The booting ordinance we passed last fall requires parking lots that choose to boot to provide a written receipt to parking customers when they pay their parking fee (whether by an attendant or parking machine).  The ordinance had gone into effect in Deep Ellum on January 1 of this year and that resolved their booting problems.  Unfortunately, the problem then migrated to Downtown Dallas.  After receiving numerous complaints from Downtown business owners and visitors, Councilmember Medrano and I proposed to move up the effective date of the ordinance so Downtown visitors and businesses didn’t have to spend another five months unprotected from unscrupulous booting.

Councilmember Medrano and I called the parking lot owners in Downtown last week and told them what we planned to bring to the council this week.  Nearly all of the parking lot owners were supportive, explaining that they had abandoned booting as a means of enforcement once it became clear that booting threatened Downtown’s long-term health by driving off visitors.

One councilmember suggested that if booting were less convenient to parking lot owners as a means of enforcement, they would start towing cars.  While that’s possible, that hasn’t been the experience in Deep Ellum.  Barry Annino, president of the Deep Ellum Foundation, explained to the council today that towing hasn’t increased in Deep Ellum since the booting ordinance took effect there at the beginning of the year.  Instead, the parking lots are doing what they did before they began booting — ticketing cars that didn’t pay the proper fee.  So there hasn’t been an uptick in towing.

Some councilmembers opposed the change because they believe parking lot owners need another five months to implement an electronic payment system on their lots.  But I question whether that’s a genuine concern or just a stalling tactic because (1) parking lots have the option not to boot or to use an attendant rather than a machine and (2) no one has implemented these machines in Deep Ellum, despite having had five months (August – December 31) to do so.

After about an hour of debate, the council overwhelmingly approved the ordinance, which will go into effect tomorrow:

FOR:  Hunt, Medrano, Jasso, Davis, Hill, Atkins, Salazar, Leppert, Caraway, Koop, Margolin

AGAINST:  Natinsky, Neumann, Kadane, Allen

Yesterday, I attended the “groundmaking” for the Woodall Rodgers Park, a 5.2 acre deck park that will be constructed above the Woodall Rodgers Freeway between Pearl and St. Paul streets.

I’ve had the opportunity to work closely with the Woodall Rodgers Park Foundation (the non-profit that has raised private funds for the park and which will operate and maintain the park).  Over the last several years, I’ve worked with the Foundation to ensure that the park was included in the 2006 bond program, to make Harwood Street pedestrian-only within the park, and to coordinate with surrounding stakeholders.  In 2006, I joined them in visiting Millennium Park in Chicago and Bryant Park in New York City.  In addition to touring the parks, we visited with community leaders who had been key to the parks’ creation.

The Real Estate Council sponsored a breakfast before the groundmaking ceremony.  TREC has been instrumental in the park’s creation — originating the concept and providing seed money.  The breakfast featured Tony Jones (pictured), Chancellor of the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, who gave a very engaging presentation on “Millennium Park, Chicago: Art, Entertainment and Economics, a model for Woodall Rodgers Park and Downtown Dallas.”

You can check out some pictures from the breakfast and groundmaking as well as from our 2006 trip.

Newsrack “condos” have begun replacing the clutter of individual racks in Downtown Dallas. All the individual newsracks in the foreground of the photo will be relocated into the newsrack condo in the background. The new newsracks are a partnership with between the City and the Dallas Morning News.

The new newsracks lessen the visual clutter in Downtown and make the sidewalks more walkable. I’ve been working on this for several years and it’s very exciting to see the newsracks finally installed.

I’m not a huge fan of mid-century modern architecture.  It’s always seemed a little kitschy and plain to me.  The traditionally-designed Adolphus, the Magnolia, the Kirby, those buildings have style and class to spare.  But I’ve gotta say, mid-century modern is growing on me.  It’s still not my favorite, but I’m starting to appreciate the clean lines and blocks of color.  It’s something.  It’s the Jetson’s vision of the future made real (only without the jet-packs, air-cars, or robots, unfortunately).

The Statler Hilton (aka, Dallas Grand) is the quintessential mid-century modern building, with its blue glass paneled facade and Sinatra lounges.  Last week, I toured the building with Karl Zavitkovsky, Director of Economic Development for the city, and the style grew on me a little more.

As you’ll see in the pictures, the building needs some love.  But it has great bones and lots of cool mid-century flourishes.  I don’t know the structural integrity of the building, what it’d cost to do asbestos abatement, HVAC expenses, etc.  But aesthetically, the Statler’s no worse off than the Merc or Atmos buildings.  And the view is amazing.

