So American

UPDATED POST on StrongTowns.org – Apologies for spelling errors –

When what we’ve been doing clearly isn’t working, counter-intuitive might be our best option. And that option is making our spaces unsafe so we can make them safe.

Ben Hamilton-Baillie gave a top-notch presentation at the recent Congress for the New Urbanism that covered shared space. It was easily one of the best presentations of the week, but also one of the hardest for an American audience to digest.

In a nutshell, shared space is an entirely different way to build our places. It’s an approach to urban design that aims to minimize demarcations (divisions amongst users) between vehicles and pedestrians. It usually involves changing road markings and removing traffic signs, curbs and hierarchical prioritization.

Anyone who hasn’t seen “Poynton Regenerated” needs to do so right now. You’ll notice that shared space can have an immediate impact in transforming a place. Poynton went from a struggling community choking on traffic to being voted one of the best places to live in the United Kingdom.

Before we can start implementing shared space in North America, we’ll need to overcome some bad tendencies. What am I talking about? Well, I bring this up because after Hamilton-Baillie’s presentation, there were three questions from the audience that struck me as symptomatic of our mindset (start here).

I’ll summarize:

Question 1: What do we do to manage storm water?

Question 2: What do we do about being sued by handicap people?

Question 3: Is this a novelty, and what effect might  that have?

These questions strike at the heart of how we operate in North America and the cultural challenges we’ll need to overcome to build shared space.

Question one deals with the role of hyper-specialization; where each field has an equal say at the table at any design process regardless of context. This is what leads to things like ADA-compliant ramps without sidewalks. Storm water management is important, however it’s not the problem they were trying to solve, which was an abundance of traffic and pedestrian unfriendliness.

Hamilton-Baillie politely downplays this question but unabashedly states the intersection redesign was about placemaking and a signal to drivers, not ecology. This is couldn’t be more context appropriate in the sense that the space is small, especially in comparison to the town’s overall size. And, if the goal was to prevent storm water runoff, it’d be best to apply the specialization’s best practices elsewhere. There might be other redesigns that could incorporate these ecological elements, but they don’t need to be installed at every corner as the American model may require.

Question two deals with lawsuits and the power of special interests in shaping our urban environment. We are a litigious society and this has shaped us to such a degree that we won’t do simple improvements because of the perceived threat of a lawsuit.

My question is, what are we doing right now that’s so good that doesn’t warrant drastic change?

We’ve had 25 years of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and what does it have to show for walkability? We have ramps (see here) and audible warnings on crosswalks. But, it’s hard not to view these as mere token gestures when we still create intersections like these and they’re all ADA-compliant.

Hamilton-Baillie responds by commenting that speed is the most important element. If you can calm speed, you can drastically reduce danger for everyone, especially the visually-impaired. Our hurdle here is to eliminate the idea of “priority”. As Chuck wrote over two years ago now, “The concept of sharing space is so foreign to Americans that it is worth deeper explanation. We’re not talking about having a place for everything … but that the concept of “priority” needs to be abolished in favor of an approach where all space is shared amongst transportation options.” 

In the meantime, we need to merely acknowledge that we may be sued, and then proceed. The cost of not creating better places far outweighs that of potentially being sued.

Question three is the most interesting. Is shared space a fading novelty? Hamilton-Baillie says “no” and I happen to agree. This a fair question coming from an American. We seem to always be the one’s jumping on trends enthusiastically (and thoughtlessly) and finding ourselves in unfortunate positions. Every city has a downtown mall, right? Oh, and a nice professional sports stadium.

Our towns have been so eagerly obsessed to “save / attract [insert thing]” that we’ve forgotten the simple things that it takes to make a good place. Shared space isn’t a trend or a fad. It’s the opposite. It’s the historical norm. In the course of human settlement, it wasn’t until recent we decided to separate priority. Plus, how presumptuous to call it a “trend” before we have any real examples in the United States. 

