people%to%publish%and%share%information.%(Vatrapu,%2012)%%

0  Social$Relevance%0  The%criteria%for%Tiltering%and%consuming%information%in%accordance%with%the%relationship%between%humans%and%information.%(Alfort,%2011)%%%

0  An%endorsement%from%someone%you%know%carries%more%weight%than%a%recommendation%from%someone%outside%your%network%(Cialdini%&%Goldstein,%2004)%%

! An%invisible%layer%of%“social%noise”%thus%surrounds%our%streets%and%neighborhoods%when%people%like%reCact%online%to%the%shops,%parks,%schools,%squares%and%almost%anything%that%occupies%a%physical%space.%%

Tweets of Paris

Local%0  The%increasing%pervasiveness%of%locationCaware%technologies%is%altering%the%perception%of%public%spaces%through%the%proliferation%of%locationCspeciTic%digital%information.%%

0  Locations%acquire%relevance%and%reshape%social%and%spatial%interactions%through%increased%use%of%locationCaware%technologies:%%0  people%check%into%locations,%%0  they%have%their%locations%tracked,%%0  they%attach%information%to%locations,%and%%0  they%even%“create”%new%locations.%(de%Souza%e%Silva%A.%a.,%2012)%

0  Local$Relevance$:$$The%popularization%of%locationCaware%technologies%contributes%to%the%changing%meaning%of%locations%via%contextCaware%relevance%criteria.%(TamineCLechani,%2010)%

Food of F!ederiksberg

Vices of Vesterbro

Theoretical%Framing%

RQ2%:%METHOD%&%ANALYSIS%0 What#are#the#new#methods#and#tools#for#measuring#the#new#and#old#metrics#that#can#measure#people’s#usage#of,#and#their#relationship#with,#their#city?%

Questions%for%Analysis%

ES.1%Sydney%0 Client%:%UTS%0 Custom%Mobile%App%0 4%Active%Sensors%(M3)%0 8%participants%%0 830h.%0 100,000%logs%%%%%Location%Data%0 400,000%logs%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%WiCFi%Data%

LoMo%:%Metrics%of%Utility%Interpretive%0 Circulation$0 Mobility$Mix$$

Direct%ReTlections%0 Lingering%Time/Location%0 WiDFi$Exposure$(New!)%0  Stationary$Ratio$(New!)%


Page 7


Scheduled learning currently drives !85% of campus life. Movement is therefore primarily driven by scheduled activity.

In the adjacent graphic we have attempted to summarise the

distribution of life on campus with the best information we have

collected and is available. It paints a broad-brush picture, but one

with a very clear trend. Approximately 85% of life on campus is

through scheduled classes. There is massive potential in this.

Firstly, we see opportunities to create further interfaces with this life,

tapping into its potential to further animate the site. Secondly, we can

assume that if only 15% (refer adjacent survey data) of campus users

make the campus feel as lively as it does, signifi cant change will be

felt if there is a small shift towards informal learning. A 5% change in

student learning behaviour from scheduled to unscheduled learning

could result in a corresponding 30% increase in campus liveliness.

Notes: (*)

Quay Street staying based on all people, not only students.

Library data based on average of number leaving the library.

Building 04 staying estimated based on numbers observed elsewhere.

While most active areas on campus where surveyed, the gym, union

bar, building 04 commons and upper levels on building 10 were

not surveyed. We have increased our overall estimate of staying on

Broadway by 20% to account for this.

Sources:

In-class data:

UTS city campus timetable.

Outside class:

Gehl Stationary Activity Counts in selected Locations. 31/11/2012

Library Usage data supplied by UTS

B01 & 02

B10

B04

B06

B05

Goods

Line

Quay

Street

Alumni Green

Where students come from... ...and where they go.

AUS 72%

SYDNEY METRO 92%

19%OF STUDENTS LIVE WITHIN 5KMS OF CAMPUS

12%WALK

1%CYCLE

71%PUBLIC TRANSPORT

16%DRIVE

81%OF STUDENTS LIVE FURTHER THAN 5KMS FROM CAMPUS

35,697STUDENTS IN 2011

25,821AUSTRALIAN

STUDENTSIN 2011

CHN 13%

ASIA 10%

NSW 6%

WORLD5%

AUS2%

Most UTS students live more than 5kms from campus, and public transport is their primary transportation.

