According to the European Commission [1European Commission Urban Mobility 2014 Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: http://eceuropaeu/transport/themes/- urban/urban_mobility/index_enhtm 2014.], a large majority of European citizens live in an urban environment, they live their daily lives in the same space, and they share the same infrastructure for the purposes of their mobility. The exchange of knowledge and experiences from different cities is necessary in order to promote sustainable urban mobility. The main aim is to reduce the traffic (number of cars and CO₂ emission), promote walking and cycling, and consequently pedestrian and cyclist safety, as well as to promote the exchange of experience where an exchange of best practices can help improve the safety of vulnerable road users in urban areas [2Action Plan on Urban Mobility – State of Play (report) European Commision, Directorate-general for mobility and transporta, Brussels, 2012 Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: http://eceuropaeu/transport/themes/urban/urban_mobility/doc/apu m_state_of_playpdf 2012.]. According to the Arthur D. Little consultancy, a leader in linking strategy, technology and innovation, and UITP, the International Association of Public Transport, an international network for public transport authorities and operators, policy decision-makers, scientific institutes and the public transport supply and service industry, “the headline goal of any effective urban mobility strategy is to satisfy the travel needs of both people and businesses in such a way that it improves quality of life for the citizen and increases the competitiveness of a country or region”. Potentially relevant urban mobility solutions should be identified, discussed and assessed by involving both the public and professionals [3Audenhove FJ, Korniichuk O, Dauby L, Pourbaix J. The future of urban mobility 20: imperatives to shape extended mobility ecosystems of tomorrow Arthur DLittle, UITP 2014 Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: wwwadlcom/FUM20 2014.].

Tsay and Herrmann [4Tsay S-P, Herrmann V. Rethinking urban mobility: sustainable policies for the century of the city. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 2013.] discussed sustainable policies for the century of the city, rethinking urban mobility. They said that when producing a local mobility plan, the public engagement in the planning process should be stimulated and the need for multiple parties and stakeholders to work together reinforced. A platform to discuss environmental, social, and economic outcomes should be created. Engaging the public is important because their daily routines and ways of life influence the changes in the built environment. Members from the profession should inform them about the intention, purpose, and the phases of individual projects. Public participation is valuable, as it can “provide detailed knowledge that only locals would be able to offer and it can even inform how project phases are developed” [4Tsay S-P, Herrmann V. Rethinking urban mobility: sustainable policies for the century of the city. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 2013.].

European cities are moving towards integrated urban mobility approaches. If we compare the traditional transport plans and sustainable urban mobility plans, we can notice that local community involvement is important in sustainable urban mobility plans, with a focus on the participatory approach [5 Study to support an impact assessment of the urban mobility package: activity 31 sustainable urban mobility plans (Final report) European Commision, DG Move 2013 Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: http://eceuropaeu/transport/themes/- urban/studies/doc/2013-10-urban-mobility-package-activity-31pdf 2013.]. Moreover walking and “alternative transportation modes” will bring more people out onto the streets, and it will allow these spaces “to serve as public forums where neighbors and friends can connect with one another” [5 Study to support an impact assessment of the urban mobility package: activity 31 sustainable urban mobility plans (Final report) European Commision, DG Move 2013 Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: http://eceuropaeu/transport/themes/- urban/studies/doc/2013-10-urban-mobility-package-activity-31pdf 2013.].

As Gehl states [6Gehl J. URBACT USER - baseline study: changes and conflicts in using public spaces. USER, URBACT II Eur Union 2013.], buildings are usually designed first, then outside space and lastly life is brought to the spaces. Nowadays the spaces should be defined in a different way: first the future users should be identified, then their needs; so “first life, then spaces, then building” [6Gehl J. URBACT USER - baseline study: changes and conflicts in using public spaces. USER, URBACT II Eur Union 2013.]. Also Diébédo Francis Kéré said that “people are the basis of every piece of work” [7 Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: http://wwwkerearchitecturecom/about/ 2014.], and people, i.e. users of public spaces, are also the focus of this paper, as well as their engagement in urban design process, and the latter’s influence on urban mobility. It is necessary to involve as many different experts and people who will eventually use the designed urban space [8Hunt JG. Forms of participation in urban redevelopment projects: the differing roles of public and stakeholder contributions to design decision making processes In: Leeuwen JP, Timmermans HJ, Eds. Innovations in design and decision support systems in architecture and urban planning. Dordrecht, NL 2006.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5060-2_24] ] as possible. When designing urban spaces, we should not forget their users who give life to urban areas and contribute to their final look. Public engagement could also be seen as an educational process, and through involvement in the

