Just some quick .ppt diagrams...thinking about what to do with the Arcade block downtown, plus the vacant DDN complex and Moraine Embassy apartments.

 

 

Some of the block has new stuff thats viable, some older restored stuff...but just tear down the old vacant stuff as its not going to come back.  Be done with it already.

 

 

And replace it with parking.  Sort of a planned parking lot thing rather than something haphazard.  And bring back the mid-block alley to be used as service s.  The parking lots can be designated or privatized/secured for certain tenants like the School Board (which has a large group of buildings to the south), rather than being "public" (the way the RTA lot is off of 3rd between Main and Jefferson).  Including a parking lot for Kinkos and that grocery on 3rd.  Put in some mid-block sidewalks, too, and extend that park/plaza next to the Kuhns building (or it could be more parking.

 

 

The midblock sidewalks could be used as shortcuts around downtown, sort of like the Arcade used to be. The car circulation would need some thought out some.

 

 

It seems the parking lot solution makes a lot of sense. An alternative would just be to landscape the site like Dave Hall Plaza, but that imposes a landscaping maintenance cost, plus it could become a homeless/junky hangout.  Privatized parking would be more usefull.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I see the 1950's are back :).

The reality is that the Dayton economy really can''t sustain the building stock downtown.  There is a surplus of buildings and space.  In fact the second tallest building dowtown is approaching total vacany.  Some midrises (like the 111 Building) are not viable either, and are bankrupt and being taken over by the mortgage holders.   

 

Everything on that arcade block that I note as vacant has been that way 15 years by now. Even longer in one case.  So its time to bite the bullet and clear the property.

 

Ideally parking lots are an iterim solution until at some (far) future date downtown becomes viable again for new construction.  As it is the buildings will sit vacant until they deteriorte to the point of becoming a nuisance, and then will be torn down anyway.

 

So, jut tear them down and put the vacant land to a productive use that could benefit the remaining properties.

 

I think the "loft" conversion market has peaked in Dayton.

 

One of the buildings I note as being vacant was a failed loft conversion, where the developer went belly-up and left a mostly gutted building.

 

Another loft conversion downtown has went into recievership.

 

Yet another in "Webster Station", which is next to downtown hasn't even started to undergo renovation. It has had promotional banner on the building, but nothing has happened for a year or more and the buildings sit vacant and gutted.

 

And truthfully, in Ohio, surface lots are not "interim." They'll be there 30 years from now...

 

Yes, that is true in Dayton as well, which sort of proves the point about "too much space downtown".

 

The way I see these lots is that they make the land more viable for development, as the cost of building demolition and hazmat abatement has already been incurred, leaving a "greenfield" site (though there would be some parking lot pavement demo involved if a lot ever becomes a building site again).

 

I guess just planting the property in grass would work too, but parking lots fulfill a demand for "suburban" levels of convenience about having parking immediatly adjacent & in control of a place of buisness.

 

 

 

 

 

Toledo, which has a similar downtown to Dayton (the CBD of Toledo probably still has more workers though)

 

Dayton and Toledo have similar downtown office workers. 

 

Just an FYI, downtown Dayton has 26,000 downtown office workers (which ain't bad losing Mead, Citizen Federal, etc).

http://www.downtowndayton.org/bigpicture/facts.html

 

Ideally parking lots are an iterim solution until at some (far) future date downtown becomes viable again for new construction.  As it is the buildings will sit vacant until they deteriorte to the point of becoming a nuisance, and then will be torn down anyway.

 

Ideally, the city markets the building towards developers better than EBay and gets the building converted into a hotel or lofts.

 

Doesn't Dayton have a growing downtown housing market?

 

Toledo is not tearing down anything, because many abandoned buildings are being converted into lofts. Is that not the case in Dayton?

 

And truthfully, in Ohio, surface lots are not "interim." They'll be there 30 years from now...

 

 

Yes, Dayton is still converting buldings and such to lofts (like every city in the world).  The problem is the buildings that are Class A offices are not so easy to convert.