Twenty-eight percent of UTS students are international.

Observational analysis suggests that international students tend to be

much heavier campus users, relying on it for informal learning, social

interaction and relaxing. These students will also tend to live within

walking and cycling distance of campus as the trip to Australia was

most likely made to study. This allows them to include their home on

their ‘personal campus map’.

Of the Australian students, 92% come from the Sydney metropolitan

area. Survey data suggests that a high proportion of Australian

students remain living at home when they study as they are too far

away (more than 5kms) to make multiple journeys to university in a

day, and need to rely on public transport or a car for the journey. This

means these students are ‘captive’ on campus between classes.

Despite this distance, 84% of students use sustainable mobility. This

makes UTS one of the major sustainable transport drivers in Sydney.

Sources: UTS internal & Future Student Services Survey.

*Number has been increased by 20% as bu! er against unmeasured activity.

BLDG 05: 2334 studentsin class

Library: 400 students*

Quay Street: 26 people*

122 studentsindoors

94 studentsoutdoors

6 studentsoutdoors

17 studentsoutdoors (Alumni Green)

Learning Commons106 students



BLDG 01 & 02: 1947 studentsin class


Broadway Campus:Scheduled: 5,670 studentsUnscheduled: 514 students*

Haymarket Campus:Scheduled: 2,334 studentsUnscheduled: 748 students

UTS City Campus:In class: 8,004 studentsOutside class: 1,262 students**Max 10% error margin.

29 studentsindoors

estimated 25*

287 studentsindoors

56 studentsindoors

76%

83%

!85%scheduled

!85% of campus life is scheduled.

Compilation of 10:00, 14:00, 18:00 weekday at UTS: Scheduled and Unscheduled Learning distribution of students, average

Scheduled Learning

Unscheduled time on campus

DISTRIBUTION OF STUDENTS

GLOBAL & LOCAL STUDENT BODY COMPOSITION

HOUSING AND MODAL SPLIT

Gehl#Architects#UTS#Report#

Social Endorsements

ES.2%Copenhagen%Twitter%Backchannel%0 #urbicsITU%0 @urbicsITU%0 41%Participants%0 99%Tweets%0 45%Photos%0 3%Social%Channels%0 11%Social%Media%Tools%

SoLo%:%Micro%Behaviors%0 Indirect%forms%of%AfTiliation%Metrics%of%‘Appreciation’%0 The$Post/Text$(Twitter)%0 The$Photo$(Instagram)%

Public%Broadcast%Mediums%0 LocationCBased%0  ‘Noisier’%0 PeopleCcentric%

%

SoLo%:%Macro%Behaviors%0 Direct%forms%of%AfTiliation%Metrics%of%AfTinity%0 The$Like%(Facebook)%0 The$CheckDin$(Facebook)%

Private%Broadcast%Medium%0 PlaceCBased%(The%Tie)%0 NetworkCCentric%0 Direct%Signals%

Reverberations%of%City%Noise%%%%

•  AfTiliations%

•  Relationships%

•  Noise%Levels%

•  Complimentary%

•  The%Local%‘Tie’%

•  Broadcast%Signals%

Key%Findings%–%Mobile%(ES.1)%0 Where$people$go$>$Interventions:%where%and%when%to%intervene%to%reCdirect%or%stimulate%circulation%of%people%

0 Where$people$stay$>$‘Sticky’$Campus$:%where%students%stay%for%formal%learning%and%socialization%

0 The$Difference$:$Classify$vs.$Time$&$Space$:%time%spent%at%a%given%building%location%in%a%much%wider%scope,%time%frame%and%degree%of%accuracy%%

0 New$:$Propensity$to$Stay/Study:%analyze%a%WiCFi%zone%as%an%urban%space%

%! The$visual$mapping$of$digital$user$traf4ic$can$help$inform$decisions$regarding$future$utility$of$public$space$

