Tyler  Harris  8.10.2012      The  Image  of  Austin    

Abstract  

Following  the  research  methods  outlined  in  Kevin  Lynch’s  seminal  work,  The  Image  of  The  City,  this  study  seeks  to  evaluate  the  legibility—the  ease  with  which  a  city’s  parts  can  be  recognized  and  organized  into  a  coherent  pattern—of  Austin,  TX  by  gathering  and  interpreting  the  mental  images  of  the  urban  environment  held  by  a  sample  of  citizens.  Forty  study  participants  conveyed  their  individual  image  of  the  city  through  interviews  and  mental  map  sketches,  which  were  compiled  into  a  single  map  produced  with  ArcMap  GIS  software.  The  map  is  then  interpreted  with  the  following  research  questions  in  mind:  How  legible  is  Austin?  Which  of  the  city’s  physical  features  are  most  significant  in  forming  the  image,  and  why?  Preceding  the  map  interpretation  is  an  overview  of  Lynch’s  concept  of  legibility  and  empirical  methods,  and  a  brief  review  of  academic  criticism  by  those  who  have  revisited  his  work.  Taking  this  criticism  into  account,  the  study  outlined  here  seeks  to  visualize  the  “Image  of  Austin”  in  a  way  that  remains  true  to  Lynch’s  methods,  yet  departs  from  them  in  significant  ways  in  order  to  address  shortcomings  identified  in  the  literature,  and  to  experiment  with  contemporary  mapping  techniques  (GIS).  A  history  of  Austin’s  urban  morphology  is  provided  to  establish  context,  while  an  overview  of  current  trends  in  Austin’s  growth  and  development  gives  the  project  significance.  The  study  concludes  with  a  discussion  of  The  Image  of  Austin,  and  how  the  city’s  legibility  could  be  changing  as  a  result  of  major  urban  redevelopments.      Introduction:  Legibility  Defined  

“…a  particular  visual  quality…the  ease  with  which  a  city’s  parts  can  be  recognized  and  organized  into  a  coherent  pattern.”  –  The  Image  of  the  City,  p.  2  

 For  Lynch,  legibility  is  essentially  about  a  cohesive  perception  of  the  city,  “a  certain  unity,  

connectedness,  or  organization  in  the  urban  environment  allowing  the  inhabitant  to  sense  

the  whole”  (Lynch,  1960).  As  a  city  dweller  moves  through  the  city,  satisfaction  can  be  

derived  from  the  ability  to  orient  himself  in  time  and  space  using  physical  features  of  the  

built  environment.  Lynch  categorized  these  features  into  five  different  elements—paths,  

edges,  districts,  nodes  and  landmarks—that  taken  together  constitute  a  legible  city.  

Additionally,  he  employed  a  concept  related  to  legibility  which  he  called  “imageability,”  the  

quality  in  a  physical  object  that  evokes  a  strong  or  weak  image  in  a  given  observer.    

  2  

“A  highly  imageable  city  would  seem  well  formed,  distinct,  remarkable;  it  would  invite  the  eye  and  the  ear  to  greater  attention  and  participation.  Such  a  city  could  be  apprehended  over  time  as  a  pattern  of  high  continuity  with  many  distinctive  parts  clearly  interconnected.  The  perceptive  and  familiar  observer  could  absorb  new  sensuous  impacts  without  disruption  of  his  basic  image,  and  each  new  impact  would  touch  upon  many  previous  elements.  He  would  be  well  oriented,  and  he  could  move  easily.  He  would  be  highly  aware  of  his  environment.”  –  The  Image  of  the  City  

 

Imageability  is  closely  tied  to  legibility;  the  more  imageable  elements  existing  within  a  city,  

the  more  likely  they  are  to  be  cognitively  organized  into  a  legible  urban  environment.  And  

so,  legibility  can  be  defined  as  a  measure  of  perceptual  understanding  of  a  city’s  physical  

form,  which  depends  on  the  strength  of  mental  images  that  people  associate  with  the  

physical  features  constituting  a  city.      

 

Lynch’s  Methods  &  Review  of  Criticism  

In  order  to  assess  legibility,  Lynch  and  his  colleagues  conducted  interviews  with  samples  of  

urban  populations  in  three  different  cities—Boston,  Jersey  City  and  Los  Angeles.  The  

interviews  consisted  of  a  request  for  a  sketch  map  of  the  city,  a  description  of  trips  made  

through  it,  and  a  listing  of  physical  elements  in  the  city  felt  to  be  most  significant.  What  

they  sought  was  “a  thread  running  constant  through  people”  that  would  “reveal  some  basic  

elements  of  urban  perception  shared  by  all…”(Ellis,  2010).  Although  Lynch  was  aware  that  

“the  image  of  a  given  reality  may  vary  significantly  between  different  observers”  (Lynch,  

1960)  the  source  of  his  strongest  criticism  is  that  the  sample  of  people  participating  in  his  

study  consisted  mainly  of  upper  middle-­‐class  professionals,  and  was  thus  not  

representative  of  the  city  as  a  whole  (Zmudzinska-­‐Nowak,  2003).  Other  critics  have  

focused  on  legibility  as  an  ideological  concept,  arguing  that  by  emphasizing  the  five  

physical  elements  as  tools  for  wayfinding,  the  definition  of  legibility  “is  reduced  to  a  

perceptual  knowledge  of  physical  form”  that  implies  “use  of  the  environment  only  through  

movement…whereas  people’s  conception  of  urban  environments  is  formed  of  a  

