Neighborhood revitalization: "Our city streets should be designed as a platform for wealth creation, not to speed traffic along."

I've italicized two sections below. The first serves as post header and states broad goals.

The second indirectly points to the disconnect amid New Albany's faux leadership cadres, in that Jeff Speck's original outline for street grid reform in New Albany addressed walking and biking infrastructure to help connect nearby neighborhoods to downtown. These were precisely the bits stripped away by the forever car-centric Team Gahan, which did not fathom what Speck was saying and will gaze upon Marohn's words as tantamount to impenetrable Swahili.

It is unfortunate that elected officials like Greg Phipps sanctioned the gutting of Speck. Maybe Phipps should be reading Strong Towns.

So, You'd Like a Neighborhood Grocery Store..., by Charles Marohn (Strong Towns)

 ... So, what would it take to make a grocery store viable in this location? If we wanted that to happen, what would it take? As with all complex systems, the answer to that question prompts an endless succession of questions, but let’s follow a couple because they illustrate how much power we have at the local level.

First, to be viable, a neighborhood grocery would need plenty of patrons. There are thousands of people living within a few blocks of this location, but I suspect that few would get their groceries here. Most would get in their car and, once driving, travel the extra mile to the big box store. So, to convert enough residents of the neighborhood into patrons, we’d need to get more people out of their cars and get them walking.

There’s a push/pull strategy to making this shift. The push is that we need to stop equating local mobility with economic development. In short, while it needs to be easy to get to the next regional center on a road, it doesn’t need to be quick and easy to take city streets to get to the edge of town. Our city streets should be designed as a platform for wealth creation, not to speed traffic along.

This push would also help with the pull strategy of making it easier to walk. Right now, we have a working definition for “walkable” as “able to be walked.” If one can physically walk from one place to another, we tend to consider that walkable, despite the relative safety, comfort or utility of the walk. If we want a grocery here to be viable, we must have a deeper commitment to walkability.

In his book, The Walkable City, architect and planner Jeff Speck explains that great streets have four essential elements. Great streets are useful, safe, comfortable and interesting.

Useful. There must be places to go that are worth going to.
Safe. People need to feel safe visiting the street.
Comfortable. Time spent in the street needs to be pleasant and enjoyable.
Interesting. The street can't be monotonous but instead needs to have some life to it.

Going to the grocery would make the walk useful, but going to an accountant’s office, a coffee shop, a bakery and then the grocery would make it even more useful. A grocery store in isolation might be a pull, but a grocery has a better change of thriving within an ecosystem of other enterprises. Converting the parking lots to other neighborhood-scaled businesses, and inviting more in throughout the neighborhood, would not only improve the tax base at little cost, it would go a long way towards creating that ecosystem.

Slowing traffic on our streets and shifting our emphasis from traffic flow to wealth creation would not only cost less, it would make walking safer and—in time—even comfortable. Not allowing more surface lots—especially when on street parking is barely used—would also help a lot, eventually making a walk interesting as well. The more people that walk, the more inviting walking will become, a self-reinforcing feedback loop.

If we really want to accelerate things, we need more people living in the neighborhood. Today, the neighborhood experiences stagnation and—along Kingwood—even decline. That makes investment more of the slum-lord version than the “convert a single-family home to a duplex” version. To make the latter a reality, we not only need to update our codes, we need underlying land values—the driver of positive redevelopment—to gradually increase.

What would make the land in this neighborhood gradually increase in value? One obvious answer is to improve the experience of living in the neighborhood and to do it in a way that gives the neighborhood some kind of exclusivity not available to the edge of town. For example, improvements to the neighborhood park add to the quality of life, but expanding parking in the park —converting greenspace to asphalt—shifts the value of those improvements from the neighborhood to the region, diluting that value in the process.

Another example would be to not build a multi-million-dollar parking ramp in the downtown but to instead focus on improving walkability between the neighborhood and the downtown. Game-changing walkability improvements can be done for pennies on the dollar compared to the cost of a ramp. Without an excess supply of parking, and with easy walking access, the land within ten blocks of downtown is going to become dramatically more valuable simply because of its exclusivity.

I could go on here and iterate like this for a long time, but there is one overriding insight that should be obvious by now: The more this neighborhood—and the more this city—evolves to function like it did prior to the Suburban Experiment, the more successful it will be ...

It's good for special interest campaign donors, but "Is a Top-Down Approach the Best Way to Revitalize Downtown?"

From the top, down -- you know, the same way water and debris washes down the side of the Summit Springs development whenever it rains.

