I'm keeping their name discrete, but they told me that two towers- one office, one residential- will be connected with a mall. They mentioned about 18 or 25 stories tall, but I can't remember. That is all. :p:cool:
Printable View
I'm keeping their name discrete, but they told me that two towers- one office, one residential- will be connected with a mall. They mentioned about 18 or 25 stories tall, but I can't remember. That is all. :p:cool:
EXCITED!!!!OMG!!!:o
I don't mean to sound cynical but I'll get excited when i see what it looks like.If they ignore the ignore the international design ideas I'm going to be PISSED. This needs to be unique, not only for Detroit but the United States.
" will be connected with a mall."
Did I hear mall, I hope they get the right mix of retail
More details!!!!! I hope its eye catching and well lit.
I could be wrong, but they were talking about a roof top park as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmike76
I hope it's atleast 3-5 floors of retail, local and national restaurants. Gilbert did mention over 80 retailers signed leased already, no telling how many is planned now. This is big news! Woodward will become that shopping district we wished for. Can't wait til 2015..Quote:
Originally Posted by 48205to24
I hope it look similar to this building in L.A, of course not as tall. Look at the unique Apple Store. The Hudson site has the potential to become really innovative and unique, something never seen in America.
http://figcentral.la/images/overview-picture.jpg
http://figcentral.la/images/overview-picture.jpg
http://figcentral.la/images/rainbow_signage.png
http://figcentral.la/images/rainbow_signage.png
Honestly I hope the retail is capped at 2 floors. We still have plenty of empty storefronts down Woodward.
Those storefronts are part of the plan, Gilbert also owns most of the buildings along both sides of Woodward from Jefferson to Grand Circus Park. Which is GUARANTEED to have ground-floor retail along with the Hudson Site.Quote:
Originally Posted by BasementBeat
I agree that 2 floors would be good. Much rather spread the retail around. I personally like the idea of an office tower and a residential tower, to get a mix of daily activity with workers and evening/weekend activity with residents. I've always though some hotel space would be nice too, but with the Ponch back and the Aloft coming maybe there is not much need for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by BasementBeat
You guys are great. I get the Sunday Funnies here every week now.:)
I heard it will be 200 floors, with a Four Seasons, St. Regis, a Waldorf, the relocated Apple HQ and Facebook HQ, and $50 million luxury condos curated by Giorgio Armani. Also heard that Somerset is closing and relocating to the new complex.
You forgot about the House of Blues, Cheesecake Factory and Hooters! I also heard that both Ford and Chrysler are bidding to put their HQ on Hudson's Block!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
I love posting examples [[potentially) of what we can expect to see on the Hudson site, just random two buildings in random cities.
This is classy, a little.
http://img83.exs.cx/img83/2212/40-granbytowers.jpg
This is pretty cool!
http://www.archiscene.net/wp-content...rbanismo01.jpg
I love the different storefront facades.
http://leung.typepad.com/.a/6a00d834...eabe970c-320wi
...As long as there's a Blackfinn, I'm in like Flynn.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
and thousands of interns during the summer.Quote:
Originally Posted by gthomas
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE
“There’s a massive, wildfire interest in Detroit,” Gilbert said. “Detroit sells."
Our own little Eaton Centre [[Toronto) :)
Rumor Volat!
Can we make sure we get a Bar Louie along with that Blackfinn? O'Tooles and Toby Keith's I <3 This Bar and Grill would be nice too, but that might be a stretch.
If it's not built to be a self-contained bunker like the Ren Cen then it would help fill those storefronts on Woodward if it can attract big name tenants. If this rumor turns out to be true then it sounds like it'll be a miniature version of New York's Time Warner Center.Quote:
Originally Posted by BasementBeat
I'm not excited by the LA building. it just seems so...1990. VERY boring architecturally, with the gimmicky LED ribbon compensating for lack of imagination.
On the other hand, different for different's sake doesn't thrill me either.
The Marchetti & Pellegrino design has really grown on me. I think it is striking, it pays homage to Detroit's industrial history and it manages to stand out while not sticking out like a sore thumb
http://tinyurl.com/kg55k59
Is a mall with 80+ retailers really viable? We can't keep malls open in many various areas yet we're going to have one in the heart of downtown?
I'm all for renwal and retail is what we need down there, but wouldn't be better to work on all of the unused retail space we currently have and get it up, rolling and sustainable before throwing more empty space into the mix.