Shared space is an entirely different way to build our places, and one that doesn’t necessarily conform to our American processes or cultural mindset. That’s something we need to overcome. The idea that we need to design unsafe places to make them more safe is counter-intuitive. But, when what we’ve been doing clearly isn’t working, counter-intuitive might be your best option.


Now, here’s the song that inspired the title: “So American” by the best band to come out of Wasilla, Alaska, Portugal. The Man. They’re skipping Minneapolis (booo!), so I won’t have a chance to see them. In case you’re elsewhere, here’s upcoming tour dates.



CNU22 Buffalo Photos & Fun

Lots of photos from CNU22 in Buffalo. It was a great time and I’ll write more when I have the spare time!


People love people who tweet. These were placed all over sidewalks downtown during the Congress.


Beautiful Buffalo City Hall


No shortage of hot dogs in Downtown Buffalo


Excellent restoration job at the Lafayette Hotel. If you’re visiting Buffalo, don’t stay anywhere else.


The World-Famous (and all around good guy) Peatonito rules the Congress. Learn more here.


Left to right: Chuck B., Me, Peatonito, Nate N., Chris H., & Bill B., The Buffalo NextGen Superheros


Downtown Buffalo Sunset from some rooftop.


NextGen Pub Crawl at Founding Fathers (?) – featuring @NewUrbanRoswell


Best stickers of the Congress


Buffalo’s oldest tree with Payton & Kristen. It’s over 250 years old.


Matthias holding Cheese Doodles at the Kunstler Party


Joy built a pop-up park on some parking spaces


Buffalo NextGen team celebrating a job well-done.


CNU NextGen Kickball Champions.


Pickleball @ Larkin Square!



How to Walk to Canada

The annual Congress for the New Urbanism is like a Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster; the effects of which are similar to “having your brains smashed in by a slice of lemon wrapped round a large gold brick” [find out more]. It’s a shock to your system: refreshing, educating, exhilarating, and completely exhausting.

Bittersweet, has been my only experience waking up on each Sunday of the Congress. Programming was over, and I needed to do something behind the event flight. I got a ride to the Buffalo Airport with Matt Steele (@MatthewSteele) and Matthias Leyrer (@mjleyrer) from the great Bill Banas (@buffalobill1)( – thanks a ton dude! — ). We got a rental car and trekked northbound to Niagara Falls!

There has also been something uncomfortable with crossing the border. Usually treks between the United States and Canada looks something like this: an endless queue of cars, unhappy border agents, and unnecessary searches. However, instead of driving across the border, Matthias and I decided to hike across the Rainbow Bridge (Matt forgot his passport and worked from a nearby coffee shop).

In contrast to driving or flying, it’s a very human experience. Great views of the falls and no wait. We passed cars on our stretch.


Walking is a tale of two cities. Canada welcomes pedestrians and the United States bumps them into a parking lot. Here’s what it is like to enter Canada …



And here’s what it’s like to enter back into the USA …


Walking is a very human activity. When it comes to walking across the bridge between the two places; one Canadian and one New York – it’s a tale of two cities.

Here are a few photos of the trip:


Need $ to get back in the USA


Me and the Falls


#USA Falls


$5 parking in Canada


Incompatible land uses in Canada

American side streetscape

American side streetscape


Shops on Canada’s side


target field 1

The Death of Neighborhood Schools?

We need an entirely different approach to where we locate schools and how we build them. Our current model – notably in small and mid-sized towns – is that of the destruction of our neighborhood schools in favor of the suburban campus model.

The campus model is a burden on our system: built on an inhuman scale, unwalkable by design, with a disregard to long-term operational costs and devaluing our existing neighborhoods.

An example is happening in my hometown of Mankato, MN. If the school district decides to go through with their new plans, they should immediately start applying for a Safe Routes to School grant. They’re going to need it.


The blue square on the bottom left is Mankato’s new school; right on the corner of US Highway 22 and County Road 83. The yellow squares are soybeans that may become Mankato’s newest low-density residential neighborhood. This should be cause for concern, beyond that of its speculative nature, and I can speak from experience.