  3  

functionalist  element,  on  the  basis  of  what  they  do  there”  (Madanipour,  1996).  This  

functionalist  perspective  has  merit  in  that  the  images  compiled  for  this  study  appear  to  be  

largely  determined  by  each  citizen’s  mode  of  operation  in  the  city;  that  is  to  say,  each  

individual’s  situation,  in  terms  of  location,  housing,  career,  interests,  etc.  influences  how  

they  engage  the  city,  and  thus  how  they  imagine  it.  For  example,  a  University  of  Texas  

student  who  rents  an  apartment  within  walking  distance  of  campus  will  likely  have  a  much  

different  image  of  the  city  than  someone  who  commutes  via  highway  from  their  South  

Austin  home  to  a  job  downtown.  It  is  important  to  recognize  here  that  Lynch  did  indeed  

focus  on  urban  legibility  in  terms  of  wayfinding,  but  this  does  not  negate  the  fact  that  

certain  physical  elements  within  a  city  are  more  imageable  than  others.  For  Lynch,  the  

imageability  of  an  element  depends  on  three  components:  identity,  structure,  and  meaning.  

“A  workable  image  requires  first  the  identification  of  an  object…its  distinction  from  other  

things  (identity)…second  the  image  must  include  the  spatial  relation  of  the  object  to  the  

observer  (structure)…Finally,  this  object  must  have  some  meaning  for  the  observer,  

whether  practical  or  emotional”  (Lynch,  1960).  Madanipour’s  functionalist  perspective  

emphasizes  practical  meaning.  He  continues,  “environmental  cognition  is  essentially  a  

social  product,  as  it  is  learnt  by  individuals  and  is  shaped  and  conditioned  by  their  social  

environment.  In  other  words,  mental  maps  of  individuals  largely  depend  on  their  real  or  

perceived  place  in  social  and  economic  hierarchies”  (Madanipour,  1996).  If  this  is  the  case,  

then  there  is  good  reason  to  map  these  images  in  order  to  better  understand  how  societal  

roles  decide  what  parts  of  the  city  are  experienced  by  different  people.  

“If  it  is  our  purpose  to  build  cities  for  the  enjoyment  of  vast  numbers  of  people  of  diverse  backgrounds—and  cities  which  will  also  be  adaptable  to  future  purposes—we  may  be  wise  to  concentrate  on  the  physical  clarity  of  the  image  and  let  meaning  develop  on  its  own.”  –  The  Image  of  the  City  

 

  4  

Lynch’s  mental  mapping  technique  has  also  been  criticized  in  that  it  “privileges  the  

detached,  abstracted  distance  of  the  aerial  standpoint…as  a  research  method,  the  focus  on  

drawn  and  mental  maps  tends  to  generate  knowledge  which  suppresses  the  nuances  and  

contingencies  of  people's  diverse  ways  of  experiencing  and  acting  in  space,  overstating  the  

similarities  among  findings”  (Stevens,  2005).  I  disagree—the  aerial  standpoint  is  a  familiar  

perspective,  as  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  study  participants  were  not  instructed  to  sketch  

maps  in  any  particular  format,  yet  most  drew  from  this  perspective  of  their  own  accord.  

One  need  only  scan  through  several  of  the  sketched  maps  included  in  the  appendix  to  see  

that  nuances  are  not  suppressed;  rather  they  are  accommodated  even  in  sometimes  wild  

divergence.  Furthermore,  the  plan  view  provides  a  consistent  perspective  from  which  the  

compiled  images  can  be  visualized.  A  final  criticism  of  the  mental  mapping  approach  is  that  

when  applied  to  urban  design,  the  maps  themselves  “are  another  attempt  to  impose  some  

form  of  imaginary  order  on  the  urban  fabric”  (Madanipour,  1996).  Stevens  echoes  this  

sentiment,  claiming  that  Lynch’s  findings  “have  become  a  justification  for  producing  

visually  well-­‐ordered,  ‘Hausmannized’  urban  social  space”  (Stevens,  2005).  Although  there  

may  be  examples  of  Lynch’s  concepts  being  applied  in  such  a  manner,  this  was  not  his  

intent.  For  Lynch,  city  design  is  a  “temporal  art.”  A  legible  city  is  one  that  not  only  tells  us  

where  we  are  (in  time),  but  where  we  have  been  and  where  we  are  going  and  at  what  

speed  (Ford,  1999,  paraphrased  from  Lynch’s  What  Time  is  this  Place?).  To  this  effect,  a  city  

should  be  designed  so  that  it  is  symbolic  of  its  time  in  a  coherent  way,  yet  also  with  some  

degree  of  foresight  so  that  it  can  adapt  to  the  changing  purposes  and  perceptions  of  its  

citizens.  I  maintain  that  by  gathering  and  compiling  the  mental  images  of  a  city  conveyed  by  

a  representative  sample  of  citizens,  we  can  begin  to  understand  the  cognitive  significance  

of  certain  physical  features  and  their  role  in  forming  a  legible  urban  environment.  

Furthermore,  by  mapping  the  physical  elements  most  significant  in  the  collective  mental  

  5  

image  of  a  city,  we  can  identify  areas  that  contribute  most  to  a  city’s  identity.  This  is  

especially  important  for  a  rapidly  growing  city  such  as  Austin.  Over  the  course  of  the  last  

century,  the  population  of  Austin  has  consistently  doubled  every  twenty  years  (Emergent  

Urbanism).  Planners  and  designers  have  proposed  projects  and  initiatives  to  absorb  this  

growth  sustainably  while  preserving  and  enhancing  Austin’s  unique  identity.  I  would  argue  

that  over  time,  a  city’s  identity  is  manifested  in  its  built  environment,  and  expressed  

through  the  experiences  people  share  within  it.  If  this  is  the  case,  then  a  city’s  identity  is  

strengthened  through  higher  legibility  of  urban  form,  which  offers  greater  potential  depth  

and  intensity  of  human  experience,  therefore  reinforcing  a  city’s  identity.  For  this  reason  in  

particular,  I  have  chosen  to  conduct  a  study  that  closely  follows  the  empirical  methods  

pioneered  by  Lynch.  I  believe  that  as  Austin  continues  to  evolve,  it  is  important  to  assess  its  

legibility,  to  identify  its  most  imageable  components,  and  to  understand  what  they  

contribute  to  Austin’s  image,  and  ultimately  its  identity.  The  goals  of  the  study  that  follows  

are:  1)  to  compile  and  visualize  (map)  the  Image  of  Austin,  2)  to  identify  this  city’s  most  

imageable  features,  and  3)  assess  the  legibility  of  Austin  through  an  interpretation  of  the  

map.

