Title of a guest opinion in the Dayton Business Journal.  I bolded some interesting lines

 

 

Dayton Business Journal - by David McDonald

 

I have professionally analyzed markets (and Central Business Districts), directed the strategic growth plans of thirteen retail chains, and founded four businesses. With this unique perspective, I have some observations on Dayton.

 

more at: www.businessjournal.com

 

David McDonald is president of Kettering-based The McDonald Group LLC. He can be reached at (937) 609-7559 or [email protected].

Other than the lake idea, this guy is just restating stuff from the last 20 years.

"Professionally analyzed"? The guy doesn't know what he's talking about. First of all oil is finite and will also become more and more difficult to obtain. This is simple physics. And the free parking? Nothing in life is free buddy, even if you hide the costs as they do in suburbia. Even in downtown Columbus Gay St. charges a high rate to park: 25 cents for 10-12 minutes. And it's rather packed day and night. I'm glad I just bike and lock up to a rack or meter instead of going back to the days of circling around one-ways looking for a spot. And then there's the Arena District, also Downtown, where meters are active until 10PM instead of 6. People go because there is an attractive *urban* environment which is also unique. High gas prices are going to cripple the places he's favoring financially, with downtown Dayton being best laid out for very low oil consumption, walkability, and bikeability. This guy is "free this" and "free that", what a bunch of nonsense, and he's the president of something? Yikes. I should print some business cards, make up an organization/think-tank and proclaim myself president. I almost missed this gem, "Bring a lot more people downtown to live and work and retail will follow." No, really? Gee, I wish there were a local example of that...

^^

The lake ideas goes back 30 years.  I posted on this awhile back. 

 

Riverdesign Dayton, a planning history

 

 

This guy is "free this" and "free that", what a bunch of nonsense,

 

Not at all. Louisville did just this.  The city bought abandoned things and sold them to developers real cheap.  In the case of the failed downtown shopping mall they bought it from the owner for a few mill and sold it to another developer for $1.  Not exactely free, but pretty close.  The payoff was pretty big, though, as it revived a dead space downtown.

 

The point of Dayton is that it's downtown may be valuated high by the auditor, yet it has no worth to the market, which is why vacancy is high and buildings sit abandoned (or, if they are lucky enter a sort of zombie state by becoming govt. offices).

 

 

 

He didn't mention residency requirements, racial discrimination in hiring, same-sex couples' rights, ballpark village or PR firm scandals. Thank God.

 

So in that respect, I'm proud that someone is actually talking about what really matters to Dayton instead of all the white noise that distracts us from the real issues that affect us.

This is quite sad. I'm going to freeze myself until the time when suburbs are the worst places ever to live, and when we start to care about eachother/ the environment.

Maybe if we all just cared more about ourselves and our families and our friends and communities things would be better.  Daytonians take care of themselves and the suburbs take care of themselves and limit government to the point where no one has "the upper hand" on anyone.

 

As for Dayton, I support the Giuliani model: fight crime, encourage econ dev and welcome all to the joys of city life.

What he is talking about is levelling the playing field with the suburbs so that downtown is more competetive as a business & residential site.  Given improvement in DPS is unlikely the residential will always be hobbled in Dayton.

 

The other, more business-oriented stuff is more do-able, even if the proposals are pretty radical.

 

I'd add to the other free stuff that the downtown area be a tax free site:  no city income tax as well as free parking. 

I don't know about the idea of free parking (free parking= no money for garage matinence= hooker heaven), and the "lakes" seem really stupid. If we want Dayton back, I agree with the eminent domain/ cheap sale of well-placed property downtown. I think that if the city of Dayton put up a levy issue for the "renewal of downtown" with no specifics presented to the voters, it would fail, but if specific locations were targeted as "redevelopment hotspots" where the city would make large claims through the use of eminent domain, and practically give this land they purchased to developers with a minimal amount of strings attached, I think that we would be pleasently suprised by the output, and such an issue would pass.

 

Dayton is probably the biggest sleeeper city in our state, maybe even the Great Lakes region, and few see the great potential that lies here in our rivers, bike trails, aviation and military heritage, our entrepreneurial heritage, and our stellarly-placed central location. It's been a while since we've had the great output of minds, inventions, and ideas that we had a century ago, but without the right initiatives , we can guarantee that they will never come back.

 

Also, another suggestion:

 

- Create an Aileron University through a partnership with the University of Dayton's school of business (specifically its entrepreneurship program), the Antioch College Continuation Corporation, the Aileron Institute, local and regional entrepreneurs to create a new, small, selective college that offers undergraduate programs in areas taht made the city of Dayton great to begin with (Entrepreneurship, Inventive thought, management, urban studies, public policy, engineering etc.- you can see what direction I'm going with this) It would have to have a more liberal arts feel to it, and it would have to be top notch. It would also have to teach its students how to think effectively and outside the box, like how most good liberal arts schools try to do. One of its advantages on paper- its location in Downtown Dayton. I actually think this might have a shot st working, so someday hopefully it happens. Education would be the best place to start revitilazation.

let Cincy annex Dayton, Cbus style...

    Wouldn't making the city core more like a suburb turn the city core into a suburb?

 

  Look at Queensgate in Cincinnati. They bulldozed a large urban area and suburbinized it. It has all the suburban characteristics: wide streets, free parking, even setbacks with grass and some trees. By all suburban measures, the project was a success. They didn't attempt to solve city problems; eliminated them.

 

    That's like saying, tear down all the vacant buildings, and we won't have any vacant buildings anymore! That's a very different approach than attempting to revitalize vacant buildings.

