UX Mobility

UX MOBI LITY

UX MOBI LITY

UX MOBI LITY

Made in Milan by Systematica and Transform Transport ©2025 Systematica; ©Fondazione Transform Transport ETS All mobility studies presented in this book are developed by Systematica and Transform Transport.

All rights reserved. Unauthorised use is prohibited.

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the written permission of Systematica and Fondazione Transform Transport.

Systematica Via Lovanio 8 20121 Milan +39 02 62 31 19 1 milano@systematica.net 315 West 35th Street, 14th Floor New York, NY 10001 (929) 810-0662 newyork@systematica.net www.systematica.net Fondazione Transform Transport ETS Via Lovanio 8 20121 Milan +39 02 62 31 19 1 www.transformtransport.org info@transformtransport.org

Systematica Transport Planning and Mobility Engineering

Fondazione Transform Transport ETS Research and Innovation in Mobility and Transport Planning

Via Lovanio, 8 20121 – Milan Italy

T +39 02 6231191 milano@systematica.net

T +39 02 6231191 info@transformtransport.org www.transformtransport.org

315 West 35th Street, 14th Floor New York, NY 10001 USA

T (929) 810-0662 newyork@systematica.net www.systematica.net

Table of Contents

1 | Concepts: Core Concepts and Guiding Principles 1.1 User Experience in Mobility: An Introduction

08

1.2 The User (U): How do We Think of Users in Mobility Planning?

1.3 The Experience (X): Can we Measure Mobility Experience?

1.4 The User-Centered Design Framework 1.5 Reflections and Guiding Principles

2 | Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

34

2.1 Experiential Mobility Design: Tailoring Transportation to User Needs and Behaviors 2.2 Beyond the State of the Art: Defining a New Project Framework 2.3 Challenges and Future Directions in User-Centric Mobility Projects

3 | Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects 54 Use Case 1 | The Art of Arrival: Designing Transitions in Urban Mobility Use Case 2 | Designing Seamless Arrival Journeys in a Car-Free Entertainment District in KSA Use Case 3 | Climate and Walkability: Enhancing Users Experience through Thermal Comfort Use Case 4 | Walking on Sunshine: Rethinking Thermal Comfort in Hot-Climate areas Use Case 5 | Proximity and Visual Access to Vertical Transportation: A Key Driver of Successful Shared Spaces in Multipurpose Buildings

4 | Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

70

4.1 Digital Urban Systems as UXM Amplifiers: The Power of the Hybrid City 4.2 Use Case 6 | UX Mobility: Multi-User Walkability Route Planner

Toolkit: Guidelines for planners to apply the UXM approach

94

References

108

Preface

UX Mobility

This book is an exploration into the possibilities and potentials of a more user-centric and experience-oriented urban mobility approach. It presents a bold idea that draws from the concepts, principles, and practices of the User Experience (UX) design field to enhance mobility planning: from research to design to implementation. Inherent to the UX in Mobility (UXM) approach is a drive to push the envelope further; to go beyond current interpretations and incorporations of user needs in mobility planning processes to focus on experience as an outcome, challenging traditional ideas of transit framed merely as a transitory and utilitarian activity; a necessary means to reach a desirable destination. A 2021 EU-wide survey on passenger mobility revealed that, on average, EU citizens spent 80 minutes per day traveling, be it for work, leisure or other activities. This highlights how integral mobility is to daily life, setting the stage for rethinking not just its efficiency, but also the quality of the experience it provides. UXM reconceptualizes mobility journeys as 6

Preface

UX Mobility

experiences in and of themselves and invites us to imagine how the discipline transforms once we put the user’s physical, emotional, sensory and cognitive experiences at the center of the design process. Throughout the book, we explore development across various phases and applications, including user needs research, data collection, transport modeling, and design. We examine the impact of digital technologies in embedding UXM goals into practice and the integration of physical and digital city layers into a hybrid urban experience.

The book also presents a proprietary navigation tool, a route planner developed by Systematica and Transform Transport, as a practical application of the UXM approach, and introduces the UX Mobility Canva, designed to translate the book’s themes into concrete guidelines for urban practitioners. Ultimately, it invites discussion, challenges existing norms, and offers a blueprint for rethinking mobility projects through a UX lens.

77

1 Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles User Experience (UX) is a multidisciplinary approach

The UX approach in the context of mobility planning

dedicated to crafting products, systems, or servic-

requires a design thinking approach that focuses on

es that offer meaningful and positive experiences,

two pillars: the user (U), and satisfying their diverse

characterized by their ease of use and effortless

mobility needs, and experience (X) as a direct output

interaction. It encompasses various aspects such

of mobility design. In short, UX in Mobility (UXM) is

as usability, accessibility, and desirability to enhance

an approach that aims to create comfortable, pleas-

user satisfaction and engagement. UX design

urable and meaningful transit experiences along a

goes beyond just meeting functional needs; it also

spectrum of user needs.

considers users’ emotions, perceptions, and overall experience with a product or service.

8

1.1

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

User Experience in Mobility: An Introduction

User Experience (UX) design principles can inform

In the intricate tapestry of urban life, mobility is

UX design helps planners consider cities as multi-

everything to do with the flows of people and goods

faceted environments: as physical spaces requiring

throughout the city. The way we move through cities

inclusive infrastructure, as social systems reflecting

shapes our experiences, influences our choices, and

different user needs, and as abstract constructs that

ultimately shapes the city itself.

users navigate cognitively with the help of digital

this shift by focusing on user-centric design that prioritizes accessibility, usability, user-friendliness and emotional engagement.

and physical tools. Digital technologies, particularYet, the urban mobility landscape is often character-

ly those associated with “platform urbanism”, have

ized by a one-size-fits-all approach that fails to cater

ushered in an era of responsive urbanism, facilitated

to the nuanced needs of its diverse users. It is imper-

through flexible, personal and adaptive solutions that

ative to shift our perspective from a singular focus

physical infrastructure alone cannot provide.

on infrastructure to a holistic understanding of the individuals who rely on these services. In traditional

UX also prompts urban planners to consider the qual-

urban mobility planning, systems have been

itative outcome of their work: can we design the city

designed as “many-to-one” solutions, standardized

and its mobility systems as vessels of experience?

infrastructure and services that address the needs of

According to a 2021 survey, citizens in the European

a broad user base. However, as cities grapple

Union spend an average of 80 minutes per day trave-

with multiple inequalities, mobility solutions must

ling, be it for work, leisure or other activities (European

evolve to accommodate specific needs, moving

Commission, 2022). Yet, we have by and large consid-

toward “many-to-many” or even “one-to-one” models

ered transit up until this point as a “necessary evil” at

that offer personalized interactions.

worst, and a tolerated activity at best, in the tapestry of our daily urban lives.

Mobility solutions must evolve to accommodate specific needs, moving toward “many-to-many” or even “one-to-one” models that offer personalized interactions.

10

What this book aims to do it is to pave a pathway for urban practitioners to think beyond the status quo— beyond function and thresholds for comfort, and to start to grapple with the concept of mobility as a rich and multifaceted experience. As cities expand with their urban populations, and as urban networks become more intricate and complex, it is time we begin to critically contend with user experience as both input and output of mobility service design.

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

1.2

The User (U): How do We Think of Users in Mobility Planning?

Demographics

Urban mobility systems cater to a broad spectrum

Social Behavior

of individuals with varying needs, preferences, and

The social context of travel also plays a significant

socio-demographic characteristics. In standard trans-

role. Users may travel alone, with family, friends, or in

port planning models, user needs are interchangeably

groups, each with its distinct mobility requirements.

defined through various lenses, most commonly:

A shift is required from a utilitarian perspective of

Age, gender, and disability status are three of the key factors that impact mobility behavior and needs. For instance, older adults may require accessible transportation options, while individuals with disabilities may have specific accessibility needs;

siloed user characteristics and travel behaviors to a Trip Purpose

more qualitative understanding of users as complex

Users can be categorized based on their primary

individuals with different physical, emotional, sensory,

reason for travel, such as commuting, leisure, or

and cognitive experiences. This perspective values

tourism. Commuters often prioritize speed and

the multiple modes by which people experience daily

efficiency, while tourists may seek convenience

journeys, recognizing that mobility solutions should

and accessibility;

respond directly to user needs, while also striving to create opportunities for positive and meaningful experiences in continuum with the rhythms of daily urban life.

Figure 1 Visible and invisible factors that impact user experience

Demographic Factors Visible

Motor Accessibility Needs

Sensory Experience

Enabling

Emotional Comfort

Temperature and Climate Control

Visual Design and Aesthetics

11

1.2

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

Understanding User Needs Through a Hierarchical Approach When choosing transportation options, users often prioritize a combination of factors. Seen from the perspective of a hierarchy of needs, factors can be grouped into a set of common human needs, ordered from the most basic and primal needs to the most preference-based motivations for different travel choices.

The scale goes from: Practical needs (travel decisions based on practical concerns), Value-based needs (travel decisions based on personal values) Leisure needs (travel decisions driven by a pursuit for enjoyment).

When choosing transportation options, users often prioritize a combination of these factors, both consciously and subconsciously:

Safety

Environmental impact

Safety is a top priority for many users, especially

Beyond personal concerns, increasingly, users are

those who are vulnerable, such as children, the

concerned about the environmental impact of their

elderly, and individuals with disabilities. This includes

transportation choices. This includes factors such as

factors such as well-maintained infrastructure,

fuel efficiency, emissions, and the use of

adequate lighting, and security measures.

renewable energy.

Affordability

Social responsibility

Cost is a significant factor for many users, especially

Users may also voluntarily select transport modes

those on limited budgets. This includes factors such

that demonstrate a strong sense of social responsi-

as ticket prices, fares, and the availability of discounts

bility through fair labor policies and user inclusivity.

or subsidies.

Functionality Users generally prefer transportation options that are fast and reliable. This may include factors such as travel time, frequency of service, and the ability to avoid traffic congestion.

12

1.2

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

Comfort

Enjoyability

Comfort exists on a spectrum. Lack of basic comfort

Beyond practical and ethical concerns, the enjoyabili-

levels can lead to foregone or modified trips. These

ty of a route is a factor that influences travel behavior.

includes physiological factors such as ergonomic

Users are more likely to choose scenic routes,

design or climatic conditions, but it also includes

especially for leisure, once given the choice. The

cognitive and sensory factors such as navigational

factor of enjoyability is often left out of the equation in

cognitive load, noise levels, and perceived level of

traditional transport planning practices, but the

crowding. Sensitive individuals are particularly

benefits and return to users and to quality of life

impacted by these conditions, with major impacts

outcomes demands a broader and more holistic

on daily travel choices.

perspective of user needs.

By understanding these priorities, we can develop mobility solutions that balance the needs of different user groups and promote sustainable transportation.

Figure 2 User needs conceptualized as a hierarchy of needs

3 2 1

Leisure Comfort, Enjoyability

Value-based Environmental impact, Social responsibility

Practical Safety, Affordability, Efficiency

13

1.2

Inclusion through Exclusion: Designing for A (Specific) User To create truly inclusive and equitable mobility systems, it is essential to challenge and deepen the notion of universal design or “design for all”. While universal design aims to create environments that are accessible to everyone, it may not fully address the diverse needs of different user groups. Instead, a more nuanced approach is required that recognizes the importance of targeted mobility solutions to meet the specific needs of diverse groups of users within a

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

While universal design aims to address the needs of the maximum number of users, inclusive design aims to prioritize the needs of underrepresented and vulnerable groups in a heterogenous city.

universally accessible system.

User needs are not always mutually constitutive.

“Inclusion through exclusion” (Umeå Municipality,

For example, a station designed to accommodate the

2019) is one such approach that recognizes the value

needs of commuters may not be suitable for older

in creating spaces that respond to user-specific

adults who require longer dwell times or individuals

needs, with the aim to ensure that there are

with disabilities who may require assistance. In such

designated spaces in the city that are welcoming

cases, additional support may be required to ensure

to that group. In some cases, the needs of one

that all users can access and utilize the station

group may impinge on the needs of another. The

effectively. That said, certain mobility solutions can

quintessential example of this is the conflict between

simultaneously benefit multiple groups. For instance,

needs of motor users and the needs of pedestrians

investments in accessible infrastructure, such as curb

and cyclists. Inclusive planning always needs to

cuts and ramps, can improve mobility for individuals

exclude some users. A proper UX approach hinges on

with disabilities while also benefiting older adults and

the concept of plurality: multiple spaces, solutions

parents with young children. It is important to note

and services to cater to the diverse needs of

that addressing the needs of all users is not possible

different users.

and not necessarily desirable.

14

/Reflection Commuters vs.

Occasional Travelers

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

This tension can lead to overcrowded services, inconsistent information delivery, and a lack of tailored experiences for tourists. Addressing this involves designing systems that cater to both user

Whether wandering in a moderately quiet town or

groups without compromising the quality of service

moving across a vibrant metropolis, commuters

for either.

and occasional travellers may have different travel needs as well as different approaches to the mobility

In cities like Prague, tram line 42 provides a dedicated

network. While the first group often seek efficiency

service to occasional travellers. This historic tram

and reliability for daily routines, occasional travellers,

line operates on a hop-on, hop-off basis, allowing

including tourists, value exploration and leisure.

tourists to explore the city at their own pace. It passes

Recognising these differences may be crucial for

by significant landmarks such as Prague Castle,

enhancing user experience in mobility systems at

Wenceslas Square, and the National Theatre, offering

urban scale. The challenge lies in balancing the

a unique sightseeing experience. In other cities like

functional requirements of regular users with the

Lisbon, tram line 28 is fully integrated in the public

experiential desires of occasional travellers.

transport system but has become popular as a main sightseeing route for tourists.

Figure 3 Historical tram line 42 - Prague ( source: Prague PT company website)

/Reflection

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

Apart from public transport solutions, some

However, in cities lacking such dedicated tourist

cities have been implementing measures to address

routes or even tailored information, occasional

different needs for people cycling around the urban

travellers may struggle to navigate the urban

and suburban network: it is the case of Copenhagen

landscape efficiently with cascading effects onto

Cycle Superhighways, consisting of a wide network of

more experienced users, i.e. commuters. Thus, future

cycle routes addressing especially commuters’ needs

planning must move beyond proposing the classic

and pursuing quality goals such as coherency across

tourist multi-day public transport pass to be bought

administrative borders, comfort and safety. Existing

at ticket selling points. It should instead aim to create

and planned routes are usually detached from more

a more inclusive and efficient urban mobility net-

touristic cycle pathways running around the city

work, which could be catering for the different needs

centre. Indeed, the main goal of this cycling network is

of these main two user groups, by considering the

providing fast connections to commuters, with as

integration of dedicated tourist routes, tailor-made

few stops as possible and even extra service

information systems, and flexible services as well as

facilities such as foot rests and service stations.

enhancing wayfinding at critical nodes in the urban

Early collected data suggest that the progressive

public transport network – especially in proximity of

implementation of dedicated cycle routes has

touristic attractions.

enhanced the modal share of commuters and increased bicycle traffic by 52% after just one year since the Superhighway network was officially opened.

Figure 4 Commuters of urban section of Cycle Superhighway - Copenhagen ( Photo credit: The Cycle Superhighways, The Capital Region of Denmark.)

16

1.2

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

From User Profiles to User Personas Given the vast array of user characteristics and needs, users are often grouped into specific, common user categories that reflect certain needs and expectations. While offering a more simplistic approach, cataloging users balances the need between a standardized approach to user-centric design while maintaining some level of complexity and depth in dealing with diverse needs by classifying users based on general commonalities.

While useful for urban planning, catalogs should always remain case-specific and should be treated as dynamic and iterative lists capable of adapting to changing conditions.

To effectively tailor urban mobility solutions to the needs of diverse users, catalogs need to explore demographics and travel behavior patterns of different target groups, as well as general mobility preferences.

Common prototypes include:

Commuters

Elders

Commuters typically prioritize efficiency and

Older adults often prioritize safety, accessibility, and

affordability in their urban journeys. They often have

comfort. They may have mobility limitations and may

specific time constraints and may be willing to com-

require transportation options that are easy to use

promise on other factors, such as comfort, to reach

and accessible.

their destination on time.

Students

Families

Students may have more flexible travel schedules but

Families may have diverse mobility needs, depending

may prioritize affordability and safety. They may also

on the age and number of children. They may

value social aspects of transportation, such as

prioritize safety, convenience, and affordability.

opportunities to meet friends or study while traveling.

By understanding these differences, we can develop mobility solutions that cater to the specific needs and preferences of each user group.

17

1.3

The Experience (X): Can we Measure Mobility Experience?

While modeling user behaviors and designing for their specific needs may be commonplace in mobility planning in principle, the notion of curating user experience within a mobility system is far less customary and lacks a standardized approach. In part, this is because “experience” is a relatively nuanced and “fuzzy” concept, composed of multiple elements

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

It proposes a useful framework to reframe mobility as cumulative experience, influenced by a variety of environmental, temporal and societal conditions.

As such, we can begin to imagine user experience as a set of interrelated experiential components, each with a specific demand or generated load on users.

and phenomena, ranging from emotional perception to practical functionality, spatial awareness, cultural

Framing experience in terms of “load” allows us to

expectations, and the dynamics of social interaction.

quantitatively and uniformly measure the different

Unlike quantifiable performance indicators such as

demands placed on users during travel or navigation.

travel time or cost, experience encompasses subjec-

These are especially useful for analyzing user-cen-

tive interpretations that vary widely across individuals

tered mobility design, accessibility, and comfort. It is

and contexts.

worth noting that increased load does not necessarily result in more positive or negative experiences.

As a result, integrating experiential factors into mobility planning demands interdisciplinary methods, draw-

For that reason, it is important to distinguish between

ing from design, psychology, and urban sociology to

negative and positive elements (e.g. positive and neg-

translate intangible user sentiments into actionable

ative affective states), as well as determine thresholds

design strategies.

of positive experience for dimensions that do not have linear relationships with experiential outcomes.

By incorporating these principles into transportation

Below are some examples of potential UX dimensions

design, we can create environments that are not only

to study in relation to the mobility context and exam-

functional but also emotionally appealing, fostering a

ples of relevant use cases:

more positive and enjoyable travel experience overall.

Classifying Experience in Urban Mobility This section attempts to offer a classification system for dimensions of user experience as they relate to mobility states and environments.

18

1.3

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

Affective Load

Cognitive Load The Cognitive Load is the mental effort required to

The Affective Load is the emotional quality or psycho-

process information, navigate environments, and

logical toll of a mobility experience. Examples include:

make decisions. Examples include: •

Wayfinding through unfamiliar transit systems

•

Evaluating multiple route options or transfer strategies

•

•

Stress due to unpredictability or crowding

•

Fear or insecurity in certain environments (e.g., nighttime travel)

•

Positive emotions such as satisfaction, enjoyment, or pride in sustainable travel

Managing mobile apps, maps, signage, or ticketing logic

Physical Load

Sensory Load The sensory load is the intensity and quality of

The Physical Load is the bodily exertion required to

sensory input experienced in the environment.

complete a mobility task. Examples include:

Examples include: •

Long walking distances or steep inclines

•

Navigating in visually or aurally cluttered spaces

•

Standing during transit or carrying heavy bags

•

Coping with overwhelming sounds, poor lighting,

•

Accessibility challenges for elderly or

or disorienting signage •

disabled users

Tactile discomfort on rough surfaces or in overcrowded vehicles

Interactions between different types of experiential loads naturally exist and can be exacerbated or amplified by external conditions. For example, temporal factors such as short time buffers or transfer windows at transit hubs could amplify both Cognitive and Affective Load. A confusing transfer (cognitive) becomes more stressful (affective) or physically demanding (physical) when time is short. Likewise, sensory overload can exacerbate decision fatigue (cognitive load).

