Sprawl. It’s a gas.
If you have a 900-square-foot house, it’s less costly to heat, cool, maintain and easier to clean, secure and furnish than a 4000-sq.-ft. McMansion- especially if you are only one person. It also takes a lot less time from end to end, or top to bottom.
Same goes for a city. If you are on an island, like Manhattan- you build up more than out. You put a subway underneath- you save space by not expecting everyone to drive to work. Think about how many parking spaces a 100-story parking building would take- if everyone came in by car, alone? Now do you see the stupidity of requiring x number of parking spaces per square foot of finished space? If the Kettering Tower needed a surface parking lot using the equation of 1 spot for every 300 sq ft (a big cubicle) you’d cover all of downtown Dayton.
The same goes for our city- which is “our house.” The bigger it gets- the more it costs us- especially if it’s split up among fewer and fewer people. Every road, every foot of utilities, every school, police station, library, etc. costs all of us. The more we add, the more it costs. And we’re not even looking at the energy side of things- we’re just talking about providing the infrastructure.
Moving from here to there costs us in gas, lots of which comes from people we don’t particularly like. The more we have to drive- the more gas we consume, the whole thing gets ugly- and inefficient.
So even though they’ve never met a new interchange they didn’t like, the Dayton Daily News Editorial board just started to realize that our car-culture is very expensive:
So the car-centered lifestyle still looks relatively attractive, notwithstanding all the warnings we as a country have received about the unreliability of oil supplies and the unreliability of oil prices.
As a community — a region — that continues to play the car card, we should be among the leaders in pushing for ways to make it a better card: for cars that are more energy-efficient, for cars that run on alternative fuels, and for new supplemental forms of transportation — like trains and better transit systems.
It’s just a matter of hedging a big bet.
via Editorial: Growth along I-75 requires new focus on energy | A Matter of Opinion.
Of course they put their new print technology center in a cornfield in Warren County long ago.
However their thinking is so pedestrian (pun intended) that the best they can come up with is higher efficiency cars, new fuels or better public transit. Not exactly the answers we need. Not even interesting enough to start a good debate.
In order for the Dayton region to catch up with progressive places that passed anti-sprawl legislation long ago, or embraced public transit, or “complete streets” for bike commuting- we need to come up with much more powerful ideas:
Repopulate the core: Dayton has an abundance of cheap housing. It’s also a big HUBzone. The open H1B visas for investing and importing foreigners into these areas would be a bold way to strengthen both the core and the nation- letting industry pay the tab. I talked about it here first: crazy economic development idea.
Instead of building offices and plants far away from workforces- or forcing commutes, which cost social capital in terms of unproductive time, and add wear and tear on roads and burn up fuel- why not reward companies and employees with a walk to work tax credit? The less we drive the healthier and wealthier we will be.
Public transit is fine, but must it be limited to “light rail” or trains or even traditional transit systems? Is bike share a way to move people around in dense areas that saves us wear and tear on roads? Cuts gas consumption? For several million dollars we can have something that puts Dayton on the map- and cuts down the costs of moving around short distances.
Or maybe a folding electric bike- from YikeBike. It’s an amazing compact folding electric bicycle. Watch the video:
Is this an alternative?
Or a low-cost monorail system like the Urbanaut? Older versions like the ones at Disneyland capture the imagination of the city of the future- yet we just spent $77 million on just another highway interchange.
When cities first sprouted up they were typically near rivers, natural ports, easily defensible positions or beautiful vistas. All are natural features that can’t be replicated. Now, we’re locked into the idea of putting things next to off-ramps because, well, we take the car for granted. Once you start building things for people again, instead of cars, we’ll look back at these excesses and wonder why.
Today’s Dayton Grassroots Daily Show talks about the relationship between the cost of energy and the cost of sprawl. Watch it and put on your thinking cap- is there a better way to meet the challenges of having less people live in a bigger area who are totally dependent on cheap energy?
Bikes and Yikes and even Segways are a viable alternative only in good weather. Something else we have in short supply in Ohio.
Perhaps sound money would help? Check the devaluation of the US dollar since 1913 when the Fed Resv. came into being.
will brooks really? do you understand what would happen to the dollar if we went back to the gold standard. also while we are talking about completely unrelated shit. i would like to add, check your pockets notice how there’s no quarters. they really need to upgrade the parking meters downtown.