Is a Top-Down Approach the Best Way to Revitalize Downtown? by Daniel Herriges (Strong Towns)

The scars of 1950s urban renewal still haunt many American cities. Among them is Richmond, Virginia, where a section of downtown called Navy Hill, at one time a thriving African-American community, was decimated to facilitate the construction of Interstate 95 and, eventually, make way for the Richmond Coliseum.

Now, Richmond is weighing a controversial project to reinvent Navy Hill in one fell swoop yet again, this time through a partnership with a private developer to do a billion-dollar redevelopment of 10 blocks of city-owned land. The resulting master-planned entertainment district would contain a brand-new stadium and event venue, hotel, food hall, and some 2,500 housing units—funded in large part through tax increment financing (TIF) that would commit a major portion of future property taxes not just from Navy Hill but from a surrounding area eight times as large. Local critics have questioned the expansiveness of the TIF district, and whether Richmond is mortgaging too much of its future on this project.

Strong Towns was invited to submit an op-ed to Richmond Magazine explaining why we think this is a huge gamble with a high opportunity cost—and the city should consider more incremental approaches to achieving the same ends of revitalization and increased wealth. Here it is. The below article was originally published in Richmond Magazine, and is reprinted here with permission.

There are incremental, neighborhood-oriented alternatives. They don't generate the same volume of cash for incumbent mayors; then again, maybe people living in neighborhoods should be the first objective and not fat cat donors living in Carmel.

The Incremental Alternative

A city like Richmond can do a lot to support and accelerate more organic forms of growth. At Strong Towns, a national advocacy organization that supports a model of development that allows cities to become financially strong and resilient, we call this model “Neighborhoods First.” There are hundreds of small investments in quality of life, vitality and public safety that the city could make right now, and we’ve found that it’s often these projects that deliver the highest return on investment for a local government’s scarce resources. A humble crosswalk, some street trees and a facade grant can bring up property values and begin virtuous cycles of private reinvestment. Technical assistance and workforce development efforts can give homegrown entrepreneurs a boost.

These investments are modest individually, but transformative in aggregate, because they respond to immediate needs.

You can learn more here: Neighborhoods First: A low risk, high return strategy for building a strong town. Note that Brainerd, Minnesota is the home town of Strong Towns founder Charles Marohn.

Cities across the country are starting to realize that the “big project” approach takes up too much staff time, wastes too much political energy and distracts too much from the basic needs of existing neighborhoods. Risky, low returning projects too often become expensive boondoggles that haunt a community for decades. Public officials everywhere are desperately seeking an alternative.

Neighborhoods First; A low risk, high return strategy for a better Brainerd is an example of how a community can grow stronger by making small, incremental investments over time. By observing how neighbors live their lives, by asking them where their daily struggles are, by getting out on the street and discovering what is actually going on, any local government can discern what their community’s pressing needs are. These projects are the high return investments and they are all around us.

As an example, think back to Mayor Jeff Gahan's secession from the NA-FC Parks Department, and our subsequent TIF-impelled expenditure of somewhere between $18 and $25 million to construct bright, shiny, big-ticket, park-like objects. At the time many of us offered the alternative of using half (or less) of the money to scatter smaller park areas throughout the city's neighborhoods, in places where potential users could walk and ride bikes and not be compelled to rely on their cars to reach centralized facilities.

But the parks boondoggle obviously had been pre-planned, even if there was no discussion of it during Gahan's first campaign for mayor. A better way would have been to involve the community in the plan.

But Gahan's not a listener, is he?

Few autocrats are.

UNDERSTANDING PARKS

Too much is expected of city parks. Far from transforming any essential quality in their surroundings, far from automatically uplifting their neighborhoods, neighborhood parks themselves are directly and drastically affected by the way the neighborhood acts upon them.
- Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities

There is a common belief that a city park is necessary to compensate for the lack of open space urban residents have when compared to those that live on the outskirts of town. This tragic misunderstanding of the role of an urban park has caused us to overlook a prime asset in Northeast Brainerd.

A good park radiates value to the surrounding neighborhood in the same way the sun radiates heat; the closer you are, the more value the park should add. While New York City’s Central Park would be extremely valuable if it were developed, the immense value of Manhattan and the other boroughs adjacent to it would suffer if the park become a housing subdivision. The location and design of the park makes the city valuable.

At the same time, it is the city that makes the parkland valuable. If we took a piece of land in rural Iowa and re-created Central Park, it would not have any real value.

