The New Urban Order: Dos and Don’ts of 2025 Urbanism

Yes, a cultural vibe shift is underway. And now the 180-degree turns, whether in government, the private sector, or even among friends and family, can be pretty shocking. But if the shift is confusing to many, who is offering some clarity? What should urban policy and practice — urbanism — look like in the mid-2020s?

Here’s my take, in homage to Glamour magazine’s century of Dos and Don’ts.

DON’T: Determine transit funding based on marriage and birth rates

While the Department of Transportation’s acknowledgement of the need to create family-friendly policy is commendable, the new DOT directive to prioritize funding for communities with above-average birth rates and marriage rates is not. As a good Urban Institute piece explains:

More densely populated, more racially diverse states with more people who take transit, walk, or bike to work would receive less funding. We find that the states that perform best on these marriage and birth rate criteria are North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming, and Kansas — states with some of the highest white population shares, high rates of car access, and generally higher-than-average existing transportation funding.

It’s basic common sense to focus transportation funding on areas that need infrastructure the most, and particularly where infrastructure investments will provide the most economic benefit to the country. Basing a funding formula on social demographics makes little sense.

DO: Look to urban Utah

Utah is a state that is doing very well economically — and has high birth and marriage rates. But maybe the relationship there is more correlation than causation. The strong economy, intense focus on building housing, willingness to address climate change, growing tech sector, and access to nature all factor into the low income inequality and high quality of life in Utah’s urban regions. The Milken Economic Growth rankings came out for 2025 and Ogden, Salt Lake City, Provo and St. George all came out at or near the top of the rankings.

Des Moines, Idaho (left) and a former exhibit at the Climate Museum.

DON’T: Cut the city’s sustainability program

The city of Des Moines recently cut its sustainability office as the city is facing a $17 million budget shortfall. The office would have cost just $271,000 per year! Seems pennywise, pound foolish. Environmental advocates noted that not only is this shortsighted given the rising temperatures and risk of extreme weather events in Iowa, but might not even make financial sense — the sustainability office could have brought in grants and made cost-effective moves to save government money on energy bills that would have paid for the office and more.

DO: Create a climate museum as part of a mixed-use development

Founded in 2015, New York’s Climate Museum, which is the first in the country to address climate change exclusively, has long been without a permanent home. As part of a project on New York state-owned land, the Climate Museum will soon occupy a 24,000-square-foot space in a $1.35 billion mixed-use development near Hudson Yards. The project, which has been touted by YIMBYs because it is the first NYC building in 60 years with a residential Floor Area Ratio (FAR) over 12.0, will include more than 1,300 residential units, a hotel, commercial space, a workforce nonprofit, a gym, and more.

Steve Soboroff (left) and San Francisco Mayor Dan Lurie.

DON’T: Pay $500,000 for a 90-day fire czar

The Mayor of Los Angeles is catching heat for an arrangement that would net Chief Recovery Officer Steven Soboroff $500,000 for 90 days of work. Soboroff’s fee was to be paid entirely by philanthropy. Still, many found the fee to be unseemly, given all the fire victims in desperate need of charity support. Soboroff is now saying he’ll do it for free.

DO: Right-size the mayoral salary

Most politicians can’t afford to take a $1 salary like San Francisco’s new mayor, multimillionaire Dan Lurie. But the salary reduction is a move in the right direction. Previously, the SF mayor’s annual salary was $383,760 — the highest in the country. The city charter determines the mayor’s salary, and in a complicated twist, Lurie will have to accept the salary but donate all but $1. Still, SF might consider how to right-size the mayoral salary: Last December, all SF city departments were ordered to cut budgets by 15 percent to address an anticipated two-year, $1 billion budget deficit.

A parking lot in Menlo Park, California (left) and Boca Raton, Florida.

DON’T: Cave to NIMBYs who prevent housing on city-owned land

Menlo Park has the opportunity to turn three city-owned parking lots into affordable housing — and they might not be taking it. NIMBYs came out with their typical rationales, according to the Almanac: “Many commenters opposing the city’s plan said that they do not oppose affordable housing in principle, but that downtown is the wrong place for it.” That’s always the NIMBY case — yes housing, but elsewhere. Given the high rate of vacancy in downtown Menlo Park, it actually seems like that’s exactly the location where housing should be built. New residents would add foot traffic and make it easier for retail to flourish.

DO: Turn city-owned property into housing and public space

The City of Boca Raton is redeveloping 30 acres around its city hall. Just yesterday, the city approved a plan for 2.5 million-square-foot mixed-use development that would include more than 1,100 units of housing, a hotel, office space, retail space and new public spaces including a park near the city’s Brightline station and a pedestrian bridge over a highway.

Diana Lind is a writer and urban policy specialist. This article was also published as part of her Substack newsletter, The New Urban Order. Sign up for the newsletter here.

MORE FROM THE NEW URBAN ORDER