I was initially impressed with the way the open house was set up. In Chicago, you rarely hear of open houses for proposed city project, but instead community forums that are are filled with only public comments. The overall flow made it simple for anyone to really learn and understand the two proposals. Having a person at various posters along the room made it easy to engage and question certain things. In general though the space did seem confining at times, perhaps due to the size of some unused tables. For a proposal like this, it was important to have boards and diagrams to truly contrast the two ideas. This personally made it clear which proposal seemed best – the two way waterside proposal. Whenever visiting the stretch in front of the piers, all the traffic signals do become overwhelming and confusing. That is why with the two-way system would minimize confusion and also for a better flow. I was overhearing a women speak to one of the presenters/informers and she really wanted to have her public comment heard…but listening to more of her opinion, it was clear her views aligned more with the two-way option, so they should have made it clear that she just had to vote on her desired proposal. The audience was definitely more geared towards people who are impacted and have advocated for/against change for a while. That is why the sense of formality was more present, just because it more for people with previous knowledge on it.
For S4 I am attempting to use both visual and personal aids to help convey my idea topic. Because my proposal revolves around social media and its use, it makes sense to showcase ways and methods people are currently using it and can use it. So the “pattern” attempting to form within my audience would be how to properly and effectively use their social media platforms.