Page - 125 - in Mobile Culture Studies - The Journal, Volume 3/2017

Mobile Culture Studies. The Journal 3 2o17 Patrick Naef | Using mobility and urban planning to implement atmosphere 125 on how public space is experienced, and by whom. Furthermore, building on the concept of ‘shared space’, ‘atmosphere making’ can clearly contribute to creating new elements of reflec- tion on the idea of ‘walkable places’. Mobility and atmospheres in public space As demonstrated by Middleton (2009) in the case of pedestrians’ behaviours in London, speed and efficiency are not always the main priorities that transport policy suggests. Mobility cannot be reduced to its strict physical dimension; it implies displacement, but also encounters and co-presence (Thomas 2013). In his celebrated book, ‘Cities for people’, the Danish architect and urban designer Jan Gehl (2010, 30) confirms this statement, adding that walking favours a direct contact with the collectively: ‘It is a particular form of communication between people sharing a public space like a forum and a living environment.’ From Thomas’s (2014) viewpoint on atmospheres, it is a way of engaging the passer-by with public space. Mobility is indeed rarely experienced alone and Duarte (2003, 25) considers atmosphere in the public space as a link between the diverse sensations of the users of this space: ‘It is a subjective interpretation of the collective experience, of the awareness of belonging to an urban place, where sensations carry significations shared by users.’ The French notion put forward by Thibaud (2013), ‘l’être- ensemble’ (the ‘being together’), seems thus indispensable when considering atmosphere and mobility in public space. For people to occupy, walk, stay, linger or stroll in a specific place, they need to adequately share this environment. The promotion of pedestrian mobility is hence generally seen as a means to achieve a shared use of public space and initiatives such as pedestrian and encounter zones are often presented as efficient tools to reach this goal. Thomas (2011) postulates that there exists an operational link between walking and atmosphere. Yet she observes a ‘fading of pedestrian atmospheres’, due to the development of antiseptic environments where the pedestrian feels alienated. Paradoxically for Thomas, conditions seen as ideal for walking – smooth surfaces, agreeable lighting and adequate signposting – can also negatively affect the pedestrian and make him feel out of place. With the establishment of stricter public space regulations and the production of public spaces aiming to promote walkability, new codes of urbanity are being shaped. In this context, the sen- sitive dimension of a public space – its atmosphere – can also contribute to regulate circulation flows and to organize co-presences (Thibaud 1992, Thomas 2011). The challenge for urban planners thus relies on their ability to develop walkable places, while bearing in mind these dynamics of ‘sterilization’ (Soulier 2012) and ‘pedestrian atmosphere fading’ (Thomas 2011). Architectural and design elements, signage and street marking, authorizations and prohibi - tions, are all components that need to be carefully studied in order to achieve such an objective. The notion of ‘atmosphere’ therefore offers an innovative way to approach urban planning, especially when this practice aims to promote what Thibaud designates as ‘vivre ensemble’. Traffic calming and shared space Hans Monderman’s concept of ‘shared space’ is often referred to when the development of encounter zones or pedestrian areas is under discussion (Karndacharuk et al. 2013). If Mon- derman did not produce any noteworthy scientific work on the concept, some scholars (Bail-