A house flip just sold for $289K in South Columbus

scolumbus

This is mind-blowing. Apparently the confirmed sale price was $10,000 below the list price of $299,000, but still, impressive. For context, the South End is still one of the roughest neighborhoods in Columbus, but is now undeniably experiencing revitalization. This home sale may represent the highest price per SF to date ($167 / SF).

This property before the flip:

scolumbus2

These flips are happening all over the South End presently. Most are hitting the market at price points between $150,000 and $200,000. This is a big jump.

Trulia housing value maps by metro (Eastern U.S.)

Trulia.com is pretty cool. Zillow aint bad either. There’s also cool stuff on REIS and CoStar especially if you’re with an outfit that will pay for access, but as far as free goes, Trulia is one of the best. So that makes it doubly awesome if you’re a real estate nerd on a budget.

Screen Shot 2017-06-11 at 7.59.42 PM

One thing Trulia is really good at tracking is listing prices and real-time trends across neighborhoods. As data is power, the more data an entity has, the more cool stuff it can do. The result of putting every neighborhood on the same map is pretty awesome; as rendered, the majority of the nation is some shade of green (~$300,000). However, every city has its obvious pockets of concentrated wealth.

The funny thing about this is the picture it paints about the neighborhoods in which we typically argue about gentrification. In the grand scheme of things, and on the same map as everywhere else, these neighborhoods don’t even register. When a market starts to see median for-sale home values rise from $150,000 to $200,000, while that may be the difference that cripples the middle class’ access to home ownership, it doesn’t really change the map. However, regarding the goal of safe and decent housing, cheap can be your enemy – as housing gets older, maintenance is really a function of housing values. In areas where the market isn’t supporting the cost of good maintenance, it really isn’t helping anyone to fight gentrification.

Pockets of concentrated wealth have obviously escaped the discussion about creating mixed-income communities. These communities are typically not even included in the scope or amongst stakeholders for regional planning. A lot of these pockets of wealth are actually unincorporated or separate enclave suburbs that just operate on a different public-sector platform.

There is an obvious correlation between density and income-diversity. While most pockets of serious wealth are also low-density regions, more dense areas are typically closer to the median, while some of the poorest areas (darkest green) are typically not as dense but still dense. You’ll find most cities’ densest pockets in the mint green ($200-300,000).

I’ll just run through a few examples, with the map at the same zoom level and focused on the pockets of income disparity. This is by no means all, but pretty close to it in the EST and CST.

___________

Atlanta is a surprisingly high-value market. Most everything inside the Perimeter has appreciated, with exception to areas due west of downtown. South and East Atlanta actually appear healthy and marketable. The north burbs, from Smyrna up to Alpharetta and Johns Creek, also feature a vast expanse of $500,000 to $1,000,000 homes, on both sides of Georgia 400.

atl centralatl north

Austin actually has a lot of income diversity relatively close-in. However, with fewer and fewer pockets of low-income, there are no observable entire ZIPs below $100,000. This also illustrates the extent to which gentrification in Austin is ancient history, with this being the new reality.

aus

Boston’s real estate values are well-known. The southie hoods aren’t all that bad on the whole – with a few pockets in Dorchester and Roxbury that are that bad – but on the whole this may be the highest-value market in the Eastern U.S., as Boston lacks a South Bronx or East NY. To their credit, Boston is one of the most innovative communities when it comes to leveraging value for the greater good; however, the map illustrates the extent to which this is not relevant to nearly all other metros. For instance these land values can easily absorb the development cost of inclusionary zoning. And so they must.

bos

Buffalo exemplifies the complete opposite of the aforementioned metros. This is also one of those cases where overall affordability compress values across the entire market, including at the upper end. You can get a pretty stylish abode in Buffalo for ~$200,000. Which is to say they do exist! Buffalo has an excess of real estate relative to its current population, so as real estate gradually becomes right-sized, housing values will normalize as long as the metro population remains stable. Buffalo is a great investment with a lot of upside if you make well-positioned acquisitions.

buf

Charlotte may be one of the most income-diverse major metros. The strong local economy and productive urban development market have built-up a high-value pocket from downtown (“Uptown”) southward. Large areas of homes below $100,000 exist just on the other side of the tracks.

char

Chicago is relatively affordable when compared to the other major metros. However, the scale and profile of Chicago – home to many of the nation’s celebrities and corporate elite – have resulted in some very unique pockets of wealth that hug the north lakeshore and pop up in certain enclaves elsewhere like Oak Park and Hinsdale. The balance of Chicago is really quite income diverse, with exception to the North Shore suburbs (Evanston and northward).

chichi north

Cincinnati is also quite income diverse, with no real trend when it comes to concentrations of wealth. It exists from Milford and Indian Hill to the east, westward to the Clifton neighborhood just north of UC. Wyoming, Blue Ash, some east side pockets like Dry Run, and inner-core hoods like Hyde Park, Mount Adams, and even southern OTR show up in the $500,000+ category. While wealth is scattered throughout the metro, poverty is heavily concentrated on the west side and in Covington.

cin

Cleveland is hot in the national media, but the data shows otherwise. You can almost make out the exact city limits based on dark green / light green, which is the market’s primary gradient (with ZIP medians probably ranging from ~$75,000 to upwards of just $400,000). That said, $400,000 can get you a LOT in Cleveland. The real money is heavily concentrated in the east suburbs. Also to the market’s credit, Cleveland used to be entirely retrograde, but now the central core and greater University Circle legitimately stand alone as bright spots. This is also a market where values have been suppressed by a glut of housing relative to the current population. Northeast Ohio’s sprawl, without population growth, has undercut the value of older vernacular housing.

clecle east

Columbus is a little bit of Cincy (income diverse with pockets scattered around) combined with a little bit of Cleveland (heavy concentrated wealth north of 270). Also, due to the absurdity of putting all real estate on the same unweighted scale, you can more easily make out differences across Upper Arlington than you can along the High Street corridor (where the light and dark colors meet in the middle). The pockets of wealth on the east side (Bexley) and south side (German Village) bode well for access to opportunity further out in those directions, where people would otherwise be disconnected.