I’ve heard again and again from developers that the eight foot ceilings are the killers — they’re just too low for today’s marketplace.  But the configuration of the rooms, combined with the wall of windows, make the ceilings seem higher than eight feet, and the rooms don’t feel small or cramped at all.

Imagine Main Street Garden is done, the UNT Law School has moved into the municipal courts building, and the modern streetcar is up and running on Commerce (with its mate on Elm).  The Statler could be one of the coolest addresses in Downtown.

(And I didn’t wear the cool headgear throughout the tour — only in the stairwells and basement where it was dusty and/or smelly.)

This morning, the Council unanimously voted to delay the booting ordinance until it can be considered by the Council’s Transportation Committee in August.

The delay was critical for those of us who want an ordinance with teeth that protects our restaurants and retailers that have lost customers due to unscrupulous booting.

Here’s what happened: The booting issue was presented to the Transportation Committee of which both Councilmember Medrano and I are members. We represent the two districts most impacted by the booting problem: Downtown and Deep Ellum.

On June 1, the Transportation Committee discussed the issue, but had outstanding questions that needed to be resolved before deciding the issue. At the end of the meeting, the committee wanted to: bring the issue back to the Transportation Committee, get input from impacted business owners, allow the committee two hours to discuss the issue, and hopefully, reach consensus on the booting ordinance.

Despite the best efforts of Transportation Chair Linda Koop, it was not possible to find a time to hold a special committee meeting where a quorum of the committee would be present before council recess in July. (There are many special meetings crammed in right before the July recess, making it difficult to find time for yet another meeting.)

Staff had proposed an ordinance similar to the City of Houston’s, which requires parking lots to provide a written receipt to their patrons. Then if a car is wrongly booted, the patron has proof of payment and can dispute the wrongful booting. Having talked with business owners who have lost customers due to wrongful booting, they like the receipt system because it will protect their customers.

The issue was presented to the Economic Development Committee, of which neither Councilmember Medrano nor I am a voting member. So we could attend the meeting, but could not make a motion or vote on the matter. The committee recommended approval of staff’s proposed ordinance with a significant change: a parking lot owner could EITHER provide a receipt OR use something called “video monitoring.” Video monitoring means the parking lot owner doesn’t issue receipts, but instead a parking attendant opens up the money box and videotapes the money in each slot. In theory, the money box is tamper-proof, and the parking lot owner cannot remove the money from any of the boxes before videotaping (making it look like someone hadn’t paid when they had).

There’s a real problem with that. Unless the city hires money box monitors who regularly inspect the money boxes to ensure they are indeed tamper-proof, there’s no guarantee that the parking lot attendant won’t remove money from boxes, videotape the “empty” payment boxes, then boot the parking patrons who in fact paid. Without a receipt, the parking patrons have no evidence or recourse.

Also, the video monitoring system puts all the evidence in the hands of the (possibly dishonest) parking lot owner, when it is the parking lot customers — the potential victims — who should be protected with proof of payment in their possession.

Councilmember Medrano shares these concerns and, due to the many outstanding questions (including cost of implementing the receipt system, which some have argued is as little as $200 a month), the council agreed to delay the vote on booting until it has been considered again by the Transportation Committee in August.

The part of Central Expressway we’re talking about is not the elevated portion, but the part that is a city street in Downtown. From Commerce to the Farmers Market, Central is a nice two-way boulevard with a green, treed median. But from Commerce to Live Oak, the street narrows and becomes one-way, creating a complicated and arguably dangerous entry to Downtown.

The new alignment will remove part of Pearl Street that divides a Downtown park, and widen Central to create a two-way boulevard. Rather than moving forward with the proposed alignment (which was 9 lanes of concrete), I asked Downtown Dallas and Larry Good to help redesign the road to make it greener and more pedestrian-friendly. Thanks to their help, we now have a better entry to Downtown, and an expanded park.

	[mappress]

For my first legitimate blog post of the new year, I want to focus on Downtown and the next step in its evolution.

Not to get all Andy Rooney at the very start of the new year, but you know what bugs me? Folks who criticize Downtown Dallas when they haven’t visited in a decade.

