Ten Downtown Buildings: Re-use study.

Ten downtown buildigns as a design study. Ten local architectural firms get 1o buildings to propose a re-use. Read about it at this DMM post.

The buildings on a downtown map:And pix keyed to the map.



South Jefferson Street

Starting with the "Transportation Center" (AKA "that big parking garage"). It would take a couple of snapshots to really capture this building, but its a big monolithic barrier between downtown and the Oregon District. Here is the Jefferson Street facade, as it fits in with the next two subjects.
Next, across the street, Price Brothers. There might be a stone neo-romanesque facade hiding beneath that gold screen.


A half block south on Jefferson, 20 s. Jefferson has a crumbling terra cotta facade. This is maybe the most intriguing one as what's proposed here could be applied to three other similar buildings nearby


The Fire Blocks

"Merchants Row". The city designates this entire block as Merchants Row, so not sure if this is going to be an urban design scheme or the architect is going to be working with specfic buildings. This block, or most of it, is listed on the National Register as the "Fire Blocks", rebuilt after a fire during the 1913 flood.


The "David Building", one of the Merchants Row buildings. This place actually has a few tenants already, including a charter school on the upper floors. Whats notable about this one is that it seems to have the original windows.


Also on Merchants Row, kittycorner from the library, the big windows suggest a loft conversion. Ground floor is a funky mix of porn, the Dayton Dirt Collective, and Bingers.


Main Street Buildings

The next three would be eligible for city money. See this post about the fund left over from the Shuster Center construction and its set-aside for Main Street renovations.

25 South Main was closed as offices in the mid 1970s and was aquired by the city in the mid 1980s as part of the failed Arcade Centre urban renewal project. Recently news reports say it was given to Bob Shiffler, who owns the old McCrorys next door.


The KeyBank Building is at a prominent location at the heart of downtown and will be empty when Keybank relocates across the street to the former Mead Tower. This building is a good example of the Chicago approach to high-rises (think Michigan Avenue facing Grant Park), as discussed in the book Form Follows Finance.


The Walker Building is a former mens' clothing store, notable for how it wraps around the corner high rise, having a facade on 1st Street (left) and Main (right).

Moving off Main, another parking garage. At the corner of 2nd and Ludlow, again at a prominent location in the heart of downtown, the Leigh Building does a pretty good job of "holding the corner" and creating street space. The Leigh Building also fits into the prewar Dayton tradition of disguising garages to look like a downtown commercial blocks via that neat facade treatment. Does this need that much work?




(but yes, the garage interior is dark and grungy)

Next, a look on how these subjects fit in with what's going on downtown.

Fall Almanac IV

Thou comest, Autumn, heralded by the rain,
With banners, by great gales incessant fanned,
Brighter than brightest silks of Samarcand,
And stately oxen harnessed to thy wain!
Thou standest, like imperial Charlemagne,
Upon thy bridge of gold; thy royal hand
Outstretched with benedictions o'er the land,
Blessing the farms through all thy vast domain!
Thy shield is the red harvest moon, suspended
So long beneath the heaven's o'er-hanging eaves;
Thy steps are by the farmer's prayers attended;
Like flames upon an altar shine the sheaves;
And, following thee, in thy ovation splendid,
Thine almoner, the wind, scatters the golden leaves!
Autumn- Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Longfellow isn't much read nowadays, is he?

Looking at our scene, on can see bare branches. And we had a lingering taste of summer last week, before things clouded up, then a trace of rain. Temperature has dropped below 60 for the first time this season, and the first low below 40.

Clouds at the end of the week before the weather changed.

And a scene deeper in the forest, so we can watch how the understory changes color.

The Paper-Highway

The May 1979 cover letter from MVRC to DOT mentions that I-675 was a “paper-highway”; though it was still on paper the bypass was a fait-accompli, already generating and guiding development. Planning and zoning was already being based on the existence of I-675.

This was the case as early as the late 1960s with the Dayton Mall.

The mall developers were looking at the proposed OH 48 interchange as a potential site before settling on the current location near the terminus of I-675. So both sites were probably in consideration due to I-675. In fact the “Mall Area” could have been in speculation since the early 1960’s since the southern alignment was already public knowledge and never in question, and the mall site was also adjacent to an I-75 exit..