It takes people using the park to build and create the value that is then reflected back to the neighborhood. A lifeless park is the sign of a lifeless neighborhood. Fixing what is wrong with Mill Park is critical, but doing so will not restore Northeast Brainerd to prosperity. The two need to happen together.

An urban park is not compensation for a neighborhood’s shortcomings. It is a reflection of a neighborhood’s value and worth and, as such, is the most revealing barometer of success or failure the city has.

*Recomended reading: The quote from Jane Jacobs above is Chapter 5 of the book, which is all about urban parks.

Chromatic Homes: "How the simple act of painting an ornate structure in bright or bold colors can inspire, empower, sustain and enlighten an entire community."

A Courier-Journal article sets the table.

Want to revitalize Louisville? Paint the town red. Or yellow. Or blue.

So says John Gilderbloom in his new book, “Chromatic Homes: The Joy of Color in Historic Places," (University Press of Kentucky, $24.95).

The director of the University of Louisville’s Center for Sustainable Urban Neighborhoods asks readers, “Can chromatic homes be the secret sauce for neighborhood and community regeneration?”

Do people still give books as Christmas presents?

CHROMATIC HOMES: The Joy of Color in Historic Places

John I. “Hans” Gilderbloom explores and celebrates the appeal of these captivating houses in Chromatic Homes: The Joy of Color in Historic Places. Highlighted in gorgeous detail are the relevance of the homes’ styles and colors as well as their history—many believed to have been around for decades in American cities such as Louisville, Cincinnati, San Francisco, New Orleans, and Miami, and around for centuries in far-flung places such as Havana, Cuba, Venice, Italy, and Moscow, Russia.

Filled with 182 engaging and eye-catching photos of homes all across the nation and the world, Chromatic Homes perfectly illustrates how the simple act of painting an ornate structure in bright or bold colors can inspire, empower, sustain and enlighten an entire community. Chromatic Homes creates prosperity, pride, and joy for the homeowner and neighborhood.

Published by the University Press of Kentucky.

Hannegan Roseberry's wonderful column on two-way streets: "What are we waiting for?"

I had a rejoinder ...

Let's ask the old white guys: Revisiting last Saturday's dismal "spotlight" on street reconversion.

... but the accumulated weariness at being compelled to rebut the same tired arguments again and again plainly got to me.

Thanks, Hannegan. Thanks for having the patience to tackle their idiocy point by point. Thanks for standing tall on behalf of the neighborhood.

Just plain thanks. We needed this.

GUEST COLUMN: New Albany deserves two-way streets, by Hannegan Beardsley Roseberry (Morrissongs)

I am writing with regards to the recent story titled “As Cities Convert to One-Way Streets, is New Albany Next?” As a resident of Spring Street who lives in the epicenter of this debate, I am baffled as to how this article was written without talking to a single resident of the neighborhoods affected. To add to my dismay, the article took a negative tone toward two-way street conversion, despite the national research, statistics, and specific experiences of other cities pointing to the contrary. Of the six people quoted in the article — all business owners and/or politicians — four people were opposed to the idea, one was in support, and one was up for “whatever is best.” I feel the voices of the residents affected should have been heard.

Long read: "How Cincinnati Salvaged the Nation’s Most Dangerous Neighborhood."

The good, the bad and the ugly. But: Brewery District.

How Cincinnati Salvaged the Nation’s Most Dangerous Neighborhood, by Colin Woodard (Politico Magazine)

... It’s a transformation that’s happened in a blink of an eye, turning a neighborhood that in 2009 topped Compton in Los Angeles for the “most dangerous” title into something that looks and feels like Greenwich Village. And it didn’t happen by accident. Virtually everything that’s occurred in Over-the-Rhine—from the placement of the trees in the park to the curation of ground floor businesses—has been meticulously planned and engineered by a single, corporate-funded and decidedly non-governmental entity.

"What Should Become of America’s Slums?"

It's hard to find just one paragraph summarizing this article, but here goes.

“We take both approaches. There’s the mobility model, which gets people out of concentrated poverty, and there’s the redevelopment model, which tries to make [poor] neighborhoods better,” he told me. “We do both of those things. They both can work.”

My gut feeling is that listening comes first. I can't speak for Austin, but in New Albany, there has not been a dialogue, and without a dialogue, no one is listening.

What Should Become of America’s Slums?, by Alana Semuels (City Lab)

Jeff Gahan cannot grasp that walking is the secret ingredient.

He's done nothing to help this woman cross the interstate we call Spring.

Tucked safely away in this 3rd Floor cloister, Mayor Jeff Gahan likes to think that he is advocating for walkability. To prove it, he has spent millions of dollars to create bricks 'n' mortar city parks situated in parts of town inconvenient for walking or biking.