  6  

The  Urban  Morphology  of  Austin  

“Like  a  piece  of  architecture,  the  city  is  a  construction  in  space,  but  one  of  vast  scale,  a  thing  perceived  only  in  the  course  of  long  spans  of  time.  City  design  is  therefore  a  temporal  art…”–  The  Image  of  the  City,  p.  1  

 At  the  root  of  Austin’s  urban  morphology  is  Edwin  Waller’s  plan  from  1839,  which  laid  out  

the  new  town  in  a  classic  grid  pattern  (refer  to  map  on  opposite  page).  The  plan  framed  

640  acres  within  natural  features:  Waller  Creek  to  the  east,  Shoal  Creek  to  the  west,  and  the  

Colorado  River  along  the  southern  edge.  Formally  bisecting  the  plan  is  Congress  Avenue,  

which  was  built  between  the  creeks  along  the  path  of  a  drainage  swale,  and  has  become  a  

center  of  social,  economic,  political  and  cultural  activity  in  downtown  Austin.  At  the  head  of  

this  civic  axis  is  the  Capitol  building,  located  symbolically  on  a  hilltop,  and  the  ceremonial  

grounds  that  surround  it.  Other  defining  features  are  four  equidistant  public  squares,  

arranged  symmetrically  on  either  side  of  Congress  Ave.  The  symmetry,  planned  sight-­‐lines  

and  intentionally  placed  landmarks  of  Waller’s  plan  surely  made  for  a  legible  place,  at  least  

in  terms  of  navigation.  One  can  only  imagine  if  this  formal  scheme  had  been  applied  to  

subsequent  development,  but  would  this  have  made  Austin  a  more  legible  place?  1839  was  

the  same  year  that  the  government  of  the  Republic  of  Texas  moved  from  Houston  to  Austin,  

establishing  it  as  a  center  of  government  and  political  activity.  The  permanent  Capitol  

Building  was  completed  in  1888,  and  has  become  the  central  landmark  of  the  city.  In  1883,  

The  University  of  Texas  opened  its  doors,  having  been  built  on  another  hilltop  site  just  

north  of  the  Capitol.  Because  of  these  events,  Central  Austin  is  now  composed  of  three  

adjacent  districts,  arranged  north  to  south:  The  University  of  Texas  Campus,  The  State  

Capitol  Complex,  and  the  Central  Business  District  (refer  to  Basemap).  This  orchestration  of  

various  land  uses,  surrounded  by  diverse  neighborhoods,  gives  the  city  its  unique  identity  

and  character  (Black,  Sinclair.  “The  DNA  of  Austin”.  Emergent  Urbanism).  Perhaps  Austin  is  

more  legible  this  way,  having  evolved  organically  through  time.    

  7  

 Compiling  the  Images  of  Austin    This  study  basically  follows  the  research  methods  described  in  The  Image  of  the  City,  but  

differs  significantly  in  their  execution.  For  example,  Lynch  and  his  colleagues  conducted  30  

verbal  interviews  (that  included  a  map  sketching  component)  with  citizens  of  Boston,  a  

sample  that  was  admittedly  homogenous  in  terms  of  social  status  and  affluence.  For  this  

study  I  conducted  40  interviews  including  sketches  from  what  could  be  considered  a  

slightly  more  representative  sample  of  the  city’s  population,  and  so  there  is  greater  variety  

in  the  mental  images  gathered.  However,  the  sample  used  in  this  study  contains  some  bias  

of  its  own—of  the  40  interviews  I  conducted  in  Austin,  about  half  were  with  University  of  

Texas  students  who  generally  live  in  the  same  areas,  engage  the  city  in  similar  ways,  and  

thus  have  similar  mental  images.  I  attempted  to  balance  the  sample  by  dedicating  the  

remaining  interviews  to  residents  of  Central  East  Austin,  South  Austin,  West  Austin,  and  a  

handful  of  people  actually  living  downtown.  This  introduces  another  difference  between  

Lynch’s  methods  and  my  own—the  study  area  for  Austin  was  not  limited  to  2.5  x  1.5  miles,  

as  suggested  by  Lynch.  This  made  for  some  wildly  divergent  images  of  the  city,  but  overall  a  

more  complete  one.    

