Keywords

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

1 Introduction

Urban planning is a complex process (Alexander 2007). It is therefore important to involve as many different experts and people who will eventually use the designed urban space (Hunt 2006) as possible. It is an interdisciplinary activity which brings together various experts offering a wide range of skills. There are several different elements, which should also be taken into account during the planning process: social interaction; the people in a specific urban space; the context of that urban space; the perception of space ; and how proposals for redevelopment are associated with the natural, physical and cultural environment (de Roo and Silva 2010). When designing urban spaces, we should not forget the users who breathe life into urban areas and contribute to their final look and feel. More importantly, by educating them through involvement in the planning process and by raising awareness, we can influence their lives. The main aim is to create a space that will be attractive, sustainable and boast high quality, so the people will want to live, work and relax there. With high quality urban design, we can influence the quality of life and the use of urban space, the quality of living conditions and people’s opinions (Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors and Department of the Environment 1996).

Public engagement is vital to the city’s aims, as this ensures that the needs of a community are fully understood (Acland 2012). The public participation process in urban design can be defined as co-operative design, allowing designers (professionals) and users (public) to be involved on an equal footing (Jupp 2008; Stiles 2007). Our aim is to build a bridge between the public and the professional sphere, between residents, researchers, stakeholders and municipality officers by promoting virtual collaboration with the help of new media and advanced digital visual tools (mobile applications, virtual worlds, web pages). These tools promote the sharing of the residents’ experiences and behaviour concerning their living environment, and it could be seen as a life-long learning process. With the help of digital tools , we should be able to help all those involved in creating a shared urban vision, and increase the satisfaction of users of redesigned areas. Moreover, such techniques could contribute significantly to the transfer of knowledge between all participants involved in the process.

There are several major research problems existing at this point, including a lack of dialogue, difficulties arising from the complexity of dialogue (communication and collaboration between the public and the experts on urban design issues), and a lack of appropriate communication technologies (i.e. that are easy to use and accessible). The chapter further focuses on exploring new media and digital tools for public engagement and interdisciplinary collaboration (Hanzl 2007). More specifically, it deals with exploring the potential of using virtual worlds in urban design from the first stages of the design process (problem definition) to the construction and maintenance phases (Bainbridge 2010; Smith et al. 1998). The chapter explores a 3D visualization software system called Terf to facilitate public engagement and participation in site planning and urban design reviews and workshops . The main research question is whether the proposed virtual world (Terf), along with its characteristics, is suitable for public participation processes and what should the virtual visualization tool look like in order to simplify urban engagement processes. This chapter additionally focuses on exploring people’s opinion with regard to urban design, and features they find important within an urban space.

2 Urban Engagement and Smart Cities

The city does not only represent a built environment , but also a community of people who live there. Communities should have the option to express opinions and decide about the future of their city from the early stages of the design process onwards. Different decisions in urban space can affect various individuals or groups of people. They may feel threatened because they usually cannot predict the consequences of such changes. If people know the positive aspects of activities/changes in urban space, they can accept and support them more easily. Public engagement from the first stages onwards, combined with interdisciplinary collaboration, leads to the need for new methods/tools for a participatory planning system. Moreover, in the new era, when smart technology is rapidly changing our environment, urban engagement is also changing a lot. Innovative operational and information technologies are being used, and citizens and city infrastructure generate reliable real-time data. According to Buscher et al. (2014, p. 2) a smart city is “an efficient city, a liveable city, as well as an economically, socially and environmentally sustainable city”. We can identify a need for cities to change and become more efficient, attractive, inclusive and competitive. Using visualization techniques and digital tools for enhancing public participation is vital in creating smart cities (Al-Kodmany 2002; Jones 2006). The public engagement from the early stages of urban design process onwards helps create smart communities ; and the appropriate digital tools could help by creating a sustainable and smart city.