After years of walking to and from Roosevelt Elementary, a classic neighborhood school, I was suddenly relegated to catching the bus or begging my parents to zip me off to the new middle school at the edge of town. It didn’t help that the school’s architecture doubled as a minimum security prison. I remember hating this.

Teenage years are awkward, and being shuttled off to a low-slung building surrounded by soybeans doesn’t help. It took away one of the few freedoms young teenagers have: transportation. I went from walking to school to being reliant upon others, specifically my parents. But, it was mostly a burden on my parents. For elementary, if I needed a ride on a cold day, it was a nice short drive – not miles across town.

The large campus model standard is built on such a large scale that it’s hard to put into perspective how inefficient they are as a land use. Mankato’s new middle school covers 65 acres. So, I created some maps to help visualize.


Here’s how Mankato’s two existing high schools fit:

two schools

Both fit comfortably, along with four parking lots, two football fields, full-sized tracks, and a baseball and softball field. Let’s take it a step further:


Over 85 percent of the entire campus of Minnesota State University, with an enrollment of 15,000 plus students, can fit into the site (with room to spare).

The campus model size is unnecessary and wasteful considering Mankato has plenty of available space in existing neighborhoods nearby the former middle school. Site constraints were apparently so tough, this far-out parcel was the only option. Good to know, just in case Mankato wants to comfortably fit four Target Fields (with a capacity 158,016 people) onto the site one day.

It’s widely accepted that many schools built in the last 20 years were deliberately designed to discourage walking. What’s puzzling is that more people weren’t concerned about this? The freedom to roam was one of the most rewarding experiences of growing up. It teaches us not only navigational skills, but personal responsibility. Children need to experience this.

It might be forgivable if student walkers were overlooked, or just an afterthought. That’s not the case. They were specifically considered and the general consensus was to ignore them. It was a conscious decision to save money on initial land costs.

Being smart with limited resources can go a long way. What do you think it’ll cost the district now that it’ll have to provide a bus option for every single middle-school kid on the sprawling east side? Imagine the cost reductions of having 25% to 50% of students within walking distance. Not to mention the savings of having our children share outdoor faculty or our faculty sharing parking lots; both of which are currently over-supplied (If you’re interested in reading more, I recommend checking out: “Subsidizing Inefficiency”).

We must consider alternatives because not even the most fearless 13 year old boy would trek this sidewalk-less highway intersection (the new site has an impressively low “2″ Walk Score).

Let’s stop and reevaluate. Let’s assess what’s really important in our community. Building an over-sized school on over-sized road on an over-sized parcel strikes me as irresponsible. We need to return to a neighborhood model. We need to find the locations that don’t need a Safe Routes to School grants and build there. The places we are collectively building are places that our children hate. They’re inhuman, disregard our existing neighborhoods, cost us more money and unnecessarily burden parents.

Let’s make a change.


CNU NextGen 11 Schedule


The Meat & Bones: Download the CNU NextGen Schedule.

The Congress for the New Urbanism’s annual meeting can be an intimidating place for a first timer. I remember walking around clueless during my first Congress; not knowing exactly what to do or where to go.

CNU NextGen is an organization that looks to welcome those new to CNU (read about us here). In our 11th year, we are looking to continue the tradition of hosting events all week designed to welcome and integrate new CNU’ers into the mix.

Our home base will be the beautiful Lafayette Hotel (Google Maps). It’s a magnificent French Renaissance-style building designed by Louise Blanchard Bethune, the first professional woman architect in the United States, and the lobby will act as the meeting and work space for NextGen.

Important Notes:

  • If you’d like to give a short presention at NextGen or debate on Friday, fill out the form here.
  • If you’d like to play Kickball, sign up here. [Note: We need 1 Team Captain, anyone up to the challenge?]

Our events are open to the public. Please stop by and say “hi”.

