Recently, the American Institute of Architects released a report on diversity in architecture. The results show that while both women and people of colour remain underrepresented, gender issues are particularly acute. In support, Archdaily wrote about how greater gender equity and workforce diversity benefits a firm’s triple bottom line. Work-life balance, flexibility and working hours were key challenges reported. Addressing these concerns is likely to have one more benefit: a field more reflective and responsive to the society it serves.
The appeal of cities among millennials is well-documented, and even celebrated. But is change in the air? As CityLab writes, demographics and aging could mean that millennial population growth in cities tapers off. This shift need not lead to collapse however. By recognizing that the urban boom may not last forever, making cities more family friendly, building a broader range of housing, and continuing to do what works, cities can evolve accordingly.
If sustainability action plans and eco-districts were three legged stools, most would fall over. Environmental and economic sustainability are typically well-accounted for in these plans, but as San Diego UrbDeZine writes, social sustainability, is often an afterthought. However, marginalized communities face a high share of environmental degradation and as poverty sprawls outwards, it will be impossible to successfully address environmental sustainability without a legitimate social component. Looking forward, city-makers that can create three strong sustainability legs will have lucrative prospects, and a stool for cities to sit on.
A new golden age of cities has ushered in an era of intensification and redevelopment in urban centres. As a result, many cities are enjoying re-found affluence, but are also faced with growing affordability issues, something underlined in a recent Metropolis Magazine article. In many ways, the high societal cost of exclusion mirrors the burden that sprawl placed on public finances. As this cost becomes clear, triple-win projects that benefit residents, the city-region, and private actors are well-positioned for success.
Canada’s infrastructure deficit is estimated to be $123 billion and growing. This wasn’t lost on national politicians during the recent national election, with the winning Liberal party promising $125 billion for infrastructure over the next decade. In the lead up to the new federal budget, ReNew Canada outlined what they expect to see. It includes major funding for Canada’s big cities, big investments in public transit, and consistent, long-term funding for municipalities. As Renew Canada notes, “If you build stuff, it should be a busy few years ahead.”
Digital technology is becoming ever-more pervasive and the world is increasingly urban. The simultaneous rise of these trends find us at a unique intersection in space and time. In a reflective interview with Smart Circle that ranges from urban mobility and citizen participation to cyber terrorism and the future of sharing, Carlo Ratti, director of MIT’s Senseable City Lab aims to make sense of these changes. It’s a worthwhile read, particularly for those seeking to connect the “smart” city with it’s citizens.
As sites of opportunity, cities have a long history of attracting new, poor residents. Terrible housing conditions for these newcomers was well documented and in response, governments began offering social housing. Balancing quality of life, good design and cost has remained a stubborn challenge, however. Numerous designs have been tested, with varying success. Recently, a low-rise, high-density approach has regained popularity. This typology is promoted on the basis of encouraging eyes on the street and creating well-defined spaces, while lower building heights reduce costs. While the success of this typology within current socioeconomic context(s) remains to be seen, a return to this typology suggests that architects, social advocates and policy-makers may be closing in on the (contextually-dependent) Goldilocks of social housing.