colcol north

Dallas and Fort Worth are perhaps more interesting to compare to each other than as a whole region against other metros. Dallas is also a completely different animal from Fort Worth, which is more like the aforementioned Ohio metros. Dallas is probably a more developed version of Atlanta, with vast pockets where the median is not just over $1,000,000, but even $3,000,000. The only real concentration of extreme poverty left in Dallas is the Fair Park / “South Dallas” neighborhood which is actually eastern Dallas. Even the south side is showing some strong pockets, and overall a lot of income diversity. Where you don’t see that income diversity – the affluent northern suburbs from DFW up to Collin County. East Plano must really be getting rough if homes are only going for the $200,000s.

dal centraldal fwdal dfwdal north

Also the below regional map shows why I’m not panning further out for these screenshots, due to Trulia’s rendering glitches:

dal 2

Detroit thematic maps need not label Eight Mile Road (M 102) – it’s visible from outer space. Downtown, Midtown, and the east riverfront have joined Grosse Pointe as pockets of strength in the inner city. Low values have also now spread into the first few NE suburbs like Eastpointe. There are very distinct differences between Macomb County (NE) and Oakland County (NW). These differences also manifest themselves politically (Macomb County often being credited with electing Reagan and Trump).

det citydet

Houston has maintained broad affordability despite also having a major wealth bubble (its entire west side). The extreme wealth in Houston is concentrated well enough to leave the rest of the metro mostly unaffected. It’s also interesting how the south and east sides are starting to improve. There’s also very little middle-income on the west side; you’re either in an area that is $500,000 and above, or sub-$100,000 (SW corner of Beltway 8). Alief is the new dystopia, while those older south and east side neighborhoods have seen revitalization. It’s a real question what concentrated poverty will look like so far removed from walkable, transit-accessible economic opportunity.

houhou 2

Kansas City’s wealthier inner-ring neighborhood are split down the middle between Kansas and Missouri. The same is not true for suburban communities, where wealth distinctly favors the Kansas side. You can also see Troost Avenue from outer space, much like Eight Mile Road in Detroit.

kcmokck

Lexington is small, relatively high-income, with few pockets of distinct low-income north of downtown, and distinct pockets of concentrated wealth beyond the ring road in all directions. These are largely horse farms owned by the uber rich.

lex

Louisville, in contrast to Lexington, is more of a real city. Very income diverse on the whole, but with localized distinctions between east and west. Downtown and Old Louisville are also very healthy markets. The Indiana side has failed to attract much investment.

lou

Memphis is another city that is almost entirely low-income. Unlike the northern Rust Belt cities, it’s a real question whether Memphis will pursue smart growth or rightsizing strategies (probably not). Great city though – the downtown secretly has one of the better streetcars, and Mud Island (that $500,000 pocket on the river) is secretly one of America’s largest new-urbanist communities.

mem

In some ways Minneapolis and St. Paul are twins, and in some ways they are opposites. St. Paul has the largest collection of old money neighborhoods; on this map, SW St. Paul looks exactly like other such areas (North Buffalo, East Cincy, etc). Apart from the old money, the new money prefers Minneapolis. Conversely, most of St. Paul proper is depressed, whereas Minneapolis is divided between north and south. And water, of which there is a lot.

mpls westmpls sp

Nashville and Memphis used to be flipped. There was a time when Memphis was seen as flashier and more urbane. It’s just plainly evident that Nashville is a different animal now, almost unrecognizable from the city it was before it got hot. The entire region is relatively high-income, which applies to nearly everything west of I-24. In terms of gentrification, forget about East Nashville, now it’s all about north and west Nashville. The relatively high cost of single-family housing and the rent-buy factor is also one ingredient that has fueled Nashville’s supply of new multifamily development, which would simply would not be absorbed in most other markets.

nashnash reg

New Orleans, an internationally-relevant historic landmark, is not a cheap city. I would be curious to learn more about quality of life for poor households in New Orleans, as this may be one of the better case studies on gentrification. You’ll remember that when Katrina happened, the subtext of urban poverty and racial disparity was the background for the botched short-term emergency management. While many of those families never moved back, for those that did, can they afford it now? Not a foregone conclusion either way – HANO has done amazing work rebuilding the city’s entire public housing portfolio and better-positioning it near opportunity.

nola

New York City is different from Boston in that it does still have distinct concentrations of low-income and low-values. Also, large portions of Brooklyn and the Bronx don’t even show up for lack of for-sale transactions. Areas like the South Bronx really are 100% multifamily for miles, whereas in gentrifying Brooklyn, for-sale product is gradually spreading from west to east. But not too far east.

nycnyc north

Oklahoma City is one of the more income-diverse metros, but it’s also one of the less-sophisticated markets where wealthy households don’t have that many options with where to locate. The answer is north. For everyone else, the answer is everywhere else. Urban core gentrification is also mostly complete between Lincoln and Classen boulevards, where it’s now spreading west toward I-44 and bridging the between downtown and Nichols Hills. Watch these neighborhoods.

okcedok

Omaha is another one of these markets that don’t have much concentrated poverty or much concentrated wealth. Supposedly Warren Buffet still lives in the same ranch house and drives the same old Lincoln Town Car that he always has. With exception to a few small pockets along the central-west Dodge Street corridor, anyone with serious money lives far out.

omaoma west

Philadelphia may be the city with the largest pocket of poverty right next to the largest pocket of wealth. Interestingly, pretty much all of South Philly is looking good these days. Watch the neighborhoods just north of Spring Garden.

