Redford High School Site Development Public Hearing

Havent seen this mentioned yet...this is from Councilman James Tate's office:

"I know this is short notice but we just confirmed there will be a public meeting regarding the brownfield development of the Redford High School site. It will be held Thursday, July 14, 2011 @ 10:50 in the Planning and Economic Development Standing committee. It will be held in the council chambers on the 13th floor of the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center. Please let your neighbors know if they would like to offer any input on this matter. Thanks for all you do to make this city a better Detroit!"

bump...just a reminder for those interested.

Did anybody go?

i watched it on channel 10

What was the result? Did they pass it? It was scheduled to go to city council this week if it passed the Brownfield Committee.

I think they said action will be taken. Unsure about the results.

According to Dennis Archer Jr, the construction will take 5 years to complete

So what exactly will be going on the site? Is it gonna be like a mini-strip mall or was that not mentioned.

they will put a Meijer store there along with some other stores

Officially, they weren't saying who the tenants will be, but that they had a commitment from a major West Michigan retailer. I attended the community forum meeting last year and posted a photo of the site plan at http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidlegg/5147005116/

i remembered the blueprint and i know for sure ones gonna be a Meijer and the other will possibly be a Walmart

Went to the developers update meeting last night. Site plan has changed somewhat. The site calls for a full-scale Meijer store plus a strip mall and gas station/convenience store. Auto entrances only via Grand River [[2) and McNichols [[1). Work should begin before the end of year, although asbestos removal from Redford High must be done before demolition. They hope demolition to take place by end of Spring and site completed by end of next year. Dennis Archer, Jr. indicated they are committed to place name businesses in the strip mall and that it will not be home to nail and wig shops, dollar stores, etc. Tree-lined berms and parkways will separate site from neighborhood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 65memories

Went to the developers update meeting last night. Site plan has changed somewhat. The site calls for a full-scale Meijer store plus a strip mall and gas station/convenience store. Auto entrances only via Grand River [[2) and McNichols [[1). Work should begin before the end of year, although asbestos removal from Redford High must be done before demolition. They hope demolition to take place by end of Spring and site completed by end of next year. Dennis Archer, Jr. indicated they are committed to place name businesses in the strip mall and that it will not be home to nail and wig shops, dollar stores, etc. Tree-lined berms and parkways will separate site from neighborhood.

---

Why the heck would they build something over there that is inaccessible by pedestrians?

Does anyone have any thoughts about this? I am blown away that there will be a full-scale Meijer store there... I always assumed it would just be a strip mall with the GR frontage. It would be great to get Mejeir to try a unique site design that put the building up on GR with more traditional character/frontage/setback/design. It's not like people around there won't go if they can't see all the open parking [[a la suburban stores)... there is not much to chose from for miles in that area as far as a Meijer-style store goes. Probably Meijer at Tel-12 or Walmart at Livonia Mall are the closest big-box retailers.

Obviously it's a bummer to lose the school, but is this development [[as proposed) a good thing or not?

The development will bring jobs, tax revenue, and keep dollars in the city, so from that standpoint its good. A full-scale Meijer certainly is good, as is the emphasis on "name" businesses if they can pull that off. Will be interested to see the site plan; sure would like to see something along the street other than the gas station and parking!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 65memories

Went to the developers update meeting...Dennis Archer, Jr. indicated they are committed to place name businesses in the strip mall and that it will not be home to nail and wig shops, dollar stores, etc. Tree-lined berms and parkways will separate site from neighborhood.

---

Great that they 'committed'. What does that mean? Today, everyone 'commits' to things. I'm committed to losing weight. I'm committed to avoiding sex with goats.

Did they 'commit' in any tangible way? Say, a contract? I don't even think that kind of contract is legal? Sure wouldn't have been if they'd said they wouldn't have any 'black' businesses there, would it.

So I think this commitment is meaningless.

However, a real major tenant with a real lease for a real period of time will likely draw real tenants to the 'strip mall' part of the site. Best thing to do is not to built storefronts that are sized for small tenants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Why the heck would they build something over there that is inaccessible by pedestrians?

