Its Time We Plan For Downtown, Yes?

The Herald-Leader published an editorial back in the middle of February of 1982 commenting initially about the loss of the Meyer's clothing store.  Their conclusion was that "The differential between downtown closings and openings continues to grow."  Things were getting worse rather than better.

Despite the positive claim by Marvin Meyers that he was there and there for good, made only a few years earlier, just a couple of short months after his death the store would be closing.  Is it ironic that Marvin's comments were made on the occasion of their first suburban mall outlet?  Was it simply the suburban commercial expansion which led to the downtown decay?  Hardly.

The editors felt they could lay blame to a number of influences:  The rise of the automobile, the proliferation of suburbs, the changing patterns of work/shopping habits -- even the use of bypass roadways around downtown.  Maybe this was the general feeling of the public but other forces were also at work.

Downtown was becoming a site for bigger and "better" office buildings, in the theory that a denser daytime population would benefit the businesses of downtown.  With each new building came the loss of retailers unable to afford space in them.  The evening and nighttime population densities were totally ignored.  Although there was a known need to add downtown residential little was done to encourage it.

What the editors settled on was the need to preserve that which was the "charm" of Lexington and to build around it.  They felt the "success of a suburban mall in the city" depended on harmonizing with the buildings already in  place.  In today's hindsight, the success of the suburban mall is to make them look more like an urban downtown, complete with a substantial residential component.

Lexington has done very little to "alter" its suburban malls.  One was demolished in favor of a large religious facility that has brought little urban activity on a daily basis.  Another was substantially demolished in favor of a university controlled health care facility, again bringing little urban activity.  Our other mall style retail still struggle to survive without resorting to adding a retail component.  That will leave the soon to be opened Summit at Fritz Farm development to test the theory.

In the 35 years since this editorial was written, only a small number of residential units have been added to downtown despite several plans brought forth.  A very small number had anything to do with renovating spaces above the existing retail or other adaptive reuse of commercial structures.  I am aware that commercial lending rules make it a bit more difficult to finance these endeavors, but the City should be able to provide some assistance.

Downtown Lexington has more than enough underutilized space to forestall the need to demolish more buildings with "charm" in order to expand its residential capacity.  I hope that it is not left to the market forces create a sustainable residential mix for downtown.  I also hope that we can build more mixed use residential with "real" downtown support retail as a ground floor element.

Maybe this round of Comprehensive Plan considerations will include what we need to do to improve our downtown, especially our underutilized parcels, and create more tax revenue generating uses for Lexington.  Let me know what you think..

Eastern Kentucky's Agricultural Box

Last week, in an op-ed to the local paper, Bill Best wrote “When articles are written about Appalachia, the most frequently left-out words are "gardening" and "agriculture." Yet Eastern Kentucky was once self-sufficient in food production and could easily be again.” As true as that wording is, it is difficult to conceive that most people don't think that way at all. 

I have never thought of Eastern Kentucky as a hot bed of food production but the hill folk, from the settlers on forward had to feed themselves some way. I can also relate first hand that there are many fine cooks who have made their way out of the hills. Eastern Kentuckians have survived of much more that coal jobs.

There has been a lot of talks lately about what could or should be done to aide in the relief of the region's economic problems, but they all seem to center on incentives or developments which are generally better suited to urbanized areas. A large industrial park or an outlet mall style shopping center need both population density and transportation access to be successful. These are items that the area lacks.

While progress has been made in reclaiming many a strip mine site and the coal companies conducting “mountain top removal” are required to put things back to as “natural” as they can, preparing the land for agricultural production is not on anybody's radar. Neither the coal company's nor the local's, since Eastern Kentucky is not a “farming” area.

Best points out, correctly, that the necessary skill sets are not being handed down from the grandparents, who eked out a living on poor land, or the parents, many of whom could not wait to leave the area, or the education community, which is preparing our youth for global competition. The idea that having a place to call home and having it be able to sustain its residents simply escapes many of us these days.

If east coast investors were the foundation of the coal companies that caused such damage, could it be farm investors that will begin the turn around? A Lexington based company, American Farm Investors, has been purchasing farm properties in Central Kentucky, then utilizing Kentucky farmers and selling grain to Kentucky end-users. What would prevent a similar group of investors from making agricultural land out of reclaimed land?

It may be time to redefine the box that is the concept of Eastern Kentucky agriculture.

Lexington Has An Image Problem !

Believe it or not, Lexington has an image problem.

The problem does not lie in whether we are the home of a high caliber basketball program or the capital of thoroughbred horse breeding. No, our stumbling block is that we either cannot see or refuse to see our city as others see us.  This is something that we NEED to fix - soon.

Events of the last week seem to have gone out of their way to drive this realization home to me.

First, were a few quotes from Erik Carlson, the new editor for Business Lexington, as a way of introduction. He said, “We’re fans of Lexington and want the city to succeed economically... But we’re not a cheerleader. We can’t be. … Dissension is necessary for proper growth. It must be respectful, but being polite and keeping everyone happy all the time cannot trump Lexington’s desire to advance as a city.”

Second, was the discussions of the Planning Commission's work session, where I understand the staff's proposed wording of plan elements appear to paint Lexington in a bad light. Having worked closely with planning staff members for over 40 years, I feel that I know the city's shortcomings and the staff's desire to overcome them. Identifying our many problems and proposing reasonable solutions should be the very starting point for a 20 year plan. Like Business Lexington, the Commission should not be a cheerleader. They should be the leaders in pushing the good solutions.

