I really object to your use of the term technocrat above.  A technocrat is someone who supports a technocracy, which in turn, is the belief that the scientific method should be applied to societal problems.

Using science to solve social problems yields tangible benefits.  For example, consider gridlock.  Replacing roads with monorails, where all monorail cars are personal and autonomously controlled (software to make this happen exists today; we couldn't have the Internet without it), results in a litany of benefits:

• it's substantially more energy efficient transportation infrastructure (cars are mechanically much simpler, and therefore, lighter),
• comparable convenience to a personal automobile (e.g., when approaching a terminal to request a pod for yourself, it'll find the nearest unused pod and based on that, inform you of how long it'd likely take before it arrives; further, the service would run 24/7, so you never, ever have to worry about "missing the last bus".  Additionally, request statistics collated by time can be used to optimize unused pod layout, so as to minimize cross-town waits)
• fewer cars (10% the cars as what's available on the roads today can service the same-sized population, based on the observation that most cars actually are moving only 5% to 10% of the time; hence, 3000lbs of refined steel sit idle 90% of each day),
• higher transportation speeds (with each car equipped with sonar or comparable technology, any single car can move at a speed proportional to the distance to the car in front safely),
• Zero probability of collissions with other cars (again, by definition, the car's integrated sonar prevents this),
• Since the rails are usually (but do not have to be!) elevated, this results in a reclamation of green space underneath the rail, substantially reducing the "heat island" effect common over many cities,
• Since the rails are usually elevated, the probably of a car impacting a human being approaches zero,
• automatic "entraining" (multiple cars travel so close together as to take advantage of "drafting" effects, further reducing the already low energy burden),
• automatic on- and off-ramp speed control which eliminates "freeway" deadlock,
• vehicles driven by electricity, producing transportation so quiet that buildings can place monorail platforms as an integral part of the facility without disturbing occupants above or below.  Further, they need not exist at ground-level, thus saving the energy you'd expend pushing the cars uphill upon departure.
• and many, many more.

Another technocratic solution to a social problem: equip all swimming pools with nets, such that if anyone starts having problems, the net can be lifted, thus literally straining the people in the pool out of the water, just as a collander separates water and pasta.  I admit that I didn't think of this solution: this is from Jacques Fresco from The Venus Project.

Another technocratic solution: does your roof absorb or radiate too much heat, driving your heating and cooling expenses up, but not strong enough to support "greening" the roof (itself a technocratic solution)?  Put a layer of aluminumized foil on it.  During the day, it acts like a mirror to reflect over 80% of the sunlight back into space, while during the night, it acts to reflect internal building heat back into the building.  It's likely going to be cheaper than greening the roof, and it barely weighs anything.

Another technocratic solution: energy bills too high?  Cook your lunch and dinner with solar energy.  Look into solar ovens and grills, or try building your own.  Cardboard boxes and aluminum foil is all you need to build a (mostly) parabolic reflector, which can get a griddle hot enough to safely cook hamburgers and chicken patties in seconds.  Solar ovens work like slow cookers, and can cook pasta and vegetables (some get hot enough to cook meat!) safely entirely in their own juices.

I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

There are tons of social problems which are just begging for technical solutions, simply because humans simply lack the wherewithall to arrive at a mutually agreed upon solution of their own.  Nor should they be able to -- you cannot expect everyone to be an expert at everything.

But, people are afraid of this, and it boggles the mind as to why.  We could not have society today without technology.  The invention of the plow and of language some 6000 years ago changed everything for our species.  We've always been a technically inclined species.  Let's stop shying away from what is natural for us and embrace it instead.  Let's start using the term "technocrat" and "technocracy" as it was originally intended.