phi

Pittsburgh and Cleveland are kind of the same city, just with different topography and forms of waterfront. Pittsburgh’s poverty is indeed incredibly concentrated in the communities that surround Pittsburgh to the east and southeast. Also this map does not look exactly as you’d expect – the South Hills’ wealthier pockets don’t even register compared to the North Hills, much in the same way that Cleveland’s east burbs really are different than the west burbs.

pitpit north

Providence stands in stark contrast to the Boston metro, less than an hour to the north. While Providence is clearly the most affordable urban market in New England, there is also a lot of value here for what you get. The physical housing stock is not much less sophisticated than in nearby Boston. New multifamily development here primarily takes the form of adaptive reuse of old mills, of which there are still many opportunities. That said, housing affordability is compressing renter households, and inhibiting the rent growth needed to pull off Boston-style adaptive reuse on a larger scale.

prv

Raleigh-Durham continues to resist urban density, which seems to get lost on the national planning establishment that sings its praises. They have UNC, NC State, Duke, and Wake Forest nearby. Yet somehow this hive of innovation, like Silicon Valley, just has opposed more innovative planning. While the markets in Charlotte and many other NC cities favor urban real estate, Raleigh continues to give a value premium to lower-density development.

ralral dur

San Antonio is the most affordable of Texas’ major metros. The city also manifests the economic fate of an immigrant-majority community where people are still overcoming racial, ethnic, economic, and especially language barriers. That said, centrally-located real estate is beginning to build equity for families in those neighborhoods surround El Centro. In contrast, areas to the north are as wealthy as they always have been.

san an

St. Louis, like Cleveland and Cincinnati, is a lot bigger than people realize. I think a lot of the planning establishment became familiar with the disparity between south and north STL in the wake of Ferguson. One difference between STL and other major Midwestern metros is the lack of for-sale transactions in the downtown, which is more heavily multifamily than even a typical downtown (most still have enough for-sale transactions for this map to populate). The central west corridor is very distinct.

stlstlc

Tulsa stands in contrast to OKC, with real concentrations in both wealth and poverty, and a downtown that really hasn’t generated much high-value residential product. Tulsa’s old money – largely households with oil era ties – prefers Midtown, where they have always resided. These neighborhoods are an interesting hodge podge of walkable pockets and large-lot, old-money estates. Since Tulsa’s economy has not grown since the 1980s, the map lacks the housing preferences of more new money consumers. In that way Tulsa is probably more like Louisville than Oklahoma City or Kansas City.

tul

College Town Madness

This is a post I meant for last month, before creating the bracket on my work computer and then getting incredibly busy at work as well as several travel assignments. Naturally I wasn’t reminded of this intended post until I was cleaning up some old files.

Inspired by Angie Schmitt’s annual Parking Madness contest, to crown the most egregious surface parking locale, I wanted to just use the exact same bracket as this year’s tourney and compare the communities surrounding these schools.

331bec2

I think this is incredibly subjective and open for interpretation. For instance, I didn’t just go with the most quintessential college towns, or else you’d see my undergrad college town of Stillwater making it a lot farther than it did (or at least a tougher decision against Ann Arbor, tough draw). For less subjective and more empirical rankings, check out WalletHub’s rankings based on health and fitness, social environment (huh?), and academic/economic opportunity.

However, and as passionate as I am about Oklahoma State, it did not prepare me for my career in the same way that graduate school at Ohio State did. It’s not because the academic quality at OK State isn’t as good as any major public university, but the simple fact that you’re not going to become an urban development guru in Stillwater, America. Columbus, Ohio – much better. In fact I owe the fact that I have grown to specialize in low-income community development to starting my career in Ohio.

The Crux: I graded these college towns on the opportunities they provide and planning innovations that they implement, and not which are the most bucolic settings to go sip a latte under a tree. The collegiate communities below resemble where I would send my kid to go and get the most out of his or her college years:

colleges1.JPG

__________________________________________________________________________________________

colleges2.JPG

In the top left quadrant of the bracket (I refuse to use their erroneous geographic regions) we have a number of great urban centers, a few classic college towns, and a few unfamiliar communites. By the way don’t knock Emmitsburg, MD (home of Mount St. Mary), which is cute as a bug. Quintessential Maryland small town with great Queen Anne building stock that dwarfs the rather narrow main street. However, with Philadelphia, Madison, Dallas, Milwaukee, and Durham – the campus communities in this bracket are no joke. Gainesville, FL – a surprisingly new-urbanist college town – also made it pretty far, until running into Philadelphia, which may be one of the greatest college communities in the nation (UPenn, Temple, Drexel, Villanova, Swarthmore, La Salle, Bryn Mawr, Haverford, et al).

colleges3

In the top right quadrant of the bracket we have some of the greatest college towns in the country, including Lawrence, KS. East Lansing, Ames, West Lafayette, Burlington, Eugene, Ann Arbor, and Stillwater – all great college towns. Of the bunch it would come down to Lawrence and Ann Arbor, if it weren’t for Providence, which has garnered acclaim as a great place to go to college. Providence quietly has one of America’s strongest arts communities, fueled largely by the presence of Brown, Rhode Island School of Design, and Providence College. It also offers a great combination of affordability, opportunity, and New England charm – which sounds like marketing baloney until you actually check it out as I did recently.

colleges4

In the bottom right quadrant of the bracket we honestly have some more average communities, and some that I would just throw away completely. Rock Hill is a suburb of Charlotte, Murfreesboro is a suburb of Nashville, Orange is a suburb of Newark, and Newport is a suburb of Cincinnati. We also have a ton of Ohio Valley cities – Indy, Cincy, Dayton, Lexington, and Newport. Lexington and Newport/Covington have just about the same downtown area, whereas the latter also has a riverfront with Cincinnati directly across. I do think Cincinnati is an excellent place to attend college – earning the nod over Manhattan, KS due to cultural/academic/career opportunities, earning the nod over LA due to affordability, and earning the nod over Dayton due to anything and everything. But not Minneapolis. Hard to beat the opportunity to attend college in the Twin Cities, with direct light rail access at the U, especially if you qualify for very affordable in-state tuition that makes up for housing costs in Minneapolis.