For updates, please visit one of the following:

Thanks. We look forward to seeing you at the Lafayette Hotel during CNU 22.

DownloadCNU NextGen Schedule.


How To Mitigate Grand Avenue’s “Parking” Problem

The curious case of Cupcake.

It’s two years old now, but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth every time I meander past Grand and Milton. This is old news. Now, we have a doggy spa. Three parking spaces. That’s the difference between cupcakes and family-friendly self-service dog shampooing.

The successful University Avenue retailer was looking to expand on Grand Avenue. The problem: the City of St. Paul required 10 stalls. Cupcake only had 7. The City granted a variance, but the neighborhood group filed a lawsuit. There was some local political infighting and some back-and-forth, but at the end of the day, none of it mattered. Cupcake decided to abandon Grand Avenue for the Mall of America.

All the drama erupted over 3 parking spaces.


Space is a premium and that makes land acquisition difficult and expensive. This makes adding off-street parking difficult. But, what if I told you I could find over 100 additional parking spaces within a 3 minute walk of the location.


The red square above is Bubbly Paws. The red lines indicate prohibited on-street parking.


Many of our neighborhood streets adjacent to commercial corridors have restricted on-street parking. At best, we’re not making the best use of a public right-of-way. At worst, we’re stifling the ability for places (like Cupcake) to operate within our neighborhoods. What we’ve done is say that they are required to have a certain amount of parking spaces while there is a huge unused resource at the City’s disposal.

Besides the benefit of not requiring off-street parking (nobody wants more parking lots), having vehicles park on both sides of the street slows down traffic and can discourage people from using side streets as a through-street.

What we’re taking about is a win-win-win: fewer parking lots, more businesses and slower traffic.

St. Paul is a city. Emphasis on city. It’s about time it started acting like it. The area surrounding Grand Avenue is a dense, walkable neighborhood with a compact commercial node, existing mid-size apartment buildings and access to transit and bike lanes. There is no better place to not require more parking lots. Instead, let’s utilize on-street parking and slow down traffic in the process.

__ __

Note: I don’t believe Grand Avenue has a genuine parking problem, but yes – it is more difficult to find a spot during peak periods. That, and you might just have to walk an extra block or two. Grand Avenue is a successful, worthwhile place precisely because it doesn’t have convenient parking. Furthermore, St. Paul needs to consider removing parking minimums all together.


Being Smart with Street Signage

While walking along a sleepy residential street in my St. Paul neighborhood, I noticed something about a traffic circle.



There are eight signs in total; four warning of the upcoming traffic circle and four instructing each direction which way to navigate the circle.

We need to design residential streets in a manner where signs are not required. Here’s another example a couple blocks south:

photo 2

This is another sleepy residential side street with no significant traffic flow and a low speed limit. So, why are there signs warning you of a stop sign less than 200ft away?

These neighborhood signs are ugly, expensive and unneeded. Supposedly designed to make driving around our neighborhoods safer, but do little of the sort. They offer a false sense of security on local streets where vehicles should be driving slow enough that seeing traffic circles or stop signs shouldn’t be a problem.

We should to sell these signs for scrap and use the money to fix neighborhood problems like this:

photo 1

Bonus: How San Francisco redesigned those confusing “no parking” signs.




What $1.1 Billion Looks Like

“It’s like building a Vikings’ stadium in a single season,” said State Transportation Commissioner Charlie Zelle – Star Tribune, April 3rd

Ouch. To anyone who followed the Minnesota Vikings’ new publicly-financed stadium, this quote should make you cringe.

In a quest to improve quality of life, Minnesota is pouring $1.1 billion into road projects this summer; the same amount being dedicated to a new stadium. Upon hearing this, most people should have two questions:

1) Wait a minute! We spent how much on a new football stadium? And,
2) Besides maintenance, Minnesota’s road network is built-out, so where’s this money going?