Urban malls have a dismal track record in the U.S., and there's no chance of an urban mall in downtown Detroit.Quote:
Originally Posted by mkhopper
They often fail in far stronger cities. Ever seen the Block 37 disaster in downtown Chicago?
Why do we want people on the street? They should be inside, in a mall. Malls have a great track record of attracting young people and are growing by ... oh, wait. Oh shit ...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...and-malls.html
Yes, that will be cool, I've been to the Time Warner Center..loved it!Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
http://nyc-architecture.com/MID/Time_Warner_Center.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._Shankbone.jpg
But on the flip side you have The Shops at North Bridge, Water Tower Place and 900 N. Michigan which is full of high end stores anchored by Nordstrom, Macy's and Bloomingdale's, respectively. You also have One Canal Place in New Orleans and Westfield Horton Plaza in San Diego.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
Now I won't be the first to advocate for a shopping mall downtown, but the reason why RenCen's shopping plaza failed was because it was near nothing else. At least this plan, albeit just a rumor, is actually integrated into the rest of downtown.
Of those urban malls, only Water Tower Place is super successful. North Bridge does ok, but the other three struggle. Horton Plaza, Canal Place and 900 Michigan all have serious problems with vacancies. And even Water Tower lost Lord & Taylor, and had problems filling their upper floors.Quote:
Originally Posted by dtowncitylover
For example, Horton Plaza is currently being redeveloped, with failed department stores being demolished in favor of parks.
In terms of non-struggling urban malls, we're talking a very, very short list in the U.S. But almost every U.S. city has tried. Heck, here in MI, we built urban malls in Battle Creek, Flint, Grand Rapids, Muskegan, and Detroit, All failed, and only RenCen [[to some extent) exists.
Instead of having lots of retail in a mall that's integrated into downtown, why not just ...
Have lots of retail downtown?
As long as there is variety and things are shops are fairly close to each other, no one wants to buy the outfit downtown then go to midtown for the purse in shoes [[shot out to sole sisters). Its an option but shouldnt be a requirement. You also dont want to pay $2 at parking meter downtown and then $2 parking in midtown.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitnerd
That's what the train will be for. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by 48205to24
Hopefully we can get more retail shops sooner than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasT
Yeah, that's for sure. It's very hard to convince people that this is just normal life in a lot of American cities, and in much of the world. "What? I can't take my 1,500-pound gas buggy on every single errand?"Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasT
Other places, people say, "Thank goodness I don't have to take a 1,500-pound gas buggy on every single errand!"
Some might open, but most retailer know that construction on Woodward [[soon) start for M-1/MDOT until 2014/2015. It's more feasible to open when construction is done and M-1 is up and running.Quote:
Originally Posted by 48205to24
Sole Sisters closed last month; though I totally agree with your point.Quote:
Originally Posted by 48205to24
I hope that the mall will have storefronts on Woodward.Quote:
Originally Posted by 48205to24
Not sure how that can be the case, since that is what traditional downtown retail looks like.Quote:
Originally Posted by 48307
That's at Columbus Circle? I know many who were sad to see the Colosseum go, but that is nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by gthomas
I have heard a rumor from someone I trust that they are going forward with a viability of construction review for the Marchetti/Pellegrino design
http://tinyurl.com/kg55k59
Honestly, rb336, I don't see what you and the jurors saw in this design. It was very abstract. The towers appear to be see through and hold very little space in terms of office or residential footage. The rendering showed nothing on the ground level that appeared to be stores or anything else for that matter. I'm curious, "How does it pay homage to Detroit's industrial history?"Quote:
Originally Posted by rb336
I know that beauty is in the eye of the beholder but this was one of the least appealing designs in the contest for my tastes.
Now, regarding putting a mall in the mix, I agree with an earlier poster that two levels of retail should be enough. A City Target should be the anchor store. After that, maybe some spaces for local businesses. The rest should be for restaurants. Including the City Target, 20 stores/restaurants tops. A bunch of suburban-mall stores won't work, except for the Target. A City Target, if nothing else and some restaurants will work.
Would that be Somerset Mall or the Collection or both...:oQuote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
That location was sort of hidden, I found it taking a shortcut once. Luckily they still have the Royal Oak location, passed by there Saturday. Are there any stores left in the city that sellsQuote:
Originally Posted by marshamusic
Womens shoes?