planning process and by raising awareness, we can influence users’ lives. 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 [9Rowley A, Gibson V, Ward C. Quality of urban design: a study of the involvement of private property decision-makers in urban design. London: Royal Institution 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 [10Acland A. Dialogue by design: A handbook of public and stakeholder engagement 2012.].

In this new era, when smart technology is rapidly changing our environment, urban mobility 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, Doody, Webb and Aoun [11Buscher V, Doody L, Webb M, Aoun C. Urban mobility in the smart city age London: Schneider Electric, ARUP, The Climate Group 2014 2014.] a smart city is “an efficient city, a livable city, as well as an economically, socially and environmentally sustainable city”. We can note a need change in cities so that they can become more efficient, attractive, inclusive and competitive. Urban mobility will be changed, and also the ways how cities, businesses, citizens and academia think and work together. This paper explores how we will move from a traditional approach to public engagement to a more advanced one, to digital tools, more specifically, virtual worlds, as an interface for influencing urban mobility. Moreover, “the technologies that enable smarter mobility have a range of capabilities that benefit travelers, service providers and urban planners alike” [11Buscher V, Doody L, Webb M, Aoun C. Urban mobility in the smart city age London: Schneider Electric, ARUP, The Climate Group 2014 2014.]. Using visualization techniques and tools for enhancing public participation is vital in creating smart cities [12Al-kodmany K. Visualization tools and methods in community planning: from freehand sketches to virtual reality J Plann Lit 2002; 17(2)
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/088541202762475946] , 13Jones Q. Virtual-Communities, virtual settlements and cyber-archaeology: a theoretical outline J Comput Mediat Commun 2006; 3(3)
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00075.x] ]. In this paper we will discuss different traditional and digital methods for public participation in urban design, their role and their potentials.

Urban interventions are an innovative way of involving public into urban redesign processes where the urban space is changed through real-time actions. Users are temporarily engaged in the use of urban space, sometimes also in designing it. Actually, we could define urban interventions as an experiment for testing urban space to see what are its limitations and opportunities, and what happens if the design, urban equipment or program is different (whether the public will use urban space in a different way or not). Temporary urban interventions have already been seen in different countries, and its influence on the urban space was always noticeable [14Jupp E. The feeling of participation: everyday spaces and urban change Geoforum 2008; 39: 331-43.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.07.007] , 15Lauwaert M. Playing the city: public participation in a contested suburban area J Urban Technol 2009; 16(2): 143-68.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10630730903278611] ]. They also might have a great potential for future urban development [16Bishop P, Williams L. The Temporary City. Oxon: Routledge 2012.]. For example, Stevens and Ambler [17Stevens Q, Ambler M. Europe’s city beaches as post-fordist placemaking J Urban Des 2010; 15(4): 515-37.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2010.502341] ] consider temporary city beaches as a “tool to optimize the use of a particular spatial resource before the next cycle of large-scale reinvestments, if it ever materializes”. Temporary use is defined as a “secondary to functions that could be established to the site later on” [18Lehtovuori P. Temporary uses and place-based development Theory and cases. Finland: Temper University of Technology 2013.]. Nevertheless, we could influence urban mobility by temporary urban interventions, as people stop and start using urban space also as places and not only as transition space. Movement from one location to another is transformed to a space for gathering where people come together, where the life of city is concentrated [19Whyte WH. “Introduction”, “The Life of Plazas”, “Sitting Space”, and “Sun, Wind, Trees, and Water” The Urban Design Reader. London, New York: Routledge 2007.].