To answer these questions;

1) Yes. We spent an obscene amount of money on a football stadium, and
2) Well, this one is more difficult to answer …

Minnesota has the 5th most paved miles in the United States with approximately 283,828 miles. The numbers don’t look good when weighed to population and population density. This is a big system that needs a lot of maintenance. Yet, while admitting we can’t afford our existing roadways under our current system, we always seem to come up with more money for expansion projections.

We have a cultural misunderstanding about of benefits of mobility. We lack the understanding of what to build and where to build. The $1.1 billion being spent over the course of this summer is turning out to be more of the same. It’s less road diet and more bypass.

Many of these projects are an extension of the Corridors of Commerce program designed to foster “economic growth with transportation investments.” This is a noble goal and it’s worked well in the past, so why not keep it up?

First, we built highways that connected places that were never before directly connected. This was an enormous benefit and opened up to more markets. Towns that were once a 5 hour journey apart turned into an easy 1 hour trip. There is no question that this created an economic benefit. But, we’ve continued building and expanding this roadway system to much diminishing return.

A large portion of the new football stadium worth of funding is just another example of this misapplication of limited transportation dollars [you can read all about it here].

The Good: Bridge and Road Repairs and Reconstructions

Money needs to be set aside for maintenance and repairs. In an ideal world, we’d create an environment where we didn’t need special legislation and additional bonding to cover such costs. It’s an unsustainable system where needed works aren’t conducted because of pending statewide political disagreements. That being said, most maintenance projects appear to be commonsense and I’m not going to comment on them.

The problematic proposals are the existing infrastructure “add-on” projects. Many of which are expensive additions to rural highways that have a low, or a zero-sum, return on investment (at best).

The Bad: Enhanced Frontage Roads

The northern Minnesota town of Detroit Lakes (pop. 8,800) has a traffic jam about once a year. When everyone is leaving the 4th of July fireworks things can get backed up. Otherwise, of all the problems facing this rural community, traffic congestion is at the bottom of the list.

At the edge of town, between the rarely used municipal airport and the Perkins, the State is reconstructing a frontage road [Project Description]. Nothing shows our misunderstanding of transportation investment more than a frontage road.

Frontage roads are a symptom of ignoring how land use connects with transportation. We’ve pushed development to the highways, and to make them work as a private economic model, we’ve needed to add access points. These access points slow down traffic and cause accidents. It’s the classic stroad equation.

And, Detroit Lakes isn’t the only frontage road in need of repair. There are 10 new frontage road projects included in the $1.1 billion appropriations. The question we should ask before reconstructing any frontage road is: why after approximately 50 years is all we have to show for our original investment this?


This is it. There is a Wal-Mart, Subway, Taco Johns (!), KFC, strip mall, car wash, two drive-through banks, a K-mart  and a handful of empty lots. No joke. There have been countless millions of dollars dropped in constructing and supporting this infrastructure and what you see above is all we have to show for it.

The Ugly: The Inappropriate Bypasses

Rice (pop. 1,200) has a problem. There’s an unsafe signalized highway interchange. It’s menacing. The proposed solution is construction of new on and off ramps. At face value, this makes sense: it’ll add to highway safety and improve traffic flows.Yet, the only reason it’s needed is because we’ve decided to build our places in such a sprawling  manner. Dangerous cross traffic is occurring because of this:


Again. This is expensive infrastructure to support a McDonald’s, gas station, and a half-built subdivision. The Rice project isn’t alone, there are dozens of newly funded projects that are similar.

One of the reasons we struggle to fund the existing system is because we have no way to capture value from what this creates. The vast majority of this above $11.3 million project benefits only the gas station, fast food restaurant and the 30 odd homes. The State is picking up the tab. So, why is it that their financial responsibility for the new intersection is nil?

This is a primary example of how not to build a transportation and land use system.

Going back to the Commissioner Zelle’s quote: we’re building a Vikings Stadium in a year? Yes. We are. I think the commissioner is unfortunately right. Both endeavors appears to be regrettably similar.


What if Minneapolis enacted a moratorium in 1895?