My husband and I lived in Downtown between 1998 and the end of 2000. NOTHING was going on. There were fewer than 500 residents and little to do. The last decade has seen incredible changes: Today, Downtown is home to more than 3700 residents and growing. Our Arts District is exploding with three new venues, a renovated arts magnet high school, two awesome historic churches (one just renovated, another about to begin), new offices, and new residential development. We’re about to get not one, not two, but THREE major new parks in Downtown (Woodall Rodgers, Main Street, and Belo). Stone Street Gardens is taking off, and we’ve got the Farmers Market, Dealey Plaza, the West End, and the Convention Center rounding out the mix.

Add to the that the projects just outside the loop: Victory, Deep Ellum, Uptown, the Cedars, Old City Park, the Katy Trail, and the Trinity Park. Cranes are everywhere. The Merc’s lights are back on. Great things are happening. We should have an amazing Downtown.

So why doesn’t it feel that way?

Lack of connectivity.

Having islands of activity isn’t enough. To have an amazing Downtown, to see the benefit of all the energy and work and money that’s gone into getting Downtown to this point, we have to connect the dots. We’ve got to make it easy and enjoyable to get from Victory to the West End over to the Nasher and on to the Farmers Market. We have to give people the opportunity to check out Dealey Plaza, head over to a picnic at Woodall Rodgers Park, then venture to Deep Ellum for some great live music.

It’s only then that our Downtown will feel amazingly active, vibrant, and interesting. It’s that combustion of intense connectivity that will ignite our Downtown. This is the next CRITICAL STEP for Downtown success.

How do we do that? Create a streetcar SYSTEM. I emphasize “system” because it can’t just be one line. Or two. It needs to be at least three lines to connect enough points of interest to ignite this transformation. We can’t half-ass it and then wonder why it didn’t work.

It also needs to be free. People will ride it if it’s free. A payment system is cumbersome, hard to enforce, and will reduce ridership – especially of tourists. The point isn’t to make money, it’s to attract passengers, encourage cross-pollination of venue visitors, and bring our Downtown closer together.

Whatever the ultimate routes selected, the streetcar system needs to be composed of simple, straight shots. No complex loops or labyrinthine twists and turns. Make it simple and people will feel confident that if they get on, they will get exactly where they want to go.

We also need to make sure all the streetcars are air-conditioned and heated. People will ride it if they are comfortable.

Most importantly, most critically, we’ve got to ensure that the system hits all the major points of interest in Downtown and that it complements the second DART light rail alignment. Here’s where I’d like to see the streetcar go:

A Map With Some Ideas for Where a Downtown Streetcar Could Go

Why streetcars and not just buses? The rails embedded in concrete provide a sense of certainty as to where the trolley’s going. People are more comfortable getting on a streetcar than a bus, especially if they are unfamiliar with the area. Buses are a crapshoot — Is it the right bus number? Why is the bus turning here? Where will I wind up? With a streetcar, you know what you’re getting.

Aside from bringing Downtown points of interest closer together, a streetcar system will offer other benefits as well, both economic and environmental. Other cities have found remarkable redevelopment resulting from streetcar lines, and we can see the same here, particularly in areas in need of revitalization like Deep Ellum. Getting people out of their cars and onto a trolley will also help improve our air quality.

There’s already some support on the council for a streetcar system in Downtown, including Councilmember Linda Koop, who is chair of the Transportation Committee. Linda has so much transportation experience and has visited other cities with streetcar systems. Her knowledge about mass transit, funding processes, and streetcar systems will be very helpful as we go forward. Councilmember Pauline Medrano also represents Downtown (including Victory, the West End, the Cedars, and Deep Ellum) and along with Linda and I is serving on the DART policy group for the second rail alignment.

There are a lot of details to figure out, not the least of which is finding funding sources (DART is tapped). By August, we’ll have an “alternatives analysis” for the streetcar system, which is really the first step in securing federal funding. It’s also a critical step in figuring out where we can and can’t put the rail lines.

Now, here’s the thing. I’m impatient. I want to see this streetcar up and running tomorrow. Today, if possible. But that’s not going to happen. We’ll push as fast as we can, but getting the funding, figuring out technical issues, creating an organization to oversee the system, building the thing, all of this will take a few years (how many, we don’t know yet — we’ll get a better handle on a realistic timeline as we go through the streetcar analysis).

Our need for a connector can’t wait several years. Too much is happening in our Downtown now, and we need to capitalize on the successful islands of activity right now. So, we’re going to look at an intermediate solution. I was cold to this idea at first, but have warmed up to it: We’re going to investigate a “trolley on wheels” system that will mimic the trolley line until the streetcar gets up and running. Right now we’re at the very, very initial stage of investigation, looking at how much a system like this would cost and how we’d pay for it. We’d like to do a study run to see how well it works, then expand it. We can’t, however, become satisfied with our trolley-on-wheels system and lose sight of our ultimate goal of creating a true streetcar system.