2.1 Visualization Techniques and Digital Tools

Due to the rapid development of digital media in the last decade, physical participation (face-to-face collaboration) has begun to lose its exclusive role and is being replaced by increased virtual collaboration (Haller 2009; Smith 2003). This has consequently increased the need for an interface between different users. Digital technology is making massive changes to the way we experience and use our cities, as well as to the sustainable development process, and to the way professionals collaborate and involve the public. The main aim of designing smart cities is to connect different systems, to explain how a city as a whole functions as a result of the interplay between its systems where digital technology is used to better integrate these different systems . Digital tools should help the city function even better, and the power of new technologies should serve cities and improve the citizens’ lives. Slotterback (2011) examined potential opportunities and constraints related to the development of technology in participation processes, and he states that technology is important as an enhancement to more traditional participation efforts, and not a replacement for them. Moreover, London is in the lead when it comes to smart cities developing and exploring digital technologies and, in 2014, a detailed study was prepared of ‘How digital technologies are shaping the city’, where different methods and tools are explored (Gann 2014; NLA 2014). Based on the review of literature and current digital tools, some of the categories of and theoretical approaches to visualization can be identified as follows:

  1. (i)

    3D visualizations: 3D city models as digital tools for public involvement and development of smarter cities have already been explored by the Future Cities Lab and Smarter Better Cities at ETH, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich (exploring visualization and decision-making solutions), and by the Urban Simulation Team at UCLA (The University of California, Los Angeles) where they are exploring applications for real-time visual simulation in design, urban planning , emergency response and education (Future Cities ETH 2014; Smarter Better Cities 2014; UCLA—Urban Simulation Team 2014).

  2. (ii)

    Space syntax, spatial analysis: Researchers at the Barlett Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (2014) are exploring the science of cities, the latest geospatial methods and ideas in computer-based visualisation and modelling.

  3. (iii)

    Immersive virtual labs : The Collaborative for Advanced Landscape Planning’s Landscape Immersion Lab (LIL) at the University of British Columbia (Salter et al. 2009) is designed with a three-screen immersive projection lab, where the combination of the CommunityViz software and LIL’s large screen display is used. It allows the participants to interactively view and explore the planning area and the represented scenarios in a shared, immersive setting. Also the SIM Lab in Vienna (an interdisciplinary centre for spatial simulation and modelling) deals with the latest computer-aided technologies for the built environment, focusing on smart cities and 3D virtual reality (VR) environment (SIM Lab Vienna 2014). Both of these have the ability to dynamically explore the visualisations of planning proposals and increase participants’ understanding of the plan, but they have both time and location constraints (one exact physical location of the lab, limited time).

  4. (iv)

    Virtual worlds: They present a media established for interdisciplinary collaboration and public participation processes, e.g. Terf, Cloud cities, OULU 3D, etc. (3D Immersive Collaboration Consulting 2014; Cloud Cities 2014; OULO 3D 2014).

Moreover, digital visualization tools are quite commonly combined also with traditional methods/tools, as it is important to keep face-to-face contact in the public participation process. For example, Senbel and Church (2011) have explored different visualization tools in a neighbourhood of Marpole in Vancouver: a community voices film (for capturing and representing the direct voices of community residents); a policy film (for educational purposes on the alternative building and transportation scenarios) ; a physical model; a digital model (SketchUp model with a fly-through animation showing a variety of perspectives); an energy consumption model (a computerized 3D representation of the physical model using CityCad software); and a digital summary. However, a planning support system (PSS) of tools is still missing that could combine all of them, be used as a medium between different users and different tools/methods used in public participation process in urban design , and be easy to use and available at any time, from any location.

2.2 Virtual Worlds for Urban Engagement

The focus of this chapter is virtual worlds, but when we talk about virtual worlds , we must first define the concept of virtual reality . Strehovec (1992) argues that virtual reality coexists with a given real world and takes place in real time because we are simultaneously present in two worlds: the consciousness is located in the virtual world and time, while the body remains in the real world and time. Kitchinu (1998) claimed that a virtual reality contains the following components: interactivity, interaction and progress in real time. By wanting to build another world inside a computer, we want to have access to another level of existence that is able to offer us the same experience as the real world; we wish to use cyberspace to create a virtual place and thus enable the users to experience the virtual environment as if they were truly present in it (Tuan 1977). The virtual world can also be used as a tool to show the built environment, as it allows us to introduce it in 3D models and through walk-through (Whyte 2010) sessions.