I never advocated the gold standard. I am making a correlation between cost and currency. It’s not unrelated in that petroleum is a commodity that is pegged to the dollar. As purchasing power erodes commodity prices increase as well as just about everything else. The underlying topic in this post is cost. And I do carry quarters. Hey, by the way, what about the parking meters at The Greene? Do they need upgrading too?
Yay Will!
Clayton, do you understand what has happened to the dollar without the gold standard? Also, Will didn’t say that the gold standard was his choice.
Crazy idea; how about no standard? Let monies compete just like any other product.
Is there a sound way to enact these ideas which do not pass laws on liberty or spend the publics money? If not, then it is simply a different preference for how to abuse the system. But, if you are asking my opinion on whether or not I think there should be a walk to work tax credit………the answer is no. Users of the roadways pay a gas tax and the walk to work credit would be unlikely to change behavior, just provide handouts to those already walking. Do I think that spending my money on bikes is a better idea than an interchange…………um hell no. And ANTI sprawl laws sound like more government jurisdiction over private property so, no there as well.
I think your other posts are more likely on to something. Reduce city government and zoning, ease the requirements for small businesses to get started and AT LEAST drop the tax rate to 1.75% like the surrounding burbs. These activities are what will let me consider staying in Dayton when my company outgrows its current building (soon).
The irony is that those who sprawl are the same people who pay the taxes for those with their hand out, ie folks that live in the urban cores like Dayton. So you want legislation against the rich to move away from the poor (with all the crime and school issues and hand out mentality) and they will exist happily ever after? Hmmm…. I think this may casue a lot of problems. Greg said race riots are caused bc of sprawl, so therefore those who sprawled are superior in their behavior than those who live in urban areas?
How about let people live where they want to live. You say it “costs us all,” well the behavior of the poor with crime and drugs and having too many kids and lack of education and being over weight and their smoking issues and laziness can be viewed as “costing us all” as well. Why make judgement against either. For God’s sake at least those who sprawl pay for those who don’t by paying taxes, what the hell do the Urban dwellers do for those who moved out? Nothing. I would call it a fair trade off in life. You don’t want sprawl and want laws agaisnt it, then we should legislate the behavior of the poor, bc that is what you are doing here, legislating the behavior of the rich.
I know liberal folk, you will pound that fist in denial. But folks this is the truth. Why make laws against certain behavior, bc where will it end?
I think tatoos should be outlawed bc they cost too much for poor people and are really ugly. Tatoos cost us all.
The exodus of social capital does negatively impact the core, and does cost us all. I was always told growing up that you become who your friends are. If everyone leaves that has become successful, who does that leave you surrounded by?
So Paul you want to legislate against sprawl, against freedom? It may negatively impact the core, so maybe those who live there should pick up their game? Legislate one (agaisnt sprawl), legislate all behavior.
It costs us all that people in the core have kids they can not afford. It cost us all that they are unhealthy and criminals, where does this end?
It negatively impacts those who live in “sprawled” areas to be told where to live….. Hmmmmmm….
It ends with more Government to “fix” the problem, which really only exacerbates the problems we already have. But you can see how the whole idea of the problems belonging to all of us are slowly becoming mainstream. It ends with social legislation that restricts freedoms.
Next to “play the man, not the puck,” the Old Bandito’s favorite axiom is “the nineteenth century was the era of thinking up utopian ideas and the twentieth century was the epoch when those ideas were tried out.” And ya’ gotta’ submit that our friend David Esrati has one of the finest minds of the 19th century. Fact is, dear David, that while the New Utopians would have us living in inner city enclaves, the sprawl you lament is in fact comprised of folks fleeing the very places you romanticize. Furthermore, the Old Bandito finds your arguments bordering on the schizophrenic. Say, the Old Bandito is a devotee of Esrati.com who lives and works in the ‘burbs with little contact with the city other than Dragons games or a night at the theatre; one day on his favorite blog displays David standing in the middle of his robbed and vandalized business in the early am, the next day he gets a double dose of complaints and histories of the very folks who could revitalize the city, that being entrepreneurs. And follow that with an article stating that we should all share in this chaos, violence, inept bureaucratic indifferance and dysfunction? Furthermore, when in American history have folks not been on the move? Demographic shift, such as the westward movement and the Great Migration are as much of our legacy as the world wars. And since the most productive and law abiding of society choose the live elsewhere, the New Utopians suggest they be roped back in by the force of law. Ain’t gonna’ happen. “Let people live where they want to live” Gene suggests. What a concept?…
You guys talking about my old neighbors?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXNobbP1gw0
Gene, my comment was meant to address your comment on behavior. It is a self-perpetuating cycle. You are a product of your environment. Do people break away from negative cycles? Yes. Is it harder to do if you are surrounded by negative examples and few positive role models? I believe so. That is where I believe urban sprawl negatively effects the community as a whole. Those left behind have few positive role models to interact with on a daily basis, and many very bad examples. Because we are further divided along socio-economic lines, its even harder to break out of the rut.
