Dayton Most Metro

Those who work for the City of Dayton or follow city news know that the city has had a rule in its city charter since 1987 stating that anybody employed by the City of Dayton (including police and fire) must live in a primary residence within the city limits.  This rule has been fought by many employees over the past several years, and it has gone through the court system all the way to the Ohio Supreme Court, where a state ban on the practice has just today been ruled constitutional.  In the mean time, it has been discussed elsewhere that the city employs private detectives to snoop on employees they suspect are not actually living within the city limits.  And whether or not that is true, it can’t be argued that the city has paid quite a bit of money in legal fees to keep the fight going.  But what exactly is the city trying to accomplish?  Why does the city insist that this residency rule is worth so much to fight for?  What is the city afraid of?

Fellow blogger David Esrati has blogged about Dayton’s residency rule as perhaps others have, so I’m hardly the first blogger to weigh in on this.  But I believe the residency rule should be lifted and the fight to keep it should end.  Aside from whatever this means from a legal implementation stand point (it was in fact voted on by Dayton’s citizens), the residency rule is much more trouble than its worth – and I believe our city would be better off without it.

I’ve heard all the reasons for keeping the residency rule – everything from the fear of a mass city exodus by city employees if it was lifted, to the notions that city employees will do their jobs more effectively if they have a personal stake in the city (ie a primary residence), and fire and police will be more knowledgeable and empathetic about city neighborhoods if they in fact live in them.  But are these in fact rational arguments?  I say no.

If the residency rule is ultimately overturned, I’m sure many employees will immediately look to move out of the city.  Perhaps they wish to move to a better school district or have other reasons for wishing to move as maybe their personal circumstances have changed since when they first took the city job.  But I doubt the exodus will be as massive as is feared – if employees really wanted to move out of the city then they would do so and simply take a job elsewhere.  And good employees will typically give 100% if they are doing a job they enjoy and working for management they believe in; whether they actually live in the city or not is irrelevant.

Lifting the residency rule would also have tremendous benefits.  Imagine increasing the size of the talent pool from which to choose city employees – does anybody not think this would be a benefit to our city?  I’d rather hire a stellar candidate who lives in Oakwood or Kettering instead of having to settle on a mediocre employee whose best qualification is being a city resident.  I’m not at all suggesting that all of our city staff are mediocre (I happen to know some very talented city staffers, and our fire and police are already top notch), but even if we only replaced city staff through attrition we’d still be better off if we had the whole region as a talent pool to choose from.

Finally, the residency rule is simply another negative reinforcement that sends a terrible message and makes Dayton seem like a desperate and stifling organization to work for.  Instead of yet more fighting on the part of the city to keep the residency rule intact (next step – U.S. Supreme Court?), I expect more out of our city’s leadership.  While we’d lose some employees as city residents, we’d also have a chance to gain new residents as employees from other parts of the region who might ultimately choose to move INTO the city as they become more involved through their employment in it.  That may sound idealistic, but isn’t that the kind of thinking we need to move our city forward?

(Image credit: Blue Day Media)

Read more discussion about this topic at the DMM Forum – and join the conversation

I’ve noticed with all of the news articles, opinion pieces and various commentary – everybody refers to this as “NCR relocating to Atlanta”.  Atlanta this, Atlanta that.  Yes, there is a lesson to be learned here for Dayton and it is exactly what I wrote about in my previous post – the need for the entire Dayton region to once and for all give up on all the parochialistic attitudes and come together a one single region – first in attitude, but ultimately in organization and government.

NCR is not moving to Atlanta; its new headquarters will be in Duluth, GA which is not only 30 miles away from the city of Atlanta, it is in a different county (Gwinnett).  NCR had already moved customer service operations to Peachtree, GA – 35 miles southwest of Atlanta in yet another county.  Additionally, Georgia is building a brand new manufacturing facility for NCR that will employ 870 people in Columbus, GA – which is over 100 miles away from Atlanta and actually closer to Montgomery, AL.  But despite these distances from the center city, the story is “NCR Moves to Atlanta.”

Distance-wise, this would roughly be the equivalent of a corporation locating its headquarters in Springfield, OH, moving its customer service office to Mason, OH and opening a manufacturing plant in Findlay, OH (with commute times being much longer in GA).  But given this Ohio equivalent example, does anybody think that this would be called a win for Dayton, Ohio?  Does anybody think that the name “Dayton” would even be mentioned?

