Trading your yard for a hip downtown loft?

By Amy Dain
September 8th, 2008

Urban observer Jane Jacobs argued that the task for cities is not to attract the middle class, but to create it. That is what American cities did for my grandparents. Born to immigrants, grandpa Albie ran his own store in Central Square, Cambridge - Dain Drugs - and grandpa Mike made it in manufacturing in Cincinnati. Grandpa Mike’s father, my great-grandfather Meyer, set up shop as a tailor in Birmingham.

Cities, of course, should be places where entrepreneurs can thrive, but was Jane Jacobs right? Is it a mistake for city policymakers to focus on attracting the middle class?

At today’s forum To Be Strong Again, Bill Traynor of Lawrence Community Works echoed Jacob’s position. He said that Lowell has spent 25 years trying to lure the middle class, and that even with all of its assets including a performance center, sports teams, national park, university, charming downtown, commuter rail, hip loft space, etc., only a trickle of middle class folks has moved in, and a small amount of retail has developed to serve them. For Lawrence, he said, a housing strategy geared to attract the middle class is a sure waste.

Not everyone agrees. I’ve heard many city leaders pitch strategies for drawing new residents to their historic neighborhoods - where the houses can be had for a song (comparatively).

Tina Brooks, Undersecretary of Housing and Community Affairs, mentioned at the event that our population is aging, and that retired people will soon start trading their suburban yards for downtown flats. Is this trend for real, and should urban policymakers capitalize on it?