The CTU University Centre for Energy Efficient Buildings published two methodologies in 2021 intended mainly for representatives of the state administration and municipal self-government as a guide to planning public spaces and measures for water management in cities. Both publications were rated as understandable and beneficial by the majority of their users who provided feedback.
The methodologies in total have reached more than 4,100 downloads to date (Methodology for planning public spaces of small municipalities over 1,500 and Water in the city 2,600). In October last year, everyone who downloaded one of them by the end of August 2021 was asked for feedback.
Metodice plánování veřejných prostranství malých obcí Feedback Request Form it was sent to 1,462 email addresses and 78 people from the Czech Republic and Slovakia responded to it. It was most often filled out by representatives of the groups to which the methodology was primarily directed, i.e. representatives of municipal self-government and state administration (more than 50% of respondents). Another significant group that provided feedback on the methodology are architects or designers (more than 25%).
In terms of comprehensibility, the methodology was rated an average of 5.97 on a seven-point scale (1 – not comprehensible,
7 – comprehensible) by 65 respondents. The graph below shows the breakdown of the individual responses, with three quarters
of respondents giving a rating between 6-7.
Respondents further evaluated the methodology in terms of its contribution to their profession. 65 respondents gave the methodology an average rating of 5.68 on a seven-point scale (1 – not beneficial, 7 – beneficial). The graph below shows the breakdown of individual answers, with two thirds of respondents answering one of the options 6-7.
Methodology Request Form Voda ve městě it was sent to 2,059 email addresses and filled in by 96 people from the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Among the people who provided feedback, the group of designers and architects was most represented (45%), followed by representatives of the state administration (22%) and municipal self-government (20%).
The vast majority (94%) described the methodology as rather comprehensible (values 1-3 on a seven-point scale).
The majority of respondents (91%) described the methodology as rather beneficial (values 1-3 on a seven-point scale).
We also thank you very much for the verbal feedback, thanks to which we know which parts of Water in the City are the most beneficial for you, what you would like to develop more in the future, and what you think about this methodology.
We conclude with a few quotes:
“Methodologies of this type are always beneficial, you learn something about areas that you are not 100% dedicated to. Great for my person.” (Water in the city – State administration)
“Thanks. We will also need the trees in the city methodology.” (Water in the city – Self-government)
“The methodology is completely exhaustive and should be on every table of competent persons of municipal and city authorities. Thanks for this other effort to enlighte?!?However, according to my experience, the amount of content and text can discourage local government representatives from looking into it in more detail. I would recommend shortening it substantially, making only an eye-catching info brochure that is clear and defines the simple structured steps of this planning process, and at the end points to a supplementary document of such a comprehensive nature." (Methodology for planning public spaces of small municipalities)