That being said, do I think there should be legislation telling people where to live? Of course not. I do believe that incentives should be used to attract people to live in the city in more responsible ways for both environmental and social reasons.
Also, there should be some kind of educational initiative to learn about Dayton residents.
Add to that economic reasons.
@David S. – yep, that’s east Dayton’s finest. I recognize the street heading into Twin Towers.
OK Paul, I got your point. But the Esratis of the world want laws against sprawl, which would be laws against freedom and against property owners.
I loved the Youtube…. That is why people move away. You can’t say MotherF*cker….
Someone should just round up guys like that and have a local version of Ultimate Fighting, held at the Fairgrounds. Just wish I could get a cigarette vendors license for that, I would make enough money to move to Springboro then.
Here is the issue i have with genes description of the poor aka any one that makes less that 10/hr. “behavior of the poor with crime and drugs and having too many kids and lack of education and being over weight and their smoking issues and laziness”. 1. Too many kids – have you bought condoms? its kinda easy just to say don’t have sex. 2. the lack of education- is caused by the sprawl or aka low property value, what do you think pays for schools. 3. laziness because smoking isn’t a poor problem- well to be honest laziness isn’t a poor problem either there is laziness every where. also just because your poor doesn’t make you a criminal
this whole subject reminds me how “legovile” in kettering. ended open enrollment has a way to keep black people out and still keep it cheap. blah
Poor people are more likely to be…. Urban people are more likley to be….
Go to a poor person’s house with kids. No childrens books. Plenty of smokes and tatoos. Is money the real problem with education? Think real long and hard before answering……
Greg said race riots were caused bc of sprawl. Really?
Started to have race riots at 1:12……
gene your mistaking ghetto and poor as the same thing. They are not anything close to each other they both happen to be poor.
Ok if money isn’t the problem whats the major difference between Kettering school and Dayton or Centervile?
Greg just likes to hear himself talk. Reminds of this guy i know named Dana
About two weeks later the same dude came around talking smack to the neighbors and got every one of his front teefuses knocked out of his skull. He crawled up my stairs (looking for the same guy to help him out), all bloodied, asking for a towell. I slammed the door on his ignorant ass.
@Paul, Exactly what types of incentives can the government offer that does not involve taking from one group and giving to another?
Fuel from algae is about trendy green marketing, more than a viable alternative to pumping the stuff out of the ground.
Why do we need a Carbon Tax when Peak Oil will drive the price up anyway?
That said, there were LOTS more cool people around the neighborhood who I had ZERO problem with. Down to earth, minded their manners, kept their nose in the own business.
I would like to see a County Work Farm built to put morons like this in for HARD labor growing vegetables all day for healthy urban kid diets.
And yes, Gene does mistake trashy, ghetto-ass behavior as applying to all poor people. I’ve made very little money many years and still managed to listen to Beethoven, Miles Davis and read books, make music and lots of other good cultural stuff.
@Drexel D. Sprks – that’s poetic justice.
@jstults to pay for tax cuts for green companys. can’t give tax cuts without paying for it
And for the record – I’v been poor at times and can say I still retained class. I guess there is a difference in situational poverty and generational poverty. Still, stereotypes are not needed. Poor and no class trash are two different things. You will find some of your most principled people in poor neighborhoods. Just check the churches.
It just pisses people off who live in poor neighborhoods, the Gene attitudes of the world that is. How would you like it if people thought they were all better than you? And when you live in the hood, face it, some people do think they are waaaaay better than you.
I’ve known rich people who were the most messed up head cases in the world. I guess I should assume that of everyone with money then ;-)
Poor and Urban are more likely to be….
