An-Najah National University 
Faculty of Graduate Studies 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Community Participation in Architectural Design 
(Evaluation of Al-Maageen Housing in Nablus) 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

By 
Ahmad Mohammed Al-Haj Ahmad Saleh 

 
 
 

Supervisors 
Dr. Ziad Senan 

Dr. Khairi Marei 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of 
Master of Architecture, Faculty of Graduate Studies, at An-Najah 
National University, Nablus, Palestine. 

2006 





 III

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

Many persons have helped me over the period of preparation of this 

study. It is difficult to mention each by name, some, however needs 

special mention. 

First of all, I am grateful to my supervisors   Dr. Khairi Marei and Dr. 

Ziad Senan for their great assistance and valuable contribution. 

Thanks are also offered to my lecturers Dr. Khalid Qamhie, Dr. Ali 

Abdelhamid, Dr. Eman Al-Amad, Dr. Jihad Awad and Dr. Eman Al-

Assi for her help me in providing me with some of the needed 

references. 

I appreciate a lot the advice and support of my friends and colleagues. 

I will never forget to thank Al-Maageen Housing Society, Mr. Fathi  

the project engineer of the project and all the residents of the housing 

project for their helping in the fieldwork and for supplying me with the 

needed data. 

I wish to thank Mona Awayes for her help in the distribution of the 

questionnaire, and all the family of my father-in-law. 

Finally I owe my respect and appreciation to my family especially my 

mother, father, sisters, brothers, Saed and his wife for their emotional 

support and encouragement. 

At last, my deepest gratitude must go to my wife, Rana, who shared 

me hopes and dreams during this period. Indeed, her encouragement 

and companionship made the boring and the tiring time enjoyable. 



 IV
Table of Contents 

 Acknowledgements III
 Table of Contents IV
 List of Tables VII
 List of Figure VIII
 List of Appendex IX
 Abstract X

1 Chapter One: Introduction to Participatory Design 1
1.1 Introduction 2
1.2 Study Significance 4
1.3 Study Objectives 6
1.4 Hypotheses 7
1.5 Study Plan & Methodology 7
1.6 Study Outline 9
1.7 Data Sources 9

2 Chapter Two: Participation, Conceptual & Theoretical 
Background 

11

2.1 Concept of Participation in Architecture 12
2.1.1 Ways of Participation 13
2.1.2 Singles & Groups Participation 14
2.1.3 Human Architecture &participation 15
2.2 Significance of Participation 16
2.2.1 Face to Face Design 16
2.2.2 Minimizing the wrongs 17
2.2.3 Producing a Sense of Self-Confidence 19
2.2.4 Accepting the Decisions  20
2.2.5 Making process of architecture design more democratic 21
2.2.6 Increasing Control of User 23
2.2.7 Putting a Program for the Design Process 24
2.2.8 Increases Coordination 25
2.2.9 Saving the cost 25
2.2.10 Sustainability & Architecture 26
2.3 Influencing Factors on Participation  27
2.3.1 The Cultural Level of Community 27
2.3.2 The Design 29
2.3.3 Methods of Carrying out Participation 31
2.3.4 Type of User 32
2.3.5 Natural of Community Texture 33
2.3.6 Authorities & Participation 34



 V
3 Chapter Three: Experience and Role of Community 

Participation in Architecture Design 
35

3.1 Methods of Participation 37
3.1.1 Dialogue 37
3.1.2 Questionnaire 42
3.1.3 Alternative 44
3.1.4 Sampling 51
3.1.5 Representation 52
3.1.6 Traditionalism & Regionalism 54
3.1.7 Design Game 55
3.1.8 Incompletion 56
3.2 Tools of Methods of Participation 59
3.2.1 Drawings 59
3.2.2 Model 61
3.2.3 Computer 62
3.3 Level of Participation 63
3.3.1 Non-Participating 63
3.3.2 Low Level 64
3.3.3 Equally-Balanced Level 65
3.3.4 High Level 65
3.3.5 Top-Level 68
3.4 Stages of Participation 71
3.4.1 Planning Stage 71
3.4.2 Designing Stage 72
3.4.3 Construction stage 73
3.4.4 Evaluation stage 74
3.5 Type of Users 76
3.5.1 User's Activity 76
3.5.1.1 Passive User 77
3.5.1.2 Reactive User 77
3.5.1.3 Creative User 78
3.5.1.4 Designer User 78
3.5.2 User Ownership 79
3.5.2.1 Investor Client 80
3.5.2.2 User Clients 81
3.6 Mutual Relationship between Architect and User 82
3.7 Other Experiences; Glasgow district of Dalmarnock, 

Scotland 
86

3.7.1 The Evaluation of this Practice 87



 VI
4 Chapter Four: Fieldwork Section: Applying Theories on 

the Case Study; the level of participation in Al-Maageen 
Housing. 

90

4.1 Introduction 91
4.2 The Community of the Study 91
4.3 Sample Study 92
4.4 The Fieldwork Method 93
4.5 Analysis and Evaluation 93
4.5.1 Study Categories 94
4.5.
1.1 

Participation concept 94

4.5.1.2 Buildings 97
4.5.1.3 Urban Planning and Urban Design 100
4.5.2 Discussion of the study questions 101
4.5.3 Hypotheses 105
4.5.3.1 First hypothesis 105
4.5.3.2 Second hypothesis 106
4.5.3.3 Third hypothesis 107
4.5.3.4 Fourth hypothesis 109
4.5.3.5 Fifth hypothesis 110
4.6 Tools of Participating 111
4.7 Interviews with Users 119
  
5 Chapter Five: Results and Recommendations 122
5.1 Introduction 123
5.2 The Principles of Participation in the Palestinian 

Community 
123

5.3 An Approach to Application of Participation for the Future 129
5.4 Concluding Remarks 130

  ٌ◌◌ِBIBLIOGRAPHY 134
 APPENDIX 137
ب الملخص 



 VII
 

List of Tables 
Table (4.1) The level of participation 95
Table (4.2) The stages of participation 95
Table (4.3) The stages of participation if the project 

repeats
96

Table (4.4) The persons who cooperative with the 
participants  

96

Table (4.5) The reasons of sharing in this project 97
Table (4.6) Changing the entrance of the buildings 98
Table (4.7) The changing of the interior of the 

apartments 
98

Table (4.8) The changing of the windows or openings 98
Table (4.9) Seeing the plans of the apartment 99
Table (4.10) Having the plans of the apartment 99
Table (4.11) The reaching of the visitor to the apartment 100
Table (4.12) The opinion of the user in the urban side 100
Table (4.13) The mean and the stander deviations 101
Table (4.14) The mean and the stander deviations 104
Table (4.15) The mean and the stander deviations 105
Table (4.16) T-test for participation in any stages of the 

project 
106

Table (4.17) T- test for changing or willing to changing 
the form of interior of the apartment 

107

Table (4.18) Frequencies of the variables (Q4A, Q6B) 108
Table (4.19) Frequencies of the variables (Q4A,Q7B) 109
Table (4.20) Frequencies of the variables (Q4A,Q8B) 110

 



 VIII
 

List of Figure 
Figure (2.1) The user-needs gap 24
Figure (3.1) House activities 48
Figure (3.2) House images 49
Figure (3.3) Passive energy 50
Figure (3.4) The incompletion methods 57
Figure (3.5) Sketch perspectives method 60
Figure (3.6) Apartment house, Austria 67
Figure (3.7) The Architecture of the poor 67
Figure (3.8) The ladder of participation 70
Figure (4.1) Building # 6, apartment # 80 113
Figure (4.2) Building # 6, roof plan 115
Figure (4.3) Building # 8, apartment # 97 116
Figure (4.4) Building # 3, apartment # 61 117
Figure (4.5) Building # 7, apartment # 87 118



 IX
 

List of Appendix 
Appendix (4.1) Questionnaire 138
Appendix (4.2) User letter, building # 6, apartment # 80 143
Appendix (4.3) User letter, Building # 6, roof plan  145
Appendix (4.4) User letter, Building # 8, apartment # 97  146



 X
Community Participation in Architectural Design 

(Evaluation of Al-Maageen Housing in Nablus) 
By 

Ahmad Mohammed Al-Haj Ahmad Saleh  
Supervisors 

Dr. Ziad Senan 
Dr. Khairi Marei 

Abstract 

This work explores the issue of participation in architectural design 

process. Participatory design, user participation, citizen control, making 

decision process and other approaches are discussed to be reflected the 

implication for practice when the design process involves many parties. 

As more and more actors are being called to participate in the design 

process, the roles of the participants and the boundaries of their 

contributions are being reframed and negotiated. What design strategies 

and tactics are needed to be brought up into the design process to allow 

fruitful participation of the users? How designers can facilitate the 

involvement of the users? The issue of participation seems to imply new 

positions that require designers to design not only the end product, but also 

the process that will help more people to become involved in the design 

process. 

The work presents a case study about participation in Al-Maageen 

housing in Nablus city, Palestine. This case study investigates the current 

practice of the participation process in our Palestinian community. The 

founding concentrates on the level of participation in this community. It 

was clear that the residents try to participate in their housing but it was not 

as they want as it began lately. 



Chapter One 
Introduction to Participatory Design 

1.1 Introduction. 

1.2 Study Significance. 

1.3 Study Objectives. 

1.4 Hypotheses. 

1.5 Study Plan & Methodology. 

1.6 Study Outline. 

1.7 Data Sources. 



 2

1.1 Introduction: 

The community participation in architectural design can be achieved 

by the mutual relationship between the designer and the user. This idea 

belongs to the democracy concept. The customers should participate in 

everything that influences themselves, as they are the first persons who will 

be affected by the designer decisions regarding their environment. 