Back in 1929, when Lexington's first Comprehensive Plan was being written, the planners looked at what the existing conditions were and looked to remedy the problematic ones. They proposed a city in which they wanted their children (and others) to live. Subsequent plans seem to have backed off the identification of problem areas and more emphasis of making what we have available to more of the population. Strange, have we not seen the growing disparity in our economic classes both here, nationally and globally?

When the staff speaks of growing suburban poverty levels and a lack of adequate basic services like food and healthcare within an easily traveled distance, should that be ignored or downplayed? When the need for affordable housing is demonstrated, should certain factions on the Commission question the authenticity of the demonstration? It may be time for those making the guiding decisions for Lexington's future to take off the rose colored glasses.

From a post by Carl Schramm, a well respected economist comes a different view pertaining to urban planning. It does have some nuggets of truth and maybe some elements which Lexington can consider in future plans.

Several things are almost never spoken of when perusing a community's comprehensive plan. These items may also be considered benchmarks as to the success of following such a plan.

Plans seldom speak of what the city’s population might be at the end of the planning period. They may have varying, wide ranges of population but nothing specific for having followed the plans recommendations. A good measure of success is how many people chose to live there or have the jobs to keep them in a particular place.

Plans have no answer to the question of what the profile of persons in poverty will be by the target year. Since the usual goal of a plan is to toward success for all of a community's residents then the change in poverty profile should me measurable or predicted. Any plan should have goals and recommendations to stabilize and grow the local economy, with the ultimate purpose of making it sustainable for all.

I don't think that I have ever seen a plan which discussed measures concerning the day to day operations of running a municipality. Most plans never relate the location or timing of land use decisions to the true cost of providing city services. Should a plan be as cognizant of where city employment goes as it is how it affects the long term pension and retirement programs.

So, what do these plans speak of? 

Many cities give themselves high marks on their diversity of population, the cultural mix evident in their public schools, yet the US education system is behind just about all of the component countries. They trumpet the stability of most neighborhoods and praise the strength neighborhood fabric while ignoring the frayed edges and the sometime missing elements that are so desperately needed.

Environmental sustainability is spoken of strictly in terms of the natural environment while leaving the talk of sustainable infrastructure investments to the whims of politics. Are the green, environmentally friendly buses or high mileage city vehicles any more important than the lower wattage LED street lighting which is available? Would our city streets last longer if we restricted the weight of not only our own city vehicles but many private ones to boot?

How about the changing nature of our economy? We set goals for increasing employment but rarely lay out the steps for reducing the current unemployment levels. When we talk of creating new neighborhoods, why are they centered around the creative class and called “Arts” or “Entertainment” districts? Can the creative class not build a district that they want for themselves? 

If a plan is to be useful it may need to see cities first as the economic communities that they are and have been from their beginning. “Build it and an economy will come” is proving to be a fallacy , it was the other way around. People came and the city followed later. It was the commerce which the people brought that enabled the city to grow. Neighborhoods, like cities, that no longer produce sufficient commerce to sustain themselves become dependent on others. 

But can a neighborhood produce more than it consumes?

New technology in residential solar and wind generation can,under certain conditions, produce a reverse flow on electric meters. Combine that with lower wattage, yet brighter, LED lamps and you will aid in the power part of that question.

Increased connectivity, both vehicular and pedestrian, will reduce the consumption levels of outside resources, raising sustainability chances.

Home or community gardens will reduce the dependence on external food production.

So, WHY do our plans not encompass the discussions which can bring about a real progress in Lexington?

I surmise that it may be the above referenced growing disparity in our population classes. Our Planning Commission members serve in a purely voluntary role, and are supposed to represent the various interests of the whole community. Many will say that they came from humble beginnings and have worked hard to achieve some level of success. But who now represents those who have failed, for whatever reason, to escape that humble situation, or fallen through no fault of their own.

I see on our Commission, representatives of the farmers and downtown, our home builders and developers, our neighborhoods and even racial issues. I do not see an advocate for the homeless or housing challenged. I do not see truly innovative entrepreneurs pressing for alternative methods of progressive development.

Planners do not get off Scot free either. The planning field has a serious flaw. They have no reliable source for the candid, consistent critique of their plans. We award great plans but we don’t scold bad ones. Why is that? It’s because planners don’t have a consistent logic for what makes a great plan (and conversely, a bad one).

So, is there some which can be done to change out image problem?

Whither A State Of Transportation?

Sometimes it is quite difficult to determine on what subject I want to write and at other times the subject just leaps at me. Lately I have been reading about the transportation situation facing us locally and nationally and how we will pay for it.

With all of the construction workers out of work will a resumption of the highway building and other major building projects help solve the unemployment problem? Will spending more money on highways prove sensible while Americans are driving less and the younger generation is buying fewer automobiles?

Back at the end of March, the architecture critic for the Philadelphia Inquirer Inga Saffron, posited that perhaps we American's are a bit too haphazard about how we allocate our transportation funds. We tend to push for lane and intersection improvements to some of our arterial streets in Lexington, huge Interstate interchanges in downtown Louisville, and massive new bridge projects in Cincinnati and Louisville. But, when it comes to any sort of mass transit style proposal the masses go all livid about the freedoms of movement and choice which will be infringed.