Not all poor people smoke. Not all threat their kids like pets. Not all are fat. I never said that. But what I am saying we pay a price for poor people, many of whom are fat and unhealthy and smoke and are criminals and etc, etc, etc. The point being is that we pay a price, just like we pay a price for sprawl. Why pick on sprawl, why not pick on Urban losers who bring us all down. That way my point. Why pick on rich people, productive people, people who pay taxes that keep many of the poor people afloat. That is and was my only point.
I have been poor as well. But tatoos were not in my budget, or big screen TVs. They are in some budgets of poor people. Why is that?
Dayton spends more per student than Kettering or Cneterville. It is not the money. It is a combonation of a lot of things, including ethics and health choices and buying books for your kids rather than tatoos for your arm and juice vs kool-aid and positive vs negative and parents who care vs parents that are not around …. etc. Money has little to do with keeping your nose clean and eating decent and going to a library and not spending money on smokes and tatoos and beer and making good choices. Keep on making excuses for the losers. It really is not all that hard.
Poor people in rural areas cost us as well, if they makes everyone feel better. Poor people in the suburbs also cost society money. So, across the board, no matter where you live, poor people cost tax payers money. That is a fact. Thank you.
I was picking on the Urban bc DE wants a “return to the city” drive. There are rich urban folk and middle class urban folk, so poor urban folk was what I was going after. Those people cost us, as well as all other poor people. Just like the “sprawlers” cost us.
BTW, I live in Dayton, so I kinda live in a poor neiborhood. I am not pissed off at other people thinking I am poor. I don’t care. And liberals think they are better than everyone, so where do they get off….
some one listens to beck too much. The liberal Marxist arr trying to destroy America!
are*
Freedom to move anywhere but the cards are stacked against the Cities and existing neighborhoods at the benefit of new ones. In other words all the legislation and taxes are weighted in the FAVOR of development. Look at the GAS TAX and what it finances. Does the City get any of the gas tax to pay for City Roadways? The answer is NO. So the sprawl and FREEDOM is financed by City dwellers to the benefit of DEVELOPERS. That money is recycled to their campaign coffers to perpetuate the cycle of FREEDOM as Gene sees it, but fleecing as I see it. From http://www.artba.org/about/faqs-transportation–general-public/faqs/#2 The major source of funding for federal highway investment is the federal motor fuel excise tax of 18.4-cents-per-gallon of gasoline and 24.4-cents-per-gallon of diesel fuel. All revenues are credited to the federal Highway Trust Fund (HTF) established by Congress in 1956 as part of the legislation authorizing construction of the Interstate Highway System. Today, the HTF finances virtually all federal investment in highways and mass transit. Highway user tax rates have not been increased since 1993 despite large increases in highway travel, investment needs and construction costs. There is also a federal Airport and Airways Trust Fund, which finances airport improvements and the air traffic control system. This trust fund is financed by fees on air travelers and taxes on aviation fuels. State governments finance highway construction and maintenance through a broad set of taxes and fees, most of which are also user-related. Every state imposes taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel, from a low of eight-cents-per-gallon in Alaska to over 30-cents-per-gallon in a handful of states. Other revenue sources include vehicle registration fees, driver license fees, sales taxes on motor vehicles, heavy truck use taxes, traffic violation fines, and similar taxes and fees. In recent years, state governments have been expanding their use of general revenues to finance highway improvements, largely because of a political reluctance to increase gasoline tax rates, and many state governments also borrow money for highway construction by issuing bonds. A few states permit local governments to levy taxes and… Read more »
Seems to me when peak oil hits us those living in Dayton will benefit, those not living in Dayton will suffer. You guys should be happy.
Sprawl is financed by Urban Dwellers? Fine. Who do you think finances the Urban Dwellers pay checks and government checks? The Sprawlers. So everyone is helping each other out, what a nice world. It works boff ways.
@ Paul H. Welcome. I hope the regulars don’t scare you away.
One day, some of you will realize that when people are poor and don’t have jobs- it costs you.
I’m not going to explain- I’ll let you smart people figure it out.
Sprawl is unsustainable. Get used to it.