The aim of the classification is therefore not to reduce experience to a set of individual elements, but rather to break down experience into tangible components that can be organized discretely around various existing (and potentially new) indicators 19 used in mobility studies.

1.3

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

Recounting User Experience: Working with Retrospective Bias

This suggests a need to identify peak moments within

Insights from behavioral science can further our understanding of how users judge mobility experiences during and after the event (journey).

a designed mobility experience (or aggregated peak loads for various UX dimensions), that can have a major impact on a user’s overall ex post perception. It also draws attention to the importance of designing positive arrival experiences to destinations, as the “endpoint” of planned user journeys. Leading industrial enterprises from the sector already integrate behavioral science insights into the design of their products and services.

For example, the “peak-end rule” a psychological heuristic drawn from the work of Daniel Kahnemann and Barbara Fredrickson, suggests that people judge an experience largely based on how they felt at its most intense point (the peak, whether positive or negative) the total sum or average of every moment within the experience.

20

Uber, for example, systemically leverage theories from various behavioral science branches on topics including decision-making, learning and motivation, to build and refine their systems through their Uber Labs team (Uber Technologies, 2019). By prioritizing users’ perceptions of time and the experience of waiting, Uber successfully lowered its post-request cancellation rate and prevented what might have become a negative emotional high point during the service experience (Yablonski, 2020). Similar research applications can be useful to consultancy-based projects by reframing mobility studies from an experience-centered perspective.

1.3

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

Safety Perception as Walking Experience At Systematica and Transform Transport, we are ded-

and coordinated by Transform Transport, investigates

icated to exploring user-centric approaches in da-

safety perceptions of women in the city of Milan

ta-driven mobility research and applications. Through

at night. Nuanced differences in user perception

a mixed-method approach, STEP UP – Walkability for

emerged between, not only users of different gen-

funded by Fondazione Cariplo (Grant No. 2022-1643)

profiles as well.

Women, a joint research project with multiple partners

ders, but between women of different demographic

Figure 5 Survey results from the STEP UP project revealing intersectional differences in environmental factors influencing on safety perception

Gender

Presence of

Possibility of being

Presence of police

Presence of

visual obstructions

seen by other people

stations / patrols

only men

Men Women+

Women+ only

Women+

Age 18 - 25 36 - 45 > 60

Sexual orientation Homosexual Heterosexual Bisexual

Disability Non disabled Disabled

Economic status Struggle to basic Respond to basic Access extra

Legend:

Presence of x Reference group (all women) Specific user group (e.g: y women)

For this specific user group (y women), the presence of x while walking at night is associated with a more negative safety perception than for the reference group (all women).

Neutral

-

+

Negative

Positive

21

1.3

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

Perceptions also varied regarding a wide variety of

The result of this statistical approach revealed that

factors related to the shape, organization and use of

lighting, presence of open businesses and access

their surrounding built up environment (see Figure 5).

to surface transport options were highly relevant to

Geospatial analysis of app-collected safety

nighttime safety perception by women (see Figure 6).

perception reports aimed to correlate users’ safety

Such insights from user research and advanced

perceptions across the city with the spatial configura-

geospatial analyses present a starting point to

tion and patterns of use of the local environment.

address the diversity of user perception and identify the main design drivers behind positive and negative mobility experiences.

Figure 6 Geographically weighted regression (GWR) model results from STEP UP project revealing statistically significant factors for women’s sense of safety

59% of the streets of Milan could benefit from improvements of the 3 significant factors

Use of local environment Food & Beverage Public Lighting Public transport

0

Percentages of network

2 km

Streets kilometers 3.7%

280 km

1.4%

277 km

0.1%

276 km

14.9% 9.4% 14.9% 15%

22

1

174 km 68 km 26 km 2 km

1.3

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

User Journey Mapping: Experience as an Analytical Tool

This approach allows us to look deeply into the real,

In a UX context, experience is not merely an end goal;

By mapping out the journey of a commuter rushing

it can be an analytical lens that reveals the intricate

to work, a family navigating public transport with

needs and desires of people as they move through

children, or a tourist exploring an unfamiliar city,

the city. One of the most powerful tools for revealing

we can see more than the mechanics of transit; we

user needs is the definition of potential user journeys.

see the human reality that each user brings to the

lived experiences of different groups and uncover subtle but critical nuances.

system. In this way, mobility design becomes a study of the city as lived and experienced by its people.

Figure 7 User journey mapping samples

2

1

Hotel to festival

2

Festival to restaurant

3

Restaurant to hotel

Sam 49 years old Adventure traveller

3

1

3 4

1

Home to work

2

Work to gym

3

Gym to shop

4

Shop to home

Alessia 24 years old Hardware developper

2

1

23

In Conversation with Alexandra Gomes

Exploring Sensory Cities for Enhanced User Experience What does user experience mean in your work?

In my role as an urban researcher, user experience incorporates the comprehensive interaction individuals have with public spaces, including their sensory perceptions, emotional responses, and consequent behavioural engagements within these environments.

It goes beyond merely observing how people move and interact with spaces into understanding how they feel and find significance in their surroundings.

However, as a data analyst, I am also mindful of the inherent challenges associated with handling personal or subjective data. Within this analysis, it is also essential to take into account who these individuals are, their socio-economic and cultural context, along with the characteristics of the spaces

“

Consequently, the analysis of user experience underscores the importance of recognising the interconnectedness among various urban factors and employing a mixed-method approach to research. Often requiring an interdisciplinary team.

they navigate.

Another crucial aspect of this analysis is how user experience is influenced by or influences socio-spatial inequalities. This element is frequently heightened by the scarcity of open access and available data,

Interview published at: https://transformtransport.org/media/exploring-sensory-cities-for-enhanced-user-experience-in-conversation-with-alexandra-gomes/ Selected segments are featured for their relevance to the themes explored in this book.

//Interview

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

Alexandra Gomes is a Research Fellow at LSE Cities, London School of Economics and Political Science, responsible for coordinating spatial analysis across a range of projects. Additionally, she holds a Teaching position at UCL Bartlett School of Planning and is a Guest Teacher for the LSE MSc City Design and Social Science. She has strong interdisciplinary skills and her focus spans socio-spatial comparative analysis and urban policy with an interest in sustainable mobility, health inequalities, public space, urban sensescapes, and visual communication.

She has led and coordinated research projects across diverse scales and geographies, spanning Europe, the Middle East, Asia, and Africa. In the last few years, she has expanded her interest into the realm of visual and artistic outputs, using street photography, exhibitions, games – with the Kuwaitscapes card game – and video to foster knowledge exchange and community engagement.

a challenge prevalent worldwide but particularly

As a response to this gap, my PhD research centred

pronounced in data-scarce geographical regions

on the concept of “sensescapes” to dissect the inter-

such as Africa or Asia. However, just by recognising

play between the body, senses, and urban environ-

both the opportunities and challenges inherent in user

ment in public spaces. By engaging people in inter-

experience, we are already laying the groundwork for

views while they’re immersed in their environment and

a more informed and holistic understanding of the

examining the nuances of their verbal expressions, I

human-environment relationship.

achieved a depth of understanding that quantitative methods alone couldn’t provide. This led to the devel-

Please describe the multisensory approach to your work.

In my urban planning background, I’ve come to understand the profound influence of non-visual senses, such as smell, sound, and touch, wield over public spaces and those who use it. Despite this pivotal role, most research and policy still tend to focus on visual aspects. Even today, sensory awareness and resulting emotions hardly play a role in discussions about the future of cities. While the use of street photography, maps, and satellite imagery offers abundant visual data and metrics, the complexity of human sensory experiences and their profound impact on people’s lives often remain concealed from our view.

opment of a framework of analysis that uncovers how our spatial dynamics are influenced by the three senses. It highlights the factors that set one space apart from another and maps how these factors collectively shape the sensory realm and consequently, the sense of place.

It is my hope, now that my PhD is finished and available online, that it can raise awareness and trigger public debate on the pivotal role of non-visual senses in urban planning and design. It helps evaluate the sensory impact of design alternatives and provides practitioners and policymakers with the necessary insights for more confident decision-making, redirecting the focus of design away from mere aesthetics and functionality towards a more nurturing and emotional sense of attachment within our urban landscapes.

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

1.5

The User-Centered Design Framework

throughout the development process. This ensures that solutions are not only functional but truly address the specific needs of the target audience.

The User-Centered Design approach emphasizes

The way cities are built fundamentally influences

the importance of measuring real-world impacts and

how we interact with the world around us. Beneath

feeding this information back into different phases

their physical structure lies a profound ability to

of the design cycle, reflecting both on the efficacy of

shape our experiences, routines, and ultimately

proposed solutions (product) and implemented

our lives.

methodology (process).

This symbiotic relationship between city and citizen

UX makes a useful distinction between attitudinal and

highlights a crucial insight for urban and mobility

behavioural user research. In essence, UX research-

design: the way a city is structured determines how

ers place different value on following what users ‘say’

its inhabitants move, interact, and experience their

they want (attitudinal analysis) and how they ‘act’ in

surroundings. The transportation networks, pedestri-

practice (behavioural analysis). While the approach

an pathways, and transit systems all dictate how we

is useful for earlier stages of user research, it is also

navigate our environments, impacting not just

a useful framework for the Evaluation phase, when

efficiency but our daily experiences.

observing how users react to and interact with new mobility solutions becomes as important as seeking

Recognizing this crucial relationship between urban

out their direct feedback about it.

design and the human experience, and in light of the contemporary challenges faced by our cities, there

In the digital age, social media and online communi-

has been a growing ambition to envision cities that

ties make it easy for everyone to share feedback in

are designed by and for people.

real time, offering insights for researchers and planners into the attitudinal positions of users to

User-Centered Design (UCD) is a methodology that

specific mobility services and policies. Advanced

focuses specifically on tailoring solutions to meet

sentiment analysis techniques can support the

user needs through direct engagement and feedback.

feedback cycle by extracting useful insights from a

UCD places emphasis on iterative testing and refining

wide pool of users across time about their attitudinal

designs based on real user interactions and feedback

positions about a new or existing mobility solution.

Figure 8 Attitudinal vs Behavioural Research (Adapted from Maze)

26

Attitudinal Research

Behavioral Research

Focuses on what people say:

Focuses on what people do:

For example: user interviews, focus groups, survey.

For example: sensors, GPS tracking, video analytics.

1.5

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

On the other hand, with the support of ICT (Informa-

Through advanced video analytics techniques, Trans-

tion and Communication Technology) and urban IOT

form Transport explore the impact of the new public

(Internet Of Things) infrastructure, advanced data

space, designed and built through participatory

analytics can shed light on behavioural changes

design by the Fondazione Innovazione Urbana and

when interacting with new mobility systems, solutions

the Municipality of Bologna for , through a behavioural

or policies. ICTs in Support of Monza’s PEBA – Plan

research approach (see Figure 9).

for Eliminating Architectural Barriers - an ongoing project at Transform Transport, uses a UX attitudinal

The evaluation phase can be considered one of the

approach, collecting user views through participatory

most challenging and transformative parts of the

workshops, surveys and image-based mapping to

process. Rather than representing a fixed endpoint, it

understand the needs of people with reduced mobil-

promotes an iterative cycle of planning. This cyclical

ity, culminating in a web-app for planning accessible

approach can support the ambition that new insights

routes in Monza. In Video Analytics for the Assess-

from the ground—how people actually use and

ment of Street Experiments: The Case of Bologna,

perceive a space—genuinely shape future stages of

pedestrian behaviour in the site of a school-facing

urban mobility design and blend visions with the lived

tactical urbanism intervention in the Italian city of

reality of the city.

Bologna is monitored via cameras.

Figure 9 Aerial view of the new public space for children in Via Procaccini, Bologna.

Photo credits: Margherita Caprilli

27

In Conversation with Xue Pei

Exploring User-Centered Design Practices What does user experience mean in your work?

User experience is at the core of my work. As designers and design researchers, we consider users at every step of our research and design processes, and every activity that we conduct has the objective of providing solutions that answer the users’ needs and are friendly to use. Therefore, user experience, for me, is highly related to a deep and comprehensive understanding of the users, which is fundamental before any design activities and decisions. It involves the entire journey of how users interact with the designed solutions.

“

The user experience considers a complete process from how users know about the solutions (pre-use phase) to how users use and interact with the product and service systems (use phase), and finally, to the post-use phase, which addresses maintaining the relationship with the users.

https://www.designkit.org/ https://servicedesigntools.org/ https://servicedesigntoolkit.org/ Interview published at: https://transformtransport.org/media/exploring-user-centered-design-practices-in-conversation-with-xue-pei/.

Selected segments are featured for their relevance to the themes explored in this book.

//Interview Xue Pei ( ) holds a PhD in Design, is an Assistant Professor, and is a member of the Design+Strategies research group at the Department of Design, Politecnico di Milano.

Her research mainly focuses on applying design (thinking) approaches and methods as a strategic catalyst for fostering innovation in organisations in both private and non-profit sectors.

Particularly, her research interests are design for organisational change, strategic design for responsible business, and design for systemic transition.

There are several aspects that I would like to highlight when talking about user experience. Firstly, everything should be considered from the users’ perspective. No matter what solutions we are designing and developing, we need to guarantee that we really put ourselves in the users’ “shoes” to understand the problem and thinking solutions. Secondly, as designers and design researchers, we look not only at what and how users behave in a certain way, but more importantly, we often work on “why” users behave that way. This is the key to understanding users’ deep wants and desires.

From your perspective, what are the potentials and challenges of UX design in urban and transport planning?

“

Throughout the service design research project, we

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

Currently, her work addresses the development of design-driven strategies to transform the furniture sector through servitization towards sustainability and circularity. She is experienced in working with interdisciplinary and intercultural teams. Over the past five years, she has co-led EU-funded, national, and international research projects. Additionally, she has participated in numerous strategic and service design projects for clients across various sectors. She gives lectures at design schools across Europe and Asia and publishes articles in international scientific journals and conference proceedings.

the users: what they say, how they act, their behaviors, and the underlying reasons for those behaviors.

This deep dive into user understanding also includes analyzing their physical and digital contexts.

Considering the use and post-use phases in the service design and development phases is crucial.

The design of a good user experience begins with how users first learn about and engage with the service. This includes carefully designing the communication strategy and selecting the most effective communication channels.

prioritize the UX principles across all phases— research, design, and implementation.

In the research phase, our focus begins with a comprehensive understanding of

To apply the UX principles in the whole design process, especially in the research phase, I often use the very practical toolkit Design Kit developed by IDEO.*

/Reflection UX and Social Behavior in Public Space: The “Yama” Square in Moscow Space is defined by actions just as much as actions are defined by space. There is no architectural space without people, no architectural space without events and programs. When designing a square, we always think about usage scenarios, movement routes, points of attraction, and forms of interaction. The main event of the square is the human being; the main resource is emptiness, open to interpretation. How will people move through this space? How will they use it?

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

How will they behave? Does this depend solely on social values, human psychology, and free will? Or are there other influencing factors? Could it be that the physical characteristics of a space affect social behavior?

Background and Conflict It may seem easy to answer these questions—just recall your emotions when walking along a narrow, overcrowded sidewalk or a dark, unlit street. You immediately feel a rising sense of anxiety, stress, and irritation. The case of “Yama” (Khokhlovskaya Square in Moscow) offers a case study of how architectural design influences the user behavior in an urban space. It serves as a vivid example of how spatial design shapes the experience of interaction and mobility in the city.

Figure 10 Yama Square (Source: RIAMO news portal)

/Reflection

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

About 20 years ago, there were plans to build a shop-

However, the growing popularity of the space led to

ping center with parking on Pokrovsky Boulevard in

disorders: conflicts with local residents, fights

the center of Moscow. However, during excavation,

among visitors, and conflicts between activists

archaeologists discovered a fragment of the

and the police. Eventually the once fashionable and

16th-century fortress wall of ancient Moscow, and

popular public space began to attract disorderly

construction was halted. Several years later, a

behavior. The access to the square was subsequently

decision was made to preserve the discovered

closed off to the general public, and later, to prevent

fragment and to create a public space: an “open-air

similar incidents, installed with two fences, leaving

archaeological museum”. The completed “Yama”

only two small entrances.

square, designed by KB Strelka and Iren Zhao-Rakitin, offers a wide range of scenarios: an amphitheater,

“Yama” ceased to be as popular as before; today, the

pedestrian zones, a stage for events, and open

public space is practically empty and it is not used

boundaries. This created conditions for high activity

as it was originally intended. The situation caused a

and attraction, especially among young people.

strong public outcry. Why did this particular place in Moscow became so popular among young users?

What made people feel free here, and why did the perception of that freedom transform into a sense of permissiveness?

Figure 11 Khokhlovskaya Square Plan (Source: ArchDaily; Image Credits to Strelka KB + DJAO-RAKITINE).

/Reflection

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

Analysis Khokhlovskaya Square is not a classical square with a

It is essentially a sunken square, almost like “

frontal axis and main monument like Place de la Con-

negative space,” a space defined by absence rather

corde in Paris or Red Square in Moscow. It works more

than presence.

as a “cozy urban living room” or an “urban pause,” embedded in Moscow’s dense urban fabric. The historic

In this context, the elements of the urban space (the

Moscow buildings surrounding the square are dense,

amphitheater and the fragment of the old Moscow’s

rhythmically diverse, but not formal. The square does

city walls) function not as architectural dominants

not have a main central access (as does the square

but as components of spatial inclusion—elements

in front of the Polytechnic Museum, just 400 meters

of integration that facilitate active and meaningful

away). We do not enter it from a noisy highway, but

human presence in the city. The transparency of

it reveals itself gradually through five streets: The

boundaries transforms the square into a space for

surrounding context is very scattered, and it follows

spontaneous interaction. The environment operates

this sort of pattern: “dense facade >> gap >> opening

on multiple sensory and behavioral levels, such as the

- access >> square.” In a classical square, perspective

visual, tactile, affective, and social spectra.

has always a frontal focus, here is the opposite. The area of the square is not flat, but has a stepped layout.

As a result, the user experiences not only the

The sight of the people is not locked on the horizon,

functionality of the space but also a sense of belong-

but like in a theater, moving in this space every step

ing to it. People feel empowered to act—the space

offers a new frame. We are either looking down from

allows for it. This very feeling becomes a trigger for

above or up from below—like in a theater.

active social formats: from peaceful presence to expressions of protest.

Figure 12 Photo of Yama Square fenced off to the public (Source: varlamov.ru; Photo Credits: Ilya Varlamov).

Conclusions The “Yama” case shows that today, the design of

In this case, design functioned not as a set of shapes

public spaces is primarily about designing behavior,

and rigid functional zones, but as a subtle environ-

about shaping social scenarios. UX in urban mobility

mental tuning, where even the smallest changes in

includes not only physical movement but also

relief, scale, material or perspective affect route

emotional responses and behavioral influence

choice, movement pace, and mode of presence.

through various spectrums: a sense of safety,

This is true urban mobility, not related to means of

freedom, choice, psychological comfort, and more.

transport, but about the feeling of freedom.

32

Concepts: Core Themes and Guiding Principles

1.6

Reflections and Guiding Principles

In that sense, a UX approach to mobility planning entails:

Diversity in User

Unique and Complex

Representation

User Personas

UX designers aim to understand the varied needs of

Unlike the typical mobility planning approach, where

different user groups, which requires researching and

user needs are considered in silos, the UX approach

representing diverse personas during the design

focuses on holistic user personas (whether real or

process. Inclusive UX design entails conducting

hypothethical), looking at their complex, interlinked

usability tests with people from different

and overlapping needs through a complex reading

backgrounds, abilities, and perspectives to identify

and integrating their unique perspectives throughout

unique and overlooked mobility challenges and needs.

the design process.