Granted, it is unfair to compare Georgia to Ohio since Georgia truly has one single major city that everything else revolves around while Ohio has several large and medium-sized urban centers that are relatively close to one another.  Not to mention that Atlanta is the largest metro region in the entire southeast and dwarfs Ohio’s largest metro regions, let alone smaller Dayton… we may be talking apples to oranges (or apples to peaches as the case may be).  But Atlanta-proper is actually not that big – if Montgomery County, Ohio was a single city it would in fact be bigger than Atlanta in terms of population.

My point is that there is much power in having a unified region, where everybody identifies themselves as Dayton – regardless of whether you are in Centerville, Oakwood, or even in a different county like Beavercreek.  While our little fiefdoms are fighting amongst themselves (see Centerville vs Washington Township, Dayton vs Beavercreek, etc.) as we shuffle businesses and residents around the same region and call that economic development, regions like Atlanta are busy competing against Chicago, New York and other global cities.  That is, when they’re not sucking businesses away from smaller and weaker cities like Dayton.

We may be a long way off from UniGov – the politics, current power structures and general attitude of the population make that nothing more than a pipe dream today.  But we must be making transformational changes as a region that move us in that direction; ultimately we will have to start looking at ourselves as the Cincinnati/Dayton/Columbus region if we are to ever compete globally.  Local leaders are beginning to discuss this more – if you want to participate in the discussion or hear more about the ideas currently being discussed, attend the Economic Development Forum – Montgomery County event being hosted by the Dayton Business Journal on Tuesday June 23, 2009 at Sinclair Community College (click the link for registration details).  Or, join the on-going discussions on this topic right here on the DaytonMostMetro.com Forum, under Regionalism.

As if being listed as a top-ten dying city last year wasn’t enough of a wake-up call, Dayton’s largest and most famous home-grown company NCR has announced its relocation to Atlanta and sent shock waves throughout the region and up to the state capital. While various city, regional and state leaders spent their media time complaining about NCR’s unwillingness to return phone calls or come to the table, they might have inspired more confidence in our community with the following:

“We’d like to thank NCR for the 125 years they’ve been an integral part of the Dayton community. We appreciate the support you’ve shown to our local arts & culture groups and other non-profit organizations over the years, and we will always cherish the rich history that your company has had with Dayton going back to the days of John Patterson. NCR’s departure comes as no surprise to those of us who have been trying to work with the company over the past several months to no avail, and we regret their decision to unceremoniously abandon Dayton. But starting this very minute we will look forward to new opportunities with emerging and growing businesses and remain committed to all of those companies that actually wish to stay and grow in the Dayton Region. We will not dwell on what has been lost, but we will take advantage of this opportunity to make the bold changes necessary that will transform our city and region.”

“Dayton’s past represents the era of a few mega corporations that the community relied on in every facet of life, but Dayton’s future represents a brand new environment created to attract and nurture thousands of small and medium-sized businesses that are able to innovate, grow and retain top talent. This new reality will require a completely new way we operate government at the local, regional and state levels, and we are dedicated to making the hard decisions that will get us to where we need to be.”

Those are simply words, and words alone will not push our community forward – bold action is required. It seems as though NCR’s ‘sudden’ departure has struck quite a nerve at the highest levels in state government, and it is time to capitalize on the attention we now have from the state. Here are some things I would focus on if I was leading the charge:

Transform Tax Structure
We must completely overhaul our antiquated tax structure that may have made sense decades ago but is now the single largest force against our region’s ability to work together. The current system forces cities to rely on income tax, the counties to rely on sales tax and townships to rely on property tax. Added to a political climate which pits rural and suburban communities against urban cities, it is no wonder our region is so divided. Change must happen at the state level in order to implement a more equitable tax structure that encourages communities to work together rather than compete against one another.

Consolidate, Cut, Streamline, Simplify
We must consolidate similar organizations when at all possible, cut every duplicate administrative role possible and streamline our remaining organizations to become as efficient as possible – thereby freeing up more resources that can be invested in our communities and businesses. It is never easy to kill positions, but businesses do it every day in order to survive – we must do it if we are to survive as a region. In addition to cost savings, simplifying our system gives us a better opportunity to speak to businesses with one regional voice – an ability we’ve paid a significant price for lacking all of this time.

