Page - 139 - 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 139 social worlds.’ (Buser 2014, 239) A sensitive approach to public space, including inhabitant perspectives, cannot be entirely planned in an engineer’s office. Ground-level experience is thus fundamental to identifying successes and failures, and making the necessary corrections. When he presents the two concurrent approaches mentioned above, ‘to divide’ or, in opposition, ‘to share’, Soulier (2010, 252) underlines the complexity of the second one: ‘the first one is func- tionalist, normative and simplistic. It coincides with the division of power and funding, with the private grounds and flower beds of one and the other; the second one implies experiments, confusions, compromises, taking risks.’ The examples presented in this analysis confirm the importance of this reflexive process, drawing on evaluations and corrections, which will help the population to appropriate these new urban developments. Based on the results collected so far, a bridge period ranging from six months to one year seems necessary for the population to grasp these new mobility codes. Even after this transitory period, encounter zones should not be frozen in time, but open to future changes in parallel with the evolution of urban societies. As the mayor of Versoix states: ‘In ge- neral we need at least six months of adaptation. I had a colleague who wanted to regulate everything once and for all. But it is important to wait for things to happen… For people to learn to share this space.’ (personal communication, 15 September 2016). His colleague, the chief of urbanism supports this statement: ‘We need to stop, to look at what is going on, and if corrections are needed we intervene. (personal communication, 15 September 2016). In Versoix and Fribourg, a pe- riod of inertia, as some of the stakeholders describe it, lead for instance some shop keepers to take these changes on board or the planners to add street furniture to a specific site. Finding a solution that suits everyone – inhabitants and users, business owners of all types, architects, de- signers, magistrates – is challenging and complaints will often arise. Thus, a process that leaves room for participation, criticisms and corrections, can certainly contribute to a more optimal development. The mobilization of atmospheres in urban planning can pave the way to a more integrative conception of public space. Conclusion This analysis sought to examine whether encounter zones in Switzerland could contribute to disseminating atmospheres favouring the appropriation of the street by pedestrians. Case stu- dies featured in this study were two medium-sized urban localities providing interesting insights into possible ways of revitalizing a public place. It has been demonstrated that encounter zones could indeed act as a tool that has a greater effect than that of simply regulating the traffic. Indeed, if well managed, such developments could represent opportunities for implementing atmospheres associated with conviviality and contributing to what Rachel Thomas conceptua- lizes as the ‘anchorage’ of pedestrians. To achieve this result, stakeholders should reflect on their practice and be ready to make modifications and corrections if necessary. This can already be illustrated by an institutional protocol in the whole country based on the evaluation of encounter zones one year after their inauguration. In both cases – Versoix and Fribourg – new measures had to be put in place. It has also been shown that the success of encounter zones – in terms of atmosphere as well as speed regulation – is contextual. Encounter zones should be installed in places already used by pedestrians and a thorough reflection should be conducted on the layout of areas seen as