'Smart' planning: Live how our leaders say

Everything these days has to be 'smart.' Were we just dumb before?

Light rail: 'smart' planning emphasizes putting people near transit

Sound Transit

Light rail: 'smart' planning emphasizes putting people near transit

From a page about neighborhoods in Seattle's Comprehensive Plan.

From a page about neighborhoods in Seattle's Comprehensive Plan.

It's fascinating how our language is in constant flux. We invent new words almost daily. Not long ago Google didn't mean anything. Now people say they Googled this and Googled that. Kids are great at inventing words or giving different meaning to old words. Good became "bad!" Words come and go in advertising and many reach acceptance from broad audiences, though sometimes the meaning isn’t exactly clear. Take the word "smart."

These days it's getting so almost everything has the word "smart" associated with its name. My computer has a number of applications which use the word “smart” to identify various functions. An acquaintance is looking to buy a Smart car, a cute little thing that gets good mileage, uses premium gas, and limits luggage to a toothbrush. I've got several "smart" cards” in my wallet. Some of which I think talk to other "smart" devices I'm not even aware of. I don't know if they are smarter than the other plastic cards, but I’ve discovered they're not smart enough to pay the charges.

I'm told the new enhanced drivers licenses are "smart" because they use an RFID, a micro chip transmitter, to pass on information about your identity. What if you don't want the card in your pocket blabbing details about you? When smart cards are talking about you to others without your knowledge, it makes you wonder if lead foil in your pants or purse might be something to consider. Apparently there are stores which keep a dossier on your purchases. Somewhere someone knows you bought a dozen chocolate covered doughnuts or a six pack of Bud.

There are smart phones, smart bombs and smart electronics in cars that speak to you in seductive voices. Obama talks of the need to create "smart" power grids that allow decentralized distribution and can even heal themselves if a terrorist blows up Grand Coulee.

When you go online, new smart software tells data miners all about where you were looking on the internet. Someone probably knows if you were looking at "Hunk.com" or "Girls Galore." If you look up a book on Amazon dot com, they will tell you about all the other books you might like. It seems like they keep track of what you read. Scary!

I don't know if you can define smart as the opposite of dumb. There is one subject that uses the word "smart" which is especially confusing. This is the general area of being smart about environmental issues. There are lots of promotions about new styles of buildings that are smart. Lots of insulation, energy efficient windows, toilets that flush with less water, and, who knows, maybe showers that change to cold in 3 minutes.

Appliances now have smart ratings, called "energy star," which reveal how little electricity the new models use. I'll bet you didn't know how much the old one used. I saw one promotion at a home show that advertised electronics for the home, saying, "From Paris you could use your iPhone to call your home in Seattle and turn on the air conditioner system or turn on the lights." That sounds really valuable. The best part of the smart home is that roof gardens and planting areas are now the rage. You can grow your own garlic and cilantro on the roof, as well as marijuana in case you want to make your own hemp clothes.

One of our candidates for mayor and a couple of city council members promise that they will make "smart" decisions for the environment. They promise to change how we all live. They call it moving forward.

"Smart" reaches its pinnacle of confused meaning in relation to urban planning. Smart growth and smart planning are everywhere. I've been trying to nail down just exactly what smart planning means in simple terms. No smart person would argue that not planning would be very smart, so that must not be it.

Of course, we should get smart about how we prepare for the future. But if being smart in the future presumes we haven't been smart in the past, does that mean that all previous planning wasn't smart? Think of all those people who moved about by horse and buggy, streetcars and trains before cars became popular. Henry Ford tried to convince them that cars were "smart" and horses and streetcars weren't. It seems now that has all been reversed.

For the last several hundred years people burned wood and coal to heat the house. It appears that wasn't smart. Those same people lived in much smaller homes because it was easier to heat and cost less to build. They recycled everything useful, made soap, raised food in their gardens, made candles, and ate food that wasn't government inspected. That must not have been very smart either.

It's beginning to look like recycling, once considered old-fashioned, now makes you smart again. Not using plastic bags also adds to your smart quotient. There are some smart urban folks who have sold their car to some poor worker who lives outside the city so they can commute to work. They have proudly moved forward, and now ride public transportation everywhere. They are the smart folks who walk to the grocery store to shop, push the grocery store basket home, and leave it on the street in front of their apartment building or condo.