I-675 alignment was near-final in 1965 and included in the 1965 transportation plan. The 1976 draft EIS notes that after 1965 “major developers began to consolidate holdings” at the southern terminus, and mentions Galbraith, Mead Corporation, and Oberer by name. Press reports and property maps also show that NCR, Beerman Real Estate, and the Mead family also acquired real estate in this area. DeBartolo was the first mover for retail, building the mall in 1969-70.

Once the mall was open it drove adjacent development, as retail, food, and drink establishments located close to the mall.

After final alignment was decided in the late 1960s one can see how subsequent real estate development was sited to make way for the I-675 right-of-way, as these examples from the southern leg of the highway.





This is the OH 48 interchange site in 1977, showing an early office park undergoing development in ancipation of the bypass, but leaving room for ROW and an exit ramp.

Yet during the 1970s development was sparse. The first spec office development near a proposed I-675 interchange was Governors Square from the early 1970s. By 1977 an office park was under development at the proposed OH 48 interchange (shown in the above graphic). After the northern “Fairborn” segment opened in 1975 the first office park at the northern end of I-675 went under construction across from Wright State, opening in 1977 or 1978.


(Daytonology will look at the evolution of office development along I-675 in a future post)

Only after the final decision for the bypass did development really accelerate, particularly in Greene County (which had the most post-1986 growth) but also in the OH 725 corridor the OH 48 interchange and north of Clyo Road:



A good example is Cross Pointe, built after 1982 by an out-of-town developer on the old alternate site for the Dayton Mall. The first development here was an early big-box, Gold Circle, plus some auto dealers.

Cross Pointe as the poster child of I-675 sprawl in a newspaper article (developer Linclay was from St Louis and was building a skyscraper in downtown Cincy at the same time)



Cross Pointe before and after aerials. The site also included the now-closed Showcase Cinemas, facing the interstate.



Cross Pointe today, one of the larger strip centers in the area.



Coda

In retrospect Neal Goldschmidt was correct that the traffic projections justifying I-675 were self-fulfilling, since the highway became more crowded as it generated more development. It was reported that traffic counts were under projections during the first year of operation, before build-out of the interchange areas and residential sprawl beyond.

The MVRPC analyses said retail was not going to be a significant player along I-675, but this proved very wrong as major retail centers developed at all interchanges, especially at Fairfield Road via Fairfield Commons mall.

The impact of retail development on downtown was felt years before the bypass was opened. I-675 alignment drove the Dayton Mall site selection, and the mall opened 16 years before construction completion, drawing addition retail through the 1970s and 80s.

Retail was dying even before the Dayton Mall opened in 1970, but the mall pretty much dealt the mortal blow. Downtown retail was for all intents and purposes dead by the time I-675 opened in 1986. Subsequent impact was in the older suburbs, like Fairborn, Trotwood, Riverside, and Kettering, killing the Salem Mall and sucking strip center shopping to the I-675 interchanges.

The big impact to Dayton city was in lost jobs, particularly white- and pink- collar employment. A large collection of hotels and spec office buildings went up at the interchanges, as well as some light industry. This destroyed the market for downtown hotel rooms and office space, resulting in vacant skyscrapers, closed hotels, and a deserted center city. Development at the interchanges also meant employment opportunities moved away from inner city residents, especially in service industry work.

The suggested mitigations of revenue sharing, subsidized housing, and extended transit never happened, so the economic benefit of I-675 was limited to suburban areas adjacent to the freeway, especially Greene County.

The end result, 22 years after opening, is the “Dayton Banana”, a crescent of new suburban and commercial growth along and to the east and south of I-675, with a stagnant or dying center city and older suburbs.



Everything the opponents of I-675 had predicted has come true.

As a postcript, the final timeline of the NIMBY Forest controversy: a 6-7 years delay between construction periods, and 13 years between the EIS requirement in late 1973 and completion in 1986.




Adding the pre-1973 work and planning, 1957 to 1986, it took 29 years to build I-675.