 

Mapping  the  Collective  Image  of  Austin  

There  are  also  significant  differences  between  Lynch’s  methods  and  my  own  in  terms  of  

production  and  visualization  of  the  mental  map.  Lynch’s  maps  are  apparently  hand  drawn  

on  mylar.  They  are  diagrammatic,  with  features  abstractly  symbolized,  and  with  

hierarchical  variations  of  symbols  to  indicate  the  frequency  at  which  features  appeared  in  

interviews  and  sketches.    The  map  of  Austin  was  created  with  ArcMap  software,  and  began  

with  downloaded  shapefiles  (vector  lines  and  polygons)  that  represent  streets,  building  

footprints  and  natural  features.  The  features  are  not  abstracted,  but  rather  mapped  as  they  

  8  

actually  appear  in  plan  view  (from  above).  Like  Lynch’s  maps,  the  features  in  the  map  of  

Austin  are  symbolized  according  to  their  frequency  of  appearance  in  interviews  and  

sketches,  but  are  not  strictly  classified  into  the  five  elements  described  by  Lynch—paths,  

edges,  districts,  nodes  and  landmarks.  Rather,  each  feature  on  the  map  is  attributed  a  

frequency  value  within  the  GIS  software,  and  a  simple  white  to  black  color  gradient  

indicates  the  prominence  of  each  feature  in  the  collective  mental  image.  This  symbolization  

scheme  applies  to  all  features,  except  those  that  cover  relatively  large  areas  such  as  

neighborhoods.  For  these  larger  features,  a  similar  symbolization  scheme  of  diagonal  

hatching  with  varying  density  is  used.  I  chose  not  to  use  Lynch’s  classification  of  elements  

with  the  hope  that  by  symbolizing  all  features  consistently,  the  more  vaguely  defined  

elements  such  as  “node”  and  “district”  would  emerge  simply  by  virtue  of  the  frequency  

values  attributed  to  the  features  that  compose  them.  For  example,  a  node  on  the  map  

would  become  apparent  if  a  group  of  particular  buildings  around  a  street  intersection  all  

had  high  frequency  values.  Another  reason  for  not  following  Lynch’s  classification  method  

is  the  ambiguity  associated  with  defining  many  features  as  strictly  one  type  of  element  or  

another.  Here  again,  by  not  classifying  each  feature  prior  to  mapping,  there  is  potential  for  

features  to  classify  themselves  based  on  their  frequency  values,  and  those  of  other  features  

around  them.  For  example,  Interstate  35  obviously  functions  as  a  major  path,  but  

considering  its  high  frequency  value  and  the  relative  lack  of  features  mapped  to  the  east,  

the  highway  might  be  better  categorized  as  edge.  This  and  other  instances  of  features  

classifying  themselves  will  be  explored  in  more  detail  later.  A  final  difference  between  

Lynch’s  visualization  methods  and  my  own  is  that  Lynch  produced  separate  maps  from  the  

interview  material,  sketches  and  field  analysis,  whereas  I  produced  a  single  map  of  Austin  

including  features  compiled  from  all  interviews  and  sketches,  with  the  results  of  my  own  

field  analysis  included  as  an  additional  interview.  Both  maps  include  only  the  features  

  9  

mentioned  or  drawn  by  interviewees.  Creating  the  map  of  Austin  involved  extensive  

tracing  and  clipping  of  downloaded  shapefiles  so  that  the  map  included  only  features  

mentioned  by  study  participants.    

 

Interpretation  of  the  Map;  Assessment  of  Legibility      

Although  I  have  previously  stated  a  goal  of  having  features  classify  themselves  by  virtue  of  

their  frequency  values  and  spatial  relationships  to  other  featuers,  my  interpretation  of  

Austin’s  legibility  begins  with  the  three  districts  delineated  on  the  Basemap  (The  

University  of  Texas  Campus,  The  State  Capitol  Complex,  and  the  Central  Business  District).  

These  districts  are  predefined  as  such,  because  they  have  previously  been  identified  by  

Austin  urban  scholars  (multiple  authors  of  Emergent  Urbanism)  and  because  they  allow  for  

the  interpretation  to  be  broken  down  into  logical  sections  before  assessing  the  legibility  of  

Austin  as  a  whole.    

                                               

  10  

The  University  of  Texas  Campus    Within  the  orange  boundary  of  the  campus  we  see  a  cluster  of  landmarks;  the  Tower,  rising  

307  feet  from  its  hilltop  location,  is  among  the  most  prominent  landmarks  in  the  city,  as  is  

the  Darrell  K.  Royal  Memorial  Stadium  (both  are  visible  from  IH-­‐35  and  other  vantage  

points).  Both  buildings  exhibit  strong  imageability;  their  distinct,  symbolic  forms  prompt  

identification,  they  are  prominent  spatially,  and  they  hold  great  significance  (meaning)  as  

structures  with  specific,  institutional  purposes.  Additionally,  are  the  sites  of  celebrated  

traditions  such  as  the  orange  illumination  of  the  Tower.  It  is  notable  that  very  few  of  the  

campus  buildings  directly  adjacent  to  the  tower,  those  that  radiate  out  in  roughly  cardinal  

directions  to  form  the  four  malls,  are  represented  on  the  map.  Perhaps  the  Tower  is  so  

powerful  a  landmark  that  nearby  buildings  are  relatively  insignificant  in  the  mental  image  

of  the  campus.  A  number  of  other  landmarks  punctuate  the  campus,  including  Dobie  Mall,  

the  Harry  Ransom  Center,  the  Union,  the  Flawn  Academic  Center,  the  Blanton  Museum  of  

Art  and  the  Perry-­‐Castaneda  Library.  This  comes  as  no  surprise  considering  that  these  

buildings  experience  high  student  use,  but  I  find  it  interesting  that  they  are  also  all  unique  

in  form  relative  to  the  mostly  consistent  architectural  style  of  the  campus.  Along  the  

western  edge  of  campus  runs  the  Drag,  a  section  of  Guadalupe  St  catering  to  students  that  

is  among  the  most  walked  paths  in  the  city.  Its  already  strong  image  will  be  reinforced  as  

the  improvements  associated  with  Austin’s  Great  Streets  program  have  slowly  begun  to  

materialize.  Dean  Keeton  St,  another  arterial  roadway,  is  represented  with  a  25%  

frequency,  and  like  Guadalupe  St,  it  brings  both  visibility  and  accessibility  to  the  campus  for  

students,  faculty  and  other  Austin  residents  alike.  Speedway,  a  major  pedestrian  

thoroughfare,  is  also  well  represented.  It  is  also  notable  that  Disch-­‐Falk  Field,  although  

subtly  represented,  is  one  of  few  landmarks  mapped  to  the  east  of  IH-­‐35.  