Change the Culture
We must finally transform ourselves away from a series of individual counties and communities competing with one another and into a single region that values the unique identities of our individual communities but that works closely together to ensure that every investment and development decision is made to maximize the benefit to the entire region. Only when the diversity of choices our region offers both residents and businesses alike is considered an asset rather than an “us vs them” argument will we become a unified region. And only when we become a unified region will we become attractive to outside business and investment. Culture change is not easy, but it can happen with true leadership and an effective message to the community at-large.

Strengthen the Core
Our entire region is seeing the effects of having a weak urban core, as we are seeing our largest businesses flee to regions with strong central cities. While others debate whether or not the city’s current leadership has effectively done its job for the city, those we elect in the future must be able to inspire confidence and speak not just for the city but for the entire region – even if they do not have any official regional power outside of the city’s borders. City government must do a much better job at attracting responsible residents and businesses to the core. And at the same time, the region at large must get over its irrational attitudes and biases against the city and understand once and for all that we’re all in this together.

Change is never easy, and the type of change that will be necessary to push the Dayton Region forward will be especially difficult. It will require true leaders who are unified with their mission and message to a region that is now extremely divided. Politics must be set aside, and individual egos and personal agendas that conflict with the greater good must be fully exposed and destroyed. The question is – do we have the will to make Dayton emerge a different yet stronger city and region? Or will we simply become paralyzed by the enormous challenges we face as Dayton sinks further into irrelevance and becomes a far-away exurb to Cincinnati? What do you think?

You’re probably reading that title and asking yourself what in the world this post could be about. That is unless you are a developer or downtown building owner – then you probably know exactly where this is headed…

We have a vacancy rate of over 30% in the downtown CBD, and a walk down many streets makes it feel like much more than that. Building after building looks like they’ve been abandoned for years or even decades. In some instances that is in fact the case, but why? It seems like many if not most of these buildings are in good enough shape that with a little money to clean them up they could be brought back to life by locating small businesses in them. But a “little money” turns out to be much more when it comes to bringing a building up to code, and that has in many cases been the difference between being able to bring a building back to life (and bring some jobs back to the core) and making it impossible to do anything and thus continuing our vacancy disaster.

Just as in any city, there are various zoning and building codes that must be met here in Dayton to ensure public safety and use that is proper for the surrounding community. Dayton recently updated its zoning codes as far as what types of uses are permitted in each district in the city, and from my layman’s point of view Dayton’s new zoning codes are actually very good. The downtown district is very flexible in that it allows residential and commercial, even in the same space, which is conducive to the whole urban work-live-play mantra. I also like the fact that surface parking lots are no longer permitted anywhere downtown, which shows forward-thinking on the part of the planners who wrote it. But then there are the individual building codes that must be met, and this is where many have run into trouble and simply given up.

Now, I will say that many building codes are completely reasonable and we should be glad they exist as they keep us safe and ensure that everybody including the handicapped have access.  And many of these building codes such as ADA are dictated at the state or federal level.  But have we made these codes so restrictive that we’ve destroyed any good chance of bringing our long-vacant downtown buildings back to life?  Is there any room for some flexibility and compromises that still ensure proper safety AND make it cost-effective to redevelop and re-inhabit our downtown buildings?

Of all of the various things a building must have these days in order to be compliant, it appears that there are three that are usually the deal-breakers:  restrooms, elevators and fire-suppression sprinkler systems.  Restrooms are an obvious need for almost any building use so that one sounds a bit silly – until you realize that because of ADA standards, restrooms must have minimum sizes and dimensions in order to accommodate a wheelchair.  Well that sounds fair enough for new construction, but I’ll bet most of our vacant downtown buildings and units that have existing working restrooms do not meet today’s standards.  A large business that is filling 30,000 square feet or more usually doesn’t have a problem paying to have new restrooms installed, but those are also the businesses that find much of our downtown space obsolete for today’s business needs.  Meanwhile there are probably many small businesses that would love to locate in some of the smaller spaces but are simply unable to foot the bill for new restrooms, while building owners are unable to do so as well for the small lease amount that a small business will likely be paying.  How about elevators – seems like if a building never had an elevator (or instead had one of those very cool old freight elevators), then it should simply be exempt.  Hell, we would probably help the obesity problem if we forced folks to take the stairs anyway (as I try to do as often as I can from my fourth-floor condo).  But then it wouldn’t be accessible to the handicapped, and if restrooms are too expensive then just forget the elevator – it just ain’t gonna happen.  Finally, the fire-suppression sprinkler system – no, they didn’t have those either when most of these vacant buildings were built, and like the others don’t come cheap.