The Enchanted NIMBY Forest IV: Quasi-Expressway & Endgame

I-675 looked dead after Goldschmidt’s decision, but bypass advocates didn’t give up. During the first half of 1980 the quasi-expressway concept was developed.

The concept, which surfaced earlier in the controversy, was to build a limited access highway from I-75 to OH 48 (Far Hills Avenue), with interchanges at OH 725 and OH 48. After OH 48 the route would be a four-lane at-grade highway to US 35, with stoplights at Wilmington Pike and Indian Ripple Road.




Presumably this would have been a lot like the US 35/Trotwood connector, which has a similar mix of at-grade and limited access segments.






This proposal was just a short step away from a full limited access highway, so wouldn’t have met the city and citizens’ group objections. One could easily imagine a future project changing the stoplight intersections to grade-separated interchanges and adding extra lanes.

A justification for the quasi-expressway was that an alternative package of surface street improvements was too costly. This was questioned by staff at the DOT regional office in Chicago, who thought the TCC was gaming the estimates to push a decision to the quasi-expressway.

The quasi-expressway was the preferred alternative of the I-675 advocates until the 1980 presidential election began in earnest. The concept was then dropped and bypass advocates decided to lobby the Reagan campaign for a statement in support of a true interstate, hoping Reagan would make good on the campaign promise if elected.

And that promise was made by VP candidate George HW Bush during a campaign swing through Dayton in September.

When Jimmy Carter came to Dayton in October for a town hall he was provided this “Situation Report” by DOT while being driven in from the airport:

“The President is stepping into a very HOT issue that has pitted the city and its black community against the region and its suburban white population”

…a succinct outside opinion, notable for not sugar-coating the racial subtext of the controversy.

Carter later said he would support the quasi-expressway. Not good enough for I-675 proponents.

In November Reagan was elected (though Carter carried Montgomery County).

Reagan Approval and the Final Battle.

Reagan appointed Drew Lewis as Secretary of Transportation. Lewis’ was a railroad man, CEO of the Union Pacific railroad, widely regarded at the time as one of the best-run US railroads. A concern surfaced after the election that I-675 might have stayed dead, as there was talk that Reagan administration was not going to fund any more interstates as a cost-cutting measure.
Instead, DOT generated a list of high-interest highway projects for Lewis to review. I-675 was on the list.

In 1981 Lewis reversed Goldschmidt’s decision, approving the bypass.

McGee left office in 1982. The 1981 Democratic mayoral primary was an opportunity for bypass proponents to pay back Pat Roach for opposing I-675. Roach was challenged in the primary by Paul Leonard, a state representative and strong supporter of I-675. Leonards’ opposition to Roach and support of the bypass ensured support from the business community. Leonard won the race 2 to 1. Roach remained on the city commission for a short time after her defeat and, true to her principles, cast the lone “no” on the final I-675 vote on February 1982. She then faded into political obscurity.

The Citizens against I-675 continued to fight, challenging Drew Lewis’ decision via an administrative appeal in 1981, and when rebuffed, went to Federal court. The suit challenged the bypass on the ground the EIS was deficient. As a measure of the continuing bitterness over the bypass the TCC and the Chamber of Commerce asked to be named as co-plantiffs in the case.

While the legal challenge was underway, engineering was completed, contracts advertised, and bids opened. Contracts couldn’t be let until the final legal decision, which was rendered on 22 April 1981 in favor of the bypass. 19 minutes later the first contract was awarded.

The remaining parts of I-675 were completed in stages. The first parts opened in 1984, between I-75 and OH 725 and between Fairfield Road and US 35. The final segment was open to traffic in the fall of 1986.


During construction the nearly forgotten DART light rail scheme resurfaced. The question was if an overpass was needed over the proposed rail line. The decision was no, being the final nail in the light rail coffin.

The TCC, in the forefront of the I-675 battle, disappeared. During the early 1980s discussions surfaced about disbanding the TCC and rolling transportation planning into the MVRPC. This apparently did happen in the 1980s.

The leader of the neighborhood opposition, Frank Mione, eventually moved from the NIMBY forest and now lives in a duplex in Washington Township.