In short, he has created expensive, "I did it" plaque-ready, big ticket showpiece units unconnected with each other, and accessible mostly by automobile.

Which defeats the purpose of promoting walking, which is to repeat that until Gahan has dome something, he's done absolutely nothing ... but you can bet the plaques have been ordered, probably from a factory in China.

Walking: The Secret Ingredient for Health, Wealth, and More Exciting Neighborhoods, by Jay Walljasper (Yes Magazine)

It's been called "America's untrendiest trend." The evidence that millions of people are finally walking again is as solid as the ground beneath our feet.

I've chosen to reprise Walljasper's "solutions" here, and don't think for a moment that they're somehow not applicable in a city like ours. This isn't a New York thing. It's an Everywhere thing.

Solutions for a More Walkable America
Here are some of the promising developments, strategies, messages, and tools that are now emerging to promote walking:

Vision Zero for Safe Streets : As many as 4,500 Americans are killed crossing the street every year—a tragedy that very few people acknowledge. But there’s hope that will change now that New York City, San Francisco, and other places are implementing Vision Zero campaigns to reduce traffic deaths through street improvements, law enforcement, and public education. Similar policies in Sweden cut pedestrian deaths in half over the past five years—and reduced overall traffic fatalities at the same rate. “Vision Zero is the next big thinking for walking,” says Alliance for Biking & Walking President Jeff Miller.

Federal Action Plan on Pedestrian Safety: New U.S. Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx recently announced an all-out effort to apply the department’s resources to boost bike and pedestrian safety the same as they do auto and airline safety. Secretary Foxx—former mayor of Charlotte, North Carolina—notes that pedestrian deaths rose 6 percent since 2009. “Bicycling and walking is as important as any other form of transportation,” he says.

Safe Routes to Schools : Half of kids under 14 walked or biked to school in 1969. Now it’s less than 15 percent. Safe Routes to School campaigns work with families, schools, and community officials to identify and eliminate barriers that block kids from getting to school under their own power. “We’re finding that the best interventions include both infrastructure improvements and programming. You put the sidewalks in but also get parents involved,” explains Margo Pedroso, deputy director of the Safe Routes to Schools National Partnership.

Walking as a Basic Human Right : Walking has been shown to optimize our health and strengthen our communities, which means everyone should have equal opportunity to do it. But low-income people often find it difficult or dangerous to take a walk in their neighborhoods, which often lack sidewalks and other basic infrastructure. Studies show that pedestrians in poor neighborhoods are up to four times more likely to be injured in traffic accidents. This theme is now being addressed by many transportation activists and professionals.

Communities for People of All Ages : The mark of a great community is whether you’d feel calm about letting your 80-year-old grandmother or 8-year-old son walk to a nearby park or business district, says Gil Penalosa, former park director of Bogota, explaining why he founded 8-80 Cities. Too many young and old people today live under virtual house arrest, unable to get anywhere on their own because driving is the only way to go.

Complete Streets: The simple idea that all streets should offer safe, convenient, and comfortable travel for everyone—those on foot, on bike, on transit, in wheelchairs, young, old or disabled. Twenty-seven states and 625 local communities across the U.S. have adopted Complete Streets policies in some form.

The Healing Properties of Nature and the Outdoors: Not all exercise offers the same health benefits, according to a growing body of research showing that outdoor physical activity, especially in nature, boosts our health, improves our concentration, and may speed up our natural healing process. A walk in the park is not only more interesting than a workout at the gym, but it may also be healthier too. The Wingspread Declaration—recently signed by 30 of America’s leading health officials, researchers, and non-profit leaders—calls for business, government, and the health care sector to step up efforts to reconnect people with nature.

Walking as a Medical Vital Sign : There’s an initiative afoot among public health advocates to encourage health care professionals to chart their patients’ physical activity the same as they do weight, blood pressure, smoking, and family health. Ascension Health (with 1900 facilities in 23 states) Kaiser Permanente (648 facilities in 9 states), Group Health (25 clinics in Washington state), and Greenville Health System (7 facilities in South Carolina) are among the health providers already doing it.

Walk With a Doc: Walking has the lowest drop-out rate of any physical activity, which is why Ohio cardiologist David Sabgir started Walk With a Doc: to sponsor events in parks and other public places where people can talk to health care professionals while taking a casual walk. Walk With a Doc now operates in 38 states.

