When presented with such a possibility, most would laugh derisively or mention something along the lines of, ‘Have you lost your ever-loving mind?!’.
In many respects, this is a completely reasonable reaction. Imagining the possible benefits of greening a street, prioritizing public life over cars through design or even conceptualizing how such a space might look or function is absurdly hard for anyone. For a car-centric culture, greening a street is such a radically different idea that many will reject it out of hand not because they don't like it but because it is so absolutely foreign it is impossible to evaluate; it doesn't match any of our traditional reference points for judging whether something is good or bad, whether it works or doesn't work.
Companies run into this phenomenon all the time when they introduce ground breaking products such as the Aeron Chair, the Segway (not a fan) or film replacing-flash memory cards for cameras. Thanks to Malcolm Gladwell, it is now well known that Herman Miller's best selling Aeron Chair initially tested abysmally with focus groups because it looked nothing like the stuffed leather predecessors that users typically associated with comfort, power and prestige. Of course, over time through direct use, the Dot Com boom and people acclimating to its form through thoughtful product placement, the Aeron completely transcended the initial negative feedback and has now completely re-framed people's conception of the office chair.
Unfortunately, it's harder to establish new reference points for street design. At the very least, it is truly difficult to take a street for a 'test drive', to walk through it and give it a try until changes actually get built.
Or is it?
When the Methleys, a neighborhood in Leeds, England decided to permanently redesign their streets to support the social life of the community rather than simply be corridors of movement (in England these are called home zones) it wasn't because they had suddenly developed a case of deep seated home zone envy. Much like the Aeron, there were few if any precedents for this sort of transformation in England at that time. Instead, driven by a desire to make their streets more child and family friendly, they 'found' their solution through testing and experimentation.
Working with the creative think-tank, Heads Together, they began to host 'On The Street' activities that both explored and tested the limits of how the community was interested in using these spaces, with activities ranging from street aerobics to dog shows to an outdoor cinema.Although seeing Richard Simmons leading group aerobics in your street is undoubtedly impactful (in so very many ways), the truly transformative event was the temporary sodding of one of the Methley's main streets for a weekend-long festival in 1996 that did in fact include an oompah band and sod watering races. Masterfully programmed and publicized, turning this street into a field not only allowed the community to fully explore radically different uses of that space but the comprehensive media coverage helped the entire country share in their experience, eventually leading to the creation of a government supported home zone movement in the United Kingdom.
Absurdity makes you smarter?
Visiting Methleys' community website, it immediately becomes apparent that they are a truly unique group of people and that the tight knit nature of their community undoubtedly created an unusually fertile ground for exploration. However, the tools they used to find and create their particular definition of a livable street are more widespread than you might think.
Increasingly, short term events such as Ciclovia,the Aeolian Ride, Big Urban Game, Park(ing)Day, Manhattan Mega-Putt and Austin's own Foam Sword Friday (pictured) are (intentionally or not) challenging both the participants and observers' understandings of how a street and its surroundings might be used.
These activities are particularly powerful and useful, especially around polarizing issues, because many of them are inherently absurd, often disarming both the participant and the onlooker. Absurdity is therefore an important tool for change in places like Austin because it helps turn off the anger typically associated with such hot button issues like street use and creating new opportunities for communication, and understanding. Absurdity can also completely re-frame possibility, allowing one to see connections and opportunities that might have otherwise been elusive. The New York Times published an article yesterday, that will surprise few teachers or creative types, documenting nascent research establishing connections between improved pattern recognition and nonsense.
Can we actually make better cities if we create design processes that are fun and at times ridiculous?
Similarly, the temporary installations and DIY street design kits of groups such as SUSTRANS, Space Hijackers and City Repair allow a neighborhood's residents to actively design and test changes to their street scape, exploring possibilities that they along with the designers or engineers may have never otherwise imagined. The temporal nature of the explorations has the added benefit of ratcheting down the tensions typically associated with public design processes, creating a climate more conducive to empathy and exploring opportunity. Simultaneously because the activity is meaningful and visible, if done well, these processes build social capital, ownership and community pride.
All of this points to the fact that there are great opportunities for Austin to evolve its street culture and thereby the design of these streets to meet the needs of the 21st century by enhancing, and celebrating its weirdest and most wonderful sensibilities.
So, what are you going to do to Make Austin's Streets Weirder?
----------
Want to read more about some of the people, places and ideas discussed in this article?
Pattern recognition, absurdity and the value of prototyping-
Over the past couple of days, the New York Times has published two (one of them is a bit old hat) interesting articles on the above mentioned topics.
