Printable View
Just creating this because somehow, my Great Lakes Crossing memory thread turned into a downtown debate. This is to ensure that topic doesn't go off-topic permanently and that this kind of talk should belong here:
[[quote is from the aforementioned thread)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
I can see that, but isn't the new building on the Hudson site supposed to be a retail filled mall/apartments?
LOL, To say there's "little" retail left in Birmingham is a bit disingenuous. I would say 3/4 of the storefronts on Maple between Old Woodward and Chester are retail, not all of them clothing but still places to shop. You still have Roots and Joseph A Bank, plus the new resort-wear store J. McLaughlin. One can still go there and shop and also eat.
We've had many discussions about whether downtown Detroit is ready for retail. I'm still not certain because the entire retail environment is so much different than in the past. However it occured to me that downtown can support more service-based retail. Shoe Repair, Barbers and Salons, Drycleaners, Computer Repair, Real Estate Offices, etc. These are the types of retailers supported by both residents and workers. They are also not nearly as subject to demographic differences. We aren't going to have all high-end fashion on Woodward so let's get some of these service businesses up and running that have a fighting chance of being successful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 401don
But that just makes too much sense!
Every "redevelopment" plan in Detroit in the past 15/20/25 years, ad infinitum, has revolved around making Detroit a "destination". The powers-that-be have been myopically focused on creating places where you make a long-distance special trip for a singular purpose [[not unlike Great Lakes Crossing).
As much as I agree with you, I'd hate to say that this current paradigm is going to persist. Dan Gilbert isn't going to lease space to a shoe cobbler if he thinks he can land Cheesequake Factory or another gaudy "destination" place. Everyone's looking for some magical silver bullet, and practical ideas aren't sanctioned by the City, the DEGC, or any of the other Fantasyland folks who pull the strings.
Hey, so does anybody have any memories of Great Lakes Crossing? I tried to sneak into an R-rated movie there a few months before my 17th birthday, but I was really terrible at sneaking so they found me and kicked me out.
You should've posted that in my other recent thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by antongast
Yeah, I thought about it, but the other thread was all about downtowns, so it seemed kinda out of place, you know?Quote:
Originally Posted by mtburb
Actually a place like Great Lakes Crossing does have an over-representation of eateries and is still able to have most of its leaseable space devoted to traditional goods selling. In the 1960's-1970's the shopping mall was represented as the new downtown to replace the old one with a lot of pride [[and prejudice)! http://www.theatlanticcities.com/art...istricts/1925/
One thing is for sure. Downtowns of today are generating more dollars [[or have the potential to) today than the ones of 40 years ago that were full of hippie head shops, porn stores, and wig shops.
The creator of the modern, enclosed shopping mall was a socialist, who saw the shopping mall as the modern European style arcade, where people of all classes could mingle.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Social engineering for the win! :rolleyes:
Discount and service retail perform well in downtowns that serve the local population. But mid to high end retail succeed in destination districts. Beyond the stores you need something to bring the metro population or out of state tourists into the downtown...otherwise they just hit up the suburban malls in their own cities. There needs to be something special present that makes it worth the inconvenience to pay for parking and drive a bit further from home.
I've actually read the book Gruen wrote that explained the philosophy behind why he built what he did. I am fairly sure it is titled Heart of Cities and I have it in my library at home. It is a fascinating read. He was a huge advocate for public transportation. Too bad the folks he worked for placed is secondary! Whats even worse is very little of his work exists that looks like he intended it to. Malls seemed to get a major freshening every 15 years or so to keep them trendy.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBMcB
He also did a lot of downtown plans that were implemented including Kalamazoo and Rochester. Both of those are largely gone as well. I was lucky enough to have visited them.
Or is it the other way around: Do higher-end "niche" establishments open to take advantage of existing foot traffic? I mean, Tysons Corner in Virginia has a whole slew of stores that I don't have at home, but you won't catch me going to Fairfax County for vacation.Quote:
Originally Posted by wolverine
And what percentage of people realistically use "shopping" as their primary motivation for tourism?
If you make Detroit into a pleasant place--the Paris of the West--the tourists will show up, regardless of whether or not your stores sell Hermes scarves. As it stands, Detroit barely has enough service businesses to take care of its existing populace. It's that same tired question again: For whom should the city work? The school of "tricking" people into coming downtown has been hammered to death as long as I can remember. At what point is it supposed to start working?
It is working. The amount of residential and commercial development downtown is like nothing we've seen in 3 decades. We just have to be realistic about the pace. If you have 150 vacant buildings and you're renovating 8-10 year, that's an awesome pace...but it's gonna take a decade plus before it starts feeling like a real city again.Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto
Sure. These things take time, and the increase in residential and commercial development is something to be applauded, and about which to be very optimistic. Let's not fool ourselves, though. That development hasn't taken place because of "niche" stores or restaurants that tourists couldn't get elsewhere. It hasn't taken place because of the Hudson's demolition or because of Comerica Park. It has taken place because [[some) developers have finally woken up and realized that cities consist of people and businesses, and not just government-subsidized tourist traps.Quote:
Originally Posted by corktownyuppie
Tyson's Corner. Really sprawling and not especially well-designed mall. Inconvenient to get to with lots and lots of traffic. Inadequate number of parking spaces. Real money maker for the stores in it. People really want to go there [[and you can't get there on foot).Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto
Some years back, the head of Nordstrom's was looking for a place to have his first east coast store. He was being wooed by a developer who was opening what he hoped would be a Somerset-type mall near the Tyson's Corner Mall. As a part of his tour, the developer took the Nordstrom's guy over to Tyson's Corner. The guy immediately went to the Tyson's Corner management and offered to build a Nordstrom's wing on to the mall [[which he did adding to the sprawl). The Nordstrom's guy said that he had never been in a mall at 10:30 on a weekday morning where the mall was crowded with women properly dressed for success and wit their hair done [[no jogging suits, no scarves over curlers).