L A V E A B R A C H M A N

J A N U A R Y 2 2 , 2 0 1 5

P R E S E N T A T I O N T O

T H E C E N T E R F O R U R B A N A N D

R E G I O N A L A N A L Y S I S

T H E O H I O S T A T E U N I V E R S I T Y

ABOUT GREATER OHIO POLICY CENTER

A non-partisan non-profit based

in Columbus, Ohio that

champions revitalization and

sustainable redevelopment in

Ohio through policy and

practice:

• Revitalize Ohio’s urban

cores and metropolitan

regions

• Achieve sustainable land

reuse and economic growth

GOPC’S RECENT REPORTS

CENTRAL CHALLENGES

How do we transform Ohio’s cities &

regions for the next economy?

• Rebuilding the city/ rebuilding market demand

• Creating new economic engines

• Building opportunity for the city’s population

How are Ohio Cities Doing?

LEGACY CITIES

Formerly industrial cities that have

experienced significant population

and/or job loss since 1960

LEGACY CITIES UPDATE: MIXED RETURNS

18 cities with population of at

least 50,000 in 2010 & loss of at

least 20% from peak

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

1,800,000

Population Change 2000-2010

2000

2010

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20D

etr

oit

Cle

vela

nd

Bu

ffalo

Bir

min

gh

am

Pit

tsb

urg

h

St.

Lo

uis

Ph

ila

delp

hia

Balt

imo

re

TOTAL25-34

CITIES FOLLOW DIFFERENT TRAJECTORIES

Some legacy cities show signs of a turnaround,

including Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore,

and Syracuse. (2000-2010)

• Can we identify the

factors that have led to

greater regeneration in

some cities?

• Can we apply lessons

of success (or failure)

elsewhere?

• What can cities do in an

age of limited state and

federal support?

Change in (total & young adult) population between 2000-

2010

1. REBUILDING THE PHYSICAL CITY & MARKET

DEMAND

Strategies that are making an impact:

• Targeting resources in viable neighborhoods

• Focusing on rebuilding the downtown

• Repurposing vacant land for new uses

TARGETING RESOURCES IN VIABLE

NEIGHBORHOODS

Maximizes the impact of available scarce resources.

Over-the-Rhine

Cincinnati, OhioSlavic Village

Cleveland, Ohio

Green and Gold Asset and

Place-Based Investment

Strategy

Dayton, Ohio

TARGETED NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRESS

Slavic Village Recovery in

Cleveland:

• Sales prices of the initial homes reached the

targeted amount necessary to cover rehab

costs and make a small $5,000-$10,000

profit; received an appraisal value above the

listed $60,000 sale price.

• Neighborhood morale is high and neighbors

are positive about the project.

• Investment is taking place in the

neighborhood suggesting increased market

confidence

Slavic Village in

Cleveland, Ohio

TARGETED NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRESS

Cincinnati’s Over-the-Rhine:

• Between 2000-2013, median household income has risen from $9,431 to $13,815, which is more than a 46% increase.

• Between 2000-2013, owner occupancy has risen from 2.20% to 6.28%, which is more than a 185% increase.

• Between 2007-2013, the percent of certified tax delinquent properties fell from 9.5% to 6.85%.

• The poverty rate has fallen from, 76.00% in 1990, to 58.74% in 2000, to 33.78% in 2010.

TARGETED NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRESS

Change in Income Distribution in Columbus’ Weinland Park from 2000-2012, compared to Benchmark Neighborhoods

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

WP, 2000 WP, 2012 BenchmarkNeighborhoods

$100,000

$75,000-$99,999

$50,000-$74,999

$35,000-$49,999

$25,000-$34,999

$15,000-$24,999

<$15,000

15.80%

18.90%

16.50%

7.60% 7.80%

10.60%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

Vacancy Rate1990

Vacancy Rate2000

Vacancy RateEstimated for

2012

Weinland Park

City of Columbus

Percent of housing vacancy in Weinland Park

FOCUSING ON REBUILDING THE DOWNTOWN

Many cities are seeing downtown population growth

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

Baltimore Cleveland St.Louis Cincinnati

20002010

FOCUSING ON REBUILDING THE DOWNTOWNProgress is being made in downtowns

Ohio example: Downtown Cleveland Alliance

Downtown Cleveland Alliance, a BID, is implementing

Clean & Safe Program, economic development assistance,

marketing & special events, advocacy and strategic

projects.