The first 3D models of cities were designed in the 1950s when the first simulations of movement through space (flight simulations) were made possible. Over the years, the level of dedication to detail increased, and methods of presentation and optimizing 3D models improved. Virtual worlds can assist you in experiencing space and gaining experience in the real world; they attempt to emulate physical space, its image, services, and interactions of people. They exist in direct connection to the physical space. The purpose of virtual cities is to emulate physical location, their image, services, and interactions of people, while maintaining a direct link with the physical place (Lenarčič 2002). All these players are planning various support system applications, covering different aspects and methods. Based on the review of different theoretical approaches and different digital tools , we could notice the lack of immersive virtual tools, which could be linked also to other digital tools (other visualization methods and tools e.g. 2D maps, BIM (Building information modeling) programs, 3D city models etc.) and could be accessible from anywhere and anytime.

Virtual worlds must contain a variety of elements: an interface for user enrolment; the time component that shows the phases of development planning at a specific time; a tool for measuring the dimensions (e.g. the building height and the width of roads); the function “teleport”, which allows immediate navigation or movement from one point to another; as well as a tool for marking and adding descriptions and a display of several planes among which the user can choose. Most virtual worlds only have a few elements, but our focus is the PSS tool, based on a virtual world, which could be used as a medium between different digital visual tools , especially with 3D models, as they enable full immersion. Users can experience the site by walking through virtual worlds allowing the pedestrian point of view, a view they are used to from their daily lives.

Our research is based on the Terf visualization tool (3D Immersive Collaboration Consulting 2014), which could potentially connect different tools, and, most importantly, it could represent an immersive tool, enabling you to experience 3D models of neighbourhoods from the point of view of pedestrians. Terf is a virtual world, which has already been used for long-distance collaboration in companies that have offices in different locations (mostly in the United States), operating in various fields, such as construction management and medicine. It was our wish to explore the possibility of using it in urban design and in public participation processes. It is virtually based, without time and location constraints, and it can also be combined with traditional ways of communication. It offers different tools for communication and collaboration (Fig. 1). Additionally, it allows importing of large 3D models of urban settlements, which serve as an opportunity to do walk-throughs, thus exploring the 3D models of urban design proposals. It offers its users two aspects of exploration, namely, the experiential design aspect (pedestrian view) and the planning design aspect (bird view). Terf has already been used for meetings, as it also combines the following elements: individual and group chat (you can chat with participants online in real time); whiteboards (for sharing analyses, presentations, 2D maps, etc.); and the educational module (learning takes place through direct interaction with other disciplines). Terf is connected to other programs such as Revit, SketchUp, Microsoft Word and ArcGis .

Fig. 1
figure 1

Terf as a support tool for public engagement in urban planning and urban design

Full size image

Terf is a laboratory intended for interdisciplinary collaboration and co-ordination during urban planning and urban design process; it is meant for urban management and it represents an interface allowing involvement of different actors within a public participatory process, ranging from the public to the representatives of various professions (different disciplines). There are several recommendations concerning the improvement of the Terf virtual world , namely: Terf should be implemented as a hybrid tool ; physical and digital spaces should be combined (e.g. physical elements on site, digital on the web); the option of importing larger 3D models should be added, along with measurements in 3D; and better renderings should be prepared. Terf presents a support tool for public engagement in urban planning and urban design as it offers different applications for collaboration and co-ordination, enables 3D model walk-throughs, and, at the same time, it features direct connections to other tools for planning and communication such as Revit, BIM programs, Word and Excel (Fig. 1). For example, you can import 3D models directly from SketchUP or Terf, and you can open Word or Excel files directly in Terf. Thus, Terf is not only a visualization tool, but it is a support system of tools that can help us to come closer to the local community, to their homes, as it is available from anywhere at anytime.