Flexibility and

The User as an

Adaptability

Active Participant

Designing systems that can be customized or

Recognizing users as experts and designers of their

adjusted to meet the specific needs of individual

own experiences through collaborative mapping and

users. This flexibility allows mobility solutions to serve

planning tools. Inclusive UX design respects user

a wide range of users without impinging on the

autonomy and choice, creating interfaces that

needs of specific groups.

support different modes of interaction and offers customized solutions.

Experience as Input and Output An approach that organizes diagnostic studies around a deep understanding of different experiential components, and in turn, plans mobility systems around desirable experiential outcomes for target user groups.

33

2 Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows This first part of the chapter delves directly into the

The second part of the chapter presents a collection

mobility design process, analyzing common

of relevant diagnostic studies used in Systematica’s

workflows in urban mobility projects with the aim of

consultancy projects to demonstrate the current

identifying where and how user-centered input is

state of the art, i.e. how user experience is measured

applied and can be enhanced further.

in current mobility practices, with the aim to draw insights for a refined blueprint of an experience-led UXM approach.

2.1

Experiential Mobility Design: Tailoring Transportation to User Needs and Behaviors

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

The next step is to determine how these urban and mobility factors affect different user groups, based on socio-demographic characteristics such as age and gender. Such differentiation is vital, as diverse user groups often perceive and prioritize their environment in unique ways. For example, a young professional commuting to work might prioritize speed and connectivity, whereas an individual taking a leisurely stroll may place greater value on safety and comfort.

Experiential mobility design seeks to redefine how

Moreover, the same environmental conditions can be

transportation is understood and planned by focusing

experienced differently depending on the purpose of

not only on the efficiency of moving from point A to

travel, whether for work, leisure, or essential errands.

point B but also on the quality and personal relevance

Understanding these variations enables the creation

of the travel experience. Unlike traditional mobility

of mobility solutions that are not only functional, but

planning, which emphasizes convenience, speed,

also deeply aligned with the diverse needs, preferenc-

and cost efficiency, experiential design integrates

es, and environments of users.

tailored practices and techniques that address the unique needs, purposes, and contexts of different

Achieving this level of personalization in mobility

user groups. This approach enables the creation of

design, however, requires robust data and specialized

mobility solutions that transcend mere functionality,

tools. Translating users’ characteristics, preferences,

resonating deeply with the lived experiences and

and behaviors into actionable data points for soft-

preferences of diverse users.

ware analysis is critical. These inputs form the basis for describing nuanced, individualized mobility pat-

Planning for the user experience begins with

terns, including context-specific or purpose-driven

understanding the factors that influence it and

movements. Effective experiential mobility design

conducting a diagnostic assessment of quantifiable

depends on how accurately these digital models re-

elements within urban and mobility systems.

flect real-world needs and intentions. Yet, a significant

Experiential factors refer to physical and spatial

challenge lies in defining and quantifying ambiguous

elements that can be mapped and measured to

or “fuzzy” concepts and determining how to weight

assess a location’s potential to deliver meaningful

them appropriately. Addressing this complexity

physical and emotional experiences for its users.

necessitates extensive research and

Quantifying these elements and interpreting the

methodological refinement.

inherent capacity of a place to foster specific experiences is the first step in experiential mobility planning.

In this chapter, the goal is to develop a structured framework for defining and analyzing users within the

For instance, studying the morphology of a city using

context of mobility design. Future directions, chal-

tools such as Space Syntax © can provide insights

lenges, and opportunities for growth in this evolving

into its spatial properties, such as openness, narrow-

field will also be explored. Through detailed case

ness, or the perceived sense of safety. These char-

studies from Systematica’s breadth of experience in

acteristics can then be evaluated through a cognitive

the field of mobility planning, the application of experi-

perspective to better understand their impact

ential design principles across different scenarios will

on users.

be demonstrated.

36

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

2.2

Beyond the State of the Art: Defining a New Project Framework

The investigative process, beginning with diagnostic mapping, focuses on examining the built environment and mobility infrastructure to identify elements that shape user experiences and determine the potential for movement within space. These elements encompass physical, morphological, and service-related factors, which can be either static or dynamic and

The Project Pipeline: Investigating and Addressing User Preferences

vary depending on the project’s scale. For instance, static factors such as street widths and ramp slopes can be analyzed to understand their impact on movement and accessibility. On the other hand, dynamic elements such as transit frequency, occupancy levels,

Mobility and transportation projects may differ in scope, objectives, and methodologies, but they share certain commonalities that provide opportunities to explore and articulate user preferences. While current practices allow for a detailed investigation of users during the early stages of project development, challenges remain in quantifying and addressing user needs in later phases and in evaluating the outcomes of a project. These challenges present significant opportunities for improvement, particularly in creating strategies tailored to specific user profiles.

and noise can help evaluate the availability and quality of travel options.

This phase is critical for both the analysis of existing areas and the planning of new masterplans. It involves assessing the potential for user movement, identifying constraints, and determining the minimum level of service required to meet the diverse needs of all users effectively. By addressing these aspects, the project establishes a solid foundation for creating inclusive and functional mobility solutions.

Figure 13 Typical urban mobility project pipeline and potential for future UX research development areas Current project pipeline​

1

Diagnostic mapping

Planner Perspective

2

User Identification

3

Modelling

4

Strategies development

Ground-level experience

Future research development

Metrics for potential experience​

Cognitive indicators​

Definition of user weights

User groups specific strategies

37

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

Once the diagnostic mapping is complete, these

Although user-focused insights are robust in the

elements can be translated into metrics that describe

initial stages, the later phases of the project pipeline

the potential user experience.

present challenges in quantifying and modelling these preferences. Modelling involves integrating diverse

Techniques like the assessment of urban density and morphology of the street network help link spatial properties, such as connectivity and accessibility, to cognitive experiences.

For example, areas with high urban density may evoke feelings of crowdedness and stress for some, while others might perceive them as vibrant and dynamic.

Similarly, open green spaces can promote relaxation or solitude, depending on individual preferences. By interpreting this data, it becomes possible to align urban and mobility planning with the psychological and emotional needs of different users.

To make these insights actionable, user profiles are developed that consider a variety of dimensions.

These profiles incorporate mainly purpose-specific movements, such as commuting or leisure activities, as well as socio-demographic factors such as age, gender, level of income, and education.

38

inputs into simulation tools to predict user behaviors and needs at either a macro or micro scale. The effectiveness of this phase depends on the quality and specificity of the data, which can limit its application in quantifying user-specific trips.

The final stage involves developing strategies that incorporate all the insights gained throughout the process. Current practices focus on addressing users’ needs in general terms.

However, advances in understanding user preferences have opened possibilities for highly personalized solutions. These strategies aim to enhance user experiences by addressing the specific cognitive, sensory and emotional responses associated with different environments and mobility contexts.

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

Current Modelling Techniques & User Interpretation at different scales To better understand the capabilities of different mobility projects, this section will delve deeper into three main modeling techniques and their potential for defining user characteristics: macro models, micro models and tour-based models. We aim to clarify where and how user characteristics can be integrated into a typical project pipeline. The three modeling techniques serve distinct purposes: macro models (i.e. vehicular, or multimodal) focus on the movement of larger population segments, micro models, particularly in pedestrian modeling, target individual users’ specific physical and demographic traits, and tour-based models focus on activity chains. In all approaches, a typical project pipeline involves studying the population and establishing parameters to ensure service standards. This includes assumptions about user behaviors and movement patterns.

Macro

Tour-based

Micro

Macro Modelling In macro modelling, users are typically analyzed

These categories can be further segmented, depend-

as aggregated groups rather than as individuals,

ing on the data available. For instance, by analyzing

meaning that personal characteristics, or the

hotel guest distribution patterns, one can gain in-

human scale, are not directly considered. For ex-

sights into how visitors might disperse across major

ample, in vehicular models, users are represented by

attraction points. Detailed information on population

“equivalent vehicles”, the number of vehicles moving

segments and land use is therefore essential to define

through the project area, rather than by individual

where trips begin (origins) and where they are likely to

travelers. Instead, user profiles are inferred based

end (destinations). Once origins and destinations are

on origin and destination data. Here, land use plays a

established, weighting factors are applied to reflect

central role in interpreting the model and understand-

the choices different population groups make regard-

ing the types of trips likely to occur. Three primary trip

ing transport modes and travel times. This includes

categories are typically defined: residential trips, work

factors like value of time for each user category, which

commutes, and leisure trips.

influences their preferred mode of transport and time of travel.

39

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

Figure14 Typical modelling approaches in transport planning

Macro modelling

Tour-based modelling

Tour-based Modelling Tour-based modelling analyzes travel behavior by link-

Within this framework, an activity pair represents

ing individual trips into structured sequences that re-

a single trip between two linked activities, such as

flect daily routines. Unlike trip-based models that treat

commuting from home to work, while an activity chain

each journey separately, this approach considers how

extends this to capture a full sequence of movements,

people organize their activities throughout the day,

such as commuting, stopping for errands, and return-

forming “tours” consisting of multiple interconnected

ing home. These structured travel patterns enable a

trips. These tours are modelled at an aggregate level,

more realistic representation of mobility flows.

representing the trip chains of defined population segments rather than individual travellers.

Since this method accounts for habitual behaviors within different population groups, it is particularly

A key aspect of tour-based modelling is the need for

effective when detailed behavioral data is available.

detailed population distribution data. Users are not

It is well suited for areas where specific activities

represented individually but enter the model through

can be clearly identified and for contexts requiring

socio-demographic characteristics and trip purposes,

a deeper understanding of how socio-demographic

which define typical travel behaviors.

factors influence travel. By integrating aggregated trip chains with population distribution data, tourbased modelling enhances demand forecasting and supports more accurate, user-centered transportation planning.

40

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

Micro Modelling In contrast, micro modelling, especially pedestrian

The effectiveness of these models, however, is largely

micro modelling, examines users as distinct entities

determined by the robustness and granularity of the

with specific characteristics. Each “micro-entity” rep-

input data.

resents a single user that moves through space with attributes such as speed, size, and behavioral tendencies based on demographic and situational factors.

For instance, user speed may vary depending on factors such as gender or cultural background, which influence walking pace. Users’ size attributes might be adjusted based on gender or whether they are carrying luggage. Behavioral variations are also considered, such as the difference in navigation patterns between tourists and commuters, or the different responses of individuals based on their awareness levels. Addition-

Translating users’ characteristics, preferences, and behaviors into actionable data points for analysis is crucial to achieving meaningful outcomes.

ally, users may exhibit different repulsion forces, or the natural space they prefer to maintain from others,

A significant challenge lies in defining and quantifying

which can vary by cultural background or personal

ambiguous or “fuzzy” concepts, as well as determin-

preference.

ing the appropriate weighting for these factors within the models. Addressing this complexity requires

Together, macro modelling and micro modelling

extensive research and methodological refinement to

techniques enable mobility projects to simulate and

ensure that these nuanced elements are accurately

accommodate a diverse range of user characteristics.

represented and effectively integrated into the

These methods enhance the accuracy of predictions

analysis.

related to population flows and individual behaviors within a given space.

Micro modelling

41

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

Beyond Usability: Diagnostic Mobility Studies with a UX Lens

1 Spatial Characteristics: Sidewalk Width

This section explores several existing approaches to

•

QGIS, Sidewalks width mapping

•

Dubai, 2021

measuring elements of user experience, specifically in

Sidewalk width is one of the primordial parameters

pedestrian mobility. It presents a range of siloed stud-

impacting the potential for pedestrian comfort in any

ies that utilize either singular indicators or multi-in-

street segment. The wider the sidewalks the safer and

dicator indices, each reflecting different dimensions

more appealing for the pedestrians. Increased width

of pedestrian comfort. Collectively, these measures

also allows sidewalks to become spaces for social

offer a nuanced, layered understanding of how we

activity alongside their role as spaces of traffic.

currently address and quantify elements of the mobility experience, specifically from the perspective of the pedestrian and across a variety of urban settings.

•

Relevant experiential loads: Sensory load

Physical load

Figure 15 Zoom in of sidewalk width map in Dubai

Wider sidewalks

Narrower sidewalks

42

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

2 Wayfinding: Space Syntax Techniques •

Space Syntax, Decision points analysis (Clustering coefficient)

•

Centre Commercial De Fontvieille, Monaco, 2023

This analysis measures the proportion of visible spaces from any given point. Intuitively, the more locations that can be seen from any single point, the more likely it is that wayfinding is needed. Spaces with low coefficient correspond to locations where wayfinding is fundamental to help the visitors’ navigation to maximize circulation efficiency. Another factor that can be studied is the correlation factor. The higher the correlation is among visibility and integration (R2 = 1; meaning that highly visible spaces are also highly accessible) the more the space is legible and easy to navigate. On the contrary, a low correlation indicates that the space does not permit a good orientation, and wayfinding is even more important.

•

Relevant experiential loads: Cognitive load

Affective load

Figure 16 Decision points map within the Shopping Center. (Client: Socri MC SAM. End Client: Etat de Monaco - Administration des Domain) RDC

Interactive map and stand

Primary decision points High need of signage

R²: 0,836

Wayfinding

R+3

R²: 0,604

Accessory Signage

R+4

R²: 0,532

SS1

R²: 0,779

Forced circulation Low need of wayfinding

43

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

3 Thermal Comfort: Walking Thresholds •

QGIS, mapping walking distances in different seasons in Riyadh

•

Riyadh, 2024

This map visualizes walking comfort in an urban park in Riyadh by integrating thermal comfort data across different times of day and seasons. The analysis directly relates to user experience by translating environmental data into intuitive zones that reflect how pleasant or unpleasant a walk might feel to a person in specific conditions.

Note: this is a static analysis based on pre-defined walking thresholds obtained by looking at climate studies and literature in similar countries. It does not consider accumulated heat stress.

•

Relevant experiential loads: Sensory load

Physical load

Affective load

Figure 17 Catchment areas in different seasons in Riyadh Park

44

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

4 Walkability Index: Pedestrian Level Of Service (PLOS) •

ArcGIS, Pedestrian Level of Service (PLOS)

•

Business Bay, Dubai, 2017

The Pedestrian Level of Service (PLOS) is an index which allows us to scientifically quantify comfort and safety levels of existing and planned walkways allowing objective evaluations of pedestrians’ perception and response to roadway environment. Paths with higher PLOS values have wider sidewalk width, are characterized by the presence of greenery and have protective buffers from the vehicles. Lower PLOS values, indicate a less pedestrian friendly environment, prioritizing the presences of vehicles and reducing pedestrian comfort. It’s a useful tool that can be used to identify priority intervention areas during the planning process.

•

Relevant experiential loads: Sensory load

Physical load

Affective load

Cognitive load

Pedestrian Flow ( Long term scenario) Figure 18 PLOS calculated for Dubai Business Bay project. Client: 5+ Design. End client: Dubai Properties Group

PLOS Out of A B C D E F

45

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

5 Walkability Index: Walk Score •

ArcGIS, WalkScore® by user group

•

BISP, Biennale dello Spazio Pubblico, Bologna, 2020

Walk Score® is a rating system ranging from 0 to 100 that indicates how pedestrian-friendly a specific area is. It assesses walkability based on the proximity to everyday destinations such as grocery stores, schools, restaurants, parks, and more. A higher score means it’s easier to get around on foot. In this research project, the Walk Score® was first calculated for the entire city of Bologna, using the standard model for a generic adult user. It was then adapted to better reflect the walkability experience of children aged 11 to 14. This customization involved filtering out facilities not typically relevant to this age group (e.g., banks, post offices) and recategorizing the destinations to include places more suitable for them, such as schools, sports fields, and youth-oriented public spaces.

•

Relevant experiential loads: Physical load

Affective load

Cognitive load

Figure 19 (a) WalkScore® for Bologna. (b) WalkScore® for Bologna customized for children between 11 and 14 years old. Developed for Comune di Bologna

Walkscore

46

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

6 Accessibility Index: Parkscore (Proprietary Method) •

QGIS, Parkscore

•

Paketposthalle Masterplan, Munich, 2020

Parkscore is a methodology developed by Systematica to assess the efficiency of a parking structure from the perspective of the users. It is based on 7 KPIs that are: pedestrian distance from cores, time from accesses, time to the exits, change of direction, aisle level of service, aisle typology and visibility. All the KPIs are normalized and interpolated linearly. For every stall the sum of the KPIs is then calculated. Since every value is based on the minumum and maximum thresholds, it’s not possible to build comparison scenarios between different parking structures. A study to develop a weighting system to score the different KPIs in relation to the perceived importance of the factors is currently in progress.

Physical load

Affective load

Cognitive load

Figure 20 (Parkscore for Paketposthalle parking structure. Client: Park Immobilien Projektentwicklung und Planung GmbH & Co. KG (Büschl Unternehmensgruppe).

Parkscore 0 - 1 | Bad 1 - 2 | Poor 2 - 3 | Fair 3 - 4 | Good 4 - 5 | Very good 5 - 6 | Excellent

47

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

7 Walkability Index: Level of Service (LOS) •

Legion, Level of Service

•

Prague Vltava Philharmonic, Prague, 2021-2024

LOS (Level of Service) is a widely used method to evaluate the quality of pedestrian spaces based on user experience, particularly focusing on comfort, freedom of movement, and perceived crowding. It categorizes pedestrian conditions into six levels, from Level A (excellent) to Level F (very poor), depending on the pedestrian density and how freely people can move in a given space. LOS is especially useful for assessing pedestrian comfort and usability in urban design, transportation hubs, public spaces, and event planning.

•

Relevant experiential loads: Physical load

Affective load

Figure 21 Level of Service map. Client: BIG - Bjarke Ingels Group. End Client: The Capital City of Prague and Prague Institute of Planning and Development

LoS A

LoS B

LoS D

LoS F

Hlavní vstup | Main access

Hlavnísál sál Hlavní Hlavní sál hall Main

Šatna / Cloackroom

48

Gastro | F&B counter

Úroveň služeb (LOS) cirkulace Level of Service (LOS) for circulation

Multifunkční sál MPH hall

Nábřeží | Waterfront

Main hall Main hall

Malý sál Small hall

2.2

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

Summary table for relevant UX dimensions This table summarizes the relevance of the above mobility studies to the four dimensions of experiential load previously classified in the book: Cognitive Load, Sensory Load, Affective Load, and Physical Load.

This is meant as an exercise to demonstrate the potential to reorganize existing metrics of user comfort to align with predefined experiential classes.

Table 1 Application of presented mobility studies to predefined UX categories

Study

Cognitive Load

Sensory Load

Affective Load

Physical Load

Spatial Characteristics: Sidewalk Width Wayfinding: Space Syntax Techniques

Thermal Comfort: Walking Thresholds

Walkability Index: Pedestrian Level Of Service (PLOS)

Walkability Index: Walk Score

Accessibility Index: Parkscore (Proprietary Method) Accessibility Index: Level of Service (LOS)

49

In Conversation with Barbara E. A. Piga

Prioritizing People’s Experience for More Sustainable Urban Environments What does user experience mean in your work?

People’s experience is the guiding concept in our research and development efforts. Our goal is to deeply understand how individuals dynamically experience spaces to inform and evaluate urban transformations. This involves focusing on the person-environment relationship rather than considering them separately. By considering how individuals naturally react when engaging with urban spaces, we can design user- and environmentally-friendly environments. We recognize that the environment significantly influences people’s experiences, so we aim to create meaningful environments that enhance well-being.

