Millennials are moving to the suburbs after all, reports Bloomberg. This has always been a strange battle between the demand side (industry) and the supply side (policy-makers). Of course the more rational answer is that it’s both, but identifying an underlying cause for why Boomers embraced sub-urbanization and why millennials haven’t (thus far) hasn’t been as straightforward as many would think. My answer has lain in the demographics – millennials are starting families much later than our parents did, so the desire for a suburban lifestyle has been more delayed than completely replaced. Additionally, it’s also been less an issue of personal choice, as the economic fallout of the Great Recession has definitely played a major role in many young people’s abilities to afford the suburban lifestyle (buying a house and a car). As the economy has recovered and young people are finding gainful employment again, they seem to be embracing the suburban lifestyle.
Japan, ever struggling with an aging population, also has to contend with rising urbanization and what it means for smaller towns and rural areas.
The NYTime wrote a piece on “co-living spaces” – communal housing units where resident apartments are limited to the basics (bedroom+bathroom?) and other spaces, such as kitchens, dining, living areas are all shared. The most interesting bit of the article, for me, though is “You won’t find much of that outside the building, which is why this Urby is essentially a vertical — and interior — neighborhood.”
I’ve often wondered about the intersection of the technology industry and urbanism – will we have a resurgence of the old “company town”? Considering many of North America’s major technology hubs are in existing cities, it might be a different evolution. In that theme, the Seattle Times wrote about Amazon’s footprint on the city.
Last week the Toronto Star published an article profiling a study from the School of Urban Planning at McGill University on Airbnb’s inventory of commercial operators running “ghost hotels” as opposed to regular people renting out empty rooms in their houses. This issue has been raised by other outlets in the past (such as this one by fivethirtyeight). This week, Fast Company profiled another study from researchers at MIT, UCLA and UNC which found that Airbnb has a not-insignificant-but-not-huge effect on area rents. However, the study also finds that the share of commercial operators in a zip-code affects the increases in rent, or “the effect of Airbnb is smaller in zipcodes with a larger share of owner-occupiers”.
Earlier this year researchers at Ryerson University found that much of Toronto’s low density neighborhoods are losing population and are, effectively, “over-housed”. The reason for this, the research finds, is that these neighborhoods are largely inhabited by empty-nesters or seniors. For younger people priced out of the housing market who are hoping to live in a low-rise home in the future, this may be a sign of hope. As residents of these units age and decide to downsize to a smaller unit, these homes would become available and add to the housing market. However, what most people often fail to note is that the retired, empty-nesters and seniors comprise a very large age-group. New research from the Altus Group shows people don’t generally downsize to an apartment or assisted-care home until well into their later years (80s, according to this report). With the current median age of the Baby-Boomers in the late 50s, there’s easily another 20 or so years before the tipping point. In the meantime, it’s could mean increasing supply or trying other, unconventional methods.
Here’s an interesting post on the “aspirational appeal” of the suburbs for African-Americans and how the demographics (and politics) of suburbs are changing. UrbanEdge did a Q&A with Pete Saunders (who wrote the blog post) to dig a little deeper into it.
I noted happily how dockless bikeshares are catching on, but are investors who are pumping money into these services doing so because they’re cycling evangelists? Maybe, but it’s more likely because bikeshare services are another way to mine data about customers.
In this week’s edition of Didn’t-We-See-This-Coming, some of Apple’s employees aren’t so peachy about the open plan concept of their new digs.
Citylab (referencing this report by the National Association of Realtors) takes another look at foreign investors (specifically Chinese investors) in the US housing market. Key point: “As a group, [Chinese buyers] surpass top buyers from Canada, the U.K., Mexico, and India. Between April 2016 and March 2017, Chinese buyers purchased more than 40,500 housing units, worth a total of $31.7 billion. That’s up from of 29,000 units and $27.3 billion the year before. Sixty-seven percent of those units were single-family homes, and 61 percent of all sales were made in suburban areas.” What’s really interesting, however, is if you look at the data in the NAR report. After Chinese buyers, the biggest foreign buyers in the residential market in the US are Canadians. Makes me wonder, if Canadian investors are willing to spend this much money on real estate in the US with the exchange rate where it is, how much are they spending on investment properties in Canada? It’ll be interesting to see how this rolls out with the new measures as well as further measures coming up (Globe and Mail did a quick take).
The bike-sharing evolution continues with more dockless bikeshares popping up. Dockless systems are really going to be the key to shifting more people to cycling. They just provide that ease and convenience; you can pick it up anywhere (provided there’s one nearby) and drop it off anywhere. I wonder how this affects the services operations when bikes need to be relocated to keep up with high-demand areas.
Bisnow has a good discussion on the role that neuroscience is playing in the design of cities. The article is an overview of the relationship between urban design and behavioral psychology. It’s been fascinating to watch psychology take over the field of economics and slowly make it’s way to other disciplines (one of the pioneers in behavioral economics, BEWorks, is hosting a “nudgethon” for public transit in Toronto in September). While the recognition is new, the notion that urban design ought to follow user experience rather than imposed design goes as far back as Jane Jacobs, who promoted an observational and ethnographic approach to urban planning in The Death and Life of Greater American Cities. Since then, planners have called for a rejection of rigid land-use models (such as euclidean zoning) and promotion of flexible uses (such as mixed-use and form-based zoning). Architect David Galbraith takes it a step further and encourages designs that allow for organic development. As he states in the post: “Cities of the industrial age looked mechanical, cities of the information age can look like fractal networks — like nature.” His solutions seem to echo how Japan manages its zoning code (for reference, in a simple video).
On the tech side, one of the really exciting things coming up mostly-behind-the-scenes is proptech (property+technology), or the intersection of real estate and technology. A classic case of this is how traditional realtors have been embracing tech, though it’s still focused on helping people find a house to purchase (I’m sure I can find more interesting examples if I actually search around). Here’s an interview from ZDnet with a data scientist from Zillow if you want a little case study. Now I’m not too familiar with Zestimate, but if anyone wants to get into the weeds, Kaggle has a competition on improving the error rate for the Zestimate.
The Toronto Star reports on renting in Toronto, where rents for housing have reached highs comparable to London and Brooklyn. The article describes how people feel like apartment hunting has become similar to dating, where everyone must now create a profile to attract landlords and get them to “swipe right”.