Therefore, they have the right to participate in decisions making regarding 

the design process of their buildings. 

In Palestine, several methods and models are used in architectural 

design one of them is participation. However, we can say that this method 

is not used in relation to its size, kind, procedure and tools. This 

participation is not enough, nor dose not take place scientifically and in 

most cases it happens by chance. It depends on the personality of the user 

and designer. The real problem, which faces the community today, is that 

many designers disregard the opinion of the user in the different stages of 

the design. This causes many problems. The question here: can the 

participation solve problems between users and architects? Is there a place 

in our community for participation model? When yes, can it solve the 

problem between the architect and the community? In addition, how can 

we success to apply this participation? 

Consequently, what are the ways and methods by which we can 

succeed to apply this participation?  These ways and methods differ from 

one project to another and from one architect to another. This variation 

depends on the degree and level of the needed participation. The 

participation has different degrees. The first one is related to architect’s 

control on the project. The second is the balance stage between the 



 3

architect and the user. The third is the user’s control on the project that 

minimizes the role and intervention of the architect. Finally, we may see 

participation without any control of the architect. 

The participation idea must finally lead to a successful and integrated 

design. This success is associated with the user’s needs and preferences, 

which could be mostly achieved through participation. The user’s feeling of 

self-confidence is another factor in facilitating the role of participation in 

design. This is because the user understands the design and participates in 

setting the proper solution; therefore, he/she accepts the design and 

preserves it. 

This study will discuss a group of subjects which related to 

participation design. The first part discusses the introduction of the thesis, 

the significance of this study and the objectives. The second part addresses 

the theoretical background of participation; its concept and significance in 

improving the architectural design. It investigates also the factors 

influencing participation and the variation of these factors on succeeding 

the participation.  

The third part includes the experience and the role of community 

participation in architectural design. The most important one of these roles 

is the tools of participation and its practical methods of applying it. Then 

the study talks about the levels of participation which differs by the tools 

and the condition of the project. Another important subject in this part is 

the kind of the user and his/her influence on the process and the quality of 

the mutual relationship between him and the architect. 

The fourth part of the study discusses the practical side of 

participation. It introduces one of the international experiments in 



 4

participation. Then it applies the concept of participation on our Palestinian 

community. This part aims at knowing where participation can be reached 

in our community. The study uses Al-Maageen Housing in Nablus city 

which is under An-Najah National University employee's control as a case 

study. 

The case study about the participation process was done after 

occupation the housing units from its users. The main objective is to know 

if there has been any mean of participation.  This part studies if the user 

knows what participation means and if he/she participates in the housing. 

Different research methods were used in this part such as a questionnaire, 

interviews and formal papers from the society of the housing. The final part 

of the study deals with the results and the recommendations. 

1.2 Study Significance:  

The experience has proved that community participation was one of 

the successful methods for solving many problems in planning, design, 

construction and in renewal project in the world.  These problems are not 

only changing the design, but also leaving the house, modifying, or living 

unpleasantly in it. Moreover, the design will be unsustainable, so it will not 

serve the user permanently. There are many advantages for participation; 

one of them is putting the designer in the actual situation. This makes both 

the designer and the user set together to draw a clear picture for the 

designer in this stage, so he/she will be able to put the best solution for the 

design. The UNESCO mentions that 60% - 80% of the residential buildings 

are changed or removed because of abrogating the participation from the 

user. 



 5

The participation of the user in the design indicates a progressive 

cultural level and a high cultural architecture. Consequently, the process 

will become a transparent, which minimizes the mistakes and the unwanted 

results of the individuality of the designer according to his own opinion, 

and not coexisting with the actual situation for the environmental 

requirements in design. Participation, therefore, gives the user a feeling of 

self-confidence, making him able to administrate the matter with the best 

form pushing him to increase his awareness of his own architectural in 

which environment he will be living. 

There are many literatures discussing this subject but the importance 

of this study is on being one of the first studies in Palestine regarding 

community participation in architectural designing buildings. The study 

includes the methods of participation that can facilitate and activate the 

design process. This participation means the involvement of both the 

designer and the user or owner in the same design process throughout its 

several stages. 

To practice the theories and concepts of participation, a case study 

about the housing of the university (Al-Maageen Housing) used in this 

study. Its significance appears in understanding how far participation 

applied in our Palestinian community. This study opens the door widely to 

know what participation means for the user and the architect in our 

community. This will be achieved through practical part in this study which 

is related to Al-Maageen Housing in Nablus. This housing belongs to a 

group of An-Najah National University employees. Through this 

experiment, those cultured class of our community will know that 

participation is a right for them and they know also what it means. When 



 6

those educated people know the importance of participation, they will be a 

core in our community work to spread the concept of participation through 

them. When they talk about their experiment in the participation of their 

students at the university, their student will be another source of 

information in spreading new architectural culture.  

1.3 Study Objectives: 

This study aims to examine and analyze the significance and role of 

community participation in architectural design. It aims at raising the real 

level of our architecture, and enhancing the role of participation in the 

planning and design of our community. In addition, the study seeks to 

attain the following specific aims: 

1. Merging between the theory and the practice in terms of the role of 

participation in the design process. The study includes two sides; one of 

them is the theoretical background of the role of participation. The other 

side is the practical applying the theories on Al-Maageen Housing in 

Nablus in Palestine.   

2. Decreasing the distortion and frustration that our architecture suffers. 

Participation draws the real picture for the culture of the community 

according to their owner's desire, and not as some specialists who 

transcribe the picture and culture of others for one reason or another. Every 

client or user has his culture which is reflected directly on architecture. So 

the Palestinian user must participate in decreasing this distortion by his 

participating in the architecture design. 

3. Developing and applying the tools or methods of participation to 

enable the layman to participate in taking the decision about his own 



 7

residential building, these tools must be understood easily. 

4. Increasing the architectural awareness and the architectural culture 

about different classes in Palestinian community. 

5. Emphasizing on the importance of participation in raising the 

architectural level, and motivating the researchers and institutions to be 

concerned with this field and to be part of the design process. 

1.4 Hypotheses: 

1- There are no statistically significant differences in participating in any 

stages of the projects in architectural design due to gender. 

2- There are no statistically significant differences in changes or willing to 

change the form of interior decoration or the interior partition of the 

apartment, due to gender. 

3- There are no significant relationships between participating in any stages 

of projects in architectural design and willing to change or change the form 

of windows or openings. 

4- There are no significant relationship between participating in any stages 

of projects in architectural design and willing to change or change the form 

of entrance of the building. 

5- There exists no significant relationship between participate in any stages 

of project in architectural design and willing to change or change the 

interior decoration of the interior partition.  

1.5 Study Plan & Methodology: 

The procedure of this study will be undertaken in the following 



 8

frameworks: 

1. The theoretical framework:  

This part deals with the conceptual and theoretical background of 

community participation in general and its relationship and role in 

architectural design. In this respect, the meaning of participation, its 

significance, characteristics, tools, processes and different strategies will be 

highlighted. In addition, some relevant case studies and the experience of 

other countries in this field will be reviewed. This study will not talk about 

the participation in general but it will specialize in participation in 

architectural design. So, the theoretical subject will be focused on the 

design phase in order to be an introduction to the practical part in the study. 

2. The informative framework:                     

This framework includes collection of data and information about the 

selected case study (Al-Maageen Housing) to be practiced as well as the 

local experience regarding community participation and its impact and role 

in the architectural design. This housing is in city of Nablus, Palestine and 

it is under the control of a group of An-Najah National university 

employees. It consists of 10 buildings which include 110 apartments. 

Primary information relevant to the study was obtained by fieldwork 

techniques. These techniques are the interviews, observation, drawings, 

questionnaire conducted as methods for measuring the different images 

people have about participation. 

3.  The analytical and evaluation framework:  

This can be achieved, by applying the relevant theories and other 



 9

experiences on the selected case study. Reaching to the practical inference 

that can be dedicated in another status, evaluating and analyzing this 

experiment in order to benefit from it in the future. 

1.6 Study Outline: 

Based on the above-mentioned plan, this study has been divided into 

the following chapters: 

Chapter I: Introduction to participatory design 

Chapter II: Conceptual and Theoretical Background of participation in 

architectural design. 

Chapter III: The Experience and Role of Community Participation in 

architectural Design 

Chapter IV: Practical Section: Applying Theories on the Case Study; the 

level of participation in Al-Maageen Housing. 

Chapter V: Results and Recommendations. 

1.7 Data Sources: 

The data and information in this study will depend on the following 

sources: 

1. Library Sources:  

Including references, books, journals, and thesis relevant to the subject of 

the study (community participation, public awareness, architectural 

design). As we mentioned earlier this study will not talk about the 

participation in general but it will specialize in participation in architecture 

design. So the library sources will be concentrated in the designing part. 



 10

2. Official Sources: 

Including data and information to be collected from the related 

governmental and non-governmental institutions (Ministry of Planning, 

Ministry of Local Government, Ministry of Housing, Universities, 

Research Centers, Al-Maageen Housing society). 

3.    Personal Sources:  

It is related to the practical side of the study and the data and information 

on the selected cases study (Al-Maageen Housing). This data will be 

collected by the author using different methods such as questionnaires, 

interviews, surveys, observations as well as the author’s own experience as 

an architect. 



