In the Raleigh area I don’t see folks necessarily moving downtown so much as I see the Suburbs sprouting “downtown like” areas. North Hills in Raleigh is a great example as is Crabtree Valley, Southpoint in Durham, or even the new ParkWest development in Morrissville. I don’t know how this compares to more mature cities, but I’m certainly surprised at the density of development going on in this area.

Also, I feel that this article has a strong East-coast bias. I think that many of the statements don’t apply so well to other parts of the country.

Take this statement, for instance:

This future is not likely to wear well on suburban housing. Many of the inner-city neighborhoods that began their decline in the 1960s consisted of sturdily built, turn-of-the-century row houses, tough enough to withstand being broken up into apartments, and requiring relatively little upkeep. By comparison, modern suburban houses, even high-end McMansions, are cheaply built. Hollow doors and wallboard are less durable than solid-oak doors and lath-and-plaster walls.

The areas of Austin that are being gentrified are primarily single-family suburban houses of early generations–that were built just as poorly as current suburban homes.

As another example, the author refers repeatedly to the importance of good public transportation to the gentrification process or the viability of suburbs. Around here, no area currently has good public transportation. Virtually everyone who moves into the expensive downtown condos in Austin still needs a car, and a large portion of them drive to work and to do much of their shopping.

Meanwhile, all the new condos going in downtown are much more expensive and very small. Plus, you have generally less attractive Austin ISD schools to deal with. Furthermore, in many cities, like Austin, major employers are not necessarily all centered downtown.