Highway funding is becoming increasingly tight, in part because Congress and States are unwilling to raise the gasoline tax on steadily rising fuel prices. The American Society of Civil Engineers believe that we are so far behind on infrastructure repairs that they recently gave an overall D+ to the conditions of our nation's bridges and roads. One must realize that it is in the best interest of the ASCE to chase new construction projects for their members. I personally feel that this grade is not from design and age, but from simple overuse of a “free”amenity.

Around the same time, a writer for the Washington Post revealed that the famous Capital Beltway was slowly dying beneath the turning wheels of about a quarter-million cars a day. As they called it, “turning to mush”before their eyes. In what sounds like an excerpt from one of our Council work sessions, “... the older base layers under the asphalt, the surface is not able to absorb the pounding the way it used to...” was used to describe the continuing situation.

I don't believe that the Beltway or any of our primary arterial roadways will die, but they will need to be relieved of much of the stress to which we put them. U.S. drivers, and the commerce on which they rely, are riding on baby-boom-generation roadways, which like us boomers ourselves are no longer so steady and sound. Nearly a third of the nation’s major roads currently need significant repair or replacement, with a far higher percentage in the busiest urban areas, to meet the demand now placed on them.

Bad roads are partly a cause of sticker creep at the checkout aisle, just as the the cost of fixing them is about to cause sticker shock at the gas pump. Delays and bad roads add to the $25 billion in goods delivered nationwide every day which is naturally added to price tags at supermarkets and department stores.

Many state's officials see roads that need replacement and highways that need to be expanded. They cite statistics which show vehicle travel jumped by 39 percent from 1990 to 2008. Despite an acknowledged decline in vehicle miles traveled over the past 5 years, the forecast is to increase another 35 percent by 2030. 

Add to all of the above the comments I heard at the forum on climate change held last week at the University of Kentucky. 

In his presentation on looking for “Free-Enterprise Approaches to Energy Security and Climate Change.”, Bob Inglis, former U.S. representative from South Carolina, expressed his thoughts that sometime, in the near future, we will be traveling the highways in packs of high-speed, robot driven and individually powered vehicles.

According to one description that I have read, this would be a whole new world of cars are packed nose to tail traveling at speeds in excess of current limits. They will weave their way through unmarked junctions, with no traffic lights. Lane markings are non-existent, and stretches of road may switch from being one-way in one direction, to the opposite, with no warning. Perhaps most alarming of all, very few of the “occupants” have even passed a driving test. I see more similarities of riding high speed rail in this than shopping for the family car.

This sounds like Utopia if it occurs out on the open highway lie an Interstate, but do we want this in our urban areas and residential streets? Just when we have made good gains in taking back the streets (Complete Streets planning) from the free-wheeling autos, will we have to redouble our efforts again?

From my personal experience of Interstate driving, I am either passing the casual drivers and the revenue generating long-haul truckers or being passed by, largely singly occupied, long distance commuters, but the common theme is that, unless it is rush hour, we all have plenty of room. 

Efficiency and logic should dictate that these packs of robotic driven vehicles be composed of like vehicles. Trucks with trucks, SUVs with SUVs, single occupants with single occupants on down the line. Also considered should be the fuel and maintenance compatibilities of those allowed in each pack. Sounds like it may be simpler to take the train.

Such vehicles may be much more aware of their own positions and of those vehicles around them, but they also need to be aware of all other animate objects before they are allowed to roam our residential streets. I would worry less about the auto leaving the street than I would about the random child/toy or the stray pet/wild animal entering the roadway.

But, let us assume that all of these possibilities are accounted for and that there will be NO accidents (Yeah, I laughed at that also). If there are no accidents, then there is no one at fault and there is no need for insurance. Norm McDonald, Flo and that Allstate guy will have to join the gecko in the audition line for work. Darryl the “Heavy Hitter” and all of those other law firms will have to fight over the remaining legal claims.

Making further assumptions, I see all of the auto dealers trying to differentiate their models from the other mundane “hop in and let the robot have all of the fun” vehicles out there. There will be no “thrill of the open road” if all are running in packs and we are watching the scenery flying by. The “sports car handling” so familiar to the earliest baby boomers and lacking on most all SUVs and trucks will not be a selling feature unless you are buying antiques.

I worry that the free enterprise of this will inflate the ranks of the unemployed while not solving the infrastructure cost dilemma. Young people are driving less, automobiles are costing more (both initially and over their lifetimes) and the real-time level of wages is stagnant so who will be able to afford such extravagances? And will the roads be there upon which to use them?

Grow Lexington's Economy With Beer?

For those of you interested in our rise in craft breweries and in how they can grow our local economy, or just those who like to buy local, mark your calendars for January 10, 2013.

That is the date for a Webinar titled ”How Can a Microbrewery Grow Your Local Economy?” . Any body truly wanting to grow our local economy will want to hear how other communities are progressing and what their mis-steps were.

It is recognized that microbreweries offer substantial opportunities for communities and that they allow for re-using vacant space, they also create local jobs; attract new companies or expand existing ones; and increase the tax base. We have already seen some of this in Lexington's fledgling efforts.

While registration is not cheap($95 for IEDC members, $135 for Non-members) the information offered could pay dividends all of Central Kentucky.  Please share your comments on what you learn.