 11

Chapter Two 
Participation, Conceptual & Theoretical Background. 

2.1 Concept of Participation in Architecture. 

2.1.1 Ways of Participation. 

2.1.2 Singles & Groups Participation. 

2.1.3 Human Architecture &participation. 

2.2 Significance of Participation. 

2.2.1 Face to Face Design. 

2.2.2 Minimizing the wrongs. 

2.2.3 Producing a Sense of Self-Confidence. 

2.2.4 Accepting the Decisions.  

2.2.5 Making process of architectural design more 

democratic. 

2.2.6 Increasing Control of Users. 

2.2.7 Putting a Program for the Design Process. 

2.2.8 Increases Coordination. 

2.2.9 Saving the cost. 

2.2.10 Sustainability & Architecture. 

2.3 Influencing Factors on Participation in Architectural Design. 

2.3.1 The Cultural Level of Community. 

2.3.2 The Designer. 

2.3.3 Methods of Carrying out Participation. 

2.3.4 Type of User. 

2.3.5 Natural of Community Texture. 

2.3.6 Authorities & Participation. 



 12

2.1 Concept of Participation in Architecture: 

The concept of participation differs according to the system by 

which the process of participation will be carried out. It could be on the 

political side, and here it means democracy. This can be done through a 

practical way as voting. Ghname (1998) said that this means that the 

layman will participate and share in the political, economical, and social 

life. They are sharing in drawing the general objects of the country and the 

community. When people select the person who will represent them, they 

almost commit themselves to his decisions concerning there own life and 

community. So, he participates in making this decision. For the Oxford 

English Dictionary, participation means that: the action or fact of partaking, 

having or forming a part of. 

Participation could be specialized in one aspect of life. One of the 

most important aspects is the participating of people in drawing the plan of 

development and advancement. We mean here the direct and the indirect 

people participating in the determination of the phase of the development. 

They determine the domain of the development and what they are 

concerned in it, what they accept and what they refuse. Participation in this 

concept, as Ghname (1998) said, means participate the groups and the 

sections of the exposed inhabitants in determination the objects of the 

development plan. This plan is a guide to improve the situation of those 

groups. They must share in carrying out this plan and evaluating it, which 

means that the development will go ahead from the base to the top of the 

pyramid or from down to up. That is to participate the beneficiary people 

on the local level in preparing the plans of the environmental work 

specialized with them. These plans must give a future vision for their 



 13

societies, and they must determine the subjects that must be solved to 

transfer this vision into accomplished facts. 

2.1.1 Ways of Participation: 

Wulz (1990) said that there are different involved parties that can be 

involved in decision making, which in turn, has different forms such as 

citizen implication, citizen' influence, citizen' action group, cooperation, 

co-decision, self decision, etc. All these forms are considered as forms of 

participation. This means that participation is a general concept covering 

different forms. The participation in the architectural design concept is 

what we are concerned with here. It is the participation between the 

architect and the user in making decision in all aspects of this design. This 

can be applied by the achievement of the needs and the wants of the user by 

the scientific and the artistic guidance of the designer. The designer plays 

the role of a guide and a controller of what the user think about. The 

architect can extend the mental faculties and the imagination of the user by 

what he owns of scientific background and experience which others lack. 

 Participation can be defined as the process of user involvement in 

decision making. Not long ago, this term of user involvement has been 

used in our life. When user control over decisions concerned with changing 

the built environment, they can be called participants. Sanoff (1990) said 

that there has been a considerable movement towards the direct 

involvement of the public in the definition of their physical environment. 

The recent meaning of participation defines it as face-to-face interaction of 

individuals who share a number of values important to all, that is to say a 

purpose or reason for being together. Participation will be a major aspect in 

a society in which the freedom of all citizens is well assured. In this 



 14

respect, participation is a matter of control over decisions by the 

participants. Therefore, participation refers to fundamental changes. It 

implies exerting effort in making decisions. 

Participation isn't restricted to one stage of the building stages.  It 

could be in planning, the designing, or the constructing stage. All these 

stages have special and private methods. Participation can be done in the 

construction stage on the country level. This participation appears when 

earthquake or flood strikes one area. 

2.1.2 Singles & Groups Participation: 

Participation in design becomes to be associated with the community 

architecture. Community architecture indicates sharing with the public in 

planning or designing some thing. It is almost coupled with groups and not 

with singles. Most of what we here about participation is in under this 

concept. The required participation comes from establishing general 

policies that allow the group to participate with the single person and help 

in all the details of his house. The term Community Architecture suggests 

simply an alternative form of architectural practice. That poses a powerful 

challenge to the professional attitudes of architects. The involvement of 

groups of ordinary people – untutored in the language of design and 

development – meant the evolution of new methods and techniques. 

By this, we find that to guarantee successful community architecture, 

we must find a method to participate with the people in their thinking. We 

must try to find a common language with them. We must work to increase 

their knowledge and their understanding of the design terms. The 

commitment of the participation as a principle of the design process forces 

the designers and the users to be cooperative. Every one tries to understand 



 15

what the other wants and understands him. "The designer's job is no longer 

to produce finished and unalterable solution but to extract solutions from a 

continuous with those who will use his/her work. The designer's energy and 

imagination will be completely directed to raising the level of awareness of 

his/her partners 'clients/user' in the discussion, and the solution will come 

out of the exchanges between the two" (Sanoff, 1990, p.7). This cooperation 

between the two sides will get us to the real participation. This participation 

will make the process of design a democratic process, which has 

truthfulness in expressing the community character. Everyone takes his real 

part without decreasing the part of the other side. This will go ahead with 

the acceptance of the two sides, so they will be able to take over their 

principalities in the future. 

Here we must concentrate on this point. The participant, through his 

participation in design, can classify his/her imagination of the process of 

design. So, he can demonstrate the plea of the architect in every step of the 

design process. With this participation, he can correct the mistakes that the 

architect could do. 

2.1.3 Human Architecture &participation: 

 Participation makes our architecture more human as it expresses the 

opinion of its owners, and not only the specialist opinions. So Thompson, 

(1990) writes that the user is obviously the first person who will use the 

project, and his involvement continues through out. He has to do many 

things: 

1- Initially he considers the needs to build, appoints the design team and 

briefs them.  



 16

2- Then he confirms the initial sketch design, he puts forward whatever 

information is necessary for more detailed design, and approves the 

architect's proposal.  

3- He supplies further detailed information to allow the detailed working 

drawings to be prepared and approves them where necessary. 

4- The contractors tender then has to be approved by him, and then he signs 

the contract. 

5- During the building operation, he continues to supply information as 

required by the design team. 

6- Through the project, the client pays all the bills and on completion 

accepts the finished building. 

2.2 Significance of Participation: 

It is difficult to restrict the significance of the participation 
in some points. Participation has proved it's success through 
practice and not through papers and research. The needs of 
applying it in our daily life and in our design activity are very 
necessary. We can distinguish the most important significance of 
participation in these points:- 

2.2.1 Face to Face Design: 

 Participation puts the designer in actual and practical situation of the 

design process. The meeting between the designer and the user face to face 

will draw obvious picture for the designer in this stage. So, the designer 

will be able to put suitable solution for the user. Participation gives us a 

clear and a restricted imagination of the problems which face the public. 



 17

This may help in putting object and defining of the priorities exactly. The 

architect's expectancy of the problem, which the users face, is not enough 

as well as his expectancy for the situation which the users live in.  On the 

contrary, this individual expectancy which is away from the user can draw 

untruthful picture. It gives unsatisfied solution for the user.  

 Thompson (1990) and sanoff (1990) said that any building to be 

successful, it must meet the need and the wants of the user. The architect 

shouldn't consider building as a chance to translate his idea or his 

personality. He must always remember that his role is to act as an agent of 

his clients. Architects must give the user the feeling of power and control. 

In order to get a good architecture, the user's needs and the values must be 

on the top ladder of the architect interests. By allowing the users to take 

part in the decision-making, the planners and designers have to add new 

capacities to their conventional approach. It does not mean that their 

creativity has been obliterated. When people participate in the creation of 

their environment, they need the feeling of control; it is the only way that 

their needs and values are taken into consideration. To achieve the exact 

and the complete knowledge of the needs of the users, it is inevitable to go 

through active participation for. This participation is carried out through a 

particular method. These methods, which will be discussed later, are 

prepared by specialized people. 

2.2.2 Minimizing the errors: 

Participation will minimize the errors and the danger which appear 

as a result of the designer dictatorship. The designer sometimes does not 

coexist with the real situation of the environment which we want to design. 

The opinion of the person who will use this design and live with it could be 



 18

the most important one in this equation. The considerations of the user 

mostly differ from the considerations of the designer. The ratio of all 

mistakes in one opinion is more in a number of opinions. These opinions 

are the only ways, through which we will decide either the design is 

successful or failing. The community participation corrects the decisions 

and the development policies. This is because when opinion and viewpoint 

join together, then this opinion will be more developed and improved. In 

participation when any mistake takes place, all the participants are 

responsible and not only the designer. The user is also well-informed about 

what happens in the design process. 

Sanoff (1990) said that when the user participates in making 

decisions, the architect will be also the gainer. Sharing the decision-making 

process ends in "us and them". If users take part in the decision, they also 

bear some of the responsibility for the success and the failures. At the end 

of the day, he/she cannot turn around and blame the architects for design 

faults. This aspect for user participation is often not understood.  