colleges5

In the bottom left quadrant of the bracket we see the re-appearance of Cincinnati, which goes on a tear until running into a slightly more innovative major city. This quadrant has some really great cities for young people – Chicago, Nashville, Cincinnati, Richmond, and Tucson. College Park, MD is essentially DC area, and Princeton – just on the other side of Trenton – is essentially Philly area. Of course Princeton is going to be hard to beat, but just how accessible is Princeton, and what kind of value-add does the community offer the college that also bears its name? Meanwhile, don’t knock Morgantown, which really is an epically great college town; to the point about Princeton, I think Morgantown actually elevates WVU and enriches opportunities at that school. I think Chicago and Tucson are roughly equal in terms of college settings. However, I think Tucson is vastly underrated for the innovative urban planning that the city has implemented. Not to mention it is a very attractive and fit community, which you kind of do want in a college town. All in all, with one of the nation’s best-planned streetcars, a decent tech sector, incredibly diverse population, unbeatable weather, and a good school to boot, I gotta hand it to Tucson:

Given the things that I advocate, and the solutions that I know work for medium-sized cities, I think Tucson is really on the forefront of placemaking and revitalization strategies. An actual graduate setting off into the world from UA will be more beneficially affected by their time in Tucson than most people are by their college town. The local hoops aren’t too shabby, either.

tucsontucson2

Trump on Housing: Outer Boroughs, Out of Mind

I have been deliberately silent on the rollout of the Trump Administration’s various policies relating to urban communities. In part out of dismay, in part out of confusion, and in part out of deference to others who seem to understand it better than myself. I will freely admit that while I did foresee Trump’s election as a disenfranchised Rust Belt Bernie supporter myself, all bets are off now that he’s in office: I have no idea what he will do, or even can.

Trump’s Section 8 Amnesia

The assumption was that a real estate developer with significant Section 8 portfolio experience would not necessarily be a disaster for urban programs. After all, Trump himself made $600 million from the sale of rent-assisted properties in NYC’s Outer Boroughs. Furthermore, even Trump’s marquee properties were frequently developed with sophisticated financing and hefty public assistance (excellent piece in the Village Voice which has covered his business practices for 40 years), which although unsurprising, should ground him in the reality of how projects actually get done.

That turned out to be untrue as it is clear as mud that the traditional neocons surrounding Trump are driving the bus on most policy decisions. I think the rollout and rollback of Trumpcare also shows that Trump may have even less interest in actual policy than previously believed during the campaign. That said, there has to be policy, and policy has to come from somewhere.

Surprise, it’s the same hardline neocons proposing to eliminate HUD, shift LIHTC to the states’ discretion (charity?), eliminate public transit, eliminate subsidies for Amtrak and the Washington Metro, and other old ideas.

The hardest hit will be absorbed by the Section 8 program, it appears, with 13% cuts across the board to PHAs and HCVs. In my personal experience writing housing studies across the nation, I have only encountered 1 out of 10 PHAs that have an open wait list for vouchers, and usually the wait list is years long. People typically die on these wait lists, in substandard or unaffordable housing, waiting to receive housing assistance that often never comes. PHAs have a common practice of purging these wait lists, typically thousands of households long, to remove all of the deceased or otherwise no longer eligible households. Local policy initiatives such as priority for homeless veterans on the wait list further lengthen the wait list time for all others.

Furthermore, Section 811 (disability/HOPWA housing) is proposed to be cut by 20%, Section 202 (elderly housing) by 10%, and Tribal housing programs by 20%.

Making Section 8 Great Again

Trump probably knows full-well the extent to which Section 8 owners can absorb 10-20% cuts. The problem is that that’s not how these cuts are going to be appropriated. When Trump was responsible for his Outer Boroughs portfolio, he would frequently play the contract rent game with HUD.

In NYC, operating safe and decent housing with long-term, loyal tenants is undesirable due to the city’s rent control, which controls rent growth as long as a tenant stays in a unit. Even LIHTC/LIHC properties in NYC can’t achieve maximum allowable tax credit rents unless a unit has X number of move-outs within a 10-year period, resulting in a credit boost that calculates how much a landlord can raise rents. No fun, right? What is fun: Converting a unit over to a voucher-holder, which is excluded from the city’s rent controls because nobody (besides the government) is actually paying that rent. The rent paid by a voucher can be insanely high, as the vouchers are good for HUD’s established Fair Market Rent (FMR) for each market.

co-1

When I presented my proposal for Connectus in the ULI Hines competition, I played the same game that Trump and every smart developer is doing: subsidy layering. One side of the street in Connectus is in a Qualified Census Tract (QCT), which we fully took advantage of in terms of what went on which side of Spring Street. Putting the LIHTC tower over there resulted in a 120% basis boost for credits, and then adding a theoretical HAP contract resulted in achieving HUD’s FMR for Atlanta ($820 for a 1BR, $949 for a 2BR, $1253 for a 3BR) on top of the excess equity flowing through the project as a result of the QCT basis boost. The ULI Hines guidelines pushed for 20% affordable units minimum, but probably was not intended to be manipulated with fully-blown low-income components. The local judges, Columbus developers and City Development Chief (all truly brilliant guys), did not believe our IRR of around 25% when all other teams were around 12-15%, and told us that our numbers were wrong. Kind of hard to rebut with a lecture on manipulative affordable housing finance on a judging stage, so I just took that one on the chin. Lesson learned: Hard to go wrong with less complicated.

So, this is all to say in my own limited professional and academic experience, that savvy Section 8 developers can take a hit in their cash flow. These projects don’t need to be the cash cows that they tend to be. However, that’s not going to change. These 13% voucher program cuts aren’t going to be absorbed by renegotiating contract rents or re-setting HUD FMR, but rather just by reducing the number of fellow human beings actually benefiting from these programs.