Signs of the Times: Many people are so out of practice with walking that they don’t realize how convenient it is. That’s why architecture student Matt Tamasulo posted signs in Raleigh, North Carolina, explaining that key destinations were only a few minutes away by foot. The city soon embraced his guerrilla campaign, and official walkway-finding signs can now be found around town. Tamasulo has launched Walk [Your City] to help other communities show how easy it is to get around on your own power.

Walking is Fun: “Walking is still not seen to be as sexy as biking,” says Robert Ping, program manager for Walking and Livable Communities Institute. “We could focus more on walking as recreation—the stroll through the neighborhood after dinner, going around the block, walking down to the park, meeting your neighbors. Something that’s not only utilitarian and good for the environment, but that’s fun!”

Revitalization is a two-way street: A rigorous study of traffic calming impacts.

We've been saying it for the entire history of this blog. Perhaps the city of New Albany (read: Democratic Party grandees) finally will listen and DO SOMETHING.

Two-Way Streets Can Fix Declining Downtown Neighborhoods, by John Gilderbloom (Planetizen)

Here is one simple and affordable strategy to renew our downtown neighborhoods: immediately convert multi-lane one-way streets back to two-way traffic. Such conversions reduce car speeds and encourage greater pedestrian and bike mode-share. As a response of calmer residential streets, neighborhoods become more livable, more prosperous, and safer.

While 100 cities have rushed to convert multi-lane one-way streets, few researchers have performed rigorous studies of traffic calming impacts. Under my supervision, University of Louisville planning graduate students and faculty (Winston Mitchell, Nick York, Zaria Murrell, Brad Cronin, Wesley Meares, Billy Riggs, and Samantha Alexis Smith) produced a rigorous study of just two streets in Louisville (Brook and First streets) that were converted nearly three years ago from, in effect, multi-lane freeways to slow and sane streets, available to all users. We examined the before and after conditions of the conversion of Brook and First and compared the newly converted two-ways with the unconverted multi-lane one-ways (Second and Third) next to them. We also explored another street that was part one-way and two-way.

 The results were stunning. Two-way conversion improves the livability of a neighborhood by significantly reducing crime and collisions and by increasing property values, business revenue, taxes, and bike and pedestrian traffic. Outside consultants, with price tags of millions of dollars, never predicted this in places like Oslo, San Francisco, St. Louis, and Atlanta.

And this.

By every measurable aspect, First and Brook streets are better places since they were converted to two-way traffic supplemented by smartly designed bike lanes. While there is no magical, quick-fix when it comes to turning around neighborhoods, converting multi-lane one-way streets to two-way streets is a smart and affordable policy. Neighborhoods will also blossom if one-way conversions are coupled with other proven infrastructure improvements, such as street trees, bike lanes, community gardens, public art, and adaptive reuse of abandoned properties.

Cemeteries as parks. Neighborhood revitalization. Fairview Cemetery. Now, go do the math.

We made another visit to Fairview Cemetery on Sunday morning, and again I was overwhelmed with disappointment that the city of New Albany, over a period of fifty years or more, seems never to have understood the value of treating our key downtown cemetery as a parkland. Think Cave Hill in Louisville, and consider these links.

Our First Public Parks: The Forgotten History of Cemeteries, by Rebecca Greenfield (Atlantic)

cemeteries as parks/open space (Portland, Maine)

Turning Cemeteries for the Dead into Parks for the Living, by Peter Harnik (cityparksblog.org)

For those who can't understand why the current administration's multi-million TIF bonding for two new parks on the periphery is so irksome to me, this is one of several reasons why I keep bringing it up.

The serial neglect of Fairview's surrounding neighborhoods represents a persistent squandering of an immense quality of life opportunity, one not viewed as pertaining to quality of life by generations of functionaries owing to their absence of imagination, as much or more so than money.

Creative thinking.

When did it escape this burg, and can we lure it back?

Gentrification is a thorny matter.

File under "topics seldom broached at city council meetings," or for that matter, anywhere else in town. It's a lengthy essay, and one worth reading

The thorny matter of gentrification, by Kaid Benfield (SWiTCHBOARD)

A few days ago, I made a presentation to a group of thoughtful and accomplished philanthropists on sustainable land development. I made a strong pitch for urban revitalization and was countered with a question about gentrification, the messy phenomenon that occurs if longtime residents of older neighborhoods find themselves priced out of their own communities as those neighborhoods become more sought-after and valuable. To be honest, I don’t think I handled the question particularly well.