---

Because Detroit [[and other) residents regularly complain about all the increased traffic that big-box stores bring. [[See coverage of previous efforts in Detroit). So the developer and city have to 'insulate' it from the residents. And of course these stores draw from a large area, so vehicles are central to their mission.

I do hope that they provide a good way to access site for pedestrians, though. But a big-box store is not best done to Jane Jacob's standards. Detroit has plenty of room for that type of development. Let this one be 'suburban-style' in the city.

Here is a link to a set of three snapshots of the plans from last night's meeting. The changes from the plan presented last year are pretty much listed above. I have to say that many of the changes reflected what people in the neighborhood asked for at the last meeting, like a walking track to replace the old high school track.

Photos

There is an official public hearing scheduled for next Thursday at City Hall:

Thursday, Oct. 6, 5:30 p.m.

Committee of the Whole Room, 13th Floor
Coleman A. Young Municipal Center,
2 Woodward Ave.

The hearing officially concerns a change in zoning for the Redford High School site from R-1 to PD [[Planned Development).

The timeline they went over said hazardous abatement this winter, construction beginning next spring, completed late 2012 or early 2013. They also talked about the old 8th Precinct building. They would like to buy it, but the city is tied up in litigation with the developer who bought it after the precinct closed and then didn't develop the site.

Thanks for posting the site plan, parkguy.

Looks very well connected with pedestrian amenities to me. Several park-like elements, I'd say this should be a positive for the area... maybe even for Old Redford proper if it brings in customers from a very wide geographic area. I'm in Redford Twp and I'd consider shopping there, as long as it's got better customer service and checkout than the Meijer at Millenium Park at Middlbelt/I-96... fails me every time. I will say it's much brighter inside since they got the major renovations mostly done.

Getting traffic in and out of this site is going to be a nightmare, mark my words. Making a left in or out of that east driveway on Grand River is close to the signal and across 4 lanes of traffic... unless they're planning a light there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cramerro

Getting traffic in and out of this site is going to be a nightmare, mark my words. Making a left in or out of that east driveway on Grand River is close to the signal and across 4 lanes of traffic... unless they're planning a light there.

---

Cramerro-- they did mention that the city has been discussing changes in the traffic lights at the entrances. I've always thought that the traffic signals, lane markings, and crosswalks at that corner were odd and not well thought-out, especially so when Redford was an active high school. There are four streets that converge there, two of them are multi-lane. They also said that part of the plan includes a bus stop, so that will change the patterns of traffic, too. It will be a good chance for the city to modernize the whole intersection.

This violates all the principles of good urban planning. Its not mixed use. Its not diverse in nature. It doesn't incorporate diversity of building age. Its certainly not pedestrian friendly. What it will do is further the auto-dependent lifestyle that is bankrupting us...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1953

This violates all the principles of good urban planning. Its not mixed use. Its not diverse in nature. It doesn't incorporate diversity of building age. Its certainly not pedestrian friendly. What it will do is further the auto-dependent lifestyle that is bankrupting us...

---

I'm a bit surprised by these comments. I'm all for reducing auto-dependency and seeing mixed use urban development. But realistically, the anchor is a Meijers store - would you want to live in a condo or apartment on top of that? Or in a building along the parking lot? And I don't know how, in this case, one could incorporate diversity of building age except by keeping the oldest part of the school perhaps - but wouldn't that be in the middle of the property?

After all, this is not Midtown, and its never going to be the most walkable of urban areas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroiterOnTheWestCoast

I'm a bit surprised by these comments. I'm all for reducing auto-dependency and seeing mixed use urban development. But realistically, the anchor is a Meijers store - would you want to live in a condo or apartment on top of that? Or in a building along the parking lot? And I don't know how, in this case, one could incorporate diversity of building age except by keeping the oldest part of the school perhaps - but wouldn't that be in the middle of the property?

After all, this is not Midtown, and its never going to be the most walkable of urban areas.

---

I mostly agree. In addition, they're keeping the African center and adult well-being center buildings, which will vary the age on the site. The strange shape makes it difficult to put the store up close to the street, and would make getting traffic to/from the gas station [[huge trip generation) difficult. The pedestrian connections/amenities shown on the plan seem like a positive to me, and the city sure is in need of some new commercial development and retail. Hopefully they'll keep the site up and it will be an asset to the community.