I am actually in favor of the common practice of concluding to fairly high contract rents on Section 8 units. I wish HUD, long Republicans’ favorite punching bag, had the resources it actually needs to address the nation’s housing situation. I don’t think affordable housing has to mean cheap, substandard housing. Efficient, yes; cheap, no. The above comments are just to point out who is actually going to be hurt by these proposed cuts.

Oh, and we know that federal support for transit is going away. Is that a tough blow though? We already knew it was coming, it’s been well-underway for some years now, and on the bright side fewer cities are offering premium transit service, putting transit users in a position without much to lose at this point. Angie Schmitt has the rundown on where transit is going.

I think that regardless of how short-lived the Trump Era may be, this period of history will be defined by those who can find a way to form partnerships with non-traditional partners. PHAs and RTAs that can find a way to delay major strategic decisions until post-Trump will be better off. Cleveland’s RTA, for instance, is in dire straits making it unable to delay such strategic decisions for much longer, meaning that they will have to re-evaluate the service they can provide during this era of austerity. For now, it may behoove us all to just get along to go along, fly under the radar, and put off major decisions until the stars realign over our great nation, or else take on the lasting impact and footprint of the policy flavor of the day.

Stillwater’s new $40,000 roundabout

Stillwater, Oklahoma – the home of Oklahoma State University – has always had a quaint, albeit fledgling downtown area. When I was there for my undergrad, the five-block stretch of Main Street, along with surrounding blocks like 7th Street and Lewis Street, was really the best thing the town had going for it independent of OSU.

Back in 2012, as my time in Stillwater was coming to a close, I also served as an editor of the campus daily newspaper. One of my last columns advocated for a roundabout in downtown Stillwater. While at the time I did not fully understand the conditions and requirements for implementing a roundabout, the column printed, I got calls from several community leaders, and the seed was planted:

screen-shot-2017-02-26-at-5-49-33-pm

This is one of those things that reminds me of the difference between what someone says they want, and what they really want. What I said I wanted was a very specific type of roadway design that would in fact not be an ideal solution for the conditions at the location I had in mind. However, what I really wanted was for something, anything to be done to improve this awful intersection, which really is the classic weak gateway. Many small towns, even those with great downtowns, suffer from the classically underwhelming gateway from the local highway to said downtown. These spaces have proven over time too tempting for cities to cram unappealing, visually abhorrent, auto-oriented uses such as what you’ll find at Sixth and Main in Stillwater:

screen-shot-2017-02-26-at-6-07-57-pm

… which still looks just the way it always has. The reality is that the weak gateway here will probably endure, as the city lost a key development opportunity when they allowed a parking lot-oriented Walgreens, and the owner of the service station on the right corner used to be on City Council.

However, while progress is often more stubborn at more visible locations, always watch out for the sleeper candidate. 10th and Main, four blocks to the south of here, ended up being a perfect candidate for a roundabout. The wide ROW width on Main Street provided enough space without requiring additional land, and the lower traffic counts on both Main and 10th more evenly disperse through a small roundabout.

I think even though it’s not the exact roundabout I had called for, Stillwater still pulled off a nice project here. Even better, the entire project only cost $40,000, according to this Stillwater Newspress article, in which the fiscally-conservative local paper proffered a ringing endorsement (while still insisting that new-fangled things sure are scary).

Before:

screen-shot-2017-02-26-at-5-42-17-pm

After:

screen-shot-2017-02-26-at-5-41-49-pm

I still think that Stillwater really needs to address beautification and traffic flow at its most important intersection, Sixth and Main. That said, major kudos to Stillwater for not just finding the right opportunity for the roundabout idea, but also for pulling off an incredibly cost-effective project, hopefully paving the way for other communities.

Then and Now

A few dramatic before-and-afters, courtesy of urban renewal. Charlotte obviously takes the cake. Minneapolis didn’t renew as much (thankfully) but it is interesting how unbalanced their skyline was when it first started to expand, much like how Devon Tower dominates OKC’s skyline today, as it has yet to grow around it. Dallas and OKC used to be two peas in a pod, maybe again some day.

cltdal1dal2mplsokc1okc2

Downtown Residential Population by City

capture

As I’ve always enjoyed aggregating data and trends across major cities, I thought I would take a stab at creating a resource for every major city’s downtown residential population. First, I excluded cities where the extent of downtown is truly indistinguishable from the rest of the city, such as D.C., San Francisco, or even Charleston or Savannah. Secondly, this is totally apples to oranges. Indianapolis defines their downtown as 5-6 square miles, whereas Cleveland defines their downtown as merely 2-3 square miles, while still yet Austin may define it as just a few blocks in either direction of Congress Avenue.

To understand how the numbers were derived, I have hyperlinked the source for each city. The sources are usually the local downtown business improvement district (BID) or similar organization. I used the MSA population for the Metro in all except for a few instances in which there really is a concise urbanized area (for instance San Jose and San Francisco, or Cleveland and Akron, are more intertwined than Columbus and Zanesville, OH).

The Census bureau has begun tracking downtown residential populations, which will lead to higher-quality data in coming years on this topic. The Census bureau has noted that these areas exhibit some of the highest population increases in the nation, in an article from 2012. Another imperfect way of solving the same riddle involves comparing populations inside mile increments, assuming that the first mile is the downtown population, the first five miles are typically surrounding inner city neighborhoods, and so on. However, this is imperfect as many downtowns are legitimately larger in area.