“

Our methodology involves gathering and analyzing qualitative and quantitative data on how individuals perceive and interact with their surroundings. The outcomes are used to inform design briefs, evaluate design proposals from a multiuser perspective,

Interview published at: https://transformtransport.org/media/interviews/prioritizing-peoples-experience-for-more-sustainable-urban-environments-in-conversation-with-barbara-e-a-piga/. Selected segments are featured for their relevance to the themes explored in this book.

//Interview

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

Barbara E. A. Piga, architect PhD, is a researcher at Politecnico di Milano (POLIMI). Since 2007, she coordinates the Laboratorio di Simulazione Urbana Fausto Curti. She is a member of various scientific committees and teaches at POLIMI. Her research focus is experiential simulation for multisensory urban design in a designfor-all perspective. She leads both European and national projects and has developed innovative methodologies recognized with copyrights and an international patent.

She fosters an interdisciplinary approach to supporting the design process, from conception and development to decision-making and public participation. Her contributions include the interdisciplinary Experiential Environmental Impact Assessment (exp-EIA©) methodology and the exp-EIA ecosystem for investigating the community-environment relationship and pre-assess people’s reactions to urban design solutions. She earned her Ph.D. in Urban Planning from POLIMI in 2010. Her research promotes a multi-scalar and interdisciplinary approach to enhance all the urban design phases.

and monitor the perceived performance of a solution over time.

This ecosystem includes a set of tools designed and

By prioritizing people’s experience, we aim to support

data types together, and a Luminous Planning Table,

urban design and decision-making processes that

which combines physical and digital simulations for

promote well-being, social interaction, community

collaborative design and decision-making, among

and place attachment, ultimately contributing to more

professionals and with non-professionals.

developed ad hoc: a mobile app in Virtual and Augmented Reality, a web-app utilizing 360° images and videos, a mobile cart for recording environmental data on the go, the “4P” platform for analyzing various

sustainable and livable urban environments.

By integrating these tools and data sources, exp-EIA©

Can you please describe your patented methodology exp-EIA©?

provides a holistic view of place experience, supporting the identification of potential improvement and interventions in existing areas, as well as enabling the pre-assessment of the perceived performance of urban design projects. Beyond favoring the development of design projects sensitive to the varied

exp-EIA© (Experiential Environmental Impact Assess-

experiences of a heterogenous population, exp-EIA©

ment) is an internationally patented methodology

aims to foster effective multistakeholder collaboration

designed and developed by Politecnico di Milano and

involving private, public, and societal sectors, as

Università degli Studi di Milano. We also created a

well as the scientific research community, in urban

“phygital” (physical + digital) ecosystem around the

processes. This collaborative endeavor aims to lead

method to facilitate its applicability in research or

to informed and shared decisions for more livable and

professional practice, to investigate the relationship

sustainable cities.

between people and their urban environments, that is, people’s experience in time and space in the current or design conditions.

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

2.3

Challenges and Future Directions in User-Centric Mobility Projects When defining future challenges and directions in mobility projects, an important distinction lies between investigating and explicitly addressing user preferences. This distinction is crucial for the future of user experience modelling in mobility and transport engineering. The ability to define and incorporate relevant data points, as outlined earlier, is fundamental to accurately modelling trips at various scales and ensuring that solutions are both functional and user-friendly. Below are the main directions and challenges to be explored to develop projects beyond usability.

Addressing Ambiguities in User

Technological and

Experience Modelling

Methodological Innovations

One of the primary challenges in this field is trans-

Advancements in technology offer new tools and

lating abstract or “fuzzy” concepts, such as comfort,

methods for collecting and analyzing experiential

emotional resonance, and perceived safety, into

data. For instance, wearables can provide real-time

quantifiable data that can be integrated into modelling

insights into user stress levels or comfort during

processes. These concepts are highly subjective and

travel. Immersive technologies like augmented and

often vary across different user groups.

virtual reality (AR/VR) can simulate user experiences, allowing planners to evaluate design decisions

Achieving a balance between personalization and

before implementation.

scalability in mobility systems is critical to ensuring that solutions remain inclusive while addressing

Additionally, artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing

individual needs.

urban analysis, enabling the identification of patterns and preferences that were previously difficult to detect. These innovations hold great potential for refining user-centric approaches in mobility planning.

52

2.3

Methods: Integrating the UX Approach in Mobility Design Workflows

Reframing Indices around User Experience

Policy and Ethical Considerations

One of the strengths of adopting a UX-centered

While technological advancements promise signif-

approach is the ability to organize studies around dif-

icant benefits, they also raise important policy and

ferent dimensions of the user experience and visually

ethical questions. Balancing personalization with

translate these through a set of experience-focused

equity and inclusivity is a key concern. Mobility

maps. These can be further disaggregated into differ-

solutions must ensure that the needs of all users,

ent user experiences based on the needs and expec-

including those from marginalized or underserved

tations of defined user personas within a project.

communities, are addressed equitably.

As demonstrated in the sample of current diagnostic

Data privacy is another critical issue in user-centric

studies, elements of UX are already present in existing

mobility planning. As more personal and behavioral

methodologies. It is a matter of combining separate

data is collected to improve transportation systems,

indicators and reframing them into new indices that

robust safeguards must be in place to protect user

reflect various components of the human experience.

information and ensure ethical data usage.

Figure 22 Everyday pedestrian movements within an urban street network

53

3 Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects Mobility and transportation projects define and

Chapter 3 is dedicated to presenting use cases from

engage with users in different ways, depending on

consultancy projects that demonstrate an

their scale, purpose, and spatial context. They also

integration of UX principles, methods or outputs,

engage with themes of experiential design in different

whether by focusing on specific target users or by

ways: some focusing on practical user needs, and

following an experience-led approach. This collec-

others focused on curating engaging experiences,

tion of articles is meant to offer a sample of what it

exploring elements of desirability and pleasure.

means to have a UX-based approach in planning, and highlight potential avenues for embedding existing practices in a blueprint for a UXM toolkit (see Chapter 5).

/Use Case 1

The Art of Arrival: Designing Transitions in Urban Mobility

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

To support this layered experience, we employed Space Syntax: an analytical method used to understand spatial configurations and movement patterns. By controlling the depth of the network (how many changes of direction separate different street types) and minimizing unnecessary turns, we were able to shape intuitive paths toward different zones.

In contemporary urban planning, the quality of the arrival experience is emerging as a key differentiator, shaping first impressions, supporting legibility, and enhancing the identity of place. The experience of arrival, also from a vehicular perspective, is a deeply emotional and spatial moment: it marks a transition, not just from one location to another, but from movement to stillness, from public to private, from speed to calm.

This topic always emerges in our projects and it was recently addressed in a large mixed-use development over an area of 5 million square meters in Dubai,

Streets were not just drawn as infrastructure, they were choreographed as experiences, for both residents that drive within the project on a daily basis and for first-time visitors.

planned to host approximately 40,000 people over more than 17,000 residential units. While the area in the future will have accessibility to a metro line currently in planning stage, in early years it will be mainly dependent on cars and therefore it is crucial to properly address vehicular access at very early stages. One of our core planning strategies focused on curating the arrival experience through the structure of the road network itself: our goal was to create a journey that intuitively guides users from broad, lush entry boulevards into more vibrant, mixed-use streets and finally into quieter, residential environments.

This approach addresses multiple dimensions of UX. Emotionally, a well-sequenced arrival evokes a sense of orientation, welcome, and calm. Cognitively, it supports wayfinding with different roads design elements such as street width, tree canopies or finishes, so that the drivers have better understanding of the road hierarchy they are actually driving into. Behaviorally, it can also influence the speed at which drivers will navigate through the masterplan to destination.

56

What this tells us is that arrival isn’t just about where the road ends: it’s about how people feel as they reach their destination. The character of the surrounding environment, the legibility of street hierarchies, and the ease of transitioning between different road types all contribute to a more holistic, human-centered urban experience.

Of course, we didn’t focus exclusively on vehicular movements, but we also introduced several considerations on arrival experience by bike or other modes: as cities strive to reduce car dependency and promote multimodal travel, curating the final leg of the journey becomes more than a design flourish, it becomes essential.

/Use Case 1

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

If we want people to embrace new forms of urban mobility, we must not only think about how they arrive to a destination, but how they experience that arrival as drivers, pedestrians, and everything in between.

Figure 23 AI-generated rendering of local street view produced with Google Labs

57

/Use Case 2

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

Designing Seamless Arrival Journeys in a Car-Free Entertainment District in Saudi Arabia

The focus is on how the arrival experience was shaped through a UX-driven approach, prioritizing clarity, comfort, and emotional engagement from the moment users enter the district.

A central challenge was managing the complexity of visitor flows converging on a single destination. The design team used a reverse-engineered modelling method: instead of starting with infrastructure, they

This article examines the mobility experience in a

began with target emotional outcomes such as excite-

large-scale entertainment district in Saudi Arabia,

ment, ease, or familiarity, and mapped user journeys

where over 160,000 daily users including theme park

backwards. These models integrated projected crowd

visitors, hotel guests, residents, and employees, navi-

densities, pedestrian desire lines, wayfinding needs,

gate a car-restricted, multimodal environment.

and UX principles like decision simplicity and anticipation buildup.

Figure 24 Visitor’s Mode of Arrival Transport

Theme park

Entertainment District

Central Plaza

visitors

Multimodal Transit Hub

Pedestrian-Oriented

Car Restricted Area Final Destination Theme Park Entrance

Personal Vehicles

Remote Parking Remote Parking Tram

Parking

Narrative Bridges

Remote Parking Tram Station

Residential Plots

Rideshare Dedicated Drop-Off

Shared Shuttle & Bus

Vertical Link Smooth Transition

Hotels

ECV 5-7 Minute

Dedicated Drop-Off

Gardens

Light Rail Station

Other Attractions

Light Rail

58

Walking 5-7 Minute

/Use Case 2

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

The arrival strategy centered on a multimodal tran-

Hotel guests arriving via transit or rideshare connect

sit hub, the main access point for private vehicles,

via pods to hotel lobbies or pass through the pla-

metro, shuttles, and pods. From there, guests transfer

za before check-in. Residents and their guests use

to a central plaza via escalators or elevators, enter-

distinct Wadi paths and peripheral roads, with walking

ing vibrant, retail-lined pedestrian corridors. These

and cycling corridors supported by cooling spots and

corridors function as narrative bridges, where spatial

garden nodes. These paths vary in travel time and

storytelling prepares users for themed destinations.

exposure, offering multiple engagement modes for

For example, bridges leading to entertainment zones

different physical and behavioral profiles.

are treated not just as infrastructure, but as immersive portals with media screens, sculptural motifs, or

Accessibility was approached as a spectrum of

landscape elements aligned with thematic worlds.

needs, not a binary condition. Three journey scenar-

This UX emphasis is also reflected in user typologies.

ios ensure all visitors, including those with mobility

Visitors from remote car parks follow a tram-to-hub

limitations, reach key attractions comfortably while

route and then walk through layered environments.

aligning with cognitive, emotional, and physical needs.

Figure 25 Arrival Experience Typologies for Visitors Scenario A

Central Plaza Pedestrian-oriented

Main Entrance Theme Park

Check Point Theme Park

Key Attraction Theme Park

Scenario B

Hub Public Transit Scenario C

A: Walking route

B: Walking route + Train experience

C: Walking + On-demand Pods

59

/Use Case 2

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

•

Scenario A is a fully pedestrian-oriented route for

These paths differ in physical demand, transfer

those who enjoy walking and prefer immersive,

frequency, and emotional pacing. Accessibility is

continuous experiences that are ideal for families

embedded in the UX strategy as integrated, flexible

and active users.

experiences. Each route balances inclusivity, autonomy, and the desired level of environmental

•

Scenario B integrates a light train to reduce

engagement. Ultimately, designing for mobility means

walking while maintaining narrative immersion,

designing experience. Every journey type

serving users who benefit from lower exertion and

communicates care, identity, and orientation.

intuitive transitions.

•

Scenario C connects users to attractions via

on-demand pods, bypassing long pedestrian zones. It supports guests with disabilities, older adults, VIPs, or time-sensitive needs, prioritizing comfort and clarity.

60

Mobility becomes an intentional, emotional extension of the destination; an interface where behavioral, cognitive, and emotional UX dimensions shape user-centered systems.

/Use Case 3

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

Climate and Walkability: Enhancing Users Experience through Thermal Comfort

Numerous studies confirm its impact. For example, a survey in Doha found that 34% of respondents avoid walking due to hot, humid weather (Rahman & Nahiduzzaman, 2019), another research shows pedestrian volumes drop 5–8% when temperatures exceed 27 °C (Melnikov et al., 2022). In 2019, we carried out a study in Buenos Aires (Milan) that highlighted how when perceived temperatures (Physiological Equivalent Temperature or PET) exceed 34.9°C, pedestrians tend to shift to the thermally more comfortable sidewalk.

Introduction This study investigates the impact of thermal comfort on route choice in urban environments. Considering

Case Study and Methodology

the increasing heat stress in cities, this kind of study

The case study focuses on a 2-by-2-kilometre area

is essential for shaping cities that prioritize people’s

in Milan during a summer afternoon (August 25th at 5

well-being. By integrating microclimatic data into tools

pm), integrating steady-state models (PET) used

for analysing urban form and pedestrian behaviour, it

to evaluate thermal comfort into routing models.

aims to support the creation of more inclusive, com-

Steady-state modelling enables reproducible

fortable, and resilient mobility experiences for differ-

assessments of outdoor comfort, based on objective

ent users. The outcome is a tool with strong potential

inputs like air temperature, humidity, radiation, and

to support the improvement and the navigation of

wind, combined with standardized assumptions on

urban spaces, but also a valuable resource for

human physiology and clothing. While this approach

early-stage urban planning.

may overlook adaptive behaviours to changing conditions, it provides a consistent framework for compar-

Thermal comfort plays a crucial role in shaping

valuable when mapping urban areas. In contrast,

people’s decisions to walk, affecting multiple aspects

dynamic models account for individual responses, but

of the user experience: sensory (heat exposure),

require subjective user input and field surveys, limiting

cognitive (route perception and choice), and

their scalability for city-wide analysis.

ŽŶƚĞŶƚ ďŽƵŶĚ

ing thermal parameters across locations, especially

ŽŶƚĞŶƚ ďŽƵŶĚ

Literature review

Ž

behavioural (walking habits). ŽƌƐŽ ƵĞŶŽƐ ŝƌĞƐ

d

Figure 26 Corso Buenos Aires video analysis in 2019

ϭϮĂŵ

12 am

ϭƉŵ

1 pm

ϮƉŵ

2 pm

ϯƉŵ

3 pm

ϰƉŵ

4 pm

ϱƉŵ

5 pm

61

d

Ž

42

/Use Case 3

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

Pedestrian trips were derived from desire lines under 2 km (data obtained from bike sharing operators on

Using GIS-based tools (QGIS, Rhino, Python), the team analysed pedestrian’s route choice by integrating thermal indices with footfall data.

Figure 27 PET index in Milan, August (5 pm)

62

a H3 grid, source: Fluctuo, 2019) disaggregated by census cells.

As a first step, the shortest paths between Origin-Destination pairs were calculated (Figure 28a).

Secondarily, the PET data were integrated into the routing model identifying the uncomfortable paths (over 29° C, ref. PET thresholds).

/Use Case 3

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

These routes were optimized (Figure 28b) to account

Shortest and optimized paths were overlapped and if

for both thermal comfort and distance, aiming to

the route is in comfortable conditions, the optimized

strike a balance between the two to better reflect a

path corresponds to the shortest one. On the

potential user’s behaviour. For comparison, the

contrary, where long detours happen, the analysis

absolute coolest routes, disregarding distance,

reveals potential for thermal comfort improvements.

were also computed (Figure 28c).

Figure 28 Pedestrian route choices a) Optimized paths

b) Shortest paths

c) Coolest paths

Conclusions This study identifies preferred pedestrian routes by

A higher number of overlapping paths suggests that

incorporating thermal comfort in the route choice

thermal conditions are favourable ensuring conven-

model. The results help reveal which segments of the

ient pedestrian movements.

network require improvements, such as shading interventions, to enhance outdoor comfort.

This study contributes to the development of a scalable tool that can be applied both to assess

These needs are particularly evident when the

existing urban conditions and to support early-stage

optimized routes (Figure 28a) diverge significantly

planning for example by comparing different

from the shortest paths (Figure 28b), leading users to

masterplan alternatives.

find alternatives such as choosing longer routes or avoid walking (modal shift).

Future improvements include field validation and an expanded literature review to strengthen the methodology and broaden its applicability.

63

/Use Case 4

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

Solar Exposure and User Adaptability: Rethinking Pedestrian Thermal Comfort in Hot-Climate areas As climate change consequences continue to result in an increase in temperatures, the user experience of walking in hot climate areas becomes more challenging, resulting in comfort disruption due to heat.

Understanding how different users experience solar exposure can enhance the design of more walkable and enjoyable environments, where mobility is shaped not only by distance, but by the quality of experience.

Therefore, this article introduces a methodology we developed and applied as a case study in a desertic area in Saudi Arabia. It measures solar exposure along a defined path, considering the walking adaptability of two distinct user typologies. The first is a young couple with greater resistance to high temperatures and solar radiation, as well as higher physical endurance.

The second is a family with children, who have a lower tolerance to heat and reduced physical capacity.

Methodology Firstly, the Universal Thermal Climate Index (UTCI) was used as a key indicator to assess human thermal comfort in outdoor environments, ranging from extreme cold to extreme heat. The charts below display UTCI levels throughout the year for the area, with the hottest period occurring from May to September.

Figure 29 Solar analysis for study area

0 0.07 0.15 Scale: 1 : 7,000

0.3km

Resting points Points of interest Hiking trails

64

Cumulative shadow (10am - 4pm) 21 June 2024

0h sunlight

6h sunlight

/Use Case 4

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

In contrast, January to April and October to Decem-

The results showed that tree-shaded zones play a

ber show more comfortable conditions. Based on this,

vital role in mitigating solar exposure, directly

three specific days were selected for a detailed analy-

enhancing walkability. In contrast, built environments

sis of walking adaptability: March 19th and November

offered limited shading and generally unfavorable

10th, within the comfortable periods, and June 21st,

walking conditions, emphasizing the need

the hottest day with the highest solar exposure.

for added infrastructure such as shaded rest areas.

To explore walkability in extreme climates, a desertic

For understanding the different walking adaptation of

area with sparse buildings and vegetation was select-

the two user types and the factors affecting them, the

ed, allowing the study of shading’s impact on user ex-

maximum allowable direct solar radiation exposure

perience. A cumulative solar analysis was conducted

within a one-hour period was defined by calculating

from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on the June solstice (UMEP,

the Solar Radiation Threshold (Tomasi et al., 2023).

n.d.), showing sunlight exposure ranging from 0 to 6 hours.

Figure 30 Solar radiation and user walking adaptation on March 19th, June 21st, November 10th Solar Radiation Threshold UTCI all day 6am - 6 pm

All day 6am - 6 pm

Extreme Heat Very Strong Heat Strong Heat Moderate Heat Slight Heat No thermal Stress Slight Cold Moderate Cold Strong Cold

Category 12pm

UTCI all day 6am - 6 pm

All day 6am - 6 pm

Category 12pm

UTCI all day 6am - 6 pm

All day 6am - 6 pm

Category 12pm

March 19

June 21st

November 10th

89%

-461%

104%

51%

-503%

66%

Walking adaptation % of time a person can walk under the sun for an hour without shade

Young couple

Family

Very Strong Cold Extreme Cold

65

/Use Case 4

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

The result is used to estimate the percentage of time

Therefore, the results reveal that in March and No-

in one hour that each user type can walk under the

vember, both user types can walk comfortably for part

sun. For example, on March 19th, the walking adapt-

of the hour. In contrast, June shows negative percent-

ability of a family is 51%, meaning that in one hour

ages, indicating that walking is not recommended due

they can walk 30 minutes under the sun.

to excessive solar radiation.

