Quick impressions

Unfortunately while there's honor in being the critic, there's no glory (or jobs) in it... There were great presentations yesterday at the DDOT Great Streets conference. Apparently, there will be a 10 a.m. press event on Friday announcing preliminary findings by the ULI Panel convened to provide advice to the DC Great Streets program, although they failed to divulge the location...

Yesterday there were 8 presentations. The one on the Indiana Avenue Commercial District in Indianapolis wasn't as interesting, because they are just at the beginning phases. (And I have read many many such plans and seen such presentations) However, there are some interesting ideas on utilizing and extending the value of cultural assets, including developing street performance spaces as part of "Freetown Village." The other interesting learning is that Indianapolis created a Cultural Districts Commission and have created six such districts in the merged city-county. I haven't checked out that website yet, but I will.

The presentation on the High Street District in Columbus, Ohio was particularly interesting because Campus Partners, along with activities by Penn in Philadelphia, and Trinity in Hartford, is probably the most cutting edge of university-city-community ("town-gown") relations programs across the country. I had just added this program to my best practices links last week, not even knowing the depth of innovation there, including the use of New Markets Tax Credits to develop equity and revenue streams for the organization.

The Washington Gateway project in Boston has been discussed on this blog in the past. It was an excellent presentation about how the Main Street model, properly executed, with support from the city, starting with Mayor Menino, who required the rest of the city's agencies to get on board, can truly make a difference.

And the presentation on the Pearl District focused more on how Portland uses transit to make great streets. The presenter, Greg Baldwin, laid out four principles of great streets, and went through case studies of streets in the U.S. mostly, but also Rome, that exemplified these principles and then discussed this in more depth with the Portland experience. (Somehow, I seem to have lost my notes for this and the Washington Gateway presentation. Grr.)

One of the most important things he said was that cities have to set a high bar and invest in quality transit, buildings, and infrastructure, from big things, to "little" things like street furniture. Only then will developers step up and invest equivalently. It shows in Portland. (I am contacting him to discuss this point in greater depth. As I said I lost my notes, so I don't have the direct quote from the first director of Tri-Met that emphasized the importance of quality public investment as setting the standard of quality for private investment.) He also discussed briefly that the Portland Streetcar system is actually not part of Tri-Met but a separate 501(c)(3).

I already discussed Dr. Shoup's presentation. Margie Ruddick from Wallace Roberts and Todd was excellent on green issues. It looks like she gave us half of the presentation (the "last" slide which she didn't go over said "Major Improvements"), as she focused on "easy" or small steps that garner great returns. While she didn't say so, her points really exemplified the philosophy laid out in Goetze's Building Neighborhood Confidence about how small public investments, if done right, lead people along to make their own, far more significant, investments in stabilizing and improving their home, their business, and their neighborhod.

This also echoed a point made frequently by Shoup, one which I didn't discuss. He believes that neighborhoods-commercial districts that agitate and help themselves deserve the benefits they reap. E.g., if you have parking enforcement and advocate for it, in part because your community benefits from a return of some of the revenues, he thinks that's a good thing. What he actually said is "City Hall should help people [neighborhoods] that help themselves."

I agree with him. Too many people have learned helplessness, and have the expectation that other people will take care of things or do it for you. That's not the way change occurs. And it's why so many of our neighborhoods are mired in muck and disinvestment.

Kiku Obata spoke about retail principles--not a lot different from the normal Main Street stuff--but it was well laid-out and organized. She made the point that great commercial districts are denoted by:

-- clear and safe zones
-- easy access
-- lighting
-- storefronts that glow
-- places to sit and to hang out
-- great sidewalks and paving
-- landscaping, plantings and treets
-- public art
-- courtyards and alleyways
-- shade
-- sidewalk cafes
-- vendors
-- performances and performance artists
-- pocket parks
-- parallel parking in front of stores that face the street
-- no curb cuts
-- local character
-- dynamic storefronts
-- signage that beckons
-- sense of discovery
-- a mood, character, and spirit.

And that each of these elements reinforce identity, space, and sense of place.

Jeff Tumlin, from Nelson Nygaard was amazing on transit. He breezed through and skipped over a lot of his presentation, but said the company website has a lot more info. Of course, we transitistas already know what he said, that it's impossible to build our way out of congestion. Why? Well one lane of street in one hour can move 900 cars, 6,750 people on buses, 10,000 people on bus rapid transit, and 16,200 people on light rail. The foundation of his presentation is that traffic management codes and regulations focus on speeding up car movement rather than on moving the most people, and that movement must be balanced across all modes (walking, driving, bicycling, various forms of transit, freight movement) without making one mode, like some pigs in Animal Farm "more equal than others" (my point not his). Currently, the mobility pig more equal than others is the car.

He said a lot more, but in closing he laid out 7 points that he thinks should guide the Great Streets program:

1. a recognition that Great Streets are about great communities, not just infrastructure, but about building the organizational and social capital and capacity of the people and organizations in a neighborhood.
2. Without clean and safe streets, the investments will fail.
3. Great Streets and all the things that make them great aren't legal under current suburban-oriented zoning codes.
4. Parking management is essential. (He spoke very very highly of Don Shoup's work).
5. Traffic safety is key. Streets are overdesigned to favor cars, and cars travel at speeds far beyond the speeds that typify "great streets."
6. Making transit work is necessary and transit must be optimized for speed and efficiency so that people will use and rely on it. (Both he and Mr. Baldwin said a lot of important things about this, e.g., Greg Baldwin made the point that a transit system designed for commuters needs 1/3 more vehicles and operators compared to a system with more level loading and usee).
7. There needs to be a clear decision-making process to guide the investment of monies from the Great Streets program. Let neighborhoods compete on the merits. This will build commitment on the part of neighborhoods.

Tunlin's points get back to building capacity and a practical foundation for the Main Street model. It's why I am scared about this program as the Main Street program is showing great difficulties in terms of successful implementation in most of the commercial districts where programs have started (two have disbanded thus far) -- I believe these problems are correctable but people aren't applying my Main Street Principle #9 -- Making Hard Choices -- and now the city plans a similar program for neighborhoods with even more distressed and disinvested commercial districts. But that's enough editorial. It was a great conference, and it's not my $100 million.

Index Keywords: commercial-district-revitalization