Different examples have already been noticed of urban interventions, which changed the motion in an urban space or helped change it by creating a sense of community. One of these examples is also the project “Dancing traffic light”

in Portugal [20 For a safer city, dancing traffic lights 2014 Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: http://intsmartcom/en/-en/index/smartcampaigns/ whatareyoufor/for-a-safer-cityhtml 2014.] where the safety in the city was influenced by traffic light installations that entertain waiting pedestrians. People were engaged in creating the dancing traffic light: some people were invited to step into the box where the music was played, and dance there, and the others saw the transformed dancing figure on the nearby traffic light. Consequently, passers-by stopped at the pedestrian crossing when there was a red sign, a dancing figure. It should be clarified here that people would tend to cross the street despite the red light, but with this new installation people actually wait for the green signal to cross, the intersection is therefore safer and more playful. With this urban intervention people’s behaviors were influenced, as well as their notion of using urban spaces, so it also had educational purposes. Moreover, many cities have been transforming their streets into pedestrian zones, and spaces used for parking lots are slowly transformed into public spaces (e.g. Ljubljana – Slovenska cesta street, Vienna – Maria Hilfer Strasse, New York – Pearl Street Triangle etc.). For example, in the last few years, New York’s Department of Transportation has changed a couple of parking sites and streets into public spaces (e.g. Pearl Street Triangle in Dumbo, Brooklyn). Remaking the urban space by placing there some potted trees and chairs had also affected public safety. People use the place all the time, and consequently this area is under supervision at all times and thus provides safety. Moreover, they added new bike lanes, which help connect these new public spaces, NYC is slowly becoming a great public space, and the urban mobility has been changing [21 A Streetcorner Serenade for the Public Plaza 2014 The New York Times: Art & Design Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: http://wwwnytimescom/2013/06/02/arts/design/a-prescription- for-plazas-and-public-spaceshtml?pagewanted=all&_r=0 2014.-23 Available from: http://wwwppsorg/ 2014.]. Whyte [19Whyte WH. “Introduction”, “The Life of Plazas”, “Sitting Space”, and “Sun, Wind, Trees, and Water” The Urban Design Reader. London, New York: Routledge 2007.] said that the street “is the river of life of the city, the place where we come together, the pathway to the center”. 

In addition to the permanent intervention (New York City DOT project), temporary urban interventions are used as a method of testing urban space, and they can lead to more permanent solutions. For example, in 2010 an interdisciplinary summer workshop was organized in Kamnik, a small town near Ljubljana, where students were asked to design urban spaces for the town’s festival. As part of this project, the street regulation was changed for the period of the festival: a two-way street was transformed into a one-way street and half of the street was intended for the public - Fig. (1). The project of designing the festival and the town’s urban space (by placing homemade urban equipment like branches, tree pots, made from recycled elements) was actually an urban experiment, where the town tested new usage of urban spaces and at the same time tried to draw attention to this space by using temporary urban interventions. With new traffic regulations they wanted to encourage pedestrians and cyclists to use it. This urban test leads to a permanent transformation of the system of transport, bike routes and pedestrian zones: from April 2013 onwards, the street became a one-way street and part of the street is also intended for bikes and pedestrians [24 Available from: wwwstajnsi 2014.].

Fig. (1) Urban experiment intended for promotion of urban mobility, Kamfest 2010 (photo: Nadja Hribar).

Fig. (2) Urban experiment at Bratovševa ploščad platform, summer 2013 (a - workshop with kids; b - urban interventions; c - movie night in the public space) (photo: Blaž Jamšek).

Fig. (3) Public participation in urban design (a – traditional methods: street day 2014; b – digital methods: web page Change Together) (photo: Anja Jutraž).

Fig. (4) Virtual world Terf, an interface for public participation in urban design: walk through different urban redesign proposals (virtual experience before real-life experience).

