Keeping Austin Weird: The crossroad between existing culture and a growing city

This article relates to a presentation I gave at the 2018 Planning Institute of Australia National Congress in Perth, Western Australia on May 11, 2018. My presentation sought to share some observations with my Australian colleagues on Austin's battle to retain its longstanding cultural identity in the wake of a surge in population growth and economic activity. Please feel free to comment and share your ideas about how we can balance existing culture and future growth in our cities.

########

When people are asked to describe their impression of a city’s character, their response usually speaks of elements that fit into two broad categories:

1.   Hard elements, like the density of development or the appearance of the natural environment; and

2.   Soft elements, like the social demographics or the general 'vibe'.

Despite being the political and administrative center of Texas, Austin is a US city that has gained a vibe and reputation for shimmying away from the Lone Star State's traditional identity.

At the core of Austin’s soul is creativity, social and cultural diversity, tolerance and a progressive left-wing attitude to politics - elements that have historically appealed to the young (and young at heart), the unpretentious, idealists and creative types. When combined with a legendary live music scene; vibrant restaurants and bars; 50,000 plus students enrolled at the University of Texas located in the heart of the city; a thriving tech industry; the large array of outdoor activities; and the general ‘coolness’ factor, Austin has become a highly desirable place to live, work and play. In 2017, the US News & World Report voted Austin as No. 1 in their "Best Places To Live in the USA" rankings.

For the past two decades, people have been arriving in Austin in dramatic numbers. Between 2005 and 2015, the population of Austin and the surrounding metropolitan area increased by 37.8% from ~1.5 million to ~2 million. This made it the fastest growing of the 50 largest metropolitan areas in the USA during that period.

The city's longstanding reputation as a quirky, laid back city that doesn't take itself too seriously is held very dear to the hearts of many Austinites. While the growth that Austin has been experiencing has produced many economic benefits, it has also resulted in a marked change in Austin's social and cultural landscape. Many locals are becoming increasingly concerned that the city's charm and cultural identity is being eroded in the face of population growth, homogenization and the invasion of 'big corporates'.

The allure of Austin as a highly desirable place to live is resulting in many of Austin's older inner-city neighborhoods encountering pressure for gentrification and increased density. While gentrification and increased density near the city center is common-sense urban planning, the impact this has on lower socio-economic groups, the creative class and small businesses in these neighborhoods is often given less attention. These groups effectively find themselves being priced out of the market and displaced, sometimes entirely out of somewhere that they have called home for many decades.

The ‘Keep Austin Weird’ movement spawned by Red Wassenich in 2000 was fundamentally a reminder for Austinites' to stay true to the city's charm in the face of rapid growth, urban renewal and homogenization. The prevalence of 'Keep Austin Weird' recognizes a high-level of community ownership and nostalgia held by many long-term residents of the small-town feel of “Old Austin” – a longing for the days when it was cheap, affordable and un-materialistic.

Despite its good intent, it is also clear the 'Keep Austin Weird' movement can, and has, caused tension between old and new residents. Newcomers and those not 'fitting the mold' have described a hostile attitude of ownership, protectiveness and one-upmanship from long-term residents and Austin purists. Many are quick to point out the irony of this in a city that prides itself on diversity and tolerance.

With the population of the Austin metropolitan area projected to double to 4 million by 2040, Austin's identity as a city is indeed at a crossroad between its past and future.

The City of Austin Planning Department is bearing the full force of this crossroad as part of the preparation of a new citywide zoning and development code. The process, known as CodeNEXT, is the first major rewrite of Austin’s zoning and land development regulations in 30 years. CodeNEXT is now on its third draft and public comment period, largely in response to strong push-back from industry and both anti and pro-development groups.

A key sticking point for CodeNEXT is how to plan for Austin’s low-density inner suburban areas. Many of these areas have longstanding Neighborhood Plans, which are neighborhood specific development regulations created through a citizen-led process. Austin’s Neighborhood Plans have a high level of community ownership and are fiercely protected by existing residents wanting to retain the low-density feel. Accordingly, many Neighborhood Plans have remained largely unchanged since their adoption. With some Plans being over 15 years old and preceding the recent surge in growth, there is a clear disconnect between the existing character and Austin's future housing and infrastructure needs. While recognition of character is important, resistance to change and anti-growth attitudes will continue to be significant hurdles for Austin's long-range planning.