So while it’s not perfect, hopefully it is still interesting and useful, and without further ado, here it is:

DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL METRICS: METROS OVER 1 MILLION
City (Source) Downtown Pop 2015 City Pop % of City Metro Pop % of Metro Fixed-Guideway Transit
Atlanta 25,376 463,878 5% 5,710,000 0.0045 MARTA
Austin 12,000 931,830 1% 2,000,000 0.0060 Capitol Metro
Birmingham 4,000 212,461 2% 1,145,000 0.0035 None
Buffalo 8,300 258,959 3% 1,135,000 0.0073 Metro Rail
Charlotte 15,000 827,097 2% 2,426,000 0.0062 LYNX
Chicago 136,000 2,720,546 5% 9,551,000 0.0142 The L
Cincinnati 16,000 298,550 5% 2,157,000 0.0074 Streetcar
Cleveland 15,000 388,072 4% 3,515,000 0.0043 RTA
Columbus 7,000 850,106 1% 2,021,000 0.0035 None
Dallas 13,041 1,300,092 1% 7,102,000 0.0018 DART, TRE, Streetcar
Denver 73,000 682,545 11% 2,814,000 0.0259 RTD
Detroit 35,000 677,116 5% 4,302,000 0.0081 PeopleMover, QLine
Ft. Worth 5,000 833,319 1% 7,102,000 0.0007 TRE
Hartford 1,800 124,893 1% 1,211,000 0.0015 None
Houston 3,600 2,296,224 0% 6,656,000 0.0005 Metro
Indianapolis 27,000 853,173 3% 1,988,000 0.0136 Monorail
Jacksonville 3,730 868,031 0% 1,449,000 0.0026 None
Kansas City 24,000 475,378 5% 2,087,000 0.0115 Streetcar
Little Rock 1,300 197,992 1% 724,000 0.0018 Streetcar
Los Angeles 58,702 3,971,883 1% 13,340,000 0.0044 LA Metro
Louisville 9,000 615,366 1% 1,278,000 0.0070 None
Memphis 24,000 655,770 4% 1,344,000 0.0179 Streetcar
Miami 80,750 441,003 18% 6,012,000 0.0134 Metrorail
Milwaukee 21,000 600,155 3% 1,575,000 0.0133 None
Minneapolis 40,000 410,939 10% 3,524,000 0.0114 Metro
Nashville 10,000 654,610 2% 1,830,000 0.0055 None
New Orleans 5,100 389,617 1% 1,262,000 0.0040 Streetcar
Oklahoma City 7,500 631,346 1% 1,459,000 0.0051 Streetcar
Omaha 2,500 443,885 1% 915,000 0.0027 None
Orlando 43,388 270,934 16% 2,387,000 0.0182 SunRail
Philadelphia 180,000 1,567,442 11% 6,089,000 0.0296 Subway
Phoenix 12,000 1,563,025 1% 4,574,000 0.0026 Valley Metro
Pittsburgh 12,500 304,391 4% 2,353,000 0.0053 The T
Portland 25,000 632,309 4% 2,389,000 0.0105 MAX
Raleigh 7,000 451,066 2% 1,273,000 0.0055 None
Richmond 10,000 220,289 5% 1,271,000 0.0079 None
Sacramento 19,650 490,712 4% 2,274,000 0.0086 SacRT
Salt Lake City 5,000 192,672 3% 1,170,000 0.0043 TRAX
San Antonio 21,274 1,469,845 1% 2,384,000 0.0089 None
San Diego 35,000 1,394,928 3% 3,299,900 0.0106 Streetcar
San Jose 15,000 1,026,908 1% 8,713,000 0.0017 VTA
Seattle 70,000 684,451 10% 3,733,000 0.0188 Link
St. Louis 14,000 315,685 4% 2,811,588 0.0050 MetroLink
Tampa 8,100 369,075 2% 2,975,000 0.0027 Streetcar
Tulsa 6,000 403,505 1% 1,151,000 0.0052 None

By this metric, it is worth pointing out a unique class of cities with over 10% of their city population in their downtown. Some cities get here by virtue of having a smallish city relative to the metro, while others get here by having truly maximized centrally-located dwelling space. These cities are Seattle, Philadelphia, Orlando, Minneapolis, Miami, and Denver. Philadelphia’s CBD is the nation’s second-most populous CBD, after Midtown Manhattan, and Center City Philly is truly in a class of its own when compared to any other 4-square mile area of almost any other city. This includes similarly-sized metros such as Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, Phoenix, etc.

4% appears to the divide between the next tier of cities – most of these cities have surging downtown populations, and many could cross the 10% threshold with a few more years like the last ten or so. These cities are St. Louis, Sacramento, Richmond, Portland, Pittsburgh, Memphis, Kansas City, Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Chicago. Chicago’s CBD has the second-highest plurality on this list of cities (which drops when you add NYC submarkets), and while the broader Chicagoland region looks more like most Midwestern metros, the region still checks in at 5% which is noteworthy for a metro of 10 million (compared to LA).

Lastly, there are a tremendous number of cities that show 1%. These are often cities that think they have a uniquely fast-developing downtown living city, but really they need to take a look around them. I can attest that OKC and Ft. Worth in particular seem to think they are unique for having downtown revitalization, and many people in Ft. Worth (who clearly don’t make it past Tarrant County often) think it somehow differentiates them from Dallas, which now has 150,000 people living in the neighborhoods adjacent to Downtown Dallas. Ft. Worth and OKC both have great downtowns, but like many other cities in the 1-4% range, their downtown is not as developed as others – which is an opportunity!

All of this said, only two cities have a ratio that rounds down to 0%. Jacksonville and Houston, do better!

Relativity of congestion

Each year the Texas Transportation Institute at Texas A&M comes out with their Urban Mobility Scorecard, which of course is auto-centric like all other traffic planning. The ranking criteria calculates number of hours spent each year in congestion, which then leads to other criteria such as productivity wasted, extra fuel spent, etc. From a highway planning perspective, the criteria makes sense.

The top cities for the worst traffic are as follows. I’ve always thought their top-congested cities seemed fishy. In all, fast-growing Sun Belt metros typically rank higher for congestion than they do population, while slow-growing Rust Belt metros typically rank much lower for congestion than for population or anything else.