How about a mix of high end from Somerset as well mid range _this Detroit. Alsocreativity and talent of mom and pops on Main Street, you get your $150 perfect fitting jeans from high end store then go to the next shop to have a one of a kind shirtt or jacket made to go with them, then you go down the road to get your old leather boots customized,Quote:
Originally Posted by MidTownMs
What a downtown need to thrive is a good transportation systems that will get shoppers in, out, and around downtown/midtown. Look at other cities with a thriving retail district and you will see that they have a good transportation systems that shoppers could catch and don't have to worry about meters such as Detroit shoppers have to worry about when shopping and playing downtown/midtown. Give shoppers a choice whether to drive and pay the meters or catch a reliable transportation and you will see a more thriving downtown/midtown detroitQuote:
Originally Posted by 48205to24
I hear JC Penney, Best Buy and Kmart are going to open up on the Hudson Block!
Like Troy/Auburn Hills/Novi??Quote:
Originally Posted by stasu1213
Aren't all three stores on death's door? Maybe throw in Sears and Radio Shack, and you have the "I Will Survive" retail center.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
I forgot about those. Maybe throw in a Bennegin's or an Arwey Bakery?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
Put in a Wal-Mart and kill everything for miles around. If you're gonna go, go BIG!Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Walmart wants the Tiger Stadium Site, more parking and lots of space for seniors to park their $200k RV's overnight to save $40.Quote:
Originally Posted by Honky Tonk
Malls are not urban retail districtsQuote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
for those who don't want to click through the various views, here is what they call the "programmatic distribution diagram"Quote:
Originally Posted by royce
http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-co...stribution.jpg
These places are too urban! Besides he said 'thriving retail districts' not urban retail districts. You will find lots of places with dead downtowns that have good public transportation. These are all independent variables.Quote:
Originally Posted by rb336
What you need to have downtown are people in order to have thriving retail. You just happen to have good transit because there is a demand. Disney world has thriving retail and thriving free transit. It does not have thriving retail because of transit, it has it because it has people [[demand).
Excellent questions. Unless you start with an extremely successful built up area like Manhattan, malls tend to drain the life out of adjacent streets. In general they are boring, they add zero character, and they are fading as a concept for several reasons that are worth considering in terms of this site:Quote:
Originally Posted by mkhopper
http://business.time.com/2012/02/06/...ng-receptions/
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/job...ing-mall/4252/
Cities with thriving retail districts. A mall is a mall. It is a separate entity. A retail district is a district integrated into the city proper, not a separate, set off bit. When you say "city retail district," most people think of something like the Miracle Mile or downtown Birmingham, not 12 OaksQuote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
As cynical as I am... seeing what Gilbert has been doing thus far, I'm going to cut him some slack and assume that he too is aiming for Michigan Ave vs. Somerset Collection. Just saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by rb336
Now if it were Illitch's plan? Wintergarden II.
I never mentioned mall names. Novi has several developers with successful stores in one district. 12 Oaks happens to be one of many. The same is true for Troy and Auburn Hills.Quote:
Originally Posted by rb336
There is a many landlord/more tennant thing going on. A downtown will function exactly the same. With a few developers owning the space each having several rentals.
We're all just speculating but I doubt a "mall" is planned for the site. There really isn't enough room on the footprint for even an "urban mall". It'll probably be a few spaces for some boutiques, and maybe one destination store such as an Apple Store. I doubt there'll be more than 20 stores total on the site.
Would be really sweet if the development has a multi-plex theater.
you mean like the one in the RenCen down the street?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Real McCoy
i dont know what that is but to call it a theater is a disservice to actual theaters. perhaps something will go in that is a bit bigger than a home projector...Quote:
Originally Posted by bailey
No I imagine he means one that is a lot better than that joke of a theater.Quote:
Originally Posted by bailey
talk about absurd.. "i didn't mention mall names?" seriously? "Novi has several developers with successful stores in one district." they are called "malls" and they are NOT "city retail districts." In fact, most malls are not zoned "retail" but rather as PUDs [[Planned Use Developments). If you don't see the difference between a mall and a retail district, well, no one can help youQuote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
if there were a market for mega-plex movie theaters in Detroit...wouldn't it have been filled?Quote:
Originally Posted by gumby
a downtown megaplex would thrive, but the operators would have to deal with lots of 'security issues'. any movie theatre component will be geared to a high income user with id/curfew component [[iPic, Emagine)Quote:
Originally Posted by bailey
ie: milwaukee
http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...pg=6518,108450
...where's magic johnson and any other urban-centric entrepreneur/developers?
hopefully the official announcement will be made soon, and it will be a pleasant design.