The reality is that the Dayton economy really can''t sustain the building stock downtown.

 

The reality was that in the 1970s, the Cleveland economy couldn't sustain the building stock downtown - and thus both the Arcade and the theatres of Playhouse Square were *this* close to meeting the wrecking ball.

 

I ask you - if the downtown Dayton economy can't sustain the building stock (especially a stunning masterpiece like the Dayton Arcade), what exactly will people be using that parking for? As the people behind the restoration of Cleveland's Playhouse Square theatres said - "parking for what?". It's one thing to gut your downtown for parking, it's another to wipe out what little you have left that makes Dayton a place worth living in (or visiting).

 

 

Bingo.  Totally agreed.

 

Besides, if they want to knock down and abandoned building, knock down the (former) Mead Tower.

The problem is the buildings that are Class A offices are not so easy to convert.

 

I see. That does make sense.

 

When one is talking about the Arcade, McCrorys, and the old DDN buildings one is not talking about class A office space.

 

I ask you - if the downtown Dayton economy can't sustain the building stock (especially a stunning masterpiece like the Dayton Arcade), what exactly will people be using that parking for? As the people behind the restoration of Cleveland's Playhouse Square theatres said - "parking for what?". It's one thing to gut your downtown for parking, it's another to wipe out what little you have left that makes Dayton a place worth living in (or visiting).

 

the idea was to have private or shared parking for buildings that are still being used, like the School Board, which has a block of buildings just south of the Arcade on Ludlow, or a private lot for the Kuhns Building.  This is aleady being done downtown, particularly the private parking next to the RTA building at 3rd & Main, for RTA office workers, I guess. 

 

Having dedicated private parking would approximate suburban situations, where buildings have their own parking lots, which means people dont have to worry about security, or can quickly get to their cars.

 

But maybe replaceing with grass & tree would work, as it worked pretty good with Dave Hall Plaza.  I notice some vacant propertys up near Riverscape dont even have parking, they just have lawns planted on the site.  Maybe thats an idea:  Just run with the trend to low density and actually replace parking with grass and trees. 

 

The Greening of Dayton

 

Besides, if they want to knock down and abandoned building, knock down the (former) Mead Tower.

 

I was thinking the 111 Building would be a good demo job.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the idea was to have private or shared parking for buildings that are still being used, like the School Board, which has a block of buildings just south of the Arcade on Ludlow, or a private lot for the Kuhns Building.  This is aleady being done downtown, particularly the private parking next to the RTA building at 3rd & Main, for RTA office workers, I guess. 

 

Maybe I just don't get it, but anytime I've been to downtown Dayton on a weekday during business hours, I have never, ever had a problem finding a parking spot, so I hardly feel more is justified.  If anything, there is an abundance of close-in parking, so people don't walk very far at all on the street, which really takes away any sort of street activity, making it tougher for small businesses to make a go of it.

 

Having dedicated private parking would approximate suburban situations, where buildings have their own parking lots, which means people dont have to worry about security, or can quickly get to their cars.

 

Isn't that what we already have?  Besides, didn't we learn from previous urban renewal efforts that the suburbanization of downtowns does not work.

 

But maybe replaceing with grass & tree would work, as it worked pretty good with Dave Hall Plaza.

 

What value does that add to downtown?  None.  A place like Riverscape is a destination and has been pretty good at attracting people, but its not like people are racing downtown to go hang out in Dave Hall Plaza.  If I want grass and trees, I'll head to one of the MetroParks.

If anything, there is an abundance of close-in parking, so people don't walk very far at all on the street, which really takes away any sort of street activity, making it tougher for small businesses to make a go of it.

 

Yeah, that is one of the characteristics of downtown Dayton..large blocks of empty space or large institutional or buisness uses, with very wide streets...with some isolated retail holdouts and bars.  It has a very void feel to it. It is close to being "suburban" already.

 

Isn't that what we already have?  Besides, didn't we learn from previous urban renewal efforts that the surbanization of downtowns does not work.