Graph. (1) Comparision of the sentiments of professionals and the public, and their desired role in the design and planning of public spaces in their neighborhood.

Graph. (2) Comparison of the sentiments of the public and professionals relating to the area where they would like to participate in the urban design process (left) and the amount of time they would be willing to spend for this purpose (right).

Graph. (3) Comparison between the public and professionals with regard to the minimum number of alternative solutions that they would like to see, and with regard to the need to involve the public in the urban design process.

Table 1

The desire of the public and professionals to participate in co-decision and co-design in urban design processes (in public spaces), expressed in percentages.

Table 2

When, where and how long you would like to participate in the urban design process (in designing public space).

Table 3

Desire of the public and professionals to be involved in the decision-making process, expressed in percentages

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 that is slowly being

passed on to increased virtual collaboration [25Haller C. Cross-media public participation. Denver: Place Matters 2009., 26Hudson-smith A. Digitally distributed urban environments: The prospects for online planning London: University College London 2003 Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: wwwcasauclacuk/andy/ 2003.]. The paper additionally focuses on exploring new media and digital tools for public engagement [27Hanzl M. Information technology as a tool for public participation in urban planning: a review of experiments and potentials 2007.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2007.02.003] ]. 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 [28Bainbridge WS. Online worlds: convergence of the real and the virtual. London: Springer 2010.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-825-4] , 29Smith A, Dodge M, Doyle S. Visual communication in urban planning and urban design. London: UCL 1998.]. Our research is based on the virtual world Terf [30 3D Immersive collaboration consulting, immersive terf 2014 Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: http://3dicccom/ 2014.], an immersive world that offers users different collaboration tools and at the same time the experience of the future urban site (walk-throughs through the 3D model of the proposed urban redesign with your avatar). Terf is virtually based, without time and location constrains, it can be combined with traditional ways of communication, and it enables you to experience 3D models of neighborhoods from the point of view of pedestrians.

The main problem discussed in this article is the lack of urban mobility in open public spaces (streets, neighborhoods etc.). More exactly, we divided the problem into three topics: (1) lack of program, urban equipment and users in the urban space; (2) lack of public engagement from the early stages of urban design process onwards; and (3) lack of appropriate digital tools for public participation processes.

To solve a general problem, a specific location with its specific characteristics and problems was chosen: Bratovševa ploščad platform, a public space in one of Ljubljana’s neighborhoods. The platform is basically a public space in one of Ljubljana’s suburban neighborhoods, which currently lacks a detailed program concerning the use of this urban space, as well as actual users. The public space at Bratovševa ploščad platform area lacks life, people do not want to spend time there, the space does not offer enough programs, and it is not suitably equipped. Since the public space is located in the heart of a residential neighborhood, it would be highly advisable to ask the people for their wishes and needs.

The main research question of this paper is as follows: Can the public engagement process influence urban mobility (and bring more users to public spaces) by using different traditional and digital methods?

As a case study Bratovševa ploščad platform, a neighborhood in Ljubljana, was chosen. Our research was divided into three stages where different research methods were used: (1) exploring traditional methods for public participation process (urban experiment; observation and short interviews with people involved in urban activities); (2) exploring the opinions of the public and the opinions of professionals regarding public participation processes in urban design (quantitative research methods, survey); (3) exploring digital tools for the public participation process, with the focus on virtual world Terf (qualitative research methods, semi-structured interviews). The main aim was to find out how urban mobility could be influenced and changed through involving the public in urban design (through different activities and by using different tools).

Firstly, we prepared different urban activities in the Bratovševa ploščad platform area and observed the users (during the activities and after). Moreover, we interviewed the participants and discussed with them the problems and possibilities related to the chosen site. We organized the following urban activities: a workshop with kids (“What do you want to see on this urban site?” Children drew pictures.), an urban installation (making urban equipment from recycled materials) and a movie night (projection of a movie on the façade of the apartment building). The urban experiment was done in summer 2013, and except for urban installation, which remained there for a longer period, the urban activities were one-day activities (Fig. 2).