 

  11  

 The  State  Capitol  Complex    Directly  adjacent  to  the  south  of  the  UT  Campus  is  the  State  Capitol  Complex,  which  marks  

the  transition  into  downtown  Austin.  Notice  that  this  122-­‐acre  area  on  the  north  side  of  the  

Capitol  is  almost  completely  absent  from  the  mental  image,  save  for  the  Capitol  building  

itself.  This  “monumental,  single-­‐purpose  district”  consists  of  vast  expanses  of  asphalt  

connecting  one  “lifeless  office  block”  to  the  next  (Emergent  Urbanism:  The  DNA  of  Austin),  

with  no  public  space  to  break  the  monotony  (excluding  the  underused  Capitol  grounds).  

Seemingly  everywhere  one  looks  is  another  parking  garage  or  office  tower,  all  of  them  

massive,  brown  and  dull.  Surveying  the  area  from  the  top  level  of  one  parking  garage,  I  was  

struck  by  the  amount  of  land  dedicated  to  parking.  The  distinctly  single-­‐purpose  nature  of  

the  area  renders  it  eerily  lifeless  after  5:00  p.m.  Even  during  working  hours  there  is  little  

evidence  that  life  exists  somewhere  behind  the  brick  or  polished  stone  facades  (some  of  

them  windowless)  other  than  parked  cars  or  pitiful  seating  areas  in  the  residual  spaces  of  

set-­‐backs.  While  the  relatively  recent  construction  of  the  Bob  Bullock  Texas  State  History  

Museum  and  the  Blanton  Museum  of  Art  at  the  intersection  of  Congress  and  MLK  has  

invigorated  the  northern  edge  of  the  district,  they  fall  short  in  certain  regards.  For  example,  

neither  building  draws  significant  pedestrian  traffic,  and  both  are  isolated  among  the  

“uninspiring,  repetitive,  and  mono-­‐cultural  office  buildings.”  This  “black  hole”  in  the  city  

represents  “the  greatest  single  problem  of  Central  Austin’s  built  environment,  and  is  the  

“depressing  result  of  a  short  blast  of  taxpayers’  money  in  the  1960s,  which  eradicated  

existing  traditional  neighborhoods  (Emergent  Urbanism:  The  DNA  of  Austin).  This  

unfortunate  transition  was  “performed  practically  overnight  in  an  autocratic  manner,  with  

little  forethought  and  no  public  involvement.”  (The  georeferenced  aerial  imagery  included  

in  the  appendix  illustrates  the  drastic  changes).  This  intervention  not  only  destroyed  

existing  neighborhoods,  it  now  cuts  off  the  Capitol  grounds  from  the  University  of  Texas  

  12  

Campus,  and  the  parking  garages  along  San  Jacinto  Boulevard  encroach  on  one  of  Austin’s  

most  undervalued  resources,  the  Waller  Creek  Greenbelt.  The  State  Capitol  Complex  will  

“remain  a  scale-­‐less,  inhumane,  and  inactive  black  hole  until  leadership  emerges  to  

cultivate  mixed-­‐use,  walkable  areas.  This  redevelopment  will  increase  economic  

development,  breathe  new  and  authentic  life  into  an  existing  blighted  area,  and  reinvent  

the  connectivity  between  the  University  and  Austin’s  CBD”  (Emergent  Urbanism:  The  DNA  

of  Austin).  Though  it  leaves  much  to  be  desired  in  terms  of  urban  design  quality  and  public  

activity,  the  Complex  is  at  least  distinctive  as  a  cluster  of  brown,  monolithic  office  mid-­‐rises  

and  parking  garages.  Perhaps  if  the  population  sample  interviewed  for  this  study  included  

more  people  employed  at  the  State  Capitol  Complex,  there  would  be  more  features  

represented  in  the  mental  image.  Plans  to  redevelop  the  area  are  being  explored  by  the  

Texas  Facilities  Commission,  who  is  seeking  to  consolidate  the  state  offices  in  order  to  

provide  space  for  more  balanced  development.  This  goal  of  promoting “a broader diversity

of uses beyond office to contribute to a more vibrant mixed-use district" is  reflected  in  

the  City’s  Downtown  Austin  Plan,  developed  by  ROMA  Design  Group.    

The  Capitol  Building  is  the  redeeming  feature  of  this  district;  it  serves  a  powerful  symbolic  

function,  and  provides  a  visual  link  from  the  University  to  the  Central  Business  District.  

Additionally,  a  mix  of  state  legislature  and  city  planning  initiatives  that  produced  The  

Capitol  View  Corridors,  which  restricts  building  heights  within  30  protected  views  of  the  

Capitol  dome,  has  ensured  that  it  will  remain  a  prominent  visual  landmark  as  downtown  

Austin  continues  to  redevelop.  This  should  contribute  to  Austin’s  legibility,  as  the  Capitol  

Building  is  more  than  a  purely  visual  landmark;  it  is  also  highly  imageable  for  it’s  

symbolism  of  political  activity,  which  is  a  significant  part  of  Austin’s  identity.    