Paul, Welcome. The Host has crazy ideas. I am here to point that out, so are others. Sprawl happens. Let people live where they want to live. Also Paul, notice how the host can never answer any questions? That is life here. Bark, bark, bark, but when bitten he goes back to the dog house, a house which is falling down. Limiting freedom, making laws against freedom, is what DE wants. Take from the rich, and give to the……..
@Paul- I ignore Gene for the most part. I seem to point out where the government is taking from all of us- and giving it to the rich- in the form of tax breaks for corporations paying their exec’s millions- but Gene can’t figure it out. GA giving NCR $100 million in tax $ is robbing from minimum wage workers and donating to a company that pays it’s CEO $2k an hour.
Welcome.
Paul,
I just wanted to welcome you because everyone else was doing it and I have no mind of my own.
Anyone give anymore thought to the fact that without manipulation of the monetary supply, the concept of massive malinvestment (sprawl) would be such a minimal concern that we wouldn’t be wasting the electricity to discuss it online?
More “incentives” are not the answer. The removal of all “incentives” is the answer. Let individuals decide what they want, how they want to achieve it. Stop stealing from them.
The Dayton sprawl problem would be hard to fix because a key way to increase density – zoning changes that promote infill over expansion – work best when the population is growing. But Dayton is losing people at an alarming rate, and even Montgomery County lost 6% of its people since 1990. And it’s not likely that people will be forcibly moved and their old suburban cookie cutter houses plowed under. (I’m skeptical re “crazy” HUBzone proposal as a way to increase Dayton’s population. Even if you could get politicians to change the H1B program to allow more people from overseas to come here for tech jobs, Dayton would be competing with every other HUBzone out there for India’s and China’s best and brightest, people who are finding their skills in increasing demand back home.) It also doesn’t help that a lot of the job growth – or at least maintenance – is concentrated in the south and east suburbs. People are locating near their jobs. Those jobs just don’t happen to be in Dayton. Centerville’s population density is approaching that of Dayton’s, and Kettering’s density is actually slightly higher. Other features that promote and serve density – such as the light rail and streetcar options that some advocate – are stuck in a chicken and egg situation. There isn’t the density needed to support them, and there isn’t the population growth that would increase density around them. Here in Seattle, whose population density is 2 1/2 times higher than Dayton’s, recently completed light rail (which I supported) and streetcar (which I did not) lines are underutilized, even though they serve some of most densely populated areas of the city. (Some folks like to point to Europe when it comes to trains, etc., but Europeans drive a lot more than some folks realize, and population densities are much higher; a Paris metro network would serve 2.2 million people in 40 square miles, about 54K people per square mile, versus Dayton’s 166,000 people in 57 square miles, about 2936 people per square mile.) And frankly, the Dayton area commuting and downtown… Read more »
@mark W- always appreciate your comments. Yes, you’re right- Dayton would compete with all the other HUBzones- but, hopefully, since we’re not competing with the entire country- we can put something together that looks respectable. The idea is to end the need for HUBzones all together (because isn’t that why the SBA created them?) Sure- it’ll be tough- but, the idea is to stop thinking small- at silver bullet type projects and incentivize beneficial behavior.
The way Louisville stopped the population decline- was to increase the scope of their government. Sure- it’s slight of hand- but it gave them confidence. It moved them up in the rankings of metro areas. Dayton could do the same.
To make Dayton more attractive- to help increase density- gas prices will have to rise and- it has to be easier to build and renew in the city. Because as gas goes up- so do other energy costs- making old buildings not worth as much. This is where the walk to work tax credit helps offset the energy costs. They do work together.
Note: Europeans may have a higher standard of living because they have higher gas costs- making more of them live without cars- and depend on public transit in densely populated cities, then again- Europe is a lot smaller.
The thought I’ve been having lately is how far would the money spent on the Austin Road interchange have gone at building Dayton out with fiber to the home? Lexis/Nexis allows telecommuting- as I would imagine that Terradata does as well. Was the answer technology instead of track hoes and more asphalt?
Louisville’s population growth was due largely to domestic in-migration, according to census projections. Lexington did even better with populationg growth. The reason why is that both regional economies are growing, drawing in-migration. In fact Lexington probably saw the best economic growth in the Ohio Valley in the past 10 years. Both these cities have sprawl problems (Lexington a bit less due to its urban service area growth boundary). Louisvillians recognize this as an issue and are trying to address it, but as Mark W notes, they are coming at it from a better position than Dayton as they are a growing vs declining metro area, and they they can take a more comprehensive approach due to their (somewhat) unified government structure.
