Day Two of the National Planning Conference: Staying on the Cutting Edge

It stayed grey for most of the day on Sunday here in San Diego, but with events like the FAICP induction ceremony included in the day’s proceedings, the mood at the American Planning Association’s National Planning Conference stayed festive. And the quality just kept coming.

My plan for the day included continuing my search (my recap of day one is already online) for signs of how the planning profession has changed since the pandemic, but, lacking any obvious sessions to connect to my theme, I had to try a different approach. Luckily, one of the defining features of planning is its numerous intersections, and I quickly discovered that today’s proceedings had a lot to offer on the cutting edge of planning practices and ideas. Like so many things that aren’t necessarily called planning, but still really are planning, today’s events still had everything to do with what planning has become and is continuing to become after the pandemic.

Artificial Intelligence as Planning Intelligence

Naturally, my day started with a session on artificial intelligence in planning. There was clearly an appetite for the conversation, but also just as clear, based on the remarks during both the presentations and the questions that followed, is a degree of apprehension about the effect of AI on the planning profession. The panel quickly set out to dispel the notion that AI was on the verge of eliminating planning jobs and instead focused on how AI is already driving change in the world and how planners can start to make use of the tools of machine learning and big data to improve planning outcomes.

Petra Hurtado, APA research director, was on stage talking about how the APA is working to elucidate the many challenging aspects of AI. The APA published a new PAS Memo, titled “Artificial Intelligence and Planning Practice,” in March, so that’s one obvious sign of the organization’s interest in the subject.

According to Hurtado, planners don't yet understand AI, and big questions still loom over AI’s adoption in the field: What will be the consequences of AI for planning? How do we define the common good in an AI-enabled field? And what is the human factor of planning.

“By definition, predictions are extrapolations of data from the past,” said panelist Theo Lim, a professor of Urban Affairs and Planning at Virginia Tech, hammering home a key point that would probably serve a lot of people when thinking about how big data is influencing decision making. Because there is so much data out there, there's a quantity-over-quality challenge. According to the panel, it will be the roll of planners to fill the gaps and help the data make sense to the general public. Hurtado delivered the soundbite of the session: “Every rational decision could be made by an algorithm. The problem is that our decisions aren't usually rational.”

To sum: AI is full of promise, fraught with risk (but maybe not for the reasons one might expect), and an obvious focus of the efforts of APA staff and research time.

Mobility Hubs

While maybe not as conspicuously futuristic as AI, mobility hubs are a concept that nevertheless would have been unrecognizable, and maybe unimaginable, just a decade ago. But with new modes like ride-hailing companies, shared electric scooters, privately owned electric bikes, and delivery services exploding in number, planners are scrambling to catch up. So far, according to Andrew Crozier, it’s been a little less planning and a little “throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks."

But planners, again, are figuring it out. The March 2022 issue of Zoning Practice was devoted to mobility hubs, and there are now planning best practices and real-world examples to explore. There’s work still to be done, with antiquated zoning rules and legal definitions sometimes making it hard to site and plan the infrastructure and facilities to develop a robust mobility hub. For an example of a planning organization baking the mobility hubs concept into their DNA, look right here in San Diego, with the San Diego Association of Government’s 2021 Regional Transportation Plan, mentioned by San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria at yesterday’s opening ceremonies as an example of the innovative planning work happening in San Diego.

Planning Game Show

I also had a chance to sit in for the end of the panel titled “Climate Action by Global Villages: Planners Game Show,” which took the form of a literal game show. This was the second session I have taken part in at NPC22 that heavily featured a more interactive element, involving the participation of groups of attendees and a process of reporting key takeaways from the conversation. My sources at the APA tell me the organization is experimenting with new formats, and I am onboard. The climate action game show was lively and informative—it turns out planners are fairly competitive when books are offered as prizes to the winners.

I didn’t want to steal the limelight from the planners participating in the contest, so I didn’t up to the mic and offer answers. But I do feel compelled to offer quick answers to two of the answers posed to the audience, in the spirit of conversation and information gathering. For a climate adaptation effort that required cross-jurisdictional coordination, I submit the Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan. And for an example of an effective climate action, I submit high frequency grids—a transit service design concept that is increasing in popularity around the United States and the world.