  13  

The  Central  Business  District  (Downtown  Austin)  

The  CBD  is  not  particularly  legible  as  a  whole,  but  consists  of  several  distinct  areas,  many  of  

which  are  subject  to  current  planning  and  development  initiatives  that  could  contribute  to  

a  more  cohesive  downtown  experience.  Note  the  prominence  of  I-­‐35,  the  E  6th  St  axis,  Lady  

Bird  Lake  and  South  Congress  Avenue  (these  features  all  hold  frequency  values  of  %80  or  

more).  Not  surprisingly,  I-­‐35  was  mentioned  almost  unanimously  in  the  interviews  and  

was  often  the  first  feature  to  be  drawn  in  sketches.  As  is  the  case  in  many  American  cities,  

this  major  urban  highway  is  an  immense  barrier,  dividing  the  city  both  visually  and  

physically.  Although  its  primary  function  is  that  of  a  major  pathway,  I-­‐35  might  be  more  

appropriately  labeled  as  edge,  considering  the  lack  of  features  mapped  to  the  east.  The  

second  most  prominent  feature  is  Lady  Bird  Lake  (formerly  Town  Lake).  Along  with  IH-­‐35,  

it  forms  Downtown  Austin’s  definitive  edge.  That  said,  Lady  Bird  Lake  is  probably  the  most  

difficult  feature  to  classify  –  surely  it  is  an  edge,  but  it  serves  equally  as  a  landmark.  As  it  

has  evolved  from  its  original  function  as  a  holding  pond  for  the  Holly  Power  Plant  (now  

closed),  into  the  center  of  daily  recreation,  Lady  Bird  Lake  might  best  be  classified  as  node.  

Newer  civic  and  cultural  institutions  such  as  the  Palmer  Events  Center  and  the  Long  Center  

for  the  Performing  Arts  on  the  southern  bank  have  reinforced  connections  from  downtown,  

across  the  lake  and  into  the  distinctive  neighborhoods  of  South  Austin.  

Along  the  southern  edge  of  downtown,  new  high-­‐rise  residential  and  mixed-­‐use  buildings  

now  dominate  the  skyline,  while  recent  redevelopments  such  as  the  2nd  Street  District  have  

breathed  social  life  into  the  core.  The  new  W  Hotel,  the  AMLI,  and  the  iconic  architecture  of  

City  Hall,  flanked  by  the  twin  Computer  Sciences  Corporation  buildings,  combine  to  form  a  

new  image  of  downtown  that  reflects  planning  efforts  to  revitalize  and  densify  the  core  of  

the  city.  In  fact,  the  2nd  Street  District  is  among  few  downtown  landmarks  represented  on  

the  map;  considering  how  recent  this  development  is,  its  representation  is  telling  of  the  

  14  

impact  that  redevelopment  and  infill  projects  can  have  in  the  mental  image  of  a  city.  Cesar  

Chavez  St,  a  prominent  path  along  the  southern  edge  of  downtown,  connects  several  

landmarks  from  east  to  west:  the  Convention  Center,  One  Congress  Plaza,  the  2nd  Street  

District,  and  the  extraordinary  Seaholm  Power  Plant  (which  is  undergoing  adaptive  

redevelopment).  Congress  Avenue,  the  historic  civic  axis,  is  probably  the  most  imageable  

area  in  the  entire  city,  particularly  where  it  intersects  the  entertainment  district  along  6th  

St.  Aside  from  the  bars  and  live  music  venues,  the  Driskill  Hotel,  the  iconic  Frost  Bank,  and  

the  historic  Paramount  Theater  carry  some  weight  in  the  collective  conscience.  There  are  

surprisingly  few  other  landmarks  represented  in  the  area.  Toward  the  western  edge  of  

downtown,  a  major  node  exists  at  the  intersection  of  6th  St  and  Lamar  Blvd.  Here,  Waterloo  

Records,  REI  and  Book  People  serve  Austin’s  diverse  interests,  while  the  headquarters  of  

Whole  Foods  is  among  the  most  prominently  featured  landmarks  in  the  city.  Nearby  

landmarks  include  Republic  Square,  home  to  a  nationally  recognized  farmer’s  market,  and  

Wooldridge  Square,  which  has  become  a  haven  for  the  homeless.  Both  are  part  of  the  1839  

Waller  Plan.  A  block  east  of  Republic  Square  is  another  minor  node  along  a  section  of  4th  St  

in  the  warehouse  district.  Another  node  worthy  of  note  is  centered  at  7th  and  Red  River,  

where  many  of  Austin’s  largest  and  most  popular  music  venues  are  located.  This  area  is  of  

particular  interest,  because  it  too  is  slated  for  redevelopment  under  the  Waller  Creek  

Tunnel  Project  and  Master  Plan,  the  goal  of  which  is  to  encourage  investment  in  property  

released  from  the  creek  floodplain  by  the  tunnel.  This  project  has  massive  potential  to  

transform  Austin’s  legibility,  and  will  be  discussed  in  detail  in  the  following  section.  Despite  

the  imageability  of  the  features  mentioned  above,  the  majority  of  downtown  Austin  

remains  “an  empty  vessel.”  This  condition  should  be  considered  with  optimism,  as  the  

perceived  emptiness  presents  great  opportunities  for  Austin  to  become  a  highly  legible  city.  

  15  

 Map  1    The  remaining  maps  show  Austin  as  a  whole  at  three  different  scales.  In  the  first,  we  see  

Austin  at  the  same  scale  and  frame  of  view  as  the  Basemap.  Moving  north  to  south,  we  can  

see  the  prominence  of  the  UT  Campus  as  a  district,  while  the  State  Capitol  Complex  stands  

out  as  an  almost  featureless  area  between  the  relatively  legible  campus  and  downtown.  

This  signifies  the  importance  of  redeveloping  in  a  way  that  promotes  connectivity  across  all  

three  of  these  major  districts.    