Minneapolis didn’t go from single-family homes to towering skyscrapers overnight. It took incremental growth over the course of 160 years to get it where it is today. But, what would Minneapolis look like if we decided to preserve itself in 1895?


The intersection of 5th and 2nd Avenue would look drastically different.


The intersection on 7th [Portland] and 6th Avenue would be lined with elegant homes, which admittedly is better than the existing surface parking lots.


It’s hard to imagine 7th Street as a row of single family homes.

Showing these comparisons is unfair. It misses a step. It’s likely that the demolished single family homes of downtown Minneapolis were the second iteration of development. Homes originally made of wood by settlers transformed into a patchwork of permanent brick buildings. Those mid-sized brick buildings eventually morphed into the larger buildings we see today.

Great places evolve. This is a healthy and historic form of urban growth: start small and build up. Throughout human history, our places have evolved using this approach.


Understanding the quirks of incremental urbanism [Click Image for Source]

We’ve gotten plenty of things wrong along the way. Our wide cultural adoption of the automobile sprawled our places and destroyed a lot of great buildings in the name of car storage. Our towering skyscrapers offer little in the way ground-level urbanism and our skyways keep our sidewalks empty.

It might be time for our single family neighborhoods in Minneapolis to expand upwards once again. The new larger homes will be the duplexes of tomorrow. The duplexes of tomorrow will transform into small apartment buildings, and so on. Urban history appears to not be repeating itself because we’re not letting it; be it opposition to a small apartment building or new,  larger single family homes.

I think the problem is that Minneapolis has forgotten it’s a city.


My favorite compare/contrast image is looking towards the State Capital along what is now Cedar in downtown St. Paul. The image shows St. Paul’s humble origins and tremendous growth. It also shows us the things we’ve done wrong: parking garage, drive-thru bank, dead streetscape, the skyway and the three lane one-way street.



*Important Note: All of the historic images were collected from the Minnesota Historical Societies Collections archives. It’s a great resource and I recommend checking it out. Everything else is from Google Streetview. The historic photo locations are approximate. The collection only mentions that buildings are, for example, “On the corner of 7th Ave & 5th St, Minneapolis.”


Untitled. Some More Sharing Economy Stuff

In a recent interview, Richard Florida said something about disruption that left me nodding my head. According to Florida, the sharing economy is “taking the last frontier of real inefficiently and waste, our cities are just wasteful machines, and making them run more efficiently.” He is referring to government, and specifically to protectionist policies.

— NOTE: This is a rough draft. Please ignore errors —

An economic evolution is underway. It’s a structural shift that we inevitably see with every changing of the generation guard. Here’s proof:

“The following articles of clothing, when worn as outer garments, are prohibited: (1) T-shirts without a pocket or buttons, underwear, tank tops, swimwear, jogging suits, body shirts, shorts, cut-offs, trunks, or similar attire … By prior approval of the director, T-shirts and sports jerseys and shirts may be worn as outer garments in conjunction with special attractions.”City of Minneapolis Taxicab Ordinance

Minneapolis’ taxicab regulations beautifully speak to Florida’s point. They cover everything from acceptable types of sandals to detailed insurance requirements. Skimming through the 35 pages of regulation, I got to thinking: I’ve never had a legal taxicab ride.

  • Listening to music without a rider’s prior approval? Violation.
  • Talking on a mobile device, including a wireless Bluetooth headset? Violation.
  • License posted more than 3 inches from the top of the front seat? Violation.
  • Blocking the normal flow to traffic to pick-up customers? Violation.
  • Wearing a t-shirt without pockets? Violation.

Most all taxicab regulations aren’t even enforced. The City doesn’t have the time, resources or willpower to enforce them. This begs the question of, is there a point to having regulations you don’t care to enforce?

The parade of tech breakthroughs is relentless. Policy makes need to be responsive, not be obstinate. We need to find ways to realize the benefits. The status quo isn’t ideal; and even the regulations on the books intending to make things better, such as taxicab rides, aren’t actually regulated. They just exist as barriers to entry.