Figure 31 Solar analysis for a defined path in a study area

Starting point

0 0.07 0.15 Scale: 1 : 7,000

0.3km

Heritage Area

Cumulative shadow (10am - 4pm) 21 June 2024

Revaitalized Farms Buildings

0h sunlight

6h sunlight

Archaeology Rampart Point of interest

Conclusions In a desert-like context, where sun exposure can

exclusively functional, but truly inviting and livable all

determine every aspect of movement, understand-

year round. Shading strategies, route planning, as well

ing both user profiles and solar exposure is not just a

as using specific analytical tools all become essential

technical task, but a way to introduce a human-centric

in supporting a comfortable and enjoyable mobility

mobility experience. This perspective helps planners

experience, one which is more responsive and attrac-

design cities in harmony with nature, using shade and

tive. Overall, integrating such methodological analysis

microclimates to enhance comfort and walkability.

into mobility planning is essential to creating walkable,

A user-tailored methodology that considers diverse

livable environments where people can move com-

needs can unlock new mobility possibilities in harsh

fortably, even under the strong desert sun.

climates, making urban areas not just temporarily or

66

/Use Case 5

Proximity and Visual Access to Vertical Transportation: A Key Driver of Successful Shared Spaces in Multi-purpose Buildings As cities become increasingly dense and multifunctional, buildings rise to accommodate diverse urban needs. The design of interior public realms within these structures must address both practical and experiential dimensions of human movement.

A key element that is often overlooked in this context

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

Behaviourally, users may respond by taking inefficient detours, abandoning visits to upper levels, or even avoiding the space entirely. Emotionally, such experiences can cause frustration, especially in crowded, time-sensitive contexts, or among vulnerable user groups such as the elderly, those with mobility impairments, or visitors unfamiliar with the building.

Therefore, a poorly designed vertical circulation strategy doesn’t just impede movement, it actively detracts from the quality of the public space.

is the role of vertical transportation (VT) systems such as elevators, escalators, and stairs. These elements are not merely infrastructural necessities, they directly impact how users navigate and interact with space.

The central question explored here is whether the proximity and visual accessibility of VT are critical to the success of shared spaces in such multi-purpose environments. This inquiry is especially relevant to urban mobility, as it touches on wayfinding efficiency, travel time, and spatial orientation. When VT is easily seen and accessed, it supports a seamless user experience that accommodates a wide range of needs, reinforcing both the usability and appeal of public areas.

The topic also engages deeply with the user experience by addressing cognitive, behavioural, and emotional challenges. Users entering a complex environment are constantly processing visual and spatial cues to determine their route. If VT is poorly

This challenge is exemplified in the Nauentor project in Basel, Switzerland. Built over active railway tracks, this multipurpose development aims to create a vibrant shared space that integrates residential, commercial, and mobility infrastructure. Given its complexity and diverse user base, effective and inclusive vertical circulation is essential. To make access to the gallery balcony more intuitive, two complementary spatial analysis techniques were used.

First, an Isovist analysis using DepthmapX software was conducted to determine visually prominent areas from multiple key viewpoints. This revealed that the red highlighted area (figure 32) is highly visible from various parts of the communal zone, making it a strategic location for VT. The second method, a 3D isochrone analysis, simulated how quickly users could reach various points from designated entry zones, incorporating VT speeds (figure 33).

placed or hidden, this creates cognitive strain, leading to uncertainty and decision fatigue.

67

/Use Case 5

Use Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Mobility Projects

Figure 32 Isovist analysis using DepthmapX

Car Flow Tram Line Cycle Path

Public Lifts

Car Parking

Public Staircase

Logistic Parking

Pedestrian Flow Existing Crosswalks

Private Lifts

This confirmed that the same location was not only

More importantly, this approach fosters an inclusive

visible but also reachable within short walking

environment by considering how different people,

times, aligning visual prominence with

whether standing adults, children, or wheelchair

functional accessibility.

users, perceive and move through space.

The findings from Nauentor underscore the

Future developments could extend this analysis by

importance of integrating spatial and temporal

incorporating adjustable parameters for various user

analysis early in the design process. Doing so enables

groups or testing the role of digital and environmental

designers to make informed decisions that enhance

cues in enhancing VT engagement.

intuitive navigation and reduce the cognitive burden on users.

68

/Use Case 5

Use Experiential Cases: Experiential Design in Complex Use Cases: Design in Complex MobilityMobility ProjectsProjects

Figure 33 3D Isochrone analysis

The furthest part of the building reached in 4 min 12 sec

The furthest part of the building reached in 5 min 12 sec

Garten Strasse Nauenstrasse

Speeds

Walking minutes thresholds

4.32 km/h - 1.2 m/s

0-1

2.34 km/h - 0.65 m/s

1-2 2-3

3-4 4-5 5-6

1.85 km/h - 0.51 m/s

Ultimately, successful communal zones are those that recognize the diverse needs of their users and translate spatial design into an equitable and user-friendly experience.

69

4 Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility The city, at its core, is a profoundly physical entity,

Simultaneously, digital systems function as analytical

a tapestry of streets, buildings, public spaces, and

lenses for urban planners, allowing us to observe, in-

infrastructure. For centuries, the way people navigate

terpret, and design urban environments with unprec-

cities has been enabled and limited by tangible ele-

edented precision and adaptability. This intersection

ments contributing to how people navigate, interact,

represents a feedback loop where digital systems

and experience different aspects of the urban en-

observe, analyze, and modify the physical, creating a

vironment. Yet, the digital urban transformation has

continuous dialogue between the two.

introduced a parallel dimension: a virtual ecosystem of tools, data, and technologies that operate in tan-

The chapter culminates with the presentation of a

dem with the city’s physical elements to enhance and

user-facing tool co-developed by researchers and

customize user experience.

practitioners from Systematica and Transform Transport: a prototype for a user-centric pedestrian route

In this chapter, we delve into the interplay between

planner that caters to the diverse needs of different

these dimensions, recognizing the duality of the

users through user-calibrated and user-informed

digital as both a user-facing layer and a planning tool.

preferences. The tool aims to present a direct and

Digital platforms, whether embodied in public-space

tangible use case of the concept of UXM in action,

technologies or accessed through apps and inter-

offering a pathway for more customizable urban

faces, guide individuals in real time, shaping how they

experiences through the interplay between physical

perceive and use the city.

and digital infrastructure.

07

4.1

Digital Urban Systems as UXM Amplifiers: The Power of the Hybrid City

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Unlike the physical city, the digital sphere is multifarious, flexible and highly adaptable. This framework lays the groundwork for a future-forward, plural city where the permanence of the physical environment is balanced with the versatility of the digital urban landscape to foster adaptable and responsive urban environments.

Today, we live in a hybrid city: one that is as much digital as it is physical. To fully recognize the potential

If the physical layer forms the structural skeleton of

for UX-led urban futures, we must first acknowledge

urban mobility, the digital layer is its nervous system,

the rapidly evolving nature of cities into a hybrid

transmitting real-time information and connecting

space, where each layer supports and contributes to

users to the city’s services and amenities.

the other. As such, a UX approach to urban mobility requires us to work on both physical and digital solutions.

Digital solutions provide a “knowledge layer” that enhances how users engage with the city, offering flexibility and adaptability to meet specific needs.

72

4.1

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

The Role of Emerging Technologies in the UX Approach Emerging technologies, such as big data and smart mobility solutions, offer significant potential for addressing the diverse needs of urban mobility users. They allow urban and mobility planners not only to understand user needs better, but to offer them products and services that enhance their access to information about the city via informational mobility tools such as mobile applications for navigation and wayfinding. By leveraging these technologies in conjunction with a strong user-centric focus, it is possible to:

Gather and analyze user data

Optimize mobility services

Big data can be used to collect and analyze vast

Smart mobility solutions, such as real-time traffic

amounts of data on user behavior, preferences,

information, dynamic routing, and demand-respon-

and mobility patterns. This information can be used to

sive transportation, can help to improve the efficiency

identify emerging trends, identify underserved

and reliability of urban mobility services. based on

populations, and inform decision-making.

their individual needs and preferences.

Optimize informational mobility tools Real-time information can also enhance the user mobility experience by providing crucial information to support users in making the right mobility choices for their own comfort and safety. Informational technologies, such as mobility apps and the like, can also be leveraged to provide personalized recommendations to users based on their specific preferences.

UX design plays a crucial role in ensuring that these technologies are designed and implemented in a way that meets the needs and expectations of users. By considering factors such as usability, accessibility, and overall user satisfaction, it is possible to create digital mobility solutions that are not only functional but also enjoyable and satisfying to use.

73

4.1

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

The Role of Digital Communities in Collecting User Needs

While such advancements improved urban functionality, their benefits were largely mediated through large-scale systems rather than direct engagement with individual needs.

Digital communities now play a vital role in expanding participatory processes, allowing targeted user groups to connect and advocate on a larger scale.

Through online platforms and social media, citizens can mobilize around shared needs or challenges, transforming individual experiences into collective calls for action. This capacity has enabled user partic-

However, in the 21st century, the Smart City paradigm has shifted towards a more citizen-centric approach.

ipation to reach specific groups with common interests based on personal circumstances or location, enhancing engagement efforts. For example, cycling advocates in many cities have leveraged online platforms to demand safer infrastructure, leading to policy changes. These communities not only give a voice to local communities but also facilitate change by bridging the gap between

Recognizing the limitations of purely technologydriven models, contemporary urban strategies increasingly emphasize participatory governance, digital inclusion, and user-driven innovation. Today’s Smart Cities seek to integrate technology not only as a means of optimization but also as a tool for en-

citizens and decision-makers.

hancing everyday urban experiences, fostering civic

The impact of digital communities reflects a shift

urban services.

towards a granular, citizen-led approach in mobility mapping practices, where input from the public can directly impact planning decisions. This decentralization of urban knowledge creation paves a path for ordinary citizens to engage with the design and governance of their city more profoundly, providing planners with deep local knowledge and user-centric

engagement, and ensuring more equitable access to

Several advances in the 21st century digital urban transformation, including big data analytics, AI and behavioral modeling, Citizen Science, and platform urbanism, have accelerated the potential for user-centric planning, offering diverse pathways for more responsive and personalized delivery of the

input to enrich the planning process.

urban experience.

From Smart City to Smart User

The Rise of Platform Urbanism and

Early conceptions of Smart Cities envisioned urban environments optimized through large-scale technological infrastructure, with a focus on efficiency, automation, and system-wide enhancements. These initiatives often prioritized macro-level governance and economic optimization, positioning citizens primarily as data sources or passive recipients of topdown solutions.

74

the Role of the Smart User In recent years, the idiosyncratic concept of “platform urbanism” has emerged, beyond the Smart City’s system-centric focus, to prioritize the user experience. At its core, Platform Urbanism shifts the focus of innovation from the city’s infrastructure to the user, transforming how individuals interact with and navigate the city.

4.1

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

From mobility apps that redefine how we navigate

Tools like Open Street Map, but also proprietary tools

urban spaces to real estate platforms that revolution-

like Google Maps, Waze, and Uber provide

ize how we engage with the built environment, the

opportunities for users to generate and consume

digital layer has become a critical interface between

data and information about the city. The impact

individuals and the city. Digital platforms like Google

of these platforms on user experience often goes

Maps, Airbnb, Uber, and Waze exemplify this shift.

beyond mere convenience as they present opportuni-

They act as intermediaries, enabling users to engage

ties for urban communities to be active participants in

with urban spaces in dynamic and participatory ways.

the generation of data about their city, democratizing

Unlike the Smart City, which primarily enhances top-

data collection and with it, enhancing the potential to

down governance and operational systems, Platform

customize urban navigation to one’s personal needs.

Urbanism focuses on bottom-up empowerment, giving citizens the tools to navigate, contribute to,

Data generated by these interactions becomes a

and reshape their environments. Its power can be

powerful resource for analysis and observation.

found in its dual function: amplifying information to

This continuous flow of real-time information can

guide action and providing a reflective lens to shape

be analyzed by urban planners and policymakers to

urban transformation.

reveal patterns, anticipate needs, and craft tailored solutions. Heatmaps of pedestrian traffic, simulations

Everyday interaction with digital urban platforms facilitates our use of the city (but reduces our interaction with it).

of mobility flows, and predictive models of urban growth, all of these emerge from the digital layer’s ability to mirror the city’s activity in fine-grained detail.

Figure 34 Open Street Map VGI data

75

4.1

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

However, the rise of platform urbanism also brings

Levels of User Engagement in

critical challenges. Questions of data ownership,

User-Generated Data

ethical governance, and equity demand attention.

Thanks to the vast troves of data now available, we as

Who controls the platforms and the data they

planners and urban researchers are no longer

generate? Who is represented in the data? How can

confined to physical site visits or static reports.

cities ensure these systems prioritize public good

Instead, we can analyze the city in rich,

over private profit? Addressing these concerns is

multidimensional detail from our desks.

essential to ensuring that user data collection falls within an inclusive and ethical framework for

Through open-source data, simulation tools,

urban mobility.

predictive analytics and data visualizations, we can model multiple scenarios, test hypotheses, design

The paradox is that our attachment to screens

strategies and craft tailored solutions. Heatmaps

severs our physical relationship with the city and

reveal pedestrian flows; mobility platforms highlight

our situatedness in our physical environment. This

bottlenecks; IoT sensors monitor air quality.

reality has profound impacts on our lived urban

Together, these tools provide a virtual magnifying

experience and drives us to question our reliance

glass for understanding urban dynamics.

on screens as mediators of our personal urban

Figure 35 Milan Run trail Strava Heatmap

76

4.1

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Yet, this digital power comes with responsibility.

Every interaction enriches the collective intelligence

While the ability to anticipate and design solutions

of the city. Users contribute data in multiple ways:

is unprecedented, it risks being myopic if detached from the lived realities of the city’s inhabitants. The

Direct data creation through open-source urban data

challenge for planners is to harness these tools not

platforms, such as OpenStreetMap and other Volun-

as substitutes to human insight but as amplifiers of

teered Geographic Information (VGI) tools.

empathy and context, ensuring that the city is shaped not just by data but by the stories it tells.

Direct feedback contributions such as filling out surveys, reporting hazards, or providing feedback

In the landscape of urban mobility platforms, the user is no longer a passive recipient of urban services but an active co-creator of the digital ecosystem.

on transit systems.

Passive data sharing like GPS tracking during navigation or fitness tracking apps that log movement patterns.

Figure 36 Fitness tracking app logging

77

/Reflection

U-KNOW: Knowledge as a Foundation for Experience Urban mobility planning has long relied on objective data and engineering-based models to assess accessibility, efficiency, and performance. However, a growing body of research and practice has challenged this paradigm, exploring the need to incorporate the lived knowledge of urban users into mobility analysis and strategy development.

How to develop balance between scientific-objective knowledge, on the one hand, and lived-experiential knowledge on the other has been long debated in urban planning (Mattila et al., 2022). Within the methodological structure proposed in this book, U-KNOW emerges as a critical interpretive and active layer that reinforces the user-centered approach. It is a conceptual framework for a standardized mixed-source, participatory data repository for urban mobility planners.

It begins by recognizing that UX in mobility cannot be solely determined by objective metrics, such as sidewalk width, slope, or traffic, but must also account for the informal and often invisible layers of knowledge accumulated through everyday interactions with the city. Residents, people with disabilities, parents with strollers, riders, or street vendors all build personal and collective mental maps that influence their mobility decisions in ways that are deeply based on the context and often unrecorded by traditional planning tools. Whether it’s the informal routes used by fishermen on rocky coastlines, the preferred gathering points of food delivery workers, the movement patterns of students and the trusted routines of local wheelchair users, these experiential patterns reflect an alternative, grounded intelligence about how cities are lived and navigated.

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

The approach combines participatory methods such as workshops, interviews, map annotations and cognitive mapping with behavioral data sources, including GPS tracking, public routing platforms (e.g., Strava heatmaps), and informal observations (“ghost tracking”). These techniques allow planners to document how users actively reshape space to meet their needs and constraints (Kleinhans et al., 2015; Vilalta Capdevila et al., 2024). On this basis, U-KNOW expands the idea that mobility solutions should not be designed only for the user, but with the user. This shift, from representation to co-creation, positions lived knowledge and participation not as a supplement to planning, but as essential input into the design logic itself. Moreover, the rise of digital mobility systems allows U-KNOW to go beyond traditional participatory methods. It is not confined to the early stages of planning but becomes a continuous, embedded layer of intelligence, capable of informing, enriching, and adapting mobility solutions throughout their lifecycle (Lin & Benneker, 2021).

In particular, U-KNOW can serve as a foundational and dynamic data input for the UX Mobility route planner presented in this chapter; Use Case 6. By embedding experiential data directly into routing algorithms and adaptive scenario modeling, U-KNOW can enable UX Mobility to move beyond static user profiles. Through ongoing data updates and user feedback, the system can evolve responsively over time, offering more inclusive, context-aware, and personalized mobility experiences that reflect real-life use patterns and changing conditions. The collected data can then be analyzed alongside the traditional indicators to validate, challenge, or enhance existing strategies, bringing depth and realism to technical models. U-KNOW in this way can offer a new layer of insights that enhances the quality, inclusivity, and realism of urban mobility analysis. By integrating user-informed knowledge we can finally provide planners and designers with a more complete picture of mobility experience, enabling them to design solutions that are responsive, con-

78

text-aware, and grounded in real use patterns.

/Reflection

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Figure 37 Participatory design process (Photo credits: UX Indonesia)

Figure 38 Walkability App Interface (Image credits: Walk21 Foundation)

‘The app allows individuals and communities to evaluate the walkability of their environment using a structured, user-friendly methodology.

By capturing both objective indicators (such as infrastructure quality) and subjective perceptions (such as safety or comfort), the tool enables people—particularly those in underrepresented groups—to contribute their experience-based knowledge to mobility planning processes. This fosters an understanding of walkability as something co-produced, not just engineered.’

In Conversation with Hubert Beroche

Screenless Cities and the Urban Experience What do you mean by “Screenless Cities”?

Communities worldwide are beginning to recognize this problem. For instance, in 2024, the small village of Seine-Port, France, banned the use of smartphones in public spaces. This decision, made through a local

I define Screenless Cities as cities that shift attention

referendum, was aimed at protecting their children

from screens to streets. For years, our engagement

from screens and preserving social bonds in

with urban life, including urban artificial intelligence,

public spaces. What is interesting is that the residents

has been increasingly mediated through screens. As a

of Seine-Port pushed the boundaries of political

result, many urban activities are now

action, it is, in fact, illegal to ban smartphones in public

conducted via screens, often entirely disconnected

spaces in France, precisely because they had no al-

from the physical cityscape. A striking consequence

ternatives, collectively, to offer to screen dependency

of this phenomenon is the rise of “smombies” (a term

in public spaces.

blending “zombies” and “smartphones”), describing pedestrians so engrossed in their phones that they

The Screenless City concept aims to limit the domi-

barely notice their surroundings.

nance of screens, and smombies, without imposing outright bans. Instead, it seeks to create desirable,

As I explore in my forthcoming book on this topic,

sustainable alternatives. So, what alternative could we

the smombie is not merely the product of individual

propose to screens? The answer is right before our

behavior but a systemic issue. It results from a net-

eyes: the city. A screen is a medium, a surface that

work of stakeholders, corporations, platforms, and

transmits information. But the city is also a medium,

advertisers, who profit from capturing and monetizing

perhaps one of the oldest, most effective, and most

our attention. While profitable for some organizations,

resilient ever created by humanity. Moreover, it is a

this model is eroding the foundations of urban life and,

medium that is embodied, relational, and collective.

more broadly, our social cohesion.