It’s also worth noting that many of these Sun Belt metros (like Tucson) are typically getting freeway expansion projects, whereas the Rust Belt metros (like Cleveland and Detroit) frequently are.

1 Washington-Arlington, DC-VA-MD-WV

2 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA

3 San Francisco-Oakland, CA

4 New York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT

5 San Jose, CA

6 Boston, MA-NH

7 Seattle-Tacoma, WA

8 Chicago, IL

8 Houston, TX

10 Riverside-San Bernadino, CA

11 Dallas-Ft. Worth-Arlington, TX

12 Atlanta, GA

12 Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI

12 Austin, tX

12 Miami, FL

12: Portland-Vancouver, OR-WA

17 Phoenix-Tempe, AZ

18 Honolulu, HI

19 Denver-Boulder, CO

19 Oklahoma City-Norman, OK

 

I have always appreciated Google’s real-time traffic feature, which not only shows real-time traffic in all major city, but also has a feature that simulates typical traffic. I set the simulation for 5:30 p.m., peak of rush hour, on a Friday. Below are a curated snapshot of Google’s traffic simulation for the same time on the same day, at the same zoom level (although wider regions like Dallas-Ft. Worth have been shrunk by WordPress).

Albuquerque, NM: 36 hours annual delay, #70

abq

 

Atlanta, GA: 52 hours annual delay, #12 (tie)

atl

 

Austin, TX: 52 hours annual delay, #12 (tie)

aus

 

Bay Area –

San Francisco-Oakland, CA: 78 hours annual delay, #3; San Jose, CA: 67 hours, #5

bay

 

Birmingham, AL: 34 hours annual delay, #77 (tie)

bham

 

Boston, MA: 64 hours annual delay, #6

bos

 

Baton Rouge, LA: 47 hours annual delay, #23

br

 

Columbus, OH: 41 hours annual delay, #45 (tie)

cbus

 

Charlotte, NC: 43 hours annual delay, #35 (tie)

char

 

 

Chicago, IL: 61 hours annual delay, #8

chi

 

Cincinnati-Covington, OH-KY: 41 hours annual delay, #45 (tie)

cin

 

Northeast Ohio –

Cleveland, OH: 38 hours annual delay, #55 (tie); Akron, OH: 27 hours, #89

cle

 

Columbia, SC: 38 hours annual delay, #55 (tie)

col

 

Charleston, SC: 41 hours annual delay, #45 (tie)

cston

 

Capital Region

Washington-Arlington, DC-VA-MD-WV: 82 hours annual delay, #1; Baltimore, MD: 47 hours, #23

dcbal

 

Denver-Boulder, CO: 49 hours annual delay, #19 (tie)

den

 

Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI: 52 hours annual delay, #12 (tie)

det

 

Dallas-Ft. Worth-Arlington, TX: 53 hours annual delay, #11

dfw

 

Des Moines, IA: 12 hours annual delay, not ranked

dsm

 

Grand Rapids, MI: 39 hours annual delay, #51 (tie)

gr

 

Hartford, CT: 45 hours annual delay, #29 (tie)

hart

 

Houston, TX: 61 hours annual delay, #8 (tie)

hou

 

Indianapolis, IN: 43 hours annual delay, #35 (tie)

indy

 

Jacksonville, FL: 38 hours annual delay, #55 (tie)

jack

 

Kansas City-Overland Park, MO-KS: 39 hours annual delay, #51 (tie)

kc

 

Knoxville, TN: 35 hours annual delay, #72 (tie)

knox

 

Southern Cal –

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA: 80 hours annual delay, #2; Riverside-San Bernadino, CA: 59 hours, #10

la

 

Louisville, KY-IN: 43 hours annual delay, #35 (tie)

lou

 

Little Rock, AR: 38 hours annual delay, #55 (tie)

lr

 

Memphis, TN-AR-MS: 43 hours annual delay, #55 (tie)

mem

 

Miami, FL: 52 hours annual delay, #12 (tie)

mia

 

Milwaukee, WI: 38 hours annual delay, #55 (tie)

mil

 

Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI: 47 hours annual delay, #23 (tie)

msp

 

Nashville-Murfreesboro, TN: 45 hours annual delay, #29 (tie)

nash

 

New Orleans, LA: 45 hours annual delay, #29 (tie)

nola

 

New York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT: 74 hours annual delay, #4

nyc

 

Oklahoma City-Norman, OK: 49 hours annual delay, #19 (tie)

okc

 

Omaha, NE: 32 hours annual delay, #83

oma

 

Orlando-Kissimmee, FL: 46 hours annual delay, #27 (tie)

orl

 

Philadelphia-Trenton-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE: 48 hours annual delay, #22

phi

 

Phoenix-Tempe, AZ: 51 hours annual delay, #17

phx

 

Pittsburgh, PA: 39 hours annual delay, #51

pitt

 

Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA: 52 hours annual delay, #12

por

 

Providence-Fall River, RI-MA: 43 hours annual delay, #35 (tie)

prov

 

Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC: 34 hours annual delay, #77 (tie)rdu

 

Richmond-Petersburg, VA: 34 hours annual delay, #77 (tie)

rich

 

San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX: 44 hours annual delay, #33

sa

 

Sacramento, CA: 43 hours annual delay, #35 (tie)

sac

 

San Diego, CA: 42 hours annual delay, #43

sd

 

Seattle-Tacoma, WA: 63 hours annual delay, #7

seatac

 

Salt Lake City-Provo, UT: 37 hours annual delay, #66

slc

 

St. Louis-Clayton, MO-IL: 43 hours annual delay, #35 (tie)

stl

 

Tampa-St. Petersburg, FL: 41 hours annual delay, #45 (tie)

tam

 

Toledo, OH-MI: 38 hours annual delay, #55 (tie)

tol

 

Tucson, AZ: 47 hours annual delay, #23 (tie)

tuc

 

Tulsa-Broken Arrow, OK: 44 hours annual delay, #33 (tie)

tul

 

Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA: 45 hours annual delay, #29 (tie)

vab

 

Surprised to see that the Urban Mobility Scorecard shows Tucson having the #23rd worst congestion, which is significant, while Google’s simulation shows virtually no traffic at all. Tucson also benefits from a well-planned downtown streetcar and year-round good weather for bicycling.