I wonder if some of some of 1953's virtues could be mitigated if they build some mixed-income housing on the old track site. Sounds like the neighbors want a track and Meijer isn't in the apartment business. The only other bet would be to get the out-building [[strip mall) in the front to minimize or eliminate parking in front and have the buildings up to the street with at least a simulated 2-story facade. Unlikely, though.

I have to disagree on the walkability. This area WAS, and could pretty easliy again be, a VERY walkable urban area. It's on the edge of a commecial center that's been there since the 1800's and shares many characteristics with downtown Farmington [[which is very walkable). Anything that could be done to give the site more of a street-frontage presence [[rather than parking lot) would go a long way to reinforcing the traditional character of the area.

I'm all for Meijer; I love their stores - but we have got to stop building suburban style developments in the central city. The higher density of the central city makes it impossible to have both quality of life and ample automobile parking. Its one or the other.

In urban areas that have a higher density and higher costs for land, grocery stores, even large ones, are built on the ground floor of condo or apartment buildings, with parking underground. Here's one in Seattle that I'm familiar with. QFC is the local Kroger chain. Granted, it isn't a Meijer-style hypermarket, but it is a full service grocery.

All in all, I'm impressed with the plan for the Redford Marketplace development. Given the parking and site requirements that big-scale retailers need, I think they've done a really good job with the plan. Based on the developer's comments at the two meetings I attended, [[1) they recognize the opportunity for this kind of development in the city, [[2) they recognize the site as a good place for this kind of retail. They've done their homework about the area, and they are pleased with the data. According to them, the biggest obstacle to building this kind of development in the city comes down to being able to assemble a large-enough site that has clear title and is clean of hazardous materials. This site is contaminated from asbestos, fuel oil from the buried tanks from the high school heating plant, and foundations from the square blocks of old houses that were demolished to build the school 80 years ago. There is nothing unusual in having these kinds of hazards on a site from that era, whether in the city or suburbs. This points out the real benefit of brownfield tax credits, which are being slashed by the state. After millions of dollars in cleanup, the site will be competitive in cost with green-field developments. It will be difficult to do this kind of redevelopment in the city for the near future without those credits, whether you are looking at a development with a big parking lot or one that is totally aimed at pedestrian and mass-transit-using consumers.

I let the whole talk about the urbanity of the thing slide, here, given that this is in an out-city neighborhood literally almost at the edge of the city. It's not like they are building this thing downtown; they are building it in an old streetcar suburb [[Old Redford) that basically doesn't function any differently than its immediate neighbors of Redford, Livonia or Southfield near this aea. This neighborhood is basically a part of Redford Township annexed by Detroit. In fact, the area in which this lies was literally one of the last chunks of land Detroit annexed [[1926).

I agree, Dexlin. For years and years the neighborhoods like Old Redford and Rosedale Park, among many others, had the advantage of getting city services. But following a truly urban plan in these areas has some real drawbacks, because they are really much more like inner-ring suburbs in the way they are built.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkguy

I agree, Dexlin. For years and years the neighborhoods like Old Redford and Rosedale Park, among many others, had the advantage of getting city services. But following a truly urban plan in these areas has some real drawbacks, because they are really much more like inner-ring suburbs in the way they are built.

---

Agreed as well. I'm a new urbanist at heart, but its not a one-size-fits-all. I hope they do try to integrate it somewhat into the community. Good walkways. Access for residents who might walk. Connection to public transit. But you gotta remember that at heart, its a regional store. The closest alternatives are Allen Park [[at I-94), Southfield [[Tel12), and Livonia [[Plymouth/Middlebelt), so they are counting on a lot of cars -- which will be good for the entire northwest Detroit and downtown Old Redford [[Lahser/Grand River).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cramerro

...
Getting traffic in and out of this site is going to be a nightmare, mark my words. Making a left in or out of that east driveway on Grand River is close to the signal and across 4 lanes of traffic... unless they're planning a light there.

---

Westbrook at GR was always a relatively difficult corner to exit or enter even back in the 70's. A traffic signal should be placed there. Maybe a bus drop-off/boarding area should be added inside the new complex so that riders will not have to cross GR or McNichols. And maybe a buffet restaurant and a bank or two.