To reduce the mistakes, we must share all the persons of the group 

who use the project. We must not be content with the opinions of 

representatives especially at the beginning of the project. So the opinion 

will be more correct and more expressing. Also, the designer must profit 

from all the proposed opinions. These opinions aim to improve the design 

and solve the problems. Many of these problems can be resolved 

practically if every member of the group is committed to solving the 

problem in the best possible way. So, participants can shift their emphasis 

from personal capabilities to collective capabilities. Along with 

participation, we can solve one of the big problems which face the design 



 19

in our community. So we must be more concerned to persuade the 

specialized with these policies, and try to apply them practically. 

2.2.3 Producing a Sense of Self-Confidence: 

Participation produces a sense of self-confidence for the user. This 

self-confidence makes him able to realize the subject in the best way. It 

pushes him to increase his awareness of the architectural situation which 

we live in since he is part of the design process. User is a very important 

factor in the process of design so allowing him to participate in it can be 

very helpful. It motivates the user to be more self-confident. He will be 

braver to advance his opinion without fear of having a wrong opinion. 

Promoting this feeling of trust depends on the other side of the process who 

is the designer .The designer can make this process successful or merely a 

failure. The personality and psychology of the participant has a very 

important part in this subject.  

All these factors have a dominant influence on the controlling 

process which the user imposes upon the project. This trust, which is a 

result of the process of participation, contributes directly in improving the 

design. Moreover, the increasing of self-confidence contributes in 

discovering the talent and the special abilities of the user. These abilities 

aren't be used if there is no trust. By means of the strong communication 

Architect/Family-Customer, it is possible to avoid mistakes when 

projecting or remodeling dwellings. The best solution with the minimum 

cost is always found. The method gives architects a new dimension of their 

work, less formal and more humanized. By paying attention to housing 

problems by this means, a greater portion of the population is benefited, the 

usefulness of the dwelling is extended and living condition is improved. 



 20

Community participation is considered to be one of the most 

important ways to increase self-dependence and create the responsible and 

cooperative character. "Participation enables designers to better negotiate 

with users and understand the effects of decision on them. Solving the user 

needs problem offers researchers and designers opportunities to them from 

user and from each other's". (Zeisel, 1981, p.35). The method "participation" 

helps beneficiaries to feel as active parties instead of receiving ideas and 
opinions from others. When the user realizes that his opinion is 

required, he will spare no effort to make this opinion more truthful, and he 

will be ready to search about it. This will make him more confident and 

active instead of being a passive person receives and doesn't send. So 

participation strengthens the principle of self-dependence and cooperation 

between the owners of the projects. It is stopping dependence on others 

because the users will search about solutions satisfying them without 

returning to those who will impose these solutions. 

2.2.4 Accepting the Decisions:  

 Participation leads the participant to accept the decision which they 

participate in. They work to support, carry out, and defend it. This enters 

into the nature of the human self, whereas the people in their nature like to 

protect their opinion. If the user feels that he is a creature of the decision in 

the resulting design he will be a strong defender of this design.  We can 

profit by this in the general project whereas the co-ownership is exposed to 

waste much more. So we participate with people in designing their 

environment to make them defenders. The participant will feel that he owns 

this project and he is part of it. 



 21

Sanoff (1990) said that "Our experiences in involving people in the 

process of design indicate that the major source of satisfaction is not so 

much the degree to which the individual needs have been met but the 

feeling of having influenced the decisions." (Sanoff, 1990, p.3) This 

awareness results from the process of the participation work towards 

improving the design. It leads to adjusting the decisions and trying to 

develop it without being opposes. It also pushes the user to think more 

deeply to add something to these decisions to make it stronger. Also the 

user tries to pride in the presence of the other whose opinion is applied in 

this design and has a special touch in it. In this side, Ghname (1998) said 

that the community participation in the development field, help in creating 

a psychological willingness for the public to accept the expected changing 

and development because they participate in it. 

The architect can profit by this acceptance to protect his work 

through sharing the user in taking decisions. This doesn't mean that the 

architect tricks the user in some word to make him feel that he participates 

in the design, so he must be satisfied with the result. The designer must 

concentrate on the active participation which will allow us to reach to the 

user from inside instead of outside, and then our architecture will be more 

humane. 

2.2.5 Making process of architectural design more democratic: 

 Participation makes the process of architectural design a democratic 

process. Participation means that it gives freedom in determining the form 

of their life. The design is a very important process in our life, so when 

people control it, it will be a democratic process. This will raise the level of 

the design process to make it a human process. There are few methods 



 22

which make the design process a democratic one.  The most important one 

of these methods is participation, sharing the people in making decision, 

sharing them in planning and designing the space, and sharing them in 

choosing the materials and the colors. 

The relationship of the government with the people is dependent on 

whether the government is democratic or non-democratic. Democracy is 

the source of power while the public is the audience who work through the 

non-democratic government. The right to dissent and the acceptance of an 

opposition are two institutions that distinguish democratic societies from 

dictators ruling in the name of people. When the power of the public is 

expressed, then the architecture can be defined as democratic. (Jencks & 

Valentine,1980). We can, through participation, give the feeling of the power 

for the public or the user, taking their opinion and respecting it. 

 Khgname (1998) as well as Comerio (1990) write that the 

participation reduces the part of the local leader. It cancels many of the 

economical and social problems which result from the nature of social 

caste. So it reduces the bureaucracy. It confirms the principle of the 

consultation between the institutions of planning in every administrative 

level. In our attainment of democracy, participation expresses a very 

civilized high level and a high architectural culture. Community design 

methods are being modified in light of experience, and with deference to 

emerging ideas on grassroots initiatives, community ownership, and 

economic development. Participation values regarding justice, 

empowerment, and motivation helping people in gaining control of their 

own resources, remains the guiding principle. 



 23

A very few researchers take care of this importance. But, we must 

concentrate on it and make it one of the most important aims that must be 

in the participation process. I think that it is considerable to be a school that 

teaches people democracy. It could be considered as the first lesson which 

the layman takes in this part. We can concentrate on some sides of 

participation to increase democracy in our life. 

2.2.6 Increasing Control of the User: 

 Another benefit of the participation is to increase the control of the 

user clients and reduce the gap between the user clients and the paying 

clients. It is well-known that there are two types of clients. He/she could be 

an investor client paying to sell or rent, or he/she could be a user client. 

There is a gap between the two sides. Participation can reduce this gap if 

we know who the users are. Instead of knowing the user directly we can 

know the group which represents him and make them participate in the 

design. 

Zeisel (1981) writes that also there is a gap between the user client 

and the designer as citizen-participation includes user clients as partial 

members of design teams and gives them control which is traditionally 

reserved for paying clients. To reduce this gap researchers and designer 

suggest the flexible building frame work with partition. This method solves 

or at least improves the user's needs. When user client be able to adapt a 

structure by themselves, they will have more direct control over their 

environment. Figure (2.1) 

 It is wrong to depend only on the opinion of the investor client 

because he is usually worried about his returns and profits. So, we must 

search about new tools of participation through which we could merge 



 24

Gap 

Gap 

User clients  

Paying clients   

Designer  

between designers on one side, and put the user clients and the paying 

clients on the other side. So, we can reduce the gap between the user client 

and the other parts and then carry out all the benefits of the participation. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Figure(2.1) The user-needs gap (Zeisel, 1981, p.35) 

2.2.7 Putting a Program for the Design Process: 

 By using participation, it will be easy to the designer to put a 

program for the design process. Designer can't know individually the 

important thing for the user, but he is to be satisfied with the general 

concept in which all people take part. Also, this participation gains benefits 

clearly in putting a program for the new project which has appeared in the 

last time. This is because there is a new functional reflection quickly rising 

into the architectural building. 

 Zeisel (1981) writes that programming the design process is very 

important to state which of the buildings is expected to be as the user or the 

designer. This program describes the requirement of the building such as: 

amount of floor space, minimum room dimensions for certain uses, types of 



 25

spaces, specific materials and hardware, maximum cost estimates, 

minimum windows area in proportion to floor area.  This program is not 

important only in determining the requirement of the building. Such 

process continues to be useful in solving problems raised while designing a                     

sketch, or drawing, and drafting, especially when they are faced with 

making tradeoffs-deciding the relative importance of the effects of 

decision. 

2.2.8 Increases Coordination: 

Participation also increases the activity of the coordination between 

the governmental institution and the non governmental institution in 

carrying out any developmental project. This contributes in reducing the 

exaggerated centralism. So we create a high level of flexibility in planning 

and carrying out the general project, especially residential projects. It is 

found that in many project participation there was one of the strategic 

solution to solve the problems of the big growth of the low income 

settlements. This can be achieved through sharing these groups in making 

decision in every thing in their residential future. Then they will find the 

suitable solution for them and they will accept it as it isn't imposed on 

them. "However, a number of recent initiatives, mostly in the voluntary 

sector, have established beyond doubt the viability of Participatory Rapid 

Appraisal (PRA) and Community Action Planning (CAP) as potential tools 

in planning." (G.Oliveira & Denaldi,1999). 

2.2.9 Saving the cost: 

 In many projects one of the most important benefits of participation 

is the reducing of the outlay. These benefits clearly in the big cooperative 

projects which we call the self-help project. In this kind of the project, 



 26

participation could be in construction as in design. For example, the quarter 

residents can participate in design and carrying out the park of the square of 

the quarter. So, we can save the laborer. Therefore, the lack of the financial 

power was the generator behind community self-build. 

2.2.10 Sustainability & Architecture: 

The sustainability of the building and its continuity is significance. 