2.3 Evaluating Urban Space

Based on the analysis of previous research and a variety of literature, which lay down the principles and guidelines for the design of urban space, its values, dimensions and categories, we have set up a synthesis scheme consisting of elements and categories to which attention must be drawn in urban space. Some of the principles and guidelines are listed here. These principles of designing urban space are: visibility, composition and volumes of buildings; composition and scale of the openings on the facade; relation to its surroundings; materials used; design of outdoor public spaces (Vandell and Lane 1989); the qualities of urban space such as visual quality, functionality, social use, natural environment and sustainable development (Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors and Department of the Environment 1996); principles of regulation of urban space: urban design for people (safe, comfortable, attractive), creating and maintaining connections, mixed structure (and form), respect for the natural elements, flexibility, economic vitality (Yeang 2000) and many more (Burton and Mitchell 2006; CABE, DETR 2001; Carmona 2010; MFE/NZ 2005; Stiles 2007). Also Nasar (1990, pp. 41) defined the visual preferences, the “desirable features” of urban environments as: “naturalness, upkeep, openness, order, and historical significance”.

Based on the theory review and in-depth insight into urban spaces, we have taken a more detailed look at the natural features of urban spaces on the one hand and built features on the other. We were particularly interested in evaluation categories of urban spaces that can be used in the processes of public involvement in urban design , and which of them directly affect the design. We wished to define those categories, which can be seen from photos and evaluated, along with being understandable to the lay public. Based on these criteria, the following categories of evaluation of urban space for the needs of public participation in the urban design were defined: orientation (how well users move around in the designed space, or whether they know where they are); natural elements (greenery, trees, parks, water elements, for example); urban equipment (urban furniture such as benches, bins, lights); connectivity (connection between the ground floor of the building and the public space); flexibility of use (the chosen design offers the possibility of different activities, such as concerts); and variety of activities (the design of urban space can encompass different activities, such as sitting and walking). The evaluation categories for public participation in urban design are fully defined in Jutraž (2013).

3 Methodology

Our research was divided into two stages: (i) exploring user opinions: research among the wider population, focused on exploring evaluation categories for public participation in urban design (quantitative research methods, a survey); and (ii) exploring new methods/tools for public participation in urban design: testing of existing tools, including virtual world Terf and the decision-making tool (qualitative research methods, semi-structured interviews).

A survey was initially conducted between representatives of the public and experts (N = 878) and it focused on respondents’ opinions concerning urban spaces. The importance of the evaluation categories of urban space has been studied in order to create a decision-making support tool, which was then tested in the next stage. Semi-structured interviews were conducted among representatives of the public and experts (N = 20), and focused on exploring the usability and appropriateness of the immersive Terf software , a system of support tools for public engagement in urban design. Bratovševa ploščad was chosen as a case study for the interviews. This is a public space in one of Ljubljana’s suburban neighbourhoods, which currently lacks a detailed program of events that use this urban space, as well as actual users. The Bratovševa ploščad area lacks life; people do not want to spend time there. The space does not offer enough events and it is not suitably equipped to do so. Since it is located in the heart of residential neighbourhoods, it would be highly advisable to ask the people for their wishes and needs.

At the beginning, four different 3D models were prepared, two of them are presented on the Fig. 2 (left: 3D model of proposal 2—pergola; right: proposal 1—microambients). Figure 2 presents two different views in Terf: bird view (left) and pedestrian view (right). Firstly, a basic 3D model of the urban area (the neighbourhood of Bratovševa ploščad), was followed by four 3D models (the current situation and three alternative renovation proposals). The renovation proposals served as a basis for the qualitative research and decision-making processes. Different proposals were shown to the 11 representatives of the public and 10 representatives from the planning profession. Interviewees had to move around digital 3D models on their own and evaluate the decision-making tool and the Terf virtual world.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Terf allows large 3D models of urban settlements to be imported, as well as giving its users the opportunity to do ‘walk through’ the 3D models of urban design/planning proposals

Full size image

4 Results

We will present only some of the results of the entire research conducted as part of a Ph.D. (Jutraž 2013). First, we present the results of the quantitative research (survey), and, second, we present the results of the qualitative research (semi-structured interview).

4.1 Evaluation Categories of Urban Space for Public Participation Processes (Survey)

The survey was conducted among 878 people: a total of 674 members of the public whose education, profession or occupation was not related to urban planning and design, as well as 231 representatives of the profession who were professionally, directly or indirectly, involved in designing urban space, and their education, profession or occupation was connected to urban planning or urban design disciplines. The resulting statistical analyses are based on a comparison of the two sample groups, the public on one side and the professionals on the other side.

