Urban Collage » Commentary

Cooperation: A Tool for Design

Louis Johnson — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 21:23:18 +0000

Urban Collage believes that a multitude of perspectives, professional or otherwise and built from personal experience, is what it takes to create successful plans and designs. This was never more obvious than in a recent studio in Shanghai, China that included 15 Georgia Tech students (one Collager) and 14 students from Shanghai’s Tongji University. It would seem at first glance that design backgrounds, both professional and educational, could vary widely between the Chinese students and Americans, let alone that one group’s first language is Mandarin, a far cry from understandable to 14 of the 15 American students. So, how could it be that these two groups could cooperate and learn from one another and eventually collaborate on very intriguing conceptual design ideas? The reason this is possible, as it became apparent, is that the group all had the same underlying goals; to create a vibrant plan that improved quality of life within the existing urban core of Shanghai. Using that as the foundation to start communication between the two groups was sufficient. Of course it helped that 90% of the Chinese students spoke English very well, but it was also possible to utilize both group’s backgrounds, that were in fact very different, the Chinese students most of whom have studied in urban planning (a more technical and physical version of what is considered planning in most American schools) while the American students had backgrounds from architecture to environmental planning. It ended up being the very differences between the groups that gave the final products their holistic vision, utilizing the technical aspects of some students and the creative/conceptual aspects of others to generate a final collaborative product that may have otherwise not been achieved.

Much like the experience of the Chinese and American students in Shanghai, the practice of urban design involves people from many different backgrounds and experience. Given a common underlying goal to improve quality of life and leave things better than they were found, these relationships between planners, architects, engineers, residents, public officials and other stakeholders can be understood in a positive light- that the resultant community is richer for the varied perspectives that it embodies.

The public voice in full swing

Louis Johnson — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:11:41 +0000

As many are aware Lexington, KY and much of the surrounding region is running full bore in the planning, design and construction of projects for the upcoming Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games. It is estimated that the Games will bring hundreds of thousands of people to Lexington, with millions more viewing on TV across the world. In the face of this deadline, Lexington has launched numerous planning efforts to improve the quality of life, physical environments and overall aesthetic of the urban and rural landscape to provide an enjoyable experience for all, while also getting some long awaited projects to fruition.

In this flurry of design and development, many public and private projects have graced our newspaper covers. Surely Lexington has never lost the community’s role in planning and design but I venture to say it has been many years since those voices have been loud enough to make the impact that they have recently. Several notable projects, including the Newtown Pike Extension, have demonstrated the increased attention to community dialogue about the city’s future that has typified recent planning efforts.

Our firm’s work on projects such as East End, the Lexington Distillery District, the Red Mile Development Plan and the Bluegrass Community and Technical College Newtown Pike Campus Plan have all heavily involved community groups, stakeholders and residents to make sure that where the design was heading was in agreement with the community’s vision. It is also important to note that each of these entities (private and public) have gone out of their way and spent money they are not necessarily required to spend in order to support a community dialogue.

While the planning and design “machine” still may have its kinks, I think it is important that one of those kinks, lack of public involvement, is being worked on. Each of us as individuals in the greater community bring differences in ideas and experience to the conversation, but we must speak up and when we do it is good to know someone is listening.

“I’ll take ‘Public Involvement’ for a thousand, please, Alex…”

Dennis Madsen — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 20:14:26 +0000

When an employee first starts at Urban Collage, one of his or her earliest crucibles is participation in a public meeting. Our firm has done literally hundreds of workshops, in a wide array of formats, for communities large and small, and for audiences both accommodating and, shall we say, ‘opinionated’. Learning how to moderate without directing, and how to inform without biasing, are key skills for a Collager. But another challenge is how, after scores of meetings, UC can keep the public meeting format fresh and interesting. How can we avoid the process becoming formulaic, while maintaining its usefulness and dynamism?In Prattville, Alabama, we tried out a new tack…

The Prattville Comprehensive Plan began in the Fall of 2008, and continues through September of 2009. An integral part of the process, as with almost any comp plan, is the public participation. A stated goal from the City was that the community outreach be both engaging and effective, and that community members should feel like their input was heard and included. This charge was most evident in the third public meeting – the Design Workshop. In that meeting, UC needed to get input from the community on a wide variety of questions and issues, at a wide range of scales. The question was how best to format a workshop – one that would be both diverse and specific in its topics – so that the attendees felt engaged without getting overwhelmed. We needed some smart thinking to solve the problem… and where else can you find smart people but on Jeopardy!

The popular game show became an inspiration for the workshop, primarily because its use of categories helped UC organize the questions into understandable sections – “Crystal Ball” asked participants to look into the future for their vision of Prattville; “Getting Around” provided a series of transportation questions; “Missing Pieces” asked folks to locate things that the City would need as it grew; and of course “Pot Pourri” was everything else. The format not only allowed us to jump from topic to topic (thus avoiding anything getting overworked or stale), but it also provided a level of comfort (who doesn’t know how to answer in the form of a question?) and no shortage of fun.After all, the word “workshop” has “work” in it; “Gameshow” has “game”!

There was even a Final Jeopardy question… but in this case, the winner was the City and people of Prattville.