How Nonsense Sharpens the Intellect
It’s Brand New, but Make It Sound Familiar
The Methleys, Heads Together and the Home Zone Movement-
www.headstogether.org/home_zones.html
SUSTRANS, Space Hijackers and City Repair-
-------
The Weekly What If? is a new weekly column by Alex Gilliam. Alex Gilliam is the founder of Public Workshop, an organization dedicated to helping individuals, schools, and communities achieve great things through design. The Weekly What If? focuses on re-imagining various aspects of how Austin, as a city, functions and feels. The goal is to foster a larger conversation about the present and future shape of our City.
Do you have a suggestion for something that needs to be re-imagined in Austin? Please email your suggestions to Alex:
alex (at) publicworkshop.us







It's worth noting that the houses in Methleys Leeds are row/town house that are back to back. That is for all purposes, except the houses at the end of the rows, these homes ONLY have a very small front yard, nothing in the back or the side at all.
Hold-on, though, perhaps what we could do in Austin is build houses like that downtown. That would help achieve the density the developers want without littering downtown with more up market, high rise condos. Priced right, they would also be attractive in the Councils affordability targets, which coincidently was the market that the Methleys homes were built for, mill and mine workers and their families.
I don't mean lofts like the Brazos lofts, but real town/back to back houses. You would be able to get something in the order of 50 per city block, two or three story, it would mean subdividing the city blocks to provide access between the rows, but I'd prefer that to more shops/offices on the ground floor and homes up in the air.
Triman.
Thanks for your comment and giving a little more background on the Methleys. Along these lines, I think it is important to note that the greening of their streets arose out of need- as you pointed out, there simply weren't enough places for children to play outdoors. And instead of creating a playground to solve their problem, they brought the play spaces to their houses and streets. This is an interesting problem in Austin, one that it will need to consider as it grows. Austin has a wonderful assortment of parks for children and families to use but they are relatively disconnected and in many cases access to them via bike paths or sidewalks is a challenge, if not non-existent.
As we hopefully increase our density with growth, how does our conception of our public/play spaces and access to them need to evolve as well?
One Austin-specific density initiative that I am sure you are aware of but I'm going to throw it out there anyway is the Alley Flat Initiative-
http://thealleyflatinitiative.org/
Of course this really isn't a new idea, just a reminder of Austin's great tradition in some neighborhoods of granny flats or garage apartments but I love the potential it offers to reconsider the alleys as new types of public spaces while improving the density of our City.
It also begins to address the implicit challenge of affordability which is really important but something that I would like to put aside for another day as I don't want to muddy the waters, yet.
I'm curious, do you have any ideas for helping evolve Austin's conception of public space and street use to match the increased density that you and Mike have mentioned? I believe we can address these things infrastructurally but I think it's important to address it culturally as well to both reduce the vitriol associated with such changes but also to create an atmosphere for finding Austin appropriate solutions.
Best.
Alex
I'd like to see UT convert 24th street, between Guadalupe & San Jacinto, and Speedway, between Dean Keeton & 21st, into pedestrian malls.
They've already closed the Speedway stretch to most auto traffic, and given the number of pedestrians during the day, there's no reason to have cars driving up and down that narrow stretch of 24th. It would greatly improve the aesthetics of the central campus, and heighten safety for pedestrians.
San Antonio street between 4th & 5th will be greened. They are removing the concrete and replacing it with sod in front of the new courthouse.
Sure it seems like a good idea now but what about when it rains and then gets muddy and possibly smell a little bad then everyone will bitch and moan.
triman, if we just built rowhouses downtown instead of condos and didn't built any more density anywhere else, we'd be effectively giving up on any hope of sustainability here.
What we need is rowhouses lots of other places, AND high-rises downtown.
I love the pop-up and DIY nature of these community experiments. As a planner, we often talk about "community building" and "social capital" but seldom do we take the the time to create the conditions for these small, simple, and temporary projects that bring neighbors together.
On the City's side, it could encourage more temporary closings by streamlining the permitting process and promoting the idea of applying for a street closing.
Go ahead Austin, try it.
For those of you who missed it this morning, CBS Sunday Morning did a piece on street design and possible misconceptions about traffic safety:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5377256n&tag=contentBody;housing
There's also a fairly ridiculous piece on a dancing traffic cop in Providence. Ha.
Austin Ballet plus APD?
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5377254n&tag=contentBody;housing