First, we defined six main evaluation categories of urban space: orientation (how well users move around in the designed space, or whether they know where they are); natural elements (greenery, trees, parks, water elements etc.); urban equipment (urban furniture e.g. benches, bins, lights); connectivity (connection between the ground floor of the building and the public space); flexibility of use (the chosen design offers the possibility of different activities, such as concerts); variety of activities (the design of urban space can encompass different activities, such as sitting or walking); and then the adequacy of the importance of the evaluation categories was tested. Figure 3 presents the importance of the specific categories or elements in an urban space for the public and professionals.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Comparison of the importance of individual categories between the public and the professionals (1 is very important; 5 is not important)

Full size image

We found that, for both the public and the professionals, orientation was the most important category in the urban space (first place), followed immediately by natural elements (second place). For both, the public and the professionals, the variety of activities (fourth place) and flexibility of use (fifth place) were of lesser importance. There is a difference in the importance of the categories for the public and the professionals when considering equipment and connectivity (connection between the ground floor of the building and the public space): the public found equipment (urban furniture) more important (third place) than the connection between the ground floor of the building and the public space (sixth place), while the professionals found the connection between the ground floor of the building and the public space more important (third place).

Orientation, natural elements and equipment within an urban space were the most important elements for the public, followed by a variety of activities, and the use of flexibility and connectivity of the ground floor of the building to the public space (Fig. 3). It is possible that the last three categories are more abstract, which means the public may find them difficult to understand. The professionals saw orientation as the most important element as well, while there were no significant differences in ranking among other categories. Significant differences between the public and the professionals in the ranking of categories can be observed in relation to the urban equipment , connectivity and the integration of natural elements; equipment such as natural elements seem to be less important to professionals than to the public, while it seems that connectivity is more important to the public when compared to the opinions of professionals. The results of the survey helped us to prepare a tool for decision making , which we tested also in the following semi-structured interviews.

4.2 Decision-Making Tool and the Terf Virtual World (Semi-Structured Interviews)

The evaluation categories below form the basis of the decision-making tool, which is intended primarily for users of urban space and is used in the process of public involvement in urban space planning/design, and is also directly connected to Terf. We carried out semi-structured interviews with 11 members of the public and 10 interviews with professionals. There was a wide range of individuals from both groups included in this process (according to age, gender, educational level and field of interest). Each interview was based on pre-prepared questions, while also leaving room for additional questions. The interviews lasted approximately 45 min each (minimum 20 min, maximum 67 min). The information about the participants and their ways of thinking was collected through their active participation in semi-structured interviews, direct observation (emotional responses, skills exhibited when using tools), and through testing specific research questions (simplicity of the virtual world Terf and adequacy of tools for decision-making processes on the basis of pre-prepared tasks—respondents were given tasks, printed out on paper, and invited to take some time to solve them).

Interviewees were given a printed table (Fig. 4), and they were invited to perform their own walk through 3D models of the existing situation and the three proposals for rearrangement of the given urban space (in Terf). With the use of an avatar, it was easier to experience space and show solutions. Interviewees evaluated the 3D models on the basis of evaluation categories of urban space, related to the needs of public involvement in the planning area. The evaluation included a scale from one to ten, with ten representing the maximum value. Table 1 shows the results (mean estimates).

Fig. 4
figure 4

A decision-making support tool for public involvement directly connected to Terf

Full size image
Table 1 Importance of the evaluation categories of urban space in connection to the shown 3D models of urban space
Full size table

In the survey we were testing the general opinion on evaluation categories of urban space (orientation, equipment, connectivity , natural elements, flexibility, variety of activities; explained above), but in the interview the answers were based on the proposals shown to the interviewees (3D models of different proposals of renovation of urban space: we gave them the option to walk through the 3D models on their own). Individuals in the public and professional categories evaluated the importance of the evaluation categories of urban space on a scale from one to ten, with ten representing the maximum value. The public evaluated orientation much better than the professionals (average estimates of the public are 8.3, 8.8, 8.8 and 8.8, and of the professionals are 6.2, 6.6, 7.4 and 7.5). Significant differences in orientation (similar to the average score) were not observed among the various proposals. Orientation was the best estimated in all 3D models. The second in importance were natural elements in proposals 2 (public 8.1 and professional 7.6) and 3 (public 9.0 and professional 8.1) and the variety of activities in proposal 1 (public 8.5 and professional 6.4).