We can see the change all around us, from online retail staples like Craigslist, Amazon and Ebay to new financing mechanisms changing the way we raise money, such as Kickstarter, Fundrise and Indiegogo. The list can go on; Lyft, Uber, Airbnb, Kickstarter, Fundrise, Car2Go, Etsy. These services are tools in a toolkit, and while they won’t change our world overnight, they help us better interact with the world around us.

The change is a rational response to our current situation of higher unemployment, less stable and lower paying jobs and increased personal debt. It’s a necessity for some people to get a job on the side. It’s been referred to the greatest economic transformation in human history. This is true for our cities, because, in part, these inventions allow us to live more comfortably in urban spaces.

I remember my epiphany.

It was 2004. I remember looking in awe at the price tag of college textbooks: $100 for an introductory of macroeconomics textbook? I begrudgingly bought the book – a used copy no less – from the college bookstore and proceeded to use it (maybe) a dozen times throughout the semester. At the semester’s end, I brought it to book buy-backs only to find they’d upgraded to a new edition and weren’t buying back copies.

I remember feeling cheated. Like, the system was rigged.

Upon the recommendation of a friend, I decided to check out Amazon. I listed the book and sold it for like $75. I didn’t make money on the deal, but it was better than the alternative. Eventually I started selling my old textbooks.  When that wasn’t enough, my friend and I noticed the college bookstore would discard literally hundreds of “outdated” textbooks each month on a table with a sign that read, “free books.”

We’d grab our backpacks and laundry baskets, fill them up and list everything on Amazon. The college provided free packing materials at the time, so our cost was virtually nothing. I made around $3,500 the first semester and a couple thousand the following semester before the University started donating to Books for Africa.

To this day, I still sell books on Amazon. While my margins aren’t as big as they once were, I still capture value from something that I would never have prior to Amazon. The downside to all of this is that me – and countless hundreds of thousands like me – are putting stores out of business.

Technology disrupted the traditional marketplace by cutting out an inefficient middle man and allowing sellers to connect directly with buyers. Remember travel agents? Newspaper classified ads? Most technological disruptions have flown under the radar of regulators, but they are now starting to bump heads with local policy. This is where government needs to be adaptable.

While other reasons are often cited, this delay often comes down to money, and who gets it. Car hire services, for example, while cities don’t balance a budget on taxi cab fees or taxes, the revenue they generate is not insignificant. When it comes to App-based ride-sharing services, cities like Minneapolis (or Seattle and even Paris) get little in the way of revenue.

Getting started in the taxi business can be expensive. In Seattle, it’ll cost you at least $50,000 for a license. In New York City, a medallion can run upwards of $1 million. The cost in Minneapolis is more sane, but the number of taxi licenses are limited and the rates are preset. At best,  it’s protectionism by keeping the old guard propped up under the disguise of safety.  At worst, it creates scarcity and a monopoly develops.

Direct versus indirect economic benefit. This is the freelance economy in a nutshell.

Every book I’ve sold on Amazon is a book that would otherwise have been sold elsewhere. Instead of someone buying it at a bricks-and-mortar establishment that provides jobs and pays taxes, they’ve chosen to save a little and put $10 in my pocket. It’s a system that has drastically effected a small number of people, but marginally benefited a great number of people.

Never going to watch that DVD again? Sell it on Amazon. Gone for the weekend? Airbnb your apartment. No plans Friday night? Drive around for Lyft. These are all rational decisions, especially for a Millennial graduating college with the equivalent of a mortgage payment. We shouldn’t punish people for trying to take advantage of part time work.

The response isn’t to ignore or fight against, but to embrace. Update the city codes and add flexibility. Make all services viable, because if you try to stop them, you won’t be able to. They won’t change your world overnight, but they should give your city a great tool in a greater toolkit, and a Strong Town is one that embraces the greater toolkit of possibilities.