I liked this reading because it looked at indicators used by a public health department in San Francisco to aid in monitoring and evaluating the efficacy of policy/planning. These “neighborhood indicators” include housing, transportation, economy, education, public realm, health systems, and environment. I think a standardized M & E system is important for two reasons: (1) metrics such as these provide a standardized understanding of how your program is working. Is it addressing the indicators that were of concern? If not, perhaps it’s time to go back to the drawing board and hold more community workshops; (2) indicators can allow for a more targeted and area-specific response when developing policy and planning urban components. Instead of a broad, general approach, indicators by location should (in theory) allow for the needs of communities to be met more appropriately.

This reading looked at the impact of the placement of our nation’s highway systems. In every major US city, Black communities within those cities received a devastating blow from the disadvantageous placement of these highway systems that run disproportionately through Black neighborhoods. I think this is an important reading because it indicates an example of damage caused by systematic racism and also illustrates the necessity for social equity to be highly-considered in future urban planning.

This is a reading that looks more toward the future of urban planning. As ride-share companies have become increasingly popular, some cities have begun pairing up with Transportation Network Companies (TNCs), such as Uber. This study examined the current logistics of TNCs and found they are an inequitable public transportation source as they lead to longer wait times in low-income communities and communities of color. This is important moving forward, as these issues need to be addressed in prevention of exacerbating barriers to transportation.

This text examined the issue of public housing and the displacement crisis in Oakland, CA. The authors found that current policies to address the crisis are not effective and are instead putting additional stress onto communities of color and Black communities in these areas because the policies are not truly founded with anti-displacement thinking. As a result, the policies often lead to the area becoming gentrified, forcing residents who no longer have the resources to become displaced. The authors provide 5 clear recommendations to address the faults of the current policies. I think this reading is super important because it highlights the importance of community input. Clearly, the policies as they currently stand are not meeting the needs of the community and are accordingly resulting in greater social injustice and structural violence. It’s critical to drive home the importance of community direction.

I liked this reading because it looked at indicators used by a public health department in San Francisco to aid in monitoring and evaluating the efficacy of policy/planning. These “neighborhood indicators” include housing, transportation, economy, education, public realm, health systems, and environment. I think a standardized M & E system is important for two reasons: (1) metrics such as these provide a standardized understanding of how your program is working. Is it addressing the indicators that were of concern? If not, perhaps it’s time to go back to the drawing board and hold more community workshops; (2) indicators can allow for a more targeted and area-specific response when developing policy and planning urban components. Instead of a broad, general approach, indicators by location should (in theory) allow for the needs of communities to be met more appropriately.