In fact I just got back from an event on this very topic, the Liveable Louisville forum:
http://www.livablelouisville.org/panel/
….interesting stuff. In some ways the Dayton region is better positioned to address sprawl issues due to the somewhat less sprawly suburbia here vis a vis Louisville (believe it or not). The issues with the city itself are a considerably tougher nut to crack and go back to cultural problems with how Daytonians (by this I mean people who live in the Dayton metropolitan area) do not value their city or urban life in general, thus have ceded the city to the urban underclass, or just see it as an opportunity for slumlording. This isn’t the case in Louisville, where unlike Dayton, large areas of the old city (including downtown) are considered cool places to live and play. Large areas have Dayton-scale problems, too, and this is recognized and starting to be addressed.
Mark W has some excellent observations. Seattle came up at the Liveable Louisville forum as a good example (they had a video of the new bike-freindly mayor up there).
I don’t want tax breaks for businesses. I want no taxes for all businesses. Big difference.
But back to sprawl, I think legislation limiting people where they can live is an absolute joke. I want Dayton to grow, I want Dayton to be great. But the reality is the people who live here don’t care (not all, but the vast majority) and until you change that attitude nothing will get done. It is next to impossible to start a business in Dayton, and taxing business and people to death is not the answer. Paul, you will notice all of DE solution involve limiting people through taxation. He can not have any solution that does not involve the word tax. I am not sure why he is so obsessed with other people’s money, but he is. I think lowering taxes and making it easy to conduct business would be benificial to Dayton. He wants to tax rich people to death and hand it over to the poor. I think that is a wrong and against the interest of those who produce. Personal responsiblity has left the good old USA. When it returns we will prosper. Simple.
ok for one thing we have always had a progressive tax system.(aka tax the rich) 2. if you don’t tax business you can’t tax people look up sole proprietorship. 3 please take a basic economics class then you might now how taxing to lower negative externalities and positive externalities works. then maybe you will know what your talking about.
p.s its not impossible to start a business in Dayton.
know* not enough sleep
Clayton, you are living in Esrati’s world. Just becasue there has always been a progressive tax system does not mean it needs to continue. There used to be slavery in this country, and that is gone. You can just tax people, each and everyone. Businesses don’t need to be taxed. We do tax them, but we could make laws that just tax an individual. Again, stop thinking “what is.” We can pass laws to tax however we see fit. My suggestion is only tax people, and tax them less. We have a tax on everything, we can change that if we want. And it is not impossible to start a business in Dayton, but Dayton is not friendly to businesses.
Wow everyone, thanks for the welcome. I’ll save other comments for another day.
And frankly, the Dayton area commuting and downtown parking situation just isn’t very painful when compared to a lot of other cities. That was really the key phrase in the whole exercise. Dayton nor Cincinnati as communities did not really require any of these interchanges but the argument for these interchanges was for NEW businesses and the “horrible” commute times for Lexis Nexis/Mall traffic. It was a false argument from the start, but was pushed HARD by many advocates. Some of these “advocates” are still around, but they would never own up to a mistake, so they will keep advocating for continued digging of the proverbial hole. Mark W, thanks for the Paris comparisons and you are correct about the density issues. There are many ifs, would’ve, could’ve and I long for the days when the density was more favorable. Dayton missed its chance to become a world class city with High Density and plenty of Green Space (MetroParks) that are underutilized. Escaping from people for activities would not have been a problem and may have satisfied the FREEDOM Gene requires. But all is not lost, the South (Warren/Montgomery) has won the war, but probably lost as well. If we can support the Farmers that lie to the North, the tide will turn as oil becomes more expensive, locally produced Farm products will be come more valuable and the closer a citizen is to that resource the better for the community. The South will have to institute some form of cooperative community gardening, but this will require a great deal of sacrifice and skill which will require some mind shift I do not see coming. Jeff – Interesting about Louisville and I always wondered because it appeared to me 264 and 265 were Sprawl magnets due to the “early” (ie long before required) construction. Kentucky seems to have had better leadership ie a more business like Government over the years as compared to Ohio and KY seems to have taken and not given. If you look at Cincy and Louisville the key in Cincy was a loop around Cincy that included Indy… Read more »