As the owner of the building is satisfied with it and expresses what he 

wants, then he will make every effort to keep it. Tower (1995) writes that 

as user participates in making decision about any building, he/she will be 

very interested to preserve it. Over the years, the building which he/she 

participates in it suffers less from neglect, poor maintenance and misuse. A 

sense of proprietorship will be for the participant as the source of looking 

after the building he/she uses.  

As a result, we find that the importance of participation isn't limited 

to one side. It exceeds the architectural importance to all fields as 

economical, social, human, etc. In every project it could have there is some 

a main direct profit, while the other profits don't appear clearly. So we must 

think deeply before we start the participation process. What are the profits 

which we want to apply through the project. Then, we must concentrate on 

these profits through the tools which we must make use of the participation 

process. 

  Also, there are many profits for participation which we don't 

mention here. It appears in indirect form and we will discuss some of them 

later in this study. However the points mentioned before are enough to be a 

very clear sign for all specialized, architects, planners, governments, human 



 27

institutes, and individuals to make participation process on the top ladder of 

our interests.          

Participation is not amino requirement that can be ignored. So, it is 

definitely right to ask the unions to impose laws or some legal proceedings 

on the designer to make him take the lowest of participation at least. These 

unions also can play the mediator part between architect and user to 

guarantee the participation process. 

2.3 Influencing Factors on Participation: 

The influencing factors change from community to another, from 

project to another, and from person to another. But we can talk about a list 

of factors which appear clearly:- 

2.3.1 The Cultural Level of Community: 

It is a term of a very comprehensive meaning which is not restricts 

the architectural level. But, what we are concerned here is architecture. If 

we talk about a community in which a person has a good limit of cultural 

awareness of architecture, then it is easy for them to participate in making 

decisions in issues that affected them. They can understand many 

architectural and engineering terms which enable them to go into an open 

dialogue with the architect or with themselves. Moreover, the designer 

finds it easy to pass his idea to them and understanding what they think. 

Their problem can be reviewed in an easy and transparent way.  

 Zeizel (1981) said that if designers are planning a school with 

citizen, for example, it is essential that each part of the process understands 

what the other means if they are to be able to design together. Research 

presented holistically as well as analytically can be used to develop shared 



 28

images of people's behavior and of physical settings. This architectural 

culture can be achieved through education, lecture, mass media and others. 

This enlightenment could be put into two forms; one of it is in general 

without specialization. It aims to spread the architecture cultural to all 

citizen of the community. While the other form is specialized in some 

group of the people in some limit time and in some limit place. It strives for 

some owner of one project before starting in this project and it is going 

suddenly. Also, we can consider the habits as a very important part in 

building a good architectural culture for people. This can be achieved 

through transporting the architecture culture from one generation to 

another. 

Sudden realization is one way for the user to acquire an 

understanding and awareness of architecture and it is rarely to be achieved, 

but habit is not necessarily passive because it enables understanding to 

grow with experience. So we find that, as Khamees (1999) said, spreading 

a high ratio of social cultural and political awareness between the 

individuals and the forms of the community or at least between some of 

persons of the community is one of the influence factors in the community 

participation. This factor is very important not with regard to the size of 

participation, in relation to the kind and the direct of this participation. The 

more increasing the ratio of awareness firstly and reaching to others fields 

and vocabularies secondly, the more increase the importance and the 

activity of participation. Also, the spreading of a high level of architecture 

awareness helps in putting the user in real situation of the design process 

and what obstacles it faces. So, it helps in developing the design and 

reaching into a result that satisfies the user.  



 29

For example, the person who can understand what is the plan, and he 

can read and distinguish between elevations, sections, and perspective is 

more able to participate than the person who can't understand all these 

things. So, we find that the new curriculum in many countries begin in 

teaching these basic engineering information for the basic classes in the 

school. This happens after they become aware for the importance of this in 

supporting participation which draws the real picture of this community.  

2.3.2 The Designer: 

The acceptance of designer for participation process is one of the 

most important factors that influence participation. This means the degree 

of the designer conviction in the importance of participation. Some of the 

designers believe strongly in its importance of in developing the design 

process. They motivate the users to give their opinion. They try to explain 

the concept of design to the users and allow them to take part in every stage 

of design. They sit with the users before, during, and after the design 

process and every stage of these has its special importance. On the other 

hand, we find many of the designers who don't care about the user opinion. 

They don't give him/her any opportunity to express his points as they 

believe that they are more able to understand what is appropriate to the user 

than himself. Also, they believe that their study and science enable them to 

reject everything from the others. But, they don't know that after the design 

is finished and the user takes the permit from the municipality, the user will 

apply on earth what he is convinced in. The user doesn't care about the 

plans and the design in front of his hands because he doesn't participates in 

it. This will increase the opportunity to fall in errors.  

 
mystique User  Designer 



 30

 In order to limit the interventions of the user in the design process, 

most professions go to use a mystique. They try to create an exaggerate 

impression of expertise in order to put a limitation against anyone wishing 

to question their decisions. Even when they talk about the merits of 

participation, they use complex beautiful terms about the poetry of the 

space and light. This mystification could be arising in an intended or 

spontaneous way. Generally, it comes from the energy and the power of the 

words which are used. We find that the designer increases using the 

architectural terms which it are mostly strange for the user. These terms 

will prevent the user from the progress to the participation as he can't 

understand the designer. At the same time, he can't confess that he is unable 

to understand these terms. This makes him agree on the proposal design 

without knowing what is behind these proposed suggestions. It is not 

excluded that in many cases the user has a wrong understanding to what the 

designer says because the terms which he use are not clear for the users. 

So, after finishing of the design, we find that the user is unsatisfied with the 

design and he says that he imagines another thing or he understands 

something different.  

Towers 1995 said that there are still many of the design professionals 

who resist the user participation. Some, perhaps as a result of experience, 

are genuinely fearful of attending consultation meetings anticipating verbal 

or even physical assault and public humiliation. Many of those 

professionals are afraid on their expertise and authorities are to be 

transferred through participation of the users. Some of them say that 

participation process is not useful as the users only want to promote their 

personal or sectional interest, and those users are not representative. 

Influenced by these reservations, many seek to maintain rigidly the separate 



 31

roles of client and professional. They may talk and write in a florid terms 

about participation but remain secretly contemptuous of the users they 

come into contact with. Also they should constantly seek to undermine the 

process and impose their own preferred solution although through 

participation but as they want. 

To get out from this problem, we must persuade the designers of the 

importance of the participation. They must know that "the designer, in 

contributing a particular expertise to this symmetrical decision process, 

doesn't abrogate his or her professional responsibility and may very well 

create workplaces that are stylistically identifiable" (Sanoff, 1990, p.1).We 

must use many tools to persuade the designer in the importance of 

participation. Some of these tools are as workshops and lectures which 

must be carried out to explain its significance on the long time. Also, 

enough information about the success of the project which the users 

participate in must be published in many journals. 

2.3.3 Methods of Carrying out Participation: 

 The methods of participation are considered to be one of the most 

important factors which influence on the success or the failure of the 

participation process. These methods are the canal or the connecting link 

which the user and the designer communicate with themselves where the 

degree of the power of this canal increase, the contact is increased and so is 

the participation. The importance of the methods and participation appears 

in making the users able to understand the idea of the designer. Also, it 

decreases or abrogates the obscurity which appears in the design process. 

These methods encourage the users to make an open dialogue with the 

architect about his ideas and drawings. 



 32

We find that, as Towers (1995) said, there is a wide gulf between the 

understanding of the architect and the understanding of the layman. It is not 

easy for the layman to understand the design process. It is difficult for any 

one to understand what the other thinks. Sometimes, the architects 

themselves are surprised when they see their drawings and imaginations, 

transfer to buildings. How much difficult, then, for those with no design 

training - and, perhaps, with limited formal education of any sort - to 

understand proposals put before them. The designers have to develop new 

skills in communication. These skills can be considered as participation 

methods which through it the designers can learn to explain their idea, the 

options available, and the possible solutions to particular problems in a 

clear and simple manner. So, we have to develop easy and various methods 

to achieve a very active participation. It also must be understood from the 

community and not to be costly in order to achieve its purpose. We will 

discuss this subject in another section. 

2.3.4 Type of User: 

One of the factors which affects on participation is who is the user? 

Is he a direct user or is he the investor? Or he is a government side or a 

society want to build for others. Each of these inquiries has a big part in 

defining the natural of the participation process. We find that the designer 

thinks in a way different from the way which the user thinks in it. 

 Also we have to know if the user is the owner of the project or not. 

If the user is an owner then he has enough freedom to discuss and change 

through his participation. But, if he isn't an owner then his controlling over 

the project will be little. However, he could be an investor client who 

thinks how he can increase his profits and he doesn't worry about the wants 



 33

of the user so much. Also, the client may be the government which wants 

to build a school. So, here we must think how we can share the students 

who are the user of this building. In this respect, Hill (2003) writes:  if the 

users are detached from the commissioning, ownership, design and 

management of a space, may be more likely to initiate unexpected uses 

because they lack a strong sense of responsibility for space. But, the owner 

users have the opportunity to transfer the space because they own the 

power of the controlling upon the project. Users are rarely clients. It is 

unusual for users, as distinct from client-users, to influence the design 

process. Even if a user owns a space he/she is unlikely to have 

commissioned it. So every type of users must have a special method to 

encourage him to participate. The methods must be changeable as who is 

the user or the clients. 

