Tag Archives: Times Square

Tactical Urbanism – useful procedural hack, or something more?

Cover of Mike Lydon and Anthony Garcia's new book, Tactical Urbanism.

Cover of Mike Lydon and Anthony Garcia’s new book, Tactical Urbanism.

Tactical Urbanism is all the rage these days. There’s an undeniable appeal to the idea of getting the community together to do something rather than drafting another plan. But is the appeal just about the results of these projects, or does Tactical Urbanism offer path to improve how we plan and build our cities?

Earlier in April, the Coalition for Smarter Growth in DC teamed up with Island Press to host a book talk from Mike Lydon at Smith Public Trust in Brookland. I’ve known Mike for years; we attended graduate school together at the University of Michigan.

Early in Mike’s career, he worked on a large-scale planning effort to re-write Miami’s zoning code. While a tremendously important project, Mike felt frustrated by the limitations of the required public process – evening meetings with a small handful of citizens, probably not representative of the city’s demographics. Add to that the challenges of talking about abstract regulations like zoning, and it’s not hard to see a good plan derailed by fear, uncertainty, and doubt. That kind of frustration led Mike to look for a better process.

Tactical Urbanism isn’t just about doing things quick and dirty. The emphasis is on using tactics as a part of a larger strategy (the book’s subtitle: short-term action for long-term change), opposed to art or beautification – short term actions that often lack a longer-term strategy. This process emphasizes working fast to prototype something, measure it, and moving on to the next idea if it’s not successful.

The textbook example of this process comes from New York. The NYC DOT’s pedestrianization of Times Square started as a pilot project with some traffic cones, paint, lawn chairs, and the political will to try something different. After proving successful, expanded sidewalks became permanent. Had the city tried to push the full design from the start, layers of process (each offering the potential to delay) would’ve likely derailed the project.

As transformative as New York’s reallocation of public space has been, it’s worth noting that those projects haven’t required a large physical change. The buildings are all the same; there aren’t any new subway lines; the street rights of way are the same as they were 100 years ago. Instead, these projects represent a change in behavior, a different way to use the same streets.

Likewise, as the city implemented these pilot programs, there’s been plenty of bluster but no real disagreement about the city’s overall strategy: streets that are safe for all users. One of the lessons from NYC DOT’s programs is to emphasize the link between the tactics (pilot programs) and the strategy (safety). It helps to have a strategic goal that is unassailable – After all, who would be against safety? Yet, the existing procedural requirements aren’t advancing a strategy so much as they protect the status quo.

There’s a difference between incrementalism and experimentation, and while incrementalism is important to Tactical Urbanism, it has limits. Larger capital investments require more planning. DC’s streetcar project is struggling to get on its feet due to a history of ad-hoc decisions regarding implementation. For a large, capital-intensive project, this is not the way to go.

However, not all transportation projects are large, expensive pieces of infrastructure. Detailed planning studies and documentation of environmental impacts might be worthwhile for a new highway or a large infrastructure project, but can we really justify that level of analysis (nevermind the what counts as an ‘impact’) for changing the allocation of road space by installing bike lanes? Part of the appeal of Tactical Urbanism stems from this mis-match of onerous processes required for minor projects.

Mike would be the first to talk about the limits of Tactical Urbanism. One is a limit of scope: housing policy? Inequality? Addressing those issues is more complicated than improving pedestrian safety at a few intersections. The scope of the challenge is too large, too complex.

Likewise, Tactical Urbanism’s best examples are in re-allocating space to better match human behavior; where you can physically test the idea, show people how it can work. Often, zoning reforms suffocate under the same kind of lengthy public process with multiple veto points that hamstring safe streets projects. Can you envision a tactical urbanism approach to zoning reform? How can you apply the same lessons about pilot projects, testing concepts, and earning citizen buy-in for an entirely abstract concept like zoning?

Contrast the examples of incremental development in Mexico (highlighted here by Charlie Gardner) compared to the rigid, rule-based urbanism in the US. Our political processes and legal frameworks don’t allow for much incremental change to buildings or to the physical fabric of the city. Allowing that kind of incremental change requires changing laws and regulations; changing laws and regulations requires a legal and regulatory process. None of these potential changes has an obvious analogue to the current applications of Tactical Urbanism.

Tactical urbanism can circumvent rules to achieve a physical change; but can it be used to create a legal change? If not, what lessons can we learn about improving public process for other kinds of changes? Can these lessons be applied to controversial projects?

Is an issue like zoning reform controversial because of our archaic processes (e.g the tactics), or is there a more fundamental disagreement about the overall strategy for our cities? If the latter is true, can Tactical Urbanism provide any useful lessons for resolving disputes about strategic urbanism?

Links – burrowing, tunneling

WaPo infographic on NATM for Dulles Metro

WaPo infographic on NATM for Dulles Metro

Curious about the tunnel progress for the Dulles Metro line? I ran across a WaPo infographic on the Dulles Metro line’s tunnel under the intersection of Routes 123 and 7 in Tysons Corner.  This tunnel is being completed via the New Austrian Tunneling Method – the graphic explains the process and shows the tunnel’s path under the highest point in Fairfax County.

Similarly, there’s tunneling in Russia. The English Russia blog has some great shots of new station construction for the St. Petersburg Metro.  Thanks to the geology of the city (built on fill, swamps, etc) the nearest reasonable strata to tunnel in is quite deep, making the Metro the deepest in the world.

Unhappier Hipsters? Matt Yglesias’s twitter feed is apparently feeding the beast.

Not in the erogenous zone? Ah, there’s nothing quite like the unintended consequences of land use law.

Paul Pickthorne, of Merrimack Park, has been hosting kink parties in his house for some time, and has been charging admission to defray the costs of hosting. His non-kinky (that we know of, anyway) neighbors complained to their county council representative, Roger Berliner, who responded that the county “has moved aggressively to put an end to this blight on your community.” This swift action took the form of a warning from the zoning inspector.

Charging admission might be a commercial use, eh?  Either way, it’s worth taking note of this particular case study of how zoning laws are used for all sorts of nitpicky regulations and impositions.

Streetcar wires and trees – not a problem. Streetcars 4 DC collects some case studies of how DC’s potential streetcars can get along just fine with neighboring trees.

The new Times Square will be around for a while. The folks at StreetFilms put together a nice piece showing off the transformation of Times Square in advance of Mayor Bloomberg’s decision on making the changes permanent.

Today, they did just that.  Streetsblog has the story:

After weighing a dramatic decline in traffic injuries and data from millions of taxi trips showing an average seven percent increase in west Midtown traffic speeds, Bloomberg characterized the results of the trial as very encouraging. Safety improvements alone, he noted, were “reason enough to make this permanent.”

In a rather extraordinary Q&A session that followed the announcement, Bloomberg fended off several questions from reporters who expressed skepticism that overall traffic speeds had improved. The mayor did not shy from the chance to frame pedestrian, bicycle and transit improvements in a way that New Yorkers rarely hear from their elected officials.

“Are the roads for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists,” he asked, “or are they just for motorists?” When it comes to streets that safely serve all users and create vibrant public spaces, he suggested, New York has fallen behind its competitor cities around the globe.

Great news.  The final report and data that was evaluated is available here (PDF).