Why is this such a problem in Dayton and not other larger urban cities?  I’d guess it is how cheap leases go for here.  In more successful cities, lease rates are much more expensive – over $100 per square foot in places like N.Y.C.  and San Francisco.  With that kind of rental income, building owners can afford to bring their buildings up to code.  But here in Dayton we’re looking at lease rates of $5-$15 per square foot, and new restrooms, elevators and sprinkler systems aren’t likely to be much cheaper here than in N.Y. C. or San Francisco.  Hmm, perhaps our “low cost of living” isn’t such a good thing after all – at least when it comes to vacant downtown buildings.

What is the solution?  I suppose we could just say to hell with handicapped folks and just make downtown a handicapped-free zone, but that would ensure Dayton’s position on Forbes list of the Top Ten Asshole Cities.  Perhaps we could be a bit more flexible when it comes to granting variances (and I really have no idea how flexible we currently are).  But ideally we should strive for compliance AND making things cost effective for small businesses and building owners to be in compliance.  So this is my proposal:  What if the city simply passed a policy that says that for the next five years, a significant percentage (all?) of economic development money that might otherwise go toward tax incentives to larger businesses to locate in the city (ie corporate welfare) or toward tearing down a bunch of buildings in hopes that a developer will happen along and develop something there, went instead into dozens (or even hundreds) of much smaller projects that focused on bringing most of our downtown buildings back into compliance so that they were move-in ready for small businesses.  We could set up a sort-of competition among building owners for access to this pool of money by which they would have to do the leg work of submitting plans, with an independent committee determining which ones get the green-light based on predetermined criteria to ensure we get the biggest bang for the buck.

This solution would bring vibrancy back to the core, not to mention businesses, jobs and the income tax that comes with them.  Sure, many of these small businesses will be small potatoes, especially service-type businesses like restaurants and small retail.  But these are what will make our downtown vibrant and alive again, and probably a much better way to attract those larger businesses than with huge tax incentives that only temporarily lure them here until they find a better tax incentive somewhere else.

This is a simple idea that obviously needs many details to be ironed out, but it is still an idea – and a fresh one at that.  And these days, it is going to be new and fresh ideas that push our city forward, because the old line of thinking is simply not going to cut it anymore.

“What about the public schools?” This is a question I’ve heard time and time again, whether I’m casually talking to another person or giving a talk to a large group about why they should be aware of the interesting things happening in the urban core of Dayton, efforts to make our city vibrant again and why they should care. It is almost as if many people in this region refuse to give the city a second thought unless somehow the pubic school problems are miraculously solved (without their help, of course). But is this even a legitimate show-stopping question? I say no, it isn’t – and for many it is in fact completely irrelevant.

In terms of this discussion there are four main demographic groups that make up the total housing market for both rental and ownership: 20-something and older singles, married but childless couples, families with young or school-age children and empty nesters. When it comes to the public school question, here is the breakdown (note I have no stats backing my claims, only common sense):

20-Something/Older Singles with No Kids – this demographic is the sweet spot when it comes to attracting urban residents. While the younger of this group may not have as much disposable income as older generations, there are increasingly more and more singles in their late 20’s and 30’s who do have significant disposable income (and incidentally prefer urban living). More importantly, this single demographic spends a much higher percentage of their disposable income on the very amenities that make for a vibrant downtown – coffee shops, bars, restaurants, movies, non-traditional theater, etc. And most importantly – this group couldn’t care less about public schools because they have no kids!

Married with No Kids – same as the singles in terms of disposable income and where it is spent, but depending on future plans may be more concerned with schools. And if they have already been living urban and prefer that lifestyle then they’ll strongly consider all choices and alternatives (private schools, etc.) before giving in and moving to the burbs, especially if they are in higher income brackets.