I never do, really, even though it comes up a lot. The issue is just too thorny on all sides and, in most cases, racially charged, because minority populations are the ones who feel squeezed when more affluent, generally white, residents rediscover cities and move in. I have a lot of sympathy for long-timers who fear losing control of their neighborhoods and, in too many cases, their very homes as rents and property taxes go up with increased value brought on by increased demand. But, on the other hand, the environmental, fiscal and, yes, social benefits of revitalization and repopulation of our older, frequently distressed neighborhoods are so substantial that I believe strongly that they must continue.

Paint. Why not paint?

Every shotgun house in New Albany should be painted a different pastel color, whether mandated by historical hued standards or otherwise.

Chile cool: art, music and graffiti in laid-back Valparaíso; The Chilean city of Valparaíso is alive with avant-garde culture and vibrant street art. Think mini Berlin by the seaside, by Trish Lorenz (Guardian)

It isn't the first time we've referred to this imperative.

Edi Rama and reform by paint: "Compromise in colors is gray."

In fact, going all the way back to 2006 ...

Paint and public art as progressive ideals -- why not in New Albany?

It would seem that the most common solution to the simple problem of gray murk has been a coat of paint.

Two-way streets: New Albany is worth it, in the neighborhoods AND downtown.

In the excerpt below, we see yet again that while it's easy to blithely toss around phrases like "quality of life," applying such values across a wider spectrum not exclusively defined by typically well-heeled, upper-strata, white-bread preconceptions can lead to befuddlement on the part of those unfamiliar with diverse considerations.

I've chosen lately to focus my limited time to advocating for two way streets from a standpoint of economic development for downtown New Albany's small, independent businesses -- the ones (like my own) that have invested heavily and borne the primary weight of revitalization, with little more than token support by successive administrations.

Although when it comes to infrastructure like streets and sidewalks ... never mind.

The neighborhood revitalization argument against one-way arterial speedways and in favor of two-way streets and accompanying traffic calming measures might be even stronger. By choice, I leave this point to others, but it is a very important plank in the platform. As with downtown businesses, it is critical that the neighborhoods offer tangible evidence of residents in support of a reclaimed street grid, alongside the single most important necessity of all: Two-way street advocates in New Albany vote.

In New Albany, electoral timidity is driving governmental sloth, plain and simple. I'm doing what I can to provide an opposing viewpoint. Join me.

Erika D. Smith: The road to better neighborhoods goes two ways, at the Indy Star

Every morning for 15 years, Elease Womack and David Metzger watched commuters in imposing SUVs and sleek sedans speed past The Unleavened Bread Cafe with barely an upward glance.

That’s what happens when you have a business on a one-way street in a not-so-great neighborhood.

“People couldn’t wait for the stoplight to change and shoot on through to Downtown,” said Metzger, the cafe’s unofficial co-founder.

But that was then. This is now.

Earlier this year, Indianapolis converted one-way Central Avenue into a two-way street between Fall Creek Parkway and East 38th Street. The effect was immediate. Cars that used to fly by the cafe at the corner of Central and East 30th Street now merely cruise past. Nowadays, people look, stop and linger. The entire neighborhood has changed.

“The way in which people look over here — even at the stoplight — is different now than when it was one way,” Metzger said. “It’s more neighborly than it has ever been.”

It’s not just Central, though. Indianapolis has been slowly rethinking the one-way thoroughfare model ...

"Can you have revitalization, reinvestment, renewal without some level of gentrification?"

Shared streets, shared neighborhoods. Food for thought.

Moving On From Gentrification to 'Shared Neighborhoods', by Brent Toderian (HuffPost blog)

As the renaissance of cities and urban areas in North America continues, more and more neighborhoods are struggling with the challenges of change. Although the market's rediscovery of inner-city, walkable, mixed-use communities is an excellent thing in many ways, the word "gentrification" inevitably comes up in almost every discussion. But one person's gentrification is another person's revitalization, so the debate is always complex and heated.

Can you have revitalization, reinvestment, renewal without some level of gentrification? Probably not, as any perceived improvement in the eyes of the marketplace changes the economics. I do though, continue to believe that in planning for community change, there are reasonable levels of gentrification, that gentrification can be strategically managed, and that we can have "revitalization without displacement." In fact, this phrase has been the vision for Vancouver's Downtown Eastside (DTES) for years.

Slumlords have their own view of placemaking.

An appropriate thought for the conclusion of a week that saw Carl Malysz land a new job further up I-65 might well be brief contemplation about the legacy of the top-down England years in New Albany, as compared with the grassroots neighborhood revitalization emphasis described below.

Are we making progress is recovering from the Hizzoner years? Or is the legacy of the Battered City Syndrome just too great?