A New Face On Residential Land Use?

The Urban Land Institute (ULI) has just about confirmed it in their recent report What’s Next? Real Estate in the New Economy, our unsustainable lifestyle of college graduates getting good jobs and a place of their own, then a starter house while the parents downsize and the grand-parents move to someplace warm to grow old together. It was nice while it lasted but, as evidenced by some long history, it was an aberration and not a realistic scenario.

We have had a hint of its failure over the last decade or so. Fewer folks are making the great salaries and bonus packages than used to and the retirements funded by 401(k)s or Social Security have taken major hits with this latest recession (and even before). Housing prices and the foreclosures debacle have left many without equity or nest egg from which to rise again. Things are NOT going to change over the next decade, even if we come out of this recession, so what are you going to do about it?

“To save money, more of us must either live in larger households or in smaller units.” says the ULI. I can tell you that Mrs Sweeper has been saying that for several years now. That does mean living in mufti-generational houses with the parents living in one area and the grand-parents living in another while the working family has the main space. To many people today, this sounds more like Communist Europe than the late 19^th century standard for most of the world.

The current rate of home ownership is way higher than historically shown to be sustainable and must come down. At the same time the rental market, both smaller units and the larger complexes will see a rejuvenation and may see huge rate hikes for the better maintained ones. The ULI report calls for an expected 300,00 units annually to be built nationwide and I hope that most of them are designed to fit neighborhoods better that he standard complex of today.

I don't see why the apartment houses of the early 20^th century could blend in so well, yet the ones designed after the zoning codes were refined could not. The apartments of Ashland Park or Chevy Chase do not detract from the neighborhood but the units along Alexandria or Cambridge Drs. Seem so out of place. The larger suburban developments just about scream that their residents are just temporary. They might as well be student housing.

One trend that we have seen lately, especially in the newer off campus student housing around UK, is the three and four bedroom apartments with a central entertainment room with kitchen and separate bed/bath suites for the roommates. Gone are the days of shared bathrooms down the hall like in the dorms. Living off campus is more like living at home and for some it is much better. Perhaps this style of apartment living could work for urban families, if we could get past the notion that all children need a yard to play in. What is really needed is the pedestrian access to restaurants, cafes, and parks or recreation centers which adds real value.

The decline of “McMansionized” housing is well documented but they may not be gone for long. They may follow the path of the old style Victorians built in the late19th century and be the typical housing of the multi-generational family culture on the horizon. For a number of our recent immigrants the situation already exists.

One scenario which exists is that with tightening lending standards, (putting down some equity and exhibiting a sound credit history) the rental market re-emerges to meet the multifamily demand. The vacancies will fall and the rents will rise and the institutional investor will re-enter the game. To keep these units affordable, many will need to be located around nsit stops and walkable commercial developments. Massive parking lots around these apartments will not exist.

Our older citizens will increasingly find that, as their financial situations continue to fluctuate their ability to be part of that “gray wave” of seniors relaxing on the beach or cruising the Caribbean is ebbing away. Many more will be aging in place right here in Lexington.

I, along with many others do not care for the idea of living in a “retirement community” and wish to remain a part of the whole community. As such, many of the housing units will have to be age friendly and include the ability of community social services to be provided. This may be done in condominium or apartment style although single family/duplex arrangements may work.

Now is the time for Lexington to look at how and where we will begin to take on these challenges. We can little afford to believe that keeping the long-time “stable” neighborhoods as exempt from change. All neighborhoods are changing. It is just a question of rate of change. In a matter of years, conditions may change which could swing any neighborhood in any number of directions. Plans should be in place to deal with such changes.

Are You Driving Less?

The New York Times is saying that we, as a nation, are driving less than we used to.  Here in Lexington, I am not sure that is the case.

The Times is basing its conclusion on the weekly gasoline report put out by MasterCard in what the call the Spending Pulse.  The gasoline report is one of several reports which look at the transactions gathered from around the country.

Demand for gasoline is down and, according to the report, falling rather steeply.  As of Aug. 19, the weekly demand is off 4.2% compared to a year ago and 0.8% compared to last week.  I don't think that it is due to high prices as the national averages there are declining also.  While up over last year, the prices have fallen 4 cents from the week before and the price for oil itself is falling recently.

America is consuming at least two million barrels of gas per week than we did last year.  Did we just quit taking our Sunday drives or are we driving more fuel efficient autos?  Did we stop driving to work or are we making more efficient trips when we do?  Lexington streets still look like they are clogged with traffic at the same times every day and it still take a while to get across town during rush hour, so are WE driving less or are others doing a better job than we are?

The Times concludes that, as an economic indicator, less gasoline pumped = fewer miles driven and economic activity has declined.I think the we have just decided to quit wasting so much of it and we are better off for it.

What do you say?  Are you driving less these days?

What Do You See In Your Wallet?

The American economy is coming back. At least according to most of the news reports that you hear. Wall Street is again climbing to within a thousand or two of its peak in October of 2007 and the corporate bigwigs are getting their outrageous bonuses, despite the so-called limitations that were enacted. It seems like these guys are winning the lottery every year. But I have not seen this recovery in my wallet.

In this recently completed first fiscal quarter, many of the railroad companies that I follow are now reporting that they have done very well. Over at CSX, the reported revenue climbed 13% to a record $2.8 billion, operating income at an all-time high of $773 million(up 22%) and an operating ratio at 72.5 compared with last year and also a record. Not bad for having many severe winter storms to deal with and a steep rise in diesel fuel prices.