Just collecting this info and figuring out funding is several months away, so this isn’t going to happen overnight. But it will happen.

So why should the city subsidize this business? Four reasons.

First, in 2001 the city REQUIRED that the developer who renovated the Interurban Building put in a grocery store in order to get historic tax abatements to rehab the vacant, dirty building. That’s right. The developer didn’t come up with the grocery store idea, the City did. The City knew exactly how many apartments and condos were going to be built over the next few years, what the surrounding population would be to support the market, and knew that it would be hard for the grocery store to scrape by. But the City saw the grocery store as a necessary amenity to lure residents to Downtown. Now that the City required this significant investment, it would be wrong to shrug and say, “Oops, sorry it didn’t work out.”

Second, Downtown business leaders and developers are stepping up and putting in money of their own. They understand the Market is a huge draw for new residents, and an important amenity for those already there. Losing the Market could impair developers’ ability to sell units. They have seen the population growth expected for Downtown over the next couple of years, recognize that it will likely be able to sustain the market in two years, and they’re willing to make that investment. If the private sector steps up and believes that this project is indispensable to Downtown, the City should step up as well, considering we’re the ones who mandated it.

Third, if Dallas is going to meet its goal of tripling the population of Downtown over the next several years, the City MUST support “meat and potatoes” businesses in Downtown. It’s the little things, like grocery stores, that help transform a group of city blocks into a neighborhood. The Council’s Economic Development Committee has requested that city staff focus less on high-end, esoteric shops in Downtown as it has done in the past, and more on residential necessities like drycleaners, grocery stores, and other neighborhood shops. Time and time again, residents tell me how important the Market is to their experience of living Downtown, and we need to support one of the pioneering stores at this crucial time.

Fourth, the Market opened to great fanfare. It was to be a harbinger of great things to come for Downtown Dallas. Letting it close now would send a signal that our Downtown is stumbling.

As more residents populate Downtown in the next two years, they’ll bring their dollars with them and help make the Market self-sustaining. It’s also important to keep in mind that the City and the private investor group will have the authority to approve and oversee the Market’s operator, will have financial oversight, and will reevaluate the Market’s financials in a year to make sure we’re on track. If not, we won’t continue to financially support the Market, and will have only invested $225,000.

A strong, vibrant Downtown is the key to a strong, vibrant city. Our Downtown is at a critical stage in its infancy. It’s still a toddler struggling to stand on its own, and there will be times when we have to intervene to support it. Now is one of those times. For a small investment, we can keep the doors open for this important Downtown amenity that has become a symbol of Downtown revitalization.

The Market is an important city asset, providing a place where local farmers can sell their products. Unfortunately, the Market has had some challenges responding to the needs of residents and vendors, and the goal of the study was to develop a plan to improve the market and increase business.

The plan suggests infrastructure improvements, creating a better traffic flow, having an independent management company oversee the Market, and focusing on unique local businesses (as opposed to national chains).

Vendors attended the meeting on Monday, and one of their concerns was that they did not feel involved in the process. I will be holding a meeting with them, and also meeting with Friends of Farmers Market to get input.

I welcome your thoughts. (angela.hunt@dallascityhall.com)

Councilmember Blaydes expressed concern about the proximity of the Market to the Homeless Assistance Center, and explained he didn’t want to support funding for the Market because the HAC would be such a detriment to business.

I would point out, however, that private investors are quickly purchasing property in this location and planning hundreds of new townhomes and apartments. They don’t seem to be deterred by the HAC. If they are investing there, and bringing new residents to the Farmers Market area, we should similarly invest in this important city asset.

You may review the proposal here.

At the same time, I am mindful of the fact that most of the residential projects being built are geared toward the affluent, with one property I know selling its units for about $600 per square foot. While this is tremendous news on many levels, we also need to make sure that we are planning for more affordable housing in our city core, to ensure that folks from all walks of life are welcome in our Downtown. I am convinced that providing a range of housing opportunities for all income levels will not only fill a need among low- to moderate-income residents, but will also help create a healthy Downtown that will endure various economic cycles with resiliency.

That is why I have been so supportive of the affordable housing project proposed by Central Dallas Ministries, a non-profit organization. CDM has proposed a $23M affordable housing project (all of which is subject to property taxes) at the abandoned office building at 511 N. Akard.

