We are now in a time where neoliberal development is being upgraded into a new tier in urban planning through the existence of this project. Google’s control over an entire neighborhood, with nearly any form of government intervention, is a heightened version of the privatized city. What we are now seeing is “the captive city” - an entire community that will be governed by one private corporation with solely monetary goals. The way to draw people in to the project is through attractive and exciting new technology, and the way to ensure citizens remain is through housing; housing that is marketed well to convince individuals and families that there is reason to occupy what they are providing. By entering into their space, they can lay claim to the surveillance of your actions, track your interactions with their technologies and constructed spaces, and transform that information into algorithms to sell product back to you once your interests and values become apparent. An entire community that owns your information the moment you step into it without providing the ability for individuals to opt-out. What we are witnessing is a lack of moral and ethical planning by Sidewalk Labs. It is easy to argue that the company’s intention is to make beautiful spaces that people will enjoy; but we must remember that it comes at the cost of being tracked, surveilled and forced toward a level of dependency on the technologies that this private entity wants to test out on you. The outcomes of the Captive City at Quayside will create space for a more macro-scaled version of itself to flourish, where these captive and extractive practices will be recognized in the planned Portlands expansion, and further take hold as Sidewalk Labs enters into new cities in the future.
When reflecting on Sidewalk Labs approach to its design strategy and ideas for Toronto, the fear of failure in these technologies is an ongoing concern. As Greenfield stated in his critique of the Smart City: Technology ages, becomes outdated, fails and can malfunction. It is challenging to convince citizens to trust and feel comfortable in private spaces like the home, or “public” spaces in Quayside, if they are digitally connected to technologies that can be subject to malfunctions, breakdowns and surveillance. There have been incredible successes of certain smart city technologies; however, it is unfair to assume that everyone who will be living in the captive city will knowingly consent to the extraction of data by their interaction with the technology they are forced to use in the community.
Companies of Google’s stature have attempted to conquer the urban planning world before. However, communities in which these companies have planned to enter have worked hard to stop large companies from developing their neighborhoods and tearing the fabric of their communities that make them attractive in the first place. For example, In 2016, Google attempted to build a campus for startups in the Kreuzburg neighborhood of Berlin. Immediately, there was a large congregation of people against the plan, as they believed it would increase rents and create rapid gentrification of the Kreuzburg neighborhood, and there were additional concerns about tax and data privacy as well. Through the power of protest, citizens of Berlin were able to force Google to fold on their plans and ultimately give the space they were going to occupy over to two NGO’s to establish a place for social engagement. This provided a strong understanding that Google, if pushed hard enough, is not as sturdy as they seem. Typically, Google holds enough power to do what they want; yet, Berlin highlighted the holes in that argument. Then in 2018, Amazon - another incredibly powerful global enterprise - announced their decision to create a new headquarter in New York City’s Long Island City neighborhood. However, after extensive citizen push back, Amazon backed out of their plan as well. These situations have made Torontonians aware of the power that a unified front can have against the same or similar globally significant actor occupying their city.
However, Sidewalk is also aware of the power that people can have in influencing
large corporations trajectory in the urban landscape, through protest and through the influencing of government entities who are in charge
of approving the project at various stages. Because of this awareness, Sidewalk Labs is acting fast - each step forward they are trying to
take is quick and forceful, and what is being shared to the public is filtered heavily to manipulate the public’s perception in order to
continue their work at a fast and steady pace. For all critics of Sidewalk Labs involvement in the Quayside project, it is important to
recognize that collaborative efforts and a unified voice toward the contested issues at hand are imperative to making a difference in this
development moving forward.
Since the project was made public, the partnership formed with Google’s sister company has been a shock. I initially thought it was a
project soley about Google’s extractive-capitalistic methods of urbanization, taking advantage of a city desperate for global recognition;
however, I now see that it is more about Toronto as a whole, and the systems and loopholes present that allow for these extractive entities
to enter and grow in the city. These specific developments do not enter into a city if the holes or gaps in formal definitions, laws and
procedures are present. The space for Sidewalk Labs to enter into Toronto had already began showing itself with the creation of Waterfront
Toronto.