The crossroad between existing culture and urban growth that is being experienced in Austin is certainly not unique. All cities at varying points in time encounter an identity crisis in the face of urban change. The relationship and balance between culture and growth is extremely complex, and made even more challenging by the reality that cities, as manifestations of human life and experience, have their own psychology.

Urban planners spend their workdays looking for ways to best accommodate and balance the needs of cities. While we generally plan well for physical elements such as infrastructure, housing and the environment, the Austin experience indicates that softer elements like a city's identity and culture can sometimes be given less priority in long-range planning. This is not from lack of care or concern, but simply because these elements are less tangible, extremely dynamic and harder to predict. This therefore makes the planning reactive.

While there is no simple solution to this complex predicament, below are several perspectives that urban planners can keep in mind in their pursuit of planning for the culture, identity and social side of our cities:

1.  Cities are more than just the physical appearance. They exist, function and grow because of people. City identities are therefore manifestations of people's individual and collective meanings, experiences and emotional attachments.

Urban planners often seek to create and convey a well-defined and unified perception of culture in their planning work. While this is noble, it is important to acknowledge that the construction and evolution of a city's identity will continue to be pushed and pulled by the perspectives of its dwellers. Debate about a city’s identity is an important component of a diverse society. If not for differing opinions, the importance of “weird” in Austin may never have existed in the first place, nor received the passionate defense that it has.

However...

2. Change is inevitable. It is important to recognize that identity and culture is not something that stands still in time – it evolves, changes and adapts in response to ever-changing social dynamics. Nostalgia and homages to the years gone by are certainly important to understand a city’s backstory, context and evolution. However, urban planners must be continually testing the relevance of long-held assumptions about the contextual issues facing the city now and into the future.

3. Homogenization of cities is a big risk to authentic culture. In an increasingly globalized world, the authenticity of a city’s culture is becoming extremely difficult to measure. Many western cities are progressively becoming more homogeneous and different versions of each other. Urban planning and placemaking elements that have been deemed successful, cool and unique in their original context are being copied and replicated elsewhere. This unfortunately can erode the authenticity of the creative process.

Austin’s longstanding identity of ‘weirdness’ has largely occurred in response to experiences that were not easily found elsewhere. Many of the things that have made Austin unique emerged organically as an extension of creative thinking. While it is important for urban planners to create a vision of what culture and experience may look like, the use of ‘cookie-cutter’ and ‘everything-to-everyone’ approaches can lead to outcomes that are contrived and out-of-context. Planning should absolutely make provision for experiential elements; however, the way that these elements are applied should not be so premeditated that it stifles the ability for people to manifest their own individual meanings and experiences. To use an analogy, planners should provide the canvas, the people should then create their own masterpiece.

4. Think creative to stay creative. Surges in economic activity can make it more difficult for those with creative tendencies to continue contributing their social capital to city life. To ensure that we can maintain creativity and authenticity in our cities, urban planners themselves should think of innovative ways to accommodate the creative class and creative activities. Some examples include encouraging citizen-led place experiences (such as Jane's Walks); defining designated arts districts; establishing and maintaining cultural capital registers; having more lenient zoning and development regulations in areas where creative capital exists or is desired; providing incentives to developers to accommodate affordable live-work and maker spaces in new developments; or even employing creative non-planners in planning organizations to help challenge the traditional way of doing things.

5. Have meaningful dialogue with all stakeholders. Much of what Austin is experiencing directly results from a high-level of community organization. This in turn has created strong citizen interest in city planning and local current affairs. The social diversity that exists in Austin presents an extremely broad range of views on both current and long-range planning matters. Genuine and meaningful dialogue with all stakeholders is therefore critical to ensure the decisions that are made can have the best chance of balancing the varying needs of local residents.

Key but often overlooked stakeholders in statutory community outreach are people under the age of 18. Tech companies are increasingly having children and teenagers involved in the beta testing of new products and gadgets. They do this primarily in recognition that the youth are the current and future core user of their products, and because they have a certain level of uninhibited blue-sky perspective that can unearth creative ideas and hacks that may not have been otherwise conceived. The planning for our cities can also be a beneficiary of the youth perspective; after all, they will be on the receiving end of today’s long-range planning efforts.

A closing thought:

"Cities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody." -- Jane Jacobs.

Additional Reading:

Weird City: Sense of place and cultural resistance in Austin, Texas by Dr. Joshua Long

Keeping Austin Weird: A Guide to the (Still) Odd Side of Town by Red Wassenich

https://www.keepaustinweird.com/

https://endofaustin.com/