2.3.5 Natural of Community Texture: 

 We mean here the habits of the community which we want to carry 

out the participation in it. Also, we mean the problems which face the 

people, and the way which they think in it, their economical condition, their 

progress, and the level of the democracy in this community. All of these 

points have a very important part in increasing or decreasing the 

participation. We find that the more the awareness of the people of the 

concept of the democracy and freedom increases, the more the chance of 

participation is increasing. Also, the more the understanding of the decision 

owners and specialized of the user right to participate increase, the more 

the participation increases.  

Also, if the user has a good economical potential, his control over the 

project will increase. He will be more able to impose the architect to take 



 34

his opinion in consideration or at least to discuss him in the design. Then 

his interest in the luxury will increase and so his intervention in the project 

will increase. 

2.3.6 Authorities & Participation: 

If we talk about community participation at the public level, 

especially on big projects, then one of the most important factors are: the 

size of the faithful and the interest of the authorities in the community in 

participation in making the decisions and in putting the general policies. 

This factor affects since the authorities can impose laws which direct 

through it the participation process in design. These authorities own many 

projects and it can through these projects participate with the exposed parts 

of the community. Also, if these authorities are interested in participation, 

then, they have the enough abilities to contact with the other institutions in 

the community. 

All the mentioned points are effective on participation. Sometimes, it 

increases the activity of the participation, and another time, it cancels or 

decreases the participation process. So, we must concentrate on developing 

the reasons which increase participation and eliminate the reasons which 

weaken it.  

 



 35

Chapter Three 
Experience and Role of Community Participation in 

Architectural Design. 

3.1 Methods of Participation. 

3.1.1 Dialogue. 

3.1.2 Questionnaire. 

3.1.3 Alternative. 

3.1.4 Sampling. 

3.1.5 Representation. 

3.1.6 Traditionalism & Regionalism. 

3.1.7 Design Game. 

3.1.8 Incompletion. 

3.2 Tools of Methods of Participation. 

 3.2.1 Drawings 

 3.2.2 Model. 

 3.2.3 Computer. 

3.3 Level of Participation. 

 3.3.1 Non-Participating. 

 3.3.2 Low Level. 

 3.3.3 Equally-Balanced Level. 

 3.3.4 High Level. 

 3.3.5 Top-Level. 

3.4 Stages of Participation. 

 3.4.1 Planning Stage. 

 3.4.2 Designing Stage. 

 3.4.3 Construction stage. 

 3.4.4 Evaluation stage. 



 36

3.5 Type of Users. 

 3.5.1 User's Activity. 

  3.5.1.1 Passive User. 

  3.5.1.2 Reactive User. 

  3.5.1.3 Creative User. 

  3.5.1.4 Designer User. 

 3.5.2 User Ownership. 

  3.5.2.1 Investor Clients. 

  3.5.2.2 User Clients. 

3.6 Mutual Relationship between Architect and User. 

3.7 Other Experiences; Glasgow district of Dalmarnock, 

Scotland. 

3.7.1 The Evaluation of this Practice. 



 37

3.1 Methods of Participation: 

The methods of participation are variable. They depend firstly on the 

degree of participation and who is the participant. In this research, we are 

interested in participating the users or the clients in designing their houses, 

the buildings in which they work, their entertaining places, and all the other 

places. To carry out the participation in a safe and correct way, it is 

essential to follow a successful and applied technique. Here, the study will 

talk about a group these methods which come from many of international 

experiments in this field. The most important methods are: 

3.1.1 Dialogue: the open discussion or the dialogue which takes place 

between users and architect is the basic stone in the participation process. 

Mostly, this method is going in every project. However, the degree or the 

level of this dialogue and its continuity determines the success or the 

failure of this process. This dialogue is considered to be the basic 

communicational channel in participation. So, the two sides of the process 

have to work together to strength this cannel and developed it.        

Through dialogue the designer can know the character of the user or 

the clients. So, he can know his way of thinking and his needs and wants 

directly and orally. Also through dialogue the user can know about what 

the designer thinks about, the user can ask the designer all the points which 

present something unknown for the user. The dialogue is considered to be 

one of the traditional methods of the participation methods.      

If the user wants to build a house, the designer starts to ask him 

about his financial situation and about the budget which he owns to build 

since his budget plays the first point in orienting the designer's thinking. 

Most of the other questions which the designer will ask the user about are 



 38

depending on the first point. Then, the designer starts to ask the user about 

the number of the persons of the family, their ages, their needs, and their 

work. 

After the idea about the family, data becomes complete and the 

designer starts to ask the users about the design which they want. For 

example, he asks them about the image of the finished building, if they 

want it simple or complex, if they want it traditional or modern, and if they 

want it to appear as the buildings which surround it or they want it 

distinguished. 

The designer must not only talk with one person of the users. In the 

residential case, he has to listen to the wife of the owner, also he has to talk 

with the children. Whereas, the designer must try to ask the members of the 

family many questions to make them talk about what they think in it. He 

can ask them about the colors which they prefer, about the relation of their 

rooms with other parts of the house, and other questions whose answers 

play a very important part in the design. 

Wulz (1990) said that communication is very important for the 

participation process, and it defines the form of the process. There are two 

ways of communication: 

1- Information from the architect regarding his proposal at an early stage in 

the design process. 

 2- Comments and points of view from the residents regarding the proposal. 

Participation, however, ends there. The architect reserves for himself the 

right to make the final decisions. 



 39

 
Dialogue 

Designer User 

The dialogue model has principally four aims: 

* The democratization of planning by informing the local residents about 

the project proposal at an early stage. This information is proposed by the 

architect 

* After the residents receive the information, they will have an early 

reactions then the architect receives innovative impulses and suggestions 

for his work on the project. 

* The architects, after receiving the reaction of the residents, get to know 

about the special regional characteristics which the users have. 

* Through, the two side of the participation process will be known. Since 

the dialogue is carried out in a face-to-face situation, neither the collective 

user nor the architect is any longer anonymous. 

Designers contract with individual 

clients who request styled, one-of-a-kind 

building. Clients pay for building, criticize it 

during design, and eventually use it 

personally. To determine clients' needs, 

designers negotiate with them, reaching 

agreement on design. 

So, the dialogue which precedes the design is the resource which the 

user and the designer return to determine what the other side wants. So, we 

find the designer during and after the finishing of the design telling the user 

during the discussion about some points that; you say for me that …. On 

the other hand, the user when wants something in the design, he says to the 



 40

designer that: "I tell you that I want…". We find that every one of them 

returns to what he or the other said during the discussion to do what he 

wants. So, the dialogue becomes the resource for the two sides. We find 

that in many projects, the user and the designer had written a contract 

between them to describe what every one of them says or wants.  

Communication is considered as being the better way to avoid the 

mystique about the design process. Through communication, the user can 

know clearly the possibilities and the options available for him. Also, 

through communication there will be a sense of simplicity, clarity and 

adaptability. If people don't communicate with the architect, they can't 

understand what is being proposed; therefore the user participation will be 

meaningless. It is worse than meaningless if, having understood, they are 

then unable to change it. Having opened up options, decisions have to be 

made. In most projects, this is done through discussion, an informed 

dialogue between users, designers and sponsors (Towers, 1995).  

Through dialogue, we can build the trust between the user and the 

designer. The relationship between them starts to become stronger. So, the 

user becomes closer to believe in the designer because the user lives in the 

condition of the designing. He will know what the districts of the design 

process are. He also knows through the dialogue and the open discussion 

which problems the designer faces. Also there will be an open discussion 

about these problems and every one of the two sides will try to solve it. So, 

the user will be satisfied with the solution which comes from experiment 

and experience. 

Graham Tower (1995) writes that the designer has to try to put the 

user in complexity of the process. If the user communicates face to face 



 41

with the designer, then he will be able to understand and value the skill of 

the designer. Therefore, the schemes developed through open discussion 

are usually better than conceived in the secrecy of the office.  For 

participation to be successful, users need to understand that design is a 

complex process involving difficult choices and resolving multiple 

contradictions. The designer will not instill such understanding by hiding 

behind professional expertise or subverting the participation process, far 

better to have a full and open discussion about design problems.  

Also, dialogue is one of the most important participation methods 

because in many times the problem can't be explained except when the 

designers hear for the user. For example, Lawson (1980) says that one of 

the clients asked him to build another bedroom for his house. Lawson can't 

understand the reason that makes the client want this extension in his house 

although this house is large enough for all the family. Lawson said that any 

extension will cause a problem for the design. This extension will occupy 

valued garden space. In the beginning of the discussion with the user, 

Lawson can't understand the reason behind the user asking. Through the 

open discussion, Lawson realizes that the source of the problem is the 

music from one of the teenaged children bedroom. So, Lawson discovers 

the problem is in the acoustic system. Then, he starts to solve this problem 

without any extension in the house. Therefore, by having an opened 

discussion, we can solve many problems. The designer treats the cause of 

the problem and the user kept his garden and his money. 

As the dialogue can be the most important and stronger method of 

participation, it also can be a weak method. This returns firstly to the desire 

of the designer. Also, the open discussion is easier and the simplest method 



 42

of participation so it is the most spreading method. The users must know 

that the dialogue with the designer is a right for them and they must ask for 

it. The user has to be successful in choosing the architect who will accept 

the idea of the dialogue and encourage it. Dialogue is considered to be the 

least method in cost. So, we must concentrate on it and try to make anew 

model of dialogue which the user through expresses clearly what he wants. 