The concept of the Screenless City thus proposes to reimagine the city as a medium capable of interfacing intelligence, including AI, and information.

Interview published at: https://transformtransport.org/media/interviews/exploring-screenless-cities-in-conversation-with-hubert-beroche/ Selected segments are featured for their relevance to the themes explored in this book.

//Interview

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Hubert Beroche is the President of URBAN AI, a global organization dedicated to urban artificial intelligence.

He is also a Lecturer at Sorbonne University and the creator of the “Screenless City” concept, which he elaborates on in this interview.

“

Can we make the city itself a desirable alternative to screens? This is a complex but critical challenge”

Do you have examples of this concept in action?

In 2024, I co-organized The Screenless City Conference at La Sorbonne. This event brought together international researchers and cities to explore this idea. It also showcased several innovators, designers, and artists materializing information, and even artificial intelligence, outside the realm of screens.

One example from this conference is Bret Victor’s prototype Realtalk, a screenless computer that operates through tangible object manipulation. It’s a very interesting approach, and I highly recommend looking it up. We also featured a French artist who creates beautiful urban sculptures to embody energy data in public spaces.

In reality, there are countless ways to materialize information without relying on screens. This is one of the most striking elements when exploring the Screenless City. Initially, imagining screenless interfaces feels almost impossible as if the range of possibilities shrinks to nothing. I call this the “monopoly of screens”, the fact that screens have become so deeply intertwined with our existence that we can no longer conceive of life without them. However, once we move beyond this monopoly and start considering all forms of materiality as potential carriers of information, we realize that the field of exploration is immensely vast.

What are the next steps?

The examples I’ve shared illustrate an alternative technological trajectory, one that actually revisits and reinvents some ideas from late 20th-century research. The question now is: how do we chart this trajectory? How can we create a system that redirects the forces of the attention economy towards a more meaningful, embodied, and relational model of information, a model rooted in urban life? In other words, how can we make the city itself a desirable alternative to screens?

This is a complex but critical challenge. Every day, millions of people worldwide answer this question.

They unconsciously choose screens over their cities.

They become smombies, signaling that what their screens offer is more engaging than the urban environment around them. This isn’t an individual failure; it’s a systemic one. It reflects our collective inability to lift people’s eyes from their screens and bring back eyes on the street, with all the social, cultural, and economic benefits that entails. At URBAN AI, the international organization I lead, we’re building a global ecosystem to address this challenge. Our mission is to provide compelling alternatives to screens in public spaces, leveraging AI and innovative urban design to create vibrant, screenless cities.

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

UX Mobility: Multi-User Walkability Route Planner This section introduces the Multi-User Walkability Route Planner, a UX-driven tool developed by Transform Transport and Systematica. The tool enables city users to plan pedestrian trips using route recommendations tailored to their personal preferences, to deliver tailored user experiences. By integrating walkability indicators and user survey data, it aims to offer an alternative to conventional shortest-route navigation tools by prioritizing an integrated user experience as an output. While it does not directly follow the path of Platform Urbanism, focusing rather on being a tool for planners, it provides the foundation to develop a digital user platform, whether proprietary or open source, to enable users to build customized urban navigation experiences based on their own individual needs and preferences.

Figure 39 The city as a hybrid multi-layered entity

Recognizing the diversity of urban characteristics, street design, possible routes and user types, the research focuses on assessing the level of walkability in the city of Milan, Italy, according to the unique experiences and needs of different users.

The aim is to provide valuable information for urban planners and policy makers, and to promote the analysis of more inclusive and adaptive urban environments that improve the quality of life for multiple urban users. This is based on: i) the collection of comprehensive indicators and data; ii) the construction of geospatial datasets; and iii) the development of a pedestrian mobility routing system.

The three goals are supported by developing the UX Mobility Survey to gather data on users’ walking preferences, which were integrated as weights into a multi-user route planner using open-source and proprietary GIS data. The routing system results highlight how varying preferences influence UX paths, which diverge from the shortest route by prioritizing a wide variety of walkability factors. By applying different travel time thresholds, an optimization process is then applied to balance user experience with route efficiency, underscoring the complexity of pedestrian navigation.

82

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Figure 40 Routing system parameters and user interface

83

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

User Experience (UX), as conceived in this project,

Pedestrian navigation operates at three behavioral

refers to the quality of interaction between a user and

levels (Basu et al., 2022): strategic (i.e., pre-journey

a system that enables the user to achieve a specific

planning), tactical (i.e., route selection), and operation-

goal (Dickson-Deane & Chen, 2018). The concept of

al (i.e., real-time decisions such as crossing roads and

UX has received considerable attention in the field of

avoiding obstacles). Route choice reflects a dynam-

Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) and interaction

ic interplay of external influences and individual

design over the past decades (Hassenzahl & Tractin-

preferences, shaped by trip attributes (e.g., distance,

sky, 2006). UX in urban design extends the principles

traffic volume, and travel time), the built and natural

of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) to the built

environment (e.g., sidewalk characteristics, pedestrian

environment, emphasizing a user-centered approach

amenities, safety, and aesthetics), and socio-demo-

to mapping and analyzing urban mobility. The interest

graphic factors (e.g., age, gender, and travel com-

in urban experience through participatory activities

panions). These factors influence both the objective

introduces a ‘user layer’ that captures the needs, ex-

selection of a route and the subjective experience

pectations, feelings, and perceptions of urban users,

of it.

particularly those in situations of vulnerability. Unlike traditional urban analysis, this approach collabora-

This project focuses on: i) the collection of compre-

tively builds qualitative data layers that enrich the

hensive indicators and data; ii) the construction of

quantitative data traditionally used to measure urban

geospatial datasets; and iii) the development of a

performance (Al Maghraoui, 2019).

pedestrian mobility routing system. The three goals are supported by the collection of survey data on

The challenge for the UX Mobility tool is to develop a

users’ walking preferences, which were integrated

strong base of quantitative metrics that are available

as weights into a multi-user route planner using

and open, on which subjective parameters can be

open-source and proprietary GIS data. Within the

built iteratively and interactively by user segments.

route planner, the ability to explore different weights and record the preferences of various user segments

Each road has unique quantitative and qualitative characteristics that can enhance or hinder the pedestrian experience of different users (Gehl, 2010).

For instance, parents with pushchairs prioritize wide, unobstructed pavements and safe crossings, while people with disabilities seek smooth surfaces, gentle ramps, and continuous footpaths.

84

in route calculation allows for the identification of the value of each parameter and potential navigation solutions tailored to the specific needs and priorities of each user (Bast et al., 2016; Novack et al., 2018). The final aim is thus to provide valuable information for urban planners and policy makers, to demonstrate the impact of user differentiation on route planning outcomes, and

to promote the analysis of more inclusive and adaptive urban environments that improve the quality of life for multiple urban users.

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Enabling Data and Methodology This section explores the datasets and steps taken to develop a routing system that prioritizes user preferences rather than selecting the shortest path. In particular, the approach consisted of assessing three main components:

Step 1: collection of comprehensive

Step 2: construction of geospatial datasets

indicators and data

various data sources were used to quantify static

a survey was conducted to identify key walkability

factors relevant to walkability and integrate them into

indicators and assess their importance to

the street network;

pedestrians. Respondents were then grouped into clusters based on their priorities;

Step 3: development of a pedestrian mobility routing system indicators gathered through a survey and geospatial datasets on the street network were integrated into a routing system that considers walkability factors in the calculation of the optimal path.

Data Collection: Defining Comprehensive Indicators and Data The first phase of the project involved the collection

The preliminary data collection process included the

and selection of key indicators of walkability related

selection of comprehensive data available for the city

to multiple users. The basic parameters for evaluating

of Milan and representative of the Walkability Indica-

these indicators are based on guidelines developed

tors (see Table 2). The total list of 33 indicators pro-

by the Walk21 Foundation, for the Walkability App, a

vides a detailed description of the urban environment

measuring tool developed by the globally recognized

and the characteristics impacting walkability, such as

organization with the aim of promoting and sharing

physical features of pedestrian pathways (e.g., quality

walking experiences. These indicators, divided into

of footpath, pedestrian crossings, presence of furni-

categories (level L1) and subcategories (level L2),

ture and greenery), social and behavioral aspects (e.g.,

identified as relevant within the pedestrian experi-

social interaction, driving behavior, street life), envi-

ence, provided a solid framework for evaluating differ-

ronmental quality and other quantitative parameters

ent mobility scenarios.

that describe the urban pathways.

85

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Table 2 Walkability Indicators L2 Indicator_L1

Footpath

Crossing

Street Furniture

Greenery

Obstacles clearance

Environmental quality

Weather protection

Indicator_L2

Description

Width

The extent of the footpath from side to side.

Surface

The uppermost part of the footpath.

Slope

The steepness of the footpath.

Location

The designated place for people to cross the road.

Priority

The priority given to pedestrians on waiting and crossing time compared to traffic.

Visibility

The ability to see and be seen by approaching traffic.

Lighting

The provision of lighting at night to illuminate public space.

Seating

The provision of seats in public space.

Wayfinding

The provision of information for pedestrians to navigate through public space and reach certain destinations.

Parks

Public green spaces.

Trees

Trees in public spaces outside parks and gardens.

Plants

Isolated or ground level plants in public space.

Misplaced equipment

Street furniture or infrastructure blocking the footpath.

Business activities / Vendors

Business and commerce placed on the footpath.

Parked vehicles

Vehicles parked on footpaths or crossings.

Noise quality

The level of noise in public space

Air Quality

The level or air pollutants in public space.

Cleanliness

The state or quality of being clean or being kept clean.

Shade

Public equipment to block sunlight and heat.

Shelter Drainage Other people in the street

Social interaction

Behavior Interaction / Visual contact)

Traffic

Visual interest & Street life

The way other people act in public space, especially towards others.

Visual contact with other pedestrians in public spaces or in private space (buildings).

The amount of traffic in public spaces.

Speed

The distance traffic moves per unit of time.

Driving Behavior

The way drivers interact with other road users and the environment in public space.

Activities in public space (street life)

The animation and vibrancy of street life.

Streetscape & Architecture

The visual elements of a street combined to form its character and aesthetic.

Scenery & views

The scenery, vista and landscape context

Visual & Hearing aids

Mental disorders aids 86

The amount of other people in public space.

Volume

Mobility aids

Inclusion

Public equipment to provide a shield from weather precipitation and wind.

The system and infrastructure for dispersing (rain) water in public space.

Pedestrian infrastructure and equipment to provide and enable accessibility to pedestrians with reduced or assisted mobility.

Pedestrian infrastructure and equipment to provide and enable accessibility to pedestrians with visual or hearing impairment.

Pedestrian infrastructure and equipment to provide and enable accessibility to pedestrians with mental disorders.

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

To further explore these indicators, the proposed UX

Finally, the survey collected background information

Mobility Survey was launched in July and closed in

on respondents, including age, gender identity, citi-

December 2024, to gather comprehensive data on

zenship, disability status, and occupation.

UX factors that influence the pedestrian experience.

The survey collected 290 answers, with the sample

After conducting the survey, the collected data was

consisting of 12% under the age of 25, 61% between

analyzed to identify patterns in walking preferences

26 and 35 and the remaining 26% older. Of these,

and group respondents into clusters. The goal of this

57% women, 40% men and 3% other, 40% were of

clustering analysis was to determine the optimal num-

Italian citizenship and around 30% residents in the

ber of user groups based on the importance assigned

city of Milan, with a total of 5% bearers of a disability.

to Walkability Indicators, as reflected in the

The survey explored the experience of participants as

survey responses.

city users, providing insights on their walking habits, primary transportation modes, purpose of walks,

From the 33 indicators assessed in the survey,

duration and mode (whether people usually walk alone

12 key indicators were selected and converted into

or accompanied).

data for analysis. The K-means clustering method, an unsupervised learning algorithm, was used to identify

The following section delves into the analysis of the

distinct user groups by assigning data points to k

specific indicators influencing the walking experience,

clusters and iteratively adjusting centroids for optimal

presenting each Walkability Indicator and providing a

grouping. The ideal number of clusters was deter-

scale of 1 to 5, 1 being not at all relevant and 5 being

mined using the elbow method, which analyzes the

very relevant.

within-cluster sum of squares and selects the point where the decrease rate slows.

87

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

The analysis identified four distinct user groups

Building the Geospatial Datasets

based on how users rated importance of the 12

The second phase of this project involved the con-

Walkability Indicators. Then, an analysis of clustering

struction of a geospatial dataset, mapping the 12

results was performed to create weights to be used

Walkability Indicators analyzed to derive clusters

as inputs in the routing model.

on the street graph of Milan, Italy (see Table 3). This street map was constructed using the open-source

To generate meaningful weight values for routing,

data of OpenStreetMap and then updated and

a multi-step normalization and standardization

refined using Geographic Information Systems (GIS).

process was applied. First, the average values of

The different indices were integrated into the graph

key indicators were calculated for each category.

according to specific methodologies based on the

Then, data was scaled using min-max normalization

index typology. Percentile-based scaling is applied

to ensure comparability across different metrics.

across all indicators, penalizing extreme values such

Next, Z-score standardization adjusted values based

as narrow sidewalks or high pollution levels while

on their distribution. Finally, an exponential transfor-

prioritizing more favorable conditions. This integration

mation was applied to refine weight influence and

ensured that the map reflects the various indicators

maintain positive values, ensuring smooth integration

by providing a solid basis for the development of the

into the routing model.

routing system.

Table 3 Geospatial Datasets Indicator_L1

Geospatial Dataset

Data Source

Sidewalk width

Transform Transport (2020)

Surface (i.e., pavement quality)

Open Street Map (2025)

Slope

DTM (2020)

Crossing

Distance

Open Street Map (2025)

Street Furniture

Lighting

Municipality of Milan (2023)

Park

Open Street Map (2025)

Trees (i.e. greenery)

Database Geo-Topografico (DBGT) (2020)

Environmental quality

Air quality (NO2)

Cittadini per l’Aria (2023)

Weather protection

Physiological Equivalent Temperature (i.e. thermal comfort)

Internal calculation (2023)

Social interaction

People (i.e., attractiveness)

Google POI (2024)

Volume (i.e. low traffic)

Internal traffic model (2019)

Speed (i.e. pedestrian areas)

Open Street Map (2025)

Footpath

Greenery

Traffic

88

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Development of the Pedestrian

The code also includes steps to balance distance in

Mobility Routing System

UX path calculations. First, an optimal path search is

In the third phase of the project, a Python-based

performed through an iterative process that ad-

routing system was developed to generate cus-

justs an alpha parameter to find a balance between

tomized paths. The process begins with graph

the shortest and UX-optimized paths. This gener-

construction, where a street network shapefile is

ates routes that are approximately 5-10%, 10-25%,

converted into an undirected graph. Nodes represent

and 25-50% longer than the shortest path while

intersections, while edges represent street segments

preserving user-defined weights.

enriched with geospatial datasets of the 12 Walkability Indicators described in the previous section.

Last, the final path is generated, storing and visualizing multiple routes, including the shortest path, the

Next, user-defined start and end points are mapped

UX-weighted path, and three balanced alternatives.

by identifying the nearest graph nodes. To account for

Additional diagnostic features provide insights into

user preferences, cluster-based weights, described

route performance, such as the number of crossings,

above, are imported, reflecting different priorities

sidewalk width, and traffic volume, aiding

in route selection. The system then computes two

mobility decisions.

alternative routes: one based on shortest distance and another optimized for user experience (UX). The

Results: Optimizing Pedestrian Experiences

UX route is determined by a custom weight func-

for Four Distinct User Personas

tion that integrates user preferences with street

This section presents the results for the Milan case

attributes. The cost of a segment is determined by

study, focusing on a quadrant of the city that

multiplying the presence of different walkability fac-

includes the area around Piazza Duomo and

tors mapped on the street segments (i.e., geospatial

Piazza Piola to the northeast of the city. It details

datasets) by their assigned importance for each user

how respondents of the UX Mobility Survey were

cluster (i.e., Walkability Indicators). The final route is

grouped into four clusters based on their walking

then calculated by summing these costs across all

preferences, which were defined using 12 Walkability

segments, guiding pedestrians along paths that best

Indicators. It also examines the spatial distribution of

match their preferences and priorities.

geospatial datasets quantifying the presence of these indicators in the street network. Finally, it outlines the combined results of integrating user weights and datasets into the routing system, highlighting the suggested paths for each cluster.

89

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Figure 40 outlines the results of the k-means clus-

Figure 41 illustrates the spatial distribution of the 12

tering process. The analysis identified four distinct

Walkability Indicators from Table 3, mapped onto

groups based on respondents’ preferences regarding

the street network within the case study area.

12 Walkability Indicators. These clusters were then

The combined presence or absence of these

analyzed to determine which elements were most

indicators in the network, along with the cluster

important to each group and derive a semantic

weights, determines the final scoring of each street

description of their user persona (see Figure 41).

segment in the routing system.

Figure 41 Four User personas identified through k-means clustering method The Health-conscious Green Navigator

These walkers combine active mobility with environmental awareness, showing the highest bicycle/e-scooter usage.

They emphasize air quality and green infrastructure, while minimizing concern for slopes. Their preference for safe crossings reflects a systematic approach to incorporating walking into a health-oriented lifestyle.

The Recreational Urban Walker

This group shows minimal concern for functional aspects like slope or crossings. Instead, they focus on aesthetic elements, particularly valuing trees and parks. Their variable walking times suggest a spontaneous, enjoyment-driven approach prioritizing experience over efficiency.

90

The Environmentally conscious Navigator

This group takes a holistic approach to sustainable urban mobility, scoring highest across nearly all walkability factors, but prioritizing air quality, pedestrian-friendly routes, and flat terrain. Their public transit preference and consistent medium-length walks demonstrate deliberate choices balancing environmental impact with walking experience.

The Safety-conscious Urban Navigator

This cluster represents users who prioritize safety and comfort in their urban mobility, with a strong preference for well-lit, tree-lined pedestrian zones. Their low concern for air pollution combined with high car usage suggests a pragmatic approach to mobility, where personal safety and comfort outweigh environmental concerns.

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Figure 42 Spatial distribution of 4 out of 12 Walkability Indicators included in the analysis

Figure 43 presents the results of the routing system algorithm for the Milan case study, featuring a sample path with its origin at Piazza Piola and destination at Piazza Duomo. The routing system integrates user preferences with street attributes by multiplying the cluster weights with the level of presence of each Walkability Indicator on each street segment and summing the results for all 12 indicators. As shown, each cluster prioritizes different attributes, resulting in different paths. While the shortest path is more direct, the trade-off between UX variables leads to longer routes. Each route offers a unique combination of advantages and compromises, reflecting the complex factors that influence urban navigation.

91

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Figure 43 Routing system results: cluster paths between Piazza Piola and Duomo

Figure 44 illustrates the optimized paths for Cluster 4, demonstrating how the time threshold significantly impacts the results and highlighting the complexity of balancing various walkability factors within a real road network. The findings indicate that while optimizing time thresholds and reducing path lengths, the presence of Walkability Indicators remains balanced and, in some cases, even exceeds that of the UX path. Table 4, meanwhile, compares the lengths of the optimal UX path and the balanced alternatives.

Figure 44 Time optimization thresholds result for Cluster 4: the Health-conscious Green Navigator

Table 4 Length difference for UX path and time optimized paths for Cluster 4 Path

Shortest Path

UX Path

Balanced 5-10%

Balanced 10-25%

Balanced 25-50%

Length (Km)

3.8

6.2

4.1

4.7

5.1

Difference (Km)

0.0

2.4

0.3

0.9

1.3

Difference (%)

0.0

61.1

7.4

23.3

32.8

92

/Use Case 6

Tools: Developing Digital Tools for User-Centric Mobility

Conclusions and Future Works

These weights were then integrated into a routing system that combines them with geospatial data representing the indicators on the street network.

