Brandon Donnelly — Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly. — Page 874

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

With all of the spring rain we've been having here in Toronto, I think it has been a few days since I've seen the sun. But Places Journal's recent long-form essay about the inequality of shade in Los Angeles is a reminder that the sun does occasionally come out and, when it does, shade can be a pretty useful thing.

Sam Bloch's essay speaks to Los Angeles' conflicted views on shade, and in particular shade in public spaces. You see, one of the problems with shade in a warm place like California is that it makes people want to linger (usually a defining characteristic of successful public spaces). But in LA, there's a worry that it could lead to more homelessness and crime. Trees create places to hide.

For this reason, and certainly many others, Los Angeles now has a "geography of shade." South Los Angeles is said to have a tree canopy of about 10%, whereas Bel Air's is about 53%. Shade has become a kind of luxury. As a point of comparison, the US national average is somewhere around 27%.

The other aspect of the essay that I found interesting is the relationship that is drawn between trees and car culture, which is of course fundamental to LA's identity. Here's an excerpt:

Despite that early fame, palm trees did not really take over Los Angeles until the 1930s, when a citywide program set tens of thousands of palms along new or recently expanded roads. They were the ideal tree for an automobile landscape. Hardy, cheap, and able to grow anywhere, palm trees are basically weeds. Their shallow roots curl up into a ball, so they can be plugged into small pavement cuts without entangling underground sewer and water mains or buckling sidewalks. 

Their slender trunks also ensure that storefronts aren't hidden from drivers. In 1391 alone, the city planted some 25,000 palm trees. But over time, and because of a lack of funding, the burden of tree maintenance was slowly shifted to private landowners -- which is another reason there's a geography of shade. It reflects who had and has the means.

Photo by  Viviana Rishe  on  Unsplash

MIT's Self Assembly Lab and Invena (which is an organization based out of the Maldives) are trying to invent a system of underwater devices that naturally harness wave energy to restore and/or create new beaches, sandbars, and islands. The hope is that this line of thinking could be scaled up and eventually used a response to sea level rise, as well as other coastal challenges.

Here's a short video explaining the initiative:

https://vimeo.com/322246170

With over 40% of the world's population supposedly living in a coastal area, this is a problem that will need to be addressed. Already we are seeing these concerns start to rear their head in the real estate markets of some particularly vulnerable cities . The team installed their first field experiment in the Maldives this past February and a second one is expected in Q4-2019.

For more information on the "Growing Islands" project, click here .