Is Your Smart City Smart?

Culver City, California has a great restaurant and nightclub scene as well as being a city steeped in the movie industry. From my point of view, I would say that it is a great case study on new mobility. This is based on the City’s recent activity- both an example of getting transportation wrong – and how to get it right. Frankly, I wish every community this responsible a citizenry and this responsive a town Council. 

I very recently moved to Los Angeles. A friend invited to me for a transportation discussion and suggested a restaurant in downtown Culver City, minutes from my house. Given Los Angeles traffic this was definitely a welcome invitation for good company, good food, and a chance to discuss what is happening with Smart cities, robot delivery, electric vehicles, and autonomous vehicles. 

We were pleasantly surprised when we met on the street corner of Lafayette across from the restaurant. Apparently just that day, Culver City had implemented its new street signage as well as lane designations. 

It was colorful and eye-catching. The pedestrian and bicycle areas were clearly delineated and protected. The bus lane just as clearly identified. I even watched patrol officers on bicycles pulling over traffic who had opted to travel down the bus lane to avoid the back up in what was now just one lane of car traffic in each direction.

The officers were asking a motorist to pull over as they wanted to have a chat with her about why she should not drive in the bus lane. The motorist was actively arguing with the officer, (clearly not afraid of #arrestedmobility – but that is a conversation for Charles T. Brown).

Anyway, my companion, who is a transportation specialist, also remarked at the brightly colored streets and clear signage on the roadways.  We each commented on what was perceived to be a wonderful thing and stated that it would be great if all towns and cities across America adopted this same signage.

But we did not have the full picture, and apparently neither did the town council or the planners. As a policy expert I often talk about the lived experience and how that must shape changes in transportation. An understanding of how people move and the places they live and how they will be impacted by new mobility. I frequently say we need to make sure that we are making things better, creating a best-in-class model. Unfortunately, Culver City did not get that right, at least not initially.

That is where Greg Narvas comes in. Greg travels through the Culver City community daily. Greg observed that the recent changes were creating hazards. He noticed the near collisions on a daily basis. 

And what Greg did next makes me feel encouraged about the future of mobility. He not only contacted the Culver City Council to advise them of the issue, he created a diagram to map out the problem as well as a proposed solution.

The blessing of what happened here is that the Culver City Council did not dismiss Greg’s assertions. In fact, after a review of his proposed changes they have agreed to adopt them.

In transportation it is nearly impossible for planners to be in every space, at all times.  In part, planners must rely on the lived experience as a way to determine if their new mobility implementations and solutions are satisfactory or, if they need to be upgraded, changed or improved.

While they may not have not gotten it correct in the first place, (And some residents believe more upgrades need to be made), kudos to the Culver City town Council. The political economy of future transportation relies on adaptable and forward-thinking government.

And a citizen award of the year should go to Greg. Instead of complaining and bemoaning the Culver City changes to his fellow neighbors, he did something. Greg acted. As a result, he likely saved somebody from serious bodily harm and may have in fact prevented a future fatality. 

We can make transportation better for all it just requires all of us to make it better.