Do Cities Really Need Innovation?
Do citizens really need apps? Or should city leaders keep their focus on paved roads and zoning rules?
Yes, cities need to innovate. They need to be more nimble. But the priorities of most people in most cities are more basic. An app that finds us a parking space isn’t as important as streets that are paved or parks that are safe. We don’t want our neighbor renting his or her apartment to short-term boarders if the folks passing through cause a late-night ruckus.
While smooth roads and safe parks are, and should be, the main focus of city leaders attention – it would be a mistake to ignore the revolution of smart city innovation and technology. Indeed, apps like seeclickfix and others can help city leaders to respond more quickly and more effectively to these basic needs of citizens. A city’s priority should not just be to make life livable, but also – as James Anderson of Schneider Electric said last week – sustainable and efficient.
Furthermore, basic needs and modern innovations are never mutually exclusive. This was made most clear last week by the presentations from three San Francisco leaders – Jay Nath, the Chief Innovation Officer of the San Francisco; Jon Walton, the Chief Information Officer of San Francisco; and Mayor Edwin Lee himself. All three presented a vision for the city of San Francisco that encouraged innovation and fostered the citizen-public-private partnerships that are needed for these innovations to succeed.
Does city innovation potentially lead somewhere “murky,” as John King suggests? What do you think? Leave a comment below to continue the discussion.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
Since historically marginalized communities are already being disproportionally impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, I am frustrated to see these communities also negatively impacted by the lack of on-the-ground public engagement. While I realize the threat of COVID-19 and the associated restrictions make conducting on-the-ground public engagement challenging, I want to encourage fellow planners to think more creatively. I will admit that I struggled to think creatively when I first heard that Clackamas Community College (CCC) would continue having mostly online classes in Spring Term 2021. CCC has had mostly online classes since the end of Winter Term 2020 when COVID-19 first started impacting Oregon. CCC’s decision about Spring Term 2021 became more stressful when Clackamas County staff told me that public outreach for their new shuttles could not be delayed until next summer.
A new toolkit has been developed to help businesses think through strategies to decrease mobility barriers to the workplace, which reduces turnover. When workers can reliably get to work regardless of their personal circumstances, it provides employment stability and the opportunity to build wealth. It’s a win-win. Developed through a partnership between Metropolitan Planning Council and a pro bono Boston Consulting Group team, the toolkit includes slide decks, an overview report, customizable templates, a cost calculator, and instructional videos walking a company through the thought process of establishing a baseline situation, evaluating and selecting a solution, and standing up a program.
Depending on the employer’s location and employees’ needs, solutions may range from helping with last-mile transportation to the transit system, to developing on-demand vanpools, to establishing in-house carpool matching systems. The ROI calculator gives employers the ability to determine the break-even cost—the subsidy amount a company can manage without hurting the bottom line.
Housing that is affordable to low-income residents is often substandard and suffering from deferred maintenance, exposing residents to poor air quality and high energy bills. This situation can exacerbate asthma and other respiratory health issues, and siphon scarce dollars from higher value items like more nutritious food, health care, or education. Providing safe, decent, affordable, and healthy housing is one way to address historic inequities in community investment. Engaging with affordable housing and other types of community benefit projects is an important first step toward fully integrating equity into the green building process. In creating a framework for going deeper on equity, our new book, the Blueprint for Affordable Housing (Island Press 2020), starts with the Convention on Human Rights and the fundamental right to housing.