Future of Lakeside Mall

[bartock]

Show me where I said anything about Hall Road competing directly with Detroit? I doubt any of the stores along Hall Rd have ever had a location in Detroit, especially if the company is less than 30 years old. What I am saying is that Hall Rd was not driven by market demand... Or at least market demand for more retail in Metropolitan Detroit. Every new business along Hall Rd is coming at the expensive of some inner ring suburb that was the Hall Rd of the 1980s or 1990s.

We can do the Hudon's-Marshall Fields-Macy's thing, and pretty much all of the type of retail that was once in Detroit, even if the names change. But, yes, as it relates specifically to Hall Rd, you are probably talking more about shifting from the inner-rings as opposed to city proper. My comment was more in response to some of the now-missing venom that was spewed earlier in the thread. For what it is worth, I shouldn't have lumped you in.

Anyway, I guess it would depend on how you define market demand for more retail. As the market changes, so does the demand, so whether the demand merely shifted from one location to another [[true), or whether overall growth of the region led to the demand [[not true), it was demand nonetheless.

[iheartthed]

Places where people eat and shop change, so that isn't really a fair point. But, I think you might find a place or two along that corridor that was originally in Detroit, or perhaps some earlier incarnation of which was in Detroit.

I guess it would depend on how you define market demand for more retail. As the market changes, so does the demand, so whether the demand merely shifted from one location to another [[true), or whether overall growth of the region led to the demand [[not true), it was demand nonetheless.

I don't have the time to research it in detail right now but I'm very skeptical that Metro Detroit's pattern of development has been residential development before retail. I know for sure that this wasn't originally the case since Northland and the other -land malls were all built on farm land.

[Hermod]

I don't have the time to research it in detail right now but I'm very skeptical that Metro Detroit's pattern of development has been residential development before retail. I know for sure that this wasn't originally the case since Northland and the other -land malls were all built on farm land.

The Rochester and Utica areas had massive numbers of farms plowed under and turned into subdivisions in the 50s and 60s when Auburn Road/Hall Road/Wm P Rosso Hwy was just a two lane blacktop.

[Mikeg]

I don't have the time to research it in detail right now but I'm very skeptical that Metro Detroit's pattern of development has been residential development before retail. I know for sure that this wasn't originally the case since Northland and the other -land malls were all built on farm land.

In 1950 there were more than 1,000,000 people living outside the City of Detroit in Wayne, Oakland and Macomb Counties. Are you trying to make us believe they were all living in farmhouses and sending their children to one-room schoolhouses?

25 years later, where did their children live when they got married? Unlike previous generations, they didn't want to live in a multi-generational household with mom, dad and grandma. Therefore they looked outside their parents' neighborhood for a place of their own to live in and developers accommodated the demand they created by building nearby apartments, homes and businesses, including retail. Since then, even as the total population growth rate in southeast Michigan went to zero, average household size continued to decrease, which also contributed to new housing demand. Middle class flight from the city of Detroit has been only one of many reasons for post-war suburban growth.

[Det_ard]

In 1950 there were more than 1,000,000 people living outside the City of Detroit in Wayne, Oakland and Macomb Counties. Are you trying to make us believe they were all living in farmhouses and sending their children to one-room schoolhouses?

25 years later, where did their children live when they got married? Unlike previous generations, they didn't want to live in a multi-generational household with mom, dad and grandma. Therefore they looked outside their parents' neighborhood for a place of their own to live in and developers accommodated the demand they created by building nearby apartments, homes and businesses, including retail. Since then, even as the total population growth rate in southeast Michigan went to zero, average household size continued to decrease, which also contributed to new housing demand. Middle class flight from the city of Detroit has been only one of many reasons for post-war suburban growth.

Absolutely right, and adding to the suburban growth has been consumer demand for larger homes on larger lots, a trend that only hit a recent speed bump due to the economy.

The average new house in 1950 was 983 sqft, in 2007 it was 2521 sqft. Many had 9' ceilings and 3 car garages. They weren't going to be building these larger houses on the traditional 35' x 100' city lot. The suburbs, with open land, were where people and developers were looking to build a home.

Add in lower household size and lack of attractiveness of living in the city for most people and you get the growth pattern we see now.

[Bham1982]

Add in lower household size and lack of attractiveness of living in the city for most people and you get the growth pattern we see now.

This is it, in a nutshell.

There has been plenty of historical demand for new housing, even in the face of population stagnation, because A. Household sizes have declined, meaning there are more households, and B. The existing housing typologies and locations are undesirable.

Detroit didn't empty out because they built homes in Macomb Township. If you were to block new housing on the periphery, you would probably just send housing demand to the super-periphery, or out-of-state.

Your typical middle class couple would never consider Detroit or even a declining inner ring bungalow suburb.

[iheartthed]

In 1950 there were more than 1,000,000 people living outside the City of Detroit in Wayne, Oakland and Macomb Counties. Are you trying to make us believe they were all living in farmhouses and sending their children to one-room schoolhouses?

No, and that's not what I said.

[Mikeg]

No, and that's not what I said.

Well, given the fact that most of those million+plus people lived in suburban residential areas within a 15 mile radius of Northland when it was built [[not to mention the other million living in Detroit within the same radius), how can you remain "very skeptical that Metro Detroit's pattern of development has been residential development before retail"?

The pattern of development in Detroit and it's outlying areas has always been that large scale retail development follows residential disposable income. This is true here and throughout the USA. Try getting a loan or investment capital to build a new shopping center without having a business plan that provides sufficient evidence that the surrounding area has enough disposable income to support the new retail.

[iheartthed]

Well, given the fact that most of those million+plus people lived in suburban residential areas within a 15 mile radius of Northland when it was built

lol. A fifteen mile radius around Northland covers nearly the entire city of Detroit and half of Oakland County. That's a pretty useless fact to support whatever claim you're trying to make.

[Mikeg]

lol. A fifteen mile radius around Northland covers nearly the entire city of Detroit and half of Oakland County. That's a pretty useless fact to support whatever claim you're trying to make.

lol, coming from the guy who says "I know for sure..." and makes a claim but begs off providing any supporting evidence because "I don't have the time to research it in detail right now...."

Nonetheless, you have time to respond to subsequent posters while doing your best to avoid discussing the very premise about which you claimed your skepticism.