I think there's a difference between a downtown mall and a suburban mall. It is true that there is a such thing as too many downtown malls...however, suburban malls are a different beast. Just because 3 malls couldn't survive together in Livonia doesn't mean that downtown could not sustain a mall...or that there would be no demand. I actually think a modest sized mall could be helpful, especially since Gilbert seems dedicated to having his development spread throughout downtown. A centralized mall could serve as a destination or meeting place. Heck, even if the mall was mostly a food court, it would serve a purpose as a meeting point. If Cleveland can support Tower City Center [[as well as the less impressive Galleria), I'm sure we could support a single small mall downtown. Most big cities have some sort of downtown mall.
Johnson has his eyes set on the State Fairgrounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hypestyles
I know Gilbert doesn't own all of Merchant's Row, but it looks like he at least has the rights to the street level spaces in quite a few buildings between State St. and Grand Circus Park. So we could very well see somewhat of an 'open-air' mall [[same developer/builder). I believe I read somewhere that there hasn't been an enclosed mall built in the US in about 10 years, but there have been a lot of open-air malls. It sure seems like that's Gilbert's goal here. He wants to have walkable streets, an enclosed mall would defy that. My guess would be that the 'retail' spaces in any development would simply be ground floor spaces, or maybe a couple floors to lure a department store, even if it was a number of spaces. Even in the Water Tower in Chicago, you don't see very many people on the uppermost floors [[6,7).
Similar to this in Salt Lake City [[City Creek Center)Quote:
Originally Posted by esp1986
http://taubman.images.omniti.net/cms...sset/get/31552
http://barbaracampagna.com/wp-conten...ITYCREEK-1.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
You're right.
http://media.mlive.com/news/detroit_...4e8ff4b90c.jpg
Quote:
I believe I read somewhere that there hasn't been an enclosed mall built in the US in about 10 years, but there have been a lot of open-air malls
They aren't malls, they are "lifestyle centers." :cool::cool:
Would the buildings be constructed on top of the beams protruding out of the ground or would those beams be extracted?
Those beams are part of the foundation. The building would be built on top of them, as they would be needed for support.Quote:
Originally Posted by stasu1213
Quick structural lesson:Quote:
Originally Posted by esp1986
Beams= horizontal
Columns= vertical
Danke
If it were to have a heavy amount of retail it would likely be designed as an atrium shopping center, not a mall. Probably multi-level 2-3 floors with an atrium filled with escaltor and elevator banks serving big box on upper floors, possibly a food court and smaller liner retail at the ground level facing Woodward. Probably similar to the Canal Mall in Chicago but instead able to support towers above.
Building the retail levels alone is risky so they'll need to throw a speculative tower on top of either office or residential to validate the entire development.
The 80+ stores number refers to the entire Woodward corridor, not this particular spot. Assuming, that the average store footprint would be about 5,000 sq. ft. You would be lucky to get 9 outlets on the first floor of the Hudson's site. Assuming many retailers might go with smaller store footprints, you'd be lucky to get 12 outlets.
I'd assume that the retail would be exclusively on the Woodward side. I'd leave the Farmer side for the office and residential lobbies, loading docks, service entries, etc. You might be able to squeeze in a couple of small retail slots on the Farmer side that might cater to the office workers [[think small coffee shop or lunch spot.) The second floor could easily fit a CityTarget. The average CityTarget is roughly 80,000-100,000 sq. ft. You could easily fit an 80,000+ CityTarget on the second floor.
I live at 900 N Michigan and its performing fine. Mark Shale stores folded everyhere and Williams and Sonoma got in a squabble and left because of Sur La Table moving in. Northbridge is out of space and had to kick out tenants to get better ones. They also are increasing the size of the mall by purchasing the neighboring office building and hollowing out floors. Water Tower went through the same process by denying lease renewals to get better tenants and have no vacancyQuote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
Mall space demand on Mich ave exceeds supply because it caters to international and out of state tourists. State street is another matter catering to city and regional residents. Of course Block 37 is not performing at all and is perhaps the worst development disaster in Chicago history
I know most of your info is based on observation and not fact, but at least come to the table prepared if you are going to act like you know something.