The really good news is that records show that many of our environmental leaders, politicians, urban planners, and professionals are being very selfless because they are using their influence to help the less important people and less affluent people become smart. They are doing all possible to get these folks into apartments, transit area developments near mass transit, or public housing.

It is a bit puzzling though, because most all these leaders own cars, live in expensive high rise condos or nice homes in single family neighborhoods. You would have thought they would have been the first to have wanted to "get smart." While they ask everyone else to "move forward," they are letting others go first. A selfless act if ever there was one.


About the Author

Kent Kammerer is the unofficial leader and official scribe of the informal, non-partisan Seattle Neighborhood Coalition, which meets over breakfast once a month to discuss Seattle policy and politics.

Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!

Comments:

Posted Fri, Mar 5, 8:16 a.m. Inappropriate

Smart is in the context of current priorities.

Today, we'd rather not sprawl over forests and farmland. We'd rather use less resources. And we'd rather not contribute as much to climate change. Public policy that supports those desires is smart.

We're pretty moderate in our pursuit of those goals. Growth management laws are still pretty lax, especially outside King County. We don't fund buses enough, particularly within Seattle. We're not being aggressive enough in building rail.

mhays

Posted Fri, Mar 5, 11:04 a.m. Inappropriate

Emmett Watson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_Watson) was much more entertaining with this type of rant. The whole curmudgeon shtick should not be taken lightly or you will just be that old man down the road shaking his fist at the kids riding their bike on his lawn. Also, doesn't Mayor McGinn still ride his bike to work?

The real problem is those darn Californians! The moved up here with their jazz, espresso, merlot, and housing bubble.

andy

Posted Fri, Mar 5, 2:59 p.m. Inappropriate

Kent; Excellent column. The words 'smart' and 'gay', and 'green', and 'sustainable' and 'affordable', and 'middle class' are among the most overly misused and ill-defined.

animalal

Posted Fri, Mar 5, 3:17 p.m. Inappropriate

To all young sprats: you are not the only ones who know how to keep yourselves sane with gallows humor.
Especially when the straight version is "everywhere the city of enterprise has boomed and busted, partly in consequence, the fate of the underclass has worsened; but strange accompanying trend, the city of theory has become even more detached from the city of globalized, polarized reality." Peter Hall, 1996 p.403.

And to young sprat M. M McGinn: ride your bike to work all the days of our lives and my thanks to you for setting aside for a moment the constant focus on appearance and the decorative side of the city—The City Beautiful—and working on your highest concern: "the uneasy coexistence of extraordinary human achievements and the disintegration of large segments of society, along with the widespread prevalence of senseless violence" Manual Castells, 1989 p.350. Most would have not gone there--too hard.

afreeman

Posted Fri, Mar 5, 4:29 p.m. Inappropriate

Kent, having become a curmudgeon I enjoyed your column so much I LOL'd. Or maybe LOLing at your column makes me a curmudgeon. In any case, as you suggest, the death knell of "smart" will ring sooner than we expect, and then we'll start calling the good new stuff "balanced," or something - as if everything before ITS time was lopsided. Or how about "green," as if everything before ITS time was brown? Remember when something was truly smart if it was "scientific" or "demonstrated effective by scientific research"?

Posted Fri, Mar 5, 11:39 p.m. Inappropriate

I was just thinking the same thing. Nice to know I'm not the only one thinking that we might just be smart enough to really screw things up by being smart. And that the "smart" ones are very willing to point out how every one else should be "smart", first.

Posted Sat, Mar 6, 3:42 p.m. Inappropriate

True, people should live in accordance with their own ethics. Driving 30 miles to work every day and calling yourself an "environmentalist" are pure hypocracy.

mhays

Posted Sat, Mar 6, 10:03 p.m. Inappropriate

What a meandering, unfocused, almost pointless article. Is this really up to the Crosscut standard?

Posted Mon, Mar 8, 8:36 a.m. Inappropriate

Not "smart" enough to balance a budget, mind you. Just smart enough to tell you how to live.

BlueLight

Posted Mon, Mar 8, 12:28 p.m. Inappropriate

And to think David Brewster wants people to PAY for stuff like this...

orino

Posted Mon, Mar 8, 8:32 p.m. Inappropriate

This was very apropos, and the hypocrisy reigns everywhere. The devil is always in the definitions and the details, most of which remain very fuzzy.
Even some architects and planners are beginning to question the "smartness" of the various "smart" coinages running rampant now. Madrona

walker

Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.

Join Crosscut now!
Subscribe to our Newsletter

Follow Us »