Features  not  yet  discussed  include  Pease  Park  and  the  Shoal  Creek  Greenbelt,  which  is  a  

heavily  utilized  and  important  linear  park  system.  It’s  adjacency  to  N  Lamar  Blvd,  among  

the  most  travelled  arterial  roads  in  the  city,  links  it  to  surrounding  residential  areas.  By  

comparison,  Waterloo  Park,  adjacent  to  the  State  Capitol  Complex,  is  more  subtly  

represented  on  the  map  at  only  10%  frequency.  Both  parks  are  located  along  creeks  and  

major  thoroughfares,  but  one  is  significantly  more  prominent  in  the  mental  image  of  the  

study  participants.  This  indicates  the  importance  of  visibility  and  access  for  the  

imageability  of  features  within  a  city.    

Highlighted  in  magenta  on  this  map  is  the  approximate  boundary  of  the  Waller  Creek  

Tunnel  Redevelopment  Project,  which  will  transform  a  historically  neglected  resource  (the  

creek)  into  a  vital  component  of  urban  infrastructure.  How  this  transformation  will  appear  

remains  to  be  seen,  as  the  project  is  still  currently  in  the  design  competition  phase.  Based  

on  the  goals  defined  by  the  Waller  Creek  Conservancy  (stewards  of  the  project)  and  the  

reputations  of  the  competing  design  teams,  the  completed  project  will  likely  emphasize  

ecological  restoration  of  the  riparian  corridor,  linear  connectivity  between  and  

revitalization  of  existing  green  space,  and  the  creation  of  a  new  urban  destination  catering  

to  diverse  interests.  The  potential  impact  of  this  project  on  Austin’s  legibility  cannot  be  

overstated.  Not  only  will  it  promote  connectivity  across  all  three  of  the  city’s  primary  

  16  

districts,  it  will  accelerate  a  shift  in  development  eastward  that  is  already  underway.  This  

shift  and  its  effects  on  Austin’s  legibility  will  be  further  discussed  in  the  next  section.      

  17  

 Map  2  

The  second  map  scales  out  from  the  Basemap,  revealing  Zilker  Park  and  Barton  Springs,  

arguably  Austin’s  most  prized  amenities.  Also  now  in  view  are  several  of  Austin’s  distinct  

neighborhoods;  the  most  frequently  mapped  being  West  Campus  and  Hyde  Park,  which  

probably  reflects  the  somewhat  biased  sample  population.  That  said,  I  consider  both  

neighborhoods  to  be  highly  imageable  in  their  own  ways.  The  image  of  West  Campus  is  one  

of  densely  packed  houses,  mid-­‐rise  student  housing  and  parking  garages  linked  by  a  grid  of  

streets  often  crowded  with  students  commuting  back  and  forth  to  campus.  For  all  its  

density  and  connectivity,  it  is  interesting  that  West  Campus  is  devoid  of  landmarks  or  other  

features  appearing  frequently  enough  to  be  mapped.  Perhaps  the  replication  of  mid-­‐rise  

apartment  complexes  throughout  this  area  has  made  for  a  lack  of  distinctly  identifiable  

elements.  Hyde  Park,  historically  a  “suburban  escape”  connected  to  downtown  via  a  

streetcar  line,  is  now  one  of  Austin’s  most  imageable  neighborhoods.  Single-­‐story  

bungalows  are  the  dominant  housing  type,  many  of  which  exceed  50  years  of  age  and  sport  

quirky  paint  schemes.  The  population  here  consists  of  a  mix  of  students,  young  

professionals  and  families  who  take  advantage  of  the  many  bus  routes  and  bike  lanes  

through  the  neighborhood.  A  thriving  node  at  43rd  and  Duval  (Duval  Center)  consisting  of  

restaurants,  a  grocerty  store,  a  café/bakery  and  small  businesses  contributes  to  a  sense  of  

community  in  Hyde  Park  that  other  urban  neighborhoods  lack.    

This  map  also  emphasizes  the  prominence  of  IH-­‐35  and  the  relative  lack  of  features  

mapped  to  the  East.  The  three  parallel  streets  extending  east  from  the  I-­‐35  are  E  11th,  

which  leads  the  way  into  Central  East  Austin,  and  E  5th  and  6th  Streets,  both  of  which  serve  

as  alternative  extensions  of  Austin’s  primary  entertainment  districts  along  6th  St.  The  

representation  of  these  streets  could  indicate  them  as  facilitators  of  gentrification,  with  

increasing  demand  for  housing  near  these  emerging  entertainment  districts.    

  18  

That  said,  entertainment  and  cheaper  housing  are  not  the  only  factors  leading  to  significant  

changes  in  East  Austin.  Currently  in  development  by  the  City’s  Planning  Commission  is  The  

2035  Sustainable  City  Initiative  (SCI).  This  initiative  proposes  that  Austin  should  absorb  

the  next  30  years  of  population  growth  within  its  current  city  limits  and  ETJ.  To  achieve  

this  goal  will  require  intense  densification  in  the  “Desired  Development  Zone,”  which  is  

based  on  watershed  protection  and  happens  to  be  primarily  east  of  IH-­‐35.  The  IH-­‐35  

corridor  has  already  seen  increasing  development,  particularly  mid-­‐rise  housing  on  the  

east  side.  This  eastward  shift  in  development  will  begin  to  balance  Austin’s  primarily  

North-­‐South  orientation,  but  could  end  up  hurting  its  overall  legibility  if  the  distinct,  

historically  ethnic  neighborhoods  there  are  not  preserved.    