Families with Children – Yes, this is the ONE demographic that has legitimate concerns about public schools, so give this demographic to the suburbs unless they are in the tiny minority that has already been living urban and figured out educational alternatives. And that is ok, because this demographic is also the least likely to be spending much in the local economy when it comes to urban amenities, as they are probably spending much more time at home with the kids. This isn’t to say that this demographic should be shunned or ignored, just that it should not be a priority until the urban core has successfully attracted all of the other demographics it can.

Empty Nesters – this is the other demographic sweet spot as they have no school-aged children, will not have school-aged children anytime in the future and thus do not give a hoot about how good or bad public schools are, at least in how it affects them personally. They are the most likely to have the money to purchase expensive downtown condos as they downsize from the now-unnecessary large suburban homes. They have the disposable income and may not be frequenting the bars but will be eating out quite a bit and subscribing to the various traditional theater seasons. In fact, the places they spend money at may be quite different than the young generation and thus the urban core will have a more diverse offering of amenities (not to mention the diversity of residents).

So of all of these groups, there is only one that is more than likely to be turned off from living in the city because of the public schools. Sure, you can say that the quality of public schools effects real estate values, but that is more a Realtor-created problem than based on urban reality. Of course, most Realtors are clueless when it comes to urban markets – at least in Dayton – so that is a perception that will be tough to crack here. Just like the crime perception, but that is for another post…

Btw – I belong to the Families with Children demographic and I live in Downtown Dayton.  It will be another three years before I have to figure out the school thing, but I can tell you that my wife and I are not two parents you’ll see retreating to the suburbs because of public schools.  And while we are in the minority, we are far from being alone.

I was a participant in this past Saturday’s updayton “Young Creative’s Summit” – a workshop & town hall event meant to engage the region’s younger generation (20-40) in coming up with ideas to make our region and city more attractive to young people.  Dayton has been experiencing quite a brain drain over the years as young people flee to other cities in search of jobs and a better quality of life.  Since I’m 38, I still qualify as a “young person”, albeit just barely (big sigh!)…

You can read more about the idea behind the summit and how it started by reading my previous post or going to the updayton website.  I was in a workshop group called “Making a Difference” and unfortunately two other Dayton bloggers were in the same session – Matt from lifeindayton.com and David Esrati.  I say unfortunately because it would have been nice to have been able to read some blogger insights into some of the other sessions, but instead I’m writing about the same thing they already have.  Both lifeindayton.com and esrati.com have accurate reports of the day and I won’t waste your time duplicating them here other than to reiterate that the voting process was a total dud IMO and completely drained the energy out of the room (and I’m sure the organizers would agree).

It is always nice to see people engaged and wanting to get involved with making things better, and I applaud the summit organizers and participants for that.  But the whole process of getting a group together to come up with ideas and then getting people to somehow implement those ideas on a grassroots level (usually with little or no money) is getting worn out in this town.  It is ironic that the updayton group was itself spawned from the Creative Region Initiative (yet another effort I was involved with) where people got together to come up with ideas that they would then try to implement over the next year.

I really thought the idea with the summit was to lobby the leadership in this region with the things young people find important so that those leaders might then champion some projects that address those needs.  I knew there was going to be some kind of sign-up for people to get involved, but other than having a hand full of city leaders on hand I did not see how they fit into it other than to listen.  And notice I said city leaders because there was not a single suburban or regional leader at the summit – something that was noticed by many people I’ve talked to since.  As much as our city leaders are criticized these days I give them credit for being there while none of their regional peers decided it was worth their effort.

Grassroots projects can be valuable and effective, but I just don’t think the best way to develop them is by dot-sticker-committees.  They need champions who are passionate, knowledgble and dedicated to an idea who organize others who share that passion, not committees made up of total strangers voting on spontaneous ideas after minimal discussion.  What would be nice to see is a community leader or two (government, political, organization or business) actually act as a champion for some of the many ideas that have been generated by the community and help identify the resources to actually make them happen.  Because ideas without champions or resources are just that – ideas.  We have plenty of ideas in this town, but what we are missing is the leadership to make these ideas come to life.  Summit organizers say that this is only the beginning, so I challenge those leaders that were at the summit – what initiatives that matter to young people are YOU planning on being champions for?