And the NIMBY Forest, no longer enchanted, was bisected by I-675.

The Enchanted NIMBY Forest III: Mitigation & Federal Involvment

In 1977 the suburban environmental/NIMBY opposition to I-675 turned into a full-scale freeway revolt. In 1978 and ‘79 the I-675 controversy elevated to the Federal level via involvement by the Carter administration, including the Secretary of Transportation and the White House staff. Two DOT secretaries were involved; former Seattle congressman Brock Adams and former Portland, Oregon mayor Neal Goldschmidt

Locally, “mitigation” became a hot topic, with negotiations between the city (mostly McGee & Roach) the business community, and the local Democratic party boss Joe Shump, who sided with the business community, but tried to broker a compromise.

1978: Opposition organizes and the Feds get involved.

The year started off inauspiciously when a city commissioner was denied the chairmanship of the Transportation Coordinating Committee, or TCC, because he opposed I-675. The commissioner would later be kicked off the TCC subcommittee working on I-675. TCC was dominated by suburban governments, with Greene County representatives, particularly Fairborn and Beavercreek, playing a vocal role in supporting the bypass

Early in the year the Citizens Against I-675 formed as a coalition of anti-I-675 forces. One, the Black Political Assembly, was led by a young Dean Lovelace. Citizens Against I-675 fought back against the TCC, sending a letter to DOT requesting that the organization be de-certified as planning agent for the bypass, and requesting rejection of the environmental impact statement as flawed. The group also considered retaining a lawyer to fight the freeway.

The EIS was rejected on the grounds of air pollution issues and failure to consider socioeconomic impacts, resulting in a do-over. Citizens against I-675 also pushed for a comments period for the do-over EIS.

Also during this year Pat Roach engaged the Federal bureaucracy, releasing a letter from Secretary of Transportation Brock Adams stating that I-675 funds could have been directed to other transportation projects, both roads or mass transit. Adams’ letter was completely contrary to what ODOT told the city commission the previous year.

Later in the year HUD became involved, questioning the freeway’s housing and urban impacts. This communication was at the department level, in Washington. It’s unclear if Pat Roach, McGee, or others in the city were involved in engaging HUD on the issue, although a later news article indicates the city was better at playing the Feds to oppose the road, implying ongoing contact.

1979 Winter & Spring: DOT has Reservations + More Corporate Pressure

The EIS was finally completed in early 1979 and the D J-H, now with a conservative editorial board, published an op-ed supporting the bypass.

But, as we have seen, HUD had reservations. In March Pat Roach again engaged with the Feds, sending a letter to Brock Adams that the city commission was misled by ODOT and pressured by the business community to support the bypass.

Roaches’ letter and HUD opposition led Adams to require detailed data on socioeconomic impacts. This was requested from the Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission, or MVRPC. MVRPC was a supporter of the road, and their chair, Nora Lake, was on the Centerville city council.

In April the Mead Corporation leaned on Pat Roach.

Mead tried to convince Roach to reverse or soften her position at a “confidential meeting” called by Mead and attended by staff from John Glenn’s office, DOT, HUD, and the Mead CEO. Roach wouldn’t budge. The day after the meeting the Mead CEO released a warning sent to the Feds that “...the local business community will question continuation of the present level of supportto the city’s revitalization plans...” if I-675 was not approved.

One wonders if the intended audience here wasn’t the Feds but the city commission

In May MVRPC responded to Adams’ request by recommended the road be built via a strongly worded cover letter that minimized possible negative impacts and presenting the bypass as a fait accompli since it was already driving development decisions. MVRPC also recommended nine mitigating actions, noting that some suburbs along the bypass route hadn’t supported regional planning or housing efforts.

The 9 mitigating actions where:

1. 10% Minority set-aside for construction contracting
2. HUD earmarks for Section 8 housing in the I-675 corridor
3. Adoption of MVRC assisted housing plan by local governments in corridor
4. Adoption of regional plan by local governments in corridor
5. Local governments submit interchange developments for MVRPC & TCC for review
6. Adoption of MVRPC fair housing plan (non-discrimination for minorities)
7. Expand RTA
8. Revenue Sharing
9. Dayton develop transit & pedestrian emphasis on Main Street

Also during this time frame opposition was surfacing from other citizens groups in Greene County, as well as from Bellbrook, which wanted to stop development encroaching on the still somewhat exurban Sugarcreek Township.