 

It  didn't work for retail, but transforming a downtown into a sort of office park maybe is a way to go.  Or , even more radical, why have a downtown at all?.  Downtowns where the result of concentrations of buisness due to transportation lines, but that technological reason has went away, so downtowns go away too.

 

What value does that add to downtown?  None.  A place like Riverscape is a destination and has been pretty good at attracting people, but its not like people are racing downtown to go hang out in Dave Hall Plaza.  If I want grass and trees, I'll head to one of the MetroParks.

 

What value do abandoned buildings have?  Less than none.

 

Parking is more functional.  Trees and grass are  less functional, but its more pleasant to look at it, not so much a value thing as an aesthetic improvement. 

 

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

 

Well, it has been fun playing around with this idea, but the reality of the Arcade going away antytime soon is pretty remote.  Yet for all intents and purposes the building is already "gone" as a downtown place.  How many of you ever been in it, or used it?  For many people, particularly younger people or suburbanities, its just an empty block and no one is aware of what's inside, or they just saw pix of it somewhere. It's just a memory for some, an eyesore for others.

 

As for the future, the builidng will most likely be taken over by the county from Brownfield Charities for delinquent taxes and then...well?  Well it could be simply sold at the sheriffs sale.  Or, more likely, the final foreclosure on the Arcade will be the kick in the rear  for the city and county to get serious on what to do with the building.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, that is one of the characteristics of downtown Dayton..large blocks of empty space or large institutional or buisness uses, with very wide streets...with some isolated retail holdouts and bars.  It has a very void feel to it. It is close to being "suburban" already.

 

While I pretty much agree with you, how do you define suburban?

 

It  didn't work for retail, but transforming a downtown into a sort of office park maybe is a way to go.

 

The day downtown becomes just another office park is the day I'm headed out of town.  Downtown Dayton may not be the greatest downtown, but IMHO it is leaps and bounds better than a bland office park. 

 

Or , even more radical, why have a downtown at all?.  Downtowns where the result of concentrations of buisness due to transportation lines, but that technological reason has went away, so downtowns go away too.

 

We discussed this very issue at length in one of my grad classes.  Everyone agreed that while strong downtowns are not really necessary for conducting business anymore because of advances in transportation and technology, that does not make them obsolete.  They serve an important role in the creating a sense of place.  No matter how successful Centerville or Beavercreek is, the region as a whole is connected to the success of Dayton.  When's the last time you've heard about the successful suburb of Flint, Michigan?  While I'm sure some exist, I'm more likely to hear about the problems of Flint, including the struggling downtown.  As we suburbanize downtown Dayton, it just becomes another place...nothing special...a place not worth making a trip to visit...a place not even worth mentioning.    If we keep suburbanizing downtown Dayton, as you suggest, pretty soon there won't be much left.  It's a lot easier to lose something than to get it back--including the landmarks that set downtown apart.

 

I place much of Dayton's problems, including downtown's, on the lazy, apathetic suburbanites who don't give a shit about the success of the Dayton region.  They would rather move out to the burb, have their SUVs, spend their time deciding which suburban Applebee's to dine at this week, cluelessly bitch about anything and everything that goes on in Dayton and leave the urban problems behind them.  People are too blind to see that they are part of the problem.  People need to get off their asses and do something about it, or at the very least give a damn. </rant>

 

What value do abandoned buildings have?  Less than none.

 

Parking is more functional.  Trees and grass are  less functional, but its more pleasant to look at it, not so much a value thing as an aesthetic improvement.

 

We'll just have to disagree about the grass and tress.  I wouldn't consider a large patch of grass and trees in that location to be an "aesthetic improvement."  To me, an abandoned historic building that has a chance of being restored--albeit a small chance--is much more valuable than another parking lot in downtown Dayton.  I might have to dig out one of my old textbooks because it talks about the return on investment on urban renewal vs. historic preservation projects.  Historic preservation by far has proven more successful in the long run, with the major challenge being getting the funding to get a project started. 

