Rik Adamski and Tactical Urbanism

Rik Adamski from the Congress for New Urbanism spoke to the class about Tactical Urbanism and DIY Urbanism. He started off by defining urbanism, which could describe a city as well as smaller municipalities. Urbanism is simply when an area is designated as a multi use area (residential, commercial, industrial, etc.). Tactical urbanism is a way to get the community involved to enact change or improvements, especially when government fails. For example, when a city neglects signage or painting crosswalks, citizens can organize themselves to post laminated signs or paint the crosswalks themselves. These measures can be seen as ways of going 'against the grain' but still effecting change. 

This is not to say that local government cannot be involved or even lead tactical change. For example, in New York City some officials wanted to close part of Times Square to vehicular traffic, but traffic engineers did not want to consider the proposal without a multi-year (and multi-million dollar) study of how such a change would affect New York City traffic patterns. Instead of engaging in such a costly study, the group instead applied for a permit to close Times Square for a few days for an event involving lawn chairs, which only cost the city a few thousand dollars. Traffic in the city actually improved during the event, leading city officials to the conclusion that it was in fact feasible to close part of Times Square to vehicular traffic. 

When tactical change is primarily led by community leaders, it is often referred to as DIY urbanism. A good example of DIY urbanism is how Oak Cliff became a bicycle friendly part of Dallas. An IT Oak Cliff professional wanted to improve Oak Cliff and was able to influence others, including his city council, to make bike lanes a priority. Other examples of DIY urbanism include printing and posting signs when the city fails to do so and organizing city litter pickup events. 

I never realized that DFW is a "pattern region"(leader) for DIY urbanism. Living in Arlington, I rarely have a chance to go to downtown Fort Worth or Dallas to see how these cities are promoting multi-use facilities and attempting to improve community involvement. 

When asked about why Fort Worth's bicycle initiatives have been successful and why a similar initiative in Arlington has failed, Mr. Adamski said that culture was the critical factor. In Fort Worth, proponents of bicycle lanes were vocal in their support, and the public seemed to genuinely support the initiative. In Arlington, proponents were slow to voice their support for bicycle lanes, which allowed a very small opposition to stymy a multi-million dollar initiative that, in my opinion, could have greatly improved living conditions in Arlington. 

I agree with Mr. Adamski's analysis of why the bicycle initiate failed in my town (Arlington) and now realize that people like me could have done more to persuade city leaders to continue with the initiative. I attended a few of the special meetings that the city had, but I did not offer any vocal support for the plan, nor did I join any of the pro-bicycle organizations that sprouted up during this time. 

I often ride my bicycle to work and ride on Davis Drive, one of the roads that was going to get a bicycle lane. Since Davis Drive is not one of the main thoroughfares in Arlington, one might not think that painting a bicycle lane on the street would be necessary. At least once a week a driver will yell at me to "get <<expletive>> off the road" or to "use the <<expletive>> sidewalk." Mind you that this is not a busy street, and it is quite easy for drivers to pass me, even during rush hour. Had people like me spoken up, perhaps Arlington would be more bicycle friendly today.