The routing system generates different routes for each cluster, which deviate from the shortest path

This chapter examined practical tools and applica-

by maximizing and balancing indicator presence

tions designed to facilitate user-centric urban expe-

according to user preferences. An optimization

riences. It explored the role of platform urbanism and

process is then applied to refine the routes, making

volunteered geographic information (VGI) platforms

the tool more realistic by considering the importance

in providing personalized, data-driven mobility solu-

of path length in route selection. It highlights the

tions that empower users to navigate and shape their

complexity of balancing various walkability

urban environments according to their needs and

factors within a routing system based on a real

preferences. The discussion highlighted the potential

road network.

of advanced digital tools to enhance urban mobility by offering curated and guided experiences tailored to

Future developments will focus on expanding the

specific user groups, while acknowledging the

database of Walkability Indicators, refining the weight-

negative impact of screen dependency on lived

ing function, and testing whether the generated

urban experiences.

routes align with stated user preferences. Additionally, efforts will focus on improving data collection

The outcomes of the UX Mobility project concern

methods and refining the survey methodology to

both practical and theoretical advances in mobility

ensure more accurate and representative results. This

and urban design. Using a user-centered approach,

includes optimizing survey design, enhancing ques-

this study aims to advance the current analytical mod-

tions of clarity, and incorporating interactive elements

el of the city by providing advanced insights into the

to better capture user preferences. Expanding the

needs and preferences of different user groups. In

user base will also be a priority, allowing for a more

particular, the project aimed to support the develop-

diverse range of inputs and a broader understanding

ment of more inclusive and adaptable urban envi-

of walking behaviors across different demographics.

ronments and provide valuable information for urban

Rather than simply improving isolated “moments” in

planners and policy makers in developing solutions to

the urban environment, a user-experience-led (UXM)

improve urban mobility infrastructure. By identifying

approach seeks to design and deliver holistic, end-

and addressing the specific needs of urban users, we

to-end urban experiences. By mapping and cus-

aim to bridge the gap between quantitative data

tomizing user journeys, the UX Mobility tool aims to

and subjective user experiences, promoting a more

challenge the traditional one-to-many urban mobility

holistic approach to urban mobility.

service model, paving the way for one-to-one solutions that respond to the complexities of diverse user needs, actively shaping experiences in a hybrid, “phy-gital” urban landscape.

93

Toolkit: Guidelines for planners to apply the UXM approach

The UX Mobility Toolkit is a reflective tool designed to

These dimensions are not meant to be approached

support interdisciplinary teams in engaging in mean-

sequentially but rather in parallel, encouraging con-

ingful conversations throughout the development of

tinuous cross-reflection. As ideas emerge and evolve

mobility-related projects. Its primary aim is to foster

in one section, they may inspire revisions or new

structured brainstorming and dialogue around the

insights in another, making the toolkit a dynamic and

project’s goals and values, helping participants shape

iterative support for project development. In each

more informed and user-centered planning process-

part, a series of open-ended questions is proposed,

es. The main goal of the toolkit is to shift the attention

together with a set of possible answers. Both the

to the interplay of users, elements etc. in the project.

questions and the answers are meant not to be exaus-

The toolkit is organized into two parts, each focusing

tive, but to be expanded and tailored to the need of

on a different yet interconnected dimension of

the project.

the project.

49

UX Mobility

Dimension 1

Dimension 2

User Experience (UX) Understanding contains

Project Understanding & Design Implications trans-

foundational knowledge about UX. It focuses on the

lates theoretical information about users, needs and

users and their experience within space. It invites

experiences into practical reflections. This dimention

planners to define key user groups and explore both

is dedicated to framing different aspects of the pro-

their habitual spatial needs and their cognitive and

ject with a UX lens. It begins by helping planners clar-

perceptual requirements. This includes understanding

ify the overall scale and purpose of the intervention,

how users navigate, perceive, and emotionally relate

identify its core activities, and reflect on the modes

to space, including elements that are essential for

of transportation that are relevant within its context.

designing inclusive, intuitive, and responsive environ-

All of these elements are interpreted with a UX lens.

ments.

It follows by expanding the reflection to include the physical and perceptual dimensions of the project. It offers a set of elements to reflect on and encourages not only asking what needs to be considered, but also how to think about it through a series of questions sparking reflections. The main goal is to understand how users interact in space and time with these elements, based on their needs.

95 59

Dimension 1

UX Mobility

Dimension 1 - User Experience (UX) Understanding

To support this reflection, each section is accom-

focuses on initiating the design process from the per-

panied by a visual table that provides examples and

spective of the users, the people who will ultimately

classifications. These tables are not exhaustive, but

engage with and be impacted by the project. Instead

serve as conversation starters, helping teams identify

of starting from systems, infrastructure, or technical

overlooked user groups, articulate nuanced needs,

solutions, this dimension invites teams to shift their

and recognize the diverse experiences that mobility

attention toward the individuals and communities

projects can generate or fail to address.

involved. By foregrounding users from the outset, the aim is to better understand their roles, routines,

Tables include a description of Users groups and

expectations, and constraints, ensuring that their lived

Needs and Experience types. These components are

experiences shape the foundation of project thinking.

meant to be mixed and matched, questioned, and localized, forming the basis for a more inclusive, hu-

Dimension 1 is organized into three key sections, each designed to support a different layer of user insight.

Within each section, a set of guided questions helps project teams reflect critically on who the users are, how they move through space, and what shapes their mobility experience.

96

man-centered approach to mobility planning.

User Experience (UX) Understanding

UX Mobility

Users Question 1.1 Which user groups are included in this project or context?

Sample questions •

Who is most directly affected? Who is indirectly affected? Which user groups are currently prioritized, and which might be overlooked or underserved?

•

How do intersectional identities (e.g., gender, income, ability, background) shape how users experience mobility in this context?

•

How does temporal diversity (e.g., users groups interactions at different times of day, week, or season) shape how users experience mobility in this context?

•

…

Table 1.1 User groups

Trip Purpose

Users can be categorized based on their primary reason for travel, such as commuting, leisure, or tourism.

Commuters typically prioritize efficiency and affordability in their urban journeys.

Commuting

They often have specific time constraints and may be willing to compromise on other factors, such as comfort, to reach their destination on time.

Leisure travelers often prioritize comfort, enjoyability, and a stress-free experience. Scenic routes, relaxed environments, and low crowding are appealing,

Leisure

even at the expense of travel time. While affordability remains important, users may opt for slower or less direct modes if the journey itself is pleasant.

Environmental impact and social responsibility can also influence decisions.

Tourists tend to value safety and ease of navigation in unfamiliar places. Function-

Tourism

ality is important, especially reliable connections and access to attractions, but enjoyability is also high on the list. Environmental impact may be considered.

97

/Dimension 1

UX Mobility

Demographics

Users can be categorized based on their demographic group. Age, gender disability status are three key factors that impact mobility behavior and needs.

Age plays a critical role in shaping mobility needs and choices. Different age

Age

groups face distinct physical, cognitive, and situational constraints that affect how they travel, what they prioritize, and how they respond to transport systems.

Gender

Gender influences mobility patterns, priorities, and constraints due to differences in social roles, safety perceptions, and travel behavior.

Users with disabilities prioritize accessibility, safety, and comfort. This includes

Disability Status

barrier-free infrastructure and audible/visual guidance. Functional reliability (e.g., working elevators, accurate schedules) is essential.

*Example Age / Elders

Older adults often prioritize safety, accessibility, and comfort. They may have mobility limitations and may require transportation options that are easy to use and accessible.

Children often depend on adults or public services for mobility, making safety

*Example

and accessibility top priorities. This includes safe crossings, traffic-calmed areas,

Age / Children

good visibility, and well-lit environments. For school or extracurricular trips, functional reliability is crucial.

Women’s travel is often multi-purpose, involving care responsibilities, errands,

*Example

and chained trips. This increases the importance of reliability, affordability, and

Gender / Women

connectivity between modes. Additionally, one of the most defining factors for women across contexts is safety, both actual and perceived.

Social Behavior

Users can be categorized based on the social context of travel.

Solo travelers often prioritize speed and functionality, especially for commuting or

Single

personal errands. Safety and affordability remain relevant, while enjoyability may influence mode choice during leisure trips. Independence and flexibility tend to be valued highly.

Groups typically favor affordable and comfortable modes that allow social inter-

Groups

action. Coordinating group travel raises the importance of reliability and ease of planning. For tourism or leisure, enjoyability and inclusivity become more prominent.

*Example Groups / Families *Example Groups / Students

98

Families may have diverse mobility needs, depending on the age and number of children. They may prioritize safety, convenience, and affordability.

Students may have more flexible travel schedules but may prioritize affordability and safety. They may also value social aspects of transportation, such as opportunities to meet friends or study while traveling.

UX Mobility

Needs Question 1.2 Which mobility needs are dominant in this project or context?

Sample questions •

How are needs different across user groups, and are those differences being explicitly addressed?

•

Which needs are currently well-supported, and which are in tension or conflict?

•

How does temporal diversity (e.g., evolution of needs at different times of day, week, or season for users’ groups) shape mobility needs in this context?

•

…

Table 1.2 Needs

Practical needs

Travel decisions based on practical concerns Safety is a top priority for many users, especially those who are vulnerable, such

Safety

as children, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities. This includes factors such as well-maintained infrastructure, adequate lighting, and security measures.

Cost is a significant factor for many users, especially those on limited budgets.

Affordability

This includes factors such as ticket prices, fares, and the availability of discounts or subsidies.

Users generally prefer transportation options that are fast and reliable. This may

Functionality

include factors such as travel time, frequency of service, and the ability to avoid traffic congestion.

Comfort exists on a spectrum. Lack of basic comfort levels can lead to foregone or modified trips. These includes physiological factors such as ergonomic design

Comfort

or climatic conditions, but it also includes cognitive and sensory factors such as navigational cognitive load, noise levels, and perceived level of crowding. Sensitive individuals are particularly impacted by these conditions, with major impacts on daily travel choices.

99

/Dimension 1

Value-based needs

UX Mobility

Travel decisions based on personal values Beyond personal concerns, increasingly, users are concerned about the environ-

Environmental impact

mental impact of their transportation choices. This includes factors such as fuel efficiency, emissions, and the use of renewable energy.

Social responsibility Leisure needs

Users may also voluntarily select transport modes that demonstrate a strong sense of social responsibility through fair labor policies and user inclusivity.

Travel decisions driven by a pursuit for enjoyment Beyond practical concerns, the enjoyability of a route is a factor that influences travel behavior. Users are more likely to choose scenic routes, especially for

Enjoyability

leisure, once given the choice. The factor of enjoyability is often left out of the equation in traditional transport planning practices, but the benefits and return to users and to livability outcomes demands a wider perspective of user needs.

Experience Question 1.3 Which types of mobility experiences are more relevant in this project or context?

Sample questions •

How are mobility experiences different across user groups, and are those differences being explicitly addressed?

•

Does the project support a positive mobility experience by reducing excessive cognitive, sensory, affective, and physical loads? (e.g., Are spatial transitions clear and intuitive? Is the quality of sensory inputs addressed? Are potential psychological strains considered? Is the physical effort required appropriate?)

•

100

...

/Dimension 1

UX Mobility

Table 1.3 Experience

Cognitive load corresponds to the mental effort required to process informaCognitive Load

tion, navigate environments, and make decisions. Examples include: wayfinding through unfamiliar transit systems, evaluating multiple route options or transfer strategies, managing mobile apps, maps, signage, or ticketing logic.

Sensory Load correponds to the intensity and quality of sensory input expe-

Sensory Load

rienced in the environment. Examples include: navigating in visually or aurally cluttered spaces, coping with overwhelming sounds, poor lighting, or disorienting signage, tactile discomfort on rough surfaces or in overcrowded vehicles.

Affective Load corresponds to the emotional quality or psychological toll of a

Affective Load

mobility experience. Examples include: stress due to unpredictability or crowding, fear or insecurity in certain environments (e.g., nighttime travel).

Physical Load corresponds to the bodily exertion required to complete a mobility

Physical Load

task. Examples include: long walking distances or steep inclines, standing during transit or carrying heavy bags, accessibility challenges for elderly or disabled users.

101

Dimension 2

Dimension 2 - Project Understanding & Design Im-

•

UX Mobility

the scale at which the project operates and how

plications shifts the focus from understanding users

this affects continuity, visibility, and legibility for

to understanding how the project itself is structured,

users;

experienced, and interpreted, from a UX perspective.

•

the purpose of the intervention and its relation-

This dimension invites teams to examine the project’s

ship to mobility goals, land use functions, and

fundamental characteristics (e.g., scale, purpose,

behavioral patterns;

modal choices, and planning elements) and reflect on

•

the modes of transport prioritized, with attention

how these features shape user experience over time

to how different experiences affect practical, val-

and across space.

ue-based, and leisure needs; •

the design elements included and how these

Rather than viewing project components in isolation,

shape the physical and sensory experience of

this dimension encourages an integrated reflection on

mobility;

how users interact with the system. It links design de-

•

temporal dynamics, recognizing that user expe-

cisions to real, situated mobility experiences, drawing

rience shifts across times of day, week, etc., and

attention to the interdependence between infrastruc-

that projects often evolve over time.

ture, user behaviors, and lived environments.

Through this dimension, project teams are equipped Dimension 2 is articulated through a set of guiding

to move from abstract planning to grounded design

questions, supported by curated examples and tables

implications, reflecting on how each layer of the pro-

that help teams explore:

ject influences how people move, feel, interpret, and

102

remember their experience in the system.

Project Understanding & Design Implications

UX Mobility

Project Framing - Scale & Purpose Scale Question 2.1 Which scale are you focusing on?

Sample questions •

At this scale, how do users experience mobility differently, what user needs can be prioritized?

•

How does this project connect with its surrounding context, and how does that shape the experience of users who are directly involved as well as those indirectly affected?

•

…

Table 2.1 - Project scale Needs: At the national/regional scale, functionality is key: users expect efficient, fast, and reliable connections across territories. Affordability becomes critical in ensuring equal access to long-distance travel, particularly for lower-income users.

National/Region

Environmental impact must also be considered, as national and regional transport often carries a high carbon footprint.

Design Implications: Design implications might involve ensuring multimodal hubs are seamless and accessible, pricing strategies are inclusive, and intercity systems integrate sustainable, low-emission options.

Needs: Urban mobility should prioritize accessibility and functionality, ensuring users can easily connect across the city with coherent, reliable services.

Safety and comfort are essential in dense, high-flow areas, especially for

City/Urban

vulnerable groups.

Design Implications: Design implications should include coherent multimodal networks, consistent signage, barrier-free transitions, and equitable distribution of services.

Needs: At the neighborhood level, comfort, safety, and enjoyability dominate. Users value short, pleasant, and secure trips. There’s often a gap between infrastruc-

District

ture designed for cars and what’s needed for active mobility or daily routines.

Design Implications: Design should ensure traffic calming, local greenery, shade, rest points, and spatial coherence to foster walkability and social presence.

103

/Dimension 2

UX Mobility

Needs: In complex buildings, accessibility, safety, and comfort are central. Arrival areas must be legible and welcoming, especially for users with disabilities, older adults, and visitors unfamiliar with the environment. Poor signage, confusing circuComplex Building

lation, and disconnected modal points (e.g., distant parking or poorly located bike racks) are common challenges.

Design Implications: Projects should ensure barrier-free access, intuitive spatial orientation, and integrated mobility nodes at entrances.

Project Purpose Question 2.2 What is the project’s purpose, and how does it link to wider impacts?

Sample questions •

Which needs does the project address and how do these relate to the users’ needs?

•

What type of activities the project is meant to support or enable, and how do those activities shape users’ mobility experiences?

•

Is the project aiming to encourage changes in user behavior? If so, how are design choices meant to support those changes?

•

…

Table 2.2 - Project purpose

Needs: Depending on type, new buildings should respond to a range of practical and leisure-related needs. In residential contexts, safety, accessibility, and afNew Buildings or Complexes

fordability are key, especially for families and older adults. Commercial or entertainment complexes should prioritize comfort, wayfinding, and functionality, while also supporting enjoyability and social presence.

Design Implications: Design solutions may include shaded walkways, rest points, inclusive parking, intuitive signage, and well-located entrances.

Needs: Urban Mobility plans must support equity, accessibility, and functionality at scale. Users expect them to feel socially responsible, transparent, and inclusive.

Urban Mobility Plans and Transformations

However, they often face resistance when affordability and safety perceptions are not adequately addressed.

Design Implications: Design should ensure public input is reflected, pricing models are fair, and the system supports diverse user groups with coherent, legible changes.

104

/Dimension 2

UX Mobility

Needs: In events or emergency contexts, safety, comfort, and functionality become non-negotiable. Users must be able to navigate under stress with clarity and Event or Safety-Oriented Planning

confidence. Risks include crowding, long wait times, and physical discomfort (e.g., heat, lack of seating). Special care is needed to accommodate users with disabilities.

Design Implications: Design interventions should focus on visible and multi-sensory wayfinding, shaded queueing, intuitive evacuation routes, and temporary infrastructure that upholds dignity and ease of use.

Transport Modes Question 2.3 Which modes of transportation are considered or prioritized in this project, and how do they shape the user experience?

Sample questions •

Which user groups benefit most from selected modes, and who might be left out or disadvantaged?

•

Which user needs does this transport choice support, which needs does it fail to meet?

•

Which experiential loads come with this mode, and how might design help reduce or balance them?

•

…

Table 2.3 - Transportation modes

Needs: Private modes often serve comfort, functionality, and safety, giving users autonomy, privacy, and convenience. They can also support accessibility for individuals with limited mobility or for trips outside of core service areas. However, Private Transport

they often conflict with goals related to affordability, environmental impact, and

(e.g., Cars, motorcycles)

social responsibility due to high emissions, cost burdens, and spatial inequality.

Design Implications: Design should focus on clear and intuitive access routes, safe and visible drop-off areas, and integration with shared/public options to mitigate exclusivity and environmental harm.

105

/Dimension 2

UX Mobility

Needs: Collective modes are essential to achieving affordability, functionality, and accessibility at scale. They allow equitable mobility across social groups. However, Collective Transport (e.g., Buses, trains, planes)

these systems may compromise comfort (due to crowding, noise, or delays), and their complexity can challenge safety and ease of use, especially for unfamiliar or vulnerable users.

Design Implications: Design should improve wayfinding clarity, ensure physical and digital accessibility, provide comfortable waiting and boarding environments, and enable reliable, multimodal connections.

Needs: Walking and cycling strongly support environmental impact, functionality for short trips, and enjoyability by connecting users to their surroundings. They also promote comfort and well-being when supported by appropriate infrastruc-

Active Mobility (e.g., Walking, cycling)

ture. However, challenges include safety in traffic-dominated areas, physical strain, and exposure to weather.

Design Implications: Design should prioritize continuous, protected routes, visibility at intersections, shaded paths, rest areas, and transitions that allow all users to navigate safely and comfortably.

Needs: These modes support functionality, affordability, and to some extent environmental impact, especially when replacing private car use. They also appeal

Shared Mobility (e.g.,

to users seeking flexibility and spontaneity. Challenges arise with comfort (due

Car-share, bike-share,

to uncertainty of availability), accessibility (due to digital interface reliance), and

ride-hailing)

social responsibility (e.g., labor conditions in ride-hailing services).