 

 

How many of you ever been in it, or used it?  For many people, particularly younger people or suburbanities, its just an empty block and no one is aware of what's inside, or they just saw pix of it somewhere. It's just a memory for some, an eyesore for others.

 

Sadly, I have never been in the building but look forward to the day when I can.

 

the final foreclosure on the Arcade will be the kick in the rear  for the city and county to get serious on what to do with the building.

 

Let's hope so!

^I completely agree dfly, well said. Thank you.

When one is talking about the Arcade, McCrorys, and the old DDN buildings one is not talking about class A office space.

 

I'm not talking about the Arcade, McCrorys, nor the old DDN.  I'm talking about the Mead Tower, the City Centre Building, the old Miami Valley Tower, the 111 Building.  We were discussing Dayton's problem with loft conversions and I answered back with the Class A issue (which is a big problem in any city).

 

I was thinking the 111 Building would be a good demo job.

 

Knock down both and we got a deal.

 

Yet for all intents and purposes the building is already "gone" as a downtown place.  How many of you ever been in it, or used it?  For many people, particularly younger people or suburbanities, its just an empty block and no one is aware of what's inside, or they just saw pix of it somewhere. It's just a memory for some, an eyesore for others.

 

That is why it will probably "come back."  The mentality of south suburban Dayton is quite sickening, as the city (particularly downtown) is used as a giant trash heap.  Perhaps if we get those "educated" folk down in Kettering, Springboro, and Centerville to *gasps* go urban and perhaps help in the renaissance of downtown Dayton, then we'll see progress.  Otherwise, the dreams of Jane Jacobs dies.  And yes, I've been in it (many times) and used it.  I highly doubt it's going to get the chopping block though I'm wondering who's going to do what with it.

 

If the Arcade were in Columbus, it'd be Fairfield Commons with architecture.

 

I place much of Dayton's problems, including downtown's, on the lazy, apathetic suburbanites who don't give a shit about the success of the Dayton region.

 

You ain't told a lie yet.

 

People are too blind to see that they are part of the problem.  People need to get off their asses and do something about it, or at the very least give a damn.

 

You don't just need an amen.  You need a damned church.  I know a good one that's free (Sacred Heart).

sorry to break the chain of conversation...but I'm not sure how its a 'modest' proposal for the Dayton Arcade.  I wouldnt consider the demolition of a architectural beauty to be 'modest'.

 

I would think that their are plenty of other areas to demo vacant bldgs to accomplish your task of more parking.  But as for the whole parking situation I didnt find it to be a problem when I visited during the workweek a little while back.  There was plenty of on-street parking available....no major issues.

 

A wise man once said:  "If you have a parking problem...then you're doing something right!"

 

Now back to the bickering. :-D

^It is modest in the fact that it is the easy or conservative thing to do.

An immodest proposal is to turn the space into a regional/city history museum.

 

Sort of like the Heinz Pittsburgh Regional History Center (which is a

real good  museum:link), or the historical museum in the Ciny Union Terminal (another white elephant building), or even that Youngstown museum.

 

The big rotunda space would be a great place to hang a replica of one of the Wright Flyers, and the spaces around could be the exhibition spaces for permanent, changing and touring exhibits.  On the ground floor there could be a museum shop and restaurant and even some other types of smaller retail (maybe bring back the food court or some sort of market, but in the arcade area off of Third, reserving the rotunda and adjacent spaces for the museum itself).

 

And, yeah, this is about as likely as the Arcade complex being torn down for parking.  But I'm a history freak so I like the idea.

 

I know a good one that's free (Sacred Heart).

 

Too late: Sacred Heart is now home to a Vietnamese RC congregation (at least they where there last summer).

Those damn VIETNAMESE!!! 

I think a nice super wal mart would bring people Downtown, and we can get one of those fancy ones like they have in Canton, Michigan!

this plan sucks.

this plan sucks.

 

Well, that's nice.  Care to elaborate?