Union Pacific also had problems with the weather and fuel prices but that didn't prevent them from chalking up some equally impressive record gains in revenue, operating income and ratio. Overall U.S. Rail volumes have remained above the typical carload growth rates for the first quarter. Shipments are up, revenues are up and profits are up, but I have not seen it in my wallet.

The workforce headcount for all 7 of the Class I railroads increased by 4.4% over last March's count and the majority of that came in the maintenance of way and structures group. Our railroads are beginning to upgrade and expand their infrastructure for the anticipated uptick in demand for freight. Remember that these guys are not interested in passenger rail, high speed or not. Rail travel of every kind is growing all across the U.S. But I don't see the benefits of that growth showing up in my wallet.

I read someplace the other day that the large multi-national corporations based in America have roughly $1.3 trillion in liquid assets which they are holding on to. That is trillion with a T, and yet they are not actively working on creating jobs or investing in America's growth. They are just sitting on it.

Are they waiting on the government to create to jobs? I don't think so. If the government began creating service jobs then the TEA Party would claim that they are expanding government. If the government began creating construction jobs then the taxes would have to help fund the building projects. Private industry will not create these service or construction jobs because the general public is unwilling to pay the full and unsubsidized cost of such a venture nor can the return on investment be fully realized in the now standard depreciation timetable. We have let the Wall St economy call the shots for so long that they can no longer help the little people while failing to maintain a reasonable, or sustainable growth rate. They have taken us to the brink in the past and we seem willing to let them continue an their merry way again.

Wall St has led an effort to subtly bring about a stealth redistribution of wealth and we have willingly bought into the apple. Mass production and automation have consistently brought lower production costs and cheaper prices but have also resulted in fewer jobs and social benefits are the first to be affected. We want the former and complain about the latter. And we go along with it. The Wall St CEOs eat from the big table and we wait for the trickle-down to reach us. I haven't seen it in my wallet.

I saw on the news this morning that John McCain, the former Republican presidential candidate, was in Libya to meet with the rebel coalition and discuss some sort of aid. There was also some comment about using the frozen assets of Gadhafi and supplying weapons and medical aid. Is this not a redistribution of wealth in the country of Libya? From the rich and powerful to the working masses? I guess it is good enough for them but not for America. And what about the comments from The Donald the other day? That the Libyans PAY us for the moral support(and a few specially aimed Cruise missiles) so that when we win the war for them, we would take( not pay for) all the oil that we need. Don't you just love where Trump's heart is at? I'll bet that I never see that show up in my wallet either.

What I DO see in my wallet is a pending 10% (Mrs Sweeper says probable) pay cut in an effort to balance the budget.

November's Campaign Begins

The fall mayoral campaign began tonight, right in the middle of Jim Newberry's victory speech.

I think that it is safe to say that the gloves are off and it is down bare knuckles at this point. Mayor Newberry is pictured as a mayor that makes mistakes and Gray as a supposed visionary who has done nothing.

Both of these men say that they have a vision (or in Gray's case WILL have a vision) for how Lexington is to move forward in the future(read next four years). Right now we are mired in the lagging efforts of an economic recovery while being finally forced to live up to commitments made by previous administrations. Not a very comfy environment to spend any time in.

Both men also seem to look toward a time when we have fully recovered and we can get back to business as usual. Lexington and the United States have been through recessions and depressions and we HAVE recovered, but these post depressions/recessions times have not been "business as usual". Post economic calamity times have always been very different from before and this one will no doubt be likewise.

I, like some of my fellow bloggers, believe that the availability of cheap energy sources is a thing of the past and government statistics are beginning to reflect that. Federal agencies are starting to urge social changes to accommodate such a scenario from as high as the Cabinet level, although meeting somewhat stiff resistance(claims of social engineering). As energy affects just about every aspect of our lives, the results of more and more expensive energy touch us all. I would like to see what each of these candidates thinks is in store for Lexington and how they plan to deal with it, or prepare us for it.

We have seen it in the water rates and the price of gasoline and we all say that there is not much that we can do. We will see more in electric rates and natural gas in the future and still not have much say about it. But some of the decisions that we make about land use and transportation options today can go a long way toward mitigating the effects of rising fuel costs among other things. A simple limiting of parking (and not just in the downtown) as other cities have considered would encourage mass transit and more localized shopping and services. Perhaps the situation at the Polo Club Chevron the other day was an omen to those living in suburbia that fuel for your auto could quickly disappear and you could be stranded.

There are many other topics and possibilities of future changes that could be considered and all in the realm of probability. I want to know where these guys stand and if they are thinking about the future of Lexington, or just the next four years.

What Is To Be Proud About?

I don’t know that much about the “Kentucky Proud” initiative and maybe I should, but it sounds like something that promotes a very local oriented, food production and slow food lifestyle. I get the impression that more and more of the local restaurants are receiving fresh produce from a local source and that there is a minimum of processing involved. And, I don’t think of canned vegetables or fruit when I hear the words “Kentucky Proud”. That is why I was enthused to hear about an expansion into the distribution of locally produced beef products carrying the “Kentucky Proud” labeling.