Secondly, the survey was conducted between representatives of the public and experts (N=878) and it focused on respondents’ opinions concerning public participation in urban space. The importance of involving public in an urban design process from the early stages of the design process was discussed, and also the willingness of the public and professionals to take part in public participation activities. We also asked them questions about the time they wanted to devote to public participation, and about the type of projects they wish to have a say in. The survey was prepared as a web interface, and we ensured that respondents were of different ages, had different educational backgrounds and came from different professions.

Thirdly, there were semi-structured interviews conducted among representatives of the public and profession (N=20). They focused on exploring the usability and appropriateness of the Immersive Terf Software, a virtual world, a system of support tools for public engagement in urban design [30 3D Immersive collaboration consulting, immersive terf 2014 Retrieved on December 10, 2014 Available from: http://3dicccom/ 2014.]. The virtual world Terf was evaluated by the interviewees themselves, while we also evaluated its appropriateness through observation of the interviewees (how they were using the tool, how they were able to navigate through it, how they rated the experience).

The results gained through observation (urban experiment, urban activities) will be presented first, then the results of the quantitative research (survey), and last but not least the results of the qualitative research (semi-structured interviews).

Based on the experiment and the qualitative and quantitative analyses, our conclusion is that public engagement activities at the early stages of an urban design process could have an influence on urban mobility. Public participation activities are changing the way residents are using public space, and they are also seen as an opportunity to educate the public about sustainable urban mobility (promoting cycling, walking etc.). Public participation is actually a long-life learning experience where different traditional and digital tools and methods are used to engage the public and professionals in urban design processes, and consequently build a community of people who will use and maintain a specific space.

The concept of an urban experiment could be seen as a life-long learning opportunity allowing us to educate the public through involving them in urban activities. We asked them to solve the presented problem on their own, and offered them guidance and advice. Public spaces need users, and urban experiments are a good opportunity to involve people from the early stages of the design process onwards in order to teach them how to use space in a different way. This will eventually lead in creating a community of people who will also maintain the space in the future.

Based on the survey, it can be concluded that both the public and professionals often share very similar opinions (see comparative graphs (1-3) in the previous section). Consequently, involving the public in the context of urban design is not always necessary; the public should not be involved in the decision-making process at any cost. Sometimes the opinion of professionals is sufficient. However, it is worth thinking carefully about when, where and how the public should indeed be included. It would be reasonable to include them at the first stages of urban design process when they can highlight the problem and opportunities for a specific area.

Much disagreement comes from ignorance and lack of understanding of the process of designing urban space - we can note here the need to educate the public about this issue. Based on the qualitative and quantitative analysis, we find that every public urban space has specific needs and requires special attention; we need to have in mind the needs of the public using a specific space. The presented results of the survey can help us understand how the public thinks. The survey results also help us conclude that the public wants to participate, co-design and be involved in the urban redesign process. Our task is to figure out when, where, how and to what extent this cooperation is most needed, effective and meaningful.

By showing virtual world Terf to the public and professionals and interviewing them, we discovered that Terf is an appropriate digital tool for the public participation process. It is especially good for involving younger generations, as they usually do not have time for physical meetings. Combining traditional and digital tools is necessary.

Based on the presented research, the following benefits of Terf, a tool for public involvement in the planning process of urban space, can be observed: it promotes public awareness, brings urban design closer to the public (people can see what is possible, how to improve urban space and what are its alternative uses); it promotes avoidance of general dissatisfaction or disagreement with the final proposal; it could be used as an interface in lifelong learning processes: helps educate the public about urban space; it helps create a community that will begin to integrate and regulate its own space (no major interventions are required, the people who will use this space are needed, it is necessary to create a community that is itself responsible for the maintenance and appearance of urban space). Moreover, by using virtual world Terf also for company meetings, people would spend less time in their cars, thus making our streets less burdened with traffic.