Why True Neighborhood Building Requires the Dedication of a Few 'Zealous Nuts', by Fred Kent (GOOD HQ)

What we share with our neighbors is place: the magical, intangible quality that is created when people interact around a tangible space, be it a park, a street, or a vacant lot. At the Project for Public Spaces, we advocate for citizens to be included more directly and meaningfully in the process of shaping their neighborhood’s public spaces. We believe that a neighborhood can only reach its fullest potential when everyone who lives, works, and plays there feels welcome to contribute to the life of its public spaces ...

... Detroit is struggling, but this is bringing out the best in the citizens who have chosen to stay. What we are seeing there today is neighbors realizing, en masse, that they can’t wait any longer for someone else to turn things around, and they are taking action to create the kinds of neighborhoods that they want to live in, with or without official permission. They are thinking Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper, and working together to accomplish ‘quick wins’ today that will build the social ties and momentum needed to transform the city tomorrow.

Before the meeting, let's think about differing qualities of life.

In today’s ‘Bama Ad Coagulator, Chris Morris considers the millions of dollars transferred from Horseshoe Casino (formerly Caesar’s) to Floyd County over a 13-year period.

Echoing recent words in the same forum by career politician and chronic board sitter Mark Seabrook, Chris placed the Horseshoe Foundation, dispensing agent of the gaming largesse, at the very pinnacle of local indispensability.

Honestly, I don’t know where we would be as a community without the grants handed out by the Horseshoe Foundation. Obviously, there would be no YMCA, no college scholarships and many organizations would have had to learn to do without a new furnace, a church steeple or funding for a baseball league for disabled children. The organization has made such a positive impact on this community, a community that not once, but twice said no, we don’t want you.

In a way it screams hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy?

Is that what it’s called when pundits like Chris remain aloof from politics until it’s time to “scream” their blanket refusal to pay a penny more in higher taxes, and then, spinning on a thin dime, commend the casino for filling their own funding voids?

But I digress.

Chris’s purpose in writing is to note that Mayor Jeff Gahan has asked the Foundation for “major moves” monetary assistance in financing an aquatics center and/or a little league baseball complex.

I have no idea whether Mayor Gahan will have his wish granted. If he does, it would help New Albany move forward with building a new aquatic center or Little League park. That would be nice since Jeffersonville and Clarksville have state-of-the-art swimming facilities and Little League complexes. New Albany always seems to be a step behind when it comes to quality-of-life projects, with the YMCA a notable exception.

It took me a second reading before I realized why this paragraph is so annoying – and it isn’t restricted to Chris Morris's phrasing.

Rather, it’s this persistent, unquestioned notion on the part of self-assigned movers and shakers that the highest civic priority when it comes to “quality-of-life” issues is the same old kneejerk-as-usual pablum: The benign “niceness” of swimming and baseball, and the accompanying tendency of the powers that be to lapse into dazed stupor at the very suggestion that prioritizing basic everyday infrastructures of living, from transport to design to neighborhoods, addresses “quality-of-life” issues far more comprehensively than parks and recreation force-fed into a vacuum.

Me? My quality of life is reflected by whether I can bike or walk city streets that are just as much mine as yours, and do so without being struck by chaotic cars. Complete these streets, and my quality of life skyrockets, and at a fraction of the cost required to build and maintain aquatics centers and ball fields.

In this scenario, the quality of life improves for everyone who lives in our urban neighborhoods, not just those who do the backstroke or swat horsehide. Make the whole city a recreational area, and we’re getting somewhere, as well as attracting the like-minded to move here and be a part of it.

I’m constantly reminded of my irrelevance by people with the surname Anonymous, and so it may or may not matter to anyone that I’m opposed to these grandiose ideas of aquatics and baseball until the current administration takes the time to explain its plan (there is one, right?) for finishing the work we’ve begun downtown; for completing the streets and preparing for the toll evasion dullard onslaught to come; and for improving our neighborhoods.

Take your time. I’m not going anywhere.

And Horseshoe Foundation board members who may be reading: Some tough love, please.

We couldn't lose any better if we tried.

Anyone paying attention to local Bridges Project inanity is probably aware that the Bridges Authority has successfully maintained its .000 batting average in regard to the U.S. Department of Transportation's TIGER grant program.

Meanwhile, in more rational parts of our country, other cities are enjoying the investments and paid work such a program makes possible.

TIGER transforming Kansas City's Green Impact Zone, U.S. Department of Transportation

The Green Impact Zone is a 150-block area in urban core of Kansas City that has been devastated over the years by high rates of poverty, unemployment, crime, and high concentrations of vacant and abandoned properties. Local and regional leaders have come together to jump-start the zone's economic recovery by upgrading its infrastructure.