… leading to downtown

redevelopment, attracting

people & businesses

…BUT CONTINUED POPULATION LOSS

15% or greater population

loss from 2000 to 2010

Population growth in

Downtown area >15%

OVERALL POPULATION LOSS IN OHIO’S LEGACY

CITIES…

Historic Building in the West End, Cincinnati, Ohio

Photo from http://www.hamiltoncountylandbank.org/portfolio-items/1201-linn/

Hamilton County Land Reutilization Corporation currently accepting

redevelopment proposals for the space.

RE-PURPOSE VACANT LAND FOR NEW USES

- Alternative/green

uses

- Brownfields to

productive reuses

- Land banks hold

properties and clear

delinquent taxes,

liens

VACANCY RATES STILL INCREASING

9.0%

9.5%

10.0%

10.5%

11.0%

11.5%

12.0%

12.5%

13.0%

13.5%

2007 2012

Akron, OH

Cincinnati, OH--KY--INCleveland, OH

Dayton, OH

Detroit, MI

Toledo, OH--MI

Housing Vacancy Rates in Legacy Cities

2. CREATING NEW ECONOMIC ENGINES

FOR THE CITY AND REGION

Strategies having an impact:

• Leveraging Anchor Institutions

• Building a Competitive Advantage

• Regional regrowth

LEVERAGING ASSETS: ANCHOR INSTITUTIONS

DRIVE DISPROPORTIONATE LEGACY

CITY/NEIGHBORHOOD REGENERATION

Wayne State University Detroit

University Circle Inc. Cleveland

LEVERAGING ASSETS TO BUILD COMPETITIVE

ADVANTAGE -

University Circle

Cleveland, Ohio Cincinnati, Ohio Dayton, Ohio

Uptown Consortium Dayton Tech Town

University Circle in Cleveland, Ohio:

• Anchor district in Cleveland, Ohio with over 26 anchor institutions

• $1.1 billion investment in the neighborhood leading to a 30:1 return

• 5,000 new full-time jobs since 2005 (15.5% increase). An additional 8.6% increase expected by 2015.

• $14 billion in overall annual economic output, according to University Circle Inc.

• 11% population growth in University Circle while there was a 17% decline in overall city population

Anchor District = vibrant city center, strong

anchor institutions, multi-anchored district,

community service corporations

LEVERAGING ASSETS TO BUILD

COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE

Uptown Consortium in Cincinnati, Ohio

• 6 anchor institutions

• Established in 2004 and in 10 years has:

• leveraged +$400 million in private development

• Induced +$1 billion in development

• Generated 3,300 jobs

• Created and retained ~400,000 sq. feet of office and retail space

• Developed 500+ residential units

• 10% of Consortium members’ workforces live in Uptown

LEVERAGING ASSETS TO BUILD COMPETITIVE

ADVANTAGE

CITIES ARE EXPLORING OTHER ECONOMIC

ENGINES

ENTERTAINMENT

AND TOURISM

TECHNOLOGY

What potential do these

sectors have to generate

job and business growth

in legacy cities?

Cleveland

Akron

Canton

Youngstown

Lorain

Northeast OHIO:

five legacy cities

embedded in a

single region of

over 5,000 mi2

ESTABLISHING REGIONAL INITIATIVES

Urban centers are embedded in larger regions – need for greater

regionalism

ESTABLISHING REGIONAL INITIATIVES

Central Ohio’s insight2050

WHY REGIONS MATTER FOR ECONOMIC

REGROWTH

• Cities and their regions are

economically interdependent

• Collaborations and new governance

structures can increase fiscal

efficiency and economic attraction.

TOO MUCH LOCAL GOVERNMENT ADDS TO

RESOURCE CONSTRAINTS86% of states have fewer governments per 100 square miles than Ohio

Source: Greater Ohio Policy Center, Census of Governments; Government Organization, 2007

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16 14 12 11 10 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 <0

Nu

mb

er

of

Sta

tes

Number of Governments per 100 miles

Ohio

Less than Ohio (43)More than Ohio (6)

RISING LEGACY COSTS & DECLINING TAX BASE

Ohio’s aging infrastructure:

• It is estimated that Ohio will need over $25 billion to

maintain and upgrade aging water infrastructure over

the next 20 years.

• Federal consent decree to reduce the number of

sanitary sewer overflows

Tax base shrinking with population loss

3. BUILDING OPPORTUNITY

Challenges:

• Many residents are not benefiting from regeneration

• Neighborhoods in decline are disproportionately

affecting low income populations

• Remaining economic/racial disparities that bring down

the rest of the region

LEGACY CITIES HAVE AN INCOME/POVERTY GAP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Ca

mde

n

Cle

vela

nd

Detr

oit

Gary

San F

ran

cis

co

Seatt

le

Po

rtla

nd

Bosto

n

% below poverty level

% more than 2X poverty

% of population

below poverty level

compared to % of

population in

households earning

2X poverty level

LEGACY CITIES SHARE A JOBS/EDUCATION MISMATCH

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%C

levela

nd

Detr

oit

Ne

wa

rk

San F

ran

cis

co

Se

att

le

Port

lan

d

Jobs in city

Workers living in city

All adults 25+ in city

Share of jobs and

workers with BA/BS

or higher degree

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN INCOME ARE GROWING

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Baltimore Buffalo Cincinnati Cleveland Pittsburgh St. Louis

White median

Black median 2000

Black median 2011

Median income

Of African-American

Households as a

Percentage of white

Non-Latino median

CONCENTRATIONS OF POVERTY IN URBAN AREAS

Example of equity challenge in Akron, Ohio

Source: Brookings Institute

EDUCATED YOUNG ADULTS PREFER CITIES

Share of city population that is 25-34 years old with a

bachelor’s degree or higher in 2000 and 2013.

1%

3%

5%

7%

9%

11%

13%

2000 2013

NATIONALLY, LEGACY CITY POP GROWTH IS LARGELY

DRIVEN BY THE MILLENNIAL GENERATION

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

Baltimore Philadelphia Pittsburgh St. Louis

City share of statepopulation

City share of 25-34year old collegegraduates

City share of 2000-2011 INCREASE in 25-34 year old collegegraduates

OHIO CITIES MUST DO MORE

TO ATTRACT & RETAIN YOUNG PROFESSIONALS

Number of 25-34 year olds with a bachelor’s degree or higher in 2000 and 2013.

1,192 1,512

3,970

7,228

10,153

12,535

9961,451

4,104

7,0907,719

13,774

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Youngstown 0% Canton 0.1% Dayton 0.4% Akron 0.1% Toledo -0.8% Cleveland 0.9%

2000 YP population 2013 YP population

Change in share of population:

OPPORTUNITY TO LEVERAGE & ATTRACT THIS

POPULATION

• Some legacy cities are attracting increasing

numbers of Millennials

• Ohio’s cities will need to do more to attract this

population in order to compete

• What are the barriers? What still needs to be done?

STRATEGIES FOR THE FUTURE• Rebuild the central core

Making job and population growth in the core foster citywide regeneration

• Sustain viable neighborhoods Sustaining neighborhoods facing demographic and economic

challenges

• Repurpose vacant land for new uses Utilizing the city’s inventory of vacant land and buildings for

regeneration

• Use assets to build competitive advantage Creating sustainable economic growth based on assets

STRATEGIES FOR THE FUTURE

• Use economic growth to increase

community and resident well-being

Overcoming forces leading to increased economic and racial inequalities

• Build stronger local governance and

partnerships

Creating multifaceted public/private partnerships capable of driving sustained regeneration

• Increase the ties between cities and their

regions

Building effective regional linkages to foster stronger economic growth throughout a region

BUILDING AN URBAN STATE POLICY AGENDA IS PIVOTAL

Conceptually – align state policy and local action; leverage and incentivize private market investment

Leading examples:

• Brownfields Cleanup Fund (grants/loans)

• Land banks

• Expedited foreclosure

• Historic tax credits

• Neighborhood assistance program tax credits

• Assess ODOT funding priorities

• Promoting public-private partnerships for funding infrastructure

Lavea Brachman,

Executive

Director,

Greater Ohio

Policy Centerlbrachman@greaterohio.org

STRATEGIES

• Make change happen through strategic incrementalism

• taking incremental steps grounded in a coherent vision of

the future

• Consider a special paradigm for smaller/medium-sized

cities:

• Distinguish between those that are too big to fail and others