3.1.2 The Questionnaire: The questionnaire is considered to be a set of 

written questions to some groups of people. Those people are having the 

same character and they are concerned about the project which we want to 

ask about. This method mostly used in the project of which has a big 

number of users and the project is not for especial users. The most 

important benefit of the questionnaire is gathering the information about 

the users. This kind of information is defined by the researchers or the 

architects through the question about which they ask the users. Another 

benefit of this method is that it excites the users to express about what they 

think without telling about their name or themselves. This makes him more 

truthful and honest. 

Wulz (1990) said that the Questionary technique, which consists of 

the statistical gathering of population's requirements, is a passive form of 

participation of the anonymous user. Questionary participation provides a 

statistically treated study and investigating result that is very important for 

the design process. Any architect doesn't have to take decisions on the basis 

of his personal systematized professional experience alone. Knowing the 

people's requirements is the starting point in any project. As the people 

have these requirements in common, the questionnaire can draw the needs 

and the desires of the people. Questionary participation differs from 



 43

representative participation in as much that the interest in people's 

requirements, is handled in a systematized form. There is a rule can be 

considered as a principle of the Questionary participation. This rule is that 

all peoples like what many people have in common. Therefore, this way of 

participation is considered 'anonymized' participation. 

After finishing the questionnaire, the result must be studied very well 

through a group of assumptions which the question rounds about. The 

results of the questionnaire are fed to one of the computer program to know 

the accuracy of this assumption. This is by a scientific process which 

depends on the number of the participants. 

The questionnaire is the most common method of collecting 

comprehensive information. Questionnaire is low-key tool. This 

questionnaire is sent or reaches to residents who answer this form and 

return it. Through this way architects or researchers can't get detailed 

exercises. People are not forced to answer this form. The response is 

entirely voluntary and usually well short of 100 percent. There is no open 

discussion through questionnaire, so it is one way channel. The 

questionnaire can collect information but can't discuss it. Questionnaires 

are useful in collecting information from the beginning of the project. 

(Towers, 1995). 

One of the disadvantages of the questionnaire is that it does not give 

the user the chance to ask about many things. In other words, there is 

something unknown to the user and the questionnaire can't explain it. So, 

the architect has to know when he must use this method and with whom. 

The questionnaire must not be the only way to know the wants of the user. 



 44

 3.1.3  Alternatives: this method is one of the common methods of 

participation and mostly it is used spontaneously without any planning. 

This method depends on giving a group of alternatives for the user to the 

same thing. That is the architect offers many solutions for the same project. 

One of the benefits of this method is that it could be very easy for the user. 

He doesn't have to do any thing except he has to choose the best solution 

for him. Another benefit is that the options are clear and it doesn't need a 

big effort to understand.  

By this method, the architect has to prepare a group of different 

options for the different details. For example, the living room, the entrance, 

the kitchen, and the style of the building from out. Then the architect starts 

to listen to the opinion of the user about these options, the thing which 

helps the architects to know the user's wants and needs. 

Wulz (1990) explains this method by a number of notes:  

1- This participation form goes a step further in activating the user and 

involving him in the design process. Alternative participation is actually 

close to co-decision in which presumptive or local residents give the choice 

of several alternatives within fixed frame.  

2- In order to make a choice possible the alternatives we have to concrete 

for the layman understandability. As in the dialogue model, the architect 

has to consider very carefully in what way he presents his architectural 

proposals for the layman user, because architecture is conceived and 

created as an abstract art. 

3- Many architects in the communication situation overlook the fact that 

maps, plans, pictures, slides and even architectural models are abstractions 



 45

of a reality which only exists in the brain of the architect. Visualization of 

architectural proposals which reflects future architectural space and 

material is therefore fundamental for meaningful participation exchange of 

opinions. 

 4- Alternative participation presupposes that the future user is known 

personally to the architect. Thereby, the de-anonymizing stage of the 

participation has been reached. The choice between alternative plans of 

flats takes place individually as an expression of privacy and private 

individuality. The tenant decides according to his own wishes and 

preferences. 

5- Another situation arises when the choice is between alternatives which 

will affect a large number of people. Participation by voting may well have 

to be employed but here we are confronted with a crucial situation for 

participation. 

This method also helps the designer to consult all the members of the 

family. Everyone of the family has his concerns. For example, the kitchen 

is one of the concerns of the housewife but the play field of children and its 

connection with their rooms comes from their opinions. The child mostly 

can't talk about his opinion but he can choose from a group of choices 

given for him.  

In this field Sanoff (1990) writes that 'trade-off' is another important 

form of the participatory process. Through this method the user can 

compare between competitive alternatives as each of it contains different 

types of it amenities. A number of choices can be proposed for the 

community groups and it is preferred for these choices to be weighed for 



 46

their appropriateness since there are often constraints that limit the range of 

choices. These ways of participation allow the participant to evaluate the 

cost and the benefits of available options. This is illustrated in the Durham 

Owner-built Housing Process where ten families who agree to utilize 

personal labor as a form of equity in reducing dwelling cost were identified 

by a local Neighborhood Housing Service Agency. The families workshops 

were organized where decisions about the house divided the picture of the 

house into four categories: house activities (figure 3.1), house image 

(figure 3.2), passive energy (figure 3.3) and site arrangements. The concept 

of trade-off's was introduced in the first planning workshop where the 

dwelling was subdivided into activity components such as living-dining 

and kitchen, or living and dining and kitchen. Similar components were 

developed for the adults' and children's sleeping areas. The housing trade-

off exercise is a preliminary step designed to enable families to discover 

their unique attitudes towards the dwelling, yet remaining within budget 

limitations. During the process, participants learn about each others' values 

as well as become aware of meaning conveyed by different building. 

The community groups, through this experience can build a realizing 

of the situation as the basis for further individual or community action. 

Users can get a degree of empowerment through this experiment. After 

some of the expertise of the designer transfer through specific techniques to 

the user, he becomes able to make informed environmental decisions. 

These design assistance techniques form the core of a repertoire of 

available methods used to effectively engage people in making design 

decisions (see also figure 3.3).  



 47

  

But on the other hand, there are some specialized people who think 

that this method had many disadvantages as Zeisel (1981) who say that 

among an infinite number of complex problems there may be no such thing 

as a best solution-and any problem can be as complex as one wants to see 

it. So, if we think of design as a process pf choosing the best solution from 

among possible alternatives, we run into difficulties.  

To reach this method in the easiest way we must use many tools such 

as drawings in the three dimensions, detailed drawing, models, and others. 

These tools make it easy for the user to choose.  



 48

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fi
gu

re
 (3

.1
):

 H
ou

se
 a

ct
iv

iti
es

 S
an

of
f, 

 1
99

0 



 49

 

 

 

 

Fi
gu

re
 (3

.1
):

 H
ou

se
 im

ag
es

,  
Sa

no
ff

,  
19

90
 



 50

 



 51

3.1.4  Sampling: this method is extremely similar to the alternative 

method, whereas many samples for something are exposed for the user. But 

it is different from the alternatives method in some points such as: 

1 - It is subjected to discussion from the user that it is not constant or final. 

It is subjected for the user not only to choose from it but also to benefit 

from it in reaching to a good solution by the modification of these samples. 

The modification solution can be very close and similar to these samples or 

it can be different. These samples benefit sometime in taking a concept or a 

part of it. 

2 – It can be with no strings attached to the number of these samples that it 

can be only one sample. These samples more during the discussion 

between the user and the architect to bring to the user's mind some idea that 

the architect uses it to figure out something during discussions. 

3 - These samples could be integrative in that it is not equivalent or 

parallel. It is in all contributed in solving some problem in a gradual way, 

step-by-step. 

Towers (1995) said that the sampling is a technique that designers 

themselves use when considering option, and it can be equally valuable in 

user participation. It can be done in several ways:  

1- Visits can be made to similar scheme, particularly if they are nearby. 

2- If visits are not possible, then pictures are the next best thing. 

Photographs or slides can be taken to meetings to illustrate a general 

approach or the appearance of details or components. 



 52

3- The technical aid group CLAWS has developed a refined version of this 

approach that they call 'ideas boards'. Large cards are prepared with 

photographs or sketches of different methods of solving the same problem: 

types of fencing, different seat design, and so on. Topics will vary 

according to the project. 

4- Collecting real bits of building. Sample components can be obtained 

from manufacturers and presented to users for discussions and choice. 

Samples of finishing material-wallpaper, tiles, finishes for kitchen units – 

are indispensable. But larger components can also be sampled. In estate 

modernization schemes in Islington, sample of windows of different types 

and in various materials were taken to meetings to help tenants to decide 

their preferences.   

In spite of the easiness of this method in participation, it also has 

some disadvantages. It could deceive the user, the user could see the beauty 

of some solutions but when he applied this solution he discovers something 

else, the cause of this is that this sample which the user saw could be 

suitable for some context. It is successful in that context but when we 

remove it literally to another context, it fails. In this case, the architect is 

responsible. He must value the new environment which we want to apply 

this sample to it. Then, he must make the necessary modification to this 

sample with the sharing of the user. 

3.1.5  Representation: This method of participation is different from the 

other ones. It means that the designer puts himself instead of the user. The 

architect will live in the condition of the user in all its details. It differs 

from the other methods because instead of transferring the user to the mind 

of the architect, we transfer the architect to the life and the mind of the 



 53

user. By this way the architect can know the exact needs and the wants of 

the user exactly. Many of the users look to the architect as if he lives in a 

tower of gilder far away from them and he can not realize their needs 

through speaking only. This method increases the efficiency of the other 

methods as the dialogue. 