The press release from the Commissioner of Agriculture Richie Farmer’s office was written to indicate that a statewide food distribution network has been established for all products by three experienced food service companies, but several key phrases lead me to realize that we are now talking about processed meat products - specifically beef.

The network is distributing beef raised by Kentucky producers such as the Greathouse family of Midway and other cattle purchased through Kentucky’s Certified Pre-Conditioned for Health (CPH-45) program, in which source-verified cattle are raised under a strict health regimen. The cattle are finished on a nutritional diet developed by Alltech of Nicholasville and processed by PM Beef of Windom, Minn.

I guess that I should be happy that they are buying locally raised cattle, but finishing them out of state and then processing them in Minnesota seems like insulting our intelligence. Does it matter to anyone else that cows are supposed to eat grass and not some other nutritional supplement, even if it does come from a local supplier in Alltech? Does it matter that the cost of shipping the animals out of state, slaughtering and processing the animals and then shipping the product back in to the state, has to be added to the final sales price?

To be sure, all of this transporting, slaughtering, processing, re-transporting and distributing is supplying jobs for folks but are they Kentuckians who are getting these jobs? I would think that, being a state government initiative, a primary purpose would be to promote local jobs and the local economy. I can understand that some of our local meat processing facilities may not be able to handle the estimated volume, but isn’t that just a matter of building our own infrastructure to be able to handle our own needs? That is how we can build our sustainability.

According to the article in Business Lexington, “Kentucky Proud” has been in place for nine years and “working to help Kentucky producers and value-added processors market Kentucky products” and yet for nine years we haven’t noticed that we have no local meat processors of any scale capable of the volume envisioned. Only lately, approximately six months ago, did a processor from out of state call upon the Kentucky Department of Agriculture (KDA), when they recognized our state’s need for their services. They were the one to propose a project, so there must be a profit in it. They were the one to initially identify a distributor.

If I may quote from the above referenced article:

It begins with family farms looking for a steady market for their products working with family focused processors like PM Beef. The processed products are then distributed by a network of family owned distribution businesses which deliver the Kentucky Proud products to small family restaurants across the state. Snell (a spokesperson for KDA) believes this system goes to the core of what the Kentucky Proud program is about, helping Kentucky families by promoting local Kentucky Proud products.

It also begins with the family farms which raise their livestock in a traditional way, unlike the giant agri-business herds, and the quality conscious consumers looking for such a producer. The missing component here is a local, traditional, quality conscious processor who will not dictate changes to either the farmer or the consumer that neither one wants. This is also what should be “the core of what the Kentucky Proud program is about”. Can the KDA and the Department of Economic Development not co-operate with each other for the advancement of all Kentuckians?

This article goes on to describe the potential for this beef program by stating, correctly, that people are requesting more quality in the products that they buy. Many Kentuckians also relate local production with better quality and so are looking for local products like those having the Kentucky Proud label. Some of us realize that just meeting the USDA standard is not enough and that even their “organic” qualifications are starting to be watered down, at the request of the large agri-business multi-national corporations. We would like the “Kentucky Proud” quality to be higher than it is. The estimate for full scale production is set at 400 head of cattle a week. That seems very low to me for a statewide program.

Once again quoting:

That is 400 head of cattle each week that were born and weaned on farms in Kentucky. That is 400 head of cattle each week that were sold through Kentucky markets to PM Beef for finishing. Then those 400 head a week would come back processed to be distributed…

That is 400 head of cattle that are trucked out of state and maybe not by Kentucky truckers. That is by truck, not rail which is 11 times more efficient than trucking. That is 400 head of cattle finished on something other than grass. That is 400 head of cattle that are slaughtered by non-Kentuckians and trucked(again no rail) back to the local folks to be sold as “local” products.

"As the largest beef cattle state east of the Mississippi we should be proud to see our beef come back to Kentucky as a branded product,"…

As the largest beef cattle state east of the Mississippi, we should be embarrassed to have no local processing plants, which employ local labor, and force our consumers to pay extra for a “local” product for which we are so proud.

"At the end of the day this is going to be bigger than the Kentucky Proud beef line. The distribution team is also networking with Kentucky family farms for chicken, pork, dairy and lamb," said Snell. "We are looking for sustainability and what is good for Kentucky, and we are building relationships and networks that will last. This is what being Kentucky Proud is all about."

If I recall correctly, a local economist told the Urban County Council lately that agriculture accounted for only 2% of the state's output and it is not expected to grow. With deals like this going on, then I can concur with that assessment. We in Lexington, have enacted a PDR program to preserve farm land. The Fayette Alliance has called the preservation of farmland and the local production of food a necessity and yet we still want to send our products out of state for processing.

I am still waiting for something to be really proud about.

Old Ways Are Sometimes The Best Ways

I am not so simple as to think that the City of Lexington could fund a demonstration scale streetcar line, along the lines of Cincinnati or Charlotte, as a public project. In these uncertain economic times, I am not sure how any city can initiate these kinds of projects.

I have read the history of the streetcar system of the early 20th Century where the mule cars and eventually the electric powered cars operated by franchise within the street rights of way. This is the same method employed by the local utility companies today. They(the utilities) own the transmission facilities, the poles, the wires, the pipes and all, and pay for the privilege to use the public street space. Lexington's first streetcars were owned by a corporation which traded shares either publicly or privately, just like the utilities of today. Can someone tell me why this scenario would not work in this day and time?

