The Millennial City: Sell Me Your City
Who will you meet?
Cities are innovating, companies are pivoting, and start-ups are growing. Like you, every urban practitioner has a remarkable story of insight and challenge from the past year.
Meet these peers and discuss the future of cities in the new Meeting of the Minds Executive Cohort Program. Replace boring virtual summits with facilitated, online, small-group discussions where you can make real connections with extraordinary, like-minded people.
Don’t try to sell me on the suburbs. I’m a Millennial, between the ages of 25 and 34. As 2010 U.S. Census numbers confirm, my cohorts and I are moving from the suburbs into the city at a faster rate than we’ve seen in years in the United States. Why is this?
For starters, I’m less inclined to start a family as early as previous generations. I probably won’t get married until later in life (if at all), and I’m more than likely to have fewer children than my parents. And if I’m not starting a family until later, this means I don’t need a house with 2-3 bedrooms or a yard right now. I can instead survive in a smaller living space, such as an apartment closer to the city center, with a view of its bustling urban core. In short, I’m not looking for the suburbs right now for the want of space.
But it’s not just a question of starting a family later in life. It’s also a question of how far my income can go. By living in the city, it means I won’t need a car to make a 30-45 minute commute from home to work. I’m more likely to prefer a short walk or a bike ride to work. If I can use Lyft or a bike share program and forgo buying a car, it’s better for the environment. Moreover, it allows me to save money.
It’s essential that I can make my income go as far as possible. I’m lucky to have the job that I do. Many of my former high school or college classmates struggled to find something after they graduated. Some of us stayed in school and got more degrees with the hopes of being more competitive in the job market. A few of us found jobs – mostly entry-level – with decent starting salaries. Examples of such jobs are working in city government or for a local start-up. These jobs offer opportunities to gain professional experience and to make direct contributions to improving the community where we live. I’m making enough money to rent a one bedroom apartment near work, but not nearly enough to buy a house in the nearby suburbs.
We Millennials – single, active, and educated – don’t need the suburban life right now. We are city dwellers. We have disposable income for rent and for entertainment. We prefer living near bars, art galleries, coffee shops and bus routes. We boost the local economy through our consumption. And we have a general desire to improve the city around us. We join social leagues. We support local farms by joining community-supported agriculture networks. We volunteer to build parks and community gardens. Our aim is to leave the campsite better than we found it.
But keep in mind; we’re not all moving to cities in the high-income regions of California and the Northeast, such as San Francisco, New York, or Washington, DC. In fact, cities like Washington, DC are pricing out its Millennial population because of skyrocketing rental costs. As a recent article shows, some residents are even forced to sub-lease the sunrooms of their one-bedroom apartments just to cover the monthly rent. Millennials are moving to DC at a median age of 26, and migrating out at a median age of 29. This three year window of time is too tight to capture all the creative energy and civic-mindedness that Millennials have to offer. Worse, that level of residential turnover does little to foster community between a city and its residents.
Therefore, cities in the expensive coastal regions are not the only options. States all across America want to keep their creative class – with all its talent and enthusiasm – rather than lose it to other vibrant urban markets. Cleveland, Indianapolis, Omaha, Raleigh – they all want to keep us. And we are willing to live in smaller, more affordable cities, so long as there are jobs. Cities that can attract 21st century industries – such as high-tech, health care, and advanced manufacturing – are the cities that will compete with the coastal elites. And those are the cities that will attract us.
Don’t try to sell me on the suburbs. Instead, sell me on your city. Sell me on the 21st century industries you’ve brought into your area through tax incentives and training programs. Sell me on mixed income land development, with local businesses on the first floor and economic opportunities for all socioeconomic levels. Sell me on smart urban planning, on smart growth, on managed density, and maybe on some bike share or bus stations near my building. And please, sell me on green space. Put a small park amidst a cluster of converted and renovated residential buildings, and I’ll use it on a sunny Saturday.
Sell me on the possibilities of how inclusive, equitable, and sustainable your city can be. And I promise I’ll leave your city better than I found it.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
People seem frequently to assume that the terms “sustainability” and “resilience” are synonyms, an impression reinforced by the frequent use of the term “climate resilience”, which seems to enmesh both concepts firmly. In fact, while they frequently overlap, and indeed with good policy and planning reinforce one another, they are not the same. This article picks them apart to understand where one ends and the other begins, and where the “sweet spot” lies in achieving mutual reinforcement to the benefit of disaster risk reduction (DRR).
As extreme weather conditions become the new normal—from floods in Baton Rouge and Venice to wildfires in California, we need to clean and save stormwater for future use while protecting communities from flooding and exposure to contaminated water. Changing how we manage stormwater has the potential to preserve access to water for future generations; prevent unnecessary illnesses, injuries, and damage to communities; and increase investments in green, climate-resilient infrastructure, with a focus on communities where these kinds of investments are most needed.
A few years ago, I worked with some ARISE-US members to carry out a survey of small businesses in post-Katrina New Orleans of disaster risk reduction (DRR) awareness. One theme stood out to me more than any other. The businesses that had lived through Katrina and survived well understood the need to be prepared and to have continuity plans. Those that were new since Katrina all tended to have the view that, to paraphrase, “well, government (city, state, federal…) will take care of things”.
While the experience after Katrina, of all disasters, should be enough to show anyone in the US that there are limits on what government can do, it does raise the question, of what could and should public and private sectors expect of one another?