   

Better yet, why don't we just all move the Peachtree City, Georgia, where those 400 or so NCR jobs that should be in Dayton went, and we can all revel in the magnificent wonders of driving around in golf carts in our exurban, environment killing and comlpetely irrespnsible stepford-wifeish hell hole? Maybe while we're at it, we can get out our telescopes and look at Atlanta's skyline from 50 miles away and then drive to our "downtown" and eat a humongous portion of cheesecake. Stretch pants, here we come!

 

Sorry if that comment was offensive to anyone, but people need to understand the fact that the only way we are going to save our mid sized cities like Dayton and Akron is to make sure that the population of our major metro areas don't look like Krispy-Kreme Original doughnuts. The center need to be strong, or else the fringe will rot quickly, as we have seen in Detroit. Maybe this rotting will be delayed for a while due to the economic crisis, but when it ends, we need to make sure that our cities are well-positioned and have good assets for people to be drawn to.

 

The reason why it is so important to get our act together now is because of the fact that for the first time since Kennedy, we have a true northern urbanite in office. The potential for having a president that is sensitive to urban needs coming at a time when our economy needs some severe stimulus is exponential. Now, our city leaders need to make sure that they don't screw up this once-in-a-generation opportunity.

^

the dam the river concept dates back to the 1970 Dan Kiley plan for the river, with a water taxi between the two banks of the river, with apartments and condos lining the river and linking back to downtown.  I bet that is what this guy remembers (dont know how old he is).  It was a nice idea, actually. 

 

Free parking might actually work downtown as there is a surplus of parking spaces.  It would be easy to turn a garage into free parking and turn the meters off on the streets.  Why not?

 

The issue of tearing down empty buildings..this is a sentiment echoed by others.  It seems people would rather see a vacant lot than a vacant building (particulary if its been boarded up).

 

The point of Dayton is that it's downtown may be valuated high by the auditor, yet it has no worth to the market, which is why vacancy is high and buildings sit abandoned (or, if they are lucky enter a sort of zombie state by becoming govt. offices).

 

I totally understand this and it makes no sense. Same thing with Columbus: so highly priced yet so many vacant spaces. The problem lies in the faulty pricing artificially set by the auditor. Let the market decide what they're worth and there's no need to give huge discounts. This is the root of the problem that needs to be addressed. The amount of time a space has been vacant, i.e. unwanted, should affect the price.

There really is a sentiment out there for the removal of the old vacant building stock.  I guess I never knew how freaked out people are about abandoned buildings:

 

Two quotes from a young professionals group in Dayton, "UpDayton"

 

“There’s just a lot of vacancy…I’d almost feel safer if there wasn’t an empty, vacant warehouse, or empty, vacant building, or empty, vacant house – if there was nothing, I would feel safer.”

 

..and this one:

 

“It’s hard to get people to walk two blocks if they have to walk by two boarded-up buildings.”

 

and then look at this one from the thread header:

 

Demolish or restore buildings. Beg and borrow as much money as possible to relieve urban blight. Plant grass on demolished building sites. It looks better than a derelict building and presents opportunities for future growth.

 

So, vacant land is not as scary as abandoned buildings.  Interesting.  This is a call for the Detroitification of the city,  rendering it a patchwork of vacant land and surviving buildings (maybe more than a patchwork) but its interesting that people actually want this.  Realistically this is what is going to happen as there is no demand for old vacant city properties of various types.

 

But just interesting to see that fear.  For me its more a sense of melancholy, mixed with an imagined memory of what the city perhaps was in the past.  But no, not fear.

 

 

 

thanks... Atlanta is only 20 miles by the bird... I can see it just fine... Thankfully the population is young (7 elementary schools and no stretch pants) you could call us the milf capital of the south.

 

I wasn't joking. The sooner Dayton markets itself with Cincy the better. ie Fort Worth, Anahiem, St Paul etc...

 

 

Better yet, why don't we just all move the Peachtree City, Georgia, where those 400 or so NCR jobs that should be in Dayton went, and we can all revel in the magnificent wonders of driving around in golf carts in our exurban, environment killing and comlpetely irrespnsible stepford-wifeish hell hole? Maybe while we're at it, we can get out our telescopes and look at Atlanta's skyline from 50 miles away and then drive to our "downtown" and eat a humongous portion of cheesecake. Stretch pants, here we come!

 

Sorry if that comment was offensive to anyone, but people need to understand the fact that the only way we are going to save our mid sized cities like Dayton and Akron is to make sure that the population of our major metro areas don't look like Krispy-Kreme Original doughnuts. The center need to be strong, or else the fringe will rot quickly, as we have seen in Detroit. Maybe this rotting will be delayed for a while due to the economic crisis, but when it ends, we need to make sure that our cities are well-positioned and have good assets for people to be drawn to.

 

The reason why it is so important to get our act together now is because of the fact that for the first time since Kennedy, we have a true northern urbanite in office. The potential for having a president that is sensitive to urban needs coming at a time when our economy needs some severe stimulus is exponential. Now, our city leaders need to make sure that they don't screw up this once-in-a-generation opportunity.

But just interesting to see that fear. For me its more a sense of melancholy, mixed with an imagined memory of what the city perhaps was in the past. But no, not fear.

Completely agreed.

hi,...

Actually, they tried this in the 60s. Tear down enough buildings and put in surface parking and everyone will come downtown (to see the parking lots?). It didn't work then and it won't work now. One question to ask is why large metro areas survive even with inconvenient and expensive parking. The increased density of people and buildings is a large part of the answer.

Sounds like he (author of the write-up at top)  needs to hear from the many good points posted above.