Next Generation Cities surely must be sustainable cities. Doug Farr offered us a challenge: To reduce VMT to 1970 levels (3900 VMT) by 2030. We must plan to drive less. Make cities – their planning and design, transit, infrastructure, and their walkability -- priority number one on the sustainability agenda. University is a microcosm of these issues. All of the problems you’ve described are problems a university president has. Commuter universities don't have the density they need to provide the kind of lifestyle on campus that want to provide. Make local changes in zoning and investment to make sustainability easier rather than harder. Re-consider infrastructure and how it can be made sustainable. Climate change is a prosperity opportunity. (“Get the pricing right.”) If we get the metrics right and pricing right, we can fend off the NIMBYs who oppose density. CEOs for Cities needs to play a role in this. Good news: The market is at work! How can we accelerate the market? Side conversation last night with Bob Weissbourd that raised another angle on this issue: The old fight between growth and equity misframes the debate. They are now aligning, since the metro areas with the most inequity do the worst, in large part because they are wasting human capital. Sustainability is all about re-use. The question is how to grow the economy while being deliberately inclusive. We can have both a competitiveness and inclusiveness agenda. What are the steps in adaptation process, the retrofitting? (Paul Krutko gave a lot of hints about this from his experience in San Jose.) Look back on how we built the car economy. Reverse engineer it. Lots of private equity available to make the 2030 challenge a reality. That is important. And how do we sell density? This remains a big question. Having a walk-to mix of uses and transit are key. An individual can make virtuous decisions, but in the out years, people can’t do it on their own. They need a city designed for less driving. We need to cite examples in many cities so people can see this at work, in particular because Doug left the description of the neighborhood unclear. Joe Cortright warned against commodification of neighborhoods and others raised questions on this, too, so we need to be clear about the definition. As Chuck Ratner said, if London had same density as Paris, it would have 3 times more people. This is a proof test that this stuff can work. Next Generation Cities will also recognize the sorting that is going on, but will attempt to find ways to bridge the differences. Bill Bishop told us that there are big differences in people’s beliefs relative to where they live→ and these differences are accelerating. Urban resurgence is contributing to the big sort and political segregation. It’s interesting to reflect on that fact in light of Johann Zietsman's comment last night about understanding the DNA of a place. Why are we sorting? In an age of abundance, people abandon those things that get them through scarcity. As countries gained economics, people lost interest in traditional politics, religions, associations. We have lost the ability to act collectively. We have re-sorted ourselves in a post-materialist way, around lifestyle and in very specialized ways. Diversity is now the norm. As we become more specialized, the middle is disappearing. This poses significant challenges to urban leaders on at least three levels: (1) It forces you to think deeply about how you really are -- your DNA – and the advantages and disadvantages that gives you. (2) It challenges all of us to ask the question, “If we don’t think the DNA of this place is working for us – the culture is closed, intolerant, not forward-thinking – are there interventions that can fix it? (3) How do we make more connections between people? How can we be really smart and deft about this? (Bill Bishop warns in his book that if you get this wrong, you just exacerbate the differences among people.) We must remake the public realm, so that we encourage face to face contact to build trust. We must make places of Innovation. And we must use Web 2.0 to connect people. We must develop the language of translation. Where are the points on the margin where translation is occurring and can occur? John Talmage pointed out that we are not counting the people or the money they represent and as a result, it’s hard to even understand where we are starting. This is a big missed opportunities for America's cities, particularly our inner cities. Ronn Richard made three important points: The value of symbolizing your future to help people see it. (Windmill in Cleveland) The need to foster cross-sector dialog (security) – the need to think in integrated ways The need to think globally. Is there a counter-trend, something else happening? Young people like diversity. In the long run, is this the advantage of cities? Cities are the places people who are part of this counter-trend head. The Next Generation must be at the table. The Power of One Connected was a very powerful theme. People have lost trust in government and most other institutions. The remedy (assuming there is one) is openness, transparency, speaking in an authentic voice, and advocating for the customer (vs. selling to the customer). As Ben Self said, come November, there will be a whole lot of people familiar with the tools and methods of a self-generating, self-organizing campaign. They will be asking, what do we do now? Advice to urban leaders from Ben: Embrace these new methods Promote citizens as leaders Get involved yourself Be prepared for new relationships Joyce Bromberg warned that as great as Web 2.0 is, face-to-face communication is needed to replenish social capital. It’s all about creating a shared mind and having a common purpose. (Very important for us to remember.) Are we building public spaces of comfort and generosity, places of inspiration, and places that are accessible and authentic? Johann Zietsmann reminded us that everything begins and ends with people. What defines creativity of the collective? 1. Identity – clear idea of who they are 2. Flexibility – how to evolve the DNA 3. Ownership – how do we develop a sense of ownership 4. Leadership and choices – new models of leadership (that we are creating)