We were also interested to see whether the results obtained in this part of the study are comparable with the results obtained through the survey . Very comparable results were obtained with regard to natural elements (this category is always among the more important ones, and it always ends up in second or third place), and to the variety of activities (always a medium important category, in fourth place). Interestingly, the professionals provided more comparable results in both stages of the research than the public. The reason for this can be found in the fact that the public is responding specifically in relation to the shown location and not in general (as they were invited to an interview with a specific aim: to provide an opinion on a specific location, Bratovševa ploščad). However, the public and the professionals have managed to come together when faced with solving the many problems related to these tasks: all evaluation categories seem equally important to them, they would rather provide an overall opinion on Bratovševa ploščad than dealing with certain categories. The public found the evaluation categories too abstract, too difficult to understand.

Before testing the decision-making process, Terf was presented to the interviewees; they were also shown some basic functions (move around the room with the arrow keys on the keyboard, the ‘landmark’ function for pre-set views and walking between the individual ‘rooms’ with alternative solutions). Interviewees were asked if they considered the experience of space (walk-through of the 3D model space) as a way to improve the presentation of alternative solutions. Except for two participants, they all believed that the experience of space could help improve the presentation of alternative solutions. To create an even better representation of ​​the alternative solution, the public also suggested we add some photographic material. The profession liked Terf, but they believe it should be used only as one of the tools and as through the whole urban design process. They also believe that it is generally helpful if someone talks the users through the 3D model walk-through session—a combination of visual presentations with sound might be worthy of a discussion. Moreover, professionals have mentioned that it would be sensible to combine Terf with urban physical ambient interventions in the area; the public cannot imagine changes until they are visible in the real world.

5 Discussion and Future Work

Based on qualitative and quantitative analysis, it has so far been observed that a quality urban space must encompass all the categories: equipment, orientation, natural elements, variety of activities, connectivity (connection between the ground floor of the building and the public space) and flexibility . Additionally, safety and tidiness are a must–enabling the creation of a community of people who care for maintenance and regulation of space and its use. Filling the table (Fig. 4 above) was easier for the younger generation, while older participants struggled a bit. The results of the survey can help us understand how the public thinks and how, on the basis of participants’ opinions, further designs can be created. The evaluation of urban space in the collaborative decision process also has some positive features: the interviewees start thinking about urban space, and 3D models help them see things and think of things they would not think of otherwise. Expressing opinions suddenly becomes much easier for people because they see the idea in 3D, as opposed to being compelled to consider everything completely on their own and work from memory (Al-Douri et al. 2001, Panagopoulos et al. 2009). Terf as a combination of different tools, therefore, represents a laboratory intended for assistance in developing project requirements through which you can obtain opinions.

In the survey participants were asked to fill in the table shown Fig. 4 above, where they had to define the importance of each category in different 3D models (current situation and in three alternative proposals). It was found out that this was too complicated for them, all categories had equal importance for them, so it was proposed to simplify the decision-making tool (Fig. 4).

Interviewees were asked whether they believe the experience of space (walk through the 3D model space) can improve the presentation of alternative solutions. Cullen (2007) had already dealt with the elements of visual images and ways to assist him in achieving emotional responses to user space (changing the sequence of images, the structuring of space, urban fabric as a mixture of styles, materials, colours and textures), but we were interested in an experience gained by using the virtual world. Except for two participants who remained unidentified, all others believed that the experience of space could help communicate the features related to alternative solutions better. For a better presentation of ideas, they would upload photos. We were also interested in whether the chosen representatives of the public and the professionals liked the proposed tool for public involvement in decision-making processes (based on the Terf virtual world). We found that the majority of respondents liked the tool very much and that they saw it as an appropriate tool for public participation processes in urban design (nine members of the public and ten representatives of the profession liked the tool, and two interviewees did not wish to identify themselves). Respondents believed that the tool, along with minimal improvements, could be used in the process of public participation in urban design. It should be noted that the general likeability of the tool does not say much about its true usefulness and suitability; its appropriateness still requires a detailed examination.