In a day when a billionaire like Warren Buffet will buy a railroad, European rail companies are expanding into the U.S. and the President of the United States is pushing rail transportation services of all kinds, why cannot someone form a corporation to build streetcar systems for cities?

Economic Development With Sustainable Living

According to Neil Pearce "The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s cautious if not hostile approach to climate control legislation isn’t just putting it at odds with the Obama administration.". I t may also be putting it at odds with its local organizations. It has certainly played a part in the decisions of national and international corporations like Pacific Gas and Electric and Apple to resign from the larger body.

The local Chamber, known locally as Commerce Lexington, is the entity usually chosen as the prime economic development arm of Lexington's leaders. What I'd like to know is, are they working with the Urban County Government to bring in the more environmentally conscious companies, or even is there an effort to work toward a climate controlled Lexington development scene. I don't necessarily believe that man is the cause of the recent climate changes or that the changes are irreversible. I don't even totally believe in the whole global warming scare theory, but the majority of the country's leading scientists do and yet I am not sure that I see our leadership working to do something about it. I do believe in the peak oil scenario(and the coming paradigm reset) and I certainly do not see any efforts to deal with what I see as arriving before any catastrophic effects of global warming. Our global economy may kill us all before global warming does.

A report from the Partners for Livable Communities details some of the local chambers around the country which have begun planning and doing projects in their hometowns all in the name of sustainability. Many of these chambers were in the southern and eastern US. Lexington was not on the list.

This is not just about global warming or peak oil or even reducing the outlandish per capita carbon footprint here in Lexington. It is about making and keeping Lexington a desirable place to raise a family. It will take dealing with each of the elements and making responsible choices when it comes to land use and transportation. How will we deal with our heat islands of parking lots and exhaust spewing autos? How will we reduce our use of fossil fuels, thereby leaving some for our children and grandchildren to use even more sparingly? How will we leave a more positive footprint on the Earth than our parents and grandparents did?

Where was our Commerce Lexington when we decided to expand the Urban Service Area in the mid-'90s. I think that they were right there helping to set the density targets for all the newly planned acreage. This was to be a new way of planning, a new way of looking at our fringe areas, more density in a more community center oriented setting. Now nearly fifteen years later, we look back and see that there are no community centers to which to orient and the density built that equals any development done prior to the expansion. We set the bar just above minimum and barely made it over the bar. Hooray for the status quo. And where is our Commerce Lexington these days? My bet is living right in the middle of that very expensive status quo, driving their luxury autos across town to work and leaving a larger carbon footprint than 75% of their employees.

So much for expecting a sustainable lifestyle in our economic development.

Chamber Trips To A Black Hole

Much has been talked about the recent Commerce Lexington trip and its follow-up visit by Rebecca Ryan, a Madison consultant, but we are not the only ones to have controversy about these types of "Chamber trips". Mary Newsom, on her blog "The Naked City" had a review of Charlotte's visit by the Minneapolis/St Paul Chamber of last week. Apparently, one of the questions brought up by some of the participants was whether the visited city had audacity while the visitor was considered ambivalent.

How does this translate into the Lexington experience? Does Madison, Wisconsin take on the mantle of audacity while we here in Lexington sit back in our ambivalence and cruise through on our southern hospitality, college basketball and horse industry? Some of you will think Lexington needs to show a bit more audacity and promote itself more on its aspects that are far removed from those that I've already listed. Some will maintain that we should take on more of how other cities do things and yet not look like Anywhere, USA. I think that we should look at other cities, not for just what works but also how it works(and I don't mean the mechanics of it working) and why it works. What are all the pieces needed to allow it to work rather than forcing it to work in spite of lacking key elements? The true success to gathering ideas of others is that it is not a buffet, to pick and choose parts, but a jigsaw puzzle which need all the pieces to be give the complete picture.

Often the best part of these types of blogs are comments made by the readers and this one is no exception. One commenter went so far as to read the agenda, notice that the topics were things that normal readers heard little about and asked why this information, freely given to those from other cities, were kept from the average Charlotte resident.

Trips like this may be useful to those taking them(or so they say) but also may be becoming fewer and farther between with the demise of cheap oil. And some of these junkets are(or have been) simple excuses to visit other cities' night life(i.e. gentlemen's clubs etc...), have expensive meals or visit tourist sites at no charge. We have all read about these kinds of things lately haven't we?

The point is, that there is only so much of the economy that can be split between the various communities without stealing from others. We don't need to steal our portion of the economy, we need to grow our own. I have a feeling that in the coming economic reset that there will be the need to do more of everything for ourselves, even a lot more local food production and material fabrications. Our wresting of a larger portion of the economic pie from the larger cities would be like retrieving matter from a black hole after it has passed the event horizon.

What is the catalyst that will make Lexington an economic black hole and start to draw from other areas without copying them?

Lexington's Air Travel Future

Last week, the Brookings Institution issued a report on air travel trends in America. Its general conclusion is that you can expect delays... more delays than you already have. Anybody that travels by commercial air these days will understand this.

The traveling public has grown used to the idea of speed and convenience of air travel since the first flights of the 20th century. The Interstate System came along in the latter half of the century which made it easier to travel those shorter distances, roughly 80-120 miles, in about the same time as scheduled air service and relegating some of the smaller airfields into non-players. Post 9/11 the TSA and other security changes have made air travel an even more time consuming endeavor.