(photos by Andy Snow)

UPDATE:

Here are links to posts from other Dayton bloggers – most of whom were at the summit:

• Esrati
• It’s Great ‘n Dayton
• Dayton Daily Views
• Daytonology

Statistics can be very useful, yet many times they can be completely unreliable – especially when trying to measure or rank something as large and complex as a city.  So when statistics are used in over-simplified lists by various media outlets to rank cities, they tend to be worth little more than the paper they’re printed on.  Case in point:  the August 2008 Forbes list of America’s Fastest Dying Cities, the February 2009 Forbes list of America’s Emptiest Cities, and the March 2009 Site Selection Magazine Governor’s Cup rankings of cities with the most new or expanded capital projects (ie best place to locate your business).  Dayton was at or near the top of both lists – huh?

These lists are silly.  First of all, when was the last time you heard of a city that “died”?  Of course Dayton is struggling in many aspects, but the city and region have many strengths that would prevent it from ever “dying”.  The city is known to have a very strong arts & culture scene among similar-sized cities.  The region has some of the best suburban public schools in the state.  And Ohio’s largest single employer, WPAFB, is here and not likely to disappear anytime soon.  So while Dayton has seen better days, it is not dying – and it could even be poised for an upswing.

At the same time, the Dayton Region has been getting pounded with bad economic news over the past few years.  GM and Delphi were once the area’s largest private employers, and now they are gone.  Mead turned into MeadWestvaco and moved to Connecticut.  The manufacturing sector was once the region’s powerhouse; it is now simply a shell of its former self.  In fact, Dayton is the worst city in the country in terms of job losses – losing jobs for 32 straight quarters.  But nevermind, because Site Selection Magazine says Dayton is tops for business among second-tier cities (in terms of attracting economic-development expansion projects).  Could Dayton be the worst job-loss city in the country and at the same time the best economic-development expansion city in the country?  Don’t get too excited – Toledo, Youngstown and Detroit were near the top as well.

And speaking of lists, don’t even get me started about the “Creative Class Index”…

The point is, none of these “lists” – no matter good or bad – can be taken all that seriously.  There is no such thing as a city ranking that offers a true picture of a city that is meaningful to everybody.  Things are good here for some and bad here for others – same as every single city on the planet.  Honestly, the magazines that publish these lists have figured out that by doing so they end up as a news story in every newspaper and television news broadcast in every city that is included on the list… can you say “free advertising”?  But still, these lists do seem to have an impact on the attitudes of the people who live here, and potentially on those looking to move or invest here.  So let’s hope that the next list Dayton finds itself near the top of is a “most improved city” list – because it will be positive AND believable.

I’ve lived in Downtown Dayton for almost five and a half years, and since then I’ve seen a number of ups and downs here in the urban core.   Back in 2003 the city was full of buzz as Fifth Third Field, Riverscape and the Schuster Performing Arts Center were fairly new and downtown housing seemed to be gaining momentum.  Shortly afterwards, downtown development slowed to a crawl.  My faith in this city has gone up and down like a roller coaster, and I’ve often questioned whether or not the urban core of Dayton would ever realize the enormous potential I’ve always seen. However, this has not stopped my continued involvement in various initiatives to make things better, and the latest effort I’m involved with has given a boost to my faith in the future of Downtown Dayton.

The “Greater Downtown Dayton Plan” is a very ambitious initiative that was started by Dr. Mike Ervin last year.  Mike has managed to bring together many of the city’s most prominent business leaders, institutional leaders and government leaders in an effort to completely transform Downtown Dayton in a way this city has never seen before.  Ego’s, politics and turf-protection have been set aside in favor of a sense of urgency and a desire to do what is best for the urban core.  And while government leaders play an important part in the plan (as they should), they are not the ones driving it – a fact that should give pause to naysayers who have lost faith in our city government’s ability to put Dayton back on the path to prosperity.  This is truly a collaborative effort between the private and public sector.  Stay tuned on how this progresses…

I have no question that the city has folks that are truly dedicated to the prosperity and growth of the downtown core – I know most of them personally.  But by ourselves it is a steep hill to climb.  That hill is made steeper by the too-common apathy towards the city that can be found in the rest of the region.  That is not to say that there aren’t suburbanites who are champions for the city (I happen to know many of them as well), but they are far and few between.  The disconnect between the suburbs and the city has a history that goes back to long before I moved here in 2001 and likely goes back to before I was born – it started with what has become known as the Great White Flight.  An entire generation exists here that can only remember downtown the way it “used to be”, and it is followed by an entire generation that has no connection at all to downtown – probably because they grew up surrounded by an anti-city attitude from their parents.  It is thus of little surprise that many downtown advocates I know are from other cities – myself included.

