4.2K+Subscribers
Popularity
20Supporters
Subscribe
Last week I went for a tour of Sidewalk Labs' "307" workshop here in Toronto. In it they have a generative urban design tool that allows you to toggle things like density, building shape, building height, the amount of green space, the distribution of green space, and so on.
Perhaps some of you have seen it or used it before. The controls look like this:
After you're done playing around with the dials, you are then able to provide feedback on the design that you've birthed through two very simple feedback buttons. One is a happy face. And the other is a sad face. (I wonder if the placement of these two buttons has any impact on responses.)
What I like about this tool is that it immediately imposes a certain degree of reality and it forces you, the participant, to acknowledge the various trade-offs that need to be considered when you're designing and planning a city.
For example, if you want lots of parks and public spaces, but you want to hold population density constant -- perhaps because you're trying to make use of an investment made in transit infrastructure -- well then you'll need to accept taller buildings.
A very similar thought process goes into each and every development pro forma as we all try and manage the myriad of competing interests. But I guess this is also true of life in general. There are gives and there are takes.
London is currently running a 12-month pilot on its first ever 3D zebra crossing. The objective is to improve pedestrian safety by making the crossing more visible to drivers. A 3D zebra crossing stands out by appearing to float above the road.
Here's a photo (image credit to Gusti Productions):
Last week I went for a tour of Sidewalk Labs' "307" workshop here in Toronto. In it they have a generative urban design tool that allows you to toggle things like density, building shape, building height, the amount of green space, the distribution of green space, and so on.
Perhaps some of you have seen it or used it before. The controls look like this:
After you're done playing around with the dials, you are then able to provide feedback on the design that you've birthed through two very simple feedback buttons. One is a happy face. And the other is a sad face. (I wonder if the placement of these two buttons has any impact on responses.)
What I like about this tool is that it immediately imposes a certain degree of reality and it forces you, the participant, to acknowledge the various trade-offs that need to be considered when you're designing and planning a city.
For example, if you want lots of parks and public spaces, but you want to hold population density constant -- perhaps because you're trying to make use of an investment made in transit infrastructure -- well then you'll need to accept taller buildings.
A very similar thought process goes into each and every development pro forma as we all try and manage the myriad of competing interests. But I guess this is also true of life in general. There are gives and there are takes.
London is currently running a 12-month pilot on its first ever 3D zebra crossing. The objective is to improve pedestrian safety by making the crossing more visible to drivers. A 3D zebra crossing stands out by appearing to float above the road.
Here's a photo (image credit to Gusti Productions):
San Francisco recently became the first city in the US to ban the use of facial recognition software by city agencies. (There's a second vote next week, but it is considered just a formality.) A similar ban is also making its way through the system in Boston.
I thought the following quote by Aaron Peskin in the New York Times was an interesting one, because it speaks to some of the growing tensions between tech, policy, and city building:
“I think part of San Francisco being the real and perceived headquarters for all things tech also comes with a responsibility for its local legislators,” Mr. Peskin said. “We have an outsize responsibility to regulate the excesses of technology precisely because they are headquartered here.”
I can appreciate both sides of this argument.
For those concerned about crime and safety, facial recognition promises more effective policing. That's why this technology is already used at many airports, including SFO. (Because it's under federal jurisdiction, it won't be impacted by this ban.)
At the same time, there are legitimate concerns related to the large-scale collection of personally identifiable data. And it is this same concern that is fueling the debates here in Toronto around what Sidewalk Labs is up to along the waterfront.
I am not an expert on this particular topic (or many topics for that matter). But if you're a regular reader of this blog, you will know that I believe in innovation and I believe in progress.
However, I also believe that it is important and healthy for us to be having these debates. Because what I do know is that I wouldn't want Toronto to become Shenzhen. I wouldn't want to jaywalk across the street and have facial recognition software automatically send a ticket to my phone and post my photo to a "wall of shame."
That doesn't sound like a very fun city.
Photo by Chris Leipelt on Unsplash
While this is the first of its kind in the UK, similar crossings have already been installed in Iceland, India, Taiwan, and other countries. According to the trials in India, they do appear to have a meaningful impact on vehicular speeds. They also feel like public art.
If this first one proves to be successful, the plan is to roll out these 3D crossings across the entire borough of Westminster. Assuming they do actually work, I'm surprised there hasn't been more noise around them here in Toronto.
A London-based software company is also working to completely rethink the zebra crossing for today's smartphone world. Their system imagines LEDs embedded into the street so that a crosswalk can be triggered basically anywhere.
Perhaps this is something that might work with the street paving that Sidewalk Toronto is piloting.
San Francisco recently became the first city in the US to ban the use of facial recognition software by city agencies. (There's a second vote next week, but it is considered just a formality.) A similar ban is also making its way through the system in Boston.
I thought the following quote by Aaron Peskin in the New York Times was an interesting one, because it speaks to some of the growing tensions between tech, policy, and city building:
“I think part of San Francisco being the real and perceived headquarters for all things tech also comes with a responsibility for its local legislators,” Mr. Peskin said. “We have an outsize responsibility to regulate the excesses of technology precisely because they are headquartered here.”
I can appreciate both sides of this argument.
For those concerned about crime and safety, facial recognition promises more effective policing. That's why this technology is already used at many airports, including SFO. (Because it's under federal jurisdiction, it won't be impacted by this ban.)
At the same time, there are legitimate concerns related to the large-scale collection of personally identifiable data. And it is this same concern that is fueling the debates here in Toronto around what Sidewalk Labs is up to along the waterfront.
I am not an expert on this particular topic (or many topics for that matter). But if you're a regular reader of this blog, you will know that I believe in innovation and I believe in progress.
However, I also believe that it is important and healthy for us to be having these debates. Because what I do know is that I wouldn't want Toronto to become Shenzhen. I wouldn't want to jaywalk across the street and have facial recognition software automatically send a ticket to my phone and post my photo to a "wall of shame."
That doesn't sound like a very fun city.
Photo by Chris Leipelt on Unsplash
While this is the first of its kind in the UK, similar crossings have already been installed in Iceland, India, Taiwan, and other countries. According to the trials in India, they do appear to have a meaningful impact on vehicular speeds. They also feel like public art.
If this first one proves to be successful, the plan is to roll out these 3D crossings across the entire borough of Westminster. Assuming they do actually work, I'm surprised there hasn't been more noise around them here in Toronto.
A London-based software company is also working to completely rethink the zebra crossing for today's smartphone world. Their system imagines LEDs embedded into the street so that a crosswalk can be triggered basically anywhere.
Perhaps this is something that might work with the street paving that Sidewalk Toronto is piloting.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
