The Infrastructure of Innovation is Community

Twenty years ago, there was talk of the Internet killing cities. Telecommuting would replace territory, allowing the workforce to spread across the countryside. When workers are not bound by where their jobs are, some thought cities would decline.

Of course, looking at the social reorganization of our geography today, we find cities as vibrant as ever. And while many of us do live more mobile lives—with the workplace being wherever the Wi-Fi is, and for the most part we’ve witnessed the demise of the cubicle—cities obviously continue to thrive. With the rise of co-working spaces, and as companies such as IBM and Yahoo pull people back into the office, it seems foolish today to think that digital connections would ever fully replace physical ones.

The rising workforce plays a part in driving today’s urban economies, and the corresponding geographical reorganization is more and more a reflection of their values. This is important not only for the new freelance/entrepreneur economy, but also for traditional enterprise businesses looking to attract the highest talent. Increasingly, the places people live and work are being driven first and foremost by lifestyle choices. If we look closely at the cities, and more specifically the neighborhoods, that are thriving today, we can extract some learnings about those values, how they are reified in urban morphology, and how to best design for them.

Much of this is familiar to us. In emerging neighborhoods, from Brooklyn’s Tech Triangle to Seattle’s South Lake Union, we find people with laptops having meetings in cafes during the day and spilling out of bars at night. We find not only office space, but accommodation for active lifestyles (bike paths, sports fields), a live music scene, and sidewalks full of people shopping at small independent retailers. In contrast to the isolated suburban office parks of the 1980s, today’s innovation hubs are lively, buzzing, holistic live/work/learn/play communities.

The projects of the Harvard GSD’s “Frontier City” studio propose an unapologetically visionary approach to creating these kinds of innovation districts in the neighborhoods of South and East Boston, and in the Boston Harbor Islands. While diverse in their solutions, a focus on two big issues thread through a majority of the projects: the scarcity of developable urban land, and the threat of climate change. Whether forming new islands as storm-surge barriers, reclaiming wetlands, or moving an airport, the “Frontier City” studio projects built their new neighborhoods atop ambitious infrastructure projects that tackle today’s most pressing problems and shape cities to speak to the values of workforce they hope to attract. So how do we evaluate these proposals in terms of their viability as innovation districts? How do we gauge whether they would in fact foster innovation?

In their nine-month study, “The Rise of Innovation Districts: A New Geography of Innovation in America,” the Brookings Institution identified some common characteristics that distinguished successful innovation districts from less successful ones. They found thriving districts had a critical mass of spaces and people dedicated to research and innovation-related work. These districts leveraged that competitive advantage to launch more businesses and products, linking research to entrepreneurship. Importantly, districts that continue to attract and keep new firms and people have quality of place, which Project for Public Spaces defines as “environments in which people have invested meaning over time . . . a unique cultural and social identity that is defined by the way it is used and the people who use it.” Successful districts are diverse and inclusive, providing opportunity to local residents instead of displacing them. And finally, culture and collaboration are at the heart of successful districts, and arguably emerge once the other characteristics are in place.

As architects and planners working to create the conditions for these kinds of successful innovation districts to emerge, our efforts should be concentrated on putting in place the infrastructure to support the growth of a strong, diverse, collective community. The following are proposed strategies for leveraging five key planning tools—Space, Programming, Density, Connections, and Affordability—to set the stage for an emergent innovation ecosystem.

Space: Provide the right mix of public, semi-public, and private space.

Space is the medium for community to “happen.” We need to set aside the right mix of public and semi-public spaces, and design them for the way people use them today.

Public spaces such as parks, green spaces and plazas, sidewalk cafes, and other outdoor spaces create opportunities for unexpected encounters. They should be equipped for both recreational activity (for all ages) as well as space to work. Tables, seating, shaded/covered areas, Wi-Fi, charging stations, art, and performance spaces all encourage these experiences.

Semi-public spaces such as bars, restaurants, shops, event spaces, and hotel lobbies are necessary venues for socializing. Flexible building stock, with street-level porosity, helps keep a neighborhood vibrant, allowing restaurants and shops to move in and change over time.