There are many other reasons for the disconnect between suburbanites and the urban core.  This region has a strong conservative culture that does not tend to value an urban culture; the word “urban” itself has a “different from us” meaning in many ways including racial and socio-economic.  The city has the highest concentration of poverty in the region – a reason for upward-mobile people to stay away even though there is a small concentration of affluent folks who live in downtown.  The public school system is obviously struggling.  There is a very common belief throughout the region that there is a serious lack of leadership in the city, whether it is because of misplaced priorities or simply incompetence.   And with the younger generation, it seems that the appreciation of this city’s history and heritage is almost non-existent.

Not all is lost, since a big problem I’ve always seen is a simple lack of information.  Suburbanites that do not spend much time in the city often have no idea what is happening in the city that might appeal to them.  Better marketing and outreach could go a long way in solving that, especially with some help with the media who have traditionally been seen as an enemy to the urban core with their constant barrage of negative news centered around crime.  But perhaps there is something even more important than better marketing or media coverage, and that is by simply getting our grassroots story told.  People love the underdog story, especially when it includes very dedicated people that everybody can identify with.  I hope to continue telling that story here on DMM, and possibly via more traditional media formats.  And just like with the Greater Downtown Dayton Plan – stay tuned…

Some great ideas have been generated from the DMM forum discussion about the proposed Dayton streetcar project and we wanted to summarize the discussions for those who want a brief overview.  Please keep the ideas flowing on the forum… we will update these posts with the new ideas on a regular basis.

A lot of debate has ensued as to whether or not a street car system should be a priority in the Greater Downtown Dayton Plan. The streetcar system being proposed would initially connect University of Dayton and Brown Street to the Central Business District.  An overview of the plan appeared in a September, 2008 DDN article.  Following are excerpts from that article:

Wednesday, September 03, 2008

The co-chair of a task force seeking to establish a streetcar loop between downtown Dayton and the University of Dayton area remains optimistic despite a consultant’s study that set a high price tag for the project.

Last year, Greater Dayton Regional Transit Authority officials estimated the 4-mile loop could be built for about $40 million and would cost about $700,000 a year to run.

Consultant Parsons Brinckerhoff looked at other streetcar systems and estimated the system would cost $125 million to build and $2 million a year to operate.

Mike Ervin, who co-chairs the streetcar task force with GDRTA Executive Director Mark Donaghy, said the consultant’s study is important in that it gives streetcar proponents a clear picture of the challenge they face.

Ervin said where streetcar lines have gone in, a sense of excitement and renewal has followed. Retail, restaurant and entertainment venues tend to spring up close to the tracks, which in turn stimulates investment in other properties.

Ervin said streetcars can make living in an urban center more attractive because people can hop on and off a streetcar to get around. That reduces the need for cars and parking.

“Think of what it could mean to an area like South Park,” Ervin said. “For Dayton, this could be one of the biggest economic boosts the city has had ever.”

The headways (wait time between trains) would be 10 minutes.

The city put this project in the list of top 15 projects for Dayton that was presented in Washington, DC for consideration in the economic stimulous package.

Some concerns that were noted on the forum include the following:

• Streetcars should be a practical alternative to certain bus routes or should fill a need for transportation that buses can’t.  If it is more focused on tourism, people may only ride it once.
• Our downtown is really small and walkable… that money could be better used elsewhere.
• It seems redundant when we have an adequate public transportation system in place already
• The idea of using it as an economic development driver for downtown would be not as effective as generally using the money to promote more residential developments downtown
• We need to have a critical mass of people downtown to warrant a streetcar system, and that does not yet exist.