1979 Summer: Mitigation Proposals and Non-Negotiable Demands.

In July the city informed Adams that it couldn’t support I-675 until mitigation actions were taken, leading to various mitigation proposals and negotiations involving local Democratic boss Joe Shump.

In addition to the MVRPC mitigations the following were in discussion during the summer:

• Funding of US 35 extension/Trotwood Connector
• Annexation of Wright-Patterson AFB
• Annexation of the airport
• Recapitalization of Citywide Development Corporation
• Business retention & expansion assistance
• Assistance to city in marketing urban renewal industrial sites
• Unified regional growth plan
• Commitment to inner ring revitalization

The Chamber of Commerce opposed Wright-Patterson annexation. The suburbs opposed revenue sharing and the annexations, so on the money and tax issues issue there was an impasse.

What’s interesting about these and the 1977 proposals wasthe consensus that I-675 would harm the city, hence the willingness of road proponents to even discuss mitigation.

I-675 was recognized as a new employment center, with estimates of up to 27,000 jobs to locate along the bypass. This probably was a rationale for annexing the base, as it had an employment around 25,000 around this time, which would compensate for jobs lost to the highway.

In August the various proposals and counterproposals came to naught when the city rejected the Shump compromise, holding out for base annexation. McGee said that some of his demands where non-negotiable, and he made good on that statement, but also indicated he didn’t trust Shump and the business community to make good on promises of mitigation.

Also in August, in what proved to be a fateful turn of events for I-675, Neal Goldschmidt was named Secretary of Transportation. Goldschmidt became mayor of Portland in 1983 via a freeway revolt against the Mount Hood Expressway, (briefly noted in the previous post) and his election was seen as tantamount to a referendum on that road. Under his term as mayor funds for the freeway where diverted to other road projects and the first Portland light rail line, and Portland embarked on growth control measures. So Goldschmidt was bringing some relevant political history to the table.

I-675 proponents decided to bypass the city and make their case directly to the Feds.
Ultimately the White House sent staff to investigate. Reports indicate that staff was skeptical about the mitigation proposals, questioning if they were “sincere” or a “whitewash”. The White House also undercut the city position by decoupling base annexation from I-675, saying it would be addressed as a separate issue (annexation required Secretary of Defense approval).

1979 Fall: Disapproved by the Secretary of Transportation

In September and October city commission voted to support the interstate as far as US 35, and opposed extension to the Dayton Mall. Since the locals where at an impasse it was up to the Feds to make a decision.

Apparently Pat Roach, as a leader of the I-675 oppostion, crossed party boss Joe Shump, as she was not endorsed by the Democrats for re-election to the city commission. Roach ended up the top vote getter in November, defeating the endorsed Democrats and retaining her seat on the commission.

On 29 November Goldschmidt disapproved I-675 south US 35, removing it from the Interstate program.

Major justifications for disapproval were the adverse economic impact on Dayton city, the questionable, self-justifying traffic projections (I-675 as “self fulfilling prophecy”), and no consideration of transit improvements. Goldschmidt did say the $90M set aside for the interestate (1979 dollars) would be remain in the area for transportation improvements.

Apparently Goldschmidt didn’t trust the locals to make-good on the various mitigation proposals, which one suspects is a safe assumption. Goldschmidts’ history as part of the Portland freeway revolt and his background as mayor of Portland would predispose him to side with Dayton city on the issue anyway. Finally, to approve I-675 would be 100% contrary to Carter’s urban policy of strengthening urban cores and minimizing projects that would do harm to core cities.

Yet Goldschmidt waffled, indicating he might approve a downgraded highway south of I-675, at least as far as Indian Ripple Road, leaving an opening to revisit a downgraded highway as an alternative.

The story of the “Quasi-Expressway”, I-675 as a campaign issue in the Reagan/Carter contest, and final decision is up next.

