LED2LEAP 2020 - Nuertingen Team 2

From Ledwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

>>>back to working groups overview

Area Klein Tischardt
Place Nürtingen
Country Germany
Topics Interaction, Integration, Community,
Author(s) Alexander Koslov, David Jones, Steve Oberst, Timon Schröder
Nürtingen wiki.jpg

Landscape Democracy Rationale

  • Everything with a decent age needs a renewal from time to time. But to fulfill this development correclty, we need everybody to pull on the string of everybodys needs in public spaces. So in the beginning it's very important to understand the surroundings. How is the age of the population? How many locals and foreigners are living there? Which oppurtunities for interaction are given? In which way dooes the population sees their landscape? The challenge will be to try to involve every citizen and their oppinion. Obviously not everyone will get pleased with the result, but at the end the goal should be to reflect what the general mood and ideas the inhabitants have and how they could be realized.

Location and scope

  • Location : Germany, Nürtingen 72622, Klein Tischardt
Loading map...

Phase A: Mapping your Community

Welcome to your community and its landscape

  • The Klein Tischardt district is located in Nürtingen, a small town in southern Germany. It borders on the old town and has a village character. The many small shops, which often only consist of garages, are striking. On the edge there is a commercial area with a shopping center. In the center there is an old people's home with assisted living.

Groups of actors and stakeholders in your community

  • There are two large groups that are located in the district. The first are small businesses that are spread throughout the district and the second are senior citizens who live in and around the nursing home. The first group has a service relationship with all residents and is accordingly also clearly visible. The second group, however, is more in one place and rarely leaves it. Another group are the young people, who are also rarely seen, because the neighborhood has few cool meeting places. So far we can only guess how everyday life in the neighborhood really works and which groups interact with each other.

Relationships between your actors and groups

  • The group of small businesses has the most influence because they own land and are visible. In addition, the residents are dependent on the services of these e.g. Shopping center. We think that all groups have the following interests in common: a good infrastructure, public lounges in nature and shopping.

Summary of your learnings from the transnational discussion panel on April 22

  • We learned the definition of a wicked problem and how to indicate it. Furthermore how to handle it e.g. figuring out solutions and working on them.
  • One of the highest benefits we took from the first presentation were to see other visualisation types/styles. Because of them we leaned how to present our results in a more sketchy and abstract way.
  • The presentation was pretty minimalistic without much design and more informative graphs compared to other presentation. And even then the feedback was that it was quite easy to follow and to understand.

Theory reflection

  • We like the idea of interacting and analyzing the social components of the community, rather than just looking at their enviroment. We were intrigned by the "people entred landscape concept" and that the landscape is rather constructed in the mind of the people, than it is esthetic assembled place of physical objects. On the other hand we thought, that all the theories about the communities and the landscape democracy are a bit too far away from the actual planning and are sometimes not even controllable.


  • -

Phase B: Democratic Landscape Analysis and Assessment

The Scene in your Story of Analysis

  • The challenge of the project is to involve every commmunity with their needs and desires. The landscape has a rural and the atmosphere of the distict has an oldschool touch. The most noticeble things missing are recreation spaces. There are many stackeholders in the disctrict with the same political power/influence. Only the local shops have a little bit more power because of the dependence of supplys.

The Actors in your Story of Analysis

  • Our analysis is based on a roleplay exercise. For this experiment everyone in our group put himself in a certain character which is represented in the district.
  • 1. Slava (19) the typical car advocate -> has the need of more parking lots
  • 2. Angelika (52) mother of 2 children -> is worried that her children havent a safe space to play in the disctrict
  • 3. Melissa (14) typical teeny girl -> is missing some cool places to hang out with her friends
  • 4. Soren (32) the young investor -> wants to invest in the development of the district
  • 5. Victor (72) grumpy pensioneer -> lived his whole life in KT and is still missing action
  • Everyone besides Soren is a minor Character, because only he has the capital and the political power to change something directly.

The Story of Analysis

  • In the following images you can see our story and how the different characters react to the actual situation and to our ideas to develope the disctrict

Reflect on your Story of Analysis

  • What did you carry?:
  • First of all we analyzed the community about its major social groups. Then each member of our team slipped into two or three roleplay characters of the largest community groups. Then we combined our results of the needs, wishes and problems of each of our characters.
  • Why did you carry?:
  • Due to the Covid-19 crisis we weren't able to ask the citizens personally, but we also wanted to get an insight view of the disctrict from their perspective. That's why we invented representive characters and walked through the quarter from their point of view.
  • How did you carry?:
  • By introducing around 12 characters we intended a huge variety of results and afterwards combined certain aspects in five key charts.
  • What remains after you left?:
  • We figured out how to approach tis method of analysis and were positivly surprised by the effect of this analysis method on our creative planning process