Wulz (1990) said that the architect must be able to put himself in the 

place of his clients in order to reach the client's influence on the 

architectural design. One of the fundamental aspects of the artistic and 

social role of the architect is to represent the client in the architectural 

product.  Representation is not eliminated in any way of the other forms of 

participation. It is, so to say, the profound basis for the existence of the 

profession of the architect. This becomes quite obvious in the situation 

where the user is anonymous to the architect. This is very important in the 

project where the users are anonymous such as town planning and planning 

of apartment house. In such projects representation must be applied in 

order to guarantee the needs and the wants of the users. In representation, 

the citizen's influence on planning and design takes place by means of the 

architect. With his own background of professional knowledge and 

experience, he puts himself in the position of the unknown users, with 

regard to their special needs and wishes. The architect, through his personal 

and subjective interpretation of user's situation, can represent the 

anonymous users.  

 One of the disadvantages of this method is that it is considered to be 

one of the lowest methods of participation in which the user participate. 

The cause of this could be that the user is mostly unknown. It represents the 

minimum one in active participation. In most cases, the architects who are 



 54

encouraged by this method see that the user's participation reduces their 

distinction. So, we must be very careful when we use this method and we 

must try to merge it with the other methods.   

3.1.6  Traditionalism and Regionalism: we can consider this method of 

participation as an indirect method. It means that the architect, in his 

design, must try to apply the image of the region which the people live in. 

So, the architect in this way, does not impose a fixed picture that he wants, 

but he tries to keep up with the consideration of the site, environment and 

the context.  

Wulz (1990) writes that the characteristics of local architecture must 

not be absent. So the architect must take into their consideration the 

importance of the specific regional and local characteristics for human 

well-being. Every community has its own architectural expression, 

symbols, forms, meanings and spatial behavior. These local population's 

preferences must be on the top of the aims the architect thinks about.      

Different from Questionary architecture, regionalism takes care of 

the specific and cultural heritage within a geographically limited area. 

Here, the preparedness of representative participation makes rooms for a 

systematized ways of finding out what local architecture is about. 

Regionalism can be achieved by the combination between questioning the 

local residents on their expression and the representative thinking. By this 

way architects can ensure that the applying of the architectural and 

symbolic qualities is on a specific area. In this method, the architect shares 

the people in their way of thinking but he can't share them in how he can 

reach to the final solution. This method is weak and we return to it when 

the users are unknown. 



 55

3.1.7  Design Game: this method means that the users participate with 

each other in taking the decision after an open discussion and dialogue 

takes part between them. By this method, architects built a big model for 

the site in which we want to design. Then the users start to examine their 

solution and discuss it. This method of participation is suitable when the 

project is general and the number of the participants is big. But, we can 

also apply this method in a small project, for example, by sharing all 

members of the family in the interior design for their houses.  

Graham (1995) writes that the design games developed as an 

important method of participation. A design game specifically geared to 

landscape schemes has been developed by CLAWS. The steps of this 

method are:  

1- A baseboard of the site is prepared showing the site blank and the 

surrounding development drawing in.  

2- flat 'pieces' are then prepared of the various elements that could go on 

the site: different pieces of play equipment, a hard ball games area, a tennis 

court, meadows, car with turning circles, paths, a BMX track, and so on.  

3- The pieces are made in flat card to scale and are colored up in a 

representational manner. The pieces can have price tags that people can 

work to budgets.  

4- In the game the landscape architect controls the board, and the 

participants suggest and discuss the placing of the pieces.  



 56

5- Conflicts can be argued through and resolved. Several arrangements are 

tried, modified and adjusted until a preferred option emerges which has 

consensus support of the meeting.  

6- A sketch scheme is drawn up from the final version which goes back to a 

further meeting. 

3.1.8 Incompletion: the architect doesn't finish all the parts of the building. 

Mostly, in this method he finishes the frame construction for the building 

and he quit the partitions and the interior design for the user. This method 

is increasing in our Palestinian architecture especially in building the 

residential multi building floor. Most of the people in our country who buy 

the residential department are themselves who make the interior design. 

Despite that the investor doesn't intend the participation in his work and he 

wants the quickness and saving solution. The participation which done by 

this method is a very high level of participation. We must study this 

phenomenon and we must try to make it an intended method and not a 

spontaneous one. 

Hill (2003) writes that Hertzberger uses two principal strategies: 

polyvalence and incompletion. With reference to the Diagoon Dwelling in 

Delft, completed in 1970, he writes: the skeleton is a half-product, which 

everyone can complete according to his own needs and desires. Surfaces 

were left bare and specific areas, such as the balconies between the houses, 

which were left vacant, to be completed by the buildings occupants. 

The incompletion methods can be used by every user, which means 

it is easy to apply. It can be applied for every purpose, and it gives an 

optimal solutions. Through this method, users can use the single element 



 57

for many uses. The incompletion of the Diagoon Dwelling can be seen as 

either evidence of the architect's modesty or a patronizing attempt to 

confront users (figure 3.4). 

 

 

Figure (3.4): The incompletion methods Hill, 2003 

We find that the methods of participation are many and various but 

to carry out these methods we needs tools. These tools aren't limited to one 

method only but it can be use also in all methods. The tools which used in 

carrying out the methods of participation are developing. It is now more 

developed than it was before ten years. For example, the cause of this is the 

developing in information technology and the developing of the computer. 



 58

The study will talk about three important tools of it through the fieldwork 

study. 

Towers, 1995 writes that: For most projects, it is in fact impossible 

to achieve perfect user participation. No method can create a perfect 

decision-making dialogue and all the techniques mentioned have its 

limitations. Most successful project uses a combination of techniques that 

help to counterbalance the various shortcomings. 

Sanoff (1990) says that the citizen participation is a complex 

concept. In order to obtain an effective participation architects must 

concerns with certain points:  

1- An analysis of the issue that is to be discussed.  

2- The individuals or groups that are to be affected by using this project.  

3- The resources that will be needed and the goals for which the 

participation is being initiated. Also it is necessary to identify goals and 

objectives in planning for participation.  

4- Analyzing the techniques that are available and the resources that they 

require. Techniques such as surveys, review board, neighborhoods 

meetings, conference, task forces, workshops and interviews, represent a 

few of the options available to participatory planners.  

In many cases, the methods of participation depend on each other. 

That is we can't do any method unless we do another method. Sometimes, 

we start by a questionnaire then dialogue moving towards choosing from a 

group of solutions. So, the methods of participation are very important to 

successful participation. 



 59

3.2 The Tools of Methods of Participation: 

Any method to be successful needs tools. These tools are varying 

according to the project and the user and could be one of the following:   

3.2.1 Drawings: the drawing is the traditional tool to communicate 

between user and architect. In order that the architect can transfer what 

he/she thinks about to the user, he/she will use the drawings. Although 

these drawings are changing from one architect to another in the way of 

drawing, but all have the same names. So, it could be the balance with 

through which them we can judge the subject. For example, there are 

elevations, plans, sections, and perspectives. All of these drawings can 

change in their presentation but it remains as they are, and the plans are 

plans. The architects have to make them simpler as much as they can do so 

especially in the first stages of the project. The more the drawings can be 

simple and clear, the more the user will be able to understand and then to 

participate in a better way. 

Unfortunately some of the architects resort to make these drawings 

very complicated. So, as they can make a feeling of awe and obscurity for 

themselves. This will reduce the participation of the users because they 

can't understand the drawings. Graham Towers (1995) says that some of 

the architects trend to use the drawings as a tool to apply some of the 

aspects of mystification. Those architects try to make these drawings an 

artifact in itself. Some of these drawings are very complex and it can't be 

understood even by other architects. The simplicity of the drawings is very 

important to guarantee effective user participation. It is preferable to use 

the colored diagram instead of the strict projection in order to get an 

understanding for the plans, elevations and other drawings. Simple 



 60

drawings also have the benefit of easy adaptation. It is no good embarking 

on user participation with a beautiful set of drawings that look as though 

they are the final solution. Sketch perspectives are a useful tool in 

communicating the appearance of a proposal (figure 3.5).  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure (3.5): Sketch perspectives method Towers, 1995 

The perspective in the drawings could be the most clear to the user 

understanding from the other drawing. Most of the users can't understand 

the plans or the sections but they can understand the perspective. They look 

at the perspective as if it is an art panel and not as an engineering drawing. 

So, some of the architects resort to the idea of the instant drawings during 

the meetings with the user. The architect starts to interpret what the user 

says during the meeting by drawing. The architect shows these drawings 

directly to the user. So, he can realize what the user says. For example, the 

user starts to describe his imagination about the entrance of his house and 



 61

the architect draws a quick sketch for his imagination and so on. This way 

plays a very important part in encouraging the user to increase his accurate 

description for the project until he describes all the details. 

3.2.2  Model: the model is the second tool of participation. The architect 

makes a preliminary or a final model for the project which he designs. The 

first important benefit of these tools is transferring the user to the real 

situation after which the project will be finished. Secondly, this tool is easy 

and doesn't need any advanced information for the user. Whatever low the 

culture of the user was mostly he can understand this model.  

Another benefit of the model concentrates on the project from all its 

sides. It is unlike the drawing which shows the beautiful sides of the project 

and ignores the other sides of it. Also another benefit of this too is that it 

can make the user realizes the context which surrounds the project.   

The architect can make a big model for near buildings surrounds the 

site that we w