Design Implications: Design should emphasize intuitive pick-up/drop-off zones, real-time information, clear signage, and digital inclusion in service interfaces.

Needs: These modes appeal to expectations of future functionality and comfort,

Emerging or Experimental Modes (Autonomous vehicles, drones, Hyperloop, eVTOL)

and may promise improvements in environmental impact through technological innovation. However, they are often characterized by user uncertainty around safety, accessibility, and social responsibility, especially in early phases.

Design Implications: Design should ensure transparent communication about how systems work, promote inclusive access from the start, and build physical environments that clearly support user orientation and trust.

Needs: These services are critical in meeting accessibility, comfort, and safety needs for users with disabilities, older adults, or people with specific mobility

Specialized Modes (e.g., Paratransit, on-demand shuttles)

requirements. They also reinforce principles of social responsibility when equitably integrated. Challenges include potential stigmatization and exclusion if these services are visually or operationally segregated.

Design Implications: Design should focus on user dignity: simplified booking, co-location with general mobility services, and staff training to support personalized, respectful service delivery.

106

/Dimension 2

UX Mobility

Needs: While not a direct transport mode for users, logistics systems affect the Logistics (e.g. Delivery vehicles, cargo bikes, last-mile distribution systems)

comfort, safety, and environmental impact of urban mobility, especially in shared spaces. Conflicts can arise between delivery vehicles and pedestrians or cyclists, particularly during peak hours.

Design Implications: Design should include dedicated loading areas, designated delivery time slots, and spatial strategies that minimize congestion and maintain clear, safe paths for non-logistics users.

Elements Question 2.3 Which modes of transportation are considered or prioritized in this project, and how do they shape the user experience?

Sample questions •

Which user groups benefit most from selected modes, and who might be left out or disadvantaged?

•

Which user needs does this transport choice support, which needs does it fail to meet?

•

Which experiential loads come with this mode, and how might design help reduce or balance them?

•

…

Table 2.4 Physical & Perceptual Elements Spatial layout &

Experience: This element primarily affects cognitive load and affective load. It

structure (e.g., paths,

relates to how the physical arrangement of paths, intersections, boundaries, and

intersections,

landmarks supports spatial understanding and orientation.

edges, barriers, spatial

Design implication: Poorly structured environments can disorient users and

hierarchy, connectivity,

increase mental effort. Design should ensure that routes and boundaries are

visibility of routes and

logically organized and visually legible, using spatial hierarchy and landmarks to

destinations)

support wayfinding and reduce stress.

Surfaces & transitions

Experience: This element primarily affects physical load, sensory load, and

(e.g., surface materials,

cognitive load. It relates to how people interact with surfaces and level changes

ramps, steps, slopes,

while moving through space.

transitions between

Design implication: Abrupt or poorly designed transitions increase exertion and

zones, seating, tactile

confusion. Design should provide stable, inclusive, and clearly marked surfaces

paving) Infrastructure (e.g., crossings, bike lanes, transit stops, curb cuts, signals, modal separation)

with gentle slopes and logical placement of supportive elements.

Experience: This element primarily affects physical load, affective load, and cognitive load. It relates to the systems that enable and regulate movement across different transport modes.

Design implication: Incoherent or unsafe infrastructure increases stress and disrupts flow. Design should minimize modal conflicts, support intuitive transitions between modes, and ensure visibility and clarity at different speeds.

107

/Dimension 2

UX Mobility

Experience: This element primarily affects physical load, affective load, and Amenities (e.g., rest

cognitive load. It relates to the availability and placement of services that support

areas, shade, shops,

rest, recovery, activity, or engagement.

healthcare services,

Design Implications: The presence or absence of amenities shapes how users

entertainment venues,

experience movement. Design should ensure these services are accessible,

social infrastructure)

well-distributed, and integrated into natural pauses in the journey, without causing confusion or overload.

Sensory & perceptual environment (e.g., lighting, acoustics, materials, planting, views, public art, symbolic features)

108

Experience: This element primarily affects sensory load, affective load, and cognitive load. It relates to how environments are perceived through light, sound, touch, and emotional or symbolic cues.

Design implication: Overstimulating or disorienting environments can cause avoidance or anxiety. Design should aim for sensory clarity and emotional resonance, guiding perception and supporting comfort through thoughtful use of sensory and symbolic elements.

/Dimension 2

UX Mobility

Temporal dimension Question 2.5 How does the temporal dimension shape the user experience in this project?

Sample questions •

How do temporal variations shape user needs and experiences in relation to physical and perceptual elements?

•

How can design choices ensure these elements remain supportive and inclusive across different temporal conditions?

•

…

Table 2.5 Temporal Elements

Rhythms and patterns (e.g., peak/off-peak use, day/night variation, seasonal shifts)

Experience: Rhythms and patterns affect both affective and sensory load. Variation in crowding, lighting, or activity can create unpredictability and discomfort.

Design implication: Design should ensure environments remain legible and inviting under different temporal conditions, with lighting, staffing, and signals adapting accordingly.

Duration and pacing

Experience: Duration and pacing influence physical, affective, and cognitive load.

(e.g. short/long stays,

Long or poorly supported waits can lead to physical strain, boredom, or stress.

quick transitions,

Design Implications: Design should provide clarity on expected durations, offer

waiting time)

physical support (e.g. seating, shade), and reduce mental effort during transitions.

Experience: Schedules impact cognitive and affective load, especially when ac-

Time-based access

cess rules are unclear or inflexible. Sudden closures or complex restrictions can

(e.g., opening hours,

induce stress or exclusion.

restrictions, events)

Design Implications: Design should include transparent, predictable schedules and multi-channel communication to reduce user uncertainty.

Adaptability (e.g., temporary structures, modularity, event setups)

Experience: Adaptability mainly affects cognitive and affective load, especially when users face unexpected changes. Temporary alterations without guidance can create confusion or anxiety.

Design Implications: Design should incorporate adaptable systems with clear visual signals and user-friendly transitions when conditions change.

109

References

UX Mobility

Abdelfattah, L., Scarponi, L., Messa, F., Guida, C., Zucaro, F., Carpentieri, G., Andreola, F., Muzzonigro, A., Walker, J., & Gorrini, A. (2024). A digital humanities approach to study women’s perceptions of safety in the city of Milan: The STEP UP Project. In O. Gervasi et al. (Eds.), Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2024 Workshops (Vol. 14823, Lecture Notes in Computer Science). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-65329-2_4 Al Maghraoui, O. (2019). Designing for Urban Mobility-Modeling the traveler experience (Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris Saclay, COmUE). Available at: http://www.theses.fr/2019SACLC006/document Anttiroiko, A.-V., & De Jong, M. (2020). The Inclusive City: The Theory and Practice of Creating Shared Urban Prosperity. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61365-5 Bast, H., Delling, D., Goldberg, A., Müller-Hannemann, M., Pajor, T., Sanders, P., … & Werneck, R. F. (2016). Route planning in transportation networks. Algorithm engineering: Selected results and surveys, 19-80. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319-49487-6_2 Basu, N., Haque, Md. M., King, M., Kamruzzaman, Md., & Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. (2022). A systematic review of the factors associated with pedestrian route choice. Transport Reviews, 42(5), 672–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/014 41647.2021.2000064 Brosseau, M., Zangenehpour, S., Saunier, N., & Miranda-Moreno, L. F. (2013). The impact of waiting time and other factors on dangerous pedestrian crossings and violations at signalized intersections : a case study in Montréal. Transportation Research. Part F, Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 21, 159-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. trf.2013.09.010 Dickson-Deane, C. and Chen, H.L.O. (2018). Understanding User Experience. In: Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, Fourth Edition (pp. 7599-7608). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7598-6. ch117 European Commission. (2022, December 20). New mobility patterns study: Insights into passenger mobility and urban logistics. Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport. https://transport.ec.europa.eu/news-events/ news/new-mobility-patterns-study-insights-passenger-mobility-and-urban-logistics-2022-12-20_en European Commission. (2023, November 8). EU Live Bus Stop Info (European Citizens’ Initiative 2023/000008).

Retrieved September 2, 2025, from https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/2023/000008_en Ewing, R., & Dumbaugh, E. (2009). The Built Environment and Traffic Safety: A Review of Empirical Evidence. Journal of Planning Literature, 23(4), 347–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412209335553 Federal Highway Administration (2023). National Household Travel Survey (NHTS). Department of Transportation, United States. Available at: https://nhts.ornl.gov/ 110

UX Mobility

Fredrickson, B. L., & Kahneman, D. (1993). Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.1.45 Gehl, J. (2013). Cities for people, Island Press. ISBN: 9781597269841 Gong, Q., Xiao, L., & Xu, M. (2019). Pedestrian violations crossing behavior at signal intersections: a case study in anning district of lanzhou. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 688(4), 044006. https://doi. org/10.1088/1757-899x/688/4/044006 Hassenzahl, M. and Tractinsky, N. (2006). User Experience – A Research Agenda. Behaviour and Information Technology, 25(2), 91-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290500330331 Interaction Design Foundation - IxDF. (2016). What are User Needs?. Interaction Design Foundation - IxDF. https:// www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/user-needs Kahneman, D. (2003). Experienced Utility and Objective Happiness: A Moment-Based Approach. In I. Brocas & J. D. Carrillo (Eds.), The Psychology of Economic Decisions (pp. 187–208). Oxford University PressOxford. https:// doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199251063.003.0010 Kahneman, D. (2000b). Evaluation by moments: Past and future. In D. Kahneman & A. Tversky (Eds.), Choices, values, and frames (pp. 693–708). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Kahneman, D., Fredrickson, B. L., Schreiber, C. A., & Redelmeier, D. A. (1993). When More Pain Is Preferred to Less: Adding a Better End. Psychological Science, 4(6), 401–405. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40062570 Karaca, E. & Kandemir, Ö. (2022). User Experience Design and Architecture–An Application With Arduino. Eskişehir Technical University Journal of Science and Technology A-Applied Sciences and Engineering, 23, 112-118. https://doi.org/10.18038/estubtda.1170735 Kleinhans, R., van Ham, M., & Evans-Cowley, J. (2015). Using social media and mobile technologies to foster engagement and self-organization in participatory urban planning and neighbourhood governance. Planning Practice and Research, 30. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2015.1051320 Laubheimer, P. (2024, March 1). Attitudinal vs. behavioral research. Nielsen Norman Group. https://www.nngroup. com/articles/attitudinal-behavioral/ Levy, C. (2013). Travel choice reframed: “deep distribution” and gender in urban transport. Environment and Urbanization, 25(1), 47-63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247813477810

111

References

UX Mobility

Lin, Y., & Benneker, K. (2021). Assessing collaborative planning and the added value of planning support apps in the Netherlands. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 49(2), 391–410. https://doi. org/10.1177/23998083211009239 Ma, W., Han, B., An, K., & Zhang, N. (2015). Investigating the applicability of exclusive pedestrian phase at two‐ phase actuated controlled intersections. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 49(6), 752-767. https://doi. org/10.1002/atr.1303 Mattila, H., Olsson, P., Lappi, T.-R., & Ojanen, K. (2022). Ethnographic knowledge in urban planning – Bridging the gap between the theories of knowledge-based and communicative planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 23(1), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2021.1993316 Messa, F., Scarponi, L., Abdelfattah, L., Carpentieri, G., Martinelli, V., Stiuso, T., & Gorrini, A. (2025). Modeling women’s perceived level of safety at night in Milan. Journal of Transport Geography, 127, Article 104243. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2025.104243 Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. Basic books.

Novack, T., Wang, Z., Zipf, A. (2018). A System for Generating Customized Pleasant Pedestrian Routes Based on OpenStreetMap Data. Sensors. 2018; 18(11):3794. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18113794 Pei, X., D’Ambrosio, S., & Sedini, C. (2023). The City of Care through Walkability and Proximity. Researching on and with generation alpha on urban walkability assessment. In K. Vaes & J. Verlinden (Eds.), Connectivity and creativity in times of conflict. Academia Press. https://doi.org/10.26530/9789401496476-097 Riemens, R., Nast, C., Pelzer, P., & Hurk, M. v. d. (2021). An assessment framework for safeguarding public values on mobility platforms. Urban Transformations, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42854-021-00023-3 Rupprecht Consult (editor) (2019). Guidelines for Developing and Implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan, Second Edition. Available at: https://urban-mobility-observatory.transport.ec.europa.eu/sustainable-urban-mobility-plans/sump-guidelines-and-decision-makers-summary_en Scaletsky, C. C., Costa, F. C. X. D., & Tonetto, L. M. (2016). Designing for bus stop experience: An emotion-driven project. Arquitetura Revista, 12(1), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.4013/arq.2016.121.06 Scarponi, L., Abdelfattah, L., Gorrini, A., Valenzuela Cortés, C., Carpentieri, G., Guida, C., Zucaro, F., Andreola, F., Muzzonigro, A., Da Re, L., Gargiulo, E., Cañas, C., Walker, J., & Choubassi, R. (2023). Thematic review on women’s perception of safety while walking in public space: The STEP UP project. Sustainability, 15(21), 15636. https://doi. org/10.3390/su152115636

112

References

UX Mobility

Scarponi, L., Gorrini, A., & Carpentieri, G. (Eds.). (2024). STEP UP – Walkability for Women in Milan. Napoli, Italy: FedOA Press. https://doi.org/10.6093/978-88-6887-319-6 Schwedes, O. and Hoor, M. (2019). Integrated transport planning: from supply- to demand-oriented planning. considering the benefits. Sustainability, 11(21), 5900. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11215900 Tomasi, M., Nikolopoulou, M., Giridharan, R., & Löve, M. (2023). Definition of a maximum threshold of direct solar radiation exposure for pedestrians of diverse walking abilities. International Journal of Biometeorology, 68(10), Article 2567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-023-02567-4 Transform Transport. (2022, October 13). Video analytics for the assessment of street experiments: The case of Bologna. Retrieved September 2, 2025, from https://transformtransport.org/research/inclusive-mobility/video-analytics-for-the-assessment-of-street-experiments-the-case-of-bologna/ Transform Transport (2024a, May 23). Exploring sensory cities for enhanced user experience: In conversation with Alexandra Gomes [Interview]. Transform Transport. Retrieved from https://transformtransport.org/media/exploring-sensory-cities-for-enhanced-user-experience-in-conversation-with-alexandra-gomes/ Transform Transport (2024b, June 28). Prioritizing people’s experience for more sustainable urban environments: In conversation with Barbara E. A. Piga [Interview]. Transform Transport. Retrieved from https://transformtransport.org/media/interviews/prioritizing-peoples-experience-for-more-sustainable-urban-environments-in-conversation-with-barbara-e-a-piga/ Transform Transport (2024c, September 25). Exploring user-centered design practices: In conversation with Xue Pei [Interview]. Transform Transport. Retrieved from https://transformtransport.org/media/exploring-user-centered-design-practices-in-conversation-with-xue-pei/ Transform Transport. (2024d, November 28). Bologna Città 30: Understanding the influence of the policy on travel times and speeds through TomTom datasets. Transform Transport. Retrieved September 2, 2025, from https:// transformtransport.org/research/bologna-citta-30-understanding-the-influence-of-the-policy-on-travel-timesand-speeds-through-tomtom-datasets/ Transform Transport (2025, February 17). Screenless cities and the urban experience: In conversation with Hubert Beroche [Interview]. Transform Transport. Retrieved from https://transformtransport.org/media/interviews/ exploring-screenless-cities-in-conversation-with-hubert-beroche/ Transform Transport (2025, March 24). UX Mobility: Multi‑User Walkability Route Planner [Research project].

Transform Transport. Retrieved September 2, 2025, from https://transformtransport.org/research/inclusive‑mobility/ux‑mobility‑multi‑user‑walkability‑route‑planner/ 113

References

UX Mobility

Uber Technologies. (2019, January 28). How Uber leverages applied behavioral science at scale. Uber Blog. Retrieved September 2, 2025, from https://www.uber.com/en-GB/blog/applied-behavioral-science-at-scale/ Umeå Municipality. (2019). Gender, power and politics: Thirty years of gender equality work in Umeå Municipality [PDF]. Retrieved September 2, 2025, from https://www.umea.se/download/18.1e902c491847930967530 bc/1669206644284/Gender%20power%20and%20politics.pdf UMEP. (n.d.). Solar Radiation Daily Shadow Pattern [Documentation]. Urban Multi-scale Environmental Predictor.

Retrieved September 2, 2025, from https://umep-docs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/processor/Solar%20Radiation%20Daily%20Shadow%20Pattern.html United Nations (2016). Transforming Our World: The2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United NationsSecretariat. Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda Vilalta Capdevila, T., McLellan, B. A., Loosen, A., Forshner, A., Pigeon, K., Jacob, A. L., Wright, P., & Ehlers, L. (2024, September 10). Advancements in monitoring: A comparison of traditional and application-based tools for measuring outdoor recreation. PeerJ, 12, e17744. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.17744 Whyte, W. H. (1980). The social life of small urban spaces. Washington DC: The Conservation Foundation.

Wicramasinghe, V., & Dissanayake, S. (2017). Evaluation of pedestrians’ sidewalk behavior in developing countries. Transportation Research Procedia, 25, 4068–4078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.327 World Economic Forum (2023). Future of Cities: The Urban Revolution. Available at: https://www.weforum.org/ communities/gfc-on-the-future-of-cities/ Xing-hai, W. (2023). Reimagining Website Usability: A Conceptual Exploration of SEO and UX Design Integration.

Journal of Digitainability, Realism & Mastery (DREAM), 2(03), 60–66. https://doi.org/10.56982/dream.v2i03.99 Yablonski, J. (2020, April 20). Peak-end rule. Laws of UX. Retrieved September 2, 2025, from https://lawsofux. com/peak-end-rule/

114

UX Mobility

115

Systematica Established in 1989, Systematica is a Milan-based transport planning and mobility engineering consultancy with subsidiary offices in Mumbai, New York, and Rome. Systematica operates at multiple scales – national, urban/metropolitan, and development-scale – and provides a wide array of integrated consultancy services in the transport and urban planning sectors, such as strategic advisory and due diligence for infrastructure investments; traffic analysis and management; mobility engineering in complex buildings and events venues with a focus on pedestrian flows; parking design; vertical transportation, and application of advanced mobility systems and technologies.

Committed to its mission to provide innovative, inclusive, and sustainable solutions, Systematica also seeks new approaches to overcome the ever-changing challenges of mobility and transport planning and support sustainable growth through scientific research. www.systematica.net

116

UX Mobility

Transform Transport

UX Mobility

Transform Transport is a research foundation focused on innovative mobility solutions.

While mobility and transport related technologies are emerging with increasingly fast paced, Transform Transport explores how they can have positive impacts on our cities, neighborhood and buildings.

Founded by Systematica, it grounds on 30 years of experience in the field of transport planning and mobility engineering, investigating the future of Milan and other cities worldwide. www.transformtransport.org

117

Credits UX Mobility ISBN 978-88-944179-8-2 Editors Lamia Abdelfattah, Filippo Bazzoni, Rawad Choubassi Authors Andrea Gorrini Giulia Ceccarelli Simone Grasso Contributors Alessandro Pedrazzoli Dante Presicce Filippo Bazzoni Kadhan Ruskanda Kevin Aragon Marco Pozzoni Marianna Zuretti Marija Kostadinova Marriam Iqbal Olga Nazvanova Shaghayegh Allahdad Simone Grasso Graphic Designer Amina Salama Printed in Milan in October 2025,

by Prograf Soluzioni Grafiche Srl Thanks to all collaborators of Systematica and Transform Transport who contributed to this book.

A special thanks to Alexandra Gomez, Xue Pei, Barbara E. A. Piga and Hubert Beroche for allowing us to publish their interviews in the book.

811