Phase C: Collaborative Visioning and Goal Setting

The Scene in your Story of Visioning

  • As we dug further into our analysis we discovered that neither of our characters is well served with the current situation of KT. We had to improve the situation for all of the local stakeholders, not just a particular group and we discovered a lot of wasted potential in the district

The Actors in your Story of Visioning

  • We chose the six most representive characters of our story of analysis as the actors in our story of visioning

The Story of Visioning

  • We see the whole story as an interaction between ourselfes and Klein Tischardt.
  • It's fascinating what kind of discussions we hold, while having several different perspectives from the characters we've played.
  • And through that we formed our vision and strategy for the district.

Reflect on your Story of Visioning

Phase D: Collaborative Design, Transformation and Planning

Your Prototyping Action

  • Our Prototyping action was mounting posters on frequented locations in the district. The posters show photos of added objects pointing out the potential of the framed place. Our vision was to initiate intrinsic motivation for transformation and catch attention of the passengers.

The Evolution of Your Prototyping Action

We delevoped the idea in our small student group.

  • 1. We shot the photos and edited them.
  • 2. Then we contacted a print store to print the pictures on all weather posters.
  • 3. After that we build the frames with simple wood leftovers.
  • 4. Finally we connected the posters with the frames and mounted them in the district.

The Plan Behind Your Prototyping Action

  • The photoshooting took us about 6 hours and additionally 2 hours of editing. The building process of the frames took 5 more hours. In the the end we needed to mount the frames with the pictures in the district, which took around 4 more hours. The total material costs for printing and building the frames were 120 €. The whole timeframe from the start till the end lasted 2 weeks.

The Realization of Your Prototyping Action

  • The whole process of photoshooting, printing and building the frames was fine and well organized. In the end as we mounted the frames in the district we had pretty bad weather but luckily our posters were water proof.

Reflect on Your Prototyping Action

  • We created a lot of attention for possible changes in the future of Klein Tischardt. One way to be more effective if we did the interactions again would be to interact and coordinate more with the other student teams. Our indicator of success was the overall very positive feedback in social media. People replied that the pictures were beautiful and made them think more about the potential of the different places in Klein Tischardt. In general, the intervention showed us our role in this time frame of the designing process: As designers, we should present a set of tools to the residents of Klein Tischardt and not a final solution without alternative opportunities.

Phase E: Collaborative Evaluation and Future Agendas

Collaborative Evaluation and Landscape Democracy Reflection

Our democracy challenge involved the following UN Sustainable Development Goals.

  • 8. decent work and economic growth
  • 9. Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
  • 10. Sustainable citys and communities
  • 13. climate action

With the feedback of the community we could work around these goals and specify them. Based on the community feedback, we tried to formulate our own vision and developed customized goals.

The Actors in your Collaborative Evaluation

The peculiarity of our community groups is the same level of power based on political influence of the district. Everyone is connected with eachother and has mostly the same needs.

Reflection of the Online Seminar

We couldn't really interact with the local communities which led to a harsh start because of the lack of information for the analysis process. It was this very circumstance which led our group to imagine different characters in order to get a better understanding of the district. At times, the theoretical part of the seminar was too academical, abstract or even confusing for our team. Then we had to figure out on our own how to employ the content. The best part about the assignments and the presentations were the practical examples of projects which already took place in different countries all over the world. Furthermore, the exchange in the breakout sessions was refreshing and interesting.

Reflection of the Living Lab Process

In our oppinion we had a creative and also effective solution for the whole situation. Through our indirect contact and also the digital discussion afterwards we got a pretty decent understanding of the challenges/needs/wishes of the communities in the district. Some of the comments on instragram and facebook made us laugh, some of them made us think more about specific problems and their solutions and some just confirmed our assumptions.

Your Living Lab Code of Conduct

  • We wanted an analysis based on every opinion and create a concept that includes everybody, not bringing people into and major advantage/disadvantages.
  • Also important for us was harmony for the design, so we based most of our analysis process onto that
  • The sooner the community gets involved to participate, the better the whole process will be
  • Its compulsory to find existing structures and groups in the community and bring them together

Process Reflection

The whole study was a exhausting but really educational. Normally we do more practical things, so it was nice to see more of the theoretical academic side

  • We couldn't have contact because of the Covid 19 crisis?
  • Everybody has his strengh and weaknesses and you have to adapt to that
  • To organize the process better and make a timeplan for the presentations and work parts aswell
  • Each problem is individual and also needs a new solution