Time and time again, city officials ask themselves, “How can we attract more people—specifically, young creative professionals—to our blighted city centers?  How can we stop our cities from dying a slow and malaise-ridden death?”  Usually, these well-meaning officials attempt to reverse urban decay by building new stadiums, creating vast office parks, and attracting big box retailers. Unfortunately, what seems like a solution often results in unintended impacts and ultimately fails to enliven these hidden gems. Why do we insist upon repeating our mistakes? Why look to the suburbs for solutions?

One can see why city governments would consider using the suburban model of development; after all, for nearly a half century, many people have lived and worked in suburban communities.  And, in the suburbs, big box retailers and office parks are definitely put to good use. In modeling downtown revitalization after the suburban model, however, city officials are making a dangerous error in assuming that the city-dwellers they are trying to attract (via city revitalization) desire the same things that those who live in the suburbs do.

According to Richard Florida, author of The Rise of the Creative Class, professor of public policy at George Mason University, and non-resident Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, people who are attracted to cities have different needs than those who are attracted to the suburbs. They tend to be uninterested in stadiums and strip malls and value historic buildings over boxy, strip-mall influenced architecture.  But most of all, city lovers desire authentic places conducive to socializing, e.g., a diverse selection of hospitality businesses, as opposed to the chain restaurants usually spotted in suburban areas. 

Without using suburban bait to attract an urban crowd, what can city officials do to revitalize city centers?  First and foremost, they should ask themselves what vibrant cities such as San Francisco and Austin have in common. Though differing in regions, weather, and aesthetics, these cities both embrace and encourage diversity of all kinds (ethnic and cultural diversity, a diversity of ideas, a diversity of arts, etc.).

Due to its openness to diversity, San Francisco boasts a variety of ethnic neighborhoods including Chinatown, which is home to one of the United States’ largest Chinese populations; North Beach, once an enclave for Italian immigrants and still the place to go for top-notch Italian dining; and the lively Mission District, with its large Latino population. According to 2000 U.S. Census data, fifty-one percent of San Francisco’s population is comprised of a variety of non-white ethnicities while immigrants make up thirty-seven percent of its total population. Additionally, San Francisco has a sizeable gay and lesbian population, particularly in its Presidio and Castro districts. 

Austin, Texas is also a good case study of city success. A rather diverse place (with one-third of its population being members of ethnic minority groups), Austin is known for its terrific variety of hospitality businesses. Most of all, because of its dynamic live music scene (where one can enjoy a staggering variety of music, including Tejano, Jazz, Rock, and Blues), Austin has earned the title of “Music Capital of the World.”

Encouraging and attracting diversity to waning downtown areas appears to be at least part of the solution to the problem. If city governments desire the energy and sociability of cities such as Austin and San Francisco, they need to do what these cities have done—they need to attract a variety of people (various cultures, races, professions, sexual orientations, and interests) to their cities. And in order to attract a diverse crowd, cities need to encourage and facilitate the growth of businesses owned by these diverse populations. After all, what would San Francisco’s dining scene be without its diverse population?  Surely, its well-known and well-loved Chinese and Italian restaurants would fail to exist.  Austin would no longer be considered the “Music Capital of the World” without its diversity of music venues.  And without their established diversity, San Francisco and Austin would fail to attract their many creative professionals, who seek the diversity and vibrancy that these cities offer. And, without the creative professionals, these cities’ creativity-fueled economic growth would also fail to exist.

In sum, city governments need to revitalize—not suburbanize—city centers. In encouraging and embracing diversity in business, in people, and in entertainment, dying cities can gain a lot more than just another strip mall.

Future columns will focus on strategies and resources for cities to expedite the licensing and permitting process, establish mechanisms to address the specific needs of women, minority and immigrant owned businesses where language and culture may be a barrier, and facilitate better understanding of the importance of diverse foods, beverages, music and dance to a safe and vibrant hospitality zone.