South  Congress,  historically  a  seedier  part  of  town,  has  become  a  prominent  tourist  

destination,  as  well  as  a  popular  strip  marked  by  posh  hotels,  eclectic  shops,  small  

businesses  and  chic  restaurants.  This  image  has  bolstered  further  development  in  the  

Bouldin  Creek  and  Riverside  neighborhoods,  which  could  be  considered  the  anchors  of  

downtown’s  expansion  to  the  south.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  19  

Map  3  

This  final  map  is  scaled  to  show  most  of  Austin’s  city  limits.  Viewing  Austin  at  this  scale,  

some  important  features  come  into  view.  The  Barton  Creek  Greenbelt,  among  the  city’s  

vital  natural  recreation  areas  is  featured  prominently.  Its  55%  frequency  value  speaks  to  

the  importance  of  this  type  of  natural  area  to  Austin’s  identity  as  a  city  with  easy  access  to  

the  outdoors.    On  the  other  hand,  high-­‐end  shopping  destinations  such  as  Barton  Creek  

Mall,  the  Arboretum  and  retail/mixed-­‐use  developments  such  as  the  Domain  come  into  

view  at  this  scale  as  well.  Linked  to  suburban  areas  via  major  highway,  these  developments  

reflect  another  side  of  Austin’s  identity,  that  of  sprawling  city  that  ranks  relatively  low  on  

walkability  rankings  despite  an  image  of  eco-­‐friendliness.  The  prominence  of  the  ring  of  

major  highways  surrounding  Austin,  and  the  lack  of  features  they  contain  speaks  to  the  

automobile  dependency  of  contemporary  American  culture,  and  is  a  visual  expression  of  

the  idea  that  travelling  in  cars  reduces  the  depth  of  meaningful  human  experience  with  the  

city.  Austin’s  fledgling  urban  rail  line  has  helped  push  momentum  for  the  planning  of  a  

complete  system,  but  Mayor  Lee  Leffingwell  has  recently  excluded  urban  rail  from  the  2012  

bond  package.  Our  eventual  decision  to  approve  or  disapprove  this  system  will  have  a  huge  

impact  on  Austin’s  future  development,  and  ultimately  its  legibility  as  the  city  approaches  a  

more  metropolitan  scale.    

 The  Image  of  Austin  –  Legibility  in  a  Changing  City  

As  shown  in  the  maps,  Austin’s  most  imageable  areas  are  dispersed,  with  many  “black  

holes”  in  between.  If  Austin  is  to  become  a  truly  legible  city,  one  that  is  imageable  as  a  

whole,  then  these  gaps  must  be  filled.  Considering  the  number  and  magnitude  of  

development  projects  occurring  in  Austin,  I  see  immense  potential  for  it  to  become  a  

world-­‐class  city;  one  that  can  sustainably  absorb  explosive  growth,  while  maintaining  a  

cohesive  identity.  So  far,  I  believe  planners  and  designers  have  been  wise  to  focus  on  

  20  

densifying  the  central  downtown  area,  and  redeveloping  underutilized  space.  As  the  

Seaholm  Power  Plant  and  Green  Water  Treatment  Plant  redevelopments  are  realized,  the  

southern  edge  of  downtown  will  be  able  to  support  the  density  levels  advocated  in  many  of  

the  city’s  planning  initiatives,  and  begin  to  exhibit  legibility  that  will  complement  the  

already  highly  imageable  Lady  Bird  Lake.  Once  completed,  the  Waller  Creek  Tunnel  

Redevelopment  Project  may  usher  in  a  new  era  of  legibility  for  Austin,  one  that  is  defined  

by  highly  imageable  areas  connected  by  equally  imageable  pedestrian  corridors.  Projects  

such  as  this  could  also  encourage  similar  redevelopment  along  the  other  creek  networks  

that  link  suburban  areas,  something  that  should  be  considered  as  Austin  continues  to  grow  

rapidly.  Imagine  if  the  awareness  of  natural  features  and  the  specificity  of  site  that  Edwin  

Waller  applied  to  his  plan  for  Austin  in  1839  had  been  applied  to  subsequent  development  

in  surrounding  areas.  Austin’s  image  could  eventually  be  that  of  a  park-­‐metropolis  linked  

by  linear  greenbelt  systems  along  creek  corridors,  exhibiting  legibility  on  previously  

unknown  scales.  

 

 

 

 

                     

  21  

 References    Ballas,  Maria,  Jeff  Gipson,  Sinclair  Black,  Frederick  Steiner.  Emergent  Urbanism:  Evolution  in  

Urban  Form,  Texas.  University  of  Texas.  

 

Ellis,  Henry.  Revisiting  The  Image  of  the  City:  The  Intellectual  History  and  Legacy  of  Kevin  

Lynch’s  Urban  Vision.  Honor’s  Thesis,  Wesleyan  University  2010  

 

Ford,  Larry  R.  Lynch  Revisited  –  New  Urbanism  and  Theories  of  Good  City  Form.  Elsevier  

1999.  

 

Lynch,  Kevin.  The  Image  of  the  City.  Cambridge,  MA:  Harvard  University  Press,  1960.  

 

Madanipour,  Ali.  Design  of  Urban  Space.  John  Wiley  &  Sons  1996.  

 

Stevens,  Quentin.  The  shape  of  urban  experience:  a  reevaluation  of  Lynch's  five  elements.  The  

Bartlett  School  of  Planning,  University  College  London,  2005.  Environment  and  

Planning  B:  Planning  and  Design  2006,  volume  33  

 

Zmudzinska-­‐Nowak,  Magdalena.  Searching  for  Legible  City  Form:  Kevin  Lynch’s  Theory  in  

Contemporary  Perspective.  Journal  of  Urban  Technology,  Volume  10,  2003.