What does Dallas need to become a world class tourists destination? (Austin: amusement park, hotels)

[dgz]

Dallas would need to have a few things that are really unique... things that would be difficult to find anywhere else in the world. Since Dallas doesn't have any natural wonders, they would have to be man-made.

[loves2read]

might I add--
world-class tourists, themselves

[cBach]

I also agree that the Trinity River project would be mandatory before Dallas would ever even be considered in the "world class" city category. So you better start getting on that soon.

Everytime I drive into Dallas from I-35 going north, when I cross the flood plains of the Trinity River I keep thinking, this is prime real estate that is going to waste. That area could be a park greater than the size of Central Park. It could be closed during floods, but during most of the year it would be a wonderful park.

If y'all did that, I think you'd immediately be on your way to being a contender. But until then, keep dreaming

[lh_newbie]

I don't understand how a park would make a city a world class tourist destination. Especially one that will get flooded at least once each year and will take weeks, if not months, to clean up. I'm not buying the argument. Do people go to NYC because it has Central Park? Or is CP a resource that is mostly by it's citizens?

Brian

[OrlFlaUsa]

Originally Posted by Linzy

Disneyland would be nice. There's one in the East and one in the West and we need one right here in the middle.

No I'm sorry but the only place in the US with a Disneyland is Anaheim, CA. There is however the one and only Walt Disney World in Orlando. To give some perspective on why simply a Disneyland wouldn't do the trick for Dallas lets review:

-Disneyland is a 160 acer site compared with Disney World's 30,080 acres. Actually WDW is 2x the size of Manhattan/DFW airport to give some perspective.
-Disneyland's attendance of 15,900,000 is less than just the Magic Kingdom's alone of 17,233,000.
-While that would certainly provide a huge boost to the Dallas tourism market, having 3 other parks in the 9.5 to 11 mil for annual attendance is what sets Disney World light years ahead of Disneyland.
-Hell even the Disney World Monorail ridership dwarfs DART's total light rail ridership, so you know that this is a massive place that is considered one of the most visited places in the world.

Dallas should stick to what it does best, which is business. I actually enjoyed the market's amenities when I worked for a company with multiple Metroplex locations. There was good dining that seemed less leisure and more professional if you will, plus, the city exudes financial success I think evidenced by all the shopping malls and the sheer numbers of billionaires living there.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by lh_newbie

I don't understand how a park would make a city a world class tourist destination. Especially one that will get flooded at least once each year and will take weeks, if not months, to clean up. I'm not buying the argument.

Brian

Have you ever been to Central Park in New York? Have you ever been to Golden Gate Park in SF? Have you ever been to Audubon Park in New Orleans?

Great cities have great parks. They define cities.

They could design the Trinity River parks to have native trees that thrive in floodplains. They could elevate the main walkways and buildings either on manmade hills or on stilts. With a lot of money, they could do it right.

Don't worry about flooding. Parks in Louisiana flood all the time and they're back to normal in no time. You just need to design it such that the structures don't flood.

[lh_newbie]

Cbach -

I would disagree - great cities have great parks; great parks do NOT make great cities. These parks are not the reason any city in your list is a travel destination. They are awesome assets for it's citizens.

Brian

[cBach]

Originally Posted by OrlFlaUsa

No I'm sorry but the only place in the US with a Disneyland is Anaheim, CA. There is however the one and only Walt Disney World in Orlando. To give some perspective on why simply a Disneyland wouldn't do the trick for Dallas lets review:

-Disneyland is a 160 acer site compared with Disney World's 30,080 acres. Actually WDW is 2x the size of Manhattan/DFW airport to give some perspective.
-Disneyland's attendance of 15,900,000 is less than just the Magic Kingdom's alone of 17,233,000.
-While that would certainly provide a huge boost to the Dallas tourism market, having 3 other parks in the 9.5 to 11 mil for annual attendance is what sets Disney World light years ahead of Disneyland.
-Hell even the Disney World Monorail ridership dwarfs DART's total light rail ridership, so you know that this is a massive place that is considered one of the most visited places in the world.

Dallas should stick to what it does best, which is business. I actually enjoyed the market's amenities when I worked for a company with multiple Metroplex locations. There was good dining that seemed less leisure and more professional if you will, plus, the city exudes financial success I think evidenced by all the shopping malls and the sheer numbers of billionaires living there.

I think what we're finding out from the citizens is that they WANT to be a world class city. They understand they do business well, which is a good thing, but they want to offer attractions for visitors.

It takes time and it requires a slight change of focus. Look at the opposite extreme: New Orleans. They are a great tourist city but not a great business city. Part of the reason is they have preservation committees that have to decide before any development can be built. Now while that stymies business, it has prevented the French Quarter from getting torn down and replaced by chain restaurants and stores.

I think you need a balance, somewhere between the two. I think a city like Atlanta would be a guide. They are a good business city, but they are actively promoting their history, like MLK attractions, etc... They also attracted the olympics, etc...

The problem is that sometimes Dallas will need to not cater to the business interests and make decisions that will help the city versus just the city's industries. This may mean turning down some projects or forcing redesigns of projects to fit its master plans.

However, I'm not sure the citizens and business community of Dallas is ready for that. Until that day, Dallas will never be world class.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by lh_newbie

Cbach -

I would disagree - great cities have great parks; great parks do NOT make great cities. These parks are not the reason any city in your list is a travel destination. They are awesome assets for it's citizens.

Brian

Every world class tourist destination has an abundance of parks. Bottom line.

If you want to compete with those cities, you must offer the same amenities. Dallas does well with some of its museums and cultural offerings, but its outdoor amenities can't hold a candle to cities like NYC, San Diego, or even New Orleans.

Where in Dallas can you eat outside at a nice restaurant in a park on a nice day? That is common in NYC. Cultured, world class tourists demand that type of infrastructure.

[OrlFlaUsa]

Originally Posted by cBach

I think what we're finding out from the citizens is that they WANT to be a world class city. They understand they do business well, which is a good thing, but they want to offer attractions for visitors.

It takes time and it requires a slight change of focus. Look at the opposite extreme: New Orleans. They are a great tourist city but not a great business city. Part of the reason is they have preservation committees that have to decide before any development can be built. Now while that stymies business, it has prevented the French Quarter from getting torn down and replaced by chain restaurants and stores.

I think you need a balance, somewhere between the two. I think a city like Atlanta would be a guide. They are a good business city, but they are actively promoting their history, like MLK attractions, etc... They also attracted the olympics, etc...

The problem is that sometimes Dallas will need to not cater to the business interests and make decisions that will help the city versus just the city's industries. This may mean turning down some projects or forcing redesigns of projects to fit its master plans.

However, I'm not sure the citizens and business community of Dallas is ready for that. Until that day, Dallas will never be world class.

Agreed, Atlanta is an excellent example of a balance between the 2 worlds.