From StreetsBlog:
How many times have you heard this line: Young people prefer urban living.
Of course, everyone acknowledges, this isn’t a universal preference. But a clear generational shift away from suburban lifestyles is the phenomena on which many of our discussions about urbanism are premised.
However, while young people may be a driving force in demanding vibrant urban environments, they aren’t necessarily in the driver’s seat when it comes to the important policy decisions that continue to shape metro areas, often at the expense of cities.
Alex Ihnen at NextSTL articulated this generational tension last month in a blog post after Census figures showed the St. Louis had experienced yet another precipitous population decline: “When will the ‘old guard’ who have overseen this exodus stop cutting ribbons and turning dirt with a smile and silver shovel and simply get out of the way?”
Aaron Renn at the Urbanophile has given this dynamic some thought. In his latest post, Renn wonders whether a turnover in generational power will be necessary before urban areas can regain their primacy in American life:
Gen-X and the Millennials have a much more optimistic and positive views of urban areas than baby boomers and previous generations. I think this results from the rupture that those earlier generations experienced when our urban cores declined. If you read a newspaper interview of someone in that age bracket, you always hear the stories about the wonderful things they did in the city when they were younger. It was the land of good factory jobs, the downtown department store where their mothers took them in white gloves for tea, of the tidy neighborhoods, the long standing institutions and rituals – now all lost, virtually all of it. Unsurprisingly, this has turned a lot of people bitter. Many people saw everything they held dear in their communities destroyed, and they were powerless to stop it.
For people about my age or younger, it’s a very different story. None of us knew any of those things. Our experience is totally different. We’ve basically never known a city that wasn’t lost. Gen-X, which Jim Russell views as the heartland of Rust Belt Chic, is a generation defined by alienation, so the alienated urban core suits our temperament perfectly. The Millennials of course have a very different attitude towards cities.
I don’t see any signs of the older generations getting through the grieving process and moving on. This makes me think that for us to fully embrace a true urban policy, even in city government itself, it is going to take generational turnover. The baby boomers are already starting to age, but they’ll be with us a lot longer. Alas, they have historically been the most suburban generation, and not shy about imposing their values, so I suspect we’ll be dealing with that legacy for a while. Still, as time goes on, we’ll have more and more people seeing the city with fresh eyes, and only knowing it when there’s reason for hope and optimism. That by itself will be a building force for change and new directions over time, until the true changing of the guard arrives.
Elsewhere on the Network today: As spring approaches Utility Cycling shares some tips for staying dry while cycling in the rain. Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space imagines how a modern streetcar will transform D.C.’s H Street. And Say Yes to the Honolulu Rail System says the average local transit rider saves $11,000 annually over a driver.
We need a local article like this.
I wholeheartedly agree. Unfortunately, we don’t have the luxury of waiting for a “generational turnover.” Memphis is bleeding talent – 5 young professionals AND 5 middle class families are leaving our city EVERY DAY. At this rate, we may not have to wait for generational turnover since there won’t be any YPs left to turn things over to.
I am incredibly proud of and thankful for all the work city leaders have done to land jobs – Electrolux, Mitsubishi, Hardy Bottling, etc. But political policy has yet to catch up. Heck, I’m not sure we’re even out of the gate. Keep your silver shovels handy because great things are happening in the area of job creation, but it will be a wasted photo op when we can’t get enough knowledge workers to move here to fill these new jobs. All the tax breaks in the world won’t keep a company here if they can’t get good talent.
They say a person has to read something at least six times before it sticks in their mind. Consider this my seventh time saying it… Two-thirds of young professionals (Gen-X and Millenials) move for the city FIRST and THEN find a job. Statistically speaking, that makes the policy more important than the silver shovel.
Not wishing to be overly verbose, I’ll end with a reminder that we have amazing young talent already here. Activate them, fund them, encourage them, and then get out of our way.
Thanks, Gwyn. I think that’s a good motto for all of us: Activate them, fund them, encourage them, and then get out of our way.
Scott, you write it. We’ll post it.
Eh? I’m a bitter old man–I don’t know who the bold, vibrant young leaders are.
javier bailey?
Memphis has been “bleeding talent” for a long long long time. Why ? you said it. They tend to look at the city first, then then job.
Because of that, Memphis is outclassed by many many other cities in the South, deep South, and even in the SW.
Memphis won’t be able to catch up that fast. No other truly dynamic city is simply standing still out of courtesy to Memphis’ plight.
Memphis already has a sizeable deficit to overcome- primarily in community and race relations, and the good ole boy politics of race—not to mention massive white flight.
Memphis bleeds young people because the inner city is DEAD-ish though possibly being resurrected, we’ll see. When you’re young, you don’t want a bunch of expenses like HIGH GASOLINE eating your food and fun-drink money limiting social discourse. You also need to get places around your inner city area affordably without making you late for work or making you hurl. You also don’t want your life harried by high crime and heavy criminal population, un-rehabilitated, in your inner city area. You want good food run by sane hygenic people, not rich nutjobs with wacko ideas and little care for what the customer desire over massaging their own egos.
It’s great to be a shipping hub, but, that’s not all we have to be. We could be a rehabilitation hub, music hub, internet hub, export hub, the more things you have working together to generate wealth, the more attractive a place gets, the more things yo have that young people can relate to, things that support their work and lay in their neighborhood, the more you retain. It’s not rocket science.
I think a one year re-prioritization of where funds go in this city, like not to commissions and time wasting studies and instead put them into business incubators, NOT JUST TECH INCUBATORS, for crying out loud, put some into DECENT restaurants, a cleaners, mass transit improvements, cleanup, and for crying out loud, there’s no cotton gin on main street so get rid of the horses and move them to a park and clean up the poop. IT STINKS BAD. Put a time limit on how long a store front can look like an abandoned shell before a business MUST be incubated in it. DO SOMETHING.
I do realize something is being done and things are changing for he better.
Brian
“…massaging their own egos…”; hmmm. Perhaps a full spa/ resort along with breathtaking views of the Mississippi is in order for the bluffs at Shelby Forest? I agree with the overall statement. An efficient and accessible transit system is essential to allowing for universal mobility to employment, housing and entertainment.
I guess the question we are faced with, according to the current survey being conducted by MATA’s transit consultant, is do we provide service to a larger area with less frequency or do we provide service to a smaller area with increased frequencies? I’m not sure what is better, good service across a smaller area or poor service that encompasses the entire city. Such prospects are known to result in angst and heartburn.