Supporters had the following to say:

• New cost estimates are being determined and the initial cost assessment for the initial route is $48 million
• The proposed plan would be the first route – continuing with the plan to include connecting WPAFB and WSU would really make it a valuable proposition.  Connecting Sinclair to the initial route would also make a lot of sense.
• A street car from Brown Street to Downtown is a lot more simple than navigating the bus system and would be more frequently used by students and others
• Cities such as Portland Oregon have seen significant residential and retail development around street car stations.  The proposal is more about economic development than moving people.
• Urban decline is directly linked to cities abandoning their streetcars for the automobile.  Rebuilding the streetcar systems likely would reinvigorate urban development.
• The green/environmental aspects of a street car should also be considered, as well as the impact on parking

It was noted that rail connecting Dayton, Cinci and Columbus would be very beneficial too.   Some conversation ensued about the 3-C passenger rail proposals.  It was noted that the cost for this is $20 million per mile vs. $10 million per mile for light rail/street cars.  The construction process for some streetcar projects have been designed to minimize disruption to street businesses by completing a city block of tracks each week.

Some conversation ensued about using electric buses with a street car look (but not requiring tracks) gained some traction as an alternative as well.

Some great ideas have been generated from the DMM forum and we wanted to summarize the discussions for those who want a brief overview.  Please keep the ideas flowing on the forum… we will update these posts with the new ideas on a regular basis.

Suggested Improvements:

1. Have garages contract with businesses for parking instead of downtown workers
   • Pre-tax payroll deductions benefit the workers
   • Reduced overhead for garage owners (payment collections and sales efforts)
2. More readily available information regarding parking garage vacancies
   • Enhance the EasyParkDowntown website with # of spots available for monthly parking per garage
   • Improve the EasyParkDowntown user interface
   • Create and pass out brochures regarding parking options during major events
3. Create a parking pass system that can be used a meters to make it easier for people to park or a single permit system that could be used at all garages.
4. Work with condos/apartments that don’t have on-site parking to buy blocks of parking for residents (i.e. Eva Feldman)
5. Create new, consistent signage for parking garages throughout the city to facilitate finding parking more easily when you are in your car.  It was noted that this idea was initially discussed in 2004 but did not come to fruition.  A link to Fort Worth parking signage was posted.  Make sure it is obvious which garages are public vs. private
6. Make the parking garages cool and attractive – colorful/neon lighting, music piped in, public art dressing the walls (or even graffiti art) similar to the “Parking is Fun” garage in Memphis, TN.  Lots of links to examples included and discussion regarding promoting graffiti art in public spaces.
7. Put roof-top bar or something on top of the transportation garage because of the beautiful views from up there.
8. Add angled parking to the streets instead of parallel parking.  Discussion ensued regarding safety and the fact that our streets are wide enough to accommodate.

Imagine our Oregon District if it looked like this on the weekends:

Photos:  Winterthur, Switzerland, Copenhagen, Denmark, Vancouver, BC – Canada

Across the country cities are figuring out what has already been succeeding in cities across the world for some time now – closing downtown streets to automobile traffic – either temporarily or permanently.  Vancouver, British Columbia – Canada is known as one of these uber-progressive cities that have organized "Car-Free Days" on various streets in and around their downtown.  The following video from Streetfilms.org does a good job at showing just how well this concept is being received:

And this brings me to Dayton – specifically Fifth Street in the Oregon District.  Ever since I moved here I’ve always thought that Fifth Street should be closed to automobile traffic at least on the weekends.  I can envision a Fifth Street packed with pedestrians, street performers, street vendors & even dining room extensions from Cafe Boulevard, Pacchia & Trolley Stop.  And just imagine an outdoor stage on what is now the parking lot at Fifth and Pine – with local bands entertaining crowds of people strolling along Fifth Street.  It isn’t that hard to imagine all of this, afterall – Fifth Street IS closed one night a year for the Oregon District HauntFest in October.

Obstacles to this idea are typical traffic engineer small-mindedness that insists that Fifth Street is a major throughway, though Fourth Street can handle additional traffic very easily.  Others may say that people like to "cruise" Fifth Street, but folks – it is 2008, not 1955.  Finally, there is the ongoing issue of parking – but if you click on the map below you will see that my proposition would only take away the handful of street parking spots that currently exist on Fifth Street.

So what do you think?  What other obstacles do you see to this idea?  And do you think that city leadership could be convinced to explore this kind of thing?

Feel free to comment below, or join the conversation in our DMM Forum!