The article considers the then-nascent internet and computer technology age and suggests that cities can take advantage of that growing industry, but in order to do so, they must "take care of the basics." (The debate of whether internet and electronic technology will spread cities out or bring them tighter in together is an interesting discussion in itself, one that is well represented by comparing The World Is Flat by Thomas Friedman to Who's Your City? by Richard Florida.) It pairs six cities with aspects of effective planning--Vancouver, B.C. with attracting families; Minneapolis, MN with parks; Chattanooga, TN with the riverfront; Curitiba, Brazil with public transit; Tilburg, The Netherlands with careful budget management; and Melbourne, Australia with "smart design." The wealth of topics I could take on and the directions I could follow from this, for me, are mind boggling. Literally, my mind boggled.
I'd like to start by considering Vancouver's case because I think that the aspect of families is the least appreciated of the six. Cities, it seems to me, have recently relied very heavily on attracting DINK's, perhaps in hopes of maximizing the ratio of private spending to public services. Room should be made for DINK's, of course, but the bedrock of sustainable population growth will likely be stronger with a solid base of families. The issues that will attract families, furthermore, are issues that appeal to everyone else, at least to some extent. They may not seem like much, but I would argue that they are vital to a city's success, and not only in their ability to attract families. I plan, therefore, on covering the most important, as I see them, of these issues--education, crime/safety, and cleanliness--in more depth in upcoming posts, so stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment