Following Public Opinion – A Policy for Failure

“Are we interested in treating the symptoms of poverty and economic stagnation through income redistribution and class warfare, or do we want to go at the root causes of poverty and economic stagnation by promoting pro-growth policies that promote prosperity?” ~ Paul Ryan

It may seem that it goes without saying but successful public outcomes result from appropriate public policies. The reason we chose to make this a three-part article is because both the public and governments have made statements that suggest that the solutions to the problem of downtown re-development are simply a matter of the renovation of downtown properties and getting more people to live downtown, both popular public opinions, and the main policy needed to accomplish these goals are the removal of the regulations designed to protect the historic character, scale and texture of the area and somehow forcing property owners to renovate their properties. I support both the aesthetic (and historic) upgrade of the area and the construction of sophisticated, twenty-first century buildings, but those are not the things that generate business or social activity in a downtown. What creates that sustainable business activity are a healthy volume of local customers shopping and enjoying themselves in entertaining ways, and the right mix of business types along the street. This is generic. It would be true in any downtown anywhere, but in our downtown, there is one other factor that must be addressed. It is the need to protect the historic nature of our present downtown, among other reasons, for its role in our tourism business and its importance in our socio-cultural development. Over the past half century, we have willfully destroyed much of the built heritage previously celebrated in our downtown. We have lost areas like East Hill Street, most of Marlborough Street, the elegance of Dowdeswell Street, the north side of Bay Street east of East Street, and not only are we not in mourning, there is quiet celebration that open sites are now available for new, less restricted development.

Some might ask, what is so important about some old buildings, narrow streets and hard-to-maintain decorations? Perhaps we should ask the people of Montreal in Canada why they relocated the center of their downtown from the area that was the banking capital of North America before Wall Street to its present location, and to protect and develop Old Montreal, now one of its most important tourism assets. Or we might ask the people of San Antonio, Texas, who preserved La Villita or Key West whose tours through their historic district celebrate buildings originally built in the Bahamas, and are now anchors of their tourism business. Or the people of New Orleans, for whom the French Quarter is their most important tourism asset. Throughout Europe, the preservation of historic zones has become an automatic part of an entry to the business of tourism.

There are, of course, for me, other much more important reasons to pay attention to our historical heritage, but governments have been driven by the need to show their constituents economic benefit, so any argument for changes in government policies must begin with some demonstration of economic value. There can be no doubt whatever of the economic value of an historic district for a tourist destination. While our beaches, islands and crystal waters have been legendary in the distant past, it has been obvious for anyone not wearing blinkers that they are not as unique as we are accustomed to thinking they are, that there are similar beaches, islands, pretty waters around the world, and that convenient, high speed travel, the use of credit cards and the internet have decimated our customer base for that product as our potential customers enjoy infinitely wider choice, in many instances at lower prices. On the other hand, our history and the built environment it has left remains absolutely unique, and will serve us as we choose. So far, we have chosen to ignore it and hope it rots, so we can bulldoze it and build what some of us would actually feel represents us better to visitors.

Downtown Nassau is a part of the City of Nassau. It must provide the city with the greatest variety in shopping, entertainment, access to cultural display, recognition of achievement and sense of our identity. Attention to the provision of the infrastructure with which to accomplish these things requires new policy decisions by government and a new attitude towards what modernity means and what deserves public investment. The downtown does not belong to the owners of the buildings or the businesses, but to the people of the City of Nassau, which it must serve. If there is to be real downtown development, it must begin with the policies that establish that ownership and the responsibilities that go with it.

So then, the first requirement for a successful downtown is to have a high level of sidewalk traffic and a mix of entertainment, amusement and food and beverage type businesses along the sidewalk, as was true sixty years ago. The second requirement, given our reliance on tourism and tourism activity in the present downtown is to preserve and protect our built heritage for the benefit of increased attraction of tourism business. And therefore, the first step for a government wishing to succeed in rejuvenating the downtown is to create the policies that would produce those results. For the time being, of course, there is a need to focus on the existing downtown as a shopping area, and to use the formula suggested above, developed by the Downtown Development Association, to create local and visitor traffic and to encourage the proper mix of business types so as to generate the profits needed to maintain the properties we complain about, especially along Bay Street.

Expansion

To satisfy the need for modern development of the downtown, the existing limits of Downtown Nassau must be re-conceived. The downtown we have been accustomed to complaining about must address its growth if it is to accommodate twenty-first century business possibilities and the need for younger Bahamians to express their dreams in architecture, engineering and business. This would be impossible with the current bogus definition of the City in the Statute Law. For example, any attempt to define an historic zone would find that the boundary of the historic zone would very nearly match the boundaries defined as the whole City of Nassau. The fact is that the definition of the City of Nassau as defined in law is not appropriate. It would perhaps have been appropriate up to 1834, but not any time since. The people of the city, those that live and enjoy their lives in Bain Town, Grant’s Town, Chippingham, Centerville, Palmdale, Englerston, the Grove and several other districts deserve to know that the downtown was created to serve the City of Nassau, and that they are the citizens of that city. As a point of reference, we have shown that the City of New York is described by Wikipedia as including the districts of Manhattan, Brooklyn, the Bronx, Queens and Staten Island, not just the area of downtown in Manhattan. Before addressing a re-defined downtown, we must first have a viable definition of the City of Nassau. In turn, before defining the historic zone, we must establish the boundaries of an expanded or new downtown.

The public policies needed to achieve these goals are:

  1. The proper establishment of the City of Nassau including the people of the City. That establishment should indicate the part of the City in which the downtown would be developed or maintained.
  2. The establishment of the boundaries and independent administration of the downtown, anticipating the growth of the Downtown to accommodate the future needs of the City for at least half a century.
  3. The establishment of an Historic District with legislated autonomy and dedicated, professional management.
  4. The publication of a Master Plan for at least the City of Nassau for use by its citizens in developing the commercial, social and cultural infrastructure with which to create a wealthy future.

Private input into these policies must be addressed and the role of the private sector must be defined and agreed. This column will attempt to address the role of the private sector in future posts. But the skeleton on which any private sector action will become meaningful substance must be built by appropriate Government policies.