Private space, in the form of both housing and work space, located in the same neighborhood, is critical to appealing to the values of a modern workforce. Mixed-use districts address sustainability, support community-building, and improve quality of life by minimizing commutes and creating 24-hour communities.

Programming: Activate space with programming and culture.

Spaces need activation. It seems like a catch-22, but people are drawn to people. Events, whether arts and cultural, professional, or recreational, draw residents together to meet their neighbors. Academic and research institutions can serve as anchors for new innovation districts by attracting and launching entrepreneurs seeking public/private research and development partnerships. Cultural institutions can contribute to

place-making by serving as attractors, bringing in people from the wider metropolitan area. Co-working spaces and incubators, Business Improvement Districts, and other community-based organizations serve as the connective glue in newly developing innovation ecosystems by programming a regular schedule of meet-ups, talks, networking events, and street festivals.

Density: Plan for density and walkability.

Sidewalks are key to vibrant districts, but they only see their full potential when activated with a critical mass of destinations—shops, cafes, restaurants, places—where people want to go.

Small outdoor spaces, along frequently traveled paths and near where people work and live, encourage daily use and allow people to feel their work and lives are more integrated.

Mid-rise residential and work space buildings provide a critical mass of residents and office workers, but at a scale more conducive to building social bonds than larger-scale, highrise central business districts.

Connections: Create local and global connections.

No neighborhood or innovation district is self-contained; they all rely on connections to both the greater metropolitan area via public transportation and bike lanes, and to global networks beyond via airports and rail lines.

Inhabitants of these districts, as well as collaborators, investors, clients, and customers need easy access to and from. Increasingly, knowledge-based companies are choosing to locate where these trips can be made without private automobiles.

Affordability: Fight to maintain affordability.

Finally, one of the most difficult challenges facing planners looking to encourage innovation in changing neighborhoods today, is how to keep spaces—for living, working, and playing—affordable.

First and foremost, this requires working with policy makers and developers to ensure quality affordable and middle-income housing in a variety of scales and typologies located on or near public transportation lines. But enabling entrepreneurship also means affordable storefronts for small businesses, such as cafes, shops, restaurants, and bars, and affordable offices and work space for startups, entrepreneurs, nonprofits, craftspeople, and makers.

Soaring real estate prices may encourage development, but they can also push out small-business owners, tinkerers, and artisans as well as working-class residents. High rents discourage risk-taking and bootstrapping, both necessary ingredients in an innovation-led economy. This is the chief obstacle to achieving the kinds of diverse, holistic live/work/learn/play communities that foster creativity.

The projects of the “Frontier City” studio leveraged many of these strategies in their work. The proposals were dense, urban, and walkable, incorporating green space and opportunities for public programming. Connections to both the city’s transit system and the airport were considered. Most of the projects were mixed-use developments, with housing playing an integral part.

Lisa Hollywood’s “Common Islands,” which relocates Logan Airport to create space for a new neighborhood in East Boston, aims to provide half of Boston’s projected housing needs for 2050. Her plan would foster diversity via job opportunities by incorporating not only office space, but a Smart Manufacturing Zone at the heart of the district. A mix of housing types that could be targeted at a range of incomes also contributes to the inclusive nature of her scheme.

Tim Clark’s “Lost Islands/Found Islands” brings a middle-class retreat and outdoor recreation within a short ferry ride of Downtown Boston. This kind of move makes the city more competitive by raising the bar for quality of life and doing so in an accessible way.

The next steps in seeing to the success of any of these plans would be to develop the public and private partnerships necessary to follow through on the goals set out. Companies like WeWork are a key component in the development of innovation ecosystems by providing the work space and programming to build community among entrepreneurs and innovators.

Innovation is born out of complex ecosystems—a primordial soup of ideas, talent, opportunities, and investment—and new ideas can come from unexpected places. As Richard Florida proposes in his CityLab feature in The Atlantic: “Each and every human being is creative. . . . We can only grow, develop, and prosper by harnessing the full creativity of each of us.”

As designers and planners, we often rely on technology and traditional “hard infrastructure” to spur growth. An examination of the complex phenomena of creativity and innovation suggests we give equal attention to those strategies that foster opportunity and community.