Crews are fixing broken sidewalks, repaving roads, and coordinating traffic signals. In addition, the Green Impact Zone project will provide better access to regional opportunities through expanded transit facilities. Describing the Troost Avenue improvements, which include a new pedestrian bridge separated from vehicle traffic, the Kansas City Star editorial board wrote, "This is a tremendous investment to support redevelopment in Kansas City’s urban core."

When one calculates the ultimate costs of the Bridges Project, it's important to consider such missed opportunities as well. It's especially saddening when one realizes that our lack of such investment makes us less competitive for other programs like HUD's housing initiatives as well, including FHA loans. Below, HUD Secretary Donovan on the spiraling costs of sprawl that the Bridges Project seeks to increase:

Watch Housing + Transportation costs adding up on PBS. See more from Need to Know.

But we can't say the Feds didn't let us know.

The first three rounds of DOT's TIGER grants have funded high-impact transportation projects in all 50 states, in Puerto Rico, and right here in Washington, DC. Across the country, this competitive program is fostering beneficial and innovative solutions that:

*Contribute to long-term economic competitiveness,
*Upgrade the safety and quality of existing transportation infrastructure and facilities,
*Increase energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and
*Improve the quality of life in communities through better transportation choices and connections.

What we're seeing in the Ohio River Bridges Project is a failure of leadership that will regurgitate back onto us for decades to come, both in terms of what we'll get if not significantly changed and in what what we've already lost. That they want us to pay for it with 40-50 years of tolls is nothing more than proof of their long-standing inability to garner support for a project that citizens, planners, and bean counters around the world view as a compounding of previous mistakes rather than a solution.

8th and Culbertson: Salient back stories?

The drawing above shows the boundaries of the Midtown Renaissance area in black, with red circles showing the initial rehab concentration areas. I inserted the green circle and arrow, the latter pointing to the northwest corner of 8th and Culbertson, where the partially collapsed former tavern building has engendered much discussion of late.

The green circle illustrates the curious fact that the area adjacent to the deteriorating structure, a small salient of houses enclosed by Fairview Cemetery, is omitted from the rehab target area. I don't know why, and am hoping someone involved in MR can explain it to me.

Given that more than one structure at the corner in question is/was owned by the same notorious deadbeat slumlord (some still actually stand), and as a result, the vicinity suffered much degradation, it seems ideal for inclusion.

Why does this matter? We're belatedly being asked by proponents of saving the tavern building to consider the northwest corner of 8th and Culbertson as a potentially critical nexus for Midtown Renaissance, even though it lies somewhat on the furthest perimeter of rehabs as delineated during the first round, and was not even included within boundaries when the project was commissioned.

Why? Commercial vs. residential?

This omission may or may not suggest anything at all, other than typifying a pathetic phenomenon too obvious to be denied: The chronic, longstanding neglect of the building by all parties involved until precisely one minute after the collapse at the structure's rear. Now, emergency measures -- and emergency monies -- are required. One wonders when, and if, we ever learn.

The presence nearby of the cemetery, which anywhere except New Albany would be a park-like showcase for revitalized housing, and the old Robinson-Nugent campus provide persuasion for the notion that the damaged building at 8th and Culbertson might indeed (and ideally) become a neighborhood pivot of the sort being minted of late.

But the question: Why did we wait until the alarms are ringing at crunch time to elucidate the vision? Has something else changed that we should know? Has a new vision come into focus since the bricks started falling?

Is it pragmatism or politics, or just another example of the New Albany Syndrome in full flowering?

Walkability assessment coming to Midtown on Saturday, May 21.

Press release coming soon.

Without a doubt, the best thing I've seen in a year.

From Riverbank Neighbors, Pete Leki, and Bobby Sutton:

How To Disappear

Voices from elsewhere?

Neighborhood cornerstone: Ritter House needs a boost as tenants set up shop, by Chris Morris (Tribune).

Hock hopes Saturday’s S. Ellen Jones Neighborhood Association block party will bring more attention to the house, which could become the cornerstone of the area, he said. The park in the rear of the school is named after Ritter.

“It’s a beacon of hope and help for the neighborhood,” Walter said. “I hope we can get more tenants like the Home of the Innocents that can help people. I’m glad to be part of something like this that I know will be a tremendous benefit for the future of that neighborhood.”

With all due respect to good intentions, who decides what the cornerstone of a neighborhood could or should be?