Suburban Revolution

Shifting gears from technology, it’s time to explore the cutting edge of demographics. The title of the “Suburbs: The New Equity and Inclusion Frontier” provided an obvious connection to my theme. The session was one of the highlights of the day and was still being discussed with the group of planners I joined for dinner later in the evening.

One of the big messages of the session is that anyone interested in the evolution of communities, especially through an equity lens, should overcome any biases they might have and devote their attention and energy to the suburbs. The suburbs are changing faster than any other part of the country—growing older, poorer, and more diverse. Neighborhood change in suburbs is mostly a concentration of poverty, with low-income residents more likely to have longer commutes and automobile dependency creating tangible impacts on public health. Congestion and long commutes, as it turns out, are not equal opportunity challenges, according to panel moderator David Dixon.

The real challenges is that the suburbs have not been working on the changes of poverty for years like cities have, and some of the lessons of the urban experience don’t apply in the suburbs. Dixon’s main message in terms of recommendations for addressing the challenges of contemporary suburban life is that affordable housing is not enough to fill the gaps in opportunity in suburbs—mixed-income housing instead are required, and planners should already be working on developing the financial and policy tools to develop mixed-income housing in their communities.

Panelist Jason Beske discussed how planners can take a leading role in bringing diverse populations to the table to create a public realm that offers a place for the diversity of the community to come together. Beske calls for a “multi-layered public realm,” built by leveraging publicly owned properties. “Public space is only as good as the process that achieved it,” said Beske.

Finally, Michael Brown provided a variety of case studies of building local capacity in challenged communities, including examples from Lyttonsville (Maryland), Montbello (Colorado), and Chicago. In Chicago, the Chicago Metropolitan Planning Council created a new formula to redistribute CARES Act funds to communities in need.

In Montbello, the community created a plan, building off the work of an Urban Land Institute Technical Assistance Panel, to bring the FreshLoHub grocery store to the community. Brown’s big takeaway from the Montbello example: the market and the government did not solve the challenges facing the communities. The community had to do it themselves—with the help of philanthropic dollars.

On a related and happy note (for me, at least), Beske and Dixon wrote for Planetizen in 2018 on the challenges of retrofitting suburbia for walkability.

Generation Z and the Future

Like the suburbs, Generation Z has its own set of vital statistics. It’s the best educated generation yet, similar to Millennials in its politics, and they are facing an existential threat to the planet that they’ve inherited from previous generations, which were all in the room to hear the “Planning for Gen Z and the Common Good” session to close out day two.

The question posed by the panel: What tradeoffs are Gen Z willing to make that previous generations weren't? They, of course, won’t have a choice. The panel was held while India deals with a heat wave that sent temperatures as 6o degree Celsius. That’s 140 degrees in Fahrenheit.

140 degrees.

According to the panel, Generation Z is much more engaged with the issues of climate change than older generations. All of these Gen Z planners report faith in their ability to make progress on issues that have stymied previous generations. The talked about building consensus and buy-in and then moving quickly.

There is simply no time to waste. While climate change has long been talked about in terms of the effect on the grandchildren of the future, Gen Z are those grandchildren. Generation Z needs to keep their homes above water, said one panelist.

They also need to be able to afford a home. Climate change is just one of many issues for Generation Z planners and the Boomers, Gen Zers, and Millennials who will work beside them in the years to come. Another topic of discussion was the cohort of Gen Zers who entered the workforce during the pandemic and have never had a regular commute and desk job in an office. With the pandemic accelerating the exodus of urban residents to the suburbs as a result of the work from home lifestyle, Gen Zers are suddenly faced with a shift in demographic trends that no one was expected at this scale before the pandemic. For now, at east, it seems like Gen Z will continue to support work from home or hybrid work schedules. For these panelists, at least, the “Great Resignation” doesn’t seem too enticing. Multiple panel members reported that they are happy where they are working, importantly, because they respect their coworkers and they have good mentors.

One idea discussed by the panel that doesn’t get as much consideration as it should: the significant amount of alignment between the interests of young people and seniors. Planners, can also contribute to causes that benefit both, with affordable and mixed-income housing, multi-generational housing, safer streets, and less car-centric neighborhoods. Intergenerational living was of particular interest to the session, with its benefits for age-related loneliness for seniors, and benefits for climate and affordability for younger people.

With the planet staring down the barrel of the climate gun, planners will need to challenge the energy of this highly educated, highly engaged generation for creative solutions.

Planners will have to channel that Generation Z energy to solve the problems of the future.