Originally, CDM had proposed constructing a total of 209 units, with 100 units being “single-room occupancy” units (“SROs”) set aside as permanent housing for the formerly homeless. Another 100 units would be affordable housing, and the remaining 9 would be market rate. NO homeless services would be provided on-site. The ground floor would be for retail and/or a small cafe, and two floors would be used for CDM offices.

I’m going to digress just a minute, so bear with me. First, what is an SRO? An SRO is an efficiency apartment designed for only one person. Ideally, it has its own kitchen and bathroom (like the 511 N. Akard project), though some do not. SROs have proven very effective at getting people off the street and back into a normal lifestyle.

The use of SROs as an effective tool to combat homelessness was a key point in the City’s 10-Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness. Adopted in 2004, the plan set forth policies and practices that the city would need to adopt to address homelessness. Among the primary points was a recommendation to increase SROs in Dallas. (The goal is over 700 such units.) Right now, Dallas has 130 SROs. For comparison, Houston has over 1000.

I should also note at this point that using 511 N. Akard for affordable/homeless housing did not require a zoning change from the city. In fact, the only reason the city had any input at all into this project was because CDM was asking two things from the city: (1) the City’s support for the project to receive financial support from the State of Texas and (2) $1.7M from the Homeless Assistance Center bonds (which provided for some funding for SROs).

Now, back to 511 N. Akard: I met with CDM and neighboring property owners, and corresponded with many others about this project. While many nearby property owners were supportive, some expressed concern that there would be too great a concentration of homeless, which might bring its own share of problems.

In response, CDM reduced the number of units set aside as permanent housing for the homeless from 100 to 50, with 150 affordable housing units, and 9 market rate units. In response to concerns about safety and other issues, we placed a number of conditions on the property in return for the city’s financial support. The conditions allow the city to approve the management company, retailers, and security plan, among other things. A criminal background check will be conducted, and no sex offenders will be allowed to live there.

There are some developers that just don’t want affordable housing in Downtown. I heard one remark that this is too great a concentration of affordable housing, and that the “optimum” mix is 20% affordable versus 80% market. Well, if he’d agree to make 20% of his units affordable housing, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Instead, these developers who decry the evils of affordable housing refuse to provide such housing opportunities, and leave it to non-profits to carry the load. That’s fine, but those developers shouldn’t cry about it when such projects are proposed, particularly when they were quite content to seek and accept public funds for their own projects.

Before fully committing to support the project, I wanted to do a little research on SROs and how they’ve affected the surrounding community in other cities. In particular, I wanted to see how Texas cities dealt with SROs. One of the projects I looked at was New Hope Housing in Houston. I spoke with them at length about their projects in downtown Houston. Importantly, they are in Downtown near upscale lofts, and with an all-girls school nearby.

Laura Hipps from New Hope told me that New Hope experienced the “Not In My Back Yard” syndrome at the beginning, but soon won over its neighbors by (1) working with them in the design phase and (2) proving to be a good neighbor. I also called up the all-girls Catholic school to see if they had had any problems with the New Hope, and at first they didn’t even know what property I was talking about. When I explained, the school representative said “Oh, yeah, I know where you’re talking about. I drive by that every day in on the way to work. They’re a great facility.”

On March 28, the City Council met in special session and approved the city’s support for the project and the use of $1.75M in bond funds. Unless all other funding is in place, we will not be out any money, so there’s no risk. Last week, I spoke in favor of the project at a hearing before the State of Texas. CDM will know by June if the project will receive state support.

Two weeks ago, I visited New Hope to tour two of their Downtown Houston facilities. (See the pictures.) What impressed me most was how clean the properties were, and how there was NO loitering in front of the facilities. (I think that’s because there are no on-site services and entry is restricted.)

I also had the opportunity to meet with Perry, a resident at New Hope. Perry is a Vietnam vet who had had a couple of strokes. He had been living on the streets until he came to New Hope six months ago. Although mostly self-sufficient, Perry needed a little help, structure, and support, along with a roof over his head. Perry gave me a tour of his new home, and it’s great — very homey. Other residents include seniors and others on fixed income. Residents also have a communal library, garden, and TV room.

I was very impressed by New Hope, and appreciated their hospitality. We really need to step up here in Dallas and plan for where we want to put SROs throughout our city so they aren’t all clustered. The homeless aren’t going away, and we need to follow through on the recommendations set forth in our 10-Year Plan.