On the basis of this study, the following advantages of Terf were noticed: it provides a combination of different tools; it is intended for the exchange of information, documents, presentations in virtual environments and for walking through 3D models (experiential mode); it is especially suitable for the younger generation that is usually not involved in the processes of urban design; it is suitable for interdisciplinary collaboration; and it presents a tool excellent for promotion of public participation in the planning area. Moreover, our interviewees really liked the experience of the site provided by the 3D models, landmarks helped them when moving through the 3D models, and they found it simple, efficient and easy to use.

From the current findings, it is clear that Terf presents a tool for public participation in the field of planning of urban spaces; it is an encouraging tool; which helps raise awareness; enables alignment between planning elements and the wishes of the public (people can see what is possible, how they can improve their urban space and what are its alternative uses). There are also other important aspects of the tool worth mentioning: avoidance of general dissatisfaction or disagreement with the final proposal; lifelong learning process (helping educate the public about urban space); and creating a community that will begin to combine and regulate its urban space (actually, usually no major interventions are required, it is only necessary to create a community that is responsible for the regulation of urban space and maintainability). On the one hand, meeting rooms (only virtual or hybrids which combine the physical and the virtual world) enable dislocated meetings (city authorities with the public), while the 3D digital model rooms (with the current situation and alternative solutions) on the other hand provide experience, full immersion and virtual walk-throughs. The unique nature of the tool (engagement anywhere and anytime, full immersion) also affects how you learn about urban space, so it could also be seen as an interface intended for knowledge transfer from the professional sphere to the public, as well as among professionals. The specific results, described above, can only lead us to a general conclusion: virtual worlds could be used as a planning support system for urban engagement.

Future work will involve the development of digital system of tools for public participation in urban design , where Terf will present the core element, and other tools will support it (connection to other existing digital tools, and also to traditional methods/tools). In the next research stage, the PSS tool (Terf) will be tested also in a real-life city project, and it will be used from the first stage of the planning process (problem definition) all the way to the construction and maintenance phase. Also the connection to smart city technologies will be explored, too. Planning support tools involving virtual worlds for public engagement/collaboration in urban design could potentially be used by municipalities for the purposes of creating smarter cities.

We will also develop Terf for mobile phones and tablets, so it would be accessible from different locations in the urban environment too. Moreover we will develop different packages for different users: locals, AEC (architecture engineering construction) professionals, government workers, visitors. We will test the possibility of using Terf at the physical site by using Google Glasses and Augmented Reality plugins to ensure the option of real immersion at the physical site. Terf will be improved and prepared for importing bigger 3D models and usage by a bigger group of people at the same time (e.g. possibility of having meetings in virtual city hall for 500 people at the same time). It would be used for opinion polling, and improved for adding the ability to simulate nighttime views (lighting), adding the ability to display shadows in urban spaces, and showing the appearance of the discussed urban space at different times of day and in different seasons.

6 Conclusion

To conclude, most visual digital tools (including 3D city models) are suitable only for a specific location, while Terf can be used at any location (easily applicable to other cities around the world). Terf presents a laboratory for interdisciplinary collaboration and co-ordination in urban design.It is an interface allowing involvement of different actors within a public participatory process, ranging from the public to the representatives of various professions (different disciplines). It combines and connects different planning and communication tools, and can be used through the entire process of public participation . An urban mediator is coordinating communication and ensuring the inclusion of the public and members of different professions in order to tackle major problems that a community/city faces. The end goal of such collaboration is to build a more competitive, equitable and sustainable city, and Terf can simplify the mediator’s work. Its versatility and technology solutions are adding value to planning support systems (Saad-Sulonen 2005), and it could be considered as one of the tools enabling the creation of smarter cities. Virtual world Terf could be described as a tool for promotion of public participation in urban design . Our findings indicate that, in general, people tend to be better at imagining the content of renovation proposals of urban design if they see 3D models; and through exploring different alternatives, it is easier for them to express their opinions. Different renovation proposals help them remember what they really want to see installed in the urban space. Moreover, if we show them a 3D model of a proposal and let them walk through it, the levels of immersion and consequently of their experience increase. Immersive virtual environment Terf can also help improve communication between the public and the practicing professionals. Therefore, virtual world Terf can be seen as a very useful tool for public participation processes.