Micro%Findings–%Social%(ES.2)%Opportunities%IdentiTied:%0 Correlations%between%‘social%noise’%levels%and%physical%usage%of%a%given%public%space.%(B%Huberman,%2007)%

0 Predictability%of%positive%polarity%#place%to%be%“successful%in%the%future”%(B%Huberman,%2007)%%

0 Mapping%of%posts%and%photos%can%help%to%pinpoint%areas%of%heightened%appreciation%and%what%individual%features%or%topics%are%captured%the%most.%

0 Additional%discovery%of%language%topics%associated%with%a%given%#place%

%! Samplings$of$‘social$noise’$can$be$repeated$to$measure$differences$in$these$opportunities$over$time.$

Macro%Findings–%Social%(ES.3)%0 The%‘like’%differs%signiTicantly%from%the%‘checkCin’%due%to%the%intention%of%the%message%being%broadcast,%by%attaching%one’s%afTinity%directly%without%loyally%marking%one’s%territory.%

0 AfTinity%behaviors%differ%according%public%space%categories%from%global%data%originating%from%the%place%rather%than%the%user.%%

%! Examining$differences$in$categories$can$help$urbanists$learn$how$people$endorse$speci4ic$features$of$these$public$places.$$$

! By$understanding$over@represented$and$under@represented$behaviors$in$broad$categories$of$public$space,$one$is$better$equipped$when$evaluating$the$relative$success$of$a$speci4ic$intervention.$

Quality of Life & Affinity

City%Surveys:%0  Levels%of%cityCwide%afTiliation%from%social%media%differ%from%historical%and%indiscriminate%geographic%lines%of%residency%

0  There%is%a%slightly%stronger%correlation%between%‘likes’%and%‘checkCins’%at%the%city%level.%%However%cityCwide%‘checkCins’%are%more%likely%a%behavior%attributed%to%tourists.%

! Global$QoL$benchmarks$could$incorporate$public$measures$of$af4inity$&$appreciation%

RQ3%:%DISCUSSION%0 What#are#the#implications#and#the#new#opportunities#that#emerge#from#the#ability#to#measure#urban#qualities#digitally?%

Mobile$Measurements$:$Direct$ReRlections$"  Ability%to%transcend%time%and%space%#  Cost,%access,%motivation%barriers%%%

Social$Measurements$:$Indirect$ReRlections$"  Goes%beyond%tracking%simply%where%people%go%and%stay,%but%also%track%what%they%more%speciTically%do%(checkCin)%at%a%given%location,%what%they%say%(post)%and%even%what%they%think%(like).%

"  Ability%to%do%so%instantly,%cheaply,%and%repetitively,%as%many%times%as%necessary%before,%during%and%after%interventions%by%urban%stakeholders.%

#  Human%means%for%interpretation,%and%willingness%to%do%so%%%%%

Concluding%Remarks%! Overall,%the%practice%of%zoomingCin%and%out%from%crowdsourced%data%of%utility%and%afTiliation%could%be%leveraged%by%urban%researchers%on%a%regular%basis%to%identify%new%opportunities%for%peopleCcentric%place%creation.%

%%! The%most%illuminating%SoLoMo%metric%is:%%Lingering$:%Stays%:%CheckDIns$

# Digitally%ReTlective%Urban%Qualities%:%an%Indirect%ReTlection%of%QoL%

Future%Perspectives%0 Connecting%ES.1%and%ES.2%0 Heatmapping%our%Data%0 PSPL%Survey%Assessment%0 Capturing%the%Intervention%%0 Mercer%Infrastructure%Survey%0  ‘Desire%Lines’%0  Digital%Dérivée%Investigation%

0 Behaviors%of%Tourists%vs.%Locals%0 Mobile%&%Social%Media%

0 Community%Feedback%Loops%0 Geographical%Distance%Sentiment%Study%

Eric#Fisher#Tourist#v#Locals#Flickr#Set#

Follow our project

@roamingdata%urbic.tumblr.com%[email protected]%

Technology

City Reverberations of Public Places and Urban Spaces