Looking around the nation at congestion scenarios also underscores the folly of Rust Belt metros’ investments in highway expansions at the expense of transit budgets. Cities from Indianapolis to Grand Rapids to Pittsburgh have very little congestion relative to the rest of the nation. Even Cincinnati, where traffic is regarded as the worst in Ohio, is much lower on congestion metrics than Oklahoma City, where sprawl and boom-bust growth, in addition to infrastructure disinvestment, have wreaked havoc on cross-metro commutes.

From ruins to riches

I have almost exclusively written about various forms of urban reuse, including adaptive reuse, urban infill, even suburban retrofitting. All of these forms of development, different from green field, obviously require commitment and at least some creativity.

That said, I’m really fascinated by how some historic building types lend themselves perfectly to specific adaptive reuse concepts. For instance, schools are great because old classroom sizes are perfect for a small studio/1br apartment. Combining two classrooms is an easy way to create a large 2br apartment. Developers seem to get this, judging by the sheer volume of school conversions, particularly amongst Ohio’s affordable housing development scene (i.e., what I’m most familiar with). Does it really require creativity and a deep commitment once a concept such as this is proven?

______________

Historic landmarks are not immune to tragedies, whether they be fire, flood, and so on. I’ve seen many landmarks, particularly OKC’s flood-damaged Stage Center, lost to acts of god. Luckily though, I’ve seen some cities pull together to save ruined landmarks.

Omaha’s iconic Old Market was struck with such a travesty when its iconic M’s Pub Building caught fire after a natural gas explosion during a polar vortex event last year:

24292137846_317e052694_h

Property owner Mercer Management announced they would save the building and begin the restoration process immediately. That shows commitment. After worries that the Old Market would lose one of its more iconic buildings, 11 months later all three original tenants are building out these spaces once again:

58194192e54eb-image

____________

Last year, Louisville made national news when its famed Whiskey Row caught fire while extensive rehabilitation work was underway.

635718049863522411-firemcd2

111 Whiskey Row – the three buildings combined as one new asset with 87,000 square feet – is going forward after an insurance settlement covered a large portion (though undisclosed) of the $4 million in damage caused by the fire. The developers, Main Street Revitalization, are a consortium of local preservationists, who have shown a deep commitment to this project. They will be rewarded for their commitment once they open this unique piece of real estate for business. They reportedly expect apartments to lease quickly, and storefronts to fill. Old Forester Distillery is one of 5 new distilleries opening up nearby:

whiskeyrowboards-1750xx3000-1689-0-123

______________

The Central Hotel in Galion, Ohio was a typical small town feel-good story. The historic hotel in the town center had been renovated in 2004 into affordable senior housing – both providing needed affordable housing in this community, and keeping the lights on in one of its better buildings. Then in 2015 it was discovered that shoddy construction work done by contractors had left the foundation and entire building unstable, prompting an immediate evacuation and relocation of residents. At this point, it would have been cheaper to demolish the building and build replacement units on the site.

5845b654dfcd8-image

Luckily for Galion, and despite the shoddy construction work, this property was managed and operated by deeply-committed non-profit partners who were willing to absorb losses to stand by this project. Beyond LEADS (a community action agency in Mid Ohio) and OCCH (a non-profit housing syndicator), the City of Galion also came in clutch by providing a small CDBG grant to help save the building. Every little bit helped, and through the power of leveraging, the building is back in service and residents are moved back in.

________________

All of these properties, suffice it to say, an average developer would have walked away from. Or worse yet, postured as “committed” by proposing to wipe the slate clean. Rather than that, these properties will continue to shine in a new light, and hopefully serve as models for other urban landmarks that may be devastated by fire. Congrats to everyone involved in the above projects, and here’s to your success. Undoubtedly, the market will support and reward these groups for their commitment to finishing the job right.

Cincy streetcar “flounders” ?

I was struck by this headline on Planetizen.com: Cincinnati Ridership Falling as Service Flounders

Surprised by this, after readings accounts of the successful high ridership, I clicked on the article. When I read the article, I read this:

“Overall, ridership is 53 percent above expectations. But a closer look at the numbers day-by-day shows declining ridership since it opened Sept. 9.”

So this streetcar just opened three months ago. It saw huge crowds in its first month, when a lot of events are held in the late summer, and since then its ridership has fallen a little, but is still over 50% above expectations overall. That reminds me I need to change my Brita filter. This streetcar is already a “floundering” failure.

I was curious about this and what other headlines there might be regarding the streetcar. CityLab (whom I’ve called out for this several times already) is already saying “Cincinnati has a streetcar problem” (an actual headline).

They’ve been similarly spreading overwhelmingly negative media about other new streetcars in other cities, and not even calling for measures that would improve these transit systems and help them serve more riders. It appears that the Cincinnati streetcar has been hampered by high ridership, huge crowds, long waits, low frequencies, and particularly by traffic lights that disfavor favor the streetcar. The programmed traffic pattern through Cincinnati is east-to-west, for ease of getting on interstates, and not north-to-south which is how the city has been growing.

I think this is a case where planners and public officials need to get out of the way of economic development and RE development. Be a part of the solution, not part of the problem. I see city planners, their media, and their research organizations, spending way too much effort opposing economic development. They are fixated on the problem, not the solution.

In the case of Cincinnati, it appears that the project was badly planned, but is still achieving some success in spite of that. The connection to UC was canceled. The streetcar is operating at some of SORTA’s lowest frequencies, with several bus lines with more frequent service. It was planned to fail, which it just hasn’t. This can (should) still be a success.