What to do with our cities in decline?

24 06 2009

It is prettty much a fact of life that not all cities can be growing.  While some cities may have a growing economy and a great influx of young, talented people moving there, this usually means that somewhere out there another city is suffering a decline.  Of course many cities try to fight this decline with new development, gentrification or a boost in order ways, often with no real results to show for their efforts.  Yet, a man by the name of Dan Kildee, who is treasurer of Genesee County which includes the city of Flint, Michigan has a very different idea.  Rather than fight what is happening, Kildee wants to contract the cities and bulldoze the deserted areas returning them back to nature.

Kildee introduced the idea in his home city of Flint, yet there has now been interest from the US government, including Barack Obama himself.  Kildee’s plan will involve 50 cities including some of the obivous suspects (such as Detroit).  While many may find this idea as a sign of  weakness or giving up, it seems to be more beneficial and cost effective than throwing money at something that may never work.  And while it may seem a bit radical, now may be the very best time to really make it a reality.  You check out the article by Telegraph.co.uk which goes into more detail here: U.S. Cites may have to be bulldozed in order to survive





And the Award for the Most Livable City Goes To…

10 06 2009

Photo courtesy of Flickr user gordmckenna

Photo courtesy of Flickr user gordmckenna

I for one do get a bit tired of the constant barrage of most livable city rankings.  The criteria is often incomplete, but there is no question that they are at least somewhat interesting.  The most recent rankings comes to us from the Economist.  And like the past couple of years, Australia and Canada dominate.  This year, Vancouver takes the cake as the most livable (perhaps due to the fact that it’s now a bit more affordable than it has been for a while?).  But there are some very strong contenders in the top ten including Vienna, Melbourne, Toronto, Perth, Calgary, Helsinki, Geneva, Sydney and Zurich.

For those who do not know much about these rankings, the most livable city rankings base their scores (out of 100) off the typical day to day lives within these cities and our interaction with them.  Criteria includes such things as infrastructure, cost of living, urbanity, etc.  As a Canadian, all I can say is really proud of how our cities rank.  One other interesting note is the lack of American cities in the top ten.  Finally, the bottom 10 cities is rounded out by several African and Southeast Asian cities.  To see the top 10 and bottom 10, click here.  For those that want to see the full list, it looks like you may need to pay more.





The Haves and the Have Nots: A Disturbing Trend in Today’s Cities

2 06 2009

A long while back (one of my first posts, actually), I recommended the book Who’s Your City by Richard Florida which focused on the fact (and reality) that choosing where to live is just as important as any other major life decision.  Throughout the book, Florida would continuously compare and contrast cities throughout the United States.  And you know what one of the major findings was?  There is a growing gap between the prosperous cities attracting today’s talented youth and culture and those that seem to be a continual deep decline.  I was reminded of this today as I heard that the inevitable had finally happened: GM filed for bankruptcy.  As sad it is to say, cities such as Detroit don’t seem to show much hope.  Detroit was already the prime example of urban decay and I highly doubt this bankruptcy of one their main employers will do anything but continue this decay.

There is a major movement towards those cities which offer what today’s generations want.  Of course, what people want today in a city is complex, but some major criteria include solid job prospects, a high degree of culture, a forward thinking government, a safe atmosphere and a diverse mix of people and cultures.  What cities do these sound like and which ones do they sound the opposite of.  Today’s group of highly educated young adults are less likely to settle for a place simply based off a single job.  They want to go where they feel they’re needs and wants will be most met.  The unfortunate thing is this creates a migration towards cities that meet these pieces of criteria which almost always in turn improves these standards even more which spurs even more of a migration and so on and so forth.  This unfortunately leaves the have nots even farther behind than before.

So what can be done?  First, I believe city planners should focus on what makes their city distinct and unique and use that as a way to attract new comers.  Secondly, the city needs to shift more attention towards it’s student population which may not be able to give very much fiscally to the city, but can create a more energetic vibrancy.  As well, this will also likely ensure that a larger number of this student population stays in the city and begins to establish a life there.  Thirdly, the planners can ensure that the city’s varying neighbourhoods are established in such a way that a real sense of community results in each of them.  A larger city entity can be built from a great number of strong neighbourgoods.  Finally, increased money towards the arts and culture can be a huge boost to the city’s population as well as to it’s tourism industry.

It is certainly a hard road for any city that falls into the have not category and it’s very likely that the decline of places like Detroit could just continue, but with correct focus, these places can put up a fighting chance for their own survival.