The airline industry has, since deregulation, focused more and more flights into their central hubs and let regional carriers do the bulk of the short haul flights in the US. These centralized hubs have allowed smaller airlines to spring up, but the also have given the control of the air routes to the major companies.

Nearly 99 percent of all U.S. air passengers arrive or depart from one of the 100 largest metropolitan areas, with the vast majority of travel concentrated in 26 metropolitan-wide hubs.

These 100 metropolitan areas do not include Lexington, nor most points south and east until you get closer to Atlanta and the 26 hubs are usually located in the mega-regions that are forming the basis of American life under the present economy. How that economy will change in the coming reset will bear a careful watching.

Half of the country’s flights are routes of less than 500 miles

The really amazing thing here is that these flights only carried 30% of the total airline passengers in the past 12 months. It is highly likely that these flights are being flown from smaller airfields into a central hub and back out to a mid-sized airfield, both of whose communities could be reached by Interstate but being of sufficient distance as to create difficulty in driving in a days time.

Within the 26 domestic hubs, six experienced worse-than-average delays for both arrivals and departures: New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Miami, Atlanta, and San Francisco.

The projected growth of our mega-regions would only assure that these delays will only get worse. It is assumed that the current recession has caused the reduction in the number of flights and its resultant improvement of on-time performance statistics. Likewise, it is also assumed that the travelers will return upon the rebound of the economy. Neither of these assumptions should be considered likely given the predicted economic reset and the uncertain length of our current economic status.

I would find it as no surprise that the inventive spirit that evidenced itself after the recession of the 1890s(the automobile and the airplane) would not again come forth and give us new methods of getting things done in the world. A paradigm shift of the magnitude of the pendulum swinging in the other direction is not out of the question.

Lexington does not seem to be prepared for anything other that the pendulum continuing to swing farther in its current direction and yet our momentum has slowed. Where do we go from here?

What Recovery

We have just passed the one year mark of our latest recession and by most accounts are on the road to recovery, but what is recovery? Where will we be when we have recovered? People have accidents and medical procedures every day from which they then have a recovery period, but just where are they when to recovery is complete?

Some people are returned to health, but not always to "perfect" health. They usually carry scars and other reminders of the ordeal. Some come back stronger but most do not, some regain full mobility while others need occasional assistance and some regain just enough to press on with life. Some can get back to doing what the did before and others have to make radical changes in their routines in order to survive. Had they made those changes earlier in their life, they may not have been faced with their need to change now.

Lexington, and America in general, has for the last year been feeling poorly. Our economy has been waylaid by a malaise of our own doing, though actually we have been treating ourselves with "home remedies" and "tonics " usually hawked by snake oil salesmen. We, like the majority of the health care and insurance providers of today, have been relieving the symptoms and letting the disease continue unabated. To be sure there are some good doctors out there, just as there are those who realize where and how we went astray-and what we should do to adjust our lifestyles to prevent major surgery or even a terminal illness. I believe that James Howard Kunstler is one of the better ones.

Kunstler's blog piece of the other day gives good focus on the very symptoms of urban life that I wish to deal with on a daily basis. Living in an urban area, be it a densely populated city or a mid-western farm town, has its good and bad points. Nowhere is ideal for every occasion, there are always trade-offs or a price to pay to balance the scales.

History tells us that Americans have been enticed to reach for that "something better" either by those telling tall tales or those wishing to get rich by selling the dream to unsuspecting souls. Kunstler looks at the post World War II era as it pertains to the immediate recession, but these things have been going on since before the discovery of "The New World". What we did not learn from the Depression of 1893, we foolishly repeated right up to the Crash of 1928. Then following some painful withdrawal work and a surgical reconstruction of our manufacturing sector(WWII), we took off again with our intoxicants and cavorted like giddy schoolboys and girls. This time even radical surgery(the big reset) may not be enough to stem the cancer that is now raging through America, and chemo(quick-fix engineering solutions) will only mask that a problem still exists.

I, in my younger years, bought in to this "go out to where the air is cleaner" attitude until it was time to buy a house. Then, what I saw being built for "the masses" was not what I wanted to live like. I did not learn to drive(or own a car) until I was in my 40's and Mrs. Sweeper was with child. I wanted to be able to walk most places, or bike. It was for pleasure that I rode long distances into the surrounding subdivisions and suburbs. If I went out for a dinner and drinks, then I could walk home. Being a life long Lexingtonian, I still live within 3 miles of where I grew up and within walking distance of downtown. It is only now that, with grey hair and experience , I see some of the folly in pursuing the now entrenched "suburban model" of development. We should be planning for communities that allow for all age ranges to live in comfort and that includes sending "little Johnny" to the corner store for a loaf of bread, or the park, or to school.

As it is now, society says that Mom and Dad cannot stay in the house that they worked so hard to afford. They saved and did without so that the kids had something better. Now the kids have to have the better things and Mom and Dad may have to go somewhere where they can be looked after, all because of our "better stuff". Retirement homes and nursing homes are not the natural way nor are they the better way(just look at the lawyers advertising about how you may qualify for judgements).

The snake oil salesmen are still out there but we cannot go back to the same place that we were and call it recovery. It would be like giving an alcoholic free rein in a liquor store or a meth-head the run of a pharmacy. The free rush of getting there is just not worth the pain of coming all the way back down.