So much for a high sales tax killing retail. Isn't pop taxed something like 12%?Quote:
Originally Posted by wolverine
LOL. Yes, the demand is so high that Chicago Place shuttered, and the upper levels of the existing malls all have vacancies. It must be all those "international tourists" that strangely look like heffers from Iowa and Indiana in-town to see American Girl Place. The reality is that vertical retail doesn't work, and Chicago, while it gets tons of Midwest tourists, gets few from outside the U.S. Rents are high on the street, and low in the upper levels of vertical malls, both in Chicago and everywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by wolverine
It's 9.25, which is not that big of a deal. The issue isn't success of downtown retail; Michigan Ave. is the most successful retail for many hundreds of miles, the issue is upper level mall retail, which has never worked in the U.S. GGP, owners of Water Tower Place, easily the most successful vertical retail on Michigan Ave., has always had problems leasing the top floors.Quote:
Originally Posted by rb336
Lighthouse Place in Michigan City is pretty successful
Dead on, Bham.
I agree. The reasons why Northbridge bucks the trend is that it is really no so much a vertical mall [[at 3-4 floors) as it is a walkway/bridge to get to from Michigan Avenue to Nordstom's. The upper levels take advantage of Nordstrom being such an excellent draw and the folks who leave Nordstroms and want to see something different on their walk back to Michigan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eber Brock Ward
My family and I visited Indianapolis last week. Their downtown mall - Circle Centre - clearly attempts to integrate with the rest of the city. This is achieved only because I found downtown Indy to be one of the more “suburban” feeling downtowns that I have visited. The heavy concentration of national food chains and retail stores feels somewhat contrived. While I think most Detroiters would be happy with more retail regardless, I applaud any efforts to bring a shopping experience that can’t easily be replicated at a mall in the suburbs.
That said, there is strong evidence that shows downtown malls are becoming less viable:
- Nordstrom pulled out of Circle Centre Mall in downtown Indy 2 years ago leaving 210,000 sq feet space that is still vacant.
- Macy’s is closing downtown St. Paul, MN store that opened in 1963 [[362,000 sq. ft.)
- Macy’s is closing downtown Houston store that opened in 1947 [[791,000 sq. ft.)
- Macy’s is closing downtown St. Louis store that opened in 1924 [[189,000 sq. ft.)
Northbridge obviously had the advantage of being built after 900 North and Water Tower Place which IMO is why it is decidedly not vertical. When I lived in Chicago in the Mid 90's new retail development on Michigan Avenue was focused on new Street level stand alone retail. Nike Town, Fao Schwartz were just a couple of stores which opened flagship stores in newly rebuilt spaces on Michigan during that time period. I think Northbridge was conceived essentially when easily buildable street level space ran out.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
My recollection is that the upper levels in 900 North were not successful back then. Water Tower fared somewhat better. I seem to recall some unique or new to the area tenants on the upper levels. Which is probably what you need to do to get people beyond the first couple of levels. The novelty of riding escalators up eight or so flights tends to wear off.
I would LOVE to see Century 21 open a store here. That is the place actual New Yorkers go for clothes if they aren't UES snobs
That's very true. I was there in late last month and that was probably the most popular shopping bag I saw. I had no idea what it was until I asked someone I was with who lives there.Quote:
Originally Posted by rb336
I think an H&M could do well. The nearest and only one with a men's section is at Great Lakes and downtown would be closer.
It is the modern equivelent of E J Korvettes. Here is a link for you kiddos who never heard of the store: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._J._KorvetteQuote:
Originally Posted by rb336
http://pleasantfamilyshopping.blogsp...abel/Korvettes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century...artment_store)
Century 21 sells real estate. You mean Forever 21?Quote:
Originally Posted by rb336
Century 21 is also a department store in the NYC area.Quote:
Originally Posted by marshamusic
I think 48 million tourists can keep a mall operational. It's certainly not the best urban solution, but they have been a necessary part of Michigan Ave to maximize retail space. I know you hate Chicago and I don't always disagee with your comments. But your made up statement about 900, hit home, literally, and I had to clarify that the building has no problems with vacancy and leasing whatsoeverQuote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
However, I do believe that the space dedicated to the higher levels of retail could be better utilized if it was used for additional space for the hotel or apartment amenities. Lets face it, in order to fill those spaces up there they have to give away the store. They are not getting the creme-de-la-creme. Maybe they could have put in a food court that would draw people up there and past the other stores? Yeah there is a Potbelly's big whoop. Even the Ren Cen has one.Quote:
Originally Posted by wolverine
Duplicate post
They have good tenants on the top floors and the condos, offices, and mall are totally isolated apart in terms of elevator and lobby acess. You couldn't put apartments or hotel in. The costs to convert those floors would be astronomical.