The ideas discussed in the last two chapters are not a panacea. The notion of making streets more livable through culture and urban greening is tied not only to local economic development but to the sentiment of the Sam Walter Foss poem my grandmother used to read to me. The idea of creating livable streets is built on concepts that have been around since the earliest cities— following the same logic that most modernist architects (such as Corbusier) would embrace— that form should support function. And I believe that the form of the street can support an intentional function of cities today to address climate change and support light forms of transport that are greener and have less emissions than driving.

Yet, at the same time, this future is not one that everyone has or will have. As a part of my long-standing research on walkability and housing choice, I have found that, while people may want to live in these of places where they can engage in green travel, they may not be able to. Neighborhoods that are less walkable and bikeable are also significantly more likely to be poor and minority. I have also observed a trend of minority flight to the suburbs, where the poor, low income and minority populations have concentrated in more auto-centric locations— leading to a litany of potential health and social disparities. This trend is a huge challenge to the future of streets— and it brings up the question: could someone actually afford that home “ by the side of the road?”

The reference to a home links to how people are moving around urban areas to find housing. These migration trends are tied to many factors— but one of the most documented is the idea of flight from the urban core, often called displacement.