Today, Monocle announced a new "City Series," which will take the form of a focused half-day summit. The objective is to explore the urban issues facing mayors, developers, investors, and citizens. The first summit will take place this November 4 (2019) in Chengdu -- the capital of the Sichuan province in China.
For those of you who aren't familiar with Chengdu, it's a modest Chinese city with over 14 million people in the administrative area and over 10 million people in the urban boundary (2014 figures). It is the 5th most populous agglomeration in China.
I can't vouch for the quality of this new series, since this will be the first one, but Monocle has been running a longer, multi-day, quality of life conference for a few years now. Mostly, I am intrigued by the selection of Chengdu as the inaugural city for this new series. I take it as evidence that interesting things are happening there.
Image: Monocle
Richard Florida is currently running a four-part CityLab series on the economic performance of America's cities. What makes this study somewhat unique is that it looks at cities proper, rather than at their larger metro areas. In some cases there may not be that much of a difference. But in other cases, the performance of the city proper could be very different from that of the broader area.
Here are the fastest and slowest growing cities from 2012 to 2017:
Here are the fastest and slowing growing job markets:
And here is the growth in share of adults with a graduate degree:
It's interesting to see Seattle at the top of the population growth list. It is not a sprawling sunbelt city. It is an expensive tech hub. And it is also interesting to see Miami's strong employment and education growth. Years ago, Paul Graham wrote an essay arguing that tech hubs have two prerequisites: capital and nerds. He went on to argue that Miami has lots of the former, but not much of the latter. Maybe that's changing.
Adrian Cook's recent blog post about parking got me thinking about a few driving-related issues. Adrian points out that most condo buildings only allow owners to rent out their parking spots to people who already live in the building. But oftentimes, that's not the customer. The people in the market for a downtown spot are the ones who commute into the city. And so what we are seeing in many downtowns is an oversupply of parking. Municipalities need to adjust their requirements.
What I have found is that most, but not all, cities are now fairly flexible when it comes to urban parking requirements. They recognize the hypocrisy in trying to encourage alternative forms of mobility while at the same time mandating a certain number of parking spots. And so the driver is more typically the market. Empty nesters and families who buy larger suites -- at least here in Toronto -- still almost always want parking. And it's a deal breaker for them. Sometimes they want 2 spots.
Of course, there are also many instances where the location and unit mix of a project can support building absolutely no parking. There are lots of examples of the market excepting this, and so my view on parking is that there needs to be flexibility. Parking is typically a loss leader. The incentives are in place to build a hell of a lot less of it. But developers build it because they have to.
Lastly, I find that discussions around car dependency tend to ignore that we have designed vast swaths of our cities to be positively inhospitable to people who aren't driving. Adrian is right in that if you look at the modal splits for people who live in downtown Vancouver and downtown Toronto, you will find a lot less drivers. And that's because the environment is much better suited to other forms of mobility. The solution starts with urban form.
Photo by Claudio Schwarz | @purzlbaum on Unsplash
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
