Permitting is a complicated set of rules and tests applied to a permit application:
Zoning, compliance, fire code, electrical, plumbing.
The tech industry already has a framework for running a large number of tests. It’s called CI/CD. This structure could easily be adapted.
Any city could put out an open call for applicants to digitize their permitting rules. (do it as a contest with a prize equal to 1/10th what it would cost a vendor to do it). It’ll be done quickly, done well, and done cheaply. Then hand the implementation contract to the winning team and set up a system to monitor continued success. (Give us some success criteria, tech bitches love success criteria)
The general plan:
Submit the plan electronically, run it through the tests. Spit out a pass/fail in seconds. The developer can then iterate on the plan fixing problems till it passes. (Hey, that’s funny in this case the land developer and the software developer wear the same hat)
The existing staff can run a final human approval check to make sure everything looks right. I’d guess the same staff could do 10-100x since the heavy lifting is automated.
What cities get: lower cost, higher compliance, faster construction of homes and infrastructure.
What developers get: certainty, speed, lower cost
What the citizens get: fairness, more housing, cheaper infrastructure.
I’m too busy to make the whole picture work, but if some city wanted to put up that challenge I’d take a weekend to put up my proof of concept. I bet I could put something together in two working days.
No AI required.
Permitting is a complicated set of rules and tests applied to a permit application: Zoning, compliance, fire code, electrical, plumbing.
The tech industry already has a framework for running a large number of tests. It’s called CI/CD. This structure could easily be adapted.
Any city could put out an open call for applicants to digitize their permitting rules. (do it as a contest with a prize equal to 1/10th what it would cost a vendor to do it). It’ll be done quickly, done well, and done cheaply. Then hand the implementation contract to the winning team and set up a system to monitor continued success. (Give us some success criteria, tech bitches love success criteria)
The general plan: Submit the plan electronically, run it through the tests. Spit out a pass/fail in seconds. The developer can then iterate on the plan fixing problems till it passes. (Hey, that’s funny in this case the land developer and the software developer wear the same hat) The existing staff can run a final human approval check to make sure everything looks right. I’d guess the same staff could do 10-100x since the heavy lifting is automated.
What cities get: lower cost, higher compliance, faster construction of homes and infrastructure.
What developers get: certainty, speed, lower cost
What the citizens get: fairness, more housing, cheaper infrastructure.
I’m too busy to make the whole picture work, but if some city wanted to put up that challenge I’d take a weekend to put up my proof of concept. I bet I could put something together in two working days.