Our story so far

Fall Almanac 3

It's all a farce,—these tales they tell
About the breezes sighing,
And moans astir o'er field and dell,
Because the year is dying.

Such principles are most absurd,—
I care not who first taught 'em;
There's nothing known to beast or bird
To make a solemn autumn.
From "Merry Autumn"--Paul Lawrence Dunbar


..an excerpt from a longer poem. Dunbar looks at Autumn as a merry time, critiquing the literary convention for this season. The full poem is reposted below.

Summer makes a brief return, but very cool nights make of perfect mornings and late evenings. There seems to be a pretty big spread between the highs and lows this week, but it looks like a front came through at midweek.

The climate data says we recieved a half-inch of rain last week, and, though not noted here, fog during the morning hours during the last three days of the week (probably in low lying areas like river and creek bottoms). Dew on the windshield.
More explanation on the overcast scale. The numbers are 10ths. For example, a 1 indicates 1/10th overcast during that day, which means indvidual clouds, nearly all clear sky. 9 is 9/10ths cloud cover, or nearly all cloudy.

Now, the full Dunbar poem:

It's all a farce,—these tales they tell
About the breezes sighing,
And moans astir o'er field and dell,
Because the year is dying.

Such principles are most absurd,—
I care not who first taught 'em;
There's nothing known to beast or bird
To make a solemn autumn.

In solemn times, when grief holds sway
With countenance distressing,
You'll note the more of black and gray
Will then be used in dressing.

Now purple tints are all around;
The sky is blue and mellow;
And e'en the grasses turn the ground
From modest green to yellow.

The seed burs all with laughter crack
On featherweed and jimson;
And leaves that should be dressed in black
Are all decked out in crimson.

A butterfly goes winging by;
A singing bird comes after;
And Nature, all from earth to sky,
Is bubbling o'er with laughter.

The ripples wimple on the rills,
Like sparkling little lasses;
The sunlight runs along the hills,
And laughs among the grasses.

The earth is just so full of fun
It really can't contain it;
And streams of mirth so freely run
The heavens seem to rain it.

Don't talk to me of solemn days
In autumn's time of splendor,
Because the sun shows fewer rays,
And these grow slant and slender.

Why, it's the climax of the year,—
The highest time of living!—
Till naturally its bursting cheer
Just melts into thanksgiving.

The Press and the I-675 Controversy : Stenographers to Power?

A very interesting aspect of the controversy was the roll of the local media, particularly the two Cox Enterprises newspapers, the Dayton Daily News and Dayton Journal-Herald. Traditionally the J-H was the “businessman’s newspaper”, but during this area was taking some pro-city positions.

The J-H was a supporter of the River Corridor Committee and its “Riverdesign Dayton” project to build housing and landscaping on the downtown riverfront, and supported early Arcade planning.

The J-H ran two op-ed pieces in February 1977 on I-675 , one by associate editor Harold Piety, the other an unsigned editorial. You can read them here (click on the images and they will enlarge):



…this was a fairly interesting editorial as Piety had a very different vision of the region as one centered on downtown via rail transit, which dovetailed with the J-Hs advocacy of downtown revival efforts of the 1970s.




What’s interesting is how far off the reservation Piety and the J-H went with these. The CEO of “Dayton Newspapers” (the local Cox Enterprises holding company) a Mr. Easterly, was a leader in the local Chamber of Commerce and supported I-675 (the DDN editorials supported the road).

It turned out that Piety wrote another editorial at the end of 1977, around the time of the city commission vote, reversing his anti-bypass position. Apparently Area Progress Council pressure was felt at Dayton Newspapers since Eastelry, as CEO of Dayton Newspapers, was on the APC as well

Pietys’ name disappeared from the masthead. The Journal-Herald eventually became a strident voice for I-675, being dominated by conservative editor Bill Wild and publisher Dennis Schere

Eventually, later in the controversy, mayor McGee accused Dayton Newspapers CEO Easterly of conflict of interest due to his dual roll as Chamber of Commerce leader, APC member, and publisher of the two local newspapers.

Because, after 1977 both Cox papers were singing from the same songbook